Population pharmacokinetics of subcutaneous C1-inhibitor for prevention of attacks in patients with hereditary angioedema.

BACKGROUND: Long-term prophylaxis with subcutaneous (SC) administration of a highly concentrated plasma-derived C1-esterase inhibitor (C1-INH) formulation was recently approved by the Food and Drug Administration for hereditary angioedema (HAE) attack prevention. OBJECTIVE: To characterize the population pharmacokinetics of C1-INH (SC) (HAEGARDA® ; CSL Behring) in healthy volunteers and HAE patients, and assess the variability and influence of covariates on pharmacokinetics. METHODS: C1-INH functional activity data obtained after administration of various C1-INH (intravenous; IV) and C1-INH (SC) doses from 1 study in healthy volunteers (n = 16) and 2 studies in subjects with HAE (n = 108) were pooled to develop a population pharmacokinetic model (NONMEM v7.2). Pharmacokinetic parameters derived from steady-state simulations based on the final model were also evaluated. RESULTS: C1-INH functional activity following C1-INH (SC) administration was described by a linear one-compartment model with first-order absorption and elimination, with inter-individual variability in all parameters tested. The mean population bioavailability of C1-INH (SC), and pharmacokinetic parameters for clearance (CL), volume of distribution, and absorption rate were estimated to be ~43%, 1.03 mL/hour/kg, 0.05 L/kg and 0.0146 hour-1 , respectively. The effect of bodyweight on CL of C1-INH functional activity was included in the final model, estimated to be 0.74. Steady-state simulations of C1-INH functional activity vs time profiles in 1000 virtual HAE patients revealed higher minimum functional activity (Ctrough ) levels after twice-weekly dosing with 40 IU/kg (~40%) and 60 IU/kg (~48%) compared with 1000 IU IV (~30%). Based on the population pharmacokinetic model, the median time to peak concentration was ~59 hours and the median apparent plasma half-life was ~69 hours. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Twice-weekly bodyweight-adjusted dosing of C1-INH (SC) exhibits linear pharmacokinetics and dose-dependent increases in Ctrough levels at each dosing interval. In this analysis, SC dosing led to maintenance of higher Ctrough levels than IV dosing.

Exposure-Response Model of Subcutaneous C1-Inhibitor Concentrate to Estimate the Risk of Attacks in Patients With Hereditary Angioedema.

Subcutaneous C1-inhibitor (HAEGARDA, CSL Behring), is a US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved, highly concentrated formulation of a plasma-derived C1-esterase inhibitor (C1-INH), which, in the phase III Clinical Studies for Optimal Management in Preventing Angioedema with Low-Volume Subcutaneous C1-inhibitor Replacement Therapy (COMPACT) trial, reduced the incidence of hereditary angioedema (HAE) attacks when given prophylactically. Data from the COMPACT trial were used to develop a repeated time-to-event model to characterize the timing and frequency of HAE attacks as a function of C1-INH activity, and then develop an exposure-response model to assess the relationship between C1-INH functional activity levels (C1-INH(f)) and the risk of an attack. The C1-INH(f) values of 33.1%, 40.3%, and 63.1% were predicted to correspond with 50%, 70%, and 90% reductions in the HAE attack risk, respectively, relative to no therapy. Based on trough C1-INH(f) values for the 40 IU/kg (40.2%) and 60 IU/kg (48.0%) C1-INH (SC) doses, the model predicted that 50% and 67% of the population, respectively, would see at least a 70% decrease in the risk of an attack.

Enhancing Patient Flexibility of Subcutaneous Immunoglobulin G Dosing: Pharmacokinetic Outcomes of Various Maintenance and Loading Regimens in the Treatment of Primary Immunodeficiency.

