Novel 1 L polyethylene glycol-based bowel preparation NER1006 for overall and right-sided colon cleansing: a randomized controlled phase 3 trial versus trisulfate.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: NER1006 is the first 32 fluid ounce (1 L) polyethylene glycol-based bowel preparation. This randomized, multicenter, colonoscopist/central reader-blinded phase 3 non-inferiority trial assessed the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of NER1006 versus trisulfate for bowel cleansing. METHODS: Patients undergoing colonoscopy were randomized (1:1) to receive NER1006 or trisulfate, using evening/morning split-dosing administration. Blinded central readers used the validated Harefield Cleansing Scale to evaluate 2 alternative primary endpoints: overall bowel-cleansing success and high-quality cleansing of the ascending colon/cecum. Secondary endpoints included lesion detection, Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS) assessment, and adherence. The non-inferiority margin was 10% and the significance threshold was P < .025. RESULTS: Of 621 patients randomized (NER1006, n=310; trisulfate, n=311), 556 were evaluated for efficacy (NER1006, n=276; trisulfate, n=280). NER1006 achieved non-inferiority versus trisulfate for both primary endpoints of overall bowel-cleansing success (85.1% vs 85.0%; difference, 0.14%; one-sided 97.5% lower confidence limit [LCL], -8.15%; P = .528) and high-quality cleansing of the ascending colon/cecum (35.9% versus 29.3%; difference, 6.58%; LCL, -1.69%; P = .059). BBPS assessments supported overall bowel-cleansing success rates. Lesion detection rates were similar between the groups. The percentage of patients with treatment-related adverse events was 14.9% with NER1006 and 9.4% with trisulfate. Both bowel preparations showed similar overall tolerability and safety profiles. Adherence was very high in both arms. CONCLUSIONS: With evening/morning split dosing, NER1006 was as effective as trisulfate for overall bowel and right-sided colon cleansing. Adverse event rates were slightly higher with NER1006 than trisulfate, but did not compromise tolerability, adherence, or efficacy. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT02254486.).

A phase III study evaluating the efficacy and safety of remimazolam (CNS 7056) compared with placebo and midazolam in patients undergoing colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Remimazolam is an ultrashort-acting benzodiazepine. METHODS: We performed a randomized double-blind comparison of remimazolam to placebo for outpatient colonoscopy. This study design was a requirement of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. An additional group was randomized to open-label midazolam administered according to its package insert instructions (the randomization ratio for remimazolam:placebo:midazolam was 30:6:10). Study medications were administered under the supervision of the endoscopist, without any involvement of an anesthesia specialist. Patients were given 50 to 75 µg of fentanyl before receiving study medications. Patients who failed to achieve adequate sedation in any arm were rescued with midazolam dosed at the investigator's discretion. The primary endpoint was a composite that required 3 criteria be met: completion of the colonoscopy, no need for rescue medication, and ≤5 doses of remimazolam or placebo in any 15-minute interval (≤3 doses of midazolam in any 12-minute interval in the open-label midazolam arm). RESULTS: There were 461 randomized patients in 12 U.S. sites. The primary endpoint was met for remimazolam, placebo, and midazolam in 91.3%, 1.7%, and 25.2% of patients, respectively (P < .0001 for remimazolam vs placebo). Patients administered remimazolam received less fentanyl, had faster recovery of neuropsychiatric function, were ready for discharge earlier, and felt back to normal sooner than patients with both placebo and midazolam. Hypotension was less frequent with remimazolam, and hypoxia occurred in 1% of patients with remimazolam or midazolam. There were no treatment-emergent serious adverse events. CONCLUSION: Remimazolam can be administered safely under the supervision of endoscopists for outpatient colonoscopy, and it allows faster recovery of neuropsychiatric function compared with placebo (midazolam rescue) and midazolam. (Clinical trial registration number: NCT02290873.).

Multiple ascending dose study of BMS-790052, a nonstructural protein 5A replication complex inhibitor, in patients infected with hepatitis C virus genotype 1.

UNLABELLED: The antiviral activity, resistance profile, pharmacokinetics (PK), safety, and tolerability of BMS-790052, a nonstructural protein 5A (NS5A) replication complex inhibitor, were evaluated in a double-blind, placebo-controlled, sequential panel, multiple ascending dose study. Thirty patients with chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1 infection were randomized to receive a 14-day course of BMS-790052 (1, 10, 30, 60, or 100 mg once daily or 30 mg twice daily) or placebo in a ratio of 4:1. The mean maximum decline from baseline in HCV RNA ranged from 2.8 to 4.1 log(10) IU/mL; the placebo group showed no evidence of antiviral activity. Most patients experienced viral rebound on or before day 7 of treatment with BMS-790052 monotherapy; viral rebound was associated with viral variants that had been previously implicated in resistance development in the in vitro replicon system. The PK profile was supportive of once-daily dosing with median peak plasma concentrations at 1-2 hours postdose and mean terminal half-life of 12-15 hours. Steady state was achieved following 3-4 days of daily dosing. BMS-790052 was well tolerated in all dose groups, with adverse events occurring with a similar frequency in BMS-790052- and placebo-treated groups. There were no clinically relevant changes in vital signs, laboratory, or electrocardiogram parameters. CONCLUSION: BMS-7590052 is the first NS5A replication complex inhibitor with multiple dose proof-of-concept in clinic. At doses of 1-100 mg daily, BMS-790052 was well tolerated, had a PK profile supportive of once-daily dosing, and produced a rapid and substantial decrease in HCV-RNA levels in patients chronically infected with HCV genotype 1.

