Safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of raltegravir after single and multiple doses in healthy subjects.

Raltegravir is a novel human immunodeficiency virus-1 integrase inhibitor with potent in vitro activity (95% inhibitory concentration (IC95)=33 nM in 50% human serum). Three double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, pharmacokinetic, safety, and tolerability studies were conducted: (1) single-dose escalation study (10-1,600 mg), (2) multiple-dose escalation study (100-800 mg q12 h x 10 days), and (3) single-dose female study (400 mg). Raltegravir was rapidly absorbed with a terminal half-life (t1/2) approximately 7-12 h. Approximately 7-14% of raltegravir was excreted unchanged in urine. Area under the curve (AUC)(0-infinity) was similar between male and female subjects. After multiple-dose administration, steady state was achieved within 2 days; there was little to modest accumulation of raltegravir. Trough levels were >33 nM for dose levels of 100 mg and greater. Raltegravir is generally well tolerated at doses of up to 1,600 mg/day given for up to 10 days and exhibits a pharmacokinetic profile supportive of twice-daily dosing with multiple doses of 100 mg and greater achieving trough levels >33 nM.

The influence of hepatic impairment on the pharmacokinetics of the dipeptidyl peptidase IV (DPP-4) inhibitor vildagliptin.

OBJECTIVE: Vildagliptin is a potent and selective dipeptidyl peptidase-IV (DPP-4) inhibitor that improves glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus by increasing alpha- and beta-cell responsiveness to glucose. This study investigated the pharmacokinetics of vildagliptin in patients with hepatic impairment compared with healthy subjects. METHODS: This was an open-label, parallel-group study in patients with mild (n = 6), moderate (n = 6) or severe (n = 4) hepatic impairment and healthy subjects (n = 6). All subjects received a single 100-mg oral dose of vildagliptin, and plasma concentrations of vildagliptin and its main pharmacologically inactive metabolite LAY151 were measured up to 36 h post-dose. RESULTS: Exposure to vildagliptin (AUC(0-infinity) and C(max)) decreased non-significantly by 20 and 30%, respectively, in patients with mild hepatic impairment [geometric mean ratio (90% CI): AUC(0-infinity), 0.80 (0.60, 1.06), p = 0.192; C(max), 0.70 (0.46, 1.05), p = 0.149]. Exposure to vildagliptin was also decreased non-significantly in patients with moderate hepatic impairment [-8% for AUC(0-infinity), geometric mean ratio (90% CI): 0.92 (0.69, 1.23), p = 0.630; -23% for C(max), geometric mean ratio (90% CI): 0.77 (0.51, 1.17), p = 0.293]. In patients with severe hepatic impairment, C(max) was 6% lower than that in healthy subjects [geometric mean ratio (90% CI): 0.94 (0.59, 1.49), p = 0.285], whereas AUC(0-infinity) was increased by 22% [geometric mean ratio (90% CI): 1.22 (0.89, 1.68), p = 0.816). Across the hepatic impairment groups, LAY151 AUC(0-infinity) and C(max) were increased by 29-84% and 24-63%, respectively, compared with healthy subjects. The single 100-mg oral dose of vildagliptin was well tolerated by patients with hepatic impairment. CONCLUSIONS: There was no significant difference in exposure to vildagliptin in patients with mild, moderate or severe hepatic impairment; therefore, no dose adjustment of vildagliptin is necessary in patients with hepatic impairment.