INTRODUCTION: Standard treatment for patients with primary immunodeficiency (PID) is monthly intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG), or weekly/biweekly subcutaneous immunoglobulin (SCIG) infusion. We used population pharmacokinetic modeling to predict immunoglobulin G (IgG) exposure following a broad range of SCIG dosing regimens for initiation and maintenance therapy in patients with PID. METHODS: Simulations of SCIG dosing were performed to predict IgG concentration-time profiles and exposure metrics [steady-state area under the IgG concentration-time curve (AUC), IgG peak concentration (C max), and IgG trough concentration (C min) ratios] for various infusion regimens. RESULTS: The equivalent of a weekly SCIG maintenance dose administered one, two, three, five, or seven times per week, or biweekly produced overlapping steady-state concentration-time profiles and similar AUC, C max, and C min values [95% confidence interval (CI) for ratios was 0.98-1.03, 0.95-1.09, and 0.92-1.08, respectively]. Administration every 3 or 4 weeks resulted in higher peaks and lower troughs; the 95% CI of the AUC, C max, and C min ratios was 0.97-1.04, 1.07-1.26, and 0.86-0.95, respectively. IgG levels >7 g/L were reached within 1 week using a loading dose regimen in which the weekly maintenance dose was administered five times in the first week of treatment. In patients with very low endogenous IgG levels, administering 1.5 times the weekly maintenance dose five times in the first week of treatment resulted in a similar response. CONCLUSIONS: The same total weekly SCIG dose can be administered at different intervals, from daily to biweekly, with minimal impact on serum IgG levels. Several SCIG loading regimens rapidly achieve adequate serum IgG levels in treatment-naïve patients.

Pharmacokinetic modeling and simulation of biweekly subcutaneous immunoglobulin dosing in primary immunodeficiency.

Replacement therapy with immunoglobulin G (IgG) given as intravenous or subcutaneous (SC) infusions is the standard treatment for patients with primary immunodeficiency. Due to the life-long need for replacement, increased flexibility in the administration and dosage regimens would improve patients' quality of life. A population pharmacokinetic model that can predict plasma IgG concentrations for various routes, dosage regimens, and patient groups is a valuable tool to improve patient therapy. Such a model was developed based on IgG concentrations from 151 unique adult and pediatric patients who participated in 4 clinical trials of intravenous and SC IgG replacement therapy. Simulations predicted that the same total IgG dose, delivered SC, either in 1 biweekly dose (once every 2 weeks), or in 2 weekly doses, results in IgG peak and trough concentrations that remain within ± 10% of each other throughout the 14-day period. The developed population pharmacokinetic model predicted that biweekly SC Hizentra dosing offers a viable alternative to weekly SC therapy, allowing more flexible and optimized dosage regimens for patients with primary immunodeficiency.

Pharmacodynamic consequences of administration of VLA-4 antagonist CDP323 to multiple sclerosis subjects: a randomized, double-blind phase 1/2 study.

BACKGROUND: Lymphocyte inhibition by antagonism of α4 integrins is a validated therapeutic approach for relapsing multiple sclerosis (RMS). OBJECTIVE: Investigate the effect of CDP323, an oral α4-integrin inhibitor, on lymphocyte biomarkers in RMS. METHODS: Seventy-one RMS subjects aged 18-65 years with Expanded Disability Status Scale scores ≤6.5 were randomized to 28-day treatment with CDP323 100 mg twice daily (bid), 500 mg bid, 1000 mg once daily (qd), 1000 mg bid, or placebo. RESULTS: Relative to placebo, all dosages of CDP323 significantly decreased the capacity of lymphocytes to bind vascular adhesion molecule-1 (VCAM-1) and the expression of α4-integrin on VCAM-1-binding cells. All but the 100-mg bid dosage significantly increased total lymphocytes and naive B cells, memory B cells, and T cells in peripheral blood compared with placebo, and the dose-response relationship was shown to be linear. Marked increases were also observed in natural killer cells and hematopoietic progenitor cells, but only with the 500-mg bid and 1000-mg bid dosages. There were no significant changes in monocytes. The number of samples for regulator and inflammatory T cells was too small to draw any definitive conclusions. CONCLUSIONS: CDP323 at daily doses of 1000 or 2000 mg induced significant increases in total lymphocyte count and suppressed VCAM-1 binding by reducing unbound very late antigen-4 expression on lymphocytes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00726648.

