Mitigating the Effects of Nonadherence in Clinical Trials.

Accounting for subject nonadherence and eliminating inappropriate subjects in clinical trials are critical elements of a successful study. Nonadherence can increase variance, lower study power, and reduce the magnitude of treatment effects. Inappropriate subjects (including those who do not have the illness under study, fail to report exclusionary conditions, falsely report medication adherence, or participate in concurrent trials) confound safety and efficacy signals. This paper, a product of the International Society for CNS Clinical Trial Methodology (ISCTM) Working Group on Nonadherence in Clinical Trials, explores and models nonadherence in clinical trials and puts forth specific recommendations to identify and mitigate its negative effects. These include statistical analyses of nonadherence data, novel protocol design, and the use of biomarkers, subject registries, and/or medication adherence technologies.

Targeting Prodromal Alzheimer Disease With Avagacestat: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Early identification of Alzheimer disease (AD) is important for clinical management and affords the opportunity to assess potential disease-modifying agents in clinical trials. To our knowledge, this is the first report of a randomized trial to prospectively enrich a study population with prodromal AD (PDAD) defined by cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarker criteria and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) symptoms. OBJECTIVES: To assess the safety of the γ-secretase inhibitor avagacestat in PDAD and to determine whether CSF biomarkers can identify this patient population prior to clinical diagnosis of dementia. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A randomized, placebo-controlled phase 2 clinical trial with a parallel, untreated, nonrandomized observational cohort of CSF biomarker-negative participants was conducted May 26, 2009, to July 9, 2013, in a multicenter global population. Of 1358 outpatients screened, 263 met MCI and CSF biomarker criteria for randomization into the treatment phase. One hundred two observational cohort participants who met MCI criteria but were CSF biomarker-negative were observed during the same study period to evaluate biomarker assay sensitivity. INTERVENTIONS: Oral avagacestat or placebo daily. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURE: Safety and tolerability of avagacestat. RESULTS: Of the 263 participants in the treatment phase, 132 were randomized to avagacestat and 131 to placebo; an additional 102 participants were observed in an untreated observational cohort. Avagacestat was relatively well tolerated with low discontinuation rates (19.6%) at a dose of 50 mg/d, whereas the dose of 125 mg/d had higher discontinuation rates (43%), primarily attributable to gastrointestinal tract adverse events. Increases in nonmelanoma skin cancer and nonprogressive, reversible renal tubule effects were observed with avagacestat. Serious adverse event rates were higher with avagacestat (49 participants [37.1%]) vs placebo (31 [23.7%]), attributable to the higher incidence of nonmelanoma skin cancer. At 2 years, progression to dementia was more frequent in the PDAD cohort (30.7%) vs the observational cohort (6.5%). Brain atrophy rate in PDAD participants was approximately double that of the observational cohort. Concordance between abnormal amyloid burden on positron emission tomography and pathologic CSF was approximately 87% (κ = 0.68; 95% CI, 0.48-0.87). No significant treatment differences were observed in the avagacestat vs placebo arm in key clinical outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Avagacestat did not demonstrate efficacy and was associated with adverse dose-limiting effects. This PDAD population receiving avagacestat or placebo had higher rates of clinical progression to dementia and greater brain atrophy compared with CSF biomarker-negative participants. The CSF biomarkers and amyloid positron emission tomography imaging were correlated, suggesting that either modality could be used to confirm the presence of cerebral amyloidopathy and identify PDAD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00890890.

