Advances in therapy · 2024
Exposure-Response Efficacy Modeling to Support Trofinetide Dosing in Individuals with Rett Syndrome.
Клиническое исследование III фазыСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Darwish Mona, Passarell Julie, Youakim James M, Bradley Heather, Bishop Kathie M
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Trofinetide was recently approved for the treatment of Rett syndrome (RTT) on the basis of the efficacy and safety findings of the phase 3 LAVENDER study, which used a body weight-based dosing regimen. Exposure-response (E-R) efficacy modeling was used to characterize relationships between trofinetide exposure measures (maximum drug concentration and area under the concentration-time curve for the dosing interval of 0-12 h [AUC0-12]) and efficacy endpoints in RTT clinical studies to support the trofinetide dosing regimen.
METHODS: Efficacy endpoints were modeled using trofinetide exposure measures predicted from the population pharmacokinetic model and Bayesian estimates. The analysis population for each E-R model comprised individuals receiving placebo or trofinetide who had available trofinetide exposure measures. Efficacy endpoints were scores from the Rett Syndrome Behaviour Questionnaire (RSBQ), the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement, the Communication and Symbolic Behavior Scales Developmental Profile™ Infant-Toddler Checklist (CSBS-DP-IT) Social Composite, and the Rett Syndrome Clinician Rating of Ability to Communicate Choices (RTT-COMC).
RESULTS: Higher trofinetide exposure was associated with improvements in RSBQ, CSBS-DP-IT Social Composite, and RTT-COMC scores. Assuming target trofinetide AUC0-12 values of 800-1200 μg·h/mL, the reductions in RSBQ total scores at week 12 were approximately five- to seven-fold greater with trofinetide (range 3.55-4.94) versus placebo (0.76). Significant E-R relationships were also found for the CSBS-DP-IT Social Composite and RTT-COMC scores.
CONCLUSION: E-R efficacy modeling demonstrated significant relationships between trofinetide exposure and RSBQ, CSBS-DP-IT Social Composite, and RTT-COMC scores. Trofinetide is efficacious within the target exposure range, supporting the approved dosing regimen for trofinetide.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01703533, NCT02715115, NCT04181723.
METHODS: Efficacy endpoints were modeled using trofinetide exposure measures predicted from the population pharmacokinetic model and Bayesian estimates. The analysis population for each E-R model comprised individuals receiving placebo or trofinetide who had available trofinetide exposure measures. Efficacy endpoints were scores from the Rett Syndrome Behaviour Questionnaire (RSBQ), the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement, the Communication and Symbolic Behavior Scales Developmental Profile™ Infant-Toddler Checklist (CSBS-DP-IT) Social Composite, and the Rett Syndrome Clinician Rating of Ability to Communicate Choices (RTT-COMC).
RESULTS: Higher trofinetide exposure was associated with improvements in RSBQ, CSBS-DP-IT Social Composite, and RTT-COMC scores. Assuming target trofinetide AUC0-12 values of 800-1200 μg·h/mL, the reductions in RSBQ total scores at week 12 were approximately five- to seven-fold greater with trofinetide (range 3.55-4.94) versus placebo (0.76). Significant E-R relationships were also found for the CSBS-DP-IT Social Composite and RTT-COMC scores.
CONCLUSION: E-R efficacy modeling demonstrated significant relationships between trofinetide exposure and RSBQ, CSBS-DP-IT Social Composite, and RTT-COMC scores. Trofinetide is efficacious within the target exposure range, supporting the approved dosing regimen for trofinetide.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01703533, NCT02715115, NCT04181723.