Reduced rebound effect in subjects treated for overweight or obesity

Abstract

The present invention relates to a composition comprising orlistat and alcarbose for use in reducing the rebound effect in an overweight or obese subject.

Description

[Technical field]

[0001] Patients treated for overweight often gain weight after treatment is stopped. The present invention relates to the use of a composition comprising orlistat and alcarbose in a dosing regimen to reduce the rebound effect seen in patients treated for overweight or obesity. The rebound effect is the effect of weight gain after weight loss. This is common when weight loss is too rapid or uncontrolled and is the body's way of compensating and securing the calories needed to maintain homeostasis. Weight gain is usually seen after the end of treatment for overweight or obesity. The present invention also relates to a composition comprising orlistat and alcarbose for treating overweight or obesity, which treatment surprisingly results in a reduced rebound effect. The reduced rebound effect is expressed as the relative change in weight from baseline (i.e., at the start of treatment) or from the end of treatment. The relative change is up to 7%. [Background technology]

[0002] The global prevalence is estimated at 1.5 billion overweight and 500 million obese. Overall, more than one in 10 of the world's adult population is obese. In 2010, over 40 million children under the age of 5 were overweight. Once considered a problem in high-income countries, overweight and obesity are now increasing in low- and middle-income countries, especially in urban areas. Overweight and obesity are the fifth leading cause of mortality worldwide. At least 2.8 million adults die each year worldwide due to being overweight or obese. Furthermore, 44% of the burden of diabetes, 23% of the burden of ischemic heart disease, and 7% to 41% of the burden of certain cancers are attributable to overweight and obesity. In June 2013, the American Medical Association officially recognized obesity as a disease.

[0003] Although this serious health problem has attracted considerable global attention, various strategies to reverse the obesity trend in the world population have not been successful. Awareness towards healthier diets and increased physical activity has also not proven to be particularly effective. Several potential causes include the lack of access to healthy and affordable food and safe places to exercise, especially in low-income neighborhoods and communities, the inferiority of freshly prepared foods to fast and prepackaged foods in terms of storability, portability and ease of eating, the marketing of mainly unhealthy products by the food and beverage industry, and modern cultural habits that increase sedentary behavior, worsen eating habits and places, and result in excessive stress levels and sleep debt. Lifestyle interventions that affect dietary intake and energy expenditure are important but are often not sufficient. Obesity is a chronic, incurable disease and better medicines are needed for successful treatment. Novel, safe and efficient medical procedures are therefore needed.

[0004] Type 2 diabetes is growing at an epidemic rate, and this increase is closely linked to obesity. Type 2 diabetes has multiple manifestations, and suboptimal treatment is associated with progressive beta-cell failure. Lifestyle modifications, such as diet and physical activity, are the first-line treatment, but are difficult to achieve successfully and most often require pharmacotherapy. Before being diagnosed with overt type 2 diabetes, patients usually have a period of impaired glucose tolerance. This impaired glucose tolerance may precede or follow weight gain, and if properly treated, may halt or avoid the progression to diabetes. Current treatment options are limited to lifestyle modifications or metformin. Novel, safe and effective medical interventions are therefore needed.

[0005] Another indication of the present invention would be the treatment of overweight / obesity associated with polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS), which is one of the most common endocrine disorders among women, affecting (conservatively) 5% of women of reproductive age. One of the most common direct symptoms is insulin resistance, which is often associated with obesity, type 2 diabetes, and high cholesterol levels. Currently recommended pharmacological treatment (in addition to contraceptives) for PCOS patients with obesity and / or glucose disorders is limited to metformin, which is considered evidence-free in current guidelines. Other insulin sensitizers, such as thiazolidinediones, are not recommended due to unfavorable risk-benefit ratio. There is a clinical need for agents that safely reduce weight and improve glucose tolerance in PCOS patients.

[0006] Nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) is inflammation and damage of the liver caused by the accumulation of fat in the liver. NASH affects 2-5% of Americans. An additional 10-20% of Americans have fat in the liver but no inflammation or liver damage, a condition called "fatty liver" or NAFLD. Both NASH and NAFLD are becoming more common, likely due to an increasing number of Americans being obese. Currently, there is no specific treatment for NASH, except for lifestyle interventions, so there is an unmet clinical need. According to the new International Diabetes Federation (IDF) definition, to be defined as metabolic syndrome, the following conditions must be present:

[0007] Central obesity plus any two of the following four factors: Elevated triglyceride (TG) levels or specific treatment for this lipid disorder - Reduction in high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol or receiving specific treatment for this lipid disorder - High blood pressure or previously diagnosed with high blood pressure and receiving treatment - Elevated fasting blood sugar level or previous diagnosis of type 2 diabetes The inventors speculate that the product will directly or indirectly affect most of the components of the metabolic syndrome, primarily through weight loss and improved glucose control, which in turn will result in lower triglyceride levels and improved hepatic fat metabolism. The product is also expected to have a direct effect on triglyceride levels.

[0008] Current Treatment Options for Obesity and Overweight Several pharmacological principles have been explored for the treatment of obesity and overweight, including increasing energy expenditure (stimulants), suppressing caloric intake (appetite suppressants), limiting nutrient absorption, and modulating insulin production and / or action. Four centrally acting noradrenergic drugs (phentermine, diethylpropion, phendimetrazine, and benzphetamine) have been approved by the FDA for the management of obesity, usually for periods of less than 12 weeks. All were approved before the need for long-term treatment for obesity was established. Furthermore, none were required to meet the current efficacy benchmarks for weight loss compared to placebo (mean weight loss of 5% or more than placebo, or the proportion of drug-treated subjects who lost 5% or more of their initial weight was 35% or more, approximately double the proportion of those who lost 5% or more of their initial weight in the placebo group). Weight control drugs approved for long-term use usually result in an additional weight loss of ~3% for orlistat and lorcaserin and 9% for phentermine / topiramate ER after one year compared to placebo, on average. Already in 2005, stimulants including dinitrophenol, amphetamine, and ephedra were abandoned. Among appetite suppressants, sibutramine was on the market for several years, but was withdrawn along with the short-lived appetite suppressant rimonabant due to side effects. Lorcaserin is a selective serotonin 2C (5HT2c) receptor agonist that was expected to reproduce the weight loss effect of fenfluramine without adverse cardiac effects. Lorcaserin moderately reduced body weight, about 3.2 kg (~3.2% of initial body weight) more than placebo. In diabetic patients, lorcaserin treatment reduced body weight and improved glycated hemoglobin levels. Liraglutide (Saxenda®; liraglutide injection) has been approved (by both the EMA and the FDA) as a treatment option for chronic weight management, in addition to a reduced-calorie diet and physical activity. The drug is approved for use in adults with a body mass index (BMI) of 30 or greater (obese) or a BMI of 27 or greater (overweight) who have at least one weight-related disorder, such as high blood pressure, type 2 diabetes, or hypercholesterolemia (dyslipidemia).GLP-1 mimetics (such as liraglutide and exenatide) were initially used to treat type 2 diabetes, but clinical trials have shown success in reducing weight, with patients receiving the highest dose of liraglutide for one year losing 8 kg compared with 2 kg in the placebo group. However, safety concerns remain about these drugs, particularly a suggested increased risk of developing pancreatic cancer. The FDA still approves the use of liraglutide, but urges both prescribers and patients to report potential side effects.

[0009] In the past 20 years, around 10 drugs have been brought to the market, only to be withdrawn within a few years. Current alternatives include attempts to limit nutrient (lipid) absorption (orlistat) or perhaps the use of compounds that affect insulin (see below). Conclusion: There are very few single-agent based medicines with an effective benefit-risk ratio in this patient population. Currently, orlistat (Xenical®) and liraglutide (Saxenda®) are the only anti-obesity drugs available worldwide. Orlistat (Xenical®) is available in both prescription (120 mg) and over-the-counter (60 mg) formulations and is administered orally. Orlistat is a semi-reversible, localized inhibitor of gastric and pancreatic lipases in the gastrointestinal tract, and acts as an anti-obesity drug by inhibiting the intestinal absorption of dietary fat (i.e., reducing energy intake). Highly lipophilic orlistat (log P 8.5) has a low absorption rate (<3%) and a correspondingly low plasma exposure (<5 ng / ml). Today, orlistat is available in a conventional, relatively immediate-release oral dosage form. However, although safe, orlistat is associated with several side effects that significantly impede compliance. In clinical trials, approximately 25% or more patients report gastrointestinal side effects such as diarrhea, oily spotting, and fecal urgency. This, combined with its rather modest effect on body weight (best case scenario: 10% relative weight loss vs. 6% relative weight loss with placebo), makes this conventional, relatively immediate release form of orlistat unattractive to the majority of obese patients. However, in a recent report, the FDA clearly stated that orlistat is safe and has clinical benefits.

[0010] Alcarbose (Glucobay®) is a competitive α-glucosidase and pancreatic α-amylase inhibitor that inhibits hydrolysis of oligosaccharides during luminal digestion of the meal. Alcarbose is hydrophilic (log P -8.1), resulting in low intestinal permeability, a low dose fraction absorbed (< 5%), and low bioavailability and systemic exposure of alcarbose. Available in a conventional immediate release dosage form, alcarbose is currently used primarily in Asia as a treatment for diabetes, but rarely in Western countries. It is not approved for the treatment of obesity. Similar to orlistat, many patients using alcarbose report gastrointestinal tolerability problems (mainly flatulence, diarrhea, and gastrointestinal and abdominal pain), limiting its current clinical use in Western countries.

[0011] Two other α-glucosidase inhibitors are currently available on the market: miglitol and voglibose. Miglitol is FDA approved and available in several countries, whereas voglibose is approved only in Japan. Acarbose, miglitol, and voglibose reduce HbA1c to similar extents, but have slightly different side effects. Miglitol is 100% absorbed and excreted through the kidneys, whereas voglibose, like alkabose, is only slightly absorbed. Voglibose causes less gastrointestinal side effects than alkabose, possibly due to its low dose (0.2 mg voglibose / meal is a typical dose), but does not slow gastric emptying. Previous studies have shown that all three α-glucosidase inhibitors are safe and have no systemic effects. In addition, a large number of plant compounds (over 1200) have been identified that exhibit various α-glucosidase inhibitory effects. Alcarbose stands out because it is the most clinically used and studied compound, approved worldwide and off patent. Currently, there are no other lipase inhibitors approved for the treatment of obesity, except for cetilistat. Cetilistat has been shown to produce similar weight loss as orlistat, but with a much lower incidence of side effects. Cetilistat is currently approved only in Japan. There are also several lipase inhibitors derived from plants, some of which are available over-the-counter. Thus, the list of potential lipase inhibitors is very short.

[0012] One of the main problems after successful treatment with anti-obesity drugs and weight loss drug substances is the occurrence of rebound effect, i.e. the fact that the weight loss is not sustained and weight gain occurs, sometimes exceeding the weight loss.Therefore, there is a need to develop a dosing regimen that can be used as a follow-up treatment after the desired weight loss has been achieved and that can reduce the rebound effect. The present invention is an extension of the invention described in the applicant's patent application published under WO 2016 / 097170. The present invention relates to a modified release composition of alkabose and orlistat, in which alkabose and orlistat are present in three different portions with different release patterns. Surprisingly, the results of a 6-month treatment with this new composition in a clinical trial show that a synergistic effect of orlistat and alkabose is obtained. This means that the weight loss obtained by treatment with this new composition of orlistat and alkabose is increased compared to what would be expected based on the combined effect of orlistat and alkabose. Furthermore, the results of the clinical trial show that the rebound effect can be reduced. In its broadest aspect, the present invention relates to avoiding the rebound effect when treating overweight with a combination of orlistat and alkabose in a manner that 1) gently induces the satiety system and 2) gently reduces fat and carbohydrate uptake from the jejunum. Summary of the Invention

[0013] The present invention relates to a composition comprising orlistat and alcarbose for use in treating overweight or obesity, which treatment leads to a reduction in the rebound effect. Typically, the present invention provides a composition comprising orlistat and alcarbose for use in treating overweight or obesity in a subject with a BMI of 25 or more, which treatment leads to a reduction in the rebound effect compared to baseline, when measured 2 to 6 months after the end of the treatment period. Typically, the obese or overweight subject has a BMI of 25 or more and ... 2 or more, for example 27 kg / m 2 , 29 kg / m 2 or more than 30 kg / m 2 Overweight subjects have a BMI of 25 kg / m 2 More than 25 kg / m 2 ~30 kg / m 2 and obese subjects have a BMI of less than 30 kg / m 2 Have a BMI of 100 or above. In other words, the present invention is 2 More than 27 kg / m 2 or more, for example 29 kg / m 2 or more than 30 kg / m 2 The present invention relates to a composition comprising orlistat and alcarbose for reducing the rebound effect in an obese / overweight subject having an initial BMI of 100 mg / kg or more. The subject is a human. The obese subject has undergone a treatment period comprising administering the composition to the obese subject, the treatment leading to a reduction in the rebound effect compared to baseline when measured 2-6 months after the end of the treatment period.

[0014] The present invention also relates to a composition comprising orlistat and alcarbose in a weight ratio of 2:1 to 4:1 for use in preventing and / or reducing the rebound effect following obesity treatment in which the weight loss is at least 5%. Typically, the reduction in rebound effect, expressed as relative change in body weight from baseline at week 0, is at least 2.1%. Expressed differently, there is a maximum 7% reduction in the rebound effect, expressed as the relative change in body weight from baseline, said baseline being the end of treatment. During the treatment period, the composition containing orlistat and acarbose is administered once, twice or three times a day. In general, the treatment period is at least 2 weeks, for example, about 2 weeks to about 1 year, for example, about 2 weeks to about 9 months, about 2 weeks to about 6 months, about 2 weeks to about 5 months, about 2 weeks to about 4 months, about 2 weeks to about 3 months, about 2 weeks to about 2 months.

[0015] Typically, the daily dose of orlistat during the treatment period is 30 mg to 540 mg or more, for example, 30 mg to 450 mg or more, 60 mg to about 450 mg or more, 90 mg to about 450 mg or more, about 120 mg to 450 mg or more, about 150 mg to about 450 mg or more, 180 mg to 450 mg or more, for example, 180 mg to 450 mg, 270 mg to 450 mg, or 360 mg to 450 mg, and for adults, 270 mg or more, 360 mg or more, or 450 mg or more. Typically, the daily dose of alcarbose during the treatment period is from 10 mg to about 180 mg, for example, from 10 mg to about 150 mg, from 20 mg to about 150 mg, from 30 mg to about 150 mg, from 40 mg to about 150 mg, from 50 mg to about 150 mg, from 60 mg to about 150 mg or more, for example, from 90 mg to 150 mg, from 90 mg or more, from 120 mg or more, or from 150 mg or more.

[0016] In embodiments, the composition comprises 90 mg orlistat / 30 mg alkabose, 120 mg orlistat / 40 mg orlistat, 150 mg orlistat / 50 mg alkabose or 180 mg orlistat / 60 mg alkabose. Compositions suitable for use according to the invention are designed for oral administration and are designed to release orlistat and alcarbose at the appropriate location in the gastrointestinal tract. To this end, suitable compositions may consist of granules, spheroids or pellets. As discussed herein, a suitable composition is one in which orlistat is in micronized form, i.e., has an average particle size of 50 microns or less, such as 20 microns or less, such as 10 microns or less.Furthermore, the inventors have found that orlistat and enteric polymers may react in an undesirable manner, and therefore, when an enteric polymer is present in the composition, orlistat should be protected from direct contact with the enteric polymer.This can be done by using a protective polymer, such as a polymer selected from cellulose, cellulose derivatives, and hydroxypropylmethylcellulose.

[0017] Specifically, the composition may be divided into 3 or 4 different individual portions with different release patterns: a) a first portion G1, which contains about 45% w / w to about 65% w / w of the total amount of alkabose, for example about 50% w / w to about 65% w / w, about 55% w / w to about 65% w / w, or about 60% w / w; b) a second portion G2A, which comprises about 35% w / w to about 55% w / w of the total amount of alkabose, for example about 35% w / w to about 50% w / w, about 35% w / w to about 45% w / w or about 40% w / w of alkabose, c) a third portion G2B, comprising about 50% w / w to about 85% w / w of the total amount of orlistat, for example, about 55% w / w to about 80% w / w, about 60% w / w to about 80% w / w, about 65% w / w to about 75% w / w, about 68% w / w to about 75% w / w, about 72% w / w to about 73% w / w, for example, about 72.2% w / w of orlistat, and d) a fourth portion G3, the oral modified release composition comprising a portion containing about 15 to about 50% w / w of the total amount of orlistat, for example, about 20% w / w to about 40% w / w, about 25% to about 35% w / w, about 25% to about 32% w / w, about 27% w / w to about 28% w / w, or about 27.8% w / w of orlistat; The total amount of alcarbose and orlistat was 100% w / w. When the composition comprises three parts, the three parts are i) G1, ii) G2 which is a combination of G2A and G2B, and iii) G3.

