A Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling Approach to Assess the Potential for Drug Interactions Between Trofinetide and CYP3A4-Metabolized Drugs.

PURPOSE: Trofinetide is the first drug to be approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for use in the treatment of patients with Rett syndrome, a multisystem disorder requiring multimodal therapies. Cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 metabolizes >50% of therapeutic drugs and is the CYP isozyme most commonly expressed in the liver and intestines. In vitro studies suggest the concentration of trofinetide producing 50% inhibition (IC50) of CYP3A4 is >15 mmol/L; that concentration was much greater than the target clinical concentration associated with the maximal intended therapeutic dose (12 g). Thus, trofinetide has a low potential for drug-drug interactions in the liver. However, there is potential for drug-drug interactions in the intestines given the oral route of administration and expected relatively high concentration in the gastrointestinal tract after dose administration. METHODS: Using a validated physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model, deterministic and stochastic simulations were used for assessing the PK properties related to exposure and bioavailability of midazolam (sensitive index substrate for CYP3A4) following an oral (15 mg) or intravenous (2 mg) dose, with and without single-dose and steady-state (12 g) coadministration of oral trofinetide. FINDINGS: Following coadministration of intravenous midazolam and oral trofinetide, the PK properties of midazolam were unchanged. The trofinetide concentration in the gut wall was >15 mmol/L during the first 1.5 hours after dosing. With the coadministration of oral midazolam and trofinetide, the model predicted increases in fraction of dose reaching the portal vein, bioavailability, Cmax, and AUCinf of 30%, 30%, 18%, and 30%, respectively. IMPLICATIONS: In this study that used a PBPK modeling approach, it was shown that CYP3A4 enzyme activity in the liver was not affected by trofinetide coadministration, but trofinetide was predicted to be a weak inhibitor of intestinal CYP3A4 metabolism after oral administration at therapeutic doses.

Exposure-Response Efficacy Modeling to Support Trofinetide Dosing in Individuals with Rett Syndrome.

INTRODUCTION: Trofinetide was recently approved for the treatment of Rett syndrome (RTT) on the basis of the efficacy and safety findings of the phase 3 LAVENDER study, which used a body weight-based dosing regimen. Exposure-response (E-R) efficacy modeling was used to characterize relationships between trofinetide exposure measures (maximum drug concentration and area under the concentration-time curve for the dosing interval of 0-12 h [AUC0-12]) and efficacy endpoints in RTT clinical studies to support the trofinetide dosing regimen. METHODS: Efficacy endpoints were modeled using trofinetide exposure measures predicted from the population pharmacokinetic model and Bayesian estimates. The analysis population for each E-R model comprised individuals receiving placebo or trofinetide who had available trofinetide exposure measures. Efficacy endpoints were scores from the Rett Syndrome Behaviour Questionnaire (RSBQ), the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement, the Communication and Symbolic Behavior Scales Developmental Profile™ Infant-Toddler Checklist (CSBS-DP-IT) Social Composite, and the Rett Syndrome Clinician Rating of Ability to Communicate Choices (RTT-COMC). RESULTS: Higher trofinetide exposure was associated with improvements in RSBQ, CSBS-DP-IT Social Composite, and RTT-COMC scores. Assuming target trofinetide AUC0-12 values of 800-1200 µg·h/mL, the reductions in RSBQ total scores at week 12 were approximately five- to seven-fold greater with trofinetide (range 3.55-4.94) versus placebo (0.76). Significant E-R relationships were also found for the CSBS-DP-IT Social Composite and RTT-COMC scores. CONCLUSION: E-R efficacy modeling demonstrated significant relationships between trofinetide exposure and RSBQ, CSBS-DP-IT Social Composite, and RTT-COMC scores. Trofinetide is efficacious within the target exposure range, supporting the approved dosing regimen for trofinetide. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01703533, NCT02715115, NCT04181723.

Trofinetide is the first approved treatment for people living with Rett syndrome, a rare genetic condition affecting brain development. This approval was based on the findings of clinical studies in which trofinetide showed significant improvements in the symptoms of Rett syndrome. In this study researchers were looking to see if the level of trofinetide in the blood was related to the level of improvement in symptoms observed in clinical studies. Information on the effectiveness of trofinetide was obtained from the phase 3 LAVENDER study which used doses of trofinetide according to body weight. Trofinetide's effectiveness was assessed on the basis of clinical measurements of key Rett syndrome symptoms. All the information on trofinetide dose, blood levels, and how much symptoms changed (i.e., effectiveness of trofinetide) was then used to develop models to predict symptom responses in the observed population. Researchers found that as the blood levels of trofinetide increased the symptom improvement also increased. When the blood levels were at the recommended level that was achieved in the LAVENDER study, the model predicted that symptom improvement was up to seven times greater with trofinetide than having no treatment (i.e., placebo). This study shows a positive relationship between trofinetide blood levels and improvement in the symptoms of Rett syndrome. Trofinetide was effective within the recommended blood level range in the LAVENDER study using the approved weight-based dosing.