A Phase I, randomized, placebo-controlled, 3-day, ascending-dose study of GS-9451, an NS3/4A protease inhibitor, in genotype 1 hepatitis C patients.

BACKGROUND: GS-9451 is a novel inhibitor of the HCV NS3/4A protease and demonstrates potent in vitro suppression of HCV genotype 1 replicons. METHODS: The safety, pharmacokinetics and antiviral efficacy of GS-9451 were evaluated in a Phase I study in treatment-naive, HCV genotype-1-infected patients. Patients were randomized to 3 days of once-daily dosing with placebo (n=8) or GS-9451 60 mg (n=8 genotype 1a), 200 mg (n=8 genotype 1a; n=8 genotype 1b) or 400 mg (n=9 genotype 1a). Plasma samples were collected up to and on day 14 for pharmacokinetic evaluation, serum HCV RNA quantitation and NS3 sequencing. RESULTS: No patients interrupted or discontinued dosing because of an adverse event. The median (range) maximal HCV RNA reductions from baseline were -0.88 (-1.24- -0.64), -3.19 (-3.31- -2.94) and -3.64 (-4.08- -3.54) log10 IU/ml in genotype 1a patients receiving 60, 200 and 400 mg/day GS-9451, respectively, and -3.48 (-3.54- -3.03) log10 IU/ml in genotype 1b patients receiving GS-9451 200 mg/day. Median half-life ranged from 14 to 17 h. Day 3 mean concentration at the end of dosing interval was 5.5- and 17-fold above protein-binding adjusted mean 50% effective inhibitory concentration in 200 mg and 400 mg cohorts, respectively. No resistance mutations were detected with GS-9451 60 mg/day. In the 200 mg/day or 400 mg/day groups, predominant mutations were NS3 R155 (R155K) in genotype 1a patients and D168 (D168E, D168V and D168G) in genotype 1b patients. CONCLUSIONS: GS-9451 was well-tolerated. During 3 days of monotherapy, GS-9451 200 mg/day or 400 mg/day demonstrated potent antiviral activity in both HCV genotype 1a- and 1b-infected patients. GS-9451 is currently being evaluated in combination regimens with and without pegylated interferon-α.

Evaluation of a new, rapid test for detecting HCV infection, suitable for use with blood or oral fluid.

The availability of a highly accurate, rapid, point-of-care test for hepatitis C virus (HCV) may be useful in addressing the problem of under-diagnosis of HCV, by increasing opportunities for testing outside of traditional clinical settings. A new HCV rapid test device (OraQuick® HCV Rapid Antibody Test), approved recently in Europe for use with venous blood, fingerstick blood, serum, plasma, or oral fluid was evaluated in a multi-center study and performance compared to established laboratory-based tests for detection of HCV. The HCV rapid test was evaluated in prospective testing of subjects with signs and/or symptoms of hepatitis, or who were at risk for hepatitis C using all 5 specimen types. Performance was assessed relative to HCV serostatus established by laboratory methods (EIA, RIBA and PCR) approved in Europe for diagnosis of hepatitis C infection. Sensitivity to antibody in early infection was also compared to EIA in 27 seroconversion panels. In addition, the reliability of the oral fluid sample for accurate detection of anti-HCV was assessed by studying the impact of various potentially interfering conditions of oral health, use of oral care products and consumption of food and drink. In this large study of at-risk and symptomatic persons, the overall specificities of the OraQuick® HCV Rapid Antibody Test were equivalent (99.6-99.9%) for all 5 specimen types and the 95% CIs substantially overlapped. Overall sensitivities were virtually identical for venous blood, fingerstick blood, serum and plasma (99.7-99.9%). Observed sensitivity was slightly lower for oral fluid at 98.1% though the upper CI (99.0%) was equal to the lower CI for venous blood and fingerstick blood. Most of the HCV positive subjects which gave nonreactive results in oral fluid had serological and virological results consistent with resolved infection. Sensitivity for anti-HCV in early seroconversion was virtually identical between the HCV rapid test and EIA. Detection of anti-HCV in oral fluid appeared generally robust to conditions of oral health, consumption of food and drink and use of oral care products. The OraQuick® HCV Rapid Antibody Test demonstrated clinical performance that was equivalent to current laboratory-based EIA. This new, HCV rapid test appears suitable as an aid in the diagnosis of HCV infection and may increase testing opportunities due to its simplicity and flexibility to use multiple specimen types, including fingerstick blood and oral fluid.