Safety and activity of ibrutinib in combination with nivolumab in patients with relapsed non-Hodgkin lymphoma or chronic lymphocytic leukaemia: a phase 1/2a study.

BACKGROUND: Preclinical studies have shown synergistic antitumour effects between ibrutinib and immune-checkpoint blockade. The aim of this study was to assess the safety and activity of ibrutinib in combination with nivolumab in patients with relapsed or refractory B-cell malignant diseases. METHODS: We did a two-part, open-label, phase 1/2a study at 21 hospitals in Australia, Israel, Poland, Spain, Turkey, and the USA. The primary objective of part A (dose escalation) was to assess the safety of daily oral ibrutinib (420 mg or 560 mg) in combination with intravenous nivolumab (3 mg/kg every 2 weeks) to ascertain a recommended phase 2 dose in patients with relapsed or refractory high-risk chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma (del17p or del11q), follicular lymphoma, or diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. Dose optimisation was investigated using a modified toxicity probability interval design. The primary objective of the part B expansion phase was to establish the preliminary activity (the proportion of patients who achieved an overall response) of the combination of ibrutinib and nivolumab in four cohorts: relapsed or refractory high-risk chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma (del17p or del11q), follicular lymphoma, diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, and Richter's transformation. All participants who received at least one dose of treatment were included in the primary analysis and analyses were done by disease cohort. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02329847. The trial is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between March 12, 2015, and April 11, 2017, 144 patients were enrolled in the study. Three patients died before receiving study treatment; thus, 141 patients were included in the analysis, 14 in part A and 127 in part B. One dose-limiting toxicity (grade 3 hyperbilirubinaemia) was reported at the 420 mg dose in the diffuse large B-cell lymphoma cohort, which resolved after 5 days. The combination of ibrutinib and nivolumab led to overall responses in 22 (61%) of 36 patients with high-risk chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma, 13 (33%) of 40 patients with follicular lymphoma, 16 (36%) of 45 patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, and 13 (65%) of 20 patients with Richter's transformation. The most common all-grade adverse events were diarrhoea (47 [33%] of 141 patients), neutropenia (44 [31%]), and fatigue (37 [26%]). 11 (8%) of 141 patients had adverse events leading to death; none were reported as drug-related. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (40 [28%] of 141 patients) and anaemia (32 [23%]). The incidence of grade 3-4 neutropenia ranged from eight (18%) of 45 patients with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma to 19 (53%) of 36 patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma; incidence of grade 3-4 anaemia ranged from five (13%) of 40 patients with follicular lymphoma to seven (35%) of 20 patients with Richter's transformation. The most common serious adverse events included anaemia (six [4%] of 141 patients) and pneumonia (five [4%]). The most common grade 3-4 immune-related adverse events were rash (11 [8%] of 141 patients) and increased alanine aminotransferase (three [2%]). INTERPRETATION: The combination of ibrutinib and nivolumab had an acceptable safety profile and preliminary activity was similar to that reported with single-agent ibrutinib in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia or small lymphocytic lymphoma, follicular lymphoma, and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. The clinical response in patients with Richter's transformation was promising and supports further clinical assessment. FUNDING: Janssen R&D.

Ibrutinib as Treatment for Patients With Relapsed/Refractory Follicular Lymphoma: Results From the Open-Label, Multicenter, Phase II DAWN Study.

