Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Quote  |  Bullboard  |  News  |  Opinion  |  Profile  |  Peers  |  Filings  |  Financials  |  Options  |  Price History  |  Ratios  |  Ownership  |  Insiders  |  Valuation

ProMIS Neurosciences Inc PMN

ProMIS Neurosciences Inc. is a development stage biotechnology company. The Company is focused on generating and developing antibody therapeutics selectively targeting toxic misfolded proteins in neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer’s disease (AD), amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and multiple system atrophy (MSA), an alpha-synucleinopathy. Its proprietary target discovery engine applies a thermodynamic, computational discovery platform - ProMIS and Collective Coordinates - to predict novel targets known as Disease Specific Epitopes on the molecular surface of misfolded proteins. Using this approach, the Company is developing novel antibody therapeutics for AD, ALS and MSA. Its product portfolio includes PMN310 / Amyloid-beta, PMN267 / TDP-43, and PMN442 / Alpha-synuclein. The Company plans to investigate additional synucleinopathies, including Parkinson's disease (PD) and dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB). Its wholly owned subsidiary is ProMIS Neurosciences (US) Inc.


NDAQ:PMN - Post by User

Comment by retiredcopon Mar 19, 2021 4:53pm
1382 Views
Post# 32842087

RE:What a great question...

RE:What a great question...

NEWS BRIEF

The medical science and research company Clarivate has named aducanumab, a potential Alzheimer disease (AD) treatment, as one of its top 5 “Drugs to Watch 2021.”1 Clarivate, which has published the “Drugs to Watch” list since 2013, included aducanumab on the list because it has a new mechanism of action and would be the first novel therapeutic for AD in more than 15 years. The company selects drugs in phase 2 or 3 trials that have the potential to bring in $1 billion in sales by 2025. Aducanumab is in phase 3 trials, and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has promised to render its verdict in June.

If approved, Helen Lavretsky, MS, MD, expects it will be a game changer. Lavretsky, professor in-residence in the Department of Psychiatry at the University of California, Los Angeles, told Psychiatric TimesTM, “It will revolutionize Alzheimer disease treatment and care, and will have a profound impact on the lives of millions of family caregivers, who will be relieved from caring for their relatives, or the time of caregiving will be shortened, improving lives of millions of people around the world, and reducing the cost of the disease to the society.”

Aducanumab would be the first approved drug in the last 15 years that could slow down the cognitive decline associated with AD. Existing treatments, for cases across the spectrum from mild to severe, are generally symptomatic therapies.

The drug might address a root cause of AD. It builds on the amyloid cascade hypothesis, in which “production and accumulation of excessive amyloid-β (Aβ) may be the main cause in the onset and progression of Alzheimer's disease.”2 If so, removing or lowering of Aβ in patients with presymptomatic and early AD could be an effective therapy, and even used as a preventive, subunit vaccine.2

If approved, Rajesh R. Tampi, MD, MS, DFAPA, DFAAGP, noted, “this drug will be the first antiamyloid therapy and disease modifying therapy for Alzheimer disease.” Tampi is professor and chairman of the Department of Psychiatry & Behavioral Sciences at the Cleveland Clinic. Lavretsky described aducanumab as a “breakthrough treatment with a novel mechanism as recombinant chimeric human IgG1 mAb targeting beta-amyloid.”

Excitement is especially strong for the drug since innovation in therapies for AD has been frustratingly slow. The problem, Tampi explained, is that AD is caused by neurological degeneration, and “it is very difficult to develop different therapies to reverse these neurobiological changes in the brain.”

Finding effective treatments has also been difficult due to “uncertainty about the underlying mechanisms of the disease, the reliance on postmortem diagnosis, and the lack of reliable biomarkers for disease early diagnosis and progression, despite almost 120-year history of research,” Lavretsky added. “Many potential therapies failed to document efficacy and did not achieve the FDA approvals.”

Sure enough, despite its promise, aducanumab has had its own set of struggles. Last November brought disappointment, when the FDA published a negative review of aducanumab, citing insufficient evidence of clinical efficacy.

The news was especially disappointing, given aducanumab’s success in previous trials. In 2015, aducanumab underwent two phase 3 efficacy trials.4 The 221AD301 ENGAGE study enrolled 1350 participants with mild cognitive impairment due to AD. It compared monthly infusions of 1 or 3 doses of aducanumab with placebo over an 18-month period, and their effects on cognitive decline. In 2017 and 2018, data from the trials showed that the treatment was slowing cognitive decline. Consequently, aducanumab became the first such DMT for AD to demonstrate clinical efficacy in a phase 3 trial.1,5

However, in March 2019 Biogen and Eisai announced termination of ongoing aducanumab trials, due to missing primary endpoints.5 Despite the termination, further analysis of the data suggested that a subgroup of participants experienced slower cognitive decline.4

Trials resumed on January 27, 2020, when Biogen announced a phase 3b study of 2400 participants who had previously used aducanumab.4 Participants were scheduled to receive monthly injections over the next 2 years. Based on this trial, Biogen requested priority review from the FDA for licensing. The FDA turned down the application in November 2020, citing the weakness of efficacy data.

