Blarcamesine for the treatment of Early Alzheimer's Disease: Results from the ANAVEX2-73-AD-004 Phase IIB/III trial.
There are no approved oral disease-modifying treatments for Alzheimer's disease (AD).
The objective of this study was to assess efficacy and safety of blarcamesine (ANAVEX®2-73), an orally available small-molecule activator of the sigma-1 receptor (SIGMAR1) in early AD through restoration of cellular homeostasis including autophagy enhancement.
ANAVEX2-73-AD-004 was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 48-week Phase IIb/III trial.
Multicenter - 52 medical research centers/hospitals in 5 countries.
508 participants with early AD (Stage 3) were randomized to receive either blarcamesine (n = 338) in medium dose group 30 mg or in high dose group 50 mg or placebo (n = 170) oral capsules once daily for 48 weeks. Participants in these groups were offered to enroll into the open-label-extension study ATTENTION-AD, which completed June 2024, ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT04314934.
The co-primary cognitive and functional outcomes were assessed as change in ADAS-Cog13 and ADCS-ADL from baseline to 48 weeks. The outcomes include the secondary outcome CDR-SB and biomarkers from the A/T/N spectrum, plasma Aβ42/40-ratio and global brain volume changes measured by MRI. All clinical endpoints were analyzed using mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM), plasma biomarker measurements were analyzed by Welch's t-test, and volumetric MRI scans were analyzed by general linear model.
Among 462 randomized participants in the intent-to-treat population (mean age, 73.7 years; 225 [48.7%] women), 338 (73.2%) completed the trial. The co-primary outcome was met under the multiplicity control rule, since the differences in the least-squares mean (LSM) change from baseline to 48 weeks between the prespecified blarcamesine and placebo groups for ADAS-Cog13 was significant at a level of P < 0.025 and for CDR-SB was significant at a level of P < 0.025, while ADCS-ADL did not reach significance at Week 48 (ADAS-Cog13 difference of -2.027 [95% CI -3.522 to -0.533]; P = 0.008; CDR-SB difference of -0.483 [95% CI -0.853 to -0.114]; P = 0.010; ADCS-ADL difference of 0.775 [95%CI -0.874 to 2.423]; P = 0.357). Plasma Aβ42/40-ratio increased significantly with blarcamesine group vs. placebo, (P = 0.048) and whole brain volume loss was significantly decreased (P = 0.002). Participants in the full safety population with ≥1 serious treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 56 participants (16.7%) in the blarcamesine and 17 (10.1%) in the placebo group. Common TEAEs included dizziness, which was transient and mostly mild to moderate in severity. One death in the blarcamesine group and 1 in the placebo group were both not considered treatment related.
Blarcamesine, demonstrating a safety profile with no associated neuroimaging adverse events, significantly slowed clinical progression by 36.3% at 48 weeks with blarcamesine group as well as the individual 30 mg (by 34.6%) and 50 mg (by 38.5%) blarcamesine groups vs. placebo on the prespecified primary cognitive endpoint ADAS-Cog13. The prespecified secondary endpoint CDR-SB, which is used as the sole primary endpoint in recent successful AD drug submissions, is significantly improved at Week 48 with blarcamesine relative to placebo. The findings are supported by biomarkers from the A/T/N spectrum, including plasma Aβ42/40-ratio and reduction of whole brain atrophy. Additionally, the prespecified SIGMAR1 gene variant subgroup analysis confirmed beneficial clinical effect of blarcamesine group through upstream SIGMAR1 activation - subjects with the common SIGMAR1 wild-type gene (excluding carriers of the mutated SIGMAR1 rs1800866 variant) experienced an even greater significant clinical benefit with slowed clinical progression by 49.8% at 48 weeks on the prespecified primary cognitive endpoint ADAS-Cog13. Oral once daily blarcamesine could represent a novel treatment in early AD and be complementary or alternative to anti-beta amyloid drugs.