Pharmacokinetics and tolerability of lamotrigine and olanzapine coadministered to healthy subjects.

AIM: To assess the pharmacokinetic effect and tolerability of lamotrigine 200 mg day(-1) and olanzapine 15 mg day(-1) coadministration in healthy male volunteers. METHODS: Subjects were randomized to receive either lamotrigine titrated on days 1-42 with olanzapine added on days 43-56 (LTG + OLZ group; N = 16), lamotrigine titration with placebo added on days 43-56 (LTG group; N = 12), or placebo on days 1-42 with olanzapine added on days 43-56 (OLZ group; N = 16). Steady state (0-24 h) pharmacokinetic profiles were determined on day 56 in each group. RESULTS: The average (90% confidence interval) ratios of lamotrigine area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h and maximum observed concentration for the comparison of LTG + OLZ:LTG were 0.76 (0.65, 0.90) and 0.80 (0.71, 0.90), respectively. Olanzapine pharmacokinetics were essentially unaffected by lamotrigine. The most frequently reported adverse events (AEs) during combination therapy were fatigue, dizziness and mild transaminase elevations. These AEs occurred at similar frequencies in the LTG + OLZ and OLZ cohorts, while being less frequent or absent in the LTG group. CONCLUSIONS: Lamotrigine and olanzapine coadministration in patients who may benefit from the combination was supported by this study. Lamotrigine dosing schedules are recommended to remain unchanged when combined with olanzapine therapy. However, the possibility exists that the lamotrigine dose for some patients may need adjustment to optimize treatment when olanzapine is added to or withdrawn from a regimen including lamotrigine.

The pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic consequences of the co-administration of lamotrigine and a combined oral contraceptive in healthy female subjects.

AIMS: To assess the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic effects of co-administration of a combined oral contraceptive (ethinyloestradiol plus levonorgestrel) and lamotrigine. METHODS: Over a period of 130 days, healthy female subjects took lamotrigine (titrated up to 300 mg day(-1)) and the combined oral contraceptive, either individually or as co-therapy. Plasma ethinyloestradiol and levonorgestrel concentrations were measured in the presence and absence of lamotrigine, and serum lamotrigine concentrations were measured in the presence and absence of the combined oral contraceptive. Serum concentrations of follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), luteinizing hormone (LH), progesterone, oestradiol and sex hormone binding globulin were also determined. RESULTS: Of the 22 enrolled subjects, 16 had evaluable pharmacokinetic data. The mean (90% CI) ratios of lamotrigine area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h (AUC(0,24 h)) and maximum observed concentration (C(max)) of lamotrigine when it was given with the combined oral contraceptive and during monotherapy were 0.48 (0.44, 0.53) and 0.61 (0.57, 0.66), respectively. Ethinyloestradiol pharmacokinetics were unchanged by lamotrigine, the mean combined oral contraceptive + lamotrigine : combined oral contraceptive alone ratios (90% CI) of the AUC(0,24 h) and C(max) of levonorgestrel were 0.81 (0.76, 0.86) and 0.88 (0.82, 0.93), respectively. FSH and LH concentrations were increased (by 4.7-fold and 3.4-fold, respectively) in the presence of lamotrigine, but the low serum progesterone concentrations suggested that suppression of ovulation was maintained. Intermenstrual bleeding was reported by 7/22 (32%) of subjects during co-administration of lamotrigine and combined oral contraceptive. CONCLUSIONS: A clinically relevant pharmacokinetic interaction was observed during co-administration of a combined oral contraceptive and lamotrigine. A dosage adjustment for lamotrigine may need to be considered when these agents are co-administered. A modest decrease in the plasma concentration of levonorgestrel was also observed but there was no corresponding hormonal evidence of ovulation.

Lack of pharmacokinetic interaction between oxcarbazepine and lamotrigine.