Purpose The Bruton's tyrosine kinase inhibitor ibrutinib has demonstrated clinical activity in B-cell malignancies. The DAWN study assessed the efficacy and safety of single-agent ibrutinib in chemoimmunotherapy relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma (FL) patients. Methods DAWN was an open-label, single-arm, phase II study of ibrutinib in patients with FL with two or more prior lines of therapy. Patients received ibrutinib 560 mg daily until progressive disease/unacceptable toxicity. The primary objective was independent review committee-assessed overall response rate (ORR; complete response plus partial response). Exploratory analyses of T-cell subsets in peripheral blood (baseline/cycle 3) and cytokines/chemokines (baseline/cycle 2) were performed for available samples. Results Between March 2013 and May 2016, 110 patients with a median of three prior lines of therapy were enrolled. At median follow-up of 27.7 months, ORR was 20.9% (95% CI, 13.7% to 29.7%, which did not meet the 18% lower-bound threshold for the primary end point). Twelve patients achieved a complete response (11%; 95% CI, 5.8% to 18.3%). Median duration of response was 19.4 months (range, 1 to ≥ 33 months), with a median progression-free survival of 4.6 months and a 30-month overall survival of 61% (95% CI, 0.51% to 0.70%). Lymphoma symptoms resolved in 67%. Seven of 32 patients who experienced initial radiologic progression responded upon continuing therapy (pseudoprogression). The most common adverse events were diarrhea, fatigue, cough, and muscle spasms; 48.2% of patients reported serious adverse events. In patients who experienced a response, regulatory T cells were downregulated at C3D1 ( P = .02), and Th1-promoting (antitumor) cytokines interferon-γ and interleukin-12 increased ( P ≤ .035). Conclusion With an ORR of 20.9%, ibrutinib failed to meet its primary efficacy end point in chemoimmunotherapy in patients with relapsed/refractory FL, although responses were durable and associated with a reduction in regulatory T cells and increases in proinflammatory cytokines.

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of once- and twice-daily multiple-doses of canagliflozin, a selective inhibitor of sodium glucose co-transporter 2, in healthy participants.

AIMS: Assess the steady-state pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and safety of once-daily (q.d.) versus twice-daily (b.i.d.) dosing with canagliflozin at the same total daily doses of 100 and 300 mg in healthy participants. METHODS: 34 participants (17 in each cohort) were enrolled in this single-center, open-label, multiple-dose, 2-cohort, 2-way crossover study. Participants in each cohort received a total daily dose of either 100 or 300 mg canagliflozin for 5 days with q.d. then b.i.d. dosing or vice versa. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics were assessed on day 5 of each period. RESULTS: The canagliflozin Cmax,ss of 100 and 300 mg q.d. dosing were higher by 66% and 72% than corresponding morning Cmax,ss of the 50 mg and 150 mg b.i.d. regimen, respectively. The geometric mean ratios (90% CI) of b.i.d./q.d. for AUC0-24h,ss at total doses of 100 and 300 mg were 97.08 (94.08; 99.62) and 99.32 (94.71; 104.16) respectively. Median tmax and mean t1/2 were independent of dose and regimen. Mean (SE) 24-h mean renal glucose threshold values for b.i.d. and q.d. regimens were 59.2 (1.03) and 60.2 (1.03) mg/dL for the 100 mg daily doses and 51.0 (1.04) and 52.5 (1.04) mg/dL for the 300 mg daily doses. Mean (SE) values of 24-h urinary glucose excretion for b.i.d. and q.d. regimens were 52.8 (1.94) and 48.6 (1.94) g for the 100 mg daily doses and 58.6 (3.81) and 57.8 (3.81) g for the 300 mg daily doses. Both doses were safe and well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of canagliflozin administered q.d. relative to b.i.d. at the same 100 and 300 mg total daily doses were comparable. Overall, canagliflozin was well tolerated.

Effects of rifampin, cyclosporine A, and probenecid on the pharmacokinetic profile of canagliflozin, a sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor, in healthy participants.

