Open-label safety assessment of bilastine in elderly patients with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and/or urticaria.

BACKGROUND: Bilastine is an H1-antihistamine approved for symptomatic treatment of patients with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis or urticaria. The safety profile of bilastine in clinical trials of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis or urticaria, assessed by type and frequency of adverse events (AE), was similar to that of placebo. OBJECTIVE: As part of the risk management plan for bilastine, the safety profile of bilastine in the elderly was assessed. METHODS: A prospective, multicenter, observational, open-label, 3-month follow-up study was performed to assess the safety profile of bilastine 20 mg in patients aged ≥65 years with allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and/or urticaria. RESULTS: A total of 74 of 146 patients (50.7%) reported 129 treatment-emergent AEs (TEAE) during the study period. The incidence of TEAEs was low, with monthly and quarterly rates of 0.29 (95% confidence intervals [CI], 0.229-0.367) and 0.88 (95% CI, 0.688-1.100), respectively. Monthly and quarterly incidence rates were 0.04 (95% CI, 0.016-0.082) and 0.12 (95% CI, 0.048-0.246), respectively, for related TEAEs (eight TEAEs in seven patients) and were 0.02 (95% CI, 0.003-0.048) and 0.05 (95% CI, 0.010-0.143), respectively, for serious TEAEs (five TEAES in three patients). All serious TEAEs were considered to be unrelated to bilastine. CONCLUSION: Bilastine 20 mg showed a favorable safety profile with a low incidence of TEAEs in patients aged ≥65 years. The results were in accordance with the known safety profile of bilastine 20 mg and incidence of AEs reported in previous studies and described in the approved summary of product characteristics.

Model Informed Pediatric Development Applied to Bilastine: Ontogenic PK Model Development, Dose Selection for First Time in Children and PK Study Design.

PURPOSE: Bilastine is an H1 antagonist whose pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) have been resolved in adults with a therapeutic oral dose of 20 mg/day. Bilastine has favorable characteristics for use in pediatrics but the PK/PD and the optimal dose in children had yet to be clinically explored. The purpose is to: (1) Develop an ontogenic predictive model of bilastine PK linked to the PD in adults by integrating current knowledge; (2) Use the model to design a PK study in children; (3) Confirm the selected dose and the study design through the evaluation of model predictability in the first recruited children; (4) Consider for inclusion the group of younger children (< 6 years). METHODS: A semi-mechanistic approach was applied to predict bilastine PK in children assuming the same PD as described in adults. The model was used to simulate the time evolution of plasma levels and wheal and flare effects after several doses and design an adaptive PK trial in children that was then confirmed using data from the first recruits by comparing observations with model predictions. RESULTS: PK/PD simulations supported the selection of 10 mg/day in 2 to <12 year olds. Results from the first interim analysis confirmed the model predictions and design hence trial continuation. CONCLUSION: The model successfully predicted bilastine PK in pediatrics and optimally assisted the selection of the dose and sampling scheme for the trial in children. The selected dose was considered suitable for younger children and the forthcoming safety study in children aged 2 to <12 years.

Bilastine 10 and 20 mg in paediatric and adult patients: an updated practical approach to treatment decisions.

BACKGROUND: Bilastine, a non-sedating H1-antihistamine, is indicated to treat the symptoms of allergic disorders (e.g. rhinoconjunctivitis and urticaria) in adults and adolescents and, more recently, in children. Following its marketing approval, many questions regarding the ideal use of bilastine in various clinical practice situations have been received by the Medical Information Department (MID) of Faes Farma Spain. This article is an update of a previous review, with a focus on recent clinical information on the use of bilastine in paediatric and other populations. METHODS: Results of recent clinical studies in paediatric and other populations as well as questions received and responses provided by the Faes Farma MID. RESULTS: The information regarding the use of bilastine in paediatric patients is the most relevant aspect of this updated review. The stepwise approval of the paediatric formulations in various countries started with the European Medicines Agency approval in 2017 in accordance with a 2009 Paediatric Investigation Plan, followed by approval in other countries. The queries that are most commonly received by the Faes Farma MID include the potential for drug interactions involving bilastine and other frequently used drugs, and the use of bilastine in special populations or to treat specific symptoms related to allergic conditions. As the concomitant use of many medications is not permitted during clinical trials, the advice provided regarding the concomitant use of other medications with bilastine considers the pharmacological properties of both the drug in question and bilastine, as well as expert opinion. Likewise, advice regarding the use of bilastine in special populations (e.g. patients with renal impairment, obesity, lactose intolerance, and elderly or pregnant individuals) or to treat specific symptoms (e.g. treatment-resistant urticaria, pruritus or BASCULE syndrome) considers the best evidence from a variety of sources, including clinical studies, real-world experience, guideline recommendations and expert opinion. CONCLUSION: This updated review provides current data regarding the best use of bilastine in specific situations and patients and identifies areas in which further knowledge is required. Although decisions regarding the use of bilastine may be aided by expert opinion that relies on knowledge of the underlying science, additional research and evidence are required to answer certain queries regarding the use of bilastine.

