The Bioequivalence Between Valsartan Oral Solution and Suspension Formulations Developed for Pediatric Use

The bioequivalence of valsartan 160 mg oral solution compared to suspension was assessed in a single-dose, open-label, randomized, 2-period, 2-way crossover study in 82 healthy adults. The participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive a single dose of the solution or suspension formulation in each of the two treatment periods. Serial blood samples for pharmacokinetic evaluation were collected up to 48 hours post-dose. The pharmacokinetic parameters were estimated by noncompartmental methods and analyzed as per bioequivalence criteria of statistical analysis. The peak plasma concentration of valsartan was reached with median time of 1 and 3 hours with solution and suspension formulation, respectively. Compared to suspension formulation, the mean peak plasma concentration with solution formulation was higher by 32% (90%CI, 1.27-1.38) while the geometric mean ratios (1.09) and the associated 90%CIs (1.05-1.13) of both the areas under the concentration time-curves (from time zero to the last quantifiable concentration and from time zero to infinity) were contained in the required range of 0.80 to 1.25. No new safety signals were observed with either of the formulations.

Zoledronic Acid vs Placebo in Pediatric Glucocorticoid-induced Osteoporosis: A Randomized, Double-blind, Phase 3 Trial

CONTEXT

Glucocorticoids (GCs) prescribed for chronic pediatric illnesses are associated with osteoporotic fractures.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to determine the efficacy and safety of intravenous (IV) zoledronic acid (ZA) compared with placebo to treat pediatric GC-induced osteoporosis (GIO).

METHODS

Children aged 5 to 17 years with GIO were enrolled in this multinational, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00799266). Eligible children were randomly assigned 1:1 to 6 monthly IV ZA 0.05 mg/kg or IV placebo. The primary end point was the change in lumbar spine bone mineral density z score (LSBMDZ) from baseline to month 12. Incident fractures and safety were assessed.

RESULTS

Thirty-four children were enrolled (mean age 12.6 ± 3.4 years [18 on ZA, 16 on placebo]), all with low-trauma vertebral fractures (VFs). LSBMDZ increased from -2.13 ± 0.79 to -1.49 ± 1.05 on ZA, compared with -2.38 ± 0.90 to -2.27 ± 1.03 on placebo (least squares means difference 0.41 [95% CI, 0.02-0.81; P = .04]); when corrected for height z score, the least squares means difference in LBMDZ was 0.75 [95% CI, 0.27-1.22; P = .004]. Two children on placebo had new low-trauma VF vs none on ZA. Adverse events (AEs) were reported in 15 of 18 children (83%) on ZA, and in 12 of 16 (75%) on placebo, most frequently within 10 days after the first infusion. There were no deaths or treatment discontinuations due to treatment-emergent AEs.

CONCLUSION

LSBMDZ increased significantly on ZA compared with placebo over 1 year in children with GIO. Most AEs occurred after the first infusion.

Pharmacodynamic interaction between intravenous nitroglycerin and oral sacubitril/valsartan (LCZ696) in healthy subjects

PURPOSE

Sacubitril/valsartan (LCZ696) and nitroglycerin share the second messenger cGMP and lower blood pressure. Given the potential for co-administration of both drugs in patients with heart failure, this study was designed to investigate the potential for a pharmacodynamic drug interaction affecting blood pressure.

METHODS

In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, crossover study, 40 healthy subjects received sacubitril/valsartan 200 mg bid (97/103 mg bid) or placebo for 5 days. Two hours after the morning dose of sacubitril/valsartan or placebo on day 5, subjects received intravenous nitroglycerin infusion at increasing doses up to 40 μg/min or placebo. Serial measurements of blood pressure (BP), heart rate, biomarkers and sacubitril/valsartan pharmacokinetics were conducted.

RESULTS

Administration of nitroglycerin alone led to a dose- and time-dependent decrease in supine systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) which was similar when nitroglycerin was co-administered with sacubitril/valsartan. At the highest dose of nitroglycerin, the mean (95% CI) decrease from baseline of SBP/DBP was 19.54 (- 21.99, - 17.09)/12.38 (- 13.85, - 10.92) mmHg for nitroglycerin alone compared to 22.63 (- 25.06, - 20.21)/12.94 (- 14.38, - 11.49) mmHg when co-administered with sacubitril/valsartan. Co-administration of sacubitril/valsartan and nitroglycerin did not result in further plasma cGMP increase compared to sacubitril/valsartan alone. The co-administration of nitroglycerin and sacubitril/valsartan was safe and well tolerated and did not impact the pharmacokinetics of sacubitril/valsartan.