OBJECTIVE: Canagliflozin, a sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor, approved for the treatment of type-2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), is metabolized by uridine diphosphate-glucuronosyltransferases (UGT) 1A9 and UGT2B4, and is a substrate of P-glycoprotein (P-gp). Canagliflozin exposures may be affected by coadministration of drugs that induce (e.g., rifampin for UGT) or inhibit (e.g. probenecid for UGT; cyclosporine A for P-gp) these pathways. The primary objective of these three independent studies (single-center, open-label, fixed-sequence) was to evaluate the effects of rifampin (study 1), probenecid (study 2), and cyclosporine A (study 3) on the pharmacokinetics of canagliflozin in healthy participants. METHODS: Participants received; in study 1: canagliflozin 300 mg (days 1 and 10), rifampin 600 mg (days 4-12); study 2: canagliflozin 300 mg (days 1-17), probenecid 500 mg twice daily (days 15-17); and study 3: canagliflozin 300 mg (days 1-8), cyclosporine A 400 mg (day 8). Pharmacokinetics were assessed at prespecified intervals on days 1 and 10 (study 1); on days 14 and 17 (study 2), and on days 2-8 (study 3). RESULTS: Rifampin decreased the maximum plasma canagliflozin concentration (Cmax) by 28% and its area under the curve (AUC) by 51%. Probenecid increased the Cmax by 13% and the AUC by 21%. Cyclosporine A increased the AUC by 23% but did not affect the Cmax. CONCLUSION: Coadministration of canagliflozin with rifampin, probenecid, and cyclosporine A was well-tolerated. No clinically meaningful interactions were observed for probenecid or cyclosporine A, while rifampin coadministration modestly reduced canagliflozin plasma concentrations and could necessitate an appropriate monitoring of glycemic control.

Effect of food on the pharmacokinetics of canagliflozin/metformin (150/1,000 mg) immediate-release fixed-dose combination tablet in healthy participants.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of food on the pharmacokinetics (PK) of canagliflozin and metformin following administration of a canagliflozin/metformin (150/1,000 mg) immediate-release (IR) fixed-dose combination (FDC) tablet. METHODS: A randomized, open-label, singlecenter, single-dose, 2-period, 2-sequence crossover study was conducted in healthy participants. Participants were randomized to 2 sequences of fasted and fed (or vice versa) administration of one 150/1,000 mg canagliflozin/metformin IR FDC, with 10-14 day washout between treatments PK parameters (AUC, Cmax, tmax, t1/2) were assessed for canagliflozin and metformin. Safety was evaluated. RESULTS: When comparing the IR FDC tablet administered with and without food, PK parameters of canagliflozin were bioequivalent as the 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for log-transformed AUClast, AUC∞, and Cmax were within the bioequivalence limits of 80-125%. For metformin, overall exposure was similar under fed and fasted conditions as geometric mean ratios for AUC and associated 90% CI were contained within the bioequivalence limits, but geometric mean Cmax decreased by 16% in the fed compared to fasted state. Both treatments were well tolerated with similar adverse events and most common were gastrointestinal events, generally attributed to metformin. CONCLUSIONS: Food did not affect canagliflozin bioavailability parameters (Cmax and AUCs) or AUCs of metformin. The Cmax of metformin was decreased by 16%, which is not considered clinically meaningful. The canagliflozin/metformin FDC tablet is recommended to be taken with meals to reduce the symptoms of gastrointestinal intolerability associated with metformin.

Absolute oral bioavailability and pharmacokinetics of canagliflozin: A microdose study in healthy participants.

Absolute oral bioavailability of canagliflozin was assessed by simultaneous oral administration with intravenous [(14) C]-canagliflozin microdose infusion in nine healthy men. Pharmacokinetics of canagliflozin, [(14) C]-canagliflozin, and total radioactivity, and safety and tolerability were assessed at prespecified timepoints. On day 1, single-dose oral canagliflozin (300 mg) followed 105 minutes later by intravenous [(14) C]-canagliflozin (10 µg, 200 nCi) was administered. After oral administration, the mean (SD) Cmax of canagliflozin was 2504 (482) ng/mL at 1.5 hours, AUC∞ 17,375 (3555) ng.h/mL, and t1/2 11.6 (0.70) hours. After intravenous administration, the mean (SD) Cmax of unchanged [(14) C]-canagliflozin was 17,605 (6901) ng/mL, AUC∞ 27,100 (10,778) ng.h/mL, Vdss 83.5 (29.2) L, Vdz 119 (41.6) L, and CL 12.2 (3.79) L/h. Unchanged [(14) C]-canagliflozin and metabolites accounted for about 57% and 43% of the plasma total [(14) C] radioactivity AUC∞ , respectively. For total [(14) C] radioactivity, the mean (SD) Cmax was 15,981 (2721) ng-eq/mL, and AUC∞ 53,755 (15,587) ng-eq.h/mL. Renal (34.5% in urine) and biliary (34.1% in feces) excretions were the major elimination pathways for total [(14) C] radioactivity. The absolute oral bioavailability of canagliflozin was 65% (90% confidence interval: 55.41; 76.07). Overall, oral canagliflozin 300 mg coadministered with intravenous [(14) C]-canagliflozin (10 µg) was generally well-tolerated in healthy men, with no treatment-emergent adverse events.