Model-informed pediatric development applied to bilastine: Analysis of the clinical PK data and confirmation of the dose selected for the target population.

Bilastine is a non-sedating second-generation H1 antihistamine approved for treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (AR) and urticaria (U) in adults at the oral (p.o.) dose of 20 mg once daily (OD). Optimal attributes can be anticipated for its clinical use in pediatrics due to its favorable safety and tolerability and age-independent PD profile. The aim of this work was to characterize bilastine PK in children through population modeling of data from a limited sampling confirmatory clinical trial in children with AR or U. The objective was also to ascertain whether the proposed dose (10 mg/day) in the target pediatric subset aged 2-<12 years matches the systemic exposure seen in adults at the 20 mg/day dose. A popPK model characterizing bilastine PK behavior in children aged from 4 to <12 years treated with 10 mg oral bilastine daily was successfully developed and qualified. No relationship was found between bilastine PK and age or weight; stopping rules pre-stablished to finalize the trial, i.e., model completeness and no dependence of exposure on decreasing age, were thus fulfilled. On a second step, the popPK model in children was linked to the PD model in adults assuming the same PD as described in adults and used to compare the PD outcome between both populations. Finally, an allometric scaling method and a physiological approximation were used to evaluate the suitability of the selected dose in the youngest children, showing that children from 2 years were deemed to belong to the same population as well. The achievement of comparable PK (i.e., within the range) to that observed in adults after the therapeutic dose of 20 mg, together with the achievement of similar PD and additional integrative analysis, served to confirm the validity of the 10 mg daily dose for the target pediatric subset (2 to <12 years).

Bilastine in allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and urticaria: a practical approach to treatment decisions based on queries received by the medical information department.

BACKGROUND: Bilastine is a safe and effective commonly prescribed non-sedating H1-antihistamine approved for symptomatic treatment in patients with allergic disorders such as rhinoconjunctivitis and urticaria. It was evaluated in many patients throughout the clinical development required for its approval, but clinical trials generally exclude many patients who will benefit in everyday clinical practice (especially those with coexisting diseases and/or being treated with concomitant drugs). Following its introduction into clinical practice, the Medical Information Specialists at Faes Farma have received many practical queries regarding the optimal use of bilastine in different circumstances. DATA SOURCES AND METHODS: Queries received by the Medical Information Department and the responses provided to senders of these queries. RESULTS: The most frequent questions received by the Medical Information Department included the potential for drug-drug interactions with bilastine and commonly used agents such as anticoagulants (including the novel oral anticoagulants), antiretrovirals, antituberculosis regimens, corticosteroids, digoxin, oral contraceptives, and proton pump inhibitors. Most of these medicines are not usually allowed in clinical trials, and so advice needs to be based upon the pharmacological profiles of the drugs involved and expert opinion. The pharmacokinetic profile of bilastine appears favourable since it undergoes negligible metabolism and is almost exclusively eliminated via renal excretion, and it neither induces nor inhibits the activity of several isoenzymes from the CYP 450 system. Consequently, bilastine does not interact with cytochrome metabolic pathways. Other queries involved specific patient groups such as subjects with renal impairment, women who are breastfeeding or who are trying to become pregnant, and patients with other concomitant diseases. Interestingly, several questions related to topics that are well covered in the Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC), which suggests that this resource is not being well used. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, this analysis highlights gaps in our knowledge regarding the optimal use of bilastine. Expert opinion based upon an understanding of the science can help in the decision-making, but more research is needed to provide evidence-based answers in certain circumstances.

Evaluation of the single-dose pharmacokinetics of bilastine in subjects with various degrees of renal insufficiency.

