Search

Stephan Herbertz,1 J Scott Sawyer,2 Anja J Stauber,2 Ivelina Gueorguieva,3 Kyla E Driscoll,4 Shawn T Estrem,2 Ann L Cleverly,3 Durisala Desaiah,2 Susan C Guba,2 Karim A Benhadji,2 Christopher A Slapak,2 Michael M Lahn21Lilly Deutschland GmbH, Bad Homburg, Germany; 2Lilly Research Laboratories, Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA; 3Lilly Research Laboratories, Eli Lilly and Company, Windlesham, Surrey, UK; 4Lilly Research Laboratories, Eli Lilly and Company, New York, NY, USA Abstract: Transforming growth factor-beta (TGF-β) signaling regulates a wide range of biological processes. TGF-β plays an important role in tumorigenesis and contributes to the hallmarks of cancer, including tumor proliferation, invasion and metastasis, inflammation, angiogenesis, and escape of immune surveillance. There are several pharmacological approaches to block TGF-β signaling, such as monoclonal antibodies, vaccines, antisense oligonucleotides, and small molecule inhibitors. Galunisertib (LY2157299 monohydrate) is an oral small molecule inhibitor of the TGF-β receptor I kinase that specifically downregulates the phosphorylation of SMAD2, abrogating activation of the canonical pathway. Furthermore, galunisertib has antitumor activity in tumor-bearing animal models such as breast, colon, lung cancers, and hepatocellular carcinoma. Continuous long-term exposure to galunisertib caused cardiac toxicities in animals requiring adoption of a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic-based dosing strategy to allow further development. The use of such a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic model defined a therapeutic window with an appropriate safety profile that enabled the clinical investigation of galunisertib. These efforts resulted in an intermittent dosing regimen (14 days on/14 days off, on a 28-day cycle) of galunisertib for all ongoing trials. Galunisertib is being investigated either as monotherapy or in combination with standard antitumor regimens (including nivolumab) in patients with cancer with high unmet medical needs such as glioblastoma, pancreatic cancer, and hepatocellular carcinoma. The present review summarizes the past and current experiences with different pharmacological treatments that enabled galunisertib to be investigated in patients. Keywords: TGF-β, TGF-βRI kinase inhibitor, ALK5, galunisertib, LY2157299, cancer, clinical trials

Abstract Background Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is the most frequent anxiety disorder in primary care patients. It is known that painful physical symptoms (PPS) are associated with GAD, regardless the presence of comorbid major depressive disorder (MDD). However the specific role of such symptoms in patients' functional impairment is not well understood. The objective of the present study is to assess functional impairment related to the presence of PPS in patients with GAD. Methods This is a post hoc analysis of a cross-sectional study. Functioning, in the presence (overall pain score >30; Visual Analog Scale) or absence of PPS, was assessed using the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) in three groups of patients; 1) GAD and comorbid MDD (GAD+MDD+), 2) GAD without comorbid MDD (GAD+MDD-), 3) controls (GAD-MDD-). ANCOVA models were used. Results Of those patients with GAD+MDD+ (n = 559), 436 (78.0%) had PPS, compared with GAD+MDD- (249 of 422, 59%) and controls (95 of 336, 28.3%). Functioning worsened in both GAD groups in presence of PPS (SDS least squares mean total score: 16.1 vs. 9.8, p < 0.0001, GAD+MDD+; 14.3 vs. 8.2, p < 0.0001, GAD+MDD-). The presence of PPS was significantly associated with less productivity. Conclusions Functional impairment related to the presence of PPS was relevant. Clinical implications should be considered.

Transforming growth factor-β (TGFβ) is an important driver of tumor growth via intrinsic and extrinsic mechanisms, and is therefore an attractive target for developing cancer therapeutics. Using preclinical models, we characterized the anti-tumor activity of a small molecule inhibitor of TGFβ receptor I (TGFβRI), galunisertib (LY2157299 monohydrate). Galunisertib demonstrated potent and selective inhibition of TGFβRI with corresponding inhibition of downstream signaling via inhibition of SMAD phosphorylation (pSMAD). Galunisertib also inhibited TGFβ-induced pSMAD in vivo, which enabled a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profile in Calu6 and EMT6-LM2 tumors. Galunisertib demonstrated anti-tumor activity including inhibition of tumor cell migration and mesenchymal phenotype, reversal of TGFβ-mediated immune-suppression, and tumor growth delay. A concentration-effect relationship was established with a dosing schedule to achieve the optimal level of target modulation. Finally, a rat model demonstrated a correlation between galunisertib-dependent inhibition of pSMAD in tumor tissues and in PBMCs, supporting the use of PBMCs for assessing pharmacodynamic effects. Galunisertib has been tested in several clinical studies with evidence of anti-tumor activity observed in subsets of patients. Here, we demonstrate that galunisertib inhibits a number of TGFβ-dependent functions leading to anti-tumor activity. The enhanced understanding of galunisertib provides rationale for further informed clinical development of TGFβ pathway inhibitors., Competing Interests: CONFLICTS OF INTEREST The authors disclose no potential conflicts of interest. All authors except HH and RAB, are current or former employees of Eli Lilly and Company.

