Investigation of monoclonal antibody CSX-1004 for fentanyl overdose.

The opioid crisis in the United States is primarily driven by the highly potent synthetic opioid fentanyl leading to >70,000 overdose deaths annually; thus, new therapies for fentanyl overdose are urgently needed. Here, we present the first clinic-ready, fully human monoclonal antibody CSX-1004 with picomolar affinity for fentanyl and related analogs. In mice CSX-1004 reverses fentanyl antinociception and the intractable respiratory depression caused by the ultrapotent opioid carfentanil. Moreover, toxicokinetic evaluation in a repeat-dose rat study and human tissue cross-reactivity study reveals a favorable pharmacokinetic profile of CSX-1004 with no safety-related issues. Using a highly translational non-human primate (NHP) model of respiratory depression, we demonstrate CSX-1004-mediated protection from repeated fentanyl challenges for 3-4 weeks. Furthermore, treatment with CSX-1004 produces up to a 15-fold potency reduction of fentanyl in NHP respiration, antinociception and operant responding assays without affecting non-fentanyl opioids like oxycodone. Taken together, our data establish the feasibility of CSX-1004 as a promising candidate medication for preventing and reversing fentanyl-induced overdose.

Dose Proportionality and Steady-State Pharmacokinetics of Serdexmethylphenidate/Dexmethylphenidate, a Novel Prodrug Combination to Treat Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder.

Objective: The study was designed to determine (1) the pharmacokinetic (PK) profile of dexmethylphenidate (d-MPH) after oral administration of three dosage strengths of a new treatment containing d-MPH and a novel prodrug, serdexmethylphenidate (SDX); (2) the dose proportionality of the different SDX/d-MPH dosages; and (3) the steady-state PK profile of d-MPH and SDX after multiple dosing of SDX/d-MPH. Methods: Twenty-three healthy volunteers (aged 18-55 years) under fasted conditions received in a crossover design SDX/d-MPH 26.1/5.2 mg (Treatment A), 39.2/7.8 mg (Treatment B), and 52.3/10.4 mg (Treatment C) for a total d-MPH hydrochloride equivalent dose of 20, 30, and 40 mg, respectively. After a 96-hour washout period, all participants received four consecutive daily doses of SDX/d-MPH 52.3/10.4 mg. Blood samples were collected for measurement of plasma d-MPH and SDX and for PK analysis. Results: Administration of all three doses of SDX/d-MPH resulted in a rapid rise and slow decline in the plasma concentration of d-MPH. For Treatments A, B, and C, mean (± standard deviation) maximum concentrations (Cmax) were 7.1 ± 2.1, 9.8 ± 2.8, and 13.8 ± 3.8 ng/mL, and overall exposures (AUC0-last) were 97.2 ± 28.8, 142.5 ± 41.2, and 199.8 ± 57.2 h*ng/mL, respectively. Dose-normalized Cmax, AUC0-last, and AUC0-inf for d-MPH were similar when comparing the high and low doses versus the middle dose. Power model regression analysis revealed that Cmax and AUC0-inf proportionally increased with an increase in SDX/d-MPH dose. In the multiple-dose study, d-MPH reached steady state before the third dose, and SDX after the first dose. Conclusion: The PK profile of SDX/d-MPH is characterized by a rapid rise and a gradual decline in d-MPH concentration, with proportional Cmax and AUC0-inf across doses. The PK attributes of SDX/d-MPH may optimize symptom control from early morning to early evening, while the demonstrated dose proportionality may facilitate initial dose titration and ongoing dose adjustment.

Oral, intranasal, and intravenous abuse potential of serdexmethylphenidate, a novel prodrug of d-methylphenidate.

