Exposure-efficacy relationship of vedolizumab subcutaneous and intravenous formulations in Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This posthoc analysis of the GEMINI and VISIBLE studies in ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn's Disease (CD) assessed exposure-efficacy of vedolizumab intravenous (IV) and subcutaneous (SC). METHODS: A previously described population pharmacokinetic model was used to predict average serum and trough concentrations at steady state (Cav,ss, Ctrough,ss) and simulate the transition from vedolizumab IV to SC. Efficacy was defined as clinical remission at week 52: complete Mayo score ≤ 2 points and no individual subscore > 1 point (UC), and CD activity index score ≤ 150 points (CD). RESULTS: Data were from 1968 patients (GEMINI 1 [n = 334], VISIBLE 1 [n = 216], GEMINI 2 [n = 1009], VISIBLE 2 [n = 409]) who received maintenance treatment with vedolizumab IV-Q8W, IV-Q4W, SC-Q2W, or placebo. Model-predicted Cav,ss for IV-Q8W and SC-Q2W was similar in UC and CD. Cav,ss was higher for IV-Q4W than IV-Q8W and SC-Q2W. Ctrough,ss values from IV and SC aligned well with pooled observed Ctrough by treatment group in UC and CD. Cav,ss was equivalent for SC and IV. For UC and CD, efficacy rates were greater in patients in the highest quartiles of vedolizumab exposure for both formulations. CONCLUSION: Exposure-efficacy relationships for IV and SC vedolizumab administration were comparable, confirming that both are equally effective during maintenance treatment.

A Phase I, Open-Label, Fixed Sequence Study to Investigate the Effect of Cytochrome P450 2D6 Inhibition on the Pharmacokinetics of Ulotaront in Healthy Subjects.

BACKGROUND: Ulotaront is a novel psychotropic agent with agonist activity at trace amine-associated receptor 1 (TAAR1) and 5-hydroxytryptamine type 1A (5-HT1A) receptors in phase III clinical development for the treatment of schizophrenia. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to investigate the effect of paroxetine, a strong cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2D6 inhibitor, on ulotaront pharmacokinetics (PK) in healthy volunteers. METHODS: Subjects received a single oral dose of 25 mg ulotaront on Day 1 and an oral dose of 20 mg paroxetine once daily from Days 5 to 10 to achieve steady-state plasma paroxetine levels. On Day 11, subjects received another single oral dose of 25 mg ulotaront, with continued daily oral dosing of 20 mg paroxetine from Days 11 to 14. All 24 subjects were CYP2D6 normal metabolizers. RESULTS: Coadministration of paroxetine increased ulotaront maximum observed plasma concentration (Cmax) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity (AUC∞) by 31% and 72%, respectively, and decreased ulotaront apparent clearance (CL/F) by approximately 42%. While coadministration of paroxetine increased AUC∞ of active but minor metabolite SEP-363854 by 32%, it had no effect on SEP-363854 Cmax, or on SEP-363854 to the ulotaront AUC from time zero to the last quantifiable concentration (AUClast) ratio. Based on the acceptable adverse event profile of ulotaront across previous phase II studies, the increase in ulotaront exposure is unlikely to be clinically meaningful. CONCLUSIONS: Weak drug-drug interactions were observed between ulotaront and the strong CYP2D6 inhibitor paroxetine; however, dose adjustment as a precondition when ulotaront is coadministered with strong CYP2D6 inhibitors or administered to CYP2D6 poor metabolizers should not be necessary.

Exposure-response analysis of efficacy and safety for pexidartinib in patients with tenosynovial giant cell tumor.

This analysis was conducted to assess exposure-response relationships for efficacy and safety of pexidartinib in patients with tenosynovial giant cell tumor. Efficacy was assessed categorically by overall response rate (ORR) with Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 and longitudinally (changes in tumor size and volume). Safety included hepatic parameters (i.e., alanine aminotransferase [ALT], aspartate aminotransferase [AST], and total bilirubin). Average pexidartinib concentration (Cavg ) was identified as the primary exposure parameter correlated with response. In categorical and longitudinal analyses, higher Cavg coincided with greater ORR and tumor size reduction, respectively, with smaller joint size having a greater impact. For safety, a significant relationship was observed between Cavg and incidence of ALT-related and AST-related adverse events (AEs). With increased exposure, an increase in efficacy was predicted with near maximum effect at 800 mg/day. Higher initial dose (1000 mg/day) during the first 2 weeks did not improve efficacy. Higher doses were associated with an increased risk of ALT-related and AST-related AEs. These results support the US Food and Drug Administration-approved dose (400 mg two times/day without initial loading dose).

Population pharmacokinetic analysis of ulotaront in subjects with schizophrenia.

