Relative Bioavailabilities of Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate and D-Amphetamine in Healthy Adults in an Open-Label, Randomized, Crossover Study After Mixing Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate With Food or Drink.

BACKGROUND: This open-label, crossover study examined lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) and D-amphetamine pharmacokinetics in healthy adults after administration of an intact LDX capsule or after the capsule was emptied into orange juice or yogurt and the contents consumed. METHODS: Healthy adult volunteers (N = 30) were administered a 70-mg LDX capsule or the contents of a 70-mg capsule mixed with yogurt or orange juice using a 3-way crossover design. Blood samples were collected serially for up to 96 hours after dose. Pharmacokinetic endpoints included maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) and area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from zero to infinity (AUC0-∞) or to last assessment (AUClast). Relative LDX and D-amphetamine bioavailabilities from the contents of a 70-mg LDX capsule mixed with orange juice or yogurt were compared with those from the intact LDX capsule using bioequivalence-testing procedures. RESULTS: Geometric least squares mean ratios (90% confidence intervals [CIs]) for D-amphetamine (active moiety) were within the prespecified bioequivalence range (0.80-1.25) when the contents of a 70-mg LDX capsule were mixed with orange juice [Cmax: 0.971 (0.945, 0.998); AUC0-∞: 0.986 (0.955, 1.019); AUClast: 0.970 (0.937, 1.004)] or yogurt [Cmax: 0.970 (0.944, 0.997); AUC0-∞: 0.945 (0.915, 0.976); AUClast: 0.944 (0.912, 0.977)]. Geometric least squares mean ratios (90% CIs) for LDX (inactive prodrug) were below the accepted range when the contents of a 70-mg LDX capsule were mixed with orange juice [Cmax: 0.641 (0.582, 0.707); AUC0-∞: 0.716 (0.647, 0.792); AUClast: 0.708 (0.655, 0.766)]; the lower 90% CI for Cmax [0.828 (0.752, 0.912)] was below the accepted range when the contents of a 70-mg LDX capsule were mixed with yogurt. CONCLUSIONS: Relative bioavailability of D-amphetamine (the active moiety) did not differ across administrations, which suggests that emptying an LDX capsule into orange juice or yogurt and consuming it is an alternative to intact capsules.

A Single-Dose, Open-Label Study of the Pharmacokinetics, Safety, and Tolerability of Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate in Individuals With Normal and Impaired Renal Function.

BACKGROUND: Lisdexamfetamine (LDX) and D-amphetamine pharmacokinetics were assessed in individuals with normal and impaired renal function after a single LDX dose; LDX and D-amphetamine dialyzability was also examined. METHODS: Adults (N = 40; 8/group) were enrolled in 1 of 5 renal function groups [normal function, mild impairment, moderate impairment, severe impairment/end-stage renal disease (ESRD) not requiring hemodialysis, and ESRD requiring hemodialysis] as estimated by glomerular filtration rate (GFR). Participants with normal and mild to severe renal impairment received 30 mg LDX; blood samples were collected predose and serially for 96 hours. Participants with ESRD requiring hemodialysis received 30 mg LDX predialysis and postdialysis separated by a washout period of 7-14 days. Predialysis blood samples were collected predose, serially for 72 hours, and from the dialyzer during hemodialysis; postdialysis blood samples were collected predose and serially for 48 hours. Pharmacokinetic end points included maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) and area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time 0 to infinity (AUC0-∞) or to last assessment (AUClast). RESULTS: Mean LDX Cmax, AUClast, and AUC0-∞ in participants with mild to severe renal impairment did not differ from those with normal renal function; participants with ESRD had higher mean Cmax and AUClast than those with normal renal function. D-amphetamine exposure (AUClast and AUC0-∞) increased and Cmax decreased as renal impairment increased. Almost no LDX and little D-amphetamine were recovered in the dialyzate. CONCLUSIONS: There seems to be prolonged D-amphetamine exposure after 30 mg LDX as renal impairment increases. In individuals with severe renal impairment (GFR: 15 ≤ 30 mL·min·1.73 m), the maximum LDX dose is 50 mg/d; in patients with ESRD (GFR: <15 mL·min·1.73 m), the maximum LDX dose is 30 mg/d. Neither LDX nor D-amphetamine is dialyzable.

