The Effect of Food or Omeprazole on the Pharmacokinetics of Osimertinib in Patients With Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer and in Healthy Volunteers.

Two phase 1, open-label studies assessed the impact of food or gastric pH modification (omeprazole) on the exposure and safety/tolerability of osimertinib and its metabolites. The food effect study was an open-label, 2-period crossover study in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer, randomized into 2 treatment sequences: single-dose osimertinib 80 mg in a fed then fasted state or fasted then fed. The gastric pH study was an open-label, 2-period fixed sequence study assessing the effect of omeprazole on osimertinib exposure in healthy male volunteers. In period 1, volunteers received omeprazole 40 mg (days 1-4), then omeprazole 40 mg plus osimertinib 80 mg (day 5). In period 2, volunteers received osimertinib 80 mg alone (single dose). Blood samples were collected at prespecified time points for pharmacokinetic analyses. Safety/tolerability was also assessed. In the food effect study 38 patients were randomized to fed/fasted (n = 18) or fasted/fed (n = 20) sequences with all patients completing treatment. Coadministration with food did not affect osimertinib exposure (geometric least-squares mean ratios [90% confidence intervals]: 106.05% [94.82%, 118.60%] [area under the plasma concentration time curve from zero to 72 hours] and 92.75% [81.40%, 105.68%] [maximum plasma concentration]). In the gastric pH study (n = 68 received treatment, n = 47 completed the study), coadministration with omeprazole did not affect osimertinib exposure (geometric least-squares mean ratios 106.66% [100.26%, 113.46%] [area under the concentration-time curve], 101.65% [94.65%, 109.16%] [peak concentration]). Osimertinib was well tolerated in both studies. Osimertinib may be administered without regard to food. Dose restriction is not required in patients whose gastric pH may be altered by concomitant agents or medical conditions. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02224053, NCT02163733.

Comparison of the Pharmacokinetics of the Phase II and Phase III Capsule Formulations of Selumetinib and the Effects of Food on Exposure: Results From Two Randomized Crossover Trials in Healthy Male Subjects.

PURPOSE: Selumetinib (AZD6244, ARRY-142886), an oral, potent, and highly selective mitogen-activated protein kinase 1/2 inhibitor with a short half-life, has shown activity across various tumor types. Before initiation of Phase III trials, the site, scale, and color (hypromellose shell from white [Phase II] to blue [Phase III]) of the selumetinib 25mg capsule manufacture was changed. We present 2 crossover trials evaluating Phase III capsules in healthy subjects. METHODS: The relative bioavailability trial was a Phase I, open-label, randomized, 3-treatment, 4-period, 6-sequence crossover trial in healthy male subjects (aged 18-55 years). Subjects received selumetinib 75mg (3 × 25 mg) Phase II or Phase III capsules, or a 35mg oral solution, during 4 dosing periods in 1 of 6 randomized treatment sequences. The food effect trial was a Phase I, open-label, randomized, 2-period crossover trial in healthy male subjects (aged 18-45 years). Subjects were randomized to 1 of 2 sequences to receive selumetinib 75mg (3 × 25 mg) Phase III capsules. In sequence 1, subjects received selumetinib after 10 hours of fasting. Following a washout period, selumetinib was administered after a high-fat meal. In sequence 2, subjects received selumetinib in the fed state, before the fasted state. Pharmacokinetic parameters were determined from serial blood sampling. FINDINGS: Twenty-seven subjects were randomized to the relative bioavailability trial; 26 completed all dosing periods. Mean selumetinib AUC was unchanged (geometric least squares mean ratio [GLSMR], 90.01% [90% CI, 81.74-99.11]). Cmax was 18% lower with the Phase III capsules (GLSMR, 81.97% [90% CI, 69.01-97.36]). A post hoc exploratory statistical analysis excluding outlying observations with later Tmax showed that Phase II and III capsules produced similar exposure in terms of Cmax and AUC. High intrasubject variability for Cmax attributed to the pharmacokinetic sampling schedule was judged to have impacted on the estimated GLSMR. In the food effect trial, 34 subjects completed both study periods. A high-fat meal reduced selumetinib Cmax compared with the fasted state (GLSMR, 49.76% [90% CI, 43.82-56.51]); AUC was minimally changed (GLSMR, 84.08% [90% CI, 80.72-87.59]). Median Tmax was prolonged by 1.49 hours. No deaths or serious adverse events were reported. IMPLICATIONS: Selumetinib 75mg (3 × 25 mg) Phase III capsules are being used in ongoing pivotal Phase III trials and should be administered in the fasted state. Based on findings from the relative bioavailability trial, pharmacokinetic sampling frequency was increased for healthy subject trials, including the food effect trial. ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT01635023 (relative bioavailability) and NCT01974349 (food effect).

