Efficacy, Safety, and Pharmacodynamic Effects of the Bruton's Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Fenebrutinib (GDC-0853) in Systemic Lupus Erythematosus: Results of a Phase II, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Fenebrutinib (GDC-0853) is a noncovalent, oral, and highly selective inhibitor of Bruton's tyrosine kinase (BTK). The efficacy, safety, and pharmacodynamics of fenebrutinib in systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) were assessed in this phase II, multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled study. METHODS: Patients who had moderately to severely active SLE while receiving background standard therapy were randomized to receive placebo, fenebrutinib 150 mg once daily, or fenebrutinib 200 mg twice daily. Glucocorticoid taper was recommended from weeks 0 to 12 and from weeks 24 to 36. The primary end point was the SLE Responder Index 4 (SRI-4) response at week 48. RESULTS: Patients (n = 260) were enrolled from 44 sites in 12 countries, with the majority from Latin America, the US, and Western Europe. The SRI-4 response rates at week 48 were 51% for fenebrutinib 150 mg once daily (P = 0.37 versus placebo), 52% for fenebrutinib 200 mg twice daily (P = 0.34 versus placebo), and 44% for placebo. British Isles Lupus Assessment Group-based Combined Lupus Assessment response rates at week 48 were 53% for fenebrutinib 150 mg once daily (P = 0.086 versus placebo), 42% for fenebrutinib 200 mg twice daily (P = 0.879 versus placebo), and 41% for placebo. Safety results were similar across all arms, although serious adverse events were more frequent with fenebrutinib 200 mg twice daily. By week 48, patients treated with fenebrutinib had reduced levels of a BTK-dependent plasmablast RNA signature, anti-double-stranded DNA autoantibodies, total IgG, and IgM, as well as increased complement C4 levels, all relative to placebo. CONCLUSION: While fenebrutinib had an acceptable safety profile, the primary end point, SRI-4 response, was not met despite evidence of strong pathway inhibition.

The impact of new partial AUC parameters for evaluating the bioequivalence of prolonged-release formulations.

To demonstrate bioequivalence (BE) between two prolonged-release (PR) drug formulations, single dose studies under fasting and fed state as well as at least one steady-state study are currently required by the European Medicines Agency (EMA). Recently, however, there have been debates regarding the relevance of steady-state studies. New requirements in single-dose investigations have also been suggested by the EMA to address the absence of a parameter that can adequately assess the equivalence of the shape of the curves. In the draft guideline issued in 2013, new partial area under the curve (pAUC) pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters were introduced to that effect. In light of these potential changes, there is a need of supportive clinical evidence to evaluate the impact of pAUCs on the evaluation of BE between PR formulations. In this retrospective analysis, it was investigated whether the newly defined parameters were associated with an increase in discriminatory ability or a change in variability compared to the conventional PK parameters. Among the single dose studies that met the requirements already in place, 20% were found unable to meet the EMA's new requirements in regards to the pAUC PK parameters. When pairing fasting and fed studies for a same formulation, the failure rate increased to 40%. In some cases, due to the high variability of these parameters, an increase of the sample size would be required to prove BE. In other cases however, the pAUC parameters demonstrated a robust ability to detect differences between the shapes of the curves of PR formulations. The present analysis should help to better understand the impact of the upcoming changes in European regulations on PR formulations and in the design of future BE studies.

Pharmacokinetic dose proportionality between two strengths (12.5 mg and 25 mg) of doxylamine hydrogen succinate film-coated tablets in fasting state: a single-dose, randomized, two-period crossover study in healthy volunteers.