A thorough QT study of guanfacine.

OBJECTIVES: Guanfacine extended- release (GXR) is approved for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in children and adolescents. As part of the clinical development of GXR, and to further explore the effect of guanfacine on QT intervals, a thorough QT study of guanfacine was conducted (ClinicalTrials. gov identifier: NCT00672984). METHODS: In this double-blind, 3-period, crossover trial, healthy adults (n = 83) received immediaterelease guanfacine (at therapeutic (4 mg) and supra-therapeutic (8 mg) doses), placebo, and 400 mg moxifloxacin (positive control) in 1 of 6 randomly assigned sequences. Continuous 12-lead electrocardiograms were extracted, and guanfacine plasma concentrations were assessed pre-dose and at intervals up to 24 hours post-dose. QT intervals were corrected using 2 methods: subject-specific (QTcNi) and Fridericia (QTcF). Time-matched analyses examined the largest, baseline-adjusted, drug-placebo difference in QTc intervals. RESULTS: In the QTcNi analysis, the largest 1-sided 95% upper confidence bound (UCB) through hour 12 was 1.94 ms (12 hours postdose). For the 12-hour QTcF analysis, the largest 1-sided 95% UCB was 10.34 ms (12 hours post-supratherapeutic dose), representing the only 1-sided 95% UCB > 10 ms. Following the supra-therapeutic dose, maximum guanfacine plasma concentration was attained at 5.0 hours (median) post-dose. Assay sensitivity was confirmed by moxifloxacin results. Among guanfacine-treated subjects, most treatment-emergent adverse events were mild (78.9%); dry mouth (65.8%) and dizziness (61.8%) were most common. CONCLUSIONS: Neither therapeutic nor supra-therapeutic doses of guanfacine prolonged QT interval after adjusting for heart rate using individualized correction, QTcNi, through 12 hours postdose. Guanfacine does not appear to interfere with cardiac repolarization of the form associated with pro-arrhythmic drugs.

Modeling and simulation of the exposure-response and dropout pattern of guanfacine extended-release in pediatric patients with ADHD.

Guanfacine extended-release (GXR) is a selective α2A-adrenergic receptor agonist approved in the United States for once-daily administration for the treatment of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adolescents ages 6-17 years old either as monotherapy or adjunctive to stimulant medications. This analysis integrates exposure-response, placebo, and dropout data from 10 clinical trials that used GXR in adolescents and children with ADHD. In these trials, the ADHD Rating Scale-IV (ADHD RS-IV) score was collected longitudinally within patients over the course of 6-13 weeks. Non-linear mixed effects models were developed and used to describe the exposure-response of the GXR and placebo time course. The OpenBUGS program was utilized to describe the dropout time course across the trials. Placebo time course was best described by an inverse Bateman function with a 3-group mixture model that allowed for the onset and offset of the placebo response. Dropout time modeling indicated a missing at random mechanism for dropouts which was best described by a Weibull distribution with an estimated percentage of non-dropout patients. A linear exposure-response model with an adolescent effect on maximum slope (SLPmax), and a time delay for reaching SLPmax, provided the best description of the GXR exposure-response time course. The GXR exposure-response model indicated that the typical (95 % confidence interval) decrease in ADHD RS-IV score from the placebo-response trajectory would be 37.1 % (32.2, 42.0 %) per 0.1 mg/kg of GXR exposure. There was little noticeable difference between the exposure-response in adolescents and children or across ADHD subtypes.

Safety and pharmacokinetics of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate in adults with clinically stable schizophrenia: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of ascending multiple doses.

