Search This Blog

Wednesday, July 8, 2020

Behavioral Therapy a Front Runner for First-Line Insomnia Treatment July 8, 2020

A similar proportion of patients responded to behavioral therapy and zolpidem (Ambien) as first-line therapy for insomnia disorder, but the proportion of responders diverged with second-line treatments, a randomized trial found.
Among 211 adults with chronic insomnia, 45.5% of patients responded to 6 weeks of behavioral therapy as a first-line treatment, and response rates continued to improve among patients who were then assigned to cognitive therapy (50.1% to 68.2%) or 5-10 mg zolpidem (40.6% to 62.7%) as a second-line treatment, reported Charles M. Morin, PhD, of the Université Laval in Quebec, Canada, and colleagues.
As noted in the study online in JAMA Psychiatry, participants were randomized to receive either behavioral therapy or zolpidem for 6 weeks, and remitters remained on maintenance therapy for the next 12 months. Meanwhile, non-remitters continued on to second-stage therapy, trazodone or cognitive therapy, for a total of four treatment arms.
“The proportion of patients who responded to 6 weeks of zolpidem as a first-line therapy was similar to those assigned to behavioral therapy (49.7%), but patients who were started on zolpidem did best when they continued with 50-150 mg trazodone (46.4% to 55.7%) rather than continuing to cognitive therapy,” the researchers reported.
However, no significant differences were observed in analyses comparing the cumulative response rates of all four treatment options, the team added.
“That still leaves about 25-30% of patients who, even with two treatments, did not respond,” Morin told MedPage Today. “I think we moved one step further from where we were before but we still don’t have the answers for all patients with chronic insomnia.”
The American College of Physicians recommends cognitive behavioral therapy as a first-line treatment for chronic insomnia, and pharmacologic therapy if that is ineffective. The American Academy of Sleep Medicine has also published recommendations on the most appropriate drugs to use in various settings, including zolpidem for sleep onset and sleep maintenance insomnia.
In the clinical setting, patients often try multiple treatments for insomnia and are commonly prescribed medication before coming in for behavioral or cognitive interventions, commented Michael A. Grandner, PhD, director of the Behavioral Sleep Medicine Clinic at the University of Arizona, who was not involved with the study.
“These results suggest that patients should get behavioral or cognitive therapy first, and that this is the most efficient way to get the most people the best help possible,” Grandner told MedPage Today in an email. “It was also important to note that — consistent with previous studies — non-medication therapy worked at least as well as medication as a first-line therapy, without all of the risks involved.”
Although the study lacked a control group, all the treatments have already demonstrated efficacy versus placebo, so comparing them with one another instead is “not a major problem,” in this context, Grandner commented.
It should also be noted that in real-world settings, many patients are on multiple treatments at once, instead of sequential treatments like in this study, he added. “This made for a cleaner analysis, but the real world is messier.”
The cohort — mean age of 46, 63% of whom were female — was enrolled through advertisements in clinics and the community at the Université Laval in Quebec and National Jewish Health in Denver. Participants were mostly white (86%), and 25% had tried a sleep-promoting medication within the past year.
Remission was defined as scores of less than 8 on the Insomnia Severity Index, while a treatment response was defined as a change of seven or more points, the researchers reported.
While behavioral therapy aims to change sleep habits, cognitive therapy focuses more on a patient’s beliefs and attitudes towards sleep, and is more time-intensive, Morin said. “That’s why we offered it only as a second-line treatment, if people did not respond to the more straightforward behavioral therapy.”
The proportion of patients who met remission criteria after first-line therapy was similar between the behavioral therapy and zolpidem arms (39% vs 30.3%), but the only second-line treatment pairing that was associated with significantly improved remission rates was behavioral therapy followed by zolpidem (39.1% to 55.9%), the investigators said.
Among 74 patients with preexisting psychiatric conditions (most commonly anxiety or depression), response rates were highest with two treatments of the same modality, such as behavioral therapy followed by cognitive therapy (58.3% to 85.3%) or zolpidem followed by trazodone (40.0% to 77.5%).
Notably, a higher proportion of patients in the pharmacologic arm dropped out of the trial compared with patients started on behavioral therapy (P=0.01), indicating that cognitive and behavioral therapies are more tolerable and may be preferred by some patients, Morin said.
Overall, a higher proportion of patients on zolpidem in the first treatment phase reported cognitive problems with attention, concentration, and memory compared with patients assigned to behavioral therapy (16% vs 7.4%), the researchers reported. However, a higher proportion of patients on behavioral therapy as first-line treatment experienced daytime sleepiness compared with those on zolpidem (13% vs 4%).
“The nuance here is that those who received a second treatment did best when that second treatment involved either cognitive therapy or trazodone,” Morin said. “We believe the reason why these patients did better is that cognitive therapy is not just focused on sleep — it also addresses mood disturbances — and trazodone is an antidepressant, so it is therefore more likely to improve mood.”
Disclosures
The study was funded by the National Institute of Mental Health.
Morin reported financial relationships with Abbot, Eisai, Merck, Philips, Weight Watchers, Idorsia, and Canopy Health; co-authors also reported many ties with industry.

