Oral gepotidacin versus nitrofurantoin in patients with uncomplicated urinary tract infection (EAGLE-2 and EAGLE-3): two randomised, controlled, double-blind, double-dummy, phase 3, non-inferiority trials.

BACKGROUND: Gepotidacin is a novel, bactericidal, first-in-class triazaacenaphthylene antibiotic that inhibits bacterial DNA replication by a distinct mechanism of action and a unique binding site, providing well balanced inhibition of two type II topoisomerase enzymes. Oral gepotidacin is under investigation to treat uncomplicated urinary tract infections. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of oral gepotidacin with that of nitrofurantoin in adolescent and adult female individuals with uncomplicated urinary tract infections. METHODS: EAGLE-2 and EAGLE-3 were phase 3, randomised, multicentre, double-blind, double-dummy, non-inferiority (10% margin) trials, in which patients were enrolled at 219 centres worldwide. Patients assigned female at birth, non-pregnant, aged 12 years or older, weighing 40 kg or more, with two or more symptoms of dysuria, frequency, urgency, or lower abdominal pain, and with evidence of urinary nitrite, pyuria, or both were eligible for inclusion. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) centrally by interactive response technology to receive oral gepotidacin (1500 mg twice daily for 5 days) or oral nitrofurantoin (100 mg twice daily for 5 days), with randomisation stratified by age category and history of recurrent uncomplicated urinary tract infections. Patients, investigators, and the sponsor study team were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint, therapeutic response (success or failure) at test-of-cure (ie, day 10-13), was evaluated in randomly assigned patients with nitrofurantoin-susceptible qualifying uropathogens (≥105 colony-forming units [CFU] per mL) and who received at least one dose of study treatment. Conforming to regulatory guidance, therapeutic success was defined as combined clinical success (ie, complete symptom resolution) and microbiological success (ie, reduction of qualifying uropathogens to <103 CFU/mL) without other systemic antimicrobial use. Safety analyses included patients who were randomly assigned and who received at least one dose of study treatment. The trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04020341 (EAGLE-2) and NCT04187144 (EAGLE-3), and are completed. FINDINGS: Studies were undertaken from Oct 17, 2019, to Nov 30, 2022 (EAGLE-2), and from April 23, 2020, to Dec 1, 2022 (EAGLE-3). 1680 patients in EAGLE-2 and 1731 patients in EAGLE-3 were screened for eligibility, of whom 1531 and 1605 were randomly assigned, respectively (767 in the gepotidacin group and 764 in the nitrofurantoin group in EAGLE-2, and 805 in the gepotidacin group and 800 in the nitrofurantoin group in EAGLE-3). After an interim analysis, which was prospectively agreed as a protocol amendment, both studies were stopped for efficacy. Thus, the primary analysis population included only patients who, at the time of the interim analysis data cutoff, had the opportunity to reach the test-of-cure visit or were known to not have attained therapeutic success before the test-of-cure visit. In EAGLE-2, 162 (50·6%) of 320 patients assigned gepotidacin and 135 (47·0%) of 287 patients assigned nitrofurantoin had therapeutic success (adjusted difference 4·3%, 95% CI -3·6 to 12·1). In EAGLE-3, 162 (58·5%) of 277 patients assigned gepotidacin and 115 (43·6%) of 264 patients assigned nitrofurantoin had therapeutic success (adjusted difference 14·6%, 95% CI 6·4 to 22·8). Gepotidacin was non-inferior to nitrofurantoin in both studies and superior to nitrofurantoin in EAGLE-3. The most common adverse event with gepotidacin was diarrhoea (observed in 111 [14%] of 766 patients in EAGLE-2 and in 147 [18%] of 804 patients in EAGLE-3), whereas the most common adverse event with nitrofurantoin was nausea (in 29 [4%] of 760 patients in EAGLE-2 and in 35 [4%] of 798 patients in EAGLE-3). Cases were mostly mild or moderate. No life-threatening or fatal events occurred. INTERPRETATION: Gepotidacin is an efficacious oral antibiotic with acceptable safety and tolerability profiles. As a first-in-class investigational oral antibiotic with activity against common uropathogens, including clinically important drug-resistant phenotypes, gepotidacin has the potential to offer substantial benefit to patients. FUNDING: GSK and the US Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority.

Pharmacokinetics and safety of inhaled oxytocin compared with intramuscular oxytocin in women in the third stage of labour: A randomized open-label study.

