Search

Background: ODM-201 is a novel second-generation androgen receptor inhibitor for the treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Objective: To evaluate the pharmacokinetics of ODM-201 tablet products and preliminary long-term safety, tolerability, and antitumor activity of ODM-201 in chemotherapy-naive men with mCRPC. Design, setting, and participants: Thirty patients were enrolled in this open-label phase 1 trial. Patients received a single 600-mg dose of ODM-201 in capsules with food and one 600-mg dose of ODM-201 tablet product (TabA or TabB) with food and in the fasted state in a random order. In the extension, patients received 600 mg twice daily ODM-201 taken with food in capsules. Outcome measurements and statistical analysis: We analyzed the pharmacokinetics of ODM-201 tablet formulations. Safety and tolerability were assessed until disease progression or an intolerable adverse event (AE). Antitumor activity was assessed by prostate-specific antigen (PSA) levels and imaging. Results and limitations: The capsule: TabA ratio of area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to the last sample at 48 h was 1.06 (90% confidence interval [CI], 0.91-1.24); the capsule: TabB ratio was 0.97 (90% CI, 0.82-1.14). At week 12, 25 of 30 patients (83%) had a PSA response (>= 50% reduction from baseline). Median time to radiographic progression was 66 wk (95% CI, 41-79). Most common AEs were fatigue (n = 4 [13%]) and nausea (n = 4 [13%]). Conclusions: The study showed that the tablet formulation of ODM-201 had similar pharmacokinetics compared with the capsule. Treatment with a 600-mg twice daily dose of ODM-201 provided anticancer activity and was well tolerated in men with chemotherapy-naive mCRPC. Patient summary: The findings of this study showed that ODM-201 is well tolerated and provided antitumor activity in chemotherapy-naive patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and that the 300-mg tablet formulation can be used in further clinical studies. A phase 3 trial with ODM-201 600 mg twice daily in patients with non-mCRPC is ongoing. (C) 2015 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Background Intravenous levosimendan is indicated for acute heart failure. The compound has shown promising beneficial effects in ischemic stroke models. Objective We evaluated the efficacy and safety of oral levosimendan in patients with a history of cerebral ischemia. Methods In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study, 16 patients with a history of ischemic stroke/transient ischemic attack received oral levosimendan in 5 escalating doses from 0.125 to 2.0 mg daily for 18-day intervals of each dose; 5 patients received placebo. Twenty-four-hour ambulatory ECG and cerebral blood flow velocities using transcranial Doppler ultrasound were recorded at baseline and at the end of each dosing period. Vasomotor reactivity was assessed via the breath holding index. In addition, plasma levels of N-terminal-pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-pro-BNP) and the metabolites of levosimendan were determined. Results Levosimendan induced an increase in cerebral blood flow velocities and a decrease in NT-pro-BNP compared with placebo. There was no significant effect on breath holding index. Doses ≥0.5 mg increased heart rate by 5 to 9 beats/min. The dose level of 2.0 mg exceeded the preset safety margin of ventricular extrasystoles per hour (ie, upper 90% CI of the ratio of levosimendan to placebo above 2) with an estimate of 3.10 (90% CI, 0.95–10.07). Conclusions Oral levosimendan increases cerebral blood flow velocities and diminishes NT-pro-BNP levels in patients with earlier ischemic cerebrovascular event. Daily doses up to 1.0 mg were well tolerated, whereas the 2.0 mg dose level induced an increase in ventricular extrasystoles. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00698763.

WOS: 000316128800011, PubMed ID: 23091203, The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of abnormal liver function tests (LFTs) and the associated clinical profile and outcome(s) in acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) patients. Alteration in LFTs is a recognized feature of ADHF, but prevalence and outcomes data from a broad contemporary cohort of ADHF are scarce and the mechanism(s) of ADHF-induced cholestasis is unknown. We conducted a post hoc analysis of SURVIVE, a large clinical trial including ADHF patients treated with levosimendan or dobutamine. All LFTs were available in 1134 patients at baseline. Abnormal LFTs were seen in 46 of ADHF patients: isolated abnormal alkaline phosphatase (AP) was noted in 11, isolated abnormal transaminases in 26, and a combination of abnormal AP and transaminases in 9. Abnormal AP was associated with marked signs of systemic congestion and elevated right-sided filling pressure. Abnormal AP had no relationship with 31-day mortality but was associated with worse 180-day mortality (23.5 vs. 34.9, P 0.001 vs. patients with normal AP). Abnormal transaminases were associated with clinical signs of hypoperfusion and with greater 31-day and 180-day mortality compared with normal transaminase profiles (17.6 vs. 8.4 and 31.6 vs. 22.4, respectively; both P 0.001). There was no additive value of abnormal AP plus abnormal transaminase on a long-term outcome. Abnormal LFTs were present in about a half of patients presenting with ADHF treated with inotropes. Abnormal AP and abnormal transaminases were associated with specific clinical, biological, and prognostic features, including a short-term overmortality with increased transaminases but not with biological signs of cholestasis, in ADHF patients., Abbott; Orion Pharma, SURVIVE study was sponsored by Abbott and Orion Pharma.