Galunisertib, a Transforming growth factor-βRI (TGF-βRI) kinase inhibitor, blocks TGF-β-mediated tumor growth in glioblastoma. In a three-arm study of galunisertib (300 mg/day) monotherapy (intermittent dosing; each cycle =14 days on/14 days off), lomustine monotherapy, and galunisertib plus lomustine therapy, baseline tumor tissue was evaluated to identify markers associated with tumor stage (e.g., histopathology, Ki67, glial fibrillary acidic protein) and TGF-β-related signaling (e.g., pSMAD2). Other pharmacodynamic assessments included chemokine, cytokine, and T cell subsets alterations. 158 patients were randomized to galunisertib plus lomustine ( n = 79), galunisertib ( n = 39) and placebo+lomustine ( n = 40). In 127 of these patients, tissue was adequate for central pathology review and biomarker work. Isocitrate dehydrogenase ( IDH1 ) negative glioblastoma patients with baseline pSMAD2⁺ in cytoplasm had median overall survival (OS) 9.5 months vs. 6.9 months for patients with no tumor pSMAD2 expression ( p = 0.4574). Eight patients were IDH1 R132H⁺ and had a median OS of 10.4 months compared to 6.9 months for patients with negative IDH1 R132H ( p = 0.5452). IDH1 status was associated with numerically higher plasma macrophage-derived chemokine (MDC/CCL22), higher whole blood FOXP3, and reduced tumor CD3⁺ T cell counts. Compared to the baseline, treatment with galunisertib monotherapy preserved CD4⁺ T cell counts, eosinophils, lymphocytes, and the CD4/CD8 ratio. The T-regulatory cell compartment was associated with better OS with MDC/CCL22 as a prominent prognostic marker.

Objective: Galunisertib (LY2157299 monohydrate), an inhibitor of the transforming growth factor β (TGFβ) pathway, is currently under investigation in several clinical trials involving multiple tumor types. The primary objective of this study was to assess relative bioavailability of two new galunisertib formulations developed using the roller compaction (RC) dry-milled (RCD) and RC slurry-milled (RCS) processes, compared with the existing formulation developed using the high-sheer wet granulation (HSWG) process. The secondary objective was to report the safety profile after a single dose of the three formulations., Methods: Patients with advanced or metastatic cancer were enrolled into this single-center, 3-period, 6-sequence crossover study. Patients were assigned sequentially to 1 of 6 sequences in blocks of 6 to ensure that all 6 sequences have the same number of completers. A patient entering a sequence received a different galunisertib formulation as a single 150 mg dose orally during each of the 3 periods. Each period was separated from the next by a washout interval of at least 48 hours. Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters, including area under curve (AUC) and C max , were computed using standard non-compartmentalized methods of analysis. For comparison of exposures between formulations, log-transformed AUC and C max values were analyzed using a linear mixed-effects model. Safety assessments included adverse event monitoring, physical examinations, and laboratory tests., Results: Of the 14 patients who entered and completed the study, 13 patients were included in the final statistical analysis. AUC(0-t last ), AUC(0-48 h), and AUC(0-∞) for the RC formulations and the HSWG formulation were similar. C max was reduced by approximately 22% and t max was longer by at least 1.00 h for the RCD and RCS formulations compared with the HSWG formulation. The RC formulations demonstrated a safety profile after a single dose similar to the HSWG formulation., Conclusions: In this relative bioavailability study comparing galunisertib formulations after a single dose, RCD and RCS formulations had similar exposure and safety profile compared with the HSWG formulation., Competing Interests: and potential conflicts of interest: Dr. Rodon has served as consultant on Eli Lilly advisory boards and received financial compensation. Drs. Azaro, Seoane, Brana, and Sicart have no conflict of interest. Dr. Gueorguieva, Dr. Desaiah, Mr. Miles, and Ms. Cleverly are employees of Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA and Erl Wood, UK and may hold company stocks. Drs. Lahn and Mitchell were former employees of Eli Lilly and Company and may hold company stock. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) Potential Conflicts of Interests form for the authors are available for download at: http://www.drugsincontext.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/dic.212303-COI.pdf.

