A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of AR19, a Manipulation-Resistant Formulation of Amphetamine Sulfate, in Adults With Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder.

Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of AR19 in the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) diagnosed by DSM-5 criteria in adults from 18 through 55 years of age. AR19 is a pellets-in-capsule, immediate-release amphetamine sulfate investigational formulation with physical and chemical barriers designed to resist manipulation to deter snorting, smoking, and intravenous injection.Methods: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, fixed-dose, forced titration, multicenter trial investigated the safety and efficacy of AR19 from September 2018 to April 2019. Study participants were randomized and titrated to 20 mg or 40 mg AR19 daily or placebo. Study medication was dosed once in the morning and again 4 to 6 hours later for a period of 5 weeks. The primary efficacy measure was the total score on the Adult ADHD Investigator Symptom Rating Scale (AISRS).Results: Participants (N = 320) were randomized and received at least 1 dose of study medication. Demographics and baseline characteristics were similar across treatment groups. The least squares mean treatment differences versus placebo (97.5% CI) were -7.2 (-11.3 to -3.1) for the AR19 20-mg group and -7.3 (-11.4 to -3.2) for the AR19 40-mg group (each P < .001). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events occurring in participants in the AR19 treatment groups were insomnia, dry mouth, decreased appetite, palpitations, headache, and tachycardia and are consistent with the known safety profile of amphetamine sulfate.Conclusions: AR19 demonstrated efficacy on all endpoints and was generally well tolerated, supporting the efficacy and safety of AR19 20 mg and 40 mg in adults with ADHD.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03659929.

Evaluation of stool collections to measure efficacy of PERT in subjects with exocrine pancreatic insufficiency.

OBJECTIVE: The standard measure of pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy (PERT) efficacy in treating exocrine pancreatic insufficiency (EPI) is the coefficient of fat absorption (CFA). CFA measurement involves 72-hour stool collection, which presents a logistical challenge because, although the test may be performed on an outpatient basis in clinical practice, hospitalization is needed if assurance of complete collection and 100% compliance is required, for example, in controlled situations such as clinical trials. Our aim was to investigate sparse stool sample collection as an alternative to complete 72-hour collection for measurement of stool fat in subjects with EPI. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Prospective data analysis from a previously published, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, 2-period crossover trial in subjects ages 7 to 11 years with EPI caused by cystic fibrosis. Percentage fat (PF) data from sparse stool samples were compared with 72-hour CFA values as a dichotomous variable (<80%, ≥80%), with evaluation of sensitivity, specificity, and positive predictive value. Area under the curve values were obtained from receiver operating characteristic plots of sensitivity versus 1-specificity. RESULTS: Twelve subjects provided samples for this analysis. Multiple-sample PF values ≤30% were greatly predictive for CFA values ≥80%, as shown by positive predictive value, sensitivity, and specificity values ≥0.89, with high accuracy (AUCs ≥0.93). CONCLUSIONS: Sparse stool sampling for PF analysis appears to be a valid, practical alternative to 72-hour CFA determination and has potential as a screening tool in clinical practice to identify both suboptimal dosing in subjects with EPI receiving PERT and substantial fat malabsorption in subjects not receiving PERT.