Electronic Patient-Reported Outcomes in Hidradenitis Suppurativa: Content Validity and Usability of the Electronic Hidradenitis Suppurativa Symptom Daily Diary, Hidradenitis Suppurativa Symptom Questionnaire, and Hidradenitis Suppurativa Quality of Life Questionnaire.

BACKGROUND: Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS), a chronic skin condition that causes pain and physical dysfunction, can impact significantly on quality of life. Disease-specific tools have been designed to assess the impact of HS on patients, including the HS Symptom Daily Diary (HSSDD), the HS Symptom Questionnaire (HSSQ), and the HS Quality of Life (HiSQOL©) questionnaire, which have been developed into electronic instruments (eHSSDD, eHSSQ, and eHiSQOL©). OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to establish the content validity of the electronic version of the HSSDD and HSSQ, and the acceptability and usability of the HSSDD, HSSQ, and HiSQOL©, using concept elicitation and cognitive debriefing interviews. METHODS: This was a non-interventional qualitative video interview study involving participants aged ≥18 years with moderate to severe HS recruited from a single clinical site in the USA. Interviews gathered feedback on participants' symptom experience, followed by training and completion of the eHSSDD, eHSSQ, and eHiSQOL© questionnaires on electronic handheld devices. Participants were then interviewed on the content of the eHSSDD and eHSSQ and the acceptability and usability of all three instruments. Interviews were transcribed and qualitatively analysed. RESULTS: Twenty participants with moderate to severe HS (median age: 41.5 [range: 20.0-64.0]; n = 16/20 female) were included. All participants found the eHSSDD, eHSSQ, and eHiSQOL© instructions clear and described the instruments as "easy", "simple" and "self-explanatory". Overall understanding of individual items within the eHSSDD and eHSSQ was high; however, 6/20 participants had difficulty in understanding the average skin pain item in the eHSSDD. All participants were able to accurately recall their symptoms within the recall periods of the eHSSDD and eHSSQ, although 4/20 participants found the 24-h recall period of the eHSSDD limiting. Completion time was quick across all instruments, and usability was high, with the majority of participants reporting no difficulty in completing questionnaires on electronic devices. CONCLUSION: The concepts covered in the eHSSDD and eHSSQ are relevant and important to patients, supporting their content validity. The findings also provide evidence of acceptability and usability of the eHSSDD, eHSSQ, and eHiSQOL©. A limitation was that all participants were recruited from a single site, which may have introduced selection bias and thus limited the generalisability of results.

Validation of the Hidradenitis Suppurativa Investigator Global Assessment: A Novel Hidradenitis Suppurativa-Specific Investigator Global Assessment for Use in Interventional Trials.

Importance: Few simplified instruments exist for use in hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) trials. Objective: To assess psychometric properties of the Hidradenitis Suppurativa Investigator Global Assessment (HS-IGA) score using a clinical trial data set. Design, Setting, and Participants: This retrospective analysis of a phase 2 randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled, active-reference arm trial (UCB HS0001) included adults with moderate-to-severe HS. Exposures: Trial participants were randomized at baseline to receive bimekizumab, adalimumab, or placebo. Main Outcomes and Measures: The HS-IGA score at prespecified time points up to 12 weeks after randomization. Results: The HS-IGA score showed strong convergent validity with IHS4 and HS-PhGA scores at baseline (Spearman correlation, 0.86 [P < .001] and 0.74 [P < .001], respectively) and at week 12 (Spearman correlation, 0.73 [P < .001] and 0.64 [P < .001], respectively). The HS-IGA scores assessed during predosing visits at screening and baseline showed good test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] = 0.92). At week 12, HS-IGA responders were significantly associated with HiSCR-(50/75/90) responders (χ2 = 18.45; P < .001; χ2 = 18.11; P < .001; and χ2 = 20.83; P < .001, respectively). The HS-IGA score was predictive of HiSCR-50/75/90 and HS-PhGA response at week 12 (AUC, 0.69, 0.73, 0.85, and 0.71, respectively). However, the HS-IGA as a measure of disease activity showed low predictive validity with patient-reported outcomes at week 12. Conclusions and Relevance: The HS-IGA score demonstrated good psychometric properties compared with existing measures and may be considered for use as an end point in clinical trials for HS.

