Safety and tolerability of cariprazine for the adjunctive treatment of major depressive disorder: a pooled analysis of phase 2b/phase 3 clinical trials.

To characterize the safety and tolerability of adjunctive cariprazine in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) and inadequate response to monotherapy antidepressant treatment (ADT). Post hoc analyses evaluated pooled data from 2 fixed-dose phase 3 cariprazine studies (1.5 and 3 mg/d [approved doses for MDD]). In a separate safety analysis, cariprazine 0.1-4.5 mg/d was evaluated using data from the 2 fixed-dose trials plus 3 flexible-dose studies grouped by modal-daily dose. In the pooled phase 3 studies (placebo = 503, 1.5 mg/d = 502, 3 mg/d = 503), overall cariprazine-treated patients had high rates of study completion (90%). Patients had mostly mild/moderate treatment-emergent adverse events that caused premature discontinuation of 4.3%. Only akathisia, nausea, and insomnia occurred in ≥5% of cariprazine patients (any group) and at twice the rate of placebo; potential dose-dependent responses were observed for akathisia and insomnia. Cariprazine had a neutral metabolic profile, with mean weight increase of <1 kg. Modal-dose results were similar, and both analyses were consistent with the known safety profile of cariprazine across its approved indications. Adjunctive cariprazine therapy was safe and generally well tolerated in patients with MDD who had not obtained an adequate response to ADT monotherapy; no new safety signals were identified.

Cariprazine for the Adjunctive Treatment of Major Depressive Disorder in Patients With Inadequate Response to Antidepressant Therapy: Results of a Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study.

Objective: To assess the efficacy of cariprazine, a dopamine D3-preferring D3/D2 and serotonin 5-HT1A receptor partial agonist, as adjunctive treatment for patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) and inadequate response to ongoing antidepressant therapy (ADT).Methods: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was conducted from November 2018 to September 2021. Adults with MDD per DSM-5 criteria were randomized (1:1:1) to cariprazine 1.5 mg/d or 3 mg/d plus ADT, or placebo plus ADT. The primary and secondary endpoints were change from baseline to week 6 in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score and Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) score, respectively.Results: A total of 249 placebo-, 250 cariprazine 1.5 mg/d-, and 251 cariprazine 3 mg/d-treated patients were included in the modified intent-to-treat population. At week 6, the least squares mean change in MADRS total score was -13.8 for cariprazine 1.5 mg/d, -14.8 for cariprazine 3 mg/d, and -13.4 for placebo; differences versus placebo were not statistically significant. Mean change from baseline in CGI-S scores at week 6 was not significant for cariprazine versus placebo, although a trend toward significance was observed for 3 mg/d (P = .0573 [not adjusted for multiplicity]). Common treatment-emergent adverse events (≥ 5% either cariprazine group and twice placebo) were akathisia and insomnia.Conclusions: There were no statistically significant differences for cariprazine 1.5 or 3 mg/d versus placebo on the primary or secondary outcomes. Cariprazine was generally well tolerated, and no new safety concerns were detected.Clinical Trials Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT03739203.

Cariprazine in Pediatric Patients with Autism Spectrum Disorder: Results of a Pharmacokinetic, Safety and Tolerability Study.

Objective: Cariprazine is a dopamine D3-preferring D3/D2 and serotonin 5-HT1A receptor partial agonist approved to treat adults with schizophrenia and manic/mixed or depressive episodes associated with bipolar I disorder. This study, which is the first to evaluate cariprazine in pediatric patients with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) (including children 5-9 years of age) using an oral solution formulation, evaluated the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and exploratory efficacy of cariprazine and its two major active metabolites, desmethyl cariprazine (DCAR) and didesmethyl cariprazine (DDCAR). Methods: This clinical pharmacology, open-label, multiple-dose study enrolled 25 pediatric patients from 5 to 17 years of age, who met the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition criteria for ASD. All patients began treatment with cariprazine 0.5 mg once daily (QD) and underwent a titration over 7 days to maintenance doses of 1.5 or 3 mg QD for patients 13-17 years of age at Screening, 0.75 or 1.5 mg QD for patients 10-12 years of age at Screening, and 0.5 or 1.5 mg QD for patients 5-9 years of age at Screening. After 6 weeks total of dosing, there was a 6-week follow-up period. Study assessments included adverse events (AEs), safety parameters, noncompartmental PK parameters, and exploratory efficacy assessments, including the Aberrant Behavior Checklist-Irritability Subscale (ABC-I), Clinical Global Impressions (CGI-S), Caregiver Global Impressions (CgGI-S), Children's Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsiveness Scale Modified for ASD (CYBOCS-ASD), Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS), and Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scale (VABS-III). Results: All AEs were mild or moderate in severity. Most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were increased weight, increased alanine aminotransferase, increased appetite, dizziness, agitation, and nasal congestion. Increases in weight were not considered clinically meaningful. Two subjects reported extrapyramidal symptom-related TEAEs that resolved without leading to discontinuation. Dose-normalized exposures of all analytes were modestly higher in pediatric patients from 5 to 9 years of age when compared to older patients. Consistent with previous studies, at steady state, the rank of exposure in plasma was DDCAR > cariprazine > DCAR. There was numerical improvement on all exploratory endpoints (ABC-I, CGI-S, CgGI-S, CYBOCS-ASD, SRS, and VABS-III). Conclusions: PK of cariprazine and its metabolites were characterized in pediatric patients with ASD at doses up to 3 mg QD (13-17 years) and 1.5 mg QD (5-12 years). Caripazine treatment was generally well tolerated and results from this study will inform the selection of appropriate pediatric doses for subsequent studies.

