The effect of acarbose on the pharmacokinetics of rosiglitazone.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate whether treatment with acarbose alters the pharmacokinetics (PK) of coadministered rosiglitazone. METHODS: Sixteen healthy volunteers (24-59-years old) received a single 8-mg dose of rosiglitazone on day 1, followed by 7 days of repeat dosing with acarbose [100 mg three times daily (t.i.d.) with meals]. On the last day of acarbose t.i.d. dosing (day 8), a single dose of rosiglitazone was given with the morning dose of acarbose. PK profiles following rosiglitazone dosing on days 1 and 8 were compared, and point estimates (PE) and associated 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. RESULTS: Rosiglitazone absorption [as measured with peak plasma concentration (Cmax) and time to peak concentration (Tmax)] was unaffected by acarbose. The area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity [AUC(0-infinity)] was on average 12% lower (95% CI-21%, -2%) during rosiglitazone + acarbose coadministration and was accompanied by an approximate 1-h (23%) reduction in terminal elimination half-life t1/2 (4.9 h versus 3.8 h). This small decrease in AUC(0-infinity) appears to be due to an alteration in systemic clearance of rosiglitazone and not changes in absorption. These observed changes in AUC(0-infinity) and t1/2 are not likely to be clinically relevant. Coadministration of rosiglitazone and acarbose was well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Acarbose administered at therapeutic doses has a small, but clinically insignificant, effect on rosiglitazone pharmacokinetics.

Lack of effect of rosiglitazone on the pharmacokinetics of oral contraceptives in healthy female volunteers.

The effect of rosiglitazone (Avandia [BRL 49653C]) on the pharmacokinetics of ethinylestradiol and norethindrone was evaluated after repeat dosing of rosiglitazone with an oral contraceptive (OC; Ortho-Novum 1/35 containing norethindrone 1 mg and ethinylestradiol 0.035 mg) in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study. Thirty-four healthy female volunteers received oral rosiglitazone (RSG) 8 mg + OC or matched placebo (P) + OC daily on days 1 to 14 of a 28-day OC dosing cycle; the alternate regimen was administered during a second cycle. Ethinylestradiol and norethindrone pharmacokinetics were determined from plasma concentrations on day 14. Lack of pharmacokinetic effect was prospectively defined as 90% CI for the point estimate (PE) of the ratio (RSG + OC):(P + OC) contained within a 20% equivalence range for both ethinylestradiol and norethindrone (analyzed by ANOVA). For RSG + OC and P + OC, respectively, mean ethinylestradiol AUC(0-24) was 1126 and 1208 pg.h/mL (PE: 0.92; 90% CI: 0.88-0.97), and mean norethindrone AUC(0-24) was 178 and 171 ng.h/mL (PE: 1.04; 90% CI: 1.00-1.07). Thus, rosiglitazone had no significant effects on the pharmacokinetics of ethinylestradiol or norethindrone. Coadministration of rosiglitazone with OCs does not induce metabolism of these synthetic sex steroids and is not expected to impair the efficacy of OCs or hormone replacement therapy.

Interpreting the International Normalized Ratio (INR) in individuals receiving argatroban and warfarin.

The effects of argatroban, a direct thrombin inhibitor, on the International Normalized Ratio (INR), activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) and functional factor X during warfarin co-administration were established to provide means to interpret INRs during argatroban/warfarin co-therapy. Twenty-four subjects receiving warfarin (7.5 mg, day 1; 3-6 mg/day, days 2-10) and argatroban (1-4 microg/kg/min over 5 h, days 1-11) were assessed daily for these coagulation parameters prior to argatroban infusion (warfarin "monotherapy") and at its conclusion ("co-therapy"). Argatroban increased aPTTs dose-dependently. Co-therapy INR increased linearly with monotherapy INR, with slope sensitive to argatroban dose and thromboplastin used. Prediction errors for monotherapy INRs were < or =+/- 0.4 for argatroban 1-2 microg/kg/min but > or = +/-1.0 for higher doses. Despite co-therapy INRs >7, no major bleeding occurred. Factor X remained > or =37% of normal. Therefore, the predictable effect of argatroban (< or =2 microg/kg/min only) [corrected] on INRs during warfarin co-therapy allows for reliable prediction of the level of oral anticoagulation.