Effect of canagliflozin, a sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor, on C-peptide kinetics.

Canagliflozin, a sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor, improves indices of ß-cell function estimated based on circulating C-peptide and glucose concentrations (e.g., Homeostasis Model Assessment [HOMA2-%B], meal tolerance test-based indices). However, use of these ß-cell function indices assumes C-peptide kinetics are not altered by canagliflozin. This 2-period crossover study assessed the effect of a single canagliflozin 300-mg dose on C-peptide kinetics in 10 healthy participants. Two hours after receiving canagliflozin or placebo, participants received intravenous somatostatin infusion to suppress endogenous C-peptide secretion and 1 hour later received a bolus injection of synthetic human C-peptide 150 µg. Serum C-peptide was measured over 3 hours and urinary glucose and C-peptide excretion were measured. C-peptide kinetic parameters, including total clearance (CLtotal ) and renal clearance (CLrenal ), were calculated. Serum C-peptide profiles were similar following canagliflozin or placebo treatment. C-peptide CLtotal was slightly lower with canagliflozin versus placebo (mean (SD) of 190 (37) vs. 197 (30) mL/min; canagliflozin/placebo ratio [90% CI] = 96.1% [93.0%; 99.3%]). Other kinetic parameters, including CLrenal , were generally similar between treatments. Results indicate canagliflozin 300 mg does not meaningfully alter C-peptide clearance or other kinetic parameters; therefore, C-peptide-based measurements of insulin secretion are appropriate for assessing ß-cell function in canagliflozin-treated participants.

Effect of canagliflozin on the pharmacokinetics of glyburide, metformin, and simvastatin in healthy participants.

Drug-drug interactions between canagliflozin, a sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor, and glyburide, metformin, and simvastatin were evaluated in three phase-1 studies in healthy participants. In these open-label, fixed sequence studies, participants received: Study 1-glyburide 1.25 mg/day (Day 1), canagliflozin 200 mg/day (Days 4-8), canagliflozin with glyburide (Day 9); Study 2-metformin 2,000 mg/day (Day 1), canagliflozin 300 mg/day (Days 4-7), metformin with canagliflozin (Day 8); Study 3-simvastatin 40 mg/day (Day 1), canagliflozin 300 mg/day (Days 2-6), simvastatin with canagliflozin (Day 7). Pharmacokinetic parameters were assessed at prespecified intervals. Co-administration of canagliflozin and glyburide did not affect the overall exposure (maximum plasma concentration [Cmax ] and area under the plasma concentration-time curve [AUC]) of glyburide and its metabolites (4-trans-hydroxy-glyburide and 3-cis-hydroxy-glyburide). Canagliflozin did not affect the peak concentration of metformin; however, AUC increased by 20%. Though Cmax and AUC were slightly increased for simvastatin (9% and 12%) and simvastatin acid (26% and 18%) following coadministration with canagliflozin, compared with simvastatin administration alone; however, no effect on active 3-hydroxy-3-methyl-glutaryl-CoA (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitory activity was observed. There were no serious adverse events or hypoglycemic episodes. No drug-drug interactions were observed between canagliflozin and glyburide, metformin, or simvastatin. All treatments were well-tolerated in healthy participants.

