Efficacy and safety of vixotrigine in idiopathic or diabetes-associated painful small fibre neuropathy (CONVEY): a phase 2 placebo-controlled enriched-enrolment randomised withdrawal study

Background

No pharmacological treatments are specifically indicated for painful small fibre neuropathy (SFN). CONVEY, a phase 2 enriched-enrolment study, evaluated the efficacy and safety of vixotrigine, a voltage- and use-dependent sodium channel blocker, in participants with idiopathic or diabetes-associated painful SFN.

Methods

CONVEY was a phase 2, multicentre, placebo-controlled, double-blind (DB), enriched-enrolment, randomised withdrawal study. The study was conducted at 68 sites in 13 countries (Europe and Canada) between May 17, 2018, and April 12, 2021. Following a 4-week open-label period in which 265 adults with painful SFN (a mixture of large and small fibre neuropathy was not exclusionary) received oral vixotrigine 350 mg twice daily (BID), 123 participants (with a ≥30% reduction from baseline in average daily pain [ADP] score during the open-label period) were randomised 1:1:1 to receive 200 mg BID, 350 mg BID or placebo for a 12-week double-blind (DB) period. Primary endpoint was change from baseline in ADP at DB Week 12. Secondary endpoints included the proportion of participants with a ≥30% reduction from baseline in ADP and the proportion of Patient Global Impression of Pain (PGIC) responders at DB Week 12. Treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were monitored. Statistical significance was set at 0.10 (2-sided). The trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03339336) and on ClinicalTrialsregister.eu (2017-000991-27).

Findings

A statistically significant difference from placebo in least squares mean reduction in ADP score from baseline to DB Week 12 was observed with vixotrigine 200 mg BID (-0.85; SE, 0.43; 95% CI, -1.71 to 0.00; p = 0.050) but not 350 mg BID (-0.17; SE, 0.43; 95% CI, -1.01 to 0.68; p = 0.70). Numerically, but not statistically significantly, more participants who received vixotrigine vs placebo experienced a ≥30% ADP reduction from baseline (68.3-72.5% vs 52.5%), and only the 350 mg BID group had significantly more PGIC responders vs placebo (48.8% vs 30.0%; odds ratio = 2.60; 95% CI, 0.97-6.99; p = 0.058) at DB Week 12. AEs were mostly mild to moderate in the vixotrigine groups. The most common AEs (≥5% of vixotrigine-treated participants) in the DB 200 mg BID and 350 mg BID vixotrigine groups were falls, nasopharyngitis, muscle spasm, and urinary tract infection.

Interpretation

In our study, vixotrigine 200 mg BID, but not 350 mg BID, met the primary endpoint; more vixotrigine-treated participants experienced a ≥30% reduction from baseline in ADP at DB Week 12. Vixotrigine (at both dosages) was well tolerated in participants with SFN.

Funding

Biogen, Inc.

A Phase IIb Randomized Study of an Anti-αvβ6 Monoclonal Antibody in Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis

RATIONALE

Treatment options for idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) are limited.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of BG00011, an anti-αvβ6 IgG1 monoclonal antibody, in the treatment of patients with IPF.

METHODS

In a phase IIb randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, patients with IPF (forced vital capacity [FVC] ≥50% predicted, on or off background therapy) were randomized 1:1 to once-weekly subcutaneous BG00011 56 mg or placebo. Primary endpoint was FVC change from baseline at Week 52. Due to early trial termination (imbalance in adverse events [AEs] and lack of clinical benefit), endpoints were evaluated at Week 26 as an exploratory analysis.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

106 patients were randomized and received ≥1 dose of BG00011 (n = 54) or placebo (n = 52). At Week 26, there was no significant difference in FVC change from baseline (SE) between patients who received BG00011 (n = 20) or placebo (n = 23), -0.056 L (0.0593) vs. -0.097 L (0.0600), respectively; P=0.268. However, after Week 26, patients in the BG00011 group showed a worsening trend. Eight of 18 (44.4%) who received BG00011 and 4 of 22 (18.2%) who received placebo showed worsening of fibrosis on high-resolution computed tomography at end of treatment. IPF exacerbation/or progression was reported in 13 patients (all in the BG00011 group). Serious AEs occurred more frequently in BG00011 patients, including four deaths.