[0018] Such a composition is designed as follows. i) the G1 portion is designed to release a portion of the total amount of alcarbose in the stomach; ii) the G2A portion is designed to release a portion of the total amount of alkabose in the duodenum and jejunum; wherein the release is relatively rapid so that alkabose becomes available in the duodenum and jejunum to exert its effect; iii) the G2B portion is designed to release a portion of the total amount of orlistat in the duodenum and jejunum; wherein the release is relatively rapid so that orlistat becomes available in the duodenum and jejunum to exert its effect; iv) Part G3 is designed to release a portion of the total amount of orlistat in the duodenum and jejunum. Moieties b) and c) may be combined into part G2.

[0019] A composition suitable for use according to the invention may be one in which G1 is in the form of an inert core coated with a composition comprising acarbose, G2A and G2B are combined with G2, which is in the form of an inert core coated with acarbose and orlistat, then coated with a protective polymer and then coated with an enteric coating, and G3 is in the form of uncoated granules. The protective polymer is typically present at a concentration of at least 10% w / w, for example in the range of 10-20% w / w, 12-20% w / w, 13-20% w / w, 13.5-20% w / w, based on the total weight of G2. The composition according to the present invention may comprise modified release granules, spheroids or pellets comprising 30-50% w / w micronized orlistat, 35-60% w / w microcrystalline cellulose and 10-18% w / w polysorbate 80, based on the total weight of the modified release granules, spheroids or pellets. In an embodiment, part G3 comprises modified release granules, spheroids or pellets comprising 30-50% w / w micronized orlistat, 35-60% w / w microcrystalline cellulose and 10-18% w / w polysorbate 80, based on the total weight of part G3.

[0020] Typically, the composition according to the invention comprises: i) the concentration of alcarbose in the first part G1 is within the range of 25% w / w to about 50% w / w, for example about 30% w / w to about 45% w / w or about 40% w / w, based on the total weight of the part G1; ii) the concentration of alcarbose in the second portion G2A or G2 is within the range of about 0.5% w / w to about 4.5% w / w, for example about 1% w / w to about 4% w / w, about 1.5% w / w to about 3.5% w / w, about 2% w / w to about 3.5% w / w, about 2.5% w / w to about 3.25% w / w or about 3% w / w, based on the total weight of either G2A or G2, as the case may be; iii) the concentration of orlistat in part G2B or part G2 is in the range of 5% w / w to about 30% w / w, for example about 10% w / w to about 25% w / w, about 10% w / w to about 20% w / w, about 12% w / w to about 20% w / w or about 15.5% w / w, based on the total weight of either part G2B or G2, as applicable; and / or iv) The concentration of orlistat in the G3 portion is within the range of 20% w / w to about 50% w / w, for example, about 25% w / w to about 50% w / w, about 30% w / w to about 45% w / w, about 35% w / w to about 45% w / w, or about 40% w / w, based on the total weight of G3.

[0021] As mentioned above, the composition may comprise modified release granules, spheroids or pellets comprising 35-60% w / w of cellulose or a cellulose derivative, such as microcrystalline cellulose, based on the total weight of the modified release granules, spheroids or pellets. In another aspect, the present invention relates to the use of a composition comprising orlistat and alcarbose to reduce the rebound effect following treatment of overweight or obesity. All details and particulars mentioned and described in relation to the aspects described herein apply mutatis mutandis to this aspect.

[0022] Detailed Description of the Invention The present invention relates to the use of a composition comprising orlistat and alcabose to reduce weight gain after the end of treatment for overweight or obesity. The composition is used in a dosage regimen for controlling weight loss obtained in a subject, the dosage regimen comprising administering orlistat and alcabose to said subject. The purpose of administering orlistat and alcabose is to treat obesity or overweight, and it has surprisingly been found that the use of orlistat and alcabose to treat obesity or overweight has an additive effect, i.e., the effect of avoiding or reducing rebound effect after the end of treatment. As previously described herein, it is very common for people treated with a drug substance that reduces weight to gain weight again after the end of treatment. In many cases, the weight gain is greater than the weight loss obtained by treatment with a weight loss drug. It is hypothesized that the rebound effect is caused by the fact that most of the known weight-reducing drug substances act directly on the endocrine system. However, both orlistat and alcabose do not act directly on the endocrine system, but only act on the endocrine system through food digestion. Therefore, it is contemplated that the administration schedule of the present invention can avoid or significantly reduce the rebound effect.

[0023] Orlistat and alcarbose are administered in the form of one or more oral compositions, and typically both orlistat and alcarbose are present in the same composition. In this context, the term "avoid or reduce rebound effect" is intended to mean that the increase in the subject's weight after a certain period of time after the end of the obesity treatment is less than the weight loss obtained during the obesity treatment. The period for measuring the weight after the end of the obesity treatment is 6 months or less, for example, in the range of 2 to 6 months after the end of the obesity treatment, for example, 2 months, 3 months, 4 months, 5 months or 6 months after the end of the obesity treatment. As an example, an obese subject loses 10 kg of weight during the obesity treatment. 6 months after the end of the treatment, the subject's weight increases by 5 kg compared to the weight after the end of the treatment, and thus a reduction in the rebound effect is observed, since the subject's weight is 5 kg lower than the weight before the start of the obesity treatment.

[0024] The reduction in rebound effect can be measured as the relative change in body weight from baseline at week 0 (when the obesity treatment is started) and at week x+y (x being the week of the end of treatment and y being the number of weeks after the end of treatment when the body weight is measured), or as the relative change in body weight from baseline at week x and week x+y. According to the above duration, y may range from 4 to 26 weeks (corresponding to 2 to 6 months). The relative change in body weight is calculated as 100%*(body weight at baseline week 0-body weight at week x+y) / (body weight at baseline) and 100%*((body weight at week x+y)-body weight at baseline week x) / (body weight at week x+y), depending on which baseline value is selected.

[0025] The relative change from baseline at week 0 and at week x+y is at least 2%, for example at least 2.1%, 2.3%, 2.4%, 2.6%, 2.7% or 2.8%. The relative change from baseline at week x and week x+y is at most 7%, e.g., 6% or less, 5.5% or less, 5% or less, 4% or less, 3% or less, 2% or less. In particular, the relative change from baseline at week x and week x+y is 5.5% or less, e.g., about 4%, about 4.3%, 4.5%, 5%, 5.2%, or about 5.4%. To obtain a reduction in rebound effect, subjects suffering from overweight or obesity are treated with a composition comprising orlistat and alkabose, with a dosing regimen comprising administering the composition comprising orlistat and alkabose once, twice or three times a day.The daily dose of orlistat and alkabose is as follows: In general, the daily dose of orlistat for an adult is 180 mg to 540 mg or more, 180 mg to 450 mg or more, for example, 180 mg to 450 mg, 270 mg to 450 mg, or 360 mg to 450 mg, and the daily dose of alkabose is 60 mg to about 180 mg or more, for example, 60 mg to about 150 mg or more, or 90 mg to 150 mg.

[0026] Preferred compositions include 90 mg orlistat / 30 mg alkabose, 120 mg orlistat / 40 mg orlistat, 150 mg orlistat / 50 mg alkabose or 180 mg orlistat / 60 mg alkabose. The daily dose of orlistat for adults is 270 mg or more, 360 mg or more, 450 mg or more, or 540 mg or more. The daily dose of alkabose for adults is 90 mg or more, 120 mg or more, 150 mg or more, or 180 mg or more. In general, the daily dose of orlistat for children is 30 mg to 450 mg or more, for example, 60 mg to about 450 mg or more, 90 mg to about 450 mg or more, about 120 mg to 450 mg or more, or about 150 mg to about 450 mg or more, and the daily dose of alkabose is 10 mg to about 150 mg, for example, 20 mg to about 150 mg, 30 mg to about 150 mg, 40 mg to about 150 mg, or 50 mg to about 150 mg.

[0027] In one embodiment of the invention, the daily dose of orlistat is 120 mg for children aged 5-10 years weighing 40-60 kg, 270 mg for children aged 5-10 years weighing 60-70 kg, and the same as an adult for children aged 11 years or older and / or children weighing 70 kg or more. In one embodiment of the present invention, the daily dose of alcarbose is 60 mg for children aged 5 to 10 years weighing 40 to 60 kg, 90 mg for children aged 5 to 10 years weighing 60 to 70 kg, and the same as an adult for children aged 11 years or older and / or weighing 70 kg or more. To avoid or reduce the rebound effect, acarbose and orlistat are administered for a period of at least 2 weeks, for example, about 2 weeks to about 1 year, for example, about 2 weeks to about 9 months, about 2 weeks to about 6 months, about 2 weeks to about 5 months, about 2 weeks to about 4 months, about 2 weeks to about 3 months, or about 2 weeks to about 2 months.

[0028] Treatment with orlistat and alcarbose may be administered simultaneously with treatment with the weight-reducing drug, such that the two treatments overlap within a range of 0 to 2 weeks. Generally, treatment with orlistat and alcarbose should be initiated immediately after treatment with the weight-reducing drug has ended or within a period of 1 to 14 days after treatment with the weight-reducing agent has ended. To avoid or reduce the rebound effect, the dosing regimen according to the invention may include gradually decreasing the daily doses of orlistat and alkabose, such that the adult daily dose of orlistat is initially 270-450 mg (down to 90 mg for children) for a treatment period of 2-7 days, followed by a daily dose of orlistat of 180-270 mg, and the daily dose of alkabose is initially 90-150 mg for a treatment period of 2-7 days, followed by a daily dose of orlistat of 60-90 mg (down to 30 mg for children). Weight loss treatment may involve any weight loss drug, such as those mentioned in the Background section.

[0029] As mentioned above, the applicant conducted clinical trials showing synergistic effects when alkabose and orlistat are orally administered simultaneously. The clinical trials are described in detail in the Experimental section of this specification. It is generally known that oral administration of orlistat for 6 months results in a placebo-adjusted weight loss of about 2-3%. Of note, these trials were conducted in scrutinized populations along with lifestyle guidance. Extrapolating from the literature, it can be seen that oral administration of alkabose (using a dose twice that of the present clinical trial) for 6 months would result in a placebo-adjusted weight loss rate of approximately 0.5%. Thus, oral administration of both alkabose and orlistat would be expected to provide a placebo-adjusted weight loss of about 2.5%. Surprisingly, the clinical results reported herein show an unexpected and significant reduction in body weight. A placebo-adjusted mean relative weight loss of 3% or more, such as about 4% or more, about 5% or more, or about 6% or more, was observed in the clinical trials.

[0030] Furthermore, the results of clinical trials have shown that the use of the two drug substances is safe and no significant side effects have been observed. Therefore, the synergistic effect of orlistat and alkabose, which allows low dose administration, combined with the safety of the two drug substances, indicates the use of a combination of orlistat and alkabose to avoid or reduce the rebound effect. In this context, overweight is defined as BMI 25 or more, and obesity is defined as BMI 30 or more. In this context, subjects with BMI 25 or more who suffer from or are at risk of suffering from overweight-related diseases (such as diabetes) may require medical treatment to alleviate or prevent such diseases by reducing weight. However, it is assumed that the reduction of rebound effect is also relevant when a subject wants to lose weight but has a BMI of less than 25. This is usually considered as a cosmetic treatment. The synergistic effect reported in Example 2 was already observed after 13 weeks of treatment, and the effect was further increased during the treatment period from 13 to 26 weeks. It is envisaged that the synergistic effect is also effective for longer treatment periods, i.e., the synergistic effect is obtained after 13 weeks or more of treatment, e.g., after 14 weeks or more, 15 weeks or more, 16 weeks or more, 17 weeks or more, 18 weeks or more, 19 weeks or more, 20 weeks or more, 21 weeks or more, 22 weeks or more, 23 weeks or more, 24 weeks or more, 25 weeks or more, or 26 weeks or more of treatment.

[0031] The synergistic effect is obtained by orally administering orlistat and acarbose in a weight ratio ranging from 2:1 to 4:1, for example a weight ratio of 3:1. Example 3 shows the results of a six month follow-up study, and as reported herein, it was surprisingly found that treating overweight or obese individuals with a composition comprising orlistat and alcarbose can significantly reduce the rebound effect commonly seen adjacent to the end of treatment for overweight or obesity. Orlistat and alkabose should be administered simultaneously, preferably with food. Administration can be performed once a day, twice a day or three times a day. The daily dose of orlistat and alkabose depends on several individual factors, such as the weight of the treated subject, the risk-benefit profile regarding side effects compared to the therapeutic effect. In general, the daily dose of orlistat for adults is 180 mg to 540 mg or more, for example 180 mg to 450 mg or more, 180 mg to 450 mg, 270 mg to 450 mg, 360 mg to 450 mg, and the daily dose of alkabose is 30 mg to about 180 mg, for example 30 mg to about 150 mg, 60 mg to about 150 mg or more, for example 90 mg to 150 mg.

[0032] For use in children, the daily dose of orlistat should be 180 mg for children aged 5 to 10 years weighing 40 to 60 kg, 270 mg for children aged 5 to 10 years weighing 60 to 70 kg, and the adult dose for children over 10 years and / or weighing more than 70 kg. For use in children, the daily dose of alcarbose should be 60 mg for children aged 5 to 10 years weighing 40 to 60 kg, 90 mg for children aged 5 to 10 years weighing 60 to 70 kg, and the adult dose for children over 10 years and / or weighing more than 70 kg. Dosage regimens according to the invention may include 90 mg orlistat / 30 mg alkabose, 120 mg orlistat / 40 mg orlistat, or 150 mg orlistat / 50 mg alkabose, typically administered orally three times daily.

[0033] Typically, orlistat and alcarbose are provided in the form of a composition. Such compositions include granules, spheroids and / or pellets containing orlistat and / or alcarbose. The granules, spheroids and / or pellets may be designed to release alcarbose and / or orlistat in a modulated manner. In the present context, the term "modulated release" is intended to indicate that the release of the active drug substance is manipulated, for example, by pharma- ceutically acceptable excipients and / or coating materials, and examples of coating materials that provide modulated release are, for example, enteric coating materials, which can be selected to release the active drug substance when the pH is higher than a certain value, for example, a pH higher than the pH in the stomach, and examples of pharma-ceutically acceptable excipients that can provide delayed release are, for example, celluloses or cellulose derivatives, such as hydroxypropylmethylcellulose. Another way to obtain modulated release may be to utilize the water-soluble properties and / or pH-dependent solubility of the drug substance itself.

[0034] As stated herein, the present invention is based on the applicant's invention as described in WO 2016 / 097170. However, in order to achieve the desired in vivo release, modulation of the composition was necessary. Surprisingly, this modulation resulted in a synergistic effect of the two drug substances. This is a very important finding, as it means that weight can be reduced faster and more efficiently, and furthermore, the desired weight loss can be obtained in a shorter period of time. The compositions of the present invention include granules, spheroids or pellets, some of which are designed to avoid release of the active agent in the stomach (e.g., by coating the granules, spheroids or pellets, or by incorporating excipients with pH-dependent release into the granules, spheroids or pellets). WO 2016 / 097170 describes compositions containing 3 or 4 different parts, each part having a well-defined in vitro release pattern. However, the release rate from each part is based on simulations and in vitro studies. The composition for use according to the invention also contains 3 or 4 parts, G1, G2A, G2B and G3, and when it contains only 3 parts, G2A and G2B are G2 parts.