A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Trial of the Efficacy and Safety of Levomilnacipran ER 40-120mg/day for Prevention of Relapse in Patients with Major Depressive Disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Major depressive disorder is often chronic, with relapse and recurrence common. Levomilnacipran extended-release is a potent and selective serotonin and reuptake inhibitor approved in the United States for treatment of major depressive disorder in adults. The objective of this study (NCT01085812) was to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of levomilnacipran extended-release in the prevention of relapse in patients with major depressive disorder. DESIGN: A 24-week Phase III randomized, double-blind, controlled trial comparing levomilnacipran extended-release 40-120mg/day with placebo for relapse prevention in patients with major depressive disorder who had responded to 12-week, open-label treatment with levomilnacipran extended-release. Statistical power was calculated on the assumption that 38 percent of placebo and 20 percent of levomilnacipran extended-release patients would relapse. SETTING: Thirty-six outpatient study centers throughout the United States and Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Of 348 patients who met randomization criteria and entered double-blind treatment, three discontinued prior to treatment, 112 were randomized to placebo, and 233 to levomilnacipran extended-release. PRIMARY OUTCOME: Time to relapse was analyzed using the Cox proportional hazard-regression model with treatment group and baseline Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale score as explanatory variables. Safety was also evaluated. RESULTS: Time to relapse was longer for levomilnacipran extended-release versus placebo (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval] = 0.68 [0.40][1.17]), but the treatment difference was not statistically significant (P=0.165). A relatively low percentage of patients from either group relapsed (placebo=20.5%, levomilnacipran extended-release=13.9%). CONCLUSION: This study did not detect between-treatment group differences, potentially due to lower than expected relapse rates in the placebo group. Levomilnacipran extended-release was generally well tolerated.

CNS sites cooperate to detect duplicate subjects with a clinical trial subject registry.

OBJECTIVE: To report the results of the first 1,132 subjects in a pilot project where local central nervous system trial sites collaborated in the use of a subject database to identify potential duplicate subjects. METHOD: Central nervous system sites in Los Angeles and Orange County, California, were contacted by the lead author to seek participation in the project. CTSdatabase, a central nervous system-focused trial subject registry, was utilized to track potential subjects at pre-screen. Subjects signed an institutional review board-approved authorization prior to participation, and site staff entered their identifiers by accessing a website. Sites were prompted to communicate with each other or with the database administrator when a match occurred between a newly entered subject and a subject already in the database. RESULTS: Between October 30, 2011, and August 31, 2012, 1,132 subjects were entered at nine central nervous system sites. Subjects continue to be entered, and more sites are anticipated to begin participation by the time of publication. Initially, there were concerns at a few sites over patient acceptance, financial implications, and/or legal and privacy issues, but these were eventually overcome. Patient acceptance was estimated to be above 95 percent. Duplicate Subjects (those that matched several key identifiers with subjects at different sites) made up 7.78 percent of the sample and Certain Duplicates (matching identifiers with a greater than 1 in 10 million likelihood of occurring by chance in the general population) accounted for 3.45 percent of pre-screens entered into the database. Many of these certain duplicates were not consented for studies because of the information provided by the registry. CONCLUSION: The use of a clinical trial subject registry and cooperation between central nervous system trial sites can reduce the number of duplicate and professional subjects entering clinical trials. To be fully effective, a trial subject database could be integrated into protocols across pharmaceutical companies, thereby mandating site participation and increasing the likelihood that duplicate subjects will be removed before they enter (and negatively affect) clinical trials.

Safety and tolerability of the γ-secretase inhibitor avagacestat in a phase 2 study of mild to moderate Alzheimer disease.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic effects of the -secretase inhibitor avagacestat in patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer disease (AD). DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled,24-week phase 2 study. SETTING: Global, multicenter trial. PATIENTS: A total of 209 outpatients with mild to moderate AD were randomized into the double-blind treatment phase. The median age of the patients was 75 years,58.9% were APOE ε4 carriers, and baseline measures of disease severity were similar among groups. INTERVENTION: Avagacestat, 25, 50, 100, or 125 mg daily,or placebo administered orally daily. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Safety and tolerability of avagacestat. RESULTS: Discontinuation rates for the 25-mg and 50-mg doses of avagacestat were comparable with placebo but were higher in the 100-mg and 125-mg dose groups.Trends for worsening cognition, as measured by change from baseline Alzheimer Disease Assessment Scale cognitive subscale score, were observed in the 100-mg and125-mg dose groups. Treatment-emergent serious adverse events were similar across placebo and treatment groups. The most common reason for discontinuation was adverse events, predominantly gastrointestinal anddermatologic. Other adverse events occurring more frequentlyin patients undergoing treatment included reversibleglycosuria (without associated serum glucose changes), nonmelanoma skin cancer, and asymptomaticmagnetic resonance imaging findings. Exploratory cerebrospinal fluid amyloid isoforms and tau biomarker analysis demonstrated dose-dependent but not statistically significant reductions in a small subset of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Avagacestat dosed at 25 and 50 mg daily was relatively well tolerated and had low discontinuation rates. The 100-mg and 125-mg dose arms were poorly tolerated with trends for cognitive worsening. Exploratory cerebrospinal fluid biomarker substudies provide preliminary support for -secretase target engagement,but additional studies are warranted to better characterize pharmacodynamic effects at the 25- and 50-mg doses.This study establishes an acceptable safety and tolerability dose range for future avagacestat studies in AD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00810147