Pharmacokinetic interactions between topiramate and pioglitazone and metformin.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate potential drug-drug interactions between topiramate and metformin and pioglitazone at steady state. METHODS: Two open-label studies were performed in healthy adult men and women. In Study 1, eligible participants were given metformin alone for 3 days (500 mg twice daily [BID]) followed by concomitant metformin and topiramate (titrated to 100mg BID) from days 4 to 10. In Study 2, eligible participants were randomly assigned to treatment with pioglitazone 30 mg once daily (QD) alone for 8 days followed by concomitant pioglitazone and topiramate (titrated to 96 mg BID) from days 9 to 22 (Group 1) or to topiramate (titrated to 96 mg BID) alone for 11 days followed by concomitant pioglitazone 30 mg QD and topiramate 96 mg BID from days 12 to 22 (Group 2). An analysis of variance was used to evaluate differences in pharmacokinetics with and without concomitant treatment; 90% confidence intervals (CI) for the ratio of the geometric least squares mean (LSM) estimates for maximum plasma concentration (Cmax), area under concentration-time curve for dosing interval (AUC12 or AUC24), and oral clearance (CL/F) with and without concomitant treatment were used to assess a drug interaction. RESULTS: A comparison to historical data suggested a modest increase in topiramate oral clearance when given concomitantly with metformin. Coadministration with topiramate reduced metformin oral clearance at steady state, resulting in a modest increase in systemic metformin exposure. Geometric LSM ratios and 90% CI for metformin CL/F and AUC12 were 80% (75%, 85%) and 125% (117%, 134%), respectively. Pioglitazone had no effect on topiramate pharmacokinetics at steady state. Concomitant topiramate resulted in decreased systemic exposure to pioglitazone and its active metabolites, with geometric LSM ratios and 90% CI for AUC24 of 85.0% (75.7%, 95.6%) for pioglitazone, 40.5% (36.8%, 44.6%) for M-III, and 83.8% (76.1%, 91.2%) for M-IV, respectively. This effect appeared more pronounced in women than in men. Coadministration of topiramate with metformin or pioglitazone was generally well tolerated by healthy participants in these studies. CONCLUSIONS: A modest increase in metformin exposure and decrease in topiramate exposure was observed at steady state following coadministration of metformin 500 mg BID and topiramate 100mg BID. The clinical significance of the observed interaction is unclear but is not likely to require a dose adjustment of either agent. Pioglitazone 30 mg QD did not affect the pharmacokinetics of topiramate at steady state, while coadministration of topiramate 96 mg BID with pioglitazone decreased steady-state systemic exposure to pioglitazone, M-III, and M-IV. While the clinical consequence of this interaction is unknown, careful attention should be given to the routine monitoring for adequate glycemic control of patients receiving this concomitant therapy. Concomitant administration of topiramate with metformin or pioglitazone was generally well tolerated and no new safety concerns were observed.

Pharmacokinetics of topiramate in patients with renal impairment, end-stage renal disease undergoing hemodialysis, or hepatic impairment.

PURPOSE: Topiramate is primarily renally excreted. Chronic renal and hepatic impairment can affect the clearance of topiramate. Therefore, the objective was to establish dosage guidelines for topiramate in chronic renal impairment, end-stage renal disease (ESRD) undergoing hemodialysis, or chronic hepatic impairment patients. METHODS: In 3 separate open-label, parallel group studies (n=5-7/group), in patients with mild-moderate and severe renal impairment (based on creatinine clearance), ESRD requiring hemodialysis, or moderate-severe hepatic impairment (based on Child-Pugh classification) and matching healthy participants, pharmacokinetics of a single oral 100mg topiramate was determined. RESULTS: Compared with healthy controls, overall exposure (AUC0-∞) for topiramate was higher in mild-moderate (85%) and severe renal impairment (117%), consistent with significantly (p<0.05) lower apparent total body clearance (CL/F) and renal clearance (CLR), leading to longer elimination half-life. Both CLR and CL/F of topiramate correlated well with renal function. CL/F was comparable in ESRD and severe renal impairment. Half of usual starting and maintenance dose is recommended in moderate-severe renal impairment patients, and those with ESRD. Hemodialysis effectively removed plasma topiramate with mean dialysis clearance approximately 12-fold greater than CL/F (123.5 mL/min versus 10.8 mL/min). Compared with healthy matched, patients with moderate-severe hepatic impairment exhibited small increase (29%) in topiramate peak plasma concentrations and AUC0-∞ values, consistent with lower CL/F (26%). Topiramate was generally well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Half of usual dose is recommended for moderate-severe renal impairment and ESRD. Supplemental dose may be required during hemodialysis. Dose adjustments might not be required in moderate-severe hepatic impairments; however, the small sample size limits generalization.