Ulotaront (SEP-363856) is a trace amine-associated receptor 1 agonist with 5-HT1A agonist activity in phase III development for the treatment of schizophrenia. The efficacy of ulotaront is not mediated by blockade of D2 or 5-HT2A receptors. The aim of this study was to evaluate the population pharmacokinetics (PopPKs) of ulotaront in adult subjects using pooled data from seven phase I studies, one phase II acute study, and one 6-month extension study. Single and multiple (up to 7 days) oral doses (5-150 mg/day) were studied in both healthy adult subjects (with intensive serial plasma sampling) and adult patients with schizophrenia (some with intensive and some with sparse plasma sampling). Ulotaront was well-absorbed and exhibited dose-proportionality in doses ranging from 10 to 100 mg, in mean maximum concentration, area under the concentration-time curve, and minimum concentration. Moderate interindividual variability was observed in concentration-time profiles. The estimated median time to maximal concentration was 2.8 h and the median effective half-life was 7 h, corresponding to an exposure accumulation ratio of 1.10 at steady-state with daily dosing. There was no indication of time-dependent changes in PKs after up to 12 weeks of daily dose administration. No clinically meaningful effects on ulotaront PK parameters were observed based on race, age, sex, formulation (capsule or tablet), or clinical status (healthy volunteer vs. patient with schizophrenia); body weight was the only meaningful covariate.

Pharmacokinetics of trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) as a single agent or in combination with pertuzumab in HER2-positive breast cancer patients with recurrent or locally advanced metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: The phase III MARIANNE study investigated single-agent trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) and combination T-DM1 plus pertuzumab as the first-line treatment for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Pharmacokinetic properties of T-DM1 and pertuzumab in these patients and the potential for drug-drug interactions (DDIs) were assessed. METHODS: Pharmacokinetic samples of T-DM1-related analytes (T-DM1 conjugate, total trastuzumab, DM1) and pertuzumab were analyzed. Observed pharmacokinetic data were summarized for all analytes. Historical population pharmacokinetic models for T-DM1 conjugate and pertuzumab in HER2-positive MBC were used to derive empirical Bayes estimates of pharmacokinetic parameters. RESULTS: In MARIANNE (N = 375), mean ± standard deviation population pharmacokinetic model-predicted Cycle 1 Cmax for T-DM1 conjugate was 74.4 ± 10.1 µg/mL, Cycle 1 Ctrough was 1.34 ± 0.802 µg/mL, and area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity after first dose (AUCinf) was 338 ± 69.5 µg*day/mL. These values were similar to other T-DM1 studies. Pharmacokinetics of T-DM1 conjugate and other analytes (total trastuzumab, DM1) were similar with or without pertuzumab. In the pertuzumab plus T-DM1 arm, mean model-predicted Cycle 1 pertuzumab Cmax, Ctrough, and AUCinf were 276 ± 50.0 µg/mL, 64.8 ± 17.9 µg/mL, and 4470 ± 1360 µg*day/mL, respectively. These values were similar to other pertuzumab studies. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the population pharmacokinetic analysis of T-DM1 conjugate and pertuzumab, pharmacokinetics are similar across different lines of treatment and stages of disease including previously untreated MBC patients, and no DDIs were identified for combined use of T-DM1 and pertuzumab.

Exposure-response analyses of trastuzumab emtansine in patients with HER2-positive advanced breast cancer previously treated with trastuzumab and a taxane.

PURPOSE: In the phase III EMILIA study, trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) versus capecitabine plus lapatinib (control) in previously treated human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive advanced breast cancer. Using EMILIA data, we evaluated the T-DM1 exposure-response relationship. METHODS: Exposure-response relationships were examined with four exposure metrics [model-predicted and observed minimum concentration (C min) and area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to day 21 of T-DM1 at cycle 1] and multiple efficacy (OS, PFS, objective response rate) and safety (grade ≥ 3 adverse events, grade ≥ 3 thrombocytopenia, grade ≥ 3 hepatotoxicity) endpoints. RESULTS: An apparent exposure-response trend was observed between model-predicted exposure metrics and efficacy; trends for observed exposure metrics were shallower and often not significant. Although median OS and PFS were numerically longer in patients with higher versus lower model-predicted cycle 1 C min, OS and PFS hazard ratios for T-DM1-treated patients in the lowest exposure quartile (Q1) versus control were < 1 after adjusting for baseline risk factors (e.g., ECOG status, tumor burden, measurable disease, and number of disease sites). No meaningful exposure-response relationship was observed for any safety endpoints. CONCLUSION: Exposure-response relationships for efficacy were inconsistent across exposure metrics; model-predicted cycle 1 C min showed the strongest exposure-response trend. The Q1 subgroup based on model-predicted cycle 1 C min had numerically similar or better OS and PFS versus control following covariate adjustment. The approved T-DM1 dose (3.6 mg/kg every 3 weeks) has a positive benefit-risk ratio versus control, even for the T-DM1 Q1 subgroup.

Population pharmacokinetics and exposure-response of trastuzumab emtansine in advanced breast cancer previously treated with ≥2 HER2-targeted regimens.

