throbber
Declaration Under 37 C.F.R. 1.132
`
`Sir:
`
`I, Masaaki Ogasa, citizen of Japan and residing at One Bridge Plaza, Suite 510, Fort Lee,
`New Jersey, 07024 USA, declare and say as follows.
`1.
`I am a graduate ofFaculty ofPharmacy, Kyoto Pharmaceutical University, Japan in 1991
`and of Master Course, same university in 1993.
`2.
`Since 1993 up till the present, I have been an employee ofDainippon Sumitomo Pharma
`Company, Limited. (Former Sumitomo Pharmaceuticals, Company, Limited), the assignee ofU.S.
`Patent Application No. 10/525,021 and I have been engaged in research and development of
`lurasidone for the treatment of psychiatric disease at the Research Center and Clinical
`Development Department of said company.
`3.
`Under my direction, the following comparative clinical studies have been done.
`
`A STUDY OF THE MAXIMUM TOLERATED DOSE OF SM-13496 (LURASIDONE) IN
`PATIENTS WITH SCHIZOPHRENIA (Study D 1 050217)
`
`Study Design and Methodology
`This was a single-center, randomized, in-patient, double-blind study to determine the safety and
`tolerability of lurasidone administered as repeated oral doses to stable schizophrenic patients. In
`order to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of lurasidone, study drug was
`administered to 7 fixed dose, sequential, escalating dose cohorts (cohorts 1-7) that were planned
`to consist of a minimum of 6 and maximum of 10 patients each (2 placebo and up to 8 lurasidone
`patients). The minimum intolerable dose (MID) was defined as the dose at which a minimum of 4
`evaluable lurasidone-treated patients in a cohort experienced more than 1 occurrence of moderate
`or severe adverse events related to the lurasidonc, or the dose at which at least 1 lurasidone-treated
`patient experienced a serious adverse event at least possibly related to lurasidone. The next dose
`level below the MID was designated the MTD.
`Following a screening period of up to 30 days, eligible patients entered a 4 day in patient
`single-blind placebo washout period during which they discontinued any previous antipsychotic
`and any other prohibited psychotropic medications. At the end of the washout period, patients
`were randomized to receive lurasidone or placebo once daily. Patients were enrolled into the first
`7 cohorts and received study drug on Days 1-6, and the lurasidone doses per cohort were: 160 mg
`(cohort 1), 200 mg (cohort 2), 240 mg (cohort 3), 280 mg (cohort 4), 320 mg (cohort 5), 400 mg
`
`Page 1 of 4
`
`SLAYBACK EXHIBIT 1015
`
`

`

`(cohort 6) and 520 mg (cohort 7). The MID was reached in cohort 7. All study drug doses were
`administered to patients in a postprandial state at approximately 8:00AM.
`
`Results: Determination of the Minimum Intolerable Dose (MID)
`The MID was defined as the dose at which a minimum of 4 evaluable lurasidone treated patients
`in a cohort each experienced more than 1 occurrence of moderate or severe adverse experiences
`related [relationship of possibly, probably, or definitely] to the lurasidone, or the dose at which at
`least 1 lurasidone treated patient experienced a serious adverse experience at least possibly related
`to lurasidone ).
`The number of patients experiencing more than 1 moderate or severe
`lurasidone-related adverse experience by
`lurasidone dose was 0 (160 mg), 1 (200 mg),
`1 (240 mg), 1 (280 mg), 0 (320 mg), 2 (400 mg), and 5 (520 mg) (Table 1). There were no
`serious adverse experiences at least possibly related to lurasidone. Therefore, the MID was
`lurasidone 520 mg. Among patients who received the MID in the fixed-dose cohorts (lurasidone
`520 mg), the moderate and severe adverse experiences were akathisia (5 patients); sedation
`(3 patients); restlessness (2 patients); anxiety (1 patient, event was severe); and extrapyramidal
`disorder, muscle spasm, depressed level of consciousness, claustrophobia, bruxism, and dystonia
`(1 patient each).
`
`Table 1 Patients Reaching MID Criteria by Lurasidone Dose
`
`Lurasidone Dose
`160 mg
`(N=6)
`200 mg
`(N=5)
`240 mg
`(N=7)
`(N=6)
`(N=7)
`(N=6)
`
`280 mg
`320 mg
`400 mg
`
`520 mg
`
`(N=7)
`
`Patients with More than 1 Moderate or Severe Treatment-Related Adverse Events
`Adverse Eventa
`--
`none
`01-203
`nausea, vomiting NOS
`01-303
`dystonia, vomiting NOS
`01-406
`bruxism, trismus
`--
`none
`01-601
`sedation, restlessness
`01-605
`akathisia, vomiting NOS, nausea
`akathisia, extrapyramidal disorder, muscle spasm
`akathisia, sedation, depressed level of consciousness
`akathisia, restlessness
`akathisia, anxiety (severe), restlessness, claustrophobia
`akathisia, bruxism, dystonia
`
`01-702
`01-703
`01-704
`01-705
`01-708
`
`NOS = not otherwise specified
`a Adverse experiences were moderate in severity unless otherwise indicated
`
`2
`
`Page 2 of 4
`
`SLAYBACK EXHIBIT 1015
`
`

`

`Dopamine D2 Receptor Occupancy in Healthy Male Subjects Treated with
`SM-13496 Using Positron Emission Tomography (PET) (Study D1050180)
`
`Study Design and Methodology
`The primary objective of this study was to determine dopamine type-2 (D2) receptor occupancy
`of SM -13496 at 5 single oral doses ranging from 10 mg to 80 mg in healthy male subjects.
`Informed consent and confirmation of eligibility were obtained for each study subject at
`Screening Visit 1; an MRI for brain mapping was performed at Screening Visit 2. Four subjects
`each were sequentially assigned to receive SM-13496 10 mg, 20 mg, 40 mg, 60 mg, or 80 mg;
`progression to each escalating dose cohort was based on the review of safety data. Subjects were
`admitted to the clinical unit on Day -1 and underwent a full physical examination, vital signs
`assessment, electrocardiograms, and laboratory assessments. On the following day, Day 1,
`baseline fasting safety labs and baseline pharmacokinetic sampling were performed, and then a
`baseline PET scan was performed and a standard breakfast was provided to the study subjects 30
`minutes before dosing with SM-13496. A PET scan was performed at 1.5 hours after dosing.
`
`Results:
`Receptor occupancy-CPET relationships were determined in the putamen, caudate nucleus, and
`ventral striatum regions of the brain after oral administration of 10 mg, 20 mg, 40 mg, 60 mg, and
`80 mg of SM-13496 in healthy male volunteers. An increase in percent D2 receptor occupancy
`was observed with each increase in SM-13496 dose up to 60 mg. Further increases in occupancy
`were not observed for the 80 mg group in which receptor occupancy was similar to the 60 mg
`group. The results for each dose group were similar among all three striatal regions. Mean D2
`receptor occupancies for the 10 mg, 20 mg, 40 mg, 60 mg, and 80 mg groups for the three regions
`ranged from 41.3%-43.3%, 51.0%-54.8%, 63.1%-67.5%, 77.4%-84.3%, and 72.9%-78.9%,
`respectively.
`
`3
`
`Page 3 of 4
`
`SLAYBACK EXHIBIT 1015
`
`

`

`Cl) 100
`....,
`co
`.._"C
`0 :l 80
`...., co
`C.()
`~ s:::
`Cl) · -
`0:::~ (.)
`s:::
`N
`co
`0
`?fl. c.
`:l
`(.)
`(.)
`0
`
`60
`
`40
`
`20
`
`N=4/Dose
`
`•
`I
`
`--.---------------
`
`-
`
`•
`
`•
`
`--~-------~ --·-· --------
`
`0
`
`0
`
`20
`
`40
`
`60
`
`80
`
`100
`
`Lurasidone Oral Single Dose (mg)
`
`Figure 1 0 2 Occupancy by C11 -Raclopride in Caudate
`
`The undersigned declares further that all statements made herein of his own knowledge
`are true and that all statements made on information and belief are believed to be true; and further
`that these statements were made with the knowledge that willful false statements and the like so
`made are punishable by fine or imprisonment, or both, under Section 1001 of Title 18 of the
`United States Code and that such willful false statements may jeopardize the validity ofthe
`above-identified application or any patent issuing thereon.
`
`This
`
`day of June, 2008
`
`Masaaki Ogasa
`
`4
`
`Page 4 of 4
`
`SLAYBACK EXHIBIT 1015
`
`

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