Adherence to Background Antipsychotic and Pimavanserin in Patients with Schizophrenia: Post Hoc Analyses from the ENHANCE and ADVANCE Studies.

Background: In patients with schizophrenia, study design to optimize adherence and objective measurement of adherence is critical for interpreting results. Two randomized, double-blind studies evaluating adjunctive pimavanserin in patients with schizophrenia who received stable antipsychotic treatment included measures to encourage and assess treatment adherence. Objective: This post hoc analysis evaluated adherence levels achieved in the Phase III ENHANCE study (NCT02970292) and the Phase II ADVANCE study (NCT02970305). Methods: Blood levels of participants receiving adjunctive treatment with pimavanserin or placebo added to their ongoing antipsychotic medication were tested and evaluated regularly throughout both studies. For both the background antipsychotic and pimavanserin, treatment adherence was defined as a blood sample test result above the lower limit of quantification. Results: Overall, 392 of 633 screened patients and 403 of 608 screened patients were in the safety populations in ENHANCE and ADVANCE, respectively. In ENHANCE, at weeks 1, 3, and 6/early termination (ET), the adherence rates remained ≥ 95.1% for the background antipsychotic in both pimavanserin and placebo treatment groups and ≥ 96.8% for pimavanserin. In ADVANCE, high adherence rates (≥90.6%) with the background antipsychotic (for both treatment groups) and pimavanserin (≥95.0%) were observed at weeks 2, 8, 14, and 26/ET. Conclusion: Rigorous screening was performed to exclude patients not adherent to their background antipsychotic before enrollment and to pimavanserin during study visits by using regular blood sampling. Mandatory caregiver participation further supported adherence to study treatment and procedures. These efforts may have contributed to the high levels of adherence to both background antipsychotic and pimavanserin reported in ENHANCE and ADVANCE.

Characterization of the Pharmacokinetics and Mass Balance of a Single Oral Dose of Trofinetide in Healthy Male Subjects.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Trofinetide is the first drug to be approved for the treatment of Rett syndrome, a neurodevelopmental disorder. The purpose of the study is to fully characterize the metabolic and excretion profiles of trofinetide in humans. METHODS: This Phase 1, open-label, single-dose trial conducted in healthy male adults was designed to characterize the pharmacokinetics of trofinetide (absorption, metabolism, and excretion), mass balance of [14C]-trofinetide, and safety profile of trofinetide following administration of an oral 12-g dose administered as a mixture of trofinetide and [14C]-trofinetide. Blood, urine, and fecal samples were collected at prespecified timepoints. The pharmacokinetics of trofinetide were assessed in blood and urine samples using high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) with tandem mass spectrometric detection. Bioanalysis of radioactivity was conducted in blood, plasma, urine, and fecal samples using liquid scintillation counting. Metabolite profiling was conducted in blood, plasma, urine, and fecal samples using HPLC with liquid scintillation counting of chromatographic fractions. Safety and tolerability, including treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), were assessed. RESULTS: Blood concentration-time profiles of trofinetide and total radioactivity were almost superimposable up to ~12 h after dosing. Urine concentration-time profiles of trofinetide and total radioactivity were similar. Trofinetide was rapidly absorbed into the circulation with an initial rapid decline (half-life [t½] alpha ~2.6 h), followed by a relatively slow terminal elimination phase (t½ beta ~20 h). The blood-to-plasma total radioactivity ratios were 0.529-0.592, indicating a lack of affinity for the cellular portion of blood. Renal excretion accounted for 83.8% of the administered radiochemical dose; 15.1% was recovered in feces. Urine and fecal recovery of radioactivity accounted for 99% of the administered dose at 168 h after dosing. Parent [14C]-trofinetide was the major radiolabeled entity in blood and plasma (88.4% and 93.1% in area under the concentration-time curves from 0 to 12 h [AUC0-12] in pooled blood and plasma samples, respectively) and the major entity excreted in urine (91.5% in 0-48-h pooled urine samples) and in feces (52.7% in 0-192-h pooled fecal samples). Only small levels of metabolites were present. In blood and plasma, only two minor metabolites were identified (each metabolite ≤ 2.24% of the AUC0-12 pool). These two metabolites were also observed in urine and fecal samples (≤ 2.41% of dose). In feces, one additional metabolite (0.84% of dose) was identified. Two mild TEAEs were reported in two participants and were not considered related to trofinetide. There were no clinically meaningful changes in individual laboratory parameters, vital signs, physical findings, or electrocardiogram results. CONCLUSIONS: Metabolic and excretion profiles confirm that trofinetide undergoes minimal hepatic or intestinal metabolism and is primarily excreted unchanged in the urine. Trofinetide containing radiolabeled [14C]-trofinetide was well tolerated.