Pharmacokinetic interactions between topiramate and diltiazem, hydrochlorothiazide, or propranolol.

Drug-drug interactions between topiramate and diltiazem, hydrochlorothiazide, or propranolol were evaluated along with safety/tolerability in three open-label studies. Healthy participants (aged 18-45 years) received topiramate 75 mg every 12 hours (q12h) and diltiazem 240 mg/day (study 1); topiramate 96 mg q12h and hydrochlorothiazide 25 mg/day (study 2); topiramate 100 mg q12h and propranolol 40-80 mg q12h (study 3). The pharmacokinetic parameters for topiramate, diltiazem (and active metabolites, desacetyldiltiazem [DEA], N-demethyl diltiazem [DEM]), hydrochlorothiazide, and propranolol (and its active metabolite) were assessed at steady state. Results showed no effect of diltiazem on topiramate pharmacokinetics. However, a modest reduction in systemic exposures of diltiazem and DEA (10-27%) occurred during coadministration with topiramate. Systemic exposure of DEM was unaffected. Furthermore, oral and renal clearance of topiramate decreased (22-30%) significantly (P < 0.05) during coadministration with hydrochlorothiazide, while systemic exposure increased by 27-29%. Topiramate had no effect on hydrochlorothiazide pharmacokinetics. The results demonstrated lack of pharmacokinetic interaction between topiramate and propranolol. Overall, no new safety concerns emerged when topiramate was coadministered with diltiazem, hydrochlorothiazide, or propranolol.

An open-label drug-drug interaction study of the steady-state pharmacokinetics of topiramate and glyburide in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND: Topiramate is approved for epilepsy and migraine headache management and has potential antidiabetic activity. Because topiramate and antidiabetic drugs may be co-administered, the potential drug-drug interactions between topiramate and glyburide (glibenclamide), a commonly used sulfonylurea antidiabetic agent, was evaluated at steady state in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). METHODS: This was a single-center, open-label, phase I, drug interaction study of topiramate (150 mg/day) and glyburide (5 mg/day alone and concomitantly) in patients with T2DM. The study consisted of 14-day screening, 48-day open-label treatment, and a 7-day follow-up phase. Serial blood and urine were obtained and analyzed by liquid chromatography coupled mass spectrometry/mass spectrometry for topiramate, glyburide, and its active metabolites M1 (4-trans-hydroxy-glyburide) and M2 (3-cis-hydroxy-glyburide) concentrations. Pharmacokinetic parameters were estimated by model-independent methods. Changes in fasting plasma glucose from baseline and safety parameters were monitored throughout the study. RESULTS: Of 28 enrolled patients, 24 completed the study. Co-administration of topiramate resulted in a significant (p < 0.05) decrease in the glyburide area under the concentration-time curve (25 %) and maximum plasma concentration (22 %), and reduction in systemic exposure of M1 (13 %) and M2 (15 %). Renal clearance of M1 (13 %) and M2 (12 %) increased during treatment with topiramate. Steady-state pharmacokinetics of topiramate were unaffected by co-administration of glyburide. Co-administration of topiramate and glyburide was generally tolerable in patients with T2DM. CONCLUSION: Glyburide did not affect the pharmacokinetics of topiramate. Co-administration of topiramate decreased systemic exposure of glyburide and its active metabolites; combined treatment may require dosing adjustments of glyburide as per clinical judgment and glycemic control.

