Clinical pharmacokinetics of gabapentin after administration of gabapentin enacarbil extended-release tablets in patients with varying degrees of renal function using data from an open-label, single-dose pharmacokinetic study

Efficacy of Prophylactic High-Dose Gabapentin and Venlafaxine on Reducing Oral Mucositis Pain Among Patients Treated With Chemoradiation for Head and Neck Cancer: A Single-Institution, Phase 2, Randomized Clinical Trial

PURPOSE

Given the paucity of level 1 evidence, the optimal regimen to control oral mucositis pain remains unclear. Although national guidelines allow consideration of prophylactic gabapentin, prior trials showed improved pain control with venlafaxine among patients with diabetic neuropathy. We sought to investigate the role of prophylactic high-dose gabapentin with venlafaxine to reduce oral mucositis pain among patients with head and neck cancer.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We performed a single-institution, phase 2 randomized trial on nonmetastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck treated with chemoradiation. Patients were randomized to either prophylactic gabapentin (3600 mg daily) with or without venlafaxine (150 mg daily). Primary endpoint was differences in pain levels at the end of chemoradiation. Secondary endpoint was toxicity profiles, quality of life changes, opioid use, and feeding tube placement. Differences between the 2 arms at multiple time points were evaluated using a generalized linear mixed regression model with Sidak correction.

RESULTS

Between May 2018 and March 2021, a total of 62 patients were enrolled and evaluable for analysis (n = 32 for the gabapentin alone arm, n = 30 for the gabapentin + venlafaxine arm). Over 90% of patients tolerated gabapentin well. Head and neck pain level showed a mean value of 45 (standard deviation, 23) and 43 (standard deviation, 21) for the gabapentin alone and the gabapentin + venlafaxine arms, respectively (P = .65). No statistically significant differences were observed in adverse events, opioid use, feeding tube placement, or quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of venlafaxine to prophylactic gabapentin did not result in improvements in pain control and quality of life among patients with head and neck cancer.

Prophylactic High-Dose Gabapentin Reduces Opiate Use during Radiation Therapy for Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

The role of prophylactic high-dose gabapentin for the management of oral mucositis during radiation therapy for head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) remains controversial.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort analysis was performed on primary HNSCC patients treated at our institution. Kruskal-Wallis and Fisher's exact tests were used to compare the patients' baseline characteristics. Multivariate competing risk and logistic regressions were performed to evaluate time to first opioid use and feeding tube placement.

RESULTS

In total, 480 consecutive HNSCC patients were included. Within this cohort, 186 patients received 3600 mg gabapentin, 182 received 300 to 3200 mg gabapentin, and 112 received no gabapentin. The time to first opioid use was greater in the 3600 mg group compared with the no gabapentin group (34.3 vs. 23.9 days, p < 0.001) and to the 300 to 3200 mg group (28.0 days, p < 0.001). The proportion of patients requiring opioids at any point during RT was lower in the 3600 mg gabapentin group compared with the no gabapentin group (31.8% vs. 60.1%, p < 0.001) and with the 300 to 3200 mg group (63.8%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylactic use of 3600 mg gabapentin was well tolerated, halved overall opioid use, and delayed the time to first opioid use during radiation therapy.

Systematic Review of Voltage-Gated Calcium Channel α2δ Subunit Ligands for the Treatment of Chronic Neuropathic Pain and Insight into Structure-Activity Relationship (SAR) by Pharmacophore Modeling

BACKGROUND

Neuropathic pain (NP) is a complex symptom related to the nerve damage. The discovery of new drugs for treating chronic NP has been continuing for several decades, while more progress is still needed to be made because of the unsatisfactory efficacy and the side effects of the currently available drugs. Among all the approved drugs for chronic NP, voltage-gated calcium channel (VGCC) α2δ subunit ligands, also known as gabapentinoids, are among the first-line treatment and represent a class of efficacious and relatively safe therapeutic agents. However, new strategies are still needed to be explored due to the unsatisfied response rate.