Tenapanor administration and the activity of the H+ -coupled transporter PepT1 in healthy volunteers.

AIM: Tenapanor (RDX5791/AZD1722), an inhibitor of gastrointestinal Na+ /H+ exchanger NHE3, is being evaluated for the treatment of patients with constipation-predominant irritable bowel syndrome and the treatment of hyperphosphataemia in patients with chronic kidney disease on dialysis. By reducing intestinal H+ secretion, inhibition of NHE3 by tenapanor could indirectly affect H+ -coupled transporter activity, leading to drug-drug interactions. We investigated the effect of tenapanor on the activity of the H+ -coupled peptide transporter PepT1 via assessment of the pharmacokinetics of cefadroxil - a compound transported by PepT1 - in healthy volunteers. METHODS: In this open-label, two-period crossover, phase 1 study (NCT02140281), 28 volunteers received in random order: a single dose of cefadroxil 500 mg for 1 day; and tenapanor 15 mg twice daily over 4 days followed by single doses of both cefadroxil 500 mg and tenapanor 15 mg on day 5. There was a 4-day washout between treatment periods. RESULTS: Cefadroxil exposure was similar when administered alone or in combination with tenapanor {geometric least-squares mean ratios [(cefadroxil + tenapanor)/cefadroxil] (90% confidence interval): area under the concentration-time curve 93.3 (90.6-96.0)%; maximum concentration in plasma 95.9 (89.8-103)%}. Tenapanor treatment caused a softening of stool consistency and an increase in stool frequency, consistent with its expected pharmacodynamic effect. No safety concerns were identified and tenapanor was not detected in plasma. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that tenapanor 15 mg twice daily does not have a clinically relevant impact on the activity of the H+ -coupled transporter PepT1 in humans. This may guide future research on drug-drug interactions involving NHE3 inhibitors.

Effects of cytochrome P450 (CYP3A4 and CYP2C19) inhibition and induction on the exposure of selumetinib, a MEK1/2 inhibitor, in healthy subjects: results from two clinical trials.

PURPOSE: Two phase I, open-label trials in healthy subjects assessed whether co-administration with CYP3A4/CYP2C19 inhibitors, itraconazole/fluconazole (study A), or CYP3A4 inducer, rifampicin (study B), affects the exposure, safety/tolerability and pharmacokinetics of selumetinib and its metabolite N-desmethyl selumetinib. METHODS: In study A (n = 26), subjects received a single dose of selumetinib 25 mg and, after 4 days of washout, were randomized to treatment 1 (itraconazole 200 mg twice daily on days 1-11) or treatment 2 (fluconazole 400 mg on day 1 then 200 mg/day on days 2-11) plus co-administration of single-dose selumetinib 25 mg on day 8 (selumetinib staggered 4 h after itraconazole/fluconazole dose); Twenty-one days after discharge/washout, subjects received the alternate treatment. In study B (n = 22), subjects received a single dose of selumetinib 75 mg (day 1) then rifampicin 600 mg/day (days 4-14) plus a single dose of selumetinib 75 mg on day 12. Pharmacokinetic analysis and safety assessments were performed. RESULTS: Selumetinib co-administered with itraconazole, fluconazole (selumetinib staggered 4 h after itraconazole/fluconazole dose), or rifampicin was well tolerated. Selumetinib exposure was higher when co-administered with itraconazole or fluconazole (area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) increased by 49 and 53%, respectively; maximum plasma concentration (C max) increased by 19 and 26%, respectively) but lower when co-dosed with rifampicin (AUC and C max decreased by 51 and 26%, respectively) versus selumetinib dosed alone. Co-administration with itraconazole or rifampicin decreased N-desmethyl selumetinib AUC(0-t) (11 and 55%, respectively), and C max (25 and 18%, respectively), with fluconazole, AUC(0-t) increased by 40%, but there was no effect on C max. CONCLUSIONS: Co-administration of CYP3A4/CYP2C19 inhibitors will likely increase exposure to selumetinib, while CYP3A4 inducers will likely reduce its exposure.

