Results from a Phase 1 Study Assessing the Pharmacokinetics of the Aldosterone Synthase Inhibitor Baxdrostat in Participants with Varying Degrees of Renal Function.

Baxdrostat is a selective small-molecule aldosterone synthase inhibitor in development for treatment of hypertension and chronic kidney disease. This phase 1, open-label, parallel-group study assessed the safety and pharmacokinetics (PK) of baxdrostat in participants with varying degrees of renal function. Participants were enrolled into control (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] ≥60 mL/min), moderate to severe renal impairment (eGFR 15-59 mL/min), or kidney failure (eGFR <15 mL/min) groups and received a single 10-mg baxdrostat dose followed by 7 days of inpatient PK blood and urine sampling. Safety was assessed by adverse events, clinical laboratory evaluations, vital signs, physical examinations, and electrocardiograms (ECGs). Thirty-2 participants completed the study. There were no deaths and only 1 mild drug-related adverse event (diarrhea). No clinically meaningful changes in laboratory values, vital signs, physical examinations, or ECGs occurred. Plasma concentration-time curves of baxdrostat were similar among all groups. Urine PK parameters were similar (approximately 12% excreted) in the moderate to severe renal impairment and control groups. Inadequate urine production in the kidney failure group resulted in minimal urinary baxdrostat excretion. Renal impairment had no significant impact on systemic exposure or clearance of baxdrostat, suggesting that dose adjustment due to PK differences in patients with kidney disease is unnecessary.

Exploring Academic Performance of Medical Students in an Integrated Hybrid Curriculum by Gender.

Gender gaps in academic performance have been reported at a variety of educational levels including several national standardized exams for medical education, with men scoring higher than women. These gaps potentially impact medical school acceptance and residency matching and may be influenced by curricular design. Performance data for our 4-year integrated hybrid curriculum, which features a large proportion of active learning, revealed a gender gap with men performing better early in the curriculum and on the first national standardized exam. This gap in performance almost entirely disappeared for years 2-4 of the curriculum and the second national standardized exam.

Results From a Randomized, Open-Label, Crossover Study Evaluating the Effect of the Aldosterone Synthase Inhibitor Baxdrostat on the Pharmacokinetics of Metformin in Healthy Human Subjects.

BACKGROUND: Due to the high comorbidity of diabetes and hypertension, co-administration of metformin with anti-hypertensive drugs is likely. Baxdrostat is an aldosterone synthase inhibitor in development for the potential treatment of hypertension. In vitro data indicated that baxdrostat inhibits the multidrug and toxin extrusion 1 (MATE1) and MATE2-K renal transporters. Metformin is a MATE substrate, so this study assessed potential effects of baxdrostat on the pharmacokinetics of metformin. METHODS: Twenty-seven healthy volunteers received 1000 mg metformin alone and 1000 mg metformin in the presence of 10 mg baxdrostat in a randomized, crossover manner. Each treatment was separated by 10 or more days. Blood and urine samples were collected over a 3-day period after each treatment to measure plasma and urine concentrations of metformin. Safety was assessed by adverse events (AEs), physical examinations, electrocardiograms, vital signs, and clinical laboratory evaluations. RESULTS: There were no deaths, serious AEs, discontinuations due to treatment-emergent AEs, or noteworthy increases in AEs with either treatment, indicating that metformin and baxdrostat were well-tolerated when co-administered. Baxdrostat did not significantly affect plasma concentrations or renal clearance of metformin. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that diabetic patients with hypertension receiving both metformin and baxdrostat are unlikely to require dose adjustment. REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier no. NCT05526690.

Results from a phase 1, randomized, double-blind, multiple ascending dose study characterizing the pharmacokinetics and demonstrating the safety and selectivity of the aldosterone synthase inhibitor baxdrostat in healthy volunteers.

