Concentration-Response Model of Immediate Release Oxycodone Drug Liking by Different Routes of Abuse.

OBJECTIVE: To understand the correlation between oxycodone concentration and drug liking response for immediate-release formulations as they relate to different doses and different routes of administration following manipulation involved in opioid misuse and nontherapeutic use. METHODS: Concentration-response and noncompartmental analyses of drug liking and plasma oxycodone data from Category 3 human abuse potential studies (n = 15-29 per study) were conducted, using Phoenix 6.0 software. Time to onset of a set threshold of subjective effects (Tonset) and offset of subjective effects (Toffset) were estimated based on a baseline pharmacodynamic response set at 50 on a bipolar Drug Liking visual analog scale of 0-100 and the threshold for drug liking set at ≥65, based on study qualification criteria. Partial Area Under the Concentration (AUCTonset-Toffset) and Effect (AUETonset-Toffset) profiles were calculated and their correlation with individual partial AUE vs partial AUC was assessed. RESULTS: The oxycodone concentration-response (drug liking) was best described by a sigmoidal-effect Emax model (S-shaped). Using a defined threshold, drug liking was closely associated with the rate of rise in concentration and the onset of action for oxycodone administered via oral or intranasal route. Partial AUCTonset-Toffset and AUETonset-Toffset showed a strong linear correlation. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate that oxycodone concentration-response and duration of drug liking following manipulation via different routes of administration may be an approach for further exploring drug liking effects of opioids.

Effect of Sunscreen Application on Plasma Concentration of Sunscreen Active Ingredients: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: A prior pilot study demonstrated the systemic absorption of 4 sunscreen active ingredients; additional studies are needed to determine the systemic absorption of additional active ingredients and how quickly systemic exposure exceeds 0.5 ng/mL as recommended by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Objective: To assess the systemic absorption and pharmacokinetics of the 6 active ingredients (avobenzone, oxybenzone, octocrylene, homosalate, octisalate, and octinoxate) in 4 sunscreen products under single- and maximal-use conditions. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized clinical trial at a clinical pharmacology unit (West Bend, Wisconsin) was conducted in 48 healthy participants. The study was conducted between January and February 2019. Interventions: Participants were randomized to 1 of 4 sunscreen products, formulated as lotion (n = 12), aerosol spray (n = 12), nonaerosol spray (n = 12), and pump spray (n = 12). Sunscreen product was applied at 2 mg/cm2 to 75% of body surface area at 0 hours on day 1 and 4 times on day 2 through day 4 at 2-hour intervals, and 34 blood samples were collected over 21 days from each participant. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the maximum plasma concentration of avobenzone over days 1 through 21. Secondary outcomes were the maximum plasma concentrations of oxybenzone, octocrylene, homosalate, octisalate, and octinoxate over days 1 through 21. Results: Among 48 randomized participants (mean [SD] age, 38.7 [13.2] years; 24 women [50%]; 23 white [48%], 23 African American [48%], 1 Asian [2%], and 1 of unknown race/ethnicity [2%]), 44 (92%) completed the trial. Geometric mean maximum plasma concentrations of all 6 active ingredients were greater than 0.5 ng/mL, and this threshold was surpassed on day 1 after a single application for all active ingredients. For avobenzone, the overall maximum plasma concentrations were 7.1 ng/mL (coefficient of variation [CV], 73.9%) for lotion, 3.5 ng/mL (CV, 70.9%) for aerosol spray, 3.5 ng/mL (CV, 73.0%) for nonaerosol spray, and 3.3 ng/mL (CV, 47.8%) for pump spray. For oxybenzone, the concentrations were 258.1 ng/mL (CV, 53.0%) for lotion and 180.1 ng/mL (CV, 57.3%) for aerosol spray. For octocrylene, the concentrations were 7.8 ng/mL (CV, 87.1%) for lotion, 6.6 ng/mL (CV, 78.1%) for aerosol spray, and 6.6 ng/mL (CV, 103.9%) for nonaerosol spray. For homosalate, concentrations were 23.1 ng/mL (CV, 68.0%) for aerosol spray, 17.9 ng/mL (CV, 61.7%) for nonaerosol spray, and 13.9 ng/mL (CV, 70.2%) for pump spray. For octisalate, concentrations were 5.1 ng/mL (CV, 81.6%) for aerosol spray, 5.8 ng/mL (CV, 77.4%) for nonaerosol spray, and 4.6 ng/mL (CV, 97.6%) for pump spray. For octinoxate, concentrations were 7.9 ng/mL (CV, 86.5%) for nonaerosol spray and 5.2 ng/mL (CV, 68.2%) for pump spray. The most common adverse event was rash, which developed in 14 participants. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study conducted in a clinical pharmacology unit and examining sunscreen application among healthy participants, all 6 of the tested active ingredients administered in 4 different sunscreen formulations were systemically absorbed and had plasma concentrations that surpassed the FDA threshold for potentially waiving some of the additional safety studies for sunscreens. These findings do not indicate that individuals should refrain from the use of sunscreen. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03582215.