Crinetics paltusotine an Orphan Drug in U.S. for growth hormone disorder

The FDA designates Crinetics Pharmaceuticals’ (NASDAQ:CRNX) paltusotine an Orphan Drug for the treatment of acromegaly, a disorder in which the pituitary gland secretes too much growth hormone resulting in excessive bone growth, typically in the face, feet and hands.
Among the benefits of Orphan Drug status in the U.S. is a seven-year period of market exclusivity for the indication, if approved.
The company plans to announce topline results from its ACROBAT clinical program in Q4. It expects to initiate a Phase 3 trial of paltusotine in H1 2021.

BofA Calculates Today Marks Peak Of US Coronavirus Hospitalizations

Several months ago, the coronavirus pandemic mutated from a purely epidemiological phenomenon and became a full-blown political issue, with clear ideological divisions forming along the lines of whether or not to pursue strict shutdowns (and in some cases, whether to engage in another round of economic closures) all the way down to whether masks should be worn. The drivers here were self-evident: opponents of Trump and the current administration demanded even more caution, in some cases arguably in pursuit self-serving hopes of further economic pain (and more stimulus payments) that would make a Trump re-election difficult; in light of this it is understandable why the president hoped to put the pandemic in the rearview mirror and to accelerate the reopening of the economy which has cost tens of millions in jobs and trillions in new debt.
In recent weeks, a similar divide has also emerged on Wall Street, where bears such as Goldman have been emphasizing the recent surge in new cases across sunbelt states, warning that these would result in another spike in deaths, as well as reduction in mobility and overall cosumption and thus a fresh hit to the economy, as a new round of shutdowns – either mandatory or voluntary – were enacted. Bulls, meanwhile, would note that higher cases are merely a function of widespread testing…
… and point to the continued decline in covid-linked deaths which despite the jump in new cases, have failed to inflect higher, and underscoring that the mortality rate appears to be much lower for younger covid patients.
In a note that appears to be firmly in the bullish camp, overnight BofA’s Hans Mikkelsen writes that sharply elevated new daily Covid-19 case numbers highlight first and foremost more successful testing strategies (more tests, contact tracing, etc.,), according to the University of Washington IHME model.
BofA also notes that are active virus outbreaks in four major states – AZ, CA, FL and TX. However, instead of merely looking at new cases, Mikkelsen says that “to gauge the spread of Covid-19 we prefer to look at number of hospitalized people that, although a bit lagged (in March/April the peak in number of hospitalized came 17 days after the peak in newly infected, according to the IHME model), is less dependent on testing strategy.”
While clearly hospitalizations are up sharply in the U.S., BofA points out that if one excludes the four states “we find they are more accurately described as flat lining.”
Moreover, BofA calculates that in the new outbreak the daily number of infected people peaked on June 21st at 75,179, up from 71,112 on June 1st, and sharply above yesterday’s 69,987 estimate, again according to the IHME model.
The optimistic conclusion: “Should hospitalizations again be lagged 17 days that would imply (local) peak hospitalizations on July 8.” Or, in other words, today.
For the sake of the US economy, political and ideological considerations aside, one can only hope that BofA is right.

