Relative Bioavailability of Cenobamate Administered as a Crushed Tablet, Either Orally or via Nasogastric Tube, versus an Intact Whole Tablet.

Cenobamate is approved for the treatment of focal seizures in adults and is currently available as an oral tablet. Alternative methods of drug administration are needed for patients who are unable to swallow whole intact tablets. This phase 1, open-label, randomized, single-dose, three-way crossover (3-period, 3-treatment, 6-sequence) study (NCT05572255), conducted in healthy volunteers, assessed the relative bioavailability of a crushed 200-mg cenobamate tablet administered orally or via nasogastric (NG) tube compared with an intact 200-mg tablet. Each treatment was separated by a 13-day washout period. Plasma samples for cenobamate concentration analysis were collected pre-dose and at multiple time points up to 264 h post-dose. Standard bioequivalence study criteria were applied to the relative bioavailability assessments. All 90% confidence intervals of test-to-reference geometric mean ratios for cenobamate pharmacokinetic parameters (Cmax, AUClast, and AUCinf) were within 85-110% (predefined limit, 80-125%), suggesting no difference in cenobamate exposures following administration of an intact tablet orally or a crushed tablet orally or via NG tube. All treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were classified as mild and resolved. There were no deaths or other serious AEs (SAEs), and no TEAEs led to discontinuation. Our results indicate that the administration of cenobamate as a crushed tablet taken orally or via an NG tube can provide additional flexibility when patients cannot swallow intact tablets. Based on the results of this study, cenobamate is now approved by FDA to be taken whole or the tablets can be crushed. The crushed tablet can be mixed with water and either administered by mouth as an oral suspension or administered via a nasogastric tube.

Pharmacokinetics of cenobamate as monotherapy compared with adjunctive therapy.

OBJECTIVE: Cenobamate was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) based on studies of adjunctive therapy in patients with focal epilepsy. To support the use of cenobamate monotherapy, this pharmacokinetic (PK)-based simulation analysis evaluated the predicted PK exposure of cenobamate when used as monotherapy versus adjunctive therapy. METHODS: A population pharmacokinetic (PopPK) model of cenobamate was developed using pooled human data from eight phase 1 studies in healthy subjects or special populations, and three phase 2 and 3 studies in patients with focal seizures (N = 960). Concomitant antiseizure medications (ASMs) with a statistically significant effect on the apparent systemic clearance (CL/F) of cenobamate in the PopPK model were used to compare simulated patient plasma exposures (area under the plasma concentration vs time curve [AUC]) following monotherapy versus adjunctive therapy. Treatment equivalence between monotherapy and adjunctive therapy was concluded if the 90% confidence interval (CI) of the geometric mean AUC ratio was within 0.8-1.25. RESULTS: In the PopPK model, statistically significant effects on cenobamate CL/F were shown for clobazam (decreased cenobamate CL/F by 19%) and carbamazepine (increased cenobamate CL/F by 15%); these differences were not considered clinically meaningful. Other ASMs (lacosamide, lamotrigine, levetiracetam, oxcarbazepine, topiramate, and valproate) when coadministered with cenobamate did not have significant effects on the disposition (ie, PK or efficacy) of cenobamate. The geometric mean ratio (90% CIs) of cenobamate AUC for adjunctive therapy/monotherapy was 0.87 (0.816-0.925) for adjunctive carbamazepine and 1.24 (1.147-1.339) for adjunctive clobazam. The 90% CI was within the no-effect limits (90% CIs 0.8-1.25) for adjunctive carbamazepine and partially exceeding no-effect limits for adjunctive clobazam. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results from this PopPK analysis, cenobamate monotherapy can be expected to result in comparable exposures to those that have been demonstrated to be safe and effective when used as adjunctive therapy for the treatment of focal seizures, supporting the use of cenobamate as monotherapy in these patients.

Metabolism, excretion, and pharmacokinetics of [14C]mirogabalin, a novel α2δ ligand, in healthy volunteers following oral administration.

The metabolism, excretion, and pharmacokinetics of mirogabalin were investigated following a single oral administration of [14C]mirogabalin at 30 mg/5.55 MBq to six healthy male subjects.The mean recovery values of radioactivity in urine and faeces were 96.85 and 1.21%, respectively. The main component of radioactivity in the plasma, urine, and faeces was mirogabalin. A204-4455 (lactam form), mirogabalin N-glucuronide, and glucuronide of oxidized A204-4455 were detected as minor components in the specimens. Renal clearance of mirogabalin was higher than the glomerular filtration rate of the human kidneys, indicating renal secretion is involved in the clearance.In vitro studies revealed that UDP-glucuronosyltransferase produced two metabolites: A204-4455, formed via mirogabalin acylglucuronide, and a ring-opened form of mirogabalin N-glucuronide.Mirogabalin was absorbed almost completely, and was eliminated via urine. A part of the orally administered dose of mirogabalin was metabolized through glucuronidation at the amine and carboxylic acid moiety, which represents the primary metabolic pathway.

