*
It is currently Sun Oct 19, 2025 6:10 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 35 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Nalmefene Update
PostPosted: Sun Nov 21, 2010 1:08 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 8:19 am
Posts: 621
Location: USA
I ran across this update from http://www.evaluatepharma.com on Biotie, the Finnish company that is developing oral nalmefene for "as needed" use in treating alcohol dependence.
Quote:
From: http://www.evaluatepharma.com
November 05, 2010

Biotie Therapies is approaching a classic make-or-break moment. Pivotal data due before the year end on its lead compound, alcohol dependence therapy nalmefene, holds the potential to pave the way for much-needed financing or much hand-wringing.

The Finland company needs a cash injection by the middle of next year, and with the remainder of its pipeline mid-stage at best, it falls to nalmefene to allow this to happen without too much pain for investors. Shares in Biotie have lost almost a third of their value this year suggesting limited confidence in success, but analysts believe a negative readout would mean further substantial falls - analysts at NomuraCode reckon a drop of more than 70% is possible; unequivocally strong results are going to be required to re-inject optimism.

Biotie has granted worldwide rights to the pharmaceutical company H. Lundbeck which has completed phase III trials and should be reporting results soon. These trials were 6 months in length. The "as needed" use is a close approximation to TSM. If the results from phase III come back unfavorable oral nalmefene may die on the vine. I would be curious to see if those experiencing severe NAL headaches notice a difference with oral nalmefene when and if it becomes available. The investor update from Biotie was very clear that they are going after reduction in alcohol in current drinkers, not abstinence, in their marketing of nalmefene. Interesting stuff.

_________________
Began TSM 7/19/10 Pre-TSM 50-70 US (106UK/84AU)
Ave. units/4 weeks for 1 year (#AF/4 wks) 22.8(1AF),29(0),30(1),27(2),23(2),20(6),16(8),17(9),13(12),15.5(9),15.8(11),15.1(10),14.6(11)
regained control wk 33


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Nalmefene Update
PostPosted: Sun Nov 21, 2010 6:27 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 8:52 pm
Posts: 116
Super interesting! When Lundbeck releases its trials results later this year, we'll almost certainly learn something. In addition, once these results are available and if they are positive, it will make a lot easier for prospective TSMers to talk doctors into prescribing nalterexone/nalmefene.


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Nalmefene Update
PostPosted: Sun Dec 19, 2010 12:26 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 8:19 am
Posts: 621
Location: USA
I ran across this study tonight about nalmefene. The nalmefene was supplied by Biotie which is the company working in conjunction with Lundbeck to get approval for oral nalmefene for targeted use in alcohol dependence.
Quote:
Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 2007 Jul;31(7):1179-87. Epub 2007 Apr 19.
Targeted nalmefene with simple medical management in the treatment of heavy drinkers: a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled multicenter study.
Karhuvaara S, Simojoki K, Virta A, Rosberg M, Löyttyniemi E, Nurminen T, Kallio A, Mäkelä R.
Biotie Therapies Corp, Turku, Finland. sakari.karhuvaara@pp.inet.fi
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Clinical studies with opioid antagonists for treatment of problem drinking have mainly been conducted in specialized alcohol treatment centers, included structured psychosocial treatment, and have focused on maintaining abstinence after a period of abstinence from alcohol.
METHODS: This multisite, randomized double-blind study investigated targeted nalmefene in reducing heavy drinking. Specialized alcohol treatment centers and private general practices enrolled 403 subjects (328 men, 75 women). Subjects were instructed to take nalmefene 10 to 40 mg (n=242) or placebo (n=161) when they believed drinking to be imminent. After 28 weeks, 57 subjects from the nalmefene group continued into a 24-week randomized withdrawal extension. Concomitant psychosocial intervention was minimal and no treatment goals were imposed. Alcohol consumption was recorded using the time-line follow-back method. Biochemical indicators of alcohol use were also measured.
RESULTS: The mean monthly number of heavy drinking days (HDDs) during the 12-week period before inclusion was 15.5 (SD 6.9) in the nalmefene group and 16.2 (SD 6.9) in the placebo group. During treatment, the mean numbers of HDDs were 8.6 to 9.3 in the nalmefene group and 10.6 to 12.0 in the placebo group (p=0.0065). The levels of serum alanine aminotransferase and gamma-glutamyl transferase decreased in the nalmefene group compared with the placebo group (p=0.0088 and 0.0023). During the randomized withdrawal period, subjects randomized to placebo apparently returned to heavier drinking. Subjects receiving nalmefene reported more nausea, insomnia, fatigue, dizziness, and malaise than subjects on placebo.
CONCLUSIONS: Nalmefene appears to be effective and safe in reducing heavy drinking, even when accompanied by minimal psychosocial support.

