Relative Bioavailability Risk Assessment: A Systematic Approach to Assessing In Vivo Risk Associated With CM&C-Related Changes.

Relative bioavailability (RBA) studies are often carried out to bridge changes made between drug products used for clinical studies. In this work, we describe the development of a risk assessment (RA) tool that comprehensively and objectively assesses the risk of noncomparable in vivo performance associated with Chemistry, Manufacturing, and Controls (CM&C)-related changes. The RA tool is based on a risk grid that provides a quantitative context to facilitate discussions to determine the need for an in vivo RBA study. Relevant regulatory guidances and the required in vitro and in silico absorption modeling data, on which the RA is based, are discussed. In addition, an analysis of previously executed RBA studies at Eli Lilly and Company over a period of several years is presented. The risk grid incorporates individual risk factors for a given study and provides a recommendation on the risk associated with bypassing an RBA study. The outcome of an RA results in 1 of 3 possible risk zones; lower tier risk, intermediate tier risk, and upper tier risk. In cases where the outcome from the RA falls into the intermediate tier risk zone, further in depth data analysis is required.

Antimicrobial Activity of Penicillin G and N-acetylcystein on Planktonic and Sessile Cells of Streptococcus suis.

The aim of this study was to investigate the capacity of Streptococcus suis strains to form biofilms and to evaluate the antimicrobial activity of Penicillin G and N-acetylcystein (NAC) on both S. suis sessile and planktonic forms. Only non-typeable isolates of S. suis were correlated with a greater biofilm formation capacity. The MCI of Penicillin G and NAC required for inhibiting biofilm growth were higher than the required concentration for inhibiting planktonic growth. The combinations of NAC and Penicillin G showed a strong synergistic activity that inhibited biofilm formation and disrupted the pre-formed biofilm of S. suis.

Pharmacodynamics of norepinephrine reuptake inhibition: Modeling the peripheral and central effects of atomoxetine, duloxetine, and edivoxetine on the biomarker 3,4-dihydroxyphenylglycol in humans.

Norepinephrine, a neurotransmitter in the autonomic sympathetic nervous system, is deaminated by monoamine oxidase to 3,4-dihydroxyphenylglycol (DHPG). Inhibition of the NE transporter (NET) using DHPG as a biomarker was evaluated using atomoxetine, duloxetine, and edivoxetine as probe NET inhibitors. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic data were obtained from healthy subjects (n = 160) from 5 clinical trials. An indirect response model was used to describe the relationship between drug plasma concentration and DHPG concentration in plasma and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). The baseline plasma DHPG concentration (1130-1240 ng/mL) and Imax (33%-37%) were similar for the 3 drugs. The unbound plasma drug IC50 (IC50U ) based on plasma DHPG was 0.973 nM for duloxetine, 0.136 nM for atomoxetine, and 0.041 nM for edivoxetine. The baseline CSF DHPG concentration (1850-2260 ng/mL) was similar for the 3 drugs, but unlike plasma DHPG, the Imax for DHPG was 38% for duloxetine, 53% for atomoxetine, and75% for edivoxetine. The IC50U based on CSF DHPG was 2.72 nM for atomoxetine, 1.22 nM for duloxetine, and 0.794 nM for edivoxetine. These modeling results provide insights into the pharmacology of NET inhibitors and the use of DHPG as a biomarker.

Pharmacokinetics of orally administered duloxetine in children and adolescents with major depressive disorder.

