Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacologic Characterization of the Dihydrotetrabenazine Isomers of Deutetrabenazine and Valbenazine.

Valbenazine and deutetrabenazine are vesicular monoamine transporter 2 (VMAT2) inhibitors approved for tardive dyskinesia. The clinical activity of valbenazine is primarily attributed to its only dihydrotetrabenazine (HTBZ) metabolite, [+]-α-HTBZ. Deutetrabenazine is a deuterated form of tetrabenazine and is metabolized to four deuterated HTBZ metabolites: [+]-α-deuHTBZ, [+]-ß-deuHTBZ, [-]-α-deuHTBZ, and [-]-ß-deuHTBZ. An open-label, crossover study characterized the pharmacokinetic profiles of the individual deuHBTZ metabolites, which have not been previously reported. VMAT2 inhibition and off-target interactions of the deuHTBZ metabolites were evaluated using radioligand binding. The only valbenazine HTBZ metabolite, [+]-α-HTBZ, was a potent VMAT2 inhibitor, with negligible affinity for off-target dopamine, serotonin, and adrenergic receptors. Following deutetrabenazine administration, [-]-α-deuHTBZ represented 66% of circulating deuHTBZ metabolites and was a relatively weak VMAT2 inhibitor with appreciable affinity for dopamine (D2S , D3 ) and serotonin (5-HT1A , 5-HT2B , 5-HT7 ) receptors. [+]-ß-deuHTBZ was the most abundant deuHTBZ metabolite that potently inhibited VMAT2, but it represented only 29% of total circulating deuHTBZ metabolites. The mean half-life of [+]-α-HTBZ (22.2 hours) was ∼3× longer than that of [+]-ß-deuHTBZ (7.7 hours). These findings are similar to studies with tetrabenazine, in that deutetrabenazine is metabolized to four deuHTBZ stereoisomers, the most abundant of which has negligible interaction with VMAT2 in vitro and appreciable affinity for several off-target receptors. In contrast, valbenazine's single HTBZ metabolite is a potent VMAT2 inhibitor in vitro with no discernible off-target activity. Determination of the effects of intrinsic/extrinsic variables on deutetrabenazine's safety/efficacy profile should incorporate assessment of the effects on all deuHTBZ metabolites.

Model-informed drug development supporting the approval of the avelumab flat-dose regimen in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma.

Avelumab is an anti-PD-L1 monoclonal antibody approved as monotherapy for Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) and urothelial carcinoma (UC), and in combination with axitinib for advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). Although initially approved with weight-based dosing (10 mg/kg intravenously [IV] every 2 weeks [Q2W]), avelumab was subsequently approved for flat dosing (800 mg IV Q2W) based on population pharmacokinetic (PopPK), exposure-efficacy, and exposure-safety modeling in MCC and UC. Here, through modeling and simulation, we provide justification for a flat-dose regimen of avelumab plus axitinib in aRCC. Simulated exposure metrics from the previous monotherapy PopPK model (1827 patients) for both weight-based and flat-dose regimens were compared with exposure metrics from treatment-naive patients with aRCC who received avelumab plus axitinib (488 patients). The aRCC population exposures were derived from a fit-for-purpose PopPK model developed using data from monotherapy and combination studies and the existing base structural PopPK model. Exposure-response relationships for safety were analyzed, including grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), any-grade infusion-related reactions, and TEAE any-grade immune-related adverse events (irAEs). Weight-based dosing of avelumab in the aRCC population yielded similar PK exposures to the flat-dose regimen reference exposures in the monotherapy population. Increased avelumab exposure was not associated with increased probabilities of grade ≥3 TEAEs or any-grade IRRs, although there was a weak association with an increased probability of any-grade irAEs. Overall, models in aRCC suggest that the avelumab 800-mg Q2W flat-dose regimen would provide similar benefits compared with weight-based dosing with no meaningful change in the probability of AEs.

Avelumab in relapsed/refractory classical Hodgkin lymphoma: phase 1b results from the JAVELIN Hodgkins trial.

The 9p24.1 chromosomal alteration in classical Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) is associated with increased expression of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1)/PD-L2 and an immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment. Blockade of PD-L1/PD-1 interactions with avelumab (anti-PD-L1) is hypothesized to restore antitumor immunity. JAVELIN Hodgkins was a phase 1b, multiple-dose, open-label, randomized, parallel-arm trial of avelumab in patients with relapsed/refractory (R/R) cHL. Primary end points included avelumab target occupancy by dose/schedule in peripheral blood immune cells and pharmacokinetic parameters. Secondary end points included safety and antitumor activity. Four dose levels and 2 dosing schedules were investigated: 70, 350, and 500 mg administered every 2 weeks; 500 mg every 3 weeks; and 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks. Thirty-one patients with R/R cHL were randomized; 9 (29.0%) and 20 (64.5%) had received 3 or ≥4 prior anticancer treatments, respectively. Target occupancy of >90% was observed across all treatment arms, throughout the dosing interval. Avelumab pharmacokinetic data were similar to those previously reported. The most common treatment-related adverse events of any grade were infusion-related reaction (30.0%), nausea (20.0%), increased alanine aminotransferase and rash (16.7% each), and fatigue (13.3%). The objective response rate (ORR) in all randomized patients was 41.9%, with a complete response rate of 19.4%; ORR in those with prior allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (allo-HSCT) was 55.6%. Due to decreased use of allo-HSCT in patients with R/R cHL, the expansion phase enrolling post-allo-HSCT patients was terminated. Avelumab was tolerable and demonstrated antitumor activity in heavily pretreated patients with cHL, suggesting that PD-L1 blockade may be sufficient for therapeutic benefit in cHL. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02603419.

