LIBERTY randomized withdrawal study: relugolix combination therapy for heavy menstrual bleeding associated with uterine fibroids.

BACKGROUND: In the pivotal LIBERTY 1 and 2 trials and long-term extension study, once-daily relugolix combination therapy (40 mg relugolix, 1 mg estradiol, 0.5 mg norethindrone acetate) reduced menstrual blood loss volume and pain among women with uterine fibroids. Relugolix combination therapy was well tolerated with preservation of bone mineral density through 52 weeks. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to report the 2-year relugolix combination therapy efficacy and safety results of the phase 3 LIBERTY randomized withdrawal study. STUDY DESIGN: Women with uterine fibroid-associated heavy menstrual bleeding who completed the 24-week LIBERTY 1 or 2 trials, followed by the 28-week long-term extension study (up to 52 weeks total treatment), and who met the responder criteria (menstrual blood loss volume <80 mL and ≥50% reduction from pivotal study baseline at week 48 [week 24 of long-term extension]) were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to either blinded treatment with relugolix combination therapy or placebo for 52 weeks (total treatment period, 104 weeks). For women who had a relapse of heavy menstrual bleeding during the study (menstrual blood loss volume ≥80 mL), open-label relugolix combination therapy was offered. The primary endpoint was the proportion of women who maintained menstrual blood loss volume <80 mL through week 76 (week 24 of randomized withdrawal study). Secondary endpoints included time to menstrual blood loss volume ≥80 mL, proportion of women who maintained a menstrual blood loss volume of <80 mL through week 104 (over the 52-week randomized treatment period), the proportion of women who achieved or maintained amenorrhea at week 76 at the end of treatment, and the change in Uterine Fibroid Symptom-Quality of Life Bleeding and Pelvic Discomfort Scale and symptom severity scores. Analyses were performed for the modified intent-to-treat population, including all randomized women who received ≥1 dose of the study drug. RESULTS: Of the 229 randomized women (relugolix combination therapy, n=115; placebo, n=114), 228 received the study drug and 175 (76.7%) completed the randomized withdrawal study. Through week 76, 78.4% of women on relugolix combination therapy maintained menstrual blood loss volume <80 mL vs 15.1% in the placebo group (difference, 63.4%; 95% confidence interval, 52.9%-73.9%; P<.0001). At week 104, 69.8% of women on relugolix combination therapy maintained menstrual blood loss volume <80 mL vs 11.8% in the placebo group (difference, 58.0%; 95% confidence interval, 47.0%-69.1%; P<.0001). Through week 104, 88.3% of women on placebo relapsed with heavy menstrual bleeding (median time to relapse, 5.9 weeks). Among the 89 women in the placebo group who relapsed and received open-label rescue treatment, 87 women responded to relugolix combination therapy with a menstrual blood loss volume <80 mL. The proportion of women who achieved or maintained amenorrhea were 57.4% vs 13.3% at week 76 (difference, 44.1%; 95% confidence interval, 33.10%-55.1%; P<.0001) and 58.3% vs 10.6% at week 104 (difference, 47.6%; 95% confidence interval, 37.0%-58.3%; nominal P<.0001) for relugolix combination therapy and the placebo group, respectively. Relugolix combination therapy was generally well tolerated; no new safety signals were identified, and the adverse event profile over the second year was consistent with that reported through the first year of treatment. Bone mineral density remained stable in women who received relugolix combination therapy from week 52 to week 104. In women continuously treated with relugolix combination therapy up to 2 years, bone mineral density was generally preserved. CONCLUSION: After 2 years of treatment with relugolix combination therapy, there was evidence of durability of the effect in maintaining low menstrual blood loss volume in women with symptomatic uterine fibroids. Most women had return of heavy menstrual bleeding and associated symptoms after treatment cessation, which improved upon retreatment with relugolix combination therapy. Relugolix combination therapy was well tolerated, the adverse event profile remained consistent, and the mean bone mineral density was generally preserved through 2 years of treatment.

