Managed Care - January 2009 - (Page 18) Tablets/Oral Solution Rx Only Brief Summary of Prescribing Information. For complete details, please see full Prescribing Information for Namenda. INDICATIONS AND USAGE Namenda (memantine hydrochloride) is indicated for the treatment of moderate to severe dementia of the Alzheimer’s type. CONTRAINDICATIONS Namenda (memantine hydrochloride) is contraindicated in patients with known hypersensitivity to memantine hydrochloride or to any excipients used in the formulation. PRECAUTIONS Information for Patients and Caregivers: Caregivers should be instructed in the recommended administration (twice per day for doses above 5 mg) and dose escalation (minimum interval of one week between dose increases). Neurological Conditions Seizures: Namenda has not been systematically evaluated in patients with a seizure disorder. In clinical trials of Namenda, seizures occurred in 0.2% of patients treated with Namenda and 0.5% of patients treated with placebo. Genitourinary Conditions Conditions that raise urine pH may decrease the urinary elimination of memantine resulting in increased plasma levels of memantine. Special Populations Hepatic Impairment Namenda undergoes partial hepatic metabolism, with about 48% of administered dose excreted in urine as unchanged drug or as the sum of parent drug and the N-glucuronide conjugate (74%). No dosage adjustment is needed in patients with mild or moderate hepatic impairment. Namenda should be administered with caution to patients with severe hepatic impairment. Renal Impairment No dosage adjustment is needed in patients with mild or moderate renal impairment. A dosage reduction is recommended in patients with severe renal impairment (see CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY and DOSAGE AND ADMINISTRATION in Full Prescribing Information). Drug-Drug Interactions N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) antagonists: The combined use of Namenda with other NMDA antagonists (amantadine, ketamine, and dextromethorphan) has not been systematically evaluated and such use should be approached with caution. Effects of Namenda on substrates of microsomal enzymes: In vitro studies conducted with marker substrates of CYP450 enzymes (CYP1A2, -2A6, -2C9, -2D6, -2E1, -3A4) showed minimal inhibition of these enzymes by memantine. In addition, in vitro studies indicate that at concentrations exceeding those associated with efficacy, memantine does not induce the cytochrome P450 isoenzymes CYP1A2, CYP2C9, CYP2E1, and CYP3A4/5. No pharmacokinetic interactions with drugs metabolized by these enzymes are expected. Effects of inhibitors and/or substrates of microsomal enzymes on Namenda: Memantine is predominantly renally eliminated, and drugs that are substrates and/or inhibitors of the CYP450 system are not expected to alter the metabolism of memantine. Acetylcholinesterase (AChE) inhibitors: Coadministration of Namenda with the AChE inhibitor donepezil HCl did not affect the pharmacokinetics of either compound. In a 24-week controlled clinical study in patients with moderate to severe Alzheimer’s disease, the adverse event profile observed with a combination of memantine and donepezil was similar to that of donepezil alone. Drugs eliminated via renal mechanisms: Because memantine is eliminated in part by tubular secretion, coadministration of drugs that use the same renal cationic system, including hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ), triamterene (TA), metformin, cimetidine, ranitidine, quinidine, and nicotine, could potentially result in altered plasma levels of both agents. However, coadministration of Namenda and HCTZ/TA did not affect the bioavailability of either memantine or TA, and the bioavailability of HCTZ decreased by 20%. In addition, coadministration of memantine with the antihyperglycemic drug Glucovance® (glyburide and metformin HCl) did not affect the pharmacokinetics of memantine, metformin and glyburide. Furthermore, memantine did not modify the serum glucose lowering effect of Glucovance®. Drugs that make the urine alkaline: The clearance of memantine was reduced by about 80% under alkaline urine conditions at pH 8. Therefore, alterations of urine pH towards the alkaline condition may lead to an accumulation of the drug with a possible increase in adverse effects. Urine pH is altered by diet, drugs (e.g. carbonic anhydrase inhibitors, sodium bicarbonate) and clinical state of the patient (e.g. renal tubular acidosis or severe infections of the urinary tract). Hence, memantine should be used with caution under these conditions. Carcinogenesis, Mutagenesis and Impairment of Fertility There was no evidence of carcinogenicity in a 113-week oral study in mice at doses up to 40 mg/kg/day (10 times the maximum recommended human dose [MRHD] on a mg/m2 basis). There was also no evidence of carcinogenicity in rats orally dosed at up to 40 mg/kg/day for 71 weeks followed by 20 mg/kg/day (20 and 10 times the MRHD on a mg/m2 basis, respectively) through 128 weeks. Memantine produced no evidence of genotoxic potential when evaluated in the in vitro S. typhimurium or E. coli reverse mutation assay, an in vitro chromosomal aberration