1. Safety and Efficacy of Deutetrabenazine at High versus Lower Daily Dosages in the ARC-HD Study to Treat Chorea in Huntington Disease.
- Author
-
Frank S, Testa CM, Goldstein J, Kayson E, Leavitt BR, Oakes D, O'Neill C, Whaley J, Gross N, Chaijale N, Barash S, and Gordon MF
- Subjects
- Humans, Male, Female, Middle Aged, Adult, Treatment Outcome, Cohort Studies, Aged, Adrenergic Uptake Inhibitors administration & dosage, Adrenergic Uptake Inhibitors adverse effects, Adrenergic Uptake Inhibitors pharmacology, Vesicular Monoamine Transport Proteins antagonists & inhibitors, Huntington Disease drug therapy, Tetrabenazine administration & dosage, Tetrabenazine analogs & derivatives, Tetrabenazine pharmacology, Tetrabenazine adverse effects, Chorea drug therapy, Dose-Response Relationship, Drug
- Abstract
Background: Huntington disease (HD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disease that causes psychiatric and neurological symptoms, including involuntary and irregular muscle movements (chorea). Chorea can disrupt activities of daily living, pose safety issues, and may lead to social withdrawal. The vesicular monoamine transporter 2 inhibitors tetrabenazine, deutetrabenazine, and valbenazine are approved treatments that can reduce chorea., Objective: This post hoc analysis was conducted to evaluate safety and efficacy among participants who received high-dosage deutetrabenazine treatment (> 48 mg/d) in ARC-HD, an open-label study that assessed long-term safety and efficacy of deutetrabenazine for the treatment of chorea in HD in adults., Methods: ARC-HD was a single-arm, two-cohort, open-label study. Participants either successfully completed the First-HD study or switched overnight from tetrabenazine to deutetrabenazine. Participants were dosed with deutetrabenazine in a response-driven manner (maximum 72 mg/d allowed). For the current analysis, exposure-adjusted incidence rates (EAIRs) for adverse events of interest were analyzed according to daily dosage (≤ 48 mg/d versus > 48 mg/d), and total maximal chorea (TMC) scores were analyzed by cohort during the stable-dose period., Results: In total, 116 of the 119 participants enrolled in ARC-HD entered the stable-dose period, where no apparent differences were seen in EAIRs when receiving deutetrabenazine dosages ≤ 48 mg/d (exposure = 177.7 person-years) compared with > 48 mg/d (exposure = 74.1 person-years). Similar results were found among the subset of participants who received deutetrabenazine dosages > 48 mg/d at least once during the study (n = 49, 42%) when their dosage was ≤ 48 mg/d (exposure = 37.9 person-years) versus > 48 mg/d (74.1 person-years). Efficacy analyses were conducted for participants who had TMC scores available (rollover cohort, n = 77; switch cohort, n = 35). For most participants, the lowest deutetrabenazine dosage needed to achieve a TMC response (≥ 30% improvement from baseline) was between 24 and 48 mg/d in both the rollover (n = 57, 74.0%) and switch (n = 16, 46.0%) cohorts. Whereas the dosage needed for a TMC response was independent of baseline TMC score in the rollover cohort, participants with higher baseline TMC scores in the switch cohort required higher dosages to achieve a TMC response during the trial., Conclusions: In this open-label, long-term study, some participants received deutetrabenazine dosing > 48 mg/d to achieve adequate chorea control. There was no new safety concern or incremental change in the safety profile between dosages of ≤ 48 mg/d and > 48 mg/d. These results include dosages that have not been approved for clinical use, however, they increase our understanding of safety and tolerability of deutetrabenazine doses., Clinical Trials Registration: ARC-HD (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01897896); First-HD (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01795859)., Competing Interests: Declarations. Funding: This study was supported by Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R&D, Inc. Conflict of Interest: Samuel Frank and Claudia M. Testa served as co-principal investigators of the First-HD study. Samuel Frank was compensated for his professional role as the chair of the Data and Safety Monitoring Board for the KINECT-HD study. Jody Goldstein, Elise Kayson, Christine O’Neill, and Jacquelyn Whaley report no conflicts of interest. Blair R. Leavitt is an employee of the Department of Medical Genetics and Division of Neurology, Department of Medicine, and a senior scientist at the Centre for Molecular Medicine and Therapeutics, The University of British Columbia, and BC Children’s Hospital. In the last 5 years, he has held or applied for research grants in the area of neurodegenerative disease from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, The Huntington Society of Canada, Weston Brain Foundation, Brain Canada, uniQure, Triplet Therapeutics, and the Nanomedicines Innovations Network. He has served on advisory boards for sRNAlytics, the Huntington’s Disease Society of America, and the Huntington Society of Canada. In addition, he has acted as a paid consultant for Roche, uniQure, Novartis, PTC Therapeutics, Triplet Therapeutics, Genentech, Takeda, and Ionis. He is also a shareholder, co-founder, and CEO of Incisive Genetics Inc. David Oakes has received research support from Auspex (for the First-HD and related studies), Vaccinex, Prana Pharmaceuticals, Biogen, and the National Institutes of Health, and received honoraria from Raptor Pharmaceuticals and Voyager Inc. Nicholas Gross, Nayla Chaijale, Steve Barash, and Mark Forrest Gordon are employees and shareholders of Teva Pharmaceuticals. Availability of Data and Material: Consistent with the policies of the Huntington Study Group, the corresponding author is confirmed as the guarantor of the work, and all authors had full access to the data. All authors have the right to publish any and all data separate and apart from any sponsor, and we take full responsibility for the data, the analysis and interpretation, and the conduct of the research. Ethics Approval: This article is based on previously conducted studies and does not contain any new studies with human participants. All involved study centers of the original trial (NCT01897896) received approval by local ethics committees and informed consent was received for all participants. Consent to Participate: Consent was obtained during the original clinical study and no new consent forms were required/collected for this analysis. Consent for Publication: Not applicable. Code Availability: Not applicable. Author Contributions: S.F., N.C., and M.F.G. contributed to the drafting/revision of the manuscript for content, including medical writing for content, and had a major role in the conceptualization, data curation, methodology, data analysis, supervision, validation, and reviewing. C.T., J.G., E.K., and J.W. contributed to the drafting/revision of the manuscript for content, including medical writing for content, and had a major role in the acquisition of data and the analysis or interpretation of data. B.R.L. and C.O. had a major role in the acquisition of data. D.O., N.G., and S.B. contributed to the drafting/revision of the manuscript for content, including medical writing for content, and the analysis or interpretation of data. All authors reviewed and approved the final manuscript., (© 2025. The Author(s).)
- Published
- 2025
- Full Text
- View/download PDF