Changing Body Weight-Based Dosing to a Flat Dose for Avelumab in Metastatic Merkel Cell and Advanced Urothelial Carcinoma.

Avelumab, an anti-programmed death-ligand 1 monoclonal antibody approved for the treatment of metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma and platinum-treated urothelial carcinoma, was initially approved with a 10 mg/kg weight-based dose. We report pharmacokinetic (PK)/pharmacodynamic analyses for avelumab comparing weight-based dosing and a flat 800 mg dose, developed using data from 1,827 patients enrolled in 3 clinical trials (NCT01772004, NCT01943461, and NCT02155647). PK metrics were simulated for weight-based and flat-dosing regimens and summarized by quartiles of weight. Derived exposure metrics were used in simulations of exposure-safety (various tumors) and exposure-efficacy (objective responses; Merkel cell or urothelial carcinoma). Flat dosing was predicted to provide similar exposure to weight-based dosing, with slightly lower variability. Exposure-safety and exposure-efficacy simulations suggested similar benefit:risk profiles for the two dosing regimens. These pharmacometric analyses provided the basis for the US Food and Drug Administration approval of a flat dose of avelumab 800 mg every 2 weeks in approved indications.

Time-Varying Clearance and Impact of Disease State on the Pharmacokinetics of Avelumab in Merkel Cell Carcinoma and Urothelial Carcinoma.

Avelumab, a human anti-programmed death ligand 1 immunoglobulin G1 antibody, has shown efficacy and manageable safety in multiple tumors. A two-compartment population pharmacokinetic model for avelumab incorporating intrinsic and extrinsic covariates and time-varying clearance (CL) was identified based on data from 1,827 patients across three clinical studies. Of 14 tumor types, a decrease in CL over time was more notable in metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck, which had maximum decreases of 32.1% and 24.7%, respectively. The magnitude of reduction in CL was higher in responders than in nonresponders. Significant covariate effects of baseline weight, baseline albumin, and sex were identified on both CL and central distribution volume. Significant covariate effects of black/African American race, C-reactive protein, and immunogenicity were found on CL. None of the covariate or time-dependent effects were clinically important or warranted dose adjustment.

To Take or Not to Take With Meals? Unraveling Issues Related to Food Effects Labeling for Oral Antineoplastic Drugs.

There has been controversy regarding whether bioavailability of certain oral oncology drugs should be maximized by taking these medications with food, irrespective of label instructions in the dosing and administration section. To provide insight into this controversy, we conducted an in-depth analysis for oral antineoplastic drugs approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2000-2016 and identified important issues influencing food labeling decisions. Furthermore, a case study involving sonidegib, a drug approved for locally advanced basal cell carcinoma with a significant food effect on exposure, was used to demonstrate the consequences of failure to adhere to food label recommendations using drug-specific population pharmacokinetic and exposure-toxicity models. In 2000-2009, 80% (4 out of 5) of all approved oral antineoplastics with increased bioavailability in the fed state were labeled as "take on empty stomach." In contrast, we found that in 2010-2016 there is a greater diversity in food recommendations for drugs with increased bioavailability in the fed state. Currently, many oral oncology drugs are given with food to maximize their bioavailability; however, as seen from our case study of sonidegib, failure to fully adhere to label recommendations to either take with food or not could lead to adverse consequences in terms of safety and efficacy.

Clinical trials in pulmonary hypertension: Time for a consortium.

Current and past clinical trials in pulmonary hypertension, while valuable, are limited by the absence of mechanistic aims, by dissatisfaction with endpoints and the inability to share data. Clinical studies in pulmonary hypertension might be enhanced by a consortium approach that utilizes the expertise of academic medicine, the treatment initiatives of the pharmaceutical industry and study design from funding agencies interested in biological mechanisms. A meeting of interested parties, the Pulmonary Hypertension Academic Research Consortium (PHARC), was held from 30 April to 1 May 2012 in Bethesda, Maryland. Members at the conference were from the USA Federal Drug Administration (FDA); pharmaceutical industry (Pfizer, Novartis, Bayer and Gilead); USA National Institutes of Health (NHLBI); the Pulmonary Vascular Research Institute (PVRI), a non-governmental organization (NGO); and research and clinical members of pulmonary hypertension programs of international scope. A recommendation to develop a clinical trials consortium was the product of the working group on academic standards in clinical trials. The working group concluded that clinical trials hold immense promise to move the field of pulmonary hypertension forward if the trials are designed by a consortium with input from multiple groups. This would result in study design, conduct and analysis determined by consortium members with a high degree of independent function. The components of a well-balanced consortium that give it scientific effectiveness are: (1) the consortium can work with multiple companies simultaneously; (2) sponsors with special interests, such as testing biological mechanisms, can add investigations to a study at lower cost than with present granting strategies; (3) data handling including archiving, analysis and future sharing would be improved; (4) ancillary studies supported by the collection and dissemination of tissues and fluids would generate a broader approach to discovery than is now possible; and (5) development of improved endpoints in consultation with regulatory agencies, industry and academia would be possible.

