Orally Bioavailable Macrocyclic Peptide That Inhibits Binding of PCSK9 to the Low Density Lipoprotein Receptor.

BACKGROUND: Inhibition of PCSK9 (proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9)-low density lipoprotein receptor interaction with injectable monoclonal antibodies or small interfering RNA lowers plasma low density lipoprotein-cholesterol, but despite nearly 2 decades of effort, an oral inhibitor of PCSK9 is not available. Macrocyclic peptides represent a novel approach to target proteins traditionally considered intractable to small-molecule drug design. METHODS: Novel mRNA display screening technology was used to identify lead chemical matter, which was then optimized by applying structure-based drug design enabled by novel synthetic chemistry to identify macrocyclic peptide (MK-0616) with exquisite potency and selectivity for PCSK9. Following completion of nonclinical safety studies, MK-0616 was administered to healthy adult participants in a single rising-dose Phase 1 clinical trial designed to evaluate its safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics. In a multiple-dose trial in participants taking statins, MK-0616 was administered once daily for 14 days to characterize the safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics (change in low density lipoprotein cholesterol). RESULTS: MK-0616 displayed high affinity (Ki = 5pM) for PCSK9 in vitro and sufficient safety and oral bioavailability preclinically to enable advancement into the clinic. In Phase 1 clinical studies in healthy adults, single oral doses of MK-0616 were associated with >93% geometric mean reduction (95% CI, 84-103) of free, unbound plasma PCSK9; in participants on statin therapy, multiple-oral-dose regimens provided a maximum 61% geometric mean reduction (95% CI, 43-85) in low density lipoprotein cholesterol from baseline after 14 days of once-daily dosing of 20 mg MK-0616. CONCLUSIONS: This work validates the use of mRNA display technology for identification of novel oral therapeutic agents, exemplified by the identification of an oral PCSK9 inhibitor, which has the potential to be a highly effective cholesterol lowering therapy for patients in need.

Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibition) model to support dose rationale in diabetes patients, including those with renal impairment, for once-weekly administered omarigliptin.

AIMS: To characterize the population pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of the once-weekly dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor omarigliptin in healthy subjects and patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, and use these models to support the dosing recommendation for patient labelling including patients with renal impairment. METHODS: PK and PD were assessed from a total of 9827 omarigliptin concentrations collected from 1387 healthy subjects and patients participating in Phase 1, 2 and 3 studies examining single- or multiple-dose weekly administration of omarigliptin at doses ranging from 0.25 to 400 mg. Population PK and PD analyses were performed using nonlinear mixed effect modelling. RESULTS: A semi-mechanistic 2-compartment model with linear unbound clearance and concentration-dependent binding of omarigliptin to the DPP-4 enzyme in both the central and peripheral compartments adequately described omarigliptin PK. Key covariates on omarigliptin PK included reduced unbound clearance with renal impairment. A direct effect sigmoid maximum inhibitory efficacy model adequately described the relationship between omarigliptin plasma concentrations and DPP-4 inhibition. These models supported the current Japan label instructions that the approved omarigliptin 25-mg once-weekly dose be halved in patients with severe renal impairment and in those with end-stage renal disease. Also, if patients missed a dose, the next dose of omarigliptin should be taken as soon as remembered up to and including the day before the next scheduled dose. No other clinically important covariates were identified. CONCLUSION: The models in the present analysis adequately described PK and PD characteristics of omarigliptin and supported the dosing and administration section of the omarigliptin label.

A randomized, placebo-controlled study of the cardiovascular safety of the once-weekly DPP-4 inhibitor omarigliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND: Omarigliptin is a once-weekly (q.w.) oral DPP-4 inhibitor that is approved for the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in Japan. To support approval of omarigliptin in the United States, the clinical development program included a cardiovascular (CV) safety study. Subsequently, a business decision was made not to submit a marketing application for omarigliptin in the United States, and the CV safety study was terminated. Herein we report an analysis of data from that early-terminated study. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind study, 4202 patients with T2DM and established CV disease were assigned to either omarigliptin 25 mg q.w. or matching placebo in addition to their existing diabetes therapy. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to summarize the primary endpoint of time to first major adverse CV event (MACE, the composite of CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and nonfatal stroke) and the analysis of first event of hospitalization for heart failure (hHF). RESULTS: The median follow-up was approximately 96 weeks (range 1.1-178.6 weeks). The primary MACE outcome occurred in 114/2092 patients in the omarigliptin group (5.45%; 2.96/100 patient-years) and 114/2100 patients in the placebo group (5.43%; 2.97/100 patient-years), with a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.00 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.77, 1.29). The hHF outcome occurred in 20/2092 patients in the omarigliptin group (0.96%; 0.51/100 patient-years) and 33/2100 patients in the placebo group (1.57%; 0.85/100 patient-years), with an HR of 0.60 (95% CI 0.35, 1.05). After 142 weeks, the least-squares mean difference (omarigliptin vs. placebo) in glycated hemoglobin levels was -0.3% (95% CI -0.46, -0.14). The numbers of patients with adverse events, serious adverse events or discontinued from study medication due to adverse events were similar in the omarigliptin and placebo groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this CV safety study of patients with T2DM and established CV disease, omarigliptin did not increase the risk of MACE or hHF and was generally well tolerated. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01703208. Registered 05 October 2012.

