A Randomised Phase I Study to Assess the Safety, Tolerability and Pharmacokinetics of Palovarotene Ophthalmic Solution.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Palovarotene, a selective retinoic acid receptor γ agonist, is under investigation for the treatment of dry eye disease. This study aimed to determine the ocular and systemic safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics of palovarotene ophthalmic solution (PVO-OS) in healthy adults. METHODS: This was a randomised, vehicle-controlled phase I study (NCT04762355; retrospectively registered). Participants received either PVO-OS (at 0.025, 0.05 or 0.10 mg/mL) or a vehicle (placebo-to-match PVO-OS) once-daily or twice-daily for seven consecutive days. Safety was assessed by ocular and systemic assessments. Blood samples for pharmacokinetic assessments were collected before and after dose administration. RESULTS: Thirty-six participants were randomised to PVO-OS and 12 to the vehicle. Overall, 89 treatment-emergent ocular adverse events (TEOAEs) were reported by 22 participants (61.1%) receiving PVO-OS and ten TEOAEs were reported by five participants (41.7%) receiving the vehicle. Erythema, irritation and skin dryness of the eyelid were the most common TEOAEs in participants receiving PVO-OS. The incidence of TEOAEs and eyelid-related findings in the PVO-OS groups increased with ascending dose and frequency compared with participants treated with the vehicle. All TEOAEs were mild (96.6%) or moderate (3.4%) and resolved without sequelae. Plasma palovarotene concentrations were generally measurable for up to 3-4 h for 0.025 mg/mL and 0.05 mg/mL and up to 12 h for 0.10 mg/mL dose regimens, independent of the frequency of administration. CONCLUSIONS: PVO-OS was generally well tolerated at doses up to and including 0.10 mg/mL twice daily. Similar pharmacokinetic profiles were observed for the once-daily and twice-daily regimens following multiple ascending doses of PVO-OS.

Randomised phase II trial of gemcitabine and nab-paclitaxel with necuparanib or placebo in untreated metastatic pancreas ductal adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Necuparanib, a rationally engineered low-molecular-weight heparin, combined with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel showed an encouraging safety and oncologic signal in a phase Ib trial. This randomised multicentre phase II trial evaluates the addition of necuparanib or placebo to gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel in untreated metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligibility included 18 years, histologically or cytologically confirmed metastatic PDAC, measurable disease and Eastern Co-Operative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1. Patients were randomly assigned to necuparanib (5 mg/kg subcutaneous injection once daily) or placebo (subcutaneous injection once daily) and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel on days 1, 8 and 15 of 28-day cycles. The primary end-point was median overall survival (OS), and secondary end-points included median progression-free survival, response rates and safety. RESULTS: One-hundred ten patients were randomised, 62 to necuparanib arm and 58 to placebo arm. The futility boundary was crossed at a planned interim analysis, and the study was terminated by the Data Safety Monitoring Board. The median OS was 10.71 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 7.95-11.96) for necuparanib arm and 9.99 months (95% CI: 7.85-12.85) for placebo arm (hazard ratio: 1.12, 95% CI: 0.66-1.89, P-value: 0.671). The necuparanib arm had a higher incidence of haematologic toxicity relative to placebo patients (83% and 70%). CONCLUSION: The addition of necuparanib to standard of care treatment for advanced PDAC did not improve OS. Safety was acceptable. No further development of necuparanib is planned although targeting the coagulation cascade pathway remains relevant in PDAC. NCT01621243.