Effect of Sunscreen Application Under Maximal Use Conditions on Plasma Concentration of Sunscreen Active Ingredients: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has provided guidance that sunscreen active ingredients with systemic absorption greater than 0.5 ng/mL or with safety concerns should undergo nonclinical toxicology assessment including systemic carcinogenicity and additional developmental and reproductive studies. Objective: To determine whether the active ingredients (avobenzone, oxybenzone, octocrylene, and ecamsule) of 4 commercially available sunscreens are absorbed into systemic circulation. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized clinical trial conducted at a phase 1 clinical pharmacology unit in the United States and enrolling 24 healthy volunteers. Enrollment started in July 2018 and ended in August 2018. Interventions: Participants were randomized to 1 of 4 sunscreens: spray 1 (n = 6 participants), spray 2 (n = 6), a lotion (n = 6), and a cream (n = 6). Two milligrams of sunscreen per 1 cm2 was applied to 75% of body surface area 4 times per day for 4 days, and 30 blood samples were collected over 7 days from each participant. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the maximum plasma concentration of avobenzone. Secondary outcomes were the maximum plasma concentrations of oxybenzone, octocrylene, and ecamsule. Results: Among 24 participants randomized (mean age, 35.5 [SD, 1.5] years; 12 (50%] women; 14 [58%] black or African American; 14 [58%]), 23 (96%) completed the trial. For avobenzone, geometric mean maximum plasma concentrations were 4.0 ng/mL (coefficient of variation, 6.9%) for spray 1; 3.4 ng/mL (coefficient of variation, 77.3%) for spray 2; 4.3 ng/mL (coefficient of variation, 46.1%) for lotion; and 1.8 ng/mL (coefficient of variation, 32.1%). For oxybenzone, the corresponding values were 209.6 ng/mL (66.8%) for spray 1, 194.9 ng/mL (52.4%) for spray 2, and 169.3 ng/mL (44.5%) for lotion; for octocrylene, 2.9 ng/mL (102%) for spray 1, 7.8 ng/mL (113.3%) for spray 2, 5.7 ng/mL (66.3%) for lotion, and 5.7 ng/mL (47.1%) for cream; and for ecamsule, 1.5 ng/mL (166.1%) for cream. Systemic concentrations greater than 0.5 ng/mL were reached for all 4 products after 4 applications on day 1. The most common adverse event was rash, which developed in 1 participant with each sunscreen. Conclusions and Relevance: In this preliminary study involving healthy volunteers, application of 4 commercially available sunscreens under maximal use conditions resulted in plasma concentrations that exceeded the threshold established by the FDA for potentially waiving some nonclinical toxicology studies for sunscreens. The systemic absorption of sunscreen ingredients supports the need for further studies to determine the clinical significance of these findings. These results do not indicate that individuals should refrain from the use of sunscreen. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03582215.