Trofinetide is the first approved treatment for Rett syndrome, a rare genetic condition that affects brain development. Study aims were to look at how a single oral dose of trofinetide is absorbed into the bloodstream, to see whether trofinetide's chemical structure is changed once in the body, and to see how trofinetide and any metabolites (chemically altered trofinetide) are removed from the body. Safety and tolerability of trofinetide were also assessed. Eight healthy adult men took a single oral 12-g dose administered as a mixture of ¹⁴C-radiolabeled and nonlabeled trofinetide. Researchers collected blood, urine, and stool samples at regular intervals for up to 10 days postdose to measure levels of trofinetide and its metabolites. Trofinetide was rapidly absorbed (time to maximum concentration was 2 h postdose) and was primarily present in the blood as the unaltered compound. Concentrations decreased rapidly during the first 24 h postdose and more slowly thereafter. Most of the dose was recovered in urine with a lower amount in stool samples (83.8% and 15.1% of the radiochemical dose, respectively). Total recovery in urine and stool samples was 99%, primarily as the chemically unaltered compound. Only low levels of three trofinetide metabolites were detected. Two metabolites were found in blood, urine, and stool samples, while one metabolite was found in stool samples only. Two mild treatment-emergent adverse events, considered to be unrelated to trofinetide, were reported. In summary, trofinetide is rapidly absorbed, minimally metabolized, and mainly removed from the body in the urine as the unchanged drug.

Population Pharmacokinetic Modeling and Stochastic Simulations to Support Pediatric Dose Selection of Pimavanserin.

Pimavanserin is a selective serotonin-modulating agent with inverse agonist/antagonist activity at the 5-hydroxytryptamine2A (5-HT2A ) receptor. The safety and efficacy of pimavanserin 34 mg once daily were studied in adults with hallucinations and delusions associated with Parkinson's disease psychosis and other neuropsychiatric conditions. This analysis used model-based simulations of pimavanserin steady-state exposures to identify a dose that generated pediatric exposures comparable with adult exposures achieved with 34 mg pimavanserin. A population pharmacokinetics model was developed using pooled plasma drug concentration (ie, actual) data from 13 clinical studies, including a phase 1 study of adolescent pediatric patients (aged 13-17 years) with various psychiatric conditions. Stochastic simulations were performed to predict exposures in a virtual (ie, simulated) group of pediatric patients (aged 5-17 years). Steady-state measures of the area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) and maximum drug concentration (Cmax ) were simulated for relevant age and weight stratifications and compared with simulated exposures in adults (aged 18-49 years). The simulated mean AUC ranged from 47.41 to 54.73 ng d/mL and the mean Cmax ranged from 41.13 to 50.07 ng/mL in adults receiving pimavanserin 34 mg. The simulated mean (SD) Cmax of 56.54 (24.58) ng/mL with pimavanserin 34 mg in patients aged 10-17 years was similar to that in adults. Pimavanserin 20 mg yielded a mean (SD) Cmax of 45.30 (21.31) ng/mL in patients aged 5-9 years and 49.18 (22.91) ng/mL in the pediatric patient weight group of 14-25 kg, which are values close to the Cmax in adults treated with 34 mg. Pimavanserin 20 and 34 mg in pediatric patients aged 5-9 and 10-17 years, respectively, yielded exposures similar to daily pimavanserin 34 mg in adults aged 18-49 years.

Exposure-response Modeling From the CLARITY Trial of Pimavanserin for Adjunctive Treatment of Major Depressive Disorder.

In the 10-week, phase 2 CLARITY study of patients with major depressive disorder, adjunctive therapy to antidepressants with pimavanserin 34 mg once daily statistically significantly improved the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-17) total score (primary endpoint) and Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) score (secondary endpoint) versus placebo. This analysis characterized the exposure-response (E-R) relationships of pimavanserin in this CLARITY patient population. Exposure measures were estimated for each patient based on population-pharmacokinetic empirical Bayesian estimates. E-R models were developed to describe exposure-efficacy (HAMD-17, SDS, and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement [CGI-I] scale) and exposure-safety relationships (Karolinska Sleepiness Scale [KSS], Massachusetts General Hospital Sexual Functioning Inventory [MGH-SFI], and adverse events [AEs] of headache, sedation, and somnolence) relationships. For the primary efficacy endpoint (HAMD-17 scores), a sigmoid maximum-effect model described the time course of response, and a linear function of pimavanserin exposure was statistically significant. HAMD-17 scores decreased steadily over time following placebo and pimavanserin treatment; separation from placebo increased as peak pimavanserin plasma concentration (Cmax ) increased. At median pimavanserin Cmax (34-mg dose), the reduction from baseline in HAMD-17 scores was -11.1 and -13.5 at weeks 5 and 10, respectively. Relative to placebo, the model predicted comparable reductions in HAMD-17 scores at weeks 5 and 10. Similar improvements in favor of pimavanserin were detected with SDS, CGI-I, MGH-SFI, and KSS scores. No E-R relationship was found for AEs. E-R modeling predicted a relationship between higher pimavanserin exposure and improvement in HAMD-17 score and improvement across multiple secondary efficacy endpoints.

