Search

• MND-2119 is a self-emulsifying eicosapentaenoic acid ethyl ester. • MND-2119 was tested in hypertriglyceridemia patients. • MND-2119 2 g/day was non-inferior to Epadel 1.8 g/day in lowering TG levels. • MND-2119 4 g/day was superior to MND-2119 2 g/day in lowering TG levels. • MND-2119 appeared safe and well tolerated. In Japan, eicosapentaenoic acid ethyl ester (EPA-E) is administered twice-daily or three-times-daily for dyslipidemia. We have developed MND-2119, a novel self-emulsifying formulation of highly purified EPA-E, which can be administered once-daily. The objective of this study was to assess non-inferiority in the efficacy of MND-2119 in patients with hypertriglyceridemia compared with highly purified EPA-E. In this multicenter, 12-week, double-blind study, patients with high triglyceride (TG levels between ≥ 150 and < 500 mg/dL) undergoing lifestyle modification were randomized to MND-2119 2 g/day (n=145), MND-2119 4 g/day (n=145), EPA-E 1.8 g/day (n=145) or EPA-E 2.7 g/day (n=145). The primary endpoint was percentage change in TG levels from baseline to end of treatment. MND-2119 2, 4 g/day and EPA-E 1.8, 2.7 g/day reduced TG levels from baseline by −10.09%, −15.51%, −9.30%, and −8.80%, respectively. The TG reduction rate of MND-2119 2 g/day was non-inferior to that of EPA-E 1.8 g/day (LS mean difference: -0.42, 95%CI: -5.76 to 4.91). Moreover, the TG reduction rate of MND-2119 4 g/day was superior to that of MND-2119 2 g/day (LS mean difference: -5.74, 95%CI: -10.59 to -0.89). There were no remarkable safety differences between MND-2119 2 g/day and EPA-E 1.8 g/day and between MND-2119 4 g/day and EPA-E 2.7 g/day. Non-inferiority of MND-2119 2 g/day to EPA-E 1.8 g/day for efficacy, and superiority of MND-2119 4 g/day over MND-2119 2 g/day for efficacy were verified. MND-2119 was safe and well tolerated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Few treatments are available for patients with idiopathic hypersomnia (IH). Modafinil, an established treatment for narcolepsy, was tested for efficacy and safety in Japanese patients with IH without long sleep time.Methods: This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group comparison study was conducted at 20 institutions in Japan. Patients who met the diagnostic criteria of IH in the International Classification of Sleep Disorders (second edition) were included. The study comprised a ≥17-day observation period and a 3-week treatment period during which modafinil (200 mg) or placebo was administered orally once daily (in the morning). The primary efficacy endpoint was change in mean sleep latency on the Maintenance of Wakefulness Test (MWT). Adverse events (AEs) were also recorded to evaluate safety.Results: In total, 123 patients were screened and 71 were randomized to receive modafinil (N = 34) or placebo (N = 37). Patients treated with modafinil experienced a significantly prolonged mean sleep latency on the MWT at the end of the study compared with placebo (5.02 min, 95% confidence interval: 3.26-6.77 min; p < 0.001). AEs occurred in 58.8% (20/34) and 27.0% (10/37) of patients in the modafinil and placebo groups, respectively. Frequent AEs in the modafinil group were headache (n = 6), dry mouth (n = 3), and nausea (n = 3); no clinically significant AEs occurred.Conclusion: Modafinil was shown to be an effective and safe treatment for excessive daytime sleepiness in patients with IH without long sleep time.Clinical Trial Registration: JapicCTI; 142539. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Hangovers are associated with negative economic consequences due to decreased job performance or frequent visits to physicians. Thus, a new strategy for the alleviation of hangover-related symptoms is needed to avoid this detriment to society. The purpose of this nationwide randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled physicians' trial was to evaluate the efficacy of loxoprofen sodium for the alleviation of fatigue, headache, and nausea after hangover. A total of 229 participants were randomized to receive loxoprofen sodium (60 mg once orally) or placebo. The study was closed when the first 150 participants (n = 74 in the loxoprofen vs. n = 76 in the placebo groups) experienced hangovers. The primary endpoint was set as the difference in severity of general fatigue before and 3 h after taking the test drugs and was evaluated using a visual analogue scale. Secondary endpoints included difference in severity of headache, nausea, and incidence of adverse events. The study participants were 34 (interquartile range; 30-39) years old, 92.0% were men, and both groups were comparable for baseline characteristics. The alleviation of general fatigue did not differ statistically between the loxoprofen and placebo groups (24 [14-49] vs. 19 [9-35], p = 0.07). However, the alleviation of headache was statistically greater in the loxoprofen group (25 [10-50] vs. 10 [2-30], adjusted difference 14, 95% confidence interval 8-21, p < 0.001), whereas, there was no difference in nausea (7 [0-27] vs. 10 [0-24], p = 0.68). The incidence of adverse symptoms such as epigastric discomfort was also comparable between groups (2.7% vs. 3.9%, p = 0.25). Loxoprofen sodium was effective for relieving headaches after hangovers but did not alleviate general fatigue or nausea. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Internet-based intervention could help drug users recover from drug dependence. This study evaluated the effectiveness of a newly developed web-based relapse prevention program (e-SMARPP) for people with a drug problem, including the use of methamphetamine, in Japan.Methods: The study was a pilot randomized controlled trial comprised of 48 psychiatric outpatients diagnosed with drug use disorder. The participants were randomly assigned to an eight-week, six-session web-based relapse prevention program (an intervention group) or only web-based self-monitoring (a control group). The primary outcome was the duration of abstinence from a primary drug during the intervention and relapse risk. Secondary outcomes included motivation to change, self-efficacy, and money spent on drugs. The outcomes, except for the duration of abstinence during the intervention, were assessed at baseline, 2-, 5-, and 8-months. Program completion rate was also assessed.Results: No significant difference was observed between the intervention and the control groups for the primary and the secondary outcomes. The effect size of the duration of abstinence during the intervention was d = 0.42, which was comparable to previous studies. In the intervention group, about 26% did not complete the entire intervention.Conclusions: e-SMARPP failed to demonstrate efficacy, however, is potentially helpful for enhancing abstinence. The low attrition rate may suggest the acceptance and feasibility of the program. Further improvement of the program and evaluation in a full-scale trial are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study investigated the efficacy of 10-module metacognitive training (MCT) among Japanese patients with schizophrenia by conducting a multicenter randomized controlled trial to test the influence of the most recent and extended version of MCT on positive symptoms. A six-center, randomized, assessor-blind, controlled trial between "treatment as usual" (TAU) and TAU + MCT was conducted. Fifty inpatients and outpatients with schizophrenia, schizotypal, and delusional disorders (ICD 10) were enrolled, then randomly assigned to TAU (n = 26) or TAU + MCT (n = 24). Assessments were made at baseline, after six weeks, immediately posttreatment, and 1-month post-treatment. The primary outcome was positive symptom score, as measured by the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). General assessment of functioning (GAF) and measures of cognitive biases were secondary outcomes. Completion at post-treatment (10 weeks later) and 1-month follow-up was high-TAU + MCT, n = 22 (91.67%) and TAU, n = 23 (88.46%). The severity of PANSS positive symptoms declined significantly in the TAU + MCT treatment group compared with the TAU group. GAF also showed significantly greater improvement in the TAU + MCT group compared with the TAU group. There was also a trend for greater efficacy of MCT on cognitive biases. In conclusion, this study provides support for the efficacy of 10 module MCT concerning positive symptomatology (especially, delusion) and general functioning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Context: Although opioids and pregabalin are widely used for cancer-related neuropathic pain (CNP), no clinical trials exist to determine which medications are effective when an opioid-pregabalin combination therapy fails.Objectives: We investigated the efficacy of duloxetine for CNP nonresponsive or intolerant to opioid-pregabalin combination therapy.Methods: A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was performed at 12 specialized palliative care services in Japan. Patients with CNP average pain scores (Brief Pain Inventory [BPI]-Item 5) ≥ 4 in the previous 24 hours and nonresponsive or intolerant to opioid-pregabalin combination therapy were eligible. Patients with chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathies were excluded. Patients were administered duloxetine 20 mg/day titrated to 40 mg/day or placebo for 10 days. The primary endpoint was BPI-Item 5 on Day 10. Responder analysis measured proportions of patients with 30% and 50% pain decreases.Results: Seventy patients were enrolled. Complete case analysis revealed mean BPI-Item 5 on Day 10 of 4.03 for Group D vs. 4.88 for Group P (P = 0.053). Baseline observation carried forward analysis revealed mean BPI-Item 5 on Day 10 of 4.06 and 4.91 for Groups D and P, respectively (P = 0.048). Clinically meaningful pain improvement (≥30%) was reported by 44.1% (n = 15) of patients in Group D vs. 18.2% (n = 6) in Group P (P = 0.02); 32.4% (n = 11) vs. 3.0% (n = 1) of patients in Groups D and P, respectively, reported pain reduction ≥ 50% (P = 0.002).Conclusion: Adding duloxetine to opioid-pregabalin therapy might have clinical benefit in alleviating refractory CNP. Further studies are needed to conclude the efficacy of adding duloxetine. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Self-harm is an important risk factor for subsequent suicide and repetition of self-harm, and a common cause of emergency department presentations. However, there still remains limited evidence on intervention in emergency department settings for individuals who self-harm.Methods: This multicentre, randomised controlled trial was conducted at 17 general hospitals in Japan. In total, 914 adult patients admitted to emergency departments for a suicide attempt and had a DSM-IV-TR axis I disorder were randomly assigned to two groups, to receive either assertive case management (intervention) or enhanced usual care (control). Assertive case management was introduced by the case manager during emergency department admissions for suicide attempts, and continued after discharge. Interventions were provided until the end of the study period (for at least 18 months and up to 5 years).Results: The number of overall self-harm episodes per person-year was significantly lower in the intervention group (adjusted incidence risk ratio (IRR) 0.88, 95%CI 0.80-0.96, p=0.0031). Subgroup analysis showed a greater reduction of overall self-harm episodes among patients with no previous suicide attempt at baseline (adjusted IRR 0.73, 95% CI 0.53-0.98, p=0.037).Limitations: Patients younger than 20 years and patients who self-harmed but were not admitted to an emergency department were excluded.Conclusions: The present study showed that assertive case management following emergency admission for a suicide attempt reduced the incident rate of repeat overall self-harm. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]