OBJECTIVES: Serdexmethylphenidate (SDX) chloride (Cl) is a novel prodrug of d-methylphenidate (d-MPH). These studies evaluated the abuse potential of SDX Cl when administered orally, intranasally (IN), and intravenously (IV). METHODS: Three randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled crossover studies were conducted in recreational drug users to evaluate the abuse-related effects of oral SDX (120 and 240 mg) vs. extended-release (ER) d-MPH (80 mg) and phentermine (60 mg); IN SDX (80 mg) vs. d-MPH (40 mg), and IV SDX (30 mg) vs. d-MPH (15 mg). Abuse-related subjective measures, pharmacokinetics, and safety were assessed. RESULTS: The primary endpoint of maximum (Emax) Drug Liking (DL) (0-100-point scale) was significantly higher following d-MPH vs. placebo, validating the studies. In the oral study, DL Emax was significantly higher following 80 mg ER d-MPH (Emax = 81.5) than 120 mg SDX (Emax = 62.8, p < .001) and 240 mg SDX (Emax = 63.8, p = .006); and following 60 mg phentermine (Emax = 80.2) than 120 mg SDX (p = .0195), but not 240 mg SDX (p = .0665). DL Emax scores were significantly higher following IN d-MPH vs SDX (Emax = 93.2 vs. 71.0, p < .0001) and following IV d-MPH vs. SDX (Emax = 84.3 vs. 56.6, p = .001). Intravenous SDX was non-inferior to placebo (p = .001) for DL Emax. Secondary endpoints (e.g. Take Drug Again) were generally consistent with the primary endpoint. Maximal and overall d-MPH exposure was lower for SDX than d-MPH for all routes. Adverse events typical of stimulants were more frequent with d-MPH than SDX. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that the novel d-MPH prodrug, SDX, has lower abuse potential than d-MPH and support its classification as a C-IV controlled substance.

A Randomized, Controlled Laboratory Classroom Study of Serdexmethylphenidate and d-Methylphenidate Capsules in Children with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder.

Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of once-daily serdexmethylphenidate/dexmethylphenidate (SDX/d-MPH) capsules (Azstarys™) compared with placebo in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in a randomized, double-blind, dose-optimized laboratory classroom study. Methods: Children ages 6-12 with ADHD were enrolled. During a 3-week, open-label, Dose Optimization Phase, subjects initiated treatment with 39.2 mg/7.8 mg/day of SDX/d-MPH and were titrated weekly to an optimal dose (maximum dose of 52.3/10.4 mg). During the double-blind Treatment Phase, subjects were randomized to receive their optimal dose of SDX/d-MPH or placebo for 7 days. On day 7, efficacy was assessed in the laboratory classroom using the Swanson, Kotkin, Agler, M-Flynn, and Pelham (SKAMP) Rating Scale and Permanent Product Measure of Performance (PERMP). To evaluate safety, adverse events (AEs), vital signs, and electrocardiograms were assessed, and suicide risk was assessed. Results: A total of 149 subjects completed the study. In the primary efficacy analysis, the mean postdose change from baseline in SKAMP-Combined scores averaged over the laboratory classroom day was significantly improved with SDX/d-MPH versus placebo (least-squares mean treatment difference [95% confidence interval]: -5.41 [-7.10 to -3.71]; p < 0.001). A significant treatment effect for SDX/d-MPH compared with placebo was observed from 1 to 10 hours postdose. A post hoc analysis more comparable with that conducted in similar studies indicated a 0.5- to 13-hour onset and duration of efficacy. Both average postdose PERMP-Attempted and PERMP-Correct score changes from baseline were significantly improved among those treated with SDX/d-MPH versus placebo (p < 0.001 for both). No serious AEs were reported. During the Dose Optimization Phase, two-thirds of subjects reported AEs; the most common being insomnia and decreased appetite. Conclusions: SDX/d-MPH showed significant improvement in ADHD symptoms compared with placebo in children 6-12 years of age, with a rapid onset and extended duration of treatment effect. SDX/d-MPH was safe, with AEs comparable with those observed with other stimulant treatments.

Pharmacokinetics and Abuse Potential of Asalhydromorphone, a Novel Prodrug of Hydromorphone, After Intranasal Administration in Recreational Drug Users.

OBJECTIVES: Hydromorphone (HM) is a potent µ-opioid receptor agonist with high susceptibility for abuse. A prodrug of hydromorphone, asalhydromorphone (ASAL-HM), has been designed to deter nonoral forms of abuse associated with hydromorphone. This study evaluated the intranasal (IN) pharmacokinetics and exploratory abuse potential of ASAL-HM compared with HM. DESIGN: Single-center, randomized, double-blind, crossover study. SETTING: Clinical research site. SUBJECTS: Healthy adult, nondependent recreational opioid users. METHODS: Subjects (N = 26) were randomized to receive IN administration of 16.1 mg of ASAL-HM and 8.0 mg of HM (molar-equivalent with respect to hydromorphone). Blood samples were taken through 24 hours postdose, and pharmacodynamic end points (Drug Liking, Feeling High, Take Drug Again, Overall Drug Liking) were assessed through eight hours postdose. Nasal irritation and safety were also assessed. RESULTS: Relative to IN HM, the rate (Cmax) and extent (area under the curve [AUC0-last, AUC0-inf]) of exposure to hydromorphone following IN ASAL-HM were reduced by ≥50%. Consistent with these findings, scores on "at-the-moment" (i.e., Drug Liking Emax, High Emax) and retrospective (i.e., Take Drug Again, Overall Drug Liking) end points were statistically significantly lower for IN ASAL-HM, with mean/median differences ranging from 11.4 to 25.0 points. ASAL-HM produced greater nasal-related effects, such as nasal burning and facial pain, and a lower incidence of typical opioid-related adverse events such as euphoria, pruritus, and somnolence. CONCLUSIONS: The novel hydromorphone prodrug ASAL-HM produced marked reductions in hydromorphone exposure and abuse-related effects following IN administration compared with HM. ASAL-HM has desirable molecular features for incorporation into putative abuse-deterrent immediate-release and extended-release hydromorphone products.

