Pharmacokinetics of Rosuvastatin: A Systematic Review of Randomised Controlled Trials in Healthy Adults

Clinical Evaluation of the Effect of Encorafenib on Bupropion, Rosuvastatin, and Coproporphyrin I and Considerations for Statin Coadministration

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Encorafenib is a kinase inhibitor indicated for the treatment of patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma or metastatic colorectal cancer, respectively, with selected BRAF V600 mutations. A clinical drug-drug interaction (DDI) study was designed to evaluate the effect of encorafenib on rosuvastatin, a sensitive substrate of OATP1B1/3 and breast cancer resistance protein (BCRP), and bupropion, a sensitive CYP2B6 substrate. Coproporphyrin I (CP-I), an endogenous substrate for OATP1B1, was measured in a separate study to deconvolute the mechanism of transporter DDI.

METHODS

DDI study participants received a single oral dose of rosuvastatin (10 mg) and bupropion (75 mg) on days - 7, 1, and 14 and continuous doses of encorafenib (450 mg QD) and binimetinib (45 mg BID) starting on day 1. The CP-I data were collected from participants in a phase 3 study who received encorafenib (300 mg QD) and cetuximab (400 mg/m2 initial dose, then 250 mg/m2 QW). Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analysis was performed using noncompartmental and compartmental methods.

RESULTS

Bupropion exposure was not increased, whereas rosuvastatin Cmax and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) increased approximately 2.7 and 1.6-fold, respectively, following repeated doses of encorafenib and binimetinib. Increase in CP-I was minimal, suggesting that the primary effect of encorafenib on rosuvastatin is through BCRP. Categorization of statins on the basis of their metabolic and transporter profile suggests pravastatin would have the least potential for interaction when coadministered with encorafenib.

CONCLUSION

The results from these clinical studies suggest that encorafenib does not cause clinically relevant CYP2B6 induction or inhibition but is an inhibitor of BCRP and may also inhibit OATP1B1/3 to a lesser extent. Based on these results, it may be necessary to consider switching statins or reducing statin dosage accordingly for coadministration with encorafenib.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03864042, registered 6 March 2019.

Ticagrelor Increases Exposure to the Breast Cancer Resistance Protein Substrate Rosuvastatin

Ticagrelor and rosuvastatin are often used concomitantly after atherothrombotic events. Several cases of rhabdomyolysis during concomitant ticagrelor and rosuvastatin have been reported, suggesting a drug-drug interaction. We showed recently that ticagrelor inhibits breast cancer resistance protein (BCRP) and organic anion transporting polypeptide (OATP) 1B1, 1B3, and 2B1-mediated rosuvastatin transport in vitro. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of ticagrelor on rosuvastatin pharmacokinetics in humans. In a randomized, crossover study, 9 healthy volunteers ingested a single dose of 90 mg ticagrelor or placebo, followed by a single 10 mg dose of rosuvastatin 1 hour later. Ticagrelor 90 mg or placebo were additionally administered 12, 24, and 36 hours after their first dose. Ticagrelor increased rosuvastatin area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) and peak plasma concentration 2.6-fold (90% confidence intervals: 1.8-3.8 and 1.7-4.0, P = 0.001 and P = 0.003), and prolonged its half-life from 3.1 to 6.6 hours (P = 0.009). Ticagrelor also decreased the renal clearance of rosuvastatin by 11% (3%-19%, P = 0.032). The N-desmethylrosuvastatin:rosuvastatin AUC0-10h ratio remained unaffected by ticagrelor. Ticagrelor had no effect on the plasma concentrations of the endogenous OATP1B substrates glycodeoxycholate 3-O-glucuronide, glycochenodeoxycholate 3-O-glucuronide, glycodeoxycholate 3-O-sulfate, and glycochenodeoxycholate 3-O-sulfate, or the sodium-taurocholate cotransporting polypeptide substrate taurocholic acid. These data indicate that ticagrelor increases rosuvastatin concentrations more than twofold in humans, probably mainly by inhibiting intestinal BCRP. Because the risk for rosuvastatin-induced myotoxicity increases along with rosuvastatin plasma concentrations, using ticagrelor concomitantly with high doses of rosuvastatin should be avoided.