Exposure of cyclosporin A in whole blood, cerebral spinal fluid, and brain extracellular fluid dialysate in adults with traumatic brain injury.

Cyclosporin A (CsA), an immunosuppressive medication traditionally used in the prevention of post-transplant rejection, is a promising neuroprotective agent for traumatic brain injury (TBI). Preliminary studies in animals and humans describe the efficacy and safety of CsA when administered following neurotrauma. The objective of this study is to describe CsA exposure in adults with severe TBI by assessing concentrations in whole blood, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), and brain extracellular fluid (ECF) dialysate as measured by brain microdialysis. Severe TBI patients were enrolled in a randomized controlled trial following the written informed consent of their legal guardians. Patients received either CsA 5 mg/kg as a continuous infusion over 24 h, or matching placebo. Noncompartmental exposure analyses were performed using CsA concentrations in whole blood, CSF, and ECF dialysate. There were 37 patients randomized to the CsA arm of the trial and included in this exposure analysis. CsA was detected in the ECF dialysate and CSF at a fraction of the whole blood concentration. Mean CsA maximum concentrations were achieved at 24 and 30 h from the start of the 24 h infusion, in the CSF and ECF dialysate, respectively. A correlation was found between ECF dialysate and CSF concentrations. CsA was detected in the blood, CSF, and brain ECF dialysate. CsA exposure characteristic differences exist for whole blood, CSF, and ECF dialysate in severe TBI patients when administered as a continuous intravenous infusion. These exposure characteristics should be used for safer CsA dose optimization to achieve target CsA concentrations for neuroprotection in future TBI studies.

U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval: ruxolitinib for the treatment of patients with intermediate and high-risk myelofibrosis.

On November 16, 2011, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) granted full approval to ruxolitinib, (Jakafi; Incyte Corp.), an inhibitor of the Janus kinases 1 and 2, for the treatment of patients with intermediate- or high-risk myelofibrosis, including primary myelofibrosis, postpolycythemia vera myelofibrosis, and postessential thrombocythemia myelofibrosis. This approval was based on the results of 2 large randomized phase III trials that enrolled patients with intermediate-2 or high-risk myelofibrosis and compared ruxolitinib with placebo (study 1) or best available therapy (study 2). The primary efficacy endpoint was the proportion of patients who experienced a reduction in spleen volume of ≥ 35% at 24 weeks (study 1) or 48 weeks (study 2). The key secondary endpoint in study 1 was the proportion of patients who experienced a ≥ 50% improvement from baseline in myelofibrosis total symptom score at 24 weeks. The results of these studies showed that a greater proportion of patients treated with ruxolitinib experienced a ≥ 35% reduction in spleen volume as compared with those treated with placebo (42% vs. 1%, P < 0.0001) or best available therapy (29% vs. 0%, P < 0.0001). A greater proportion of patients in study 1 experienced a ≥ 50% reduction in the myelofibrosis total symptom score during treatment with ruxolitinib than with placebo (46% vs. 5%, P < 0.0001). Ruxolitinib treatment was associated with an increased incidence of grades III and IV anemia, thrombocytopenia, and neutropenia. This is the first drug approved for myelofibrosis.

Impact of pharmacometric analyses on new drug approval and labelling decisions: a review of 198 submissions between 2000 and 2008.

Pharmacometric analyses have become an increasingly important component of New Drug Application (NDA) and Biological License Application (BLA) submissions to the US FDA to support drug approval, labelling and trial design decisions. Pharmacometrics is defined as a science that quantifies drug, disease and trial information to aid drug development, therapeutic decisions and/or regulatory decisions. In this report, we present the results of a survey evaluating the impact of pharmacometric analyses on regulatory decisions for 198 submissions during the period from 2000 to 2008. Pharmacometric review of NDAs included independent, quantitative analyses by FDA pharmacometricians, even when such analysis was not conducted by the sponsor, as well as evaluation of the sponsor's report. During 2000-2008, the number of reviews with pharmacometric analyses increased dramatically and the number of reviews with an impact on approval and labelling also increased in a similar fashion. We also present the impact of pharmacometric analyses on selection of paediatric dosing regimens, approval of regimens that had not been directly studied in clinical trials and provision of evidence of effectiveness to support a single pivotal trial. Case studies are presented to better illustrate the role of pharmacometric analyses in regulatory decision making.

Food and oral antineoplastics: more than meets the eye.

Food can alter the bioavailability of orally administered drugs. Description of food effects in product labels and information about administration in relation to food are influenced by a variety of factors. Because food effects can change drug efficacy and toxicity, it is important that physicians and patients be aware of them.