[0035] The following discussion focuses on combination products of orlistat and alcarbose. The release rates of the APIs are designed so that alcarbose is released both in the stomach and in parts of the small intestine by defined and different formulation principles, whereas orlistat is released throughout the small intestine but at different rates and until the end of the jejunum. By releasing unchanged APIs at different rates, sufficient inhibition of the digestive enzymes is achieved, allowing the corresponding amount of undigested carbohydrates and lipids to reach the distal regions of the small intestine. The digested metabolites (fatty acids, monoacylglycerols and hexoses) formed locally by local digestion then act as ligands and stimulate the so-called gastrointestinal brake effect. In the context of the present invention, the terms RR mean rapid release, DR mean delayed release and PR mean sustained release. Delayed release means that the release is delayed, but once released it can be rapid or gradual. The subscript DC stands for delayed coating, GASTRIC stands for release starting in the stomach, but there may be release of drug substance even after passing through the small intestine until the end of the jejunum, and EC stands for enteric coating, i.e. coating with a specific polymer with a cut-off of pH about 4, i.e. not soluble at acidic pH and slowly starting to dissolve at about pH 4. The polymer has a pK a A value of about 5.5, i.e., starting to dissolve at about pH 5.5, can be employed. Thus, since no drug substance is released below a pH of 4, PROX-SI indicates that release begins and occurs primarily in the proximal small intestine, and INTESTINAL indicates that release occurs from the initial portion of the small intestine to the end of the jejunum.

[0036] The present invention relates to i) releasing a portion of the total amount of alcarbose in the stomach, but in a delayed manner to ensure that the particles containing alcarbose are thoroughly mixed with food ingredients and gastric juices in the stomach after a meal; ii) releasing a portion of the total amount of alkabose and a portion of the total amount of orlistat in the duodenum and jejunum, and this release should be relatively rapid so that both alkabose and orlistat are available in the duodenum and jejunum to exert their effects; iii) Providing an oral pharmaceutical modified release (MR) composition designed to release a portion of the total amount of orlistat in the duodenum and jejunum.

[0037] As mentioned above, various formulation principles can be used to prepare compositions for use according to the present invention. Such formulation principles can be understood from the reference WO 2016 / 097170. However, in order to obtain a synergistic effect, the present inventors have developed a composition comprising alcarbose and orlistat, which contains different individual parts. The composition comprises 3 or 4 different parts: a) a first portion G1, which contains about 45% w / w to about 65% w / w of the total amount of alkabose, for example about 50% w / w to about 65% w / w, about 55% w / w to about 65% w / w, or about 60% w / w; b) a second portion G2A, which comprises about 35% w / w to about 55% w / w of the total amount of alkabose, for example about 35% w / w to about 50% w / w, about 35% w / w to about 45% w / w or about 40% w / w of alkabose, c) a third portion G2B, comprising about 50% w / w to about 85% w / w of the total amount of orlistat, for example, about 55% w / w to about 80% w / w, about 60% w / w to about 80% w / w, about 65% w / w to about 75% w / w, about 68% w / w to about 75% w / w, about 72% w / w to about 73% w / w, for example, about 72.2% w / w of orlistat, and d) a fourth portion G3, which may contain about 15 to about 50% w / w of the total amount of orlistat, for example, about 20% w / w to about 40% w / w, about 25% to about 35% w / w, about 25% to about 32% w / w, about 27% w / w to about 28% w / w, or about 27.8% w / w of orlistat, and the total amount of alkabose and orlistat is 100% w / w, When the composition contains only three parts, parts b) and c) are combined. This combined part is called G2. The individual parts are designed to release alcarbose and orlistat at different parts of the digestive tract, so the release patterns of the individual parts are different.

[0038] Furthermore, in order to obtain a desired release in vivo, the concentration of alkabose in the first part G1 is within the range of 25% w / w to about 50% w / w, for example, about 30% w / w to about 45% w / w or about 40% w / w, based on the total weight of the G1 part. The concentration of alkabose in the second part G2A or G2 is within the range of about 0.5% w / w to about 4.5% w / w, for example, about 1% w / w to about 4% w / w, about 1.5% w / w to about 3.5% w / w, about 2% w / w to about 3.5% w / w, about 2.5% w / w to about 3.25% w / w or about 3% w / w, based on the total weight of either G2A or G2, as the case may be. The concentration of orlistat in the second part G2B or G2 is within the range of 5% w / w to about 30% w / w, for example, about 10% w / w to about 25% w / w, about 10% w / w to about 20% w / w, about 12% w / w to about 20% w / w or about 15.5% w / w, based on the total weight of either G2B or G2, as the case may be. The concentration of orlistat in the third (or fourth) part G3 is within the range of 20% w / w to about 50% w / w, for example, about 25% w / w to about 50% w / w, about 30% w / w to about 45% w / w, about 35% w / w to about 45% w / w or about 40% w / w, based on the total weight of G3.

[0039] In order to obtain the desired in vivo release of the active substance, it is important to select a pharma- ceutically acceptable excipient that controls the release of the active substance. In particular, the inventors have addressed the release of orlistat from the G2 (G2A, G2B) and G3 parts in order to obtain the desired release in vivo. The inventors have found that the enteric polymer contained in G2 may have a certain adverse effect on the in vivo release of orlistat (and / or alcabose) from G2 (G2A, G2B). As a result, it has been found that the desired release in vivo can be obtained by minimizing the direct contact between the drug substance and the enteric polymer. When G2 (G2A, G2B) is in the form of granules, roughly spheres or pellets, the direct contact between the drug substance and the enteric polymer can be minimized by coating the granules, roughly spheres or pellets with a protective layer (before mixing with the enteric polymer or coating with the enteric polymer). It has been found that in order to prevent the active substance in the G2 granules from coming into direct contact with the enteric polymer, the protective layer should have a certain thickness, expressed as the concentration of the protective layer in the final G2 (G2A, G2B) part, which should be at least 10% w / w, e.g., in the range of 10-20% w / w, 12-20% w / w, 13-20% w / w, 13.5-20% w / w, based on the weight of G2 (G2A, G2B).

[0040] Another observation was to obtain the right balance between the active substance and pharma- ceutically acceptable excipients that impart modulated release properties to the G2B or G2 and / or G3 parts to obtain the desired in vivo release. Furthermore, the in vivo release could be optimized by using a micronized form of orlistat. Orlistat has very low water solubility (less than 0.001 g / ml) and using orlistat in a micronized form increases the surface area and enhances water solubility. Also, the use of surfactants that facilitate contact of orlistat with the gastrointestinal fluids favorably affected the in vivo release rate. Part G3 of the composition is intended to release orlistat in a delayed manner so that it is effective in the proximal intestine. To achieve this, orlistat is used in micronized form and the concentration of orlistat in this part should be much lower than originally envisaged in WO 2016 / 097170.

[0041] Thus, the composition according to the invention comprises a G3 part comprising modified release granules, spheroids or pellets comprising orlistat, said modified release granules, spheroids or pellets containing 30-50% w / w micronised orlistat based on the total weight of G3. Furthermore, the G3 granules, spheres or pellets contain 35-60% w / w of cellulose or a cellulose derivative, such as microcrystalline cellulose. Thus, in one aspect of the invention, any of the compositions described above comprise modified release granules, spheroids or pellets comprising 30-50% w / w micronized orlistat, 35-60% w / w microcrystalline cellulose and 10-18% w / w polysorbate 80. The present invention also provides compositions as described herein, such as the compositions described above.

[0042] Formulation of parts G1, G2 and G3 of the composition The G1 part of the composition is designed to release alkabose for a long period of time. The sustained release is obtained by providing the G1 part containing alkabose and sustained release polymer or lipid. The sustained release polymer is typically a polymer with low water solubility, i.e. hydrophobic, and can be selected from the group consisting of ethyl cellulose, acrylate or acrylic acid derivatives, gelatin, copolymers based on polymethacrylic acid and methacrylate, ethyl acrylate and methyl acrylate, copolymers of acrylic acid esters and methacrylic acid esters, hydroxypropylmethylcellulose phthalate, cellulose acetate phthalate, polyvinyl acetate phthalate or a coating agent selected from the group consisting of. The fat can be selected from fatty acids and / or esters, fatty alcohols, cetyl alcohol, stearyl alcohol, mineral oil, hydrogenated vegetable oil, vegetable oil, acetylated hydrogenated soybean oil glyceride, castor oil, preferably solid at room temperature, most preferably hydrogenated vegetable oil. The hydrophobic polymer or fat is typically present in G1 at a concentration of about 10% w / w to about 50% w / w of the total weight of G1, such as about 15% to about 45% w / w, about 20 to about 40% w / w, about 15% to about 25%.

[0043] The hydrophobic polymers or lipids may be substituted or supplemented with hydroxypropylmethylcellulose or waxes such as glycerol monostearate, white wax, carnauba wax, stearyl alcohol, stearic acid, polyethylene glycols and triglycerides or mixtures thereof. Hydroxypropyl methylcellulose or wax is typically present in G1 at a concentration of about 3% w / w to about 50% w / w based on the total weight of G1, such as about 3% w / w to about 45% w / w, about 3% w / w to about 40% w / w, about 3% w / w to about 35% w / w, about 3% w / w to about 30% w / w, about 3% w / w to about 25% w / w, about 4% w / w to about 20% w / w, about 4% w / w to about 15% w / w, about 4.5% w / w to about 10% w / w, or about 5% to about 9.5% w / w. In some cases, the concentration range is about 10% to about 50% w / w, such as about 15% to about 45% w / w, or about 20 to about 40% w / w of the total weight of G1. Further, in order to obtain a desired release in vivo, the concentration of alcarbose in the first part G1 is within the range of 25% w / w to about 50% w / w, for example about 30% w / w to about 45% w / w or about 40% w / w, based on the total weight of the G1 part. As can be seen from the examples herein, G1 can be prepared based on a neutral core, for example a microcrystalline cellulose core, to which a coating composition containing alcarbose is applied.

[0044] The G2 part of the composition is designed to have a delayed release of alcarbose and orlistat, but once the release has started, it is relatively rapid thereafter. This release pattern is obtained by combining the drug substance with one or more surfactants (especially to increase the solubility of orlistat) and an enteric polymer, i.e., a polymer with a pH-dependent solubility such that it does not dissolve at low pH (usually below pH 4) but dissolves at neutral / alkaline pH. The polymer may be incorporated into the G2 formulation or may be used as a coating material to coat the G2 formulation. As previously described herein, any direct contact between the drug substance and the enteric polymer should be minimized. This can be obtained by providing a protective coating layer on the spheroids, granules or pellets containing the active drug substance. Suitable polymers for use as protective polymers include cellulose or cellulose derivatives, such as hydroxypropylmethylcellulose or other film-forming polymers. Furthermore, orlistat must be used in micronized form to achieve the desired release in vivo, and therefore the average particle size of orlistat should be 50 microns or less, e.g., 20 microns or less, 10 microns or less, or 5 microns or less.

[0045] The surfactant is typically selected from the group consisting of anionic, cationic or nonionic surfactants. Nonionic surfactants are, for example, polysorbate 20, polysorbate 21, polysorbate 40, polysorbate 60, polysorbate 61, polysorbate 65, polysorbate 80, polysorbate 81, polysorbate 85, polysorbate 120, sorbitan monoisostearate, sorbitan monolaurate, sorbitan monopalmitate, sorbitan monostearate, sorbitan monooleate, sorbitan sesquioleate, sorbitan trioleate, glyceryl monooleate and polyvinyl alcohol. Anionic surfactants include sodium docusate and sodium lauryl sulfate. Cationic surfactants include, for example, benzalkonium chloride, benzethonium chloride and cetrimide. The total concentration of surfactant is typically present in G2 at a concentration of about 0.5% to about 30% w / w of the total weight of G2. Preferably, the concentration is about 1% w / w to about 10% w / w, e.g., about 1% w / w to about 8% w / w, about 1% w / w to about 5% w / w, based on the total weight of G2.

[0046] The enteric polymer may be a coating agent selected from the group consisting of polymethacrylic acid and methacrylate, copolymers based on ethyl acrylate and methyl acrylate, copolymers of acrylic and methacrylic esters, hydroxypropylmethylcellulose phthalate, hydroxypropylmethylcellulose acetate succinate, cellulose acetate phthalate, polyvinyl acetate phthalate or mixtures thereof, such as those commercially available under the name Aqoat® AS-LG (hypromellose acetate succinate) from Shin-Etsu and Seppic. The enteric polymer is typically an acrylate or acrylic acid polymer or copolymer. The acrylic polymer may include one or more ammonio methacrylate copolymers. Ammonio methacrylate copolymers are well known in the art and are described in NF XVII as fully polymerized copolymers of acrylic acid esters and methacrylic acid esters with low content of quaternary ammonium groups.

[0047] The acrylic polymer may be used in the form of an acrylic resin lacquer used in the form of an aqueous dispersion, for example those sold under the trade name Eudragit® by Rohm Pharma or under the trade name Acryl-EZE® by Colorcon. The acrylic coating may comprise a mixture of two acrylic resin lacquers sold under the trade names Eudragit® RL 30 D and Eudragit® RS 30 D by Evonik, respectively. Eudragit® RL 30 D and Eudragit® RS 30 D are copolymers of acrylic and methacrylic acid esters with a low content of quaternary ammonium groups, the molar ratio of ammonium groups to the remaining neutral (meth)acrylic acid esters being 1:20 for Eudragit® RL 30 D and 1:40 for Eudragit® RS 30 D. Eudragit® RL / RS mixtures are insoluble in water and digestive fluids. However, coatings formed therefrom are swellable and permeable in aqueous solutions and digestive fluids. Eudragit® RL / RS dispersions may be mixed together in any desired ratio to ultimately obtain a modified release formulation having a desired dissolution profile.

[0048] In part G2, the enteric polymer is typically present in a concentration of about 15 to about 50% w / w based on the total weight of the G2 formulation, preferably about 20% w / w to about 40% w / w, for example about 15% w / w to about 40% w / w, about 15% w / w to about 35% w / w, about 15% w / w to about 30% w / w, about 20 to 25% w / w based on the total weight of G2. The concentration of the protective layer in the G2 (G2A, G2B) part should be at least 10% w / w, for example in the range of 10-20% w / w, 12-20% w / w, 13-20% w / w, 13.5-20% w / w, based on the total weight of G2 (G2A, G2B). The concentration of alcarbose in the second part G2A or G2 is within the range of about 0.5% w / w to about 4.5% w / w, for example, about 1% w / w to about 4% w / w, about 1.5% w / w to about 3.5% w / w, about 2% w / w to about 3.5% w / w, about 2.5% w / w to about 3.25% w / w, or about 3% w / w, based on the total weight of the corresponding G2A or G2. The concentration of orlistat in the second part G2B or G2 is within the range of 5% w / w to about 30% w / w, for example, about 10% w / w to about 25% w / w, about 10% w / w to about 20% w / w, about 12% w / w to about 20% w / w, or about 15.5% w / w, based on the total weight of the corresponding G2B or G2.

[0049] The G3 part is designed to release orlistat for an extended period of time. Orlistat may be released to a low extent already in the stomach. Orlistat is very poorly water soluble and to achieve the desired release, orlistat is combined with one or more surfactants. The surfactants may be one or more of those mentioned above in G2. The surfactants are present in G3 at a concentration of about 1% to about 30% w / w of the total weight of the G3 formulation. Preferably, they are present at about 2% to about 20% w / w, about 3% to about 20% w / w, about 5% w / w to about 20% w / w, about 10% w / w to about 15% w / w. Furthermore, orlistat must be used in micronized form to achieve the desired release in vivo, and therefore the average particle size of orlistat should be 50 microns or less, e.g., 20 microns or less, 10 microns or less, or 5 microns or less. Alternatively, or additionally, release of orlistat from G3 can be obtained by incorporation of water-soluble or water-swellable polymers such as hydroxypropylmethylcellulose or other cellulose derivatives, e.g., methylcellulose, carboxymethylcellulose, hydroxypropylcellulose, microcrystalline cellulose.

[0050] Such water-soluble polymers are typically incorporated into G3 formulations at a concentration of about 35% w / w to about 60% w / w, e.g., about 35% w / w to about 55% w / w, about 35% w / w to about 50% w / w, about 40% w / w to about 50% w / w, based on the total weight of G3. In some cases, the concentration may be about 70 to about 90% w / w, based on the total weight of G3. Preferably, the concentration is about 40 to about 50% w / w. The concentration of orlistat in the third (or fourth) part G3 is within the range of 20% w / w to about 50% w / w, for example about 25% w / w to about 50% w / w, about 30% w / w to about 45% w / w, about 35% w / w to about 45% w / w, or about 40% w / w, based on the total weight of G3.

