Effects of Cytochrome P450 3A4 Induction and Inhibition on the Pharmacokinetics of BI 425809, a Novel Glycine Transporter 1 Inhibitor.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Increased glycine availability at the synaptic cleft may enhance N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor signalling and provide a promising therapeutic strategy for cognitive impairment associated with schizophrenia. These studies aimed to assess the pharmacokinetics of BI 425809, a potent glycine-transporter-1 inhibitor, when co-administered with a strong cytochrome P450 3A4 (CYP3A4) inhibitor (itraconazole) and inducer (rifampicin). METHODS: In vitro studies using recombinant CYPs, human liver microsomes, and human hepatocytes were conducted to determine the CYP isoforms responsible for BI 425809 metabolism. In addition, two open-label, fixed-treatment period, phase I studies in healthy male volunteers are described. Period 1: participants received oral BI 425809 25 mg (single dose) on day 1; period 2: participants received multiple doses, across 10 days, of oral itraconazole or rifampicin combined with a single dose of oral BI 425809 25 mg on day 4/7 of the itraconazole/rifampicin treatment, respectively. Pharmacokinetic and safety endpoints were assessed in the absence/presence of itraconazole/rifampicin and included area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) over the time interval 0-167 h (AUC0‒167; itraconazole), 0-168 h (AUC0‒168; rifampicin), or 0-infinity (AUC0-∞; rifampicin and itraconazole), maximum measured concentration (Cmax) of BI 425809, and adverse events. RESULTS: In vitro results suggested that CYP3A4 accounted for ≥ 90% of the metabolism of BI 425809. BI 425809 exposure (adjusted geometric mean ratio [%]) was higher in the presence of itraconazole (AUC0‒167: 265.3; AUC0-∞: 597.0; Cmax: 116.1) and lower in the presence of rifampicin (AUC0‒168: 10.3; AUC0-∞: 9.8; Cmax: 37.4) compared with BI 425809 alone. Investigational treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Systemic exposure of BI 425809 was altered in the presence of strong CYP3A4 modulators, corroborating in vitro results that CYP3A4 mediates a major metabolic pathway for BI 425809. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02342717 (registered on 15 January 2015) and NCT03082183 (registered on 10 March 2017).

Triple fixed-dose combination empagliflozin, linagliptin, and metformin for patients with type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVES: Fixed-dose combination (FDC) therapy can improve outcomes in type 2 diabetes (T2D). We evaluated the bioequivalence of 2 doses of an FDC of extended-release metformin (metformin XR), empagliflozin, a sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor, and linagliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor, versus corresponding free tablet combinations. METHODS: Two randomized, open-label, two-way crossover studies in healthy adults compared: 2 FDC tablets of empagliflozin 5 mg/linagliptin 2.5 mg/metformin XR 1000 mg (Study 1; N = 30), 1 FDC tablet of empagliflozin 25 mg/linagliptin 5 mg/metformin XR 1000 mg (Study 2; N = 30) versus corresponding dose of free combinations. Subjects received study medication under fed conditions; washout was ≥35 days between treatments. Primary endpoints: area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) from time 0 to last quantifiable data point for empagliflozin and metformin; AUC from time 0 to 72 hours for linagliptin, and peak plasma concentration (Cmax) for empagliflozin, linagliptin, and metformin. Bioequivalence was defined as adjusted geometric mean ratios (FDC: free combination) and two-sided 90% confidence intervals (CIs) of AUC and Cmax for each component within 80.00-125.00%. RESULTS: Study 1: 27/29 and 28/30 treated participants were included in the pharmacokinetic analysis for the FDC and free combination periods, respectively. Study 2: 29/29 treated participants were included in the pharmacokinetic analysis for both periods. The adjusted geometric mean ratios of FDCs to their respective free tablet combinations and two-sided 90% CIs were all within the predefined range. The shapes of the mean plasma concentration-time profile of empagliflozin, linagliptin, and metformin XR were similar for subjects in the FDC and free combination groups in both studies. No serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: The evaluated doses of empagliflozin/linagliptin/metformin XR FDC tablets were bioequivalent to the corresponding free combinations. Based on these two bioequivalence studies and existing phase 3 data, the FDA has recently approved this triple FDC to improve glycemic control in adults with T2D.