Rosiglitazone does not alter the pharmacokinetics of metformin.

Rosiglitazone is a potent oral antidiabetic agent of the thiazolidinedione class that works through activation of the peroxisome proliferator-activated nuclear receptor. It improves insulin sensitivity in peripheral tissues and effectively lowers blood glucose in patients with type 2 diabetes. Metformin is a dimethyl-biguanide, also used in type 2 diabetes, that lowers fasting blood glucose primarily by decreasing hepatic glucose output. Rosiglitazone and metformin reduce plasma glucose concentrations via different mechanisms and thus could potentially be used in combination to optimize glycemic control. This study evaluated the effects of the coadministration of these two agents on the pharmacokinetics of both rosiglitazone and metformin. Sixteen male volunteers (22-55 years old) received oral metformin (500 mg every 12 hours), rosiglitazone (2 mg every 12 hours), or the combination each for 4 days. Plasma collected on day 4 of each regimen was assayed for rosiglitazone and metformin concentrations. Oral doses of rosiglitazone and metformin were safe and well tolerated when administered alone or in combination. There were no clinically significant episodes of hypoglycemia or increased blood lactic acid levels following treatment with any regimen. Coadministration of rosiglitazone and metformin had no significant effects on the steady-state pharmacokinetics (AUC(0-12 h), Cmax, tmax, or t1/2) of either drug. The authors conclude that rosiglitazone can be safely administered with metformin and, due to the different mechanisms of action of these agents, may offer a therapeutic advantage in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Rosiglitazone has no clinically significant effect on nifedipine pharmacokinetics.

To examine the effects of repeat oral dosing of rosiglitazone on the pharmacokinetics of nifedipine, a prototype CYP3A4 substrate, a randomized, open-label, crossover study was performed with two treatment phases separated by a washout period of at least 14 days. Twenty-eight healthy male volunteers received either a single 20 mg oral nifedipine dose or rosiglitazone 8 mg orally once daily for 14 days with a single 20 mg oral nifedipine dose administered on day 14. Plasma nifedipine concentrations were determined over the 24-hour period following administration of the nifedipine doses. Lack of effect was defined as the demonstration that the 90% CI was contained entirely within a symmetrical 30% range either side of unity on the loge-scale. Following rosiglitazone + nifedipine administration, the area under the nifedipine concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity (AUC(0-infinity)) was 13% lower than that after administration of nifedipine alone. This difference in nifedipine AUC(0-infinity) was not deemed to be clinically significant since the 90% CI was contained within the protocol-defined 30% range (point estimate for ratio of geometric means 0.87; 90% CI: 0.79, 0.96). Rosiglitazone had no marked effect on nifedipine peak plasma concentration (point estimate: 0.99; 90% CI: 0.73, 1.34) or time to peak concentration compared with nifedipine alone. Rosiglitazone coadministration produced a small decrease in the mean nifedipine half-life (point estimate: -0.77; 90% CI: mean difference -1.29 h, -0.25 h). Both treatment regimens were well tolerated and associated with a favorable safety profile. Rosiglitazone, at the highest dose used in clinical studies, produced a small, clinically insignificant decrease in nifedipine exposure. The very small effect on nifedipine pharmacokinetics suggests that rosiglitazone is an extremely weak inducer of CYP3A4, a characteristic that distinguishes rosiglitazone from troglitazone.

The effect of low-dose cimetidine (200 mg twice daily) on the pharmacokinetics of theophylline.