BACKGROUND: Duloxetine, a selective serotonin (5-hydroxytryptamine) and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, has been approved since 2004 for the treatment of adults with major depressive disorder (MDD). It is currently not approved for use in pediatric patients (aged <18 years) with MDD. The clinical development program for duloxetine in the pediatric MDD population, which consisted of three clinical studies, provided extensive data on the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of duloxetine across a wide dose range in pediatric patients of differing ages, sex, body weights, and sexual maturation. OBJECTIVES: The objectives were to characterize the pharmacokinetics of duloxetine based on population modeling following daily oral administration in children and adolescents aged 7-17 years diagnosed with MDD; to estimate the magnitude of between- and within-patient variability; to identify potential patient factors affecting duloxetine pharmacokinetics, and to compare duloxetine pharmacokinetics in the pediatric population with those characterized in adults. METHODS: The analyses meta-dataset was created from pharmacokinetic and demographic data available from one phase II (open-label) and two phase III (randomized, double-blind) clinical trials of duloxetine in children and adolescents. Patients received 20-120 mg of oral duloxetine once daily. Duloxetine concentrations (a total of 1,581 concentrations) were obtained from 428 patients: 34% were children (aged 7-11 years) and 66% were adolescents (aged 12-18 years). Population modeling analyses were performed using nonlinear mixed-effects modeling and the first-order conditional estimation method with interaction. Patient factors were assessed for their potential influence on duloxetine apparent clearance (CL/F) and apparent volume of distribution (V d/F). Duloxetine pharmacokinetic parameters and model-predicted duloxetine concentrations at steady state in the pediatric population were compared with those in adults. RESULTS: Duloxetine pharmacokinetics in pediatric patients was described by a one-compartmental model. Typical values of CL/F, V d/F, and half-life (t 1/2) at 60 mg/day of duloxetine were 79.7 L/h, 1,200 L, and 10.4 h, respectively. The between-patient variability in CL/F and V d/F was 68 and 87%, respectively, while within-patient variability was 57% (proportional error) and 2.04 ng/mL (additive error). Body surface area (BSA), dose, and race had a statistically significant effect on duloxetine pharmacokinetics. With a 2.2-fold increase in BSA, the CL/F increased about twofold. A sixfold increase in dose (20 to 120 mg) decreased CL/F by 32%. In American Indian patients, V d/F was 131% higher than the other races combined. Age, sex, body mass index, serum creatinine, cytochrome P450 2D6 predicted phenotype, and menarche status did not have a statistically significant effect. Estimates of CL/F and V d/F were higher in the pediatric population than in adults; subsequently, the average steady-state duloxetine concentration was approximately 30% lower in the pediatric population than in adults. CONCLUSIONS: Duloxetine pharmacokinetics was similar in children and adolescents with MDD. The statistically significant effects of dose, BSA, and race on duloxetine pharmacokinetics in pediatric patients did not appear to be clinically meaningful. At a given dose, the typical steady-state duloxetine concentrations in the pediatric population were lower than in adults, and the distribution of steady-state duloxetine concentrations in pediatric patients were typically in the lower range of concentrations in adults.

Results from clinical trials of a selective ionotropic glutamate receptor 5 (iGluR5) antagonist, LY5454694 tosylate, in 2 chronic pain conditions.

This article reports results of 2 studies investigating LY545694 in pain due to osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee and diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain (DPNP). Study I randomized patients to either of 2 doses of LY545694 or to placebo, and study II randomized patients to either of 3 doses of LY545694, to pregabalin, or to placebo. No significant differences between LY545694 groups and placebo were observed on the primary (average pain severity) or secondary efficacy measures in either study. Notably, study I lacked an active control, and, in study II, pregabalin, did not separate from placebo. Treatment-emergent nausea, vomiting, and dizziness were significantly more frequent in the LY545694 groups in both trials (P⩽.05), and significantly more LY545694-treated patients discontinued because of adverse events (P<.001). Steady-state concentrations of LY545694 were comparable in patients in both studies but were lower than exposures required for efficacy in animal models of pain behavior. Because the active control did not separate from placebo in the DPNP study, the study was potentially failed, rather than negative. Without an active control, it is unknown whether the OA study was negative or failed. Consequently, efficacy of selective ionotropic glutamate receptor antagonism in chronic pain conditions may warrant further investigation. Future trials should consider different pain conditions, contain a positive control with larger patient numbers per arm, and be conducted within a single region.

Safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and effects on human experimental pain of the selective ionotropic glutamate receptor 5 (iGluR5) antagonist LY545694 in healthy volunteers.