test in human lymphocytes, an in vivo cytogenetics assay for chromosome damage in rats, and the in vivo mouse micronucleus assay. The results were equivocal in an in vitro gene mutation assay using Chinese hamster V79 cells. No impairment of fertility or reproductive performance was seen in rats administered up to 18 mg/kg/day (9 times the MRHD on a mg/m2 basis) orally from 14 days prior to mating through gestation and lactation in females, or for 60 days prior to mating in males. Pregnancy Pregnancy Category B: Memantine given orally to pregnant rats and pregnant rabbits during the period of organogenesis was not teratogenic up to the highest doses tested (18 mg/kg/day in rats and 30 mg/kg/day in rabbits, which are 9 and 30 times, respectively, the maximum recommended human dose [MRHD] on a mg/m2 basis). Slight maternal toxicity, decreased pup weights and an increased incidence of non-ossified cervical vertebrae were seen at an oral dose of 18 mg/kg/day in a study in which rats were given oral memantine beginning pre-mating and continuing through the postpartum period. Slight maternal toxicity and decreased pup weights were also seen at this dose in a study in which rats were treated from day 15 of gestation through the post-partum period. The no-effect dose for these effects was 6 mg/kg, which is 3 times the MRHD on a mg/m2 basis. There are no adequate and well-controlled studies of memantine in pregnant women. Memantine should be used during pregnancy only if the potential benefit justifies the potential risk to the fetus. Nursing Mothers It is not known whether memantine is excreted in human breast milk. Because many drugs are excreted in human milk, caution should be exercised when memantine is administered to a nursing mother. Pediatric Use There are no adequate and well-controlled trials documenting the safety and efficacy of memantine in any illness occurring in children. ADVERSE REACTIONS The experience described in this section derives from studies in patients with Alzheimer’s disease and vascular dementia. Adverse Events Leading to Discontinuation: In placebo-controlled trials in which dementia patients received doses of Namenda up to 20 mg/day, the likelihood of discontinuation because of an adverse event was the same in the Namenda group as in the placebo group. No individual adverse event was associated with the discontinuation of treatment in 1% or more of Namenda-treated patients and at a rate greater than placebo. Adverse Events Reported in Controlled Trials: The reported adverse events in Namenda (memantine hydrochloride) trials reflect experience gained under closely monitored conditions in a highly selected patient population. In actual practice or in other clinical trials, these frequency estimates may not apply, as the conditions of use, reporting behavior and the types of patients treated may differ. Table 1 lists treatment-emergent signs and symptoms that were reported in at least 2% of patients in placebo-controlled dementia trials and for which the rate of occurrence was greater for patients treated with Namenda than for those treated with placebo. No adverse event occurred at a frequency of at least 5% and twice the placebo rate. Table 1: Adverse Events Reported in Controlled Clinical Trials in at Least 2% of Patients Receiving Namenda and at a Higher Frequency than Placebotreated Patients. Body System Adverse Event Body as a Whole Fatigue Pain Cardiovascular System Hypertension Central and Peripheral Nervous System Dizziness Headache Gastrointestinal System Constipation Vomiting Musculoskeletal System Back pain Psychiatric Disorders Confusion Somnolence Hallucination Respiratory System Coughing Dyspnea Placebo (N = 922) % 1 1 2 5 3 3 2 2 5 2 2 3 1 Namenda (N = 940) % 2 3 4 7 6 5 3 3 6 3 3 4 2 Other adverse events occurring with an incidence of at least 2% in Namenda-treated patients but at a greater or equal rate on placebo were agitation, fall, inflicted injury, urinary incontinence, diarrhea, bronchitis, insomnia, urinary tract infection, influenza-like symptoms, abnormal gait, depression, upper respiratory tract infection, anxiety, peripheral edema, nausea, anorexia, and arthralgia. The overall profile of adverse events and the incidence rates for individual adverse events in the subpopulation of patients with moderate to severe Alzheimer’s disease were not different from the profile and incidence rates described above for the overall dementia population. Vital Sign Changes: Namenda and placebo groups were compared with respect to (1) mean change from baseline in vital signs (pulse, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and weight) and (2) the incidence of patients meeting criteria for potentially clinically significant changes from baseline in these variables. There were no clinically important changes in vital signs in patients treated with Namenda. A comparison of