Background and Objectives Although the pharmacokinetics of dexmedetomidine in healthy volunteers have been studied, there are limited data about the pharmacokinetics of long-term administration of dexmedetomidine in critically ill patients. Methods This population pharmacokinetic analysis was performed to quantify the pharmacokinetics of dexmedetomidine in critically ill patients following infusions up to 14 days in duration. The data consisted of three phase III studies (527 patients with sparse blood sampling, for a total of 2,144 samples). Covariates were included in a full random-effects covariate model and the most important covariate relationships were tested separately. The linearity of dexmedetomidine clearance was evaluated by observing steady-state plasma concentrations acquired at various infusion rates. Results The data were adequately described with a one-compartment model. The clearance of dexmedetomidine was 39 (95 % CI 37–41) L/h and volume of distribution 104 (95 % CI 93–115) L. Both clearance and volume of distribution were highly variable between patients (coefficients of variation of 62 and 57 %, respectively), which highlights the importance of dose titration by response. Covariate analysis showed a strong correlation between body weight and clearance of dexmedetomidine. The clearance of dexmedetomidine was constant in the dose range 0.2–1.4 μg/kg/h. Conclusions The pharmacokinetics of dexmedetomidine are dose-proportional in prolonged infusions when dosing rates of 0.2–1.4 μg/kg/h, recommended by the Dexdor® summary of product characteristics, are used.

Background Dexmedetomidine can be used for sedation of mechanically ventilated patients and has minor respiratory effects. The aim of this study was to compare the incidence of patient-ventilator dyssynchronies during sedation with dexmedetomidine or propofol. Methods We conducted a multicentre, prospective, open-label, randomised clinical trial, comparing dexmedetomidine with standard propofol sedation at three intensive care units of university hospitals in Italy. Twenty difficult-to-wean patients for whom the first weaning trial had failed and who were on pressure support ventilation were randomised to receive sedation with either dexmedetomidine or propofol at a similar level of sedation (Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale [RASS] score +1 to −2). The asynchrony index (AI) was calculated using tracings of airflow, airway pressure and electrical activity of the diaphragm sampled at 0, 0.5, 1, 2, 6, 12, 18 and 24 h. Results The mean AI was lower with dexmedetomidine than with propofol from 2 h onwards, although the two groups significantly differed only at 12 h (2.68 % vs 9.10 %, p

Aims Dexmedetomidine (dexdor®) is approved in the European Union (EU) for sedation of adults in the intensive care unit (ICU). The present observational, retrospective study was requested by the European Medicines Agency to investigate dexmedetomidine use in clinical practice, with a particular focus on off‐label use, including the paediatric population. Methods Study countries and sites were chosen from those with highest dexmedetomidine use, based on sales. Site selection (blind) was conducted by a multispecialist, independent group. Anonymized data on demographics, treatment indication, dexmedetomidine dosing, concomitant medications and treatment effectiveness were collected retrospectively from records of all dexmedetomidine‐treated patients at the site during the enrolment period. Informed consent was waived, to avoid influencing the prescribing of dexmedetomidine. Recruitment was completed within 18 months of first site initiation. Results Data from 2000 patients were collected from 16 hospitals in four EU countries (Finland 750, Poland 505, Germany 470, Austria 275). The median age was 62 years, with more males (70.2%) than females. Dexmedetomidine was primarily used in the adult ICU (86.0%) for ICU sedation (78.6%) and mostly dosed according the product label. The intended sedative effect was obtained in 84.9% of administrations. Paediatric use (5.9% of patients, mostly in Austria and Finland) occurred mainly in the adult or paediatric ICU (75.6%) for sedation (67.2%). Conclusions Overall, most patients were treated with dexmedetomidine according to the product labelling. Use in children was limited but significant and similar in scope to that in adults. Administrations not fully according to the product labelling usually occurred in an ICU environment and reflected extensively investigated clinical uses of dexmedetomidine.