BACKGROUND: Bilastine is a novel second-generation H1 antihistamine, which has not shown sedative or cardiotoxic effects in clinical trials and in post-marketing experience so far, developed for the symptomatic treatment of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and urticaria. It has recently been granted marketing authorization for these therapeutic indications in adults and adolescents at a once-daily oral dose of 20 mg in several European countries. OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted to determine the pharmacokinetics of bilastine at a single oral dose of 20 mg in renally impaired subjects. The need for a dose adjustment in patients with renal insufficiency was assessed by comparing the exposure to bilastine in these subjects with the estimated exposure of a dose corresponding to the safety margin. METHODS: The study was an open-label, single-dose, parallel-group study of the pharmacokinetics and safety of a single dose of bilastine. The study was conducted as an in-patient setting at a clinical pharmacology facility. A total of 24 male or female subjects aged 18-80 years were to be enrolled in four groups of six subjects each. The groups were as follows: (1) healthy [glomerular filtration rate (GFR) >80 mL/min/1.73 m(2)]; (2) mild renal insufficiency (GFR 50-80 mL/min/1.73 m(2)); (3) moderate renal insufficiency (GFR 30-50 mL/min/1.73 m(2)); and (4) severe renal insufficiency (GFR ≤30 mL/min/1.73 m(2)). A single 20 mg bilastine tablet was administered in a fasted state. Blood and urine samples were collected from pre-dose up to 72 h post-dose for bilastine pharmacokinetic analysis. Pharmacokinetic results were summarized using appropriate descriptive statistics. RESULTS: There was a clear trend of increasing area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) and maximum plasma concentration (C(max)) through the groups 1-4. The mean AUC from time zero to infinity (AUC(∞)) ranged from 737.4 to 1708.5 ng·h/mL in healthy subjects and severely impaired subjects, respectively. No significant differences among groups in median time to reach Cmax (tmax) or in the mean terminal disposition rate constants for bilastine were found. Renal and plasma clearance paralleled GFR. In all groups of renally impaired subjects the corresponding 90 % confidence interval of both AUC(∞) and AUC from time zero to time of last measurable plasma concentration (AUC(last)) were not within the 0.8-1.25 interval, indicating that bioequivalence between groups could not be demonstrated. The majority of bilastine was excreted within the first 12 h, and elimination was essentially complete by 72 h. CONCLUSION: An oral dose of bilastine (20 mg) was well-tolerated in renal insufficiency, despite the increase in exposure. The oral plasma clearance to renal clearance ratio [(CL(P)/F)/CL(R)] was approximately equal in the different groups, suggesting that renal excretion was the main elimination route for bilastine, and no alternative elimination routes were used even in severe renal insufficiency. Although exposure to bilastine was higher in renally impaired subjects, it remained well within the safety margins, thus allowing the conclusion that a 20-mg daily dose can be safely administered to subjects with different degrees of renal insufficiency without the need for dose adjustments.

Lack of significant effect of bilastine administered at therapeutic and supratherapeutic doses and concomitantly with ketoconazole on ventricular repolarization: results of a thorough QT study (TQTS) with QT-concentration analysis.

The effect of bilastine on cardiac repolarization was studied in 30 healthy participants during a multiple-dose, triple-dummy, crossover, thorough QT study that included 5 arms: placebo, active control (400 mg moxifloxacin), bilastine at therapeutic and supratherapeutic doses (20 mg and 100 mg once daily, respectively), and bilastine 20 mg administered with ketoconazole 400 mg. Time-matched, triplicate electrocardiograms (ECGs) were recorded with 13 time points extracted predose and 16 extracted over 72 hours post day 4 dosing. Four QT/RR corrections were implemented: QTcB; QTcF; a linear individual correction (QTcNi), the primary correction; and a nonlinear one (QTcNnl). Moxifloxacin was associated with a significant increase in QTcNi at all time points between 1 and 12 hours, inclusively. Bilastine administration at 20 mg and 100 mg had no clinically significant impact on QTc (maximum increase in QTcNi, 5.02 ms; upper confidence limit [UCL] of the 1-sided, 95% confidence interval, 7.87 ms). Concomitant administration of ketoconazole and bilastine 20 mg induced a clinically relevant increase in QTc (maximum increase in QTcNi, 9.3 ms; UCL, 12.16 ms). This result was most likely related to the cardiac effect of ketoconazole because for all time points, bilastine plasma concentrations were lower than those observed following the supratherapeutic dose.

Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modelling of the antihistaminic (H1) effect of bilastine.