Baxdrostat is a selective inhibitor of aldosterone synthase designed for the treatment of disorders associated with elevated aldosterone. This study evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of multiple ascending doses of baxdrostat in healthy volunteers. Subjects were randomized to receive oral baxdrostat (0.5, 1.5, 2.5, or 5.0 mg) or placebo once daily for 10 days and were placed on either a low-salt or normal-salt diet for the duration of the study. Blood samples were collected before and after dosing on days 1 and 10 to characterize pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. Safety was assessed by adverse events, physical examinations, electrocardiograms, orthostatic vital signs, and clinical laboratory evaluations. Fifty-four subjects completed the study. There were no deaths or serious adverse events, and all treatment-emergent adverse events in subjects receiving baxdrostat were mild in severity. Plasma levels of baxdrostat increased proportionally with ascending doses, with peak concentrations observed within 4 h after dosing and a mean half-life of 26 to 31 h. A dose-dependent reduction of plasma aldosterone occurred with baxdrostat doses ≥1.5 mg, regardless of diet. Decreases in plasma aldosterone were sustained, with levels reduced by approximately 51 to 73% on day 10. Baxdrostat had no meaningful impact on plasma cortisol levels and resulted in mild dose-dependent decreases in plasma sodium levels and increases in potassium levels. Baxdrostat was safe and well tolerated with a half-life that supports once-daily dosing. The dose-dependent reduction in plasma aldosterone and lack of effect on cortisol demonstrate the selective blockade of aldosterone synthase.

Clerkship Chiefs: Introducing Students to the Role of Physician Educator.

As a Clerkship Chief, senior medical students prepare for future roles as physician leaders and future medical educators. The Clerkship Chief elective offers senior students an opportunity to work with junior students on their core clerkships. Chiefs assume an educational leadership role as they mentor and provide supplemental formative feedback to junior students in real time. As educators, Chiefs answer questions, prepare study materials and didactics, and assist clerkship students with time management. This early experience and behind-the-scenes view of medical education may influence attitudes and decisions of senior students in pursuit of education leadership.

Population Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Modeling of Weight-Based Intravenous Reslizumab Dosing.

Reslizumab 3.0 mg/kg has demonstrated efficacy in clinical studies of patients with eosinophilic asthma and a history of exacerbations. A population pharmacokinetic (PK) model was developed to determine whether 3.0 mg/kg weight-based dosing is appropriate to obtain consistent reslizumab exposures in all patients. PK data in healthy volunteers and patients ≥12 years with moderate to severe asthma, eosinophilic asthma, or nasal polyposis were analyzed from 4 phase 1, 2 phase 2, and 2 phase 3 studies of intravenous (IV) reslizumab (N = 804). Covariates evaluated included age, race, sex, baseline weight, renal and liver function, concomitant medications, and antidrug antibody status. Exposure-response models were developed to characterize key efficacy (blood eosinophil levels, forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV1 ], Asthma Control Questionnaire [ACQ-7] scores), and safety end points (muscle disorder adverse events [AEs]). Vial-based dosing was evaluated as an alternative to weight-based dosing. IV reslizumab PK was accurately described by a 2-compartment PK model with 0-order input and first-order elimination. Body weight was the only covariate that significantly influenced PK parameters. However, with weight-based dosing, comparable steady-state exposures were observed across high and low body weights. Greater eosinophil lowering and longer response duration were observed with increasing dose; exposure-related effects on FEV1 and ACQ-7 were also seen, demonstrating the clinical importance of a dosing regimen to optimize reslizumab exposure. The probability of a muscle disorder AE appeared to increase with increasing exposure. Steady-state exposure measures were similar for both dosing regimens, showing vial-based dosing as an alternative method of achieving the benefits of weight-based dosing.

What if the bully is the manager?

Bullying can occur at all levels of nursing, and anyone could be targeted. This article offers strategies to identify bullying behaviors and discusses the prevalence of incivility in the nursing profession with a focus on vertical violence.

Evaluation of the Relative Intranasal Abuse Potential of a Hydrocodone Extended-Release Tablet Formulated with Abuse-Deterrence Technology in Nondependent, Recreational Opioid Users.

Objective: To assess the intranasal abuse potential of hydrocodone extended-release (ER) tablets developed with CIMA Abuse-Deterrence Technology compared with hydrocodone powder and hydrocodone bitartrate ER capsules (Zohydro ER, original formulation [HYD-OF]). Design: Single-dose, randomized, double-blind, quadruple-dummy, active- and placebo-controlled, crossover study. Setting: One US site. Subjects: Healthy, adult, nondependent, recreational opioid users. Methods: Subjects able to tolerate intranasal hydrocodone and discriminate hydrocodone from placebo were eligible for study enrollment. Eligible participants randomly received intranasal hydrocodone ER, intranasal hydrocodone powder, intranasal HYD-OF, intact oral hydrocodone ER, and placebo. Coprimary pharmacodynamic end points were a maximum effect on "at the moment" Drug Liking visual analog scale and Overall Drug Liking visual analog scale. Pharmacokinetics and safety were assessed. Results: Mean maximum effect for "at the moment" Drug Liking was significantly (P < 0.01) lower for intranasal hydrocodone ER (72.8) compared with hydrocodone powder (80.2) and HYD-OF (83.2). Similar results were observed for Overall Drug Liking maximum effect (68.5 vs 77.1 and 79.8, respectively; P < 0.01). Secondary end points, including balance of effects and positive, sedative, and other effects, were consistent with these results. Intranasal treatments showed significantly greater effects vs placebo, while intact oral hydrocodone ER was similar to placebo. For each treatment, plasma concentration-time profiles paralleled "at the moment" Drug Liking over time. Incidences of adverse events for intranasal treatments were 52% for hydrocodone ER, 53% for hydrocodone powder, and 61% for HYD-OF. Conclusions: The statistically significant differences between hydrocodone ER vs hydrocodone powder and HYD-OF for the primary drug liking end points indicate a lower intranasal abuse potential with hydrocodone ER in healthy, nondependent, recreational opioid users.