Epilepsy and bipolar disorder are commonly treated by combination drug therapy, such as lamotrigine and oxcarbazepine. To ensure the safety of this combination, information on pharmacokinetics and tolerability must be available. The objective of study was to evaluate the pharmacokinetics and tolerability of coadministered lamotrigine and oxcarbazepine in healthy subjects. This randomized, single-blind, parallel-group study comprised three cohorts: lamotrigine (200 mg daily) plus oxcarbazepine (600 mg twice daily), lamotrigine (200 mg daily) plus placebo, and oxcarbazepine (600 mg twice daily) plus placebo. Serial blood samples were collected at steady state to determine serum concentrations of lamotrigine and plasma concentrations of oxcarbazepine and its active metabolite 10-monohydroxy metabolite (MHD). Pharmacokinetic parameters were determined by noncompartmental methods. Tolerability was monitored through adverse event reports, clinical laboratory results, vital signs, and electrocardiograms. A total of 47 male volunteers received study drugs. At steady state, lamotrigine AUC((0-24)) and C(max) were not significantly affected by oxcarbazepine co-therapy, nor were MHD AUC((0-12)) and C(max) significantly affected by lamotrigine co-therapy. The most common adverse events, headache, dizziness, nausea, and somnolence, occurred more frequently during lamotrigine and oxcarbazepine combination therapy than during the monotherapy. No significant changes in clinical laboratory parameters, vital signs, or electrocardiograms were reported. In conclusion, the combination of lamotrigine and oxcarbazepine does not require dose adjustments based on pharmacokinetic data. However, it is important to recognize that the combination therapy was associated with more frequent adverse events.

Pharmacokinetic profile of a new form of sumatriptan tablets in healthy volunteers.

OBJECTIVE: Rapid delivery of migraine-specific medication to its site(s) of action is thought to be crucial in preventing or minimizing sensitization of central pain pathways and thereby in optimizing pain-free outcomes in patients with migraine. Sumatriptan has been developed as a new tablet formulation to enhance the rate of systemic drug delivery by improving tablet disintegration and drug dispersion relative to those of conventional tablets. These enhanced formulation characteristics may be beneficial during occurrences of the gastric stasis that can accompany migraine. METHODS: This randomized, open-label, 4-way crossover study (n = 32) was conducted to determine whether the new formulation of sumatriptan 50 and 100 mg is bioequivalent to sumatriptan conventional tablets and to compare the pharmacokinetic profiles of the new formulation and the conventional tablet during the early (0-2 h) postdose interval in healthy volunteers. Pharmacokinetics during the early post-dose interval are important in determining a drug's onset of action, an important parameter to patients with migraine. RESULTS: The results confirm that the new formulation of sumatriptan and sumatriptan conventional tablets are bioequivalent as demonstrated by the finding that the 90% confidence intervals for the sumatriptan area under the concentration time curve to infinity and to the last evaluable time point (AUC(0- infinity ) and AUC(0-t), respectively) and maximum plasma concentration (C(max)) fell within the predetermined bounds defining bioequivalence (0.80-1.25) for both doses. Pharmacokinetic parameters measured early (0-2 h) after dosing reveal slightly faster absorption, on average, of the new sumatriptan formulation than sumatriptan conventional tablets although high intersubject variability was observed. For the new sumatriptan formulation, AUC(0-2) (AUC up to 2 h post dose) was, on average, 1% greater (50 mg) and 8% greater (100 mg) and maximal sumatriptan levels were attained, on average, 10 min earlier (50 mg) and 15 min earlier (100 mg) compared with the conventional tablet. Other measures including AUC(0-0.5) (AUC to 30 min post-dose), times to achieve sumatriptan concentrations of 5 and 10 ng/mL, and mean percentage C(max) 15, 20 and 30 min post-dose demonstrate an observable improvement in rate of drug absorption for the new form of sumatriptan compared with conventional tablets. CONCLUSION: The new form of sumatriptan is bioequivalent to sumatriptan conventional tablets and is absorbed more quickly than conventional tablets.