Effects of Hepatic Impairment on the Pharmacokinetic Profile and Safety of Lobeglitazone.

In this open-label, single-dose, parallel-group study, we compared the pharmacokinetic profile and safety of lobeglitazone, a thiazolidinedione acting as an agonist for peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors, in patients with hepatic impairment (HI) and healthy matched controls for age, sex, and body weight. After a single oral dose of lobeglitazone (0.5 mg), the lobeglitazone (parent drug) and M7 (major metabolite) plasma concentrations and pharmacokinetic parameters were analyzed and compared between the HI patient groups and healthy matched control groups. The geometric mean ratio (GMR; 90% confidence interval [CI]) for maximum concentration (Cmax ) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 extrapolated to infinity (AUCinf ) of lobeglitazone was 1.06 (0.90-1.24) and 1.07 (0.82-1.40), respectively, for mild HI vs control A. The GMR (90%CI) of Cmax and AUCinf was 0.70 (0.56-0.88) and 1.00 (0.72-1.37), respectively, for moderate HI vs control B. For M7, the GMR (90%CI) of Cmax and AUCinf was 1.09 (0.75-1.57) and 1.18 (0.71-1.97), respectively, for mild HI vs control A and 1.50 (0.95-2.38) and 1.79 (1.06-3.04), respectively, for moderate HI vs control B. Notable adverse events or tolerability issues were not observed. Lobeglitazone may be safely used in patients with mild or moderate HI without dose adjustment.

Pharmacokinetic drug interaction and safety after coadministration of clarithromycin, amoxicillin, and ilaprazole: a randomised, open-label, one-way crossover, two parallel sequences study.

PURPOSE: Ilaprazole, the latest proton pump inhibitor, can be used with clarithromycin and amoxicillin as a triple therapy regimen for eradicating Helicobacter pylori. The aim of this study was to evaluate pharmacokinetic drug interactions and safety profiles after coadministration of clarithromycin, amoxicillin, and ilaprazole. METHODS: A randomised, open-label, one-way crossover, two parallel sequences study was conducted in 32 healthy subjects. In part 1, the subjects received a single dose of ilaprazole 10 mg in period 1 and clarithromycin 500 mg and amoxicillin 1000 mg twice daily for 6 days in period 2. In part 2, the subjects received clarithromycin 500 mg and amoxicillin 1000 mg once in period 1 and ilaprazole 10 mg twice daily for 6 days in period 2. In both sequences, the three drugs were coadministrated once on day 5 in period 2. Pharmacokinetic evaluations of ilaprazole (part 1), and clarithromycin and amoxicillin (part 2) were conducted. RESULTS: Twenty-eight subjects completed the study. For ilaprazole, the peak concentration (Cmax) slightly decreased from 479 (ilaprazole alone) to 446 ng/mL (triple therapy) [Geometric least square mean ratio (90% confidence interval), 0.93 (0.70-1.22)]. The area under the concentration-time curve from 0 h to the last measurable concentration (AUClast) slightly increased from 3301 to 3538 µg·h/mL [1.07 (0.85-1.35)]. For clarithromycin, the Cmax slightly decreased from 1.87 to 1.72 µg/mL [0.90 (0.70-1.15)], and AUClast slightly increased from 14.6 to 16.5 µg·h/mL [1.09 (0.87-1.37)]. For amoxicillin, the Cmax slightly decreased from 9.37 to 8.14 µg/mL [0.86 (0.74-1.01)], and AUClast slightly decreased from 27.9 to 26.7 µg·h/mL [0.98 (0.83-1.16)]. These changes in the PK parameters of each drug were not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: The coadministration of ilaprazole, clarithromycin, and amoxicillin was tolerable and did not cause a significant PK drug interaction. Thus, a triple therapy regimen comprising ilaprazole, clarithromycin, and amoxicillin may be an option for the eradication of H. pylori. Clinicaltrials.gov number: NCT02998437.

Pharmacokinetic drug interaction between atorvastatin and ezetimibe in healthy Korean volunteers.

Atorvastatin and ezetimibe are frequently co-administered to treat patients with dyslipidemia for the purpose of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol control. However, pharmacokinetic (PK) drug interaction between atorvastatin and ezetimibe has not been evaluated in Korean population. The aim of this study was to investigate PK drug interaction between two drugs in healthy Korean volunteers. An open-label, randomized, multiple-dose, three-treatment, three-period, Williams design crossover study was conducted in 36 healthy male subjects. During each period, the subjects received one of the following three treatments for seven days: atorvastatin 40 mg, ezetimibe 10 mg, or a combination of both. Blood samples were collected up to 96 h after dosing, and PK parameters of atorvastatin, 2-hydroxyatorvastatin, total ezetimibe (free ezetimibe + ezetimibe-glucuronide), and free ezetimibe were estimated by non-compartmental analysis in 32 subjects who completed the study. Geometric mean ratios (GMRs) with 90% confidence intervals (CIs) of the maximum plasma concentration (Cmax,ss) and the area under the curve within a dosing interval at steady state (AUCτ,ss) of atorvastatin when administered with and without ezetimibe were 1.1087 (0.9799-1.2544) and 1.1154 (1.0079-1.2344), respectively. The corresponding values for total ezetimibe were 1.0005 (0.9227-1.0849) and 1.0176 (0.9465-1.0941). There was no clinically significant change in safety assessment related to either atorvastatin or ezetimibe. Co-administration of atorvastatin and ezetimibe showed similar PK and safety profile compared with each drug alone. The PK interaction between two drugs was not clinically significant in healthy Korean volunteers.

Mass imaging of iron oxide nanoparticles inside cells for in vitro cytotoxicity.

Time-of-flight secondary ion mass spectrometry (ToF-SIMS) imaging analysis was performed on murine macrophage cells treated with various concentrations of iron oxide (Fe3O4) nanoparticles, which are used as MRI contrast agents. First, murine macrophage cells were seeded on a slide glass for 24 hrs and treated with varying concentrations of Fe3O4 nanoparticles for 24 hrs. To expose a cross section of each cell and obtain a distribution of the nanoparticles inside the cells, the cells were sputtered using Bi ions after which the cross section of each cell was scanned and imaged using the focused cluster ion beam with a spatial resolution of 300 nm. Fe3O4 nanoparticles were found mainly in the cytoplasm region of the cells, not in the nucleus region of cells, suggesting that the uptake of the Fe3O4 nanoparticles were into the cytoplasm of cell, not into the nucleus of cell. Based on these observations, our protocol using mass imaging analysis would be a useful addition to the study of in vitro nanoparticle cytotoxicity.