Efficacy and Safety of Bimekizumab in Moderate to Severe Hidradenitis Suppurativa: A Phase 2, Double-blind, Placebo-Controlled Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a chronic inflammatory disease with a high burden for patients and limited existing therapeutic options. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of bimekizumab, a monoclonal IgG1 antibody that selectively inhibits interleukin 17A and 17F in individuals with moderate to severe HS. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This phase 2, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial with an active reference arm was performed from September 22, 2017, to February 21, 2019. The study included a 2- to 4-week screening period, a 12-week treatment period, and a 20-week safety follow-up. Of 167 participants screened at multiple centers, 90 were enrolled. Eligible participants were 18 to 70 years of age with a diagnosis of moderate to severe HS 12 months or more before baseline. INTERVENTIONS: Participants with HS were randomized 2:1:1 to receive bimekizumab (640 mg at week 0, 320 mg every 2 weeks), placebo, or reference arm adalimumab (160 mg at week 0, 80 mg at week 2, and 40 mg every week for weeks 4-10). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The prespecified primary efficacy variable was the proportion of participants with a 50% or greater reduction from baseline in the total abscess and inflammatory nodule count with no increase in abscess or draining fistula count (Hidradenitis Suppurativa Clinical Response [HiSCR] at week 12. Exploratory variables included proportion achieving a modified HiSCR with 75% reduction of HiSCR criteria (HiSCR75) or a modified HiSCR with 90% reduction of HiSCR criteria (HiSCR90), change in Patient's Global Assessment of Pain, and Dermatology Life Quality Index total scores. RESULTS: Eighty-eight participants received at least 1 dose of study medication (61 [69%] female; median age, 36 years; range, 18-69 years). Seventy-three participants completed the study, including safety follow-up. Bimekizumab demonstrated a higher HiSCR rate vs placebo at week 12 (57.3% vs 26.1%; posterior probability of superiority equaled 0.998, calculated using bayesian analysis). Bimekizumab demonstrated greater clinical improvements compared with placebo. Improvements in the International Hidradenitis Suppurativa Severity Score (IHS4) were seen at week 12 with bimekizumab (mean [SD] IHS4, 16.0 [18.0]) compared with placebo (mean [SD] IHS4, 40.2 [32.6]). More bimekizumab-treated participants achieved positive results on stringent outcome measures compared with placebo. At week 12, 46% of bimekizumab-treated participants achieved HiSCR75 and 32% achieved HiSCR90, whereas 10% of placebo-treated participants achieved HiSCR75 and none achieved HiSCR90; in adalimumab-treated participants, 35% achieved HiSCR75 and 15% achieved HiSCR90. One participant withdrew because of adverse events. Serious adverse events occurred in 2 of 46 bimekizumab-treated participants (4%), 2 of 21 placebo-treated participants (10%), and 1 of 21 adalimumab-treated participants (5%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this phase 2 randomized clinical trial, bimekizumab demonstrated clinically meaningful improvements across all outcome measures, including stringent outcomes. Bimekizumab's safety profile was consistent with studies of other indications, supporting further evaluation in participants with HS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03248531.

Certolizumab pegol for the treatment of chronic plaque psoriasis: Results through 48 weeks of a phase 3, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, etanercept- and placebo-controlled study (CIMPACT).