Pimavanserin Exposure-Response Analyses in Patients With Schizophrenia: Results From the Phase 2 ADVANCE Study.

PURPOSE/BACKGROUND: Pimavanserin is a selective serotonin 5-HT 2A receptor inverse agonist/antagonist being investigated in patients with negative symptoms of schizophrenia. This analysis aimed to characterize exposure-response relationships of pimavanserin in this population. METHODS/PROCEDURES: Exposure-response models were developed using data from ADVANCE. Patients with negative symptoms of schizophrenia receiving background antipsychotics were randomized to pimavanserin 20 mg (adjusted to 34 or 10 mg between weeks 2-8 based on efficacy or tolerability) or placebo for 26 weeks. Time-varying pimavanserin exposure measures were predicted for each patient using a population pharmacokinetic model and individual empiric Bayesian parameter estimates. Response measures were the Negative Symptom Assessment 16 (NSA-16, primary end point), Personal and Social Performance scale, negative symptoms component of the Clinical Global Impression of Schizophrenia-Severity Scale, and adverse events. FINDINGS/RESULTS: A higher pimavanserin exposure was associated with greater improvement in NSA-16 score. For a median area under the pimavanserin plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 to 24 hours of 1465 ng × h/mL for the 34-mg dose, the model predicted a 10.5-point reduction in NSA-16 score. This exposure-response relationship with NSA-16 scores was not influenced by covariates. Similar results were observed with Personal and Social Performance and Clinical Global Impression of Schizophrenia-Severity, but not to the extent as NSA-16. There was no significant exposure-response relationship with anxiety, headache, insomnia, or somnolence. IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS: Increasing pimavanserin plasma concentration was associated with improved NSA-16 scores (primary end point) in patients with negative symptoms of schizophrenia. No exposure-response relationship with select adverse events was observed.

A Phase 1, Open-Label Study to Evaluate the Effects of Food and Evening Dosing on the Pharmacokinetics of Oral Trofinetide in Healthy Adult Subjects.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Trofinetide, a synthetic analog of tripeptide glycine-proline-glutamate, is an investigational agent for the treatment of Rett syndrome, a neurodevelopmental disorder with affected individuals requiring lifelong support. Food can affect the pharmacokinetic profile of a drug, and this phase 1 study assessed the potential effect of food on the pharmacokinetics of trofinetide. The study also evaluated the potential effect of evening dosing on trofinetide bioavailability and characterized the pharmacokinetic profile of trofinetide in urine. METHODS: A 60 mL oral solution of trofinetide (12 g) was administered in three dosing periods: morning fasted (A; reference), morning fed (B), and evening fasted (C). Healthy adult subjects (18-45 years) were randomized to sequence ABC (n = 19) or BAC (n = 22). Blood and urine samples were collected at scheduled timepoints for trofinetide pharmacokinetic analysis. Bioequivalence was confirmed if 90% confidence intervals for geometric mean ratio between B/A or C/A fell within 80-125% equivalence limits for area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) and maximum concentration (Cmax) in whole blood. RESULTS: Bioequivalence criteria were met for all conditions (i.e., morning fed vs. morning fasted and evening fasted vs. morning fasted) except Cmax in the fed versus fasted condition, which was just below the bioequivalence limit (75.49%), suggesting a negligible food effect and lack of diurnal variation on bioavailability. Trofinetide was primarily excreted unchanged in urine. Trofinetide was well tolerated, and there were no significant changes in vital signs or laboratory parameters. CONCLUSION: This study supports dosing of trofinetide without regard to food.

Efficacy and safety of active vitamin D supplementation in chronic spontaneous urticaria patients.

BACKGROUND: Chronic spontaneous urticaria (CSU) is a common skin disorder affecting negatively patients' lives. Vitamin D deficiency has been reported to be associated to many allergic skin disorders. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the association between the serum level of 25 hydroxy vitamin D and CSU and to assess the efficacy and safety of active vitamin D in management of CSU. METHODS: The study was conducted on 77 patients with CSU and 67 healthy controls, then the 77 CSU patients were randomized to either the study group that received 0.25 µg alfacalcidol daily or the placebo group that received oral placebo for 12 weeks. RESULTS: Serum 25(OH) D was significantly lower in CSU as compared to healthy controls and was negatively correlated to the urticarial severity. After alfacalcidol administration, the study group showed significant higher level of 25(OH) D compared to the placebo group. In addition, the mean serum level of IL6, hsCRP and TNFα significantly decreased in the study group in comparison to the placebo group and as compared to their baseline results. CONCLUSION: Vitamin D deficiency is more common in CSU patients as compared to healthy people and hence, alfacalcidol might have a beneficial role as add on therapy in CSU management with no reported side effects.

