Efficacy and safety of Vespireit® (buspirone) prolonged-release tablets (PR) 15 mg in the therapy of patients with functional dizziness: results of the double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, randomized, phase 3 clinical trial

M. V. Zamergrad, V. A. Parfenov, A. S. Agafina, N. V. Lyamina, M. M. Gavrik, L. R. Kuchumova, E. R. Barantsevich, V. S. Krasnov, A. A. Ivanova, A. L. Vladykin, K. А. Ishchenko
{"title":"Efficacy and safety of Vespireit® (buspirone) prolonged-release tablets (PR) 15 mg in the therapy of patients with functional dizziness: results of the double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, randomized, phase 3 clinical trial","authors":"M. V. Zamergrad, V. A. Parfenov, A. S. Agafina, N. V. Lyamina, M. M. Gavrik, L. R. Kuchumova, E. R. Barantsevich, V. S. Krasnov, A. A. Ivanova, A. L. Vladykin, K. А. Ishchenko","doi":"10.14412/2074-2711-2023-5-20-34","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Functional dizziness (FD) is one of the most common causes of chronic dizziness for which there is no effective drug therapy, highlighting the importance of searching for new treatment technologies. Objective: to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Vespireit® (INN buspirone) prolonged-release tablets 15 mg2 (JSC “Valenta Pharm”, Russia) compared with placebo in the treatment of patients with autonomic dysfunction syndrome accompanied by FD. Material and methods . The clinical trial (CT) included a total of 268 patients with autonomic dysfunction syndrome accompanied by FD and a DHI (The Dizziness Handicap Inventory) dizziness scale score of 36 to 52 inclusive, who were randomly divided into 2 groups and treated in a double-blind fashion. 135 patients (Group 1) received Vespireit® prolonged-release tablets 15 mg at a dose of 15 mg (1 tablet) once daily for 28 days. 133 patients (Group 2) received placebo at the same dosage regimen. Treatment was given against a background of vestibular gymnastic exercises. The primary outcome of the clinical trial was assessment of patient response rate (proportion of responders), i.e., a ≥50% reduction in total DHI for dizziness score at Visit 5 (day 28±1) compared with baseline (Visit 1, day 1). Secondary efficacy measures included assessment of: 1) treatment response rates (≥50% reduction in DHI total score compared to Visit 1) at Visits 2, 3, and 4; 2) DHI total score at Visits 2, 3, 4, and 5; 3) changes in DHI total score at Visits 2, 3, 4, and 5 compared to Visit 1; 4) proportion of patients with a 30% or greater reduction in DHI scale dizziness compared with baseline at Visit 2, 3, 4, and 5; 5) time elapsed until total DHI score decreased by ≥50% compared to baseline; 6) time elapsed until total DHI score decreased by ≥30% compared to baseline; 7) changes in Digital Rating Scale (DRS) score from Visit 1 to Visit 2, 3, 4, 5; 8) scores on the DRS at Visits 2, 3, 4, 5; 9) proportion of patients with different response to treatment on the Likert scale at Visits 2, 3, 4, and 5. Additional secondary criteria of efficacy were also assessed: total Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) score at Visits 4 and 5; change in total Hamilton scale score at Visits 4 and 5 compared to Visit 1. The safety criterion assessed in the clinical trial was monitoring of adverse events (AEs), clinically significant deviations in vital signs, laboratory parameters, and ECG parameters. Results. The proportion of responders with a ≥50% reduction in DHI total score at Visit 5 (Day 28±1) compared to baseline (Visit 1, Day 1) was 68.7% (n=92) in Group 1, which was 52.9% more than in Group 2 – 15.8% (n=21) (p<0.0001). Evaluation of all secondary (including additional) efficacy criteria also showed a statistically significant benefit of therapy in Group 1 compared to Group 2 (p<0.0001). A total of 61 AEs were recorded in 46 (17.2%) patients: 30 AEs in 21 (15.6%) patients in Group 1 and 31 AEs in 25 (18.8%) patients in Group 2. There was no significant difference between treatment groups in the number of patients with AEs (p=0.5196). In both groups, there were no patients with AEs with severity ≥3, serious AEs (SAEs), SAEs with fatal outcome, or SAEs that led to discontinuation of study therapy. No clinically significant abnormalities were noted during