Pharmacokinetic properties of remimazolam in subjects with hepatic or renal impairment.

BACKGROUND: Remimazolam is a new benzodiazepine for procedural sedation and general anaesthesia. The aim of this study was to characterise its pharmacokinetic properties and safety in renally and hepatically impaired subjects. METHODS: Two separate trials were conducted in patients with hepatic (n=11) or renal impairment (n=11) compared with matched healthy subjects (n=9 and n=12, respectively). The hepatic impairment trial was an open-label adaptive 'Reduced Design' trial, using a single bolus of remimazolam 0.1 mg kg-1 i.v., whereas the renal impairment trial was an open-label trial of a single bolus dose of remimazolam 1.5 mg i.v. Remimazolam plasma concentrations over time were analysed by population pharmacokinetic modelling. RESULTS: Remimazolam pharmacokinetic properties were adequately described by a three-compartment, recirculatory model. Exposure in subjects with severe hepatic impairment was 38.1% higher (i.e. clearance was 38.1% lower) compared with healthy volunteers. This increase caused a slightly delayed recovery (8.0 min for healthy, 12.1 min for moderate, and 16.7 min for severe hepatic impairment). With renal impairment, plasma clearance was comparable with that measured in healthy subjects. Simulations of Cmax after a bolus dose of 10 mg showed no relevant impact of hepatic or renal impairment. The overall incidence of adverse events was low, and all adverse events were mild. CONCLUSIONS: As Cmax after a remimazolam bolus i.v. was not affected by hepatic or renal impairment, no dose adjustments are required. No unexpected adverse events related to remimazolam were seen in subjects with renal or hepatic impairment. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Hepatic impairment trial: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01790607 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01790607). Renal impairment trial: EudraCT Number: 2014-004575-23.

Remimazolam Has Low Oral Bioavailability and No Potential for Misuse in Drug-Facilitated Sexual Assaults, with or Without Alcohol: Results from Two Randomised Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Remimazolam is a new ultra-short-acting benzodiazepine currently being developed for intravenous use in procedural sedation, general anaesthesia, and intensive care unit sedation. Benzodiazepines represent a drug class associated with drug-facilitated sexual assaults, especially in combination with alcohol. Two clinical trials were designed to evaluate the oral bioavailability and pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of remimazolam and to assess the potential for remimazolam misuse in drug-facilitated sexual assaults via oral ingestion. METHODS: Trial 1 was conducted in 14 healthy volunteers to evaluate the oral bioavailability of remimazolam. Part 1 of trial 2 was conducted in 21 healthy female volunteers to find the minimal biologically active dose of oral remimazolam. Part 2 of trial 2 was conducted in 11 healthy female volunteers to evaluate the pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of oral remimazolam in combination with alcohol. RESULTS: Remimazolam undergoes rapid and extensive first-pass metabolism upon oral administration. The oral bioavailability of remimazolam was negligible (2.2% based on total systemic exposure and 1.2% based on maximum plasma concentration). Plasma clearance of both remimazolam and its metabolite was fast (elimination half-life 20‒40 min and 1.75‒2 h, respectively). Alcohol did not appear to inhibit the rapid first-pass metabolism of remimazolam. No clear sedative effects were observed for remimazolam without alcohol. Significant sedation was observed in one of ten subjects after remimazolam 360 mg (18 drug product vials) + 40% v/v alcohol. CONCLUSION: The oral bioavailability of remimazolam is negligible, which-together with its distinct bitter taste-suggests no meaningful potential for misuse in drug-facilitated sexual assaults via oral ingestion, with or without alcohol. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS: Trial 1 (NCT04113564) and trial 2 (NCT04113343) both retrospectively registered on 2 October 2019.

Randomized Crossover Trial to Compare Abuse Liability of Intravenous Remimazolam Versus Intravenous Midazolam and Placebo in Recreational Central Nervous System Depressant Users.

