Oral Sebetralstat for On-Demand Treatment of Hereditary Angioedema Attacks.

BACKGROUND: Approved on-demand treatments for hereditary angioedema attacks need to be administered parenterally, a route of administration that is associated with delays in treatment or withholding of therapy. METHODS: In this phase 3, double-blind, three-way crossover trial, we randomly assigned participants at least 12 years of age with type 1 or type 2 hereditary angioedema to take up to two oral doses of sebetralstat (300 mg or 600 mg) or placebo for an angioedema attack. The primary end point, assessed in a time-to-event analysis, was the beginning of symptom relief, defined as a rating of "a little better" on the Patient Global Impression of Change scale (ratings range from "much worse" to "much better") at two or more consecutive time points within 12 hours after the first administration of the trial agent. Key secondary end points, assessed in a time-to-event analysis, were a reduction in attack severity (an improved rating on the Patient Global Impression of Severity [PGI-S] scale, with ratings ranging from "none" to "very severe") at two or more consecutive time points within 12 hours and complete attack resolution (a rating of "none" on the PGI-S scale) within 24 hours. RESULTS: A total of 136 participants were assigned to one of six trial sequences, with 110 treating 264 attacks. The time to the beginning of symptom relief with the 300-mg dose and the 600-mg dose was faster than with placebo (P<0.001 and P = 0.001 for the two comparisons, respectively), with median times of 1.61 hours (interquartile range, 0.78 to 7.04), 1.79 hours (1.02 to 3.79), and 6.72 hours (1.34 to >12), respectively. The time to reduction in the attack severity with the 300-mg dose and the 600-mg dose was faster than with placebo (P = 0.004 and P = 0.003), with median times of 9.27 hours (interquartile range, 1.53 to >12), 7.75 hours (2.19 to >12), and more than 12 hours (6.23 to >12). The time to complete resolution was faster with the 300-mg and 600-mg doses than with placebo (P = 0.002 and P<0.001). The percentage of attacks with complete resolution within 24 hours was 42.5% with the 300-mg dose, 49.5% with the 600-mg dose, and 27.4% with placebo. Sebetralstat and placebo had similar safety profiles; no serious adverse events related to the trial agents were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Oral sebetralstat provided faster times to the beginning of symptom relief, reduction in attack severity, and complete attack resolution than placebo. (Funded by KalVista Pharmaceuticals; KONFIDENT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05259917; EudraCT number, 2021-001226-21.).

Evaluation of patient-reported outcome measures for on-demand treatment of hereditary angioedema attacks and design of KONFIDENT, a phase 3 trial of sebetralstat.

BACKGROUND: Hereditary angioedema (HAE) with C1-inhibitor deficiency (HAE-C1-INH) is characterized by recurrent, debilitating episodes of swelling. Sebetralstat, an investigational oral plasma kallikrein inhibitor, demonstrated promising efficacy for on-demand treatment of HAE-C1-INH in a phase 2 trial. We describe the multipronged approach informing the design of KONFIDENT, a phase 3 randomized, placebo-controlled, three-way crossover trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of sebetralstat in patients aged ≥12 years with HAE-C1-INH. METHODS: To determine an optimal endpoint to measure the beginning of symptom relief in KONFIDENT, we engaged patients with HAE on clinical outcome measures and subsequently conducted analyses of phase 2 outcomes. Sample size was determined via a simulation-based approach using phase 2 data. RESULTS: Patient interviews revealed a strong preference (71%) for the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGI-C) over other measures and indicated a rating of "A Little Better" as a clinically meaningful milestone. In phase 2, a rating of "A Little Better" demonstrated agreement with attack severity improvement and resolution on the Patient Global Impression of Severity and had better sensitivity than "Better." Simulations indicated that 84 patients completing treatment would ensure at least 90% power for assessing the primary endpoint of time to beginning of symptom relief defined as a PGI-C rating of at least "A Little Better" for two time points in a row. CONCLUSIONS: Patient feedback and phase 2 data support PGI-C as the primary outcome measure in the phase 3 KONFIDENT trial evaluating sebetralstat, which has the potential to be the first oral on-demand treatment for HAE-C1-INH attacks.