Table of Contents Feed for the Digital Edition of Managed Care - January 2009 Managed Care - January 2009 Editor's Memo Contents Legislation & Regulation News and Commentary Medication Management Compensation Monitor Health Care's Disruptive Innovations Q&A With Clayton Christensen 'Disruption' May Be Plans' Best Bet Avoid the PBM Rebate Trap HealthPartners Puts Diabetes on Notice Formulary Files Plan Watch Tomorrow's Medicine Ad Index Outlook Unmet Needs in the Management of Plaque Psoriasis Impact of RSV: Implications for Managed Care Managed Care - January 2009 Managed Care - January 2009 - Managed Care - January 2009 (Page Cover1) Managed Care - January 2009 - Managed Care - January 2009 (Page Cover2) Managed Care - January 2009 - Managed Care - January 2009 (Page Cover2a) Managed Care - January 2009 - Managed Care - January 2009 (Page Cover2b) Managed Care - January 2009 - Managed Care - January 2009 (Page 1) Managed Care - January 2009 - Editor's Memo (Page 2) Managed Care - January 2009 - Editor's Memo (Page 3) Managed Care - January 2009 - Contents (Page 4) Managed Care - January 2009 - Contents (Page 5) Managed Care - January 2009 - Legislation & Regulation (Page 6) Managed Care - January 2009 - Legislation & Regulation (Page 7) Managed Care - January 2009 - News and Commentary (Page 8) Managed Care - January 2009 - Medication Management (Page 9) Managed Care - January 2009 - Medication Management (Page 10) Managed Care - January 2009 - Compensation Monitor (Page 11) Managed Care - January 2009 - Health Care's Disruptive Innovations (Page 12) Managed Care - January 2009 - Health Care's Disruptive Innovations (Page 13) Managed Care - January 2009 - Health Care's Disruptive Innovations (Page 14) Managed Care - January 2009 - Health Care's Disruptive Innovations (Page 15) Managed Care - January 2009 - Health Care's Disruptive Innovations (Page 16) Managed Care - January 2009 - Health Care's Disruptive Innovations (Page 17) Managed Care - January 2009 - Health Care's Disruptive Innovations (Page 18) Managed Care - January 2009 - Health Care's Disruptive Innovations (Page 19) Managed Care - January 2009 - Health Care's Disruptive Innovations (Page 20) Managed Care - January 2009 - Health Care's Disruptive Innovations (Page 21) Managed Care - January 2009 - Q&A With Clayton Christensen (Page 22) Managed Care - January 2009 - Q&A With Clayton Christensen (Page 23) Managed Care - January 2009 - Q&A With Clayton Christensen (Page 24) Managed Care - January 2009 - Q&A With Clayton Christensen (Page 25) Managed Care - January 2009 - 'Disruption' May Be Plans' Best Bet (Page 26) Managed Care - January 2009 - 'Disruption' May Be Plans' Best Bet (Page 27) Managed Care - January 2009 - 'Disruption' May Be Plans' Best Bet (Page 28) Managed Care - January 2009 - 'Disruption' May Be Plans' Best Bet (Page 29) Managed Care - January 2009 - 'Disruption' May Be Plans' Best Bet (Page 30) Managed Care - January 2009 - Avoid the PBM Rebate Trap (Page 31) Managed Care - January 2009 - Avoid the PBM Rebate Trap (Page 32) Managed Care - January 2009 - Avoid the PBM Rebate Trap (Page 33) Managed Care - January 2009 - Avoid the PBM Rebate Trap (Page 34) Managed Care - January 2009 - Avoid the PBM Rebate Trap (Page 35) Managed Care - January 2009 - HealthPartners Puts Diabetes on Notice (Page 36) Managed Care - January 2009 - HealthPartners Puts Diabetes on Notice (Page 37) Managed Care - January 2009 - HealthPartners Puts Diabetes on Notice (Page 38) Managed Care - January 2009 - HealthPartners Puts Diabetes on Notice (Page 39) Managed Care - January 2009 - HealthPartners Puts Diabetes on Notice (Page 40) Managed Care - January 2009 - HealthPartners Puts Diabetes on Notice (Page 41) Managed Care - January 2009 - HealthPartners Puts Diabetes on Notice (Page 42) Managed Care - January 2009 - Formulary Files (Page 43) Managed Care - January 2009 - Plan Watch (Page 44) Managed Care - January 2009 - Plan Watch (Page 45) Managed Care - January 2009 - Plan Watch (Page 46) Managed Care - January 2009 - Tomorrow's Medicine (Page 47) Managed Care - January 2009 - Ad Index (Page 48) Managed Care - January 2009 - Ad Index (Page 49) Managed Care - January 2009 - Outlook (Page 50) Managed Care - January 2009 - Unmet Needs in the Management of Plaque Psoriasis (Page CB-A1) Managed Care - January 2009 - Unmet Needs in the Management of Plaque Psoriasis (Page CB-A2) Managed Care - January 2009 - Unmet Needs in the Management of Plaque Psoriasis (Page CB-A3) Managed Care - January 2009 - Unmet Needs in the Management of Plaque Psoriasis (Page CB-A4) Managed Care - January 2009 - Unmet Needs in the Management of Plaque Psoriasis (Page CB-A5) Managed Care - January 2009 - Unmet Needs in the Management of Plaque Psoriasis (Page CB-A6) Managed Care - January 2009 - Impact of RSV: Implications for Managed Care (Page CB-B1) Managed Care - January 2009 - Impact of RSV: Implications for Managed Care (Page CB-B2) Managed Care - January 2009 - Impact of RSV: Implications for Managed Care (Page CB-B3) Managed Care - January 2009 - Impact of RSV: Implications for Managed Care (Page CB-B4) Managed Care - January 2009 - Impact of RSV: Implications for Managed Care (Page CB-B5) Managed Care - January 2009 - Impact of RSV: Implications for Managed Care (Page CB-B6) Managed Care - January 2009 - Impact of RSV: Implications for Managed Care (Page CB-B7) Managed Care - January 2009 - Impact of RSV: Implications for Managed Care (Page Cover4)
For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.