RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Aggregated α-synuclein plays an important role in the pathogenesis of Parkinson's disease. The monoclonal antibody prasinezumab, directed at aggregated α-synuclein, is being studied for its effect on Parkinson's disease. METHODS: In this phase 2 trial, we randomly assigned participants with early-stage Parkinson's disease in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive intravenous placebo or prasinezumab at a dose of 1500 mg or 4500 mg every 4 weeks for 52 weeks. The primary end point was the change from baseline to week 52 in the sum of scores on parts I, II, and III of the Movement Disorder Society-sponsored revision of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (MDS-UPDRS; range, 0 to 236, with higher scores indicating greater impairment). Secondary end points included the dopamine transporter levels in the putamen of the hemisphere ipsilateral to the clinically more affected side of the body, as measured by 123I-ioflupane single-photon-emission computed tomography (SPECT). RESULTS: A total of 316 participants were enrolled; 105 were assigned to receive placebo, 105 to receive 1500 mg of prasinezumab, and 106 to receive 4500 mg of prasinezumab. The baseline mean MDS-UPDRS scores were 32.0 in the placebo group, 31.5 in the 1500-mg group, and 30.8 in the 4500-mg group, and mean (±SE) changes from baseline to 52 weeks were 9.4±1.2 in the placebo group, 7.4±1.2 in the 1500-mg group (difference vs. placebo, -2.0; 80% confidence interval [CI], -4.2 to 0.2; P = 0.24), and 8.8±1.2 in the 4500-mg group (difference vs. placebo, -0.6; 80% CI, -2.8 to 1.6; P = 0.72). There was no substantial difference between the active-treatment groups and the placebo group in dopamine transporter levels on SPECT. The results for most clinical secondary end points were similar in the active-treatment groups and the placebo group. Serious adverse events occurred in 6.7% of the participants in the 1500-mg group and in 7.5% of those in the 4500-mg group; infusion reactions occurred in 19.0% and 34.0%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Prasinezumab therapy had no meaningful effect on global or imaging measures of Parkinson's disease progression as compared with placebo and was associated with infusion reactions. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche and Prothena Biosciences; PASADENA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03100149.).
Asunto(s)
Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados , Antiparkinsonianos , Enfermedad de Parkinson , alfa-Sinucleína , Anticuerpos Monoclonales Humanizados/uso terapéutico , Antiparkinsonianos/uso terapéutico , Proteínas de Transporte de Dopamina a través de la Membrana Plasmática/uso terapéutico , Método Doble Ciego , Humanos , Enfermedad de Parkinson/tratamiento farmacológico , Resultado del Tratamiento , alfa-Sinucleína/antagonistas & inhibidoresRESUMEN
PURPOSE: In Alzheimer's disease (AD), increased metabolism of monoamines by monoamine oxidase type B (MAO-B) leads to the production of toxic reactive oxygen species (ROS), which are thought to contribute to disease pathogenesis. Inhibition of the MAO-B enzyme may restore brain levels of monoaminergic neurotransmitters, reduce the formation of toxic ROS and reduce neuroinflammation (reactive astrocytosis), potentially leading to neuroprotection. Sembragiline (also referred as RO4602522, RG1577 and EVT 302 in previous communications) is a potent, selective and reversible inhibitor of MAO-B developed as a potential treatment for AD. METHODS: This study assessed the relationship between plasma concentration of sembragiline and brain MAO-B inhibition in patients with AD and in healthy elderly control (EC) subjects. Positron emission tomography (PET) scans using [11C]-L-deprenyl-D2 radiotracer were performed in ten patients with AD and six EC subjects, who received sembragiline each day for 6-15 days. RESULTS: At steady state, the relationship between sembragiline plasma concentration and MAO-B inhibition resulted in an Emax of â¼80-90 % across brain regions of interest and in an EC50 of 1-2 ng/mL. Data in patients with AD and EC subjects showed that near-maximal inhibition of brain MAO-B was achieved with 1 mg sembragiline daily, regardless of the population, whereas lower doses resulted in lower and variable brain MAO-B inhibition. CONCLUSIONS: This PET study confirmed that daily treatment of at least 1 mg sembragiline resulted in near-maximal inhibition of brain MAO-B enzyme in patients with AD.