Remimazolam (RMZ) is a new and ultra-fast-acting, short-duration intravenous benzodiazepine, a drug class associated with abuse potential. This trial was designed to compare the abuse potential of remimazolam with placebo and midazolam (MDZ), a well-characterized member of the same pharmacological class in healthy, recreational drug users 18-55 years-of-age, who demonstrated good drug tolerance and were able to discriminate between midazolam and placebo. At equipotent intravenous doses selected to produce effects ranging from mild/moderate to relatively strong sedation without loss of consciousness (RMZ: 5, 10 mg versus MDZ: 2.5, 5 mg), peak scores (Emax or Emin , respectively) for drug liking, good/bad/any effects, and sedation (drowsiness and relaxation) were significantly greater than placebo for both active drugs and were broadly comparable between RMZ and MDZ. In contrast, areas under the effect-time curves (TA_AUE) were notably lower for RMZ versus MDZ, particularly for measures of good and any effects, reflecting the shorter duration of action and consistent with the more rapid observed plasma clearance for RMZ versus MDZ and the lack of an active RMZ metabolite. Scores for willingness to take drug again were also lower for RMZ versus MDZ, but not significantly so. We concluded that the abuse potential of RMZ is comparable to or lower than that of MDZ, a drug known to have a low potential for intravenous abuse.

A phase IIb study comparing the safety and efficacy of remimazolam and midazolam in patients undergoing colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Remimazolam is an ultra-short-acting benzodiazepine currently being developed for procedural sedation and for induction and maintenance of anesthesia. This trial was the fourth study for procedural sedation. The aim was to compare the safety and efficacy profile of remimazolam and to refine suitable doses for subsequent phase III studies in this indication. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, parallel group, active controlled clinical trial with 162 male and female patients, aged 18 to 70, scheduled to undergo a routine colonoscopy. Patients were randomized to receive 1 of 3 remimazolam doses or midazolam for sedation. Supplemental oxygen and 100 µg of fentanyl was given before procedures were started, and the colonoscopy commenced as soon as suitable sedation had been achieved (Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation score ≤3). Top-up doses of the study drug and/or fentanyl were allowed to maintain suitable sedation and/or analgesia. Response was defined as sufficient sedation, no rescue sedative, and no ventilation required. RESULTS: This study showed that a single dose of remimazolam or midazolam, followed by top-up doses to maintain suitable sedation, provided adequate sedation with a high success rate (>92%) for the remimazolam groups, compared with 75% for the midazolam group (P = .007). There was no requirement for mechanical ventilation in any group, and procedure failures were all due to use of rescue sedative. CONCLUSIONS: The high success rates and good safety profile of remimazolam observed in this study warrants further investigation and confirmation in phase III trials. ( CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01145222.).

A Phase IIa, randomized, double-blind study of remimazolam (CNS 7056) versus midazolam for sedation in upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.

BACKGROUND: This exploratory study was the first study of remimazolam in patients to assess the safety and efficacy of different single doses for procedural sedation. METHODS: Patients scheduled to undergo a diagnostic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy were randomized to receive 1 of 3 doses of remimazolam or midazolam (25 per group) in a double-blind manner. After a single dose of study drug to achieve sedation, patients underwent gastroscopy. We assessed the success of the procedure, sedation levels, recovery from sedation, and safety. RESULTS: A single dose of remimazolam resulted in a successful procedure in 32%, 56%, and 64% of patients in the low (0.10), middle (0.15), and high (0.20 mg/kg) dose groups compared with 44% of patients in the midazolam (0.075 mg/kg) dose group. The onset of sedation was 1.5 to 2.5 minutes in the remimazolam dose groups compared with 5 minutes for midazolam. Because this was a single administration study, sedation could be maintained for as long as necessary to complete the procedure, using rescue midazolam or propofol. Recovery from sedation was rapid for all treatment groups but was influenced by the choice of rescue medication. There were no obvious differences in the safety profiles of remimazolam and midazolam. CONCLUSIONS: This exploratory dose-finding study showed that a single administration of remimazolam (0.10-0.20 mg/kg) was capable of inducing rapid sedation with a quick recovery profile in patients undergoing a diagnostic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy. The safety profile was favorable and appeared to be similar to that of midazolam, warranting further development of this short-acting compound.