Influence of a Short Course of Ritonavir Used as Booster in Antiviral Therapies Against SARS-CoV-2 on the Exposure of Atorvastatin and Rosuvastatin

PURPOSE

Early antiviral treatment with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir is recommended for SARS-CoV-2-infected patients at high risk for severe courses. Such patients are usually chronically ill and susceptible to adverse drug interactions caused by ritonavir. We investigated the interactions of short-term low-dose ritonavir therapy with atorvastatin and rosuvastatin, two statins commonly used in this population.

METHOD

We assessed exposure changes (area under the concentration-time curve (AUC∞) and maximum concentration (Cmax)) of a single dose of 10 mg atorvastatin and 10 mg rosuvastatin before and on the fifth day of ritonavir treatment (2 × 100 mg/day) in healthy volunteers and developed a semi-mechanistic pharmacokinetic model to estimate dose adjustment of atorvastatin during ritonavir treatment.

RESULTS

By the fifth day of ritonavir treatment, the AUC∞ of atorvastatin increased 4.76-fold and Cmax 3.78-fold, and concurrently, the concentration of atorvastatin metabolites decreased to values below the lower limit of quantification. Pharmacokinetic modelling indicated that a stepwise reduction in atorvastatin dose during ritonavir treatment with a stepwise increase up to 4 days after ritonavir discontinuation can keep atorvastatin exposure within safe and effective margins. Rosuvastatin pharmacokinetics were only mildly modified; ritonavir significantly increased the Cmax 1.94-fold, while AUC∞ was unchanged.

CONCLUSION

Atorvastatin doses should likely be adjusted during nirmatrelvir/ritonavir treatment. For patients on a 20-mg dose, we recommend half of the original dose. In patients taking 40 mg or more, a quarter of the dose should be taken until 2 days after discontinuation of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir. Patients receiving rosuvastatin do not need to change their treatment regimen.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

EudraCT number: 2021-006634-39. DRKS00027838.

Ribociclib may potentiate rosuvastatin effect in causing late onset rhabdomyolysis

A woman in her 50s with metastatic hormone receptor positive breast cancer developed rhabdomyolysis and subsequent acute kidney injury while on a combination of ribociclib and rosuvastatin therapy. She had been taking both medications long term and had recently recommenced her ribociclib at her usual dose after a routine 1 week break. Cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors have been implicated in causing rhabdomyolysis by potentiating statin effect by way of inhibition of cytochrome P450 enzymatic action and decreasing hepatic membrane transporter function. This is the first case in which the combination of ribociclib and rosuvastatin has been shown to cause this adverse effect. It is also one of the first to demonstrate this effect occurring years after commencement of therapy. Continued vigilance for this side effect should be maintained long term.

The frequency of rs2231142 in ABCG2 among Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander subgroups: implications for personalized rosuvastatin dosing

Statins are among the most commonly prescribed medications worldwide. Rosuvastatin is a moderate- to high-intensity statin depending on the prescribed dose. Statin-associated muscle symptoms are the main side effects, contributing to low adherence to statins. The missense variant rs2231142 in ABCG2 affects the functionality of the ABCG2 transporter, altering the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of rosuvastatin. This special report aims to accentuate the importance of considering the ABCG2 genotype upon prescribing rosuvastatin in high cardiovascular disease risk subgroups, specifically Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander populations. Based on the reported frequencies of rs2231142 in ABCG2, it may be justifiable to initiate low-dose rosuvastatin in Samoans relative to Marshallese or Native Hawaiians. Interpopulation differences in pharmacogenetic allele frequencies underscore the need to disaggregate broad population categories to achieve health equity in treatment outcomes.