Pharmacokinetics and Abuse Potential of Benzhydrocodone, a Novel Prodrug of Hydrocodone, After Intranasal Administration in Recreational Drug Users.

Objective: Developing an acetaminophen-free, immediate-release hydrocodone product remains an unmet medical need; however, new opioid analgesics should not introduce new abuse risks. Benzhydrocodone is a prodrug of hydrocodone that must be metabolized into hydrocodone by enzymes in the intestinal tract to optimally deliver its pharmacologic effects. This study evaluated the intranasal pharmacokinetics and abuse potential of benzhydrocodone active pharmaceutical ingredient (API) compared with hydrocodone bitartrate (HB) API. Design: Single-center, randomized, double-blind, crossover study. Setting: Clinical research site. Subjects: Healthy adult, nondependent, recreational opioid users. Methods: Subjects (N = 51 Completers) were randomized to receive 13.34 mg of intranasal benzhydrocodone API and 15.0 mg of intranasal HB API (molar-equivalent doses of hydrocodone). Blood samples were taken, and Drug Liking scores (assessed on a bipolar visual analog scale) were obtained throughout each dosing interval. Nasal irritation and safety were assessed. Results: Peak hydrocodone plasma concentration (Cmax) was 36.0% lower, and total hydrocodone exposures (AUClast and AUCinf) were 20.3% and 19.5% lower, respectively, for benzhydrocodone API compared with HB API (P < 0.0001). All partial AUC values were lower for benzhydrocodone API, with a ≥ 75% reduction in hydrocodone exposure at all time intervals up to one hour postdose (P < 0.0001). Median Tmax of hydrocodone following benzhydrocodone API was delayed by more than one hour compared with HB. Drug Liking score, as assessed by maximal liking (Emax), was significantly lower for benzhydrocodone API vs HB API (P = 0.004), with 45% of subjects showing a ≥ 30% reduction in Drug Liking Emax. Conclusion: Reductions in hydrocodone exposure and associated decreases in Drug Liking relative to HB suggest that the prodrug benzhydrocodone may deter intranasal abuse.

Relative Bioavailability, Intranasal Abuse Potential, and Safety of Benzhydrocodone/Acetaminophen Compared with Hydrocodone Bitartrate/Acetaminophen in Recreational Drug Abusers.

Objectives: Benzhydrocodone is a hydrocodone prodrug that has been combined with acetaminophen (APAP) in a novel immediate-release analgesic. This study evaluated the relative bioavailability, intranasal abuse potential, and safety of benzhydrocodone/APAP compared with commercially available hydrocodone bitartrate (HB)/APAP. Design: Single-center, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, two-part study comprising a Dose Selection (Part A) phase and a Main Study (Part B) phase. Setting: Clinical research site. Subjects: Healthy adult, nondependent, recreational opioid users with a history of intranasal abuse. Methods: Subjects (N = 42) in Part B received five in-clinic treatments consisting of intranasal and oral benzhydrocodone/APAP (13.34/650 mg), intranasal and oral hydrocodone/APAP (15/650 mg), and placebo, with four or more days of washout between treatments. Pharmacodynamic assessments included subjective effects of Drug Liking, Overall Drug Liking, and Take Drug Again (assessed on visual analog scale [VAS]), as well as nasal irritation. Pharmacokinetics and safety were also assessed. Results: Hydrocodone Cmax was 11% lower for intranasal benzhydrocodone/APAP vs intranasal HB/APAP (P = 0.0027). Early cumulative hydrocodone exposures for intranasal benzhydrocodone/APAP through 0.5, 1, and 2 hours were reduced by approximately 50%, 29%, and 15%, respectively (P ≤ 0.0024). Correspondingly, Drug Liking VAS values up to two hours postdose were significantly lower for intranasal benzhydrocodone/APAP vs intranasal HB/APAP (P ≤ 0.0079), although peak Drug Liking VAS (Emax) scores were not different (P = 0.2814). Adverse nasal effects were more frequent for intranasal benzhydrocodone/APAP vs intranasal HB/APAP. Conclusions: Reduced hydrocodone exposure and drug liking at early time intervals, coupled with adverse nasal effects, can be expected to provide a level of deterrence to the intranasal route of abuse for benzhydrocodone/APAP.