Adjunctive Cariprazine for the Treatment of Patients With Major Depressive Disorder: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Phase 3 Study.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy of cariprazine, a dopamine D3-preferring D3/D2 and serotonin 5-HT1A receptor partial agonist, as adjunctive therapy for patients with major depressive disorder and nonresponse to at least one antidepressant monotherapy. METHODS: In this double-blind placebo-controlled study, adults with major depressive disorder and inadequate response to antidepressants alone were randomized in a 1:1:1 ratio to placebo, cariprazine at 1.5 mg/day, or cariprazine at 3.0 mg/day. The primary outcome was change from baseline to week 6 in total score on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). Least-squares mean differences were estimated in the modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures with adjustment for multiple comparisons. RESULTS: The mITT population comprised 751 patients (placebo: N=249; cariprazine 1.5 mg/day: N=250; cariprazine 3.0 mg/day: N=252). At week 6, the mean reduction from baseline in MADRS total score was significantly greater with cariprazine 1.5 mg/day than with placebo (-14.1 vs. -11.5) but not with cariprazine 3.0 mg/day (-13.1). Significant differences between the cariprazine 1.5 mg/day and placebo groups were also observed at weeks 2 and 4. Meeting the MADRS response criteria was significantly more likely among patients receiving cariprazine 1.5 mg/day than placebo (44.0% vs. 34.9%); remission rates were not significantly different among groups. Common treatment-emergent adverse events (≥5% in either cariprazine group and twice the placebo rate) were akathisia and nausea. CONCLUSIONS: Adjunctive cariprazine at 1.5 mg/day demonstrated efficacy in reducing depressive symptoms in adults with major depressive disorder and inadequate response to antidepressants alone. Cariprazine was generally well tolerated, with a safety profile that was consistent with previous findings.

Pharmacokinetics, Safety, and Tolerability of Cariprazine in Pediatric Patients with Bipolar I Disorder or Schizophrenia.

Objective: Cariprazine is a dopamine D3-preferring D3/D2 and serotonin 5-HT1A receptor partial agonist approved to treat adults with schizophrenia and manic/mixed or depressive episodes associated with bipolar I disorder. This sequential-cohort, dose-escalation study was the first to evaluate the pharmacokinetic, safety, and tolerability profile of cariprazine and its two major active metabolites, desmethyl-cariprazine (DCAR) and didesmethyl-cariprazine (DDCAR), in pediatric patients with schizophrenia or bipolar I disorder. Methods: This phase I open-label study enrolled patients with schizophrenia (13-17 years of age) or bipolar I disorder (10-17 years of age). Patients met the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) criteria for schizophrenia or bipolar I disorder and had Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total scores ≥70 or Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total scores ≥20. Patients were assigned to one of four treatment groups to receive 6 weeks of cariprazine treatment through slow titration to 1.5, 3, or 4.5 mg/d or fast titration to 4.5 mg/d. Pharmacokinetics, adverse events (AEs), and various safety parameters were analyzed. Efficacy was evaluated as an exploratory outcome. Results: A total of 50 participants were enrolled. Based on mean trough levels, steady state appeared to be reached within 1-2 weeks for cariprazine and DCAR and within 4-5 weeks for DDCAR. Systemic exposure of cariprazine, DCAR, and DDCAR generally increased approximately in proportion to the increases in dose from 1.5 to 4.5 mg/d. The most frequent treatment-related, treatment-emergent AEs included sedation, parkinsonism, tremor, dystonia, and blurred vision. Improvements from baseline on the PANSS and YMRS were observed throughout treatment. Conclusion: In this first investigation of cariprazine in a pediatric population with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder, pharmacokinetic parameters were consistent with those observed in adults. Cariprazine appeared to be safe and tolerable in children and adolescents.

