Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate: Prodrug Delivery, Amphetamine Exposure and Duration of Efficacy.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Ermer JC
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4823324 | biostudies-literature | 2016 May
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate: Prodrug Delivery, Amphetamine Exposure and Duration of Efficacy.
Ermer James C JC Pennick Michael M Frick Glen G
Clinical drug investigation 20160501 5
Lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) is a long-acting d-amphetamine prodrug used to treat attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children, adolescents and adults. LDX is hydrolysed in the blood to yield d-amphetamine, and the pharmacokinetic profile of d-amphetamine following oral administration of LDX has a lower maximum plasma concentration (Cmax), extended time to Cmax (Tmax) and lower inter- and intra-individual variability in exposure compared with the pharmacokinetic profile of an ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThis open-label, crossover study examined lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) and D-amphetamine pharmacokinetics in healthy adults after administration of an intact LDX capsule or after the capsule was emptied into orange juice or yogurt and the contents consumed.MethodsHealthy adult volunteers (N = 30) were administered a 70-mg LDX capsule or the contents of a 70-mg capsule mixed with yogurt or orange juice using a 3-way crossover design. Blood samples were collected serially for up to 96 hours after dose. Pharmacokinetic endpoints included maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) and area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from zero to infinity (AUC0-∞) or to last assessment (AUClast). Relative LDX and D-amphetamine bioavailabilities from the contents of a 70-mg LDX capsule mixed with orange juice or yogurt were compared with those from the intact LDX capsule using bioequivalence-testing procedures.ResultsGeometric least squares mean ratios (90% confidence intervals [CIs]) for D-amphetamine (active moiety) were within the prespecified bioequivalence range (0.80-1.25) when the contents of a 70-mg LDX capsule were mixed with orange juice [Cmax: 0.971 (0.945, 0.998); AUC0-∞: 0.986 (0.955, 1.019); AUClast: 0.970 (0.937, 1.004)] or yogurt [Cmax: 0.970 (0.944, 0.997); AUC0-∞: 0.945 (0.915, 0.976); AUClast: 0.944 (0.912, 0.977)]. Geometric least squares mean ratios (90% CIs) for LDX (inactive prodrug) were below the accepted range when the contents of a 70-mg LDX capsule were mixed with orange juice [Cmax: 0.641 (0.582, 0.707); AUC0-∞: 0.716 (0.647, 0.792); AUClast: 0.708 (0.655, 0.766)]; the lower 90% CI for Cmax [0.828 (0.752, 0.912)] was below the accepted range when the contents of a 70-mg LDX capsule were mixed with yogurt.ConclusionsRelative bioavailability of D-amphetamine (the active moiety) did not differ across administrations, which suggests that emptying an LDX capsule into orange juice or yogurt and consuming it is an alternative to intact capsules.
| S-EPMC5158093 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn clinical practice, α₂-adrenoceptor agonists have been adjunctively administered with psychostimulants for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Two studies have examined the adjunctive use of guanfacine extended release (GXR, Intuniv®; Shire Development LLC, Wayne, PA, USA) with psychostimulants in children and adolescents with a suboptimal response to psychostimulant treatment. However, the potential for pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions (DDIs) between GXR and lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX, Vyvanse®; Shire US LLC, Wayne, PA, USA) has not been thoroughly evaluated.ObjectiveThe primary objective of this study was to examine the pharmacokinetics of GXR 4 mg and LDX 50 mg given as single doses alone and in combination.Study designThis was an open-label, randomized, three-period crossover, DDI study.SettingThe study was conducted in a single clinical research center.ParticipantsForty-two healthy adults were randomized in this study.InterventionsSubjects were administered single oral doses of GXR 4 mg, LDX 50 mg, or GXR and LDX in combination.Main outcome measuresBlood samples collected predose and up to 72 h postdose assessed guanfacine, LDX, and d-amphetamine levels. Bioequivalence was defined as the 90% confidence intervals (CIs) of the geometric mean ratios of the area under the plasma concentration-time curve extrapolated to infinity (AUC0-∞) and maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) falling within the bioequivalence reference interval (0.80-1.25). Safety measures included adverse events, vital signs, and electrocardiograms (ECGs).ResultsForty subjects completed the study. Following administration of LDX alone or in combination with GXR, the statistical comparisons of the AUC0-∞ and Cmax of d-amphetamine fell entirely within the reference interval. For guanfacine, the 90% CI of the geometric mean ratio of AUC∞ for the two treatments was within the bioequivalence criteria, but for Cmax the upper bound of the 90% CI exceeded the standard range for bioequivalence by 7%. This relatively small change is unlikely to be clinically meaningful. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported by 42.9% of subjects; the most commonly reported TEAEs included dizziness (5.0, 7.3, and 7.3%) and headache (7.5, 4.9, and 7.3%) following administration of GXR, LDX, and GXR and LDX in combination, respectively. Clinically significant ECG abnormalities occurred in one subject following administration of LDX and in one subject following coadministration of GXR and LDX.ConclusionsIn healthy adults, coadministration of GXR and LDX did not result in a clinically meaningful pharmacokinetic DDI compared with either treatment alone. No unique TEAEs were observed with coadministration of GXR and LDX compared with either treatment alone.
