A Drug-Drug Interaction Study to Evaluate the Impact of Rimegepant on OCT2- and MATE1-Mediated Transport of Metformin in Healthy Participants

Rimegepant is a calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist approved for migraine treatment. This phase 1, open-label, single-center, fixed-sequence study evaluated the effect of rimegepant on the pharmacokinetics (PK) of metformin. Twenty-eight healthy participants received metformin 500 mg twice daily from Days 1 to 4 and Days 7 to 10, and once daily on Days 5 and 11. Rimegepant, 75 mg tablet, was administered once daily from Days 9 to 12. At pre-specified time points, plasma metformin concentration, serum glucose levels, and safety and tolerability were evaluated. A 16% increase in the area under the plasma metformin concentration-time curve (AUC) for 1 dosing interval (AUC0-τ,ss), a statistically insignificant increase in maximum and minimum steady-state metformin concentration (Cmax,ss and Cmin,ss), and a decrease in metformin renal clearance were observed on Day 11 following metformin-rimegepant coadministration compared with metformin alone; however, the changes were not clinically relevant. Additionally, coadministration of rimegepant with metformin did not induce clinically meaningful change in the maximum observed glucose concentration (Gmax) or AUCgluc compared with metformin alone. Overall, rimegepant and metformin coadministration did not result in clinically relevant changes in metformin PK, renal clearance, or the antihyperglycemic effects of metformin. Rimegepant is considered safe for use with metformin.

Rimegepant orally disintegrating tablet 75 mg for acute treatment of migraine in adults from China: a subgroup analysis of a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Rimegepant orally disintegrating tablet (ODT), an oral small-molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist, is indicated for acute and preventive treatment of migraine in the United States and other countries. Previously, a large clinical trial assessed the efficacy and safety of rimegepant ODT 75 mg for the acute treatment of migraine in adults living in China or South Korea. A post hoc subgroup analysis of this trial was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of rimegepant for acute treatment of migraine in adults living in China.

METHODS

Eligible participants were ≥ 18 years of age and had a ≥ 1-year history of migraine, with 2 to 8 attacks of moderate or severe pain intensity per month and < 15 headache days per month during the 3 months before screening. Participants self-administered rimegepant ODT 75 mg or matching placebo to treat a single migraine attack of moderate or severe pain intensity. The co-primary endpoints were pain freedom and freedom from the most bothersome symptom (MBS) at 2 h post-dose. Key secondary endpoints included pain relief at 2 h post-dose, ability to function normally at 2 h post-dose, use of rescue medication within 24 h post-dose, and sustained pain freedom from 2 to 24 h and 2 to 48 h post-dose. All p values were nominal. Safety was assessed via treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), electrocardiograms, vital signs, and routine laboratory tests.

RESULTS

Overall, 1075 participants (rimegepant, n = 538; placebo, n = 537) were included in the subgroup analysis. Rimegepant was more effective than placebo for the co-primary endpoints of pain freedom (18.2% vs. 10.6%, p = 0.0004) and freedom from the MBS (48.0% vs. 31.8%, p <  0.0001), as well as all key secondary endpoints. The incidence of TEAEs was comparable between the rimegepant (15.2%) and placebo (16.4%) groups. No signal of drug-induced liver injury was observed, and no study drug-related serious TEAEs were reported in the rimegepant group.

CONCLUSIONS

A single dose of rimegepant 75 mg rimegepant was effective for the acute treatment of migraine in adults living in China, with safety and tolerability similar to placebo.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04574362 Date registered: 2020-10-05.

A multicenter, open-label long-term safety study of rimegepant for the acute treatment of migraine

BACKGROUND

The present study evaluated the long-term safety and tolerability of rimegepant, an orally administered small molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist, in people with migraine.

METHODS

This multicenter, long-term, open-label safety study included adults (≥18 years) with ≥1 year history of migraine who were sequentially enrolled into three groups: participants in the first two groups had either 2-8 or 9-14 moderate to severe migraine attacks per month by history and treated as needed (pro re nata [PRN]) with one rimegepant 75 mg oral tablet up to once per calendar day for 52 weeks (PRN 2-8 and PRN 9-14); a third group, included to collect safety data during higher-frequency dosing, had 4-14 moderate to severe migraine attacks per month by history and who took one rimegepant tablet every other day as scheduled dosing plus PRN dosing of one rimegepant tablet for migraine attacks of any severity on nonscheduled dosing days for 12 weeks (every other day (EOD) + PRN).

RESULTS

Overall, 1800 participants self-administered rimegepant (PRN 2-8: n = 1033; PRN 9-14: n = 481; EOD + PRN: n = 286). The most common on-treatment adverse events (AEs) were upper respiratory tract infection (8.8%), nasopharyngitis (6.8%) and sinusitis (5.1%). Most AEs were mild or moderate and considered unrelated to rimegepant. Serious AEs considered possibly (n = 1) or unlikely (n = 9) related to rimegepant were reported in ten (0.6%) participants. No signal of drug-induced liver injury because of rimegepant was identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Rimegepant 75 mg up to once per day as EOD + PRN for 12 weeks or PRN for up to 52 weeks was safe and well tolerated. No signal of hepatotoxicity, potential drug abuse, or medication-overuse headache was identified.Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03266588.

Bioequivalence of rimegepant, a small molecule CGRP receptor antagonist, administered as an oral tablet, a sublingual orally disintegrating tablet, and a supralingual orally disintegrating tablet: two phase 1 randomized studies in healthy adults

BACKGROUND

Rimegepant is an orally administered small molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist indicated for the acute and preventive treatment of migraine.

METHODS

Two single-center, phase 1, open-label, randomized bioequivalence studies were conducted in healthy adult non-smokers, aged 18-55 years. One study compared the rate and extent of absorption of the marketed formulation of rimegepant 75 mg orally disintegrating tablet (ODT) administered sublingually with rimegepant 75 mg oral tablet, an earlier development formulation; the second compared the rate and extent of absorption of 75 mg rimegepant ODT administered supralingually with rimegepant oral tablet.

RESULTS

The ln-transformed geometric mean ratios for the area under the curve (AUC) from time 0 to the last available concentration time point (time t) (AUC0-t), AUC from time 0 to infinity (AUC0-inf), and maximum observed concentration (Cmax) of sublingual rimegepant ODT vs. rimegepant tablet were 97, 97, and 105%, respectively, and the 90% confidence intervals (CIs) were all within the predefined range (80-125%) for bioequivalence. The ln-transformed geometric mean ratios for the AUC0-t and AUC0-inf of supralingual rimegepant ODT vs. rimegepant tablet were 98%, the 90% CIs were within the predefined range (80-125%), and the geometric mean ratio for Cmax was 103% with the 95% upper confidence bound for the scaled average bioequivalence criterion of -0.0575 (within-participant coefficient of variation for the reference for Cmax > 30%) for bioequivalence.

CONCLUSIONS

Rimegepant 75 mg ODT, administered sublingually or supralingually, and rimegepant 75 mg oral tablet were bioequivalent.