Effects of Acute and Chronic Treatments with Dopamine D2 and D3 Receptor Ligands on Cocaine versus Food Choice in Rats.

Dopamine D3 receptor ligands are potential medications for psychostimulant addiction. Medication assessment may benefit from preclinical studies that evaluate chronic medication effects on choice between an abused drug and an alternative, nondrug reinforcer. This study compared acute and chronic effects of dopamine D2- and D3-preferring ligands on choice between intravenous cocaine and palatable food in rats. Under baseline conditions, cocaine maintained dose-dependent increases in cocaine choice and reciprocal decreases in food choice. Acutely, the D2 agonist R-(-)-norpropylapomorphine (NPA) and antagonist L-741,626 [3-[[4-(4-chlorophenyl)-4-hydroxypiperidin-l-yl]methyl-1H-indole] produced leftward and rightward shifts in cocaine dose-effect curves, respectively, whereas the partial agonist terguride had no effect. All three drugs dose-dependently decreased food-maintained responding. Chronically, the effects of R-(-)-norpropylapomorphine and L-741,626 on cocaine self-administration showed marked tolerance, whereas suppression of food-reinforced behavior persisted. Acute effects of the D3 ligands were less systematic and most consistent with nonselective decreases in cocaine- and food-maintained responding. Chronically, the D3 agonist PF-592,379 [5-[(2R,5S)-5-methyl-4-propylmorpholin-2-yl]pyridin-2-amine] increased cocaine choice, whereas an intermediate dose of the D3 antagonist PG01037 [N-[(E)-4-[4-(2,3-dichlorophenyl)piperazin-1-yl]but-2-enyl]-4-pyridin-2-ylbenzamide] produced a therapeutically desirable decrease in cocaine choice early in treatment; however, tolerance to this effect developed, and lower and higher doses were ineffective. D3 ligands failed to significantly modify total cocaine intake but caused persistent decreases in food intake. Thus, D2-and D3-preferring ligands showed distinct profiles, consistent with different pharmacological actions. In addition, these results highlight the role of acute versus chronic treatment as a determinant of test drug effects. With the possible exception of the D3 antagonist PG01037, no ligand was promising in terms of cocaine addiction treatment.

Budesonide Multimatrix Is Efficacious for Mesalamine-refractory, Mild to Moderate Ulcerative Colitis: A Randomised, Placebo-controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Safety and efficacy of budesonide multimatrix, an oral extended-release second-generation corticosteroid designed for targeted delivery throughout the colon, were examined for induction of remission in patients with mild to moderate ulcerative colitis refractory to baseline mesalamine therapy. METHODS: A randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial evaluated efficacy and safety of budesonide multimatrix for induction of remission [ulcerative colitis disease activity index score ≥ 4 and ≤ 10] in 510 adults randomised to once-daily oral budesonide multimatrix 9 mg or placebo for 8 weeks. Patients continued baseline treatment with oral mesalamine ≥ 2.4 g/day. RESULTS: Combined clinical and endoscopic remission at Week 8 was achieved by 13.0% and 7.5% of patients receiving budesonide multimatrix [n = 230] or placebo [n = 228], respectively, in the modified intention-to-treat population [p = 0.049]. Clinical remission [ulcerative colitis disease activity index rectal bleeding and stool frequency subscale scores of 0] was similar in both groups [p = 0.70]. More patients receiving budesonide multimatrix vs placebo achieved endoscopic remission [ulcerative colitis disease activity index mucosal appearance subscale score of 0; 20.0% vs 12.3%; p = 0.02] and histological healing [27.0% vs 17.5%; p = 0.02]. Adverse event rates were similar [budesonide multimatrix, 31.8%; placebo, 27.1%]. Mean morning cortisol concentrations decreased at Weeks 2, 4, and 8 with budesonide multimatrix but remained within the normal range. CONCLUSION: Budesonide multimatrix was safe and efficacious for inducing clinical and endoscopic remission for mild to moderate ulcerative colitis refractory to oral mesalamine therapy.