In vitro evaluation of a novel immediate-release formulation of oxy-codone (RoxyBond™) for the potential for abuse via injection.

OBJECTIVE: Immediate-release (IR) oxycodone formulations may be manipulated for nonoral routes of administration. Oxycodone abuse-resistant immediate-release (ARIR) is a novel abuse-deterrent formulation (ADF) of IR oxycodone. This study aimed to assess the intravenous (IV) abuse potential of oxycodone ARIR relative to commercially available IR oxycodone tablets using in vitro laboratory studies. DESIGN: Intact or manipulated tablets were incubated in 5 or 10 mL of room temperature water for increasing amounts of time. For each timepoint, syringeability, defined as the ability to draw up water-immersed intact or manipulated tablets into a syringe, was assessed on a scale of 1 (very easy) to 10 (impossible). If the prepared sample could be drawn into a syringe, the proportion of syringeable oxycodone was measured analytically. RESULTS: In all conditions, it was nearly impossible to draw any liquid into a syringe from samples containing manipulated oxycodone ARIR tablets (N = 5/group), and most samples released very low concentrations (<10 percent) of their total oxycodone content, regardless of sample volume. In contrast, samples containing crushed IR oxycodone (N = 5/group) in small volumes of fluid were easily drawn into a syringe through the smallest needle, and more than 90 percent of the oxycodone content was released from relatively small sample volumes (5 mL). CONCLUSION: The difficulty required to prepare an injectable solution from oxycodone ARIR when manipulated suggests that oxycodone ARIR has abuse-deterrent properties that may deter IV abuse.

A Randomized, Crossover Study on the Effect of Food on the Pharmacokinetic Characteristics of Morphine ARER (MorphaBond™ ER), an Abuse-Deterrent Formulation of Extended-Release Morphine.

INTRODUCTION: Food can alter the pharmacokinetics of certain abuse-deterrent formulations. Morphine ARER is an oral abuse-deterrent formulation of ER morphine sulfate tablets formulated with physical and chemical properties that contribute to the abuse-deterrent aspects of the drug. This study compared the relative bioavailability of Morphine ARER in the presence and absence of food. METHODS: This was a randomized, single-dose, two-treatment, crossover study in which healthy adults received Morphine ARER 100 mg under fasting and fed conditions. Subjects were given naltrexone 50 mg to limit opioid effects. Plasma concentrations of morphine and its active metabolite morphine-6-glucuronide (M6G) were obtained up to 48 h post-dose; area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) from time 0 extrapolated to infinity (AUC0-∞), maximum observed plasma concentration (Cmax) and time to Cmax (Tmax) were calculated. Safety was evaluated by observation or report of adverse events, which were monitored during the treatment periods. RESULTS: Of 28 enrolled subjects, 27 completed all treatments; 1 subject in the fasted group withdrew voluntarily. Under fed conditions, the Cmax for morphine was 33% higher (44.78 vs. 33.30 ng/ml for fed and fasted conditions, respectively) and the median Tmax was 30 min longer than under fasted conditions. The overall morphine exposure (AUC0-∞) was similar for fed (440.6 ng · h/ml) vs. fasted conditions (395.1 ng · h/ml). For M6G, the Cmax and AUC0-∞ were similar under both conditions, and the median Tmax for M6G was 60 min longer under fed conditions. Common adverse events were somnolence and nausea. CONCLUSION: Morphine ARER can be administered without regard to food. Plain language summary available for this article. FUNDING: Inspirion Delivery Sciences, LLC.

