throbber
BEMA® Buprenorphine Produced Effective Analgesia in a Phase 2 Placebo-Controlled Trial
`of Moderate to Severe Pain Following Dental Extraction
`Stephen E. Daniels, DO;1 Iris Breithaupt;2 Susan Kerls;2 David Wright, PhD;2 Andrew Finn, PharmD2
`1Premier Research, Austin, TX; 2BioDelivery Sciences International, Inc., Raleigh, NC
`
`Poster
`0114
`
`BACKGROUND
`
`DESIGN AND PROCEDURES
`
`RESULTS
`
` BEMA® Buprenorphine (BEMA-Bup)
`
` Is a small, bilayered, dissolvable polymer
`film (Figure 1)
`formulated with the analgesic buprenorphine for buccal
`application
`
`(BEMA®)
` Employs
`delivery
`BioErodible MucoAdhesive
`technology to facilitate buccal delivery of buprenorphine, which is
`poorly bioavailable when administered orally
`
` Being developed by BioDelivery Sciences International,
`Inc.
`(BDSI) for the management of moderate to severe chronic pain
`
` Buprenorphine
`
` A partial mu-opioid agonist
`
` Long duration of action
`
` Lower propensity for abuse and addiction (Schedule III)
`
` The only single-entity Schedule III opioid analgesic
`
` The randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group study
`included a screening visit, treatment day, and a follow-up visit (Figure 2).
`
` Subjects received one of five treatments:
`
` BEMA-Bup 0.5 mg Formulation 1 (high dose)
`
` BEMA-Bup 0.5 mg Formulation 2 (medium dose)
`
` BEMA-Bup 0.25 mg Formulation 2 (low dose)
`
` Oxycodone 5 mg (overencapsulated oral tablet)
`
` Placebo
`
` The buprenorphine bioavailability of BEMA-Bup Formulation 2 is
`approximately 63% that of Formulation 1. This difference accounts for
`the distinction between the high dose and the medium dose.
`
`Figure 3. Mean (SD) SPID-8 values:
`LOCF and BOCF results
`
`LOCF
`
`P=0.0809 versus placebo
`
`11.3 (23.0)
`
`11.9 (20.7)
`
`High-dose
`BEMA-Bup
`
`Medium-dose
`BEMA-Bup
`
`Low-dose
`BEMA-Bup
`
`6.0 (20.0)
`
`BOCF
`
`P=0.0334 versus placebo
`
`14.1 (18.9)
`
`12.7 (16.8)
`
`8.7 (16.4)
`
`High-dose
`BEMA-Bup
`
`Medium-dose
`BEMA-Bup
`
`Low-dose
`BEMA-Bup
`
`Oxycodone
`
`4.3 (14.9)
`
`Oxycodone
`
`4.2 (9.2)
`
`Figure 2. Study flow chart
`
`Placebo
`
`5.3 (17.6)
`
`Placebo
`
`7.4 (13.9)
`
` A total of 153 subjects (mean age 21.9 years, 90.8%
`white, 62.7% female) enrolled: n=31 high-dose BEMA-
`Bup, n=30 medium-dose BEMA-Bup, n=31 low-dose
`BEMA-Bup, n=31 oxycodone, n=30 placebo. All but 1
`subject, who was lost to follow-up, completed the study.
`
` Values for SPID-8 increased with BEMA-Bup dose. The
`difference between BEMA-Bup and placebo was
`significant in the baseline observation carried forward
`(BOCF) sensitivity analysis (p=0.0334) (Figure 3).
`
` Values for TOPAR-8 increased with BEMA-Bup dose
`with significant differences versus placebo for high-
`dose BEMA-Bup in both the LOCF analysis (p=0.0242)
`and the BOCF analysis (p=0.0164) (Figure 4).
`
`0
`
`10
`5
`Mean (SD) SPID-8
`
`15
`
`0
`
`5
`10
`Mean (SD) SPID-8
`
`15
`
` Likely fewer
`typical opioid side effects, such as respiratory
`depression and constipation
`
` Widely used outside the United States
`
`Figure 1. The BEMA® drug delivery technology
`is a buccal soluble film consisting of a
`small, bioerodible polymer film for application
`to the inner lining of the cheek.
