Time filter

Source Type

Raritan, NJ, United States

Hodder S.,Rutgers University | Jayaweera D.,University of Miami | Mrus J.,Janssen Global Services | Ryan R.,Janssen R and D | Witek J.,Janssen R and D
AIDS Research and Human Retroviruses | Year: 2012

The GRACE (Gender, Race and Clinical Experience) trial enrolled treatment-experienced, HIV-1-infected patients, mainly women, in North America, to assess outcomes with a darunavir/ritonavir-based regimen, which could include etravirine (ETR). We present outcomes at week 48 for men and women receiving ETR. Virologic response (HIV-1 RNA <50 copies/ml) and safety were assessed; descriptive statistics are reported. To evaluate the independent contribution of ETR treatment, a post hoc analysis including a multivariate model assessed factors predictive of virologic response for the entire GRACE population (429 patients). Of 207 patients who received ETR (women, 57.5%; black or Hispanic, 81.7%), 71.4% of women and 79.5% of men completed the study. Week 48 virologic response rates in women and men (intent-to-treat population) were 58.0% and 61.4%, respectively. After censoring patients who discontinued treatment for reasons other than virologic failure, response rates were 79.3% and 73.0%, respectively. Overall, ETR was well tolerated. Women experienced more nausea (24.4% vs. 11.4%) and rash-related events (21.0% vs. 15.9%), but less diarrhea (15.1% vs. 21.6%), compared with men. Grade 3-4 hypertriglyceridemia was more common in men (9.3%) than women (1.1%). In total, 11 (9.2%) women and 7 (8.0%) men discontinued ETR due to adverse events. In the multivariate model of the entire GRACE population, ETR use was independently associated with improved virologic response. ETR is effective and well tolerated in treatment-experienced patients with HIV-1, with similar outcomes among women and men. © Copyright 2012, Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. Source

Kavanagh S.,Janssen Global Services | Van Baelen B.,SGS Life Science Services | Schauble B.,Janssen Cilag Medical Affairs
Journal of Alzheimer's Disease | Year: 2011

In Alzheimer's disease (AD), it is important to consider long-term effects, not only in patients receiving treatment, but also in subjects in whom therapy has been discontinued. The present analysis evaluates the long-term effects of galantamine on cognitive function in AD in terms of Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores for up to 7 years, using both clinical data and epidemiological modeling. Consideration is given not only to patients continuing to receive galantamine therapy, but also to those who stop this treatment. In a retrospective review of medical notes, re-contacted study investigators obtained data from 258 patients originally recruited into three previously described randomized clinical trials involving galantamine: two placebo-controlled trials in mild-to-moderate AD (of 3 and 6 months' duration, followed by open-label extensions) and the galantamine-treatment arm of a 12-month comparative study with donepezil in moderate AD. Information relating to disease progression was collated (up to five MMSE scores, separated by at least 3 months, for each patient). Changes in MMSE scores over time were evaluated using observed data. In the absence of long-term placebo, the rate of cognitive decline without treatment was projected using a previously described epidemiological model. A new, exploratory statistical model was also developed. Results showed that patients with mild-to-moderate AD who received long-term galantamine treatment exhibited attenuated decline in cognitive function, as assessed by MMSE, compared with decline predicted in the absence of treatment. Furthermore, patients who stopped treatment experienced subsequent cognitive decline at a rate similar to that predicted for untreated patients. © 2011 - IOS Press and the authors. All rights reserved. Source

Jacobson I.M.,New York Medical College | Dore G.J.,University of New South Wales | Foster G.R.,Queen Mary, University of London | Fried M.W.,University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill | And 12 more authors.
The Lancet | Year: 2014