OBJECTIVES

To review the latest status of the discovery and development of gabapentinoids for the treatment of chronic NP by covering both the marketed and the preclinical/clinical ones. To analyze the structure-activity relationship (SAR) of gabapentinoids to facilitate the future design of structurally novel therapeutic agents targeting VGCC α2δ subunit.

METHODS

We searched PubMed Central, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Scopus and Espacenet for the literature and patents of diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain, postherpetic neuralgia, fibromyalgia, voltage-gated calcium channel α2δ subunit and related therapeutic agents from incipient to June 10, 2021. The SAR of gabapentinoids were analyzed by pharmacophore modeling using Phase module in Schrödinger suite.

RESULTS

A variety of gabapentinoids were identified as VGCC α2δ ligands that have ever been under development for the treatment of chronic NP. Among them, four gabapentinoids are marketed, one is at the active late clinical trials, and eight have been discontinued. Pharmacophore models were generated by using Phase module in Schrödinger suite, and common pharmacophores were predicted based on pharmacophoric features and analyzed.

CONCLUSION

The latest progress of the discovery and development of gabapentinoids for the treatment of chronic NP was reviewed. Moreover, the structure-activity relationship (SAR) of gabapentinoids is analyzed by pharmacophore modeling, which will be valuable for the future design of structurally novel therapeutic agents targeting VGCC α2δ subunit.

Extracorporeal Treatment for Gabapentin and Pregabalin Poisoning: Systematic Review and Recommendations From the EXTRIP Workgroup

Toxicity from gabapentin and pregabalin overdose is commonly encountered. Treatment is supportive, and the use of extracorporeal treatments (ECTRs) is controversial. The EXTRIP workgroup conducted systematic reviews of the literature and summarized findings following published methods. Thirty-three articles (30 patient reports and 3 pharmacokinetic studies) met the inclusion criteria. High gabapentinoid extracorporeal clearance (>150mL/min) and short elimination half-life (<5 hours) were reported with hemodialysis. The workgroup assessed gabapentin and pregabalin as "dialyzable" for patients with decreased kidney function (quality of the evidence grade as A and B, respectively). Limited clinical data were available (24 patients with gabapentin toxicity and 7 with pregabalin toxicity received ECTR). Severe toxicity, mortality, and sequelae were rare in cases receiving ECTR and in historical controls receiving standard care alone. No clear clinical benefit from ECTR could be identified although major knowledge gaps were acknowledged, as well as costs and harms of ECTR. The EXTRIP workgroup suggests against performing ECTR in addition to standard care rather than standard care alone (weak recommendation, very low quality of evidence) for gabapentinoid poisoning in patients with normal kidney function. If decreased kidney function and coma requiring mechanical ventilation are present, the workgroup suggests performing ECTR in addition to standard care (weak recommendation, very low quality of evidence).

Population pharmacokinetics of gabapentin in patients with neuropathic pain: Lack of effect of diabetes or glycaemic control

AIMS

Gabapentin (GBP) is widely used to treat neuropathic pain, including diabetic neuropathic pain. Our objective was to evaluate the role of diabetes and glycaemic control on GBP population pharmacokinetics.

METHODS

A clinical trial was conducted in patients with neuropathic pain (n = 29) due to type 2 diabetes (n = 19) or lumbar/cervical disc herniation (n = 10). All participants were treated with a single oral dose GBP. Blood was sampled up to 24 hours after GBP administration. Data were analysed with a population approach using the stochastic approximation expectation maximization algorithm. Weight, body mass index, sex, biomarkers of renal function and diabetes, and genotypes for the main genetic polymorphisms of SLC22A2 (rs316019) and SLC22A4 (rs1050152), the genes encoding the transporters for organic cations OCT2 and OCTN1, were tested as potential covariates.