The objective of this study was to establish in healthy volunteers the maximally tolerated multiple dose (MTMD) of the ionotropic glutamate receptor 5 antagonist LY545694 (part A), and to investigate whether that dose had analgesic or antihyperalgesic effects in the brief thermal stimulation (BTS) pain model (Part B). Part A was a double-blind, placebo-controlled study in 3 groups of 10 healthy men. To simulate an extended-release formulation, study drug was administered orally over 6hours (12 equally divided aliquots at 30-minute intervals). Part B was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, double-dummy, 3-way crossover study in 27 healthy men. At each of the 3 study periods, subjects received either LY545694 (MTMD; as determined during part A) as a simulated, twice daily extended-release formulation for 4 doses over 3days, gabapentin (600mg 8hours apart; 6 doses over 3days; positive control), or matching placebo. The BTS model was induced twice with a 1-hour interval on each of the 2 study days, before drug administration and at the time of expected peak analgesia of LY545694. Plasma exposure for LY545694 was approximately linear over the 25- to 75-mg dose range. The MTMD of LY545694 was 25mg twice daily. Areas of secondary hyperalgesia were significantly smaller after administration of LY545694 and gabapentin compared with placebo (P<.0001 and P=.0004, respectively), but there was no difference between areas after administration of gabapentin and LY545694 (P=.400). Neither gabapentin nor LY545694 reduced the painfulness of skin heating during BTS model induction. The most common treatment-emergent adverse event was dizziness. The results of this study suggest that LY545694 should be explored further as a potential treatment for chronic pain involving neuronal sensitization.

Effects of duloxetine on norepinephrine and serotonin transporter activity in healthy subjects.

Duloxetine selectively inhibits the serotonin (5-HT) and norepinephrine (NE) transporters (5-HTT and NET, respectively), as demonstrated in vitro and in preclinical studies; however, transporter inhibition has not been fully assessed in vivo at the approved dose of 60 mg/d. Here, the in vivo effects of dosing with duloxetine 60 mg once daily for 11 days in healthy subjects were assessed in 2 studies: (1) centrally (n = 11), by measuring concentrations of 5-hydroxyindoleacetic acid, 3,4-dihydroxyphenylglycol (DHPG), and NE in cerebrospinal fluid, and (2) versus escitalopram 20 mg/d (n = 32) in a 2-period crossover study by assessing the ΔDHPG/ΔNE ratio in plasma during orthostatic testing and by pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modeling of reuptake inhibition using subjects' serum in cell lines expressing cloned human 5-HTT or NET. At steady state, duloxetine significantly reduced concentrations of DHPG and 5-hydroxyindoleacetic acid (P < 0.05), but not NE, in cerebrospinal fluid; DHPG was also decreased in plasma and urine. The ΔDHPG/ΔNE ratio in plasma decreased significantly more with duloxetine than escitalopram (65% and 21%, respectively; P < 0.0001). Ex vivo reuptake inhibition of 5-HTT was comparable (EC50 = 44.5 nM) for duloxetine and escitalopram, but duloxetine inhibited NET more potently (EC50 = 116 nM and 1044 nM, respectively). Maximal predicted reuptake inhibition for 5-HTT was 84% for duloxetine and 80% for escitalopram, and that for NET was 67% and 14%, respectively. In summary, duloxetine significantly affected 5-HT and NE turnover in the central nervous system and periphery; these effects presumably occurred via inhibition of reuptake by the 5-HTT and NET, as indicated by effects on functional reuptake inhibition ex vivo.

Optimization of LY545694 tosylate controlled release tablets through pharmacoscintigraphy.

PURPOSE: To optimize a controlled release (CR) matrix formulation with two goals: (1) effectively deliver a prodrug to a preferred absorption region of the upper GI tract, and (2) afford a PK profile similar to a "reference" CR formulation. METHODS: A pharmacoscintigraphic clinical study was conducted using a flexible formulation design space. A six-arm, three-prototype study was employed to cover the formulation design space and assess performance against the reference formulation. Pharmacokinetic and scintigraphic data from the first three dosing arms were used to select prototypes to be dosed in subsequent arms. RESULTS: Of three prototypes tested, the third prototype had an optimal release rate. The in vivo erosion rate was observed via scintigraphy to reach 90% in 3 h. The AUC ratio relative to the reference for the prodrug was 1.25, while the C(max) ratio was 1.07. The ratios for the active moiety were 1.31 (AUC) and 1.01 (C(max)). CONCLUSIONS: A single pharmacoscintigraphic study efficiently investigated a wide formulation design space and precisely optimized the release rate with few formulation iterations. The selected formulation provided the desired exposure at a 30% lower dose. The approach is beneficial when drug absorption is limited to a region of the GI tract.