CONCLUSIONS

The results do not support the continued clinical development of BG00011. Further research is warranted to identify new treatment strategies that modify inflammatory and fibrotic pathways in IPF Clinical trial registration available at www.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov, ID: NCT03573505.

An integrated analysis of safety and tolerability of etelcalcetide in patients receiving hemodialysis with secondary hyperparathyroidism

Background

Calcimimetics have been shown to be effective and safe therapies for the treatment of secondary hyperparathyroidism (sHPT), a serious complication of disordered mineral metabolism associated with dialysis-dependent chronic kidney disease. Etelcalcetide, a recently approved intravenous calcimimetic, reduces serum parathyroid hormone (PTH), calcium, phosphorus, and fibroblast growth factor-23 concentrations. Here we report the first integrated safety profile of etelcalcetide using pooled data from five pivotal clinical trials.

Methods

This analysis included data from patients receiving hemodialysis with moderate to severe sHPT enrolled in two randomized, placebo-controlled trials; a randomized active-controlled (with cinacalcet) trial; and two single-arm, open-label extension trials. Patients initially received etelcalcetide intravenously 5 mg three times weekly (TIW) after hemodialysis; with potential dose increases of 2.5 or 5 mg at 4-week intervals to a maximum dose of 15 mg TIW, depending on serum PTH and calcium levels. The nature, frequency, and severity of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) and changes in laboratory parameters were assessed.

Results

Overall, we evaluated 1023 patients from the placebo-controlled trials, 683 from the active-controlled trial, and 1299 from open-label extensions. The frequency and nature of common treatment-emergent AEs reported for the etelcalcetide arm were consistent among the placebo-controlled and active-controlled trials. The most common AEs were those related to mineral metabolism (decreased blood calcium, hypophosphatemia, muscle spasms) or gastrointestinal abnormalities (diarrhea, nausea, vomiting). Hypocalcemia leading to discontinuation of either calcimimetic was experienced in ≤ 1% of patients.

Conclusions

This integrated safety assessment of etelcalcetide across placebo- and active-controlled trials showed an overall favorable risk/benefit profile, with safety similar to that of cinacalcet. Consistent with its mechanism of action, the most important risks associated with etelcalcetide were serum calcium reductions and hypocalcemia-related AEs; no new safety findings were identified in the pooled long-term extension trials.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of the efficacy and safety of 2 doses of vortioxetine in adults with major depressive disorder

BACKGROUND

This 8-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, conducted August 2010-May 2012 in the United States, evaluated the safety and efficacy of vortioxetine 10 mg and 15 mg in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). The mechanism of action of vortioxetine is thought to be related to direct modulation of serotonin (5-HT) receptor activity and inhibition of the serotonin transporter.

METHOD

Adults aged 18-75 years with MDD (DSM-IV-TR) and Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score ≥ 26 were randomized (1:1:1) to receive vortioxetine 10 mg or 15 mg or placebo once daily, with the primary efficacy end point being change from baseline at week 8 in MADRS analyzed by mixed model for repeated measures. Adverse events were recorded during the study, suicidal ideation and behavior were assessed using the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS), and sexual dysfunction was assessed using the Arizona Sexual Experience (ASEX) scale.