RESULTS

GBP drug disposition was described by a 1-compartment model with lag-time, first-order absorption and linear elimination. The total clearance was dependent on estimated glomerular filtration rate. Population estimates (between-subject variability in percentage) for lag time, first-order absorption rate, apparent volume of distribution and total clearance were 0.316 h (10.6%), 1.12 h^-1 (10.7%), 140 L (7.7%) and 14.7 L/h (6.97%), respectively. No significant association was observed with hyperglycaemia, glycated haemoglobin, diabetes diagnosis, age, sex, weight, body mass index, SLC22A2 or SLC22A4 genotypes.

CONCLUSION

This population pharmacokinetics model accurately estimated GBP concentrations in patients with neuropathic pain, using estimated glomerular filtrationrate as a covariate for total clearance. The distribution and excretion processes of GBP were not affected by hyperglycaemia or diabetes.

Prospective randomized trial of interventions for vincristine-related neuropathic pain

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the efficacy of gabapentin at 20 mg/kg per day in the treatment of vincristine-related neuropathic pain.

PROCEDURE

Children aged 1-18 years who developed vincristine-induced neuropathy on a St Jude frontline acute lymphoblastic leukemia trial were prospectively enrolled on a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase II trial with two treatment arms: gabapentin plus opioid versus placebo plus opioid. Daily evaluations of morphine dose (mg/kg per day) and pain scores were conducted for up to 21 days; the values of the two arms were compared to assess analgesic efficacy.

RESULTS

Of 51 study participants, 49 were eligible for analyses. Twenty-five participants were treated with gabapentin, with a mean (SD) dose of 17.97 (2.76) mg/kg per day (median 18.26, range 6.82-21.37). The mean (SD) opioid doses taken, expressed as morphine equivalent daily (mg/kg per day), were 0.26 (0.43) in the gabapentin group (25 patients, 432 days) and 0.15 (0.22) in the placebo group (24 patients, 411 days; P = .15). Only the risk classification of acute lymphoblastic leukemia was significantly associated with the daily morphine dosage (P = .0178): patients in the lower risk arm received higher daily morphine dosages. Multivariate analyses revealed a significant difference between the groups' average daily scores for the previous 24 h and "right now."

CONCLUSION

In this population of children with vincristine-related neuropathic pain, opioid consumption and pain scores were higher in the gabapentin group than in the placebo group. Future randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies should test gabapentin given longer or at a higher dose.

A facile di-acid mono-amidation strategy to prepare cyclization-activating mono-carboxylate transporter 1-targeting gemcitabine prodrugs for enhanced oral delivery

Intestinal mono-carboxylate transporter 1 (MCT1) plays an important role in the oral absorption of short-chain fatty acids that were used as oxidative metabolite. However, the prodrug strategy targeting intestinal MCT1 for oral delivery is rarely exploited. The oral bioavailability of Gemcitabine (Gem) is low mainly due to its poor intestinal permeability and rapid metabolism. Herein, a facile di-acid mono-amidation strategy was firstly developed to target MCT1 for oral chemotherapy. The N4-amino group of Gem is mono-amidated with di-acids containing different carbon chain lengths, which could recognize intestinal MCT1 and are bio-activated at physiological pH independent of the hydrolysis enzymes. The adipic acid-Gem shows higher MCT1 affinity, better gastrointestinal tract stability (3-fold), improved oral bioavailability (8.8-fold), and less gastrointestinal toxicity in comparison to Gem. Moreover the bio-activation rate of the prodrugs decreases with the increased fatty acid chain length of the linkage under physiological conditions. In summary, we present the first evidence that MCT1 could act as a new target for oral prodrug delivery, and that the linkage could modify the bio-activation rate for achieving optimal oral bioavailability. Our findings provide novel knowledge to rationally design intestinal transporter-targeting oral carrier prodrug.

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of treatments for restless legs syndrome in end-stage renal disease: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Background

Restless legs syndrome (RLS) is common in end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients and impairs health and quality of life significantly. However, the optimal treatment of RLS in ESRD patients is uncertain and less studied compared with idiopathic RLS patients.