Effects of fremanezumab in patients with chronic migraine and comorbid depression: Subgroup analysis of the randomized HALO CM study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of fremanezumab in patients with chronic migraine (CM) and moderate to severe depression. BACKGROUND: Fremanezumab, a fully humanized monoclonal antibody that selectively targets calcitonin gene-related peptide, has been approved for the preventive treatment of migraine in adults. CM and depression are highly comorbid. METHODS: The 12-week, Phase 3 HALO trial randomized patients with CM to fremanezumab quarterly (675 mg/placebo/placebo), fremanezumab monthly (675/225/225 mg), or placebo. Post hoc analyses evaluated the effects of fremanezumab in patients with moderate to severe depression (baseline 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire sum score ≥10) on monthly number of headache days of at least moderate severity; monthly migraine days; Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC); 6-item Headache Impact Test (HIT-6) scores; and depression. RESULTS: For the 219/1121 (19.5%) patients with moderate to severe depression at baseline, fremanezumab was associated with a significant reduction in monthly number of headache days of at least moderate severity for active treatment versus placebo (least-squares mean change ± standard error for quarterly dosing: -5.3 ± 0.77; for monthly dosing: -5.5 ± 0.72; and for placebo: -2.2 ± 0.81; both p < 0.001). More patients achieved a ≥50% reduction in headache days of at least moderate severity with fremanezumab (quarterly: 31/78 [39.7%]; monthly: 39/96 [40.6%]) than placebo (9/67 [13.4%]; both p < 0.001). Compared with placebo, fremanezumab improved PGIC and HIT-6 scores. CONCLUSIONS: Fremanezumab demonstrated efficacy in the preventive treatment of CM and reduced headache impact in patients with comorbid depression.

Long-term safety, tolerability, and efficacy of fremanezumab in migraine: A randomized study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the long-term safety, tolerability, and efficacy of fremanezumab, a fully humanized monoclonal antibody approved for the preventive treatment of migraine. METHODS: A 52-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study evaluated fremanezumab monthly or quarterly in adults with chronic migraine (CM) or episodic migraine (EM). Safety and tolerability were assessed by adverse event (AE) monitoring (performed by the investigators), systematic local injection-site assessments (immediately and 1 hour after injection), laboratory/vitals assessments, and immunogenicity testing. Prespecified exploratory evaluations included change from baseline in the monthly number of migraine days, headache days of at least moderate severity, and days with any acute headache medication use. Change from baseline in headache-related disability (6-item Headache Impact Test scores) was also measured. RESULTS: Of 1,890 patients enrolled, 551 and 559 patients with CM received quarterly and monthly dosing; 394 and 386 patients with EM received quarterly or monthly, respectively. The most commonly reported AEs were injection-site reactions (induration 33%, pain 31%, and erythema 26%). Fremanezumab reduced monthly migraine days (CM quarterly -7.2 days, CM monthly -8.0 days, EM quarterly -5.2 days, EM monthly -5.1 days) and headache days of at least moderate severity (CM quarterly -6.4 days, CM monthly -6.8 days, EM quarterly -4.4, EM monthly -4.2 days) from baseline to 12 months. Reductions in any acute headache medication use and headache-related disability were also maintained over 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Fremanezumab quarterly and fremanezumab monthly were well tolerated and demonstrated sustained improvements in monthly migraine days, headache days, and headache-related disability for up to 12 months in patients with migraine. CLINICALTRIALSGOV: NCT02638103. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class IV evidence that long-term fremanezumab treatment is safe, well tolerated, and effective at sustaining reductions in monthly migraine and headache days.

Effect of fremanezumab on quality of life and productivity in patients with chronic migraine.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate fremanezumab quarterly or monthly vs placebo on health-related quality of life, health status, patients' global impression of change, and productivity in patients with chronic migraine (CM). METHODS: HALO CM was a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in patients with CM. Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to treatment with fremanezumab quarterly (675 mg at baseline, placebo at weeks 4 and 8), fremanezumab monthly (225 mg at baseline, weeks 4 and 8), or placebo. This article assessed the effect of treatment with fremanezumab on health-related quality of life and productivity using the following prespecified assessments: the Migraine-Specific Quality of Life (MSQoL) questionnaire at baseline and weeks 4, 8, and 12; Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC) questionnaire at weeks 4, 8, and 12; and EuroQoL 5-dimension, 5-response level (EQ-5D-5L) questionnaire and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment: General Health (WPAI:GH) questionnaire at baseline and week 12. RESULTS: The full analysis set included 1,121 patients: 375 patients with quarterly dosing, 375 with monthly dosing, and 371 with placebo. Fremanezumab quarterly and monthly was associated with significant improvements over placebo in change from baseline mean scores in MSQoL domains (all, p < 0.05) to week 12. At week 12, fremanezumab also showed significant improvements in EQ-5D-5L visual analog scale (p < 0.05) and PGIC scores (p < 0.0001) as well as significant reductions from baseline in WPAI:GH scores (p < 0.01) and presenteeism (impairment while working; p < 0.05) vs placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Fremanezumab quarterly or monthly was associated with improvement over placebo in migraine-specific quality of life, overall health status, patients' global impression of change with treatment, and productivity in patients with CM. CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER: NCT02621931. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class II evidence that in patients with CM, treatment with fremanezumab quarterly or monthly is associated with improvements in health-related quality of life and productivity.