The Pharmacokinetics, Safety, and Tolerability of Rimegepant 75 mg Are Similar in Elderly and Nonelderly Adults: A Phase 1, Open-Label, Parallel-Group, Single-Dose Study

Rimegepant is a small-molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist approved for the acute treatment of migraine ± aura and preventive treatment of migraine in adults. The pharmacokinetics of rimegepant in elderly and nonelderly subjects were evaluated. In an open-label Phase 1 study, 14 elderly (aged 65 years or older) and 14 nonelderly (aged 18 to less than 45 years) subjects each received a single oral dose of rimegepant 75 mg. Blood samples were collected before dosing and through 96 hours after dosing. The pharmacokinetic parameters of rimegepant after a single dose were similar in both age groups. Geometric least-squares mean ratios (elderly/nonelderly) of the natural log-transformed maximum observed plasma concentration and natural log-transformed area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 extrapolated to infinity were 96.6 and 104.6, respectively. Eight (28.6%) subjects (4 elderly, 4 nonelderly) experienced 1 or more adverse events (AEs); all AEs were mild in intensity, and no serious AEs or AEs leading to discontinuation were reported. Following a single 75-mg dose of oral rimegepant, pharmacokinetic parameters were similar in elderly and nonelderly adults; no dose adjustment is warranted in elderly subjects.

Rimegepant 75 mg in Subjects With Hepatic Impairment: Results of a Phase 1, Open-Label, Single-Dose, Parallel-Group Study

Rimegepant is a small-molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist (gepant) with demonstrated efficacy and safety in the acute and preventive treatment of migraine. Here, we report the pharmacokinetics and safety of a single 75-mg oral dose of rimegepant in subjects with severe, moderate, or mild hepatic impairment and matched healthy subjects from an open-label, single-dose, 4-group phase 1 study. Thirty-six subjects aged 41-71 years were enrolled, including 6 each with severe, moderate, or mild hepatic impairment and 18 healthy subjects. All subjects completed the study. A <20% increase in total and unbound pharmacokinetics was observed in subjects with mild hepatic impairment and ≤65% increase with moderate hepatic impairment versus matched healthy controls. Total and unbound systemic exposure increased 2.0- and 3.9-fold in the severe hepatic impairment group. In subjects with severe hepatic impairment, geometric mean ratios (severe impairment/controls) for total concentrations were 202.2% for area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 to the last quantifiable concentration, 202.2% for area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 to infinity, and 189.1% for maximum observed plasma concentration. Corresponding geometric mean ratios using unbound concentrations were 388.8% and 388.7%, respectively. Three (8.3%) subjects reported 4 treatment-emergent adverse events. Rimegepant is not recommended for use in adults with severe hepatic impairment.

A placebo-controlled, randomized, single and multiple dose study to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of rimegepant in healthy participants

BACKGROUND

Rimegepant is an oral, small molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist for acute treatment of migraine and migraine prevention.

METHODS

This was a single-site, placebo-controlled, sequential, single and multiple ascending dose study in healthy males and females, aged 18-55 years, with no clinically significant medical history. The objectives were to assess the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of the oral capsule free-base formulation. Single oral doses of rimegepant from 25-1500 mg were evaluated in the single ascending dose phase, and 75-600 mg/day doses administered for 14 days were evaluated in the multiple ascending dose phase.

RESULTS

No dose-related trends were observed in orthostatic systolic and diastolic blood pressure or heart rate after rimegepant administration. Rimegepant was rapidly absorbed with the median time of maximum observed plasma concentration from 1-3.5 hours. Rimegepant showed a more than dose-proportional increase in exposure from 25-1500 mg following a single dose and from 75-600 mg/day following multiple doses.

CONCLUSIONS

Rimegepant was safe and generally well tolerated at single oral doses up to 1500 mg and multiple doses up to 600 mg/day for 14 days in healthy participants in this study. Median terminal half-life ranged from 8-12 hours across the wide range of single doses studied.

Safety and efficacy of rimegepant orally disintegrating tablet for the acute treatment of migraine in China and South Korea: a phase 3, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

No acute treatments targeting calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) have been approved for use in China or South Korea. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of rimegepant-an orally administered small molecule CGRP antagonist-with placebo in the acute treatment of migraine among adults in these countries.

METHODS

This double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, multicentre phase 3 trial was done at 86 outpatient clinics at hospitals and academic medical centres (73 in China and 13 in South Korea). Participants were adults (≥18 years) with at least a 1-year history of migraine who had two to eight moderate or severe attacks per month and fewer than 15 headache days per month within the 3 months before the screening visit. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to 75 mg rimegepant or placebo to treat a single migraine attack of moderate or severe pain intensity. Randomisation was stratified by the use of preventive medication and by country. The allocation sequence was generated and implemented by study personnel using an interactive web-response system accessed online from each study centre. All participants, investigators, and the sponsor were masked to treatment assignment. The coprimary endpoints of freedom from pain and freedom from the most bothersome symptom (nausea, phonophobia, or photophobia) 2 h after dosing were assessed in the modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population (randomly assigned participants who took study medication for a migraine attack of moderate or severe pain intensity, and provided at least one efficacy datapoint after treatment) using Cochran-Mantel Haenszel tests. Safety was assessed in all participants who received rimegepant or placebo. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT04574362, and is completed.

FINDINGS

1431 participants were randomly assigned (716 [50%] to rimegepant and 715 [50%] to placebo). 668 (93%) participants in the rimegepant group and 674 (94%) participants in the placebo group received treatment. 1340 participants were included in the mITT analysis (666 [93%] in the rimegepant group and 674 [94%] in the placebo group). 2 h after dosing, rimegepant was superior to placebo for pain freedom (132 [20%] of 666 vs 72 [11%] of 674, risk difference 9·2, 95% CI 5·4-13·0; p<0·0001) and freedom from the most bothersome symptom (336 [50%] of 666 participants vs 241 [36%] of 674 participants, 14·8, 9·6-20·0; p<0·0001). The most common (≥1%) adverse events were protein in urine (8 [1%] of 668 participants in the rimepegant group vs 7 [1%] of 674 participants in the placebo group), nausea (7 [1%] of 668 vs 18 [3%] of 674), and urinary tract infection (5 [1%] of 668 vs 8 [1%] of 674). There were no rimegepant-related serious adverse events.

INTERPRETATION

Among adults living in China or South Korea, a single dose of 75 mg rimegepant was effective for the acute treatment of migraine. Safety and tolerability were similar to placebo. Our findings suggest that rimegepant might be a useful new addition to the range of medications for the acute treatment of migraine in China and South Korea, but further studies are needed to support long-term efficacy and safety and to compare rimegepant with other medications for the acute treatment of migraine in this population.

FUNDING

BioShin Limited.

TRANSLATIONS

For the Chinese and Korean translations of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Safety, tolerability, and efficacy of zavegepant 10 mg nasal spray for the acute treatment of migraine in the USA: a phase 3, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled multicentre trial

BACKGROUND

Intranasal formulations can provide treatment options for people with migraine in whom oral drugs are ineffective, slow-acting, or intolerable because of nausea and vomiting. Zavegepant, an intranasally administered small molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonist, was previously assessed in a phase 2/3 trial. This phase 3 trial aimed to compare the efficacy, tolerability, safety, and timecourse of response for zavegepant nasal spray with placebo in the acute treatment of migraine.