Macfarlane S
，Grimmer T
，Teo K
，O'Brien TJ
，Woodward M
，Grunfeld J
，Mander A
，Brodtmann A
，Brew BJ
，Morris P
，Short C
，Kurrle S
，Lai R
，Bharadwaj S
，Drysdale P
，Sturm J
，Lewis SJG
，Barton D
，Kalafatis C
，Sharif S
，Perry R
，Mannering N
，MacSweeney JE
，Pearson S
，Evans C
，Krishna V
，Thompson A
，Munisamy M
，Bhatt N
，Asher A
，Connell S
，Lynch J
，Rutgers SM
，Dautzenberg PL
，Prins N
，Oschmann P
，Frölich L
，Tacik P
，Peters O
，Wiltfang J
，Henri-Bhargava A
，Smith E
，Pasternak S
，Frank A
，Chertkow H
，Ingram J
，Hsiung GR
，Brittain R
，Tartaglia C
，Cohen S
，Villa LM
，Gordon E
，Jubault T
，Guizard N
，Tucker A
，Kaufmann WE
，Jin K
，Chezem WR
，Missling CU
，Sabbagh MN
... -
《-》
Efficacy and safety of filgotinib as induction and maintenance therapy for Crohn's disease (DIVERSITY): a phase 3, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial.
There is a need for efficacious therapies for patients with Crohn's disease that are better tolerated and more durable than available treatments. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of filgotinib, an oral Janus kinase 1 preferential inhibitor, for treating Crohn's disease.
This phase 3, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial was conducted in 371 centres in 39 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18-75 years with moderately to severely active Crohn's disease for at least 3 months before enrolment. Patients were enrolled into one of two induction studies on the basis of their experience with biological agents (induction study A included biologic-naive and later biologic-experienced patients and induction study B included biologic-experienced patients). In both induction studies, patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1), using an interactive web response system, to receive oral filgotinib 200 mg, filgotinib 100 mg, or placebo once daily for 11 weeks. Patients who received filgotinib and had two-item patient-reported outcome (PRO2) clinical remission or an endoscopic response at week 10 were re-randomised (2:1) to receive their induction dose or placebo orally, once daily to the end of week 58 in the maintenance study. Co-primary endpoints were PRO2 clinical remission and an endoscopic response at week 10 (induction studies) and week 58 (maintenance study). PRO2 clinical remission was defined as an abdominal pain subscore of not more than 1 and a liquid or very soft stool frequency subscore of not more than 3 (from eDiary data) and endoscopic response was defined as a reduction of at least 50% in Simple Endoscopic Score for Crohn's disease from induction baseline (from central reading of endoscopy). For the induction studies, efficacy was assessed in all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of study drug. For the maintenance study, efficacy was assessed in all patients from either filgotinib treatment group in the induction studies who reached PRO2 clinical remission or an endoscopic response at week 10, and who were re-randomised and received at least one dose of study drug in the maintenance study. Patients who received placebo throughout the induction and maintenance studies were not included in the full analysis set for the maintenance study. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This trial is complete and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02914561.