Background Although the addition of the HCV NS3/4A protease inhibitors boceprevir and telaprevir to pegylated interferon (peginterferon) alfa plus ribavirin has improved sustained virological response (SVR) in treatment-naive and treatment-experienced patients infected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1, the regimens have a high pill burden and are associated with increased rates and severity of adverse events, such as anaemia and rash. The efficacy and safety of the combination of simeprevir, a one pill, once-daily, oral HCV NS3/4A protease inhibitor, plus peginterferon alfa 2a plus ribavirin were assessed in treatment-naive patients with HCV genotype 1 infection. Methods In QUEST-1, a phase 3, randomised, double-blind multicentre trial undertaken in 13 countries (Australia, Europe, North America, Puerto Rico, and New Zealand), 394 patients (aged ≥18 years) with chronic HCV genotype 1 infection and no history of HCV treatment, stratified by HCV subtype and host IL28B genotype, were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio with a computer-generated allocation sequence to receive simeprevir (150 mg once daily, orally) plus peginterferon alfa 2a plus ribavirin for 12 weeks, followed by peginterferon alfa 2a plus ribavirin (simeprevir group), or placebo orally plus peginterferon alfa 2a plus ribavirin for 12 weeks, followed by peginterferon alfa 2a plus ribavirin (placebo group). Treatment duration was 24 weeks or 48 weeks in the simeprevir group according to criteria for response-guided therapy (ie, HCV RNA <25 IU/mL [undetectable or detectable] at week 4 and <25 IU/mL undetectable at week 12) and 48 weeks in the placebo group. Patients, study personnel, and the sponsor were masked to the treatment group assignment. The primary efficacy endpoint was sustained virological response 12 weeks after the planned end of treatment (SVR12) and was assessed with an intention-to-treat analysis. The results of the primary analysis (week 60) are presented for safety and SVR12. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01289782. Findings Treatment with simeprevir, peginterferon alfa 2a, and ribavirin was superior to placebo, peginterferon alfa 2a, and ribavirin (SVR12 in 210 [80%] patients of 264 vs 65 [50%] of 130, respectively, adjusted difference 29·3% [95% CI 20·1-38·6; p<0·0001). Adverse events in the first 12 weeks of treatment led to discontinuation of simeprevir in two (<1%) patients and discontinuation of placebo in one patient (<1%); fatigue (106 [40%] vs 49 [38%] patients, respectively) and headache (81 [31%] vs 48 [37%], respectively) were the most common adverse events. The prevalences of anaemia (42 [16%] vs 14 [11%], respectively) and rash (72 [27%] vs 33 [25%]) were similar in the simeprevir and placebo groups. Addition of simeprevir did not increase severity of patient-reported fatigue and functioning limitations, but shortened their duration. Interpretation Simeprevir once daily with peginterferon alfa 2a and ribavirin shortens therapy in treatment-naive patients with HCV genotype 1 infection without worsening the adverse event profiles associated with peginterferon alfa 2a plus ribavirin. Funding Janssen Infectious Diseases-Diagnostics. © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. Source

Reddy K.R.,University of Pennsylvania | Zeuzem S.,Goethe University Frankfurt | Zoulim F.,University of Lyon | Weiland O.,Karolinska University Hospital | And 13 more authors.
The Lancet Infectious Diseases | Year: 2015

Background: We did a phase 3 study in previous non-responders with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1 infection and compensated liver disease that related to the standard of care for these patients at the time this study was initiated. We investigated whether simeprevir is non-inferior in terms of efficacy to telaprevir, each in combination with peginterferon alfa-2a and ribavirin. Methods: We did this randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial at 169 investigational sites in 24 countries. We enrolled adults (≥18 years) with chronic HCV genotype 1 infection, compensated liver disease, and plasma HCV RNA higher than 10 000 IU/mL who were null or partial responders during at least one previous course of peginterferon alfa-2a and ribavirin treatment. We randomly assigned (1:1) patients (stratified by HCV genotype 1 subtype [1a plus other/1b] and previous treatment response [partial or null]) to receive simeprevir (150 mg once a day) plus telaprevir placebo (three times a day 7-9 h apart) or telaprevir (750 mg three times a day) plus simeprevir placebo (once a day) in combination with peginterferon alfa-2a and ribavirin for 12 weeks followed by 36 weeks of peginterferon alfa-2a and ribavirin alone. The primary efficacy endpoint was sustained virological response 12 weeks after end of treatment (SVR12) in the intention-to-treat and the per-protocol population. We compared groups with the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test. We established a non-inferiority margin of 12%. Adverse events were reported descriptively. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01485991. Findings: Patient screening began on Jan 19, 2012, and the last visit was on April 7, 2014. We included 763 patients (472 previous null responders [62%]). Simeprevir and peginterferon alfa-2a and ribavirin was non-inferior to telaprevir and peginterferon alfa-2a and ribavirin for SVR12 (54% [203/379] vs 55% [210/384]; difference -1·1%, 95% CI -7·8 to 5·5; p=0·0007). SVR12 was achieved in 70% (101/145) versus 68% (100/146) of previous partial responders and 44% (102/234) versus 46% (110/238) of previous null responders with simeprevir and peginterferon alfa-2a and ribavirin and telaprevir and peginterferon alfa-2a and ribavirin treatment, respectively. We recorded differences between treatment groups in simeprevir or telaprevir-related adverse events (69% [261/379] in the simeprevir group vs 86% [330/384] in the telaprevir group), serious adverse events (2% [8/379] vs 9% [33/384]), and adverse events leading to simeprevir or telaprevir discontinuation (2% [7/379] vs 8% [32/384]). Interpretation: Simeprevir once a day with peginterferon alfa-2a and ribavirin was well tolerated in HCV genotype 1-infected previous non-responders and was non-inferior to telaprevir, thus providing an alternative treatment in areas of the world where all-oral HCV regimens are not available or accessible. Funding: Janssen. © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. Source

