RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Celiac disease (CeD) is an immune-mediated disorder triggered by the ingestion of gluten. Despite adhering to a gluten-free diet (the only management option available to patients with CeD), many patients continue to experience symptoms and intestinal injury. Degradation of immunogenic fractions of gluten peptides in the stomach has been proposed as an approach to reduce toxicity of ingested gluten; however, no enzymes evaluated to date have demonstrated sufficient gluten degradation in complex meals. TAK-062 is a novel, computationally designed endopeptidase under development for the treatment of patients with CeD. METHODS: Pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability of TAK-062 100-900 mg were evaluated in a phase I dose escalation study in healthy participants and patients with CeD. Gluten degradation by TAK-062 was evaluated under simulated gastric conditions in vitro and in healthy participants in the phase I study, with and without pretreatment with a proton pump inhibitor. Residual gluten (collected through gastric aspiration in the phase I study) was quantified using R5 and G12 monoclonal antibody enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays. RESULTS: In vitro, TAK-062 degraded more than 99% of gluten (3 g and 9 g) within 10 minutes. In the phase I study, administration of TAK-062 was well tolerated and resulted in a median gluten degradation ranging from 97% to more than 99% in complex meals containing 1-6 g gluten at 20-65 minutes postdose. CONCLUSIONS: TAK-062 is well tolerated and rapidly and effectively degrades large amounts of gluten, supporting the development of this novel enzyme as an oral therapeutic for patients with CeD. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03701555, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03701555.).
Assuntos
Doença Celíaca/metabolismo , Endopeptidases/farmacocinética , Suco Gástrico/química , Glutens/metabolismo , Adulto , Doença Celíaca/tratamento farmacológico , Dieta Livre de Glúten , Endopeptidases/análise , Endopeptidases/farmacologia , Feminino , Gliadina/análise , Gliadina/metabolismo , Glutens/análise , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Engenharia de Proteínas , Distribuição AleatóriaRESUMO
The pharmacokinetic (PK) profile of budesonide oral suspension (BOS) was evaluated during a phase 2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging study in pediatric patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) (MPI 101-01/NCT00762073). Non-compartmental methods were used to calculate PK parameters in 37 patients after receiving morning doses of BOS, with volume and dose adjusted for age (low dose: 0.35 or 0.5 mg; high dose: 1.4 or 2.0 mg [2-9 or 10-18 years old, respectively]). Relationships between apparent oral clearance and volume of distribution, and bodyweight and body mass index were also evaluated. Budesonide systemic exposure increased with BOS dose. After oral administration, time to maximum plasma budesonide concentration occurred ~1 hour post dose and the half-life of budesonide was 3.3-3.5 hours. PK parameters were similar between age groups for low- and high-dose BOS, indicating that volume and dose adjustments for age were appropriate for pediatric patients with EoE. BOS was well tolerated.
Assuntos
Budesonida , Esofagite Eosinofílica , Administração Oral , Adolescente , Budesonida/uso terapêutico , Criança , Método Duplo-Cego , Esofagite Eosinofílica/tratamento farmacológico , Glucocorticoides , Humanos , Suspensões , Resultado do TratamentoRESUMO
BACKGROUND & AIMS: No treatment has been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE). We investigated the efficacy and safety of a new formulation of oral budesonide suspension (OBS), a corticosteroid, in a prospective, placebo-controlled, dose-ranging study. METHODS: Subjects 2-18 years old with symptoms of EoE and peak eosinophil counts ≥20/high-power field at ≥2 levels of the esophagus were randomly assigned to groups given placebo or low-dose, medium-dose, or high-dose OBS for 12 weeks. Doses and volumes were adjusted on the basis of patients' age to cover the entire esophagus. The primary efficacy end point was compound response to therapy (peak eosinophil counts ≤6/high-power field at all levels of the esophagus and ≥50% reduction in EoE symptom score). Multiple safety parameters were evaluated. RESULTS: Data from 71 subjects who completed all efficacy assessments were included in the primary efficacy analysis. At the end of 12 weeks, there were significantly greater percentages of responders in groups given medium-dose OBS (52.6%, P = .0092) and high-dose OBS (47.1%, P = .0174) than in the group given placebo (5.6%); there was no significant difference in percentages of responders between the low-dose OBS (11.8%) and placebo groups (P = .5282). The significant compound responses noted in the medium-dose and high-dose OBS groups were accounted for by the significant histologic responses; in contrast, all 4 groups (including the placebo group) had large symptom responses, and there was no significant difference in the percentage of subjects with a symptom response in either OBS group compared with the placebo group (P ≥ .1235). There were no unexpected safety concerns or signals. CONCLUSIONS: Peak eosinophil counts were significantly reduced throughout the esophagus in pediatric patients with EoE who were given medium-dose and high-dose OBS. There was a large symptom response to placebo that was similar to symptom responses in the OBS groups; symptom response did not distinguish OBS from placebo. ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00762073.