Effect of gemfibrozil, rifampicin, or probenecid on the pharmacokinetics of the SGLT2 inhibitor empagliflozin in healthy volunteers.

BACKGROUND: Empagliflozin is a potent, oral, selective inhibitor of sodium glucose cotransporter 2 in development for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus. OBJECTIVE: The goal of these studies was to investigate potential drug-drug interactions between empagliflozin and gemfibrozil (an organic anion-transporting polypeptide 1B1 [OATP1B1]/1B3 and organic anion transporter 3 [OAT3] inhibitor), rifampicin (an OATP1B1/1B3 inhibitor), or probenecid (an OAT3 and uridine diphosphate glucuronosyltransferase inhibitor). METHODS: Two open-label, randomized, crossover studies were undertaken in healthy subjects. In the first study, 18 subjects received the following in 1 of 2 randomized treatment sequences: a single dose of empagliflozin 25 mg alone and gemfibrozil 600 mg BID for 5 days with a single dose of empagliflozin 25 mg on the third day. In the second study, 18 subjects received a single dose of empagliflozin 10 mg, a single dose of empagliflozin 10 mg coadministered with a single dose of rifampicin 600 mg, and probenecid 500 mg BID for 4 days with a single dose of empagliflozin 10 mg on the second day in 1 of 6 randomized treatment sequences. RESULTS: In the gemfibrozil study, 11 subjects were male, mean age was 35.1 years and mean body mass index (BMI) was 23.47 kg/m(2). In the rifampicin/probenecid study, 10 subjects were male, mean age was 32.7 years and mean BMI was 23.03 kg/m(2). Exposure to empagliflozin was increased by coadministration with gemfibrozil (AUC0-∞: geometric mean ratio [GMR], 158.50% [90% CI, 151.77-165.53]; Cmax: GMR, 115.00% [90% CI, 106.15-124.59]), rifampicin (AUC0-∞: GMR, 135.20% [90% CI, 129.58-141.06]; Cmax: GMR, 175.14% [90% CI, 160.14-191.56]), and probenecid (AUC0-∞: GMR, 153.47% [90% CI, 146.41-160.88]; Cmax: GMR, 125.60% [90% CI, 113.67-138.78]). All treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Increases in empagliflozin exposure were <2-fold, indicating that the inhibition of the OATP1B1/1B3, OAT3 transporter, and uridine diphosphate glucuronosyltransferases did not have a clinically relevant effect on empagliflozin exposure. No dose adjustments of empagliflozin were necessary when it was coadministered with gemfibrozil, rifampicin, or probenecid. ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT01301742 and NCT01634100.

Lack of clinically relevant drug-drug interaction between empagliflozin, a sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor, and verapamil, ramipril, or digoxin in healthy volunteers.

BACKGROUND: Empagliflozin is a sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor in clinical development as a treatment for type 2 diabetes mellitus. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to investigate potential drug-drug interactions between empagliflozin and verapamil, ramipril, and digoxin in healthy volunteers. METHODS: The potential drug-drug interactions were evaluated in 3 separate trials. In the first study, 16 subjects were randomized to receive single-dose empagliflozin 25 mg alone or single-dose empagliflozin 25 mg with single-dose verapamil 120 mg. In the second study, 23 subjects were randomized to receive empagliflozin 25 mg once daily (QD) for 5 days, ramipril (2.5 mg on day 1 then 5 mg QD on days 2-5) for 5 days or empagliflozin 25 mg with ramipril (2.5 mg on day 1 then 5 mg QD on days 2-5) for 5 days. In the third study, 20 subjects were randomized to receive single-dose digoxin 0.5 mg alone or empagliflozin 25 mg QD for 8 days with single-dose digoxin 0.5 mg on day 5. RESULTS: Exposure of empagliflozin was not affected by coadministration with verapamil (AUC0-∞: geometric mean ratio [GMR], 102.95%; 90% CI, 98.87-107.20; Cmax: GMR, 92.39%; 90% CI, 85.38-99.97) or ramipril (AUC over a uniform dosing interval τ at steady state [AUCτ,ss]: GMR, 96.55%; 90% CI, 93.05-100.18; Cmax at steady state [Cmax,ss]: GMR, 104.47%; 90% CI 97.65-111.77). Empagliflozin had no clinically relevant effect on exposure of ramipril (AUCτ,ss: GMR, 108.14%; 90% CI 100.51-116.35; Cmax,ss: GMR, 103.61%; 90% CI, 89.73-119.64) or its active metabolite ramiprilat (AUCτ,ss: GMR, 98.67%; 90% CI, 96.00-101.42; Cmax,ss: GMR, 98.29%; 90% CI, 92.67-104.25). Coadministration of empagliflozin had no clinically meaningful effect on digoxin AUC0-∞ (GMR, 106.11%; 90% CI, 96.71-116.41); however, a slight increase in Cmax was observed that was not considered clinically relevant (GMR, 113.94%; 90% CI, 99.33-130.70). All treatments were well tolerated. There were no serious adverse events or adverse events leading to discontinuation in any of the studies. CONCLUSIONS: No dose adjustment of empagliflozin is required when coadministered with ramipril or verapamil, and no dose adjustment of digoxin or ramipril is required when coadministered with empagliflozin. ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT01306175 (digoxin), NCT01276301 (verapamil), and NCT01284621 (ramipril).