RESULTS

Of the 1,111 subjects screened, 469 subjects were randomized: 160 to placebo, 157 to vortioxetine 10 mg, and 152 to vortioxetine 15 mg. Differences from placebo in the primary efficacy end point were not statistically significant for vortioxetine 10 mg or vortioxetine 15 mg. Nausea, headache, dry mouth, constipation, diarrhea, vomiting, dizziness, and flatulence were reported in ≥ 5% of subjects receiving vortioxetine. Discontinuation due to adverse events occurred in 7 subjects (4.4%) in the placebo group, 8 (5.2%) in the vortioxetine 10 mg group, and 12 (7.9%) in the vortioxetine 15 mg group. ASEX total scores were similar across groups. There were no clinically significant trends within or between treatment groups on the C-SSRS, laboratory values, electrocardiogram, or vital sign parameters.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, vortioxetine did not differ significantly from placebo on MADRS total score after 8 weeks of treatment in MDD subjects.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01179516.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of the efficacy and safety of vortioxetine 10 mg and 20 mg in adults with major depressive disorder

CONTEXT

Vortioxetine (Lu AA21004) is an antidepressant with a mechanism of action thought to be related to a combination of 2 pharmacologic actions: direct modulation of several receptors and inhibition of the serotonin transporter.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of vortioxetine 10 and 20 mg once daily in outpatients with major depressive disorder.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This 8-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study was conducted from July 2010 to January 2012 among adults with a primary diagnosis of recurrent major depressive disorder (DSM-IV-TR).

INTERVENTION

Eligible subjects were randomized in 1:1:1 ratio to 1 of 3 treatment arms: vortioxetine 10 mg, vortioxetine 20 mg, or placebo once daily for 8 weeks. Subjects who completed the 8-week trial entered a 2-week blinded discontinuation period to assess potential discontinuation symptoms.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

The primary endpoint was the least squares mean change in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score from baseline. Key secondary outcomes were analyzed in the following prespecified sequential order: MADRS response (≥ 50% decrease from baseline in total score), Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement score, change from baseline in MADRS total score in subjects with baseline Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale score ≥ 20, MADRS remission (total score ≤ 10), and change from baseline in Sheehan Disability Scale total score (all at week 8).

RESULTS

A total of 462 subjects were randomized to placebo (n = 157), vortioxetine 10 mg (n = 155), and vortioxetine 20 mg (n = 150). Mean (SE) reductions from baseline in MADRS total score (week 8) were -10.77 (± 0.807), -12.96 (± 0.832), and -14.41 (± 0.845) for the placebo, vortioxetine 10 mg (P = .058 vs placebo), and vortioxetine 20 mg (P = .002 vs placebo) groups. MADRS response/remission was achieved in 28.4%/14.2%, 33.8%/21.4%, and 39.2%/22.3% of subjects, respectively, in the 3 groups. Only MADRS response for vortioxetine 20 mg significantly separated from placebo (P = .044). Treatment was well tolerated, with the most frequently reported adverse events consisting of nausea, headache, diarrhea, and dizziness.

CONCLUSIONS

Vortioxetine 20 mg significantly reduced MADRS total score at 8 weeks in this study population. Overall, vortioxetine was well tolerated in this study.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01163266.

A randomized, double-blind, duloxetine-referenced study comparing efficacy and tolerability of 2 fixed doses of vortioxetine in the acute treatment of adults with MDD

RATIONALE

Vortioxetine has reduced depressive symptoms in adults with major depressive disorder (MDD) in multiple clinical trials.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of vortioxetine 15 and 20 mg vs placebo in adults with MDD.

METHODS

Patients were randomized 1:1:1:1 to vortioxetine 15 mg, vortioxetine 20 mg, duloxetine 60 mg (active reference), or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was mean change in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score at week 8 (MMRM). Safety/tolerability assessments included physical examinations, vital signs, laboratory evaluations, electrocardiograms, adverse events (AEs), Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale, Arizona Sexual Experiences Scale, and Discontinuation-Emergent Signs and Symptoms checklist.