After aducanumab’s developers, Biogen Inc and Eisai Co Ltd, submitted additional data, the FDA extended its decision date to June 7, 2021.6

If approved, aducanumab would meet an enormous need. “It will offer a new hope to patients and their families and therapeutic optimism to geriatric clinicians and researchers,” said Lavretsky.

References

1. Aducanumab. Drugs to Watch 2021. Clarivate. Accessed March 9, 2021. https://clarivate.com/drugs-to-watch/drugs-to-watch-listing/aducanumab/

2. Yu YZ, Xu Q. Prophylactic immunotherapy of Alzheimer's disease using recombinant amyloid-β B-cell epitope chimeric protein as subunit vaccine. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2016;12(11):2801-2804.

3. Talan J. FDA Panel Votes ‘No’ to Approving Audcanumab for Alzheimer’s, Citing Inconsistent Data. Neurology Today. December 3, 2020. Accessed March 9, 2021. https://journals.lww.com/neurotodayonline/Fulltext/2020/12030/FDA_Panel_Votes__No__to_Approving_Aducanumab_for.1.aspx

4. Aducanumab. Therapeutics. Alzforum: networking for a cure. Accessed March 9, 2021. https://www.alzforum.org/therapeutics/aducanumab

5. Biogen/Eisai Halt Phase 3 Aducanumab Trials. Alzforum: networking for a cure. March 21, 2019. Accessed March 9, 2021. https://www.alzforum.org/news/research-news/biogeneisai-halt-phase-3-aducanumab-trials

6. Biogen and Eisai Announce FDA’s 3-Month Extension of Review Period for the Biologics License Application for Aducanumab. News release. GlobeNewswire. January 29, 2021. Accessed March 9, 2021. https://www.globenewswire.com/news-release/2021/01/29/2166560/0/en/Biogen-and-Eisai-Announce-FDA-s-3-Month-Extension-of-Review-Period-for-the-Biologics-License-Application-for-Aducanumab.html

 

 

 

 

 

 
 

Effectiveness of Pharmacotherapies for Schizoaffective Disorder

March 18, 2021

 

What is the long-term, real-world effectiveness of pharmacotherapies for schizoaffective disorder? An investigation into 2 nationwide cohorts of patients living with schizophrenia provides new details.

 
schizophrenia, antipsychotics, mental health

DimaBerlin/AdobeStock

RESEARCH UPDATE

Schizoaffective disorder includes both psychotic and affective symptoms, with separate bipolar and depressive subtypes.1-3 ICD-11 aims to improve the diagnostic accuracy and differential diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder.4 There is debate whether schizoaffective disorder is a separate illness, or part of the continuum of schizophrenia and mood disorder spectrum.5 Pharmacotherapy recommendations for schizoaffective disorder are generally derived from studies on schizophrenia and bipolar disorder; thus symptoms are most commonly treated with antipsychotics, mood stabilizers, and/or antidepressants. Only paliperidone has an approved treatment indication specifically for schizoaffective disorder.

Lintunen and colleagues6 compared the long-term, real-world effectiveness of pharmacotherapies for schizoaffective disorder in 2 nationwide cohorts, including oral and long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics, mood stabilizers, antidepressants, and benzodiazepines and nonbenzodiazepines together (zopiclone, zolpidem, and zaleplon, also known as Z-drugs).

The authors analyzed 2 cohorts from nationwide Finnish and Swedish registers. The Finnish cohort included 7655 patients treated for schizoaffective disorder based on inpatient care, as recorded in the Finnish Hospital Discharge Register. The Swedish cohort included 7525 persons ages 16 to 64 with schizoaffective disorder based on inpatient, specialized outpatient, disability pensions, and a social insurance agency register.6 Cohort members were followed from July 2006 until their deaths, change in diagnosis to schizophrenia, or study end (December 2016 for the Swedish cohort and December 2017 for the Finnish cohort). Sensitivity analyses were performed excluding anyone who received a schizophrenia diagnosis during follow-up.

The main exposure was antipsychotics, based on Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical classification code N05A (except lithium), as well as mood stabilizers, antidepressants, and benzodiazepines and/or Z-drugs. Psychotropic medication use periods were based on the PRE2DUP method.18 The primary outcome measure was hospitalization because of psychosis. The authors also analyzed a composite measure of treatment failure, including psychiatric hospitalization, change in medication, and death. Analyses were conducted in each cohort separately using within-individual design and Cox regression models (hazard ratios [HRs] and 95% confidence intervals), with p-values adjusted for multiple comparisons.