Bioequivalence of an ezetimibe/simvastatin combination tablet and coadministration of ezetimibe and simvastatin as separate tablets in healthy subjects.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the bioequivalence of an ezetimibe/simvastatin (EZE/SIMVA) combination tablet compared to the coadministration of ezetimibe and simvastatin as separate tablets (EZE + SIMVA). METHODS: In this open-label, randomized, 2-part, 2-period crossover study, 96 healthy subjects were randomly assigned to participate in each part of the study (Part I or II), with each part consisting of 2 single-dose treatment periods separated by a 14-day washout. Part I consisted of Treatments A (EZE 10 mg + SIMVA 10 mg) and B (EZE/SIMVA 10/10 mg/mg) and Part II consisted of Treatments C (EZE 10 mg + SIMVA 80 mg) and D (EZE/SIMVA 10/80 mg/mg). Blood samples were collected up to 96 hours post-dose for determination of ezetimibe, total ezetimibe (ezetimibe + ezetimibe glucuronide), simvastatin and simvastatin acid (the most prevalent active metabolite of simvastatin) concentrations. Ezetimibe and simvastatin acid AUC(0-last) were predefined as primary endpoints and ezetimibe and simvastatin acid Cmax were secondary endpoints. Bioequivalence was achieved if 90% confidence intervals (CI) for the geometric mean ratios (GMR) (single tablet/coadministration) of AUC(0-last) and Cmax fell within prespecified bounds of (0.80, 1.25). RESULTS: The GMRs of the AUC(0-last) and Cmax for ezetimibe and simvastatin acid fell within the bioequivalence limits (0.80, 1.25). EZE/ SIMVA and EZE + SIMVA were generally well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: The lowest and highest dosage strengths of EZE/SIMVA tablet were bioequivalent to the individual drug components administered together. Given the exact weight multiples of the EZE/SIMVA tablet and linear pharmacokinetics of simvastatin across the marketed dose range, bioequivalence of the intermediate tablet strengths (EZE/SIMVA 10/20 mg/mg and EZE/SIMVA 10/40 mg/mg) was inferred, although these dosages were not tested directly. These results indicate that the safety and efficacy profile of EZE + SIMVA coadministration therapy can be applied to treatment with the EZE/SIMVA tablet across the clinical dose range.

FTY720 pharmacokinetics in mild to moderate hepatic impairment.

The influence of mild and moderate hepatic impairment on FTY720 pharmacokinetics was assessed. The authors enrolled 32 subjects consisting of 8 with mild and 8 with moderate hepatic impairment based on Child-Pugh criteria and 16 demographically matched control subjects. A single 1-mg oral dose of FTY720 was administered under fasting conditions. Blood, plasma, and urine samples were obtained over a 14-day period for measurement of FTY720 and metabolite concentrations and protein binding. Total blood lymphocyte counts and heart rate were serially monitored to assess pharmacologic responses to FTY720. Peak FTY720 blood concentrations were similar across groups. Oral clearance (CL/F) was reduced 10% in mild hepatic impairment (P = .493) and 31% in moderate hepatic impairment (P = .034). There were no significant differences in blood exposure to the hexanoic or butanoic acid metabolites among groups. The effect of FTY720 on blood lymphocytes was similar across groups, with a mean decrease of 44% from the predose value. Like-wise, the effect of FTY720 on supine heart rate was similar across groups, with a mean 13% decrease from the predose rate occurring 2 to 4 hours postdose and recovering within 1 to 2 days. Although hepatic impairment elicited changes in the disposition of FTY720, the magnitude of these changes suggests that the FTY720 dose does not need to be adjusted in mild or moderate hepatic-impaired patients.

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of rosuvastatin in subjects with hepatic impairment.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of chronic hepatic impairment on rosuvastatin disposition, pharmacodynamic activity and tolerability. METHODS: This was an open-label, non-randomised, parallel-group trial. Six subjects were enrolled in each of three hepatic-function strata: Child-Pugh class A (CP-A, mild impairment), Child-Pugh class B (CP-B, moderate impairment) and normal hepatic function; the latter two strata were age, weight, race, sex and smoking history matched. All subjects were given rosuvastatin 10 mg for 14 days. RESULTS: In subjects with CP-A, and in four of six subjects with CP-B, rosuvastatin steady-state AUC(0-24) and C(max) were similar to subjects with normal hepatic function (geometric mean values 60.7 ng h/ml and 6.02 ng/ml, respectively). Two of six subjects with CP-B who had the highest CP scores (i.e. the highest degrees of hepatic impairment) had the highest AUC(0-24) (128 ng h/ml and 242 ng h/ml) and C(max) (23.4 ng/ml and 96.7 ng/ml) values. Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) was decreased in all strata, but the response was more variable in the CP-B group. Rosuvastatin was well tolerated, and the safety profile was similar in subjects with hepatic impairment and normal hepatic function. CONCLUSION: In most subjects with mild-to-moderate hepatic impairment, the steady-state pharmacokinetics of rosuvastatin were similar to subjects with normal hepatic function (more extensive hepatic impairment may increase systemic exposure to rosuvastatin), and most had LDL-C reductions similar to subjects with normal hepatic function.

