EX-99.3 4 a13-11872_1ex99d3.htm EX-99.3

Exhibit 99.3

 

Poster 421

APS2013, New Orleans, LA

rvickery@theravance.com

 

No Evidence of Analgesic Interference or CNS Opioid Withdrawal for TD-1211 in a

Phase 2b Study in Opioid-Induced Constipation

 

Ross Vickery(1), Lynn Webster(2), Yu-Ping Li(1), Ullrich Schwertschlag(1), Neil Singla(3), and Daniel Canafax(1)

 


(1) Theravance, Inc., South San Francisco, CA; (2) Lifetree Clinical Research, Inc., Salt Lake City, UT; (3) Lotus Clinical Research, Inc., Pasadena, CA

 

Introduction

 

·             Opioid analgesics such as morphine continue to play a critical role in chronic cancer and non-cancer pain control.(1) Despite their effectiveness, opioids have significant drawbacks, notably the development of analgesic tolerance and physical dependence, sedation, respiratory depression and bowel dysfunction.(2)

·             Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) is common, affecting up to 80% of patients receiving opioids for chronic non-cancer pain.(3)

·             TD-1211 is an investigational, peripherally selective, mu-opioid receptor antagonist designed to alleviate gastrointestinal side effects of opioid therapy without affecting analgesia.

·             Safety and efficacy results, including the primary and key secondary endpoints, from a 5-week, Phase 2b study in chronic non-cancer pain OIC patients have been previously reported.(4)

·             Additional assessments on daily pain score, opioid dose, and central opioid withdrawal are reported here to demonstrate that TD-1211 is peripherally selective and does not impact centrally-mediated analgesia.

 

Methods

 

·             A 5-week, double-blind, randomized, multi-center, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study was conducted in chronic non-cancer pain patients with OIC, defined as <5 spontaneous bowel movements (SBMs) over a 2-week baseline period and at least one additional symptom of constipation in at least 25% of the bowel movements.

·             For the first 4 days of dosing, patients randomized to TD-1211 received 5mg daily and on Day 5, remained at 5mg or were dose-escalated to 10mg or 15mg daily for the remainder of the treatment period. Patients randomized to placebo received placebo for all 5 weeks.

·             For at least 14 days prior to Day 1, patients were on a stable chronic opioid regimen, with a total daily dose of >30mg morphine equivalent units (MEU).

·             Patients were required to stop laxatives and bowel regimens, except protocol-permitted rescue bisacodyl use, throughout the study.

·             Electronic diaries collected frequency, timing, and symptoms of bowel movements; use of laxatives and opioids; daily pain scores; and satisfaction / quality of life metrics.

·             The Clinician Opiate Withdrawal Scale (COWS) was used to assess symptoms of opioid withdraw at baseline and on Day 1 and Day 35.

·             The primary efficacy endpoint was the change from baseline in weekly average complete spontaneous bowel movements (CSBMs) over weeks 2-5 of treatment.

·             Week 1 was excluded from the primary analysis in order to confirm durability of response and predictability of longer term efficacy studies.

 

Results

 

Patient baseline characteristics

 

·             217 patients were randomized.

 

Opioid Use

 

·             Majority of patients were on opioids for >3 years.

·             Mean and median baseline daily oral opioid dose were 145 and 89 MEU, respectively, with a range of 30-1740 MEU.

·             Subjects were on a representative spectrum of opioids.

·             Back pain was the most commonly reported reason for chronic opioid use.

 

OIC

 

·             Mean duration of OIC was 6 years.

·             Mean baseline SBMs/week was 1.1-1.2.

·             Mean satisfaction with ability to manage OIC was 3.0 (on 1-6 scale); 45% of patients were notably dissatisfied (score <2).

·             20% of patients reported sometimes taking less pain medication (typically a few days each month) because of OIC.

 

Primary efficacy endpoint

 

·             All doses of TD-1211 achieved statistical significance for the change from baseline in weekly average CSBMs over weeks 2-5 of treatment. (Figure 1).

 

Measures demonstrating no evidence of analgesic interference

 

·             The mean average daily pain score (0 - 10 VAS with 10 as worst imaginable pain) was 5.9 - 6.1 across treatment groups at baseline, and the change from baseline at Week 5 ranged from -0.7 to 0.1 across the 4 treatment groups (Figure 2).

·             The mean change from baseline in daily opioid dose at Week 5 was -6, -8.9, and -4.3 MEU for the 5, 10, and 15mg TD-1211 treatment groups, respectively, compared with +4.8 MEU for placebo (Figure 3).