Effects of fremanezumab on the use of acute headache medication and associated symptoms of migraine in patients with episodic migraine.

BACKGROUND: Fremanezumab, a fully humanized monoclonal antibody targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide, has demonstrated efficacy for the preventive treatment of migraine in adults. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of fremanezumab treatment on acute headache medication use and migraine-associated symptoms in patients with episodic migraine. METHODS: In the Phase 3 HALO trial, patients with episodic migraine were randomized to receive subcutaneous fremanezumab monthly (225 mg at baseline, weeks 4 and 8), fremanezumab quarterly (675 mg at baseline, placebo at weeks 4 and 8), or placebo over a 12-week period. The secondary endpoint was change from baseline in the monthly number of days with use of any acute headache mediation or migraine-specific acute headache medication; exploratory endpoints were change from baseline in the monthly number of days with nausea or vomiting, photophobia, or phonophobia. RESULTS: Of 875 patients randomized, 865 were included in the analysis (monthly, n = 287; quarterly, n = 288; placebo, n = 290). Baseline mean ± standard deviation days with: Any acute headache medication use (monthly: 7.7 ± 3.4; quarterly: 7.8 ± 3.7; placebo: 7.7 ± 3.6), migraine-specific acute headache medication use (6.1 ± 3.1; 6.6 ± 3.1; 7.1 ± 3.0), nausea or vomiting (4.5 ± 3.6; 4.9 ± 3.7; 4.5 ± 3.3) and photophobia and phonophobia (5.5 ± 4.1; 6.3 ± 4.1; 6.0 ± 3.9) were similar among treatment arms. Fremanezumab reduced the number of days of acute headache medication use ([least-squares mean change vs. placebo] monthly: -1.4 [95% confidence interval: -1.84, -0.89], p < 0.001; quarterly: -1.3 [-1.76, -0.82], p < 0.001) and migraine-specific acute headache medication use (monthly: -2.2 [-2.80, -1.56], p < 0.001; quarterly: -2.2 [-2.81, -1.58], p < 0.001) compared with placebo. Fremanezumab also reduced nausea or vomiting, photophobia, and phonophobia compared with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Fremanezumab reduced the need for acute headache medications, including migraine-specific medications, while treating migraine-associated symptoms in patients with episodic migraine. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02629861.

Early Onset of Efficacy With Fremanezumab for the Preventive Treatment of Chronic Migraine.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the onset of efficacy for fremanezumab in chronic migraine by evaluating pain-related clinical measures at different time points. BACKGROUND: Faster onset of efficacy of preventive treatments could benefit patients with migraine. Fremanezumab is a fully humanized monoclonal antibody that selectively targets calcitonin gene-related peptide, a neuropeptide involved in the pathophysiology of migraine. In 12-week clinical trials, subcutaneous fremanezumab significantly reduced the frequency of migraine headaches, headache hours, and headaches in general, without serious treatment-related adverse events. New drug classes of migraine preventive treatment demonstrate markedly different clinical profiles from standard-of-care treatments. METHODS: In this double-blind phase III study, eligible patients were randomized 1:1:1 to receive subcutaneous injections of fremanezumab quarterly (675 mg at baseline, placebo at weeks 4 and 8), fremanezumab monthly (675 mg at baseline, 225 mg at weeks 4 and 8), or placebo at each time point. This study included secondary, exploratory, and post hoc analyses of the primary trial, evaluating the change in headache days of at least moderate severity or migraine days during the first 4 weeks of the trial. RESULTS: A total of 1130 patients were randomized (fremanezumab quarterly, n = 376; fremanezumab monthly, n = 379; or placebo, n = 375). During the 4-week period after the first dose, the mean number of monthly headache days of at least moderate severity was reduced for the all-fremanezumab group (mean reduction [95% confidence interval]: -4.6 days [-5.1, -4.1]) compared with the placebo group (-2.3 days [-2.9, -1.6]; P < .0001). Treatment effects were observed at Week 1 for the all-fremanezumab group (-1.1 days [-1.3, -1.0]) vs placebo (-0.5 days [-0.7, -0.3]; P < .0001), with separation from placebo by Day 2 (P = .003). Similar effects were observed for the monthly average number of migraine days and mean number of monthly headache hours. CONCLUSIONS: The early onset of efficacy of fremanezumab may have the potential to improve patient compliance and clinical outcomes.