METHODS

This double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, multicentre phase 3 trial, conducted at 90 academic medical centres, headache clinics, and independent research facilities in the USA, recruited adults (aged ≥18 years) with a history of two to eight moderate or severe migraine attacks per month. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to zavegepant 10 mg nasal spray or matching placebo and self-treated a single migraine attack of moderate or severe pain intensity. Randomisation was stratified by the use or non-use of preventive medication. Study centre personnel entered eligible participants into the study using an interactive web response system that was operated and managed by an independent contract research organisation. All participants, investigators, and the funder were masked to group assignment. The coprimary endpoints, freedom from pain and freedom from the most bothersome symptom at 2 h after the treatment dose, were assessed in all randomly assigned participants who took the study medication, had a migraine attack of moderate or severe pain intensity at baseline, and provided at least one evaluable post-baseline efficacy datapoint. Safety was analysed in all randomly assigned participants who received at least one dose. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT04571060, and is closed to accrual.

FINDINGS

Between Oct 27, 2020, and Aug 20, 2021, 1978 participants were recruited and assessed for eligibility. 1405 participants were eligible (703 were assigned to zavegepant and 702 to placebo), and 1269 were included in the efficacy analysis set (623 in the zavegepant group and 646 in the placebo group). 2 h after the treatment dose, more participants in the zavegepant group than in the placebo group had pain freedom (147 [24%] of 623 participants vs 96 [15%] of 646 participants, risk difference 8·8 percentage points, 95% CI 4·5-13·1; p<0·0001) and freedom from their most bothersome symptom (247 [40%] vs 201 [31%], risk difference 8·7 percentage points, 3·4-13·9; p=0·0012). The most common adverse events in either treatment group (≥2%) were dysgeusia (129 [21%] of 629 in the zavegepant group vs 31 [5%] of 653 in the placebo group), nasal discomfort (23 [4%] vs five [1%]), and nausea (20 [3%] vs seven [1%]). No signal of hepatotoxicity due to zavegepant was identified.

INTERPRETATION

Zavegepant 10 mg nasal spray was efficacious in the acute treatment of migraine, with favourable tolerability and safety profiles. Additional trials are needed to establish the long-term safety and consistency of effect across attacks.

FUNDING

Biohaven Pharmaceuticals.

Efficacy of rimegepant for the acute treatment of migraine based on triptan treatment experience: Pooled results from three phase 3 randomized clinical trials

BACKGROUND

This post-hoc analysis from three phase 3 treatment trials of rimegepant 75 mg - an oral small molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist for acute and preventive treatment of migraine - assessed efficacy in adults with migraine based on triptan treatment experience.

METHODS

Participants were assigned to one of four groups based on triptan treatment experience: insufficient response (e.g. lack of efficacy and/or poor tolerability) to 1 triptan, insufficient response to ≥2 triptans, current triptan users, and triptan-naïve participants. The co-primary efficacy endpoints were pain freedom and most bothersome symptom freedom at two hours postdose.

RESULTS

In the three trials (N = 3507; rimegepant n = 1749, placebo n = 1758), 1235 (35.2%) participants had a history of insufficient response to 1 triptan (n = 910 [25.9%]) or ≥2 triptans (n = 325 [9.3%]), and 2272 (64.8%) had no history of insufficient response to triptans (current use = 595 [17.0%], naïve = 1677 [47.8%]). Rimegepant was effective on the co-primary endpoints in all subgroups (p ≤ 0.013), except for freedom from the most bothersome symptom in the triptan-naïve group (p = 0.06). No differences on co-primary endpoints were found in pairwise comparisons of rimegepant-treated participants.

CONCLUSIONS

Rimegepant was effective for the acute treatment of migraine in adults with a history of insufficient response to 1 or ≥2 triptans and in current triptan users. Efficacy on co-primary endpoints did not differ based on the number of insufficient triptan responses.Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03235479, NCT03237845, NCT03461757.

Health State Utility Mapping of Rimegepant for the Preventive Treatment of Migraine: Double-Blind Treatment Phase and Open Label Extension (BHV3000-305)

INTRODUCTION

The objectives of this study were to (1) report long-term health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes among patients using rimegepant preventatively in BHV3000-305 (NCT03732638) open-label extension (OLE) and (2) map Migraine-Specific Quality of Life questionnaire version 2.1 (MSQv2) to EQ-5D-3L utility values over the double-blind treatment (DBT; 0-12 weeks) and the OLE (13-64 weeks) to assess the influence of treatment on these values.

METHODS

This was a post hoc analysis using data from a rimegepant study for the prevention of migraine (BHV3000-305). Adult patients with migraine took either rimegepant 75 mg or placebo every other day (EOD) during the DBT phase. All patients received rimegepant during the OLE. MSQv2 was measured at baseline, weeks 12, 24, and 64. A validated algorithm was used to map MSQv2 scores to EQ-5D utilities.

RESULTS

Baseline data were available for 347 patients treated with placebo and 348 treated with rimegepant in the DBT period, who continued to the OLE. Baseline EQ-5D utilities were similar between trial arms: 0.598 for placebo and 0.614 for rimegepant. EQ-5D improved from baseline to week 12 and utilities increased by + 0.09 for placebo and + 0.10 for rimegepant (p value = 0.011). By 24 weeks, at which point patients who were originally randomized to placebo had received rimegepant 75 mg EOD for 12 weeks, HRQoL measures (MSQv2 and EQ-5D) were similar across groups, demonstrating rapid onset of treatment effect. This HRQoL improvement was durable out to 64 weeks.

CONCLUSION

Compared to placebo, treatment with rimegepant 75 mg was associated with greater improvement in EQ-5D utilities during the 12-week DBT phase. Patients originally randomized to placebo experienced a similar improvement in EQ-5D utilities after switching to rimegepant during the OLE, demonstrating that benefits are realized within 12 weeks of active treatment. This preventive effect was durable out to 64 weeks and was associated with an additional increase in HRQoL over time.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03732638.

Rimegepant, Ubrogepant, and Lasmiditan in the Acute Treatment of Migraine Examining the Benefit-Risk Profile Using Number Needed to Treat/Harm

OBJECTIVES

To develop and compare benefit-risk profiles for rimegepant, ubrogepant, and lasmiditan based on a network meta-analysis (NMA) of published clinical trials.

METHODS

A fixed-effects Bayesian NMA of randomized controlled trials of lasmiditan, rimegepant, and ubrogepant for the acute treatment of adults with migraine were used to determine risk differences for efficacy and safety outcomes of the 3 treatments compared with pooled placebo. Risk differences were used to calculate number needed to treat (NNT) for pain relief and pain freedom at 2 and 2 to 24 hours and freedom from most bothersome symptoms at 2 hours; and number needed to harm (NNH) for dizziness and nausea, relative to placebo.

RESULTS

Results were based on 5 randomized controlled trials (NCT03461757, NCT02828020, NCT02867709, NCT02439320, and NCT02605174). NNT to achieve sustained pain relief at 2 to 24 hours was lowest for rimegepant 75 mg (5; 95% credible interval [Crl]: 4, 7) and ubrogepant 100 mg (5; 95% Crl: 4, 8) and highest for ubrogepant 25 mg (8; 95% Crl: 5, 16). Rimegepant had the lowest NNT to achieve sustained pain freedom at 2 to 24 hours and lasmiditan 50 mg had the highest (7; 95% Crl: 5, 12 vs. 26; 95% Crl: 13, 95). NNH for dizziness and nausea was highest for ubrogepant 25 mg (28; 95% Crl: 15, 62 and 99; 95% Crl: -2580, 2378, respectively). Lasmiditan 200 mg had the lowest NNH for dizziness and rimegepant 75 mg had the lowest NNH for nausea.