Synergistic antitumor activity of regorafenib and rosuvastatin in colorectal cancer

Introduction: Colorectal cancer is one of the most prevalent life-threatening malignant tumors with high incidence and mortality. However, the efficacy of current therapeutic regimens is very limited. Regorafenib has been approved for second- or third-line treatment of patients who are refractory to standard chemotherapy diagnosed with metastatic colorectal cancer, but its clinical efficacy needs to be further improved. Accumulating evidence demonstrates that statins also possess potent anticancer activities. However, whether regorafenib and statins pose synergistic anticancer effects in colorectal cancer is still unclear. Methods: Sulforhodamine B (SRB) assays were applied to evaluate the anti-proliferative activity of regorafenib or/and rosuvastatin in vitro, and immunoblotting analysis were applied to detect the effects of regorafenib/rosuvastatin combined treatment on mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) signaling and apoptosis-related proteins. MC38 tumors were applied to investigate the synergistic anticancer effects of regorafenib in combination with rosuvastatin in vivo. Results: We found that regorafenib in combination with rosuvastatin exerted significant synergistic inhibition against colorectal cancer growth in vitro and in vivo. Mechanistically, regorafenib and rosuvastatin combination synergistically suppressed MAPK signaling, a crucial signaling pathway promoting cell survival, as indicated by the reduction of phosphorylated MEK/ERK. In addition, regorafenib in combination with rosuvastatin synergistically induced the apoptosis of colorectal cancer in vitro and in vivo. Discussion: Our study demonstrated the synergistic anti-proliferative and pro-apoptotic effects of regorafenib/rosuvastatin combined treatment in colorectal cancer in vitro/vivo and might potentially be evaluated as a novel combination regimen for clinical treatment of colorectal cancer.

Pharmacokinetics and Bioequivalence of Two Formulations of Rosuvastatin Following Single-dose Administration in Healthy Chinese Subjects Under Fasted and Fed Conditions

The main objective of the study was to evaluate the bioequivalence of two rosuvastatin calcium tablets in healthy Chinese subjects under fasted and fed conditions. The study was carried out using a randomized, open-label, two-formulation, two-sequence, two-period, single-dose crossover design, with a washout period of 7 days. Both the fasted study and fed study enrolled 28 subjects. In each study period, the subjects were administrated a single oral dose of the test product or reference product of rosuvastatin 10 mg. Blood samples were collected from pre-dose to 72 hours after administration with 16 time points in total. Bioequivalence evaluation was performed using ln-transformed pharmacokinetic parameters of rosuvastatin, including C_max , AUC_0-t , and AUC_0-∞ . In the present study, 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of test/reference geometric mean ratios (GMRs) of C_max , AUC_0-t , and AUC_0-∞ under the fasted and fed conditions were all within the acceptance range of 80%-125%. Additionally, only one subject experienced one adverse event (AE). High-fat meals reduced the C_max , AUC_0-t , and AUC_0-∞ , but had no significant effects on the λz, t_1/2 , or T_max of rosuvastatin. In the current study, the test product was bioequivalent to the reference product, and a single dose of rosuvastatin (10 mg) was well-tolerated. Food decreased the systemic exposure of rosuvastatin without the effects on the T_max or elimination rate.

Quantitative prediction of breast cancer resistant protein mediated drug-drug interactions using physiologically-based pharmacokinetic modeling

Quantitative assessment of drug‐drug interactions (DDIs) involving breast cancer resistance protein (BCRP) inhibition is challenged by overlapping substrate/inhibitor specificity. This study used physiologically‐based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling to delineate the effects of inhibitor drugs on BCRP‐ and organic anion transporting polypeptide (OATP)1B‐mediated disposition of rosuvastatin, which is a recommended BCRP clinical probe. Initial static model analysis using in vitro inhibition data suggested BCRP/OATP1B DDI risk while considering regulatory cutoff criteria for a majority of inhibitors assessed (25 of 27), which increased rosuvastatin plasma exposure to varying degree (~ 0–600%). However, rosuvastatin area under plasma concentration‐time curve (AUC) was minimally impacted by BCRP inhibitors with calculated G‐value (= gut concentration/inhibition potency) below 100. A comprehensive PBPK model accounting for intestinal (OATP2B1 and BCRP), hepatic (OATP1B, BCRP, and MRP4), and renal (OAT3) transport mechanisms was developed for rosuvastatin. Adopting in vitro inhibition data, rosuvastatin plasma AUC changes were predicted within 25% error for 9 of 12 inhibitors evaluated via PBPK modeling. This study illustrates the adequacy and utility of a mechanistic model‐informed approach in quantitatively assessing BCRP‐mediated DDIs.