OBJECTIVE: To model the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic relationship of bilastine, a new histamine H(1) receptor antagonist, from single- and multiple-dose studies in healthy adult subjects. METHODS: The pharmacokinetic model was developed from different single-dose and multiple-dose studies. In the single-dose studies, a total of 183 subjects received oral doses of bilastine 2.5, 5, 10, 20, 50, 100, 120, 160, 200 and 220 mg. In the multiple-dose studies, 127 healthy subjects received bilastine 10, 20, 40, 50, 80, 100, 140 or 200 mg/day as multiple doses during a 4-, 7- or 14-day period. The pharmacokinetic profile of bilastine was investigated using a simultaneous analysis of all concentration-time data by means of nonlinear mixed-effects modelling population pharmacokinetic software NONMEM version 6.1. Plasma concentrations were modelled according to a two-compartment open model with first-order absorption and elimination. For the pharmacodynamic analysis, the inhibitory effect of bilastine (inhibition of histamine-induced wheal and flare) was assessed on a preselected time schedule, and the predicted typical pharmacokinetic profile (based on the pharmacokinetic model previously developed) was used. An indirect response model was developed to describe the pharmacodynamic relationships between flare or wheal areas and bilastine plasma concentrations. Finally, once values of the concentration that produced 50% inhibition (IC(50)) had been estimated for wheal and flare effects, simulations were carried out to predict plasma concentrations for the doses of bilastine 5, 10 and 20 mg at steady state (72-96 hours). RESULTS: A non-compartmental analysis resulted in linear kinetics of bilastine in the dose range studied. Bilastine was characterized by two-compartmental kinetics with a rapid-absorption phase (first-order absorption rate constant = 1.50 h(-1)), plasma peak concentrations were observed at 1 hour following administration and the maximal response was observed at approximately 4 hours or later. Concerning the selected pharmacodynamic model to fit the data (type I indirect response model), this selection is attributable to the presence of inhibitory bilastine plasma concentrations that decrease the input response function, i.e. the production of the skin reaction. This model resulted in the best fit of wheal and flare data. The estimates (with relative standard errors expressed in percentages in parentheses) of the apparent zero-order rate constant for flare or wheal spontaneous appearance (k(in)), the first-order rate constant for flare or wheal disappearance (k(out)) and bilastine IC(50) values were 0.44 ng/mL/h (14.60%), 1.09 h(-1) (15.14%) and 5.15 ng/mL (16.16%), respectively, for wheal inhibition, and 11.10 ng/mL/h (8.48%), 1.03 h(-1) (8.35%) and 1.25 ng/mL (14.56%), respectively, for flare inhibition. The simulation results revealed that bilastine plasma concentrations do not remain over the IC(50) value throughout the inter-dose period for doses of 5 and 10 mg. However, with a dose of 20 mg of bilastine administered every 24 hours, plasma concentrations remained over the IC(50) value during the considered period for the flare effect, and up to 20 hours for the wheal effect. CONCLUSION: Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic relationships of bilastine were reliably described with the use of an indirect response pharmacodynamic model; this led to an accurate prediction of the pharmacodynamic activity of bilastine.

Effects of lerisetron, a new 5-HT3 receptor antagonist, on ipecacuanha-induced emesis in healthy volunteers.

The purpose of these studies was to evaluate the effect of lerisetron (1-phenyl-methyl-2-piperazinyl-1H-benzimidazole hydrochloride, CAS 143257-98-1, F-0930-RS2), a new 5-HT3 receptor antagonist, on ipecacuanha-induced nausea and vomiting. The ipecacuanha model of emesis has been used to test the anti-emetic activity of several different 5-HT3 antagonists and the anti-emetic doses that were effective in the ipecacuanha model have been found to correlate well with the clinically effective doses. Study 1 investigated oral doses of lerisetron from 4 mg to 40 mg. Study 2 evaluated the duration of effect of a single dose of 20 mg oral lerisetron. Study 3 evaluated intravenous doses of 18 mg and 12 mg lerisetron. In Study 1, the 40 mg dose of oral lerisetron inhibited emesis in all test subjects. The percentage of subjects who experienced an emetic episode increased as the dose of lerisetron decreased. At the lowest dose level tested five of six subjects had an emetic episode compared with four out of five in the placebo group. In Study 2, 20 mg oral lerisetron was effective up to 12 h after administration. When ipecacuanha was administered at 18 h post-dose three of seven subjects had an emetic episode and at 24 h post-dose the incidence of emesis was similar to the placebo treatment groups in the previous study. Study 3 demonstrated the effectiveness of intravenous doses of lerisetron. The 18 mg intravenous dose reduced the number of patients experiencing emetic episodes by 75% compared with placebo, doses below 12 mg i.v. were not evaluated because of the reduced efficacy of the compound at this dose level. In conclusion, lerisetron has been shown to be effective in the treatment of ipecacuanha-induced nausea and vomiting at intravenous doses of 18 mg and at oral doses of 20 mg for up to 12 hours.