How debunking biases in research and development decisions could lead to more equitable healthcare?

Decades of research have demonstrated that a variety of cognitive biases can affect our judgment and ability to make rational decisions in personal and professional environments. The lengthy, risky, and costly nature of pharmaceutical research and development (R&D) makes it vulnerable to biased decision-making. Moreover, cognitive biases can play a role in regulatory and clinical decision-making, the latter impacting diagnostic and treatment decisions in the therapeutic use of medicines. These inherent and/or institutionalized biases (e.g., in assumptions, data, or decision-making practices) could conceivably contribute to health inequities. In this mini-review, we provide a broad perspective on how cognitive biases can affect pharmaceutical R&D, regulatory evaluation, and therapeutic decision-making. Example approaches to mitigate the effect of common biases in the development, approval, and use of new therapeutics, such as quantitative decision criteria, multidisciplinary reviews, regulatory and treatment guidelines, and evidence-based clinical decision support systems are illustrated. Mitigating the impact of cognitive biases could increase pharma R&D efficiency, change the perspective and prioritization of unmet medical needs, increase representativeness and quality of evidence generated through clinical trials and real-world research, leading to higher quality insights and more effective medication use, and as such could eventually contribute to more equitable healthcare.

Statin Drug-Drug Interactions: Pharmacokinetic Basis of FDA Labeling Recommendations and Comparison Across Common Tertiary Clinical Resources.

Statins are widely prescribed and highly susceptible to pharmacokinetic (PK)-based drug-drug interactions (DDIs). To date, there has not been a comprehensive analysis of the basis upon which statin DDI recommendations in US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) prescribing information (PI) are derived. We have conducted such an analysis. We also assessed the degree of concordance of statin DDI recommendations in FDA PI and those provided in common tertiary clinical resources. We catalogued statin DDI information, including PK data and management recommendations, for statin precipitant drugs approved from 2010 to 2021, available from FDA PI and tertiary clinical resource databases. Recommendations were categorized and mapped with associated PK data to assess consistency in the PK basis for labeling recommendations. From the 80 precipitant drugs evaluated, 180 statin DDIs were identified in FDA PI. Dedicated clinical DDI studies were conducted for 54% (n = 97) of these DDIs and 34% (n = 61) of DDI recommendations were extrapolated from clinical data with other statins. Overall, we found that PK-based statin recommendations were consistent across PI. These findings highlight regulatory precedence for translating information across statins without conducting dedicated clinical DDI studies, which may support future efforts toward streamlining the approach to investigation and labeling of statin DDIs. In addition, with the exception of some notable discrepancies, general concordance was observed between FDA and tertiary resources regarding "Dose Adjustment" and "Avoid Coadministration" recommendations. However, further analyses are warranted across other DDI pairs to determine whether discordance can routinely lead to different clinical recommendations depending on the drug information resource.

Clinical Pharmacology Approaches to Support Approval of New Routes of Administration for Therapeutic Proteins.

Intravenous or subcutaneous routes of administration (ROAs) are common dosing routes for therapeutic proteins. Eleven therapeutic proteins with approval for one ROA have subsequently received approval for a second ROA. The clinical programs supporting the second ROA consistently leveraged data from the first ROA and included studies that characterized the pharmacokinetics (PKs) of the drug administered by the new ROA to identify an appropriate dosage regimen. The selected dosing regimen was then further evaluated in clinical trials designed with various primary end points. All programs implemented model-informed drug development approaches to ensure that the selected regimens would achieve comparable systemic exposures (PK-based bridging) or pharmacodynamic (PD) responses (PD-based bridging) as the reference ROA. To support the approval of a second ROA, these programs either demonstrated noninferiority in PK, PD, and/or clinical end points for the second ROA, or established efficacy and safety through a comparison to a placebo treatment. The accumulative examples showed that clinical trials which provided the primary evidence to support approvals of the second ROA generally demonstrated noninferiority in the systemic exposures regardless of being specified as an end point or not in the study protocols. The experience to date supports the use of PK- and PD-based bridging approaches not only in the selection of dosing regimens for a second ROA to be tested in clinical studies, but also for providing evidence of effectiveness to support approval, when appropriate.