To assess the safety and pharmacokinetics of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX), a d-amphetamine prodrug, this double-blind study enrolled adults with clinically stable schizophrenia who were adherent (≥12 weeks) to antipsychotic pharmacotherapy. The participants received placebo or ascending LDX doses (50, 70, 100, 150, 200, and 250 mg) daily for 5 days at each dose (dose periods, 1-6; days, 1-5). Of the 31 enrolled participants, 27 completed the study (placebo, n = 6; LDX, n = 21). Treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were reported by 4 participants receiving placebo and by 23 participants receiving LDX (all doses) with no serious AEs while on active treatment. For all periods, the mean postdose change on day 5 (up to 12 hours postdose) in systolic and diastolic blood pressure and pulse, respectively, ranged from -4.62 to 8.05 mm Hg, -3.67 to 4.43 mm Hg, and -3.57 to 14.43 beats per minute for placebo and -3.83 to 11.25 mm Hg, -1.55 to 5.80 mm Hg, and -0.36 to 21.26 beats per minute for LDX. With ascending LDX dose, the mean (SD) maximum plasma concentration for LDX-derived d-amphetamine ranged from 51.68 (10.28) to 266.27 (56.55) ng/mL. The area under the plasma concentration-time curve for 24 hours ranged from 801.8 (170.2) to 4397.9 (1085.9) ng[BULLET OPERATOR]h/mL. The d-amphetamine maximum plasma concentration and area under the plasma concentration-time curve increased linearly with ascending LDX dose. Antipsychotic agents did not markedly affect d-amphetamine pharmacokinetics. Over a wide range of ascending doses, LDX safety profile in adults with schizophrenia was consistent with previous findings with no unexpected treatment-emergent AEs. Pulse tended to increase with LDX dose; overall, blood pressure did not increase with LDX dose. Consistent with previous studies, pharmacokinetic parameters increased linearly with increasing LDX dose.

Pharmacokinetics of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate after targeted gastrointestinal release or oral administration in healthy adults.

The purpose of this work was to assess the pharmacokinetics and safety of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) delivered and released regionally in the gastrointestinal (GI) tract. In this open-label, randomized, crossover study, oral capsules and InteliSite delivery capsules containing LDX (50 mg) with radioactive marker were delivered to the proximal small bowel (PSB), distal SB (DSB), and ascending colon (AC) during separate periods. Gamma scintigraphy evaluated regional delivery and GI transit. LDX and d-amphetamine in blood were measured postdose (≤72 h). Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were assessed. Healthy males (n = 18; 18-48 years) were enrolled. Mean (S.D.) maximal plasma concentration (C(max)) was 37.6 (4.54), 40.5 (4.95), 38.7 (6.46), and 25.7 (9.07) ng/ml; area under the concentration-time curve to the last measurable time point was 719.1 (157.05), 771.2 (152.88), 752.4 (163.38), and 574.3 (220.65) ng · h · ml⁻¹, respectively, for d-amphetamine after oral, PSB, DSB, and AC delivery of LDX. Median time to C(max) was 5, 4, 5, and 8 h, respectively. Most TEAEs were mild to moderate. No clinically meaningful changes were observed (laboratory, physical examination, or electrocardiogram). LDX oral administration or targeted delivery to small intestine had similar d-amphetamine systemic exposure, indicating good absorption, and had reduced absorption after colonic delivery. The safety profile was consistent with other LDX studies.