Methods

We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and acceptability of treatments for RLS in ESRD patients. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) by February 2019 in the PubMed, Cochrane Library, Embase and ClinicalTrials.gov were reviewed. RLS severity reduction was treated as treatment efficacy, and adverse events were treated as acceptable. Both outcomes were appraised using a random effects model expressed as standardized mean differences and odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), respectively, and were ranked using surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) probabilities to obtain a hierarchy of interventions.

Results

A total of 12 RCTs were included, comprising 9 interventions and 498 participants. All the interventions significantly improved RLS severity without critical side effects compared with placebo. Gabapentin achieved the greatest decrease of RLS severity [standardized mean difference (SMD) = 1.95, 95% CI 0.81–3.09 (SUCRA: 79.3%)], despite its frequent adverse events [SMD = 0.18, 95% CI 0.02–1.50 (19.9%)]. The combination therapy of exercise plus dopamine agonist had better efficacy [SMD = 1.60, 95% CI 0.08–3.12 (59.8%)] and acceptability [SMD = 1.41, 95% CI 0.01–142.53 (63.9%)] compared with that of vitamin C plus vitamin E [SMD = 1.50, 95% CI 0.47–2.54 (56.6%); SMD = 0.32, 95% CI 0.04–2.86 (32.5%)].

Conclusions

This network meta-analysis supports that gabapentin is the most effective treatment for RLS in ESRD patients. Exercise plus dopamine agonist is a favorable combination therapy concerning side effects. Future large RCTs with long-term treatment outcomes are necessary.

Non-inferiority double-blind randomised controlled trial comparing gabapentin versus tramadol for the treatment of chronic neuropathic or mixed pain in children and adolescents: the GABA-1 trial-a study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Gabapentin is currently used 'off-label' in children and adolescents with chronic neuropathic pain, and reliable evidence of its effects and optimal dosing are lacking.

OBJECTIVES

The GABA-1 trial aims to compare the efficacy and safety of gabapentin liquid formulation relative to tramadol and to explore the pharmacokinetics of both drugs in the treatment of chronic, neuropathic or mixed pain in the paediatric population.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The trial is a multicentre, double-blind, double-dummy, randomised, active-controlled, non-inferiority trial. Participants aged from 3 months to <18 years of age with moderate to severe (≥4/10 in age-appropriate pain scales) chronic neuropathic or mixed pain will be recruited in 14 clinical sites in eight European countries. A total of 94 subjects will be randomised to receive gabapentin and tramadol placebo or tramadol and gabapentin placebo throughout 16-19 weeks (including 3 weeks of titration [optimisation period], 12 weeks of treatment at a stable dose [maintenance period] and 1-4 weeks of tapering [discontinuation period]). The primary objective is to assess the efficacy of gabapentin relative to tramadol for the treatment of moderate to severe chronic neuropathic or mixed pain by comparing the difference in average pain scores (assessed by age-appropriate pain scales) between intervention arms after 15 weeks of treatment. Secondary objectives include the assessment of the safety, quality of life and global satisfaction with treatment and the description of the pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic relationship of gabapentin liquid formulation and tramadol oral drops to validate the recommended paediatric doses. Only rescue pain medication by paracetamol and/or ibuprofen is allowed during the trial.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethic approval was obtained in the eight participating countries. Results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at one or more scientific conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS

2014-004851-30 and NCT02722603.

TRIAL STATUS

Ongoing research study, currently recruiting.