CONCLUSIONS

The benefit-risk profiles of lasmiditan, rimegepant, and ubrogepant may improve clinical decision-making.

Zavegepant nasal spray for the acute treatment of migraine: A Phase 2/3 double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging trial

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of zavegepant nasal spray in the acute treatment of migraine.

BACKGROUND

Calcitonin gene-related peptide-targeting agents are a novel class of therapeutics for migraine, but none are currently available as a nonoral option for acute treatment. Zavegepant, a high-affinity, selective, and structurally unique calcitonin gene-related peptide-receptor antagonist in late-stage development, is formulated as a nasal spray for the acute treatment of migraine.

METHODS

This randomized, dose-ranging, placebo-controlled, Phase 2/3 trial in adults aged ≥18 years with migraine (NCT03872453) was conducted at US study sites. Participants were randomized by an interactive web response system and treated a single attack of moderate to severe pain intensity with zavegepant nasal spray 5, 10, 20 mg, or placebo. Coprimary efficacy endpoints were pain freedom and freedom from the most bothersome symptom at 2 h postdose.

RESULTS

Of the 1673 participants aged 18 to 79 years who were randomized, 1588 were treated with study medication, and 1581 (mean age 40.8 years, 85.5% female) were analyzed for efficacy: zavegepant 5 mg (n = 387), 10 mg (n = 391), 20 mg (n = 402), and placebo (n = 401). Zavegepant 10 and 20 mg were more effective than placebo on the coprimary endpoints of pain freedom at 2 h postdose (placebo: 15.5% [98.3% confidence interval (CI), 11.1, 19.8]; 10 mg: 22.5% [98.3% CI, 17.5, 27.6; p = 0.0113]; 20 mg: 23.1% [98.3% CI, 18.1, 28.2; p = 0.0055]) and freedom from the most bothersome symptom at 2 h postdose (placebo: 33.7% [98.3% CI, 28.0, 39.3]; 10 mg: 41.9% [98.3% CI, 36.0, 47.9; p = 0.0155]; 20 mg: 42.5% [98.3% CI, 36.6, 48.4; p = 0.0094]). Findings for the 5 mg dose were not significant. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events with zavegepant 10 and 20 mg and placebo were dysgeusia (13.5% to 16.1% vs. 3.5%), nausea (2.7% to 4.1% vs. 0.5%), and nasal discomfort (1.3% to 5.2% vs. 0.2%). Most adverse events were mild or moderate and resolved without treatment. There was no signal of hepatotoxicity.

CONCLUSION

Zavegepant nasal spray, in single doses of 10 or 20 mg, was effective for the acute treatment of migraine, with a favorable safety profile. Additional research is needed to confirm its potential as a nonoral medication for the acute treatment of migraine.

P-Glycoprotein and Breast Cancer Resistance Protein Transporter Inhibition by Cyclosporine and Quinidine on the Pharmacokinetics of Oral Rimegepant in Healthy Subjects

Rimegepant (Nurtec ODT)—an orally administered, small‐molecule calcitonin gene–related peptide receptor antagonist indicated for the acute and preventive treatment of migraine—is a substrate for both the P‐glycoprotein and breast cancer resistance protein transporters in vitro. We evaluated the effects of concomitant administration of strong inhibitors of these transporters on the pharmacokinetics of rimegepant in healthy subjects. This single‐center, open‐label, randomized study was conducted in 2 parts, both of which were 2‐period, 2‐sequence, crossover studies. Part 1 (n = 15) evaluated the effect of a single oral dose of 200‐mg cyclosporine, a strong inhibitor of the P‐glycoprotein and breast cancer resistance protein transporters, on the pharmacokinetics of rimegepant 75 mg. Part 2 (n = 12) evaluated the effect of a single oral dose of 600‐mg quinidine, a strong selective P‐glycoprotein transporter, on the pharmacokinetics of rimegepant 75 mg. Coadministration with cyclosporine showed an increase in rimegepant area under the plasma concentration–time curve from time 0 to infinity and maximum observed concentration based on geometric mean ratios (90% confidence intervals [CIs]) of 1.6 (1.49‐1.72) and 1.41 (1.27‐1.57), respectively, versus rimegepant alone. Coadministration with quinidine showed an increase in rimegepant area under the plasma concentration–time curve from time 0 to infinity and maximum observed concentration geometric mean ratios (90% CIs) of 1.55 (1.40‐1.72) and 1.67 (1.46‐1.91), respectively, versus rimegepant alone. Strong P‐glycoprotein inhibitors (cyclosporine, quinidine) increased rimegepant exposures (>50%, <2‐fold). In parts 1 and 2, rimegepant coadministration was well tolerated and safe. The similar effect of cyclosporine and quinidine coadministration on rimegepant exposure suggests that inhibition of breast cancer resistance protein inhibition may have less influence on rimegepant exposure.

Human Milk and Plasma Pharmacokinetics of Single-Dose Rimegepant 75 mg in Healthy Lactating Women

Objective: Investigate whether rimegepant-an oral small molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist for the treatment of migraine-is excreted in human milk after a single 75 mg dose and characterize its concentration-time profile in the plasma and milk of healthy lactating women to determine the relative infant dose (RID). Methods: This open-label, single-center study enrolled healthy lactating women aged 18-40 years with a gestation of 37-42 weeks and uncomplicated delivery of a single healthy child ≥2 weeks (14 days) and ≤6 months before study drug administration. Plasma samples were collected 0, 1, 2, 4, and 8 hours postdose; human milk samples were collected at 0, 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24, 32, and 36 hours. The milk:plasma drug concentration ratio was estimated as the ratio of the human milk:plasma areas under the curve. The RID (%) was calculated as 100 times the quotient of the body weight-normalized infant and maternal doses. Results: Subjects (N = 12) were enrolled between 25 January and 15 September 2020. The mean (standard deviation [SD]) age was 29.8 (3.6) years; mean (SD) body mass index was 26.8 (4.9) kg/m². The mean (SD) RID of rimegepant was 0.51% (0.14). The mean (SD) body-weight normalized infant dose was 0.005 (0.001) mg/kg/day, the mean (SD) body-weight normalized maternal dose was 1.04 (0.18) mg/kg/day, and mean (SD) maternal body weight was 74.0 (13.3) kg. Conclusion: On a weight-adjusted basis, the mean RID of rimegepant was <1% of the maternal dose.

Rimegepant 75 mg for acute treatment of migraine is associated with significant reduction in monthly migraine days: Results from a long-term, open-label study

Background:

Rimegepant, a small molecule oral calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonist, is approved for the acute and preventive treatment of migraine. We hypothesized that intermittent CGRP receptor blockade with rimegepant 75 mg acute treatment as needed (PRN) might result in reductions in monthly migraine days (MMD) over time, and was evaluated as the study objective.

Methods:

This was a post-hoc analysis of adults with ≥6 MMD at baseline who self-administered rimegepant 75 mg orally PRN for acute treatment of migraine up to 52-weeks in an open-label safety study (BHV3000-201; NCT03266588). Outcome measures (defined as median time to) and response rates (defined as proportion of patients reporting) were captured for ≥30% and ≥50% reduction of baseline MMD.