Identifying factors associated with clinical success in patients treated with NASHA(®)/Dx injection for fecal incontinence.

PURPOSE: Injection with the bulking agent consisting of non-animal stabilized hyaluronic acid/dextranomer (NASHA(®)/Dx) is well tolerated and efficacious for the treatment of fecal incontinence (FI); however, the patient population that may derive maximum benefit has not been established. This post hoc responder analysis assessed demographic and baseline characteristics predictive of responsiveness to NASHA/Dx treatment. METHODS: Adults with a Cleveland Clinic Florida fecal incontinence score (CCFIS) ≥10 were randomized to receive NASHA/Dx or sham treatment. The primary end point was response to treatment (ie, decrease from baseline of ≥50% in number of FI episodes) at 6 months; a prespecified secondary end point was change in fecal incontinence quality of life (FIQL) score at 6 months. Post hoc subgroup analyses were performed for baseline and demographic characteristics and prior FI treatments. RESULTS: Overall, response to treatment was significantly greater with NASHA/Dx versus sham injection (52.7% vs 32.1%; P=0.0089). All subgroups analyzed demonstrated evidence of improvement, favoring NASHA/Dx versus sham treatment for both response to treatment and change in the FIQL coping/behavior subscale score. For the primary end point, a significantly greater percentage of patients with CCFIS ≤15, FI symptoms ≤5 years' duration, or obstetric causes of FI responded to NASHA/Dx treatment versus patients receiving sham treatment (51.1% vs 28.3%, P=0.0169; 55.4% vs 25.7%, P=0.0026; and 53.6% vs 23.1%, P=0.0191, respectively). The mean change in the FIQL coping/behavior score significantly favored NASHA/Dx versus sham treatment for patients with CCFIS ≤15 (P=0.0371), FI symptoms ≤5 years' duration (P=0.0289), or obstetric causes of FI (P=0.0384). Patients without a history of specific FI treatments (eg, antidiarrheal medications, biofeedback, surgery) were more likely to respond to NASHA/Dx versus sham treatment for both end points. CONCLUSION: Although all subgroups analyzed showed evidence of quantitative and qualitative benefit from NASHA/Dx therapy, patients with characteristics indicative of mild-to-moderate FI may exhibit the greatest benefit.

Once-daily mesalamine granules for maintaining remission of ulcerative colitis: pooled analysis of efficacy, safety, and prognostic factors.

OBJECTIVES: A capsule formulation of mesalamine granules (MG) was developed for once-daily dosing and better compliance. The study aim was to evaluate MG efficacy and tolerability in maintaining ulcerative colitis (UC) remission. METHODS: Pooled analysis of 2 identical phase 3, randomized, double-blind trials of once-daily MG 1.5 g or placebo for up to 6 months. The primary endpoint was percentage of patients remaining relapse-free at month 6 versus placebo. Relapse was defined as revised Sutherland Disease Activity Index (SDAI) rectal bleeding score ≥1 and mucosal appearance score ≥2, UC flare, or UC-related adverse event (AE). RESULTS: Data were pooled for patients receiving MG (n = 373) and placebo (n = 189). Significantly more patients were relapse-free at 6 months with MG (79.4%) than placebo (62.4%; P < 0.001) and across subgroups based on select demographic and baseline characteristics (P < 0.05). Secondary outcome measures including rectal bleeding, physician rating of disease activity, stool frequency, total SDAI score, and relapse-free duration favored MG (P < 0.01). Common AEs with MG and placebo, respectively, were headache (10.9% and 7.6%), diarrhea (7.9% and 7.0%), and abdominal pain (6.3% and 6.5%). CONCLUSION: Once-daily MG was more efficacious than and as well tolerated as placebo in maintaining UC remission. ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT00744016 and NCT00767728.

Long-Term Benefit of Mesalamine Granules for Patients Who Achieved Corticosteroid-Induced Ulcerative Colitis Remission.