Food alters how the body processes some currently available opioids. How the opioid is formulated in the final commercial product can impact this effect. Morphine ARER is a new oral abuse-deterrent formulation of extended-release morphine created with properties to make it more difficult to abuse via the intranasal and intravenous routes. To better understand how food affects Morphine ARER bioavailability, we compared the amount of morphine in the blood when 100 mg of Morphine ARER was given with or without food, in random order, to 27 healthy volunteers. Plasma samples were collected up to 48 h after dosing to measure the concentrations of morphine and its active metabolite morphine-6-glucuronide. We measured the amount of drug absorbed by using the area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) and the rate of drug absorption by looking at the highest amount of drug observed in the blood using the maximum observed plasma concentration (C_max) and time to C_max (T_max). When subjects were fed, the C_max for morphine was 33% higher (44.78 ng/ml) than when they fasted (33.30 ng/ml). The median T_max was 30 min longer when subjects were fed. Total morphine exposure (AUC_0­∞) was similar when subjects were fed (440.6 ng · h/ml) or when they fasted (395.1 ng · h/ml). Safety was evaluated throughout the treatment periods by adverse events, either observed by the clinician or reported by subjects. The most common adverse events noted were somnolence (e.g., sleepiness) and nausea. Our findings show that Morphine ARER has similar bioavailability when taken with or without food.

Relative Oral Bioavailability of an Abuse-Deterrent, Immediate-Release Formulation of Oxycodone, Oxycodone ARIR in a Randomized Study.

INTRODUCTION: Oxycodone ARIR is a novel oral, abuse-deterrent, immediate-release (IR) formulation with physical and chemical properties that deter misuse and abuse by non-oral routes. In this single-dose pharmacokinetic study, we assessed the relative bioavailability of oxycodone for Oxycodone ARIR and IR oxycodone, and the effect of food on Oxycodone ARIR following oral administration. METHODS: This open-label, randomized study in healthy adults compared the relative bioavailability of Oxycodone ARIR 30 mg to IR oxycodone 30 mg under fasted conditions, and Oxycodone ARIR under fed versus fasted conditions. Pharmacokinetic parameters included area under the concentration-time curve from time 0 to the last measured concentration (AUC0-t) and the maximum oxycodone plasma concentration (Cmax). Equivalence was determined using an analysis of variance of the least-squares means. RESULTS: Fifty-eight subjects completed the study. Under fasted conditions, AUC0-t was 4% lower (90% CI 92.5-98.7%) and mean Cmax was 14% lower (90% CI 78.8-94.3%) for Oxycodone ARIR versus IR oxycodone. AUC0-t was 23% higher (90% CI 119.1-127.0%) and mean Cmax was higher (90% CI 108.6-129.4%) when Oxycodone ARIR was administered in the fed versus fasted state. Common adverse events included nausea, headache, and dizziness. CONCLUSION: In this single-dose pharmacokinetic evaluation, fasted Oxycodone ARIR 30 mg had similar bioavailability to and is expected to have the same efficacy and safety profile as IR oxycodone. When administered in the fed state, pharmacokinetic parameters were slightly higher; however, these differences were considered not clinically meaningful and show that Oxycodone ARIR can be administered with or without food. FUNDING: This study was funded by Inspirion Delivery Sciences, LLC. Daiichi Sankyo, Inc. funded the journal's article processing charges and open access fee. Plain language summary available for this article.

Syringeability of morphine ARER, a novel, abuse-deterrent, extended-release morphine formulation.