Pharmacokinetics and safety of lefamulin after single intravenous dose administration in subjects with impaired renal function and those requiring hemodialysis.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Lefamulin is a novel IV and oral pleuromutilin recently approved for the treatment of community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP). Given that renal comorbidities are common in patients admitted for CABP, understanding the pharmacokinetics of lefamulin in the face of severe renal impairment, including those requiring hemodialysis, is needed. DESIGN: Open-label, Phase-1 pharmacokinetic study. SETTING: Research Study Center. PATIENTS: Twenty-three matched subjects were included, seven with "Normal" renal function (creatinine clearance >90 ml/min), eight with "Severe" renal impairment (glomerular filtration rate <30 ml/min/1.73 m2 ), and eight subjects requiring hemodialysis. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Subjects were administered a single dose of lefamulin IV 150 mg as a 1-h infusion. Subjects in the hemodialysis group started hemodialysis within 1 h after lefamulin infusion (On dialysis), as well as, on a non-dialysis day (Off dialysis). Plasma, urine, and dialysate fluid were collected for 36 h and analyzed for lefamulin and its major metabolite, BC-8041. Lefamulin was primarily excreted non-renally across groups. Statistical analyses revealed lefamulin and BC-8041 pharmacokinetics were similar between Normal and Severe groups, except for renal clearance, which decreased in Severe subjects (mean 1.3 L/h Normal vs. 0.4 L/h Severe). Likewise, lefamulin pharmacokinetics during on and off dialysis were unchanged, with lefamulin not measurably filtered in dialysate fluid. Two, three, and three subjects reported drug-related treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) in Normal, Severe, and Hemodialysis groups, respectively. All TEAEs were mild, except one (infusion-site reaction) that was classified as moderate. CONCLUSION: No dosage adjustment is required for patients with renal impairment, and lefamulin can be administered without regard to hemodialysis timing.

Pharmacokinetics and safety of lefamulin after single intravenous dose administration in subjects with impaired-hepatic function.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Lefamulin is a novel pleuromutilin recently approved by the FDA for the treatment of community-acquired bacterial pneumonia. Given that, lefamulin is primarily metabolized by CYP450 Phase-1 reactions, this study evaluated the pharmacokinetics of IV lefamulin in subjects with various degrees of hepatic impairment as compared with matched healthy subjects. DESIGN: Open-label, Phase-1 clinical pharmacokinetic study. SETTING: Research Study Center. PATIENTS: Twenty-seven subjects; comprised of 11 individuals with normal hepatic function and eight each with moderate or severe hepatic impairment were included, as classified by Child-Pugh scores. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Subjects were administered a single dose of IV lefamulin 150 mg over 1 h. Plasma was collected for 48 h and analyzed for lefamulin and its major metabolite, BC-8041, concentrations in addition to assessing lefamulin plasma protein binding. Pharmacokinetics were evaluated by noncompartmental analysis. Pharmacokinetic parameters were compared using least square geometric mean ratios. Lefamulin was well tolerated in all hepatic function groups. Statistical analyses revealed reductions in Cmax and increases in renal clearance for Moderate and Severe groups, as well as, the increased volume of distribution for the Severe group. Lefamulin plasma AUC mean (SD) was similar across groups at 7615 (1554), 8233 (2286), and 8938 (1640) h.ng/mL for Normal, Moderate, and Severe groups, respectively, despite decreased clearance observed primarily during terminal elimination phases. Decreased plasma-protein binding was seen in hepatically-impaired versus normal subjects. CONCLUSION: Lefamulin was generally well tolerated. Differences in lefamulin and BC-8041 pharmacokinetics were small, relative to the overall variability, and any changes appear to be compensated by increases in renal clearance and decreased protein binding.

A phase 1, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of single and multiple doses of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate in Japanese and Caucasian healthy adult subjects.

