Pharmacokinetic Interactions between the Hepatitis C Virus Inhibitors Elbasvir and Grazoprevir and HIV Protease Inhibitors Ritonavir, Atazanavir, Lopinavir, and Darunavir in Healthy Volunteers.

The combination of the hepatitis C virus (HCV) nonstructural protein 5A (NS5A) inhibitor elbasvir and the NS3/4A protease inhibitor grazoprevir is a potent, once-daily therapy indicated for the treatment of chronic HCV infection in individuals coinfected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). We explored the pharmacokinetic interactions of elbasvir and grazoprevir with ritonavir and ritonavir-boosted HIV protease inhibitors in three phase 1 trials. Drug-drug interaction trials with healthy participants were conducted to evaluate the effect of ritonavir on the pharmacokinetics of grazoprevir (n = 10) and the potential two-way pharmacokinetic interactions of elbasvir (n = 30) or grazoprevir (n = 39) when coadministered with ritonavir-boosted atazanavir, lopinavir, or darunavir. Coadministration of ritonavir with grazoprevir increased grazoprevir exposure; the geometric mean ratio (GMR) for grazoprevir plus ritonavir versus grazoprevir alone area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h (AUC0-24) was 1.91 (90% confidence interval [CI]; 1.31 to 2.79). Grazoprevir exposure was markedly increased with coadministration of atazanavir-ritonavir, lopinavir-ritonavir, and darunavir-ritonavir, with GMRs for grazoprevir AUC0-24 of 10.58 (90% CI, 7.78 to 14.39), 12.86 (90% CI, 10.25 to 16.13), and 7.50 (90% CI, 5.92 to 9.51), respectively. Elbasvir exposure was increased with coadministration of atazanavir-ritonavir, lopinavir-ritonavir, and darunavir-ritonavir, with GMRs for elbasvir AUC0-24 of 4.76 (90% CI, 4.07 to 5.56), 3.71 (90% CI, 3.05 to 4.53), and 1.66 (90% CI, 1.35 to 2.05), respectively. Grazoprevir and elbasvir had little effect on atazanavir, lopinavir, and darunavir pharmacokinetics. Coadministration of elbasvir-grazoprevir with atazanavir-ritonavir, lopinavir-ritonavir, or darunavir-ritonavir is contraindicated, owing to an increase in grazoprevir exposure. Therefore, HIV treatment regimens without HIV protease inhibitors should be considered for HCV/HIV-coinfected individuals who are being treated with elbasvir-grazoprevir.

A Thorough QTc Study Confirms Early Pharmacokinetics/QTc Modeling: A Supratherapeutic Dose of Omarigliptin, a Once-Weekly DPP-4 Inhibitor, Does Not Prolong the QTc Interval.

Omarigliptin is a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor being developed as a once-weekly treatment for type 2 diabetes. This double-blind, double-dummy, randomized, 3-period balanced crossover study definitively evaluated the effects of a supratherapeutic omarigliptin dose on QTc interval. Population-specific correction of QT interval (QTcP) was used for the primary analysis. Healthy subjects (n = 60) were enrolled and received treatments separated by a ≥4-week washout: (1) single-dose 25 mg omarigliptin (day 1), single-dose 175 mg omarigliptin (day 2); (2) placebo (day 1) followed by single-dose 400 mg moxifloxacin (day 2); (3) placebo (days 1 and 2). Day 2 QTcP intervals were analyzed. The primary hypothesis was supported if the 90%CIs for the least-squares mean differences between omarigliptin 175 mg and placebo in QTcP interval change from baseline were all < 10 milliseconds at every postdose point on day 2. The upper bounds of the 90%CIs for the differences (omarigliptin-placebo) in QTcP change from baseline for omarigliptin 175 mg were < 10 milliseconds at all postdose times on day 2. In conclusion, a supratherapeutic dose of omarigliptin does not prolong the QTcP interval to a clinically meaningful degree relative to placebo, confirming the results of the earlier concentration-QTc analysis.

The impact of posture on cardiac repolarization: more than heart rate?

INTRODUCTION: The effect of standing on heart rate and QT is well known but its impact on QTc is less clear. METHODS: Serial supine and standing 12-lead ECGs (seven pairs each day) were recorded from 54 healthy volunteers each day of a three-day period. ECGs were captured digitally and over-read by a cardiologist. RESULTS: A statistically significant shortening of RR (216 ms), QT (40 ms), and decreases in QTc-F (Fridericia) and QTc-LR (Framingham) were demonstrated on standing (8.3 and 6.9 ms, respectively). In contrast, QTc-B (Bazett's) significantly increased by 9.6 ms. Two subject-individualized correction methods were derived using each subject's supine measurements. Both showed significant decreases in QTc of approximately 13-14 ms upon standing. Using the bin analysis method, comparisons between positions using 25 ms interval RR bins revealed significant QT shortening of up to 15 ms upon standing. CONCLUSION: We have demonstrated a postural effect on cardiac repolarization independent of heart rate using two individualized correction methods, as well as QTc-F and QTc-LR, and the bin method. Characterization of postural differences in QT/QTc (other than QTc-B) may provide a safe and inexpensive physiological control to validate the ECG methodology used in clinical trials to assess potential drug-induced QT interval changes.