Administration of oxathridine, a first-in-class histamine-3 receptor partial agonist in healthy male volunteers: Central nervous system depression and pseudo-hallucinations.

AIMS: To characterise the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of single ascending doses of oxathridine, a first-in-class histamine-3 receptor partialagonist, in healthy male volunteers. METHODS: A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study including the NeuroCart, consisting of a battery of drug sensitive neurophysiological tests, was performed. Oxathridine was administered orally as an aqueous solution. After dosing, safety and NeuroCart tests (adaptive tracking [AT], body sway [BS], saccadic peak velocity [SPV], smooth pursuit [SP] eye movements, VAS according to Bond and Lader, VAS according to Bowdle [VAS B&L, Bowdle], pharmaco-electroencephalogram [pEEG], Sustained Attention to Response Task [SART]) were performed at set times. RESULTS: Forty volunteers completed the study. Given doses were: 0.5, 2.5, 5, 0.25 and 1.5 mg. At 5 mg, unacceptable and unanticipated adverse events (AEs) of (orthostatic) hypotension and pseudo-hallucinations were reported. Statistically significant effects ([CI]; p-value) of 2.5 mg and 5 mg oxathridine were observed on AT ([-8.28, -1.60]; p = 0.0048), ([-8.10, -1.51]; p = 0.00530), BS ([0.6, 80.2]; p = 0.0455), ([5.9, 93.1]; p = 0.0205) and SPV ([-59.0, -15.9]; p = 0.0011), ([-43.9, -1.09]; p = 0.0399), respectively. Oxathridine 5 mg significantly increased all three VAS Bowdle subscale scores; VAS external ([0.183, 0.476]; p = <.0001), VAS internal ([0.127, 0.370]; p = 0.0001) and VAS feeling high ([0.263, 0.887]; p = 0.0006). CONCLUSION: NeuroCart tests indicated central nervous system (CNS) depressant effects. Oxathridine also unexpectedly caused pseudohallucinations. Although this led to the decision to stop further development of oxathridine, these observations suggest that the H3R system could be an interesting new target for the development of novel antipsychotics.

Safety and efficacy of pitolisant in children aged 6 years or older with narcolepsy with or without cataplexy: a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Narcolepsy is a life-long disorder characterised by excessive daytime sleepiness and cataplexy, often arising in childhood or adolescence. Pitolisant, a selective histamine H3 receptor inverse agonist, has been approved in Europe and USA for adults with narcolepsy with or without cataplexy, with a favourable safety profile. This phase 3 study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of pitolisant in children with narcolepsy with or without cataplexy. METHODS: For this double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, multisite study, we recruited patients aged 6-17 years with narcolepsy with or without cataplexy in 11 sleep centres in five countries (Italy, France, Netherlands, Russia, and Finland). Participants were required to have a Pediatric Daytime Sleepiness Scale score of 15 or greater and to have not received psychostimulants for at least 14 days before enrolment; participants who needed anticataplectics (including sodium oxybate) were required to have been on a stable dose for at least 1 month. Participants were randomly assigned to treatment with pitolisant or placebo in a 2:1 ratio at the end of screening. Randomisation was stratified by study centre and treatment was allocated using an interactive web response system. After a 4-week screening period including a 2-week baseline period, patients entered in a 4-week individual up-titration scheme from 5 mg a day to a maximum of 40 mg a day of pitolisant or placebo; treatment was administered at a stable dose for 4 weeks, followed by a 1-week placebo period. For the primary analysis, we assessed pitolisant versus placebo using change in the Ullanlinna Narcolepsy Scale (UNS) total score from baseline to the end of double-blind period in the full analysis set, defined as all randomly allocated patients who received at least one dose of treatment and who had at least one baseline UNS value. A decrease in the UNS total score reflects a reduction in both excessive daytime sleepiness and cataplexy. All adverse events were assessed in the safety population, defined as all participants who took at least one dose of study medication. An open-label follow-up is ongoing. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02611687. FINDINGS: Between June 6, 2016, and April 3, 2021, we screened 115 participants and 110 were randomly assigned (mean age 12·9 [SD 3·0] years, 61 [55%] male, and 90 [82%] with cataplexy; 72 assigned to pitolisant and 38 to placebo); 107 (70 receiving pitolisant and 37 receiving placebo) completed the double-blind period. The mean adjusted difference in UNS total score from baseline to the end of the double-blind period was -6·3 (SE 1·1) in the pitolisant group and -2·6 (1·4) in the placebo group (least squares mean difference -3·7; 95% CI -6·4 to -1·0, p=0·007). Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 22 (31%) of 72 patients in the pitolisant group and 13 (34%) of 38 patients in the placebo group. The most frequently reported adverse events (affecting ≥5% of patients) in either group were headache (14 [19%] in the pitolisant group and three [8%] in the placebo group) and insomnia (five [7%] in the pitolisant group and one [3%] in the placebo group). INTERPRETATION: Pitolisant treatment resulted in an improvement in narcolepsy symptoms in children, although the UNS was not validated for use in children with narcolepsy when our study began. The safety profile was similar to that reported in adults but further studies are needed to confirm long-term safety. FUNDING: Bioprojet.