Fremanezumab for the preventive treatment of migraine.

Introduction: The recent approval of monoclonal antibodies targeting the calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) pathway introduced the first preventive treatments for migraine that were specifically designed to target the underlying pathophysiology of the disease. Fremanezumab, a fully humanized monoclonal antibody (IgG2Δa) administered via subcutaneous injection, is the first approved monoclonal antibody that targets the CGRP ligand and offers both quarterly (once every 3 months) and monthly dosing. Areas covered: An introduction to migraine, overview of the migraine preventive treatments that target CGRP or its receptor, background on CGRP, and details on the fremanezumab clinical development program in both chronic and episodic migraine. Focus is on the Phase 2b and Phase 3 studies, as well as the recently completed long-term Phase 3 study. Expert opinion: The approval of the first disease-specific preventive treatments for migraine heralds a new era in the treatment of migraine. Fremanezumab has a favorable efficacy and safety profile, which is maintained over the long term. Data from patient subgroups with more-complex disease are promising, and an ongoing study in treatment-refractory patients is evaluating the efficacy of fremanezumab in patients who have failed on multiple prior therapies.

Effect of Fremanezumab Compared With Placebo for Prevention of Episodic Migraine: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Fremanezumab, a fully humanized monoclonal antibody that targets calcitonin gene-related peptide, may be effective for treating episodic migraine. Objective: To assess the efficacy of fremanezumab compared with placebo for prevention of episodic migraine with a monthly dosing regimen or a single higher dose. Design and Setting: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial conducted at 123 sites in 9 countries from March 23, 2016 (first patient randomized), to April 10, 2017, consisting of a screening visit, 28-day pretreatment period, 12-week treatment period, and final evaluation at week 12. Participants: Study participants were aged 18 to 70 years with episodic migraine (6-14 headache days, with at least 4 migraine days, during 28-day pretreatment period). Patients who had previous treatment failure with 2 classes of migraine-preventive medication were excluded. Interventions: Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to receive subcutaneous monthly dosing of fremanezumab (n = 290; 225 mg at baseline, week 4, and week 8); a single higher dose of fremanezumab, as intended to support a quarterly dose regimen (n = 291; 675 mg of fremanezumab at baseline; placebo at weeks 4 and 8); or placebo (n = 294; at baseline, week 4, and week 8). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was mean change in mean number of monthly migraine days during the 12-week period after the first dose. Results: Among 875 patients who were randomized (mean age, 41.8 [SD, 12.1] years; 742 women [85%]), 791 (90.4%) completed the trial. From baseline to 12 weeks, mean migraine days per month decreased from 8.9 days to 4.9 days in the fremanezumab monthly dosing group, from 9.2 days to 5.3 days in the fremanezumab single-higher-dose group, and from 9.1 days to 6.5 days in the placebo group. This resulted in a difference with monthly dosing vs placebo of -1.5 days (95% CI, -2.01 to -0.93 days; P < .001) and with single higher dosing vs placebo of -1.3 days (95% CI, -1.79 to -0.72 days; P < .001). The most common adverse events that led to discontinuation were injection site erythema (n = 3), injection site induration (n = 2), diarrhea (n = 2), anxiety (n = 2), and depression (n = 2). Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with episodic migraine in whom multiple medication classes had not previously failed, subcutaneous fremanezumab, compared with placebo, resulted in a statistically significant 1.3- to 1.5-day reduction in the mean number of monthly migraine days over a 12-week period. Further research is needed to assess effectiveness against other preventive medications and in patients in whom multiple preventive drug classes have failed and to determine long-term safety and efficacy. Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02629861.

A phase 1 study to assess the pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability of fremanezumab doses (225 mg, 675 mg and 900 mg) in Japanese and Caucasian healthy subjects.