Comparison of rofecoxib, celecoxib, and naproxen on renal function in elderly subjects receiving a normal-salt diet.

BACKGROUND: This study compared directly the renal effects of two selective cyclooxygenase (COX)-2 inhibitors (rofecoxib and celecoxib) with naproxen (dual COX-1/COX-2 inhibitor) and placebo in healthy elderly subjects on a sodium-replete diet. METHODS: A total of 67 elderly subjects stabilized in the clinic for weight and urinary sodium on a controlled 200-mEq sodium diet were randomized in a double-blind fashion to receive rofecoxib, 25 mg daily (n = 17); celecoxib, 200 mg twice daily (n = 17); naproxen, 500 mg twice daily (n = 17); or matching placebo (n = 16) for 28 days. Subjects were sequestered in the clinic for the first 14 treatment days on the controlled diet. RESULTS: Daily urinary sodium excretion during the first 72 hours of treatment (primary endpoint) significantly decreased in rofecoxib, celecoxib, and naproxen groups compared with baseline (P < or =.05). Rofecoxib and celecoxib decreases in urinary sodium excretion rates that were comparable with each other, on the basis of predefined boundaries (-39.5 versus -27.1 mEq/d, respectively) and to naproxen (-40.6, mEq/d). Rofecoxib, celecoxib, and naproxen increased mean systolic blood pressure to a similar degree (3.4, 4.3, and 3.1 mm Hg, respectively, versus -1.3 mm Hg for placebo) after 14 days of treatment; small changes also occurred in diastolic blood pressure (0.3, 0.8, and -0.4 mm Hg, respectively, versus -1.4 mm Hg for placebo). Changes from baseline in creatinine clearance, body weight, and urinary potassium excretion among active treatments were similar. After 28 days of treatment, findings were generally consistent with those at 14 days. No subject reported edema or discontinued treatment as the result of an adverse experience. CONCLUSION: In healthy elderly subjects on a sodium-replete diet, the COX-2 inhibitors rofecoxib and celecoxib did not differ from a nonselective nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (naproxen), in influencing renal function as measured by urinary sodium excretion, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, creatinine clearance, or weight change.

Omapatrilat versus lisinopril: efficacy and neurohormonal profile in salt-sensitive hypertensive patients.