Adjunctive therapy with pregabalin in generalized anxiety disorder patients with partial response to SSRI or SNRI treatment.

This study evaluated the efficacy of adjunctive pregabalin versus placebo for treatment of patients with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) who had not optimally responded to previous or prospective monotherapies. This was a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients diagnosed with GAD who had a historical and current lack of response to pharmacotherapy [Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) of ≥ 22 at screening] were randomized to adjunctive treatment with either pregabalin (150-600 mg/day) or placebo. The primary outcome measure was the change in HAM-A total scores after 8 weeks of combination treatment. Adverse events were regularly monitored. Randomized patients (N=356) were treated with pregabalin (n=180) or placebo (n=176). Mean baseline HAM-A scores were 20.7 and 21.4, respectively. After treatment, the mean change in HAM-A was significantly greater for pregabalin compared with placebo (-7.6 vs. -6.4, respectively; P<0.05). HAM-A responder rates (≥ 50% reduction) were significantly higher for pregabalin (47.5%) versus placebo (35.2%; P=0.0145). The time-to-sustained response favored pregabalin over placebo (P=0.014). Adverse events were consistent with previous studies and discontinuations were infrequent for pregabalin (4.4%) and placebo (2.3%). The study was discontinued early after an interim analysis. The results indicate that adjunctive pregabalin is an efficacious therapy for patients with GAD who experience an inadequate response to established treatments.

Effects of high-dose ziprasidone and haloperidol on the QTc interval after intramuscular administration: a randomized, single-blind, parallel-group study in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder.

BACKGROUND: Antipsychotic agents have been associated with a prolonged QT interval. Data on the effects of ziprasidone and haloperidol on the QTc interval are lacking. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to characterize the effects of 2 high-dose intramuscular injections of ziprasidone and haloperidol on the QTc interval at T(max). METHODS: This randomized, single-blind study enrolled patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder in whom long-term antipsychotic therapy was indicated. Patients were randomized to receive 2 high-dose intramuscular injections of ziprasidone (20 and 30 mg) or haloperidol (7.5 and 10 mg) separated by 4 hours. The primary outcome measure was the mean change from baseline in QTc at the T(max) of each injection. Each dose administration was followed by serial ECG and blood sampling for pharmacokinetic determinations. Twelve-lead ECG data were obtained immediately before and at predetermined times after injections. ECG tracings were read by a blinded central reader. Blood samples were obtained immediately before and after injections. Point estimates and 95% CIs for mean QTc and changes from baseline in QTc were estimated. No between-group hypothesis tests were conducted. For the assessments of tolerability and safety profile, patients underwent physical examination, including measurement of vital signs, clinical laboratory evaluation, and monitoring for adverse events (AEs) using spontaneous reporting. RESULTS: A total of 59 patients were assigned to treatment, and 58 received study medication (ziprasidone, 31 patients; haloperidol, 27; age range, 21-72 years; 79% male). After the first injection, mean (95% CI) changes from baseline were 4.6 msec (0.4-8.9) with ziprasidone (n = 25) and 6.0 msec (1.4-10.5) with haloperidol (n = 24). After the second injection, these values were 12.8 msec (6.7-18.8) and 14.7 msec (10.2-19.2), respectively. Mild and transient changes in heart rate and blood pressure were observed with both treatments. None of the patients had a QTc interval >480 msec. Two patients in the ziprasidone group experienced QTc prolongation >450 msec (457 and 454 msec) and QTc changes that exceeded 60 msec (62 and 76 msec) relative to the time-matched baseline values. With haloperidol, QTc interval values were <450 msec with no changes >60 msec. Treatment-emergent AEs were reported in 29 of 31 patients (93.5%) in the ziprasidone group and 25 of 27 patients (92.6%) in the haloperidol group; most events were of mild or moderate severity. Frequently reported AEs were somnolence (90.3% and 81.5%, respectively), dizziness (22.6% and 7.4%), anxiety (16.1% and 7.4%), extrapyramidal symptoms (6.5% and 33.3%), agitation (6.5% and 18.5%), and insomnia (0% and 14.8%). CONCLUSIONS: In this study of the effects of high-dose ziprasidone and haloperidol in patients with schizophrenic disorder, none of the patients had a QTc interval >480 msec, and changes from baseline QTc interval were clinically modest with both drugs. Both drugs were generally well tolerated.