Background: Extended-release (ER) morphine formulations are commonly manipulated for non-oral routes of administration, particularly via injection. Morphine ARER, an abuse-deterrent formulation of ER morphine, has both physical and chemical properties that deter abuse. Objectives: To assess the syringeability of morphine ARER using in vitro laboratory studies. Methods: Intact, cut, or crushed morphine ARER tablets were incubated in 1, 5, or 10 mL of room temperature or 90°C water for 1, 5, 10, or 30 min of agitation. Crushed ER morphine tablets were assessed in 10 mL room temperature water. The difficulty to draw the mixture into a syringe was assessed on a scale of 1 (very easy) to 10 (impossible). If the prepared mixture was syringeable, released morphine was measured analytically. Results: Crushed and cut morphine ARER tablets formed a viscous material when subjected to a liquid environment and were rated as "impossible to syringe" in ≤5 mL water and were slightly syringeable in 10 mL water. In contrast, all syringeability tests of crushed ER morphine were rated as "very easy to syringe". After 30 min in room temperature water, crushed ER morphine released 75% morphine whereas intact, cut, and crushed morphine ARER tablets released a maximum of 12%, 12%, and 5% of the total morphine content. Heating extractions resulted in increased morphine release. Conclusion: The difficulty to syringe morphine ARER when manipulated suggests that morphine ARER has abuse-deterrent properties that may deter intravenous abuse.

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Double-Dummy, Placebo-Controlled, Intranasal Human Abuse Potential Study of Oxycodone ARIR, a Novel, Immediate-Release, Abuse-Deterrent Formulation.

OBJECTIVE: Prescription opioid abuse continues to be a public health concern. Oxycodone ARIR is an immediate-release (IR) oxycodone tablet composed of multiple overlapping barriers that deter manipulation of the tablet for non-oral abuse. DESIGN: This randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, active- and placebo-controlled, four-way crossover, intranasal human abuse potential study assessed the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of crushed intranasal oxycodone ARIR compared with crushed intranasal IR oxycodone and intact oral oxycodone ARIR. OUTCOME MEASURES: Pharmacodynamic end points included mean maximum drug liking (Emax), as measured by subjects on a bipolar 100-mm visual analog scale (primary), and desire to take the drug again, overall drug liking, drug high, and good effects (secondary). Pharmacokinetic assessments included peak concentration and time to peak concentration. RESULTS: Twenty-nine subjects completed the treatment phase. Crushed intranasal oxycodone ARIR demonstrated a significant reduction of 46.9% and 23.4% in drug liking Emax compared with crushed intranasal IR oxycodone and intact oral oxycodone ARIR, respectively (P < 0.0001 for both). Significant reductions also were observed in desire to take the drug again, drug high, overall drug liking, and good effects when comparing crushed intranasal oxycodone ARIR with crushed intranasal IR oxycodone and intact oral oxycodone ARIR (P < 0.001 for all). Crushed intranasal oxycodone ARIR exhibited lower peak oxycodone plasma concentrations and slower time to peak concentration compared with crushed intranasal IR oxycodone and intact oral oxycodone ARIR. All treatments were well tolerated; adverse effects were typical of opioids or intranasal administration. CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate that oxycodone ARIR has the potential to reduce abuse via the intranasal route.

Intranasal Pharmacokinetics of Morphine ARER, a Novel Abuse-Deterrent Formulation: Results from a Randomized, Double-Blind, Four-Way Crossover Study in Nondependent, Opioid-Experienced Subjects.

Objective: To investigate the pharmacokinetics (PK) of Morphine ARER, an extended-release (ER), abuse-deterrent formulation of morphine sulfate after oral and intranasal administration. Methods: This randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled, four-way crossover study assessed the PK of morphine and its active metabolite, M6G, from crushed intranasal Morphine ARER and intact oral Morphine ARER compared with crushed intranasal ER morphine following administration to nondependent, recreational opioid users. The correlation between morphine PK and the pharmacodynamic parameter of drug liking, a measure of abuse potential, was also evaluated. Results: Mean maximum observed plasma concentration (Cmax) for morphine was lower with crushed intranasal Morphine ARER (26.2 ng/mL) and intact oral Morphine ARER (18.6 ng/mL), compared with crushed intranasal ER morphine (49.5 ng/mL). The time to Cmax (Tmax) was the same for intact oral and crushed intranasal Morphine ARER (1.6 hours) and longer for crushed intranasal morphine ER (1.1 hours). Higher mean maximum morphine Cmax, Tmax, and abuse quotient (Cmax/Tmax) were positively correlated with maximum effect for drug liking (R2 ≥ 0.9795). Conclusion: These data suggest that Morphine ARER maintains its ER profile despite physical manipulation and intranasal administration, which may be predictive of a lower intranasal abuse potential compared with ER morphine.