Bioavailability and cardiovascular effects of adrenaline administered by Anapen 500 µg auto-injector in healthy volunteers.

AIMS: Anaphylaxis guidelines recommend intramuscular adrenaline, commonly 300 µg administered using an auto-injector device. However, overweight/obese patients may require a higher adrenaline dose for adequate cardiovascular (CV) response. This study evaluated the pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) CV profiles after a single 500 µg adrenaline injection via Anapen auto-injector in healthy normal weight males and otherwise healthy, overweight or obese females. METHODS: In this exploratory open-label, single-centre study, 54 healthy volunteers aged 18-50 years received a single 500 µg adrenaline injection (Anapen auto-injector) in the thigh (antero-lateral middle third [18 males] or antero-inferior third [36 females]). Assessments included depot depth (ultrasonography), plasma adrenaline levels (liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry) and heart rate (HR; ECG Holter monitor). RESULTS: Ultrasonography showed that 82.4% of normal weight males received intramuscular injections; all overweight and obese females received subcutaneous injections. Anapen injection produced rapid increases in circulating adrenaline levels and significant increases in systolic blood pressure (SBP) and HR. Second peak plasma adrenaline concentrations (Cmax2 ) were reduced, and time to Cmax2 increased in overweight and obese females compared with males with normal body mass index; area under the curve (0-240 min) (AUC(0-240) ) was increased in overweight and obese females. Obese females had reduced maximal SBP values compared with normal weight males or overweight females; overweight and obese females had markedly different HR time courses compared with normal weight males. CONCLUSION: A 500 µg adrenaline injection via Anapen produced rapid PK/PD changes in normal weight, overweight and obese subjects, irrespective of intramuscular or subcutaneous injection, and was well tolerated.

Pitolisant, a wake-promoting agent devoid of psychostimulant properties: Preclinical comparison with amphetamine, modafinil, and solriamfetol.

Several therapeutic options are currently available to treat excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) in patients suffering from narcolepsy or obstructive sleep apnea. However, there are no comparisons between the various wake-promoting agents in terms of mechanism of action, efficacy, or safety. The goal of this study was to compare amphetamine, modafinil, solriamfetol, and pitolisant at their known primary pharmacological targets, histamine H3 receptors (H3R), dopamine, norepinephrine, and serotonin transporters, and in various in vivo preclinical models in relation to neurochemistry, locomotion, behavioral sensitization, and food intake. Results confirmed that the primary pharmacological effect of amphetamine, modafinil, and solriamfetol was to increase central dopamine neurotransmission, in part by inhibiting its transporter. Furthermore, solriamfetol increased levels of extracellular dopamine in the nucleus accumbens, and decreased the 3,4-dihydroxyphenyl acetic acid (DOPAC)/DA ratio in the striatum, as reported for modafinil and amphetamine. All these compounds produced hyperlocomotion, behavioral sensitization, and hypophagia, which are common features of psychostimulants and of compounds with abuse potential. In contrast, pitolisant, a selective and potent H3R antagonist/inverse agonist that promotes wakefulness, had no effect on striatal dopamine, locomotion, or food intake. In addition, pitolisant, devoid of behavioral sensitization by itself, attenuated the hyperlocomotion induced by either modafinil or solriamfetol. Therefore, pitolisant presents biochemical, neurochemical, and behavioral profiles different from those of amphetamine and other psychostimulants such as modafinil or solriamfetol. In conclusion, pitolisant is a differentiated therapeutic option, when compared with psychostimulants, for the treatment of EDS, as this agent does not show any amphetamine-like properties within in vivo preclinical models.