[0051] Parts G1, G2 (or G2A, G2B) and G3 may also contain other pharma- ceutically acceptable ingredients selected from those described herein. Furthermore, to produce the final composition, G1, G2 (or G2A, G2B) and / or G3 may be mixed with one or more pharma- ceutically acceptable excipients, or G1, G2 (or G2A, G2B) and / or G3 may be coated, for example, with a film coating or with a coating that prevents or reduces the adverse effects of one part on another part. Part G1 of the composition may be in the form of granules, spheroids, pellets, minitablets, etc., or part G1 is incorporated into a bilayer tablet in which part G1 is contained in one of the two layers. The layer containing part G1 may be provided with a delayed release coating. Part G2 of the composition, or G2A and G2B, may be in the form of granules, spheroids, pellets, mini-tablets, etc., containing an enteric polymer or provided with an enteric coating, or G2, or G2A and G2B, are incorporated in a bilayer tablet, with parts G2, or G2A and G2B, contained in one of the two layers, the layer containing parts G2, or G2A and G2B, provided with an enteric coating. Part G3 may be in the form of granules, spheroids, pellets, mini-tablets, etc., or may be contained in a bilayer tablet, with part G3 being contained in one of the two layers.

[0052] The final modified release composition according to the present invention may be in the form of a multi-unit tablet, a bilayer multi-unit tablet, a coated tablet, a multi-unit capsule or a multi-unit oral powder. Typically, G1, G2, or G2A and G2B, as well as G3, are in the form of pellets, granules, spheroids, etc., and the modified release composition according to the present invention is in the form of a multi-unit tablet, capsule, sachet or powder. In a preferred embodiment, G1 is in the form of an inert core coated with a coating composition containing alkabose, G2 is in the form of an inert core coated with a drug substance, then a protective coating, and then an enteric coating, and G3 is in the form of an uncoated granule. Other pharma- ceutically acceptable excipients may be included in the G1, G2, or G3 formulations. However, it should be understood that a synergistic effect can also be obtained by administering two compositions, one containing alkabose and the other containing orlistat, the alkabose composition comprising the G1 and G2A portions and the orlistat composition comprising the G2B and G3 portions. To obtain a synergistic effect, the compositions should be administered to a subject simultaneously. The composition according to the invention comprises parts G1, G2 (or G2A and G2B) and G3, and optionally one or more pharma- ceutically acceptable excipients, such compositions comprising 30-50% w / w micronized orlistat, 35-60% w / w microcrystalline cellulose and 10-18% w / w polysorbate 80, based on the total weight of the composition.

[0053] Compositions of the Invention The present invention also provides compositions comprising two or more portions with different release patterns. These portions are designated G2 or G2B and G3. Such compositions include i) a G2B portion, which contains about 50% w / w to about 85% w / w of the total amount of orlistat, for example, about 55% w / w to about 80% w / w, about 60% w / w to about 80% w / w, about 65% w / w to about 75% w / w, about 68% w / w to about 75% w / w, about 72% w / w to about 73% w / w, for example, about 72.2% w / w of orlistat, and ii) a G3 portion, which comprises about 15 to about 50% w / w of the total amount of orlistat, for example, about 20% w / w to about 40% w / w, about 25% to about 35% w / w, about 25% to about 32% w / w, about 27% w / w to about 28% w / w, or about 27.8% w / w of orlistat, and the total amount of alkabose and orlistat is 100% w / w, Orlistat is present in the portion in the form of micronized orlistat.

[0054] More specifically, the concentration of orlistat in the G2B portion is within the range of 5% w / w to about 30% w / w, for example, about 10% w / w to about 25% w / w, about 10% w / w to about 20% w / w, about 12% w / w to about 20% w / w, or about 15.5% w / w, based on the total weight of G2B. The concentration of orlistat in the G3 portion is within the range of 20% w / w to about 50% w / w, for example, about 25% w / w to about 50% w / w, about 30% w / w to about 45% w / w, about 35% w / w to about 45% w / w, or about 40% w / w, based on the total weight of G3. The composition may further contain parts G1 and G2A as described herein, and parts G2A and G2B may be mixed to form part G2. All details given herein regarding parts G1, G2(G2A / G2B) and G3 apply mutatis mutandis to the compositions described above.

[0055] The present invention also relates to a method for producing a composition comprising a method for producing a composition comprising: a) a first portion G1, which contains about 45% w / w to about 65% w / w of the total amount of alkabose, for example, about 50% w / w to about 65% w / w, about 55% w / w to about 65% w / w, or about 60% w / w; b) a second portion G2A, which comprises about 35% w / w to about 55% w / w of the total amount of alkabose, for example about 35% w / w to about 50% w / w, about 35% w / w to about 45% w / w or about 40% w / w of alkabose, c) a third portion G2B, comprising about 50% w / w to about 85% w / w of the total amount of orlistat, for example, about 55% w / w to about 80% w / w, about 60% w / w to about 80% w / w, about 65% w / w to about 75% w / w, about 68% w / w to about 75% w / w, about 72% w / w to about 73% w / w, for example, about 72.2% w / w of orlistat, and d) a fourth portion G3, which is a composition comprising a portion containing about 15 to about 50% w / w of the total amount of orlistat, for example, about 20% w / w to about 40% w / w, about 25% to about 35% w / w, about 25% to about 32% w / w, about 27% w / w to about 28% w / w, or about 27.8% w / w of orlistat, and the total amount of alkabose and orlistat is each 100% w / w, If the composition contains only three parts, provide a composition in which parts b) and c) are combined. This combined part is called G2. The individual parts are designed to release alcarbose and orlistat at different sites in the digestive tract, so that the release patterns of the individual parts are different.

[0056] Furthermore, in order to obtain a desired release in vivo, the concentration of alkabose in the first part G1 is within the range of 25% w / w to about 50% w / w, for example, about 30% w / w to about 45% w / w or about 40% w / w, based on the total weight of the G1 part. The concentration of alkabose in the second part G2A or G2 is within the range of about 0.5% w / w to about 4.5% w / w, for example, about 1% w / w to about 4% w / w, about 1.5% w / w to about 3.5% w / w, about 2% w / w to about 3.5% w / w, about 2.5% w / w to about 3.25% w / w or about 3% w / w, based on the total weight of either G2A or G2, as the case may be. The concentration of orlistat in the second part G2B or G2 is within the range of 5% w / w to about 30% w / w, for example, about 10% w / w to about 25% w / w, about 10% w / w to about 20% w / w, about 12% w / w to about 20% w / w or about 15.5% w / w, based on the total weight of either G2B or G2, as the case may be. The concentration of orlistat in the third (or fourth) part G3 is within the range of 20% w / w to about 50% w / w, for example, about 25% w / w to about 50% w / w, about 30% w / w to about 45% w / w, about 35% w / w to about 45% w / w or about 40% w / w, based on the total weight of G3.

[0057] All details given herein regarding parts G1, G2(G2A / G2B) and G3 apply mutatis mutandis to the compositions described above. Orlistat (tetrahydrolipstatin) Chemical structure of orlistat ((S)-((S)-1-((2S,3S)-3-hexyl-4-oxooxetan-2-yl)tridecan-2-yl)2-formamido-4-methylpentanoate):

[0058] [ka]

[0059] Orlistat may be prepared from biological sources (Streptomyces toxytricin) or may be prepared synthetically or semi-synthetically. According to the literature, orlistat appears in two different crystalline forms, Form I and Form II. The melting points of Form I and Form II are 44°C and 43°C, respectively. The product sold by Roche in Sweden under the name Xenical® capsules contains Form II. No salt forms of orlistat appear to exist. Orlistat is practically insoluble in water. In the context of the present invention, the term "orlistat" encompasses the above chemical structure as well as any optical isomers thereof, as well as any crystalline form thereof, any polymorphs, any hydrates, any pharma- ceutically acceptable or any prodrugs thereof.

[0060] Orlistat is a local inhibitor of gastric and pancreatic lipases in the GI tract, which acts by inhibiting luminal digestion and blocking intestinal absorption of dietary fat. The physicochemical conditions along the stomach and small intestine are highly dynamic, and the activity and inhibition kinetics of orlistat are significantly different. These dynamic GI conditions are taken into consideration in the design of this fixed oral MR dosage form. The percentage of the oral orlistat dose absorbed from the conventional dosage form (Xenical®) is low (<3%), and thus the plasma exposure is low (<5 ng / ml). However, although orlistat is safe, it is associated with side effects that significantly impede compliance. In clinical trials, approximately 25% or more of patients complain of gastrointestinal side effects such as diarrhea, oily spots, and fecal urgency. This, combined with a rather modest effect on body weight, makes Xenical® less attractive to the majority of obese patients. However, in a recent report, the FDA clearly stated that Xenical® is safe and has clinical benefits. Clinical use of orlistat in an oral modified release (MR) dosage form not only reduces fat GI absorption by preventing the breakdown of triglycerides into free fatty acids and monoacylglycerols, but orlistat also alters GI transit time and affects satiety through many of the cell types listed above and below.

[0061] In the stomach, the decrease in lipid digestion caused by orlistat accelerates gastric emptying (food is sent to the duodenum more quickly). If the meal is high in fat, diarrhea can occur within 30 minutes of starting the meal. This diarrhea is probably because food in the stomach triggers the colon to empty. This signal, combined with a higher than normal amount of fat in the stool from a previous meal (leading to less water being absorbed during colonic transit), can cause diarrhea. Presumably, a high-fat meal further increases the signal from the stomach to the colon, making the situation worse. Since fatty acids, but not intact triglycerides, are ligands for receptors in the GI tract, many of the above hormones will be secreted at lower levels if the normal digestion of lipids in the stomach is inhibited. Note: In the duodenum, the fatty acid signal to CCK is weakened, less bile is secreted, and fat digestion is further reduced. It inhibits the normal meal-induced decrease in the appetite-stimulating hormone ghrelin. L cells (which secrete incretins) also secrete less GLP-1, resulting in a smaller ileal brake.

[0062] Undigested triglycerides enter the colon, and as mentioned above, only small amounts of fat enter the colon. The greater the amount of fat, the faster the propulsion through the colon and the less water is absorbed. In summary, the current method of delivering Orlistat to the GI tract in conventional dosage forms (including drug release in the stomach) removes calories in the form of triglycerides that remain undigested, on the one hand, but causes many side effects, bypasses many of the appetite-regulating systems of the GI tract, and also increases the rate of gastric emptying, which actually reduces satiety and increases appetite.

[0063] Alkabos The chemical structure of acarbose (O-4,6-dideoxy-4-[[(1S,4R,5S,6S)-4,5,6-trihydroxy-3-(hydroxymethyl)cyclohex-2-enyl]amino]-α-D-glucopyranosyl-(1→4)-O-α-D-glucopyranosyl-(1→4)-D-glucopyranose: [ka]

[0064] Alcarbose may be prepared from biological sources (Actinoplanes) or may be prepared synthetically or semi-synthetically. No information on the crystalline form of Arkabose was found in the literature. However, some sources indicate that Arkabose can be amorphous and that no salt forms of Arkabose appear to exist. According to Ph. Eur., Arkabose is highly soluble in water. In the context of the present invention, the term "alkabose" encompasses the above structure as well as any optical isomers thereof, as well as any crystalline form thereof, any polymorphs, any hydrates, any pharma- ceutically acceptable or any prodrugs thereof.

[0065] Alcarbose (Glucobay®) is a competitive α-glucosidase and pancreatic α-amylase inhibitor that inhibits the hydrolysis of oligosaccharides during GI luminal digestion of meals. Alcarbose is currently used primarily in Asia as a diabetes treatment, but is rarely used in Western countries. By inhibiting luminal digestion and subsequent absorption of carbohydrates, the concentration of glucose in blood glucose increases slowly after a meal, and the patient's insulin requirements are reduced. Alcarbose has low intestinal permeability (due to its hydrophilicity), and the drug absorption rate after oral administration is less than 5%. Due to its low GI absorption and bioavailability, alcarbose has very low plasma exposure and is considered a safe drug without systemic side effects. As with orlistat, many patients using alcarbose report GI tolerability issues (mainly flatulence, diarrhea, and GI pain and abdominal pain), limiting its current clinical use in Western countries. The magnitude of GI side effects is directly related to the strength of the oral dose, in a stepwise manner. Furthermore, the side effects of alcarbose also appear to be "food-driven". In Asian countries, the higher consumption of carbohydrates and perhaps slightly more "tolerated" carbohydrates (digested somewhat slower) appears to reduce the incidence of side effects. In addition, patients are encouraged to slowly introduce acarbose by using 50 mg per day for 1-3 weeks, then slowly increase the oral dose to 100 mg per meal. As more undigested carbohydrates reach further down the GI tract, more enzymes are being produced locally in the distal small intestine to process the undigested carbohydrates. Acarbose also removes ligands from various cell types throughout the GI tract, although some notable differences are observed. Acarbose reduces the rate of gastric emptying, possibly by sending less ligand to the GIP-secreting K cells in the proximal small intestine and more ligand to the distal GLP-1-secreting L cells. Acarbose also allows more undigested polysaccharides to enter the proximal colon, where bacteria can ferment the polysaccharides and the resulting short-chain fatty acids can bind to the L cells to enhance the ileal brake.

[0066] It will be understood that the features and / or embodiments discussed above in relation to the compositions apply by analogy to the methods described herein. Below are illustrated examples to explain the present invention, which are intended to be illustrative and are not to be construed as limiting in any way. The following figures and examples are provided to illustrate the present invention, but are intended to be illustrative and are not to be construed as limiting in any way. [Brief description of the drawings]

[0067] [Figure 1] Details regarding the clinical trial and its results are provided in Example 2 herein. [Diagram 2] The relative weight loss over the 26 week study period is shown (see Example 2). [Diagram 3] The percentage of participants who lost 5% or more and 10% or more of their body weight is shown. At week 26, more patients in the active treatment group lost 5% or more of their body weight (both p<0.0001 for active treatment vs. placebo), and more patients lost 10% or more of their body weight (both p<0.1 for active treatment vs. placebo). [Figure 4] Based on the results presented in Example 3, the mean relative change in body weight from baseline at weeks 7, 14, 26 and 52 with 95% confidence intervals are shown. [Diagram 5] Based on the results presented in Example 3, the mean absolute change from baseline in HbAbl at weeks 7, 14, 26 and 52 with 95% confidence intervals are shown. [Figure 6] Correlation between relative weight loss and change in RAND-36 health outcomes (baseline to week 26) in the three arms is shown. EXAMPLES

[0068] Example 1 - A composition was prepared containing three parts G1, G2 and G3. [Table 1]

[0069] The composition of EMP16-02-60 / 20 modified release capsules containing 60 mg / unit of orlistat and 20 mg / unit of acarbose is set forth below: [Table 2]

[0070] The composition of EMP16-02-90 / 30 modified release capsules containing 90 mg / unit of orlistat and 30 mg / unit of acarbose is set forth below: [Table 3]

[0071] The composition of G1 granules containing 391.5 mg / g of alkabose is given below: [Table 4]

[0072] The composition of G2 Granules containing 155.8 mg / g orlistat and 29.7 mg / g alkabose is given below: [Table 5]

[0073] The composition of G3 granules containing 400.0 mg / g of alkabose is given below: [Table 6]

[0074] Example 2 - Clinical Trials A 26-week, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized study was conducted in overweight and obese patients. The primary objective was to evaluate the effect of EMP16-02 (orlistat 120 mg / alcarbose 40 mg and orlistat 150 mg / acarbose 50 mg) compared with placebo on relative weight loss after 26 weeks of oral treatment.

[0075] Secondary objectives were to: i) To evaluate the effects of two different doses of EMP16-02 (120 mg O / 40 mg A and 150 mg O / 50 mg A) on relative and absolute weight loss during 26 weeks of oral treatment compared to placebo. ii) To evaluate the effects of two different doses of EMP16-02 (120 mg O / 40 mg A and 150 mg O / 50 mg A) compared with placebo on other anthropometric characteristics during 26 weeks of oral treatment. iii) To evaluate the effects of two different doses of EMP16-02 (120 mg O / 40 mg A and 150 mg O / 50 mg A) on satiety and meal patterns during 26 weeks of oral treatment compared to placebo. iv) To evaluate the effects of two different doses of EMP16-02 (120 mg O / 40 mg A and 150 mg O / 50 mg A) on fasting insulin, markers of glucose metabolism, markers of lipid metabolism, and markers of inflammation during 26 weeks of oral treatment compared to placebo. v) To evaluate the effects of two different doses of EMP16-02 (120 mg O / 40 mg A and 150 mg O / 50 mg A) on blood pressure during 26 weeks of oral treatment compared to placebo. vi) To evaluate the effects of two different doses of EMP16-02 (120 mg O / 40 mg A and 150 mg O / 50 mg A) on quality of life during 26 weeks of oral treatment compared to placebo. vii) To evaluate the relationship between dropout rate and tolerability for two different doses of EMP16-02 (120 mg O / 40 mg A and 150 mg O / 50 mg A) compared with placebo during 26 weeks of oral treatment. viii) To evaluate the safety and gastrointestinal (GI) tolerability of two different doses of EMP16-02 (120 mg O / 40 mg A and 150 mg O / 50 mg A) compared to placebo during 26 weeks of oral treatment.