Effect of Food on the Pharmacokinetics of Single- and Multiple-Dose Hydrocodone Extended Release in Healthy Subjects.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Food intake can alter the pharmacokinetics of certain medications, including changes in their oral bioavailability, which is of particular concern for extended-release (ER) opioids because of the high drug loads. Two randomized, open-label studies assessed the effect of food on the pharmacokinetics of single and multiple doses of hydrocodone ER formulated with CIMA® Abuse-Deterrence Technology. METHODS: Healthy subjects in fed and fasted states received single 90-mg doses of hydrocodone ER (Studies 1 and 2) or multiple doses of hydrocodone ER (45 mg twice daily on days 2-3, 60 mg twice daily on days 4-5, 90 mg twice daily on days 6-10, and 90 mg once in the morning on day 11) (Study 2). Naltrexone was administered to minimize opioid-related adverse events. Pharmacokinetic parameters included maximum hydrocodone plasma concentration (C max) and area under the concentration-versus-time curve from time 0 to infinity (AUC0-∞) in Study 1 (day 1) and for one dosing interval at steady state (AUCτ,ss) in Study 2 (day 11). Before conducting the multiple-dose study, single-dose data were fitted with a population pharmacokinetic methodology. RESULTS: In total, 40 subjects were randomized to Study 1 and 43 subjects were randomized to Study 2. While overall exposure (AUC0-∞) was relatively similar (least squares mean ratio [90% CI]: 1.11 [1.06-1.16]), results indicated that the single-dose C max was 40% higher under fed versus fasted conditions (least squares mean ratio [90% CI]: 1.40 [1.31-1.51]; Study 1). Modeling of single-dose data predicted that the effect of food would be much less at steady state [predicted fed:fasted C max at steady state (C max,ss) and AUCτ,ss ratios of 1.18 and 1.09, respectively]. The multiple-dose study results validated these predicted ratios and indicated that the steady-state 90% CIs were within 0.80-1.25 for the fed:fasted C max,ss (1.14 [1.07-1.21]) and AUCτ,ss (1.11 [1.04-1.17]) parameters, indicating that clinically meaningful food effects at steady state are not expected. CONCLUSION: No evidence of an effect of food was found on the pharmacokinetics of hydrocodone ER after multiple days of twice-daily dosing.

The clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of cetuximab (review of technology appraisal no. 176) and panitumumab (partial review of technology appraisal no. 240) for previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer: a systematic review and economic evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer is the fourth most commonly diagnosed cancer in the UK after breast, lung and prostate cancer. People with metastatic disease who are sufficiently fit are usually treated with active chemotherapy as first- or second-line therapy. Targeted agents are available, including the antiepidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) agents cetuximab (Erbitux®, Merck Serono UK Ltd, Feltham, UK) and panitumumab (Vecitibix®, Amgen UK Ltd, Cambridge, UK). OBJECTIVE: To investigate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of panitumumab in combination with chemotherapy and cetuximab in combination with chemotherapy for rat sarcoma (RAS) wild-type (WT) patients for the first-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer. DATA SOURCES: The assessment included a systematic review of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness studies, a review and critique of manufacturer submissions, and a de novo cohort-based economic analysis. For the assessment of effectiveness, a literature search was conducted up to 27 April 2015 in a range of electronic databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE and The Cochrane Library. REVIEW METHODS: Studies were included if they were randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or systematic reviews of RCTs of cetuximab or panitumumab in participants with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer with RAS WT status. All steps in the review were performed by one reviewer and checked independently by a second. Narrative synthesis and network meta-analyses (NMAs) were conducted for outcomes of interest. An economic model was developed focusing on first-line treatment and using a 30-year time horizon to capture costs and benefits. Costs and benefits were discounted at 3.5% per annum. Scenario analyses and probabilistic and univariate deterministic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: The searches identified 2811 titles and abstracts, of which five clinical trials were included. Additional data from these trials were provided by the manufacturers. No data were available for panitumumab plus irinotecan-based chemotherapy (folinic acid + 5-fluorouracil + irinotecan) (FOLFIRI) in previously untreated patients. Studies reported results for RAS WT subgroups. First-line treatment with anti-EGFR therapies in combination with chemotherapy appeared to have statistically significant benefits for patients who are RAS WT. For the independent economic evaluation, the base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for RAS WT patients for cetuximab plus oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy (folinic acid + 5-fluorouracil + oxaliplatin) (FOLFOX) compared with FOLFOX was £104,205 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained; for panitumumab plus FOLFOX compared with FOLFOX was £204,103 per QALY gained; and for cetuximab plus FOLFIRI compared with FOLFIRI was £122,554 per QALY gained. The ICERs were sensitive to treatment duration, progression-free survival, overall survival (resected patients only) and resection rates. LIMITATIONS: The trials included RAS WT populations only as subgroups. No evidence was available for panitumumab plus FOLFIRI. Two networks were used for the NMA and model, based on the different chemotherapies (FOLFOX and FOLFIRI), as insufficient evidence was available to the assessment group to connect these networks. CONCLUSIONS: Although cetuximab and panitumumab in combination with chemotherapy appear to be clinically beneficial for RAS WT patients compared with chemotherapy alone, they are likely to represent poor value for money when judged by cost-effectiveness criteria currently used in the UK. It would be useful to conduct a RCT in patients with RAS WT. STUDY REGISTRATION: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42015016111. FUNDING: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Abuse Potential with Oral Route of Administration of a Hydrocodone Extended-Release Tablet Formulated with Abuse-Deterrence Technology in Nondependent, Recreational Opioid Users.

Objective: To compare the oral abuse potential of hydrocodone extended-release (ER) tablet developed with CIMA ® Abuse-Deterrence Technology with that of hydrocodone immediate release (IR). Design: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study. Setting and Patients: One study site in the United States; adult nondependent, recreational opioid users. Methods: After confirming their ability to tolerate and discriminate hydrocodone IR 45 mg from placebo, eligible participants were randomized to receive each of the following oral treatments once: finely crushed placebo, hydrocodone IR 45-mg powder, intact hydrocodone ER 45-mg tablet, and finely crushed hydrocodone ER 45-mg tablet. Primary pharmacodynamic measure was "at the moment" drug liking. Secondary measures included overall drug liking, drug effects (e.g., balance, positive, negative, sedative), pupillometry, pharmacokinetics, and safety. Results: Mean maximum effect (E max ) for "at the moment" drug liking was significantly lower for intact (53.9) and finely crushed hydrocodone ER (66.9) vs. hydrocodone IR (85.2; P < 0.001). Drug liking for intact hydrocodone ER was comparable to placebo (E max : 53.9 vs. 53.2). Secondary measures were consistent with these results, indicating that positive, negative, and sedative drug effects were diminished with intact and crushed hydrocodone ER tablet vs. hydrocodone IR. The 72-hour plasma concentration-time profile for each treatment mimicked its respective "at the moment" drug-liking-over-time profile. Incidence of adverse events was lower with intact hydrocodone ER (53%) vs. hydrocodone IR (79%) and finely crushed hydrocodone ER (73%). Conclusions: The oral abuse potential of hydrocodone ER (intact and finely crushed) was significantly lower than hydrocodone IR in healthy, nondependent, recreational opioid users. Hydrocodone ER was generally well tolerated.