Effects of ranitidine (antacid), food, and formulation on the pharmacokinetics of fostamatinib: results from five phase I clinical studies.

PURPOSE: Fostamatinib is an orally dosed phosphate prodrug that is cleaved by intestinal alkaline phosphatase to the active metabolite R406. Clinical studies were performed to assess the effect of food and ranitidine on exposure, to support in vitro-in vivo relationships (IVIVR) understanding and formulation transitions and to investigate absolute oral bioavailability. METHODS: A series of in vitro dissolution and clinical pharmacokinetic studies were performed to support the design and introduction of a new formulation, understand the impact of changes in in vitro dissolution on in vivo performance for two fostamatinib formulations, to characterize the effects of food and ranitidine on exposure, and determine the absolute oral bioavailability. RESULTS: The in vivo performance of fostamatinib was generally insensitive to changes in in vitro dissolution performance, although marked slowing of the dissolution rate did impact exposures. Food and ranitidine had minor effects on R406 exposure that were not considered clinically relevant. The absolute oral bioavailability of fostamatinib was 54.6 %. CONCLUSIONS: The absolute oral bioavailability of fostamatinib was ~55 %. Food and ranitidine had minor effects on R406 exposure. An in vitro dissolution versus clinical performance relationship was determined that supported formulation transitions.

Pharmacokinetic evaluations of the co-administrations of vandetanib and metformin, digoxin, midazolam, omeprazole or ranitidine.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Vandetanib is a selective inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR), epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and rearranged during transfection (RET) signalling, indicated for the treatment of medullary thyroid cancer. We investigated potential drug-drug interactions between vandetanib and metformin [organic cation transporter 2 (OCT2) substrate; NCT01551615]; digoxin [P-glycoprotein (P-gp) substrate; NCT01561781]; midazolam [cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 substrate; NCT01544140]; omeprazole (proton pump inhibitor) or ranitidine (histamine H2-receptor antagonist; both NCT01539655). METHODS: Four open-label, phase I studies were conducted in healthy volunteers: n = 14 (metformin), n = 14 (digoxin), n = 17 (midazolam), n = 16 (omeprazole), n = 18 (ranitidine). Three of these comprised the following regimens: metformin 1000 mg ± vandetanib 800 mg, midazolam 7.5 mg ± vandetanib 800 mg, or digoxin 0.25 mg ± vandetanib 300 mg. The randomized study comprised vandetanib 300 mg alone and then either (i) omeprazole 40 mg (days 1-4), and omeprazole + vandetanib (day 5); or (ii) ranitidine 150 mg (day 1), and ranitidine + vandetanib (day 2). The primary objective assessed metformin, digoxin, midazolam and vandetanib pharmacokinetics. RESULTS: Vandetanib + metformin increased metformin area under the plasma concentration-time curve from zero to infinity (AUC0-∞) and maximum observed plasma concentration (Cmax) by 74 and 50 %, respectively, and decreased the geometric mean metformin renal clearance (CLR) by 52 % versus metformin alone. Vandetanib + digoxin increased digoxin area under the concentration-time curve from zero to the last quantifiable concentration (AUC0-last) and Cmax by 23 and 29 %, respectively, versus digoxin alone, with only a 9 % decrease in CLR. Vandetanib had no effect on midazolam exposure. Vandetanib exposure was unchanged during co-administration with omeprazole/ranitidine. Treatment combinations were generally well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Patients receiving vandetanib with metformin/digoxin may require additional monitoring of metformin/digoxin, with dose adjustments where necessary. Vandetanib with CYP3A4 substrates or omeprazole/ranitidine is unlikely to result in clinically relevant drug-drug interactions.

Effect of a monoclonal antibody to PCSK9 on LDL cholesterol.