OBJECTIVES: The primary and secondary objectives of this phase 1 study were to evaluate the pharmacokinetic profile, safety, and immunogenicity of fremanezumab subcutaneous (sc) doses tested in phase 2 and 3 trials (225 mg, 675 mg and 900 mg) following single administration in Japanese (n = 32) and Caucasian (n = 32) healthy subjects. METHODS: Japanese and matched Caucasian healthy subjects were enrolled into one of four cohorts and were randomly assigned to one of four treatments: 225, 675, or 900 mg fremanezumab, or placebo. Pharmacokinetic and immunogenicity sampling, and safety and tolerability assessments occurred at one inpatient visit and 12 ambulatory visits during the 36-week study. RESULTS: Pharmacokinetic analyses included those randomized to fremanezumab (n = 24 for each ethnic group) and safety analyses included all subjects enrolled in the study (n = 32 for each ethnic group). Fremanezumab concentration-time profiles and pharmacokinetic parameters per dose were similar for Japanese and Caucasians at all dose levels. Geometric mean ratios (GMRs) for Cmax for Japanese to Caucasian subjects were 0.91, 1.04 and 1.14 for the 225 mg, 675 mg and 900 mg fremanezumab doses. GMRs for AUC0-inf were 0.96, 1.09, and 0.98, respectively. Median Tmax (range 5-11 days) and mean half-lives (range 31-39 days) were similar across doses for both ethnicities. Most frequently occurring adverse events were injection site reactions, abdominal pain, headache, upper respiratory tract infection, constipation and nasopharyngitis. There was no development of anti-drug-antibodies and no clinically meaningful changes in laboratory findings. CONCLUSION: The results of the pharmacokinetic exposure parameters and safety measures were similar for Japanese and Caucasians and support the once monthly and once quarterly sc injections of fremanezumab.

Fremanezumab for the Preventive Treatment of Chronic Migraine.

BACKGROUND: Fremanezumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), is being investigated as a preventive treatment for migraine. We compared two fremanezumab dose regimens with placebo for the prevention of chronic migraine. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients with chronic migraine (defined as headache of any duration or severity on ≥15 days per month and migraine on ≥8 days per month) in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive fremanezumab quarterly (a single dose of 675 mg at baseline and placebo at weeks 4 and 8), fremanezumab monthly (675 mg at baseline and 225 mg at weeks 4 and 8), or matching placebo. Both fremanezumab and placebo were administered by means of subcutaneous injection. The primary end point was the mean change from baseline in the average number of headache days (defined as days in which headache pain lasted ≥4 consecutive hours and had a peak severity of at least a moderate level or days in which acute migraine-specific medication [triptans or ergots] was used to treat a headache of any severity or duration) per month during the 12 weeks after the first dose. RESULTS: Of 1130 patients enrolled, 376 were randomly assigned to fremanezumab quarterly, 379 to fremanezumab monthly, and 375 to placebo. The mean number of baseline headache days (as defined above) per month was 13.2, 12.8, and 13.3, respectively. The least-squares mean (±SE) reduction in the average number of headache days per month was 4.3±0.3 with fremanezumab quarterly, 4.6±0.3 with fremanezumab monthly, and 2.5±0.3 with placebo (P<0.001 for both comparisons with placebo). The percentage of patients with a reduction of at least 50% in the average number of headache days per month was 38% in the fremanezumab-quarterly group, 41% in the fremanezumab-monthly group, and 18% in the placebo group (P<0.001 for both comparisons with placebo). Abnormalities of hepatic function occurred in 5 patients in each fremanezumab group (1%) and 3 patients in the placebo group (<1%). CONCLUSIONS: Fremanezumab as a preventive treatment for chronic migraine resulted in a lower frequency of headache than placebo in this 12-week trial. Injection-site reactions to the drug were common. The long-term durability and safety of fremanezumab require further study. (Funded by Teva Pharmaceuticals; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02621931 .).

Response to inhaled loxapine in patients with schizophrenia or bipolar I disorder: PANSS-EC responder analyses.

BACKGROUND: Efficacy of inhaled loxapine 5 or 10 mg in treating agitation was shown using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale - Excited Component (PANSS-EC) in two Phase III randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials in 344 agitated patients with schizophrenia and 314 patients with bipolar I disorder (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00628589, NCT00721955). AIMS: To examine the five individual items comprising the PANSS-EC and the percentage of patients achieving a clinical response (reduction of ≥40%) in PANSS-EC (Response-40) for these two studies. METHOD: Response-40 was examined at the primary end-point (2 h) and over time. RESULTS: Response-40 and each PANSS-EC item score were statistically significant v. placebo at 2 h and at each assessment time point for both doses. CONCLUSIONS: Inhaled loxapine produced rapid improvement in agitated patients with schizophrenia or bipolar I disorder, achieving Response-40 at the first assessment (10 min post dose). These results highlight the effectiveness of loxapine across all components of agitation as measured by the PANSS-EC. DECLARATION OF INTEREST: S.Z. is a member of the speakers bureau for Grupo Ferrer. L.Z. has been a speaker and grant recipient for Teva Pharmaceuticals. J.V.C. and D.A.S. were employees of Alexza Pharmaceuticals during execution of the studies, and are currently paid consultants for and have received stock and/or stock options from Alexza Pharmaceuticals. P.P.Y. is a full-time employee and receives stock options from Teva Pharmaceuticals. COPYRIGHT AND USAGE: © The Royal College of Psychiatrists 2017. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Non-Commercial, No Derivatives (CC BY-NC-ND) license.

