Model-based evaluation of the efficacy and safety of nivolumab once every 4 weeks across multiple tumor types.

BACKGROUND: Nivolumab 480 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W) is approved in the European Union, United States, and several other markets across multiple tumor types. Its approval was supported by quantitative efficacy/safety analyses bridging to 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks (Q2W). PATIENTS AND METHODS: The benefit-risk profile of nivolumab 480 mg Q4W relative to 3 mg/kg Q2W was evaluated using population pharmacokinetic modeling and exposure-response (E-R) analyses for safety and efficacy. Pharmacokinetic exposures were predicted for 3203 patients with melanoma, non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), renal cell carcinoma (RCC), squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck, urothelial carcinoma, or classical Hodgkin lymphoma. Quantitative models analyzed E-R to predict 480-mg Q4W safety across all indications and efficacy for melanoma, NSCLC, and RCC. Intratumoral receptor occupancy (RO) was predicted for parameters representing different tumor types. RESULTS: Time-averaged concentrations for 480 mg Q4W versus 3 mg/kg Q2W were higher during the first 28 days (26.8%) and similar at steady state (5.2%). The maximum concentration (Cmax) after the first dose was higher (110.4%), and the trough concentration at day 28 was lower (-22.1%) with 480 mg Q4W versus 3 mg/kg Q2W. The Cmax achieved with 480 mg Q4W was lower than the previously established safe dose of 10 mg/kg Q2W. The probability of adverse events for key safety end points was similar for 480 mg Q4W and 3 mg/kg Q2W. The predicted overall survival and objective response rates with 480 mg Q4W were comparable to 3 mg/kg Q2W. The predicted high intratumoral RO provided additional evidence to support 480 mg Q4W across tumor types. CONCLUSIONS: The benefit-risk profile for nivolumab 480 mg Q4W was predicted to be similar to that of 3 mg/kg Q2W across tumor types while providing a convenient and flexible option for patients and their caregivers.

Pharmacokinetics and tolerability of intranasal diazepam and midazolam in healthy adult volunteers.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this pilot study was to determine the pharmacokinetics and tolerability of an investigational diazepam (DZP) formulation and a parenteral midazolam (MDZ) formulation following intranasal (i.n.) administration for the efficient treatment of seizure emergencies. METHODS: Each subject received 5 mg of DZP and MDZ via both i.n. and intravenous routes in a four-way, randomized crossover trial. Blood samples were collected over 48 h. DZP and MDZ concentrations were measured using HPLC. Using analog scales, subjects rated tolerability (0 = no change from normal; 10 = maximum intolerability) and pain (0 = no pain; 4 = extreme pain) prior to and 0, 5, 15, 60 min, and 8 h after administration. RESULTS: The C(max) and T(max) values for i.n. DZP and MDZ were 179.2 ng/ml and 28.8 min vs 62.8 ng/ml and 21.6 min, respectively. Immediately following i.n. administration, subjects reported tolerability scores of 6.75 and 6.0, and identical pain scores, 3.2, for DZP and MDZ, respectively. CONCLUSION: Both formulations were rapidly absorbed following i.n. administration with transient discomfort. DZP had a longer half-life, which may result in an extended duration of action. Further studies in large patient populations to evaluate the safety after long term use, efficacy and pharmacokinetics of i.n. DZP are warranted.