Pooled Dosing and Efficacy Analysis of the Sufentanil Sublingual Tablet 30 mcg Across Demographic Subgroups for the Management of Moderate-to-Severe Acute Pain.

PURPOSE: To aid nurses in dosing sufentanil sublingual tablet (SST) 30 mcg administered via a single-dose applicator, dosing requirements and efficacy of SST 30 mcg were analyzed across age, sex, race, and body mass index subgroups. DESIGN: Patient characteristics were pooled from three postoperative studies (two placebo-controlled and one open-label) and one open-label emergency department study. Drug dosing and efficacy data were pooled from the postoperative studies. METHODS: Efficacy was assessed through summed pain intensity difference to baseline during 12 hours across subgroups. FINDINGS: Mean (standard deviation) drug doses administered from 0 to 12 hours was 3.9 (2.0) for SST 30 mcg and was less frequent for older (≥65 years) versus younger patients. The summed pain intensity difference to baseline during 12 hours was superior with SST 30 mcg versus placebo across all subgroups. CONCLUSIONS: SST 30 mcg is a sublingual opioid analgesic with efficacy across demographic subgroups.

Pooled Phase III safety analysis of sufentanil sublingual tablets for short-term treatment of moderate-to-severe acute pain.

Aim: To evaluate the pooled safety of sufentanil sublingual tablets (SSTs) administered at 30-mcg dose equivalents over ≤72 h for moderate-to-severe acute pain management in medically supervised settings. Patients & methods: Safety data from SST 30 mcg Phase III studies were pooled with an additional patient subset from studies in which two SST 15 mcg were self-administered within 20-25 min (30-mcg dose-equivalent). Results: Analyses included 804 patients. Median (range) SST 30-mcg dosing over 24 h was 7.0 (1-15) tablets. Adverse events (AEs) were experienced by 60.5% (SST) and 61.4% (placebo) and treatment-related AEs by 43.8% (SST) and 33.5% (placebo; 10.3% difference; 95% CI: 2.0-18.6) of patients. No dose-dependent increase in oxygen desaturation was observed with SST. Conclusion: SST was well-tolerated, with most AEs considered mild or moderate in severity.

Administration of intravenous morphine for acute pain in the emergency department inflicts an economic burden in Europe.

BACKGROUND: Acute pain is among the leading causes of referral to the emergency department (ED) in industrialized countries. Its management mainly depends on intensity. Moderate-to-severe pain is treated with intravenous (IV) administered opioids, of which morphine is the most commonly used in the ED. We have estimated the burden of IV administration of morphine in the five key European countries (EU5) using a micro-costing approach. SCOPE: A structured literature review was conducted to identify clinical guidelines for acute pain management in EU5 and clinical studies conducted in the ED setting. The data identified in this literature review constituted the source for all model input parameters, which were clustered as analgesic (morphine), material used for IV morphine administration, nurse workforce time and management of morphine-related adverse events and IV-related complications. FINDINGS: The cost per patient of IV morphine administration in the ED ranges between €18.31 in Spain and €28.38 in Germany. If costs associated with the management of morphine-related adverse events and IV-related complications are also considered, the total costs amount to €121.13-€132.43. The main driver of those total costs is the management of IV-related complications (phlebitis, extravasation and IV prescription errors; 73% of all costs) followed by workforce time (14%). CONCLUSIONS: IV morphine provides effective pain relief in the ED, but the costs associated with the IV administration inflict an economic burden on the respective national health services in EU5. An equally rapid-onset and efficacious analgesic that does not require IV administration could reduce this burden.

Sufentanil sublingual tablet 30mcg for moderate-to-severe acute pain in the ED.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacological properties of the sufentanil sublingual tablet 30mcg (SST 30mcg) could offer potential analgesic advantages in settings requiring noninvasive, acute pain management. The feasibility of using SST 30mcg for moderate-to-severe pain management in the emergency department (ED) was evaluated. METHODS: This open-label, multicenter feasibility study included patients aged ≥18years who presented to the ED with moderate-to-severe pain (≥4 on the numeric rating scale of pain intensity (NRS); opioid-tolerant patients were excluded. Patients received a single SST 30-mcg dose (single-dose cohort) or, upon request, ≤3 additional doses ≥60min apart (multiple-dose cohort) and were evaluated over 1 or 2h. Effectiveness was assessed by patient-reported pain scores (11-point NRS; 5-point pain relief scale). Safety and tolerability were also assessed. RESULTS: Overall, 76 patients enrolled into the single-dose (n=40) and multiple-dose (n=36) cohorts. In the first hour (combined cohorts), mean pain intensity was significantly lower 15-min post-dosing (P<0.001; clinically meaningful within 30-minutes post-dosing) and continued to decrease during the first hour (P<0.001 for each 15-minute interval). Mean pain intensity (multiple-dose cohort) decreased from 7.6 at baseline to 4.5 at 1h and to 4.6 at 2h (P<0.001 for both); mean pain relief increased from baseline to 1.9 at 1h (P<0.001) and to 2.0 at 2h (P<0.001). Most (79%) patients had no adverse events (AEs), and there were no severe AEs. CONCLUSIONS: SST 30mcg was feasible for managing moderate-to-severe acute pain in an ED setting.