Effects of Oral Ziprasidone and Oral Haloperidol on QTc interval in patients with Schizophrenia or Schizoaffective disorder.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To characterize the effect of oral ziprasidone and haloperidol on the corrected QT (QTc) interval under steady-state conditions. Design. Prospective, randomized, open-label, parallel-group study. SETTING: Inpatient clinical research facility. Patients Fifty-nine adults (age range 25-59 yrs) with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder who had no clinically significant abnormality on electrocardiogram (ECG) at screening. Intervention. During period 1 (days -10 to -4), antipsychotic and anticholinergic drugs were tapered. On the first day (day -3) of period 2, the drugs were discontinued, and placebo was given for the next 3 days (days -2 to 0). On the last day (day 0) of period 2, serial baseline ECGs were collected. During period 3 (days 1-16), patients received escalating oral doses of ziprasidone and haloperidol to reach steady state. Period 4 (days 17-19) allowed for study drug washout and initiation of outpatient antipsychotic therapy; safety assessments were also performed during this period. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: At each steady-state dose level, three ECGs and a serum or plasma sample were collected at the predicted time of peak exposure to the administered drug. Point estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were determined for the mean QTc interval at baseline and for the mean change from baseline in QTc at each steady-state dose level. Mean changes from baseline in the QTc interval (msec) for ziprasidone were 4.5 (95% CI 1.9-7.1), 19.5 (95% CI 15.5-23.4), and 22.5 (95% CI 15.7- 29.4) for steady-state doses of 40, 160, and 320 mg/day, respectively; for haloperidol, -1.2 (95% CI -4.1-1.7), 6.6 (95% CI 1.6-11.7), and 7.2 (95% CI 1.4-13.1) for steady-state doses of 2.5, 15, and 30 mg/day. Although no patient in either treatment group experienced a QTc interval of 450 msec or greater, the QTc interval increased 30 msec or more in 11 and 17 ziprasidone-treated patients at 160 and 320 mg/day, respectively, and in 3 and 5 haloperidol-treated patients at 15 and 30 mg/day, respectively. Most treatment-emergent adverse drug reactions were mild in intensity, and none were severe. CONCLUSION: The QTc interval in ziprasidone- and haloperidol-treated patients increased with dose. Treatment with high doses of ziprasidone or haloperidol did not result in any patient experiencing a QTc interval of 450 msec or greater.