The potential for nonprescription cimetidine (200 mg twice daily) to affect the pharmacokinetics of sustained-release (SR) theophylline was assessed in 26 male subjects, 13 smokers and 13 nonsmokers. This was a concentration-controlled drug interaction study in which the subjects were administered a dose of SR theophylline every 12 hours to provide a mean steady-state concentration between 8 and 15 micrograms/ml. To determine individual theophylline dose, a test dose of aminophylline was administered, and baseline theophylline pharmacokinetics were determined. Subjects remained on SR theophylline for 23 days and were treated in the following sequence: run-in phase (4 days), treatment 1 (7 days), washout (5 days), and treatment 2 (7 days). During the treatment phases, subjects received cimetidine (200 mg at approximately 08:00 and 12:00) or placebo for 7 days in a randomized crossover fashion. Theophylline pharmacokinetics were determined on days 1, 4, and 7 of both treatment phases. A large day-to-day variability in the oral clearance of theophylline was evident for the theophylline-placebo treatment and the theophylline-cimetidine treatment. Nonprescription strength cimetidine resulted in a mean 5% decrease in theophylline oral clearance on day 1 and a mean 12% decrease on days 4 and 7 combined. There were no significant differences in the cimetidine-theophylline interaction between smokers and nonsmokers. Oral clearance during the nighttime dosing interval was 13% greater than the daytime oral clearance for nonsmokers and 22% greater for smokers, showing a greater circadian rhythm for smokers. In summary, nonprescription doses of cimetidine (400 mg/day) have the potential to produce small changes in theophylline concentrations during steady-state dosing with SR theophylline; however, this effect appears less than changes that occur as a consequence of theophylline's intrasubject variability.

Pharmacokinetics and protein binding of eprosartan in hemodialysis-dependent patients with end-stage renal disease.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To compare eprosartan pharmacokinetics in hemodialysis patients and in volunteers with normal renal function, and to determine the effect of hemodialysis on these values. DESIGN: Open-label, parallel-group, single-dose study. SETTING: Outpatient hemodialysis treatment center and an industry-affiliated clinical pharmacology unit. PATIENTS: Ten healthy volunteers and nine hemodialysis patients. INTERVENTION: A single oral dose of eprosartan 400 mg was administered to volunteers on 1 day and to patients on 2 days (a nondialysis and a dialysis day). Patients underwent high-flux hemodialysis. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Concentrations of eprosartan in plasma and dialysate were assayed by high-performance liquid chromatography; plasma protein binding was determined by ultrafiltration. Eprosartan pharmacokinetics showed greater variability in patients than in volunteers. However, six of nine patients had exposures that were within the range observed for volunteers. Mean total AUC(0-t) was increased approximately 60% (95% CI-22, 225) in patients. Total Cmax was similar between groups (PE = 1.01, 95% CI -40, 71). Mean percent fraction unbound (%f(u)) in patients (3.02%) was significantly greater than that in volunteers (1.74%). Unbound AUC(0-t) and unbound Cmax were, on average, approximately 172% (95% CI 28, 479) and 73% (95% CI -1, 199) greater, respectively, in patients. After hemodialysis, the mean %f(u) decreased from 3.19-2.01%. Mean recovery of eprosartan in dialysate was 6.8 mg (range 0-23.1 mg) and hemodialytic clearance was approximately 11 ml/minute, which does not represent a significant portion of total clearance. CONCLUSIONS: Eprosartan was safe and well tolerated in both groups. Based on its known safety profile and because of its exaggerated pharmacokinetic variability in patients undergoing hemodialysis, treatment should be individualized based on tolerability and response. Supplemental doses of eprosartan after hemodialysis are unnecessary.

Safety and pharmacokinetics of an intramuscular monoclonal antibody (SB 209763) against respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) in infants and young children at risk for severe RSV disease.

We conducted a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial of a humanized monoclonal antibody against a respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) fusion protein (SB 209763) to evaluate its safety, pharmacokinetics, and fusion inhibition and neutralization titers. Forty-three infants who were either delivered prematurely (

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of SB 209670, an endothelin receptor antagonist: effects on the regulation of renal vascular tone.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of an infusion of SB 209670, a non-peptide endothelin-A/endothelin-B receptor antagonist. METHODS: The study was conducted in 2 parts. Part 1 was a placebo-controlled, single-blind, rising-dose crossover evaluation of the pharmacokinetics and safety of SB 209670 infused at doses that ranged from 0.2 to 1.5 mirog kg(-1) for approximately 8 hours in 17 healthy male volunteers. In part 2, renal hemodynamic effects of a 4-hour infusion of SB 209670 were assessed in 10 healthy male volunteers in a 2-period, period-balanced, single-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled crossover study. RESULTS: SB 209670 appeared to display linear kinetics over the dose range from 0.2 to 1.5 microg kg(-1) min(-1). The half-life was approximately 4 to 5 hours. Plasma immunoreactive endothelin-1 increased in an apparent dose-dependent manner. Mean renal hemodynamic responses (para-aminohippurate clearance) increased by approximately 15% relative to placebo (P = .007). Renal sodium excretion was similar during SB 209670 and placebo infusion. CONCLUSION: The pharmacokinetics of intravenous SB 209670 appeared to be linear, and infusion resulted in dose-related increases in immunoreactive endothelin-1. The lack of anti-natriuretic effect and the renal vasodilator response observed in this study indicate that SB 209670 does not possess any partial agonist activity. Further, the renal hemodynamic response supported a potential physiologic role for endogenous endothelin in the maintenance of renal vascular tone in humans.