An Open-Label Study of Sufentanil Sublingual Tablet 30 Mcg in Patients with Postoperative Pain.

Objective: To evaluate sufentanil sublingual tablet 30 mcg (SST 30 mcg) for postoperative pain in an older patient population with comorbidities. Design: Multicenter, open-label, single-arm study. Setting: Nine hospitals across the United States. Subjects: Adults aged ≥40 years who had undergone a surgical procedure. Methods: Patients with a postoperative pain intensity score ≥4 on an 11-point numeric rating scale (NRS) were allowed to enter the study and receive SST 30 mcg as requested for pain (minimum 60-minute redosing interval) over the 12-hour study period. Efficacy was assessed by patient reports of pain intensity on the NRS and a five-point pain relief scale. Safety was monitored throughout the study; plasma sufentanil concentrations were also measured. The primary efficacy endpoint was the time-weighted summed pain intensity difference (SPID) to baseline over 12 hours (SPID12). Results: Of the 140 patients enrolled, 69% were American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Class II or III, 44% had a body mass index (BMI) ≥30 mg/kg2, and 29% had hepatic and/or renal impairment. Average age was 54.7 years (SD = 9.9 years), and average baseline pain intensity was 6.2 (SD = 1.9). The most common surgeries were abdominal (59%) and orthopedic (20%). The mean SPID12 was 36.0 (standard error of the mean = 2.2); mean scores were similar, regardless of age, sex, race, and BMI. From baseline, mean pain intensity decreased significantly starting 30 minutes postdose, and mean pain relief increased significantly starting 15 minutes postdose, remaining relatively stable through 12 hours (P < 0.001 at each time point). Four (3%) patients discontinued due to inadequate analgesia, and 45 (32%) patients had one or more adverse events that were considered possibly or probably related to the study drug. Mean plasma sufentanil concentrations were generally similar regardless of age, sex, BMI, or organ impairment status. Conclusions: SST 30 mcg was effective and well tolerated for the management of moderate-to-severe acute postoperative pain.

Sufentanil Sublingual Tablet 30 mcg for the Management of Pain Following Abdominal Surgery: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Phase-3 Study.

BACKGROUND: Results from a phase-3, prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluating sufentanil sublingual tablet 30 mcg (SST) for the management of pain after ambulatory abdominal surgery are presented. METHODS: Adults with American Society of Anesthesiologists status 1 to 3 scheduled to undergo abdominoplasty, open tension-free inguinal hernioplasty, or laparoscopic abdominal surgery under general or spinal anesthesia that did not include intrathecal opioids during the operation were eligible. Opioid-tolerant patients were excluded. The primary endpoint was the time-weighted summed pain intensity difference to baseline (SPID) over 12 hours. Secondary endpoints included SPID over 24 and 48 hours, total pain relief, and patient and healthcare professional (HCP) global assessments. RESULTS: Overall, 161 patients were randomized to SST (N = 107) or placebo (N = 54); pain scores were recorded for up to 48 hours. SPID 12 was higher (greater pain intensity reduction from baseline) in the SST group compared with placebo (25.8 vs. 13.1; P < 0.001, with a difference of 12.7 [95% confidence interval 7.16, 18.23]). In the SST group, a greater proportion of patients and HCPs responded "good" or "excellent" on the global assessments compared with placebo (P < 0.001 for both). There was a numerically, but not statistically, higher incidence of nausea and headache in the SST group. CONCLUSIONS: In patients following abdominal surgery in an ambulatory care setting, SST was an effective opioid analgesic in postoperative pain management. In addition, SST was well tolerated with mild-to-moderate side effects, similar to those found in placebo-treated patients.