| S-EPMC3689918 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objectives: Describe the safety and tolerability of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) and provide data on clinical effects for efficacy-related endpoints and pharmacokinetics in preschool-aged children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Methods: This phase 2, multicenter, open-label, dose-optimization study (ClinicalTrials.gov registry: NCT02402166) was conducted at seven U.S. sites between April 15, 2015, and June 30, 2016. Children (4-5 years of age) meeting Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision criteria for ADHD and having ADHD Rating Scale-IV Preschool version (ADHD-RS-IV-PS) total scores ?28 (boys) or ?24 (girls) were eligible. Open-label LDX (8-week duration) was initiated at 5?mg and titrated to 30?mg until achieving an optimal dose. Assessments included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), vital sign changes, ADHD-RS-IV-PS total score changes, and pharmacokinetic evaluations. Results: Among 24 participants, the most frequently reported TEAE was decreased appetite (8/24; 33%). At week 8/early termination, mean (standard deviation) systolic and diastolic blood pressure and pulse changes from baseline were -1.1 (7.31) and 1.5 (6.93) mmHg and -0.8 (12.75) bpm, respectively. The mean (95% confidence interval) change from baseline ADHD-RS-IV-PS total score at the final on-treatment assessment was -26.1 (-32.2 to -20.0). Pharmacokinetic parameters of d-amphetamine, a major active metabolite of LDX, were characterized: d-amphetamine exposure increased with LDX dose; mean tmax and t1/2, respectively, ranged from 4.00 to 4.23 hours and 7.18 to 8.46 hours. Conclusions: In preschool-aged children with ADHD, LDX was generally well tolerated and reduced ADHD symptoms, consistent with observations in children 6-17 years of age. Based on these findings, a starting LDX dose as low as 5?mg in phase 3 studies in preschool-aged children is supported.
| S-EPMC7153646 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAttention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a common neurobehavioral psychiatric disorder that afflicts children, with a reported prevalence of 2.4% to 19.8% worldwide. Stimulants (methylphenidate [MPH] and amphetamine) are considered first-line ADHD pharmacotherapy. MPH is a catecholamine reuptake inhibitor, whereas amphetamines have additional presynaptic activity. Although MPH and amphetamine can effectively manage ADHD symptoms in most pediatric patients, many still fail to respond optimally to either. After administration, the prodrug stimulant lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) is converted to l-lysine and therapeutically active d-amphetamine in the blood. The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy of LDX in children with ADHD who remained symptomatic (ie, nonremitters; ADHD Rating Scale IV [ADHD-RS-IV] total score > 18) on MPH therapy prior to enrollment in a 4-week placebo-controlled LDX trial, compared with the overall population.MethodsIn this post hoc analysis of data from a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, forced-dose titration study, we evaluated the clinical efficacy of LDX in children aged 6-12 years with and without prior MPH treatment at screening. ADHD symptoms were assessed using the ADHD-RS-IV scale, Conners' Parent Rating Scale-Revised short form (CPRS-R), and Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement scale, at screening, baseline, and endpoint. ADHD-RS-IV total and CPRS-R ADHD Index scores were summarized as mean (SD). Clinical response for the subgroup analysis was defined as a ≥ 30% reduction from baseline in ADHD-RS-IV score and a CGI-I score of 1 or 2. Dunnett test was used to compare change from baseline in all groups. Number needed to treat to achieve one clinical responder or one symptomatic remitter was calculated as the reciprocal of the difference in their proportions on active treatment and placebo at endpoint.ResultsOf 290 randomized participants enrolled, 28 received MPH therapy at screening, of which 26 remained symptomatic (ADHD-RS-IV > 18). ADHD-RS-IV total scores, changes from baseline, clinical responsiveness, and rates of symptomatic remission in this subgroup were comparable to the overall population. The safety and tolerability profiles for LDX were comparable to other stimulants currently available.ConclusionIn this analysis, children with significant clinical ADHD symptoms despite MPH treatment improved during treatment with LDX and experienced similar improvements in their symptoms as the overall study population.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00556296.