A randomized, placebo- and sitagliptin-controlled trial of the safety and efficacy of omarigliptin, a once-weekly dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor, in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes.

AIMS: To assess the safety and efficacy of omarigliptin in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). METHODS: In a 24-week double-blind trial, 414 patients with T2D were randomized to omarigliptin 25 mg once weekly, sitagliptin 50 mg once daily or placebo. The double-blind period was followed by a 28-week open-label extension during which all patients received omarigliptin 25 mg once weekly. Efficacy endpoints were glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), 2-hour postprandial glucose (PPG) and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) levels. RESULTS: After 24 weeks, the least squares (LS) mean change from baseline in HbA1c was -0.66% for omarigliptin, -0.65% for sitagliptin and 0.13% for placebo. The difference in LS mean for omarigliptin vs placebo was -0.80% ( P < .001). The difference in LS mean for omarigliptin vs sitagliptin was -0.02% (95% confidence interval -0.15, 0.12), which met the criterion for non-inferiority to sitagliptin. Both active treatments provided significant reductions in FPG and 2-hour PPG compared with placebo (P < .001). Over the 24-week double-blind period, there were no clinically meaningful differences in the incidence rates of adverse events among the treatment groups. There was 1 episode of symptomatic hypoglycaemia in the sitagliptin group and none in the omarigliptin or placebo groups. In the 28-week open-label period, omarigliptin provided persistent improvements in glycaemic control without notable change in safety profile compared with the double-blind period. Omarigliptin had no meaningful effect on body weight. CONCLUSIONS: In Japanese patients with T2D, omarigliptin 25 mg once weekly provided significant glucose-lowering compared with placebo and was non-inferior to sitagliptin 50 mg once daily. Omarigliptin was generally well tolerated for up to 52 weeks.

Randomized clinical trial comparing the efficacy and safety of treatment with the once-weekly dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor omarigliptin or the once-daily DPP-4 inhibitor sitagliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on metformin monotherapy.

AIM: To compare the efficacy and safety of the once-weekly oral dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor omarigliptin or once-daily DPP-4 inhibitor sitagliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and inadequate glycaemic control on metformin. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with T2DM with a glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) concentration ≥6.5% to ≤9.0% while on a stable dose of metformin (≥1500 mg/d) were randomized in a double-blind manner to receive omarigliptin 25 mg once weekly (n = 322) or sitagliptin 100 mg once daily (n = 320). The primary analysis assessed whether omarigliptin was non-inferior to sitagliptin in reducing HbA1c at week 24, based on the criterion of having an upper bound of the 95% confidence interval (CI) about the difference less than the non-inferiority bound of 0.3%. RESULTS: The mean baseline HbA1c was 7.5% in both groups. After 24 weeks, the least squares (LS) mean change in HbA1c from baseline was -0.47% in the omarigliptin group and -0.43% in the sitagliptin group, with a between-group difference of -0.03% (95% CI -0.15, 0.08). This result met the prespecified criterion for declaring non-inferiority. The LS mean change from baseline in fasting plasma glucose and the percentage of patients with HbA1c <7.0% or <6.5% at week 24 were similar in the two treatment groups. There were no notable differences in adverse events and the incidence of symptomatic hypoglycaemia was low and similar in the groups. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with T2DM and inadequate glycaemic control on metformin, the addition of omarigliptin 25 mg once weekly or sitagliptin 100 mg once daily led to similar improvements in glycaemic control. Both agents were generally well tolerated with a low incidence of hypoglycaemia.

A randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial evaluating the safety and efficacy of the once-weekly DPP-4 inhibitor omarigliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled by glimepiride and metformin.