A Randomized Open-Label Study of Relugolix Alone or Relugolix Combination Therapy in Premenopausal Women.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Relugolix is a gonadotropin-releasing hormone receptor antagonist. Relugolix 40-mg monotherapy is associated with vasomotor symptoms and long-term bone mineral density loss due to hypoestrogenism. This study assessed whether the addition of estradiol (E2) 1 mg and norethindrone acetate (NETA) 0.5 mg to relugolix 40 mg (relugolix combination therapy) provides systemic E2 concentrations in the 20-50 pg/mL range to minimize these undesirable effects. METHODS: This was a randomized, open-label, parallel-group study to assess the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, safety, and tolerability of relugolix 40 mg alone or in combination with E2 1 mg and NETA 0.5 mg in healthy premenopausal women. Eligible women were randomized 1:1 to receive relugolix alone or relugolix plus E2/NETA for 6 weeks. Study assessments included pharmacokinetic parameters of E2, estrone, and relugolix in both treatment groups, and norethindrone in the relugolix plus E2/NETA treatment group at weeks 3 and 6. RESULTS: Median E2 24 h average concentrations with the relugolix plus E2/NETA group (N = 23) were 31.5 pg/mL, 26 pg/mL higher compared with the relugolix-alone group (6.2 pg/mL) (N = 25). There were 86.4% of participants in the relugolix plus E2/NETA group who had E2 average concentrations exceeding 20 pg/mL, the threshold expected to minimize bone mineral density loss, compared with 21.1% in the relugolix-alone group. Both treatments were generally safe and well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Relugolix 40 mg in combination with E2 1 mg and NETA 0.5 mg provided systemic E2 concentrations within a range expected to minimize the risk of undesirable effects of hypoestrogenism associated with the administration of relugolix alone. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier no. NCT04978688. Trial registration date: 27 July, 2021; retrospectively registered.

Relugolix Combination Therapy for Uterine Leiomyoma-Associated Pain in the LIBERTY Randomized Trials.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of once-daily relugolix combination therapy (relugolix-CT: relugolix 40 mg, estradiol 1 mg, and norethindrone acetate 0.5 mg) compared with placebo on moderate-to-severe pain in women with uterine leiomyomas and heavy menstrual bleeding. METHODS: Two replicate, multinational, double-blind, 24-week, randomized, phase 3 studies (LIBERTY 1 and 2) were conducted in premenopausal women with uterine leiomyoma-associated heavy menstrual bleeding (80 mL or greater per cycle for two cycles or 160 mL or greater during one cycle). A predefined secondary objective was to determine the effect of relugolix-CT on moderate-to-severe uterine leiomyoma-associated pain in the pain subpopulation (women with maximum pain scores of 4 or higher on the 0-10 numerical rating scale at baseline, with pain score reporting compliance of 80% (ie, 28 days or more over the last 35 days of treatment). This key secondary endpoint was defined as the proportion of women achieving minimal-to-no uterine leiomyoma-associated pain (maximum numerical rating scale score 1 or lower) at week 24; menstrual and nonmenstrual pain were evaluated in prespecified secondary analyses. Treatment comparisons were performed in the pooled LIBERTY 1 and 2 pain subpopulation using the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test stratified by baseline menstrual blood loss volume. RESULTS: Across both trials, 509 women were randomized to relugolix-CT or placebo (April 2017-December 2018). Of these, 277 (54.4%) met pain subpopulation requirements. With relugolix-CT, 45.2% (95% CI 36.4-54.3) of women achieved minimal-to-no pain compared with 13.9% (95% CI 8.8-20.5) with placebo (nominal P<.001). The proportions of women with minimal-to-no pain during menstrual days and during nonmenstrual days were significantly higher with relugolix-CT (65.0% [95% CI 55.6-73.5] and 44.6% [95% CI 32.3-57.5], respectively) compared with placebo (19.3% [95% CI 13.2-26.7], nominal P<.001, and 21.6% [95% CI 12.9-32.7], nominal P=.004, respectively). CONCLUSION: Over 24 weeks, relugolix-CT significantly reduced moderate-to-severe uterine leiomyoma-associated pain with a more pronounced effect on menstrual pain. These data support that relugolix-CT had clinically meaningful effects on women's experience of uterine leiomyoma-associated pain. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: LIBERTY 1, NCT03049735; LIBERTY 2, NCT03103087. FUNDING SOURCE: Myovant Sciences GmbH.

