Pharmacokinetics, safety and tolerability of a single oral dose of maraviroc in HIV-negative subjects with mild and moderate hepatic impairment.

BACKGROUND: Maraviroc is the first CCR5 antagonist and only oral entry inhibitor approved for the treatment of HIV type-1 infection. Maraviroc is extensively metabolized, primarily by cytochrome P450 3A4 and hence its pharmacokinetics might be affected by impaired hepatic function. The objective of this study was to evaluate the pharmacokinetics of maraviroc in subjects with mild or moderate hepatic impairment compared with subjects with normal hepatic function. Safety and tolerability were also assessed. METHODS: This was an open-label, non-randomized, single-centre, parallel-group study. A total of 24 subjects with mild (n=8) or moderate (n=8) hepatic impairment, or normal hepatic function (n=8) received a single dose of 300 mg maraviroc. RESULTS: Relative to those with normal hepatic function, the geometric mean ratio (90% confidence interval) for the maximum observed plasma concentration (C(max)) of maraviroc was 111% (74.6-166) and 132% (89.6-194) for those with mild and moderate hepatic impairment, respectively; the area under the concentration-time curve from time 0 to the last quantifiable concentration (AUC(last)) was 125% (84.7-185) and 146% (100-212); oral clearance was 89% (53.2-150) and 83% (49.2-139); and renal clearance was 94% (70.5-126) and 131% (98.6-173), respectively. Maraviroc was well tolerated in all subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Although differences in maraviroc pharmacokinetics were noted in subjects with hepatic impairment compared with those with normal hepatic function, these do not currently support a dose modification. The single 300 mg dose of maraviroc was well tolerated by subjects with normal and impaired hepatic function.

Effect of maraviroc on the pharmacokinetics of midazolam, lamivudine/zidovudine, and ethinyloestradiol/levonorgestrel in healthy volunteers.

AIMS: To assess the effect of maraviroc on the pharmacokinetics of midazolam, a sensitive probe CYP3A4 substrate; lamivudine/zidovudine, a combination of nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs); and ethinyloestradiol/levonorgestrel, a combination oral contraceptive. METHODS: Three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies were conducted in healthy subjects to assess the effect of maraviroc on pharmacokinetics of other drugs. Two, two-period crossover studies were conducted to assess (i) the effect of steady-state maraviroc (300 mg b.i.d.) on pharmacokinetics of midazolam; and (ii) the effect of steady-state maraviroc (300 mg b.i.d.) on the pharmacokinetics of lamivudine/zidovudine. A third two-way crossover study was conducted to evaluate the effect of steady-state maraviroc (100 mg b.i.d.) on the pharmacokinetics of 30 microg ethinyloestradiol/150 microg levonorgestrel (Microgynon). RESULTS: The geometric mean ratios for C(max) and AUC for each of the compounds tested in the presence and absence of maraviroc were between 92% and 121%. There were no notable differences in T(max), t(1/2) or CL(R) (where measured) for any of the compounds. CONCLUSIONS: Maraviroc had no clinically relevant effects on the pharmacokinetics of the CYP3A4 substrate midazolam, the NRTIs zidovudine/lamivudine, or the oral contraceptive steroids ethinyloestradiol and levonorgestrel.

The effects of cotrimoxazole or tenofovir co-administration on the pharmacokinetics of maraviroc in healthy volunteers.

AIMS: To assess the potential of cotrimoxazole and tenofovir, drugs which are inhibitors and/or substrates of renal transporters, to alter the pharmacokinetic profile of maraviroc. METHODS: Two randomized, placebo-controlled, two-way crossover studies were conducted in healthy male and female subjects. In study 1, 16 subjects, aged 18-45 years, received maraviroc (300 mg b.i.d.) with and without cotrimoxazole (960 mg b.i.d.; 160 mg trimethoprim and 800 mg sulfamethoxazole). In study 2, 12 subjects, aged 21-45 years, received maraviroc (300 mg b.i.d.) with and without tenofovir (300 mg q.d.). For study 1, blood was collected predose and on days 1-7. In study 2, blood was collected predose, on day 1 and days 3-7. In both studies, blood was collected at intervals up to 12 h postdose on day 7. Urine was collected on day 7, 0-12 h post morning dose. Blood and urine were analysed for maraviroc using liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry. RESULTS: The geometric mean ratios for C(max) and AUC(12) were 119% and 111%, respectively, for maraviroc plus cotrimoxazole and 104% and 103%, respectively, for maraviroc plus tenofovir, compared with maraviroc plus placebo. Renal clearance of maraviroc plus placebo was 8.3 l h(-1) and 8.5 l h(-1) and was 7.8 l h(-1) for maraviroc plus cotrimoxazole and maraviroc plus tenofovir. There were no serious or severe adverse events or any clinically significant changes in laboratory tests, blood pressure, or electrocardiograms. CONCLUSIONS: Neither cotrimoxazole nor tenofovir caused a clinically significant effect on the pharmacokinetics of maraviroc. Maraviroc 300 mg b.i.d. was well tolerated when co-administered with either cotrimoxazole or tenofovir.

