Franck Skobieranda

Biased agonism of the μ-opioid receptor by TRV130 increases analgesia and reduces on-target adverse effects versus morphine: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study in healthy volunteers

Summary An experimental medicine comparison of the novel biased ligand TRV130 to morphine reveals that selective signaling at the mu opioid receptor may improve opioid therapeutic index. ABSTRACT Opioids provide powerful analgesia but also efficacy‐limiting adverse effects, including severe nausea, vomiting, and respiratory depression, by activating &mgr;‐opioid receptors. Preclinical models suggest that differential activation of signaling pathways downstream of these receptors dissociates analgesia from adverse effects; however, this has not yet translated to a treatment with an improved therapeutic index. Thirty healthy men received single intravenous injections of the biased ligand TRV130 (1.5, 3, or 4.5 mg), placebo, or morphine (10 mg) in a randomized, double‐blind, crossover study. Primary objectives were to measure safety and tolerability (adverse events, vital signs, electrocardiography, clinical laboratory values), and analgesia (cold pain test) versus placebo. Other measures included respiratory drive (minute volume after induced hypercapnia), subjective drug effects, and pharmacokinetics. Compared to morphine, TRV130 (3, 4.5 mg) elicited higher peak analgesia (105, 116 seconds latency vs 75 seconds for morphine, P < .02), with faster onset and similar duration of action. More subjects doubled latency or achieved maximum latency (180 seconds) with TRV130 (3, 4.5 mg). Respiratory drive reduction was greater after morphine than any TRV130 dose (−15.9 for morphine versus −7.3, −7.6, and −9.4 h * L/min, P < .05). More subjects experienced severe nausea after morphine (n = 7) than TRV130 1.5 or 3 mg (n = 0, 1), but not 4.5 mg (n = 9). TRV130 was generally well tolerated, and exposure was dose proportional. Thus, in this study, TRV130 produced greater analgesia than morphine at doses with less reduction in respiratory drive and less severe nausea. This demonstrates early clinical translation of ligand bias as an important new concept in receptor‐targeted pharmacotherapy.

A randomized, phase 2 study investigating TRV130, a biased ligand of the μ-opioid receptor, for the intravenous treatment of acute pain.

Abstract Efficacy of conventional opioids can be limited by adverse events (AEs). TRV130 is a structurally novel biased ligand of the &mgr;-opioid receptor that activates G protein signaling with little &bgr;-arrestin recruitment. In this phase 2, randomized, placebo- and active-controlled study, we investigated the efficacy and tolerability of TRV130 in acute pain after bunionectomy. We used an adaptive study design in which 144 patients experiencing moderate-to-severe acute pain after bunionectomy were randomized to receive double-blind TRV130, placebo, or morphine in a pilot phase. After pilot phase analysis, 195 patients were randomized to receive double-dummy TRV130 0.5, 1, 2, or 3 mg every 3 hours (q3h); placebo; or morphine 4 mg q4h intravenously. The primary end point was the time-weighted average change in numeric rating scale pain intensity over the 48-hour treatment period. Secondary end points included stopwatch and categorical assessments of pain relief. Safety and tolerability were also assessed. TRV130 2 and 3 mg q3h, and morphine 4 mg q4h produced statistically greater mean reductions in pain intensity than placebo over 48 hours (P < 0.005). TRV130 at 2 and 3 mg produced significantly greater categorical pain relief than morphine (P < 0.005) after the first dose, with meaningful pain relief occurring in under 5 minutes. TRV130 produced no serious AEs, with tolerability similar to morphine. These results demonstrate that TRV130 rapidly produces profound analgesia in moderate-to-severe acute pain, suggesting that G-protein-biased &mgr;-opioid receptor activation is a promising target for development of novel analgesics.

A randomized, Phase IIb study investigating oliceridine (TRV130), a novel µ-receptor G-protein pathway selective (µ-GPS) modulator, for the management of moderate to severe acute pain following abdominoplasty

Background Oliceridine (TRV130), a novel μ-receptor G-protein pathway selective (μ-GPS) modulator, was designed to improve the therapeutic window of conventional opioids by activating G-protein signaling while causing low β-arrestin recruitment to the μ receptor. This randomized, double-blind, patient-controlled analgesia Phase IIb study was conducted to investigate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of oliceridine compared with morphine and placebo in patients with moderate to severe pain following abdominoplasty (NCT02335294; oliceridine is an investigational agent not yet approved by the US Food and Drug Administration). Methods Patients were randomized to receive postoperative regimens of intravenous oliceridine (loading/patient-controlled demand doses [mg/mg]: 1.5/0.10 [regimen A]; 1.5/0.35 [regimen B]), morphine (4.0/1.0), or placebo with treatment initiated within 4 hours of surgery and continued as needed for 24 hours. Results Two hundred patients were treated (n=39, n=39, n=83, and n=39 in the oliceridine regimen A, oliceridine regimen B, morphine, and placebo groups, respectively). Patients were predominantly female (n=198 [99%]) and had a mean age of 38.2 years, weight of 71.2 kg, and baseline pain score of 7.7 (on 11-point numeric pain rating scale). Patients receiving the oliceridine regimens had reductions in average pain scores (model-based change in time-weighted average versus placebo over 24 hours) of 2.3 and 2.1 points, respectively (P=0.0001 and P=0.0005 versus placebo); patients receiving morphine had a similar reduction (2.1 points; P<0.0001 versus placebo). A lower prevalence of adverse events (AEs) related to nausea, vomiting, and respiratory function was observed with the oliceridine regimens than with morphine (P<0.05). Other AEs with oliceridine were generally dose-related and similar in nature to those observed with conventional opioids; no serious AEs were reported with oliceridine. Conclusion These results suggest that oliceridine may provide effective, rapid analgesia in patients with moderate to severe postoperative pain, with an acceptable safety/tolerability profile and potentially wider therapeutic window than morphine.