Health care resource use and cost differences by opioid therapy type among chronic noncancer pain patients.

The study assessed 12-month chronic pain (CP)-related health care utilization and costs among chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) patients who initiated various long-term opioid treatments. Treatments included monotherapy with long-acting opioids (mono-LAOs), mono-therapy with short-acting opioids (mono-SAOs), both LAOs and SAOs (combination), and opioid therapy initiated with SAO or LAO and switched to the other class (switch). Using MarketScan® claims databases (2006-2012), we identified CNCP patients with ≥90 days opioid supply after pain diagnosis and continuous enrollment 12 months before pain diagnosis (baseline period) and 12 months after opioid start (post-index period). Outcomes included CP-related health care utilization and costs. Among CNCP patients (n=21,203), the cohort distribution was 74% mono-SAOs, 22% combination, 2% mono-LAOs, and 2% switch. During follow-up, the average daily morphine equivalent dose was highest in mono-LAO patients (96.4 mg) compared with combination patients (89.8 mg), switch patients (64.3 mg), and mono-SAO patients (36.2 mg). After adjusting for baseline differences, the mono-LAO cohort had lower total CP-related costs ($4,933) compared with the mono-SAO ($8,604), switch ($10,470), and combination ($15,190) cohorts (all: P<0.05). Mono-LAO patients had greater CP-related prescription costs but lower medical costs than the other cohorts during the follow-up period, including lower CP-related hospitalizations (1% vs 11%-20%), emergency department visits (4% vs 11%-18%), and diagnostic radiology use (21% vs 54%-61%) (all: P<0.001). Use of pain-related medications and other treatment modalities was also significantly lower in the mono-LAO cohort relative to the other cohorts. CNCP patients using long-term monotherapy with LAOs had the lowest CP-related total health care costs in the 12 months after opioid initiation compared with mono-SAO, switch, or combination patients despite higher opioid daily doses and higher prescription costs. Future research accounting for severity and duration of pain would aid in determining the optimal long-term opioid regimen for CNCP patients.

Burden of Alcohol Abuse or Dependence Among Long-Term Opioid Users with Chronic Noncancer Pain.

BACKGROUND: Substance abuse disorders among chronic noncancer pain (CNCP) patients add to the clinical challenges and economic burden of caring for such patients. Despite potential risks, some CNCP patients with a history of alcohol abuse or dependence (AAD) and pain that is refractory to nonopioid treatment options may still need opioids for pain management. However, there is a lack of data on adverse outcomes in long-term opioid users with CNCP and a history of substance abuse or AAD disorders. OBJECTIVE: To compare adverse outcomes and all-cause health care costs among CNCP patients on long-term opioid treatment with and without a previous diagnosis of AAD. METHODS: Using MarketScan claims databases (2006-2012), CNCP patients with ≥ 90 days of opioid supply after CNCP diagnosis and continuous enrollment 12 months before CNCP diagnosis (baseline period) and 12 months after opioid start (post-index period) were identified. AAD was defined by diagnosis codes at any time before opioid initiation. Outcomes included opioid overdose, accident, and injury episodes identified by ICD-9-CM diagnoses codes. T-tests and Mann-Whitney tests compared continuous measures, and chi-square and Fisher's exact tests compared categorical measures between those with and without AAD. Multivariable analyses for outcomes were conducted, adjusting for baseline differences between cohorts. RESULTS: Of 21,203 CNCP patients with long-term opioid treatment, 750 (3.5%) had an AAD diagnosis before opioid initiation. AAD patients were significantly younger (48.4 [SD ± 11.4] years vs. 52.8 [SD ± 14.8] years), less likely to be enrolled in Medicare (17% commercial vs. 4% Medicare), and more likely to be male (67% vs. 48%; all P < 0.001). There were no differences in type or number of CNCP diagnoses or Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) scores. Patients with AAD had significantly higher rates of depression and anxiety diagnoses, antidepressant and benzodiazepine use, and drug abuse/dependence diagnoses in the baseline period. Twelvemonth post-index rates of opioid overdose (1.2% vs. 0.2%), accident (7.3% vs. 2.8%), and injury (46.1% vs. 36.8%) were greater in the AAD cohort (all P < 0.001). The differences were nonsignificant for accidents in multivariable analyses. While mean prescription costs were similar ($3,562 vs. $3,312; P = 0.212), AAD patients had significantly higher mean all-cause medical costs ($28,429 vs. $22,082; P < 0.001) and significantly higher all-cause total health care costs ($31,991 vs. $25,395; P < 0.001). The cost differences remained significant in multivariable analyses. CONCLUSIONS: In the first year after long-term opioid initiation, CNCP patients with a previous AAD diagnosis had 5 times the rate of opioid overdose, 2.3 times the rate of accidents, 1.2 times the rate of injury, and higher all-cause health care costs compared with those not diagnosed with AAD. DISCLOSURES: Funding for this research study and resultant publication was provided by Teva Global Health Economics and Outcomes Research, which fully reviewed the manuscript. Gajria and Yeung are employees of Teva Pharmaceuticals. White was an employee of Teva Pharmaceuticals at the time this research was conducted. Blumberg and Coutinho are employees of Xcenda, which received research funding from Teva Pharmaceuticals for the conduct of this study and for the preparation of this manuscript. Katz has received research funding and consulting fees from Teva Pharmaceuticals unrelated to this study. Study concept and design were contributed by Katz, White, and Blumberg, along with Coutinho and Yeung. Coutinho took the lead in data collection, assisted by the other authors. Data interpretation was performed by Blumberg, Katz, and Gajria, along with the other authors. The manuscript was written by Gajria, Yeung, Coutinho, and Blumberg, along with Katz and White, and revised by Gajria, Blumberg, Katz, and Coutinho, along with Yeung and White.