First do no harm: pain relief for the peripheral venous cannulation of adults, a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Peripheral venous cannulation is an everyday practice in hospitals, which many adults find painful. However, anaesthesia for cannulation is usually only offered to children. Inadequate pain relief is not only unpleasant for patients but may cause anxiety about further treatment and deter patients from seeking medical care in the future. The aim of this study is to discover the most effective local anaesthetic for adult peripheral venous cannulation and to find out how the pain of local anaesthetic application compares with that of unattenuated cannulation. METHODS: These aims are addressed through a systematic review, network meta-analysis and random-effects meta-analysis. Searching covered 12 databases including MEDLINE and EMBASE from 1990 to August 2015. The main included study design was RCTs. The primary outcome measure is self-reported pain, measured on a 100 mm visual analogue scale. RESULTS: The systematic review found 37 includable studies, 27 of which were suitable for network meta-analysis and two for random-effects meta-analysis. The results of the network meta-analysis indicate that none of the 17 anaesthetic considered had a very high probability of being the most effective when compared to each other; 2 % lidocaine had the highest probability (44 %). When the anaesthetics were compared to no treatment, the network meta-analysis showed that again 2 % lidocaine was estimated to be the most effective (mean difference -25.42 (95 % CI -32.25, -18.57). Other members of the 'caine' family were also estimated to be more effective than no treatment as were Ametop®, EMLA® and Rapydan® patch. The meta-analysis compared the pain of anaesthetic application with the unattenuated pain of cannulation. This found that all applications of local anaesthetic were less painful than cannulation without local anaesthetic. In particular a 1 % lidocaine injection was estimated to be -12.97 (95 % CI -15.71, -10.24) points (100 mm VAS) less painful than unattenuated cannulation. CONCLUSIONS: The pain of peripheral venous cannulation in adults can be successfully treated. The pain of application of any local anaesthetic is less than that of unattenuated cannulation. Local anaesthetic prior to cannulation should become normal practice and a marker of high quality care. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: The protocol for the larger study was registered with PROSPERO no. CRD42012002093 .

Immunosuppressive therapy for kidney transplantation in adults: a systematic review and economic model.

BACKGROUND: End-stage renal disease is a long-term irreversible decline in kidney function requiring renal replacement therapy: kidney transplantation, haemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis. The preferred option is kidney transplantation, followed by immunosuppressive therapy (induction and maintenance therapy) to reduce the risk of kidney rejection and prolong graft survival. OBJECTIVES: To review and update the evidence for the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of basiliximab (BAS) (Simulect(®), Novartis Pharmaceuticals UK Ltd) and rabbit anti-human thymocyte immunoglobulin (rATG) (Thymoglobulin(®), Sanofi) as induction therapy, and immediate-release tacrolimus (TAC) (Adoport(®), Sandoz; Capexion(®), Mylan; Modigraf(®), Astellas Pharma; Perixis(®), Accord Healthcare; Prograf(®), Astellas Pharma; Tacni(®), Teva; Vivadex(®), Dexcel Pharma), prolonged-release tacrolimus (Advagraf(®) Astellas Pharma), belatacept (BEL) (Nulojix(®), Bristol-Myers Squibb), mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) (Arzip(®), Zentiva; CellCept(®), Roche Products; Myfenax(®), Teva), mycophenolate sodium (MPS) (Myfortic(®), Novartis Pharmaceuticals UK Ltd), sirolimus (SRL) (Rapamune(®), Pfizer) and everolimus (EVL) (Certican(®), Novartis) as maintenance therapy in adult renal transplantation. METHODS: Clinical effectiveness searches were conducted until 18 November 2014 in MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE (via Ovid), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (via Wiley Online Library) and Web of Science (via ISI), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and Health Technology Assessment (The Cochrane Library via Wiley Online Library) and Health Management Information Consortium (via Ovid). Cost-effectiveness searches were conducted until 18 November 2014 using a costs or economic literature search filter in MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE (via Ovid), NHS Economic Evaluation Database (via Wiley Online Library), Web of Science (via ISI), Health Economic Evaluations Database (via Wiley Online Library) and the American Economic Association's electronic bibliography (via EconLit, EBSCOhost). Included studies were selected according to predefined methods and criteria. A random-effects model was used to analyse clinical effectiveness data (odds ratios for binary data and mean differences for continuous data). Network meta-analyses were undertaken within a Bayesian framework. A new discrete time-state transition economic model (semi-Markov) was developed, with acute rejection, graft function (GRF) and new-onset diabetes mellitus used to extrapolate graft survival. Recipients were assumed to be in one of three health states: functioning graft, graft loss or death. RESULTS: Eighty-nine randomised controlled trials (RCTs), of variable quality, were included. For induction therapy, no treatment appeared more effective than another in reducing graft loss or mortality. Compared with placebo/no induction, rATG and BAS appeared more effective in reducing biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR) and BAS appeared more effective at improving GRF. For maintenance therapy, no treatment was better for all outcomes and no treatment appeared most effective at reducing graft loss. BEL + MMF appeared more effective than TAC + MMF and SRL + MMF at reducing mortality. MMF + CSA (ciclosporin), TAC + MMF, SRL + TAC, TAC + AZA (azathioprine) and EVL + CSA appeared more effective than CSA + AZA and EVL + MPS at reducing BPAR. SRL + AZA, TAC + AZA, TAC + MMF and BEL + MMF appeared to improve GRF compared with CSA + AZA and MMF + CSA. In the base-case deterministic and probabilistic analyses, BAS, MMF and TAC were predicted to be cost-effective at £20,000 and £30,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). When comparing all regimens, only BAS + TAC + MMF was cost-effective at £20,000 and £30,000 per QALY. LIMITATIONS: For included trials, there was substantial methodological heterogeneity, few trials reported follow-up beyond 1 year, and there were insufficient data to perform subgroup analysis. Treatment discontinuation and switching were not modelled. FUTURE WORK: High-quality, better-reported, longer-term RCTs are needed. Ideally, these would be sufficiently powered for subgroup analysis and include health-related quality of life as an outcome. CONCLUSION: Only a regimen of BAS induction followed by maintenance with TAC and MMF is likely to be cost-effective at £20,000-30,000 per QALY. STUDY REGISTRATION: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42014013189. FUNDING: The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.