Asunto(s)
Acetamidas/uso terapéutico , Enfermedad de Alzheimer/diagnóstico por imagen , Inhibidores de la Monoaminooxidasa/farmacocinética , Tomografía de Emisión de Positrones , Pirrolidinonas/uso terapéutico , Acetamidas/sangre , Acetamidas/farmacocinética , Administración Oral , Anciano , Enfermedad de Alzheimer/tratamiento farmacológico , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Monoaminooxidasa/metabolismo , Inhibidores de la Monoaminooxidasa/administración & dosificación , Inhibidores de la Monoaminooxidasa/uso terapéutico , Unión Proteica , Pirrolidinonas/sangre , Pirrolidinonas/farmacocinéticaRESUMEN
Background: Objectively measuring Parkinson's disease (PD) signs and symptoms over time is critical for the successful development of treatments aimed at halting the disease progression of people with PD. Objective: To create a clinical trial simulation tool that characterizes the natural history of PD progression and enables a data-driven design of randomized controlled studies testing potential disease-modifying treatments (DMT) in early-stage PD. Methods: Data from the Parkinson's Progression Markers Initiative (PPMI) were analyzed with nonlinear mixed-effect modeling techniques to characterize the progression of MDS-UPDRS part I (non-motor aspects of experiences of daily living), part II (motor aspects of experiences of daily living), and part III (motor signs). A clinical trial simulation tool was built from these disease models and used to predict probability of success as a function of trial design. Results: MDS-UPDRS part III progresses approximately 3 times faster than MDS-UPDRS part II and I, with an increase of 3 versus 1 points/year. Higher amounts of symptomatic therapy is associated with slower progression of MDS-UPDRS part II and III. The modeling framework predicts that a DMT effect on MDS-UPDRS part III could precede effect on part II by approximately 2 to 3 years. Conclusions: Our clinical trial simulation tool predicted that in a two-year randomized controlled trial, MDS-UPDRS part III could be used to evaluate a potential novel DMT, while part II would require longer trials of a minimum duration of 3 to 5 years underscoring the need for innovative trial design approaches including novel patient-centric measures.
To develop effective medicines that can slow down or stop the progression of Parkinson's disease (PD), it is important to accurately understand how the disease worsens over time. We used data from an observational study, led by the Michael J. Fox Foundation, called the Parkinson's Progression Markers Initiative (PPMI) to understand the natural progression ofâ PD. We simulated clinical trials on a computer using different scales to measure the progression of PD. We specifically looked at a physician-reported measure MDS-UPDRS part III, and at a patient-reported measure MDS-UPDRS part II of how PD symptoms worsen over time. To measure the effect of a new medicine slowing down the progression of PD using patient-reported measure MDS-UPDRS part II, we estimate that we may need to conduct a clinical trial of at least 3 to 5 years. On the other hand, to measure an effect using physician-reported measure MDS-UPDRS part III, the duration of the trial could be shorter than 2 years. We were also able to show that worsening recorded by the physician-reported measure MDS-UPDRS part III could be predictive of a later worsening recorded by the patient-reported measure MDS-UPDRS part II. We concluded that MDS-UPDRS part III may be a good endpoint for a clinical trial of a reasonable duration and that MDS-UPDRS part II could be measured in longer studies, for example, open-label extensions.
Asunto(s)
Progresión de la Enfermedad , Enfermedad de Parkinson , Humanos , Enfermedad de Parkinson/diagnóstico , Enfermedad de Parkinson/terapia , Femenino , Masculino , Anciano , Persona de Mediana Edad , Actividades Cotidianas , Simulación por Computador , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como AsuntoRESUMEN
Background: Currently available treatments for Parkinson's disease (PD) do not slow clinical progression nor target alpha-synuclein, a key protein associated with the disease. Objective: The study objective was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of prasinezumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody that binds aggregated alpha-synuclein, in individuals with early PD. Methods: The PASADENA study is a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled treatment study. Individuals with early PD, recruited across the US and Europe, received monthly intravenous doses of prasinezumab (1,500 or 4,500 mg) or placebo for a 52-week period (Part 1), followed by a 52-week extension (Part 2) in which all participants received active treatment. Key inclusion criteria were: aged 40-80 years; Hoehn & Yahr (H&Y) Stage I or II; time from diagnosis ≤2 years; having bradykinesia plus one other cardinal sign of PD (e.g., resting tremor, rigidity); DAT-SPECT imaging consistent with PD; and either treatment naïve or on a stable monoamine oxidase B (MAO-B) inhibitor dose. Study design assumptions for sample