Oral bioavailability of dabigatran etexilate (Pradaxa(®) ) after co-medication with verapamil in healthy subjects.

AIM: To investigate the effect of the P-glycoprotein inhibitor verapamil on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of dabigatran etexilate (DE). METHOD: In this two part multiple crossover trial in 40 healthy subjects, DE 150 mg was given alone or with verapamil at different doses, duration of treatment (single vs. multiple dosing), formulations, and timings (before, concurrently or after DE). Primary pharmacokinetic endpoints were determined from concentrations of total dabigatran (unconjugated plus conjugated). Pharmacodynamic endpoints were determined from clotting time. RESULTS: The greatest effect was observed with single dose verapamil 120 mg immediate release given 1 h before single dose DE. Geometric mean area under the plasma concentration curve [AUC(0,∞)] and maximum analyte concentration in the plasma (Cmax ) were increased by 143% [90% confidence interval (CI) 91, 208] and 179% (90% CI 115, 262), respectively. The effect was reduced to a 71% and 91% increase in AUC and Cmax , respectively, when DE was administered with verapamil 240 mg extended release. After multiple verapamil dosing, DE AUC(0,∞) and Cmax increases were 54% and 63%, respectively. However, DE given 2 h before verapamil increased DE AUC(0,∞) and Cmax by <20%. With regard to clotting prolongation, the dabigatran plasma concentration-effect relationship was generally not affected by the co-administration of verapamil. Concomitant administration of DE and verapamil did not reveal any unexpected safety findings. CONCLUSION: Verapamil increased DE bioavailability, likely due to inhibition of P-glycoprotein. Our results suggest that an interaction between verapamil and DE can be minimized if DE is administered 2 h prior to verapamil.

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic effects of comedication of clopidogrel and dabigatran etexilate in healthy male volunteers.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic effects of concomitant administration of single loading doses of clopidogrel or multiple doses of clopidogrel with multiple doses of dabigatran etexilate. METHODS: This was an open-label trial in healthy male subjects. In part 1 (pilot, n = 8) and part 3 (n = 12), a single dose of clopidogrel (300 or 600 mg, respectively) was given concomitantly with dabigatran etexilate at steady state; part 2 was a randomized, multiple-dose, crossover study with the test treatment being clopidogrel at steady state [300 mg loading dose on day 1, then 75 mg once daily (qd)] with concomitant dabigatran. RESULTS: Bioavailability was moderately increased when a loading dose of clopidogrel (300 mg in part 1 and 600 mg in part 3) was administered concomitantly with dabigatran etexilate 150 mg twice daily (bid). Test/reference ratios for AUC(τ,ss) were 135% (90% CI 107-169%) and 132% (90% CI 112-156%), respectively. Steady-state dosing of clopidogrel 75 mg qd and dabigatran etexilate 150 mg bid (part 2) demonstrated minor effects on dabigatran pharmacokinetics (AUC(τ,ss) ratio test/reference: 91.9%, 90% CI 78.7-107%) or its pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic relationships (activated partial thromboplastin time, ecarin clotting time, thrombin time). Similarly, clopidogrel bioavailability remained unchanged by chronic administration of dabigatran etexilate (part 3: ratio test/reference for AUC(0-24) was 103%; 90% CI 80.3-131%), as did its pharmacodynamic effects on the inhibition of platelet aggregation. CONCLUSIONS: When given concomitantly, dabigatran etexilate and clopidogrel at clinically relevant doses did not appear to have significant effects on the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles of either agent.