Background: The combination of galunisertib, a transforming growth factor (TGF)-β receptor (R)1 kinase inhibitor, and lomustine was found to have antitumor activity in murine models of glioblastoma., Methods: Galunisertib (300 mg/day) was given orally 14 days on/14 days off (intermittent dosing). Lomustine was given as approved. Patients were randomized in a 2:1:1 ratio to galunisertib + lomustine, galunisertib monotherapy, or placebo + lomustine. The primary objective was overall survival (OS); secondary objectives were safety, pharmacokinetics (PKs), and antitumor activity., Results: One hundred fifty-eight patients were randomized: galunisertib + lomustine (N = 79), galunisertib (N = 39), and placebo + lomustine (N = 40). Baseline characteristics were: male (64.6%), white (75.3%), median age 58 years, ECOG performance status (PS) 1 (63.3%), and primary glioblastoma (93.7%). The PKs of galunisertib were not altered with lomustine, and galunisertib had a median half-life of ∼8 hours. Median OS in months (95% credible interval [CrI]) for galunisertib + lomustine was 6.7 (range: 5.3-8.5), 8.0 (range: 5.7-11.7) for galunisertib alone, and 7.5 (range: 5.6-10.3) for placebo + lomustine. There was no difference in OS for patients treated with galunisertib + lomustine compared with placebo + lomustine [P (HR < 1) = 26%]. Median progression-free survival of ∼2 months was observed in all 3 arms. Among 8 patients with IDH1 mutation, 7 patients were treated with galunisertib (monotherapy or with lomustine); OS ranged from 4 to 17 months. Patients treated with galunisertib alone had fewer drug-related grade 3/4 adverse events (n = 34) compared with lomustine-treated patients (10% vs 26%). Baseline PS, post-discontinuation of bevacizumab, tumor size, and baseline levels of MDC/CCL22 were correlated with OS., Conclusions: Galunisertib + lomustine failed to demonstrate improved OS relative to placebo + lomustine. Efficacy outcomes were similar in all 3 arms., Clinical Trial Registration: NCT01582269, ClinicalTrials.gov., (© The Author(s) 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for Neuro-Oncology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Purpose: TGFβ signaling plays a key role in tumor progression, including malignant glioma. Small-molecule inhibitors such as LY2157299 monohydrate (LY2157299) block TGFβ signaling and reduce tumor progression in preclinical models. To use LY2157299 in the treatment of malignancies, we investigated its properties in a first-in-human dose (FHD) study in patients with cancer., Experimental Design: Sixty-five patients (58 with glioma) with measurable and progressive malignancies were enrolled. Oral LY2157299 was given as a split dose morning and evening on an intermittent schedule of 14 days on and 14 days off (28-day cycle). LY2157299 monotherapy was studied in dose escalation (part A) first and then evaluated in combination with standard doses of lomustine (part B). Safety was assessed using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 3.0, echocardiography/Doppler imaging, serum troponin I, and brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) levels. Antitumor activity was assessed by RECIST and Macdonald criteria., Results: In part A, 16.6% (5/30) and in part B, 7.7% (2/26) of evaluable patients with glioma had either a complete (CR) or a partial response (PR). In both parts, 15 patients with glioma had stable disease (SD), 5 of whom had SD ≥ 6 cycles of treatment. Therefore, clinical benefit (CR+PR+SD ≥ 6 cycles) was observed in 12 of 56 patients with glioma (21.4%). LY2157299 was safe, with no cardiac adverse events., Conclusions: On the basis of the safety, pharmacokinetics, and antitumor activity in patients with glioma, the intermittent administration of LY2157299 at 300 mg/day is safe for future clinical investigation., (©2014 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Introduction: PRONOUNCE compared the efficacy and safety of pemetrexed+carboplatin followed by pemetrexed (Pem+Cb) with paclitaxel+carboplatin+bevacizumab followed by bevacizumab (Pac+Cb+Bev) in patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC)., Methods: Patients ≥18 years of age with stage IV nonsquamous NSCLC (American Joint Committee on Cancer v7.0), and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0/1 were randomized (1:1) to four cycles of induction Pem+Cb (pemetrexed, 500 mg/m, carboplatin, area under the curve = 6) followed by Pem maintenance or Pac+Cb+Bev (paclitaxel, 200 mg/m, carboplatin, area under the curve = 6, and bevacizumab, 15 mg/kg) followed by Bev maintenance in the absence of progressive disease or discontinuation. The primary objective was progression-free survival (PFS) without grade 4 toxicity (G4PFS). Secondary end points were PFS, overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and safety. Resource utilization was also assessed., Results: Baseline characteristics of the patients randomized to Pem+Cb (N = 182) and Pac+Cb+Bev (N = 179) were well balanced between the arms. Median (months) G4PFS was 3.91 for Pem+Cb and 2.86 for Pac+Cb+Bev (hazard ratio = 0.85, 90% confidence interval, 0.7-1.04; p = 0.176); PFS, OS, ORR, or DCR did not differ significantly between the arms. Significantly more drug-related grade 3/4 anemia (18.7% versus 5.4%) and thrombocytopenia (24.0% versus 9.6%) were reported for Pem+Cb. Significantly more grade 3/4 neutropenia (48.8% versus 24.6%), grade 1/2 alopecia (28.3% versus 8.2%), and grade 1/2 sensory neuropathy were reported for Pac+Cb+Bev. Number of hospitalizations and overall length of stay did not differ significantly between the arms., Conclusions: Pem+Cb did not produce significantly better G4PFS compared with Pac+Cb+Bev. Pem+Cb was not superior in PFS, OS, ORR, or DCR compared with Pac+Cb+Bev. Both regimens were well tolerated, although, toxicity profiles differed.