Tulane researchers find that coronavirus can survive in air for hours

SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19, can remain infective in aerosol for up to 16 hours according to a Tulane study published in Emerging Infectious Diseases. The researchers also found that the virus can survive in the air much longer than other similar coronaviruses, such as SARS or MERS.
Scientists already know that large droplets, such as those that might be felt when someone sneezes, can effectively transmit COVID-19. But the infectiousness of tiny aerosol particles, measuring less than 2 microns and emitted when someone simply speaks or breathes, has been less understood.
In this study, scientists investigated the durability of these tiny, respirable SARS-CoV-2 aerosols to determine if they deteriorate and become less infectious over 16 hours, or if they remain stable. To conduct the experiment, researchers sprayed the viral aerosols into a slowly churning aerosol chamber and suspended them for 16 hours, continuously monitoring what changes were taking place.
Lead investigator and Director of Infectious Disease Aerobiology at the Tulane National Primate Research Center, Chad Roy, PhD, was surprised at the results. “We saw very little deterioration in the infectiousness of these aerosols after 16 hours,” said Roy. “This is notable because we would expect it to behave similar to other coronaviruses that begin to decay over this amount of time – and, it didn’t.”
While this research was conducted in an artificial, laboratory-type setting that didn’t factor in real-word conditions like UV light or wind, Roy believes that the findings do have practical implications.
“This is just one more piece of the puzzle in understanding how people are getting sick and how we can best protect ourselves and each other. If anything, this research should serve as a warning light that this virus is more resilient than similar viruses, and that public health measures should be heeded.”

Therapeutics Acquisition prices upsized $118M IPO at $10

Therapeutics Acquisition (TXAC) priced its initial public offering (IPO) of 11.8M Class A common shares at $10/share.
Trading commenced today. Shares are currently exchanging hands at $11.39 up 14%.
In June the company filed preliminary prospectus for a $100M offering.

Gilead launches early-stage study of inhaled remdesivir

Gilead Sciences (GILD -1.1%) has initiated a U.S. Phase 1a clinical trial evaluating an inhalable formulation of antiviral remdesivir in 60 healthy volunteers between the ages of 18 and 45.
The company says an inhalable version may enable more targeted and accessible administration in non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients and lower systemic exposure to the drug.
The intravenous formulation remains the only medicine approved in the U.S. for emergency use in hospitalized patients, receiving the FDA nod on May 1.

India’s Cipla prices its generic remdesivir at $53.34 per vial, below rivals

Cipla Ltd has priced its generic version of remdesivir, Cipremi, at 4,000 rupees ($53.34) per 100 mg vial, the Indian drugmaker said on Wednesday, making it among the lowest priced versions of the COVID-19 treatment available so far globally.
Cipla had earlier said pricing would not exceed 5,000 rupees. On Tuesday, Sovereign Pharma, which is manufacturing and packaging the drug for Cipla, said it had dispatched the first batch.
Cipla India business chief executive officer and executive vice president Nikhil Chopra said in an emailed statement that the company was launching Cipremi commercially on Wednesday and aims to supply over 80,000 vials within the first month.
The drug will be available through the government and hospitals only, the company said.
Sources had told Reuters that the first batch of 10,000 vials had been printed with a price of 4,000 rupees, 800 rupees below the cheapest option, launched by European competitor Mylan this week.
It was not immediately clear how many of Cipla’s vials would be required for a full treatment course. Gilead has said a patient would typically need six vials of remdesivir for a five-day course.