Alterations of immunoglobulin G and immunoglobulin M levels in the breast milk of mothers with exclusive breastfeeding compared to mothers with non-exclusive breastfeeding during 6 months postpartum: The Jordanian cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to measure changes in the concentration of immunoglobulin G (IgG) and immunoglobulin M (IgM) in the mature breast milk of Jordanian mothers during the first 6 months after giving birth between exclusively breastfeeding (EBF) mothers and non-exclusively breastfeeding (non-EBF) mothers. METHODS: A longitudinal follow-up design was used to measure changes in the concentration of IgG and IgM in the mothers' mature milk during the first 6 months after giving birth. Sixty-nine lactating mothers were recruited in this study. Breast milk samples were collected by mothers themselves in the first, fourth, and sixth months of lactation to measure IgG and IgM concentrations using the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) technique. RESULTS: There was a significant difference in IgG and IgM concentrations between EBF and non-EBF mothers. IgG was higher in the EBF mothers' milk than in the milk of non-EBF mothers, whereas IgM was not affected by the type of baby feeding. CONCLUSION: The concentration of immunoglobulins changes in human breast milk along with breastfeeding intervals. EBF enhances the concentration of IgG in breast milk compared to non-EBF.

Effect of Food on the Pharmacokinetics of Single- and Multiple-Dose Hydrocodone Extended Release in Healthy Subjects.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Food intake can alter the pharmacokinetics of certain medications, including changes in their oral bioavailability, which is of particular concern for extended-release (ER) opioids because of the high drug loads. Two randomized, open-label studies assessed the effect of food on the pharmacokinetics of single and multiple doses of hydrocodone ER formulated with CIMA® Abuse-Deterrence Technology. METHODS: Healthy subjects in fed and fasted states received single 90-mg doses of hydrocodone ER (Studies 1 and 2) or multiple doses of hydrocodone ER (45 mg twice daily on days 2-3, 60 mg twice daily on days 4-5, 90 mg twice daily on days 6-10, and 90 mg once in the morning on day 11) (Study 2). Naltrexone was administered to minimize opioid-related adverse events. Pharmacokinetic parameters included maximum hydrocodone plasma concentration (C max) and area under the concentration-versus-time curve from time 0 to infinity (AUC0-∞) in Study 1 (day 1) and for one dosing interval at steady state (AUCτ,ss) in Study 2 (day 11). Before conducting the multiple-dose study, single-dose data were fitted with a population pharmacokinetic methodology. RESULTS: In total, 40 subjects were randomized to Study 1 and 43 subjects were randomized to Study 2. While overall exposure (AUC0-∞) was relatively similar (least squares mean ratio [90% CI]: 1.11 [1.06-1.16]), results indicated that the single-dose C max was 40% higher under fed versus fasted conditions (least squares mean ratio [90% CI]: 1.40 [1.31-1.51]; Study 1). Modeling of single-dose data predicted that the effect of food would be much less at steady state [predicted fed:fasted C max at steady state (C max,ss) and AUCτ,ss ratios of 1.18 and 1.09, respectively]. The multiple-dose study results validated these predicted ratios and indicated that the steady-state 90% CIs were within 0.80-1.25 for the fed:fasted C max,ss (1.14 [1.07-1.21]) and AUCτ,ss (1.11 [1.04-1.17]) parameters, indicating that clinically meaningful food effects at steady state are not expected. CONCLUSION: No evidence of an effect of food was found on the pharmacokinetics of hydrocodone ER after multiple days of twice-daily dosing.

Buprenorphine implants in medical treatment of opioid addiction.

INTRODUCTION: Opioid use disorder is a chronic, relapsing disease that encompasses use of both prescription opioids and heroin and is associated with a high annual rate of overdose deaths. Medical treatment has proven more successful than placebo treatment or psychosocial intervention, and the partial µ-opioid receptor agonist and κ-opioid receptor antagonist buprenorphine is similar in efficacy to methadone while offering lower risk of respiratory depression. However, frequent dosing requirements and potential for misuse and drug diversion contribute to significant complications with treatment adherence for available formulations. Areas covered: This review describes the development of and preliminary data from clinical trials of an implantable buprenorphine formulation. Efficacy and safety data from comparative studies with other administrations of buprenorphine, including tablets and sublingual film, will be described. Key premises of the Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy program for safely administering buprenorphine implants, which all prescribing physicians must complete, are also discussed. Expert commentary: Long-acting implantable drug formulations that offer consistent drug delivery and lower risk of misuse, diversion, or accidental pediatric exposure over traditional formulations represent a promising development for the effective treatment of opioid use disorder.

Abuse Potential with Oral Route of Administration of a Hydrocodone Extended-Release Tablet Formulated with Abuse-Deterrence Technology in Nondependent, Recreational Opioid Users.