The effect of eszopiclone in patients with insomnia and coexisting rheumatoid arthritis: a pilot study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of eszopiclone 3 mg, a nonbenzodiazepine medication/hypnotic indicated for the treatment of insomnia with comorbid rheumatoid arthritis (RA). METHOD: This multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study was conducted in 153 patients aged 25-64 years with American College of Rheumatology-defined RA who met DSM-IV criteria for insomnia. The data were collected from February to November of 2004. Patients were randomly assigned to either eszopiclone or placebo nightly for 4 weeks, followed by a 2-week placebo run out. Efficacy was evaluated using patient reports of sleep (wake time after sleep onset [WASO], sleep latency [SL], and total sleep time [TST]), daytime function, pain, and RA assessments. Insomnia severity was evaluated using the Insomnia Severity Index. Safety was also evaluated. RESULTS: Eszopiclone significantly improved all patient-reported sleep measures (WASO, SL, and TST), sleep quality, depth of sleep, and daytime function (P < .05 vs placebo). At week 4, 48% of eszopiclone-treated patients had no clinically meaningful insomnia as assessed by ISI score (versus 30% of placebo-treated patients, P = .03). Eszopiclone was significantly better than placebo on some RA-associated pain measures: (1) overall (P = .05), pain (P = .006), and pain and other symptoms (P = .02) scores of the Arthritis Self-Efficacy Scale, (2) tender joint counts (P = .03) and pain severity scores (P = .023), (3) the activities domain of the Health Assessment Questionnaire-Disability Index (P = .04), and (4) the role physical (P = .03) and bodily pain (P = .01) scales of the 36-item Medical Outcomes Study Short-Form General Health Survey. The most commonly reported adverse events with eszopiclone were unpleasant taste and transient increases in RA symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: In this pilot study of patients with insomnia comorbid with RA, eszopiclone 3 mg improved all assessed sleep and daytime function measures over the treatment period, as well as some measures of RA-associated pain, disability, and quality of life. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00367965.

A pilot study evaluating acute use of eszopiclone in patients with mild to moderate obstructive sleep apnea syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of eszopiclone on measures of respiration and sleep using polysomnography in patients with mild to moderate obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS). METHODS: This double-blind, randomized crossover study included patients (35-64 years) with mild-to-moderate OSAS [apnea and hypopnea index (AHI) range 10 and 40]. Patients received either eszopiclone 3mg or placebo for two consecutive nights, with a 5-7 day washout between treatments. Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) was not allowed on nights in the sleep laboratory. RESULTS: The primary endpoint, mean total AHI, was not significantly different from placebo (16.5 with placebo and 16.7 with eszopiclone; 90% confidence interval (CI) -1.7, 1.9). No significant differences in total arousals, respiratory arousals, duration of apnea and hypopnea episodes, or oxygen saturation were noted. Significant differences in spontaneous arousals (13.6 versus 11.4 for placebo and eszopiclone, respectively; 90% CI -3.7, -0.7), sleep efficiency (85.1% and 88.4%; p=0.0075), wake time after sleep onset (61.8 and 48.1 min; p=0.0125), and wake time during sleep (55.9 and 43.2 min; p=0.013) were noted after eszopiclone treatment. Eszopiclone was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: In this pilot study, eszopiclone did not worsen AHI, and it improved sleep maintenance and efficiency. Further study is warranted to determine whether eszopiclone could improve CPAP compliance or next-day function in patients with OSAS.

Evaluation of the safety and efficacy of levalbuterol in 2-5-year-old patients with asthma.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of single-isomer (R)-albuterol (levalbuterol, LEV) in children aged 2-5 years. Children aged 2-5 years (n = 211) participated in this multicenter, randomized, double-blind study of 21 days of t.i.d. LEV (0.31 mg or 0.63 mg without regard to weight), racemic albuterol (RAC, 1.25 mg for children <33 pounds (lb); 2.5 mg for children >/=33 lb), or placebo (PBO). Endpoints included adverse-event (AE) reporting, safety parameters, peak expiratory flow (PEF), the Pediatric Asthma Questionnaire(c) (PAQ), and the Pediatric Asthma Caregiver's Quality of Life Questionnaire (PACQLQ). Baseline disease severity was generally mild in all groups, as defined by PAQ scores that ranged from 6.3-7.3 on a scale of 0-27 and 1.5 days/week of uncontrolled asthma. After treatment, the PAQ decreased in all groups (P = NS). In the subset of subjects able to perform PEF (51.7%), all active treatments improved in-clinic PEF after the first dose (mean +/- SD: PBO, 1.4 +/- 20.8; LEV 0.31 mg, 12.4 +/- 12; LEV 0.63 mg, 16.7 +/- 15.4; RAC, 18.0 +/- 16.5 l/min; P < 0.01). PACQLQ measurements improved more than the minimally important difference only in the LEV-treated groups, and were significant in children <33 lb (P < 0.05). Asthma exacerbations occurred primarily in children >/=33 lb, and one serious asthma exacerbation occurred in the 2.5-mg RAC group. RAC and LEV 0.63 mg, but not LEV 0.31 mg or placebo, led to significant increases in ventricular heart rate. In this study of levalbuterol in children aged 2-5 years with asthma, LEV was generally well-tolerated, and in children able to perform PEF, led to significant bronchodilation compared with placebo.