Pharmacokinetics of dapoxetine hydrochloride in healthy Chinese, Japanese, and Caucasian men.

Dapoxetine is a short-acting selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor developed for the on-demand treatment of premature ejaculation and is approved in some European Union countries, as well as Mexico and Korea, for this indication. The pharmacokinetics of dapoxetine 30 mg and 60 mg in healthy Chinese (single dose), Japanese, and Caucasian men (single and multiple dose) were assessed in 2 studies. In the 3 ethnic groups, dapoxetine was rapidly absorbed following oral administration, with peak plasma concentrations evident approximately 1 hour after dosing, independent of dose, dosing frequency (single or multiple dosing), or ethnicity. Dapoxetine was eliminated in a biphasic manner with an apparent mean terminal half-life of 14 to 17 hours. There was a dose-proportional increase in dapoxetine maximum plasma concentration (C(max)) and area under concentration-time curves (AUCs). The single-dose pharmacokinetic parameters of dapoxetine metabolites were also similar for the 3 ethnic groups, as were the pharmacokinetics of dapoxetine and its metabolites following single and multiple dosing in Caucasian and Japanese men. Dapoxetine was well tolerated by all 3 ethnic groups.

Effects of acetaminophen, naproxen, and acetylsalicylic acid on tapentadol pharmacokinetics: results of two randomized, open-label, crossover, drug-drug interaction studies.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of acetaminophen, naproxen, and acetylsalicylic acid on the pharmacokinetics of the centrally acting analgesic tapentadol in healthy subjects. DESIGN: Two randomized, open-label, crossover, drug-drug interaction studies. SETTING: Clinical research facilities in the United States and Belgium. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-four healthy adults (2-way crossover study) and 38 healthy adults (3-way crossover study). INTERVENTIONS: In both studies, tapentadol immediate release (IR) 80 mg was administered as a single oral dose alone. In the 2-way crossover study, tapentadol IR was also given with the fifth of seven doses of acetaminophen 1000 mg; in the 3-way crossover study, tapentadol IR was also given with the third of four doses of naproxen 500 mg and the second of two doses of acetylsalicylic acid 325 mg. All treatments were separated by a washout period of 7-14 days. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Overall, mean serum concentrations were similar after administration of tapentadol IR alone and after coadministration with acetaminophen or acetylsalicylic acid, and the 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for the ratios of the mean area under the serum concentration-time curve (AUC) from time zero to time of the last measurable concentration (AUC(0-t)) and from time zero extrapolated to infinity (AUC(0-infinity)) and the maximum serum concentration (C(max)) of the combined treatments to those parameters of tapentadol alone were well within 80-125%, representing the accepted range for bioequivalence. Coadministration of naproxen did not significantly alter the C(max) of tapentadol, although a slightly higher serum tapentadol exposure relative to tapentadol alone was observed. Coadministration of naproxen resulted in a mean increase of 17% in AUCs, and the upper limits of the 90% CIs for the ratios of the mean AUC(0-t) and AUC(0-infinity) were slightly outside the upper limit of bioequivalence range of 80-125%(126.47%AUC(0-t) and 126.14%AUC(0-infinity)). CONCLUSION: No clinically relevant changes were noted in the serum concentrations of tapentadol, and accordingly, no dosage adjustments with respect to the investigated pharmacokinetic mechanism of interaction are warranted for the administration of tapentadol given concomitantly with acetaminophen, naproxen, or acetylsalicylic acid.

Pharmacokinetic interactions of topiramate.

