Pharmacotherapeutic group: Anti-parkinson drugs, dopamine agonists; ATC code: N04BC09
Rotigotine is a non-ergolinic dopamine agonist for the treatment of signs and symptoms of Parkinson's disease and Restless Legs Syndrome.
Mechanism of action
Rotigotine is believed to elicit its beneficial effect on Parkinson's disease by activation of the D3, D2 and D1 receptors of the caudate-putamen in the brain.
The precise mechanism of action of rotigotine as a treatment of RLS is unknown. It is thought that rotigotine may exert its activity mainly via dopamine receptors.
Pharmacodynamic effects
Regarding the functional activity at the various receptor subtypes and their distribution in the brain, rotigotine is a D2 and D3 receptor agonist acting also on D1, D4 and D5 receptors. With non-dopaminergic receptors, rotigotine showed antagonism at alpha2B and agonism at 5HT1A receptors, but no activity on the 5HT2B receptor.
Clinical efficacy and safety
Clinical studies in Restless Legs Syndrome
The efficacy of rotigotine was evaluated in 5 placebo-controlled trials with more than 1,400 patients with idiopathic Restless Legs Syndrome (RLS). Efficacy was demonstrated in controlled trials in patients treated for up to 29 weeks. The effect was maintained over a 6 months period.
The changes from baseline in the International RLS Rating Scale (IRLS) and CGI-item 1 (severity of illness) were primary efficacy parameters. For both primary endpoints statistically significant differences have been observed for the doses 1 mg/24 h, 2 mg/24 h and 3 mg/24 h in comparison to placebo. After 6 months of maintenance treatment in patients with moderate to severe RLS, the baseline IRLS score improved from 30.7 to 20.7 for placebo and from 30.2 to 13.8 for rotigotine. The adjusted mean difference was ‑6.5 points (CI95% ‑8.7; ‑4.4, p <0.0001). CGI-I responder rates (much improved, very much improved) were 43.0% and 67.5% for placebo and rotigotine respectively (difference 24.5% CI 95%: 14.2%; 34.8%, p<0.0001).
In a placebo-controlled, 7-week trial polysomnographic parameters were investigated. Rotigotine significantly reduced the periodic limb movement index (PLMI) from 50.9 to 7.7 versus 37.4 to 32.7 for placebo (p<0.0001).
Augmentation
In two 6-month, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies, clinically relevant augmentation was observed in 1.5% of rotigotine-treated patients versus 0.5% of placebo treated patients. In two open-label, follow-up studies over a subsequent 12 months, the rate of clinically relevant augmentation was 2.9%. None of these patients discontinued therapy because of augmentation. In a 5-year open-label treatment study, augmentation occurred in 11.9% of patients treated with the approved dosages for RLS (1-3 mg/24 h), and 5.1% were considered clinically significant. In this study, the majority of augmentation episodes occurred in the first and second years of treatment. Furthermore, in this study a higher dose of 4 mg/24 h that is unapproved in RLS was also used and led to higher rates of augmentation.
Clinical studies in Parkinson's disease
The effectiveness of rotigotine in the treatment of the signs and symptoms of idiopathic Parkinson's disease was evaluated in a multinational drug development program consisting of four pivotal, parallel, randomized, double-blind placebo controlled studies and three studies investigating specific aspects of Parkinson's disease.
Two pivotal trials (SP512 Part I and SP513 Part I) investigating the effectiveness of rotigotine in the treatment of the signs and symptoms of idiopathic Parkinson's disease were conducted in patients who were not receiving concomitant dopamine agonist therapy and were either L-dopa naïve or previous L-dopa treatment was ≤ 6 months. The primary outcome assessment was the score for the Activities of Daily Living (ADL) component (Part II) plus the Motor Examination component (Part III) of the Unified Parkinson's Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS). Efficacy was determined by the subject's response to therapy in terms of responder and absolute points improvement in the scores of ADL and Motor Examination combined (UPDRS part II+III).
In the double blind study SP512 Part I, 177 patients received rotigotine and 96 patients received placebo. The patients were titrated to their optimal dose of rotigotine or placebo in weekly increments of 2 mg/24 h starting at 2 mg/24 h to a maximum dose of 6 mg/24 h. Patients in each treatment group were maintained at their optimal dose for 6 months.
At the end of the maintenance treatment in 91% of the subjects in the rotigotine arm, the optimal dose was the maximal dose allowed i.e. 6 mg/24 h. An improvement of 20% was seen in 48% of the subjects receiving rotigotine and in 19% of the subjects receiving placebo (Difference 29%, CI95% 18%; 39%, p<0.0001). With rotigotine, the mean improvement in the UPDRS score (Parts II + III) was -3.98 points (baseline 29.9 points) whereas in the placebo-treated arm a worsening of 1.31 points was observed (baseline 30.0 points). The difference was 5.28 points and statistically significant (p<0.0001).
In the double-blind study SP513 Part I, 213 patients received rotigotine, 227 received ropinirole and 117 patients received placebo. The patients were titrated to their optimal dose of rotigotine in weekly increments of 2 mg/24 h starting at 2 mg/24 h to a maximum dose of 8 mg/24 h over 4 weeks. In the ropinirole group, patients were titrated to their optimal dose up to a maximum of 24 mg/day over 13 weeks. Patients in each treatment group were maintained for 6 months.