AIM: To assess safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate in Japanese and Caucasian healthy adults. METHODS: A phase 1, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, single- and multiple-dose study in Japanese and Caucasian subjects. Subjects received lisdexamfetamine 20 mg or placebo on Day 1, then lisdexamfetamine 20 mg/d (Days 4-8), 50 mg/d (Days 9-13), 70 mg/d (Days 14-18), or matching placebo. Pharmacokinetic parameters for lisdexamfetamine and d-amphetamine were estimated by noncompartmental analysis. RESULTS: Fifteen Japanese and 19 Caucasian subjects were enrolled and randomized. The lisdexamfetamine and d-amphetamine plasma concentration-time curves were similar for both ethnic groups following single and multiple doses. Mean area under the concentration-time curves for d-amphetamine were higher (by 11%-15%) in Japanese than Caucasian subjects following multiple dosing of lisdexamfetamine. Mean bodyweight was 17% lower in Japanese than Caucasian subjects. Weight-corrected means for oral clearance were similar in both ethnic groups, with no unexpected accumulation of d-amphetamine. Lisdexamfetamine was generally well tolerated by both ethnic groups, with no serious adverse events reported. The 10/12 Japanese and 11/16 Caucasian subjects who received lisdexamfetamine completed the study; two Japanese and three Caucasian subjects discontinued due to adverse events. Most adverse events were of mild severity. CONCLUSION: Pharmacokinetics were generally similar for Japanese and Caucasian subjects; the minor differences observed were likely due to bodyweight differences in the two ethnic groups. Lisdexamfetamine was generally well tolerated. Adverse events were consistent with the established safety profile of lisdexamfetamine and were similar in both ethnic groups.

Assessment of the Effects of Age and Renal Function on Pharmacokinetics of Bazedoxifene in Postmenopausal Women.

Bazedoxifene (BZA), a chemically distinct selective estrogen receptor modulator, has demonstrated efficacy and long-term safety in phase 3 placebo-controlled studies for prevention and treatment of osteoporosis. Here, we assessed the potential effects of age and renal function on BZA pharmacokinetics in healthy postmenopausal women (aged 55-84 years; CLcr, 32-109 mL/min). This was an open-label, single-dose, parallel, nonrandomized inpatient study conducted in healthy postmenopausal women and postmenopausal women with impaired renal function. Each subject received a single oral dose of BZA in a 20-mg tablet. Twenty-six subjects were enrolled: 8 in each of 3 age groups (55-64 years, 65-74 years, ≥75 years) and 2 (aged 71 and 75 years) with mild renal impairment; all subjects received treatment and completed the study. Age-related changes in pharmacokinetics were apparent. Although the correlation was modest (R2 = 0.28), BZA CL/F decreased steadily with age, such that the oldest group (>75 years) had a mean CL/F 60% less than the youngest group (55-64 years). Over the observed range of CLcr, there was a weak positive correlation (R2 = 0.19) between BZA CL/F and CLcr.

Pharmacokinetics and Safety of Bazedoxifene in Hepatically Impaired and Healthy Postmenopausal Women.

Bazedoxifene, a selective estrogen receptor modulator with proestrogenic effects on bone and lipid metabolism and antiestrogenic effects on the breast and endometrium, is a treatment option for osteoporosis in postmenopausal women. It is extensively metabolized by the liver; therefore, a decrease in liver function was expected to decrease bazedoxifene clearance. This single-dose, open-label, inpatient/outpatient, nonrandomized study assessed the pharmacokinetics of bazedoxifene 20 mg in 18 postmenopausal women with hepatic impairment and 18 matched healthy postmenopausal women. Bazedoxifene elimination was slower, and exposure was higher, in hepatically impaired subjects compared with healthy subjects. In subjects with severe (Child-Pugh C) liver impairment, bazedoxifene mean half-life was 50% longer than that of healthy subjects. Area under the concentration-time curve geometric mean ratios (90%CI) for Child-Pugh A, B, and C liver impairment vs healthy subjects were 243% (156-379), 209% (135-326), and 368% (236-572), respectively. Although there were no severe adverse events in this study, bazedoxifene use in patients with hepatic impairment is not recommended.

Pharmacokinetic Drug Interaction Study of Bazedoxifene and Ibuprofen.