Topiramate is a new antiepileptic drug (AED) that has been approved worldwide (in more than 80 countries) for the treatment of various kinds of epilepsy. It is currently being evaluated for its effect in various neurological and psychiatric disorders. The pharmacokinetics of topiramate are characterised by linear pharmacokinetics over the dose range 100-800 mg, low oral clearance (22-36 mL/min), which, in monotherapy, is predominantly through renal excretion (renal clearance 10-20 mL/min), and a long half-life (19-25 hours), which is reduced when coadministered with inducing AEDs such as phenytoin, phenobarbital and carbamazepine. The absolute bioavailability, or oral availability, of topiramate is 81-95% and is not affected by food. Although topiramate is not extensively metabolised when administered in monotherapy (fraction metabolised approximately 20%), its metabolism is induced during polytherapy with carbamazepine and phenytoin, and, consequently, its fraction metabolised increases. During concomitant treatment with topiramate and carbamazepine or phenytoin, the (oral) clearance of topiramate increases 2-fold and its half-life becomes shorter by approximately 50%, which may require topiramate dosage adjustment when phenytoin or carbamazepine therapy is added or discontinued. From a pharmacokinetic standpoint, topiramate is a unique example of a drug that, because of its major renal elimination component, is not subject to drug interaction due to enzyme inhibition, but nevertheless is susceptible to clinically relevant drug interactions due to induction of its metabolism. Unlike old AEDs such as phenytoin and carbamazepine, topiramate is a mild inducer and, currently, the only interaction observed as a result of induction by topiramate is that with ethinylestradiol. Topiramate only increases the oral clearance of ethinylestradiol in an oral contraceptive at high dosages (>200 mg/day). Because of this dose-dependency, possible interactions between topiramate and oral contraceptives should be assessed according to the topiramate dosage utilised. This paper provides a critical review of the pharmacokinetic interactions of topiramate with old and new AEDs, an oral contraceptive, and the CNS-active drugs lithium, haloperidol, amitriptyline, risperidone, sumatriptan, propranolol and dihydroergotamine. At a daily dosage of 200 mg, topiramate exhibited no or little (with lithium, propranolol and the amitriptyline metabolite nortriptyline) pharmacokinetic interactions with these drugs. The results of many of these drug interaction studies with topiramate have not been published before, and are presented and discussed for the first time in this article.

Effect of topiramate or carbamazepine on the pharmacokinetics of an oral contraceptive containing norethindrone and ethinyl estradiol in healthy obese and nonobese female subjects.

PURPOSE: To study the pharmacokinetics of a combination oral contraceptive (OC) containing norethindrone and ethinyl estradiol during OC monotherapy, concomitant OC and topiramate (TPM) therapy, and concomitant OC and carbamazepine (CBZ) therapy in order to comparatively evaluate the pharmacokinetic interaction, which may cause contraceptive failure. METHODS: This randomized, open-label, five-group study included two 28-day cycles. Five groups of female subjects received oral doses of ORTHO-NOVUM 1/35 alone (cycle 1) and then concomitant with TPM or CBZ (cycle 2). The treatment groups were group 1, TPM, 50 mg/day; group 2, TPM, 100 mg/day; group 3, TPM, 200 mg/day; group 4, TPM, 200 mg/day (obese women); and group 5, CBZ, 600 mg/day. Group 4 comprised obese women whose body mass index (BMI) was between 30 and 35 kg/m(2). The BMI of the remaining four groups was < or =27 kg/m2. RESULTS: Coadministration of TPM at daily doses of 50, 100, and 200 mg (nonobese) and 200 mg (obese) nonsignificantly (p > 0.05) changed the mean area under the curve (AUC) of ethinyl estradiol by -12%, +5%, -11%, and -9%, respectively, compared with OC monotherapy. A similar nonsignificant difference was observed with the plasma levels and AUC values of norethindrone (p > 0.05). CBZ (600 mg/day) significantly (p < 0.05) decreased the AUC values of norethindrone and ethinyl estradiol by 58% and 42%, respectively, and increased their respective oral clearance by 69% and 127% (p < 0.05). Because CBZ induces CYP 3A-mediated and glucuronide conjugation metabolic pathways, the significant increase in the oral clearance of ethinyl estradiol and norethindrone was anticipated. CONCLUSIONS: TPM, at daily doses of 50-200 mg, does not interact with an OC containing norethindrone and ethinyl estradiol. The lack of the TPM-OC interaction is notable when it is compared with the CBZ-OC interaction.