Objective: To evaluate suicidal thoughts in relationship to depressive symptom severity and reasons for living in patients hospitalized for major depressive disorder (MDD)., Method: A post hoc analysis was conducted of a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group trial involving hospitalized patients with MDD (DSM-IV criteria) who received duloxetine 60 mg once daily or duloxetine 60 mg twice daily for 8 weeks. After 4 weeks, the dose for nonresponders receiving 60 mg once daily could be increased to 60 mg twice daily (double-blind). The study was conducted between February 9, 2007, and August 26, 2008 at 43 centers in 4 countries across Europe and South Africa. Suicidal thoughts were assessed with Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) item 10, depression severity was assessed with the 6-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale and the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness scale, and protective factors were assessed with the patient-rated Reasons for Living Inventory (RFL) assessing 6 domains. Descriptive statistics, correlation, and linear regression analysis were performed., Results: At baseline, patients (N = 336) had varying severity of suicidal thoughts: 18% had a score ≥ 4. The proportion of patients with a score ≥ 4 decreased to 7% at week 1 and 1% at week 8 of treatment. The RFL scores at baseline were lower in patients with higher baseline suicidal thoughts and increased significantly during treatment (P < .0001). A regression model revealed that only 16% of variance in baseline total RFL score is explained by the different MADRS items. Eight patients had suicidal behavior or ideation recorded as an adverse event during the study; no consistent pattern was found in the different psychometric scores either at baseline or at the visit preceding the suicidal behavior/ideation., Conclusions: Suicidality rapidly decreased in hospitalized patients with severe depression treated with duloxetine. The RFL scores were low at baseline but increased during treatment, suggesting that they are at least partially state rather than trait variables. Since RFL scores are lower in depressed inpatients, these scores lose the predictive value that they have in a general population sample., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00422162.

Objective: Functional outcomes were measured over a 12-month period in children and adolescents with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) after they received monotherapy., Design: Prospective, observational, noninterventional study., Setting: Conducted in six non-Western countries., Participants: Outpatients 6 to 17 years of age with a verified diagnosis of ADHD in accordance with the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR), together with their physicians, decided to initiate or switch treatment for ADHD. Patients were prescribed pharmacological monotherapy: methylphenidate (n=221), nootropic agents (n=91), or atomoxetine (n=234)., Measurements: Patients were followed for changes in their functional status and quality of life, which were assessed with the Child Health and Illness Profile-Child Edition (CHIP-CE) Achievement domain., Results: At the end of the study, a mean improvement on the CHIP-CE Achievement domain score was observed for all countries and therapies except in Taiwan, where patients received atomoxetine, and in Lebanon, where patients received methylphenidate. No patient experienced a serious adverse event during the study. Four patients discontinued due to a treatment-emergent adverse event., Conclusion: After 12 months of treatment, clinical and functional outcomes were improved in children and adolescents from non-Western countries who initiated and remained on their prescribed pharmacological monotherapy.

Objective: Major depressive disorder (MDD) is a significant public health concern and challenges health care providers to intervene with appropriate treatment. This article provides an overview of efficacy and safety information for duloxetine 60 mg/day in the treatment of MDD, including its effect on painful physical symptoms (PPS)., Design: A literature search was conducted for articles and pooled analyses reporting information regarding the use of duloxetine 60 mg/day in placebo-controlled trials., Setting: Placebo-controlled, active-comparator, short- and long-term studies were reviewed., Participants: Adult (≥18 years) patients with MDD., Measurements: Effect sizes for continuous outcome (change from baseline to endpoint) and categorical outcome (response and remission rates) were calculated using the primary measures of 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD-17) or Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score. The Brief Pain Inventory and Visual Analogue Scales were used to assess improvements in PPS. Glass estimation method was used to calculate effect sizes, and numbers needed to treat (NNT) were calculated based on HAMD-17 and MADRS total scores for remission and response rates. Safety data were examined via the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events and by mean changes in vital-sign measures., Results: Treatment with duloxetine was associated with small-to-moderate effect sizes in the range of 0.12 to 0.72 for response rate and 0.07 to 0.65 for remission rate. NNTs were in the range of 3 to 16 for response and 3 to 29 for remission. Statistically significant improvements (p≤0.05) were observed in duloxetine-treated patients compared to placebo-treated patients in PPS and quality of life. The safety profile of the 60-mg dose was consistent with duloxetine labeling, with the most commonly observed significant adverse events being nausea, dry mouth, diarrhea, dizziness, constipation, fatigue, and decreased appetite., Conclusion: These results reinforce the efficacy and tolerability of duloxetine 60 mg/day as an effective short- and long-term treatment for adults with MDD. The evidence of the independent analgesic effect of duloxetine 60 mg/day supports its use as a treatment for patients with PPS associated with depression. This review is limited by the fact that it included randomized clinical trials with different study designs. Furthermore, data from randomized controlled trials may not generalize well to real clinical practice.

Background: Duloxetine is approved for the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) in the United States and elsewhere. This study aimed to assess the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of duloxetine in Chinese patients with GAD., Methods: This 9-site study consisted of double-blind treatment for 15 weeks either with duloxetine 60 - 120 mg or with placebo. Patients with at least moderately severe GAD and a Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) global functioning impairment total score ≥ 12 were included in this study. Patients who were randomly assigned to duloxetine received 60 mg for 7 weeks; at that point, for nonresponders the dose was increased to 120 mg for the remaining 8 weeks. The primary efficacy measure was mean change from baseline to endpoint on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-Anxiety subscale score (HADS-A). Secondary efficacy measures included the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA), the SDS, and pain measures. Safety and tolerability were assessed., Results: Baseline characteristics did not differ significantly between treatment groups. Mean age of the subjects (n = 210) was 37.6 years, 50.5% were female, and 74.3% completed the 15 weeks treatment. Patients treated with duloxetine had significantly greater improvement compared to placebo on the HADS-A (mean change -6.6 vs. -4.9, respectively, P = 0.022). Improvement in anxiety was greater with duloxetine treatment at 7 weeks and continued through 15 weeks for both the HADS-A and the HAMA total score (0.01 ≤ P < 0.05). Compared with placebo, duloxetine was also associated with greater improvement on most secondary measures, but not on the SDS global functioning score. Nausea, dizziness, and somnolence occurred significantly more frequently as treatment-emergent adverse events with duloxetine treatment compared with placebo treatment., Conclusions: Duloxetine 60 - 120 mg once daily is effective and well-tolerated for the treatment of patients with GAD in China.