Gabapentin and Pregabalin Use and Association with Adverse Outcomes among Hemodialysis Patients

Background Gabapentin and pregabalin are used to manage neuropathic pain, pruritus, and restless legs syndrome in patients on hemodialysis. These patients may be especially predisposed to complications related to these agents, which are renally cleared, but data regarding the risk thereof are lacking.Methods From the US Renal Data System, we identified 140,899 Medicare-covered adults receiving hemodialysis with Part D coverage in 2011. Using Cox regression models in which we adjusted for demographics, comorbidities, duration of exposure, number of medications, and use of potentially confounding concomitant medications, we investigated the association between gabapentin and pregabalin, modeled as separate time-varying exposures, and time to first emergency room visit or hospitalization for altered mental status, fall, and fracture. We evaluated risk according to daily dose categories: gabapentin (>0-100, >100-200, >200-300, and >300 mg) and pregabalin (>0-100 and >100 mg).Results In 2011, 19% and 4% of patients received gabapentin and pregabalin, respectively. Sixty-eight percent of gabapentin or pregabalin users had a diagnosis of neuropathic pain, pruritus, or restless legs syndrome. Gabapentin was associated with 50%, 55%, and 38% higher hazards of altered mental status, fall, and fracture, respectively, in the highest dose category, but even lower dosing was associated with a higher hazard of altered mental status (31%-41%) and fall (26%-30%). Pregabalin was associated with up to 51% and 68% higher hazards of altered mental status and fall, respectively.Conclusions Gabapentin and pregabalin should be used judiciously in patients on hemodialysis, and research to identify the most optimal dosing is warranted.

Can Chronic Pain Patients Be Adequately Treated Using Generic Pain Medications to the Exclusion of Brand-Name Ones?

According to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reports, approximately 8 in 10 prescriptions filled in the United States are for generic medications, with an expectation that this number will increase over the next few years. The impetus for this emphasis on generics is the cost disparity between them and brand-name products. The use of FDA-approved generic drugs saved 158 billion dollars in 2010 alone. In the current health care climate, there is continually increasing pressure for prescribers to write for generic alternative medications, occasionally at the expense of best clinical practices. This creates a conflict wherein both physicians and patients may find brand-name medications clinically superior but nevertheless choose generic ones. The issue of generic versus brand medications is a key component of the discussion of health payers, physicians and their patients. This review evaluates some of the important medications in the armamentarium of pain physicians that are frequently used in the management of chronic pain, and that are currently at the forefront of this issue, including Opana (oxymorphone; Endo Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Malvern, PA), Gralise (gabapentin; Depomed, Newark, CA), and Horizant (gabapentin enacarbil; XenoPort, Santa Clara, CA) that are each available in generic forms as well. We also discuss the use of Lyrica (pregabalin; Pfizer, New York, NY), which is currently unavailable as generic medication, and Cymbalta (duloxetine; Eli Lilly, Indianapolis, IN), which has been recently FDA approved to be available in a generic form. It is clear that the use of generic medications results in large financial savings for the cost of prescriptions on a national scale. However, cost-analysis is only part of the equation when treating chronic pain patients and undervalues the relationships of enhanced compliance due to single-daily dosing and stable and reliable pharmacokinetics associated with extended-duration preparations using either retentive technologies or delayed absorption strategies. Medications given to chronic pain patients should be individualized to best serve analgesic needs and assure patient safety primarily, based on high levels of scientific and economic evidence. Decisions regarding utilization should not be made based solely on limited or faulty assessments of cost-benefit analyses.

Restless Legs Syndrome in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease

Symptoms of restless legs syndrome (RLS) are common in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) on dialysis; symptoms of RLS are estimated to affect up to 25% of patients on dialysis when the international RLS diagnostic criteria are applied. RLS is a neurologic disorder with a circadian rhythmicity characterized by an overwhelming urge to move the legs during rest, which can be relieved temporarily by movement. RLS has been associated with an increase in sleep disturbance, higher cardiovascular morbidity, decreased quality of life, and an increased risk of death in patients with CKD. Although the exact pathophysiology of RLS is unknown, it is thought to involve an imbalance in iron metabolism and dopamine neurotransmission in the brain. The symptoms of moderate to severe RLS can be treated with several pharmacologic agents; however, data specific to patients on dialysis with RLS are lacking. The purpose of this article is to examine the relationship between, and complications of, RLS and CKD both in dialysis and nondialysis patients, and discuss the treatment options for patients on dialysis with RLS.