Objective: To compare the oral abuse potential of hydrocodone extended-release (ER) tablet developed with CIMA ® Abuse-Deterrence Technology with that of hydrocodone immediate release (IR). Design: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover study. Setting and Patients: One study site in the United States; adult nondependent, recreational opioid users. Methods: After confirming their ability to tolerate and discriminate hydrocodone IR 45 mg from placebo, eligible participants were randomized to receive each of the following oral treatments once: finely crushed placebo, hydrocodone IR 45-mg powder, intact hydrocodone ER 45-mg tablet, and finely crushed hydrocodone ER 45-mg tablet. Primary pharmacodynamic measure was "at the moment" drug liking. Secondary measures included overall drug liking, drug effects (e.g., balance, positive, negative, sedative), pupillometry, pharmacokinetics, and safety. Results: Mean maximum effect (E max ) for "at the moment" drug liking was significantly lower for intact (53.9) and finely crushed hydrocodone ER (66.9) vs. hydrocodone IR (85.2; P < 0.001). Drug liking for intact hydrocodone ER was comparable to placebo (E max : 53.9 vs. 53.2). Secondary measures were consistent with these results, indicating that positive, negative, and sedative drug effects were diminished with intact and crushed hydrocodone ER tablet vs. hydrocodone IR. The 72-hour plasma concentration-time profile for each treatment mimicked its respective "at the moment" drug-liking-over-time profile. Incidence of adverse events was lower with intact hydrocodone ER (53%) vs. hydrocodone IR (79%) and finely crushed hydrocodone ER (73%). Conclusions: The oral abuse potential of hydrocodone ER (intact and finely crushed) was significantly lower than hydrocodone IR in healthy, nondependent, recreational opioid users. Hydrocodone ER was generally well tolerated.

Effects of Renal Impairment and Hepatic Impairment on the Pharmacokinetics of Hydrocodone After Administration of a Hydrocodone Extended-Release Tablet Formulated With Abuse-Deterrence Technology.

Two open-label, single-dose, parallel-group studies assessed effects of renal and hepatic impairment on the pharmacokinetics of a hydrocodone extended-release (ER) formulation developed with the CIMA Abuse-Deterrence Technology platform. Forty-eight subjects with normal renal function or varying degrees of renal impairment received hydrocodone ER 45 mg (study 1); 16 subjects with normal hepatic function or moderate hepatic impairment received hydrocodone ER 15 mg (study 2). Blood samples were obtained predose and through 144 hours postdose. Mean maximum observed plasma hydrocodone concentration (Cmax ) in subjects with normal renal function, mild, moderate, and severe impairment, and end-stage renal disease was 28.6, 33.4, 42.4, 36.5, and 31.6 ng/mL, and mean area under the plasma hydrocodone concentration-versus-time curve from time 0 to infinity (AUC0-∞ ) was 565, 660, 973, 983, and 638 ng·h/mL, respectively. Incidence of adverse events was 57%, 38%, 44%, 33%, and 56%, respectively. Mean Cmax with normal hepatic function and moderate impairment was 10.1 and 13.0 ng/mL, and mean AUC0-∞ was 155 and 269 ng·h/mL, respectively. Incidence of adverse events was 38% in both groups. Altered systemic exposure in renally or hepatically impaired populations (up to ∼70% higher) should be considered when titrating to an effective dose of hydrocodone ER.

Assessment of Alcohol-Induced Dose Dumping with a Hydrocodone Bitartrate Extended-Release Tablet Formulated with CIMA(®) Abuse Deterrence Technology.

BACKGROUND: Greater drug content requirements for extended-release (ER) opioids necessitate greater protection against dose dumping. Hydrocodone ER employs the CIMA(®) Abuse-Deterrence Technology platform, which provides resistance against rapid release of the active moiety when the tablet is manipulated or taken with alcohol. OBJECTIVE: Assess effects of alcohol on hydrocodone ER pharmacokinetics. STUDY DESIGN: Open-label, crossover (January 25-April 30, 2010). SETTING: Single center. PARTICIPANTS: Forty healthy adults. INTERVENTION: Subjects received all four treatments in a randomized manner (separated by a minimum 5-day washout): hydrocodone ER 15 mg with 240 mL water and 240 mL orange juice containing 4, 20, and 40% alcohol in a fasted state. Naltrexone was administered to minimize opioid-related adverse events. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Effect of alcohol on pharmacokinetics of hydrocodone ER assessed by comparing systemic exposure [maximum plasma drug concentration (Cmax) and area under the plasma drug concentration-versus-time curve from time 0 to infinity (AUC0-∞)] after administration with alcohol or with water. RESULTS: Geometric means ratios of hydrocodone ER with 4, 20, and 40% alcohol relative to water were 1.05, 1.09, and 1.14, respectively, for Cmax and 1.07, 1.13, and 1.17, respectively, for AUC0-∞. All 90% confidence intervals for these geometric means ratios fell within the limits of 0.8 and 1.25. Increasing alcohol concentrations did not notably affect systemic exposure but were associated with increased adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Hydrocodone ER tablets were resistant to dose dumping when administered with alcohol in healthy subjects based on similar systemic exposures observed across all treatments.