AIMS: To compare pharmacokinetics (PK) and safety of heat-stable inhaled (IH) oxytocin with intramuscular (IM) oxytocin in women in third stage of labour (TSL), the primary endpoint being PK profiles of oxytocin IH and secondary endpoint of safety. METHODS: A phase 1, randomized, cross-over study was undertaken in 2 UK and 1 Australian centres. Subjects were recruited into 2 groups: Group 1, women in TSL; Group 2, nonpregnant women of childbearing potential (Cohort A, combined oral contraception; Cohort B, nonhormonal contraception). Participants were randomized 1:1 to: Group 1, oxytocin 10 IU (17 µg) IM or oxytocin 240 IU (400 µg) IH immediately after delivery; Group 2, oxytocin 5 IU (8.5 µg) intravenously and oxytocin 240 IU (400 µg) IH at 2 separate dosing sessions. RESULTS: Participants were recruited between 23 November 2016 to 4 March 2019. In Group 1, 17 participants were randomized; received either IH (n = 9) or IM (n = 8) oxytocin. After IH and IM administration, most plasma oxytocin concentrations were below quantification limits (2 pg/mL). In Group 2 (n = 14), oxytocin IH concentrations remained quantifiable ≤3 h postdose. Adverse events were reported in both groups, with no deaths reported: Group 1, IH n = 3 (33%) and IM n = 2 (25%); Group 2, n = 14 (100%). CONCLUSION: Safety profiles of oxytocin IH and IM were similar. However, PK profiles could not be established for oxytocin IH or IM in women in TSL, despite using a highly sensitive and specific assay.

Dose selection for a phase III study evaluating gepotidacin (GSK2140944) in the treatment of uncomplicated urogenital gonorrhoea.

BACKGROUND: Gepotidacin is a novel, first-in-class triazaacenaphthylene antibiotic that inhibits bacterial DNA replication by a distinct mechanism of action and is active against most strains of Neisseria gonorrhoeae (N. gonorrhoeae). Phase II data suggested higher exposures were needed for efficacy and to suppress resistance development. A translational approach using in vitro pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) and clinical data was used to select a gepotidacin dose for a phase III study. In this narrative review of previously shown data, we summarise how a translational approach based on in vitro PK/PD and population PK modelling and simulation data was undertaken to select a dosing regimen for the ongoing phase III gepotidacin study in participants with uncomplicated urogenital gonorrhoea. METHODS: For dose selection, prior in vitro minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) and PK/PD data were available. PK modelling was conducted to determine a dose that would limit plasma concentrations to less than 14 µg/mL (as concentrations above this are associated with QT prolongation and effects associated with acetylcholinesterase inhibition) while maintaining ≥90% probability of target attainment (PTA) for efficacy and resistance suppression against N. gonorrhoeae isolates with gepotidacin MICs ≤1 µg/mL. RESULTS: Two 3000 mg gepotidacin doses, administered 10-12 hours apart, resulted in PTA of ≥97.5% and ≥91.7% for gepotidacin MICs ≤1 µg/mL for the ratio of the area under the free drug plasma concentration-time curve over 24 hours to the MIC (fAUC0-24/MIC) efficacy, and resistance suppression targets of 40 and 46, respectively, but limited the occurrence of maximum plasma concentrations ≥14 µg/mL. CONCLUSIONS: Two gepotidacin 3000 mg oral doses 10-12 hours apart provide ~2-fold higher systemic exposures, increase efficacy for higher gepotidacin MIC N. gonorrhoeae isolates, reduce resistance potential and limit plasma concentrations of potential safety concern, compared with higher doses.

Safety and Outcomes in Infants Born to Mothers Participating in Retosiban Treatment Trials: ARIOS Follow-up Study.