A phase II, single-blind, randomized, crossover evaluation of the safety and efficacy of avanafil using visual sexual stimulation in patients with mild to moderate erectile dysfunction.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety, efficacy and time course of three doses of avanafil (50 mg, 100 mg and 200 mg) compared with sildenafil 50 mg or placebo, given in conjunction with visual sexual stimulation (VSS) videos in men with mild to moderate erectile dysfunction (ED). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Male patients, 35-70 years of age, with mild to moderate ED of ≥6 months duration, were included in the study. During the course of the study, each patient received placebo, active control (sildenafil 50 mg), and one dose of avanafil (50 mg, 100 mg or 200 mg), all administered in random order at least 72 h apart. RigiScan® (Dacomed Corp., Minneapolis, MN, USA) monitoring was used in conjunction with 20-min VSS videos (20, 60, and 100 min after dosing) to determine the duration of and time to ≥60% penile rigidity, maximum rigidity, tumescent activity units (TAUs), rigidity activity units (RAUs), and responses to the five-point Erection Assessment Scale. Safety assessments included adverse events (AEs), vital sign changes in response to dosing, laboratory results (complete blood counts, chemistry panel, prostate-specific antigen, serum testosterone, prothrombin time and urine analysis) and physical examination findings. RESULTS: Eighty-three patients were randomized and received at least one dose of study medication; 82 patients completed the study. Peak response to avanafil occurred in the early interval (20-40 min after dosing), while peak response to sildenafil occurred either in the middle (60-80 min) or late (100-120 min) intervals after dosing. Results were qualitatively similar for all other efficacy endpoints. During the 20-40-min interval, the majority of values for TAUs and RAUs with the avanafil 50-mg, 100-mg and 200-mg treatments were significantly superior to placebo (P < 0.05). Avanafil treatment was generally well tolerated; facial flushing (7-15%) was the most commonly observed AE, and no visual disturbances were reported. CONCLUSION: A favourable safety profile and improvement in sexual function, coupled with rapid onset of action and durability of effect, make avanafil an attractive option for males with ED, especially in the setting of on-demand treatment.

A phase 3, placebo controlled study of the safety and efficacy of avanafil for the treatment of erectile dysfunction after nerve sparing radical prostatectomy.

PURPOSE: We evaluated the safety and efficacy of 100 and 200 mg avanafil for the treatment of adult males with erectile dysfunction after bilateral nerve sparing radical prostatectomy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a double-blind, placebo controlled, parallel group, phase 3 study in males age 18 to 70 years with a history of erectile dysfunction of 6 months or more after bilateral nerve sparing radical prostatectomy. Patients were randomized to 100 or 200 mg avanafil or placebo (taken 30 minutes before sexual activity) for 12 weeks. Primary end points included successful vaginal insertion (Sexual Encounter Profile [SEP] question 2), successful intercourse (SEP3) and change in score on the erectile function domain of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF-EF) questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 298 patients were randomized and 84.6% completed the study. At baseline 16.1% were age 65 years or older and 71.5% had severe erectile dysfunction (mean overall IIEF-EF domain score 9.2). After 12 weeks there were significantly greater increases in SEP2 and SEP3 and change in mean IIEF-EF domain score with 100 and 200 mg avanafil vs placebo (p <0.01). Following dosing with avanafil 36.4% (28 of 77) of sexual attempts (SEP3) at 15 minutes or less were successful vs 4.5% (2 of 44) for placebo (p <0.01). Avanafil was generally well tolerated. No serious adverse events were reported and fewer than 2% of patients discontinued the study due to an adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: Avanafil in 100 and 200 mg doses was effective and well tolerated in improving erectile function after prostatectomy. Results suggest a rapid onset of action and sustained duration of effect, with all 3 primary end points being achieved at both dose levels.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of an oral, extended-release formulation of phentermine/topiramate for the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea in obese adults.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To evaluate safety and efficacy of phentermine 15 mg plus extended-release topiramate 92 mg for treatment of moderate to severe obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in obese adults. DESIGN: This phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study included 2-week screening and 28-week treatment periods. Overnight polysomnography was performed at baseline, Week 8, and Week 28. SETTING: Single-center study conducted from August 2008 to September 2009. PARTICIPANTS: Forty-five subjects with moderate to severe OSA not receiving positive airway pressure (PAP) treatment with body mass index of 30-40 kg/m(2). INTERVENTIONS: Subjects were randomized to receive placebo (n = 23) or phentermine 15 mg plus extended-release topiramate 92 mg (n = 22). Both groups received lifestyle-modification counseling. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Primary endpoint, change in apnea-hypopnea index (AHI), significantly favored phentermine 15 mg plus extended-release topiramate 92 mg (-31.5 events/h, 95% CI: -40.0, -22.9) over placebo (-16.6 events/h, 95% CI: -25.0, -8.2) at Week 28 (P =0.0084). At Week 28, there was a 10.2% (95% CI: -12.7, -7.6; 10.8 kg, 95% CI: -13.5, -8.0) mean decrease in weight in the phentermine 15 mg plus extended-release topiramate 92 mg group compared with 4.3% (95% CI: -6.6, -2.0; 4.7 kg, 95% CI: -7.2, -2.2) in the placebo group (P = 0.0006) and a positive, significant (P = 0.0003) correlation between percent change in weight and change in AHI. Significant improvements in overnight oxygen saturation and reduction in blood pressure compared with placebo were observed. Phentermine 15 mg plus extended-release topiramate 92 mg was well tolerated with low adverse event rates. CONCLUSIONS: Phentermine 15 mg plus extended-release topiramate 92 mg induced significant weight reductions and concomitant improvements in OSA and related symptoms vs placebo. This suggests weight loss mediated by phentermine 15 mg plus extended-release topiramate 92 mg may be useful in treatment of moderate to severe OSA in obese subjects unable or unwilling to comply with PAP treatment.