Evaluation of potential pharmacokinetic drug-drug interaction between armodafinil and risperidone in healthy adults.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Patients with bipolar I disorder and schizophrenia have an increased risk of obstructive sleep apnea. The effects of armodafinil, a weak cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 inducer, on pharmacokinetics and safety of risperidone, an atypical antipsychotic used to treat major psychiatric illness, were investigated. METHODS: Healthy subjects received 2 mg risperidone alone and after armodafinil pretreatment (titrated to 250 mg/day). Pharmacokinetic parameters were derived from plasma concentrations of risperidone and its active metabolite, 9-hydroxyrisperidone (formed via CYP2D6 and CYP3A4), collected before and over 4 days after risperidone administration, and from steady-state plasma concentrations of armodafinil and its circulating metabolites, R-modafinil acid and modafinil sulfone. Safety and tolerability were assessed. RESULTS: Thirty-six subjects receiving study drug were evaluable for safety; 34 were evaluable for pharmacokinetics. Risperidone maximum plasma concentration (C max) decreased from mean 16.5 ng/mL when given alone to 9.2 ng/mL after armodafinil pretreatment (geometric mean ratio [90 % CI] 0.55 [0.50-0.61]); area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 to infinity (AUC0-∞) decreased from 92.3 to 44.5 ng·h/mL (geometric mean ratio [90 % CI] 0.51 [0.46-0.55]). C max and AUC0-∞ for 9-hydroxyrisperidone were also reduced (geometric mean ratios [90 % CI] 0.81 [0.77-0.85] and 0.73 [0.69-0.77], respectively). Adverse events were consistent with known safety profiles. CONCLUSION: Consistent with CYP3A4 induction, risperidone and 9-hydroxyrisperidone systemic exposure was reduced in the presence of armodafinil. Concomitant armodafinil and risperidone use may necessitate risperidone dosage adjustment, particularly when starting or stopping coadministration of the two drugs. However, any such decision should be based on patient disease state and clinical status.

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profile of bendamustine and its metabolites.

PURPOSE: Bendamustine is a unique alkylating agent indicated for the treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia and rituximab-refractory, indolent B cell non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Despite the extensive experience with bendamustine, its pharmacokinetic profile has only recently been described. This overview summarizes the pharmacokinetics, pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic relationships, and drug-drug interactions of bendamustine in adult and pediatric patients with hematologic malignancies. METHODS: A literature search and data on file (including a human mass balance study, pharmacokinetic population analyses in adult and pediatric patients, and modeling analyses) were evaluated for inclusion. RESULTS: Bendamustine concentrations peak at end of intravenous infusion (~1 h). Subsequent elimination is triphasic, with the intermediate t 1/2 (~40 min) as the effective t 1/2 since the final phase represents <1 % of the area under the curve. Bendamustine is rapidly hydrolyzed to monohydroxy-bendamustine and dihydroxy-bendamustine, which have little or no activity. Cytochrome P450 (CYP) 1A2 oxidation yields the active metabolites γ-hydroxybendamustine and N-desmethyl-bendamustine, at low concentrations, which contribute minimally to cytotoxicity. Minor involvement of CYP1A2 in bendamustine elimination suggests a low likelihood of drug-drug interactions with CYP1A2 inhibitors. Systemic exposure to bendamustine 120 mg/m(2) is comparable between adult and pediatric patients; age, race, and sex have been shown to have no significant effect on systemic exposure in either population. The effect of hepatic/renal impairment on bendamustine pharmacokinetics remains to be elucidated. Higher bendamustine concentrations may be associated with increased probability of nausea or infection. No clear exposure-efficacy response relationship has been observed. CONCLUSIONS: Altogether, the findings support dosing based on body surface area for most patient populations.

Dose proportionality of a hydrocodone extended-release tablet formulated with abuse-deterrence technology.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: This open-label, crossover study evaluated the dose proportionality of a hydrocodone extended-release (ER) tablet employing the CIMA(®) Abuse-Deterrence Technology platform. METHODS: Healthy volunteers were randomized to receive single doses of hydrocodone ER 15, 30, 45, 60, and 90 mg separated by a minimum 14-day washout. Subjects received naltrexone to minimize opioid-related adverse events (AEs). Blood samples were collected for 72 h after each hydrocodone administration. Pharmacokinetic measures included maximum observed plasma hydrocodone concentration (C max) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity (AUC∞). Dose proportionality was concluded if the confidence interval (CI) of the slope of the regression line for C max and AUC∞ versus dose fell within 0.875-1.125. RESULTS: In total, 60 subjects were evaluable for pharmacokinetics. The mean C max was 12.6, 20.7, 30.3, 41.2, and 62.5 ng/mL and the mean AUC∞ was 199, 382, 592, 766, and 1189 ng.h/mL for hydrocodone ER 15, 30, 45, 60, and 90 mg, respectively. C max and AUC∞ increased linearly with increasing dose. The 90 % CIs of the slope of the regression line for C max (0.880-0.922) and AUC∞ (0.984-1.026) indicated systemic exposure to hydrocodone increased in a dose-proportional manner. In these naltrexone-blocked subjects, no increased incidence of AEs was apparent with increasing dose. CONCLUSION: Hydrocodone exposure increased in a dose-proportional manner after administration of hydrocodone ER 15-90 mg tablets in healthy, naltrexone-blocked subjects.