CONCLUSIONS

The results from this study demonstrate no pharmacodynamic drug interaction between nitroglycerin and sacubitril/valsartan in healthy subjects, suggesting that no change of dose selection and escalation recommendations or clinical monitoring during nitroglycerin administration is required.

Clinical Pharmacokinetics of Sacubitril/Valsartan (LCZ696): A Novel Angiotensin Receptor-Neprilysin Inhibitor

Sacubitril/valsartan (LCZ696) is indicated for the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Absorption of sacubitril/valsartan and conversion of sacubitril (prodrug) to sacubitrilat (neprilysin inhibitor) was rapid with maximum plasma concentrations of sacubitril, sacubitrilat, and valsartan (angiotensin receptor blocker) reaching within 0.5, 1.5-2.0, and 2.0-3.0 h, respectively. With a two-fold increase in dose, an increase in the area under the plasma concentration-time curve was proportional for sacubitril, ~1.9-fold for sacubitrilat, and ~1.7-fold for valsartan in healthy subjects. Following multiple twice-daily administration, steady-state maximum plasma concentration was reached within 3 days, showing no accumulation for sacubitril and valsartan, while ~1.6-fold accumulation for sacubitrilat. Sacubitril is eliminated predominantly as sacubitrilat through the kidney; valsartan is eliminated mainly by biliary route. Drug-drug interactions of sacubitril/valsartan were evaluated with medications commonly used in patients with heart failure including furosemide, warfarin, digoxin, carvedilol, levonorgestrel/ethinyl estradiol combination, amlodipine, omeprazole, hydrochlorothiazide, intravenous nitrates, metformin, statins, and sildenafil. Co-administration with sacubitril/valsartan increased the maximum plasma concentration (~2.0-fold) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve (1.3-fold) of atorvastatin; however, it did not affect the pharmacokinetics of simvastatin. Age, sex, or ethnicity did not affect the pharmacokinetics of sacubitril/valsartan. In patients with heart failure vs. healthy subjects, area under the plasma concentration-time curves of sacubitril, sacubitrilat, and valsartan were higher by approximately 1.6-, 2.1-, and 2.3-fold, respectively. Renal impairment had no significant impact on sacubitril and valsartan area under the plasma concentration-time curves, while the area under the plasma concentration-time curve of sacubitrilat correlated with degree of renal function (1.3-, 2.3-, 2.9-, and 3.3-fold with mild, moderate, and severe renal impairment, and end-stage renal disease, respectively). Moderate hepatic impairment increased the area under the plasma concentration-time curves of valsartan and sacubitrilat ~2.1-fold.

Effect of the angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitor sacubitril/valsartan on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of a single dose of furosemide

Aims

Sacubitril/valsartan is indicated for the treatment of heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Furosemide, a loop diuretic commonly used for the treatment of HFrEF, may be coadministered with sacubitril/valsartan in clinical practice. The effect of sacubitril/valsartan on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of furosemide was evaluated in this open label, two‐period, single‐sequence study in healthy subjects.

Methods

All subjects (n = 28) received 40 mg oral single‐dose furosemide during period 1, followed by a washout of 2 days. In period 2, sacubitril/valsartan 200 mg (97/103 mg) was administered twice daily for 5 days and a single dose of 40 mg furosemide was coadministered on day 6. Serial plasma and urine samples were collected to determine the pharmacokinetics of furosemide and sacubitril/valsartan and the pharmacodynamics of furosemide. The point estimates and the associated 90% confidence intervals for pharmacokinetic parameters were evaluated.