A novel probe drug interaction study to investigate the effect of selected antiretroviral combinations on the pharmacokinetics of a single oral dose of maraviroc in HIV-positive subjects.

AIMS: Maraviroc (UK-427 857), an antagonist of the CCR5 receptor with potent anti-HIV activity, was recently approved for use in treatment-experienced patients infected with CCR5-tropic HIV-1. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of selected commonly used antiretroviral therapy (ART) combinations on the pharmacokinetics of a single oral dose of maraviroc 300 mg in HIV-positive subjects compared with historical controls. METHODS: In this study, four cohorts of HIV-positive patients (n = 8 each) receiving one of the following combination therapies were recruited: cohort 1--efavirenz + Combivir (lamivudine/zidovudine); cohort 2--efavirenz + didanosine + tenofovir; cohort 3--nevirapine + lamivudine + tenofovir; cohort 4--Kaletra (lopinavir/ritonavir) + stavudine + lamivudine. Subjects continued on their prescribed ART and also received a single oral dose of maraviroc 300 mg. Serial blood samples and urine for determination of maraviroc pharmacokinetics were collected over 12 h postdose. Plasma pharmacokinetic parameters from this study were compared with historical data generated in HIV-positive subjects receiving maraviroc monotherapy in a Phase IIa study. RESULTS: A total of 29 subjects were recruited (eight each in cohorts 1-3, and five in cohort 4). The geometric mean ratios for AUC(12) and C(max) for each treatment group compared with maraviroc monotherapy were: 47% and 67% (cohort 1); 48% and 76% (cohort 2); 101% and 154% (cohort 3); and 265% and 180% (cohort 4), respectively. T(max) was similar in all treatment groups. Mean values for renal clearance ranged from 8.2 l h(-1) (cohort 1) to 13.2 l h(-1) (cohort 4). There were no renal clearance data collected in the comparator study. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study support those previously seen in healthy volunteer studies that showed that efavirenz reduces maraviroc exposure, whereas lopinavir/ritonavir increases maraviroc exposure. These data also suggest that nevirapine does not lead to a clinically significant effect on maraviroc pharmacokinetics.

Effects of CYP3A4 inhibitors on the pharmacokinetics of maraviroc in healthy volunteers.

AIMS: To evaluate the influence of cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 inhibitors on the clinical pharmacokinetics of maraviroc, a novel CCR5 antagonist. METHODS: Four open-label, randomized, placebo-controlled studies were conducted in healthy subjects to assess the effect of separate and distinct combinations of CYP3A4 inhibitors on the steady-state pharmacokinetics of maraviroc. Study 1 was a two-way crossover study investigating the influence of saquinavir (SQV; 1200 mg t.i.d.) and ketoconazole (400 mg q.d.) on the pharmacokinetics of maraviroc (100 mg b.i.d.). All subjects received maraviroc for 7 days in both study periods. Cohort 1 subjects also received SQV or placebo and cohort 2 subjects also received ketoconazole or placebo. Study 2 was a parallel-group study including four treatment groups investigating the effects of ritonavir-boosted lopinavir (LPV/r; 400 mg/100 mg b.i.d.), ritonavir-boosted saquinavir (SQV/r; 1000 mg/100 mg b.i.d.), and low-dose ritonavir (RTV; 100 mg b.i.d.) on the steady-state pharmacokinetics of maraviroc (100 mg b.i.d.), and exploring whether maraviroc dose adjustment can compensate for interaction effects. Treatment lasted 28 days and comprised three distinct phases: (i) maraviroc alone on days 1-7; (ii) maraviroc + interactant on days 8-21; and (iii) maraviroc (adjusted dose) + interactant on days 22-28. Study 3 was a two-way crossover study investigating the effects of atazanavir (ATZ; 400 mg q.d.) and ritonavir-boosted atazanavir (ATZ/r; 300 mg/100 mg b.i.d.) on the pharmacokinetics of maraviroc (300 mg b.i.d.). All subjects received maraviroc on days 1-14 of both study periods. Subjects also received ATZ on days 1-7 and ATZ/r on days 8-14 of one treatment period, and placebo on days 1-14 of the other treatment period. Study 4 was a two-way crossover study investigating the effects of ritonavir-boosted tipranavir (TPV/r; 500 mg/200 mg b.i.d.) on the pharmacokinetics of maraviroc (150 mg b.i.d.). Subjects received maraviroc plus TPV/r or placebo on days 1-8. RESULTS: All of the drugs/drug combinations tested (except for TPV/r) increased maraviroc exposure, albeit to different degrees of magnitude. SQV/r caused the largest increase in maraviroc exposure (8.3-fold increase in AUC(tau)), whereas RTV caused the smallest increase in maraviroc exposure (2.6-fold increase in AUC(tau)). Downward adjustment of the maraviroc dose in study 2 during co-administration of HIV protease inhibitors was able to compensate for the interactions. TPV/r had no clinically relevant effect on maraviroc exposure at steady state. There were no treatment-related serious adverse events or discontinuations due to adverse events in any of the studies, and most adverse events were mild or moderate in severity and resolved without intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Potent CYP3A4 inhibitors, including ketoconazole and protease inhibitors (except TPV/r), increase maraviroc exposure. Downward adjustment of the maraviroc dose during co-administration with protease inhibitors can compensate for the interaction. TPV/r does not affect the steady-state pharmacokinetics of maraviroc, and hence no dose adjustment would be warranted.