OBJECTIVE: Retosiban, an oxytocin receptor antagonist, was developed for treating spontaneous preterm labor (sPTL) in women with intact membranes. This ARIOS follow-up study aimed to characterize clinical safety, morbidity, and mortality of infants exposed to retosiban or comparator over 2 years. STUDY DESIGN: ARIOS prospectively assessed outcomes in infants whose mothers received at least one dose of retosiban or comparator (placebo/atosiban) in two Phase 3 sPTL trials. Both trials were terminated prematurely owing to poor enrolment. Infants could be enrolled into ARIOS from 28 days after estimated due date until hospital discharge or up to 9 months (corrected age). An internally developed questionnaire detailing medical conditions, mortality and resource use (Child Health Inventory; CHI), Ages and Stages Questionnaire-3 (ASQ-3), Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers-Revised with Follow-Up, and Child Behavior Checklist for Ages 1.5 to 5 were completed remotely by parents or legal guardians at prespecified intervals. Serious adverse events (SAEs) were primarily captured via CHI. No comparative statistical analysis was conducted between treatment arms. RESULTS: A total of 49 (86%) infants who had received retosiban and 49 (78%) infants who had received a comparator were enrolled in ARIOS. No deaths occurred during the study. Nine infants experienced SAEs: 6/49 (12.2%) infants in the comparators group and 3/49 (6.1%) in the retosiban group. Of the nine SAEs, seven were due to infections, three, and four in the retosiban and comparators groups, respectively. Based on ASQ-3 score, the incidence of neurodevelopmental delay at 18 and 24 months were 0/18 (0%) and 2/25 (8%) with retosiban and 7/22 (31.8%) and 3/21 (14.3%) with comparator, respectively. CONCLUSION: The current study showed no unexpected adverse outcome or impairment with retosiban based on safety monitoring and neurodevelopment assessments. No further follow-up is intended owing to the discontinuation of clinical development of retosiban. KEY POINTS: · There is a need for an effective and safe treatment for sPTL.. · ARIOS was a follow-up study of two Phase 3 trials in sPTL.. · There were no safety concerns with retosiban treatment.. · Slow recruitment led to termination of the Phase 3 trials..

Science-Based Approach to Harmonize Contraception Recommendations in Clinical Trials and Pharmaceutical Labels.

This review presents a European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Association/PreClinical Development Expert Group (EFPIA-PDEG) topic group consensus on a data-driven approach to harmonized contraception recommendations for clinical trial protocols and product labeling. There is no international agreement in pharmaceutical clinical trial protocols or product labeling on when/if female and/or male contraception is warranted and for how long after the last dose. This absence of consensus has resulted in different recommendations among regions. For most pharmaceuticals, contraception recommendations are generally based exclusively on nonclinical data and/or mechanism. For clinical trials, contraception is the default position and is maintained for women throughout clinical development, whereas appropriate information can justify removing male contraception. Conversely, contraception is only recommended in product labeling when warranted. A base case rationale is proposed for whether or not female and/or male contraception is/are warranted, using available genotoxicity and developmental toxicity data. Contraception is generally warranted for both male and female subjects treated with mutagenic pharmaceuticals. We propose as a starting point that contraception is not typically warranted when the margin is 10-fold or greater between clinical exposure at the maximum recommended human dose and exposure at the no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) for purely aneugenic pharmaceuticals and for pharmaceuticals that induce fetal malformations or embryo-fetal lethality. Other factors are discussed, including contraception methods, pregnancy testing, drug clearance, options for managing the absence of a developmental toxicity NOAEL, drug-drug interactions, radiopharmaceuticals, and other drug modalities. Overall, we present a data-driven rationale that can serve as a basis for consistent contraception recommendations in clinical trials and in product labeling across regions.

Design of Two Phase III, Randomized, Multicenter Studies Comparing Gepotidacin with Nitrofurantoin for the Treatment of Uncomplicated Urinary Tract Infection in Female Participants.

BACKGROUND: Uncomplicated urinary tract infections (uUTIs) are among the most common community-acquired infections for women worldwide. Treatment options are increasingly limited by antibiotic resistance; novel oral antibiotics are urgently needed. Gepotidacin is a novel, bactericidal, first-in-class triazaacenaphthylene antibiotic that inhibits bacterial deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) replication by a distinct mechanism of action, which confers activity against most strains of target pathogens, such as Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus saprophyticus, including those resistant to current antibiotics. Here, we describe the designs of two near-identical phase III clinical trials (EAGLE-2 and EAGLE-3) evaluating gepotidacin for the treatment of uUTI. METHODS: These are phase III, randomized, multicenter, parallel-group, double-blind, double-dummy, comparator-controlled, noninferiority studies, comparing the efficacy and safety of gepotidacin to nitrofurantoin in the treatment of uUTI. Eligible participants are women aged ≥ 12 years with ≥ 2 uUTI symptoms, randomized (1:1) to receive oral gepotidacin (1500 mg) plus placebo or nitrofurantoin (100 mg) plus placebo, twice daily for 5 days. The primary therapeutic endpoint is composite clinical and microbiological efficacy, with noninferiority comparisons made in individuals with a qualifying (≥ 105 colony-forming units/mL urine) nitrofurantoin-susceptible uropathogen. RESULTS: These trials were designed in accordance with US Food and Drug Administration (2019) and European Medicines Agency (2018) guidance, particularly the composite endpoint and microbiological evaluability requirements. Across the trials ~ 5000 participants are planned to be enrolled from > 200 centers globally. CONCLUSIONS: Gepotidacin represents an important potential treatment option being evaluated to address the need for novel oral antibiotics to treat uUTI. These trials are registered at ClinicalTrials.gov ( https://clinicaltrials.gov/ ) where the full protocols can be accessed under trial IDs: NCT04020341 (EAGLE-2) and NCT04187144 (EAGLE-3).