The purpose of this study was to assess the safety and identify the recommended doses of enzastaurin and bortezomib in combination for future Phase II studies in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. Three dose levels (DLs) of oral enzastaurin and intravenous bortezomib were used according to a conventional "3 + 3" design. A loading dose of enzastaurin (250 mg twice/day [BID]) on Day 1 was followed by enzastaurin 125 mg BID for 1 week, after which bortezomib was added (Cycle 1, 28 days, 1.0 mg/m(2) : Days 8, 11, 15, and 18; seven subsequent 21-day cycles, 1.3 mg/m(2) : Days 1, 4, 8, and 11). Twenty-three patients received treatment; all patients received prior systemic therapy. Most patients received ≥3 regimens; 17 patients were bortezomib-refractory. A median of four treatment cycles (range 1-24) was completed. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed; thus, DL 3 was the recommended Phase II dose. The most common drug-related Grade 3/4 toxicities were thrombocytopenia (n = 6) and anemia (n = 2). No patients died on therapy. One patient (DL 1) achieved a very good partial response; three patients (DLs 2 and 3), a partial response; nine patients, stable disease; and four patients, progressive disease. The recommended Phase II doses in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma are as follows: enzastaurin loading dose of 375 mg three times/day on Day 1 followed by 250 mg BID, with bortezomib 1.3 mg/m(2) on Days 1, 4, 8, and 11 of a 21-day cycle. The combination was well-tolerated and demonstrated some antimyeloma activity., (Copyright © 2011 Wiley-Liss, Inc.)

Background: Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is the most frequent anxiety disorder in primary care patients. It is known that painful physical symptoms (PPS) are associated with GAD, regardless the presence of comorbid major depressive disorder (MDD). However the specific role of such symptoms in patients' functional impairment is not well understood. The objective of the present study is to assess functional impairment related to the presence of PPS in patients with GAD., Methods: This is a post hoc analysis of a cross-sectional study. Functioning, in the presence (overall pain score >30; Visual Analog Scale) or absence of PPS, was assessed using the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) in three groups of patients; 1) GAD and comorbid MDD (GAD+MDD+), 2) GAD without comorbid MDD (GAD+MDD-), 3) controls (GAD-MDD-). ANCOVA models were used., Results: Of those patients with GAD+MDD+ (n = 559), 436 (78.0%) had PPS, compared with GAD+MDD- (249 of 422, 59%) and controls (95 of 336, 28.3%). Functioning worsened in both GAD groups in presence of PPS (SDS least squares mean total score: 16.1 vs. 9.8, p < 0.0001, GAD+MDD+; 14.3 vs. 8.2, p < 0.0001, GAD+MDD-). The presence of PPS was significantly associated with less productivity., Conclusions: Functional impairment related to the presence of PPS was relevant. Clinical implications should be considered.

Objective: To review efficacy of duloxetine for physical symptoms and depressive illness in patients with at least mild to moderate major depressive disorder (MDD; DSM-IV) and clinically significant painful physical symptoms at baseline., Data Sources: Global database of duloxetine clinical trials (Eli Lilly and Company)., Study Selection: All 11 acute, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of duloxetine (7 with duloxetine 60-mg doses and 4 with non-60-mg doses) in the database that used a scale to measure painful physical symptoms and were completed before March 17, 2011., Data Extraction: For each study, patients with clinically significant pain levels at baseline (Visual Analog Scale overall pain rating ≥ 30, Numerical Rating Scale score ≥ 3, or Brief Pain Inventory 24-hour average pain rating ≥ 3) were selected in order to determine the effect sizes of duloxetine (compared with placebo for each trial) on the pain and depression measures. Overall effect sizes for both painful physical symptoms and MDD were obtained from the mean of individual-trial effect sizes, and each effect size was weighted relative to the number of patients within each study., Data Synthesis: The overall mean effect sizes were as follows: painful physical symptoms-60-mg trials, 0.29 (95% CI, 0.06 to 0.52); non-60-mg trials, 0.13 (95% CI, -0.19 to 0.45); MDD-60-mg trials, 0.29 (95% CI, 0.18 to 0.40); non-60-mg trials, 0.16 (95% CI, 0.00 to 0.32). Across the 11 studies, the weighted effect size for painful physical symptoms was 0.26 (95% CI, 0.00 to 0.51) and for MDD, 0.25 (95% CI, 0.16 to 0.34)., Conclusions: According to this meta-analysis, duloxetine 60 mg once daily is as effective in improving painful physical symptoms as it is for depression in patients with MDD and clinically significant painful physical symptoms. The results of this meta-analysis indicate that duloxetine has small effect sizes in reducing painful physical symptoms and depressive symptoms in patients with MDD and clinically significant pain levels at baseline. Thus, the results of the study permit one to conclude that duloxetine has a clinically significant impact on painful physical symptoms and in reducing the severity of depressive symptoms. However, the results do not address its efficacy compared to other alternatives, as in all studies the comparator was placebo.