An open-label safety and pharmacokinetics study of duloxetine in pediatric patients with major depression.

OBJECTIVE: This preliminary, 32-week study assessed the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of duloxetine in pediatric patients (aged 7-17 years) with major depressive disorder. METHODS: Patients received flexible duloxetine doses of 20-120 mg once daily, with dose changes made based on clinical improvement and tolerability. Pharmacokinetic samples were collected across all duloxetine doses, and data were analyzed using population modeling. Primary outcome measures included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), vital signs, and Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS). RESULTS: Of the 72 enrolled patients, 48 (66.7%) completed acute treatment (18 weeks) and 42 (58.3%) completed extended treatment. Most patients (55/72; 76%) required doses ≥ 60 mg once daily to optimize efficacy based on investigator judgment and Clinical Global Impressions-Severity score. Body weight and age did not significantly affect duloxetine pharmacokinetic parameters. Typical duloxetine clearance in pediatric patients was ≈ 42%-60% higher than that in adults. Four patients (5.6%) discontinued due to TEAEs. Many (36/72, 50%) patients experienced potentially clinically significant (PCS) elevations in blood pressure, with most cases (21/36, 58%) being transient. As assessed via C-SSRS, one nonfatal suicidal attempt occurred, two patients (2.8%) experienced worsening of suicidal ideation, and among the 19 patients reporting suicidal ideation at baseline, 17 (90%) reported improvement in suicidal ideation. CONCLUSION: Results suggested that pediatric patients generally tolerated duloxetine doses of 30 to 120 mg once daily, although transient PCS elevations in blood pressure were observed in many patients. Pharmacokinetic results suggested that adjustment of total daily dose based on body weight or age is not warranted for pediatric patients and different total daily doses may not be warranted for pediatric patients relative to adults.

Evaluation of methods for achieving stable INR in healthy subjects during a multiple-dose warfarin study.

PURPOSE: No consistent method is available for finding stable warfarin maintenance doses and fast stabilization of international normalized ratio (INR) values among healthy subjects in experimental warfarin interaction studies. Using data from an earlier study that targeted a stable INR of 1.5-2.0 to test an interaction, we retrospectively evaluated potential dosing algorithms using all methods available to us to decrease the time needed for INR stabilization, which could be useful for future interaction studies in healthy subjects. METHODS: Published pharmacogenetic and clinical dosing algorithms used to initiate pharmacotherapy with warfarin were applied, predicted doses and actual doses were compared by regression analysis, and concentration-time profiles of S-warfarin were simulated using SimCYP® software. RESULTS: No demographic variables were significantly associated with time to reach a stable, low-intensity INR in this population of relatively young, healthy subjects. Predicted and actual doses were positively correlated for the pharmacogenetic algorithm, but not for the clinical algorithm. INR levels and S-warfarin concentrations were associated with CYP2C9 and VKORC1 genotypes. CONCLUSIONS: Induction to a pharmacodynamic steady state for warfarin for future multiple-dose warfarin drug-interaction studies in healthy volunteers may be predicted using a pharmacogenetic-based dosing algorithm. Simulations revealed that the desired subtherapeutic INR level may be achieved by reducing the predicted dose by approximately 15%. Further study is needed to assess the applicability of this approach to decrease attrition rates and the time needed to reach INR stabilization.