Intranasal Naloxone Repeat Dosing Strategies and Fentanyl Overdose: A Simulation-Based Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Questions have emerged as to whether standard intranasal naloxone dosing recommendations (ie, 1 dose with readministration every 2-3 minutes if needed) are adequate in the era of illicitly manufactured fentanyl and its derivatives (hereinafter, fentanyl). Objective: To compare naloxone plasma concentrations between different intranasal naloxone repeat dosing strategies and to estimate their effect on fentanyl overdose. Design, Setting, and Participants: This unblinded crossover randomized clinical trial was conducted with healthy participants in a clinical pharmacology unit (Spaulding Clinical Research, West Bend, Wisconsin) in March 2021. Inclusion criteria included age 18 to 55 years, nonsmoking status, and negative test results for the presence of alcohol or drugs of abuse. Data analysis was performed from October 2021 to May 2023. Intervention: Naloxone administered as 1 dose (4 mg/0.1 mL) at 0, 2.5, 5, and 7.5 minutes (test), 2 doses at 0 and 2.5 minutes (test), and 1 dose at 0 and 2.5 minutes (reference). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the first prespecified time with higher naloxone plasma concentration. The secondary outcome was estimated brain hypoxia time following simulated fentanyl overdoses using a physiologic pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic model. Naloxone concentrations were compared using paired tests at 3 prespecified times across the 3 groups, and simulation results were summarized using descriptive statistics. Results: This study included 21 participants, and 18 (86%) completed the trial. The median participant age was 34 years (IQR, 27-50 years), and slightly more than half of participants were men (11 [52%]). Compared with 1 naloxone dose at 0 and 2.5 minutes, 1 dose at 0, 2.5, 5, and 7.5 minutes significantly increased naloxone plasma concentration at 10 minutes (7.95 vs 4.42 ng/mL; geometric mean ratio, 1.95 [1-sided 97.8% CI, 1.28-∞]), whereas 2 doses at 0 and 2.5 minutes significantly increased the plasma concentration at 4.5 minutes (2.24 vs 1.23 ng/mL; geometric mean ratio, 1.98 [1-sided 97.8% CI, 1.03-∞]). No drug-related serious adverse events were reported. The median brain hypoxia time after a simulated fentanyl 2.97-mg intravenous bolus was 4.5 minutes (IQR, 2.1-∞ minutes) with 1 naloxone dose at 0 and 2.5 minutes, 4.5 minutes (IQR, 2.1-∞ minutes) with 1 naloxone dose at 0, 2.5, 5, and 7.5 minutes, and 3.7 minutes (IQR, 1.5-∞ minutes) with 2 naloxone doses at 0 and 2.5 minutes. Conclusions and Relevance: In this clinical trial with healthy participants, compared with 1 intranasal naloxone dose administered at 0 and 2.5 minutes, 1 dose at 0, 2.5, 5, and 7.5 minutes significantly increased naloxone plasma concentration at 10 minutes, whereas 2 doses at 0 and 2.5 minutes significantly increased naloxone plasma concentration at 4.5 minutes. Additional research is needed to determine optimal naloxone dosing in the community setting. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04764630.

