Comparative efficacy and safety of lofexidine and clonidine in mild to moderately severe systemic hypertension

Sublingual dexmedetomidine (BXCL501) reduces opioid withdrawal symptoms: findings from a multi-site, phase 1b/2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Background: Like other alpha-2-adrenergic receptor agonists, dexmedetomidine may reduce the severity of opioid withdrawal but with fewer adverse cardiovascular effects.Objective: This study assessed the safety of sublingual dexmedetomidine (BXCL501) and its preliminary efficacy in treating opioid withdrawal (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04470050).Methods: Withdrawal was induced among individuals with physiological dependence on opioids via discontinuation of oral morphine (Days 1-5). Participants were randomized to receive placebo or active BXCL501: 30, 60, 90, 120, 180, and 240 μg twice daily (Days 6-12). Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were the primary outcome measure. Secondary outcomes included the Clinical and Subjective Opiate Withdrawal Scales (COWS and SOWS-Gossop, respectively), and the Agitation and Calmness Evaluation Scale (ACES).Results: Of 225 participants enrolled, 90 discontinued during morphine stabilization. Post-BXCL501 randomization (Day 6) data were available from 135 participants (73% male), with 33% completing thru Day 12. In total, 36 subjects reported 1 or more TEAE. Higher doses of BXCL501 (i.e. 180 and 240 µg, twice daily) increased the frequency of: hypotension, orthostatic hypotension, and somnolence. TEAEs related to BXCL501 were mild or moderate in severity, except for one participant in the 120 µg condition whose orthostatic hypotension and bradycardia were classified as severe. Higher BXCL501 dose conditions (120, 180, and 240 µg) resulted in statistically significant reductions in COWS & SOWS scores. Mean ratings on the ACES were between 3 (mild), 4 (normal), and 5 (mild calmness), with few significant differences as a function of dose.Conclusions: These findings support the continued development of BXCL501 for the management of opioid withdrawal.

Improving Translational Research Outcomes for Opioid Use Disorder Treatments

Purpose of Review

Pharmacotherapies are the most effective means of reducing the harms associated with opioid use disorder (OUD). Translational research seeking to develop novel medications to treat OUD has been challenging due to the complex etiology of addiction. Preclinical outcome measures are often behavioral, and it is difficult, if not impossible, to fully mirror the various emotional and cognitive processes that motivate opioid use in humans. The goal of the current narrative review was to summarize the translational progression of three potential medications for OUD, which had varying levels of success.

Recent Findings

Memantine, lorcaserin, and lofexidine all showed promise in preclinical studies; however, only lofexidine was able to consistently replicate these findings in human subjects, and receive FDA approval. It was the authors' objective to use this review to identify areas of needed improvement in translational research for OUD.

Summary

Preclinical studies vary significantly in their ability to forecast effectiveness in clinical trials. Among the various preclinical models, suppression of opioid self-administration appears to have the best predictive validity. As they model a mostly physiological phenomenon, preclinical assessments of opioid withdrawal also appear to have high predictive validity. In our review of the literature, the authors noted numerous examples of clinical trials that were underpowered, lack precision, and proper outcomes. Better-validated preclinical targets and improved design of proof-of-concept human studies should allow investigators to more efficiently develop and test medications for OUD.

Hemodynamic and Cognitive Effects of Lofexidine and Methadone Coadministration: A Pilot Study

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To determine the hemodynamic and cognitive effects of lofexidine and methadone coadministration.

DESIGN

Prospective, double-blind study.

SETTING

Outpatient drug treatment research clinic.

SUBJECTS

Fourteen participants (aged 18-45 yrs) with physical dependence on opioids.

INTERVENTION

Subjects were stabilized on methadone maintenance therapy, starting with 30 mg/day and increasing by 10-mg/day increments, based on each subject's tolerability to achieve a target dose of 80 mg/day. After 3 weeks of methadone stabilization, lofexidine 0.4 mg/day or matching placebo were coadministered with methadone, in doses escalating by 0.2-mg/week increments, to achieve a target dose of 1.6 mg/day over the next 8 weeks.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Acute orthostatic vital signs and neuropsychological effects of lofexidine and methadone coadministration were monitored for 5 hours after the dose on the first day of each new lofexidine dose. Orthostatic vital signs and adverse events were assessed daily thereafter to determine the effects of repeated doses. Lofexidine significantly decreased sitting systolic and diastolic blood pressure (p=0.045 and p=0.033, respectively) compared with placebo (i.e., methadone alone). With lofexidine 0.4 mg/day, mean decreases in systolic and diastolic blood pressure were 27 +/- 17 and 15 +/- 16 mm Hg, respectively. No significant association was noted between changes in orthostatic vital signs and lofexidine dose. Decreased cognitive efficiency was associated with lofexidine administration, and higher lofexidine doses adversely affected performance on a mathematical task compared with placebo (p=0.0035). The rate of adverse events was no higher with lofexidine than with placebo; the majority (54.3%) were common adverse effects of lofexidine.

CONCLUSION

Significant changes in hemodynamic and cognitive efficiency were observed with coadministration of lofexidine and methadone compared with methadone alone. When patients receiving methadone are prescribed lofexidine, they should be closely monitored for cardiovascular and cognitive changes.

Evaluation of the effects of lofexidine and clonidine on naloxone-precipitated withdrawal in opioid-dependent humans

AIMS

To examine the efficacy of lofexidine, an alpha2 adrenergic agonist, to suppress opioid withdrawal symptoms in opioid-dependent humans under in-patient laboratory conditions by using a naloxone challenge procedure.