Immunosuppressive therapy for kidney transplantation in children and adolescents: systematic review and economic evaluation.

BACKGROUND: End-stage renal disease is a long-term irreversible decline in kidney function requiring kidney transplantation, haemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis. The preferred option is kidney transplantation followed by induction and maintenance immunosuppressive therapy to reduce the risk of kidney rejection and prolong graft survival. OBJECTIVES: To systematically review and update the evidence for the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of basiliximab (BAS) (Simulect,(®) Novartis Pharmaceuticals) and rabbit antihuman thymocyte immunoglobulin (Thymoglobuline,(®) Sanofi) as induction therapy and immediate-release tacrolimus [Adoport(®) (Sandoz); Capexion(®) (Mylan); Modigraf(®) (Astellas Pharma); Perixis(®) (Accord Healthcare); Prograf(®) (Astellas Pharma); Tacni(®) (Teva); Vivadex(®) (Dexcel Pharma)], prolonged-release tacrolimus (Advagraf,(®) Astellas Pharma); belatacept (BEL) (Nulojix,(®) Bristol-Myers Squibb), mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) [Arzip(®) (Zentiva), CellCept(®) (Roche Products), Myfenax(®) (Teva), generic MMF is manufactured by Accord Healthcare, Actavis, Arrow Pharmaceuticals, Dr Reddy's Laboratories, Mylan, Sandoz and Wockhardt], mycophenolate sodium, sirolimus (Rapamune,(®) Pfizer) and everolimus (Certican,(®) Novartis Pharmaceuticals) as maintenance therapy in children and adolescents undergoing renal transplantation. DATA SOURCES: Clinical effectiveness searches were conducted to 7 January 2015 in MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE (via Ovid), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (via Wiley Online Library) and Web of Science [via Institute for Scientific Information (ISI)], Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects and Health Technology Assessment (HTA) (The Cochrane Library via Wiley Online Library) and Health Management Information Consortium (via Ovid). Cost-effectiveness searches were conducted to 15 January 2015 using a costs or economic literature search filter in MEDLINE (via Ovid), EMBASE (via Ovid), NHS Economic Evaluation Databases (via Wiley Online Library), Web of Science (via ISI), Health Economic Evaluations Database (via Wiley Online Library) and EconLit (via EBSCOhost). REVIEW METHODS: Titles and abstracts were screened according to predefined inclusion criteria, as were full texts of identified studies. Included studies were extracted and quality appraised. Data were meta-analysed when appropriate. A new discrete time state transition economic model (semi-Markov) was developed; graft function, and incidences of acute rejection and new-onset diabetes mellitus were used to extrapolate graft survival. Recipients were assumed to be in one of three health states: functioning graft, graft loss or death. RESULTS: Three randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and four non-RCTs were included. The RCTs only evaluated BAS and tacrolimus (TAC). No statistically significant differences in key outcomes were found between BAS and placebo/no induction. Statistically significantly higher graft function (p < 0.01) and less biopsy-proven acute rejection (odds ratio 0.29, 95% confidence interval 0.15 to 0.57) was found between TAC and ciclosporin (CSA). Only one cost-effectiveness study was identified, which informed NICE guidance TA99. BAS [with TAC and azathioprine (AZA)] was predicted to be cost-effective at £20,000-30,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) versus no induction (BAS was dominant). BAS (with CSA and MMF) was not predicted to be cost-effective at £20,000-30,000 per QALY versus no induction (BAS was dominated). TAC (with AZA) was predicted to be cost-effective at £20,000-30,000 per QALY versus CSA (TAC was dominant). A model based on adult evidence suggests that at a cost-effectiveness threshold of £20,000-30,000 per QALY, BAS and TAC are cost-effective in all considered combinations; MMF was also cost-effective with CSA but not TAC. LIMITATIONS: The RCT evidence is very limited; analyses comparing all interventions need to rely on adult evidence. CONCLUSIONS: TAC is likely to be cost-effective (vs. CSA, in combination with AZA) at £20,000-30,000 per QALY. Analysis based on one RCT found BAS to be dominant, but analysis based on another RCT found BAS to be dominated. BAS plus TAC and AZA was predicted to be cost-effective at £20,000-30,000 per QALY when all regimens were compared using extrapolated adult evidence. High-quality primary effectiveness research is needed. The UK Renal Registry could form the basis for a prospective primary study. STUDY REGISTRATION: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42014013544. FUNDING: The National Institute for Health Research HTA programme.