Using Machine Learning to Determine a Suitable Patient Population for Anakinra for the Treatment of COVID-19 Under the Emergency Use Authorization.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study (SAVEMORE trial) provided data to support an Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) of anakinra in hospitalized adults with positive results of direct severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 viral testing with pneumonia requiring supplemental oxygen (low- or high-flow oxygen) who are at risk of progressing to severe respiratory failure and likely to have an elevated plasma soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR). Currently, the suPAR assay is not commercially available in the United States. An alternative method was needed to identify patients that best reflect the population in the clinical trial selected based on suPAR level ≥ 6 ng/mL at baseline. A machine learning approach based on data from the SAVEMORE trial was used to develop a scoring rule to identify patients who are likely to have a suPAR level ≥ 6 ng/mL at baseline. External validation of the scoring rule was conducted with data from a different trial (SAVE). This clinical scoring rule with high positive predictive value, high specificity, reasonable sensitivity, and biological relevance is expected to identify patients who are likely to have an elevated suPAR level ≥ 6 ng/mL at baseline. As such, it is included in the EUA to identify patients that fall within the authorized population for whom the known and potential benefits outweigh the known and potential risks of anakinra.

CXCL5 polymorphisms are associated with variable blood pressure in cardiovascular disease-free adults.

OBJECTIVE: Leukocyte count has been associated with blood pressure, hypertension, and hypertensive complications. We hypothesized that polymorphisms in the CXCL5 gene, which encodes the neutrophilic chemokine ENA-78, are associated with blood pressure in cardiovascular disease (CVD)-free adults and that these polymorphisms are functional. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 192 community-dwelling participants without CVD or risk equivalents were enrolled. Two CXCL5 polymorphisms (-156 G > C (rs352046) and 398 G > A (rs425535)) were tested for associations with blood pressure. Allele-specific mRNA expression in leukocytes was also measured to determine whether heterozygosity was associated with allelic expression imbalance. In -156 C variant carriers, systolic blood pressure (SBP) was 7 mmHg higher than in -156 G/G wild-type homozygotes (131 ± 17 vs. 124 ± 14 mmHg; P = 0.008). Similarly, diastolic blood pressure (DBP) was 4 mmHg higher in -156 C variant carriers (78 ± 11 vs. 74 ± 11 mmHg; P = 0.013). In multivariate analysis of SBP, age, sex, body mass index, and the -156 G > C polymorphism were identified as significant variables. Age, sex, and the -156 G > C SNP were further associated with DBP, along with white blood cells. Allelic expression imbalance and significantly higher circulating ENA-78 concentrations were noted for variant carriers. CONCLUSION: CXCL5 gene polymorphisms are functional and associated with variable blood pressure in CVD-free individuals. The role of CXCL5 as a hypertension- and CVD-susceptibility gene should be further explored.

Continuing to strengthen FDA's science approach to emerging technologies.

Emerging technologies result when advances and innovation in technology lead to discoveries. Often emerging technologies stimulate novel research in medical product development that contribute to new approaches to manufacturing and can improve the quality of products. By supporting investments in agency coordination, staff training and professional development, regulatory science research, stakeholder engagement, and enhancing opportunities for expert input, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration plays a critical role in translating innovations into novel safe and effective medical products that improve the public health.

A Multistakeholder Perspective on Advancing Individualized Therapeutics.

Precision medicine has evolved from the application of pharmacogenetic biomarkers to the prospective development of targeted therapies in patients with specific molecular/genetic subtypes of disease to truly "N-of-1" medicines targeted to very small numbers of patients - in some cases, a single identified patient. This latter iteration of precision medicine presents unprecedented opportunities for patients with severe, life-threatening, or life-limiting diseases. At the same time, these modalities present complex scientific, clinical, and regulatory challenges. To realize the promise of individualized medicines, a multistakeholder approach to streamlining medical diagnoses, advancing the technologies that enable development of these therapeutic modalities, and re-envisioning collaborative environments for access and evidence generation is of critical importance. Herein, we highlight some of these challenges and opportunities.

Pharmacodynamic Biomarkers Evidentiary Considerations for Biosimilar Development and Approval.