Atomoxetine augmentation of cholinesterase inhibitor therapy in patients with Alzheimer disease: 6-month, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-trial study.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the efficacy and tolerability of atomoxetine (ATX) in improving cognitive performance of patients with Alzheimer dementia. DESIGN: A randomized, double-blind, placebo (PLA)-controlled, parallel-groups study, starting with a 5-33-day screening and evaluation period, followed by a 6-month treatment period. SETTING: Eight independent or academic outpatient clinics in the United States. PARTICIPANTS: Male or female patients, aged 55 years and older, with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer disease (Mini-Mental State Examination score between 10 and 26) at baseline. INTERVENTION: ATX (25-80 mg/day) or PLA for up to 6 months, added to ongoing cholinesterase-inhibitor therapy. MEASUREMENTS: Alzheimer Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Portion (ADAS-Cog, primary measure), Clinician's Interview-Based Impression of Change score at end point, Neuropsychiatric Inventory, and Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study Inventory-Activities of Daily Living Inventory total score, safety measures (secondary measures). RESULTS: Patients' (N = 92) scores on assessments of cognitive function, global clinical impression, and neuropsychiatric symptoms were not significantly different between treatment groups. Neither group showed significant changes from baseline on the primary measure of efficacy, the ADAS-Cog. The ATX group showed a significantly greater increase of heart rate, and the mean increase in diastolic blood pressure and decrease in weight differed significantly from the decrease in pressure and weight increase in the PLA group. No other clinically meaningful safety results were obtained. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of ATX to ongoing cholinesterase-inhibitor therapy was generally well tolerated but did not significantly improve cognitive function.

One-week dose titration of extended release galantamine in patients with Alzheimer's disease.

BACKGROUND: Our purpose was to assess the safety and tolerability of extended-release galantamine (GAL-ER), using a 1-week dose titration in Alzheimer's patients. METHODS: An open-label, 12-week, multicenter study was performed (n = 82). Results were compared with findings from a placebo-controlled trial using a 4-week titration of GAL-ER and immediate-release galantamine. The primary analysis compared incidences of adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Although not statistically significant, more patients in the 1-week titration study experienced an AE. More patients with a 1-week titration had at least one prespecified gastrointestinal (GI) AE. These findings correlated with a higher baseline incidence of GI disturbances. Four patients experienced serious AEs; no deaths occurred. Mean Mini-Mental State Examination scores improved by 1.8 and 1.9 points at weeks 4 and 12, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A 1-week titration of GAL-ER was generally safe and well tolerated, with a potential risk of more GI side effects. A 1-week titration may permit dosing flexibility and promote increased adherence to medication regimens.

A randomized evaluation of the effects of six antipsychotic agents on QTc, in the absence and presence of metabolic inhibition.

Many drugs have been associated with QTc prolongation and, in some cases, this is augmented by concomitant administration with metabolic inhibitors. The effects of 6 antipsychotics on the QTc interval at and around the time of estimated peak plasma/serum concentrations in the absence and presence of metabolic inhibition were characterized in a prospective, randomized study in which patients with psychotic disorders reached steady-state on either haloperidol 15 mg/d (n = 27), thioridazine 300 mg/d (n = 30), ziprasidone 160 mg/d (n = 31), quetiapine 750 mg/d (n = 27), olanzapine 20 mg/d (n = 24), or risperidone 6-8 mg/d increased to 16 mg/d (n = 25/20). Electrocardiograms (ECGs) were done at estimated Cmax at steady-state on both antipsychotic monotherapy and after concomitant administration of appropriate cytochrome P-450 (CYP450) inhibitor(s). Mean QTc intervals did not exceed 500 milliseconds in any patient taking any of the antipsychotics studied, in the absence or presence of metabolic inhibition. The mean QTc interval change was greatest in the thioridazine group, both in the presence and absence of metabolic inhibition. The presence of metabolic inhibition did not significantly augment QTc prolongation associated with any agent. Each of the antipsychotics studied was associated with measurable QTc prolongation at steady-state peak plasma concentrations, which was not augmented by metabolic inhibition. The theoretical risk of cardiotoxicity associated with QTc prolongation should be balanced against the substantial clinical benefits associated with atypical antipsychotics and the likelihood of other toxicities.

An 8-week multicenter, parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of sertraline in elderly outpatients with major depression.