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Double-Dummy, Placebo-Controlled, Intranasal Drug Liking Study on a Novel Abuse-Deterrent Formulation of Morphine-Morphine ARER.

OBJECTIVE: Misuse and abuse of prescription opioids remains a major healthcare concern despite considerable efforts to increase public awareness. Abuse-deterrent formulations of prescription opioids are designed to reduce intentional misuse, abuse, and prescription opioid-related death. A novel extended-release (ER) formulation of morphine (Morphine ARER; MorphaBond™) resists physical manipulation and retains the drug's ER characteristics, even if attempts are made to manipulate the formulation. DESIGN: This randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled, four-way crossover study investigated the abuse potential and safety of crushed intranasal and intact oral Morphine ARER compared with commercially available crushed intranasal ER morphine sulfate (ER morphine). OUTCOME MEASURES: Endpoints included maximum mean drug liking (E max ) as measured by subjects on a bipolar 100 mm visual analog scale (primary), a subject's desire to take the drug again, good effects of the drug, and drug high. RESULTS: Twenty-five subjects completed the treatment phase. There was a 40% reduction in E max for crushed intranasal Morphine ARER compared with crushed intranasal ER morphine ( P < .0001). There was no significant difference when comparing the E max for crushed intranasal vs intact Morphine ARER. When comparing crushed intranasal Morphine ARER with ER morphine, subjects reported lower mean scores for good effects of the drug, drug high, and overall drug liking, as well as a lower desire to use Morphine ARER again. Other than adverse events associated with intranasal administration of a drug, all adverse events were typical of those reported for opioid-containing drugs. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, these data suggest that Morphine ARER has a lower abuse potential via the intranasal route of administration when compared with ER morphine.

Comparative effects of morning vs. evening dosing of extended-release hydromorphone on sleep physiology in patients with low back pain: a pilot study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate effects of extended-release (ER) hydromorphone dosing time (morning, QAM; evening, QPM) on sleep physiology in patients with chronic low back pain. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial. SETTING: Clinical research site. PATIENTS: Fifteen patients with moderate-to-severe chronic low back pain requiring long-term opioid analgesia. INTERVENTIONS: Following an open-label immediate-release (IR) hydromorphone titration phase, patients received once-daily ER hydromorphone QAM or QPM for at least 14 days and then crossed over to the alternate regimen. Overnight polysomnographic sleep studies were performed at baseline, following IR hydromorphone titration, and following each ER hydromorphone dosing period. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome measure was prevalence of nocturnal apnea-hypopnea index (AHI). Other evaluations included central apnea index and obstructive apnea index; Short-Form McGill Pain Questionnaire; a modified Medical Outcomes Study sleep scale, patient responses in a daily diary, and adverse event safety profiles. RESULTS: Mean AHI scores were lower following QAM rather than QPM dosing, but not significantly (12.9 vs. 17.1, P > 0.05). Secondarily, QAM dosing resulted in numerically fewer apnea episodes and improvements in pulse oximetry measures; however, these differences were not significant (P > 0.05). Sleep quality/quantity and pain measures were improved with opioid therapy overall, particularly QPM dosing, without significantly compromising safety. CONCLUSIONS: ER hydromorphone QAM dosing may be preferred if sleep-disordered breathing associated with ongoing opioid therapy is of concern; however, QPM dosing may be advantageous in terms of pain relief and quality/quantity of sleep. Further research is recommended to provide more definitive clinical guidance.