Omapatrilat, a vasopeptidase inhibitor, simultaneously inhibits neutral endopeptidase and ACE. The efficacy and hormonal profile of omapatrilat and lisinopril were compared in salt-sensitive hypertensive patients. On enrollment, antihypertensive medications were withdrawn, and patients received a single-blind placebo. On day 15, salt-sensitivity determinations were made. Salt-sensitive hypertensive patients returned within 5 to 10 days for baseline evaluations of ambulatory diastolic blood pressure, ambulatory systolic blood pressure, and atrial natriuretic peptide. Salt-sensitive hypertensive patients were randomized to receive double-blind omapatrilat (n=28) or lisinopril (n=33) at initial doses of 10 mg for 1 week, increasing to 40 and 20 mg, respectively, for an additional 3 weeks. Ambulatory blood pressure and urinary atrial natriuretic peptide were assessed at study termination. Both omapatrilat and lisinopril significantly reduced mean 24-hour ambulatory diastolic and systolic blood pressures; however, omapatrilat produced significantly greater reductions in mean 24-hour ambulatory diastolic blood pressure (P=0.008), ambulatory systolic blood pressure (P=0.004), and ambulatory mean arterial pressure (P=0.005) compared with values from lisinopril. Both drugs potently inhibited ACE over 24 hours. Omapatrilat significantly (P<0.001) increased urinary excretion of atrial natriuretic peptide over 0- to 24-hour (3.8-fold) and 12- to 24-hour (2-fold) intervals; lisinopril produced no change. Omapatrilat significantly (P<0.001) increased urinary excretion of cGMP over the 0- to 24- and 4- to 8-hour intervals compared with that from lisinopril. Neither drug had a diuretic, natriuretic, or kaliuretic effect. In conclusion, in salt-sensitive hypertensive patients, omapatrilat demonstrated the hormonal profile of a vasopeptidase inhibitor and lowered ambulatory diastolic and systolic blood pressures more than lisinopril.

Interactions between simvastatin and troglitazone or pioglitazone in healthy subjects.

Two randomized, two-period crossover studies were conducted to evaluate the effects of repeat oral dosing of troglitazone (Study I) and pioglitazone (Study II) on the pharmacokinetics of plasma HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors following multiple oral doses of simvastatin and of simvastatin on the plasma pharmacokinetics of troglitazone (Study I) in healthy subjects. In both studies, each subject received two treatments. Treatment A consisted of once-daily oral doses of troglitazone 400 mg (Study I) or pioglitazone 45 mg (Study II) for 24 days with coadministration of once-daily doses of simvastatin 40 mg (Study I) or 80 mg (Study II) on Days 15 through 24. Treatment B consisted of once-daily oral doses of simvastatin 40 mg (Study I) or 80 mg (Study II) for 10 days. In Study I, the area under the plasma concentration-time profiles (AUC) and maximum plasma concentrations (Cmax) of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors in subjects who received both troglitazone and simvastatin were decreased modestly (by approximately 30% for Cmax and approximately 40% for AUC), but time to reach Cmax (tmax) did not change, as compared with those who received simvastatin alone. Simvastatin, administered orally as a 40 mg tablet daily for 10 days, did not affect the AUC or tmax (p > 0.5) but caused a small but clinically insignificant increase (approximately 25%) in Cmax for troglitazone. In Study II, pioglitazone, at the highest approved dose for clinical use, did not significantly alter any of the pharmacokinetic parameters (AUC, Cmax, and tmax) of simvastatin HMG-CoA reductase inhibitory activity. For all treatment regimens, side effects were mild and transient, suggesting that coadministration of simvastatin with either troglitazone or pioglitazone was well tolerated. The modest effect of troglitazone on simvastatin pharmacokinetics is in agreement with the suggestion that troglitazone is an inducer of CYP3A. The insignificant effect of simvastatin on troglitazone pharmacokinetics is consistent with the conclusion that simvastatin is not a significant inhibitor for drug-metabolizing enzymes. The lack of pharmacokinetic effect of pioglitazone on simvastatin supports the expectation that this combination may be used safely.

Multiple-dose pharmacokinetics of a contraceptive patch in healthy women participants.

This open-label, randomized study evaluated the pharmacokinetics of norelgestromin (NGMN) and ethinyl estradiol (EE) following the application of a contraceptive patch (1/week) for three cycles (3 weeks/cycle). Healthy women (n = 24) wore a 20-cm(2) patch (ORTHO EVRA/EVRA) on either their abdomen or buttock during blood sampling weeks and on any of four approved sites at other times. Serum was analyzed for NGMN and EE from samples taken during Week 1 of Cycle 1 and Weeks 1-3 of Cycle 3. Steady-state conditions were achieved during the three-cycle study. The patch delivered NGMN and EE at steady-state concentrations within their reference ranges throughout three cycles of treatment; reference ranges are based on studies with ORTHO-CYCLEN/Cilest. Steady-state serum concentrations and area under the curve from 0 to 168 h increased only slightly from Cycle 1, Week 1 to Cycle 3, Week 3 for NGMN and EE, indicating minimal accumulation. Treatment was well tolerated, and patch adhesion was excellent.