BACKGROUND: Patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) who achieve remission with corticosteroids often relapse after tapering or discontinuation; alternative treatments limiting steroid exposure and UC relapse would be beneficial. It remains uncertain whether patients with corticosteroid-induced remission experience benefit with mesalamine granules (MG), a locally acting aminosalicylate extended-release capsule formulation for maintenance of UC remission in adults. AIMS: Efficacy and safety of MG 1.5 g once daily was evaluated in patients with UC in corticosteroid-induced remission. METHODS: Data from patients with previous corticosteroid use to achieve baseline UC remission were analyzed from two 6-month randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials and a 24-month open-label extension (OLE). Six-month relapse-free rates were assessed using the revised Sutherland Disease Activity Index. UC-related adverse events (AEs) were recorded during the 30 months. RESULTS: Included were 158 steroid-treated patients in UC remission (MG, n = 105; placebo, n = 53) and 74/105 MG-treated patients who continued MG in the OLE. A significantly larger percentage of patients remained relapse-free at 6 months with MG (77.1 %) versus placebo (54.7 %; P = 0.006), with a 55 % reduction in relapse risk (hazard ratio [HR] 0.45; 95 % CI 0.25-0.79). There was a similar (49.2 %) reduction in risk of UC-related AEs at 6 months (HR 0.51; 95 % CI 0.31-0.84; P = 0.009) that was sustained during the OLE. CONCLUSIONS: MG 1.5 g once daily administered for maintenance of corticosteroid-induced remission was associated with low risk of relapse and UC-related AEs. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV: NCT00744016, NCT00767728, and NCT00326209.

Once-daily Mesalamine Formulation for Maintenance of Remission in Ulcerative Colitis: A Randomized, Placebo-controlled Clinical Trial.

GOALS: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of mesalamine granules 1.5 g once daily for maintenance of ulcerative colitis (UC) remission. BACKGROUND: Mesalamine is a first-line treatment for induction and maintenance of UC remission. STUDY: A phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of patients with a history of mild to moderate UC, currently in remission, who received mesalamine granules once daily for 6 months. The primary efficacy endpoint was percentage of patients maintaining UC remission at 6 months. RESULTS: A significantly greater percentage of patients receiving mesalamine granules versus placebo were in remission at 6 months (79.9% vs. 66.7%; P=0.03). A greater percentage of patients receiving mesalamine granules maintained a revised Sutherland Disease Activity Index (SDAI)≤2 with no individual component of revised SDAI>1 and rectal bleeding=0 at 6 months (72.0% vs. 58.1%; P=0.04). No significant differences between groups were observed for change from baseline to 6 months for total SDAI score or its components (ie, stool frequency, rectal bleeding, mucosal appearance, physician's rating of disease). Mesalamine granules treatment resulted in a significantly longer remission duration versus placebo (P=0.02) and decreased patients' risk of relapse by 43% (hazard ratio=0.57; 95% confidence interval, 0.35-0.93; P=0.02). Mesalamine granules were well tolerated, and adverse events related to hepatic, renal, and pancreatic function-potential concerns with long-term treatment-occurred at a rate similar to placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily mesalamine granules are efficacious and safe for the maintenance of UC remission.

Efficacy and Safety of Methylnaltrexone for Opioid-Induced Constipation in Patients With Chronic Noncancer Pain: A Placebo Crossover Analysis.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: In patients with chronic noncancer pain, subcutaneous methylnaltrexone for opioid-induced constipation (OIC) was examined in a randomized controlled trial (RCT) followed by an open-label extension (OLE). This study examined the reproducibility of RCT findings by analyzing data from placebo-treated patients who crossed over to methylnaltrexone. METHODS: Adults with less than 3 weekly rescue-free bowel movements (RFBMs), taking 50 mg or more of an oral morphine equivalent per day, were randomized to receive methylnaltrexone 12 mg or placebo for 4 weeks, followed by open-label methylnaltrexone 12 mg as needed for 8 weeks. RESULTS: A total of 134 placebo-treated patients (median morphine equivalent dose, 150 mg/d; mean of 1.1 RFBM per week) crossed over to methylnaltrexone in OLE. During the RCT, 9.7% of placebo-treated patients experienced an RFBM within 4 hours of first dose and 9.0% of all placebo injections resulted in an RFBM within 4 hours compared with 45.9% and 34.5%, respectively, with methylnaltrexone treatment in the OLE. When expressed as percentage of patients experiencing 3 or more RFBMs per week and a 1-RFBM increase over baseline, weekly values ranged from 35% to 40% during placebo treatment; at week 5 of OLE methylnaltrexone, this percentage increased to more than 70% and remained relatively stable throughout the OLE. The most common adverse events during methylnaltrexone treatment were abdominal pain (9.7% vs 1.5% for placebo) and nausea (5.2% vs 6.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Findings during placebo treatment further establish the profile of OIC and support that little or no gastrointestinal tolerance develops across time. Findings under open-label conditions established the reproducibility and durability of methylnaltrexone for OIC.