Basch E.,University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill | Autio K.,Sloan Kettering Cancer Center | Ryan C.J.,University of California at San Francisco | Mulders P.,Radboud University Nijmegen | And 13 more authors.
The Lancet Oncology | Year: 2013

Background: Abiraterone acetate plus prednisone significantly improves radiographic progression-free survival in asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic, chemotherapy-naive patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer compared with prednisone alone. We describe analyses of data for patient-reported pain and functional status in a preplanned interim analysis of a phase 3 trial. Methods: Between April 28, 2009, and June 23, 2010, patients with progressive, metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer were enrolled into a multinational, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Patients were eligible if they were asymptomatic (score of 0 or 1 on item three of the Brief Pain Inventory Short Form [BPI-SF] questionnaire) or mildly symptomatic (score of 2 or 3) and had not previously received chemotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive oral abiraterone (1 g daily) plus prednisone (5 mg twice daily) or placebo plus prednisone in continuous 4-week cycles. Pain was assessed with the BPI-SF questionnaire, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) with the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) questionnaire. We analysed data with prespecified criteria for clinically meaningful pain progression and deterioration in HRQoL. All patients who underwent randomisation were included in analyses. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00887198. Findings: 1088 patients underwent randomisation: 546 were assigned to abiraterone plus prednisone and 542 to placebo plus prednisone. At the time of the second prespecified interim analysis, median follow-up was 22·2 months (IQR 20·2-24·8). Median time to progression of mean pain intensity was longer in patients assigned to abiraterone plus prednisone (26·7 months [95% CI 19·3-not estimable]) than in those assigned to placebo plus prednisone (18·4 months [14·9-not estimable]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·82, 95% CI 0·67-1·00; p=0·0490), as was median time to progression of pain interference with daily activities (10·3 months [95% CI 9·3-13·0] vs 7·4 months [6·4-8·6]; HR 0·79, 95% CI 0·67-0·93; p=0·005). Median time to progression of worst pain was also longer with abiraterone plus prednisone (26·7 months [95% CI 19·4-not estimable]) than with placebo plus prednisone (19·4 months [16·6-not estimable]), but the difference was not significant (HR 0·85, 95% CI 0·69-1·04; p=0·109). Median time to HRQoL deterioration was longer in patients assigned to abiraterone plus prednisone than in those assigned to placebo plus prednisone as assessed by the FACT-P total score (12·7 months [95% CI 11·1-14·0] vs 8·3 months [7·4-10·6]; HR 0·78, 95% CI 0·66-0·92; p=0·003) and by the score on its prostate-cancer-specific subscale (11·1 months [8·6-13·8] vs 5·8 months [5·5-8·3]; HR 0·70, 95% CI 0·60-0·83; p<0·0001). Interpretation: Abiraterone plus prednisone delays patient-reported pain progression and HRQoL deterioration in chemotherapy-naive patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. These results provide further support for the efficacy of abiraterone in this population. Funding: Janssen Research & Development. © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. Source

Discover hidden collaborations