Mycoplasmas hyorhinis in different regions of cuba: diagnosis

M. hyorhinis is considered one of the etiological agents of arthritis in sucking pigs, but recently as seen, some strains can produce pneumonia that could not be distinguished from the mycoplasmosis caused by M. hyopneumoniae. The study was conducted to research the presence of Mycoplasma hyorhinis (M. hyorhinis ) in different regions of the country from exudates of pig lungs with typical EP lesions. Exudates from 280 pig lungs with typical EP lesions were studied using molecular techniques such as PCR, real time PCR and amplification of the 16S-23S rRNA. It was detected that the 66 percent of the samples studied resulted positive to M. hyorhinis, and the presence of this species was detected in all the provinces. Amplification and studies on the intergenic region 16S-23S of M. hyorhinis rRNA demonstrated the existing variability among strains of a same species. This study is the first report on M. hyorhinis detection in Cuba.

Duloxetine: clinical pharmacokinetics and drug interactions.

Duloxetine, a potent reuptake inhibitor of serotonin (5-HT) and norepinephrine, is effective for the treatment of major depressive disorder, diabetic neuropathic pain, stress urinary incontinence, generalized anxiety disorder and fibromyalgia. Duloxetine achieves a maximum plasma concentration (C(max)) of approximately 47 ng/mL (40 mg twice-daily dosing) to 110 ng/mL (80 mg twice-daily dosing) approximately 6 hours after dosing. The elimination half-life of duloxetine is approximately 10-12 hours and the volume of distribution is approximately 1640 L. The goal of this paper is to provide a review of the literature on intrinsic and extrinsic factors that may impact the pharmacokinetics of duloxetine with a focus on concomitant medications and their clinical implications. Patient demographic characteristics found to influence the pharmacokinetics of duloxetine include sex, smoking status, age, ethnicity, cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2D6 genotype, hepatic function and renal function. Of these, only impaired hepatic function or severely impaired renal function warrant specific warnings or dose recommendations. Pharmacokinetic results from drug interaction studies show that activated charcoal decreases duloxetine exposure, and that CYP1A2 inhibition increases duloxetine exposure to a clinically significant degree. Specifically, following oral administration in the presence of fluvoxamine, the area under the plasma concentration-time curve and C(max) of duloxetine significantly increased by 460% (90% CI 359, 584) and 141% (90% CI 93, 200), respectively. In addition, smoking is associated with a 30% decrease in duloxetine concentration. The exposure of duloxetine with CYP2D6 inhibitors or in CYP2D6 poor metabolizers is increased to a lesser extent than that observed with CYP1A2 inhibition and does not require a dose adjustment. In addition, duloxetine increases the exposure of drugs that are metabolized by CYP2D6, but not CYP1A2. Pharmacodynamic study results indicate that duloxetine may enhance the effects of benzodiazepines, but not alcohol or warfarin. An increase in gastric pH produced by histamine H(2)-receptor antagonists or antacids did not impact the absorption of duloxetine. While duloxetine is generally well tolerated, it is important to be knowledgeable about the potential for pharmacokinetic interactions between duloxetine and drugs that inhibit CYP1A2 or drugs that are metabolized by CYP2D6 enzymes.

Mycoplasmas hyorhinis in different regions of cuba. diagnosis.

M. hyorhinis is considered one of the etiological agents of arthritis in sucking pigs, but recently as seen, some strains can produce pneumonia that could not be distinguished from the mycoplasmosis caused by M. hyopneumoniae. The study was conducted to research the presence of Mycoplasma hyorhinis (M. hyorhinis ) in different regions of the country from exudates of pig lungs with typical EP lesions. Exudates from 280 pig lungs with typical EP lesions were studied using molecular techniques such as PCR, real time PCR and amplification of the 16S-23S rRNA. It was detected that the 66% of the samples studied resulted positive to M. hyorhinis, and the presence of this species was detected in all the provinces. Amplification and studies on the intergenic region 16S-23S of M. hyorhinis rRNA demonstrated the existing variability among strains of a same species. This study is the first report on M. hyorhinis detection in Cuba.

Dissolution modeling of bead formulations and predictions of bioequivalence for a highly soluble, highly permeable drug.

