Pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability of encenicline, a selective α7 nicotinic receptor partial agonist, in single ascending-dose and bioavailability studies.

PURPOSE: Encenicline (EVP-6124) is a selective α7 nicotinic acetylcholine receptor partial agonist being developed for cognitive impairment in Alzheimer's disease and schizophrenia. We report on 2 single-dose studies to assess the relative bioavailability, pharmacokinetic profile, tolerability, and cognitive effects of encenicline in healthy volunteers. METHODS: A single ascending-dose study assessed the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetic, and pharmacodynamic profiles of encenicline in healthy male volunteers. Subjects received a single 1-, 3.5-, 7-, 20-, 60-, or 180-mg oral solution dose of encenicline or placebo. A second single-dose, randomized, open-label, 3-period, crossover study in healthy male and female subjects compared the relative bioavailability of a 1-mg oral capsule versus a 1-mg oral solution dose of encenicline and evaluated the effects of food and sex on encenicline pharmacokinetic profile. FINDINGS: In the first study, encenicline was well tolerated and dose-proportional increases in C(max) (mean range 0.59-100 ng/mL) and AUC0-∞ (mean range 45.6-8890 ng·h/mL) were observed over a 1- to 180-mg dose range. Procognitive effects on the Digit Symbol Substitution Test were maximal at the 20-mg dose. In the second study, encenicline 1-mg oral capsules and oral solution were bioequivalent and there was no observed food effect on encenicline pharmacokinetic profile with the 90% confidence intervals of the treatment ratios for both comparisons (ie, capsule to solution and fed to fasted) for Cmax and AUC being within 80% to 125%. A 30% to 40% higher encenicline exposure in female subjects than respective values in male subjects was consistent with a 33% higher weight of the male subjects. No clinically relevant safety profile or tolerability effects of encenicline were observed. IMPLICATIONS: Encenicline was well tolerated at single doses up to 180 mg, and doses as low as 1 mg had dose- and time-dependent pharmacodynamic effects on the central nervous system. Oral capsule and solution were bioequivalent and were not affected by food. Although a sex effect on pharmacokinetic profile was observed, it was attributable to weight differences. Clinical Trial Registration at EudraCT: 2006-005623-42 and EudracT: 2008-000029-20.

Somatosensory profiles but not numbers of somatosensory abnormalities of neuropathic pain patients correspond with neuropathic pain grading.

Due to the lack of a specific diagnostic tool for neuropathic pain, a grading system to categorize pain as 'definite', 'probable', 'possible' and 'unlikely' neuropathic was proposed. Somatosensory abnormalities are common in neuropathic pain and it has been suggested that a greater number of abnormalities would be present in patients with 'probable' and 'definite' grades. To test this hypothesis, we investigated the presence of somatosensory abnormalities by means of Quantitative Sensory Testing (QST) in patients with a clinical diagnosis of neuropathic pain and correlated the number of sensory abnormalities and sensory profiles to the different grades. Of patients who were clinically diagnosed with neuropathic pain, only 60% were graded as 'definite' or 'probable', while 40% were graded as 'possible' or 'unlikely' neuropathic pain. Apparently, there is a mismatch between a clinical neuropathic pain diagnosis and neuropathic pain grading. Contrary to the expectation, patients with 'probable' and 'definite' grades did not have a greater number of abnormalities. Instead, similar numbers of somatosensory abnormalities were identified for each grade. The profiles of sensory signs in 'definite' and 'probable' neuropathic pain were not significantly different, but different from the 'unlikely' grade. This latter difference could be attributed to differences in the prevalence of patients with a mixture of sensory gain and loss and with sensory loss only. The grading system allows a separation of neuropathic and non-neuropathic pain based on profiles but not on the total number of sensory abnormalities. Our findings indicate that patient selection based on grading of neuropathic pain may provide advantages in selecting homogenous groups for clinical research.

Bilateral sensory abnormalities in patients with unilateral neuropathic pain; a quantitative sensory testing (QST) study.

In patients who experience unilateral chronic pain, abnormal sensory perception at the non-painful side has been reported. Contralateral sensory changes in these patients have been given little attention, possibly because they are regarded as clinically irrelevant. Still, bilateral sensory changes in these patients could become clinically relevant if they challenge the correct identification of their sensory dysfunction in terms of hyperalgesia and allodynia. Therefore, we have used the standardized quantitative sensory testing (QST) protocol of the German Research Network on Neuropathic Pain (DFNS) to investigate somatosensory function at the painful side and the corresponding non-painful side in unilateral neuropathic pain patients using gender- and age-matched healthy volunteers as a reference cohort. Sensory abnormalities were observed across all QST parameters at the painful side, but also, to a lesser extent, at the contralateral, non-painful side. Similar relative distributions regarding sensory loss/gain for non-nociceptive and nociceptive stimuli were found for both sides. Once a sensory abnormality for a QST parameter at the affected side was observed, the prevalence of an abnormality for the same parameter at the non-affected side was as high as 57% (for Pressure Pain Threshold). Our results show that bilateral sensory dysfunction in patients with unilateral neuropathic pain is more rule than exception. Therefore, this phenomenon should be taken into account for appropriate diagnostic evaluation in clinical practice. This is particularly true for mechanical stimuli where the 95% Confidence Interval for the prevalence of sensory abnormalities at the non-painful side ranges between 33% and 50%.

Antipsychotics and single-cell activity in the rat superior colliculus.

Schizophrenic patients have problems with saccadic eye movements that can be characterized as a loss of control over the saccadic system. Preliminary clinical results suggest that antipsychotics can either disrupt or improve saccadic performance. The brain mechanism through which antipsychotics might affect saccades is the subject of study. The superior colliculus (SC) is crucially involved in the generation of saccades. Previous experimental studies showed that the substantia nigra reticulata (SNr), a structure with profound inhibitory influence on the SC, is differentially affected by classical and atypical antipsychotics. In this study, we investigated the potential effects of atypical antipsychotics (clozapine, olanzapine, and risperidone) and a classical antipsychotic (haloperidol) on the firing rate of SC cells in the rat. In anesthetized rats, we performed extracellular recordings on spontaneous active neurons in the intermediate and deep layers of the SC. After subcutaneous injection of an antipsychotic drug, changes in firing rate were compared with responses upon saline injection. Olanzapine (1.0 mg/kg), risperidone (0.3 and 1.0 mg/kg), and haloperidol (0.5 mg/kg) did not significantly alter cell activity, but clozapine (10.0 mg/kg) induced a short-lasting but significant decrease. Except for clozapine, the effects of antipsychotics on the SC were nonsignificant and therefore independent of the effects in the SNr. Our results support the notion that clozapine is different from the other atypical antipsychotics.