[0076] Exploratory purpose: To evaluate the effects of two different doses of EMP16-02 (120 mg O / 40 mg A and 150 mg O / 50 mg A) on fasting plasma / serum levels of apolipoprotein A1 (ApoA1) and apolipoprotein B (ApoB) during 26 weeks of oral treatment compared with placebo. To assess predose plasma levels of orlistat and alcarbose at steady state. To evaluate the effects of two different doses of EMP16-02 (120 mg O / 40 mg A and 150 mg O / 50 mg A) compared with placebo on relative and absolute weight loss 6 months after the end of 26 weeks of oral treatment. To evaluate the effects of two different doses of EMP16-02 (120 mg O / 40 mg A and 150 mg O / 50 mg A) compared with placebo on HbA1c concentrations 6 months after the end of 26 weeks of oral treatment. To evaluate the effects of two different doses of EMP16-02 (120 mg O / 40 mg A and 150 mg O / 50 mg A) compared with placebo on blood pressure 6 months after the end of 26 weeks of oral treatment.

[0077] Diagnosis and Key Eligibility Criteria Body mass index (BMI) ≥ 30, or ≥ 28 kg / m in the presence of other risk factors (e.g., hypertension, glucose dysregulation, e.g., impaired glucose tolerance and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and / or dyslipidemia). 2 Male and female patients who are overweight or obese, defined as: Age ≥ 18 and ≤ 75 years. -You are willing and able to provide written informed consent to participate in this study. - Stable weight (<5% change reported in the 3 months prior to screening and randomization).

[0078] The primary endpoint was the relative % change from baseline in body weight after 26 weeks of treatment with EMP16-02 (120 mg O / 40 mg A) compared with placebo. A total of 156 patients were enrolled in this study. Patients were randomized to receive one of two doses of EMP16-02. 1. EMP16-02 120 mg O / 40 mg A 2. EMP16-02 150 mg O / 50 mg A 3. Placebo (identical capsules) For the EMP16-02 120 / 40, two capsules of EMP16-02 60 / 20 are used. For EMP16-02 150 / 50, use one capsule of EMP16-02 60 / 20 and one capsule of EMP16-02 90 / 30.

[0079] Blood samples (fasting) and physical measurements were taken. Patients were given instructions for an electronic diary and asked to complete satiety and craving questionnaires before breakfast (at the clinic) and then hourly (at home) for 4 hours until before lunch. A standardized breakfast was served at the clinic. Midway through breakfast at Visit 2, all patients, regardless of randomized treatment group, were given a placebo capsule and were given the opportunity to train in self-administration of IMP under the supervision of clinic staff. Patients were also instructed to complete further questionnaires regarding health and quality of life, dietary patterns, activity and sleep, and gastrointestinal symptoms (Gastrointestinal Symptom Scale [GSRS]). Patients were instructed to take EMP16-02 or placebo midway through each meal with approximately 100-200 mL of water (or other beverage) on all subsequent treatment days. Once the IMP was distributed, patients were free to leave the clinic. The first randomized IMP dose was taken during lunch (or the next meal) at home.

[0080] Patients randomized to EMP16-02 began with a 6-week lead-in period during which the dose was increased continuously. Starting at week 7, all patients reached their final dose and began the 20-week treatment and observation period. The lead-in period began with a dose of 60 mg O and 20 mg A TID, which was increased successively by 30 mg O / 10 mg A every 2 weeks until a target dose of 120 mg O / 40 mg A TID (for the low-dose group) and 150 mg O / 50 mg A TID (for the high-dose group) was reached. The dosing schedule was as follows: [Table 7]

[0081] Placebo treatment consisted of matching oral capsules. Placebo and EMP16-02 capsules were to be taken TID with meals three times daily. Patients visited the clinic at Visit 3 (Week 7), Visit 4 (Week 14), and Visit 5 (Week 26) for safety assessments and weight and anthropometric assessments. Patients arrived in the morning after an overnight fast of at least 8 hours. All visits began with a brief physical examination, followed by blood sampling (fasting), weight and body composition assessments. A standardized breakfast was served, during which patients took their IMP. All or selected questionnaires, including satiety and craving questionnaires, were completed in a similar manner to Visit 2.

[0082] After 18 and 22 weeks of treatment (days 123 ± 3 and 151 ± 3, respectively), patients were asked to answer questions about IMP compliance, occurrence of AEs, and use of concomitant medications using an electronic diary. New IMPs were given to patients at Visits 2, 3, and 4. At Visit 5 (Week 26), patients took their final dose during breakfast at the clinic. Visit 6 was a safety follow-up visit. Visit 7 was a 6-month follow-up visit for consented patients who completed the 26-week treatment period with active EMP16-02 treatment (120 mg O / 40 mg A and 150 mg O / 50 mg A) or placebo.

[0083] Treatment period Each patient received EMP16 or a matching placebo three times daily for 26 weeks. IMP was taken with three main meals per day.

[0084] Efficacy evaluation Weight, other body measurements (BMI, waist circumference, sagittal diameter, bioimpedance), blood sampling for fasting lipid metabolism, glucose metabolism and inflammatory markers, blood pressure, questionnaires (dietary patterns, GSRS, satiety and cravings, activity and sleep, and health and quality of life [RAND-36]), dropout rate (assessed in terms of both safety and efficacy). Eating patterns, satiety and cravings, and health and quality of life (RAND-36) questionnaires were analyzed using Wilcoxon rank sum tests. The GSRS questionnaire was analyzed using ANCOVA and activity and sleep questionnaires were analyzed using chi-square tests. Dropout rates (overall and GI-related) after treatment with EMP16-120 / 40 or EMP16-150 / 50 compared to placebo were analyzed using chi-square tests without continuity correction.

[0085] Summary of results Efficacy Results Patients treated with EMP16 for 26 weeks lost significantly more weight than patients receiving placebo (p<0.0001 for both active treatment groups vs. placebo at week 26). Mean relative weight loss was -5.8% and -6.5% after 26 weeks of treatment with EMP16-120 / 40 or EMP16-150 / 50 compared to -0.7% in the placebo group at week 26, and mean absolute weight loss was -5.75 kg, -6.44 kg and -0.78 kg in the EMP16-120 / 40, EMP16-150 / 50 and placebo groups, respectively, at week 26. The same trends were observed after 14 weeks of treatment and at weeks 14 and 26 for women treated with EMP16-120 / 40 or EMP16-150 / 50 and for men treated with EMP16-150 / 50. At week 26, more patients in the active treatment groups lost ≥5% body weight (p<0.0001 for both active treatments vs. placebo) and ≥10% body weight (p=0.0029 for EMP16-120 / 40 and p=0.0034 for EMP16-150 / 50 vs. placebo). In total, 55% of patients in the EMP16-120 / 40 and 67% of patients in the EMP16-150 / 50 groups lost ≥5% body weight from baseline to week 26, compared with 13% in the placebo group. 23% and 22% of patients in the active treatment groups lost ≥10% body weight, compared with 2.2% in the placebo group. The same trends were observed after 14 weeks of treatment and in women treated with EMP16-120 / 40 or EMP16-150 / 50 at weeks 14 and 26, but not in men at either dose.

[0086] BMI and waist circumference were significantly reduced in patients treated with EMP16 for 26 weeks compared to patients receiving placebo (BMI: p<0.0001; waist circumference: p=0.0087 for EMP16-120 / 40 and p=0.0047 for EMP16-150 / 50 vs. placebo). Mean relative and absolute changes from baseline in BMI were -5.8% and -2.08 kg / m in the EMP16-120 / 40 group, respectively. 2, -6.5% and -2.23 kg / m in the EMP16-150 / 50 group. 2 , -0.7% and -0.25 kg / m in the placebo group 2 The mean absolute change from baseline in waist circumference at week 26 for the EMP16-120 / 40, EMP16-150 / 50, and placebo groups was -6.61 cm, -6.80 cm, and -3.36 cm, respectively. The same trend was observed for BMI after 14 weeks of treatment. For waist circumference, there was no statistically significant difference between the active treatment group and placebo at 14 weeks.

[0087] Body composition in terms of sagittal diameter and percentage body fat was significantly reduced in patients treated with EMP16-150 / 50 for 26 weeks compared to patients treated with placebo (sagittal diameter: p=0.0020, percentage body fat: p=0.0047 and p=0.0035, relative and absolute change from baseline vs. placebo, respectively). The mean absolute change from baseline in sagittal diameter was -1.89 cm in the EMP16-150 / 50 group and -0.49 cm in the placebo group at week 26. The mean relative and absolute change from baseline in percentage body fat was -5.4% and -2.21, respectively, in the EMP16-150 / 50 group and -0.3% and -0.19, respectively, in the placebo group. There were no statistically significant differences in sagittal diameter and body composition between patients treated with EMP16-120 / 40 and those receiving placebo at week 26. The same trends were observed after 14 weeks of treatment, although at this time there was a statistically significant difference in sagittal diameter between the EMP16-120 / 40 and placebo groups. In general, there were no significant differences between the active and placebo groups in terms of satiety and cravings, or eating patterns. Patients' appetite was not significantly affected during the study in any treatment group, and most patients appeared to adhere more or less to the healthy eating habits already recommended at baseline. Overall, there were small and similar improvements in eating habits in all treatment groups with regard to vegetables and root vegetables, fruits and berries, and fish and seafood. Eating habits with regard to sweet foods (cookies, chocolate, confectionery, chips, soft drinks) and breakfast habits improved significantly in the EMP16-150 / 50 group compared to the placebo group at week 26.

[0088] There were no clinically relevant changes from baseline in fasting glucose metabolism markers (glucose, insulin, HbA1c), albumin or CRP over time in any treatment group. The lipid metabolism markers LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol and cholesterol, but not triglycerides, decreased more in the active treatment group than in the placebo group over time. The differences compared to placebo were statistically significant at most time points analyzed, but the small changes from baseline were not considered clinically relevant. ApoA1 and ApoB also appeared to decrease more from baseline in the active treatment group than in the placebo group, but the changes from baseline were not considered clinically relevant. Similarly, there were no clinically relevant changes from baseline in liver enzymes (ALT, AST, ALP or GGT) in any treatment group. There were no statistically significant differences between the active and placebo groups in terms of diabetes and prediabetes status at any time point. The proportion of patients with diabetes at baseline and 26 weeks was 9.6% and 4.5% in the EMP16-120 / 40 group, 3.8% and 2.2% in the EMP16-150 / 50 group, and 9.6% and 13% in the placebo group, and the proportion of patients with prediabetes at the corresponding time points was 25% and 20% in the EMP16-120 / 40 group, 27% and 22% in the EMP16-150 / 50 group, and 37% and 22% in the placebo group.

[0089] There were no clinically relevant changes from baseline in blood pressure in any treatment group over time. The mean absolute changes from baseline in systolic blood pressure ranged from -2.7 to -2.2 mmHg in the EMP-120 / 40 group, -6.9 to -3.2 mmHg in the EMP-150 / 50 group, and -2.2 to -1.8 mmHg in the placebo group. The mean absolute changes from baseline in diastolic blood pressure ranged from -3.0 to -2.4 mmHg in the EMP-120 / 40 group, -3.3 to -1.0 in the EMP-150 / 50 group, and -1.5 to 0.7 mmHg in the placebo group. Health-related quality of life based on the RAND-36 Health Survey improved more in the active treatment groups compared to the placebo group between baseline and week 26. Significant increases occurred in the categories of physical functioning and general health status in both active treatment groups compared to the placebo group. In addition, patients in the EMP150 / 50 group improved significantly more than patients in the placebo group in terms of bodily pain, energy / fatigue, and psychological well-being. The mean global health transition score increased by 18.5 and 16.5 points in the EMP-120 / 40 and EMP-150 / 50 groups, respectively, which was significantly higher than the 5.9 point increase in the placebo group (p=0.0058 for EMP16-120 / 40 vs. placebo, p=0.0111 for EMP150 / 50 vs. placebo). No significant differences were found between the active treatment groups and placebo in terms of changes in sleep patterns or performance of strenuous physical work. Overall dropout rates were similar between treatment groups, with 15.4%, 13.5% and 11.5% of patients in the EMP16-120 / 40, EMP16-150 / 50 and placebo groups, respectively, prematurely discontinuing.

[0090] The results are shown in Figures 1-3 and 6 and in the table below: [Table 8]

[0091] [Table 9]

[0092] [Table 10]

[0093] [Table 11]

[0094] [Table 12]

[0095] Appendix Table [Table 13]

[0096] [Table 14]

[0097] [Table 15]

[0098] [Table 16] [Table 17]

[0099] [Table 18]

[0100] [Table 19]

[0101]

Table 20

[0102]

Table 21

[0103]

Table 22

[0104]

Table 23

[0105]

Table 24-1

[0106]

Table 24-2

[0107]

Table 24-3

[0108]

Table 25-1

[0109]

Table 25-2

[0110]

Table 26

[0111]

Table 27

[0112] Discussion of results Of the 156 randomized participants, 149 comprised the modified ITT population and were evaluated for the primary endpoint, with 135 completing the 28-week study period. The PP population consisted of 122 participants across treatment groups. In total, 111 women and 45 men were randomized in the study. There were no significant differences between the three groups at baseline (Table 1). As shown in FIG. 2, participants treated with both doses of EMP16 for 26 weeks lost more weight than participants treated with placebo (p<0.0001). The mean relative weight loss in the ITT population was 5.53% with EMP16-120 / 40 compared with 0.83% in the placebo group (estimated treatment difference -4.70 (95% confidence interval -6.16 to -3.24; Table 2). More participants in the active treatment groups lost at least 5% and 10% of baseline weight at week 26 (Figure 3). Similar weight losses were seen in the PP population or using more conservative imputation methods. Compared to placebo, statistically significant absolute mean reductions in BMI and waist circumference were observed for participants treated with both EMP16 doses over 26 weeks (Table 3). Body composition in terms of absolute mean sagittal diameter and percent body fat were significantly reduced in participants treated with EMP16-150 / 50 compared to placebo, whereas the reductions in the EMP16-120 / 40 treatment group were not statistically significant.

[0113] No significant treatment differences were seen in absolute mean change from baseline in glucose metabolism markers (fasting glucose, insulin, HbA1c) or vital signs at week 26 (Table 3). Lipid metabolism markers LDL and HDL cholesterol and total cholesterol, but not triglycerides, showed small but statistically significant reductions compared to the placebo group at week 26. No significant treatment differences were seen in change from baseline in T2DM or prediabetic status at week 26. In general, no differences were found between the active and placebo groups in the total satiety and craving scores at week 26 (Table 4). Similarly, most participants appeared to follow healthy eating recommendations at baseline, and no treatment differences in overall dietary patterns were observed. Dietary habits regarding sweet foods (cookies, chocolate, sweets, chips, soft drinks) and breakfast improved in the EMP16-150 / 50 group but not in the EMP16-120 / 40 group compared with the placebo group at week 26.

[0114] Quality of life based on the RAND-36 Health Survey improved more in both active treatment groups compared with the placebo group between baseline and week 26 for physical functioning, general health status, and global health transition scores (Table 4). Patients in the EMP150 / 50 group also improved more than patients in the placebo group for bodily pain, energy / fatigue, and psychological well-being. No differences in activity and sleep habits were observed between the study groups during the study. The mean scores on the GRSR diarrhea and dyspepsia syndrome increased to a significantly greater extent in both active treatment groups compared with the placebo group at week 26 (Table 4). Most participants rated their symptoms as mild or moderate. No treatment differences were observed in other portions of the GSRS. A total of 191 AEs were reported by 101 (65%) of the 156 randomized participants, with the three most common events being nasopharyngitis, diarrhea, and headache (Table 5). Diarrhea was reported only in the active treatment groups. Four of the 52 participants (7.7%) in the EMP16-120 / 40 group and five of the 52 participants (9.6%) in the EMP16-150 / 50 group withdrew early from the study due to GI-related AEs. Also, one participant in the EMP-150 / 50 group withdrew consent to remain in the study due to COVID-19 infection. No placebo participants withdrew due to AEs, but overall withdrawal rates were comparable between the active treatment groups. Most AEs were mild or moderate in intensity. No deaths or serious AEs occurred during the study. Compliance was high, with no differences observed between treatment groups.