Results

Coadministration of furosemide with sacubitril/valsartan decreased the maximum observed plasma concentration (C_max) [estimated geometric mean ratio (90% confidence interval): 0.50 (0.44, 0.56)], area under the plasma concentration–time curve (AUC) from time 0 to infinity [0.72 (0.67, 0.77)] and 24‐h urinary excretion of furosemide [0.74 (0.69, 0.79)]. When coadministered with sacubitril/valsartan, 0–4‐h, 4–8‐h and 0–24‐h diuresis in response to furosemide was reduced by ~7%, 21% and 0.2%, respectively, while natriuresis was reduced by ~ 28.5%, 7% and 15%, respectively. Post hoc analysis of the pivotal phase III Prospective comparison of ARNI with ACEI to Determine Impact on Global Mortality and morbidity in Heart Failure trial (PARADIGM‐HF) indicated that the median furosemide dose was similar at baseline and at the end of the study in the sacubitril/valsartan group.

Conclusions

Sacubitril/valsartan reduced plasma C_max and AUC and 24‐h urinary excretion of furosemide, while not significantly affecting its pharmacodynamic effects in healthy subjects.

Evaluation of Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Drug-Drug Interaction of Sacubitril/Valsartan (LCZ696) and Sildenafil in Patients With Mild-to-Moderate Hypertension

Sacubitril/valsartan (LCZ696) is indicated for the treatment of patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Since patients with HFrEF may receive sacubitril/valsartan and sildenafil, both increasing cyclic guanosine monophosphate, the present study evaluated the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic drug interaction potential between sacubitril/valsartan and sildenafil. In this open‐label, three‐period, single sequence study, patients with mild‐to‐moderate hypertension (153.8 ± 8.2 mmHg mean systolic blood pressure (SBP)) received a single dose of sildenafil 50 mg, sacubitril/valsartan 400 mg once daily for 5 days, and sacubitril/valsartan and sildenafil coadministration. When coadministered with sildenafil, the AUC and C_max of valsartan decreased by 29% and 39%, respectively. Coadministration of sacubitril/valsartan and sildenafil resulted in a greater decrease in BP (–5/–4/–4 mmHg mean ambulatory SBP/DBP/MAP (mean arterial pressure)) than with sacubitril/valsartan alone. Both treatments were generally safe and well tolerated in this study; however, the additional BP reduction suggests that sildenafil should be administered cautiously in patients receiving sacubitril/valsartan. Unique identifier: NCT01601470.

Assessment of Drug-Drug Interaction Potential Between Atorvastatin and LCZ696, A Novel Angiotensin Receptor Neprilysin Inhibitor, in Healthy Chinese Male Subjects

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

LCZ696 (sacubitril/valsartan), a novel angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor has been recently approved for the treatment of patients with heart failure (HF) and reduced ejection fraction. As several HF patients are likely to use statins as co-medications, the potential for a pharmacokinetic drug-drug interaction between atorvastatin and LCZ696 was evaluated.

METHODS

This was an open-label, three-period, single-sequence study in 28 healthy Chinese male subjects wherein LCZ696 200 mg was administered twice daily for 5 days in period 1. Following a washout period, atorvastatin 80 mg was administered once daily for 4 days (period 2) and subsequently co-administered with LCZ696 200 mg for 5 days (period 3). Serial plasma samples were collected to determine pharmacokinetic parameters of LCZ696 analytes (sacubitril, LBQ657, and valsartan) and atorvastatin and its metabolites.

RESULTS

Atorvastatin co-administration had no effect on the pharmacokinetics of LBQ657, while the AUC_τ,ss and C _max,ss of sacubitril increased by 30 and 19 %, respectively, and the corresponding values for valsartan decreased by 19 and 9 %, respectively. Co-administration with LCZ696 increased C _max,ss of atorvastatin, o-hydroxyatorvastatin, and p-hydroxyatorvastatin by 74, 68, and 108 %, respectively, and the AUC_τ,ss of corresponding analytes increased by 34, 22, and 26 %, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

While atorvastatin had no significant impact on the pharmacokinetics of LCZ696 analytes upon co-administration, the C _max of atorvastatin and its metabolites increased twofold, with a marginal increase in AUC (<1.3-fold). Multiple-dose administration of LCZ696 200 mg twice daily and atorvastatin 80 mg once daily either alone or in combination was generally safe and well tolerated in healthy subjects.