assessment of vital signs, laboratory parameters, or ECG parameters Conclusion. The superiority of Vespireit® prolonged-release tablets (PR) 15 mg therapy over placebo in reducing FD in patients with autonomic dysfunction syndrome was confirmed. The drug demonstrated a favorable safety profile comparable to placebo.","PeriodicalId":37732,"journal":{"name":"Nevrologiya, Neiropsikhiatriya, Psikhosomatika","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nevrologiya, Neiropsikhiatriya, Psikhosomatika","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14412/2074-2711-2023-5-20-34","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Functional dizziness (FD) is one of the most common causes of chronic dizziness for which there is no effective drug therapy, highlighting the importance of searching for new treatment technologies. Objective: to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Vespireit® (INN buspirone) prolonged-release tablets 15 mg2 (JSC “Valenta Pharm”, Russia) compared with placebo in the treatment of patients with autonomic dysfunction syndrome accompanied by FD. Material and methods . The clinical trial (CT) included a total of 268 patients with autonomic dysfunction syndrome accompanied by FD and a DHI (The Dizziness Handicap Inventory) dizziness scale score of 36 to 52 inclusive, who were randomly divided into 2 groups and treated in a double-blind fashion. 135 patients (Group 1) received Vespireit® prolonged-release tablets 15 mg at a dose of 15 mg (1 tablet) once daily for 28 days. 133 patients (Group 2) received placebo at the same dosage regimen. Treatment was given against a background of vestibular gymnastic exercises. The primary outcome of the clinical trial was assessment of patient response rate (proportion of responders), i.e., a ≥50% reduction in total DHI for dizziness score at Visit 5 (day 28±1) compared with baseline (Visit 1, day 1). Secondary efficacy measures included assessment of: 1) treatment response rates (≥50% reduction in DHI total score compared to Visit 1) at Visits 2, 3, and 4; 2) DHI total score at Visits 2, 3, 4, and 5; 3) changes in DHI total score at Visits 2, 3, 4, and 5 compared to Visit 1; 4) proportion of patients with a 30% or greater reduction in DHI scale dizziness compared with baseline at Visit 2, 3, 4, and 5; 5) time elapsed until total DHI score decreased by ≥50% compared to baseline; 6) time elapsed until total DHI score decreased by ≥30% compared to baseline; 7) changes in Digital Rating Scale (DRS) score from Visit 1 to Visit 2, 3, 4, 5; 8) scores on the DRS at Visits 2, 3, 4, 5; 9) proportion of patients with different response to treatment on the Likert scale at Visits 2, 3, 4, and 5. Additional secondary criteria of efficacy were also assessed: total Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) score at Visits 4 and 5; change in total Hamilton scale score at Visits 4 and 5 compared to Visit 1. The safety criterion assessed in the clinical trial was monitoring of adverse events (AEs), clinically significant deviations in vital signs, laboratory parameters, and ECG parameters. Results. The proportion of responders with a ≥50% reduction in DHI total score at Visit 5 (Day 28±1) compared to baseline (Visit 1, Day 1) was 68.7% (n=92) in Group 1, which was 52.9% more than in Group 2 – 15.8% (n=21) (p<0.0001). Evaluation of all secondary (including additional) efficacy criteria also showed a statistically significant benefit of therapy in Group 1 compared to Group 2 (p<0.0001). A total of 61 AEs were recorded in 46 (17.2%) patients: 30 AEs in 21 (15.6%) patients in Group 1 and 31 AEs in 25 (18.8%) patients in Group 2. There was no significant difference between treatment groups in the number of patients with AEs (p=0.5196). In both groups, there were no patients with AEs with severity ≥3, serious AEs (SAEs), SAEs with fatal outcome, or SAEs that led to discontinuation of study therapy. No clinically significant abnormalities were noted during assessment of vital signs, laboratory parameters, or ECG parameters Conclusion. The superiority of Vespireit® prolonged-release tablets (PR) 15 mg therapy over placebo in reducing FD in patients with autonomic dysfunction syndrome was confirmed. The drug demonstrated a favorable safety profile comparable to placebo.