Effects of CYP3A4 inducers with and without CYP3A4 inhibitors on the pharmacokinetics of maraviroc in healthy volunteers.

AIMS: To assess the potential of known CYP3A4 inducers, with and without CYP3A4 inhibitors, to alter the pharmacokinetic profile of maraviroc. METHODS: Two separate, open, randomized, placebo-controlled studies were conducted in healthy subjects. Study 1 was a 28-day parallel-group study with three treatment groups of 12 subjects each. On days 1-7, all subjects received maraviroc 100 mg b.i.d.; on days 8-21, subjects received maraviroc 100 mg b.i.d. plus either rifampicin 600 mg q.d., efavirenz (EFV) 600 mg q.d., or placebo q.d. as assigned; on days 22-28, the maraviroc dose was increased to 200 mg b.i.d. for patients receiving either rifampicin or EFV. Study 2 was a 21-day, two-way crossover study with three cohorts (12 subjects per cohort). On days 1-21, subjects received maraviroc 300 mg b.i.d. and boosted lopinavir (LPV/r, lopinavir 400 mg + ritonavir 100 mg) or placebo b.i.d. in cohort 1, maraviroc 100 mg b.i.d. and boosted saquinavir (SQV/r, saquinavir 1000 mg + ritonavir 100 mg) or placebo b.i.d. in cohort 2, and maraviroc 100 mg b.i.d. and 1000 mg saquinavir + LPV/r (400 mg/100 mg) or placebo b.i.d. in cohort 3. On days 8-21, subjects in all three cohorts also received EFV 600 mg or placebo q.d. RESULTS: Maraviroc (100 mg b.i.d.) exposure (AUC(12) and C(max)) was reduced in the presence of rifampicin and EFV by approximately 70% and 50%, respectively. Maraviroc AUC(12) and C(max) approached preinduction values when the maraviroc dose was increased to 200 mg b.i.d. for both the rifampicin-treated and EFV-treated groups. Co-administration of LPV/r with maraviroc (300 mg b.i.d.) resulted in geometric mean ratios (GMRs) of 395% and 197% for maraviroc AUC(12) and C(max), respectively, compared with placebo; addition of EFV resulted in GMRs of 253% and 125% for AUC(12) and C(max), respectively. Co-administration of SQV/r with maraviroc (100 mg b.i.d.) resulted in GMRs of 977% and 478% for maraviroc AUC(12) and C(max), respectively, compared with placebo; addition of EFV resulted in GMRs of 500% and 226% for AUC(12) and C(max), respectively. No pharmacokinetic data are reported for cohort 3 because all subjects were discontinued during period 1 due to poor toleration of the drug regimen. There were no serious adverse events reported in either study, and most adverse events were mild or moderate in severity and resolved without intervention. CONCLUSION: As expected with a CYP3A4 substrate, maraviroc exposure (C(max) and AUC(12)) was significantly reduced by the known CYP3A4 inducers, rifampicin and EFV, by approximately 70% and 50%, respectively. Upward adjustment of the maraviroc dose during co-administration with rifampicin or EFV appears to compensate for this reduction. Protease inhibitors (PIs) significantly increased maraviroc exposure; however, the addition of EFV to the maraviroc + PI regimens reduced the magnitude of PI-mediated increase in maraviroc exposure (by approximately 50%), but the net effect was still CYP3A4 inhibition.

Assessment of the absorption, metabolism and absolute bioavailability of maraviroc in healthy male subjects.