At the end of the maintenance treatment in 92% of the subjects in the rotigotine arm, the optimal dose was the maximal dose allowed i.e. 8 mg/24 h. An improvement of 20% was seen in 52% of the subjects receiving rotigotine, 68% of the subjects receiving ropinirole and 30% of the subjects receiving placebo (Difference rotigotine versus placebo 21.7%, CI95% 11.1%; 32.4%, difference ropinirole versus placebo 38.4%, CI95% 28.1%; 48.6%, difference ropinirole versus rotigotine 16.6%, CI95% 7.6%; 25.7%). The mean improvement in the UPDRS score (Parts II + III) was 6.83 points (baseline 33.2 points) in the rotigotine arm, 10.78 points in the ropinirole arm (baseline 32.2 points) and 2.33 points in the placebo arm (baseline 31.3 points). All differences between the active treatments and placebo were statistically significant. This study failed to demonstrate non-inferiority of rotigotine to ropinirole.
In a subsequent open-label study (SP824), a multicenter, multinational study, the tolerability of overnight switching from ropinirole, pramipexole or cabergoline to rotigotine transdermal patch and its effect on symptoms in subjects with idiopathic Parkinson's disease have been studied. 116 patients were switched from previous oral therapy to receive up to 8 mg/24 h of rotigotine, among these were 47 who had been treated with ropinirole up to 9 mg/day, 47 who had been treated with pramipexole up to 2 mg/day and 22 who had been treated with cabergoline up to 3 mg/day. Switching to rotigotine was feasible, with minor dose adjustment (median 2 mg/24 h) being necessary in only 2 patients switching from ropinirole, 5 patients from pramipexole and 4 patients from cabergoline. Improvements were seen in UPDRS Parts I - IV scores. The safety profile was unchanged from that observed in previous studies.
In a randomized, open-label study (SP825) in patients with early-stage Parkinson's disease, 25 patients were randomized to rotigotine treatment and 26 to ropinirole. In both arms treatment was titrated to optimal or maximum dose of 8 mg/24 h or 9 mg/day, respectively. Both treatments showed improvements in early morning motor function and sleep. Motor symptoms (UPDRS Part III) improved by 6.3 ± 1.3 points in rotigotine-treated patients, and by 5.9 ± 1.3 points in the ropinirole-group after 4 weeks of maintenance. Sleep (PDSS) improved by 4.1 ± 13.8 points for rotigotine-treated patients, and by 2.5 ± 13.5 points for ropinirole-treated patients. The safety profile was comparable, with the exception of application site reactions.
In studies SP824 and SP825 conducted since the initial comparative trial, rotigotine and ropinirole at equivalent doses were shown to have comparable efficacy.
Two additional pivotal trials (SP650DB and SP515) were conducted in patients who were receiving concomitant levodopa therapy. The primary outcome assessment was the reduction in “off” time (hours). Efficacy was determined by the subject's response to therapy in terms of responder and absolute improvement in the time spent “off”.
In the double blind study SP650DB, 113 patients received rotigotine up to a maximum dose of 8 mg/24 h, 109 patients received rotigotine up to a maximum dose of 12 mg/24 h and 119 patients received placebo. The patients were titrated to their optimal doses of rotigotine or placebo in weekly increments of 2 mg/24 h starting at 4 mg/24 h. Patients in each treatment group were maintained at their optimal dose for 6 months. At the end of the maintenance treatment an improvement of at least 30% was seen in 57% and 55% of the subjects receiving rotigotine 8 mg/24 h and 12 mg/24 h, respectively and in 34% of the subjects receiving placebo (Differences 22% and 21%, respectively, CI95% 10%; 35% and 8%; 33%, respectively, p<0.001 for both rotigotine groups). With rotigotine, the mean reductions in “off” time were 2.7 and 2.1 hours, respectively whereas in the placebo-treated arm a reduction of 0.9 hours was observed. The differences were statistically significant (p<0.001 and p=0.003, respectively).
In the double-blind study SP515, 201 patients received rotigotine, 200 received pramipexole and 100 patients received placebo. The patients were titrated to their optimal dose of rotigotine in weekly increments of 2 mg/24 h starting at 4 mg/24 h to a maximum dose of 16 mg/24 h. In the pramipexole group, patients received 0,375 mg in the first week, 0.75 mg in the second week and were titrated further in weekly increments of 0.75 mg to their optimal dose up to a maximum of 4.5 mg/day. Patients in each treatment group were maintained for 4 months.
At the end of the maintenance treatment an improvement of at least 30% was seen in 60% of the subjects receiving rotigotine, 67% of the subjects receiving pramipexole and 35% of the subjects receiving placebo (Difference rotigotine versus placebo 25%, CI95% 13%; 36%, difference pramipexole versus placebo 32%, CI95% 21%; 43%, difference pramipexole versus rotigotine 7%, CI95% -2%; 17%). The mean reduction in the “off” time was 2.5 hours in the rotigotine arm, 2.8 hours in the pramipexole arm and 0.9 hours in the placebo arm. All differences between the active treatments and placebo were statistically significant.
A further multinational double-blind study (SP889) was conducted in 287 patients with early or advanced stages of Parkinson's disease who had unsatisfactory early morning motor symptom control. 81.5% of these patients were on concomitant levodopa therapy. 190 patients received rotigotine, and 97 placebo. The patients were titrated to their optimal dose of rotigotine or placebo in weekly increments of 2 mg/24 h starting at 2 mg/24 h to a maximum dose of 16 mg/24 h over 8 weeks, followed by a maintenance period of 4 weeks. Early morning motor function, assessed by UPDRS part III, and nocturnal sleep disturbances, measured by the modified Parkinson's Disease Sleep Scale (PDSS-2), were co-primary outcome measures. At the end of maintenance, the mean UPDRS part III score had improved by 7.0 points in rotigotine-treated patients (baseline 29.6), and by 3.9 points in the placebo-group (baseline 32.0). Improvements in the mean PDSS-2 total score were 5.9 (rotigotine, baseline 19.3) and 1.9 points (placebo, baseline 20.5). Treatment differences for the coprimary variables were statistically significant (p=0.0002 and p<0.0001).