Pitolisant for Residual Excessive Daytime Sleepiness in OSA Patients Adhering to CPAP: A Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: Excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) in individuals with OSA syndrome persisting despite good adherence to CPAP is a disabling condition. Pitolisant is a selective histamine H3-receptor antagonist with wake-promoting effects. RESEARCH QUESTION: Is pitolisant effective and safe for reducing daytime sleepiness in individuals with moderate to severe OSA adhering to CPAP treatment but experiencing residual EDS? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: In a multicenter, double-blind, randomized (3:1), placebo-controlled, parallel-design trial, pitolisant was titrated individually at up to 20 mg/day and taken over 12 weeks. The primary end point was change in the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) score in the intention-to-treat population. Key secondary end points were maintenance of wakefulness assessed by the Oxford Sleep Resistance Test, Clinical Global Impressions scale of severity, the patient's global opinion, EuroQoL quality-of-life questionnaire score, Pichot fatigue questionnaire score, and safety. RESULTS: Two hundred forty-four OSA participants (82.8% men; mean age, 53.1 years; mean Apnea Hypopnea Index with CPAP, 4.2/h; baseline ESS score, 14.7) were randomized to pitolisant (n = 183) or placebo (n = 61). ESS significantly decreased with pitolisant compared with placebo (-2.6; 95% CI, -3.9 to -1.4; P < .001), and the rate of responders to therapy (ESS ≤ 10 or change in ESS ≥ 3) was significantly higher with pitolisant (71.0% vs 54.1%; P = .013). Adverse event occurrence (mainly headache and insomnia) was higher in the pitolisant group compared with the placebo group (47.0% and 32.8%, respectively; P = .03). No cardiovascular or other significant safety concerns were reported. INTERPRETATION: Pitolisant used as adjunct to CPAP therapy for OSA with residual sleepiness despite good CPAP adherence significantly reduced subjective and objective sleepiness and improved participant-reported outcomes and physician-reported disease severity. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT01071876; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov; EudraCT N°: 2009-017248-14; URL: eudract.ema.europa.eu.

Pitolisant for Daytime Sleepiness in Patients with Obstructive Sleep Apnea Who Refuse Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Treatment. A Randomized Trial.

Rationale: Excessive daytime sleepiness is a common disabling symptom in obstructive sleep apnea syndrome.Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of pitolisant, a selective histamine H3 receptor antagonist with wake-promoting effects, for the treatment of daytime sleepiness in patients with moderate to severe obstructive sleep apnea refusing continuous positive airway pressure treatment.Methods: In an international, multicenter, double-blind, randomized (3:1), placebo-controlled, parallel-design trial, pitolisant was individually titrated at up to 20 mg/d over 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was the change in the Epworth Sleepiness Scale score. Key secondary endpoints were maintenance of wakefulness assessed on the basis of the Oxford Sleep Resistance test, safety, Clinical Global Impression of severity, patient's global opinion, EuroQol quality-of-life questionnaire, and Pichot fatigue questionnaire.Measurements and Main Results: A total of 268 patients with obstructive sleep apnea (75% male; mean age, 52 yr; apnea-hypopnea index, 49/h; baseline sleepiness score, 15.7) were randomized (200 to pitolisant and 68 to placebo) and analyzed on an intention-to-treat basis. The Epworth Sleepiness Scale score was reduced more with pitolisant than with placebo (-2.8; 95% confidence interval, -4.0 to -1.5; P < 0.001). Wake maintenance tests were not improved. The Pichot fatigue score was reduced with pitolisant. The overall impact of pitolisant was confirmed by both physicians' and patients' questionnaires. Adverse event incidence, mainly headache, insomnia, nausea, and vertigo, was similar in the pitolisant and placebo groups (29.5% and 25.4%, respectively), with no cardiovascular or other significant safety concerns.Conclusions: Pitolisant significantly reduced self-reported daytime sleepiness and fatigue and improved patient-reported outcomes and physician disease severity assessment in sleepy patients with obstructive sleep apnea refusing or nonadherent to continuous positive airway pressure.Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01072968) and EU Clinical Trials Register (EudraCT 2009-017251-94).

Long-term use of pitolisant to treat patients with narcolepsy: Harmony III Study.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To asses the long-term safety and efficacy of pitolisant, an histamine H3-receptor antagonist, on narcolepsy. METHODS: This open-label, single-arm, pragmatic study, recruited adult patients with narcolepsy and Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) score ≥12. After a titration period, patients were treated for up to 1 year with oral pitolisant once-a-day at up to 40 mg. Concomitant stimulants and anti-cataplectic agents were allowed. The primary endpoint was safety; secondary endpoints included ESS, cataplexy, and other diary parameters. RESULTS: Patients (n = 102, 75 with cataplexy) received pitolisant, for the first time in 73 of them. Sixty-eight patients (51 with cataplexy) completed the 12-month treatment. Common treatment-emergent adverse events were headache (11.8% of patients), insomnia (8.8%), weight gain (7.8%), anxiety (6.9%), depressive symptoms (4.9%), and nausea (4.9%). Seven patients had a serious adverse effect, unrelated to pitolisant except for a possibly related miscarriage. One-third of patients stopped pitolisant, mostly (19.6%) for insufficient benefit. ESS score decreased by 4.6 ± 0.6. Two-thirds of patients completing the treatment were responders (ESS ≤ 10 or ESS decrease ≥ 3), and one third had normalized ESS (≤10). Complete and partial cataplexy, hallucinations, sleep paralysis, and sleep attacks were reduced by 76%, 65%, 54%, 63%, and 27%, respectively. Pitolisant as monotherapy (43% of patients) was better tolerated and more efficacious on ESS than on add-on, but efficacy was maintained in this last case. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term safety and efficacy of pitolisant on daytime sleepiness, cataplexy, hallucinations, and sleep paralysis is confirmed.

Bioavailability and Cardiovascular Effects of Adrenaline Administered by Anapen Autoinjector in Healthy Volunteers.

BACKGROUND: The administration of adrenaline is a life-saving intervention for anaphylactic reactions. However, it has been questioned whether the needle length of the autoinjectors is sufficient to achieve genuine intramuscular delivery and optimal bioavailability. OBJECTIVE: To assess the adequacy of Anapen, which has a relatively short needle length (10.5 mm), through a comparison of the depot localization, plasma pharmacokinetics, and cardiovascular responses of adrenaline delivered via Anapen versus a prefilled syringe with a 25.4-mm needle, which is generally used for intramuscular injections. METHODS: This randomized, open-label, crossover study compared the impact of adrenaline administration at 2 sites in the thigh of 18 normal weight male volunteers, using either Anapen or the prefilled syringe; in addition, we studied the treatment of 12 overweight women with Anapen. The depot depth was measured by ultrasonography, plasma adrenaline level was evaluated by ultra performance liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (UPLC-MS), and heart rates were measured using a Holter monitor. RESULTS: Intramuscular injections were given with both devices at both thigh sites in nonobese men, but not in overweight women. Adrenaline levels showed a double peak, with parallel changes in the heart rate. The first peak, of potential vital importance in anaphylaxis treatment, occurred at approximately 10 minutes postinjection, with maximum concentration and area under the curve significantly higher with Anapen than with prefilled syringes; the magnitude of the second peak did not differ among the various conditions. Unexpectedly, in overweight women treated with Anapen, the magnitude of the first peak was similar to that observed in men, despite the injection being subcutaneous, and the overall bioavailability was enhanced. CONCLUSIONS: Needle length and intramuscular injection are not absolute requirements for autoinjector efficacy, but the monitoring of injection location, biphasic adrenaline levels, and cardiovascular responses is important for the assessment of their therapeutic relevance in anaphylaxis.