Itraconazole alters the pharmacokinetics of atorvastatin to a greater extent than either cerivastatin or pravastatin.

BACKGROUND: 3-Hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors (statins) are metabolized by distinct pathways that may alter the extent of drug-drug interactions. Cerivastatin is metabolized by cytochrome P450 (CYP)3A4 and CYP2C8. Atorvastatin is metabolized solely by CYP3A4, and pravastatin metabolism is not well defined. Coadministration of higher doses of these statins with CYP3A4 inhibitors has the potential for eliciting adverse drug-drug interactions. OBJECTIVE: To determine the comparative effect of itraconazole, a potent CYP3A4 inhibitor, on the pharmacokinetics of cerivastatin, atorvastatin, and pravastatin. METHODS: In this single-site, randomized, three-way crossover, open-labeled study, healthy subjects (n = 18) received single doses of cerivastatin 0.8 mg, atorvastatin 20 mg, or pravastatin 40 mg without and with itraconazole 200 mg. Pharmacokinetic parameters [AUC(0-infinity), AUC(0-tn), peak concentration (Cmax), time to reach Cmax (tmax), and half-life (t1/2)] were determined for parent statins and major metabolites. RESULTS: Concomitant cerivastatin/itraconazole treatment produced small elevations in the cerivastatin AUC(0-infinity), Cmax, and t1/2 (27%, 25%, and 19%, respectively; P < .05 versus cerivastatin alone). Itraconazole coadministration produced similar changes in pravastatin pharmacokinetics [AUC elevated 51% (P < .05 versus pravastatin alone), 24% (Cmax), and 23% (t1/2), respectively]. However, itraconazole dramatically increased atorvastatin AUC (150%), Cmax (38%), and t1/2 (30%) (P < .05). The elevation in atorvastatin AUC was significantly greater than that of cerivastatin (P < .005) or pravastatin (P < .005). CONCLUSION: Itraconazole markedly elevated atorvastatin plasma levels (2.5-fold) after 20 mg dosing, suggesting that concomitant itraconazole/atorvastatin therapy be carefully considered. Itraconazole produced modest elevations in the plasma levels of cerivastatin 0.8 mg or pravastatin 40 mg (1.3-fold and 1.5-fold, respectively), indicating that combination treatment with itraconazole with cerivastatin or pravastatin may be preferable.

Effect of cyclooxygenase-2 inhibition on renal function in elderly persons receiving a low-salt diet. A randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Most nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) inhibit both cyclooxygenase-1 (COX-1), whose inhibition is associated with gastrointestinal ulceration, and COX-2, whose inhibition is associated with therapeutic benefits. Although agents that do not produce COX-1 activity may have fewer adverse effects, targeted disruption of the COX-2 allele in mice has resulted in severe renal problems, suggesting that COX-2 inhibition may also produce adverse effects. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of rofecoxib, a member of the coxib class of drugs and a specific inhibitor of the COX-2 enzyme, on renal function in elderly patients. DESIGN: A randomized, three-period, single-dose crossover study and a randomized, parallel-group, multiple-dose study. SETTING: Clinical research units. PATIENTS: 75 patients 60 to 80 years of age. INTERVENTION: In the first study, single doses of rofecoxib, 250 mg (about 5-fold to 20-fold the recommended dose); indomethacin, 75 mg; and placebo were administered to 15 patients. In the second study, multiple doses of rofecoxib, 12.5 or 25 mg/d; indomethacin, 50 mg three times daily; or placebo were administered to 60 patients. Patients in both studies received a low-sodium diet MEASUREMENTS: Glomerular filtration rate, creatinine clearance, and urinary and serum sodium and potassium values. RESULTS: Compared with placebo, single doses of rofecoxib and indomethacin decreased the glomerular filtration rate by 0.23 m/s (P < 0.001) and 0.18 mL/s (P = 0.003), respectively. In contrast, respective decreases of 0.14, 0.13, and 0.10 mL/s were observed after multiple doses of rofecoxib, 12.5 mg/d (P = 0.019); rofecoxib, 25 mg (P = 0.029), and indomethacin (P = 0.086) were administered. Changes in creatinine clearance and serum and urinary sodium and potassium were less pronounced. CONCLUSIONS: The effects of COX-2 inhibition on renal function are similar to those observed with nonselective NSAIDs. Thus, COX-2 seems to play an important role in human renal function.