[0115] No clinically noteworthy changes in liver enzymes were observed during the study. A few participants experienced transient increases that were deemed unrelated to IMP by the investigators, and participants continued in the study. No clinically relevant or statistically significant changes or differences in safety laboratory parameters or ECGs were observed during the study (data not shown). In this study, 26 weeks of treatment with EMP16 resulted in stable and clinically relevant weight loss. More than 50% of participants in both active treatment groups showed a weight loss of at least 5% of baseline weight, and more than 20% showed a weight loss of at least 10%, compared to 14% and 2% of participants in the placebo group, respectively. Other anthropometric measurements such as BMI, waist circumference, sagittal abdominal diameter, and body fat percentage showed similar treatment effects, but greater effects at the higher EMP16-150 / 50 dose. Patient-reported quality of life showed improvement in both intervention groups, especially in physical function, general health, and overall health transition scores. Blood pressure, glucose metabolism markers, and blood lipids were not significantly affected, and no treatment differences were observed in satiety and craving assessments, although slight improvements in dietary patterns were seen in the EMP16-150 / 50 intervention group with regard to sweet foods and breakfast. EMP16 was generally well tolerated, with no safety concerns identified.

[0116] This study confirms findings from a previous pilot study with EMP16, which demonstrated that both efficacy and tolerability of orlistat and alcarbose were increased by employing a modulated release intervention. Treatment with conventional dosage forms of orlistat and alcarbose typically results in approximate relative weight loss of about 2-3% and less than 0.5%, respectively, whereas the mean placebo-adjusted weight loss observed in the EMP16 group was approximately 5%. The efficacy of EMP16 appears to be comparable to most currently approved weight loss drugs. Furthermore, the combination of orlistat and alcarbose in conventional dosage forms is likely to cause tolerability issues and may enhance associated GI side effects such as flatulence with or without ejection. EMP16 is designed to encompass three contributing factors: (i) the mechanism of action on energy intake of orlistat and alcarbose in conventional dosage forms; (ii) the adoption of a modulated release pattern to ensure that food-derived ligands are delivered in an appropriate manner to various appetite-regulating checkpoints in the GI tract; and (iii) improved tolerability.

[0117] Despite the weight loss achieved by EMP16, the effects on blood pressure, glucose metabolism, and blood lipids were limited. However, as is evident from the baseline characteristics, this was a fairly healthy obese population. The baseline prevalence of hypertension was approximately 30%, whereas a prevalence of approximately 60% is usually observed in obese patients. Furthermore, baseline blood lipid values ​​were generally low in the present study, the proportion of people taking lipid medications was low (7%), and most participants had baseline HbA1c values ​​below 40 mmol / mol. The lack of clinically relevant changes in metabolic risk markers is consistent with similar weight loss studies in obese non-diabetic patients with liraglutide or semaglutide. Patient-reported quality of life improved significantly in the intervention groups, especially in the EMP16 150 / 50 group, with clear, clinically relevant differences in several domains in RAND-36. The differences recorded were larger than those seen in other weight-loss trials with conventional orlistat or liraglutide.

[0118] The larger increase in rated quality of life was somewhat unexpected, given the association between weight loss and increased rated health in exploratory post hoc analyses, but the explained variance was rather low, suggesting that additional factors apart from weight loss must be responsible for the increase in quality of life ratings. No significant treatment differences were found in satiety and craving assessments. In pilot studies, satiety was greater in the EMP16 group compared with conventional orlistat. As previously mentioned, orlistat administered in conventional formulations is associated with increased appetite compared with placebo, in part due to effects on duodenal satiety-sensing cells. In the MR preparation employed in EMP16, orlistat-mediated appetite-enhancing effects appear to be reduced.

[0119] Participants in the EMP16-150 / 50 group reported increased breakfast intake and decreased sweets and cakes intake, but no major treatment differences were observed in reported dietary patterns. As side effects were exacerbated when consuming a sweet, high-fat meal, this is probably a "boost" effect of EMP16, and the "cost" of not eating properly appeared higher in the EMP16-150 / 50 group. Alternatively, EMP16 may have caused an incretin effect, influencing participants' preference for sweets and cakes. In a previous 14-day pilot study, no effect on GLP-1 was observed. However, it is possible that longer times and higher doses are needed to cause an incretin response in obese patients.

[0120] Orlistat and alcarbose in their conventional dosage forms have many GI side effects, which has limited their popularity. In this study, 15% of participants receiving EMP16 reported diarrhea, whereas no placebo participants reported diarrhea, and more subjects in the EMP16 group (6-8%) reported flatulence compared to the placebo group (2%). GI events were recorded as AEs only if the investigator deemed them severe or would lead to discontinuation in the study, so some mild or moderate GI events were not registered. Results from the GSRS confirm that the frequency of diarrhea with EMP16 was greater than that in the placebo group, although the diarrhea syndrome score in both intervention groups was about 3 (mild discomfort). Participants in the active group also rated the GSRS dyspepsia syndrome as mild discomfort. A score of less than 2 (mild discomfort) usually indicates normal gastric function. Fecal incontinence is perhaps the most problematic side effect associated with traditional orlistat, but this did not appear to be a problem in the current study, with only one event reported in the EMP16-150 / 50 group, although it was severe in intensity. In a similar 6-month study, 5% of participants in the traditional orlistat group reported fecal incontinence, whereas approximately 18% of participants in the longer-term study reported such an event. Finally, only one participant reported nausea and none reported vomiting. This is in contrast to the study with liraglutide.

[0121] This was a proof-of-concept study with limited interaction between the study sites and participants, with several clinic visits with limited activities. Furthermore, participants did not receive any lifestyle instructions and only limited information on dietary choices. In contrast to many weight loss studies, no lead-in participant selection procedure was used before randomization. One of the reasons for this "lean" design was to better understand the efficacy of EMP16 in a more clinical-like setting, mimicking real-life situations and somewhat similar to phase IV trials. The chosen design accounted for limited placebo effects and ensured that the study could be conducted without major interruptions during the COVID-19 pandemic. Only a few participants had their last clinic visit date postponed for more than a week. One limitation of the study, although not unique to EMP16, is the potential problem of maintaining masking, especially since one of the known side effects of conventional orlistat is steatorrhea. Participants who assumed they were receiving a placebo may have been less motivated to follow through with the additional lifestyle instructions, which may have magnified the differences in outcomes between active and placebo. However, there was no difference in compliance between treatment groups, and dropout rates in all groups were low (≤15%).

[0122] Another weakness of the study was the imputation method chosen. LOCF imputation was prespecified in the protocol and was previously recommended by regulatory authorities but is no longer considered optimal. A more conservative imputation method was added post hoc and produced comparable results. Overall, this study supports that orlistat and alcabose can be successfully combined as a promising potential candidate to improve weight management. The magnitude of weight loss may have been smaller than that achieved with semaglutide. However, as stated in the Obesity Canada guidelines, "individual responses to obesity management pharmacotherapy are heterogeneous and responses to drugs may vary from patient to patient," so having more tools in the toolbox can only be beneficial for obese patients. Furthermore, obesity is a chronic disease and may require long-term treatment. Both orlistat and alcabose have already proven long-term safety in conventional dosage forms. No safety concerns were identified in this study with EMP16, and in general, the safety and tolerability of the modified release formulation appeared to be improved compared to conventional products. The efficacy and safety of EMP16 need to be evaluated in longer-term studies with more diverse populations.

[0123] Quality of life RAND-36 The RAND-36 health questionnaire contains 36 questions. The questionnaire explores eight health concepts: physical functioning, bodily pain, role limitations due to physical health problems, role limitations due to personal or psychological problems, psychological health, social functioning, energy / fatigue, and perception of general health. It also contains a single item that provides an index of subjective change in health. Lower scores indicate lower health-related quality of life and higher scores indicate higher health-related quality of life. In the EMP-120 / 40 group, three of the eight domains (physical functioning, role limitations due to physical health problems, and general health status) showed a mean absolute increase of 3 points or more from baseline to week 26. Similarly, four of the eight domains (physical functioning, role limitations due to physical health problems, general health status, and energy / fatigue) showed a mean score increase of 10% or more from baseline. The mean global health transition score increased by 18.5 points, corresponding to a relative increase of 41.3%.

[0124] The differences between the EMP-120 / 40 group and the placebo group were statistically significant in the domains of physical function (p=0.0076 [absolute change from baseline] and p=0.0131 [relative change from baseline]), general health status (p=0.0171 [absolute change from baseline] and p=0.0180 [relative change from baseline]), and mean global health transition score (p=0.0058 [absolute change from baseline] and p=0.0138 [relative change from baseline]) (see Table 14.3-35). In the EMP-150 / 50 group, seven of the eight domains (physical functioning, role limitations due to physical health problems, bodily pain, general health, energy / fatigue, social functioning, and role limitations due to psychological problems) showed a mean absolute increase of 3 points or more from baseline to week . Similarly, mean scores increased by 10% or more from baseline in all domains except psychological health. The mean global health transition score increased by 16.5 points, corresponding to a relative increase of 48.4%.

[0125] The differences between the EMP-150 / 50 group and the placebo group were statistically significant for physical function (p=0.0019 [absolute change from baseline] and p=0.0024 [relative change from baseline]), pain (p=0.0134 [absolute change from baseline] and p=0.0278 [relative change from baseline]), general health status (p=0.0003 [absolute change from baseline] and p=0.0006 [relative change from baseline]), energy / fatigue (p=0.0224 [absolute change from baseline] and p=0.0287 [relative change from baseline]), psychological well-being (p=0.0363 [absolute change from baseline] and p=0.0390 [relative change from baseline]), and mean global health transition score (p=0.0111 [absolute change from baseline] and p=0.0057 [relative change from baseline]).

[0126] In the placebo group, the mean total score did not increase by more than 3 points or 10% from baseline in any domain. The largest change from baseline was in the domain of physical function (mean absolute increase: 2.0 points; mean relative increase: 3.8%). The mean total scores for the remaining domains were in the same range or below baseline at week 26. Nevertheless, the mean global health transition score increased by 5.9 points 13.0%.

[0127] conclusion Efficacy Conclusions Treatment with two doses of EMP16 (orlistat 120 mg / alcarbose 40 mg or orlistat 150 mg / acarbose 50 mg) for 26 weeks produced significant and clinically relevant weight loss effects in obese patients. Patients treated with EMP16-120 / 40 or EMP16-150 / 50 lost 5.8% / -5.75 kg and 6.5% / -6.44 kg, respectively, compared with 0.7% / -0.78 kg for placebo patients. Both doses of EMP16 increased the proportion of patients with a weight loss of 5% or more and 10% or more, and produced significant effects on the reduction of BMI and waist circumference. The higher EMP16 dose also produced significant effects on the reduction of sagittal diameter and percent body fat. EMP16 did not produce clinically relevant effects on markers of fasting glucose metabolism, lipid metabolism, or liver enzymes, had no apparent effect on patients' diabetic or prediabetic status, and had no apparent effect on blood pressure compared to placebo, which is what would be reasonably expected in a patient population with a low prevalence of hypertension and blood lipids and HbA1c within normal ranges, similar to the EP-002 study. Both doses of EMP16 had a significant positive effect on health-related quality of life. In general, no clear differences were found between the treatment groups in terms of appetite and overall eating habits, but EMP16-150 / 50 had a significant positive effect on sweet food intake and breakfast habits.

[0128] In this lean 6-month study, a clear synergistic effect was observed, as the relative weight loss achieved with both doses of EMP16-02 was more than twice the expected weight loss estimated from the conventional numerical addition of the individual contributions of orlistat and alcarbose. Furthermore, the trend of the weight loss curves indicates that the nadir is not reached until approximately 9-10 months. Modeling suggests that the EMP16-02 group may have a relative weight loss of around 6.5-7% after 12 months, while the placebo group is likely back to baseline. Body composition also showed clear health benefits, with a reduction in body fat percentage, and a reduction in waist circumference and sagittal diameter. The latter two are indicators of central obesity and directly related to health outcomes. Furthermore, compliance was high, the number of gastrointestinal side effects was low, and dropouts were low. In this healthy obese population, there were few expected changes in secondary outcomes from analysis of blood samples. The safety profile demonstrated in all previous studies with orlistat and alcarbose was confirmed with no significant SAEs or AEs. No adverse outcomes were observed in any safety variables.

[0129] Example 3 - A sophisticated Phase IIa proof-of-concept efficacy study A multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized study investigating the effects of EMP16-02 on body weight, safety, and clinical biomarkers in overweight and obese patients for 26 weeks - 6-month follow-up data Study design This was an exploratory, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study comparing two doses of EMP16-02 versus placebo for weight loss in overweight and obese patients. The study was conducted at two research centers in Sweden.

[0130] the purpose The primary and secondary objectives of this body of research are outlined in the main CSR. The objectives relevant to this addendum are all exploratory and are detailed below.

[0131] exploratory purpose To assess pre-dose plasma levels of orlistat and alcarbose at steady state Week 26 (end of treatment, Visit 5). To evaluate the effects of two different doses of EMP16-02 (120 mg O / 40 mg A and 150 mg O / 50 mg A) compared with placebo on relative and absolute weight loss 6 months after the end of 26 weeks of oral treatment. To evaluate the effects of two different doses of EMP16-02 (120 mg O / 40 mg A and 150 mg O / 50 mg A) on hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) concentrations 6 months after the end of 26 weeks of oral treatment, compared with placebo. To evaluate the effects of two different doses of EMP16-02 (120 mg O / 40 mg A and 150 mg O / 50 mg A) compared with placebo on blood pressure 6 months after the end of 26 weeks of oral treatment.

[0132] Number of patients Participated in the 6-month follow-up: 125 Week 52 (Visit 7) End: 97 (32:34:31)* 6 Month Analysis Set: 97 Pharmacokinetic analysis set: 75 *Numbers in brackets correspond to the number of patients who received EMP16-02 (120 mg O / 40 mg A):EMP16-02 (150 mg O / 50 mg A):placebo in the main part of the study.

[0133] Diagnosis and Key Eligibility Criteria All 135 patients who completed the main part of the study were offered a 6-month follow-up, of which 125 agreed to participate.

[0134] method This example summarizes data from the follow-up portion of the EP-002 study. Exploratory variables assessed at the 6-month follow-up visit at Week 52 (Visit 7) were: Weight 6 months after treatment HbA1c 6 months after treatment Blood pressure 6 months after treatment This example also includes an assessment of trough plasma concentrations of orlistat and alcarbose measured pre-dose at Week 26 (end of treatment, Visit 5).

[0135] Patients participating in the 6-month follow-up portion were required to fast overnight (8 hours) before the 6-month visit and to refrain from strenuous exercise (defined as >70% of maximum pulse rate for ≥1 hour) for 48 hours prior to and during the visit. Investigational New Drug (IMP) No treatments were administered during the follow-up period of this study. Details of the IMP are provided in the main CSR. Subjects enrolled in the 6-month follow-up portion of the study had been receiving EMP16 or matching placebo three times daily for 26 weeks.

[0136] statistical methods The relative (%) and absolute changes in weight and BMI compared to placebo from baseline and end of treatment at week 26 for EMP16-02 (120 mg O / 40 mg A and 150 mg O / 50 mg A) to 6 months after end of treatment were analyzed using analysis of variance (ANOVA) with treatment as the independent variable and analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with treatment as the independent variable and baseline weight as the covariate, respectively. Absolute changes compared to placebo in fasting bA1c and blood pressure at baseline and from the end of treatment at 26 weeks to 6 months after the end of treatment with EMP16-02 (120 mg O / 40 mg A and 150 mg O / 50 mg A) were analyzed using ANCOVA with treatment and body weight as covariates.

[0137] Baseline was defined as the visit with the last data collection point before the first dose of IMP in the main part of the study. All hypothesis tests used a 5% significance level (α = 0.05). Data were not imputed for descriptive statistics. For analyses using ANOVA and ANCOVA up to Week 26, imputation was performed using last observation carried forward (LOCF). No LOCF imputation was performed at Week 52 (Visit 7). Continuous data are presented in terms of evaluable and missing observations, arithmetic mean, standard deviation (SD), median, minimum, maximum, Q1 and Q3, and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Categorical data are presented as counts and percentages. Summary data are presented by procedure and assessment time, where applicable. Individual patient data are presented by procedure, patient number, and assessment time, where applicable. All descriptive summaries and statistical analyses were performed using SAS Version 9.4 (SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC).