Erratum to: Clinical Pharmacokinetics of Sacubitril/Valsartan (LCZ696): A Novel Angiotensin Receptor-Neprilysin Inhibitor

Sacubitril/valsartan (LCZ696) is indicated for the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Absorption of sacubitril/valsartan and conversion of sacubitril (prodrug) to sacubitrilat (neprilysin inhibitor) was rapid with maximum plasma concentrations of sacubitril, sacubitrilat, and valsartan (angiotensin receptor blocker) reaching within 0.5, 1.5-2.0, and 2.0-3.0 h, respectively. With a twofold increase in dose, an increase in the area under the plasma concentration-time curve was proportional for sacubitril, ~1.9-fold for sacubitrilat, and ~1.7-fold for valsartan in healthy subjects. Following multiple twice-daily administration, steady-state maximum plasma concentration was reached within 3 days, showing no accumulation for sacubitril and valsartan, while ~1.6-fold accumulation for sacubitrilat. Sacubitril is eliminated predominantly as sacubitrilat through the kidney; valsartan is eliminated mainly by biliary route. Drug-drug interactions of sacubitril/valsartan were evaluated with medications commonly used in patients with heart failure including furosemide, warfarin, digoxin, carvedilol, levonorgestrel/ethinyl estradiol combination, amlodipine, omeprazole, hydrochlorothiazide, intravenous nitrates, metformin, statins, and sildenafil. Co-administration with sacubitril/valsartan increased the maximum plasma concentration (~2.0-fold) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve (1.3-fold) of atorvastatin; however, it did not affect the pharmacokinetics of simvastatin. Age, sex, or ethnicity did not affect the pharmacokinetics of sacubitril/valsartan. In patients with heart failure vs. healthy subjects, area under the plasma concentration-time curves of sacubitril, sacubitrilat, and valsartan were higher by approximately 1.6-, 2.1-, and 2.3-fold, respectively. Renal impairment had no significant impact on sacubitril and valsartan area under the plasma concentration-time curves, while the area under the plasma concentration-time curve of sacubitrilat correlated with degree of renal function (1.3-, 2.3-, 2.9-, and 3.3-fold with mild, moderate, and severe renal impairment, and end-stage renal disease, respectively). Moderate hepatic impairment increased the area under the plasma concentration-time curves of valsartan and sacubitrilat ~2.1-fold.

A Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Model to Describe Artemether Pharmacokinetics in Adult and Pediatric Patients

Artemether is co-administered with lumefantrine as part of a fixed-dose combination therapy for malaria in both adult and pediatric patients. However, artemether exposure is higher in younger infants (1-3 months) with a lower body weight (<5 kg) as compared to older infants (3-6 months) with a higher body weight (≥5 to <10 kg), children, and adults. In contrast, lumefantrine exposure is similar in all age groups. This article describes the clinically observed artemether exposure data in pediatric populations across various age groups (1 month to 12 years) and body weights (<5 or ≥5 kg) using physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) mechanistic models. A PBPK model was developed using artemether physicochemical, biopharmaceutic, and metabolic properties together with known enzyme ontogeny and pediatric physiology. The model was verified using clinical data from adult patients after multiple doses of oral artemether, and was then applied to simulate the exposure in children and infants. The simulated PBPK concentration-time profiles captured observed clinical data. Consistent with the clinical data, the PBPK model simulations indicated a higher artemether exposure for younger infants with lower body weight. A PBPK model developed for artemether reliably described the clinical data from adult and pediatric patients.

In vitro and clinical evaluation of OATP-mediated drug interaction potential of sacubitril/valsartan (LCZ696)

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Sacubitril/valsartan (LCZ696) has been recently approved for the treatment of heart failure (HF) patients with reduced ejection fraction. Several HF patients receive statins as co-medication.