Results:

1044 participants with ≥6 MMD at baseline were analyzed. Median time to ≥30% reduction in MMD was 12 weeks (IQR; 4–40 weeks); median time to ≥50% reduction was 32 weeks (IQR; 12-NR weeks). Reduction in MMD was observed over time regardless of baseline migraine frequency, however higher baseline MMD were associated with a longer time to achieving ≥30% or ≥50% MMD reduction.

Conclusion:

In participants presenting with ≥6 MMD, PRN acute treatment of migraine attacks over 52-weeks with oral rimegepant 75 mg was observed to confer reductions in migraine frequency.

Trial registration:

NCT03266588

Mapping Migraine-Specific Quality of Life to Health State Utilities in Patients Receiving Rimegepant

INTRODUCTION

Migraine is a debilitating neurological condition, affecting up to 15% of Americans. Recent estimates from a long-term safety study of rimegepant showed evidence of decreased monthly migraine days (MMD) in people with episodic migraine treated with rimegepant 75 mg. The objective of this study was to characterize migraine-specific quality of life version 2.1 (MSQv2) scores and corresponding mapped EuroQol-5 Dimensions-3 Level (EQ-5D-3L) utility values.

METHODS

Study participants were randomized into two treatment regimens: individuals with 2-14 MMD received rimegepant 75 mg as needed (PRN), and those with 4-14 MMD at baseline who received rimegepant on a fixed every-other-day schedule plus an as needed dose on days they did not treat (QOD + PRN). MSQv2 was mapped to EQ-5D-3L utilities using a validated algorithm. Outcomes were assessed for the PRN arm at baseline weeks 12, 24, 36, and 52 and for the QOD + PRN arm at baseline and week 12.

RESULTS

At baseline, MSQv2 data were available for 1,800 patients: 1,033 with 2-8 MMD in the PRN group, 481 with 9-14 MMD in the PRN group, and 286 with 4-14 MMD in the QOD + PRN group. For all MSQv2 domains as well as mapped utility values, outcomes improved over each study visit. At baseline, EQ-5D-3L utilities were 0.66, 0.63, and 0.65 for the 2-8 MMD PRN, 9-14 MMD PRN, and 4-14 MMD QOD + PRN groups, respectively. At end-of-study, utilities had increased by + 0.09, + 0.10, and + 0.12 for the three groups, respectively (p < 0.001 for all comparisons with baseline). Similar trends in improvement were observed across MSQv2 subdomains; all differences were statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Rimegepant 75 mg, which has been shown to be associated with reduced MMD, is associated with improvement in MSQv2 domains over time, leading to estimated improvement in EQ-5D-3L utilities. While this improvement was observed in all patient-groups, it was most pronounced in those with higher MMD and those taking rimegepant QOD + PRN.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trials NCT03266588.

Comparative efficacy and safety of rimegepant, ubrogepant, and lasmiditan for acute treatment of migraine: a network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

In the absence of head-to-head comparisons, the objective of this study was to conduct a network meta-analysis (NMA) to indirectly compare the relative efficacy and safety of rimegepant, ubrogepant, and lasmiditan for the acute treatment of migraine.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of rimegepant, ubrogepant, and lasmiditan in adults with acute migraine. Outcomes included sustained pain freedom and -relief 2-48 hours post-dose, and adverse events. No RCTs were identified that directly compared these interventions. Therefore, a fixed-effects Bayesian NMA was conducted by identifying a connected (via comparison to placebo) network of RCTs.

RESULTS

Five RCTs were identified as follows: rimegepant study 303 (n = 1,466), ubrogepant ACHIEVE I and II (n = 1,672 and n = 1,686, respectively), and lasmiditan SAMURAI and SPARTAN (n = 2,231 and n = 3,005, respectively). Efficacy outcomes (pain freedom and relief at 2, 24, 48 hours) tended to be highest for lasmiditan 200 mg and rimegepant followed lower doses of lasmiditan and all doses of ubrogepant. However, lasmiditan 200 mg was also associated with higher rates of adverse events, particularly somnolence and dizziness.

CONCLUSIONS

Lasmiditan, rimegepant, and ubrogepant all performed significantly better than placebo with respect to pain freedom and pain relief. Efficacy results were similar for rimegepant and lasmiditan with rimegepant having higher rates of pain freedom and relief than lower doses of lasmiditan, while somnolence and dizziness outcomes were lower for rimegepant than higher doses of lasmiditan.

Matching-adjusted indirect comparisons of oral rimegepant versus placebo, erenumab, and galcanezumab examining monthly migraine days and health-related quality of life in the treatment of migraine

OBJECTIVE

Rimegepant is an orally administered small-molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) receptor antagonist, with demonstrated efficacy in the acute treatment of migraine. Recent estimates from a single-arm trial (BHV3000-201) have also shown evidence of long-term preventive effects in monthly migraine days (MMDs) and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). This study aimed to compare MMDs and HRQoL data for oral rimegepant to those obtained in placebo-controlled trials for injectable anti-CGRP monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) galcanezumab and erenumab.

METHODS

Matching-adjusted indirect comparisons (MAICs) were conducted using rimegepant subject-level data and published aggregate-level results from mAb trials. Rimegepant baseline characteristics were matched to the pooled subject characteristics from EVOLVE-I/II (galcanezumab vs. placebo; n = 1773) and STRIVE (ereumab vs. placebo; n = 955) by reweighting the rimegepant subjects to more closely match the distributions observed in these trials. To align with inclusion criteria of the mAb trials, only the subset of rimegepant subjects with a history of 4-14 MMDs were included (n = 257). Weighted mean differences were used to calculate adjusted change in MMDs, Migraine Disability Assessment Test (MIDAS) score, and Migraine-Specific Quality of Life Questionnaire version 2 (MSQv2) scores from baseline to week 12.

RESULTS

When matched to the EVOLVE trials, rimegepant was superior to placebo with a mean difference in MMD change from baseline [95% confidence interval] of -1.16 [-1.80, -0.52] and was not statistically significantly different from galcanezumab 0.59 [-0.13, 1.32]. When matched to the STRIVE trial, rimegepant was superior to placebo -1.59 [-2.15, -1.03] and was not statistically significantly different from erenumab -0.06 [-0.61, 0.50]. Rimegepant showed superior MIDAS and MSQv2 results compared with placebo in both EVOLVE trials and in the STRIVE trial, no statistically significant differences from galcanezumab and erenumab regarding MIDAS, and favorable results compared with erenumab across all MSQv2 domains, while being generally similar to galcanezumab across all MSQv2 domains.

CONCLUSIONS

When adjustments were made to reflect baseline characteristics in published literature, supporting data from BHV3000-201 suggest that rimegepant every other day is an effective therapy in reducing disability and MMDs and enhancing migraine-specific HRQoL. These data support the preventive benefit observed in randomized trials of rimegepant and further validate its efficacy for both acute and preventive treatment of migraine.

A phase 1 randomized study of hemodynamic effects and pharmacokinetic interactions during concomitant use of rimegepant and sumatriptan in healthy adults

Objective:

This randomized, partially-blinded, placebo-controlled study evaluated hemodynamic effects, pharmacokinetic interactions, and safety of concomitant administration of oral rimegepant and subcutaneous sumatriptan.

Methods:

Healthy non-smokers aged ≥18 and ≤40 years (men) or ≥18 and ≤50 years (women) were enrolled. On Day 1, subjects received 12 mg of sumatriptan as 2 subcutaneous 6 mg injections separated by 1 hour. From Days 2 to 4, subjects received rimegepant or placebo once daily (randomized 6 to 1, rimegepant to placebo). On Day 5, subjects received rimegepant or placebo, followed 2 hours later by 2 subcutaneous 6 mg injections of sumatriptan, separated by 1 hour. Sumatriptan was administered at the same times as on Day 1.