A biosimilar is a biological product that is highly similar to and has no clinically meaningful differences from a US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved reference product. The development and approval of biosimilars is critical to enhancing the availability of safe, effective, and affordable treatment options for patients. Utilization of pharmacodynamic (PD) biomarkers can help streamline biosimilar development programs as the current process can be costly and time-consuming. Whereas PD biomarkers have not been prominently used across biosimilar approvals to date, moving forward, there is ample opportunity to increase the use of PD biomarkers in biosimilar development programs in place of comparative clinical studies with efficacy end point(s). This includes utilizing PD biomarkers that were not used as surrogate end points in approval of reference products. This mini-review summarizes how PD biomarkers have been used in biosimilar development programs to date and then discusses evidentiary considerations for PD biomarkers. In addition, study design considerations for clinical pharmacokinetic and PD assessment of proposed biosimilars are discussed. Finally, the FDA's applied regulatory science activities related to PD biomarkers for biosimilars conducted in support of the FDA's Biosimilars Action Plan are reviewed. This included conducting three clinical studies to address information gaps about PD biomarkers for biosimilars and inform general methodological best practices. In summary, enhancing our understanding of key evidentiary considerations and optimal study designs for incorporating PD biomarkers in the evaluation of proposed biosimilars can help bring more treatment options to patients faster.

US FDA Postmarketing Requirements and Commitments: A Systematic Assessment of Clinical Pharmacology Studies and Their Impact on US FDA Prescribing Information.

Many of the conditions for the safe and effective use of new molecular entities (NMEs) are understood at the time of initial drug approval. However, some remaining knowledge gaps can be addressed after drug approval through postmarketing requirements (PMRs) or commitments (PMCs) established by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). Our objective was to conduct an assessment of clinical pharmacology-related PMRs and PMCs established at the time of approval and evaluate the impact of fulfilled PMRs and PMCs on prescription information (PI). This analysis included clinical pharmacology-related PMRs and PMCs established for NMEs approved between 2009 and 2020. Of the 1171 PMRs and PMCs, over one-third were clinical pharmacology-related. Of these, 46% were to evaluate drug interactions, 16% were to evaluate drug dosing in patients with hepatic impairment, and 10% were related to dose. The majority (57%) of PMRs and PMCs were fulfilled at the time of analysis, with a median time to fulfillment of approximately 2.3 years. The majority (94%) of the fulfilled PMRs and PMCs, either with or without a PI revision, resulted in new or modified instructions for use or supported existing instructions for use. This is the first time that clinical pharmacology-related PMRs and PMCs have been catalogued and analyzed to understand their impact on PI. An understanding of the knowledge gaps that exist at the time of drug approval could inform the most effective and efficient methods for evidence generation prior to and after new drug approval.

Model-Based Approach to Selecting Pegfilgrastim Dose for Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Similarity Studies in Biosimilar Development.

This study applied modeling and simulation (M&S) approaches to evaluate the sensitivity of pegfilgrastim pharmacokinetics (PKs) and pharmacodynamics (PDs) to changes in dose amount, and linear or nonlinear clearance (CL) over pegfilgrastim subcutaneous dose of 2-6 mg. A previously published model was adapted to better describe pegfilgrastim PK and PD data in healthy subjects and used in simulation. Nonlinear CL accounts for 98% and 77%, respectively, of the total CL of pegfilgrastim at 2 and 6 mg. The sensitivity analyses showed: (i) PK of 2 and 6 mg doses are similarly sensitive to detect differences for a 5% change in dose; (ii) PK of 2 mg dose is more sensitive to changes in receptor binding affinity, a model parameter for nonlinear CL, and a product quality attribute characterized with orthogonal methods as part of demonstrating analytical similarity between products; (iii) PK of approved 6 mg dose is more sensitive to changes in linear CL, which has not been associated with any specific product quality attributes, and (iv) the PDs are not sensitive to changes in linear or nonlinear CL. Taken together, our analyses support that the approved pegfilgrastim dose of 6 mg is appropriate for detecting differences between a biosimilar and the reference products in pegfilgrastim PK and PD similarity studies. The described M&S approaches can be adopted to support dose selection for biosimilars with nonlinear PK and complex PK-PD interplay.

