Pharmacokinetic Interactions between the Hepatitis C Virus Inhibitors Elbasvir and Grazoprevir and HIV Protease Inhibitors Ritonavir, Atazanavir, Lopinavir, and Darunavir in Healthy Volunteers.

The combination of the hepatitis C virus (HCV) nonstructural protein 5A (NS5A) inhibitor elbasvir and the NS3/4A protease inhibitor grazoprevir is a potent, once-daily therapy indicated for the treatment of chronic HCV infection in individuals coinfected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). We explored the pharmacokinetic interactions of elbasvir and grazoprevir with ritonavir and ritonavir-boosted HIV protease inhibitors in three phase 1 trials. Drug-drug interaction trials with healthy participants were conducted to evaluate the effect of ritonavir on the pharmacokinetics of grazoprevir (n = 10) and the potential two-way pharmacokinetic interactions of elbasvir (n = 30) or grazoprevir (n = 39) when coadministered with ritonavir-boosted atazanavir, lopinavir, or darunavir. Coadministration of ritonavir with grazoprevir increased grazoprevir exposure; the geometric mean ratio (GMR) for grazoprevir plus ritonavir versus grazoprevir alone area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h (AUC0-24) was 1.91 (90% confidence interval [CI]; 1.31 to 2.79). Grazoprevir exposure was markedly increased with coadministration of atazanavir-ritonavir, lopinavir-ritonavir, and darunavir-ritonavir, with GMRs for grazoprevir AUC0-24 of 10.58 (90% CI, 7.78 to 14.39), 12.86 (90% CI, 10.25 to 16.13), and 7.50 (90% CI, 5.92 to 9.51), respectively. Elbasvir exposure was increased with coadministration of atazanavir-ritonavir, lopinavir-ritonavir, and darunavir-ritonavir, with GMRs for elbasvir AUC0-24 of 4.76 (90% CI, 4.07 to 5.56), 3.71 (90% CI, 3.05 to 4.53), and 1.66 (90% CI, 1.35 to 2.05), respectively. Grazoprevir and elbasvir had little effect on atazanavir, lopinavir, and darunavir pharmacokinetics. Coadministration of elbasvir-grazoprevir with atazanavir-ritonavir, lopinavir-ritonavir, or darunavir-ritonavir is contraindicated, owing to an increase in grazoprevir exposure. Therefore, HIV treatment regimens without HIV protease inhibitors should be considered for HCV/HIV-coinfected individuals who are being treated with elbasvir-grazoprevir.

Assessment of drug interaction potential between the HCV direct-acting antiviral agents elbasvir/grazoprevir and the HIV integrase inhibitors raltegravir and dolutegravir.

BACKGROUND: Elbasvir/grazoprevir is a once-daily fixed-dose combination therapy for the treatment of chronic HCV infection, including HCV/HIV coinfection. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the pharmacokinetic interaction of elbasvir and grazoprevir with raltegravir or dolutegravir. METHODS: Three open-label trials in healthy adult participants were conducted. In the raltegravir trials, participants received a single dose of raltegravir 400 mg, a single dose of elbasvir 50 mg or grazoprevir 200 mg, and raltegravir with either elbasvir or grazoprevir. In the dolutegravir trial, participants received a single dose of dolutegravir 50 mg alone or co-administered with once-daily elbasvir 50 mg and grazoprevir 200 mg. RESULTS: The raltegravir AUC0-∞ geometric mean ratio (GMR) (90% CI) was 1.02 (0.81-1.27) with elbasvir and 1.43 (0.89-2.30) with grazoprevir. Dolutegravir AUC0-∞ GMR (90% CI) was 1.16 (1.00-1.34) with elbasvir and grazoprevir. The elbasvir AUC0-∞ GMR (90% CI) was 0.81 (0.57-1.17) with raltegravir and 0.98 (0.93-1.04) with dolutegravir. The grazoprevir AUC0-24 GMR (90% CI) was 0.89 (0.72-1.09) with raltegravir and 0.81 (0.67-0.97) with dolutegravir. CONCLUSIONS: Elbasvir or grazoprevir co-administered with raltegravir or dolutegravir resulted in no clinically meaningful drug-drug interactions and was generally well tolerated. These results support the assertion that no dose adjustments for elbasvir, grazoprevir, raltegravir or dolutegravir are needed for co-administration in HCV/HIV-coinfected people.