Effects of Renal Impairment and Hepatic Impairment on the Pharmacokinetics of Hydrocodone After Administration of a Hydrocodone Extended-Release Tablet Formulated With Abuse-Deterrence Technology.

Two open-label, single-dose, parallel-group studies assessed effects of renal and hepatic impairment on the pharmacokinetics of a hydrocodone extended-release (ER) formulation developed with the CIMA Abuse-Deterrence Technology platform. Forty-eight subjects with normal renal function or varying degrees of renal impairment received hydrocodone ER 45 mg (study 1); 16 subjects with normal hepatic function or moderate hepatic impairment received hydrocodone ER 15 mg (study 2). Blood samples were obtained predose and through 144 hours postdose. Mean maximum observed plasma hydrocodone concentration (Cmax ) in subjects with normal renal function, mild, moderate, and severe impairment, and end-stage renal disease was 28.6, 33.4, 42.4, 36.5, and 31.6 ng/mL, and mean area under the plasma hydrocodone concentration-versus-time curve from time 0 to infinity (AUC0-∞ ) was 565, 660, 973, 983, and 638 ng·h/mL, respectively. Incidence of adverse events was 57%, 38%, 44%, 33%, and 56%, respectively. Mean Cmax with normal hepatic function and moderate impairment was 10.1 and 13.0 ng/mL, and mean AUC0-∞ was 155 and 269 ng·h/mL, respectively. Incidence of adverse events was 38% in both groups. Altered systemic exposure in renally or hepatically impaired populations (up to ∼70% higher) should be considered when titrating to an effective dose of hydrocodone ER.

Abuse-deterrent formulations of prescription opioid analgesics in the management of chronic noncancer pain.

Misuse, abuse and diversion of prescription opioid analgesics represent a global public health concern. The development of abuse-deterrent formulations (ADFs) of prescription opioid analgesics is an important step toward reducing abuse and diversion of these medications, as well as potentially limiting medical consequences when misused or administered in error. ADFs aim to hinder extraction of the active ingredient, prevent administration through alternative routes and/or make abuse of the manipulated product less attractive, less rewarding or aversive. However, opioid ADFs may still be abused via the intended route of administration by increasing the dose and/or dosing frequency. The science of abuse deterrence and the regulatory landscape are still relatively new and evolving. This paper reviews the current status of opioid ADFs, with particular focus on different approaches that can be used to deter abuse, regulatory considerations and implications for clinical management.

Routes of abuse of prescription opioid analgesics: a review and assessment of the potential impact of abuse-deterrent formulations.

Prescription opioid analgesics are an important treatment option for patients with chronic pain; however, misuse, abuse and diversion of these medications are a major global public health concern. Prescription opioid analgesics can be abused via intended and non-intended routes of administration, both intact or after manipulation of the original formulation to alter the drug-delivery characteristics. Available data indicate that ingestion (with or without manipulation of the prescribed formulation) is the most prevalent route of abuse, followed by inhalation (snorting, smoking and vaping) and injection. However, reported routes of abuse vary considerably between different formulations. A number of factors have been identified that appear to be associated with non-oral routes of abuse, including a longer duration of abuse, younger age, male sex and a rural or socially deprived location. The development of abuse-deterrent formulations of prescription opioid analgesics is an important step toward reducing abuse of these medications. Available abuse-deterrent formulations aim to hinder extraction of the active ingredient, prevent administration through alternative routes and/or make abuse of the manipulated product less attractive, less rewarding or even aversive. There are currently five opioid analgesics with a Food and Drug Administration abuse-deterrent label, and a number of other products are under review. A growing body of evidence suggests that introduction of abuse-deterrent opioid analgesics in the USA has been associated with decreased rates of abuse of these formulations. The availability of abuse-deterrent formulations therefore appears to represent an important step toward curbing the epidemic of abuse of prescription opioid analgesics, while ensuring the availability of effective pain medications for patients with legitimate medical need.