The pharmacokinetics of ziprasidone in subjects with normal and impaired hepatic function.

AIMS: To assess whether hepatic impairment influences the pharmacokinetics of ziprasidone. METHODS: Thirty subjects with normal hepatic function or a primary diagnosis of clinically significant cirrhosis (Child-Pugh A or B) were enrolled into an open-label, multicentre, multiple-dose study. The subjects with chronic, stable hepatic impairment and the matched control subjects received ziprasidone 40 mg day(-1), given orally with food, as two divided daily doses for 4 days and a single 20 mg dose on the morning of day 5. Pharmacokinetic variables were determined from multiple venous blood samples collected on days 1 and 5. Liver function was evaluated quantitatively using antipyrine. RESULTS: On day 1 there were no statistically significant differences in the pharmacokinetics (AUC(0,12 h), Cmax, tmax) of ziprasidone between the two groups. On day 5 there were no statistically significant differences in the Cmax or tmax for ziprasidone between the two groups. The mean AUC(0,12 h) for ziprasidone was statistically significantly greater in the hepatically impaired subjects compared with the normal subjects (590 ng ml(-1) h vs. 467 ng ml(-1) h, P = 0. 042). However, the AUC(0,12 h) increased by only 26% in the cirrhotic group compared with the matched control group. The ziprasidone lambda(z) in the subjects with normal hepatic function was statistically significantly greater than that in the hepatically impaired subjects (P<0.001). There was no correlation between antipyrine lambda(z) and ziprasidone lambda(z) in the subjects with normal hepatic function or in those with hepatic impairment. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this study indicate that mild to moderate hepatic impairment does not result in clinically significant alteration of ziprasidone pharmacokinetics.

Effects of specific inhibition of cyclooxygenase-2 on sodium balance, hemodynamics, and vasoactive eicosanoids.

Conventional nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs inhibit both cyclooxygenase (Cox) isoforms (Cox-1 and Cox-2) and may be associated with nephrotoxicity. The present study was undertaken to assess the renal effects of the specific Cox-2 inhibitor, MK-966. Healthy older adults (n = 36) were admitted to a clinical research unit, placed on a fixed sodium intake, and randomized under double-blind conditions to receive the specific Cox-2 inhibitor, MK-966 (50 mg every day), a nonspecific Cox-1/Cox-2 inhibitor, indomethacin (50 mg t.i.d.), or placebo for 2 weeks. All treatments were well tolerated. Both active regimens were associated with a transient but significant decline in urinary sodium excretion during the first 72 h of treatment. Blood pressure and body weight did not change significantly in any group. The glomerular filtration rate (GFR) was decreased by indomethacin but was not changed significantly by MK-966 treatment. Thromboxane biosynthesis by platelets was inhibited by indomethacin only. The urinary excretion of the prostacyclin metabolite 2,3-dinor-6-keto prostaglandin F1alpha was decreased by both MK-966 and indomethacin and was unchanged by placebo. Cox-2 may play a role in the systemic biosynthesis of prostacyclin in healthy humans. Selective inhibition of Cox-2 by MK-966 caused a clinically insignificant and transient retention of sodium, but no depression of GFR. Inhibition of both Cox isoforms by indomethacin caused transient sodium retention and a decline in GFR. Our data suggest that acute sodium retention by nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs in healthy elderly subjects is mediated by the inhibition of Cox-2, whereas depression of GFR is due to inhibition of Cox-1.