Unlabelled: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study assessed efficacy and safety of duloxetine in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP). Adults (n = 401) with a nonneuropathic CLBP and average pain intensity of ≥ 4 on an 11-point numerical scale (Brief Pain Inventory [BPI]) were treated with either duloxetine 60 mg once daily or placebo for 12 weeks. The primary measure was BPI average pain. Secondary endpoints included Patient's Global Impressions of Improvement (PGI-I), Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ-24), BPI-Severity (BPI-S), BPI-Interference (BPI-I), and response rates (either ≥ 30% or ≥ 50% BPI average pain reduction at endpoint). Health outcomes included Short Form-36, European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions, and the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment questionnaire. Safety and tolerability were assessed. Compared with placebo-treated patients, duloxetine-treated patients reported a significantly greater reduction in BPI average pain (P ≤ .001). Similarly, duloxetine-treated patients reported significantly greater improvements in PGI-I, BPI-S, BPI-I, 50% response rates, and some health outcomes. The RMDQ and 30% response rate showed numerical improvements with duloxetine treatment. Significantly more patients in the duloxetine group (15.2%) than patients in the placebo group (5.4%) discontinued because of adverse events (P = .002). Nausea and dry mouth were the most common treatment-emergent adverse events with rates significantly higher in duloxetine-treated patients., Perspective: This study provides clinical evidence of the efficacy and safety of duloxetine at a fixed dose of 60 mg once daily in the treatment of chronic low back pain (CLBP). As of December 2009, duloxetine has not received regulatory approval for the treatment of CLBP., (Copyright © 2010 American Pain Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Duloxetine, a selective serotonin and noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor, has been shown to be effective in treatment of diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain and approved for the management of patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain (DPNP) in the United States, European Union, and many other countries. This study assessed the efficacy and safety of duloxetine in Chinese patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain., Methods: This double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, flexible-dose study treated adult patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain and baseline Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) 24-hour average pain severity ratings ≥ 4 with duloxetine 60 mg to 120 mg once daily or placebo for 12 weeks. Dose adjustments of duloxetine or matching placebo were based upon investigator's judgment of clinical response. Change from baseline to endpoint in BPI average pain was the primary efficacy outcome. Secondary outcome measures included BPI-severity and -Interference, Patient Global Impression of Improvement, Clinical Global Impressions of Severity, EuroQol: 5 Dimensions, Athens Insomnia Scale, and safety measures., Results: Of 215 patients randomized, 88.4% and 82.1% of patients in placebo and duloxetine groups, respectively, completed the study. Mean change from baseline to endpoint in BPI average pain was not statistically different between the treatment groups (P = 0.124). Duloxetine- treated patients showed significantly greater pain reduction compared with those in placebo group at weeks 1, 2, and 4 (P = 0.004, P = 0.009, and P = 0.006, respectively), but not at weeks 8 (P = 0.125) and 12 (P = 0.107). Duloxetine-treated patients experienced statistically significant improvement in Patient Global Impression of Improvement, Clinical Global Impression of Severity, area under the curve for pain relief, BPI-severity pain right now, and BPI-interference walking ability. Patients treated with duloxetine 120 mg once daily showed significantly greater pain reduction on the Brief Pain Inventory average pain score relative to placebo. Duloxetine-treated patients reported nausea, somnolence, anorexia, and dysuria significantly more than placebo., Conclusions: Although the primary study endpoint was not achieved, the overall observed response pattern suggests the efficacy of duloxetine in the treatment of Chinese patients with diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain. The safety profile for duloxetine is similar to that reported in other global trials.

Inositol 1,4,5-trisphosphatee (IP3), an intracellular messenger, releases Ca2+ from microsomes. Ca2+ plays a major role in regulating various cellular events like neural transmission and regulation of hormones and growth factors. Aluminum (Al), lead (Pb) and mercury (Hg) were reported to alter Ca(2+)-regulated events thereby causing neurotoxicity. Hence, an attempt was made characterize IP3 mediated Ca2+ release from rat brain microsomes under the influence of Al, Pb and Hg. Different concentrations of metals were tested over a designated time scale and their effects on IP3 mediated Ca2+ release from microsomes were monitored using Fura-2 technique. All the three metals inhibited IP3 mediated Ca2+ release, Pb being more potent. The order of potency of these three metals was Pb>Hg>Al. Except for Al, both Hg and Pb independently released Ca2+ from microsomes. Re-uptake of Ca2+ into microsomes was inhibited by all the three metals, Pb being more potent. Microsomal Ca(2+)-ATPase activity was also inhibited by all the three metals. These results suggest that neurotoxicity exerted by Al, Pb and Hg may be due to the interference of these metals with IP3 mediated calcium release and also interfering with the microsomal Ca2+ sequestration mechanism. Differential effects of heavy metal induced changes in Ca2+ flux can be used as an index of relative toxicity.