The purpose of this article was to evaluate the potential for a pharmacokinetic interaction between bazedoxifene and ibuprofen. In a randomized crossover study, 12 healthy postmenopausal women (aged 45-65 years) received either a single oral dose of ibuprofen (600-mg tablet), bazedoxifene (20-mg capsule), or both ibuprofen and bazedoxifene during the 3 treatment periods. Serial blood samples were collected for pharmacokinetic analyses. There was no relationship between the UGT1A1 genotype and bazedoxifene clearance. The 90% log-transformed confidence intervals (CIs) for bazedoxifene Cmax , 96% to 144%, and AUC, 85% to 134%, were slightly above the bioequivalence limits of 80% to 125%. The 90% log-transformed CIs for ibuprofen pharmacokinetic parameters were within these limits (Cmax , 92%-122%; AUC, 94%-106%). The increase in bazedoxifene plasma concentrations when combined with ibuprofen versus bazedoxifene alone is unlikely to be clinically significant. The lack of interaction between bazedoxifene and ibuprofen suggests that they may be coadministered without dose adjustment.

A Study of the Potential Interaction Between Bazedoxifene and Atorvastatin in Healthy Postmenopausal Women.

An open-label, 3-period study was conducted in 30 healthy postmenopausal women (mean age, 58.4 years) who received a single oral dose of atorvastatin 20 mg on day 1 (period 1), multiple daily dosing of bazedoxifene 40 mg on days 4-11 (period 2), and coadministration of atorvastatin 20 mg + bazedoxifene 40 mg on day 12 (period 3). Serial blood samples were collected (24 hours after bazedoxifene and 72 hours after atorvastatin) and assayed for bazedoxifene, atorvastatin, and its ortho-hydroxy and para-hydroxy metabolites. Pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated using noncompartmental methods. Bazedoxifene exposure was not altered with coadministration of atorvastatin 20 mg (Cmax and AUCss were within bioequivalence limits). Similarly, atorvastatin and ortho-hydroxyatorvastatin exposure was equivalent with or without coadministration with bazedoxifene. Para-hydroxyatorvastatin concentrations were below the limit of quantitation under both conditions. Cmax for atorvastatin and ortho-hydroxyatorvastatin was 14% and 18% lower, respectively, and Tmax was 20% and 34% longer, respectively, with the combination compared with atorvastatin alone. There were no serious adverse events, and no subjects discontinued the study because of safety. No clinically significant pharmacokinetic interaction was observed between bazedoxifene and atorvastatin or its active metabolites, indicating they may be safely coadministered without dosage adjustment.

Pharmacokinetics, Safety, and Tolerability of Single and Multiple Doses of Guanfacine Extended-Release Formulation in Healthy Japanese and Caucasian Male Adults.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Guanfacine extended-release (guanfacine XR) could be a useful treatment option for children and adolescent patients with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). As an initial step in the development in Japan, the pharmacokinetics, safety and tolerability were assessed in healthy Japanese and non-Hispanic Caucasian adults. METHODS: A Phase 1, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, single- and multiple-oral dose escalation study of guanfacine XR was conducted. Healthy Japanese and Caucasian subjects received guanfacine XR 1 mg orally in the morning on Day 1. Following safety assessments, subjects subsequently received guanfacine XR 1 mg (Days 4-8), 2 mg (Days 9-13), 3 mg (Days 14-18), and 4 mg (Days 19-23) once daily, followed by a taper-down period. Single- and multiple-dose pharmacokinetic parameters were estimated based on plasma concentration-time data and urine concentration data of guanfacine by non-compartmental analysis. RESULTS: A total of 30 male subjects (15 Japanese and 15 Caucasian, active:placebo = 12:3) were enrolled. Of those receiving guanfacine XR, 11/12 (91.7%) subjects in each active drug group completed the study. Following multiple doses, the mean area under the plasma concentration-time curves of guanfacine were 9-22% greater for Caucasian subjects than Japanese subjects in the 1-3 mg dose range and 54% greater for the 4 mg. Guanfacine XR was generally well tolerated by both ethnic groups, with most adverse events being mild in both groups. There were no serious or severe adverse events during the study and no adverse events led to withdrawal from the study. CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to guanfacine in Japanese subjects tended to be lower than in Caucasian subjects. Guanfacine XR was generally well tolerated and safety profiles were similar for Japanese and Caucasian subjects.