Pharmacokinetics of hydrocodone extended-release tablets formulated with different levels of coating to achieve abuse deterrence compared with a hydrocodone immediate-release/acetaminophen tablet in healthy subjects.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: A hydrocodone extended-release (ER) formulation employing the CIMA(®) Abuse-Deterrence Technology platform was developed to provide resistance against rapid release of hydrocodone when tablets are comminuted or taken with alcohol. This study evaluated the pharmacokinetics of three hydrocodone ER tablet prototypes with varying levels of polymer coating to identify the prototype expected to have the greatest abuse deterrence potential based on pharmacokinetic characteristics that maintain systemic exposure to hydrocodone comparable to that of a commercially available hydrocodone immediate-release (IR) product. METHODS: In this four-period crossover study, healthy subjects aged 18-45 years were randomized to receive a single intact, oral 45-mg tablet of one of three hydrocodone ER prototypes (low-, intermediate-, or high-level coating) or an intact, oral tablet of hydrocodone IR/acetaminophen (APAP) 10/325 mg every 6 h until four tablets were administered, with each of the four treatments administered once over the four study periods. Dosing periods were separated by a minimum 5-day washout. Naltrexone 50 mg was administered to block opioid receptors. Blood samples for pharmacokinetic assessments were collected predose and through 72 h postdose. Parameters assessed included maximum observed plasma hydrocodone concentration (C(max)), time to C(max) (t(max)), and area under the concentration-time curve from time 0 to infinity (AUC(0-∞)). RESULTS: Mean C(max) values were 49.2, 32.6, and 28.4 ng/mL for the low-, intermediate-, and high-level coating hydrocodone ER tablet prototypes, respectively, and 37.3 ng/mL for the hydrocodone IR/APAP tablet; respective median t(max) values were 5.9, 8.0, 8.0, and 1.0 h. Total systemic exposure to hydrocodone (AUC(0-∞)) was comparable between hydrocodone ER tablet prototypes (640, 600, and 578 ng·h/mL, respectively) and hydrocodone IR/APAP (581 ng·h/mL). No serious adverse events or deaths were reported. The most common adverse events included headache (26%) and nausea (18%). CONCLUSION: All three hydrocodone ER tablet prototypes (low-, intermediate-, and high-level polymer coating) demonstrated ER pharmacokinetic characteristics. The hydrocodone ER tablet prototype with the high-level coating was selected for development because of its comparable exposure to the hydrocodone IR/APAP formulation and potentially increased ability to resist rapid drug release upon product tampering because of a higher polymer coating level. All study medications were well tolerated in healthy naltrexone-blocked volunteers.

Evaluation of the potential for pharmacokinetic drug-drug interaction between armodafinil and carbamazepine in healthy adults.

PURPOSE: Polypharmacy is common in psychiatry practice and can lead to an increased risk of drug interactions. Armodafinil, a wakefulness-promoting agent, has been studied as adjunctive therapy for the treatment of major depressive episodes associated with bipolar I disorder. Armodafinil and the mood stabilizer carbamazepine are both inducers of and substrates for cytochrome P450 (CYP3A4). This study was designed to evaluate the bidirectional carbamazepine-armodafinil pharmacokinetic drug-drug interaction. METHODS: This was an open-label, single-center study conducted in healthy adult men. Subjects assigned to group 1 received a dose of carbamazepine (200 mg) alone and a dose after pretreatment with daily dosing of armodafinil (titrated to 250 mg/d). Subjects assigned to group 2 received a dose of armodafinil (250 mg) alone and a dose after pretreatment with carbamazepine BID (titrated to 400 mg/d). Pharmacokinetic parameters for carbamazepine, armodafinil, and their major circulating metabolites were determined when dosed alone and after pretreatment with the other drug. The safety and tolerability of armodafinil and carbamazepine were also assessed throughout the study. FINDINGS: Eighty-one subjects enrolled in the study (group 1 = 40; group 2 = 41), of whom 79 (group 1 = 40; group 2 = 39) were evaluable for pharmacokinetic analysis and 80 (group 1 = 40; group 2 = 40) were evaluable for safety analysis. In group 1, pretreatment with armodafinil reduced systemic exposure to carbamazepine by 12% for Cmax and 25% for AUC (based on comparison of geometric means). Similarly, in group 2, pretreatment with carbamazepine reduced systemic exposure to armodafinil by 11% for Cmax and 37% for AUC. Systemic exposure to the metabolites of these agents that are formed via CYP3A4 were increased after pretreatment in each group. There were no new or unexpected adverse events. IMPLICATIONS: Systemic exposure to both carbamazepine and armodafinil was reduced after pretreatment with the other drug; systemic exposure to the metabolites of each drug, which are formed via CYP3A4, was increased. These changes were consistent with the induction of CYP3A4. Both drugs were generally safe and well tolerated alone and in combination under the conditions studied. Dose adjustment may be required when initiating or discontinuing armodafinil and carbamazepine cotherapy.