I read the full text version of the study. I find it interesting that the researchers seem to only be concerned with reporting the reduction in heavy drinking days, but for me as a alcoholic I am more interested in the reduction in drinks per drinking day and # of drinks/week because this is what is going to have the biggest impact on my quality of life. In this study the nalmefene group went from 43.2 (50.4 US units) drinks per week pre-study to 23.2 (27.1) seven months later (a 46% reduction) versus the placebo group who went from 45.0 (52.5 US units) to 28.5 (33.3 US units) drinks/week (a 37% reduction). At the end of the study they took the responders and randomized them to either continued nalmefene or placebo and in the researcher's words,
Quote:
During the randomized withdrawal, there appeared to be a return to more frequent heavy drinking among the subjects randomized to placebo, while the subjects continuing with nalmefene remained at the level of drinking that they had achieved during the initial 28-week period. Partly due to the small number of subjects, the difference between the treatments was not statistically significant (p=0.07, treatment × time interaction)
What I take from this is when the nalmefene responders went on placebo their drinking increased. If I were drinking 50.4 drinks/week (7.2 drinks/day) and began taking oral nalmefene I would be a much more functional human being 7 months later when I was averaging 27.1 drinks/week (3.9 drinks/day). I know this first hand because I've had a lot of weeks around 27 drinks in the last few months. For me there is a huge difference between a 7 drink night and a 4 drink night in terms of my quality of life, ability to function as a single father and generally be a productive person and not put myself or others in harm's way. Presumably, the 37% reduction in drinks/week that the placebo group saw is due to them recognizing they had a drinking problem and enrolling in the study thereby focusing their attention on the fact that they needed to slow down. The difference between nalmefene and placebo (9% extra reduction in drinks/week) is the effect of targeted nalmefene use. I welcome anyone else's interpretation of the results.
Note: edited to convert to US units

_________________
Began TSM 7/19/10 Pre-TSM 50-70 US (106UK/84AU)
Ave. units/4 weeks for 1 year (#AF/4 wks) 22.8(1AF),29(0),30(1),27(2),23(2),20(6),16(8),17(9),13(12),15.5(9),15.8(11),15.1(10),14.6(11)
regained control wk 33


Last edited by Saint Vincent on Sun Dec 19, 2010 10:45 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Nalmefene Update
PostPosted: Sun Dec 19, 2010 8:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 4:26 pm
Posts: 61
It would be interesting if they further divided HDD into moderate/very HDD. I would imagine that (as you said) there would be a more dramatic reduction in very HDD with the Nal group and the VHDD days are the ones that do the most harm.

_________________
Why drag about this monstrous corpse of your memory, lest you contradict somewhat you have stated in this or that public place?


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Nalmefene Update
PostPosted: Sun Dec 19, 2010 8:25 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 4:26 pm
Posts: 61
It would be interesting if they further divided HDD into moderate/very HDD. I would imagine that (as you said) there would be a more dramatic reduction in very HDD with the Nal group and the VHDD days are the ones that do the most harm.

_________________
Why drag about this monstrous corpse of your memory, lest you contradict somewhat you have stated in this or that public place?