Selectivity of avanafil, a PDE5 inhibitor for the treatment of erectile dysfunction: implications for clinical safety and improved tolerability.

INTRODUCTION: Phosphodiesterase type 5 (PDE5) inhibitors are indicated for the treatment of erectile dysfunction (ED); however, they can also inhibit other PDE isozymes, affecting their target tissues (e.g., PDE1: heart; PDE6: retina; and PDE11: skeletal muscle), which in some cases can cause unwanted side effects and therapy discontinuation. Data from in vitro studies showed that avanafil, a PDE5 inhibitor for the treatment of ED, exhibited strong selectivity toward PDE5 and against all other PDE isozymes. AIM: To review the inhibitory effects of avanafil for PDE isozymes compared with those of sildenafil, tadalafil, and vardenafil and to discuss these results within the context of clinical trial safety observations. METHODS: Review of in vitro selectivity data for avanafil (published primary data from a peer-reviewed journal and scientific congress abstracts); PubMed search for pertinent publications on PDE5 inhibitor safety data; and review of published articles and abstracts from avanafil phase 1, 2, and 3 clinical trials. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: A low incidence of some PDE-related adverse events may be reflected by the high selectivity of avanafil against non-PDE5 isozymes. RESULTS: Avanafil is highly selective toward PDE5 and against all other PDE isozymes tested. Lower selectivity against PDE1, PDE6, and PDE11 is consistent with results from randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trials in which musculoskeletal and hemodynamic adverse events were reported in <2% of patients and no color vision-related abnormalities were reported with avanafil doses up to 200 mg once daily. CONCLUSIONS: Data suggest that avanafil may confer a safety benefit, in terms of a lower incidence of specific adverse events, by virtue of its high specificity to PDE5 and its overall selectivity against other PDE isozymes.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled evaluation of the safety and efficacy of avanafil in subjects with erectile dysfunction.

INTRODUCTION: Phosphodiesterase type 5 (PDE5) inhibitors have become standard treatment for erectile dysfunction (ED). AIM: To prospectively evaluate the safety and efficacy of avanafil, a novel PDE5 inhibitor, in men with mild to severe ED. METHODS: In this multicenter, double-blind, Phase 3 trial, 646 subjects were randomized to receive avanafil (50 mg, 100 mg, 200 mg) or placebo throughout a 12-week treatment period. Subjects were instructed to take study drug 30 minutes prior to initiation of sexual activity. At least a 12-hour separation time between doses was required; no restrictions were placed on food or alcohol intake. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Improvement in erectile function (EF) was measured by Sexual Encounter Profile questions 2 and 3 (SEP2 and SEP3) and by the EF domain of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) questionnaire. RESULTS: Mean change in percentage of successful sexual attempts (SEP2 and SEP3) and IIEF-EF domain score significantly favored all doses of avanafil over placebo (P ≤ 0.001). Secondary analyses demonstrated achievement of successful intercourse by subjects within 15 minutes of dosing. Of the 300 sexual attempts made during this interval, 64% to 71% were successful in avanafil-treated subjects compared with 27% in placebo-treated subjects. Successful intercourse was also demonstrated >6 hours post dosing, with 59% to 83% of the 80 sexual attempts successful in avanafil-treated subjects compared with 25% of placebo-treated subjects. The most commonly reported adverse events in subjects taking avanafil included headache, flushing, and nasal congestion; there were no drug-related serious adverse events. CONCLUSION: Following 12 weeks of avanafil treatment without food or alcohol restrictions, significant improvements in sexual function were observed with all 3 doses of avanafil compared with placebo. Successful intercourse was observed as early as 15 minutes and >6 hours after dosing in some subjects. Avanafil was generally well tolerated for the treatment of ED.