| S-EPMC3225298 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Sleep problems are common in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). This analysis aimed to evaluate the impact of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) on sleep quality in adults with ADHD.This 4-week, phase 3, double-blind, forced-dose escalation study of adults aged 18 to 55 years with ADHD randomized participants to receive placebo (n = 62), or 30 (n = 119), 50 (n = 117), or 70 (n = 122) mg/d LDX, taken once a day in the morning. The self-rated Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) was administered at baseline and at week 4 to assess sleep quality. The PSQI global score assesses 7 sleep components (subjective sleep quality, sleep latency, sleep duration, habitual sleep efficiency, sleep disturbances, use of sleeping medications, and daytime dysfunction) each scored from 0 (no difficulty) to 3 (severe difficulty).The mean baseline PSQI global score was 5.8 for LDX and 6.3 for placebo (P = .19) indicating poor overall sleep quality. At endpoint, least squares (LS) mean change from baseline was -0.8 for LDX vs -0.5 for placebo (P = .33). The daytime functioning component showed significant improvement in LS mean change at endpoint for LDX compared with placebo (LDX -0.4 vs placebo 0.0, P = .0001). LS mean changes for the other 6 PSQI components did not significantly differ from placebo. Sleep-related treatment-emergent adverse events with an incidence >/=2% in the active treatment and placebo groups, respectively, were insomnia (19.3% and 4.8%), initial insomnia (5.0% and 3.2%), middle insomnia (3.6% and 0%), sleep disorder (0.6% and 3.2%), somnolence (0.3% and 3.2%), and fatigue (4.7% and 4.8%), and were generally mild or moderate in severity.For most subjects, LDX was not associated with an overall worsening of sleep quality and significantly improved daytime functioning in adults with ADHD.clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00334880.
| S-EPMC2732626 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundUnderstanding the nature and time course of the pharmacodynamic effects of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) medications is useful. The Cognitive Drug Research Computerized Battery of Tests (CDR-CBT) is a 20-min battery of ten standardized, validated neuropsychometric tasks.ObjectiveThis pilot study examined the sensitivity and responsiveness of the CDR-CBT for assessing cognitive function in adults with ADHD prior to and up to 16 h postdose during treatment with lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) or mixed amphetamine salts immediate release (MAS-IR; various generics available).MethodsThis was a double-blind three-period crossover study. Participants received LDX 50 mg/day, MAS-IR 20 mg/day, and placebo (~7 a.m.) for 7 days each in randomized order. CDR-CBT was administered on day 1 of period 1 and day 7 of each period at scheduled times between -0.5 (predose) and 16 h postdose. Composite power of attention (PoA) score (sum of simple reaction time, choice reaction time, and digit vigilance speed) was the primary outcome measure. The Conners' Adult ADHD Rating Scales-Self-Report: Short Version (CAARS-S:S) was administered at baseline and on day 1 of period 1, and days 6 and 7 of each treatment period. Tertiary outcomes included CDR-CBT composite continuity of attention scores, its component task scores, cognitive reaction time, and response variability scores. No inferential statistical comparisons were conducted. Safety assessments included adverse events (AEs) and vital signs.ResultsThis analysis included 18 participants (mean age 30.8 years); one withdrew because of AEs. Mean pretreatment PoA scores were 1175.9-1361.2 ms, scores commensurate with a normative age of >40 years. Maximum reductions in PoA scores with LDX and MAS-IR occurred at 5 h postdose at day 7 (least squares mean difference [95% CI] of -150.0 [-235.41 to -64.50] and -79.8 [-165.72 to 6.21] ms vs. placebo, respectively). CAARS-S:S scores were unchanged with LDX and MAS-IR (vs. placebo) at all postdose timepoints. Tertiary attention-related CDR-CBT outcomes were sensitive to LDX and MAS-IR (vs. placebo). Treatment-emergent AEs and vital signs were consistent with previous studies in adult ADHD.ConclusionIn adults with ADHD, PoA scores indicated impaired attention at baseline and response to treatment with LDX and MAS-IR (vs. placebo), demonstrating value for measuring the time course of pharmacologic treatment effects.