Between Oct 31, 2016, and Nov 11, 2022, 2634 patients were screened, of whom 1372 were enrolled (induction study A: n=707, induction study B: n=665, and maintenance study: n=481). There were 346 (49%) women and 358 (51%) men in induction study A, 356 (54%) women and 303 (46%) men in induction study B, and 242 women (51%) and 236 men (49%) in the maintenance study. Significantly more patients had PRO2 clinical remission at week 10 with filgotinib 200 mg than with placebo in induction study B (29·7% vs 17·9%, difference 11·9%; 95% CI 3·7 to 20·2, p=0·0039) but not induction study A (32·9% vs 25·7%, 6·9%; -1·4 to 15·2, p=0·0963); there was no significant difference for endoscopic response (induction study A: 23·9% vs 18·1%, difference 5·5%; 95% CI -2·0 to 12·9, p=0·1365; induction study B: 11·9% vs 11·4%, 0·1%; -6·5 to 6·6, p=0·9797). At week 58, both co-primary endpoints were reported in greater proportions of patients who received filgotinib 200 mg than in those who received placebo (PRO2 clinical remission: 43·8% vs 26·4%, difference 16·8%; 95% CI 2·0 to 31·6, p=0·0382; endoscopic response: 30·4% vs 9·4%, difference 20·6%; 95% CI 8·2 to 33·1, p=0·0038). Co-primary endpoints were not met for filgotinib 100 mg in any study. In the induction studies, the most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs; ≥5% of patients in any group) were abdominal pain; arthralgia; an exacerbation, flare, or worsening of Crohn's disease; headache; nasopharyngitis; nausea; and pyrexia. In the maintenance study, the most frequently reported TEAEs (≥5% of patients in any filgotinib or associated placebo group) were those reported in the induction studies (except for headache) and abdominal distension, upper abdominal pain, anaemia, and flatulence. Serious TEAEs were reported in 49 patients in induction study A (18 [8%]) of 222 patients in the filgotinib 200 mg group, 16 [7%] of 245 patients in the filgotinib 100 mg group, and 15 [6%] of 237 patients in the placebo group), 81 patients in induction study B (19 [9%] of 202 patients in the filgotinib 200 mg group, 36 [16%] of 228 patients in the filgotinib 100 mg group, and 26 [11%] of 229 patients in the placebo group), and 49 patients in the maintenance study (13 [11%] of 118 patients in the filgotinib 200 mg-filgotinib 200 mg group, five [9%] of 56 patients in the filgotinib 200 mg-placebo group, 14 [13%] of 104 patients in the filgotinib 100 mg-filgotinib 100 mg group, three [5%] of 55 patients in the filgotinib 100 mg-placebo group, and 14 [10%] of 145 patients in the placebo-placebo group). No deaths were reported during the induction and maintenance studies.
Filgotinib 200 mg did not meet the co-primary endpoints of clinical remission and an endoscopic response at week 10, but did meet the co-primary endpoints at week 58. Filgotinib treatment was well tolerated, and no new safety signals were reported.
Galapagos.
Vermeire S
，Schreiber S
，Rubin DT
，D'Haens G
，Reinisch W
，Watanabe M
，Mehta R
，Roblin X
，Beales I
，Gietka P
，Hibi T
，Hospodarskyy I
，Ritter T
，Genovese MC
，Kwon P
，Santermans E
，Le Brun FO
，Barron R
，Masior T
，Danese S
... -
《The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology》
Galantamine for dementia due to Alzheimer's disease and mild cognitive impairment.
Dementia leads to progressive cognitive decline, and represents a significant health and societal burden. Its prevalence is growing, with Alzheimer's disease as the leading cause. There is no cure for Alzheimer's disease, but there are regulatory-approved pharmacological interventions, such as galantamine, for symptomatic relief. This review updates the 2006 version.
To assess the clinical effects, including adverse effects, of galantamine in people with probable or possible Alzheimer's disease or mild cognitive impairment, and to investigate potential moderators of effect.
We systematically searched the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's Specialised Register on 14 December 2022 using the term 'galantamine'. The Register contains records of clinical trials identified from major electronic databases (including CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase), trial registries, grey literature sources, and conference proceedings. We manually searched reference lists and collected information from US Food and Drug Administration documents and unpublished trial reports. We imposed no language restrictions.
We included double-blind, parallel-group, randomised controlled trials comparing oral galantamine with placebo for a treatment duration exceeding four weeks in people with dementia due to Alzheimer's disease or with mild cognitive impairment.
Working independently, two review authors selected studies for inclusion, assessed their quality, and extracted data. Outcomes of interest included cognitive function, change in global function, activities of daily living, functional disability, behavioural function, and adverse events. We used a fixed-effect model for meta-analytic synthesis, and presented results as Peto odds ratios (OR) or weighted mean differences (MD) with 95% confidence intervals. We used Cochrane's original risk of bias tool (RoB 1) to assess the risk of bias in the included studies.