BACKGROUND: Phase 2 psoriasis studies with the Fc-free, PEGylated, anti-tumor necrosis factor biologic certolizumab pegol demonstrated meaningful clinical activity. OBJECTIVE: Assess safety and efficacy of certolizumab in adults with moderate-to-severe chronic plaque psoriasis. METHODS: Patients were randomized 3:3:1:3 to certolizumab 400 mg, certolizumab 200 mg, or placebo every 2 weeks for 16 weeks or etanercept 50 mg twice weekly for 12 weeks. Certolizumab-treated patients achieving a ≥75% reduction in Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) at week 16 from baseline PASI were rerandomized to certolizumab or placebo for 32 weeks. The primary endpoint was responder rate (≥75% reduction in PASI from baseline PASI) versus placebo (primary analysis) and etanercept (secondary analysis) at week 12; secondary endpoints included responder rates on various measures versus placebo at weeks 12, 16, and 48. Safety was assessed by treatment-emergent adverse events. RESULTS: All endpoints were significantly greater for certolizumab versus placebo with the greatest response seen with 400 mg. Certolizumab 400 mg was superior to and 200 mg was noninferior to etanercept. Adverse events were consistent with the anti-tumor necrosis factor class of drugs. LIMITATIONS: Etanercept was administered by unblinded study staff or self-administered, but efficacy assessments were performed by a blinded assessor. CONCLUSION: Both certolizumab regimens improved psoriasis symptoms, with a greater response seen with the higher dose. No new safety signals were observed.

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.

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.

Assessing subjective and physiologic effects following intranasal administration of a new formulation of immediate release oxycodone HCl (Oxecta™) tablets in nondependent recreational opioid users.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the pharmacodynamic effects (subjective and physiologic) of a new formulation of immediate release oxycodone HCl (IRO-A; Oxecta™) tablets compared with immediate release oxycodone HCl (IRO; Roxicodone®) tablets when crushed and administered intranasally to nondependent recreational opioid users. DESIGN: Single-center, single-dose, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled two-way crossover study. SETTING: Inpatient Clinical Pharmacology Unit, Toronto, Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Nondependent, recreational opioid users aged 18-55 years. INTERVENTIONS: Subjects able to discriminate intranasally administered crushed IRO from placebo were randomized to receive 15 mg crushed IRO-A and crushed IRO in crossover fashion in treatment phase. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Primary subjective endpoints were maximum effect (E(max)) for Drug Liking and effect at 8 hours (E(8h)) postdose for Take Drug Again and Overall Drug Liking. All were assessed using bipolar 0-100 visual analog scale (VAS; 50 points = neutral). Secondary pharmacodynamic endpoints included other VAS endpoints, pupillometry, and subject-rated scales for nasal effects. RESULTS: Forty subjects were randomized to treatment; 39 were evaluable, one subject was excluded for postdose vomiting. Subjects were mostly male (80 percent) and White (75 percent). Least squares mean Drug Liking VAS E(max) (70.8 vs 93.5), Overall Drug Liking E(8h) (47.8 vs 87.4), and Take Drug Again E(8h) (45.9 vs 91.3) were significantly lower for crushed IRO-A vs IRO (all p < 0.0001). A significant sequence effect was found, but lower liking of IRO-A was observed for both treatment sequence groups. Pupillary responses between treatments were similar overall, but differences were noted for some endpoints/time points. Adverse events common to opioids were observed with both treatments. Subjects experienced more nasal-related symptoms with IRO-A. CONCLUSIONS: Crushed IRO-A tablets demonstrated lower scores on "drug liking," "overall drug liking," and "take drug again" than crushed IRO when administered intranasally to nondependent recreational opioid users.

Dose proportionality and the effects of food on bioavailability of an immediate-release oxycodone hydrochloride tablet designed to discourage tampering and its relative bioavailability compared with a marketed oxycodone tablet under fed conditions: a single-dose, randomized, open-label, 5-way crossover study in healthy volunteers.