Effect of DS-8500a, a Novel G Protein-Coupled Receptor 119 Agonist, on the Pharmacokinetics of Rosuvastatin and Atorvastatin in Healthy Subjects.

BACKGROUND: Non-clinical study data suggest that DS-8500a, a G protein-coupled receptor 119 agonist, exhibits antidiabetic activity, inhibition of some transporters and induction of cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A. Statins are substrates for some transporters and CYP3A that may be coadministered with DS-8500a in clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: To determine the potential effects of DS-8500a on the pharmacokinetics of statins, we evaluated the effects of repeated oral administration of DS-8500a 75 mg on the pharmacokinetics of rosuvastatin and atorvastatin in healthy adults. METHODS: We performed two single-center, open-label, single-sequence studies. In Study I, subjects received single-dose rosuvastatin 10 mg (Period A) and DS-8500a 75 mg once daily + single-dose rosuvastatin 10 mg (Period B). In Study II, subjects received single-dose atorvastatin 10 mg (Period A) and DS-8500a 75 mg once daily + single-dose atorvastatin 10 mg (Period B). Primary pharmacokinetic endpoints were maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) of rosuvastatin and atorvastatin. Safety was evaluated. RESULTS: In Study I, the Cmax and AUC of rosuvastatin increased by 66% and 33%, respectively, when coadministered with DS-8500a, versus rosuvastatin alone. In Study II, the Cmax of atorvastatin increased by 28%, but AUC remained unchanged following coadministration with DS-8500a, versus atorvastatin alone. Treatment-emergent adverse events were mild to moderate and mostly unrelated to the study drugs. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple doses of DS-8500a increased exposure to rosuvastatin and atorvastatin. This short-term study suggests that the impact of DS-8500a coadministration on atorvastatin exposure is limited and may not be clinically relevant. Nevertheless, caution may be necessary when patients are coadministered rosuvastatin with DS-8500a. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT03699774. JAPAN PHARMACEUTICAL INFORMATION CENTER IDENTIFIER: JapicCTI-152878.

First-in-Human Study to Assess the Safety, Pharmacokinetics, and Pharmacodynamics of an Oral Formulation of DS-1040, an Inhibitor of the Activated Form of Thrombin-Activatable Fibrinolysis Inhibitor, in Healthy Subjects.

DS-1040, a low-molecular-weight imidazole derivative, inhibits the enzymatic activity of thrombin-activatable fibrinolysis inhibitor (TAFIa), enhancing endogenous tissue plasminogen activator-triggered fibrinolysis. This first-in-human, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 1 study evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), and pharmacodynamics (PD) of an oral formulation of DS-1040. Healthy adults (aged 20-45 years; N = 56) were randomized 3:1 to receive DS-1040 orally administered as single ascending doses (50, 100, 200, or 400 mg) or placebo, or DS-1040 multiple ascending doses (100 mg once daily, 200 mg once daily, or 150 mg twice daily) or placebo for 14 days. Safety, PK, and PD parameters were assessed. All doses of DS-1040 were well tolerated; no serious/severe adverse events (AEs) or discontinuations due to AEs occurred. DS-1040 had no effect on coagulation parameters, and no treatment-related trends in the bleeding time were observed. DS-1040 exposure (peak concentration and area under the concentration-time curve) increased in a dose-proportional manner across the single-dose range. With multiple doses, steady state was achieved by day 7 with minimal accumulation (mean accumulation ratio 1.15-1.25), and the PK was time-independent. After 72 hours, approximately 10% of the DS-1040 400-mg single dose was recovered in urine as intact parent drug. The mean terminal half-life ranged from 17.2 to 24.9 hours, which was similar to previous intravenous administration data. Dose-dependent inhibition of total TAFIa activity was observed following single and multiple doses of oral DS-1040. The safety and PK/PD profiles of oral DS-1040 in healthy subjects support further clinical development.

Clinical pharmacology and pharmacokinetics of once-daily hydromorphone hydrochloride extended-release capsules.

Hydromorphone hydrochloride extended release (HHER) is a multiparticulate melt-extrusion pellet capsule formulation administered q24h. Study 1 investigated the bioavailability of 24-mg HHER fed, as well as 24-mg and 12-mg HHER and 8-mg hydromorphone hydrochloride immediate-release (HHIR) tablets fasting. No clinically significant food effect was observed on hydromorphone C(max) or AUC for the 24-mg HHER, and dose proportionality (AUC) was demonstrated between 12- and 24-mg HHER. Study 2 demonstrated dose strength proportionality for 3 x 12-mg HHER versus 1 x 32-mg HHER. Study 3 evaluated 12-mg HHER q24h versus 3-mg HHIR q6h at steady state. HHER produced relatively constant steady-state concentrations over 24 hours. HHER and HHIR were equivalent for AUC(ss). C(ssmax) was 26% lower for HHER than HHIR, C(ssmin) was 43% higher for HHER, and peak-to-trough fluctuation was 126% for HHER versus 328% for HHIR, which are ideal attributes of a once-daily oral extended-release dosage form. HHER administration resulted in fewer adverse events than HHIR in study 3.