Switching from enoxaparin to dabigatran etexilate: pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and safety profile.

PURPOSE: Dabigatran etexilate is an oral, reversible, direct thrombin inhibitor licensed for the prevention of venous thromboembolism and stroke prevention in patients with atrial fibrillation. The aim of this study was to investigate whether, and to what extent, a switch from enoxparin to dabigatran etexilate affects the pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) parameters and safety profile of dabigatran. METHODS: Enoxaparin 40 mg was administered subcutaneously once daily for 3 days followed by a single dose of dabigatran etexilate 220 mg (test treatment) on day 4 in an open-label, two-way cross-over trial in healthy volunteers. Dabigatran plasma levels were measured using a validated high-performance liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry method. Anticoagulant activity was measured using a number of clotting tests, including prothrombinase-induced clotting time (PiCT), activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT), ecarin clotting time (ECT), and diluted thrombin time (dTT). RESULTS: PK, PD, and safety data were available for 23 subjects for each treatment. The adjusted geometric mean test/reference ratio of area under the concentration-time curve for total dabigatran was 84% (90% confidence interval 67.2-105.0%) and 86% (67.0-110.0%) for maximum plasma concentration. The PiCT test/reference ratio, which represents the activity of enoxaparin and dabigatran, was elevated by approximately 15% for peak maximum effect ratio to baseline and total area under the effect curve (AUEC0₋48) activity, suggesting that some anticoagulant activity of enoxaparin was still present. Enoxaparin pre-treatment increased the AUEC0₋48 of activated partial thromboplastin time by approximately 14%. All other dabigatran-related PD markers were unaffected. Tolerability was good, with only mild and reversible adverse events during the treatment. CONCLUSION: Prior administration of enoxaparin did not meaningfully affect the PK or PD properties of dabigatran, and the switch from enoxaparin to dabigatran etexilate was well tolerated among the study subjects. These data support the safety of switching patients from enoxaparin to dabigatran etexilate.

Bioavailability investigation of two different oral formulations of citalopram, a so-called 'second generation' antidepressant drug.

Citalopram (CAS 59729-33-8) belongs to the so-called 'second generation' antidepressant drugs and is used for the treatment of patients with major depression or other depressive disorders. In the present study, two different oral citalopram formulations (Citalopram-ratiopharm film-coated tablets as test preparation and tablets of a reference preparation distributed in Germany) were investigated in 20 healthy volunteers in order to prove bioequivalence between both preparations. A single 40 mg oral dose was administered according to an open, randomised, two-period cross-over design in the fasted state. Blood samples for determination of citalopram plasma concentrations were collected at pre-defined time points up to 168 h following drug administration. A wash-out period of 21 days separated both treatment periods. Citalopram plasma concentrations were determined by means of a validated HPLC method with fluorescence detection. Maximum plasma concentrations (Cmax), of 34.77 ng/ml (test) and 34.42 ng/ml (reference) were achieved. Areas under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC0-infinity) of 1,719.69 ng*h/ml (test) and 1,725.71 ng*h/ml (reference) were determined. The results showed nearly identical rate and extent of drug absorption. Also further pharmacokinetic parameters were well comparable with each other. Thus, tmax showed values of 3.29 h (test) and 3.77 h (reference). The plasma elimination half-life (t1/2) was 42.50 h (test) und 44.46 h (reference). Both primary target parameters Cmax and AUC0-infinity were tested parametrically by analysis of variance (ANOVA). Bioequivalence between test and reference preparation was demonstrated since for both parameters AUC and Cmax the 90 % confidence intervals of the T/R-ratios of logarithmically transformed data were in the generally accepted range of 80 %-125 %.