A randomized, placebo-controlled repeat-dose thorough QT study of inhaled loxapine in healthy volunteers.

OBJECTIVE: This randomized, double-blind, active- and placebo-controlled, crossover, thorough QT study assessed the effect of two inhaled loxapine doses on cardiac repolarization as measured by corrected QT (QTc) interval in healthy subjects (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01854710). METHODS: Subjects received two doses of inhaled loxapine (10 mg) 2 hours apart+oral placebo, two doses of inhaled placebo+oral placebo, or two doses of inhaled placebo+oral moxifloxacin (400 mg; positive control), with ≥3 days washout between treatments. Two-sided 90% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated around least-squares mean predose placebo-subtracted individually corrected QT durations (ΔΔTcIs) at 12 time points throughout 24 hours after dosing. A ΔΔTcI 95% upper CI exceeding 10 msec was the threshold indicating QTc prolongation (primary endpoint). Secondary endpoints included Fridericia- and Bazett-corrected QT duration and QTcI outliers. Pharmacokinetics and adverse events (AEs) were also assessed. RESULTS: Of 60 subjects enrolled (mean age, 33.8 years; 52% male), 44 completed the study. Post loxapine dosing, no ΔΔTcI 95% upper CI exceeded 10 msec; the largest was 6.31 msec 5 minutes post dose 2. Methodology was validated by ΔΔTcI 95% lower CIs exceeding 5 msec at 9 of 12 time points after moxifloxacin dosing. Loxapine plasma concentrations increased rapidly (mean Cmax, 177 ng/mL; median tmax 2 minutes after dose 2, 2.03 hours after dose 1). There were no deaths, serious AEs, or AEs leading to discontinuation, and one severe AE. CONCLUSIONS: Primary and secondary endpoints indicated two therapeutic doses of inhaled loxapine did not cause threshold QTc prolongation in this study.

A randomized, placebo-controlled repeat-dose thorough QT study of inhaled loxapine in healthy volunteers.

OBJECTIVE: This randomized, double-blind, active- and placebo-controlled, crossover, thorough QT study assessed the effect of two inhaled loxapine doses on cardiac repolarization as measured by corrected QT (QTc) interval in healthy subjects (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01854710). METHODS: Subjects received two doses of inhaled loxapine (10 mg) 2 hours apart + oral placebo, two doses of inhaled placebo + oral placebo, or two doses of inhaled placebo + oral moxifloxacin (400 mg; positive control), with ≥ 3 days washout between treatments. Two-sided 90% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated around least-squares mean predose placebo-subtracted individually corrected QT durations (ΔΔQTcIs) at 12 time points throughout 24 hours after dosing. A ΔΔQTcI 95% upper CI exceeding 10 msec was the threshold indicating QTc prolongation (primary endpoint). Secondary endpoints included Fridericia- and Bazettcorrected QT duration and QTcI outliers Pharmacokinetics and adverse events (AEs) were also assessed. RESULTS: Of 60 subjects enrolled (mean age, 33.8 years; 52% male), 44 completed the study. Post loxapine dosing, no ΔΔQTcI 95% upper CI exceeded 10 msec; the largest was 6.31 msec 5 minutes post dose 2. Methodology was validated by ΔΔQTcI 95% lower CIs exceeding 5 msec at 9 of 12 time points after moxifloxacin dosing. Loxapine plasma concentrations increased rapidly (mean Cmax, 177 ng/mL; median tmax 2 minutes after dose 2, 2.03 hours after dose 1). There were no deaths, serious AEs, or AEs leading to discontinuation, and one severe AE. CONCLUSIONS: Primary and secondary endpoints indicated two therapeutic doses of inhaled loxapine did not cause threshold QTc prolongation in this study.