Assessment of Alcohol-Induced Dose Dumping with a Hydrocodone Bitartrate Extended-Release Tablet Formulated with CIMA(®) Abuse Deterrence Technology.

BACKGROUND: Greater drug content requirements for extended-release (ER) opioids necessitate greater protection against dose dumping. Hydrocodone ER employs the CIMA(®) Abuse-Deterrence Technology platform, which provides resistance against rapid release of the active moiety when the tablet is manipulated or taken with alcohol. OBJECTIVE: Assess effects of alcohol on hydrocodone ER pharmacokinetics. STUDY DESIGN: Open-label, crossover (January 25-April 30, 2010). SETTING: Single center. PARTICIPANTS: Forty healthy adults. INTERVENTION: Subjects received all four treatments in a randomized manner (separated by a minimum 5-day washout): hydrocodone ER 15 mg with 240 mL water and 240 mL orange juice containing 4, 20, and 40% alcohol in a fasted state. Naltrexone was administered to minimize opioid-related adverse events. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Effect of alcohol on pharmacokinetics of hydrocodone ER assessed by comparing systemic exposure [maximum plasma drug concentration (Cmax) and area under the plasma drug concentration-versus-time curve from time 0 to infinity (AUC0-∞)] after administration with alcohol or with water. RESULTS: Geometric means ratios of hydrocodone ER with 4, 20, and 40% alcohol relative to water were 1.05, 1.09, and 1.14, respectively, for Cmax and 1.07, 1.13, and 1.17, respectively, for AUC0-∞. All 90% confidence intervals for these geometric means ratios fell within the limits of 0.8 and 1.25. Increasing alcohol concentrations did not notably affect systemic exposure but were associated with increased adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Hydrocodone ER tablets were resistant to dose dumping when administered with alcohol in healthy subjects based on similar systemic exposures observed across all treatments.

Evaluation of potential pharmacokinetic drug-drug interaction between armodafinil and risperidone in healthy adults.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Patients with bipolar I disorder and schizophrenia have an increased risk of obstructive sleep apnea. The effects of armodafinil, a weak cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 inducer, on pharmacokinetics and safety of risperidone, an atypical antipsychotic used to treat major psychiatric illness, were investigated. METHODS: Healthy subjects received 2 mg risperidone alone and after armodafinil pretreatment (titrated to 250 mg/day). Pharmacokinetic parameters were derived from plasma concentrations of risperidone and its active metabolite, 9-hydroxyrisperidone (formed via CYP2D6 and CYP3A4), collected before and over 4 days after risperidone administration, and from steady-state plasma concentrations of armodafinil and its circulating metabolites, R-modafinil acid and modafinil sulfone. Safety and tolerability were assessed. RESULTS: Thirty-six subjects receiving study drug were evaluable for safety; 34 were evaluable for pharmacokinetics. Risperidone maximum plasma concentration (C max) decreased from mean 16.5 ng/mL when given alone to 9.2 ng/mL after armodafinil pretreatment (geometric mean ratio [90 % CI] 0.55 [0.50-0.61]); area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 to infinity (AUC0-∞) decreased from 92.3 to 44.5 ng·h/mL (geometric mean ratio [90 % CI] 0.51 [0.46-0.55]). C max and AUC0-∞ for 9-hydroxyrisperidone were also reduced (geometric mean ratios [90 % CI] 0.81 [0.77-0.85] and 0.73 [0.69-0.77], respectively). Adverse events were consistent with known safety profiles. CONCLUSION: Consistent with CYP3A4 induction, risperidone and 9-hydroxyrisperidone systemic exposure was reduced in the presence of armodafinil. Concomitant armodafinil and risperidone use may necessitate risperidone dosage adjustment, particularly when starting or stopping coadministration of the two drugs. However, any such decision should be based on patient disease state and clinical status.