AIMS: Two studies were conducted to: (i) quantify the amount of drug-related radioactivity in blood, plasma, urine and faeces following a (14)C-labelled dose of maraviroc; and (ii) investigate the pharmacokinetics, safety and tolerability of intravenous (i.v.) maraviroc and determine the absolute bioavailability of oral maraviroc. Metabolite profiling was also conducted. Data from both of these studies were used to construct a mass-balance model for maraviroc. METHODS: Study 1 was an open-label study in three healthy male subjects. All subjects received a single 300-mg oral solution dose of (14)C-labelled maraviroc. Study 2 included two cohorts of subjects. Cohort 1 involved a double-blind (third party open), four-way crossover study where eight subjects received escalating i.v. doses of maraviroc (3, 10 and 30 mg) with placebo insertion. Cohort 2 involved an open, two-way crossover study where 12 subjects received 30 mg maraviroc by i.v. infusion and 100 mg maraviroc orally in random order. In study 1, blood samples and all urine and faeces were collected up to at least 120 h postdose. In study 2, blood samples were taken at intervals up to 48 h postdose. Urine was also collected up to 24 h postdose in cohort 1 only. RESULTS: After oral administration in study 1, maraviroc was rapidly absorbed with a plasma T(max) reached by 2 h postdose for all three subjects. The maximum concentrations of radioactivity also occurred within 2 h for all subjects. There was a higher amount of radioactivity in plasma than in blood (blood/plasma ratio approximately 0.6 for AUC(t) and C(max)). Unchanged maraviroc was the major circulating component in plasma, accounting for approximately 42% of the circulating radioactivity. Following a 300-mg (14)C-labelled maraviroc dose, means of 76.4% and 19.6% of radioactivity were recovered in the faeces and urine, respectively. The mean total recovery of dosed radioactivity was 96%, with the majority of radioactivity being recovered within 96 h postdose. Profiling of the urine and faeces showed similar and extensive metabolism in all subjects. Unchanged maraviroc was the major excreted component (33%). The major metabolic pathways were determined and involved oxidation and N-dealkylation. Intravenous doses of maraviroc (3-30 mg) were well tolerated in study 2, and drug exposure was approximately proportional to dose within the studied range. Approximately 23% of total clearance (44 l h(-1)) was accounted for by renal clearance (10.2 l h(-1)). Mean volume of distribution at steady state was 194 l. Absolute bioavailability of a 100-mg oral tablet dose, by comparison with a 30-mg i.v. dose, was calculated to be 23.1%. CONCLUSIONS: Maraviroc is rapidly absorbed and extensively metabolized, although unchanged maraviroc is the major circulating component in plasma and is the major excreted component after oral dosing. The pharmacokinetics of maraviroc after i.v. administration is approximately proportional over the dose range studied. Renal clearance contributes 23% of total clearance. The absolute bioavailability of 100 mg oral maraviroc is 23%.

Assessment of the pharmacokinetics, safety and tolerability of maraviroc, a novel CCR5 antagonist, in healthy volunteers.

AIMS: To evaluate the pharmacokinetics, safety and tolerability of single and multiple oral doses of maraviroc in healthy volunteers. METHODS: Three double-blind, placebo-controlled, dose-escalation studies with either single or multiple doses of maraviroc were conducted in healthy volunteers. Plasma and urine samples were collected to investigate the pharmacokinetics of maraviroc and evaluate any changes with respect to dose and duration/frequency of dosing. Safety and toleration of maraviroc were also assessed. RESULTS: Maraviroc is rapidly absorbed following oral administration, and plasma T(max) is achieved within 0.5-4.0 h postdose. Steady-state plasma concentrations are achieved after 7 consecutive days of dosing. Although the pharmacokinetics of maraviroc is nonproportional over the dose range studied (3-1200 mg), the degree of nonproportionality is small at clinically relevant doses. Renal clearance is approximately 10-12 l h(-1) and appears unaffected by increasing maraviroc doses. Maraviroc does not significantly modulate the activity of CYP2D6 or CYP3A4 at clinically relevant doses. There were no serious adverse events in any of these studies, and doses up to 900 mg were generally well tolerated, with postural hypotension being the dose-limiting event. There was no pattern or dose relationship observed with maraviroc with regard to laboratory abnormalities, including hepatic transaminases. No clinically significant increases in QTc were noted at clinically relevant doses. CONCLUSIONS: Maraviroc is absorbed into the systemic circulation and reaches steady state by day 7 of multiple dosing. It does not significantly influence the activity of major drug-metabolizing enzymes and is well tolerated at clinically relevant doses, with most adverse events being mild or moderate.