Effect of Hepatic Impairment on the Pharmacokinetics of Grazoprevir, a Hepatitis C Virus Protease Inhibitor.

Grazoprevir (GZR) plus elbasvir is an approved treatment for chronic infection with hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1 or 4. HCV infection complications include liver cirrhosis, end-stage liver disease, and hepatocellular carcinoma. The objective of this study was to evaluate the pharmacokinetics and safety of multiple-dose GZR (200, 100, or 50 mg) in non-HCV participants with mild, moderate, or severe hepatic impairment (HI), respectively, and in healthy matched controls (protocol MK-5172_p013; Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ). Participants with mild, moderate, or severe HI and controls (aged 18 to 65 years) matched for race, age, sex, and body mass index were enrolled in a 3-part, open-label, sequential-panel pharmacokinetic study. Participants received oral doses of GZR 200 mg (two 100-mg tablets), 100 mg (one 100-mg tablet), or 50 mg (two 25-mg tablets) once daily for 10 days. A total of 50 participants were enrolled: 8 with mild HI, 9 with moderate HI, 8 with severe HI, and a corresponding number of healthy matched controls for each hepatic cohort. Participants with HI demonstrated higher GZR exposure than healthy matched controls and showed an increase in exposure with increasing HI severity. The steady-state GZR AUC0-24 (area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h) for participants with mild, moderate, or severe HI was ≈2-, ≈5-, or ≈12-fold higher, respectively, than that for healthy matched controls. GZR was generally well tolerated in participants with HI. No dose adjustment is required for GZR in people with HCV with mild HI. GZR is contraindicated for those with moderate or severe HI (Child-Pugh class B or C), since they may have significantly increased GZR exposures that may lead to an increased risk of transaminase elevation.

No clinically meaningful pharmacokinetic interaction between the hepatitis C virus inhibitors elbasvir and grazoprevir and the oral contraceptives ethinyl estradiol and levonorgestrel.

PURPOSE: Oral contraceptive pills (OCPs) are an important element of hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment in women of childbearing potential. These studies evaluated the safety and pharmacokinetic interactions between elbasvir (EBR) and grazoprevir (GZR) and ethinyl estradiol/levonorgestrel (EE/LNG). METHODS: Both studies were open-label, single-site, two-period, fixed-sequence, one-way interaction studies. In period 1, subjects received one tablet of EE/LNG (0.03 mg/0.15 mg). In period 2, subjects received EBR (50 mg once daily) for 13 days or GZR (200 mg once daily) for 10 days, with one tablet of EE/LNG on day 7 (GZR group) or 10 (EBR group). Each study enrolled 20 healthy, nonsmoking adult females. RESULTS: There was no clinically meaningful effect of multiple doses of EBR or GZR on the pharmacokinetics of EE or LNG. Geometric mean ratios (GMRs) for AUC0-∞ and Cmax in the presence and absence of EBR were 1.01 and 1.10 for EE and 1.14 and 1.02 for LNG, with 90% confidence intervals (CIs) that were contained in the interval [0.80, 1.25]. Similarly, the AUC0-∞ and Cmax GMRs in the presence and absence of GZR were 1.10 and 1.05 for EE and 1.23 and 0.93 for LNG, respectively. The 90% CIs for EE AUC0-∞ and for EE and LNG Cmax were contained in the interval [0.80, 1.25]; however, the 90% CI for the LNG AUC0-∞ [1.15, 1.32] slightly exceeded the upper bound. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that EBR/GZR can be co-administered to female patients with HCV of childbearing potential who are on OCPs to prevent pregnancy.

Disposition and metabolism of the cathepsin K inhibitor odanacatib in humans.