Assessment of the potential pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions between erythromycin and argatroban.

Argatroban, a direct thrombin inhibitor, is metabolized in vitro by CYP3A4/5 and therefore may be susceptible to clinically relevant CYP3A drug interactions. The effect of erythromycin, a potent CYP3A4/5 inhibitor, on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of argatroban was evaluated in 14 healthy male volunteers in an open-label, crossover study with a 5-day washout between regimens. Argatroban 1 microgram/kg/min was infused alone for 5 hours (regimen A) and again on day 6 of a 7-day oral regimen of 500 mg erythromycin four times daily (regimen B). Serial blood samples for the determination of activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT) and argatroban concentrations were collected for up to 48 hours following infusion. Mean values for argatroban area under the concentration-time curves (AUC0-inf), maximum concentration (Cmax), and half-life (t1/2) were similar between regimens. Mean aPTT values were not affected significantly by the concomitant administration of argatroban and erythromycin compared to argatroban alone. No serious adverse events or bleeding episodes occurred during the study. These results suggest that oxidative metabolism by CYP3A4/5 is unlikely to be an important in vivo elimination pathway for argatroban. Therefore, coadministration of CYP3A4/5 inhibitors should not require a modification in the dosage of argatroban.

Systemic exposure to rosiglitazone is unaltered by food.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of food on the bioavailability and pharmacokinetics of the insulin sensitizer rosiglitazone. METHODS: In a randomized, open-label, period-balanced, single-dose, crossover study, rosiglitazone 2 mg was administered to 12 healthy male volunteers either in the fasting state or following a standard high-fat breakfast. The primary end points of the study were AUC(0-inf) and Cmax. RESULTS: Single oral doses of rosiglitazone were safe and well tolerated. Overall exposure to rosiglitazone was unaffected by food. The geometric mean ratio of AUC(0-inf) in the fed:fasted regimens was 0.94 (95% CI: 0.82, 1.06); t1/2 was unaffected. Absorption of rosiglitazone in the fed state was more gradual and sustained than in the fasted state. Cmax was reduced by approximately 20% (point estimate 0.80; 95% CI 0.65 to 0.97) and tmax was modestly delayed in the fed state. CONCLUSION: These data support dosing guidelines that will permit the administration of rosiglitazone without regard to meals for treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Effect of age and gender on the pharmacokinetics of eprosartan.

AIMS: To compare the pharmacokinetics of eprosartan between young (18-45 years) and elderly (65 years) men and between young men and young, premenopausal women (18-45 years). METHODS: Twenty-four subjects (eight subjects/group) received a single 200 mg eprosartan oral dose followed by serial blood sampling over 24 h. RESULTS: Eprosartan was safe and well tolerated. There were no apparent differences in the pharmacokinetics of eprosartan between young females and young males or in the plasma protein binding of eprosartan (98%) for the three groups. On average, AUC (0,infinity) and Cmax values were approximately 2-fold higher in elderly men than young men [AUC (0,infinity) 95% CI: 1.22, 4.34; Cmax 95% CI: 0.98, 4.001. Similarly, unbound AUC (0,infinity) and Cmax values were, on average, approximately 2-fold higher in elderly men than young men [unbound AUC (0,infinity) 95% CI: 1.29, 4.44; unbound Cmax 95% CI: 1.02, 4.12]. tmax was delayed in the elderly men compared with young men, with a median difference of 2.5 h (95% CI: 1.00, 3.01 h). CONCLUSIONS: No gender differences were observed in the pharmacokinetics of eprosartan. There were approximately two fold higher AUC and Cmax values for eprosartan observed in elderly men as compared with young men, most likely due to increased bioavailability of eprosartan in the elderly. Based on the excellent safety profile in the elderly in Phase III clinical trials (doses up to 1200 mg eprosartan) eprosartan can be safely administered to elderly hypertensive patients without an initial dose adjustment. Subsequently, the dose of eprosartan, as for other antihypertensive agents, may be individualized based on tolerability/response.