Objectives: This post hoc analysis compared how patients and physicians estimate disease severity and global improvement during 8 weeks of treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD) with associated nonspecific pain. In addition, predictors of pain and depression were identified., Method: Data were derived from a double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, European study (conducted from May 2005 to May 2006) in adult outpatients with MDD (DSM-IV criteria) and moderate pain not attributable to a diagnosed organic pain syndrome (Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form [BPI-SF] average pain score ≥ 3). Patients were randomly assigned to duloxetine 60 mg/day or placebo and treated for 8 weeks. Physicians were asked to rate severity of depression by using the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) and CGI-Improvement (CGI-I) scales. Patients were asked to assess pain using the BPI-SF, psychological symptomatology (9 domains including depression) with the Symptom Checklist-90-Revised (SCL-90-R), and overall improvement with the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I). Multivariate linear regressions were performed as post hoc analyses to identify predictors of disease assessment at baseline and at the end of the study using a last-observation-carried-forward approach., Results: All SCL-90-R domains improved during the 8 weeks of treatment. At baseline, the MADRS was associated only with the SCL-90-R obsessive-compulsive score, while the SCL-90-R depression score was associated with the BPI-SF average pain score and with many SCL-90-R subscores. The global impression of improvement was rated higher by the physicians than by the patients. At the end of the study, CGI-I was significantly associated with a decrease in depression severity (MADRS; p < .0001), younger age (p = .0005), and a decrease of the SCL-90-R interpersonal sensitivity score (p = .0359), but not with BPI-SF average pain. In contrast, patient-rated PGI-I was significantly associated with the SCL-90-R depressive domain (p < .0001), BPI-SF average pain (p = .0003), and the SCL-90-R anxiety domain (p = .0041) scores., Conclusion: In patients with MDD associated with at least moderate nonspecific pain, physicians consider mainly the change in depressive symptoms as measured by MADRS in their CGI-I ratings, while patients also consider pain, depression, and anxiety in their PGI-I ratings. When treating depression and assessing treatment outcome, a broad spectrum of symptoms needs to be monitored., Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00191919.

Background: Functional impairment is associated with major depressive disorder (MDD), and patients with MDD often present with somatic symptoms., Objective: To examine the relationships between improved global functioning and core depressive symptoms as well as painful and nonpainful somatic symptoms in patients with MDD., Method: This post hoc analysis of 2 identical trials compared the efficacy of duloxetine with that of paroxetine or placebo as treatment of MDD. In the trials, patients with DSM-IV-defined MDD received duloxetine 80 mg/day (N = 188), duloxetine 120 mg/day (N = 196), paroxetine 20 mg/day (N = 183), or placebo (N = 192) for 8 weeks. The Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS), Maier subscale of the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, 21-item Somatic Symptom Inventory, and Visual Analog Scale for overall pain were used to measure functional impairment, core symptoms of depression, and nonpainful and painful somatic symptoms, respectively. Baseline-to-endpoint mean changes in SDS total and subdomains were measured using analysis of variance with last-observation-carried-forward Pearson partial correlations, and path analysis was used to assess the significance of associations and relative contributions of improvement in global functional impairment, depression, and somatic symptoms. The trials were conducted from November 2000 to July 2002., Results: The difference between antidepressant treatment and placebo in SDS total and subdomains was significant (p < .001). At baseline and in change from baseline to endpoint, associations between global functional impairment and core depressive and somatic symptoms were all significant (p < .05). Path analysis demonstrated improvement of functional impairment attributed to treatment effect as 37.0% (core depressive symptoms), 13.0% (nonpainful somatic symptoms), and 11.0% (painful somatic symptoms)., Conclusion: In patients with MDD, over a third of functional improvement associated with antidepressant therapy was mediated through improvement in core depressive symptoms. In addition, a significant proportion of functional improvement, although to a lesser degree, was associated with the treatment of both nonpainful and painful somatic symptoms.

Objective: To evaluate the impact of baseline disease variables related to diabetes and diabetic neuropathy severity on efficacy and safety of duloxetine in the management of diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain., Research Design and Methods: The impact of baseline conditions was evaluated using the data from three pooled placebo-controlled studies for combined duloxetine, doses of 60 mg q.d. and 60 mg b.i.d., versus placebo. The primary efficacy measure was the weekly mean of 24-h average pain severity, and night pain was the secondary measure. Safety and tolerability were assessed., Results: There were no significant (P > 0.10) interactions of treatment by age (< 65 or > or = 65 years), type of diabetes (type 1 or type 2), duration of diabetes (median split < 9.18 or > or = 9.18 years), duration of diabetic neuropathy (< 2, 2 to < 6, or > or = 6 years), severity of diabetic neuropathy (baseline Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument score < 5 or > or = 5), baseline A1C level (median split < 7.6 or > or = 7.6%), or baseline insulin use (yes/no). Significant interactions for both pain measures were observed in baseline pain subgroups (Brief Pain Inventory average pain, > or = 6 and < 6). Duloxetine was more effective in the subgroup with more pain. No significant association was found between any other subgroups (P > 0.10). Significant interactions (P < 0.1) occurred with treatment-emergent adverse events when stratified by subgroups., Conclusions: Pain severity but not variables related to diabetes or neuropathy may predict the effects of duloxetine in diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain. The efficacy of duloxetine is related to the initial pain severity and is generalizable across a broad spectrum of diabetic patients, including those with the highest severity of diabetes or neuropathy.