Analysis of opioid-mediated analgesia in Phase III studies of methylnaltrexone for opioid-induced constipation in patients with chronic noncancer pain.

BACKGROUND: Subcutaneous methylnaltrexone is efficacious and well tolerated for opioid-induced constipation (OIC) but may theoretically disrupt opioid-mediated analgesia. METHODS: Opioid use, pain intensity, and opioid withdrawal (Objective Opioid Withdrawal Scale [OOWS] and Subjective Opiate Withdrawal Scale [SOWS] scores) were reported in a randomized, double-blind trial with an open-label extension (RCT) and an open-label trial (OLT) evaluating safety in adults with chronic noncancer pain. In the RCT, patients taking ≥50 mg of oral morphine equivalents daily with <3 rescue-free bowel movements weekly received methyl naltrexone 12 mg once daily (n=150), every other day (n=148), or placebo (n=162) for 4 weeks, followed by open-label methylnaltrexone 12 mg (as needed [prn]; n=364) for 8 weeks. In the OLT, patients (n=1,034) on stable opioid doses with OIC received methylnaltrexone 12 mg prn for up to 48 weeks. RESULTS: Minimal fluctuations of median morphine equivalent dose from baseline (BL) were observed in the RCT double-blind period (BL, 154.8-161.0 mg/d; range, 137.1-168.0 mg/d), RCT open-label period (BL, 156.3-174.6; range, 144.0-180.0) and OLT (BL, 120 mg/d; range, 117.3-121.1 mg/d). No significant change from BL in pain intensity score occurred in any group at weeks 2 or 4 (both P≥0.1) of the RCT double-blind period, and scores remained stable during the open-label period and in the OLT (mean change, -0.2 to 0.1). Changes from BL in OOWS and SOWS scores during the double-blind period were not significantly impacted by methylnaltrexone exposure at weeks 2 or 4 (P>0.05 for all). CONCLUSION: Methylnaltrexone did not affect opioid-mediated analgesia in patients with chronic noncancer pain and OIC.

Budesonide Foam Has a Favorable Safety Profile for Inducing Remission in Mild-to-Moderate Ulcerative Proctitis or Proctosigmoiditis.

BACKGROUND: Budesonide foam, a rectally administered, second-generation corticosteroid with extensive hepatic first-pass metabolism, is efficacious for the treatment of mild-to-moderate ulcerative proctitis and ulcerative proctosigmoiditis. AIM: The aim of this study was to comprehensively assess the safety and pharmacokinetic profile of budesonide foam. METHODS: Data from five phase III studies were pooled to further evaluate safety, including an open-label study (once-daily treatment for 8 weeks), an active-comparator study (once-daily treatment for 4 weeks), and two placebo-controlled studies and an open-label extension study (twice-daily treatment for 2 weeks, then once daily for 4 weeks). Data from the placebo-controlled studies and two phase I studies (i.e., patients with mild-to-moderate ulcerative colitis and healthy volunteers) were pooled to evaluate the pharmacokinetics of budesonide foam. RESULTS: A similar percentage of patients reported adverse events in the budesonide foam and placebo groups, with the majority of adverse events being mild or moderate in intensity (93.3 vs 96.0%, respectively). Adverse events occurred in 41.4 and 36.3% of patients receiving budesonide foam and placebo, respectively. Mean morning cortisol concentrations remained within the normal range for up to 8 weeks of treatment; there were no clinically relevant effects of budesonide foam on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis. Population pharmacokinetic analysis demonstrated low systemic exposure after budesonide foam administration. CONCLUSIONS: This integrated analysis demonstrated that budesonide foam for the induction of remission of distal ulcerative colitis is safe overall, with no clinically relevant effects on the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis.

Fixed-Dose Subcutaneous Methylnaltrexone in Patients with Advanced Illness and Opioid-Induced Constipation: Results of a Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study and Open-Label Extension.