BACKGROUND: Proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin 9 (PCSK9), one of the serine proteases, binds to low-density lipoprotein (LDL) receptors, leading to their accelerated degradation and to increased LDL cholesterol levels. We report three phase 1 studies of a monoclonal antibody to PCSK9 designated as REGN727/SAR236553 (REGN727). METHODS: In healthy volunteers, we performed two randomized, single ascending-dose studies of REGN727 administered either intravenously (40 subjects) or subcutaneously (32 subjects), as compared with placebo. These studies were followed by a randomized, placebo-controlled, multiple-dose trial in adults with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia who were receiving atorvastatin (21 subjects) and those with nonfamilial hypercholesterolemia who were receiving treatment with atorvastatin (30 subjects) (baseline LDL cholesterol, >100 mg per deciliter [2.6 mmol per liter]) or a modified diet alone (10 subjects) (baseline LDL cholesterol, >130 mg per deciliter [3.4 mmol per liter]). REGN727 doses of 50, 100, or 150 mg were administered subcutaneously on days 1, 29, and 43. The primary outcome for all studies was the occurrence of adverse events. The principal secondary outcome was the effect of REGN727 on the lipid profile. RESULTS: Among subjects receiving REGN727, there were no discontinuations because of adverse events. REGN727 significantly lowered LDL cholesterol levels in all the studies. In the multiple-dose study, REGN727 doses of 50, 100, and 150 mg reduced measured LDL cholesterol levels in the combined atorvastatin-treated populations to 77.5 mg per deciliter (2.00 mmol per liter), 61.3 mg per deciliter (1.59 mmol per liter), and 53.8 mg per deciliter (1.39 mmol per liter), for a difference in the change from baseline of -39.2, -53.7, and -61.0 percentage points, respectively, as compared with placebo (P<0.001 for all comparisons). CONCLUSIONS: In three phase 1 trials, a monoclonal antibody to PCSK9 significantly reduced LDL cholesterol levels in healthy volunteers and in subjects with familial or nonfamilial hypercholesterolemia. (Funded by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals and Sanofi; ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT01026597, NCT01074372, and NCT01161082.).

Physicians' intention to educate about emergency contraception.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to examine the intention of academic primary care physicians to educate women about emergency contraception (EC) and whether differences in their intention varies with patient situation, knowledge and attitudes about EC, gender, or specialty. METHODS: As part of a larger cross-sectional survey about intention to prescribe EC with 96 faculty physicians from one Southern and three Midwestern universities, we analyzed factors associated with intention to educate patients about EC. Physicians were from departments of family medicine, obstetrics-gynecology, and pediatrics. RESULTS: The main outcome variable was intention to educate about EC. Attitudes and perceived peer expectations on educating about EC predicted physicians' intentions to provide EC education to their patients. Neither knowledge about EC nor physician demographics predicted intention to educate. Almost one in five respondents were reluctant to provide education to sexually active adolescents. Physicians who had high intention to educate were more likely than others to believe that educating about EC enhances a woman's reproductive options and that EC education reduces unintended pregnancy and abortion. Providers with low intention to educate were more likely to consider EC education to be inconvenient and to take too much clinic time. CONCLUSIONS: To maximize training programs, physicians' attitudes, beliefs, and professional expectations should be examined when designing and initiating educational interventions.

Using the theory of reasoned action to explain physician intention to prescribe emergency contraception.

CONTEXT: Although research has examined providers' knowledge, attitudes and prescribing behaviors with regard to emergency contraception, none has used a theory-based approach to understanding the interplay of these factors. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey of 96 faculty physicians from one Southern and three Midwestern universities was conducted in 2004 to assess factors associated with intention to prescribe emergency contraception. The theory of reasoned action guided the study hypotheses and survey design. Correlation and regression analyses were used to examine the data. RESULTS: Only 42% of respondents strongly intended to prescribe emergency contraception for teenagers, but 65-77% intended to do so for all other specified groups (women who ask for the method, who have had a method problem, who have experienced rape or incest, and who have had unprotected sex). Consistent with the theory of reasoned action, high intention to prescribe emergency contraception was associated with positive attitudes toward doing so and with the perception that specific colleagues or professional groups support prescribing it; however, the perception of support by colleagues or professional groups in general did not predict intention. Also consistent with the theory, physicians' knowledge about emergency contraception and their demographic characteristics were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions to encourage physicians to provide emergency contraception should take into account their attitudes toward the method and the components of those attitudes.