Modified-Release Formulations of Second-Generation Antiepileptic Drugs: Pharmacokinetic and Clinical Aspects

Modified-release or extended-release (XR) formulations are used to decrease the frequency of dosing for drugs with rapid elimination, to improve convenience and adherence. Use of a modified-release formulation can decrease the peak to trough fluctuations in serum concentrations and theoretically improve the therapeutic benefit of the drug, by decreasing adverse events associated with the higher peak concentrations. Once-daily formulations of lamotrigine (Lamictal XR(®)), levetiracetam (Keppra XR(®)), oxcarbazepine (Oxtellar XR(®), Apydan(®) extent) and topiramate (Qudexy XR™, Trokendi XR™) are approved for the treatment of focal and/or generalized onset seizures. Other seizure medications have been approved for non-epileptic symptoms. Gabapentin XR (Gralise(®)) is approved for the treatment of post-herpetic neuralgias. Gabapentin enacarbil XR (Horizant(®)) is a prodrug of gabapentin and is indicated for treatment of post-herpetic neuralgia and restless leg syndrome, a novel indication. For all but Qudexy XR™, the tablets/capsules must be swallowed whole, without cutting, crushing or chewing, in order to maintain the XR properties of the formulation. Qudexy XR™ can be swallowed intact or the capsules can be opened and sprinkled onto soft food for those with swallowing difficulties, for example, children and the elderly. The bioavailability of Gralise(®) and Horizant(®) is significantly affected by food, specifically fat content, and should be taken with a meal to maximize absorption. Overall, the primary advantage of the newly released XR formulations is the once-daily dosing to improve convenience and adherence, with very limited data suggesting improved tolerability.

Effectiveness of Vestibular Rehabilitation in Hemodialysis Patients With Dizziness

PURPOSE

This study evaluated the effectiveness of vestibular rehabilitation (VR) for hemodialysis (HD) patients with chronic dizziness.

DESIGN

A single-blind, randomized controlled study was performed.

METHODS

Cluster-randomized sampling was used to select the experimental group from two outpatient dialysis clinics. A total of 26 patients participated in the study. Dizziness Handicap Inventory (DHI) and falls were used as outcome measures. Data were collected at baseline (T1), 3 months (T2), and 6 months (T3).

FINDINGS

Two-way repeated-measures ANOVA of DHI revealed a statistically significant group and time interaction. Dizziness handicap outcome was significantly reduced over time in the experimental group (DHI total score, T1 = 35.29, T2 = 32.86, T3 = 27.86, p = .001).

CONCLUSIONS

VR exercise instructed by nurses can be effective in alleviating handicap imposed by dizziness in dialysis patients.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Nurses are encouraged to learn VR as a simple exercise to improve well-being in dialysis patients with chronic dizziness.

Pharmacokinetic of antiepileptic drugs in patients with hepatic or renal impairment

Many factors influence choice of antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), including efficacy of the drug for the indication (epilepsy, neuropathic pain, affective disorder, migraine), tolerability, and toxicity. The first-generation AEDs and some newer AEDs are predominately eliminated by hepatic metabolism. Other recent AEDs are eliminated by renal excretion of unchanged drug or a combination of hepatic metabolism and renal excretion. The effect of renal and hepatic disease on the dosing will depend on the fraction of the AED eliminated by hepatic and/or renal excretion, the metabolic isozymes involved, as well as the extent of protein binding, if therapeutic drug monitoring is used. For drugs that are eliminated by renal excretion, methods of estimating creatinine clearance can be used to determine dose adjustments. For drugs eliminated by hepatic metabolism, there are no specific markers of liver function that can be used to provide guidance in dosage adjustments. Based on studies with probe drugs, the hepatic metabolic enzymes are differentially affected depending on the cause and severity of hepatic disease, which can aid in predicting dose adjustment when clinical data are not available. Several AEDs are also associated with laboratory markers of mild hepatic dysfunction and, rarely, more severe hepatic injury. In contrast, the risk of renal injury from AEDs is generally low. In general, co-morbid hepatic or renal diseases influence the decision for the selection of an AED. For some patients dosing changes to their existing AEDs may be appropriate. For others, a change to another AED may be a better option.