size and study duration were built using a patient cohort from the Parkinson's Progression Marker Initiative (PPMI). In this report, baseline characteristics are compared between the treatment-naïve and MAO-B inhibitor-treated PASADENA cohorts and between the PASADENA and PPMI populations. Results: Of the 443 patients screened, 316 were enrolled into the PASADENA study between June 2017 and November 2018, with an average age of 59.9 years and 67.4% being male. Mean time from diagnosis at baseline was 10.11 months, with 75.3% in H&Y Stage II. Baseline motor and non-motor symptoms (assessed using Movement Disorder Society-Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale [MDS-UPDRS]) were similar in severity between the MAO-B inhibitor-treated and treatment-naïve PASADENA cohorts (MDS-UPDRS sum of Parts I + II + III [standard deviation (SD)]; 30.21 [11.96], 32.10 [13.20], respectively). The overall PASADENA population (63.6% treatment naïve and 36.4% on MAO-B inhibitor) showed a similar severity in MDS-UPDRS scores (e.g., MDS-UPDRS sum of Parts I + II + III [SD]; 31.41 [12.78], 32.63 [13.04], respectively) to the PPMI cohort (all treatment naïve). Conclusions: The PASADENA study population is suitable to investigate the potential of prasinezumab to slow disease progression in individuals with early PD. Trial Registration: NCT03100149.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Sembragiline is a potent, selective, long-acting, and reversible MAO-B inhibitor developed as a potential treatment for Alzheimer's disease (AD). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of sembragiline in patients with moderate AD. METHODS: In this Phase II study (NCT01677754), 542 patients with moderate dementia (MMSE 13-20) on background acetylcholinesterase inhibitors with/without memantine were randomized (1:1:1) to sembragiline 1âmg, 5âmg, or placebo once daily orally for 52 weeks. RESULTS: No differences between treated groups and placebo in adverse events or in study completion. The primary endpoint, change from baseline in ADAS-Cog11, was not met. At Week 52, the difference between sembragiline and placebo in ADAS-Cog11 change from baseline was - 0.15 (pâ=â0.865) and 0.90 (pâ=â0.312) for 1 and 5âmg groups, respectively. Relative to placebo at Week 52 (but not at prior assessment times), the 1âmg and 5âmg sembragiline groups showed differences in ADCS-ADL of 2.64 (pâ=â0.051) and 1.89 (pâ=â0.160), respectively. A treatment effect in neuropsychiatric symptoms (as assessed by the difference between sembragiline and placebo on BEHAVE-AD-FW) was also seen at Week 52 only: - 2.80 (pâ=â0.014; 1âmg) and - 2.64 (pâ=â0.019; 5âmg), respectively. A post hoc subgroup analysis revealed greater treatment effects on behavior and functioning in patients with more severe baseline behavioral symptoms (above the median). CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that sembragiline was well-tolerated in patients with moderate AD. The study missed its primary and secondary endpoints. Post hoc analyses suggested potential effect on neuropsychiatric symptoms and functioning in more behaviorally impaired study population at baseline.
Asunto(s)
Acetamidas/uso terapéutico , Enfermedad de Alzheimer/tratamiento farmacológico , Antipsicóticos/uso terapéutico , Pirrolidinonas/uso terapéutico , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Enfermedad de Alzheimer/diagnóstico por imagen , Relación Dosis-Respuesta a Droga , Método Doble Ciego , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Hipocampo/diagnóstico por imagen , Humanos , Imagen por Resonancia Magnética , Masculino , Pruebas de Estado Mental y Demencia , Persona de Mediana EdadRESUMEN
Adequate pediatric formulations are a must to ensure compliance to treatment, and safe delivery of the intended dose. Adult formulations may not be suitable for children, and new pediatric formulation(s) must be developed for the pediatric studies, and for market. As the development of pediatric formulations with optimized properties for market might be challenging, preliminary "enabling" formulations might be envisaged for early pediatric studies, prior to the introduction of more elegant market formulations in the confirmatory study. Supportive clinical studies, such as relative bioavailability (RBA) studies may be necessary to establish the bridge from adult and/or enabling formulations to the final pediatric formulation. Late changes to the pediatric formulation will necessitate establishment of bioequivalence (BE) between the two drug products. As failure to demonstrate BE can delay approval, it is strongly advised that the final pediatric formulation(s) be introduced no later than in the pivotal program. RBA studies assessing performance of pediatric formulations are typically performed in adult healthy volunteers, however a possible interplay between age/disease and formulation effects must be taken into account. Formulation bridging based on in vitro approaches might be envisaged under certain circumstances, such as minor formulation changes, development of new dosage strengths, or BCS class-supported biowaivers.