BACKGROUND: Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a progressive disease that often requires a patient to use multiple antihyperglycemic agents to achieve glycemic control with disease progression. Omarigliptin is a once-weekly dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor. The purpose of this trial was to assess the efficacy and safety of adding omarigliptin to the treatment regimen of patients with T2D inadequately controlled by dual therapy with metformin and glimepiride. METHODS: Patients with T2D and HbA1c ≥7.5% and ≤10.5% while on metformin (≥1500 mg/day) and glimepiride (≥4 mg/day) were randomized to omarigliptin 25 mg once-weekly (N = 154) or placebo (N = 153) for 24 weeks. The primary objective was to assess whether omarigliptin was superior to placebo in reducing HbA1c at Week 24. Secondary objectives were to assess the effects of omarigliptin vs. placebo on FPG and the proportion of subjects attaining HbA1c goals of <7% and <6.5%. RESULTS: From a mean baseline HbA1c of 8.5% (omarigliptin) and 8.6% (placebo), the least squares (LS) mean change from baseline in HbA1c at Week 24 was -0.67% in the omarigliptin group and -0.06% in the placebo group, with a between-group difference (95% CI) of -0.61% (-0.85, -0.38). Treatment with omarigliptin resulted in a significantly greater reduction in FPG relative to placebo (LS mean difference [95% CI] -0.9 mmol/L [-1.4, -0.4]; p < 0.001). The proportion of patients achieving glycemic goals of <7.0% and <6.5% was higher in the omarigliptin group relative to the placebo group. The overall incidences of adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, drug-related AEs and discontinuations were generally similar between treatment groups. The incidence of symptomatic hypoglycemia was 10.5% in the omarigliptin group and 8.5% in the placebo group. Relative to baseline, omarigliptin and placebo treatments were associated with LS mean changes in body weight of -0.1 kg and -0.9 kg, respectively. CONCLUSION: In patients with T2D and inadequate glycemic control on dual therapy with metformin and glimepiride, compared with placebo, once-weekly omarigliptin provided greater improvement in glycemic control and was generally well tolerated. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01704261 , EudraCT Number: 2012-002612-10. Trial Registration Date: October 8, 2012.

A randomised, double-blind, trial of the safety and efficacy of omarigliptin (a once-weekly DPP-4 inhibitor) in subjects with type 2 diabetes and renal impairment.

AIMS: To assess the safety and efficacy of omarigliptin in subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and chronic renal impairment (RI). METHODS: Patients with T2DM with moderate RI (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] ≥30 to <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 ) (N=114), severe RI (eGFR <30 mL/min/1.73 m2 ) (N=55) or end-stage renal disease on dialysis (N=44), who were either not on an antihyperglycaemic agent therapy for at least 12 weeks at screening, washed-off of oral antihyperglycaemic agent monotherapy or low-dose dual combination therapy, or on insulin monotherapy, with baseline glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) of 6.5%-10.0% were randomised to omarigliptin or to placebo for 24 weeks (primary end-point) followed by a 30-week period with subjects on placebo switched to blinded glipizide (if not on insulin). RESULTS: After 24 weeks, from a mean baseline HbA1c of 8.4% in the omarigliptin group and 8.3% in the placebo group, the least squares mean (95% CI) change from baseline in HbA1c in the overall population (all renal strata combined) was -0.77% (-1.00 to -0.54) in the omarigliptin group and -0.44% (-0.67 to -0.21) in the placebo group; between-group difference of -0.33% (-0.63 to -0.02); P=0.035. After 24 weeks, the incidences of subjects with symptomatic hypoglycaemia, one or more adverse event (AE), drug-related AE, serious AE and discontinuation due to an AE were similar in the omarigliptin and placebo groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this study in subjects with T2DM and RI, relative to placebo, omarigliptin provided clinically meaningful reductions in HbA1c, had a similar incidence of symptomatic hypoglycaemia and was generally well tolerated.

Effects of Extended-Release Niacin and Extended-Release Niacin/Laropiprant on the Pharmacokinetics of Simvastatin in Healthy Subjects.

The use of multiple lipid-modifying agents with different mechanisms of action is often required to regulate lipid levels in patients with dyslipidemia. During combination therapy, alterations in the pharmacokinetics of any of the drugs used and their metabolites may occur. Three separate open-label, randomized, crossover studies evaluated the potential for pharmacokinetic interaction between extended-release niacin (with and without concomitant laropiprant) and simvastatin in healthy subjects. Study 1 used single doses of extended-release niacin and simvastatin; study 2 used multiple-dose coadministration of extended-release niacin/laropiprant and simvastatin in healthy subjects; and study 3 used single doses of both extended-release niacin and the coadministration of extended-release niacin/laropiprant and simvastatin in healthy Chinese subjects. During each treatment period, plasma samples were collected predose and at prespecified postdose time points for pharmacokinetic analyses. The safety and tolerability of simvastatin with and without coadministered extended-release niacin (or extended-release niacin/laropiprant) were assessed by clinical evaluation of adverse experiences. In 2 studies in healthy subjects, modest increases in exposure to simvastatin acid (by ∼60%) by extended-release niacin and extended-release niacin/laropiprant were observed. Based on the clinical experience with simvastatin, these effects are not believed to be clinically meaningful. In the third study on healthy Chinese subjects, no statistically meaningful increases in exposure to simvastatin by extended-release niacin and extended-release niacin/laropiprant were observed. In all populations examined in these studies, the coadministration of extended-release niacin and simvastatin was generally well tolerated.