BACKGROUND: Doxylamine succinate, an ethanolamine-based antihistamine, is used in the short-term management of insomnia because of its sedative effects. No data on the dose proportionality of the pharmacokinetics of doxylamine are available, although this drug has been marketed in European countries for more than 50 years. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate and compare the dose proportionality between two marketed strengths (12.5 mg and 25 mg) of doxylamine hydrogen succinate after a single oral dose administration under fasting conditions in healthy human subjects. STUDY DESIGN: This was a single-center, randomized, single dose, laboratory-blinded, two-period, two-sequence, crossover study. SETTING: The study was conducted in a phase I clinical unit. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A single oral dose of doxylamine hydrogen succinate of 12.5 mg (equivalent to 8.7 mg of doxylamine base) or 25 mg (equivalent to 17.4 mg of doxylamine base) was administered to healthy volunteers under fasting conditions in each study period. The drug administrations were separated by a wash-out period of 7 calendar days. Blood samples were collected for up to 60 h post-dose, and plasma doxylamine levels were determined by an ultra high-performance liquid chromatography method with tandem mass spectrometry detection. Pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated using non-compartmental analysis. Dose proportionality was assessed based on the parameter area under the concentration-time curve (AUCt normalized). Safety was evaluated through assessment of adverse events, standard laboratory evaluations, vital signs and 12-lead electrocardiogram (ECG). RESULTS: In total, 12 healthy volunteers (3 male; 9 female) were included in the study. Mean maximum observed plasma concentration (Cmax) and area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to time t (AUCt ) of doxylamine hydrogen succinate 12.5 mg and 25 mg tablets increased linearly and dose-dependently [12.5 mg: mean Cmax 61.94 ng/mL, coefficient of variation (CV) 23.2%; mean AUCt 817.33 ng·h/mL, CV 27.4%; and 25 mg: mean Cmax 124.91 ng/mL, CV 18.7%; mean AUCt 1630.85 ng·h/mL, CV 22.8%]. Mean AUCt normalized was 815.43 ng·h/mL, CV 22.8% for 25 mg. The dose-normalized geometric mean ratio (%, 12.5 mg/25 mg) of AUCt was 98.92 (90% CI: 92.46, 105.83). The most common adverse event was somnolence. CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to doxylamine was proportional over the therapeutic dose range of 12.5-25 mg in healthy volunteers. Based on the results, a predictable and linear increase in systemic exposure can be expected. Doxylamine hydrogen succinate was safe and well tolerated.

Food effects on the pharmacokinetics of doxylamine hydrogen succinate 25 mg film-coated tablets: a single-dose, randomized, two-period crossover study in healthy volunteers.

BACKGROUND: Doxylamine succinate, an ethanolamine-based antihistamine, is used in the short-term management of insomnia because of its sedative effects. The data available on the pharmacokinetic profile of doxylamine in humans are limited, notwithstanding that this drug has been marketed in European countries for more than 50 years. In fact, no data on the effect of food on the pharmacokinetic parameters of doxylamine are available. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the pharmacokinetic parameters of doxylamine following a single oral dose of doxylamine hydrogen succinate 25 mg in healthy human subjects under fed and fasting conditions. STUDY DESIGN: This was a single-center, randomized, single-dose, laboratory-blinded, two-period, two-sequence, crossover study. SETTING: The study was conducted in a phase I clinical unit. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A single oral dose of doxylamine hydrogen succinate 25 mg (equivalent to 17.4 mg of doxylamine base) was administered to healthy volunteers under either fed conditions (high-fat, high-calorie food intake) or fasting conditions in each study period. The drug administrations were separated by a wash-out period of seven calendar days. Plasma samples were collected for up to 60 hours postdose, and plasma doxylamine concentrations were determined by a high-performance liquid chromatography method with tandem mass spectrometry detection. Pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated using noncompartmental analysis. Safety was evaluated through assessment of adverse events, standard laboratory evaluations, vital signs, and 12-lead electrocardiography. RESULTS: In total, 24 healthy subjects (12 male and 12 female) were included in the study. Doxylamine succinate 25 mg tablets exhibited similar oral bioavailability of doxylamine in the fasting state (mean maximum plasma drug concentration [C(max)] 118.21 ng/mL, coefficient of variation [CV] 19.2%; mean area under the plasma concentration time curve from time zero to time t [AUC(t)] 1746.97 ng · h/mL, CV 31.6%) and in the fed state (mean C(max) 120.99 ng/mL, CV 15.0%; mean AUC(t) 1712.20 ng · h/mL, CV 26.7%). No statistically significant between-treatment differences were observed for any of the pharmacokinetic parameters under study. The fed : fasting ratios of the geometric least squares means with corresponding 90% confidence intervals for C(max) and AUC(t) were within the range of 80-125%. CONCLUSION: High-fat, high-calorie food intake does not affect the kinetics of doxylamine in healthy subjects. The drug was safe and well tolerated by the subjects in this study.

Determination of naproxen using DBS: evaluation & pharmacokinetic comparison of human plasma versus human blood DBS.

BACKGROUND: Dried blood spots (DBS) sampling is a well-known technology for qualitative determination such as DNA analysis and screening of newborn metabolic disorders. The scientific community has recently expressed interest in applying the DBS technique for quantitative determination of drugs in biological fluid. RESULTS: Two new bioanalytical assays were developed and validated for the determination of naproxen in human plasma and in DBS samples using liquid chromatography coupled with tandem MS. Furthermore, plasma and DBS clinical samples were collected from four subjects enrolled as part of a bioequivalence study. Concentration data for plasma and DBS samples were determined and pharmacokinetic (PK) profiles in plasma and in DBS samples were compared. CONCLUSIONS: A strong correlation between PK data obtained by the DBS and conventional plasma method was observed, which makes DBS a valuable technique for further naproxen bioavailability and PK investigations and studies.