Results:

All 42 dosed subjects were analyzed. There were no significant differences in the time-weighted average of mean arterial pressure, diastolic blood pressure, or systolic blood pressure between treatment with rimegepant + sumatriptan and sumatriptan alone. Co-administration of rimegepant and sumatriptan had no effect on the pharmacokinetics of either drug. Overall, 93% (39/42) of subjects experienced ≥1 adverse event; injection site reaction was most common (60% [29/42]).

Conclusions:

Concomitant administration of oral rimegepant and subcutaneous sumatriptan to healthy adults was without hemodynamic or pharmacokinetic interaction and was safe and well tolerated.

Oral rimegepant for preventive treatment of migraine: a phase 2/3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Rimegepant is a calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist that has shown efficacy and safety in the acute treatment of migraine. We aimed to compare the efficacy of rimegepant with placebo for preventive treatment of migraine.

METHODS

We did a multicentre, phase 2/3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial at 92 sites in the USA. Adults with at least a 1-year history of migraine were recruited. After a 4-week observation period, eligible participants were randomised using an interactive web response system to oral rimegepant 75 mg or matching placebo every other day for 12 weeks (double-blind treatment phase). The primary efficacy endpoint was change from the 4-week observation period in the mean number of migraine days per month in the last 4 weeks of the double-blind treatment phase (weeks 9-12). Participants who received at least one dose of their assigned study medication and who had 14 days or more of data in the observation period and 14 days or more of data for at least one 4-week interval during the double-blind treatment phase were analysed for efficacy. Those who received at least one dose of study medication were analysed for safety. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03732638.

FINDINGS

Between Nov 14, 2018, and Aug 30, 2019, 1591 participants were recruited and assessed for eligibility, of whom 747 were randomly allocated either rimegepant (n=373) or placebo (n=374). 695 participants were included in the analysis for efficacy, of whom 348 were assigned rimegepant and 347 were allocated placebo. Rimegepant was superior to placebo on the primary endpoint of change in the mean number of migraine days per month during weeks 9-12. The change from the observation period in mean number of migraine days per month during weeks 9-12 was -4·3 days (95% CI -4·8 to -3·9) with rimegepant and -3·5 days (-4·0 to -3·0) with placebo (least squares mean difference -0·8 days, 95% CI -1·46 to -0·20; p=0·0099). 741 participants received study medication and were included in the safety analysis. 133 (36%) of 370 patients who received rimegepant reported an adverse event, compared with 133 (36%) of 371 who received placebo. Seven (2%) participants who received rimegepant and four (1%) who received placebo discontinued the study due to an adverse event; no patients died.

INTERPRETATION

Taken every other day, rimegepant was effective for preventive treatment of migraine. Tolerability was similar to that of placebo, and no unexpected or serious safety issues were noted.

FUNDING

Biohaven Pharmaceuticals.

Safety of Rimegepant, an Oral CGRP Receptor Antagonist, Plus CGRP Monoclonal Antibodies for Migraine

Objective

Evaluate the safety and tolerability of oral rimegepant when used for acute treatment concomitantly with a monoclonal antibody (mAb) targeting the calcitonin gene‐related peptide (CGRP) ligand or receptor (CGRP mAb) for the preventive treatment of migraine.

Background

The efficacy of CGRP mAbs for the preventive treatment of migraine and the small molecule CGRP receptor antagonist rimegepant for acute treatment has been demonstrated in randomized controlled clinical trials. Over the past few years, the US Food and Drug Administration has approved 4 CGRP mAbs for the preventive treatment of migraine and 2 small molecule CGRP receptor antagonists for the acute treatment of migraine. A previous case report of 2 patients receiving concomitant treatment with rimegepant and erenumab suggested that rimegepant may be safely used as acute treatment in patients who are also receiving a preventive regimen involving CGRP mAbs. We report here 13 additional patients with migraine who simultaneously used rimegepant and either erenumab, fremanezumab, or galcanezumab and assess the rate of on‐treatment adverse events (AEs).

Methods

This was a substudy nested within a multicenter, open‐label, long‐term safety study in adults with 2‐14 monthly migraine attacks of moderate to severe pain intensity. A subgroup experiencing 2‐8 monthly attacks and taking a stable dose of a CGRP mAb also took rimegepant 75 mg as needed up to once daily for acute treatment for 12 weeks.

Results

The 13 patients (11 women [85%]; mean age 49.9 years) enrolled in the substudy were being treated with CGRP mAbs (erenumab [n = 7], fremanezumab [n = 4], or galcanezumab [n = 2]). Mean (SD) time in the rimegepant treatment period was 9.6 (4.6) weeks. Mean (SD) 4‐week rimegepant exposure was 7.8 (5.5) doses; a total of 224 doses were taken. Five (38%) patients reported ≥1 on‐treatment AE. Of these, 2 (15%) patients had mild or moderate nasopharyngitis; no other AEs occurred in ≥2 patients. Three patients had AEs of mild or moderate severity that were considered potentially treatment‐related. No patients had serious AEs, AEs leading to discontinuation, or aminotransferase levels >3× the upper limit of normal.

Conclusion

Rimegepant, when used as an oral acute treatment in patients receiving CGRP mAbs as preventive treatment, was well tolerated; no safety issues were identified. Studies involving larger patient populations are needed to confirm these findings.

Potential for treatment benefit of small molecule CGRP receptor antagonist plus monoclonal antibody in migraine therapy

Objective

To provide the first clinical report that 2 calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) therapies, a small molecule CGRP receptor antagonist and an anti-CGRP receptor antibody, can be used concomitantly to treat refractory migraine.

Methods

Case reports are presented of 2 patients participating in a long-term safety study of rimegepant 75 mg oral tablets for acute treatment (NCT03266588). After Food and Drug Administration approval of erenumab, both patients started subcutaneous erenumab monthly as allowed per protocol.

Results

Patients were women 44 and 36 years of age with ≥2 decades of self-reported suboptimal response to multiple migraine medications. Patient 1 used rimegepant for 6 months and then started erenumab 70 mg subcutaneous monthly. Despite a response to preventive treatment with erenumab, she experienced substantial relief treating 7 of 7 acute attacks with rimegepant and eliminated regular, frequent use of ibuprofen and a caffeinated analgesic. Patient 2 used rimegepant for 60 days before starting erenumab 140 mg subcutaneously monthly. While on erenumab, 9 of 9 attacks treated with rimegepant responded. She stopped near-daily use of injectable ketorolac and diphenhydramine. While using rimegepant alone or together with erenumab, patients reported no related adverse events.

Conclusions

Rimegepant 75 mg may be effective for acute treatment during concomitant erenumab preventive administration. The mechanism underlying the benefits of concomitant use of a small molecule CGRP receptor antagonist and an anti-CGRP receptor antibody is unknown and requires further study.

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier

NCT03266588.

Classification of evidence

This study provides Class IV evidence that for patients with migraine using erenumab, rimegepant is effective for acute treatment.

Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of rimegepant orally disintegrating tablet for the acute treatment of migraine: a randomised, phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Rimegepant, a small molecule calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist, has shown efficacy in the acute treatment of migraine using a standard tablet formulation. The objective of this trial was to compare the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of a novel orally disintegrating tablet formulation of rimegepant at 75 mg with placebo in the acute treatment of migraine.

METHODS

In this double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, multicentre phase 3 trial, adults aged 18 years or older with history of migraine of at least 1 year were recruited to 69 study centres in the USA. Participants were randomly assigned to receive rimegepant (75 mg orally disintegrating tablet) or placebo and instructed to treat a single migraine attack of moderate or severe pain intensity. The randomisation was stratified by the use of prophylactic medication (yes or no), and was carried out using an interactive web response system that was accessed by each clinical site. All participants, investigators, and the sponsor were masked to treatment group assignment. The coprimary endpoints were freedom from pain and freedom from the most bothersome symptom at 2 h postdose. The efficacy analyses used the modified intention-to-treat population, which included all patients who were randomly assigned, had a migraine attack with pain of moderate or severe intensity, took a dose of rimegepant or placebo, and had at least one efficacy assessment after administration of the dose. The safety analyses included all randomly assigned participants who received at least one dose of study medication. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03461757, and is closed to accrual.

FINDINGS

Between Feb 27 and Aug 28, 2018, 1811 participants were recruited and assessed for eligibility. 1466 participants were randomly assigned to the rimegepant (n=732) or placebo (n=734) groups, of whom 1375 received treatment with rimegepant (n=682) or placebo (n=693), and 1351 were evaluated for efficacy (rimegepant n=669, placebo n=682). At 2 h postdose, rimegepant orally disintegrating tablet was superior to placebo for freedom from pain (21% vs 11%, p<0·0001; risk difference 10, 95% CI 6-14) and freedom from the most bothersome symptom (35% vs 27%, p=0·0009; risk difference 8, 95% CI 3-13). The most common adverse events were nausea (rimegepant n=11 [2%]; placebo n=3 [<1%]) and urinary tract infection (rimegepant n=10 [1%]; placebo n=4 [1%]). One participant in each treatment group had a transaminase concentration of more than 3 × the upper limit of normal; neither was related to study medication, and no elevations in bilirubin greater than 2 × the upper limit of normal were reported. Treated participants reported no serious adverse events.

INTERPRETATION

In the acute treatment of migraine, a single 75 mg dose of rimegepant in an orally disintegrating tablet formulation was more effective than placebo. Tolerability was similar to placebo, with no safety concerns.

FUNDING

Biohaven Pharmaceuticals.

Rimegepant, an Oral Calcitonin Gene-Related Peptide Receptor Antagonist, for Migraine

BACKGROUND

Calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor has been implicated in the pathogenesis of migraine. Rimegepant is an orally administered, small-molecule, calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist that may be effective in acute migraine treatment.

METHODS

In a multicenter, double-blind, phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned adults with at least a 1-year history of migraine and two to eight migraine attacks of moderate or severe intensity per month to receive rimegepant orally at a dose of 75 mg or matching placebo for the treatment of a single migraine attack. The primary end points were freedom from pain and freedom from the most bothersome symptom (other than pain) identified by the patient, both of which were assessed 2 hours after the dose of rimegepant or placebo was administered.

RESULTS

A total of 1186 patients were randomly assigned to receive rimegepant (594 patients) or placebo (592 patients); of these, 537 patients in the rimegepant group and 535 patients in the placebo group could be evaluated for efficacy. The overall mean age of the patients evaluated for efficacy was 40.6 years, and 88.7% were women. In a modified intention-to-treat analysis, the percentage of patients who were pain-free 2 hours after receiving the dose was 19.6% in the rimegepant group and 12.0% in the placebo group (absolute difference, 7.6 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.3 to 11.9; P<0.001). The percentage of patients who were free from their most bothersome symptom 2 hours after the dose was 37.6% in the rimegepant group and 25.2% in the placebo group (absolute difference, 12.4 percentage points; 95% CI, 6.9 to 17.9; P<0.001). The most common adverse events were nausea and urinary tract infection.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment of a migraine attack with the oral calcitonin gene-related peptide receptor antagonist rimegepant resulted in a higher percentage of patients who were free of pain and free from their most bothersome symptom than placebo. (Funded by Biohaven Pharmaceuticals; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03237845.).

A contrast in safety, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics across age groups after a single 50 mg oral dose of the γ-secretase inhibitor avagacestat

AIM

To evaluate the single dose pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and preliminary tolerability of the γ-secretase inhibitor BMS-708163 (avagacestat) in young and elderly men and women.

METHODS

All subjects received double-blinded administration of a single 50 mg dose of avagacestat in capsule form or matching placebo. Main evaluations included pharmacokinetics, safety, plasma amyloid-β (Aβ)(1-40) concentratios and exploration of Notch biomarkers.

RESULTS

Avagacestat 50 mg capsule was well tolerated and rapidly absorbed among young and elderly subjects, with a median t(max) between 1 and 2 h post dose and an average half-life between 41 and 71 h. In general, subjects aged 75 years or more had higher AUC(0,∞) values than those aged less than 75 years. An exploratory analysis of Aβ(1-40) serum concentrations showed a pattern of decreasing concentrations over the first 4-6 h followed by a rise above baseline that was maintained until the end of the assessment period. Adverse events were generally mild, occurring more frequently in elderly subjects, with no observed difference between subjects receiving avagacestat and placebo. No dose limiting gastrointestinal effects of avagacestat were observed and exploratory biomarkers of Notch inhibition did not change significantly.

CONCLUSIONS

The favourable safety profile and pharmacokinetic effects of avagacestat in this study support its continued development, especially in the target population of elderly subjects with mild cognitive impairment or Alzheimer's disease.

Do corticotropin releasing factor-1 receptors influence colonic transit and bowel function in women with irritable bowel syndrome?

Corticotropin releasing factor (CRF), a mediator of stress response, alters gastrointestinal (GI) functions. Stress-related changes in colonic motility are blocked by selective CRF(1) receptor antagonists. Our aim was to assess whether modulation of central and peripheral CRF(1) receptors affects colonic transit and bowel function in female patients with diarrhea-predominant irritable bowel syndrome (D-IBS). This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 2-wk study evaluated the effects of oral pexacerfont (BMS-562086), a selective CRF(1) receptor antagonist, 25 and 100 mg qd, on GI and colonic transit of solids [by validated scintigraphy with primary end point colonic geometric center (GC) at 24 h] and bowel function (by validated daily diaries) in 39 women with D-IBS. The 100-mg dose was comparable to a dose that inhibited colonic motility in stressed rats. Treatment effects were compared by analysis of covariance with baseline colonic transit as covariate. The study had 80% power (alpha = 0.05) to detect clinically meaningful (26%) differences in colonic transit. Thirty-nine of 55 patients fulfilled eligibility criteria (9 screen failures, 5 baseline GC24 outside prespecified range). At baseline, three treatment groups had comparable age, body mass index, and GC 24 h. Significant effects of pexacerfont relative to placebo were not detected on colonic GC24 (P = 0.53), gastric emptying, orocecal transit, ascending colon emptying half-time, and stool frequency, consistency, and ease of passage. No safety issues were identified. We conclude that in women with D-IBS, pexacerfont, 25 or 100 mg qd, does not significantly alter colonic or other regional transit or bowel function. The role of central and peripheral CRF(1) receptors in bowel function in D-IBS requires further study.