The effects of laropiprant on the antiplatelet activity of co-administered clopidogrel and aspirin.

Laropiprant is an antagonist of the prostaglandin PGD2 receptor DP1. Laropiprant has a weak affinity for the thromboxane A2 receptor TP. Two double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled, crossover studies evaluated the effects of multiple-dose laropiprant at steady state on the antiplatelet effects of multiple-dose aspirin and clopidogrel. Study 1 had two treatment periods, in which each healthy subject received laropiprant 40 mg, clopidogrel 75 mg, and aspirin 80 mg (Treatment A), or placebo, clopidogrel 75 mg, and aspirin 80 mg (Treatment B) once daily for 7 days. Study 2 consisted of three treatment periods. In the first two, each patient with hypercholesterolemia or mixed dyslipidemia received laropiprant 40 mg, clopidogrel 75 mg, and aspirin 81 mg (Treatment A), or placebo, clopidogrel 75 mg, and aspirin 81 mg (Treatment B) once daily for 7 days. In period 3, patients received a single dose of two tablets of extended release nicotinic acid 1 g/laropiprant 20 mg (Treatment C). In both studies, pharmacodynamic endpoints included bleeding time at 24 (primary) and 4 hours (secondary) post-dose following 7 days of once-daily laropiprant in combination with clopidogrel and aspirin, and platelet aggregation in platelet-rich plasma at 4 and 24 hours post-dose on day 7 (secondary). After 7 days, increased bleeding time of 27% (Study 1) and 23% (Study 2) at 24 hours post-dose was observed with laropiprant compared to placebo (both combined with clopidogrel and aspirin), with corresponding upper bounds of the 90% CI marginally exceeding the prespecified upper comparability bound of 1.50 in both studies. The GMR and 90% CI for bleeding time of laropiprant compared to placebo (both combined with clopidogrel and aspirin) at 4 hours post-dose on day 7 was 0.92 (0.70, 1.21) in Study 1, and 1.46 (1.20, 1.78) in Study 2. Compared with placebo, laropiprant (both combined with clopidogrel and aspirin) increased the inhibition of collagen- and ADP-induced platelet aggregation, respectively, by ∼2.4% and ∼8.1% in Study 1 and by ∼4% and ∼5.4% in Study 2, at 24 hours post-dose on day 7. The inhibition of collagen- and ADP-induced platelet aggregation, respectively, was increased by ∼0.1% and ∼5.0% in Study 1, and by ∼5% and ∼12% in Study 2, at 4 hours post-dose on day 7. In conclusion, co-administration of multiple doses of laropiprant with aspirin and clopidogrel induced a prolongation of bleeding time and an inhibitory effect on platelet aggregation ex vivo in healthy subjects and patients with dyslipidemia.

Phase 1 Study of MK-5475, an Inhaled Soluble Guanylate Cyclase Stimulator, in Participants with Pulmonary Hypertension Associated with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease.

Purpose: This phase 1 study (NCT04370873) evaluated safety and pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics (PK/PD) of MK-5475 in participants with pulmonary hypertension associated with COPD (PH-COPD). Methods: Eligible participants were 40-80 years old with COPD (FEV1/FVC <0.7; FEV1 >30% predicted) and PH (mean pulmonary arterial pressure ≥25 mmHg). Participants were randomized 2:1 to MK-5475 or placebo via dry-powder inhaler once daily for 7 days in Part 1 (360 µg) or 28 days in Part 2 (380 µg). Safety was assessed by adverse events (AEs) and arterial blood oxygenation. Part-2 participants had pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR; primary PD endpoint) and pulmonary blood volume (PBV; secondary PD endpoint) measured at baseline and Day 28. A non-informative prior was used to calculate posterior probability (PP) that the between-group difference (MK-5475 - placebo) in mean percent reduction from baseline in PVR was less than -15%. Results: Nine participants were randomized in Part 1, and 14 participants in Part 2. Median age of participants (86.4% male) was 68.5 years (41-77 years); 95.5% had moderate-to-severe COPD. Incidences of AEs were comparable between MK-5475 and placebo: overall (5/14 [36%] versus 5/8 [63%]), drug-related (1/14 [7%] versus 2/8 [25%]), and serious (1/14 [7%] versus 1/8 [13%]). MK-5475 caused no meaningful changes in arterial blood oxygenation or PBV. MK-5475 versus placebo led to numerical improvements from baseline in PVR (-21.2% [95% CI: -35.4, -7.0] versus -5.4% [95% CI: -83.7, 72.9]), with between-group difference in PVR less than -15% and calculated PP of 51%. Conclusion: The favorable safety profile and numerical reductions in PVR observed support further clinical development of inhaled MK-5475 for PH-COPD treatment.

Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic studies of the 11ß-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 1 inhibitor MK-0916 in healthy subjects.

AIMS: To characterize pharmacokinetic parameters of MK-0916 and its safety and tolerability in lean, healthy male subjects following single and multiple oral doses. To assess (by stable-isotope labelling) the in vivo inhibition of cortisone-to-cortisol conversion following oral MK-0916. METHODS: Data are presented from two randomized, controlled, double-blind, rising-dose phase I studies. In the first study, subjects received single oral doses of 0.4-100 mg MK-0916 (n = 16). In the second study, subjects received 0.2-225 mg MK-0916 followed by daily doses of 0.2-100 mg for 13 days beginning on day 2 or day 15 (n = 80). Plasma and urine drug concentrations were measured for pharmacokinetic analysis. For pharmacodynamic analysis, concentrations of plasma [(13)C4]cortisol were measured by high-pressure liquid chromatography and tandem mass spectrometry following a single oral dose of 5 mg [(13)C4]cortisone. RESULTS: Doses ≥3 mg were rapidly absorbed (time at which maximal concentration was achieved in plasma, 1.1-1.8 h). Exposure (measured as the area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 168 h) increased approximately in proportion to dose. Values for the maximal plasma concentration and the plasma concentration at 24 h increased in excess of dose proportionality at doses <6 mg and roughly in proportion to dose at doses >6 mg. In subjects dosed with 6 mg MK-0916 once daily for 14 days, the mean trough plasma concentration was 240 nm and in vivo cortisone-to-cortisol conversion was inhibited by 84%. The relationship between plasma MK-0916 and hepatic 11ß-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 1 inhibition was well represented by a simple Emax model with an IC50 of 70.4 nm. Exposure to MK-0916 was generally well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that 11ß-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 1 is effectively inhibited in human subjects by doses of MK-0916 that are well tolerated.

Using human recombinant UDP-glucuronosyltransferase isoforms and a relative activity factor approach to model total body clearance of laropiprant (MK-0524) in humans.

A major pathway of elimination of the prostaglandin D2 receptor 1 antagonist laropiprant in humans is by uridine diphosphate-glucuronosyltransferase (UGT)-mediated biotransformation. In this study, liver and kidney relative activity factors were developed for UGT1A1, 1A9 and 2B7 to allow for in vitro-in vivo extrapolation of intrinsic clearance data to whole organ clearance using recombinant human UGT isoforms applying this to laropiprant as a model substrate. The total body metabolic clearance of laropiprant determined using this approach (5.0 L/hr) agreed well with the value determined in vivo following intravenous administration to healthy human volunteers (5.1 L/hr). The results suggest that approximately 36%, 36% and 28% of the hepatic metabolic clearance of laropiprant was mediated by UGT1A1, 1A9 and 2B7, respectively. Likewise, 80% and 20% of the renal metabolic clearance was mediated by UGT1A9 and 2B7, respectively. Furthermore, the data suggested that the contribution of the kidney to the overall total metabolic clearance was minor relative to the liver (≈ 12%).

Effects of an inhaled soluble guanylate cyclase (sGC) stimulator MK-5475 in pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH).

BACKGROUND: Novel therapeutics for pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) with improved safety/tolerability profiles are needed to address continued high rates of morbidity/mortality. METHODS: This Phase 1 study evaluated efficacy/safety of inhaled single-dose MK-5475, an investigational, small-molecule stimulator of soluble guanylate cyclase designed for inhaled delivery via a dry-powder inhaler device, in participants with PAH (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT03744637). Eligible participants were 18-70 years of age; body mass index ≤35 kg/m2; diagnosis of PAH (Group 1 pulmonary hypertension). In Part 1, participants received double-blind MK-5475 or placebo for safety assessment (primary outcome). In Part 2, 4 panels participated in ≤3 open-label periods. Part 2/Period 1 assessed safety/tolerability. Part 2/Periods 2 and 3, respectively, involved functional respiratory imaging for measuring pulmonary blood volume (secondary outcome) and right heart catheterization for measuring pulmonary vascular resistance (primary outcome). RESULTS: MK-5475 was generally well tolerated without systemic side effects on blood pressure or heart rate up to 24 h post dose. With respect to the primary pharmacodynamic outcome, mean reductions in pulmonary vascular resistance ranged from 21% to 30% across 120 µg and 360 µg doses. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with inhaled single-dose MK-5475 showed rapid and sustained reductions in pulmonary vascular resistance and increases in pulmonary blood volume. MK-5475 was generally well tolerated versus placebo without vasodilatory systemic side effects. The promising pulmonary selectivity and favorable safety/tolerability profile of MK-5475 seen in this study of adult participants with PAH lays the foundation for further clinical development.