Pharmacokinetics and safety of tanaproget, a nonsteroidal progesterone receptor agonist, in healthy women.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and safety of the nonsteroidal progesterone receptor agonist, tanaproget. METHODS: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, sequential-group study of ascending single doses of tanaproget was conducted in healthy, 25- to 45-year-old women on cycle days 8 to 12. Eight subjects (six active, two placebo) per cohort received a dose of 0.1, 0.3, 1, 3, 7 (+/-high-fat meal) or 15 mg. RESULTS: The maximum concentration (C(max)) of tanaproget occurred approximately 2 to 3 h after administration. The elimination half-life (t(1/2)) ranged from 12 to 30 h, and the oral clearance was approximately 70 L/h. The pharmacokinetics of tanaproget was not noticeably altered with a high-fat meal. All doses of tanaproget decreased cervical mucus scores (using a modified Insler method), indicating poor production and poor quality of cervical mucus. The most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events were vaginal bleeding/spotting, abdominal cramping and vomiting; their incidence was not dose related and most events were mild. CONCLUSIONS: Tanaproget was safe and well tolerated, decreased cervical mucus scores and had a pharmacokinetic profile acceptable for use as a once-daily oral contraceptive.

Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate: Prodrug Delivery, Amphetamine Exposure and Duration of Efficacy.

Lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) is a long-acting d-amphetamine prodrug used to treat attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children, adolescents and adults. LDX is hydrolysed in the blood to yield d-amphetamine, and the pharmacokinetic profile of d-amphetamine following oral administration of LDX has a lower maximum plasma concentration (Cmax), extended time to Cmax (Tmax) and lower inter- and intra-individual variability in exposure compared with the pharmacokinetic profile of an equivalent dose of immediate-release (IR) d-amphetamine. The therapeutic action of LDX extends to at least 13 h post-dose in children and 14 h post-dose in adults, longer than that reported for any other long-acting formulation. Drug-liking scores for LDX are lower than for an equivalent dose of IR d-amphetamine, which may result from the reduced euphorigenic potential associated with its pharmacokinetic profile. These pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of LDX may be beneficial in the management of symptoms in children, adolescents and adults with ADHD.

Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate Effects on the Pharmacokinetics of Cytochrome P450 Substrates in Healthy Adults in an Open-Label, Randomized, Crossover Study.

INTRODUCTION: This open-label, randomized, two-period drug interaction study assessed lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) effects on cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzyme (CYP1A2, CYP2D6, CYP2C19, and CYP3A) activity. METHODS: Thirty healthy volunteers were administered the Cooperstown cocktail (CYP1A2 [caffeine 200 mg], CYP2D6 [dextromethorphan 30 mg], CYP2C19 [omeprazole 40 mg], and CYP3A [midazolam 0.025 mg/kg] substrates) or Cooperstown cocktail + oral LDX 70 mg. Blood samples for pharmacokinetic analysis were collected pre-dose and serially for 72 h post-dose. Treatment differences in the primary endpoints, maximum plasma concentration (C max) and area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from 0 to infinity (AUC0-∞), were assessed using geometric mean ratios with 90 % CIs. RESULTS: Geometric least squares (LS) means (without versus with LDX) for C max (ng/mL) were 5370 versus 5246 for caffeine, 2.43 versus 2.87 for dextromethorphan, 35.23 versus 35.11 for midazolam, and 677.9 versus 466.9 for omeprazole; and for AUC0-∞ (ng · h/mL) were 56,207 versus 56,688 for caffeine, 34.85 versus 37.27 for dextromethorphan, 92.07 versus 93.04 for midazolam, and 1428 versus 1499 for omeprazole. Geometric LS mean ratios were within the standard bioequivalence testing range, except for omeprazole and dextromethorphan C max. Parent/metabolite C max and AUC0-∞ ratios were similar between treatments except for dextromethorphan/dextrorphan AUC0-∞ ratio, which was lower with LDX. No serious or severe treatment-emergent adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: LDX did not alter CYP1A2, CYP2D6, or CYP3A activity. A small C max reduction for omeprazole and its metabolite was observed, possibly reflecting an effect either on the activity of CYP2C19 or omeprazole absorption.