We included 21 studies with a total of 10,990 participants. The average age of participants was 74 years, and 37% were male. The studies' durations ranged from eight weeks to two years, with 24 weeks being the most common duration. One newly included study assessed the effects of galantamine at two years, and another newly included study involved participants with severe Alzheimer's disease. Nineteen studies with 10,497 participants contributed data to the meta-analysis. All studies had low to unclear risk of bias for randomisation, allocation concealment, and blinding. We judged four studies to be at high risk of bias due to attrition and two due to selective outcome reporting. Galantamine for dementia due to Alzheimer's disease We summarise only the results for galantamine given at 8 to 12 mg twice daily (total galantamine 16 mg to 24 mg/day), assessed at six months. See the full review for results of other dosing regimens and assessment time points. There is high-certainty evidence that, compared to placebo, galantamine improves: cognitive function, as assessed with the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale - Cognitive Subscale (ADAS-cog) (MD-2.86, 95% CI -3.29 to -2.43; 6 studies, 3049 participants; minimum clinically important effect (MCID) = 2.6- to 4-point change); functional disability, as assessed with the Disability Assessment for Dementia (DAD) scale (MD 2.12, 95% CI 0.75 to 3.49; 3 studies, 1275 participants); and behavioural function, as assessed with the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) (MD -1.63, 95% CI -3.07 to -0.20; 2 studies, 1043 participants) at six months. Galantamine may improve global function at six months, as assessed with the Clinician's Interview-Based Impression of Change plus Caregiver Input (CIBIC-plus) (OR 1.58, 95% CI 1.36 to 1.84; 6 studies, 3002 participants; low-certainty evidence). Participants who received galantamine were more likely than placebo-treated participants to discontinue prematurely (22.7% versus 17.2%) (OR 1.41, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.68; 6 studies, 3336 participants; high-certainty evidence), and experience nausea (20.9% versus 8.4%) (OR 2.89, 95% CI 2.40 to 3.49; 7 studies, 3616 participants; high-certainty evidence) during the studies. Galantamine reduced death rates at six months: 1.3% of participants in the galantamine groups had died compared to 2.3% in the placebo groups (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.96; 6 studies, 3493 participants; high-certainty evidence). Galantamine for mild cognitive impairment We summarise results, assessed at two years, from two studies that gave participants galantamine at 8 to 12 mg twice daily (total galantamine 16 mg to 24 mg/day). Compared to placebo, galantamine may not improve cognitive function, as assessed with the expanded ADAS-cog for mild cognitive impairment (MD -0.21, 95% CI -0.78 to 0.37; 2 studies, 1901 participants; low-certainty evidence) or activities of daily living, assessed with the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study - Activities of Daily Living scale for mild cognitive impairment (MD 0.30, 95% CI -0.26 to 0.86; 2 studies, 1901 participants; low-certainty evidence). Participants who received galantamine were probably more likely to discontinue prematurely than placebo-treated participants (40.7% versus 28.6%) (OR 1.71, 95% CI 1.42 to 2.05; 2 studies, 2057 participants) and to experience nausea (29.4% versus 10.7%) (OR 3.49, 95% CI 2.75 to 4.44; 2 studies, 2057 participants), both with moderate-certainty evidence. Galantamine may not reduce death rates at 24 months compared to placebo (0.5% versus 0.1%) (OR 5.03, 95% CI 0.87 to 29.10; 2 studies, 2057 participants; low-certainty evidence). Results from subgroup analysis and meta-regression suggest that an imbalance in discontinuation rates between galantamine and placebo groups, together with the use of the 'last observation carried forward' approach to outcome assessment, may potentially bias cognitive outcomes in favour of galantamine.
Compared to placebo, galantamine (when given at a total dose of 16 mg to 24 mg/day) slows the decline in cognitive function, functional ability, and behaviour at six months in people with dementia due to Alzheimer's disease. Galantamine probably also slows declines in global function at six months. The changes observed in cognition, assessed with the ADAS-cog scale, were clinically meaningful. Gastrointestinal-related adverse events are the primary concerns associated with galantamine use in people with dementia, which may limit its tolerability. Although death rates were generally low, participants in the galantamine groups had a reduced risk of death compared to those in the placebo groups. There is no evidence to support the use of galantamine in people with mild cognitive impairment.
Lim AWY
，Schneider L
，Loy C
《Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews》
ResearchGate
(全网免费下载)
钛学术
(全网免费下载)