Evaluation of a stabilized RSV pre-fusion F mRNA vaccine: Preclinical studies and Phase 1 clinical testing in healthy adults.

Human respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) causes a substantial proportion of respiratory tract infections worldwide. Although RSV reinfections occur throughout life, older adults, particularly those with underlying comorbidities, are at risk for severe complications from RSV. There is no RSV vaccine available to date, and treatment of RSV in adults is largely supportive. A correlate of protection for RSV has not yet been established, but antibodies targeting the pre-fusion conformation of the RSV F glycoprotein play an important role in RSV neutralization. We previously reported a Phase 1 study of an mRNA-based vaccine (V171) expressing a pre-fusion-stabilized RSV F protein (mDS-Cav1) in healthy adults. Here, we evaluated an mRNA-based vaccine (V172) expressing a further stabilized RSV pre-fusion F protein (mVRC1). mVRC1 is a single chain version of RSV F with interprotomer disulfides in addition to the stabilizing mutations present in the mDS-Cav1 antigen. The immunogenicity of the two mRNA-based vaccines encoding mVRC1 (V172) or a sequence-optimized version of mDS-Cav1 to improve transcriptional fidelity (V171.2) were compared in RSV-naïve and RSV-experienced African green monkeys (AGMs). V172 induced higher neutralizing antibody titers than V171.2 and demonstrated protection in the AGM challenge model. We conducted a Phase 1, randomized, placebo-controlled, clinical trial of 25 µg, 100 µg, 200 µg, or 300 µg of V172 in healthy older adults (60-79 years old; N = 112) and 100 µg, 200 µg, or 300 µg of V172 in healthy younger adults (18-49 years old; N = 48). The primary clinical objectives were to evaluate the safety and tolerability of V172, and the secondary objective was to evaluate RSV serum neutralization titers. The most commonly reported solicited adverse events were injection-site pain, injection-site swelling, headache, and tiredness. V172 was generally well tolerated in older and younger adults and increased serum neutralizing antibody titers, pre-fusion F-specific competing antibody titers, and RSV F-specific T-cell responses.

Safety and immunogenicity of the measles vector-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccine candidate, V591, in adults: results from a phase 1/2 randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging trial.

BACKGROUND: We report on the safety and immunogenicity of V591, a measles vector-based SARS-CoV-2 vaccine candidate. METHODS: In this multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 1/2 trial, healthy adults with no history of COVID-19 disease were assigned to intramuscular injection of V591 or placebo (4:1 ratio). In part 1, younger adults (18-55 years) received V591 median tissue culture infectious dose (TCID50)-levels of 1×105 or 1×106 or placebo, 56 days apart. In part 2, younger and older (>55 years) adults received a single dose of one of four (104/105/106/107) or one of two (105/106) V591 TCID50 levels, respectively, or placebo. PRIMARY OUTCOME: safety/tolerability. Secondary outcome: humoral immunogenicity. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04498247. FINDINGS: From August-December 2020, 444 participants were screened and 263 randomised (210 V591; 53 placebo); 262 received at least one and 10 received two doses of V591 or placebo. Adverse events were experienced by 140/209 (67.0%) V591 dose-group participants and 37/53 (69.8%) placebo-group participants following injection 1; most frequent were fatigue (57 [27.3%] vs 20 [37.7%]), headache (57 [27.3%] vs 19 [35.8%]), myalgia (35 [16.7%] vs 10 [18.9%]), and injection-site pain (35 [16.7%] vs 4 [7.5%]). No deaths nor vaccine-related serious adverse events occurred. At Day 29, no anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike serum neutralising antibody and IgG-responses were identified in placebo or the three lower V591 dose-groups; responses were detected with V591 1×107 TCID50, although titres were lower than convalescent serum. INTERPRETATION: V591 was generally well tolerated, but immunogenicity was insufficient to warrant continued development. FUNDING: Merck Sharp & Dohme, Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA.

