ObjectiveTo investigate the efficacy and safety of the interleukin-6 receptor antibody tocilizumab in patients with Takayasu arteritis (TAK).MethodsPatients with TAK who had relapsed within the previous 12 weeks were induced into remission with oral glucocorticoid therapy. In this double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive weekly tocilizumab 162 mg or placebo subcutaneously, and oral glucocorticoids were tapered 10 %/week from week 4 to a minimum of 0.1 mg/kg/day until 19 patients relapsed. The primary endpoint was time to relapse of TAK, defined as ≥2 of the following: objective systemic symptoms, subjective systemic symptoms, elevated inflammation markers, vascular signs and symptoms or ischaemic symptoms.ResultsThe intent-to-treat and safety populations included 18 tocilizumab-treated and 18 placebo-treated patients. The per-protocol set (PPS) included 16 tocilizumab-treated and 17 placebo-treated patients. HRs for time to relapse of TAK were 0.41 (95.41% CI 0.15 to 1.10; p=0.0596) in the intent-to-treat population (primary endpoint) based on relapse in eight tocilizumab-treated and 11 placebo-treated patients and 0.34 (95.41% CI 0.11 to 1.00; p=0.0345) in the PPS. The secondary endpoints, time to relapse assessed by Kerr’s definition and clinical symptoms only, were consistent with the primary endpoint. Serious adverse events were reported in one tocilizumab-treated and two placebo-treated patients. There were no serious infections and no deaths.ConclusionAlthough the primary endpoint was not met, the results suggest favour for tocilizumab over placebo for time to relapse of TAK without new safety concerns. Further investigation is warranted to confirm the efficacy of tocilizumab in patients with refractory TAK.Trial registration numberJapicCTI-142616.

Introduction Emicizumab is a recombinant humanized bispecific monoclonal antibody mimicking the cofactor function of activated factor VIII. Aim In this multicentre, open‐label study (HOHOEMI), we evaluated the efficacy, safety and pharmacokinetics of emicizumab in Japanese paediatric patients aged <12 years with severe haemophilia A without factor VIII (FVIII) inhibitors. Methods Emicizumab was administered subcutaneously, with four loading doses of 3 mg/kg every week followed by maintenance doses of 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks (Q2W) or 6 mg/kg every 4 weeks (Q4W) in 6 and 7 patients, respectively. Results All patients completed at least 24 weeks of treatment. Baseline ages ranged from 4 months to 10 years, and all patients had been treated with FVIII prophylaxis prior to enrolment except a 4‐month‐old patient untreated with FVIII previously. In the respective Q2W and Q4W cohorts, 2/6 and 5/7 patients experienced no treated bleeding events, and annualized bleeding rates for treated bleeding events were 1.3 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.6‐2.9) and 0.7 (95% CI, 0.2‐2.6). All caregivers preferred emicizumab to the patient's previous treatment. Only one related adverse event (injection site reaction) was observed. There were no thromboembolic events or thrombotic microangiopathy. Individual trough plasma concentrations of emicizumab were within the variability observed in preceding adult/adolescent studies. All patients tested negative for anti‐emicizumab antibodies. Conclusions Emicizumab administered Q2W or Q4W was efficacious and safe in paediatric patients with severe haemophilia A without inhibitors. This study was registered at http://www.clinicaltrials.jp (JapicCTI‐173710).

Treated individuals with optimal BP had a higher stroke risk than untreated ones with optimal BP. Healthcare providers need to be vigilant for residual cardiovascular risks in treated hypertensive patients.

BackgroundBitopertin, a glycine reuptake inhibitor, was investigated as a novel treatment for schizophrenia. We report all the results of a double-blind randomized study assessing safety and efficacy following 52-week adjunctive treatment with bitopertin in Japanese patients with schizophrenia.MethodsThis study enrolled Japanese outpatients with schizophrenia who met criteria for either “negative symptoms”, i.e., patients with persistent, predominant negative symptoms of schizophrenia even after long-term treatment with antipsychotics or “sub-optimally controlled symptoms”, i.e., patients with insufficiently improved symptoms of schizophrenia even after long-term treatment with antipsychotics, respectively. One hundred sixty-one patients were randomly assigned to receive 52-week treatments with bitopertin doses of 5, 10, or 20 mg/day at ratio of 1:5:5, where existing antipsychotics were concomitantly administered. Efficacy endpoints included Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), Clinical Global Impression (CGI), and Personal and Social Performance (PSP). The purpose of the present study is primarily to evaluate the safety, and secondarily to investigate the clinical efficacy of bitopertin.ResultsOne hundred fourteen patients (71 %) completed 52-week treatment with bitopertin. Most of the adverse events were mild or moderate in their severity. The patients in the 20-mg group experienced more adverse events than the patients in the other two groups. Common dose-dependent adverse events were somnolence and insomnia associated with worsening schizophrenia. The blood hemoglobin levels gradually decreased from baseline in a dose-dependent manner, but there were no patients with the decrease below 10 g/dL that would have led to their discontinuation. All the efficacy endpoints gradually improved in all the treatment groups for both of the two symptoms, while there were no clear differences among the three dose groups.ConclusionsAltogether, bitopertin was found to be generally safe and well-tolerated for the treatment of patients with schizophrenia. All three bitopertin treated groups showed improvements in all the efficacy endpoints for both of the two symptoms, i.e., “negative symptoms” and “sub-optimally controlled symptoms”, throughout the duration of the study.Trial registrationJapan Pharmaceutical Information Center, number JapicCTI-111627 (registered on September 20, 2011)Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12888-016-0778-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

We examined the efficacy of intravenous (IV) ibandronate 1 mg/month in patient subgroups in the phase III MOVER study. Here we present results of analyses on the incidence of fractures in patients with prevalent vertebral fractures (1 or ≥2, and ≥3) at screening and femoral neck (FN) bone mineral density (BMD) T scores ≥-2.5 or <-2.5, and <-3.0 at baseline. The per-protocol set comprised 1134 patients (ibandronate 0.5 mg/month n = 376; ibandronate 1 mg/month n = 382; risedronate oral 2.5 mg/day n = 376). The incidence of vertebral fractures in patients with 1 or ≥2 prevalent vertebral fractures was 11.2 and 20.4 %, respectively, with ibandronate 1 mg/month, and 12.6 and 22.1 %, respectively, with risedronate. In patients with FN BMD T scores ≥-2.5 or <-2.5, the vertebral fracture incidence was 13.7 and 16.4 %, respectively, with ibandronate 1 mg/month, and 17.3 and 19.1 %, respectively, with risedronate. The incidence of non-vertebral fractures in patients with ≥2 prevalent vertebral fractures or FN BMD T score <-2.5 was 7.6 and 7.6 %, respectively, with ibandronate 1 mg/month, and 9.5 and 9.4 %, respectively, with risedronate. Fracture incidence was consistently lower, but not significant, with ibandronate 1 mg/month than with risedronate in patients with ≥2 prevalent vertebral fractures and FN BMD T score <-2.5. The efficacy of the fracture reduction of monthly IV ibandronate appears consistent and seemingly independent of the number of prevalent vertebral fractures or baseline BMD values.