Clinical trials in peripheral vascular disease: pipeline and trial designs: an evaluation of the ClinicalTrials.gov database.

BACKGROUND: Tremendous advances have occurred in therapies for peripheral vascular disease (PVD); until recently, however, it has not been possible to examine the entire clinical trial portfolio of studies for the treatment of PVD (both arterial and venous disease). METHODS AND RESULTS: We examined interventional trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov from October 2007 through September 2010 (n=40,970) and identified 676 (1.7%) PVD trials (n=493 arterial only, n=170 venous only, n=13 both arterial and venous). Most arterial studies investigated lower-extremity peripheral artery disease and acute stroke (35% and 24%, respectively), whereas most venous studies examined deep vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolus prevention (42%) or venous ulceration (25%). A placebo-controlled trial design was used in 27% of the PVD trials, and 4% of the PVD trials excluded patients >65 years of age. Enrollment in at least 1 US site decreased from 51% of trials in 2007 to 41% in 2010. Compared with noncardiology disciplines, PVD trials were more likely to be double-blinded, to investigate the use of devices and procedures, and to have industry sponsorship and assumed funding source, and they were less likely to investigate drug and behavioral therapies. Geographic access to PVD clinical trials within the United States is limited to primarily large metropolitan areas. CONCLUSIONS: PVD studies represent a small group of trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, despite the high prevalence of vascular disease in the general population. This low number, compounded by the decreasing number of PVD trials in the United States, is concerning and may limit the ability to inform current clinical practice of patients with PVD.

Safety and efficacy of anti-tau monoclonal antibody gosuranemab in progressive supranuclear palsy: a phase 2, randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 52-week study (no. NCT03068468) evaluated gosuranemab, an anti-tau monoclonal antibody, in the treatment of progressive supranuclear palsy (PSP). In total, 486 participants dosed were assigned to either gosuranemab (n = 321) or placebo (n = 165). Efficacy was not demonstrated on adjusted mean change of PSP Rating Scale score at week 52 between gosuranemab and placebo (10.4 versus 10.6, P = 0.85, primary endpoint), or at secondary endpoints, resulting in discontinuation of the open-label, long-term extension. Unbound N-terminal tau in cerebrospinal fluid decreased by 98% with gosuranemab and increased by 11% with placebo (P < 0.0001). Incidences of adverse events and deaths were similar between groups. This well-powered study suggests that N-terminal tau neutralization does not translate into clinical efficacy.

Evaluation of the Potential Pharmacokinetic Interactions Between Vixotrigine and an Oral Contraceptive.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Vixotrigine is a voltage- and use-dependent sodium channel blocker in development for neuropathic pain management. This study evaluated the effect of coadministration of vixotrigine (metabolized primarily via uridine diphosphate-glucuronosyltransferases) and an oral contraceptive containing ethinyl estradiol (uridine diphosphate-glucuronosyltransferase inducer) and levonorgestrel on the pharmacokinetics and safety of all three compounds. METHODS: In this phase I, open-label, fixed-sequence, multiple-dose study, 36 healthy women received oral vixotrigine 150 mg three times daily for 6 days and once on day 7. This was followed by a washout period, days 8-11. The oral contraceptive was administered alone on days 12-25 and with vixotrigine 150 mg three times daily on days 26-32. Serial blood samples were collected for pharmacokinetic analysis. Safety was assessed. RESULTS: The geometric least-squares mean ratios (90% confidence intervals) for the area under the concentration-time curve over 8 h and maximum concentration of vixotrigine co-administered with an oral contraceptive vs vixotrigine alone were 0.85 (0.82-0.89) and 0.91 (0.87-0.96), respectively. The geometric least-squares mean ratios (90% confidence interval) for area under the concentration-time curve over 24 h and maximum concentration of ethinyl estradiol with vixotrigine vs ethinyl estradiol alone were 0.94 (0.91-0.97) and 0.89 (0.84-0.94), respectively; the ratios for levonorgestrel with vixotrigine vs levonorgestrel alone were 1.06 (0.98-1.16) and 1.05 (0.98-1.13), respectively. No adverse events occurring with vixotrigine alone were deemed related to the study drug by the investigators. CONCLUSIONS: Coadministration of vixotrigine and an oral contraceptive containing ethinyl estradiol and levonorgestrel had no clinically relevant effect on exposure of all three compounds. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT03324685 (registered 25 October, 2017).

Evaluation of the Pharmacokinetic Interaction Between the Voltage- and Use-Dependent Nav1.7 Channel Blocker Vixotrigine and Carbamazepine in Healthy Volunteers.

Vixotrigine is a voltage- and use-dependent Nav1.7 channel blocker under investigation for the treatment of peripheral neuropathic pain conditions, including trigeminal neuralgia. Vixotrigine is metabolized primarily via uridine diphosphate-glucuronosyltransferases (UGTs). Carbamazepine, a UGT and cytochrome P450 3A4 inducer, is a first-line treatment for trigeminal neuralgia. We conducted a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, single-center phase 1 study to investigate the impact of coadministering vixotrigine and carbamazepine on their respective pharmacokinetics (PK) in healthy volunteers, the safety and tolerability of combined treatment, and PK recovery of vixotrigine following carbamazepine discontinuation. Randomly assigned treatments were carbamazepine (100 mg twice a day, days 1-3 and 200 mg twice a day, days 4-21) or placebo on days 1 to 21. All volunteers received vixotrigine 150 mg 3 times a day on days 16 to 28. At prespecified times, whole-blood samples were collected for PK assessment. Statistical analyses were performed on the log-transformed PK parameters area under the concentration-time curve within a dosing interval (AUC0-tau ) and maximum observed concentration (Cmax ) for vixotrigine, carbamazepine, and metabolites. Vixotrigine AUC0-tau and Cmax were reduced by 31.6% and 26.3%, respectively, when coadministered with carbamazepine compared with placebo. Seven days after carbamazepine discontinuation, vixotrigine AUC0-tau and Cmax remained 24.5% and 21.4% lower compared with placebo. Carbamazepine AUC0-tau and Cmax were <10% lower when coadministered with vixotrigine compared on days 15 and 21. Vixotrigine/carbamazepine coadministration was well tolerated. These results suggest that vixotrigine does not have an effect on carbamazepine PK, and although carbamazepine has an effect on the exposure of vixotrigine, the effect is not considered clinically relevant.