[0138] Summary of results At week 52, 6 months after the end of treatment, no significant differences were found between the active and placebo groups in terms of relative and absolute change from baseline in weight or BMI. However, based on the 95% CIs, a sustained treatment effect was demonstrated within the EMP16-150 / 50 group in terms of these parameters. Patients in the active groups gained significantly more weight than patients in the placebo group between weeks 26 and 52, based on both relative change from week 26 (p<0.0001 for EMP16-120 / 40 and p=0.0003 for EMP16-150 / 50) and absolute change (p<0.0001 for EMP16-120 / 40 and p=0.0003 for EMP16-150 / 50). The relative / absolute changes from the end of treatment were 5.3% / +4.92kg, +4.5% / +4.17kg and +1.0% / +0.98kg for the EMP16-120 / 40, EMP16-150 / 50 and placebo groups, respectively. Similar results were obtained for BMI. At week 52, there were no clinically relevant changes in HbA1c from baseline or from week 26, and no statistically significant differences between active and placebo groups for any comparison. There were significant differences between the active treatment and placebo groups in absolute change in systolic blood pressure from baseline to week 52 and from week 26 to week 52, and there were significant differences between the EMP16-150 / 50 and placebo groups in absolute change in diastolic blood pressure, but these differences were not deemed clinically relevant by the investigators. Low orlistat values ​​were measured in 27 of 75 patients receiving active treatment, and low alkabose values ​​were measured in 3 of 75 patients.

[0139] conclusion Termination of treatment with EMP16-120 / 40 and EMP16-150 / 50 resulted in significant rebound weight gain over the subsequent 6-month follow-up period, whereas weight and BMI in patients treated with EMP16-150 / 50 did not return to baseline during this period. No clinically relevant effects on EMP16-mediated HbA1c or blood pressure were observed 6 months after the end of treatment. Low or undetectable levels of orlistat and alcarbose at steady state indicated little or no systemic uptake of the active drugs.

[0140] body weight Relative change in body weight at baseline and from end of treatment at week 26 to 6 months after end of treatment Relative (%) change in body weight from baseline (week 0) at week 52 At week 52, the mean relative change in body weight from baseline in the EMP16-120 / 40, EMP16-150 / 50 and placebo groups was -1.6%, -2.8% and -0.3%, respectively, compared to -6.6%, -7.0% and -1.3% at week 26 (Table 9). No statistically significant differences were found between the active and placebo groups in relative weight loss from baseline to week 52 (6-month follow-up visit). However, the 95% confidence interval for the EMP16-150 / 50 group at week 52 suggests a sustained treatment benefit in terms of mean weight loss from baseline within this group (mean relative weight loss from baseline: -2.8%, 95% CI: -4.4; -1.2). Relative change in body weight between end of treatment at week 26 and week 52 The mean relative changes in body weight from week 26 (end of treatment) to week 52 (6-month follow-up visit) were +5.3%, +4.5%, and +1.0% in the EMP16-120 / 40, EMP16-150 / 50, and placebo groups, respectively (Table 9). Differences compared to placebo were statistically significant (p<0.0001 for EMP16-120 / 40 and p=0.0003 for EMP16-150 / 50). The mean relative change from baseline in body weight is graphed in Figure 4. Body weights measured at each visit are summarized in Table 9.

[0141] [Table 28]

[0142] Absolute change in body weight from baseline and from the end of treatment at week 26 to 6 months after the end of treatment Absolute change from baseline in body weight at week 52 At week 52, the mean absolute change in body weight from baseline in the EMP16-120 / 40, EMP16-150 / 50 and placebo groups was -1.51 kg, -2.71 kg and -0.38 kg, respectively, compared to -6.43 kg, -6.88 kg and -1.36 kg at week 26 (Table 10). No statistically significant differences were found between the active and placebo groups in absolute weight loss from baseline to week 52 (6-month follow-up visit). However, the 95% confidence interval for the EMP16-150 / 50 group at week 52 suggests that the treatment benefit in terms of mean weight loss from baseline in this group is sustained (mean absolute weight loss from baseline: -2.71 kg, 95% CI: -4.34; -1.09). Although most patients partially or completely regained the weight lost during the treatment period, 20 of 32 patients in the EMP16-120 / 40 group, 24 of 34 patients in the EMP16-150 / 50 group, and 14 of 31 patients in the placebo group still weighed less than baseline 6 months after the end of treatment. Results: 12 of 32 patients in the EMP16-120 / 40 group, 10 of 34 patients in the EMP16-150 / 50 group, and 17 of 31 patients in the placebo group gained weight compared to baseline 6 months after the end of treatment.

[0143] Absolute change in body weight between end of treatment at week 26 and week 52 The mean absolute change in body weight from week 26 (end of treatment) to week 52 (6-month follow-up visit) was +4.92 kg, +4.17 kg, and +0.98 kg in the EMP16-120 / 40, EMP16-150 / 50, and placebo groups (Table 10). Differences compared to placebo were statistically significant (p<0.0001 for EMP16-120 / 40 and p=0.0003 for EMP16-150 / 50). Three patients in the EMP16-120 / 40 group, 0 in the EMP16-150 / 50 group, and 10 in the placebo group lost weight between week 26 (end of treatment) and week 52 (6-month follow-up visit).

[0144] [Table 29]

[0145] Relative change in BMI from baseline and from end of treatment at week 26 to 6 months after end of treatment Relative change (%) from baseline in BMI at week 52 At week 52, the mean relative change from baseline in BMI was -1.6%, -2.8%, and -0.3% for the EMP16-120 / 40, EMP16-150 / 50, and placebo groups, respectively, compared to -6.5%, -6.9%, and -1.2% at week 26 (Table 10). No statistically significant differences were found between the active and placebo groups in the relative BMI reduction from baseline to week 52 (6-month follow-up visit). However, the 95% confidence interval for the EMP16-150 / 50 group at week 52 suggests a sustained treatment benefit in terms of mean BMI reduction from baseline within this group (mean relative BMI reduction from baseline: -2.8%, 95% CI: -4.4; -1.1). Relative (%) change in BMI between end of treatment at week 26 and week 52 The mean relative changes from week 26 (end of treatment) to week 52 (6-month follow-up visit) were +5.2%, +4.5%, and +0.9% for the EMP16-120 / 40, EMP16-150 / 50, and placebo groups, respectively. Differences compared to placebo were statistically significant (p<0.0001 for EMP16-120 / 40 and p=0.0003 for EMP16-150 / 50).

[0146] Absolute change in BMI from baseline and from end of treatment at week 26 to 6 months after end of treatment Absolute change from baseline in BMI at week 52 The mean absolute change from baseline in BMI at week 52 was -2.31 kg / m at week 26 in the EMP16-120 / 40 group, the EMP16-150 / 50 group, and the placebo group, respectively. 2 , -2.39 kg / m2 and -0.45 kg / m 2 -0.61 kg / m compared to 2 , -0.91 kg / m 2 and -0.07 kg / m 2 No statistically significant differences were found between the active and placebo groups in absolute BMI reduction from baseline to week 52 (6-month follow-up visit). However, the 95% confidence intervals for the EMP16-150 / 50 group at week 52 suggest a sustained treatment benefit in terms of mean BMI reduction from baseline within this group (mean absolute reduction in BMI from baseline: -0.91 kg / m 2 , 95% CI:-1.45;-0.37).

[0147] Absolute change in BMI between end of treatment at week 26 and week 52 The mean absolute change in BMI from week 26 (end of treatment) to week 52 (6-month follow-up visit) was +1.70 kg / m for the EMP16-120 / 40, EMP16-150 / 50, and placebo groups, respectively. 2 , +1.48 kg / m 2 and +0.38 kg / m 2 The differences compared to placebo were statistically significant (p=0.0001 for EMP16-120 / 40 and p=0.0006 for EMP16-150 / 50). Hemoglobin A1c Absolute change in HbA1c from baseline and from end of treatment at week 26 to 6 months after end of treatment There were no statistically significant or clinically relevant changes from baseline in HbA1c at week 52 or between weeks 26 and 52 between or within treatment groups. The mean absolute change from baseline in HbA1c is graphed in Figure 5 .

[0148] blood pressure Absolute change in blood pressure from baseline and from the end of treatment at week 26 to 6 months after the end of treatment Absolute change from baseline in blood pressure at week 52 At week 52, the mean absolute change from baseline in systolic blood pressure was +1.1, +2.7, and -4.5 mmHg in the EMP16-120 / 40, EMP16-150 / 50, and placebo groups, respectively, compared with -4.3, -3.9, and -2.1 mmHg at week 26. The differences between the active and placebo groups were statistically significant (p=0.0195 for EMP-120 / 40 and p=0.0020 for EMP-150 / 50) but were deemed not clinically relevant by the investigators. As shown by the 95% CI, the mean change from baseline within the active groups was not significant, whereas the mean decrease in the placebo group was significant. The mean absolute change from baseline in diastolic blood pressure was -1.9, +2.1, and -1.2 mmHg in the EMP16-120 / 40, EMP16-150 / 50, and placebo groups, respectively, compared with -3.5, -2.3, and -1.9 mmHg at week 26. The difference between the highest dose and placebo groups was statistically significant (p=0.0286) but was deemed not clinically relevant by the investigator. There were no significant changes from baseline within any treatment group, as indicated by the 95% CI. Absolute change in blood pressure between end of treatment at week 26 and week 52

[0149] The mean absolute change in systolic blood pressure from week 26 (end of treatment) to week 52 (6-month follow-up visit) was +5.4, +6.7, and -2.4 mmHg for the EMP16-120 / 40, EMP16-150 / 50, and placebo groups, respectively. The differences compared to the placebo group were statistically significant (p=0.0138 for EMP16-120 / 40 and p=0.0039 for EMP16-150 / 50) but were deemed not clinically relevant by the investigators. As shown by the 95% CI, the increase in systolic blood pressure from week 26 within the active treatment groups was significant, whereas the change from week 26 in the placebo group was not significant. The mean absolute change in diastolic blood pressure from week 26 (end of treatment) to week 52 (6-month follow-up visit) was +1.6, +4.3, and +0.7 mmHg for the EMP16-120 / 40, EMP16-150 / 50, and placebo groups, respectively. The difference between the highest dose and placebo groups was statistically significant (p=0.0322) but was deemed not clinically relevant by the investigator. As shown by the 95% CI, there was a significant increase in diastolic blood pressure in the EMP16-150 / 50 group, but no significant change from week 26 in the EMP16-120 / 40 and placebo groups, respectively.

[0150] Summary of exploratory endpoints At week 52, 6 months after the end of treatment, no significant differences were found between the active and placebo groups in terms of relative and absolute change from baseline in weight or BMI, but based on the 95% CIs, a persistence of treatment effect was demonstrated within the EMP16-150 / 50 group in terms of these parameters. Patients in the active treatment groups gained significantly more weight than patients in the placebo group between weeks 26 and 52, based on both relative change from week 26 (p<0.0001 for EMP16-120 / 40 and p=0.0003 for EMP16-150 / 50) and absolute change (p<0.0001 for EMP16-120 / 40 and p=0.0003 for EMP16-150 / 50). The relative / absolute changes from end of treatment were 5.3% / +4.92kg, +4.5% / +4.17kg and +1.0% / +0.98kg for the EMP16-120 / 40, EMP16-150 / 50 and placebo groups, respectively. Similar results were observed for BMI. At week 52, there were no clinically relevant changes in HbA1c from baseline or from week 26, and no statistically significant differences between active and placebo groups for any comparison. There were significant differences between the active treatment and placebo groups in absolute change in systolic blood pressure and between the EMP16-150 / 50 and placebo groups in absolute change in diastolic blood pressure from baseline to Week 52 and from Week 26 to Week 52. However, these differences were not deemed clinically relevant by the investigators. Low levels of orlistat were measured in 27 of 75 patients receiving active treatment, and low levels of alkabose were measured in 3 of 75 patients.

[0151] Conclusions of exploratory endpoints Termination of treatment with EMP16-120 / 40 and EMP16-150 / 50 was followed by significant rebound weight gain over the 6-month follow-up period, whereas weight and BMI in patients treated with EMP16-150 / 50 did not return to baseline during this period. No clinically relevant effects on EMP16-mediated HbA1c or blood pressure were seen 6 months after the end of treatment. Low or undetectable levels of orlistat and alcabose at steady state indicated little or no systemic uptake of the active drugs.

[0152] Observations and general conclusions Consideration The main part of the EP-002 study demonstrated that treatment with EMP16 at two doses (orlistat 120 mg / alcarbose 40 mg or orlistat 150 mg / acarbose 50 mg) for 26 weeks had a significant and clinically relevant effect on weight loss in obese patients. Patients with FAS treated with EMP16-120 / 40 or EMP16-150 / 50 lost 5.8% / -5.75 kg and 6.5% / -6.44 kg of body weight, respectively, compared with 0.7% / -0.78 kg in placebo patients (see main CSR). Treatment with EMP16 also had a significant effect on e.g. BMI and waist circumference, but not on fasting glucose metabolism markers (including HbA1c) or blood pressure. In a patient population with a low prevalence of hypertension and baseline blood lipids and HbA1c in the normal range, such as in the EP-002 trial, a lack of effect on the latter parameter was considered reasonably expected.

[0153] The follow-up portion of the study, reported in this example, followed selected parameters (weight, BMI, HbA1c, and blood pressure) 6 months after the end of treatment. Of the 135 individuals who completed the main part of the study, 125 agreed to continue into the 6-month follow-up portion, and 97 completed the 6-month follow-up visit at week 52. The 6-month follow-up analysis set, which included 97 patients who completed the 6-month follow-up visit, consisted of 69 women and 28 men with a mean age of 53 years. The mean body weights in the EMP16-120 / 40, EMP16-150 / 50 and placebo groups were 98.6 kg, 98.9 kg and 101.3 kg, respectively, and baseline characteristics of patients in the 6-month analysis set were comparable between treatment groups. The mean body weights at week 26 (end of treatment and start of follow-up portion) were 92.1 kg, 92.0 kg and 100.0 kg in the corresponding groups, respectively. Thus, patients lost an average of 6.6%, 7.0% and 1.3% of their body weight during the main portion of the study, respectively.

[0154] It is a well-known fact that many patients regain weight after completing a weight loss program, the so-called rebound effect. This phenomenon was also evident at the 6-month follow-up visit, where active treatment patients showed a significant weight gain of 5.27% (EMP16-120 / 40) and 4.51% (EMP16-150 / 50), compared to an increase of 0.95% observed in the placebo group. In line with this finding, there were no longer any significant differences between the active treatment and placebo groups with regard to the relative and absolute change from baseline in weight, or BMI, 6 months after the end of treatment. However, based on 95% CI, mean relative and absolute weight loss (-2.8% / -2.71 kg) and BMI (-2.8% / -0.91 kg / m2) were significantly greater among patients treated with EMP16-150 / 50 in the main part of the study, although no patients in the EMP16-150 / 50 group lost more weight between weeks 26 and 52. 2 ) showed sustained treatment benefits. It is somewhat surprising that the EMP16-150 / 50 group has not yet fully returned to baseline, as similar studies have shown that patients return to baseline somewhat more quickly than during the intervention period. Patients who received lifestyle advice with strict calorie goals regained weight more slowly after the intervention ended. Because little lifestyle advice was given in this study, there were no major behavioral changes at the end of treatment that would buffer the lack of pharmacological effect.

[0155] As expected, based on the results of the main study and the reasonably healthy obese population enrolled in the study, there were no clear EMP16-mediated effects on either HbA1c or blood pressure 6 months after the end of treatment. Blood pressure returned to baseline values ​​in the active treatment group and remained slightly below baseline in the placebo group. However, this change was deemed by the investigators to be clinically relevant. As expected, neither orlistat nor alcabose was detectable in the plasma of most subjects at steady state, indicating little or no systemic uptake of the active drug. The impact of the dropout of 28 patients during the follow-up portion and the potential bias that may have resulted from it are unclear. One plausible scenario is that those with the highest degree of weight gain from week 26 declined participation at week 52, which would have led to an underestimation of the rebound effect in all treatment groups. However, as confirmed by the investigators, for several patients the main reason for not attending the 6-month follow-up visit was rather pragmatic, such as not wanting to take time off work. Although both the main and follow-up parts of the study were conducted during the Covid-19 pandemic, we only faced minor problems related to the pandemic. None of these issues occurred during the follow-up period. During the study, a continuous risk assessment was performed consisting of the evaluation of potential risks related to Covid-19, and mitigation measures were implemented accordingly to maintain patient safety and data quality and integrity, in accordance with EMA guidelines and local authority guidelines and regulations.