Naldemedine versus placebo for opioid-induced constipation (COMPOSE-1 and COMPOSE-2): two multicentre, phase 3, double-blind, randomised, parallel-group trials.

BACKGROUND: Opioid-induced constipation is a frequent side-effect of opioid treatment, and standard interventions have limited or inconsistent efficacy. This study assessed the efficacy and safety of naldemedine, a peripherally acting µ-opioid receptor antagonist, for the treatment of opioid-induced constipation in patients with chronic non-cancer pain. METHODS: We report two double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trials in adults with chronic non-cancer pain and opioid-induced constipation. The first (COMPOSE-1) was done in 68 outpatient sites in seven countries and the second (COMPOSE-2) at 69 outpatient sites in six countries; both studies were done in Europe and the USA. Eligible patients were aged 18-80 years, did not use laxatives, and had a stable opioid regimen for treatment of chronic non-cancer pain with a total daily dose averaging at least 30 mg (morphine equivalent) for at least 1 month before screening. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either oral naldemedine 0·2 mg or matching placebo once a day for 12 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by average total daily opioid dose (30-100 mg and >100 mg equivalents of oral morphine sulphate). The primary endpoint was proportion of responders. A responder had at least three spontaneous bowel movements (SBMs) per week with an increase from baseline of at least one SBM per week for at least 9 weeks of the 12-week treatment period including at least three of the last 4 weeks. Efficacy endpoints were analysed by intention to treat and the safety population included all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. These trials have both been completed and are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, numbers NCT01965158 and NCT01993940. FINDINGS: In COMPOSE-1, 547 patients were recruited between Aug 29, 2013, and Jan 22, 2015, and were randomly assigned to receive naldemedine (n=274) or placebo (n=273). Patients for COMPOSE-2 were recruited between Nov 4, 2013, and June 9, 2015; 553 patients were randomly assigned to receive naldemedine (n=277) or placebo (n=276). Five patients were enrolled at more than one site, so were excluded from the intention-to-treat population (COMPOSE-1: one per group; COMPOSE-2: one in the naldemedine group, two from the placebo group), with intention-to-treat group sizes of 273 in the naldemedine group and 272 in the placebo group in COMPOSE-1, and 276 in the naldemedine group and 274 in the placebo group in COMPOSE-2. The proportion of responders in both trials was significantly higher with naldemedine than with placebo in COMPOSE-1 (130 responders [47·6%] of 273 in the naldemedine group vs 94 responders [34·6%] of 272 in the placebo group, difference 13·0% [95% CI 4·8-21·3]; p=0·002) and in COMPOSE-2 (145 [52·5%] of 276 vs 92 [33·6%] of 274, difference 18·9% [10·8-27·0]; p<0·0001). Incidence of adverse events with naldemedine was similar to placebo (COMPOSE-1: 132 [49%] of 271 in the naldemedine group vs 123 [45%] of 272 in the placebo group; COMPOSE-2: 136 [50%] of 271 vs 132 [48%] of 274). Treatment-related adverse events were noted in 59 (22%) of 271 patients in the naldemedine group and 45 (17%) of 272 in the placebo group in COMOPOSE-1, and in 54 (20%) of 271 patients in the naldemedine group and 31 (11%) of 274 in the placebo group of COMPOSE-2; the between-group differences were largely due to gastrointestinal disorders, which were more common with naldemedine than placebo (COMPOSE-1: 40 [15%] patients in the naldemedine group vs 18 [7%] in the placebo group; COMPOSE-2: 42 [16%] vs 20 [7%]). INTERPRETATION: Naldemedine treatment led to a significantly higher responder rate than did placebo and was generally well tolerated. These results support that naldemedine could be a new option for the treatment of opioid-induced constipation in patients with chronic non-cancer pain. FUNDING: Shionogi & Co, Ltd.