Safety and efficacy of remimazolam in high risk colonoscopy: A randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Procedural sedation of ASA III/IV patients has increased risk. Remimazolam (an ultra-short-acting benzodiazepine) has proven safe and efficient for outpatient colonoscopy sedation. METHODS: A double-blind, randomized, multi-center, parallel group trial was performed, comparing remimazolam to placebo with an additional open-label arm for midazolam in procedural sedation of 79 ASA III/IV patients undergoing colonoscopy. This was the third of 3 Phase III trials for remimazolam in the procedural sedation program. The primary end point was the safety of remimazolam. RESULTS: Of 79 patients randomized at 3 US sites, 77 underwent sedation and colonoscopy (31 received remimazolam, 16 placebo and 30 midazolam). Incidence and frequency of treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were comparable in all three treatment arms, and independent of ASA status. One TEAE leading to discontinuation and one serious TEAE were reported; both in the open label midazolam arm. The efficacy endpoint was achieved for remimazolam, placebo, and midazolam in 87.1%, 0%, and 13.3% of patients (p<0.00001 for remimazolam versus placebo and versus midazolam, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Remimazolam is safe and efficient in procedural sedation of high risk ASA patients undergoing colonoscopy, showing a safety profile comparable to that in low risk ASA.

Safety and Efficacy of Remimazolam Compared With Placebo and Midazolam for Moderate Sedation During Bronchoscopy.

BACKGROUND: While the complexity of flexible bronchoscopy has increased, standard options for moderate sedation medications have not changed in three decades. There is a need to improve moderate sedation while maintaining safety. Remimazolam was developed to address shortcomings of current sedation strategies. METHODS: A prospective, double-blind, randomized, multicenter, parallel group trial was performed at 30 US sites. The efficacy and safety of remimazolam for sedation during flexible bronchoscopy were compared with placebo and open-label midazolam. RESULTS: The success rates were 80.6% in the remimazolam arm, 4.8% in the placebo arm (P < .0001), and 32.9% in the midazolam arm. Bronchoscopy was started sooner in the remimazolam arm (mean, 6.4 ± 5.82 min) compared with placebo (17.2 ± 4.15 min; P < .0001) and midazolam (16.3 ± 8.60 min). Time to full alertness after the end of bronchoscopy was significantly shorter in patients treated with remimazolam (median, 6.0 min; 95% CI, 5.2-7.1) compared with those treated with placebo (13.6 min; 95% CI, 8.1-24.0; P = .0001) and midazolam (12.0 min; 95% CI, 5.0-15.0). Remimazolam registered superior restoration of neuropsychiatric function compared with placebo and midazolam. Safety was comparable among all three arms, and 5.6% of the patients in the remimazolam group had serious treatment-emergent adverse events as compared with 6.8% in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Remimazolam administered under the supervision of a pulmonologist was effective and safe for moderate sedation during flexible bronchoscopy. In an exploratory analysis, it demonstrated a shorter onset of action and faster neuropsychiatric recovery than midazolam.

Solriamfetol for the Treatment of Excessive Sleepiness in OSA: A Placebo-Controlled Randomized Withdrawal Study.

BACKGROUND: Excessive sleepiness (ES) is a common symptom of OSA, which often persists despite primary OSA therapy. This phase III randomized withdrawal trial evaluated solriamfetol (JZP-110) for the treatment of ES in adults with OSA. METHODS: After 2 weeks of clinical titration (n = 174) and 2 weeks of stable dose administration (n = 148), participants who reported improvement on the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGI-C) and had numerical improvements on the Maintenance of Wakefulness Test (MWT) and Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) were randomly assigned to placebo (n = 62) or solriamfetol (n = 62) for 2 additional weeks. Coprimary end points were change from weeks 4 to 6 in MWT and ESS. RESULTS: In the modified intention-to-treat population (n = 122), MWT mean sleep latencies and ESS scores improved from baseline to week 4 (from 12.3-13.1 to 29.0-31.7 minutes and from 15.3-16.0 to 5.9-6.4, respectively). From weeks 4 to 6, participants treated with solriamfetol maintained improvements (least squares [LS] mean [SE] changes of -1.0 [1.4] minutes on MWT and -0.1 [0.7] on ESS), whereas participants treated with placebo worsened (LS mean [SE] change of -12.1 [1.3] minutes on MWT and 4.5 [0.7] on ESS); LS mean differences between treatments were 11.2 minutes (95% CI, 7.8-14.6) and -4.6 (95% CI, -6.4 to -2.8) on MWT and ESS, respectively. Fewer participants treated with solriamfetol reported worsening on the PGI-C from weeks 4 to 6 (20% vs 50%; P = .0005). Common adverse events included headache, dry mouth, nausea, dizziness, and insomnia. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated maintenance of solriamfetol efficacy and safety over 6 weeks. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT02348619; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov; EudraCT No.: 2014-005515-16.