The objective of this study was to assess the impact of observed in vitro dissolution rate differences on in vivo pharmacokinetics for two enteric-coated bead formulations of a highly soluble, highly permeable drug. A new bead dissolution model was developed to quantitatively simulate the dissolution profiles of the two formulations. The model is based on the boundary layer diffusion model and can be used to simulate dissolution profiles for bead formulations using physicochemical properties of the formulation. The model was applied to show that the observed differences in dissolution profiles can be attributed completely to the difference in surface area of the beads for the two formulations. An absorption/pharmacokinetic model (GastroPlus) was used to predict the in vivo plasma concentration time profiles for the formulations using their respective in vitro dissolution profiles as input. The simulation results showed that the plasma concentration-time profiles were not significantly impacted by slower dissolution rates. Additionally, a sensitivity analysis was performed with a range of dissolution rate profiles. The fastest dissolution rate reached 80% dissolved in 41 min, while the slowest reached 80% in 114 min. Over this range, the predicted C(max) decreased by 9% and the AUC decreased by 1%. An in vivo bioequivalence study on the two experimental formulations demonstrated the formulations were bioequivalent, consistent with predictions. The lack of sensitivity is attributable to the high permeability and long elimination half-life of the drug. The work presented in this article demonstrates the use of a bead dissolution model and an absorption/PK model to predict in vivo formulation performance.

Effects of varying degrees of renal impairment on the pharmacokinetics of duloxetine: analysis of a single-dose phase I study and pooled steady-state data from phase II/III trials.

BACKGROUND: Duloxetine is indicated for patients with a variety of conditions, and some of these patients may have mild to moderate degrees of renal impairment. Renal impairment may affect the pharmacokinetics of a drug by causing changes in absorption, distribution, protein binding, renal excretion or nonrenal clearance. As duloxetine is highly bound to plasma proteins and its metabolites are renally excreted, it is prudent to evaluate the effect of renal insufficiency on exposure to duloxetine and its metabolites in the systemic circulation. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of varying degrees of renal impairment on duloxetine pharmacokinetics in a single-dose phase I study and using pooled steady-state pharmacokinetic data from phase II/III trials. METHODS: In the phase I study, a single oral dose of duloxetine 60 mg was given to 12 subjects with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and 12 matched healthy control subjects. In the phase II/III trials (n = 463 patients), duloxetine 20-60 mg was given as once- or twice-daily doses. Duloxetine and metabolite concentrations in plasma were determined using liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry. Noncompartmental methods (phase I: duloxetine and its metabolites) and population modelling methods (phase II/III: duloxetine) were used to analyse the pharmacokinetic data. RESULTS: The maximum plasma concentration (C(max)) and the area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) of duloxetine were approximately 2-fold higher in subjects with ESRD than in healthy subjects, which appeared to reflect an increase in oral bioavailability. The C(max) and AUC of two major inactive conjugated metabolites were as much as 2- and 9-fold higher, respectively, reflecting reduced renal clearance of these metabolites. Population pharmacokinetic results indicated that mild or moderate renal impairment, assessed by creatinine clearance (CL(CR)) calculated according to the Cockcroft-Gault formula, did not have a statistically significant effect on pharmacokinetic parameters of duloxetine. Values for the apparent total body clearance of duloxetine from plasma after oral administration (CL/F) in subjects with ESRD were similar to CL/F values in patients with normal renal function or with mild or moderate renal impairment. CONCLUSION: Dose adjustments for duloxetine are not necessary for patients with mild or moderate renal impairment (CL(CR) > or =30 mL/min). For patients with ESRD or severe renal impairment (CL(CR) <30 mL/min), exposures of duloxetine and its metabolites are expected to increase; therefore, duloxetine is not generally recommended for these patients.

Oral olanzapine disposition in adolescents with schizophrenia or bipolar I disorder: a population pharmacokinetic model.