Nonclinical cardiovascular safety of pitolisant: comparing International Conference on Harmonization S7B and Comprehensive in vitro Pro-arrhythmia Assay initiative studies.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: We evaluated the concordance of results from two sets of nonclinical cardiovascular safety studies on pitolisant. EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH: Nonclinical studies envisaged both in the International Conference on Harmonization (ICH) S7B guideline and Comprehensive in vitro Pro-arrhythmia Assay (CiPA) initiative were undertaken. The CiPA initiative included in vitro ion channels, stem cell-derived human ventricular myocytes, and in silico modelling to simulate human ventricular electrophysiology. ICH S7B-recommended assays included in vitro hERG (KV 11.1) channels, in vivo dog studies with follow-up investigations in rabbit Purkinje fibres and the in vivo Carlsson rabbit pro-arrhythmia model. KEY RESULTS: Both sets of nonclinical data consistently excluded pitolisant from having clinically relevant QT-liability or pro-arrhythmic potential. CiPA studies revealed pitolisant to have modest calcium channel blocking and late INa reducing activities at high concentrations, which resulted in pitolisant reducing dofetilide-induced early after-depolarizations (EADs) in the ICH S7B studies. Studies in stem cell-derived human cardiomyocytes with dofetilide or E-4031 given alone and in combination with pitolisant confirmed these properties. In silico modelling confirmed that the ion channel effects measured are consistent with results from both the stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes and rabbit Purkinje fibres and categorized pitolisant as a drug with low torsadogenic potential. Results from the two sets of nonclinical studies correlated well with those from two clinical QT studies. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Our findings support the CiPA initiative but suggest that sponsors should consider investigating drug effects on EADs and the use of pro-arrhythmia models when the results from CiPA studies are ambiguous.

Safety and efficacy of pitolisant on cataplexy in patients with narcolepsy: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Histaminergic neurons are crucial to maintain wakefulness, but their role in cataplexy is unknown. We assessed the safety and efficacy of pitolisant, a histamine H3 receptor inverse agonist, for treatment of cataplexy in patients with narcolepsy. METHODS: For this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial we recruited patients with narcolepsy from 16 sleep centres in nine countries (Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Hungary, Macedonia, Poland, Russia, Serbia, Turkey, and Ukraine). Patients were eligible if they were aged 18 years or older, diagnosed with narcolepsy with cataplexy according to version two of the International Classification of Sleep Disorders criteria, experienced at least three cataplexies per week, and had excessive daytime sleepiness (defined as an Epworth Sleepiness Scale score ≥12). We used a computer-generated sequence via an interactive web response system to randomly assign patients to receive either pitolisant or placebo once per day (1:1 ratio). Randomisation was done in blocks of four. Participants and investigators were masked to treatment allocation. Treatment lasted for 7 weeks: 3 weeks of flexible dosing decided by investigators according to efficacy and tolerance (5 mg, 10 mg, or 20 mg oral pitolisant), followed by 4 weeks of stable dosing (5 mg, 10 mg, 20 mg, or 40 mg). The primary endpoint was the change in the average number of cataplexy attacks per week as recorded in patient diaries (weekly cataplexy rate [WCR]) between the 2 weeks of baseline and the 4 weeks of stable dosing period. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01800045. FINDINGS: The trial was done between April 19, 2013, and Jan 28, 2015. We screened 117 patients, 106 of whom were randomly assigned to treatment (54 to pitolisant and 52 to placebo) and, after dropout, 54 patients from the pitolisant group and 51 from the placebo group were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. The WCR during the stable dosing period compared with baseline was decreased by 75% (WCRfinal=2·27; WCRbaseline=9·15; WCRfinal/baseline=0·25) in patients who received pitolisant and 38% (WCRfinal=4·52; WCRbaseline=7·31; WCRfinal/baseline=0·62) in patients who received placebo (rate ratio 0·512; 95% CI 0·43-0·60, p<0·0001). Treatment-related adverse events were significantly more common in the pitolisant group than in the placebo group (15 [28%] of 54 vs 6 [12%] of 51; p=0·048). There were no serious adverse events, but one case of severe nausea in the pitolisant group. The most frequent adverse events in the pitolisant group (headache, irritability, anxiety, and nausea) were mild or moderate except one case of severe nausea. No withdrawal syndrome was detected following pitolisant treatment; one case was detected in the placebo group. INTERPRETATION: Pitolisant was well tolerated and efficacious in reducing cataplexy. If confirmed in long-term studies, pitolisant might constitute a useful first-line therapy for cataplexy in patients with narcolepsy, for whom there are currently few therapeutic options. FUNDING: Bioprojet, France.