| S-EPMC3899471 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate the efficacy of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate in adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder symptom subtypes who exhibit predominantly inattention, hyperactivity/ impulsivity, or combined symptom clusters.Design/setting/participantsThis is a post-hoc analysis from a multicenter, one-year, open-label lisdexamfetamine dimesylate study in adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder previously completing two weeks or more in a four-week, randomized, placebo-controlled lisdexamfetamine dimesylate study, using Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale IV symptom ratings as an attention deficit hyperactivity disorder subtype proxy (N=349).MeasurementsAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale IV was measured at baseline of prior study and throughout the open-label study. Proxy subtypes were based on item scores of 2 (moderate) or 3 (severe), representing endorsement of at least six of nine symptoms on respective subscales; predominantly combined type endorsed at least six of nine symptoms on each subscale. Overall safety evaluations included treatment-emergent adverse events.ResultsAt baseline, 93 of 345 participants exhibited predominantly inattention, 13 predominantly hyperactivity/ impulsivity, 236 combined symptom clusters, and three were unassigned. For the three subgroups, respectively, mean (standard deviation) Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale IV total scores at baseline were 34.5 (4.02), 33.8 (3.27), and 43.6 (5.24); change from baseline to endpoint scores were -19.3 (9.48), -24.0 (7.22), and -27.3 (11.78). Mean (standard deviation) end-of-study lisdexamfetamine dimesylate dose was 57.7 (14.75), 53.1 (16.01), and 56.9 (14.94)mg/day, respectively.Treatment-emergent adverse events (>5%) were upper respiratory tract infection (21.8%), insomnia (19.5%), headache (17.2%), dry mouth (16.6%), decreased appetite (14.3%), irritability (11.2%), anxiety (8.3%), nasopharyngitis (7.4%), sinusitis (6.6%), decreased weight (6.0%), back pain (5.4%), and muscle spasms (5.2%).ConclusionsLisdexamfetamine dimesylate was effective in participants with predominantly inattention, hyperactivity/ impulsivity, and combined attention deficit hyperactivity disorder symptom clusters. Groups exhibiting specific predominant subtype symptoms did not differ in clinical response to lisdexamfetamine dimesylate.
| S-EPMC3398683 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) is a long-acting, prodrug stimulant therapy for patients with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). This randomized placebo-controlled trial of an optimized daily dose of LDX (30, 50 or 70 mg) was conducted in children and adolescents (aged 6-17 years) with ADHD. To evaluate the efficacy of LDX throughout the day, symptoms and behaviors of ADHD were evaluated using an abbreviated version of the Conners' Parent Rating Scale-Revised (CPRS-R) at 1000, 1400 and 1800 hours following early morning dosing (0700 hours). Osmotic-release oral system methylphenidate (OROS-MPH) was included as a reference treatment, but the study was not designed to support a statistical comparison between LDX and OROS-MPH. The full analysis set comprised 317 patients (LDX, n = 104; placebo, n = 106; OROS-MPH, n = 107). At baseline, CPRS-R total scores were similar across treatment groups. At endpoint, differences (active treatment - placebo) in least squares (LS) mean change from baseline CPRS-R total scores were statistically significant (P < 0.001) throughout the day for LDX (effect sizes: 1000 hours, 1.42; 1400 hours, 1.41; 1800 hours, 1.30) and OROS-MPH (effect sizes: 1000 hours, 1.04; 1400 hours, 0.98; 1800 hours, 0.92). Differences in LS mean change from baseline to endpoint were statistically significant (P < 0.001) for both active treatments in all four subscales of the CPRS-R (ADHD index, oppositional, hyperactivity and cognitive). In conclusion, improvements relative to placebo in ADHD-related symptoms and behaviors in children and adolescents receiving a single morning dose of LDX or OROS-MPH were maintained throughout the day and were ongoing at the last measurement in the evening (1800 hours).