Population Pharmacokinetic Modeling of Guanfacine in Pediatric Patients.

INTRODUCTION: The population pharmacokinetics of guanfacine extended release were characterized in pediatric patients aged 6-17 years using NONMEM and evaluated by predictive check and bootstrap. METHODS: Data were described using a one-compartment model. A covariate modeling approach that emphasized parameter estimation rather than stepwise hypothesis testing was implemented. A nonparametric bootstrap procedure and a predictive check method were used to evaluate the final model and parameter estimates. RESULTS: Typical population pharmacokinetic parameters (95 % confidence interval), given the reference covariates (Caucasian, male, age 12 years, weight 50 kg), were 33.1 (30.2-36.4) L/h for apparent clearance (CL/F), 804 (703-900) L for apparent volume of distribution, 0.552 (0.437-0.670) h(-1) for the absorption rate constant, and 0.651 (0.608-0.697) h for absorption lag time. DISCUSSION: The pharmacokinetics of guanfacine are similar in pediatric patients compared with adults when appropriately scaled by patient weight. The main predictor of guanfacine exposure, as determined by a change in CL/F, was weight. Effects of the other covariates (age, sex, and race) on CL/F were estimated with reasonable precision; however, the additional effects of age, sex, and race can be considered to have little to no clinical relevance.

Population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modeling of guanfacine effects on QTc and heart rate in pediatric patients.

Using a previously developed population pharmacokinetic model, an exposure-response (ER) model was successfully developed to describe guanfacine plasma concentrations and changes in heart rate (HR) and the QT interval. Guanfacine exposure was associated with small decreases in HR and a small prolongation of the population-corrected QT (QTcP) interval. Based on the final ER model for effect of guanfacine on HR, the estimated population typical decrease in HR would be 2.3% (2.1-2.7%) of the baseline circadian HR for every 1 ng/mL of guanfacine exposure. A QTcP was developed for the analysis using the sampled population. An effect of sex on baseline-corrected QT (BQTP) was the only covariate effect in the final ER model for QTcP, its inclusion resulting in a typical baseline QTcP estimate that is 9 (5-13) ms higher for females. There was no evidence of QT-RR hysteresis. A linear model was used to relate guanfacine plasma concentrations to QTcP. The typical (95% confidence interval) slope parameter was estimated to be 0.941 (0.62-1.25) ms/ng/mL. The final model predicted an approximate 1-ms increase from baseline for every 1 ng/mL of guanfacine in plasma. The main predictor of QTcP prolongation was guanfacine exposure, which decreased with body weight and increased with dose.

A double-blind, randomized, ascending, multiple-dose study of bazedoxifene in healthy postmenopausal women.

Bazedoxifene is a novel selective estrogen receptor modulator in clinical development for the prevention and treatment of postmenopausal osteoporosis. This phase 1, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study (N = 107) of healthy postmenopausal women examined the pharmacokinetics and safety/tolerability profile of multiple doses of bazedoxifene (1, 2.5, 5, 10, 20, 40, and 80 mg) administered orally once daily for 30 days. Bazedoxifene demonstrated a half-life of 25 to 30 hours, reached steady state within 7 days, and exhibited linear pharmacokinetics over a dose range of 5-80 mg. Fibrinogen levels decreased with bazedoxifene doses of 5 mg and greater; these changes were significant for bazedoxifene 20, 40, and 80 mg (P ≤ .05 vs placebo), but were not dose dependent. Bazedoxifene was associated with increased levels of sex hormone-binding globulin, thyroxine-binding globulin, and cortisol-binding globulin (CBG); only increases in the levels of CBG appeared to be dose related. Bazedoxifene was safe and well tolerated within the tested dose range. Bazedoxifene showed no differences from placebo in adverse event reports, vital sign measurements, or electrocardiogram findings.