Vespireit®(丁螺环酮)缓释片(PR) 15mg治疗功能性头晕患者的疗效和安全性:双盲、安慰剂对照、多中心、随机、3期临床试验结果
功能性头晕(FD)是慢性头晕最常见的原因之一,目前尚无有效的药物治疗方法,因此寻找新的治疗技术非常重要。目的:评价Vespireit®(INN丁螺环酮)缓释片15mg2(俄罗斯JSC“Valenta Pharm”公司)与安慰剂治疗自主神经功能障碍综合征合并FD患者的疗效和安全性。材料和方法。临床试验(CT)共纳入268例自主神经功能障碍综合征伴FD和DHI(头晕障碍量表)头晕量表评分为36 ~ 52分的患者,随机分为2组,采用双盲治疗。135例患者(第一组)给予Vespireit®缓释片15mg,剂量15mg(1片),每日1次,连用28天。133例患者(第二组)接受相同剂量方案的安慰剂治疗。治疗以前庭体操训练为背景。临床试验的主要结局是评估患者反应率(反应者比例),即与基线(第1次就诊,第1天)相比,第5次就诊时(28±1天)头晕总分DHI降低≥50%。次要疗效指标包括评估:1)第2、3和4次就诊时的治疗反应率(DHI总分与第1次就诊相比降低≥50%);2)第2、3、4、5次访问DHI总分;3)与第1次相比,第2、3、4和5次访诊时DHI总分的变化;4)与就诊2、3、4和5时基线相比,DHI眩晕量表减少30%或更多的患者比例;5)与基线相比,DHI总分下降≥50%的时间;6) DHI总分与基线相比下降≥30%的时间;7)访问1至访问2、3、4、5期间DRS评分的变化;8)第2、3、4、5次访问DRS得分;9)就诊第2、3、4、5次时不同疗效患者的比例。还评估了其他次要疗效标准:就诊4和5时汉密尔顿抑郁评定量表(HDRS)总分;与第一次访问相比,第4次和第5次访问时汉密尔顿量表总分的变化。临床试验评估的安全性标准是监测不良事件(ae)、生命体征、实验室参数和心电图参数的临床显著偏差。结果。与基线(第1次就诊,第1天)相比,第5次就诊(第28±1天)DHI总分降低≥50%的应答者比例在第1组为68.7% (n=92),比第2组高52.9% - 15.8% (n=21) (p<0.0001)。所有次要(包括附加)疗效标准的评估也显示,与2组相比,1组的治疗获益具有统计学意义(p<0.0001)。46例(17.2%)患者共发生61例ae,第1组21例(15.6%)患者发生30例ae,第2组25例(18.8%)患者发生31例ae。两组间不良反应发生率比较,差异无统计学意义(p=0.5196)。两组均无严重程度≥3级不良事件、严重不良事件(SAEs)、具有致命结局的SAEs或导致研究治疗中断的SAEs患者。在评估生命体征、实验室参数或心电图参数时未发现有临床意义的异常。Vespireit®缓释片(PR) 15mg治疗在减少自主神经功能障碍综合征患者FD方面优于安慰剂。与安慰剂相比,该药具有良好的安全性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Nevrologiya, Neiropsikhiatriya, Psikhosomatika
Nevrologiya, Neiropsikhiatriya, Psikhosomatika Psychology-Clinical Psychology
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
95
期刊介绍: The journal’s chief mission is the postgraduate training of neurologists and psychiatrists through dissemination of current knowledge, new medical technologies and advances, the integration to the global scientific process, and the qualitative representation of achievements of global and Russian science. The journal “Nevrologiya, Neiropsikhiatriya, Psikhosomatika” publishes original articles dedicated to the practical and theoretical issues of neurological, mental, and psychosomatic diseases, conducted clinical, clinical-and-experimental studies and basic researches, as well as reviews, lectures, case reports, and ancillary materials on all relevant problems of neurology and psychiatry, including information on congresses, symposia, and new books. The journal is intended for a wide range of neurologists, psychiatrists, neuropsychologists, and specialists of related occupations.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信