For antipsychotic effectiveness, the reference was antipsychotic nonuse. Nonantipsychotic medications were considered as adjunctive therapies, with antipsychotic use without adjunctive use, as the reference (eg, olanzapine monotherapy was the reference for comparisons with olanzapine-mood stabilizer analyses). Data on 16 most commonly used antipsychotics were reported. Five oral antipsychotics (clozapine, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, and aripiprazole) and LAIs (as a single category) were analyzed in combinations with adjunctive pharmacotherapies.

In both cohorts, 60% of subjects were female. Mean age was 45 to 47 years. During follow-up, 13% of the Finnish cohort and 22% of the Swedish cohort were censored because of a change in diagnosis to schizophrenia. The median follow-up was 8 years in the Swedish cohort and 11 years in the Finnish cohort, during which about half of all participants had a hospitalization for psychosis. Approximately 90% of all individuals used antipsychotics during the follow-up; first-generation agents were more common in Sweden, and clozapine and antipsychotic polypharmacy were more common in Finland. About half of all patients had concurrent antipsychotic and antidepressant use, whereas mood stabilizers were used in 41% of the Swedish and 47% of the Finnish cohort. Benzodiazepines/Z-drugs were used in 72% of the Swedish and 61% of the Finnish cohort.

In both groups, clozapine (HR= 0.49-0.50), LAIs, and polypharmacy (HR = 0.51-0.57) were consistently associated with decreased risk of psychosis hospitalization. Notably, quetiapine was not associated with a decreased risk of hospitalization (versus antipsychotic nonuse) in either country. In sensitivity analyses, the pattern of findings was similar.

Antipsychotics plus mood stabilizers were associated with a 16% to 24% decreased risk of psychosis hospitalization (HR = 0.76-0.84). Antidepsychosis pressant use was associated with a 10% decreased risk of inpatient hospitalization in the Swedish cohort (HR = 0.90), but not in the Finnish cohort (HR = 1.00). By contrast, Z-drug use was associated with a 7% to 21% increased risk of hospitalization, even after censoring the first 30 days of use. The overall pattern of findings remained similar with the broader outcome of any psychiatric hospitalization (instead of hospitalization for psychosis).

The authors found that exposure to antipsychotics was associated with decreased risk for inpatient hospitalization in patients with schizoaffective disorder. Furthermore, the combination of antipsychotics and adjunctive mood stabilizers (versus antipsychotic monotherapy) was also associated with lower risk of psychosis hospitalization. Evidence was much less robust for adjunctive antidepressants.

Adjunctive use of benzodiazepines/Z-drugs was associated with an increased risk of hospitalization.Study strengths included in the use of two large, nationwide cohorts with multiple years of follow-up, and the within-individual model, which inherently controls for time-invariant covariates. Study limitations including the lack of availability of some clinically relevant factors and potential diagnostic uncertainty in register-based data.

The Bottom Line

The use of antipsychotics, particularly clozapine and LAIs, and adjunctive mood stabilizers, were associated with a decreased risk, whereas benzodiazepines/Z-drugs were associated with an increased risk of psychosis hospitalization among individuals with schizoaffective disorder in 2 nationwide cohorts. Future studies of adjunctive treatments should consider the bipolar and depressive subtypes of schizoaffective disorder separately.

Dr Miller is professor in the Department of Psychiatry and Health Behavior, Augusta University, Augusta, Georgia. He is on the Editorial Board and serves as the schizophrenia section chief for Psychiatric TimesTMThe author reports that he receives research support from Augusta University, the National Institute of Mental Health, the Brain and Behavior Research Foundation, and the Stanley Medical Research Institute.

References

1. Murru A, Pacchiarotti I, Nivoli AM, et al. What we know and what we don’t know about the treatment of schizoaffective disorderEur Neuropsychopharmacol. 2011;21:680–690.

2. World Health Organization. International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems. 10th revision. Geneva: World Health Organization; 1992.

3. American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 5th ed. Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Association; 2013.

4. Peterson DL, Webb CA, Keeley JW, et al. The reliability and clinical utility of ICD-11 schizoaffective disorder: a field trial. Schizophr Res. 2019;208:235–241.

5. Cheniaux E, Landeira-Fernandez J, Lessa Telles L, et al. Does schizoaffective disorder really exist? A systematic review of the studies that compared schizoaffective disorder with schizophrenia or mood disorders. J Affect Disord. 2008;106:209–217.

6. Lintunen J, Taipale H, Tanskanen A, et al. Long-term real-world effectiveness of pharmacotherapies for schizoaffective disorderSchizophr Bull 2021. doi:10.1093/schbul/sbaa004.

 

 
 

 

<< Previous
Bullboard Posts
Next >>