AIMS: We conducted population pharmacokinetic (PopPK) and exposure-response analyses for trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1), to assess the need for T-DM1 dose optimization in patients with low exposure by using TH3RESA [A Study of Trastuzumab Emtansine in Comparison With Treatment of Physician's Choice in Patients With human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive Breast Cancer Who Have Received at Least Two Prior Regimens of HER2-directed Therapy] study data (NCT01419197). The randomized phase III TH3RESA study investigated T-DM1 vs. treatment of physician's choice (TPC) in patients with heavily pretreated HER2-positive advanced breast cancer. METHODS: We compared a historical T-DM1 PopPK model with T-DM1 pharmacokinetics in TH3RESA and performed exposure-response analyses using model-predicted cycle 1 maximum concentration (Cmax ), cycle 1 minimum concentration (Cmin ) and area under the concentration-time curve at steady state (AUCss ). Kaplan-Meier analyses [overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS)] and logistic regression [overall response rate (ORR), safety] were stratified by T-DM1 exposure metrics. Survival hazard ratios (HRs) in the lowest exposure quartile (Q1) of cycle 1 Cmin were compared with matched TPC-treated patients. RESULTS: T-DM1 concentrations in TH3RESA were described well by the historical PopPK model. Patients with higher cycle 1 Cmin and AUCss exhibited numerically longer median OS and PFS and higher ORR than patients with lower exposure. Exposure-response relationships were less evident for cycle 1 Cmax . No relationship between exposure and safety was identified. HRs for the comparison of T-DM1-treated patients in the Q1 subgroup with matched TPC-treated patients were 0.96 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63, 1.47] for OS and 0.92 (95% CI 0.64, 1.32) for PFS. CONCLUSIONS: Exposure-response relationships for efficacy were inconsistent across exposure metrics. HRs for survival in patients in the lowest T-DM1 exposure quartile vs. matched TPC-treated patients suggest that, compared with TCP, the approved T-DM1 dose is unlikely to be detrimental to patients with low exposure.

A novel model-based meta-analysis to indirectly estimate the comparative efficacy of two medications: an example using DPP-4 inhibitors, sitagliptin and linagliptin, in treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus.

OBJECTIVES: To develop a longitudinal statistical model to indirectly estimate the comparative efficacies of two drugs, using model-based meta-analysis (MBMA). Comparison of two oral dipeptidyl peptidase (DPP)-4 inhibitors, sitagliptin and linagliptin, for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) treatment was used as an example. DESIGN: Systematic review with MBMA. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane review of DPP-4 inhibitors for T2DM, sitagliptin trials on Food and Drug Administration website to December 2011 and linagliptin data from the manufacturer. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES: Double-blind, randomised controlled clinical trials, ≥12 weeks' duration, that analysed sitagliptin or linagliptin efficacies as changes in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels, in adults with T2DM and HbA1c >7%, irrespective of background medication. MODEL DEVELOPMENT AND APPLICATION: A Bayesian model was fitted (Markov Chain Monte Carlo method). The final model described HbA1c levels as function of time, dose, baseline HbA1c, washout status/duration and ethnicity. Other covariates showed no major impact on model parameters and were not included. For the indirect comparison, a population of 1000 patients was simulated from the model with a racial composition reflecting the average racial distribution of the linagliptin trials, and baseline HbA1c of 8%. RESULTS: The model was developed using longitudinal data from 11 234 patients (10 linagliptin, 15 sitagliptin trials), and assessed by internal evaluation techniques, demonstrating that the model adequately described the observations. Simulations showed both linagliptin 5 mg and sitagliptin 100 mg reduced HbA1c by 0.81% (placebo-adjusted) at week 24. Credible intervals for participants without washout were -0.88 to -0.75 (linagliptin) and -0.89 to -0.73 (sitagliptin), and for those with washout, -0.91 to -0.76 (linagliptin) and -0.91 to -0.75 (sitagliptin). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates the use of longitudinal MBMA in the field of diabetes treatment. Based on an example evaluating HbA1c reduction with linagliptin versus sitagliptin, the model used seems a valid approach for indirect drug comparisons.

Combining patient-level and summary-level data for Alzheimer's disease modeling and simulation: a ß regression meta-analysis.

Our objective was to develop a beta regression (BR) model to describe the longitudinal progression of the 11 item Alzheimer's disease (AD) assessment scale cognitive subscale (ADAS-cog) in AD patients in both natural history and randomized clinical trial settings, utilizing both individual patient and summary level literature data. Patient data from the coalition against major diseases database (3,223 patients), the Alzheimer's disease neruroimaging initiative study database (186 patients), and summary data from 73 literature references (representing 17,235 patients) were fit to a BR drug-disease-trial model. Treatment effects for currently available acetyl cholinesterase inhibitors, longitudinal changes in disease severity, dropout rate, placebo effect, and factors influencing these parameters were estimated in the model. Based on predictive checks and external validation, an adequate BR meta-analysis model for ADAS-cog using both summary-level and patient-level data was developed. Baseline ADAS-cog was estimated from baseline MMSE score. Disease progression was dependent on time, ApoE4 status, age, and gender. Study drop out was a function of time, baseline age, and baseline MMSE. The use of the BR constrained simulations to the 0-70 range of the ADAS-cog, even when residuals were incorporated. The model allows for simultaneous fitting of summary and patient level data, allowing for integration of all information available. A further advantage of the BR model is that it constrains values to the range of the original instrument for simulation purposes, in contrast to methodologies that provide appropriate constraints only for conditional expectations.