OBJECTIVE: There have been few placebo-controlled trials of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors for depressed elderly patients. This placebo-controlled study of sertraline was designed to confirm the results of non-placebo-controlled trials. METHOD: The subjects were outpatients age 60 years or older who had a DSM-IV diagnosis of major depressive disorder and a total score on the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale of 18 or higher. The patients were randomly assigned to 8 weeks of double-blind treatment with placebo or a flexible daily dose of 50 or 100 mg of sertraline. The primary outcome variables were the Hamilton scale and Clinical Global Impression (CGI) scales for severity and improvement. RESULTS: A total of 371 patients assigned to sertraline and 376 assigned to placebo took at least one dose. At endpoint, the patients receiving sertraline evidenced significantly greater improvements than those receiving placebo on the Hamilton depression scale and CGI severity and improvement scales. The mean changes from baseline to endpoint in Hamilton score were -7.4 points (SD=6.3) for sertraline and -6.6 points (SD=6.4) for placebo. The rate of CGI-defined response at endpoint was significantly higher for sertraline (45%) than for placebo (35%), and the time to sustained response was significantly shorter for sertraline (median, 57 versus 61 days). There were few discontinuations due to treatment-related adverse events, 8% for sertraline and 2% for placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Sertraline was effective and well tolerated by older adults with major depression, although the drug-placebo difference was not large in this 8-week trial.

Estimation of the absolute bioavailability of rivastigmine in patients with mild to moderate dementia of the Alzheimer's type.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the bioavailability of rivastigmine, an approved therapy for patients with mild to moderate dementia of the Alzheimer's type, at the highest approved single dose of 6 mg. DESIGN AND SETTING: Randomised, two-period crossover, single-centre, non-blinded, inpatient study. PATIENTS AND PARTICIPANTS: Eleven patients (five females and six males) with mean age 69.5 years. METHODS: The 6 mg oral dose was compared with a 2 mg intravenous dose of rivastigmine infused over a 1-hour period. Plasma concentrations of rivastigmine and its metabolite NAP 226-90 were measured with a gas chromatographic/mass spectrometric method. RESULTS: Following oral administration of a single 6 mg capsule, rivastigmine is rapidly absorbed with an average time to peak plasma concentration of about 1 hour and an average peak concentration of about 25.6 g/L. By a noncompartmental approach, the absolute bioavailability of the 6 mg oral dose of rivastigmine was 71.7% when compared with a 2mg intravenous infusion normalised for dose. By using a population pharmacokinetic model with Michaelis-Menten elimination, absolute bioavailability was estimated at 60.2%. The average terminal elimination half-life of rivastigmine ranged from 1.4 to 1.7 hours for both treatments. Plasma concentrations of the major metabolite, NAP 226-90, formed by the hydrolysis of rivastigmine by cholinesterase are lower than those of the parent compound following oral and intravenous administration. CONCLUSION: A noncompartmental approach and a compartmental approach based on a population pharmacokinetic model with Michaelis-Menten elimination yielded comparable values, 71.7% and 60.2% respectively, for the absolute bioavailability of a single 6 mg oral dose of rivastigmine. Comparison with previous studies confirmed that the oral form of the drug exhibits increased bioavailability with increasing dose, consistent with its nonlinear pharmacokinetics..

Brasofensine treatment for Parkinson's disease in combination with levodopa/carbidopa.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetic, and pharmacodynamic properties of the dopamine transporter antagonist brasofensine (BMS-204756) in patients with Parkinson's disease receiving levodopa/carbidopa treatment. METHODS: A 4-period crossover study was performed in 8 men (mean age 66 y) with moderate Parkinson's disease (Hoehn-Yahr stage II-IV). A dose escalation study was used in which each patient was given a single oral dose of brasofensine 0.5, 1, 2, or 4 mg, which was coadministered with the patient's usual dose of levodopa/carbidopa. RESULTS: The maximum concentration (Cmax) values of brasofensine observed in plasma after oral administration were 0.35, 0.82, 2.14, and 3.27 ng/mL for the 0.5-, 1-, 2-, and 4-mg doses, respectively; these concentrations occurred 4 hours (time to Cmax) after administration in all cases. Exposure to brasofensine (based on AUC0-infinity) increased at a rate greater than proportional to dose. Based on the motor performance subscale of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale, no change in patient disability was observed at any dose level. CONCLUSIONS: Brasofensine was safe and well tolerated in the patient cohort studied at daily doses of up to 4 mg. Adverse events were generally mild in intensity, and included headache, insomnia, phlebitis, dizziness, ecchymosis, and vomiting.