Effect of experimentally induced hepatic and renal failure on the pharmacokinetics of topiramate in rats

We aimed to investigate the effect of induced hepatic and renal failure on the pharmacokinetics of topiramate (TPM) in rats. Twenty-four Sprague-Dawley rats were used in this study. Renal or hepatic failure was induced by a single i.p. dose of 7.5 mg/kg cisplatin (n = 8) or 0.5 mL/kg carbon tetrachloride (CCl4) (n = 8), respectively. Three days after cisplatin dose or 24 h after CCl4 dose, the rats were administered a single oral dose of 20 mg/kg TPM. The plasma samples were quantified by LC-MS/MS method. Compared to control, plasma concentration-time profile in CCl4-treated and, to a lesser extent, in cisplatin-treated rats decreased more slowly particularly in the elimination phase. TPM oral clearance (CL/F) in CCl4-treated group was significantly lower than that in control (P < 0.001), whereas AUC0-∞, T1/2, and Vd/F were significantly higher in CCl4-treated rats compared to the control (P < 0.01). The CL/F was not significantly different between cisplatin-treated rats and control (P > 0.05). However, in cisplatin-treated rats, the T1/2 and Vd/F were significantly higher than that in the control group (P < 0.01). Both conditions failed to cause a significant effect on Cmax or Tmax. The present findings suggest that induced hepatic or renal failure could modify the pharmacokinetic profile of TPM in the rat.

Gabapentin enacarbil for the treatment of moderate to severe primary restless legs syndrome (Willis-Ekbom disease): 600 or 1,200 mg dose?

Gabapentin enacarbil is a prodrug of the anticonvulsant gabapentin. The efficacy and safety of gabapentin enacarbil for the treatment of moderate to severe primary restless legs syndrome (RLS) has been evaluated in several clinical trials in the United States and Japan. Although most clinical trials assessed gabapentin enacarbil at doses greater than 600 mg/day and demonstrated the overall safety and efficacy (defined as improvements in the coprimary endpoints of the international RLS rating scale [IRLS] total score and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement response), the US Food and Drug Administration approved the 600 mg once-daily dosage because doses higher than 600 mg/day were considered to provide no additional benefits and were associated with higher rates of adverse events, such as somnolence and dizziness. Nonetheless, the results of clinical trials and post hoc meta-analyses have indicated that the 1,200 mg once-daily dosage was the most validated gabapentin enacarbil treatment for not only subjective RLS symptoms but also severe sleep disturbance associated with RLS. A Japanese dose-finding study showed that 900 mg/day, the intermediate dose between 600 and 1,200 mg, failed to show a significant improvement in IRLS total score, probably because many of the patients who discontinued treatment did so early, suggesting that a half-landing dose may cause more adverse effects than favorable ones in some RLS patients early in the treatment. Gabapentin enacarbil may have two distinct therapeutic doses for the treatment of RLS: 600 mg/day or lower doses for the treatment of subjective RLS symptoms and 1,200 mg/day or higher doses for the treatment of both subjective RLS symptoms and associated problems such as severe sleep disturbances.

