BackgroundCurrently available treatments for Alzheimer’s disease (AD) can produce mild improvements in cognitive function, behavior, and activities of daily living in patients, but their influence on long-term survival is not well established. This study was designed to assess patient survival and drug efficacy following a 2-year galantamine treatment in patients with mild to moderately severe AD.MethodsIn this multicenter, double-blind study, patients were randomized 1:1 to receive galantamine or placebo. One primary end point was safety; mortality was assessed. An independent Data Safety Monitoring Board monitored mortality for the total deaths reaching prespecified numbers, using a time-to-event method and a Cox-regression model. The primary efficacy end point was cognitive change from baseline to month 24, as measured by the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score, analyzed using intent-to-treat analysis with the ‘last observation carried forward’ approach, in an analysis of covariance model.ResultsIn all, 1,024 galantamine- and 1,021 placebo-treated patients received study drug, with mean age ~73 years, and mean (standard deviation [SD]) baseline MMSE score of 19 (4.08). A total of 32% of patients (661/2,045) completed the study, 27% (554/2,045) withdrew, and 41% (830/2,045) did not complete the study and were discontinued due to a Data Safety Monitoring Board-recommended early study termination. The mortality rate was significantly lower in the galantamine group versus placebo (hazard ratio [HR] =0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.37; 0.89) (P=0.011). Cognitive impairment, based on the mean (SD) change in MMSE scores from baseline to month 24, significantly worsened in the placebo (−2.14 [4.34]) compared with the galantamine group (−1.41 [4.05]) (P<0.001). Functional impairment, based on mean (SD) change in the Disability Assessment in Dementia score (secondary end point), at month 24 significantly worsened in the placebo (−10.81 [18.27]) versus the galantamine group (−8.16 [17.25]) (P=0.002). Incidences of treatment-emergent adverse events were 54.0% for the galantamine and 48.6% for the placebo group.ConclusionLong-term treatment with galantamine significantly reduced mortality and the decline in cognition and daily living activities, in mild to moderate AD patients.IdentificationThis study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00679627).

R115777 showed no significant antitumor activity as a single agent in sensitive-relapse SCLC.

In these combined analyzes from 3 open-label, phase-1 studies, the pharmacokinetic profile of tramadol and its metabolite (M1) following administration of tramadol immediate-release (IR) tablets in children and adolescents, 7-16 years old (studies 1 and 2: n = 38; study 3: n = 21) with painful conditions following single oral dose of tramadol IR (25-100 mg) (studies 1 and 2) or multiple oral doses of tramadol IR tablets every 6 hours for 3 days (study 3) were compared with that of healthy adults following similar treatment. Area under the curve of tramadol and its metabolite M1 in children and adolescents was lower compared with adults (Dose-normalized [DN] AUC, h ng/mL: tramadol: 1316.87 [children]; 1418.02 [adolescents];1838.29 [adults]; M1: 342.56 [children]; 475.4 [adolescents]; 636.13 [adults]) while the Cmax remained similar (DN Cmax , ng/mL: tramadol: 203.75 [children]; 165.35 [adolescents]; 226.92 [adults]; M1: 34.93 [children]; 38.42 [adolescents]; 52.14 [adults]). The DN AUC was further lower in children and adolescents with a lower body weight (<50 kg). The weight normalized oral clearance of tramadol was higher in children and adolescents compared with adults (CL/F, mL/min/kg: 12.66 [children]; 11.75 [adolescents]; 9.06 [adults]). No new safety findings emerged. Tramadol was generally safe and well-tolerated by children and adolescents with painful conditions.

No abstract

This randomized, double-blind, parallel-group multiple-ascending-dose study evaluated the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of tramadol hydrochloride in healthy adults to inform dosage and design for a subsequent QT/QTc study. Healthy men and women, 18 to 45 years old (inclusive), were sequentially assigned to the tramadol 200, 400, or 600 mg/day treatment cohort and within each cohort, randomized (4:1) to either tramadol or placebo every 6 hours for 9 oral doses. Of the 24 participants randomized to tramadol (n = 8/cohort), 22 (91.7%) completed the study. The AUC of tramadol increased approximately 2.2- and 3.6-fold for the (+) enantiomer and 2.0- and 3.5-fold for the (-) enantiomer with increasing dose from 200 to 400  and 600 mg/day, whereas the C increased 2.1- and 3.3-fold for the (+) enantiomer and 2.0- and 3.2-fold for the (-) enantiomer. Overall, 21 participants (87.5%) participants reported ≥1 treatment-emergent adverse event; most frequent were nausea (17 of 24, 70.8%) and vomiting (7 of 24, 29.2%). Vomiting (affected participants and events) increased with increasing dose from 200 to 600 mg/day but was mild (5 of 24) or moderate (2 of 24) in severity. All tested dosage regimens of tramadol showed acceptable safety and tolerability profile for further investigation in a thorough QT/QTc study.