Odanacatib is a selective inhibitor of the cathepsin K enzyme that is expressed in osteoclasts involved in the degradation of bone organic matrix, and is being developed as a novel treatment of osteoporosis. Odanacatib has demonstrated increases in bone mineral density in postmenopausal women and is undergoing a pivotal phase III trial. The absorption, metabolism, and excretion of [(14)C]odanacatib were studied in healthy male volunteers (n = 6) after a single oral dose of 25 mg (100 µCi). Plasma, urine, and fecal samples were collected at intervals up to 34 days postdose. The pharmacokinetics of odanacatib were characterized by slow absorption (mean time to achieve maximum plasma concentration of 14.2 hours) and long apparent elimination half-life (mean t1/2 96.7 hours); 74.5% of the dose was recovered in feces and 16.9% in urine, resulting in a total recovery of 91.4%. Seven metabolites were identified in urine; the major pathway (methyl hydroxylation producing M8 and its derivatives) was largely dependent on CYP3A. Metabolites and odanacatib accounted for 77% and 23% of urinary radioactivity, respectively. In fecal extracts, the only radioactive components identified were odanacatib (60.9%) and M8 (9.5%). The fraction of odanacatib in feces derived from absorbed drug was estimated using a bioavailability value obtained from the results of a separate intravenous study. Collectively, the data indicate that odanacatib has a long t1/2 on account of its low metabolic intrinsic clearance, and that metabolism (principally mediated by CYP3A) and excretion of intact parent compound account for ∼70% and ∼30% of the clearance of odanacatib in humans.

Assessment of Drug Interaction Potential Between the Hepatitis C Virus Direct-Acting Antiviral Agents Elbasvir/Grazoprevir and the Nucleotide Analog Reverse-Transcriptase Inhibitor Tenofovir Disoproxil Fumarate.

Treatment of individuals coinfected with hepatitis C virus (HCV) and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) requires careful consideration of potential drug-drug interactions. We evaluated the pharmacokinetic interaction of the direct-acting antiviral agents elbasvir and grazoprevir coadministered with the nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitor tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (TDF). Three open-label, multidose studies in healthy adults were conducted. In the first study (N = 10), participants received TDF 300 mg once daily, elbasvir 50 mg once daily, and elbasvir coadministered with TDF. In the second study (N = 12), participants received TDF 300 mg once daily, grazoprevir 200 mg once daily, and grazoprevir coadministered with TDF. In the third study (N = 14), participants received TDF 300 mg once daily and TDF 300 mg coadministered with coformulated elbasvir/grazoprevir 50 mg/100 mg once daily. Pharmacokinetics and safety were evaluated. Following coadministration, the tenofovir area under the plasma concentration-time curve to 24 hours and maximum plasma concentration geometric mean ratios (90% confidence intervals) for tenofovir and coadministered drug(s) versus tenofovir were 1.3 (1.2, 1.5) and 1.5 (1.3, 1.6), respectively, when coadministered with elbasvir; 1.2 (1.1, 1.3) and 1.1 (1.0, 1.2), respectively, when coadministered with grazoprevir; and 1.3 (1.2, 1.4) and 1.1 (1.0, 1.4), respectively, when coadministered with the elbasvir/grazoprevir coformulation. TDF had minimal effect on elbasvir and grazoprevir pharmacokinetics. Elbasvir and/or grazoprevir coadministered with TDF resulted in no clinically meaningful tenofovir exposure increases and was generally well tolerated, with no deaths, serious adverse events (AEs), discontinuations due to AEs, or laboratory AEs reported. No dose adjustments for elbasvir/grazoprevir or TDF are needed for coadministration in HCV/HIV-coinfected people.

Pharmacokinetic Interactions Between Elbasvir/Grazoprevir and Immunosuppressant Drugs in Healthy Volunteers.