METHODS

Because clearance of statins is meditated via OATP1B1/1B3, the inhibition potential of these transporters by LCZ696 analytes was evaluated in vitro. Furthermore, an open-label, fixed-sequence clinical study was conducted to determine the effect of LCZ696 on the exposure of simvastatin and its active metabolite simvastatin acid. In this clinical study, 26 healthy subjects received simvastatin 40 mg alone or in combination with LCZ696 or after 1 or 2 h of LCZ696 dosing.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Although no significant inhibition by LBQ657 (an active metabolite of sacubitril) and valsartan was observed, sacubitril inhibited OATP1B1 and OATP1B3 in vitro, with IC50 of 1·91 and 3·81 μm, respectively. Upon co-administration of simvastatin with LCZ696, the Cmax of simvastatin and simvastatin acid decreased by 7% and 13%, respectively. When administered 1 h after LCZ696 dosing, the corresponding Cmax of simvastatin and simvastatin acid decreased by 16% and 4%, respectively. When administered 2 h after LCZ696 dosing, the Cmax of simvastatin decreased by 33% and that of simvastatin acid increased by 16%. However, no notable changes were observed in the AUCs of simvastatin or simvastatin acid upon co-administration or time-separated administration with LCZ696. No notable impact of simvastatin co-administration was observed on the pharmacokinetics of LCZ696 analytes. LCZ696 and simvastatin were generally well tolerated when administered alone or in combination.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the results of this study suggest that although sacubitril inhibited OATP1B1 and OATP1B3 in vitro, it does not translate into any clinically relevant in vivo effect.

Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Canakinumab in Patients With Systemic Juvenile Idiopathic Arthritis

The characterization of the pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) properties in pediatric patients is essential in supporting the recommended dosage of canakinumab in the relevant population. Here the PK and PD properties of canakinumab-a monoclonal antibody-in pediatric patients with systemic juvenile idiopathic arthritis (SJIA) are presented. Blood samples were obtained from 4 phase 2/3 clinical studies in patients with SJIA. Canakinumab PK properties and total interleukin (IL)-1β kinetic properties were characterized by a population-based PK-binding model. On administration, canakinumab increased total IL-1β complex in SJIA patients. Canakinumab clearance and volume of distribution were not impacted by age in pediatric patients after correction for the patient's body weight. The estimated serum clearance of canakinumab was 0.106 ± 0.00689 L/day, with a corresponding volume of distribution at steady state of 3.2 L and an estimated half-life of 22 days, based on a model typical body weight of 33 kg. Body-weight-based dosing provided comparable canakinumab exposure across the age groups in patients 2 to <20 years with SJIA. In younger children, a modest increase in the turnover rate of IL-1β was observed. Compared to other indications, IL-1β production rate was higher and clearance was slower in patients with SJIA. Low immunogenicity incidence of 3.1% was observed, and none of the patients had neutralizing antibodies. In conclusion, the PK/PD findings further support dose selection of canakinumab in patients with SJIA.

Pharmacokinetic drug-drug interaction assessment of LCZ696 (an angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor) with omeprazole, metformin or levonorgestrel-ethinyl estradiol in healthy subjects

LCZ696 is a novel angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor in development for the treatment of cardiovascular diseases. Here, we assessed the potential for pharmacokinetic drug-drug interaction of LCZ696 (400 mg, single dose or once daily [q.d.]) when co-administered with omeprazole 40 mg q.d. (n = 28) or metformin 1000 mg q.d. (n = 27) or levonorgestrel-ethinyl estradiol 150/30 μg single dose (n = 24) in three separate open-label, single-sequence studies in healthy subjects. Pharmacokinetic parameters of LCZ696 analytes (sacubitril, LBQ657, and valsartan), metformin, and levonorgestrel-ethinyl estradiol were assessed. Omeprazole did not alter the AUCinf of sacubitril and pharmacokinetics of LBQ657; however, 7% decrease in the Cmax of sacubitril, and 11% and 13% decreases in AUCinf and Cmax of valsartan were observed. Co-administration of LCZ696 with metformin had no significant effect on the pharmacokinetics of LBQ657 and valsartan; however, AUCtau,ss and Cmax,ss of metformin were decreased by 23%. Co-administration of LCZ696 with levonorgestrel-ethinyl estradiol had no effect on the pharmacokinetics of ethinyl estradiol and LBQ657 or AUCinf of levonorgestrel. The Cmax of levonorgestrel decreased by 15%, and AUCtau,ss and Cmax,ss of valsartan decreased by 14% and 16%, respectively. Co-administration of LCZ696 with omeprazole, metformin, or levonorgestrel-ethinyl estradiol was not associated with any clinically relevant pharmacokinetic drug interactions.