BACKGROUND: Subcutaneous methylnaltrexone (MNTX), dosed based on body weight, is efficacious and well tolerated in inducing bowel movements in patients with advanced illness and opioid-induced constipation (OIC); however, fixed-dose administration of MNTX may improve ease of administration. OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to assess safety and efficacy of fixed-dose MNTX in two phase 4 trials. METHODS: In a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial (RCT), patients with advanced illness and OIC received MNTX (8 mg or 12 mg by body weight [38 kg to <62 kg or ≥62 kg, respectively]) or placebo every other day (QOD) for two weeks. Patients completing the RCT could enroll in an open-label extension (OLE) study with MNTX administered as needed (PRN). The primary endpoint was percentage of patients with a rescue-free bowel movement (RFBM) within four hours after ≥2 of the first 4 doses in the first week. RESULTS: In the RCT, 116 and 114 patients received MNTX and placebo, respectively, and 149 patients continued to the OLE study. The percentage of patients achieving primary endpoint was 62.9% and 9.6% for MNTX and placebo groups, respectively (p<0.0001). Median time to RFBM after the first dose was 0.8 hour and 23.6 hours in MNTX and placebo groups, respectively (p<0.0001). Efficacy results during the OLE study were consistent with the RCT. MNTX demonstrated a favorable safety profile in the RCT and OLE study. CONCLUSION: Fixed-dose MNTX administered QOD in the RCT and PRN in the OLE study demonstrated robust efficacy and was well tolerated in treating OIC in patients with advanced illness.

Budesonide foam induces remission in patients with mild to moderate ulcerative proctitis and ulcerative proctosigmoiditis.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Budesonide is a high-potency, second-generation corticosteroid designed to minimize systemic adverse consequences of conventional corticosteroids. We performed 2 randomized, phase 3 trials to evaluate the ability of budesonide rectal foam, formulated to optimize retention and provide uniform delivery of budesonide to the rectum and distal colon, to induce remission in patients with ulcerative proctitis or ulcerative proctosigmoiditis. METHODS: Two identically designed, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials evaluated the efficacy of budesonide foam for induction of remission in 546 patients with mild to moderate ulcerative proctitis or ulcerative proctosigmoiditis who received budesonide foam 2 mg/25 mL twice daily for 2 weeks, then once daily for 4 weeks, or placebo. RESULTS: Remission at week 6 occurred significantly more frequently among patients receiving budesonide foam than placebo (Study 1: 38.3% vs 25.8%; P = .0324; Study 2: 44.0% vs 22.4%; P < .0001). A significantly greater percentage of patients receiving budesonide foam vs placebo achieved rectal bleeding resolution (Study 1: 46.6% vs 28.0%; P = .0022; Study 2: 50.0% vs 28.6%; P = .0002) and endoscopic improvement (Study 1: 55.6% vs 43.2%; P = .0486; Study 2: 56.0% vs 36.7%; P = .0013) at week 6. Most adverse events occurred at similar frequencies between groups, although events related to changes in cortisol values were reported more frequently with budesonide foam. There were no cases of clinically symptomatic adrenal insufficiency. CONCLUSIONS: Budesonide rectal foam was well tolerated and more efficacious than placebo in inducing remission in patients with mild to moderate ulcerative proctitis and ulcerative proctosigmoiditis. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT01008410 and NCT01008423.

Validity of the ≥50% Response Threshold in Treatment With NASHA/Dx Injection Therapy for Fecal Incontinence.

OBJECTIVES: Many fecal incontinence (FI) studies define primary efficacy outcome as a decrease from baseline of ≥50% in the number of FI episodes; this threshold has never been validated. We aimed to establish the validity and responsiveness of ≥50% reduction in FI episodes (responder50) as the threshold indicative of clinically meaningful response. METHODS: Adults with a Cleveland Clinic Florida fecal incontinence score ≥10 were randomized to receive nonanimal stabilized hyaluronic acid/dextranomer (NASHA/Dx) injection or sham treatment in a 6-month trial. Validity and responsiveness of the primary end point were evaluated post hoc. The data were compared using different thresholds for defining a responder for a number of end points. RESULTS: Data from 206 patients (NASHA/Dx, n=136; sham, n=70) were evaluated. Incremental patient response threshold increases showed that although the percentage of patients who achieved response decreased with increasing threshold, the difference between treatments remained significant up to an 80% response threshold (NASHA/Dx, 23%; sham, 10%; P=0.02). Response thresholds between 40% and 80% demonstrated evidence for convergent validity, with the strongest correlation with the number of FI episodes, the number of FI episodes when the patient was awake, and the number of FI-free days observed at ≥40% and ≥50% thresholds. Further examination of the responder50 threshold indicated that, regardless of treatment (NASHA/Dx or sham), responders performed significantly better than nonresponders on nearly all secondary efficacy end points. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates the responsiveness, validity, and clinical applicability of the ≥50% response threshold in clinical studies of patients with FI receiving treatment with NASHA/Dx.