Considerations for Use of Pharmacodynamic Biomarkers to Support Biosimilar Development - (I) A Randomized Trial with PCSK9 Inhibitors.

US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidance outlines how biosimilars can be developed based on pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) similarity study data in lieu of a comparative clinical efficacy study. There is a paucity of PD comparability studies in biosimilar development, leaving open questions about how best to plan these studies. To that end, we conducted a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, single-dose, parallel-arm clinical study in healthy participants to evaluate approaches to address information gaps, inform analysis best practices, and apply emerging technologies in biomarker characterization. Seventy-two healthy participants (n = 8 per arm) received either placebo or one of four doses of the proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitors alirocumab (15-100 mg) or evolocumab (21-140 mg) to evaluate the maximum change from baseline (ΔPDmax ) and the baseline-adjusted area under the effect curve (AUEC) for the biomarkers low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and apolipoprotein B (apoB) in serum. We investigated approaches to minimize variability in PD measures. Coefficient of variation was lower for LDL-C than apoB at therapeutic doses. Modeling and simulation were used to establish the dose-response relationship and provided support that therapeutic doses for these products are adequately sensitive and are on the steep part of the dose-response curves. Similar dose-response relationships were observed for both biomarkers. ΔPDmax plateaued at lower doses than AUEC. In summary, this study illustrates how pilot study data can be leveraged to inform appropriate dosing and data analyses for a PK and PD similarity study.

Effects of genetic variation in H3K79 methylation regulatory genes on clinical blood pressure and blood pressure response to hydrochlorothiazide.

BACKGROUND: Nearly one-third of the United States adult population suffers from hypertension. Hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ), one of the most commonly used medications to treat hypertension, has variable efficacy. The renal epithelial sodium channel (ENaC) provides a mechanism for fine-tuning sodium excretion, and is a major regulator of blood pressure homeostasis. DOT1L, MLLT3, SIRT1, and SGK1 encode genes in a pathway that controls methylation of the histone H3 globular domain at lysine 79 (H3K79), thereby modulating expression of the ENaCα subunit. This study aimed to determine the role of variation in these regulatory genes on blood pressure response to HCTZ, and secondarily, untreated blood pressure. METHODS: We investigated associations between genetic variations in this candidate pathway and HCTZ blood pressure response in two separate hypertensive cohorts (clinicaltrials.gov NCT00246519 and NCT00005520). In a secondary, exploratory analysis, we measured associations between these same genetic variations and untreated blood pressure. Associations were measured by linear regression, with only associations with P ≤ 0.01 in one cohort and replication by P ≤ 0.05 in the other cohort considered significant. RESULTS: In one cohort, a polymorphism in DOT1L (rs2269879) was strongly associated with greater systolic (P = 0.0002) and diastolic (P = 0.0016) blood pressure response to hydrochlorothiazide in Caucasians. However, this association was not replicated in the other cohort. When untreated blood pressure levels were analyzed, we found directionally similar associations between a polymorphism in MLLT3 (rs12350051) and greater untreated systolic (P < 0.01 in both cohorts) and diastolic (P < 0.05 in both cohorts) blood pressure levels in both cohorts. However, when further replication was attempted in a third hypertensive cohort and in smaller, normotensive samples, significant associations were not observed. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest polymorphisms in DOT1L, MLLT3, SIRT1, and SGK1 are not likely associated with blood pressure response to HCTZ. However, a possibility exists that rs2269879 in DOT1L could be associated with HCTZ response in Caucasians. Additionally, exploratory analyses suggest rs12350051 in MLLT3 may be associated with untreated blood pressure in African-Americans. Replication efforts are needed to verify roles for these polymorphisms in human blood pressure regulation.

Modulatory effect of fenofibrate on endothelial production of neutrophil chemokines IL-8 and ENA-78.