[0156] Overall conclusion Termination of treatment with EMP16-120 / 40 and EMP16-150 / 50 was followed by significant rebound weight gain over the 6-month follow-up period, whereas weight and BMI in patients treated with EMP16-150 / 50 did not return to baseline during this period. No clinically relevant effects on EMP16-mediated HbA1c or blood pressure were seen 6 months after the end of treatment. Low or undetectable levels of orlistat and alcabose at steady state indicated little or no systemic uptake of the active drugs.

[0157] Specific embodiments 1. A dosing regimen for controlling weight loss obtained in a subject, the dosing regimen comprising administering to said subject orlistat and acarbose in a weight ratio of 2:1 to 4:1. 2. The dosing regimen described in item 1 to avoid or reduce the rebound effect. 3. The dosing regimen according to item 1 or 2, wherein orlistat and alcarbose are administered in the form of one or more oral compositions. 4. The dosing regimen of any one of the preceding items, wherein orlistat and alcarbose are present in an oral composition. 5. The dosing regimen according to item 3 or 4, wherein the composition is administered once, twice or three times daily.

[0158] 6. The dosing regimen according to any one of the preceding items, wherein the daily dose of orlistat is 30 mg to 450 mg or more, for example, 60 mg to about 450 mg or more, 90 mg to about 450 mg or more, about 120 mg to 450 mg or more, about 150 mg to about 450 mg or more, 180 mg to 450 mg or more, for example, 180 mg to 450 mg, 270 mg to 450 mg, or 360 mg to 450 mg, and for adults, 270 mg or more, 360 mg or more, or 450 mg or more. 7. The administration regimen according to any one of the preceding items, wherein the daily dose of alkabose is from 10 mg to about 150 mg, for example, from 20 mg to about 150 mg, from 30 mg to about 150 mg, from 40 mg to about 150 mg, from 50 mg to about 150 mg, from 60 mg to about 150 mg or more, for example, from 90 mg to 150 mg, from 90 mg or more, from 120 mg or more, or from 150 mg or more. 8. The composition according to any one of the preceding items, wherein the daily dose of orlistat is 120 mg for children aged 5-10 years weighing 40-60 kg, 270 mg for children aged 5-10 years weighing 60-70 kg, and the same as for adults for children aged 11 years or older and / or weighing more than 70 kg. 9. The composition according to any one of the preceding items, wherein the daily dose of alcarbose is 60 mg for children aged 5 to 10 years weighing 40 to 60 kg, 90 mg for children aged 5 to 10 years weighing 60 to 70 kg, and the same as for adults for children aged 11 years or older and / or weighing more than 70 kg. 10. The dosing regimen according to any one of items 3 to 9, wherein the composition comprises 90 mg orlistat / 30 mg alkabose, 120 mg orlistat / 40 mg orlistat or 150 mg orlistat / 50 mg alkabose.

[0159] 11. The administration regimen according to any one of the preceding items, wherein alkabose and orlistat are administered for a period of at least 2 weeks, for example, from about 2 weeks to about 1 year, for example, from about 2 weeks to about 9 months, from about 2 weeks to about 6 months, from about 2 weeks to about 5 months, from about 2 weeks to about 4 months, from about 2 weeks to about 3 months, or from about 2 weeks to about 2 months. 12. The dosing regimen of any one of the preceding items, wherein the daily dose of orlistat is initially 270-450 mg, followed by a daily dose of orlistat of 180-270 mg (up to 90 mg for children) for a treatment period of 2-7 days. 13. The dosing regimen of any one of the preceding items, wherein the daily dose of alcarbose is initially 90-150 mg, followed by a daily dose of orlistat of 60-90 mg (up to 30 mg for children), for a treatment period of 2-7 days. 14. The dosing regimen according to any one of items 3 to 13, wherein the composition comprises granules, spheroids or pellets. 15. The dosing regimen according to any one of items 3 to 14, wherein the composition comprises enteric coated granules, spheroids or pellets comprising orlistat.

[0160] 16. The dosing regimen according to any one of items 3 to 15, wherein the composition comprises enteric coated granules, spheroids or pellets. 17. The dosing regimen according to any one of items 3 to 16, wherein the composition comprises modified release granules, spheroids or pellets. 18. Three or four different parts of: a) a first portion G1, which contains about 45% w / w to about 65% w / w of the total amount of alkabose, for example, about 50% w / w to about 65% w / w, about 55% w / w to about 65% w / w, or about 60% w / w; b) a second portion G2A, which comprises about 35% w / w to about 55% w / w of the total amount of alkabose, for example about 35% w / w to about 50% w / w, about 35% w / w to about 45% w / w or about 40% w / w of alkabose, c) a third portion G2B, comprising about 50% w / w to about 85% w / w of the total amount of orlistat, for example, about 55% w / w to about 80% w / w, about 60% w / w to about 80% w / w, about 65% w / w to about 75% w / w, about 68% w / w to about 75% w / w, about 72% w / w to about 73% w / w, for example, about 72.2% w / w of orlistat, and d) The fourth portion G3 comprises a portion containing orlistat in an amount of about 15 to about 50% w / w, for example, about 20% w / w to about 40% w / w, about 25% to about 35% w / w, about 25% to about 32% w / w, about 27% w / w to about 28% w / w, or about 27.8% w / w of the total amount of orlistat, and the total amount of alkabose and orlistat is each 100% w / w. 19. The dosing regimen according to item 18, wherein parts b) and c) are combined. 20. The dosage regimen according to item 18 or 19, wherein the concentration of alcarbose in the first part G1 is in the range of 25% w / w to about 50% w / w, for example about 30% w / w to about 45% w / w or about 40% w / w, based on the total weight of the G1 part.

[0161] 21. The dosing regimen according to any one of items 18 to 20, wherein the concentration of alkabose in the second part G2A or G2 is within the range of about 0.5% w / w to about 4.5% w / w, such as about 1% w / w to about 4% w / w, about 1.5% w / w to about 3.5% w / w, about 2% w / w to about 3.5% w / w, about 2.5% w / w to about 3.25% w / w or about 3% w / w, based on the total weight of either G2A or G2, as applicable. 22. The dosing regimen according to any one of items 18 to 21, wherein the concentration of orlistat in part G2B or part G2 is within the range of 5% w / w to about 30% w / w, for example about 10% w / w to about 25% w / w, about 10% w / w to about 20% w / w, about 12% w / w to about 20% w / w, or about 15.5% w / w, based on the total weight of either G2B or G2, as applicable. 23. The dosing regimen according to any one of items 18 to 22, wherein the concentration of orlistat in part G3 is within the range of 20% w / w to about 50% w / w, for example about 25% w / w to about 50% w / w, about 30% w / w to about 45% w / w, about 35% w / w to about 45% w / w or about 40% w / w, based on the total weight of G3. 24. The dosage regimen according to any one of items 18 to 23, wherein part G2 comprises the protective polymer in a concentration of at least 10% w / w, for example in the range of 10-20% w / w, 12-20% w / w, 13-20% w / w, 13.5-20% w / w, based on the weight of either G2, G2A or G2B as applicable. 25. The dosing regimen according to any one of items 3 to 24, wherein the composition comprises modified release granules, spheroids or pellets, and the modified release granules, spheroids or pellets contain 30-50% w / w orlistat.

[0162] 26. The dosing regimen according to any one of items 3 to 25, wherein the composition comprises orlistat in micronized form, i.e. orlistat having an average particle size of 50 microns or less, such as 20 microns or less, for example 10 microns or less. 27. The dosing regimen according to any one of items 3 to 26, wherein the composition comprises modified release granules, spheroids or pellets comprising 35 to 60% w / w of cellulose or a cellulose derivative, such as microcrystalline cellulose. 28. The dosing regimen according to any one of items 3 to 27, wherein the composition comprises modified release granules, spheroids or pellets comprising 30-50% w / w micronized orlistat, 35-60% w / w microcrystalline cellulose and 10-18% w / w polysorbate 80. 29. The composition as defined in any one of items 18 to 28. 30. A method for avoiding or reducing the rebound effect associated with weight loss obtained in a subject, comprising administering to said subject alkabose and orlistat as defined in any one of items 1 to 29.

Claims

1. A composition comprising orlistat and alcarbose for use in the treatment of overweight or obesity, said treatment leading to the prevention and / or reduction of the rebound effect.

2. A composition comprising orlistat and alcarbose for use in treating overweight or obesity in a subject with a BMI of 27 or greater, wherein said treatment leads to a reduction in the rebound effect compared to baseline when measured 2 to 6 months after the end of the treatment period.

3. A composition comprising orlistat and alcarbose in a weight ratio of 2:1 to 4:1 for use in preventing and / or reducing the rebound effect following obesity treatment in which the weight loss is at least 5%.

4. A composition comprising orlistat and alcarbose for reducing the rebound effect in an obese subject having an initial BMI of 27 kg / m2 or more, such as 29 kg / m2 or more or 30 kg / m2 or more.

5. 5. The composition of claim 4, wherein the obese subject has undergone a treatment period comprising administering the composition to the obese subject, and wherein the treatment leads to a reduction in the rebound effect compared to baseline when measured 2-6 months after the end of the treatment period.

6. The composition according to any one of claims 1 to 5, which reduces the rebound effect, expressed as relative change in body weight from baseline at week 0, by at least 2.1%.

7. The composition according to any one of claims 1 to 5, which reduces the rebound effect, expressed as relative change in body weight from baseline, by up to 7%, said baseline being the end of said treatment.

8. The composition of any one of claims 1 to 5, administered once, twice or three times daily during the treatment period.

9. 6. The composition according to any one of claims 1 to 5, wherein the daily dose of orlistat during the treatment period is from 30 mg to 540 mg or more, such as from 30 mg to 450 mg or more, such as from 30 mg to 450 mg or more, from 60 mg to about 450 mg or more, from 90 mg to about 450 mg or more, from about 120 mg to 450 mg or more, from about 150 mg to about 450 mg or more, from 180 mg to 450 mg or more, such as from 180 mg to 450 mg, 270 mg to 450 mg, 360 mg to 450 mg, and for adults is from 270 mg or more, 360 mg or more or 450 mg or more.

10. The composition according to any one of claims 1 to 5, wherein the daily dose of alkabose during the treatment period is from 10 mg to about 180 mg, e.g., from 10 mg to about 150 mg, from 20 mg to about 150 mg, from 30 mg to about 150 mg, from 40 mg to about 150 mg, from 50 mg to about 150 mg, from 60 mg to about 150 mg or more, e.g., from 90 mg to 150 mg, from 90 mg or more, from 120 mg or more, or from 150 mg or more.

11. 6. A composition according to any one of claims 1 to 5, comprising 90 mg orlistat / 30 mg alkabose, 120 mg orlistat / 40 mg orlistat, 150 mg orlistat / 50 mg alkabose or 180 mg orlistat / 60 mg alkabose.

12. 6. The composition of any one of claims 1 to 5, wherein the treatment period is at least 2 weeks, e.g., from about 2 weeks to about 1 year, e.g., from about 2 weeks to about 9 months, from about 2 weeks to about 6 months, from about 2 weeks to about 5 months, from about 2 weeks to about 4 months, from about 2 weeks to about 3 months, from about 2 weeks to about 2 months.

13. The composition according to any one of claims 1 to 5, comprising granules, spheroids or pellets.

14. A composition according to any preceding claim which comprises orlistat in micronised form, ie orlistat having an average particle size of 50 microns or less, such as 20 microns or less, for example 10 microns or less.

15. Three or four different individual portions with different release patterns: a) a first portion G1, which comprises about 45% w / w to about 65% w / w of the total amount of alkabose, for example about 50% w / w to about 65% w / w, about 55% w / w to about 65% w / w or about 60% w / w, b) a second portion G2A, which comprises about 35% w / w to about 55% w / w of the total amount of alkabose, for example about 35% w / w to about 50% w / w, about 35% w / w to about 45% w / w or about 40% w / w, c) a third portion G2B, comprising about 50% w / w to about 85% w / w of the total amount of orlistat, such as about 55% w / w to about 80% w / w, about 60% w / w to about 80% w / w, about 65% w / w to about 75% w / w, about 68% w / w to about 75% w / w , a portion comprising about 72% w / w to about 73% w / w, for example about 72.2% w / w, of orlistat, and d) a fourth portion G3, comprising about 15 to about 50% w / w of orlistat, such as about 20% w / w to about 40% w / w, about 25% to about 35% w / w, about 25% to about 32% w / w, about 27% w / w to about 28% w / w or about 27.8% w / w of the total amount of orlistat; 1. An oral modified release composition comprising: The total amount of alcarbose and orlistat was 100% w / w. When the composition comprises three parts, the three parts are i) G1, ii) G2 in combination with G2A and G2B, and iii) G3.

16. i) the G1 portion is designed to release a portion of the total amount of alcarbose in the stomach; ii) the G2A portion is designed to release a portion of the total amount of alkabose in the duodenum and jejunum; wherein the release is relatively rapid so that alkabose becomes available in the duodenum and jejunum to exert its effect; iii) the G2B portion is designed to release a portion of the total amount of orlistat in the duodenum and jejunum; wherein the release is relatively rapid so that orlistat becomes available in the duodenum and jejunum to exert its effect; iv) The composition according to claim 15, wherein part G3 is designed to release a portion of the total amount of orlistat in the duodenum and jejunum.

17. The composition of claim 15, wherein part b) and part c) are combined.

18. G1 is in the form of an inert core coated with a composition comprising alcarbose, G2A and G2B are combined to form G2, which is in the form of a coated inert core onto which is applied alkabose and orlistat, followed by a coating with a protective polymer, and then coated with an enteric coating; 16. The composition of claim 15, wherein G3 is in the form of uncoated granules.

19. 20. The composition of claim 18, wherein the protective polymer is selected from cellulose, cellulose derivatives, and hydroxypropyl methylcellulose.

20. 16. The composition of claim 15, wherein parts G2A and G2B are combined to form G2, and G2 comprises a protective polymer at a concentration of at least 10% w / w, for example in the range of 10-20% w / w, 12-20% w / w, 13-20% w / w, 13.5-20% w / w, based on the total weight of G2.

21. 6. The composition of any one of claims 1 to 5, comprising modified release granules, spheroids or pellets comprising 30-50% w / w micronized orlistat, 35-60% w / w microcrystalline cellulose and 10-18% w / w polysorbate 80.

22. 16. The composition of claim 15, wherein part G3 comprises modified release granules, spheroids or pellets comprising 30-50% w / w micronized orlistat, 35-60% w / w microcrystalline cellulose and 10-18% w / w polysorbate 80.

23. The composition according to claim 15, wherein the concentration of alcarbose in the first part G1 is in the range of 25% w / w to about 50% w / w, for example about 30% w / w to about 45% w / w or about 40% w / w, based on the total weight of the part G1.

24. The composition of claim 15, wherein the concentration of alcarbose in the second portion G2A or G2 is within the range of about 0.5% w / w to about 4.5% w / w, such as about 1% w / w to about 4% w / w, about 1.5% w / w to about 3.5% w / w, about 2% w / w to about 3.5% w / w, about 2.5% w / w to about 3.25% w / w or about 3% w / w, based on the total weight of either G2A or G2 as appropriate.

25. 16. The composition of claim 15, wherein the concentration of orlistat in part G2B or part G2 is in the range of 5% w / w to about 30% w / w, such as about 10% w / w to about 25% w / w, about 10% w / w to about 20% w / w, about 12% w / w to about 20% w / w, or about 15.5% w / w, based on the total weight of either part G2B or G2, as applicable.

26. 16. The composition of claim 15, wherein the concentration of orlistat in the G3 part is in the range of 20% w / w to about 50% w / w, such as about 25% w / w to about 50% w / w, about 30% w / w to about 45% w / w, about 35% w / w to about 45% w / w or about 40% w / w based on the total weight of G3.

27. 16. A composition according to claim 15 comprising modified release granules, spheroids or pellets comprising 35 to 60% w / w of cellulose or a cellulose derivative, such as microcrystalline cellulose, based on the total weight of the modified release granules, spheroids or pellets.

28. 2. Use of a composition comprising orlistat and alcarbose to prevent and / or reduce the rebound effect following treatment of overweight or obesity.

29. 29. The use according to claim 28, wherein the composition is as defined in claim 14.

30. Use according to claim 28, wherein the reduction of the rebound effect is as defined in any one of claims 2 to 4.

31. The use according to claim 28, wherein a reduction in the rebound effect is observed after treatment of overweight or obesity, as defined in any one of claims 1 to 5.

Images