Identifying Barriers to Enrollment in Patient Pregnancy Registries: Building Evidence Through Crowdsourcing.

BACKGROUND: Enrollment in pregnancy registries is challenging despite substantial awareness-raising activities, generally resulting in low recruitment owing to limited safety data. Understanding patient and physician awareness of and attitudes toward pregnancy registries is needed to facilitate enrollment. Crowdsourcing, in which services, ideas, or content are obtained by soliciting contributions from a large group of people using web-based platforms, has shown promise for improving patient engagement and obtaining patient insights. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to use web-based crowdsourcing platforms to evaluate Belimumab Pregnancy Registry (BPR) awareness among patients and physicians and to identify potential barriers to pregnancy registry enrollment with the BPR as a case study. METHODS: We conducted 2 surveys using separate web-based crowdsourcing platforms: Amazon Mechanical Turk (a 14-question patient survey) and Sermo RealTime (a 11-question rheumatologist survey). Eligible patients were women, aged 18-55 years; diagnosed with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE); and pregnant, recently pregnant (within 2 years), or planning pregnancy. Eligible rheumatologists had prescribed belimumab and treated pregnant women. Responses were descriptively analyzed. RESULTS: Of 151 patient respondents over a 3-month period (n=88, 58.3% aged 26-35 years; n=149, 98.7% with mild or moderate SLE; and n=148, 98% from the United States), 51% (77/151) were currently or recently pregnant. Overall, 169 rheumatologists completed the survey within 48 hours, and 59.2% (100/169) were based in the United States. Belimumab exposure was reported by 41.7% (63/151) patients, whereas 51.7% (75/145) rheumatologists had prescribed belimumab to <5 patients, 25.5% (37/145) had prescribed to 5-10 patients, and 22.8% (33/145) had prescribed to >10 patients who were pregnant or trying to conceive. Of the patients exposed to belimumab, 51% (32/63) were BPR-aware, and 45.5% (77/169) of the rheumatologists were BPR-aware. Overall, 60% (38/63) of patients reported belimumab discontinuation because of pregnancy or planned pregnancy. Among the 77 BPR-aware rheumatologists, 70 (91%) referred patients to the registry. Concerns among rheumatologists who did not prescribe belimumab during pregnancy included unknown pregnancy safety profile (119/169, 70.4%), and 61.5% (104/169) reported their patients' concerns about the unknown pregnancy safety profile. Belimumab exposure during or recently after pregnancy or while trying to conceive was reported in patients with mild (6/64, 9%), moderate (22/85, 26%), or severe (1/2, 50%) SLE. Rheumatologists more commonly recommended belimumab for moderate (84/169, 49.7%) and severe (123/169, 72.8%) SLE than for mild SLE (36/169, 21.3%) for patients trying to conceive recently or currently pregnant. Overall, 81.6% (138/169) of the rheumatologists suggested a belimumab washout period before pregnancy of 0-30 days (44/138, 31.9%), 30-60 days (64/138, 46.4%), or >60 days (30/138, 21.7%). CONCLUSIONS: In this case, crowdsourcing efficiently obtained patient and rheumatologist input, with some patients with SLE continuing to use belimumab during or while planning a pregnancy. There was moderate awareness of the BPR among patients and physicians.

The emotional impact of urinary tract infections in women: a qualitative analysis.