BACKGROUND: An immediate-release oxycodone hydrochloride formulation (IRO-A) indicated for moderate to severe pain was designed (by adding functional excipients) to discourage tampering associated with intranasal and intravenous abuse of prescription opioids. OBJECTIVES: The primary objective of this study was to determine the dose proportionality of oxycodone in IRO-A tablets under fasted conditions. Secondary objectives were to assess food effects on the pharmacokinetics of IRO-A tablets, to compare the relative bioavailability of oxycodone in IRO-A tablets versus marketed oxycodone hydrochloride (IRO) tablets under fed conditions and to evaluate the single-dose safety profile of the IRO-A tablets in healthy volunteers pretreated with naltrexone. METHODS: This open-label, single-dose, randomized, 5-way crossover study was conducted in healthy adults who received each of the following treatments, separated by a washout period of ≥7 days: IRO-A 1 × 5 mg, 2 × 5 mg, and 2 × 7.5 mg under fasted conditions, and IRO-A 2 × 7.5 mg and IRO 1 × 15 mg after a high-fat, high-calorie breakfast. Naltrexone was administered to minimize untoward pharmacologic effects of oxycodone. Dose proportionality (IRO-A), food effects (IRO-A), and relative bioavailability in a fed state (IRO-A and IRO) were assessed by using bioequivalence criteria (90% CIs between 80% and 125% for C(max) and AUC). RESULTS: Of the 35 adults enrolled in the study, 33 completed at least 1 dosing period. Most participants were male (54%) and white (69%), with a mean (SD) age of 32.6 (11.1) years and mean weight of 75.5 (12.3) kg. Plasma levels of oxycodone in IRO-A suggested dose-proportional pharmacokinetics; 90% CIs for dose-normalized C(max), AUC(0-last), and AUC(0-∞) fell within the 80% to 125% range. Concomitant food intake with IRO-A resulted in an ~14% reduction in oxycodone C(max) and an ~21% increase in AUC(0-last). The bioavailability of oxycodone from IRO-A tablets in the fed state was comparable with IRO tablets based on AUC parameters, although C(max) was ~16.5% lower. Reported or observed treatment-emergent adverse events were monitored throughout the study and were similar for IRO-A and IRO tablets. Nausea, headache, abdominal pain, and dizziness were the most common and are consistent with known effects of oxycodone after naltrexone blockade. CONCLUSIONS: Plasma levels of oxycodone in IRO-A tablets were compatible with proportional single-dose pharmacokinetics from 5 to 15 mg under fasted conditions. Administration of IRO-A with food suggested increased overall bioavailability relative to fasting conditions and a reduction in peak systemic exposure of oxycodone that is not expected to be clinically significant. When comparing IRO-A tablets with IRO tablets in the fed state, the overall systemic exposure of oxycodone was comparable, and peak systemic exposure was lower.

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled and active-controlled study to assess the relative abuse potential of oxycodone HCl-niacin tablets compared with oxycodone alone in nondependent, recreational opioid users.

BACKGROUND: Abuse-deterrent formulations attempt to address public health and societal concerns regarding opioid abuse. Oxycodone HCl-niacin tablets combine oxycodone HCl with niacin and functional inactive excipients to create potential barriers to oral, intranasal, and intravenous abuse. This study compared the relative abuse potential of oral immediate-release oxycodone HCl-niacin with that of oral immediate-release oxycodone HCl and placebo in nondependent, recreational opioid users. METHODS: Forty-nine participants received oxycodone HCl-niacin 40/240 mg and 80/480 mg, oxycodone 40 mg and 80 mg, and placebo in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled and active-controlled, five-way crossover study. Primary endpoints based on a bipolar 100 mm visual analog scale for drug liking were area under effect curve (AUE0-1h, AUE0-2h, AUE0-3h), peak disliking, and effect at 0.5 hours post-dose (E0.5h). Other endpoints included take drug again assessment, overall drug liking, and pupillometry. RESULTS: There were statistically significant differences between oxycodone HCl-niacin and oxycodone HCl doses for all primary endpoints (P < 0.0001, all comparisons), suggesting reduced abuse potential with oxycodone HCl-niacin. Take drug again and overall drug liking showed greater liking of oxycodone alone. Oxycodone HCl-niacin 80/480 mg had consistently lower liking assessments than oxycodone HCl-niacin 40/240 mg, suggesting a dose-response to the aversive effects of niacin. Opioid-related adverse events were similar for equivalent oxycodone doses. The treatment-emergent adverse events most specifically associated with oxycodone HCl-niacin (ie, skin-burning sensation, warmth, and flushing) were consistent with the expected vasocutaneous effects of niacin. No serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: Oxycodone HCl-niacin tablets may, in a dose-dependent manner, decrease the potential for oral abuse of oxycodone without unexpected adverse events or clinically signifi-cant differences in safety parameters compared with oxycodone alone. Although statistically powered, the small size of the study sample and the characteristics of its participants may not be generalizable to the population that abuses prescription opioid medications.