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Nalmefene Update
PostPosted: Sun Dec 19, 2010 10:41 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 8:19 am
Posts: 621
Location: USA
They did break it down into moderate, heavy and very heavy. VHDD are 10 or more drinks/day for men or 8 for women, HDD are 5 or more drinks for men and 4 for women. The researchers were using 12g of ethanol as their standard drink measure since this was done in Finland. In the US 14g is the standard drink. So you should multiply everything by 1.17 if you want to convert to US units.
Quote:
Overall, subjects in the nalmefene group had fewer HDDs, and the use of study medication seemed to be associated with heavy drinking more often in the placebo group (on 71% of drug-taking days) than in the nalmefene group (56% of drug-taking days).
The VHDD went from 7 pretreatment to 2,1,1,2,1,1,1 per month over the next seven months. So the number of VHDD dropped dramatically and stayed low on nalmefene. Compare this to the pretreatment placebo which had 8 VHDD per month pretreatment to 5,5,5,4,4.5,4,4 over the next 7 months. To me this is a big difference if you are still having 1 or more episodes of drinking over 10 units per week (11.7 US units) in placebo versus only 1 a month on nalmefene. The nalmefene group went from 43.2 (50.4 US units) drinks per week pre-study to 23.2 (27.1) seven months later (a 46% reduction) versus the placebo group who went from 45.0 (52.5 US units) to 28.5 (33.3 US units) drinks/week (a 37% reduction). As I mentioned in the first post I can function pretty well averaging 3.9 drinks/day compared to 7.2 drinks/day. Add a little effort and a little harm reduction practice and you can get your drinks down to 3 per day for men, which means no drunk driving, no missed work or kids soccer practices, no hangovers. I would say this applies to many TSMers but there are clearly others out there for whom this won't work.

_________________
Began TSM 7/19/10 Pre-TSM 50-70 US (106UK/84AU)
Ave. units/4 weeks for 1 year (#AF/4 wks) 22.8(1AF),29(0),30(1),27(2),23(2),20(6),16(8),17(9),13(12),15.5(9),15.8(11),15.1(10),14.6(11)
regained control wk 33


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Nalmefene Update
PostPosted: Sun Dec 19, 2010 11:12 am 
Offline

Joined: Wed Nov 10, 2010 4:26 pm
Posts: 61
That's the big thing I think everyone notices: the reduction in VHDD. Cheers for posting this.

_________________
Why drag about this monstrous corpse of your memory, lest you contradict somewhat you have stated in this or that public place?


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Nalmefene Update
PostPosted: Sun Dec 19, 2010 11:27 am 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 8:19 am
Posts: 621
Location: USA
Here's a graph of the drinks/month on nalmefene for all subjects.

Image


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Nalmefene Update
PostPosted: Sun Dec 19, 2010 1:11 pm 
Offline

Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 8:19 am
Posts: 621
Location: USA
For the fun of it I graphed my first 5 months of data versus the targeted nalmefene group.

Image
This doesn't really mean anything but I found it interesting how similar the graphs were and how spectacularly mediocre I've been in my response to TSM. In this case mediocre is good because I'm happy where I am but after looking at this data set I would not characterize myself as an excellent responder.

_________________
Began TSM 7/19/10 Pre-TSM 50-70 US (106UK/84AU)
Ave. units/4 weeks for 1 year (#AF/4 wks) 22.8(1AF),29(0),30(1),27(2),23(2),20(6),16(8),17(9),13(12),15.5(9),15.8(11),15.1(10),14.6(11)
regained control wk 33


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: Nalmefene Update
PostPosted: Mon Dec 20, 2010 8:12 pm 
Offline

Joined: Wed Sep 29, 2010 8:52 pm
Posts: 116
I think that this paper fits very well the the main body of research on TSM. Overall impression from that named body seems to be "clearly effective - but not tremendously so and not obviously much better than other interventions". Of course it would help if there was a much bigger trial. Unfortunately, many small do not equal one large study. Much bigger N would significantly increase the statistical power and allow for stratification of patients.

Any news on that Lundbeck report?


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 35 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group