Effective dose range of candesartan cilexetil for systemic hypertension. Candesartan Cilexetil Study Investigators.

The results of this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, forced-dose titration study in a diverse population of hypertensive patients in the US indicate that candesartan cilexetil has clinically meaningful dose-related blood pressure-lowering effects and that maximum blood pressure reduction is achieved with doses of 16 and 32 mg given once daily. This study confirms that candesartan cilexetil is a highly effective antihypertensive agent with an excellent tolerability and safety profile, without dose-related adverse effects.

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of zolmitriptan in patients with mild to moderate hypertension: a double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

Zolmitriptan is a potent selective 5HT1B/1D receptor agonist for acute migraine therapy. Zolmitriptan has vasoconstrictor activity in cerebral vessels and may cause slight elevations of blood pressure in subjects without hypertension. Therefore, the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of zolmitriptan (5, 10, and 20 mg) were evaluated in 16 patients with mild to moderate hypertension (controlled by hydrochlorothiazide 50 mg once daily) and 17 healthy age- and sex-matched control subjects in a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, four-period crossover study. The pharmacokinetics of zolmitriptan and its metabolites were dose proportional. Although area under the concentration-time curve (AUC0-infinity) and maximum concentration (Cmax) were slightly higher in patients with hypertension at all doses, this was only statistically significant for AUC at the 20-mg dose. Differences between subjects with and without hypertension were not clinically significant. Zolmitriptan produced a small increase in blood pressure, but this was similar in subjects with and without hypertension and was of no clinical significance. Zolmitriptan was well tolerated in both groups. Zolmitriptan plasma concentrations were higher in women than in men, with higher values of AUC and Cmax and lower total clearance in women. These results indicate that zolmitriptan can be administered for treatment of migraine in patients with controlled hypertension without dose adjustment.

First-time-in-humans safety and pharmacokinetics of WR 238605, a new antimalarial.

WR 238605 is an 8-aminoquinoline drug currently under development for prophylaxis and treatment of malaria. Preclinical studies have demonstrated that it has greater efficacy and less toxicity compared with primaquine. In this first-time-in-human randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study designed to evaluate the safety, tolerance and pharmacokinetics, WR 238605 was administered to 48 men in single oral doses ranging from four to 600 mg (base). It was well tolerated, with gastrointestinal disturbances as possible side effects. Linear kinetics were demonstrated at these doses. WR 238605 has a long absorption phase and is slowly metabolized, with a tmax of 12 hr and an elimination half-life of 14 days. These safety, efficacy and pharmacokinetic properties make this drug an excellent candidate for further testing as a prophylactic, radical curative, and terminal eradication drug.

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of irbesartan in patients with hepatic cirrhosis.

The effect of hepatic impairment on the clinical pharmacology of the angiotensin II (AII) receptor antagonist irbesartan was assessed by comparing pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters in 10 patients with hepatic cirrhosis with a matched group of 10 healthy volunteers. The pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of irbesartan, 300 mg taken orally once daily, were evaluated after single- and multiple-dose (7 consecutive days) administration to normotensive subjects in an open-label, multiple-dose, parallel group study. Pharmacokinetic data obtained after administration of single and multiple doses of irbesartan showed no significant difference between the two groups in time to maximum observed plasma concentration of drug (tmax), half-life (t1/2), area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC), apparent oral clearance (Cl(t)/F), renal clearance (Cl(r)), and accumulation index (AI). Steady-state levels of irbesartan were reached within 3 days in both treatment groups. After irbesartan administration on day 1, mean increases from baseline in plasma AII levels and plasma renin activity (PRA) were greater in the group with cirrhosis than in the control group. On day 7, mean increases from baseline in PRA were greater in the control group than in the group with cirrhosis. No discontinuations or serious adverse events occurred during the study. The pharmacokinetics of irbesartan after repeated oral administration were not significantly affected in patients with mild-to-moderate cirrhosis of the liver. No dosage adjustment is necessary in patients with hepatic insufficiency.