A phase Ib, dose-finding study of multiple doses of remimazolam (CNS 7056) in volunteers undergoing colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND: We performed the first multiple dose study of remimazolam designed to assess both the feasibility of maintaining suitable sedation during colonoscopy and reversing the sedative effects of remimazolam with flumazenil. METHODS: Healthy volunteers received fentanyl followed by remimazolam for sedation during colonoscopy. Three dose groups of 15 volunteers each received remimazolam in increasing initial doses, plus top-up doses to maintain sedation for a 30-minute period. In a separate double-blind crossover part of the trial, 6 volunteers were sedated with a single high dose of remimazolam, followed by flumazenil or placebo to reverse the sedation. RESULTS: Successful sedation that was adequate for colonoscopy was achieved in >70% of subjects. After the procedure, subjects rapidly recovered to fully alert, with a median of <10 minutes overall. Failures were due to the inability to sedate or adverse events, with 1 subject failing due to hypotension (arterial blood pressure 80/40) and low SpO2 (<90%). There were no serious adverse events reported, and no events that were unexpected with the combination of a benzodiazepine and fentanyl. The study also showed that sedation was rapidly reversible (1.0 minutes flumazenil vs 10.5 minutes placebo) without resedation. CONCLUSIONS: Remimazolam has the attributes of a sedative drug, with success rates comparable with recent studies of other drugs. Remimazolam provided adequate sedation in 33 of 44 subjects undergoing colonoscopy, and its sedative effects were easily reversed with flumazenil.

A placebo- and midazolam-controlled phase I single ascending-dose study evaluating the safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of remimazolam (CNS 7056): Part II. Population pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic modeling and simulation.

BACKGROUND: A new benzodiazepine, remimazolam, which is rapidly metabolized by tissue esterases to an inactive metabolite, has been developed to permit a fast onset, a short, predictable duration of sedative action, and a more rapid recovery profile than currently available drugs. We report on modeling of the data and simulations of dosage regimens for future study. METHODS: A phase I, single-center, double-blind, placebo and active controlled, randomized, single-dose escalation study was conducted. Fifty-four healthy subjects in 9 groups received a single 1-minute IV infusion of remimazolam (0.01-0.3 mg/kg). There were 18 control subjects taking midazolam and 9 placebos. Population pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic modeling of the data was undertaken and the parameters obtained were used for Monte-Carlo simulations of alternative dosing regimens. RESULTS: A 4-compartment mammillary pharmacokinetic model of midazolam and a physiologically based recirculation model of remimazolam were fitted to the observed plasma levels. The recirculation model of remimazolam explained the observed high venous, compared with arterial, concentrations at later time points. The 2 models were used to simulate the arterial concentrations required for the pharmacodynamic models of sedation (Bispectral Index and Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation [MOAA/S]) and gave population mean pharmacodynamic parameters as follows: Bispectral Index-IC(50): 0.26, 0.07 µg/mL; γ: 1.6, 8.6; k(e0): 0.14, 0.053 min(-1); I(MAX): 39, 19, and MOAA/S-IC(50): 0.4, 0.08 µg/mL; γ: 1.4, 3.4; k(e0): 0.25, 0.050 min(-1) for remimazolam and midazolam, respectively. Simulations to obtain >70% of the population with MOAA/S scores of 2 to 4 were developed. This criterion was achieved (95% confidence intervals: 67%-74%) with a 6-mg initial loading dose of remimazolam followed by 3-mg maintenance doses at >2-minute intervals. Recovery to a MOAA/S score of 5 is predicted to be within 16 minutes for 89% (95% confidence intervals: 87%-91%) of the treated population after this loading/maintenance dose regimen. CONCLUSIONS: Population pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic models developed for remimazolam and midazolam fitted the observed data well. Simulations based on these models show that remimazolam delivers extremely rapid sedation, with maximal effect being reached within 3 minutes of the start of treatment. This property will enable maintenance doses to be given more accurately than with slower-acting drugs. No covariate effects considered to be clinically relevant were observed, suggesting that dosing by body weight may offer no advantage over fixed doses in terms of consistency of exposure to remimazolam within the weight range studied (65-90 kg).

A placebo- and midazolam-controlled phase I single ascending-dose study evaluating the safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of remimazolam (CNS 7056): Part I. Safety, efficacy, and basic pharmacokinetics.