Assessment of pharmacokinetic drug-drug interaction between pradigastat and atazanavir or probenecid

Pradigastat, a novel diacylglycerol acyltransferase-1 inhibitor, has activity in common metabolic diseases associated with abnormal accumulation of triglycerides. In vitro studies suggest that glucuronidation is the predominant metabolism pathway for elimination of pradigastat in humans and confirmed the role of uridine 5'-diphosphoglucuronosyltransferase (UGT) enzymes, UGT1A1, -1A3, and -2B7. The in vitro studies using atazanavir as a selective inhibitor of UGT1A1 and -1A3 indicated that these enzymes contribute ∼55% toward the overall glucuronidation pathway. Therefore, a clinical study was conducted to assess the potential for drug interaction between pradigastat and probenecid (purported general UGT inhibitor) or atazanavir (selective UGT1A1, -1A3 inhibitor). The study included 2 parallel cohorts, each with 3 sequential treatment periods and 22 healthy subjects per cohort. The 90%CI of the geometric mean ratios for Cmax,ss and AUCτ,ss of pradigastat were within 0.80-1.25 when administered in combination with probenecid. However, the Cmax,ss and AUCτ,ss of pradigastat decreased by 31% (90%CI: 0.62-0.78) and 26% (0.67-0.82), respectively, when administered in combination with atazanavir. This magnitude of decrease in pradigastat steady-state exposure is not considered clinically relevant. Pradigastat was well tolerated by all subjects, either alone or in combination with atazanavir or probenecid.

Relative bioavailability of diclofenac potassium from softgel capsule versus powder for oral solution and immediate-release tablet formulation

The oral bioavailability of diclofenac potassium 50 mg administered as a soft gelatin capsule (softgel capsule), powder for oral solution (oral solution), and tablet was evaluated in a randomized, open-label, 3-period, 6-sequence crossover study in healthy adults. Plasma diclofenac concentrations were measured using a validated liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry/mass spectrometry method, and pharmacokinetic analysis was performed by noncompartmental methods. The median time to achieve peak plasma concentrations of diclofenac was 0.5, 0.25, and 0.75 hours with the softgel capsule, oral solution, and tablet formulations, respectively. The geometric mean ratio and associated 90%CI for AUCinf, and Cmax of the softgel capsule formulation relative to the oral solution formulation were 0.97 (0.95-1.00) and 0.85 (0.76-0.95), respectively. The geometric mean ratio and associated 90%CI for AUCinf and Cmax of the softgel capsule formulation relative to the tablet formulation were 1.04 (1.00-1.08) and 1.67 (1.43-1.96), respectively. In conclusion, the exposure (AUC) of diclofenac with the new diclofenac potassium softgel capsule formulation was comparable to that of the existing oral solution and tablet formulations. The peak plasma concentration of diclofenac from the new softgel capsule was 67% higher than the existing tablet formulation, whereas it was 15% lower in comparison with the oral solution formulation.

Population pharmacokinetic modeling and noncompartmental analysis demonstrated bioequivalence between metformin component of metformin/vildagliptin fixed-dose combination products and metformin immediate-release tablet sourced from various countries

Metformin is the first-line pharmacotherapy choice for treating type-2 diabetes mellitus, alone or in combination with other antidiabetic drugs. During the development of immediate-release (IR) metformin containing novel fixed-dose combination (FDC) products, several health-authorities require sponsors to demonstrate bioequivalence between FDC products and the country-sourced metformin for market approval. Eight bioequivalence studies that compared metformin/vildagliptin FDC product (test) to metformin IR tablet sourced from various countries (reference) were conducted. A population pharmacokinetic (PPK) analysis of pooled metformin concentration-time data was performed to evaluate whether country-sourced metformin is a significant covariate. The PPK analysis demonstrated that there was no clinically relevant effect of metformin source or race/ethnicity on metformin pharmacokinetics. Also, noncompartmental analysis conducted showed that 90%CI of geometric mean ratios of test to reference metformin formulations, calculated for maximum-concentration and exposure parameters, were within the 80%-125% criteria, indicating comparable metformin exposure regardless of the country-sourced metformin IR formulation. These results are consistent with the biopharmaceutics properties of metformin and provide scientific evidence that after assessing in vitro dissolution of novel FDC formulation, additional bioequivalence studies with multiple countries' reference products may not be required once bioequivalence is established with 1 country-sourced IR metformin formulation.