Population pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of pyridostigmine bromide for prophylaxis against nerve agents in humans.

This study was conducted to determine the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of pyridostigmine given as 30 mg of pyridostigmine bromide every 8 hours in healthy subjects. Plasma pyridostigmine concentration and red blood cell acetylcholinesterase activity were measured in blood samples collected during a 3-week period. Population analysis was performed using standard pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic models with the nonlinear mixed-effect modeling software (NONMEM). The pharmacokinetic model that best fit the pyridostigmine plasma levels was a two-compartment open model with first-order absorption, a lag time, and first-order elimination from the central compartment. The pharmacodynamic model that best fit red blood cell acetylcholinesterase activity was an inhibitory Emax model with an effect compartment linked to the central compartment. The results showed that the pharmacokinetics of pyridostigmine bromide are both gender and weight dependent. The pharmacodynamic effect does not lag significantly from the plasma concentration and returns to near normal within 8 hours. With the present dosage regimen of 30 mg every 8 hours, 30% of individuals may not have red blood cell acetylcholinesterase inhibition > 10% at the time of the trough.

Metabolic profiles of montelukast sodium (Singulair), a potent cysteinyl leukotriene1 receptor antagonist, in human plasma and bile.

Montelukast sodium [1-([(1(R)-(3-(2-(7-chloro-2-quinolinyl)-(E)- ethenyl)phenyl)-3-(2-(1-hydroxy-1-methylethyl)phenyl)propyl)thio]methyl)cyclopropylacetic acid sodium salt] (MK-476, Singulair) is a potent and selective antagonist of the cysteinyl leukotriene (Cys-LT1) receptor and is under investigation for the treatment of bronchial asthma. To assess the metabolism and excretion of montelukast, six healthy subjects received single oral doses of 102 mg of [14C]montelukast, and the urine and feces were collected. Most of the radioactivity was recovered in feces, with

Evaluation of indapamide 1.25 mg once daily in elderly patients with mild to moderate hypertension.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of indapamide 1.25 mg once daily as monotherapy in elderly patients (65 years and older) with mild to moderate essential hypertension. Two hundred and seventy-nine (279) elderly patients were enrolled in a washout period, during which patients received single-blind placebo for 4 weeks. Patients demonstrating supine diastolic pressures between 95 mm Hg and 114 mm Hg at the end of the 4-week placebo washout period were entered into the 8-week double-blind treatment period. Two hundred and four (204) patients qualified for the study and were randomized to the double-blind treatment; 103 patients received indapamide 1.25 mg and 101 patients received placebo for 8 weeks. Overall, 177 patients (92 indapamide and 85 placebo) completed the study. The primary efficacy criterion was the mean change in supine diastolic blood pressure (DBP) from double-blind baseline to the end of 8 weeks of therapy. By week 8 of the double-blind treatment period, indapamide 1.25 mg produced a statistically significant (P = 0.0037) decrease in supine DBP of 8.2 mm Hg compared to a decrease of 5.3 mm Hg produced in the placebo group. Additionally, indapamide 1.25 mg was statistically (P = 0.0028) more effective than placebo in reducing supine systolic BP (SBP) (-10.1 vs -4.2 mm Hg). The incidence of drug-related adverse events during the double-blind treatment period was similar between the two treatment groups. A low dose of indapamide, 1.25 mg, given once daily for 8 weeks was effective as monotherapy with respect to BP reduction in an elderly population with mild to moderate hypertension. Indapamide 1.25 mg was safe and generally well tolerated in this elderly patient population.