·             On the COWS, with a maximum possible score of 48, the maximum post-treatment score reported was 6 for patients receiving TD-1211 (2 patients) and placebo (3 patients), indicating no evidence of CNS withdrawal. (One patient in the 15mg TD-1211 group had a score of 7 at baseline.) (Figure 4)

 

Figure 1: Primary Efficacy Endpoint: Change from Baseline in Weekly Average CSBMs over Weeks 2-5

 

 

Efficacy Analysis (EA) Population, diff = Least Squares (LS) Mean Differences from placebo

 

Figure 2: Average Daily Pain Scores Per Week

 

 

Efficacy Analysis (EA) Population. Weeks 6+7 = follow-up period. Asterisk =mean. Black line = median. Blue box = upper and lower quartiles. Whiskers = minimum and maximum score range.

 

Figure 3: Mean Change from Baseline in Daily Opioid Use on Study Visit Days

 

 

Efficacy Analysis (EA) Population. x = mean. Black line = median. Box = upper and lower quartiles. Whiskers = Q1 - 1.5*IQR, Q3 + 1.5*IQR, where IQR = Q3-Q1. Circles = outliers beyond the whisker range.

 

Figure 4: Clinician Opiate Withdrawal Scale

 

 

Efficacy Analysis (EA) Population. x = mean. Black line = median. Cylinder = upper and lower quartiles. Whiskers = Q1 - 1.5*IQR, Q3 + 1.5*IQR, where IQR = Q3-Q1. Circles = outliers beyond the whisker range.

 

Table 1: GI-Related Adverse Events Occurring in at Least 2 Patients in Any Group

 

 

 

TD-1211

 

 

 

Placebo

 

5 mg

 

10 mg

 

15 mg

 

All TD-1211

 

Safety Population

 

(N=54)

 

(N=56)

 

(N=53)

 

(N=52)

 

(N=161)

 

No. of Patients and Percentage with GI AEs

 

11

 

13

 

15

 

14

 

42

 

 

 

(20.4%)

 

(23.2%)

 

(28.3%)

 

(26.9%)

 

(26.1%)

 

Abdominal Pain

 

6

 

7

 

6

 

8

 

21

 

 

 

(11.1%)

 

(12.5%)

 

(11.3%)

 

(15.4%)

 

(13.0%)

 

Abdominal Pain Upper

 

1

 

2

 

3

 

2

 

7

 

 

 

(1.9%)

 

(3.6%)

 

(5.7%)

 

(3.8%)

 

(4.3%)

 

Diarrhea

 

0

 

4

 

6

 

4

 

14

 

 

 

 

 

(7.1%)

 

(11.3%)

 

(7.7%)

 

(8.7%)

 

Flatulence

 

3

 

1

 

2

 

1

 

4

 

 

 

(5.6%)

 

(1.8%)

 

(3.8%)

 

(1.9%)

 

(2.5%)

 

Nausea

 

2

 

4

 

8

 

3

 

15

 

 

 

(3.7%)

 

(7.1%)

 

(15.1%)

 

(5.8%)

 

(9.3%)

 

Vomiting

 

1

 

4

 

1

 

0

 

5

 

 

 

(1.9%)

 

(7.1%)

 

(1.9%)

 

 

 

(3.1%)

 

 

Tolerability and Safety

 

·        TD-1211 was generally well tolerated, with overall treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) similar between TD-1211 and placebo and gastrointestinal (GI) TEAEs predominant. (Table 1).

·        The majority of treatment-related GI AEs were associated with initiation of treatment, resolved within a few days, and were mild or moderate.

·        No treatment-related serious adverse events (SAEs) were reported.

·        No clinically significant laboratory, ECG, or vital sign abnormalities were observed.

 

TD-1211 Conclusions

 

·             10mg and 15mg demonstrated sustained, clinically meaningful response over the 5-week treatment period.

·             Met primary endpoint of change from baseline in CSBMs / week in moderate to severely constipated OIC population.

·             No evidence of interference with analgesia, as noted by stable average daily pain scores and daily opioid doses over the treatment period.

·             No evidence of centrally-mediated opioid withdrawal.

·             Generally well-tolerated with no treatment-related SAEs.

 


References

 

(1)              Walsh, T.D. (2000). Seminars in Oncology, 27, 45-63.

(2)              Walsh, T.D. (1990). J. Pain Symptom Manage., 5, 362-367.

(3)              Holzer, P. (2012). Current Pharmaceutical Design, 18, 6010-6020.

(4)              Vickery, R., et al. PainWeek 2012, Las Vegas, NV, September 5-8. Poster #121.