Evaluation of food effect on the oral bioavailability of pradigastat, a diacylglycerol acyltransferase 1 inhibitor

Pradigastat, a diacylglycerol acyltransferase 1 inhibitor, is being developed for the treatment of familial chylomicronemia syndrome. The results of two studies that evaluated the effect of food on the oral bioavailability of pradigastat using randomized, open-label, parallel group designs in healthy subjects (n=24/treatment/study) are presented. In study 1, a single dose of 20 mg pradigastat was administered under the fasted condition or with a high-fat meal. In study 2, a single dose of 40 mg pradigastat was administered under the fasted condition or with a low- or high-fat meal. At the 20 mg dose, the pradigastat Cmax and AUClast increased by 38% and 41%, respectively, with a high-fat meal. When 40 mg pradigastat was administered with a low-fat meal, the Cmax and AUClast increased by 8% and 18%, respectively, whereas with a high-fat meal the increase was 20% and 18%, respectively. The population pharmacokinetic analysis with the pooled data from 13 studies indicated that administration of pradigastat with a meal resulted in an increase of 30% in both the Cmax and AUC parameters. Based on these results, food overall increased pradigastat exposure in the range of less than 40%, which is not considered clinically significant. Both 20 and 40 mg doses of pradigastat were well tolerated under fasted or fed conditions.

Pharmacokinetic drug-drug interaction assessment between LCZ696, an angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor, and hydrochlorothiazide, amlodipine, or carvedilol

LCZ696 is a first-in-class angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor in development for treatments of hypertension and heart failure indications. In 3 separate studies, pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions (DDIs) potential was assessed when LCZ696 was coadministered with hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ), amlodipine, or carvedilol. The studies used a open-label, single-sequence, 3-period, crossover design in healthy subjects. Blood samples were collected to determine the pharmacokinetic parameters of LCZ696 analytes (AHU377, LBQ657, and valsartan), HCTZ, amlodipine, or carvedilol (R[+]- and S[-]-carvedilol) for statistical analysis. When coadministered LCZ696 with HCTZ, the 90% CIs of the geometric mean ratios of AUCtau,ss of HCTZ and that of LBQ657 were within a 0.80-1.25 interval, whereas HCTZ Cmax,ss decreased by 26%, LBQ657 Cmax,ss increased by 19%, and the AUCtau,ss and Cmax,ss of valsartan increased by 14% and 16%, respectively. Pharmacokinetics of amlodipine, R(+)- and S(-)-carvedilol, or LBQ657 were not altered after coadministration of LCZ696 with amlodipine or carvedilol. Coadministration of LCZ696 400 mg once daily (qd) with HCTZ 25 mg qd, amlodipine 10 mg qd, or carvedilol 25 mg twice a day (bid) had no clinically relevant pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions. LCZ696, HCTZ, amlodipine, and carvedilol were safe and well tolerated when given alone or concomitantly in the investigated studies.

Assessment of pharmacokinetic drug-drug interaction between pradigastat and acetaminophen in healthy subjects

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of pradigastat, a diacylglycerol acyltransferase-1 inhibitor, on the pharmacokinetics of acetaminophen, a gastric emptying marker.

METHODS

Twenty-five healthy subjects were enrolled and received 1000 mg acetaminophen with meal in period 1, pradigastat (100 mg × 3 days followed by 40 mg × 7 days, 1 h before meal) in period 2, and 1000 mg acetaminophen at -2, -1, 0, +1, and +3 h with respect to meal timing in presence of steady-state pradigastat (40-mg maintenance dose) during periods 3-7.

RESULTS

The geometric mean ratio and 90% confidence interval of Cmax and AUC of acetaminophen were within 80-125% suggesting that the rate ad extent of acetaminophen were not affected when given at various time points with respect to pradigastat/meal timing. The acetaminophen Tmax was also not impacted under all treatment conditions but increased from 0.75 to 2.00 h when administered 1 h after food.

CONCLUSION

In the presence of steady-state pradigastat, the pharmacokinetics of acetaminophen is unchanged, when given before, with, or 3 h after a meal. However, when given 1 h after a meal, the Tmax of acetaminophen was delayed by ∼1.25 h without affecting Cmax or AUC.