BACKGROUND: While many studies address the clinical management of participants with uncomplicated urinary tract infection (uUTI), the emotional impact of uUTIs has been investigated less often. The aim of this qualitative study was to understand the emotional experience of women with uUTIs. METHODS: This was a qualitative, exploratory, in-depth interview-based study conducted among women in the United States (US) and Germany. Women aged ≥ 18 years with at least one uUTI treated with antibiotics in the past year were recruited through a patient community panel and physician referrals. Participants were recruited using purposive sampling to include an equal split of those with 1 or ≥ 2 antibiotics, and an equal split of those treated for a single or recurrent uUTIs (≥ 2 uUTIs in the past year). A structured telephone interview included questions about symptoms, diagnosis, treatment, and retreatment (if any). Each participant was queried about her emotions and the impact of the uUTI on life activities. Thematic analysis of responses was carried out to identify common themes. RESULTS: A total of 65 participants completed the interview, 40 (61.5%) from the US and 25 (38.5%) from Germany. Major themes that emerged from the analyses included (1) a wide range of negative emotions were experienced due to uUTI symptoms, interference with activities of daily life, and effects on relationships and sleep; (2) varied emotions and understanding related to uUTI treatment and management approaches; (3) treatment failure caused frustration, worry, and anger; and (4) the prospect of recurrent uUTIs provoked dread and helplessness. CONCLUSION: Our research uncovered emotions of helplessness and dread experienced by women in the context of uUTI clinical treatment failure and recurrent uUTIs. Knowing patients' perspectives on UTI management will help guide the development of patient education and improve shared decision-making.

Development of a Once-Daily Modified-Release Formulation for the Short Half-Life RIPK1 Inhibitor GSK2982772 using DiffCORE Technology.

PURPOSE: GSK2982772 is a selective inhibitor of receptor-interacting protein kinase-1 (RIPK1) with a short 2- to 3-h half-life. In a previous modified-release (MR) study, a matrix monolithic formulation (80% GSK2982772 released over 12 h) provided a once-daily (QD) pharmacokinetic (PK) profile in the fasted state; however, it was susceptible to food effects. The current study evaluated the safety and PK of MR formulations using GSK proprietary DiffCORE™ technology. METHODS: Part A evaluated PK following single-dose (240 mg) fasted and fed (high-fat meal) administration of three DiffCORE MR formulations within pre-defined in vitro extremes of 80% GSK2982772 released over 12 h (MR-12 h) to 80% GSK2982772 released over 18 h (MR-18 h) versus an immediate-release formulation. Part B evaluated MR-16 h (120-960 mg) in different prandial states. RESULTS: Pharmacokinetic profiles for all MR formulations and doses tested in the fasted and fed states were consistent with QD dosing. CONCLUSIONS: The DiffCORE technology overcame the food effect vulnerability observed with the matrix monolithic formulation. The MR-16 h formulation was selected for further clinical development as a QD dosing regimen (NCT03649412 September 26, 2018).

Development of standard definitions and grading for Maternal and Fetal Adverse Event Terminology.

OBJECTIVE: Adverse event (AE) monitoring is central to assessing therapeutic safety. The lack of a comprehensive framework to define and grade maternal and fetal AEs in pregnancy trials severely limits understanding risks in pregnant women. We created AE terminology to improve safety monitoring for developing pregnancy drugs, devices and interventions. METHOD: Existing severity grading for pregnant AEs and definitions/indicators of 'severe' and 'life-threatening' conditions relevant to maternal and fetal clinical trials were identified through a literature search. An international multidisciplinary group identified and filled gaps in definitions and severity grading using Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) terms and severity grading criteria based on Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Event (CTCAE) generic structure. The draft criteria underwent two rounds of a modified Delphi process with international fetal therapy, obstetric, neonatal, industry experts, patients and patient representatives. RESULTS: Fetal AEs were defined as being diagnosable in utero with potential to harm the fetus, and were integrated into MedDRA. AE severity was graded independently for the pregnant woman and her fetus. Maternal (n = 12) and fetal (n = 19) AE definitions and severity grading criteria were developed and ratified by consensus. CONCLUSIONS: This Maternal and Fetal AE Terminology version 1.0 allows systematic consistent AE assessment in pregnancy trials to improve safety.

A randomised, placebo-controlled study of RIPK1 inhibitor GSK2982772 in patients with active ulcerative colitis.