`
`OBJECTIVE
`
`To compare the analgesic effects and tolerability of a range of doses of
`BEMA-Bup with those of placebo and a standard opiate in subjects with
`moderate to severe pain
`
`SUBJECTS
`
` Were 18 to 45 years old and generally in good health
`
` Had, within 5 hours of completing third molar extraction under local
`anesthesia:
`
` At least moderate postsurgical (baseline) pain intensity on a
`4-point categorical scale
`
` Pain intensity ≥5 on a 0- to 10-point Numeric Rating Scale
`
` No history of substance abuse or dependence per DSM-IV-TR criteria
`
` Analgesic assessments were recorded at baseline; at 30, 45, 60, and 90
`minutes postdose; and at 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 12, 20 and 24 hours
`postdose:
`
` Pain Intensity on a 0-10 Numeric Rating Scale (0=none,
`10=worst pain imaginable). The Pain Intensity Difference (PID) is
`the difference between baseline and measured Pain Intensity.
`
` Pain relief on a 0-4 categorical scale (none, a little, some, a lot,
`complete)
`
` Key endpoints:
`
` SPID-8, the time-weighted sum of PID from baseline to 8 hours
`postdose (primary endpoint)
`
` TOPAR-8, Total Pain Relief over 8 hours postdose,
`weighted
`
`time-
`
` Incidence of adverse events
`
`Figure 4. Mean (SD) TOPAR-8 values:
`LOCF AND BOCF results
`
`LOCF
`
`P=0.0242 versus placebo
`
`10.5 (9.9)
`
`9.9 (9.4)
`
`BOCF
`
`P=0.0164 versus placebo
`
`9.6 (10.4)
`
`8.1 (9.4)
`
`High-dose
`BEMA-Bup
`
`Medium-dose
`BEMA-Bup
`
`7.3 (8.7)
`
`Low-dose
`BEMA-Bup
`
`5.7 (8.6)
`
`High-dose
`BEMA-Bup
`
`Medium-dose
`BEMA-Bup
`
`Low-dose
`BEMA-Bup
`
`Oxycodone
`
`6.2 (6.7)
`
`Oxycodone
`
`3.2 (4.4)
`
`Placebo
`
`6.4 (8.6)
`
`Placebo
`
`5.1 (8.6)
`
`0
`
`10
`5
`Mean (SD) TOPAR-8
`
`15
`
`0
`
`10
`5
`Mean (SD) TOPAR-8
`
`15
`
`This research was funded by BioDelivery Sciences International, Inc.
`
` The incidence of adverse events increased with BEMA-
`Bup dose (35.5%, 70.0%, and 83.9% at low, medium,
`and high doses, respectively). Nausea and vomiting
`were the most common adverse events (Table).
`
` The oxycodone dose utilized in this study (5 mg) was
`subtherapeutic, not eliciting effective analgesia or
`producing significant adverse events.
`
`Table. Number (%) of subjects with adverse events*
`
`*Adverse events reported in >5% of subjects the study population are listed regardless of suspected cause.
`
`CONCLUSIONS
` In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled,
`Phase 2 trial, BEMA-Bup produced effective analgesia
`versus placebo in the treatment of moderate to severe
`pain following dental extraction.
`
` The adverse event profile of BEMA-Bup was typical of
`strong opioid doses administered to subjects who are
`not opioid tolerant.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Adverse Event
`
`Low-Dose
`
`Medium-Dose
`
`High-Dose
`
`BEMA-Bup
`
`BEMA-Bup
`
`BEMA-Bup Placebo Oxycodone
`
`Nausea
`
`Vomiting
`
`6 (19.4)
`
`14 (46.7)
`
`20 (64.5)
`
`2 (6.5)
`
`12 (40.0)
`
`16 (51.6)
`
`0
`
`0
`
`Dizziness
`
`5 (16.1)
`
`6 (20.0)
`
`13 (41.9)
`
`1 (3.3)
`
`2 (6.5)
`
`0
`
`0
`
`Headache
`
`2 (6.5)
`
`4 (13.3)
`
`2 (6.5)
`
`0
`
`2 (6.5)
`
`Alveolar osteitis
`
`0
`
`2 (6.7)
`
`3 (9.7)
`
`2 (6.7)
`
`2 (6.5)
`
`
`
`Eligibility and Screening
`
`Treatment Day
`
`Safety Follow-Up Visit
`
`Up to 14 days prior to tooth
`extraction
`
`Third Molar Extraction
`
`Randomization
`
`Study Drug Administration
`
`6 to 10 days after treatment day
`
`Page 1
`
`RB Ex. 2051
`BDSI v. RB PHARMACEUTICALS LTD
`IPR2014-00325
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket