Neurocrine Announces Top-Line Results From 702 Study (Lilac PETAL Study) of Elagolix for Treatment of Endometriosis Pain
STUDY CONFIRMS EFFICACY IN VALIDATED ENDPOINTS; MIXED RESULTS IN EXPLORATORY ENDPOINTS
COMPANY TO HOST CONFERENCE CALL AND WEBCAST
"It is clear from this study and all of our previous studies that elagolix
is a safe and effective treatment for endometriosis sufferers," said
The Lilac PETAL study assessed endometriosis pain through a variety of
measures, several of which were never before utilized in an endometriosis
trial. These exploratory endpoints included three daily assessments using an
electronic diary: a numeric rating scale (NRS) for pain (scale 0-10); a
dysmenorrhea pain assessment (scale 0-3); and a non-menstrual pelvic pain
assessment (scale 0-3). The NRS is the pain assessment scale suggested by the
The top-line data confirm that elagolix provides endometriosis sufferers with clinical improvement of symptoms, coupled with an excellent safety and tolerability profile. However, certain aspects of the exploratory endpoints, used as an alternative to the validated Composite Pelvic Signs and Symptoms Scale (CPSSS), require additional dialogue with our expert advisors and regulatory authorities.
Efficacy Endpoints: Mean
Change From Baseline to Week 12 Placebo 150 mg 250 mg
Numeric Rating Scale (mean daily pain, 0-10) -0.90 -1.19 -1.25
Numeric Rating Scale (peak pain, 0-10) -1.33 -2.45* -2.75**
Non-Menstrual Pelvic
Pain (mean daily pain, 0-3) -0.24 -0.27 -0.25
Dysmenorrhea (mean daily pain, 0-3) -0.27 -0.68** -0.76**
Endometriosis Health
Profile (pain dimension, 0-100) -11 -23* -20***
Efficacy Endpoints: Status at Week 12
Patient Global
Impression of
Change (mean score, 1-7) 3.2 2.2** 2.3**
Patient Global
Impression of
Change (% subjects score /=2) 33% 67%** 62%**
*p0.05, **p0.01, ***p=0.068
As shown with all previous elagolix trials, symptoms of dysmenorrhea improved significantly in both elagolix treatment groups compared to placebo (elagolix 150 mg, p0.01; elagolix 250 mg, p0.001). Additionally, the percentage of dysmenorrhea pain-free days was markedly higher in the elagolix treatment groups when compared to placebo (elagolix 150 mg, p=0.0012; elagolix 250 mg, p=0.0002).
The impact of elagolix treatment on "worst pain" is evident when examining the monthly peak NRS. Statistically significant improvement was documented for elagolix 150 mg (p 0.05) and elagolix 250 mg (p0.005) compared to placebo.
The PGIC utilizes a standard 7-point Likert scale spanning "Very Much Worsened" to "Very Much Improved" ("No Change"=4) to assess the change in endometriosis-related pain. Clinically meaningful and statistically significant improvement was documented at all time points for either dose of elagolix compared to placebo, even when using the conservative definition of "Much Improved" or "Very Much Improved" (p0.05 at Weeks 4 and 8, p0.01 at Week 12).
Subjects treated with elagolix also reported improvement compared to placebo on the EHP-5 core domain of endometriosis pain, a validated endometriosis-specific scale which documents the impact of treatment on a variety of health outcome domains. Statistical significance (p 0.05) for the core pain domain was demonstrated at Weeks 8 and 12 for elagolix 150 mg and at Week 8 for elagolix 250 mg (Week 12 value, p=0.068).
Two of the exploratory scales (daily NRS and non-menstrual pelvic pain, each averaged monthly) were relatively insensitive to treatment effects. Although the daily pain scores improved numerically over the course of treatment on the primary endpoint NRS, the change from baseline was not statistically significant compared to placebo. The non-menstrual pelvic pain score of 0.9 was low at baseline and decreased across all treatment groups by approximately -0.25 points. The results from both of these two exploratory scales are in direct contrast to the statistically significant results of the validated PGIC and EHP-5 pain dimension.
To better understand this observation, we examined treatment effects in subjects with moderate or greater pain (CPSSS non-menstrual pelvic pain score at baseline >/=2); which accounted for two-thirds of the subjects (n=95). For these subjects, both elagolix treatment arms were superior to placebo on a composite of the FDA-suggested daily scales (total score DYS + NMPP): elagolix 150 mg, p=0.0305 and elagolix 250 mg, p=0.0440. This observation suggests that changes in the exploratory FDA composite scale is clinically relevant in women with dysmenorrhea and non-menstrual pelvic pain (if moderate or severe at baseline) and confirms the effect of elagolix as shown with the validated endpoints. It also suggests that the NMPP component of the FDA exploratory scale may not be useful in assessing patients with mild endometriosis symptoms.
"This is the first time that we have assessed the exploratory endpoints
suggested by the FDA and the NIH," said Dr.
Safety Profile
Elagolix was generally safe and well tolerated; the frequency of treatment-related adverse events was 8% in the placebo group and 14 and 15% in the two elagolix treatment groups. There were no serious adverse events during the treatment period. The two most common adverse events were headache and nausea, which were typically mild and transient. Consistent with previous clinical studies, elagolix showed a dose dependent decrease in mean estradiol levels and minimal impact on bone mineral density and related serum n-telopeptide levels during the initial three months of treatment.
Conference Call and Webcast Information
The Company will host a live conference call and webcast to provide
additional details of this study tomorrow morning,
If you are unable to attend the Webcast and would like further information
on this announcement please contact the
In addition to historical facts, this press release may contain
forward-looking statements that involve a number of risks and uncertainties.
Among the factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from
those indicated in the forward-looking statements are risks and uncertainties
associated with Neurocrine's business and finances in general, as well as
risks and uncertainties associated with the Company's GnRH program and Company
overall. Specifically, the risks and uncertainties the Company faces with
respect to the Company's GnRH program include, but are not limited to, risk
that the Company's elagolix Phase II clinical trials will fail to demonstrate
that elagolix is safe and effective; risk that elagolix will not proceed to
later stage clinical trials; risk associated with the Company's dependence on
corporate collaborators for development, commercial manufacturing and
marketing and sales activities. With respect to its pipeline overall, the
Company faces risk that it will be unable to raise additional funding required
to complete development of all of its product candidates; risk relating to the
Company's dependence on contract manufacturers for clinical drug supply; risks
associated with the Company's dependence on corporate collaborators for
commercial manufacturing and marketing and sales activities; uncertainties
relating to patent protection and intellectual property rights of third
parties; risks and uncertainties relating to competitive products and
technological changes that may limit demand for the Company's products; and
the other risks described in the Company's report on Form 10-K for the year
ended
SOURCE:
CONTACT:
+1-858-617-7600
Web Site: http://www.neurocrine.com