Discovery of nanomolar ligands with novel scaffolds for the histamine H4 receptor by virtual screening.

The involvement of histamine H4 receptor (H4R) in immune cells chemotaxis and mediator release makes it an attractive target for the treatment of inflammation disorders. A decade of medicinal chemistry efforts has led to several promising ligands, although the chemical structures described so far possesses a singular limited diversity. We report here the discovery of novel structures, belonging to completely different scaffolds. The virtual screening was planed as a two-steps process. First, using a "scout screening" methodology, we have experimentally probed the H4R ligand binding site using a small size chemical library with very diverse structures, and identified a hit that further assist us in refining a raw 3D homology model. Second, the refined 3D model was used to conduct a widened virtual screening. This two-steps strategy proved to be very successful, both in terms of structural diversity and hit rate (23%). Moreover, the hits have high affinity for the H4R, with most potent ligands in the nanomolar range.

Synthesis and evaluation of a 2-benzothiazolylphenylmethyl ether class of histamine H4 receptor antagonists.

Synthesis and biological evaluation of a new class of histamine H4 receptor ligands, distinct from the previously reported chemotypes, are described. A virtual screening of our corporate compound collection identified a hit with an undesired dual H3R/H4R activity. Chemical exploration led to the discovery of a more potent and selective 2-benzothiazolylphenylmethyl ether lead compound.

Improving selectivity of dopamine D3 receptor ligands.

The seminal human dopamine D3 receptor (hD3R) ligand BP 897 has shown interesting properties during clinical trials. However, its lack of selectivity towards human adrenergic receptor impedes further development. Two approaches were followed to increase hD3R selectivity. The lead optimisation succeeded, we disclose here ligands with subnanomolar potency for D3R, combined with a good selectivity for the closely related human dopamine D2 and human adrenergic alpha-1 receptors.

Pitolisant versus placebo or modafinil in patients with narcolepsy: a double-blind, randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Narcolepsy is characterised by excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) and cataplexy. Histamine neurons are crucial to maintain wakefulness. We assessed the safety and efficacy of pitolisant (previously called BF2.649), a selective histamine H3 receptor inverse agonist that activates these neurons, in patients with narcolepsy. METHODS: For this double-blind, randomised, parallel-group controlled trial, we recruited patients with narcolepsy from 32 sleep disorder centres in five European countries. Patients were eligible if they were aged 18 years or older, had not taken psychostimulants for at least 14 days, and had EDS (defined as an Epworth Sleepiness Scale [ESS] score of at least 14). Using a computer-generated randomisation sequence, we randomly allocated patients to receive pitolisant, modafinil, or placebo (1:1:1). Treatment lasted 8 weeks: 3 weeks of flexible dosing according to investigator's judgment (10 mg, 20 mg, or 40 mg a day of pitolisant; 100 mg, 200 mg or 400 mg a day of modafinil) followed by 5 weeks of stable dosing. Patients took four tablets a day in a double-dummy design to ensure masking. For the primary analysis, assessed in the intention-to-treat population, we assessed the superiority of pitolisant versus placebo, and the non-inferiority of pitolisant versus modafinil. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01067222. FINDINGS: Between May 26, 2009, and June 30, 2010, we screened 110 patients, 95 of whom were eligible and randomly assigned to treatment: 30 to placebo, 32 to pitolisant, and 33 to modafinil. Over the 8-week treatment period, mean ESS score reductions were -3·4 (SD 4·2) in the placebo group, -5·8 (6·2) in the pitolisant group, and -6·9 (6·2) in the modafinil group. Our primary analysis of between-group differences in mean ESS score at endpoint (adjusted for baseline) showed pitolisant to be superior to placebo (difference -3·0, 95% CI -5·6 to -0·4; p=0·024), but not non-inferior to modafinil (difference 0·12, 95% CI -2·5 to 2·7; p=0·250). We recorded 22 adverse events with pitolisant, 26 with modafinil, and ten with placebo. Six severe adverse events were treatment-related: one with pitolisant (abdominal discomfort) and five with modafinil (abdominal pain, abnormal behaviour, amphetamine-like withdrawal symptoms, lymphoadenopathy, and inner ear disorders). INTERPRETATION: Pitolisant at doses up to 40 mg was efficacious on EDS compared with placebo and well tolerated compared with modafinil. If these findings are substantiated in further studies, pitolisant could offer a new treatment option for patients with narcolepsy. FUNDING: Bioprojet, France.