OBJECTIVE: Tumour necrosis factor signalling via the receptor-interacting protein kinase 1 (RIPK1) pathway regulates colonic inflammation suggesting that RIPK1 inhibition may be a potential therapeutic target in ulcerative colitis (UC). This phase IIa, randomised, double-blind experimental medicine study investigated the safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD) and preliminary efficacy of the RIPK1 inhibitor GSK2982772 in patients with active UC. DESIGN: In part A, prior to a protocol amendment, one patient was randomised to receive GSK2982772 60 mg twice daily for 42 days. After the amendment, patients were randomised 2:1 to receive GSK2982772 60 mg or placebo three times daily for 42 days. In part B, all patients switched to open-label GSK2982772 60 mg three times daily for 42 days. Safety, PK, PD biomarkers, histological disease activity, clinical efficacy and quality of life were assessed at days 43 and 85. RESULTS: Thirty-six patients were randomised (n=12, placebo/open-label GSK2982772; n=24, GSK2982772/open-label GSK2982772). Most adverse events were mild, with headache reported the most frequently across groups (placebo/open-label GSK2982772, n=2 (17%); GSK2982772/open-label GSK2982772, n=8 (33%)). GSK2982772 was well distributed into colonic tissue, with generally higher concentrations in colonic biopsy samples versus plasma. No apparent differences between treatment groups were observed for PD, histological disease activity, clinical disease activity or quality-of-life measures. At screening, all patients had Mayo endoscopic scores of 2 or 3. At day 43, no patients in the placebo/open-label GSK2982772 group achieved Mayo endoscopic scores of 0 or 1 vs 3/24 (13%) for GSK2982772/open-label GSK2982772. At day 85, 1/9 (11%) achieved scores of 0 or one for placebo/open-label GSK2982772 vs 3/22 (14%) for GSK2982772/open-label GSK2982772. CONCLUSION: GSK2982772 was generally well tolerated, with no treatment-related safety concerns identified. However, no significant differences in efficacy were observed between treatment groups, suggesting that GSK2982772 as monotherapy is not a promising treatment for patients with active UC. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02903966.

Development of a Prototype, Once-Daily, Modified-Release Formulation for the Short Half-Life RIPK1 Inhibitor GSK2982772.

PURPOSE: GSK2982772 is a selective inhibitor of receptor-interacting protein kinase-1, with a 2-3 h half-life. This study evaluated if a once-daily modified-release formulation of GSK2982772 could be developed with no significant food effect. METHODS: Part A evaluated the pharmacokinetics of GSK2982772 following fasted single-dose (120 mg) administration of two matrix minitab formulations (MT-8 h and MT-12 h) vs 120 mg immediate release (IR) and MT-12 h with a high-fat meal. Part B evaluated once-daily MT-12 h for 3 days at three dose levels. Part C evaluated a matrix monolithic (MM-12 h) formulation at two dose levels in different prandial states. RESULTS: All modified-release formulations dosed in the fasted state reduced maximum plasma concentration (Cmax), delayed time to Cmax, and decreased area under the curve (AUC) vs IR. When MT-12 h or MM-12 h were co-administered with a meal (standard or high-fat) Cmax and AUC increased. Dosing MM-12 h 1 h before a standard or high-fat meal had minimal impact on exposure vs fasted. CONCLUSIONS: MT-12 h and MM-12 h provided a QD pharmacokinetic profile in the fasted state, however when MT-12 h was dosed with a high-fat meal a QD profile was not maintained. ( ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03266172).

Randomized Trials of Retosiban Versus Placebo or Atosiban in Spontaneous Preterm Labor.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy and safety of retosiban in spontaneous preterm labor (sPTL). STUDY DESIGN: Two multicenter, randomized, and double-blind trials compared retosiban with placebo and retosiban with atosiban in women with a singleton pregnancy and intact membranes in sPTL at 24 to 336/7 weeks' gestation. Coprimary endpoints in the placebo-controlled trial were time to delivery (TTD) or treatment failure (whichever occurred first) and neonatal composite morbidity and mortality. The primary endpoint of the atosiban comparator trial was TTD. RESULTS: The trials were terminated early because of slow recruitment. The placebo-controlled trial enrolled 23 participants (February 2016-July 2017; 2.6% of target);the atosiban-comparator trial enrolled 97 (March 2015-August 2017; 29% of target). Baseline participant characteristics were similar between treatments. In the placebo-controlled trial, mean gestational ages at randomization were 30.8 (retosiban, n = 10) and 30.5 weeks (placebo, n = 13), and mean times to delivery/treatment failure were 18.9 days (retosiban) and 11.1 days (placebo). Two and four neonates in the retosiban and placebo groups, respectively, had ≥1 component of the neonatal composite endpoint. In the atosiban-comparator trial, mean gestational age at randomization was 31.5 weeks (for both retosiban, n = 47, and atosiban, n = 50), and adjusted mean TTDs were 32.51 days (retosiban) and 33.71 days (atosiban; p > 0.05). Adverse events were no more common with retosiban than placebo or atosiban. CONCLUSION: Despite considerable efforts to conduct two adequate and well-controlled studies in patients with sPTL, both studies were unable to recruit effectively and consequently terminated prematurely. Key factors negatively affecting participation were patient and physician resistance to use of a placebo comparator, lack of investigator consensus on diagnostic criteria and acceptance of protocol procedures, and ethics committee decisions. Meaningful cooperation between pharmaceutical companies, regulatory authorities, and the obstetric community is essential for future development of drugs to treat sPTL.