| S-EPMC3918120 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundEfficacy and safety profiles by sex and age (6-9 vs 10-12 years) and magnitude and duration of effect by effect size overall and across the day of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) vs placebo were assessed.MethodsThis study enrolled children (6-12 years) with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in an open-label dose optimization with LDX (30-70 mg/d) followed by a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 2-way crossover phase. Post hoc analyses assessed interaction between sex or age and treatment and assessed effect sizes for Swanson, Kotkin, Agler, M-Flynn, and Pelham (SKAMP) and Permanent Product Measure of Performance (PERMP) scales and ADHD Rating Scale IV measures. No corrections for multiple testing were applied on time points and subgroup statistical comparisons.Results129 participants enrolled; 117 randomized. Both sexes showed improvement on all assessments at postdose time points; females showed less impairment than males for SKAMP and PERMP scores in treatment and placebo groups at nearly all times. Both age groups improved on all assessments at postdose time points. Children 10-12 years had less impairment in SKAMP ratings than those 6-9 years. Treatment-by-sex interactions were observed at time points for SKAMP-D, SKAMP total, and PERMP scores; no consistent pattern across scales or time points was observed. LDX demonstrated significant improvement vs placebo, by effect size, on SKAMP-D from 1.5-13 hours postdose. The overall LS mean (SE) SKAMP-D effect size was -1.73 (0.18). In the dose-optimization phase, common (≥2%) treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) in males were upper abdominal pain, headache, affect lability, initial insomnia, and insomnia; in females were nausea and decreased weight. During the crossover phase for those taking LDX, higher incidence (≥2% greater) was observed in males for upper abdominal pain and insomnia and in females for nausea and headache. Overall incidence of TEAEs in age groups was similar.ConclusionApparent differences in impairment level between sex and age groups were noted. However, these results support the efficacy of LDX from 1.5 hours to 13 hours postdose in boys and girls with medium to large effect sizes across the day with some variability in TEAE incidence by sex.Trial registration numberClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00500149.
| S-EPMC3022598 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo assess effects of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) and mixed amphetamine salts extended release (MAS XR) on symptom improvement in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).MethodsPost hoc analysis of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover analog-classroom environment was conducted. The primary efficacy outcome was the deportment subscale of the Swanson, Kotkin, Agler, M-Flynn, and Pelham (SKAMP-D) rating scale. The secondary efficacy outcome was the investigator-rated Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement (CGI-I), a 7-point scale ranging from 1 (very much improved) to 7 (very much worse), which assesses improvement over time from baseline. McNemar test was used to compare participants' responses to LDX and MAS XR on CGI-I scores dichotomized into 1 (very much improved) vs all other response scores (2 to 7) in a 2 × 2 table.ResultsFifty-two children (aged 6 to 12 years) were enrolled, titrated, and randomized; 50 completed the study. Investigators rated 74% of LDX participants as either very much improved or much improved on the CGI-I scale relative to 72% of MAS XR participants and 18% of placebo participants. Of the 50 children who completed the study, 32% of LDX participants were very much improved vs 16% of MAS XR, and 2% of placebo participants relative to baseline. McNemar test indicated that 10 participants were very much improved with LDX, but not MAS XR; 2 participants were very much improved with MAS XR, but not LDX; 6 participants were very much improved with both, while 32 were not very much improved with either. Analysis showed that LDX had a significantly higher number of children with a very much improved score on the CGI-I than MAS XR (P = 0.0386).ConclusionTreatment of children with LDX resulted in a higher number of participants with a very much improved score on the CGI-I than treatment with MAS XR or placebo.
| S-EPMC3101887 | biostudies-literature