BACKGROUND: Olanzapine is an atypical antipsychotic approved for the treatment of adults and adolescents (aged 13 -17 years) with schizophrenia or bipolar I disorder (manic or mixed episodes). OBJECTIVES: To characterize the pharmacokinetics of olanzapine in adolescents, to estimate the sources of variability, and to identify significant co-variates. In addition, olanzapine pharmacokinetic parameters in adolescents were compared with those in adults to guide appropriate dosing recommendations for adolescent patients. METHODS: A population pharmacokinetic modeling study was performed. The majority of pharmacokinetic data for the model came from a multicenter, open-label study in which 4.5 weeks of oral olanzapine 2.5-20 mg once daily was administered to a total of 105 patients aged 13-17 years (41.1-148 kg) who had a diagnosis of schizophrenia or bipolar I disorder. Four blood samples at steady state were obtained from each patient. Olanzapine concentrations in plasma were determined using a validated high-performance liquid chromatography method with electrochemical detection. Similar data from 11 adolescents from three previous studies were also included. A pharmacokinetic model was developed and the potential effects of patient characteristics (sex, bodyweight, age, ethnic origin) were investigated using a nonlinear mixed effects modeling program. The distributions of pharmacokinetic parameters for olanzapine in adolescents were compared with those previously reported in adults (n = 912, diagnosis of schizophrenia, olanzapine 5-20 mg/day) using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov 2-sample test. A visual predictive check was performed using Monte Carlo simulations on an external validation dataset. RESULTS: The pharmacokinetics of oral olanzapine in adolescent patients were described by a one-compartment pharmacokinetic model. The typical model estimates were 13.6 L/h (70 kg female patient) for oral clearance (CL/F) and 899 L for oral volume of distribution (V/F). Interpatient variability (40.5% for CL/F, 65.4% for V/F) and residual error (27%) were moderate. Bodyweight and sex had a significant influence on CL/F, which was lower in patients with lower weights and approximately 30% higher in males than females. Olanzapine exposure was typically 27% higher in adolescents versus adults. Approximately 77% of adolescents and adults had comparable CL/F values and 69% had comparable V/F values. CONCLUSIONS: The pharmacokinetics of oral olanzapine in adolescent patients are similar to those in adults, and are linear in the dosage range of 2.5-20 mg/day. Given the small magnitude of co-variate effects and the interpatient variability, dose adjustments based on bodyweight or sex are not necessary in adolescents.

Effects of duloxetine on the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of warfarin at steady state in healthy subjects.

This study evaluated the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of once-daily dosing of warfarin at steady state when taken concomitantly with once-daily doses of duloxetine. Healthy subjects with a stable international normalized ratio (INR) of 1.5 to 2.0 on an individualized fixed dose of warfarin (2-9 mg) in period 1 received daily warfarin and duloxetine (60 mg for 14 days [n = 15] or 60 mg for 4 days, then 120 mg for 10 days [n = 15]) in period 2. Across the 14-day period when warfarin was coadministered with duloxetine, the least squares mean INR changes from baseline (warfarin alone) ranged from -0.05 to +0.07, and the 90% confidence intervals ranged from -0.12 to +0.14. Following coadministration of warfarin with 60 mg duloxetine, but not with 120 mg duloxetine, there was a statistically significant prolongation in bleeding time compared to warfarin alone. For both R- and S-warfarin, the 90% confidence interval for the geometric mean ratios of area under the curve (AUC(tau,ss)) and maximum plasma concentrations (C(max,ss)) between warfarin administered alone and with 60 or 120 mg duloxetine were contained within the bioequivalence limits of 0.8 to 1.25. In conclusion, duloxetine had no clinically or statistically significant effect on the pharmacodynamics or pharmacokinetics of warfarin at steady state.

Population pharmacokinetics of orally administered duloxetine in patients: implications for dosing recommendation.

OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this analysis were to characterize the pharmacokinetics of duloxetine at steady state in patients, estimate the variability, identify significant covariates that may influence duloxetine pharmacokinetics and provide appropriate dosing recommendations for patients on duloxetine treatment. METHODS: The pharmacokinetic meta-analysis dataset was created from one open-label clinical study and four double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical studies. Duloxetine concentrations (N = 2002) were obtained from 594 patients diagnosed with major depressive disorder (n = 223), diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain (n = 112), stress urinary incontinence (n = 128) and fibromyalgia (n = 131). Patients were given 20-60 mg/day of oral duloxetine once or twice daily (the highest dose studied was 120 mg/day). A population pharmacokinetic model was developed using a nonlinear mixed-effects modelling method. Covariates including bodyweight, age, sex, ethnicity, smoking status, disease condition, dose, dosing regimen and creatinine clearance were tested for their influence on duloxetine pharmacokinetics. The final model was used to predict steady-state duloxetine concentration-time profiles in various patient subgroups. RESULTS: Duloxetine pharmacokinetics in patients were described by a one-compartmental pharmacokinetic model. The interpatient variability in apparent oral clearance (CL/F) was 59% and the interpatient variability in the apparent volume of distribution after oral administration (V(d)/F) was 97%. The residual error was 31%. Sex, smoking status, age and dose had a statistically significant effect on CL/F, whereas the V(d)/F was influenced by ethnicity. CL/F was 40% lower in females than in males and 30% lower in nonsmokers than in smokers. CL/F decreased with increasing dose and age. The V(d)/F in Hispanic patients was twice that of non-Hispanic patients. Simulations showed a considerable overlap in duloxetine exposure between the identified patient subgroups. CONCLUSION: Given the clinically insignificant change in the magnitude of duloxetine steady-state exposure and the considerable overlap in duloxetine exposure between the patient subgroups, specific dose recommendations based on sex, smoking status, age, dose and ethnicity are not warranted.

In vitro and in vivo evaluations of cytochrome P450 1A2 interactions with duloxetine.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether duloxetine is a substrate, inhibitor or inducer of cytochrome P450 (CYP) 1A2 enzyme, using in vitro and in vivo studies in humans. METHODS: Human liver microsomes or cells with expressed CYP enzymes and specific CYP inhibitors were used to identify which CYP enzymes catalyse the initial oxidation steps in the metabolism of duloxetine. The potential of duloxetine to inhibit CYP1A2 activity was determined using incubations with human liver microsomes and phenacetin, the CYP1A2 substrate. The potential for duloxetine to induce CYP1A2 activity was determined using human primary hepatocytes treated with duloxetine for 72 hours. Studies in humans were conducted using fluvoxamine, a potent CYP1A2 inhibitor, and theophylline, a CYP1A2 substrate, as probes. The subjects were healthy men and women aged 18-65 years. Single-dose duloxetine was administered either intravenously as a 10-mg infusion over 30 minutes or orally as a 60-mg dose in the presence or absence of steady-state fluvoxamine (100 mg orally once daily). Single-dose theophylline was given as 30-minute intravenous infusions of aminophylline 250 mg in the presence or absence of steady-state duloxetine (60 mg orally twice daily). Plasma concentrations of duloxetine, its metabolites and theophylline were determined using liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry. Pharmacokinetic parameters were estimated using noncompartmental methods and evaluated using mixed-effects ANOVA. Safety measurements included vital signs, clinical laboratory tests, a physical examination, ECG readings and adverse event reports. RESULTS: The in vitro results indicated that duloxetine is metabolized by CYP1A2; however, duloxetine was predicted not to be an inhibitor or inducer of CYP1A2 in humans. Following oral administration in the presence of fluvoxamine, the duloxetine area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity (AUC(infinity)) and the maximum plasma drug concentration (C(max)) significantly increased by 460% (90% CI 359, 584) and 141% (90% CI 93, 200), respectively. In the presence of fluvoxamine, the oral bioavailability of duloxetine increased from 42.8% to 81.9%. In the presence of duloxetine, the theophylline AUC(infinity) and C(max) increased by only 13% (90% CI 7, 18) and 7% (90% CI 2, 14), respectively. Coadministration of duloxetine with fluvoxamine or theophylline did not result in any clinically important safety concerns, and these combinations were generally well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Duloxetine is metabolized primarily by CYP1A2; therefore, coadministration of duloxetine with potent CYP1A2 inhibitors should be avoided. Duloxetine does not seem to be a clinically significant inhibitor or inducer of CYP1A2; therefore, dose adjustment of CYP1A2 substrates may not be necessary when they are coadministered with duloxetine.