Background: The electrophysiological effects of duloxetine at supratherapeutic exposures were evaluated to ensure compliance with regulatory criteria and to assess the QT prolongation potential., Methods: Electrocardiograms were collected in a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, crossover study that enrolled 117 healthy female subjects aged 19 to 74 years. Duloxetine dosages escalated from 60 mg twice daily to 200 mg twice daily; a single moxifloxacin 400 mg dose was used as a positive control. Data were analyzed using 3 QT interval correction methods: mixed-effect analysis of covariance model with RR interval change from baseline as the covariate, the QT Fridericia's correction method, and the individual QT correction method. Concentrations of duloxetine and its 2 major metabolites were measured., Results: Compared with placebo, the mean change from baseline in QTc decreased with duloxetine 200 mg twice daily. The upper limits of the 2-sided 90% confidence intervals for duloxetine vs. placebo were <0 msec at each time point by any correction method. No subject had absolute QT Fridericia's correction values >445 msec with duloxetine, and the change in QT Fridericia's correction from baseline with duloxetine did not exceed 36 msec. No relationship was detected between QTc change and plasma concentrations of duloxetine or its metabolites even though average duloxetine concentrations ranged to more than 5 times those achieved at therapeutic doses. Moxifloxacin significantly prolonged QTc at all time points, regardless of correction method., Conclusions: Duloxetine does not affect ventricular repolarization as assessed by both mean changes and outliers in QT corrected by any method.

Objective: In placebo-controlled clinical trials, duloxetine has been shown to be effective and well-tolerated in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). However, patients in registration trials may not be representative of patients in clinical practice. This study sought to assess the effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of duloxetine in diverse populations of outpatients with MDD., Method: This open-label study recruited out-patients ≥ 18 years of age with DSM-IV MDD in primary care or psychiatric practice settings and treated them with duloxetine 60 mg q.d. for 7 weeks. Primary outcome measures were (1) the physicianrated Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness scale, (2) the patient-rated 28-item Somatic Symptom Inventory (SSI-28) average, and (3) the patient-rated 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self Report. Quality of life, disability, and vital signs also were assessed. The first patient visit was August 16, 2004. The last patient visit was January 7, 2005., Results: Of 3543 outpatients enrolled, 3431 received at least 1 dose of duloxetine, of whom 71.4% completed the study. Most patients were Caucasian (90.8%) and female (75.4%); mean age was 48 years. Duloxetine significantly (p < .001) improved all efficacy measures in all treated patients as well as in subgroups based on gender, ethnic origin, age, and patient care setting. Except for the SSI-28 average, all the efficacy measures were in favor of female gender and primary care subgroups. Overall, 10.8% of patients discontinued due to adverse events., Conclusion: Duloxetine 60 mg q.d. was effective, regardless of gender, ethnic origin, age, and patient care settings, in this 7-week open-label study and was well-tolerated in a diverse population of outpatients with MDD., Clinical Trials Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00479726.

Unlabelled: The effects of teriparatide when given in combination with HRT were studied in postmenopausal women with low bone mass or osteoporosis. The data provide evidence that the adverse event profile for combination therapy with teriparatide + HRT together is consistent with that expected for each treatment alone and that the BMD response is greater than for HRT alone., Introduction: Teriparatide [rhPTH(1-34)], given as a once-daily injection, activates new bone formation in patients with osteoporosis. Hormone replacement therapy (HRT) prevents osteoporosis by reducing bone resorption and formation. Combination therapy with these two compounds, in small clinical trials, increased BMD and reduced vertebral fracture burden. The purpose of this study was to determine whether teriparatide provided additional effect on BMD when given in combination with HRT., Materials and Methods: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was conducted in postmenopausal women with either low bone mass or osteoporosis. Patients were randomized to placebo subcutaneous plus HRT (n = 125) or teriparatide 40 microg/day (SC) plus HRT (TPTD40 + HRT; n = 122) for a median treatment exposure of 13.8 months. Approximately one-half of the patients in each group were pretreated with HRT for at least 12 months before randomization. Patients received 1000 mg calcium and 400-1200 IU of vitamin D daily as oral supplementation. BMD was measured by DXA., Results: Compared with HRT alone, TPTD40 + HRT produced significant (p < 0.001) increases in spine BMD (14% versus 3%), total hip (5.2% versus 1.6%), and femoral neck (5.2% versus 2%) at study endpoint. BMD, in whole body and ultradistal radius, was higher, and in the one-third distal radius was lower, in the combination therapy but not in the HRT group. Serum bone-specific alkaline phosphatase and urinary N-telopeptide/Cr were increased significantly (p < 0.01) in the women receiving TPTD40 + HRT compared with HRT. A similar profile of BMD and bone markers was evident in both randomized patients as well as in subgroups of patients not pretreated or pretreated with HRT. Patients tolerated both the treatments well. Nausea and leg cramps were more frequently reported in the TPTD40 + HRT group., Conclusions: Adding teriparatide, a bone formation agent, to HRT, an antiresorptive agent, provides additional increases in BMD beyond that provided by HRT alone. The adverse effects of teriparatide when added to HRT were similar to the adverse effects described for teriparatide administered alone. Whether teriparatide was initiated at the same time as HRT or after at least 1 year on HRT, the incremental increases over HRT alone were similar.