PURPOSE: The PPAR-alpha agonists (fibrates) are commonly used in the treatment of dyslipidemia. It has been hypothesized that the cardio-protective effects of fibrates are partially due to immunomodulatory effects. However, there is a paucity of data regarding the effect of fibrates on neutrophilic chemokines such as epithelial neutrophil activating protein (ENA-78) and interleukin (IL)-8. We investigated the influence of fenofibrate on IL-1ß-stimulated production of ENA-78 and IL-8 from human endothelial cells (HUVECs). METHODS: HUVECs were cultured in the presence or absence of IL-1ß and fenofibrate ranging from 1-50 uM. ENA-78 and IL-8 were measured and normalized to total protein content in cell culture supernates by multiplex immunofluorescence detection. Experimental samples were measured in triplicate. Significance was set at P < 0.05 by ANOVA with correction for multiple comparisons. RESULTS: Endothelial production of both ENA-78 and IL-8 was induced by the proinflammatory cytokine IL-1ß. ENA-78 concentrations increased by more than 160-fold over constitutively produced ENA-78 upon IL-1ß stimulation (mean ± SEM: 10,129 ± 1591 pg/mg vs. 61 ± 9.5 mg/mg; P < 0.0001). IL-8 concentrations increased by slightly over 5-fold (6145 ± 860 pg/mg vs. 1160 ± 201 pg/mg; P = 0.0003). ENA-78 protein and mRNA were significantly reduced by fenofibrate while no drug effects were observed on IL-8 production. CONCLUSIONS: Fenofibrate blunts IL-1ß-mediated ENA-78 production with no effect on IL-8. This represents a novel mechanism by which fenofibrate exerts anti-inflammatory effects and should be further explored.

Liver X receptor α gene polymorphisms and variable cardiovascular outcomes in patients treated with antihypertensive therapy: results from the INVEST-GENES study.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Liver X receptor-α (LXRA) is a nuclear receptor that regulates genes important in cholesterol homeostasis and inflammation. Several single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in the LXRA gene (NR1H3) have been earlier associated with metabolic phenotypes (dyslipidemia and elevated body mass index). Metabolic dysregulation is a major contributor to coronary disease; therefore, we assessed LXRA in International Verapamil Sustained Release SR Trandolapril Study Genetic Substudy (INVEST-GENES), a genetic-substudy of a large clinical trial in patients with hypertension and coronary artery disease. METHODS: Seven tag SNPs in the LXRA gene region (NR1H3) were selected for study: rs11039149, rs12221497, rs2279238, rs7120118, rs326213, rs11039159, and rs10501321. One thousand fifty-nine patients were genotyped from the INVEST-GENES case-control set (verapamil-sustained release-based or atenolol-based treatment strategies) that comprised of 297 cases frequency matched (approximately 2.5:1) with that of event-free controls by sex and race. The primary outcome was defined as first occurrence of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) were calculated using logistic regression. RESULTS: Three of the seven SNPs were associated with significant effects on the primary outcome in nonBlacks. The variant G allele of rs11039149 and the variant A allele of rs12221497 were associated with reduced risk of experiencing the primary outcome [OR: 0.62, confidence interval (CI): 0.45-0.85, P=0.003 and OR: 0.60, CI: 0.39-0.91, P=0.016, respectively]. The rs2279238 genotype was associated with a significant increase in risk for the primary outcome (OR: 1.42, CI: 1.03-1.95, P=0.03). Furthermore, there was a significant genotype-treatment strategy interaction for carriers of the variant T allele of rs2279238 (OR for verapamil-sustained release strategy compared with atenolol strategy: 2.86, CI: 1.50-5.46, P=0.0015). Diplotype analyses showed that the SNPs are rarely coinherited and support the directionally opposite effects of the SNPs on the primary outcome. CONCLUSION: LXRA genotypes were associated with variable risk for cardiovascular outcomes and pharmacogenetic effect in INVEST-GENES. These novel findings suggest that LXRA is a genetic/pharmacogenetic target that should be further explored.