Comparison of the Pharmacokinetics of RIPK1 Inhibitor GSK2982772 in Healthy Western and Japanese Subjects.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: GSK2982772 is an oral small-molecule RIPK1 inhibitor with potential therapeutic efficacy in immune-mediated inflammatory diseases (IMIDs). An inter-ethnic comparison of GSK2982772 pharmacokinetics was conducted based on data from Western (Study 1) and Japanese subjects (Study 2). METHODS: Both studies were single-centre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies with objectives to assess the safety and characterise the pharmacokinetics of GSK2982772. Western subjects in Study 1 (NCT03305419), Part A (N = 15), were randomly assigned to receive 120 mg three times daily (TID), 240 mg TID, or 360 mg twice daily (BID) doses of GSK2982772, or placebo (TID or BID) for 1 day. Part B subjects (N = 47) received GSK2982772 120 mg TID, 240 mg TID, or placebo TID for 14 days. Japanese subjects in Study 2 (N = 13) (NCT03590613) were randomly assigned to receive TID doses of GSK2982772 60, 120, 240 mg TID or placebo TID for 1 day. RESULTS: GSK2982772 was well tolerated and adverse events were generally mild. Maximum observed plasma drug concentration (Cmax), time to reach Cmax (Tmax), area under the plasma drug concentration versus time curve after the first GSK2982772 dose (AUC(0-7)) of 120 and 240 mg, and (AUC(0-24)) values for the 120 and 240 mg TID doses over a single day were similar in Japanese and Western subjects. CONCLUSIONS: The pharmacokinetics and tolerability of GSK2982772 were similar between Western and Japanese subjects, justifying inclusion of Japanese subjects in future global clinical studies to assess the therapeutic potential of RIPK1 inhibition for the treatment of IMIDs. Clinical Trials: NCT03305419 and NCT03590613 available from http://www.clinicaltrials.gov .

A model for human and animal data integration: Weight of evidence strategy.

BACKGROUND: Integration of animal and human data to assess potential risks of the use of medications in pregnancy is important. A qualitative weight of evidence process enables all available evidence to be considered in a consistent, systematic manner. METHODS: We aim to describe the weight of evidence methodology utilized by the authors, a summary of which was presented at the 59th Annual Meeting of the Teratology Society entitled "Integration of Human and Animal Data to Inform Medication Use in Pregnant Women." The qualitative weight of evidence process evaluates data that inform on a potential relationship between an adverse pregnancy outcome and a medication exposure. An interdisciplinary panel evaluates all available human and animal data related to the question of interest. Study quality assessments of both human and animal data are incorporated. The evaluation assesses gaps in the data from the following areas: (a) strength, (b) specificity, (c) consistency, (d) dose response relationship, (e) methodological considerations, and (f) biological plausibility for the potential association of interest. RESULTS: The panel integrates all the information to arrive at an assessment of the evidence and provides recommendations, which may include obtaining more specific information. We provide examples of how the authors apply this process at a pharmaceutical company for evaluation of potential postmarketing safety issues regarding medications and pregnancy outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: This weight of evidence method improves the ability to integrate published literature and other data sources to assess the potential risks of medication use in pregnant women and inform future drug safety studies.

A Retrospective Database Analysis of Neonatal Morbidities to Evaluate a Composite Endpoint for Use in Preterm Labor Clinical Trials.