Levalbuterol compared with racemic albuterol in the treatment of acute asthma: results of a pilot study.

This was a prospective, open-label, nonrandomized pilot study to evaluate efficacy and tolerability of levalbuterol (LEV) in acute asthma. Asthmatics (forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV1], 20-55% predicted) were sequentially enrolled into cohorts of 12 to 14 and received 0.63, 1.25, 2.5, 3.75, or 5.0 mg LEV or 2.5 or 5.0 mg racemic albuterol (RAC) every 20 minutes x 3. After the first dose, FEV1 changes were 56% (0.6 L) for 1.25 mg LEV and 6% (0.07 L) and 14% (0.21 L) for 2.5 and 5 mg RAC respectively. After three doses, FEV1 changes were 74% (0.9 L), 39% (0.5 L), and 37% (0.6 L) for 1.25 mg, LEV 2.5 mg, RAC and 0.63 mg LEV respectively. LEV doses greater than 1.25 mg did not further improve bronchodilation. Baseline plasma (S)-albuterol levels were negatively correlated with baseline FEV1 (R = - 0.3, P = .004) and percent change in FEV1 (R = -0.3, P = .006). LEV at a dose of 1.25 mg produced effective bronchodilation that was greater than both RAC doses. The negative correlation between (S)-albuterol levels and FEV1 could suggest a deleterious effect of (S)-albuterol. Larger comparative studies are warranted.

Pairwise comparison of levalbuterol versus racemic albuterol in the treatment of moderate-to-severe asthma.

The object of this study is a post hoc pairwise comparison of levalbuterol versus racemic albuterol for asthma in a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial. The participants are patients > or =12 years of age (n = 362) with FEV1 45-70% of predicted. The patients received nebulized levalbuterol (0.63 or 1.25 mg), racemic albuterol (1.25 or 2.5 mg), or placebo t.i.d. for 4 weeks. The primary endpoints, published in Nelson HS, Bensch G, Pleskow WW, et al. Improved bronchodilation with levalbuterol compared with racemic albuterol in patients with asthma. J Allergy Clin Immunol 102:943-952, 1998, included comparisons of active treatments with placebo and of the combined levalbuterol with the combined racemic albuterol groups for pulmonary function and rescue medication use. After the first dose, levalbuterol 1.25 mg produced a significantly greater increase in the mean peak change in FEV1 compared with both doses of racemic albuterol (p < 0.03) in all patients and in those with more severe asthma. Levalbuterol 1.25 mg also produced a significantly greater (p < 0.05) mean area under the curve (AUC) of the FEV1 versus time plot (AUC FEV1) compared with all other treatments after the first dose in all patients and in the subset with more severe disease, illustrating better overall improvement in FEV1. Active treatment groups demonstrated significant improvements compared with the placebo group (p < 0.05), except for AUC FEV1 in the racemic albuterol 1.25-mg group at week 4. Levalbuterol in the absence of the (S)-isomer provided greater bronchodilation than the same quantity of (R)-albuterol delivered as the racemate. These data suggest that (S)-albuterol may compromise the efficacy of (R)-albuterol.