Gabapentin enacarbil: in patients with restless legs syndrome

Oral gabapentin enacarbil is approved in adult patients for the treatment of moderate to severe primary restless legs syndrome (RLS) [featured indication] and the management of postherpetic neuralgia. In the 12-week Patient Improvements in Vital Outcomes following Treatment (PIVOT) RLS I and II trials in adult patients with moderate to severe primary RLS (n > 500 total evaluable), once-daily gabapentin enacarbil 600 or 1,200 mg significantly improved mean International Restless Legs Scale (IRLS) total scores compared with placebo, with significantly higher investigator-rated Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) responder rates in gabapentin enacarbil groups than in placebo groups. Improvements in other sleep outcomes (assessed using various scales) also generally favoured gabapentin enacarbil treatment. These data are supported by results from a polysomnography, crossover (two 4-week treatment periods) trial (n > 100 evaluable). Improvements in RLS symptoms with gabapentin enacarbil were maintained in a 52-week extension study of clinical trials, including PIVOT RLS I and II. The longer-term efficacy of gabapentin enacarbil in patients with moderate to severe RLS was also demonstrated in the 36-week PIVOT RLS Maintenance study and a 52-week noncomparative study conducted in Japan. Gabapentin enacarbil was generally well tolerated in adult patients with RLS participating in short- and longer-term clinical trials. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were somnolence/sedation and dizziness. Most adverse events were of mild to moderate severity, with relatively few patients discontinuing treatment because of an adverse event.

ADMET considerations for restless leg syndrome drug treatments

INTRODUCTION

Restless legs syndrome (RLS) is a common neurological disorder that might impair nocturnal rest causing decreased alertness, depressed mood, reduced job performance, and poor quality of life. In patients affected by severe RLS, a pharmacological treatment is mandatory.

AREAS COVERED

The present review is based on a search using PubMed from 1994 to 2012. It is focused on the Absorption, Distribution, Metabolism, Elimination and Toxicology (ADMET) characteristics of the most used medications for RLS. In particular, the ADMET characteristics of dopaminergic agents, anticonvulsants able to improve neuropathic pain, and iron were discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

Clinical trials have showed that non-ergolic dopamine agonists are efficacious and safe for patients affected by moderate to severe idiopathic RLS. However, no head-to-head study has compared the long-term effects of the three dopamine agonists approved by the FDA for RLS (ropinirole, pramipexole, and rotigotine). Moreover, further studies should investigate the extended-release formulation of ropinirole and pramipexole in RLS patients affected by all day long distressing symptoms. A standardized treatment for symptomatic forms of RLS is lacking. Randomized, placebo-controlled trials should be performed at least in RLS patients with peripheral neuropathic and chronic kidney disease. Concerning RLS due to iron deficiency, a head-to-head study comparing efficacy, safety and compliance of oral iron versus intravenous one seems to be needed.

Role of gabapentin enacarbil XR in restless legs syndrome

Gabapentin enacarbil XR is a new extended-release formulation which attempts to overcome the reduced efficacy of shorter-acting gabapentin, with sustained delivery over a 24-hour period. It is a gabapentin prodrug which is efficiently and rapidly converted to gabapentin during active transport throughout the length of the intestine via high-capacity monocarboxylate type 1 nutrient transporters unlike its predecessor, which is absorbed via low-capacity transporters largely confined to the upper intestinal region. Its lack of saturable absorption allows for dose-proportional absorption and hence increased bioavailability. Several clinical trials addressing its efficacy in moderate to severe restless legs syndrome (RLS) demonstrate improvements in the International RLS Rating Scale after a 2-week to 3-month period. Open-label studies of 52 weeks' duration showed maintenance of symptom reduction with once-daily administration of the extended-release formulation. The most commonly reported treatment-emergent adverse effects were somnolence and dizziness. Although the incidence of emergent adverse effects is high, it is comparable with that of gabapentin. No studies thus far have documented augmentation as an issue, unlike that observed with most dopaminergic agents. In addition, both dopamine precursors and agonists have not been shown to increase slow wave sleep or improve overall sleep architecture consistently despite improvement in the periodic leg movement index, in contrast with gabapentin enacarbil. Presently, gabapentin enacarbil has not been approved by the Therapeutic Goods Administration or Medsafe for use in RLS. The cost of this medication may also be a potential barrier for many patients. Future comparative efficacy studies with gabapentin, first-line dopaminergic agents, rotigotine, being the other once daily RLS medication, and pregabalin, the structural analog of gabapentin, will be necessary.