Evaluation of an Adaptive Maximizing Design Study Based on Clinical Utility Versus Morphine for TRV130 Proof-of-Concept and Dose-Regimen Finding in Patients With Postoperative Pain After Bunionectomy

Background: Conventional opioids provide powerful analgesia but also produce efficacy-limiting adverse effects, limiting their clinical utility (CU). TRV130 is being evaluated to determine whether CU can be expanded by way of increased efficacy, decreased adverse effects, or some combination thereof. Methods: This phase 2 study of TRV130 blends traditional objectives with novel design features aimed toward the specific strategic goal of optimizing the attributes of TRV130 efficacy and tolerability compared with the conventional opioid, morphine. The adaptive maximizing design (AMD) was developed to maximize assignment of future patients to doses that demonstrate maximum balance between efficacy and tolerability (ie, CU) assessed via a CU function. Results: Our evaluation of the AMD performance characteristics reveals that the AMD has a strong capacity to estimate the TRV130 dose-regimens with maximum CU, assign more patients to the TRV130 dose-regimens with maximum CU, and, conversely, assign fewer patients to doses away from the those with maximum or near-maximum CU. Conclusions: Based on this evaluation of performance characteristics of the AMD versus a traditional study design, the AMD was selected for this proof-of-concept and dose-regimen finding study of TRV130.

Oliceridine, a Novel G Protein–Biased Ligand at the μ‐Opioid Receptor, Demonstrates a Predictable Relationship Between Plasma Concentrations and Pain Relief. II: Simulation of Potential Phase 3 Study Designs Using a Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Model

Oliceridine is a novel G protein–biased ligand at the μ‐opioid receptor that differentially activates G protein coupling while mitigating β‐arrestin recruitment. Unlike morphine, oliceridine has no known active metabolites; therefore, analgesic efficacy is predictably linked to its concentration in the plasma. Oliceridine is primarily hepatically metabolized by CYP3A4 and CYP2D6. Using a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic model relating oliceridine plasma concentrations to its effect on pain intensity as measured by numeric pain‐rating scale (NPRS) scores, we have simulated potential dosing regimens using both fixed‐dose regimens and as‐needed (prn) dosing regimens in which various doses of oliceridine were administered if NPRS scores indicated moderate to severe pain (≥4 on a 0‐10 scale). In addition, regimens in which oliceridine was self‐administered via a patient‐controlled analgesia device were also simulated. The simulated population included 10% CYP2D6 poor metabolizers (PM). The simulation results suggest that oliceridine doses of 1‐3 mg prn should be effective in reducing NPRS scores relative to placebo. The simulations also revealed that a 1‐mg “supplemental dose” given 0.25 hour after the loading dose would decrease NPRS scores further in almost one‐third of patients. In addition, if oliceridine is administered prn, a longer interval between doses is observed in simulated PM patients, consistent with their reduced oliceridine clearance. Because this longer average dosing interval is predicted to decrease oliceridine exposure in PM patients, the need to know the patients CYP2D6 genotype for dosing is effectively obviated.

Oliceridine (TRV130), a Novel G Protein–Biased Ligand at the μ‐Opioid Receptor, Demonstrates a Predictable Relationship Between Plasma Concentrations and Pain Relief. I: Development of a Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Model

Conventional opioids bind to μ‐opioid receptors and activate 2 downstream signaling pathways: G‐protein coupling, linked to analgesia, and β‐arrestin recruitment, linked to opioid‐related adverse effects and limiting efficacy. Oliceridine (TRV130) is a novel G protein–biased ligand at the μ‐opioid receptor that differentially activates G‐protein coupling while mitigating β‐arrestin recruitment. Using data derived from both phase 1 studies in healthy volunteers as well as data from a phase 2 study examining the efficacy of oliceridine for the treatment of postbunionectomy pain, we have developed a population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic model linking the pharmacokinetics of oliceridine to its effect on pain, as measured by the Numeric Pain Rating Scale score. Phase 1 data consisted of 145 subjects (88% male, 12% female), who received single doses of oliceridine ranging between 0.15 and 7 mg, as well as multiple doses ranging from 0.4 to 4.5 mg every 4–6 hours. Sixteen of these subjects were CYP2D6 poor metabolizers, who have lower oliceridine clearance than extensive metabolizers. Approximately 265 subjects (10% male, 90% female) came from the phase 2 study, in which they received active doses ranging from 0.5 to 4 mg every 3–4 hours. The final model was a 3‐compartment model that included covariates of body weight, sex, and CYP2D6 status. The PD model was an indirect response model linked to plasma oliceridine concentrations and included the placebo pain response over the 48‐hour treatment period. The EC50 for oliceridine on pain relief was estimated as 10.1 ng/mL (95%CI, 8.4–12.1 ng/mL). Model qualification showed that the model robustly reproduced the original data.