Objective To propose and assess a composite endpoint (CE) of neonatal benefit based on neonatal mortality and morbidities by gestational age (GA) for use in preterm labor clinical trials. Study Design A descriptive, retrospective analysis of the Medical University of South Carolina Perinatal Information System database was conducted. Neonatal morbidities were assessed for inclusion in the CE based on clinical significance/risk of childhood neurodevelopmental impairment, frequency, and association with GA in a mother-neonate linked cohort, comprising women with uncomplicated singleton pregnancies delivered at ≥24 weeks' GA. Results Among 17,912 mother-neonate pairs, neonates were at a risk of numerous severe but infrequent morbidities. Clinically important, predominantly rare events were combined into a CE comprising neonatal mortality and morbidities, which decreased in frequency with increasing GA. The highest CE frequency occurred at <31 weeks. High frequency of respiratory distress syndrome, bronchopulmonary dysplasia, and sepsis drove the CE. Median length of hospital stay was longer at all GAs in those with the CE compared with those without. Conclusions Descriptive epidemiological assessment and clinical input were used to develop a CE to measure neonatal benefit, comprising clinically meaningful outcomes. These empirical data and CE allowed trials investigating tocolytics to be sized appropriately.

Safety, Tolerability and Pharmacokinetics of Single Doses of Oxytocin Administered via an Inhaled Route in Healthy Females: Randomized, Single-blind, Phase 1 Study.

BACKGROUND: The utility of intramuscular (IM) oxytocin for the prevention of postpartum hemorrhage in resource-poor settings is limited by the requirement for temperature-controlled storage and skilled staff to administer the injection. We evaluated the safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics (PK) of a heat-stable, inhaled (IH) oxytocin formulation. METHODS: This phase 1, randomized, single-center, single-blind, dose-escalation, fixed-sequence study (NCT02542813) was conducted in healthy, premenopausal, non-pregnant, non-lactating women aged 18-45years. Subjects initially received IM oxytocin 10 international units (IU) on day 1, IH placebo on day 2, and IH oxytocin 50µg on day 3. Subjects were then randomized 4:1 using validated GSK internal software to IH placebo or ascending doses of IH oxytocin (200, 400, 600µg). PK was assessed by comparing systemic exposure (maximum observed plasma concentration, area under the concentration-time curve, and plasma concentrations at 10 and 30min post dose) for IH versus IM oxytocin. Adverse events (AEs), spirometry, laboratory tests, vital signs, electrocardiograms, physical examinations, and cardiac telemetry were assessed. FINDINGS: Subjects were recruited between September 14, 2015 and October 12, 2015. Of the 16 subjects randomized following initial dosing, 15 (IH placebo n=3; IH oxytocin n=12) completed the study. IH (all doses) and IM oxytocin PK profiles were comparable in shape. However, systemic exposure with IH oxytocin 400µg most closely matched IM oxytocin 10IU. Systemic exposure was approximately dose proportional for IH oxytocin. No serious AEs were reported. No clinically significant findings were observed for any safety parameters. INTERPRETATION: These data suggest that similar oxytocin systemic exposure can be achieved with IM and IH administration routes, and no safety concerns were identified with either route. The inhalation route may offer the opportunity to increase access to oxytocin for women giving birth in resource-poor settings.

Treatment of spontaneous preterm labour with retosiban: a phase II pilot dose-ranging study.

AIMS: The aims of the present study were to investigate the maternal, fetal and neonatal safety and tolerability, pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of intravenous (IV) retosiban in pregnant women with spontaneous preterm labour (PTL) between 340/7 and 356/7  weeks' gestation. METHODS: In parts A and B of a three-part, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre study, women were randomized 3:1 (Part A) or 2:1 (Part B) to either 12-h IV retosiban followed by a single dose of oral placebo (R-P) or 12-h IV placebo followed by single-dose oral retosiban (P-R). RESULTS: A total of 29 women were randomized; 20 to R-P and nine to P-R. An integrated analysis found that adverse events were infrequent in mothers/newborns and consistent with events expected in the population under study or associated with confounding factors. Retosiban was rapidly absorbed after oral administration, with an observed half-life of 1.45 h. Efficacy analyses included 19 women. While not statistically significant, those receiving R-P more frequently achieved uterine quiescence in 6 h (R-P, 63%; 95% credible interval [CrI]: 38, 84; P-R, 43%; 95% CrI: 12, 78) and more achieved a reduction of ≥50% in uterine contractions in 6 h (R-P, 63%; 95% CrI: 38, 84; P-R, 29%; 95% CrI: 4, 64). The number of days to delivery was increased in women receiving R-P (median 26 days for R-P vs. 13 days for P-R). CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous retosiban has a favourable safety and tolerability profile and might prolong pregnancies in women with PTL. The study provides the rationale and dosing strategy for further evaluation of the efficacy of retosiban in the treatment of PTL.