A non-randomized study to investigate the effects of the atypical antipsychotic aripiprazole on the steady-state pharmacokinetics of lamotrigine in patients with bipolar I disorder

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of aripiprazole on steady-state pharmacokinetics of lamotrigine in patients with bipolar I disorder who were clinically stable on lamotrigine (100-400 mg/day) for >or=4 weeks.

METHODS

In this open-label study, aripiprazole was administered at 10 mg/day for 3 days, 20 mg/day for 3 days, then 30 mg/day for 8 days. Blood samples were collected on Days -1 and 14 for determination of lamotrigine steady-state pharmacokinetic parameters. Safety and tolerability were assessed.

RESULTS

Eighteen patients were administered aripiprazole in combination with lamotrigine. Geometric mean (GM) values for lamotrigine maximum plasma concentration were similar for lamotrigine alone (26 ng/mL) and with co-administered aripiprazole (23 ng/mL). GM values for plasma lamotrigine area under the concentration-time curve (AUCtau) were comparable for lamotrigine alone (434 ng/h/mL) and with co-administered aripiprazole (394 ng/h/mL). Median T(max) of lamotrigine alone and combined with aripiprazole was 1.98 and 0.77 h, respectively. No changes to lamotrigine dose-normalized plasma trough concentrations were observed with co-administered aripiprazole. Sixteen patients (88.9%) experienced >or=1 adverse event (AE), the most common of which was insomnia (n = 6).

CONCLUSIONS

Aripiprazole had no meaningful effect on lamotrigine steady-state pharmacokinetics in patients with bipolar I disorder. No dosage adjustment of lamotrigine is required and the combination was generally safe and well tolerated.

Pharmacokinetics of 6-hydroxybuspirone and its enantiomers administered individually or following buspirone administration in humans

The objective of this study was to assess the pharmacokinetics of 6-hydroxybuspirone (6OHB) when given orally via three forms: racemate (BMS-528215), S-enantiomer (BMS-442606) and R-enantiomer (BMS-442608), versus following the administration of buspirone. A double-blind, randomized, four-period, four-treatment, crossover study balanced for residual effects in healthy subjects was conducted (n=20). Subjects received single 10 mg doses of each compound in a randomized fashion with pharmacokinetics determined over a 24 h period. There was a 4-day washout between each dosing period. All three forms of 6OHB (racemate, S-enantiomer and R-enantiomer) were well tolerated. There was nterconversion between enantiomers. The dominant enantiomer was the S-enantiomer no matter which form of 6OHB was administered. All three forms of 6OHB produced approximately 2- to 3-fold greater exposure to total 6OHB than did buspirone. All three forms produced equal exposure to 1-(2-pyrimidinyl)-piperazine (1-PP) which was approximately 30% less than the 1-PP exposure derived from buspirone administration. All three forms of 6OHB produced approximately 3-fold higher 6OHB:1-PP ratios and approximately 2.5-fold higher total 6OHB exposures than did buspirone administration. All compounds were well tolerated. There seemed to be no advantage of one of the enantiomers of 6OHB over the racemate. Therefore, the racemate was chosen for further clinical development.

Pharmacokinetics of a newly identified active metabolite of buspirone after administration of buspirone over its therapeutic dose range

The objective of this study was to assess the pharmacokinetics of a newly identified active metabolite of buspirone, 6-hydroxybuspirone (6OHB), over the therapeutic dose range of buspirone. A 26-day, open-label, nonrandomized, single-sequence, dose-escalation study in normal healthy volunteers was conducted (N = 13). Subjects received escalating doses of buspirone with each dose administered for 5 days starting at a dose of 5 mg twice daily and increasing up to 30 mg twice daily. Plasma concentrations of 6OHB were approximately 40-fold greater than those of buspirone. 6OHB was rapidly formed following buspirone administration, and exposure increased proportionally with buspirone dose. Further research regarding the safety and efficacy of 6OHB itself is warranted.

Lack of efficacy of naltrexone in the prevention of alcohol relapse: results from a German multicenter study

In a placebo-controlled, double-blind German multicenter study (seven sites) the efficacy of naltrexone as an adjunctive treatment in alcoholism to maintain abstinence was assessed for 12 weeks. A total of 171 detoxified patients (97.7% met the DSM-III-R criteria for alcohol dependence) were included. Patients had been abstinent for a mean of 19.5 +/- 9.4 days at study entry. Eighty-four and 87 patients were randomized to receive naltrexone (50 mg/day) and placebo, respectively. Each site was instructed to provide its usual psychosocial alcohol treatment program. The primary effectiveness measure was the time to first heavy drinking as derived from self-reports of drinking (timeline-follow-back method). Secondary effectiveness measures included time to first drink, amount of alcohol consumption, intensity of craving, severity of alcoholism problems, and liver enzymes. Thirty-three (38%) placebo patients and 28 (33%) naltrexone patients discontinued the study. At endpoint, 62% of the patients in each group did not have an episode of heavy drinking. Also, there were no significant differences between the study groups concerning secondary effectiveness measures as well as compliance and adverse clinical events--with the exception of the gamma-GT, which was significantly greater reduced in the naltrexone group throughout the study. Based upon an intention-to-treat population, this study confirms the safety but not the efficacy of naltrexone in prevention of alcohol relapse. Nevertheless, the question arises whether self-reports of drinking are more reliable than gamma-GT as a measure of recent alcohol consumption.

A multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of naltrexone in the treatment of alcohol dependence or abuse

The opioid antagonist, naltrexone, is reported, in single centre studies, to improve the clinical outcome of individuals with alcohol dependence participating in outpatient psychosocial programmes. This is the first multicentre controlled study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of naltrexone as adjunctive treatment for alcohol dependence or abuse. Patients who met criteria for alcohol dependence (n = 169) or alcohol abuse (n = 6) were randomly assigned to receive double-blind oral naltrexone 50 mg daily (n = 90) or placebo (n = 85) for 12 weeks as an adjunct to psychosocial treatment. The primary efficacy variable was time to first episode of heavy drinking; secondary efficacy assessments included time to first drink, alcohol consumption, craving, and changes in the serum biological markers gamma-glutamyl transferase (GGT), and aspartate and alanine aminotransferases. Compliance was assessed by tablet counts and, in the naltrexone-treated group, by measurement of urinary concentrations of 6-ss-naltrexol. Forty-nine (58%) patients randomized to placebo and 53 (59%) randomized to naltrexone did not complete the study. In intention-to-treat analyses, there was no difference between groups on measures of drinking. The median reduction from baseline of serum GGT (P: < 0.05) and the reductions in alcohol craving (Obsessive and Compulsive Drinking Scale: OCDS) were greater in the naltrexone group (P: < 0.05), from approximately half-way through the study. Of 70 patients (35 placebo; 35 naltrexone) who met an a priori definition of compliance (80% tablet consumption, attendance at all follow-up appointments), those allocated to naltrexone reported consuming half the amount of alcohol (P: < 0.05), had greater median reduction in serum GGT activity (P: < 0.05), and greater reduction in alcohol craving (OCDS total score: P: < 0.05; Obsessive subscale score: P: < 0.05), compared to patients in the placebo group. Use of naltrexone raised no safety concerns. Naltrexone is effective in treating alcohol dependence/abuse in conjunction with psychosocial therapy, in patients who comply with treatment.