Eprosartan does not affect the pharmacodynamics of warfarin.

Eprosartan is an angiotensin II receptor antagonist being developed for the treatment of hypertension and heart failure. The effect of eprosartan on the steady-state anticoagulant activity of warfarin was evaluated in 18 healthy male volunteers. Each subject's daily warfarin dose was titrated over 9 days to achieve a stable international normalized ratio (INR) of 1.3 to 1.6 by day 14. After the 14-day warfarin titration phase, subjects were randomized to receive either eprosartan 300 mg or matching placebo twice a day for 7 days. All subjects continued to take the warfarin dose established during the 14-day titration phase. The anticoagulant activity of warfarin was statistically equivalent when coadministered with eprosartan or with placebo. No serious or unexpected adverse events suggestive of abnormal bleeding occurred during coadministration of eprosartan and warfarin. As measured by the INR, there is no apparent effect of eprosartan on the anticoagulant effect of warfarin.

Urinary excretion of 6 beta-hydroxycortisol as an in vivo marker for CYP3A induction: applications and recommendations.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the usefulness of 6 beta-hydroxycortisol as a screen for CYP3A induction in early-phase drug development. METHODS: Five groups of 12 healthy elderly men were randomized to one of five treatment regimens: (1) 600 mg rifampin (INN, rifampicin) once daily, (2) placebo once daily, (3) 40 mg SB 216469 twice a day, (4) 60 mg SB 216469 twice a day, or (5) 40 mg SB 216469 three times a day. All medications were taken orally and administered for 7 consecutive days. Urine was collected over a 24-hour period for each subject before administration and on the last day of administration for each respective regimen for measurement of 6 beta-hydroxycortisol and 17-hydroxycorticosteroid concentrations. RESULTS: Subjects in the rifampin group had a significant increase from predose value in the 24-hour urinary excretion of 6 beta-hydroxycortisol and the ratio of 6 beta-hydroxycortisol to 17-hydroxycorticosteroid. All 12 subjects in the rifampin group had increases in 6 beta-hydroxycortisol excretion, whereas 11 of 12 had an increase in the ratio. The placebo and three active treatment groups did not show significant changes in either parameter. CONCLUSIONS: Urinary excretion of 6 beta-hydroxycortisol may be useful as a screening tool in early-phase development to assess the potential for an investigational drug to induce CYP3A.

Fenoldopam, a selective dopamine-1 receptor agonist, raises intraocular pressure in males with normal intraocular pressure.

Recent studies have suggested that intravenous infusion of fenoldopam, a selective dopamine-1 receptor agonist, elevates intraocular pressure (IOP) in man. This study evaluated the effect of intravenous fenoldopam on IOP, aqueous humor outflow facility and gonioscopy in 12 healthy human subjects. Three doses (0.2, 0.5 and 1.0 microg/kg/min) were infused for 120 minutes in a double masked, placebo controlled, four-way crossover design. IOP was measured every 20 minutes in the supine position and every 40 minutes while sitting during the drug and placebo infusions. Tonography and gonioscopy were performed at baseline and after 120 minutes of infusion. Compared to placebo, IOP increased by 3.5 mm Hg (32%) for the lowest dose, 5.8 mm Hg (46%) for the intermediate dose, and 6.9 mm Hg (55%) for the highest dose (p<0.05 for all three doses). IOP returned to baseline within 30 minutes of stopping the infusion. The outflow facility decreased from baseline by 26% after 120 minutes of infusion for all drug doses. In contrast, outflow facility increased from baseline by 11% during placebo infusion. Compared to placebo, the fenoldopam induced changes in outflow were statistically significant (p<0.05). There was no change in the gonioscopic appearance of the anterior chamber angle during the infusion. This study shows that systemic administration of a selective dopamine-1 receptor agonist causes a significant dose-dependent increase in IOP that can be explained in part by diminished outflow facility. These results support a role for the dopamine-1 receptor in the modulation of IOP in general and suggest modulation of aqueous humor outflow by dopaminergic receptors.