Determination of the binding mode and interacting amino-acids for dibasic H3 receptor antagonists.

Due to its involvement in major CNS functions, the histamine H3 receptor (H3R) is the subject of intensive medicinal chemistry investigation, supported by the range of modern drug discovery tools, such as receptor modeling and ligand docking. Although the receptor models described to date share a majority of common traits, they display discrete alternatives in amino-acid conformation, rendering ligand binding modes quite different. Such variations impede structure-based drug design in the H3R field. In the present study, we used a combination of medicinal chemistry, receptor-guided and ligand-based methods to elucidate the binding mode of antagonists. The approaches converged towards a ligand orientation perpendicular to the membrane plane, bridging Glu206 of the transmembrane helix 5 to acidic amino acids of the extracellular loops. This consensus will help future structure-based drug design for H3R ligands.

Novel and highly potent histamine H3 receptor ligands. Part 3: an alcohol function to improve the pharmacokinetic profile.

Synthesis and biological evaluation of potent histamine H3 receptor antagonists incorporating a hydroxyl function are described. Compounds in this series exhibited nanomolar binding affinities for human receptor, illustrating a new possible component for the H3 pharmacophore. As demonstrated with compound BP1.4160 (cyclohexanol 19), the introduction of an alcohol function counter-intuitively allowed to reach high in vivo efficiency and favorable pharmacokinetic profile with reduced half-life.

Novel and highly potent histamine H3 receptor ligands. Part 1: withdrawing of hERG activity.

Pre-clinical investigation of some aryl-piperidinyl ether histamine H3 receptor antagonists revealed a strong hERG binding. To overcome this issue, we have developed a QSAR model specially dedicated to H3 receptor ligands. This model was designed to be directly applicable in medicinal chemistry with no need of molecular modeling. The resulting recursive partitioning trees are robust (80-85% accuracy), but also simple and comprehensible. A novel promising lead emerged from our work and the structure-activity relationships are presented.

Novel and highly potent histamine H3 receptor ligands. Part 2: exploring the cyclohexylamine-based series.

Synthesis and biological evaluation of novel and potent cyclohexylamine-based histamine H3 receptor inverse agonists are described. Compounds in this newly identified series exhibited subnanomolar binding affinities for human receptor and no significant interaction with hERG channel. One derivative (10t) demonstrated enhanced in vivo efficiency and preferential brain distribution, both properties suitable for potential clinical evaluation.

Homology Model Versus X-ray Structure in Receptor-based Drug Design: A Retrospective Analysis with the Dopamine D3 Receptor.

Structure-based design methods commonly used in medicinal chemistry rely on a three-dimensional representation of the receptor. However, few crystal structures are solved in comparison with the huge number of pharmaceutical targets. This often renders homology models the only information available. It is particularly true for G protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), one of the most important targets for approved medicines and current drug discovery projects. However, very few studies have tested their validity in comparison with corresponding crystal structures, especially in a lead optimization perspective. The recent solving of dopamine D3 receptor crystal structure allowed us to assess our historical homology model. We performed a statistical analysis, by docking our in-house lead optimization library of 1500 molecules. We demonstrate here that the refined homology model suits at least as well as the X-ray structure. It is concluded that when the crystal structure of a given GPCR is not available, homology modeling can be an excellent surrogate to support drug discovery efforts.