DESIGN

Randomized, within-subject, cross-over design with drug administration taking place under double-blind and triple-dummy conditions.

SETTING

A 14-bed in-patient hospital research unit dedicated to the conduct of behavioral pharmacology studies.

PARTICIPANTS

Eight healthy adult volunteers (two female/six male) with histories of polysubstance abuse and current physical dependence on opioids.

INTERVENTION

Participants were stabilized onto methadone and maintained on 30 mg/day, p.o. throughout the study. Oral placebo, lofexidine (0.4, 0.8 and 1.6 mg, p.o.) and clonidine (0.1 and 0.2 mg, p.o.) were each tested as pre-treatments once in combination with each of three intramuscular naloxone doses (0, 0.1 and 0.3 mg, i.m.) during 18 separate experimental sessions.

MEASUREMENTS

An array of physiological indices (e.g. heart rate, blood pressure, pupil diameter) as well as a number of subjective and observer-rating scales sensitive to opioid withdrawal effects.

FINDINGS

As expected, lofexidine and clonidine both produced dose-related decreases in blood pressure and heart rate but few subjective effects; naloxone increased opioid withdrawal signs and symptoms in a dose- and time-dependent fashion. Although both lofexidine and clonidine reduced the cardiovascular response to naloxone challenge, close inspection of the data reveal that this occurred only to the extent that baseline physiological parameters were reduced, while neither drug significantly modified the overall magnitude of the response to naloxone. Moreover, neither lofexidine nor clonidine suppressed the subjective discomfort of opioid withdrawal or significantly reduced other autonomic signs of opioid withdrawal, such as lacrimation or rhinorrhea.

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that lofexidine is well tolerated even at supratherapeutic acute doses. However, its failure to modify most signs and symptoms of opioid withdrawal suggest that its effective use in spontaneous withdrawal will require concomitant medications for improved therapeutic response.

Alpha-adrenoceptors

Major advances have been made in our understanding of the molecular structure and function of the alpha-adrenoceptors. Many new subtypes of the alpha-adrenoceptor have been identified recently through biochemical and pharmacological techniques and several of these receptors have been cloned and expressed in a variety of vector systems. Currently, at least seven subtypes of the alpha-adrenoceptor have been identified and the molecular structure and biochemical functions of these subtypes are beginning to be understood. The alpha-adrenoceptors belong to the super family of receptors that are coupled to guanine nucleotide regulatory proteins (G-proteins). A variety of G-proteins are involved in the coupling of the various alpha-adrenoceptor subtypes to intracellular second messenger systems, which ultimately produce the end-organ response. The mechanisms by which the alpha-adrenoceptor subtypes recognize different G-proteins, as well as the molecular interactions between receptors and G-proteins, are the topics of current research. Furthermore, the physiological and pathophysiological role that alpha-adrenoceptors play in homeostasis and in a variety of disease states is also being elucidated. These major advances made in alpha-adrenoceptor classification, molecular structure, physiologic function, second messenger systems and therapeutic relevance are the subject of this review.

Comparison of moxonidine and clonidine HCl in treating patients with hypertension

In a six-week multicenter, double-blind comparison study, moxonidine and clonidine HCl were tested in 122 and 30 outpatients, respectively, with mild to moderate hypertension (World Health Organization stage I and II; highest measured diastolic blood pressure, 90 to 115 mm Hg). Each agent reduced systolic and diastolic blood pressure to a similar significant extent: moxonidine, 25.4 and 12.4 mm Hg, respectively; clonidine, 25.3 and 10.0 mm Hg, respectively (P less than .001 vs baseline). The mean individually titrated dose of moxonidine and clonidine HCl was found to be 0.36 mg/d. Clonidine slightly reduced heart rate in patients assuming an upright position by 3 beats/min at the end of dose titration (P = .018), while moxonidine did not. Two patients receiving moxonidine and three patients taking clonidine HCl discontinued therapy because of side effects. However, patients administered clonidine experienced significantly more side effects (53%) compared with a 30% incidence of adverse effects associated with moxonidine (P = .031). The most frequent adverse effect of both agents was dryness of mouth, which was mentioned significantly more often with clonidine (47%) than with moxonidine (20%) (P = .005). Edemas were found in 0.8% and 17% of patients during six-week treatment with moxonidine and clonidine, respectively (P = .001). Accordingly, moxonidine was tolerated significantly better than clonidine (P less than .001) in this parallel comparison study. Moxonidine is as effective as clonidine in monotherapy of mild to moderate essential hypertension and, additionally, neither drug produces clinically important changes in biochemical parameters.

Long-term experience with lofexidine in the treatment of mild-to-moderate essential hypertension

This study describes sustained efficacy and safety of lofexidine in hypertensive patients. Twenty-one male patients (mean age 55 +/- 9 yr) who had previously completed a short-term trial of lofexidine entered this open-label trial. The daily dose of lofexidine was titrated over three months to a maximum of 1.6 mg or an erect diastolic blood pressure less than 90 mm Hg. Hydrochlorothiazide was added when necessary. Thereafter, each patient was evaluated for blood pressure (BP) response, compliance, side effects, hepatic, renal, or hematological abnormalities every three months for two years. Sustained BP reduction with lofexidine was achieved but not without concomitant diuretic therapy. There were no clinically important changes in heart rate or hepatic, renal, or hematological profiles. Side effects were frequent but severe enough to warrant discontinuation in only four patients. The side-effect profile was similar to that of clonidine. We recommend concurrent diuretic use to maximize effectiveness of lofexidine.