A dose-response study to assess the renal hemodynamic, vascular, and hormonal effects of eprosartan, an angiotensin II AT1-receptor antagonist, in sodium-replete healthy men.

STUDY DESIGN: The effects of orally administered eprosartan on changes induced by angiotensin II in blood pressure, renal hemodynamics, and aldosterone secretion were evaluated in healthy men in this double-blind, randomized, single-dose, placebo-controlled crossover study, which was conducted in three parts. Part 1 (n = 12) assessed the onset and duration of the effect of eprosartan 350 mg or placebo; part 2 (n = 14) assessed the dose-response profile of placebo or 10, 30, 50, 70, 100 or 200 mg eprosartan; and part 3 (n = 5) assessed the duration of the effect of 50, 100, or 350 mg eprosartan. RESULTS: In part 1 of the study; 350 mg eprosartan caused complete inhibition of angiotensin II-induced pressor and renal blood flow hemodynamic effects (effects on effective renal plasma flow [ERPF]) and inhibited angiotensin II-induced stimulation of aldosterone secretion from 1 to 3 hours after administration. Eprosartan, 350 mg, inhibited the effects of exogenous angiotensin II by approximately 50% to 70% from 12 to 15 hours after dosing. Eprosartan had no angiotensin II agonistic activity and produced an increase in ERPF starting at 1 to 4 hours after dosing. In study part 2, at 3 hours after single doses of 10, 30, 50, 70, 100, and 200 mg, eprosartan inhibited angiotensin 11-induced decreases in ERPF by 39.1%, 49.9%, 33.0%, 56.0%, 71.0%, and 85.7%, respectively, compared with placebo. In study part 3, 50, 100, and 350 mg eprosartan produced measurable Inhibition of angiotensin II-induced decreases in ERPF from 12 to 15 hours after administration. In parts 2 and 3, the eprosartan angiotensin II antagonism on blood pressure response and aldosterone secretion mirrored the angiotensin II antagonism on ERPF.

Use of topical corticosteroid pretreatment to reduce the incidence and severity of skin reactions associated with testosterone transdermal therapy.

Local skin reactions at the application site are the most common adverse events associated with the testosterone transdermal delivery (TTD) systems used to treat postpubertal hypogonadism in males. This open-label, controlled pilot study was conducted to determine whether topical pretreatment with triamcinolone acetonide 0.1% cream might be useful in reducing the incidence and/or severity of chronic skin irritation when used in healthy volunteers receiving TTD systems. Adult male volunteers wore three topical systems, which were applied to the upper back daily (Monday through Friday) for 6 weeks: (1) TTD with no pretreatment of application site; (2) TTD with pretreatment of application site using triamcinolone acetonide 0.1% cream; and (3) an inactive occlusive dressing (control). On Monday through Thursday, systems were removed 24 hours after application. Patches applied on Friday were worn continuously for 72 hours until their removal on Monday. Skin reactions were graded on a scale from 0 to 4 (0 = none, 4 = severe) and were assessed daily by research personnel, beginning at the time of system removal (assessment 1) and on the two subsequent clinic visits (assessments 2 and 3). All skin irritation scores of all subjects were totaled for each treatment regimen to obtain a cumulative score per treatment regimen. The cumulative scores were also analyzed by assessment time and study week (weeks 1-6). Eighty-two subjects were enrolled in the study, and 65 completed the 6-week treatment course. Mean age of subjects was 24 years (range, 18-69 years), and mean weight was 79.0 kg (range, 58.9-127.3 kg). All subjects were white males. At assessment 1, pretreatment with triamcinolone acetonide 0.1% cream (compared with no pretreatment) was associated more often with scores of 0 (no erythema), with comparable occurrences of mild skin irritation, and with fewer occurrences of moderate erythema. At all three assessments, more subjects had lower cumulative scores with pretreatment than without pretreatment. At every assessment and in each week of the study, total weekly cumulative skin irritation scores were also lower with pretreatment than without pretreatment. No adverse experiences other than skin irritation were reported. Results of this study suggest that in patients using TTD systems, the incidence and severity of skin irritation at application sites may be reduced through pretreatment with triamcinolone acetonide 0.1% cream.