Safety and immunogenicity of intramuscular, single-dose V590 (rVSV-SARS-CoV-2 Vaccine) in healthy adults: Results from a phase 1 randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging trial.

BACKGROUND: Vaccines against COVID-19 are needed to overcome challenges associated with mitigating the global pandemic. We report the safety and immunogenicity of V590, a live recombinant vesicular stomatitis virus-based COVID-19 vaccine candidate. METHODS: In this placebo-controlled, double-blind, three-part phase 1 study, healthy adults were randomised to receive a single intramuscular dose of vaccine or placebo. In Part 1, younger (18-54 years) and, in Part 2, older (≥55 years) adults seronegative for SARS-CoV-2 nucleocapsid received one of four V590 dose levels (5.00 × 105; 2.40 × 106; 1.15 × 107; or 5.55 × 107 plaque-forming units [pfu]) or placebo. In Part 3, a single V590 dose level (5.55 × 107 pfu) or placebo was administered to younger SARS-CoV-2 seropositive adults. Primary endpoints included adverse events (AEs) and for Parts 1 and 2 anti-SARS-CoV-2 serum neutralising antibody responses measured by 50% plaque reduction neutralisation (PRNT50) assay at Day 28. Registration NCT04569786 [P001-02]. FINDINGS: 232 participants were randomised and 219 completed the study. In seronegative participants, anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific antibody responses to V590 were low and comparable to placebo across the lower dose levels. At the highest dose level (5.55 × 107 pfu), anti-SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific PRNT50 was 2.3-fold higher than placebo. The most frequently reported AEs were injection-site pain (38.4%), headache (15.1%) and fatigue (13.4%). INTERPRETATION: V590 was generally well-tolerated. However, Day 28 anti-SARS-Cov-2 spike-specific antibody responses in seronegative participants following a single intramuscular administration of V590 were not sufficient to warrant continued development. FUNDING: The study was funded by Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA.

The effects of laropiprant, a selective prostaglandin D2 receptor 1 antagonist, on the antiplatelet activity of clopidogrel or aspirin.

Laropiprant (LRPT) is being developed in combination with Merck's extended-release niacin (ERN) formulation for the treatment of dyslipidemia. LRPT, an antagonist of the prostaglandin PGD2 receptor DP1, reduces flushing symptoms associated with ERN. LRPT also has affinity for the thromboxane A2 receptor TP (approximately 190-fold less potent at TP compared with DP1). Aspirin and clopidogrel are two frequently used anti-clotting agents with different mechanisms of action. Since LRPT may potentially be co-administered with either one of these agents, these studies were conducted to assess the effects of steady-state LRPT on the antiplatelet activity of steady-state clopidogrel or aspirin. Bleeding time at 24 h post-dose (trough) was pre-specified as the primary pharmacodynamic endpoint in both studies. Two separate, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, crossover studies evaluated the effects of multiple-dose LRPT on the pharmacodynamics of multiple-dose clopidogrel or aspirin. Healthy subjects were randomized to once-daily oral doses of LRPT 40 mg or placebo to LRTP co-administered with clopidogrel 75 mg or aspirin 81 mg for 7 days with at least a 21-day washout between treatments. In both studies, bleeding time and platelet aggregation were assessed 4 and 24 hours post-dose on Day 7. Comparability was declared if the 90% confidence interval for the estimated geometric mean ratio ([LRPT+clopidogrel]/clopidogrel alone or [LRPT+aspirin]/aspirin alone) for bleeding time at 24 hours post-dose on Day 7 was contained within (0.66, 1.50). Concomitant daily administration of LRPT 40 mg with clopidogrel 75 mg or aspirin 81 mg resulted in an approximate 4-5% increase in bleeding time at 24 hours after the last dose vs. bleeding time after treatment with clopidogrel or aspirin alone, demonstrating that the treatments had comparable effects on bleeding time. Percent inhibition of platelet aggregation was not significantly different between LRPT co-administered with clopidogrel or aspirin vs. clopidogrel or aspirin alone at 24 hours post-dose at steady state. At 4 hours after the last dose, co-administration of LRPT 40 mg resulted in 3% and 41% increase in bleeding time vs. bleeding time after treatment with aspirin or clopidogrel alone, respectively. Co-administration of LPRT with clopidogrel or aspirin was generally well tolerated in healthy subjects. Co-administration of multiple doses of LRPT 40 mg and clopidogrel 75 mg or aspirin 81 mg had no clinically important effects on bleeding time or platelet aggregation.

A phase 1, randomized, placebo-controlled study to evaluate the safety and immunogenicity of an mRNA-based RSV prefusion F protein vaccine in healthy younger and older adults.

Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) causes lower respiratory tract infections that can be severe and sometimes fatal. The risk for severe RSV infection is highest in infants and older adults. A safe and effective RSV vaccine for older adults represents a serious unmet medical need due to higher morbidity and mortality in this age group. In this randomized, partially double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1 dose-escalation study, we evaluated the safety, tolerability and immunogenicity of an investigational messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) vaccine encoding the RSV fusion protein (F) stabilized in the prefusion conformation. The study was conducted in healthy younger adults (ages ≥18 and ≤49 years) and healthy older adults (ages ≥60 and ≤79 years). Participants received mRNA-1777 (V171) or placebo as a single intramuscular dose. For each dose level, three sentinel participants were administered open-label mRNA-1777 (V171). Seventy-two younger adults were randomized and administered 25, 100, or 200 µg mRNA-1777 (V171) or placebo, and 107 older adults were randomized and administered 25, 100, 200 or 300 µg mRNA-1777 (V171) or placebo. Primary objectives were safety and tolerability and secondary objectives included humoral and cell-mediated immunogenicity. All dose levels of mRNA-1777 (V171) were generally well tolerated and no serious adverse events related to the vaccine were reported. Immunization with mRNA-1777 (V171) elicited a humoral immune response as measured by increases in RSV neutralizing antibody titers, serum antibody titers to RSV prefusion F protein, D25 competing antibody titers to RSV prefusion F protein, and cell-mediated immune responses to RSV-F peptides.

A Phase 1 Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial to Assess the Safety, Tolerability, and Pharmacokinetics of a Respiratory Syncytial Virus Neutralizing Monoclonal Antibody MK-1654 in Healthy Adults.

Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) is the leading cause of acute lower respiratory tract infection and related morbidity and mortality in infants. Passive immunization with an RSV-neutralizing antibody can provide rapid protection to this vulnerable population. Proof-of-concept for this approach has been demonstrated by palivizumab; however, the use of this antibody is generally restricted to the highest-risk infants due to monthly dosing requirements and its cost. To address the large unmet medical need for most infants, we are evaluating MK-1654, a fully human RSV-neutralizing antibody with half-life extending mutations targeting site IV of the fusion protein. In this 2-part, placebo-controlled, double-blind, first-in-human study, 152 healthy adults were randomized 3:1 to receive a single dose of MK-1654 or placebo in 5 cohorts (100 or 300 mg as an intramuscular dose or 300, 1000, or 3000 mg as an intravenous dose). Safety, pharmacokinetics, antidrug antibodies, and RSV serum-neutralizing antibody titers were evaluated through 1 year. MK-1654 serum concentrations increased proportionally with dose and resulted in corresponding elevations in RSV serum-neutralizing antibody titers. The antibody displayed a half-life of 73 to 88 days and an estimated bioavailability of 69% at the 300-mg dose. The overall safety profile of MK-1654 was similar to placebo, and treatment-emergent antidrug antibodies were low (2.6%) with no associated adverse events. These data support the continued development of MK-1654 for the prevention of RSV disease in infants.

Forward and reverse translational approaches to predict efficacy of neutralizing respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) antibody prophylaxis.

BACKGROUND: Neutralizing mAbs can prevent communicable viral diseases. MK-1654 is a respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) F glycoprotein neutralizing monoclonal antibody (mAb) under development to prevent RSV infection in infants. Development and validation of methods to predict efficacious doses of neutralizing antibodies across patient populations exposed to a time-varying force of infection (i.e., seasonal variation) are necessary. METHODS: Five decades of clinical trial literature were leveraged to build a model-based meta-analysis (MBMA) describing the relationship between RSV serum neutralizing activity (SNA) and clinical endpoints. The MBMA was validated by backward translation to animal challenge experiments and forward translation to predict results of a recent RSV mAb trial. MBMA predictions were evaluated against a human trial of 70 participants who received either placebo or one of four dose-levels of MK-1654 and were challenged with RSV [NCT04086472]. The MBMA was used to perform clinical trial simulations and predict efficacy of MK-1654 in the infant target population. FINDINGS: The MBMA established a quantitative relationship between RSV SNA and clinical endpoints. This relationship was quantitatively consistent with animal model challenge experiments and results of a recently published clinical trial. Additionally, SNA elicited by increasing doses of MK-1654 in humans reduced RSV symptomatic infection rates with a quantitative relationship that approximated the MBMA. The MBMA indicated a high probability that a single dose of ≥ 75 mg of MK-1654 will result in prophylactic efficacy (> 75% for 5 months) in infants. INTERPRETATION: An MBMA approach can predict efficacy of neutralizing antibodies against RSV and potentially other respiratory pathogens.