Elbasvir (EBR)/grazoprevir (GZR) may be coadministered with immunosuppressant drugs in posttransplant people who are infected with hepatitis C virus. The aim of the present study was to assess the safety and pharmacokinetic interactions between EBR and GZR and single doses of cyclosporine, tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), and prednisone. This was a 4-part, open-label study in 58 healthy volunteers. Participants received single doses of cyclosporine 400 mg, tacrolimus 2 mg, MMF 1 g, or prednisone 40 mg alone or in the presence of once-daily EBR 50 mg/GZR 200 mg. Multiple oral doses of EBR + GZR had no significant effect on cyclosporine. However, in the presence of cyclosporine, the 24-hour area under the concentration-time curve of GZR was increased by approximately 15-fold (geometric mean ratio [90%CI] 15.21 [12.83; 18.04]); the concentration of EBR was increased approximately 2-fold in the presence of cyclosporine. Coadministration of EBR/GZR and tacrolimus did not affect the pharmacokinetics of EBR or GZR, but resulted in an increase in tacrolimus AUC (geometric mean ratio [90%CI] 1.43 [1.24; 1.64]). There were no clinically relevant interactions between EBR/GZR and either MMF or prednisone. Data from the present study indicate that EBR/GZR may be coadministered in people receiving tacrolimus, MMF, and prednisolone. EBR/GZR is contraindicated in people receiving cyclosporine because the significantly higher concentrations of GZR may increase the risk of transaminase elevations.

Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic-based decision making in the development of MK-0888, a VEGFR-2/FLT-3 kinase inhibitor.

PURPOSE: MK-0888 is an investigational VEGFR-2 inhibitor with demonstrated potent in vitro enzyme activity. Clinical investigation in healthy volunteers and cancer patients was undertaken to evaluate its pharmacokinetic properties and early safety profile. Early data were used to guide whether further clinical development was warranted. METHODS: Five phase I studies were conducted. Studies 1-4 were conducted in healthy male volunteers and examined safety and pharmacokinetics across a dose range of 0.5-100 mg. Single-dose and limited multiple-dose escalations were performed. Three formulations and food effect were assessed. Study 5 was a dose escalation study in cancer patients, evaluating pharmacokinetics and safety at doses of 6-100 mg administered up to twice daily. RESULTS: Safety: MK-0888 was generally well tolerated in healthy volunteers at single doses up to 100 mg and in cancer patients at doses up to 100 mg twice daily. Pharmacokinetics: After single-dose administration, MK-0888 was readily absorbed with a T(max) of 4-5 h and a half-life of 11.3-22.7 h. AUC, C(max), and C(24h) increased in a slightly less than dose proportional manner. With longer duration multiple-dose administration (2 weeks), trough concentrations decreased from Day 2 at doses of 50 mg twice daily and higher, suggestive of autoinduction of metabolism. The efficacious trough pharmacokinetic target was not attained at steady state. CONCLUSIONS: The pharmacokinetic behavior of MK-0888 does not support continued development. The early pharmacokinetic profile of the compound provides important information as to the probability of success of MK-0888 achieving efficacious exposures.

Lack of meaningful effect of ridaforolimus on the pharmacokinetics of midazolam in cancer patients: model prediction and clinical confirmation.

Ridaforolimus, a unique non-prodrug analog of rapamycin, is a potent inhibitor of mTOR under development for cancer treatment. In vitro data suggest ridaforolimus is a reversible and time-dependent inhibitor of CYP3A. A model-based evaluation suggested an increase in midazolam area under the curve (AUC(0- ∞)) of between 1.13- and 1.25-fold in the presence of therapeutic concentrations of ridaforolimus. The pharmacokinetic interaction between multiple oral doses of ridaforolimus and a single oral dose of midazolam was evaluated in an open-label, fixed-sequence study, in which cancer patients received a single oral dose of 2 mg midazolam followed by 5 consecutive daily single oral doses of 40 mg ridaforolimus with a single dose of 2 mg midazolam with the fifth ridaforolimus dose. Changes in midazolam exposure were minimal [geometric mean ratios and 90% confidence intervals: 1.23 (1.07, 1.40) for AUC(0-∞) and 0.92 (0.82, 1.03) for maximum concentrations (C(max)), respectively]. Consistent with model predictions, ridaforolimus had no clinically important effect on midazolam pharmacokinetics and is not anticipated to be a perpetrator of drug-drug interactions (DDIs) when coadministered with CYP3A substrates. Model-based approaches can provide reasonable estimates of DDI liability, potentially obviating the need to conduct dedicated DDI studies especially in challenging populations like cancer patients.