RESULTS

Six hundred and fourteen patients were randomized. Mean changes in MADRS scores were -12.83 (±0.834), -14.30 (±0.890), -15.57 (±0.880), and -16.90 (±0.884) for placebo, vortioxetine 15 mg (P = .224), vortioxetine 20 mg (P = .023), and duloxetine 60 mg (P < .001) (P vs placebo), respectively. AEs reported by ≥5 % of vortioxetine patients included nausea, headache, diarrhea, dizziness, dry mouth, constipation, vomiting, insomnia, fatigue, and upper respiratory infection. Treatment-emergent sexual dysfunction, suicidal ideation or behavior, and discontinuation symptoms were not significantly different between vortioxetine and placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Vortioxetine 20 mg significantly reduced MADRS total scores after 8 weeks of treatment. Both vortioxetine doses were well tolerated.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01153009; www.clinicaltrials.gov/ .

Pharmacokinetic drug interactions involving vortioxetine (Lu AA21004), a multimodal antidepressant

Background and Objective

The identification and quantification of potential drug–drug interactions is important for avoiding or minimizing the interaction-induced adverse events associated with specific drug combinations. Clinical studies in healthy subjects were performed to evaluate potential pharmacokinetic interactions between vortioxetine (Lu AA21004) and co-administered agents, including fluconazole (cytochrome P450 [CYP] 2C9, CYP2C19 and CYP3A inhibitor), ketoconazole (CYP3A and P-glycoprotein inhibitor), rifampicin (CYP inducer), bupropion (CYP2D6 inhibitor and CYP2B6 substrate), ethinyl estradiol/levonorgestrel (CYP3A substrates) and omeprazole (CYP2C19 substrate and inhibitor).

Methods

The ratio of central values of the test treatment to the reference treatment for relevant parameters (e.g., area under the plasma concentration–time curve [AUC] and maximum plasma concentration [C_max]) was used to assess pharmacokinetic interactions.

Results

Co-administration of vortioxetine had no effect on the AUC or C_max of ethinyl estradiol/levonorgestrel or 5′-hydroxyomeprazole, or the AUC of bupropion; the 90 % confidence intervals for these ratios of central values were within 80–125 %. Steady-state AUC and C_max of vortioxetine increased when co-administered with bupropion (128 and 114 %, respectively), fluconazole (46 and 15 %, respectively) and ketoconazole (30 and 26 %, respectively), and decreased by 72 and 51 %, respectively, when vortioxetine was co-administered with rifampicin. Concomitant therapy was generally well tolerated; most adverse events were mild or moderate in intensity.

Conclusion

Dosage adjustment may be required when vortioxetine is co-administered with bupropion or rifampicin.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40261-013-0117-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

A randomized, double-blind, fixed-dose study comparing the efficacy and tolerability of vortioxetine 2.5 and 10 mg in acute treatment of adults with generalized anxiety disorder

BACKGROUND

Vortioxetine is a recently approved multimodal antidepressant with anxiolytic properties in preclinical studies.

OBJECTIVE

This double-blind, placebo-controlled study assessed the efficacy and tolerability of vortioxetine in subjects with a primary diagnosis of generalized anxiety disorder.

METHODS

Subjects (n = 457) were randomized 1:1:1 to treatment with placebo or vortioxetine 2.5 or 10 mg once daily. The primary efficacy endpoint was reduction in Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAM-A) total scores from baseline after 8 weeks of treatment. Key secondary outcomes were changes from baseline in HAM-A total scores for the 2.5 and 10 mg dose, Hospital Anxiety and Depression anxiety subscore, 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey, Sheehan Disability Scale, and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement Scale score, as well as HAM-A response rate at week 8.

RESULTS

Neither vortioxetine dose achieved a statistically significant improvement over placebo on the primary endpoint (least-squares mean difference ± standard error from placebo: -0.87 ± 0.803 [p = 0.279] for 2.5 mg and -0.81 ± 0.791 [p = 0.306] for 10 mg vortioxetine) or on any secondary efficacy endpoints. Common adverse events (≥5% in either vortioxetine group) were nausea, dry mouth, headache, diarrhea, constipation, and vomiting.

CONCLUSIONS

Vortioxetine 2.5 and 10 mg treatment did not significantly improve generalized anxiety disorder symptoms versus placebo. Vortioxetine was safe and well tolerated in this patient population.