Urine drug screening results from volunteers in phase I clinical pharmacology studies: are we being misled?

The general intent of phase I clinical pharmacology studies is to demonstrate the safety and tolerability of investigational new drugs in healthy human volunteers. There is emerging evidence that people who volunteer for these studies are not always truthful with investigators during the screening process. All healthy volunteers who participate in studies at the SmithKline Beecham Clinical Pharmacology Unit in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, are required to submit to urine drug testing. During 11 months of 1996, a total of 1,469 urine samples were collected and tested for eight different drugs or classes of drugs of abuse. The urine samples collected during the first five months of 1996 were all analyzed using EMIT (Syva Corporation) and interpreted according to the guidelines established by the National Institutes of Drug Abuse (NIDA). Of 534 samples, 12 (2.2%) were reported as positive. During the last 6 months of 1996, a new methodology using a fluorescence polarization immunoassay (FPIA) was used. This assay had lower limits of quantification than EMIT, and more stringent interpretation guidelines than those of the NIDA were used. Of 935 samples analyzed by FPIA, 89 (9.5%) were positive. Of the 89 positive test results, 59 were below the cut-offs specified by the NIDA guidelines and would have been reported as negative. Interpretation of urine drug screen results according to the NIDA guidelines is not acceptable for clinical pharmacology investigations.

The effects of eprosartan, an angiotensin II AT1 receptor antagonist, on uric acid excretion in patients with mild to moderate essential hypertension.

The effects of antihypertensive agents, including angiotensin II receptor antagonists, on urine uric acid excretion may have important clinical consequences. Therefore, the effects of single and repeated doses of eprosartan on uric acid excretion were evaluated in 57 male patients with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension in a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, repeated dose, dose-rising, two-period, period-balanced, crossover study conducted in two parts. In part 1 (n = 33), the effects of eprosartan dose regimens of 50 mg, 100 mg, and 350 mg once daily and 150 mg every 12 hours on uric acid excretion were assessed. In part 2 (n = 24), the effects of eprosartan dose regimens of 600 mg, 800 mg, and 1,200 mg once daily on uric acid excretion were assessed. Eprosartan was well tolerated. There were no appreciable changes from predose values in fractional excretion of uric acid (FEua), urine uric acid excretion, urine uric acid to creatinine (Uua/Ucr) ratios, or serum uric acid concentrations after single or repeated doses of eprosartan. Mean Uua/Ucr ratios for eprosartan doses of 50 mg, 100 mg, or 350 mg daily or 150 mg every 12 hours were comparable to those for placebo. Mean FEua values and Uua/Ucr ratios for eprosartan doses of 600 mg, 800 mg, or 1,200 mg daily also were comparable to those for placebo. Single and repeated oral doses of eprosartan ranging from 50 mg to 1,200 mg daily had no effect on serum uric acid concentrations or urine uric acid excretion in patients with mild-to-moderate essential hypertension.

A dose proportionality study of eprosartan in healthy male volunteers.

The present study investigated the proportionality of exposure after single oral doses of 100, 200, 400, and 800 mg of eprosartan, a nonpeptide, nonbiphenyl angiotensin II receptor antagonist, in 23 healthy young men. Eprosartan was safe and well tolerated. Exposure to eprosartan increased with dose but in a less than proportional manner. For each two-fold dose increase, area under the concentration--time curve (AUC) increased an average of 1.6 to 1.8 times and maximum plasma drug concentration (Cmax) increased an average of 1.5 to 1.8 times. For both parameters, the greatest difference from the dose multiple was observed between the 400- and 800-mg doses. Dose proportionality of eprosartan, as assessed by an equivalence-type approach using the 100-mg dose as the reference and a 30% acceptance region (0.70, 1.43), was achieved for the 200- and 400-mg doses for AUC and the 200-mg dose for Cmax. The observed changes in the pharmacokinetics of eprosartan suggest slight saturation of absorption of eprosartan over the 100- to 800-mg dose range, most likely due to the physicochemical properties of the drug (pH-dependent aqueous solubility and lipophilicity).