BACKGROUND: A new benzodiazepine, remimazolam, metabolized by tissue esterases to an inactive compound, CNS 7054, has been developed to permit a fast onset, a short and more predictable duration of sedative action, and a more rapid recovery profile than with currently available benzodiazepines. We report on the safety and efficacy of the first human study. METHODS: A phase I, single-center, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled, randomized, single-dose escalation study was conducted. Up to 10 cohorts of healthy subjects were scheduled to receive a single 1-minute IV infusion of remimazolam, midazolam, or placebo. In the 10 possible cohorts, remimazolam doses were from 0.01 to 0.35 mg/kg. In cohorts 1 to 3, 6 subjects received remimazolam and 1 placebo. From cohort 4 onward, an additional 3 subjects in each cohort received midazolam (0.075 mg/kg). Safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics were measured. A stop criterion of loss of consciousness for >5 minutes in >50% of subjects was predefined. RESULTS: The stop criterion was reached in cohort 9 (0.30 mg/kg remimazolam) so that 81 subjects were enrolled. Remimazolam was well tolerated in all dose cohorts, and no serious adverse events (AEs) were reported. Three AEs of mild (Spo(2) 85%-88%) hemoglobin desaturation (2 in the remimazolam groups and 1 in the midazolam group) resolved spontaneously, and 1 AE of moderate hemoglobin desaturation (Spo(2) 75%) resolved with a chin lift in the highest remimazolam dose group. No supplemental oxygen or manual ventilation was required. Vital signs remained stable throughout, although there was an increase in heart rate 2 minutes postdose for both remimazolam and midazolam. There were no reports of hypo- or hypertension. The pharmacokinetic behavior of remimazolam was linear and its systemic clearance approximately 3 times that of midazolam. Clearance was essentially independent of body weight. A rapid onset and dose-dependent sedation was observed after administration of remimazolam at 0.05 mg/kg and higher. Remimazolam (0.075 to 0.20 mg/kg) induced peak sedation levels similar to or higher than those achieved with midazolam (0.075 mg/kg). Median recovery times after approximately equieffective doses of remimazolam (0.10 and 0.15 mg/kg) and midazolam (0.075 mg/kg) were 10 and 40 minutes, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Remimazolam provided sedation with rapid onset and offset, and was well tolerated. There was no supplemental oxygen or ventilation required. On the basis of these data, further studies on the potential utility of remimazolam for sedation/anesthesia are warranted.

Transplantation of mobilized peripheral blood cells to HLA-identical siblings with standard-risk leukemia.

Allogeneic mobilized peripheral blood progenitor cells instead of bone marrow are increasingly used to restore hematopoiesis after myeloablative therapy. Data supporting this important change of clinical practice are scarce. We therefore assigned patients with early leukemias to peripheral blood or bone marrow transplantation; the occurrence of acute and chronic graft versus host disease, survival, transplantation-related mortality, and relapse rates were compared. A total of 350 patients between 18 and 55 years of age with acute leukemias in remission or chronic myelogenous leukemia in first chronic phase were randomized to receive either filgrastim-mobilized peripheral blood progenitor cells or bone marrow cells from HLA-identical sibling donors after standard high-dose chemoradiotherapy. Neutrophil and platelet recovery occurred significantly faster after transplantation of peripheral blood progenitor cells than after bone marrow transplantation. Acute graft versus host disease of grades II-IV was significantly more frequent in recipients of peripheral blood progenitor cells than in recipients of marrow cells (52% vs 39%, odds ratio 1.74, 95% confidence interval 1.12-2.69, P =.013). The cumulative incidence of chronic graft versus host disease was 67% with peripheral blood progenitor cells and 54% with bone marrow cells (hazard ratio 1.67, 95% confidence interval 1.15-2.42, P =.0066). The estimated overall probability of survival at 2 years was 65% with either source of stem cells (hazard ratio 1.15, 95% confidence interval 0.79-1.67, P =.46). Disease-free survival, transplantation-related mortality at day 100, and relapse rates did not significantly differ between treatment arms. Peripheral blood is an equivalent source of hematopoietic stem cells compared with bone marrow if administered to patients with standard-risk leukemias. Long-term observation of patients with different diseases and stages of disease is necessary to ultimately define the role of both sources of stem cells.