Single-dose bioequivalence of 105-mg fenofibric acid tablets versus 145-mg fenofibrate tablets under fasting and fed conditions: a report of two phase I, open-label, single-dose, randomized, crossover clinical trials

Safety and pharmacokinetic comparison between fenofibric acid 135 mg capsule and 110 mg enteric-coated tablet in healthy volunteers

This study aimed to compare the pharmacokinetic (PK) and safety profiles of 2 fenofibric acid formulations under fasting and fed conditions. The reference was a 135 mg capsule, while the test was a 110 mg enteric-coated tablet. This randomized, open-label, two-sequence, two-period crossover phase 1 clinical trial was conducted in healthy Korean men. Sixty participants were enrolled in each of the fasting and feeding groups. Blood samples were collected 72 hours after drug administration. PK parameters were calculated using a non-compartmental method with Phoenix WinNonlin^®. A total of 53 and 51 participants from the fasting and feeding groups, respectively, completed the study. The geometric mean ratio and 90% confidence intervals of the maximum concentration (C_max) and area under the concentration-time curve to the last measurable plasma concentration were 0.9195 (0.8795-0.9614) and 0.8630 (0.8472-0.8791) in the fasting study and 1.0926 (1.0102-1.1818) and 0.9998 (0.9675-1.0332) in the fed study, respectively. The time to reach C_max of the enteric-coated tablet compared to that of the capsule was extended by 1 and 3 hours under fasting and fed conditions, respectively. In conclusion, enteric-coated tablets have a higher bioavailability than capsules. In addition, the enteric-coated tablet was smaller than the capsule, making it easier for patients to swallow.

Trial Registration

Clinical Research Information Service Identifier: KCT0007177, KCT0003304.

Efficacy and safety of metabolic interventions for the treatment of severe COVID-19: in vitro, observational, and non-randomized open-label interventional study

Background

Viral infection is associated with a significant rewire of the host metabolic pathways, presenting attractive metabolic targets for intervention.

Methods

We chart the metabolic response of lung epithelial cells to SARS-CoV-2 infection in primary cultures and COVID-19 patient samples and perform in vitro metabolism-focused drug screen on primary lung epithelial cells infected with different strains of the virus. We perform observational analysis of Israeli patients hospitalized due to COVID-19 and comparative epidemiological analysis from cohorts in Italy and the Veteran's Health Administration in the United States. In addition, we perform a prospective non-randomized interventional open-label study in which 15 patients hospitalized with severe COVID-19 were given 145 mg/day of nanocrystallized fenofibrate added to the standard of care.

Results

SARS-CoV-2 infection produced transcriptional changes associated with increased glycolysis and lipid accumulation. Metabolism-focused drug screen showed that fenofibrate reversed lipid accumulation and blocked SARS-CoV-2 replication through a PPARα-dependent mechanism in both alpha and delta variants. Analysis of 3233 Israeli patients hospitalized due to COVID-19 supported in vitro findings. Patients taking fibrates showed significantly lower markers of immunoinflammation and faster recovery. Additional corroboration was received by comparative epidemiological analysis from cohorts in Europe and the United States. A subsequent prospective non-randomized interventional open-label study was carried out on 15 patients hospitalized with severe COVID-19. The patients were treated with 145 mg/day of nanocrystallized fenofibrate in addition to standard-of-care. Patients receiving fenofibrate demonstrated a rapid reduction in inflammation and a significantly faster recovery compared to patients admitted during the same period.

Conclusions

Taken together, our data suggest that pharmacological modulation of PPARα should be strongly considered as a potential therapeutic approach for SARS-CoV-2 infection and emphasizes the need to complete the study of fenofibrate in large randomized controlled clinical trials.

Funding

Funding was provided by European Research Council Consolidator Grants OCLD (project no. 681870) and generous gifts from the Nikoh Foundation and the Sam and Rina Frankel Foundation (YN). The interventional study was supported by Abbott (project FENOC0003).

Clinical trial number

NCT04661930.

A Fenofibrate Diet Prevents Paclitaxel-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy in Mice

Simple Summary

Paclitaxel, a drug used in the treatment of malignancies such as lung, ovarian and breast cancer, often produces severe side effects, among which is peripheral neuropathy. This neuropathy involves diffuse or localized pain, notably burning pain, cold and mechanical hyperexcitability. Recently, fenofibrate, a Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved drug for the treatment of dyslipidemia, has been shown to reduce the severity of symptoms in other forms of peripheral neuropathy. In the current work, we tested whether fenofibrate could reverse mechanical and cold hypersensitivity and improve motivation and the reduction in nerve conduction in a mouse model of paclitaxel-induced neuropathy. Our behavioral, histological and molecular assessments indicate that fenofibrate prevents the development of paclitaxel-induced neuropathy. Taken together, our studies support the therapeutic potential of fenofibrate in the prevention of paclitaxel-induced neuropathy and suggest the possible repurposing of this drug for this purpose in the clinic.

Abstract

Background: Paclitaxel-induced peripheral neuropathy (PIPN) is a major adverse effect of this chemotherapeutic agent that is used in the treatment of a number of solid malignancies. PIPN leads notably to burning pain, cold and mechanical allodynia. PIPN is thought to be a consequence of alterations of mitochondrial function, hyperexcitability of neurons, nerve fiber loss, oxidative stress and neuroinflammation in dorsal root ganglia (DRG) and spinal cord (SC). Therefore, reducing neuroinflammation could potentially attenuate neuropathy symptoms. Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-α (PPAR-α) nuclear receptors that modulate inflammatory responses can be targeted by non-selective agonists, such as fenofibrate, which is used in the treatment of dyslipidemia. Methods: Our studies tested the efficacy of a fenofibrate diet (0.2% and 0.4%) in preventing the development of PIPN. Paclitaxel (8 mg/kg) was administered via 4 intraperitoneal (i.p.) injections in C57BL/6J mice (both male and female). Mechanical and cold hypersensitivity, wheel running activity, sensory nerve action potential (SNAP), sciatic nerve histology, intra-epidermal fibers, as well as the expression of PPAR-α and neuroinflammation were evaluated in DRG and SC. Results: Fenofibrate in the diet partially prevented the development of mechanical hypersensitivity but completely prevented cold hypersensitivity and the decrease in wheel running activity induced by paclitaxel. The reduction in SNAP amplitude induced by paclitaxel was also prevented by fenofibrate. Our results indicate that suppression of paclitaxel-induced pain by fenofibrate involves the regulation of PPAR-α expression through reduction in neuroinflammation. Finally, co-administration of paclitaxel and the active metabolite of fenofibrate (fenofibric acid) did not interfere with the suppression of tumor cell growth or clonogenicity by paclitaxel in ovarian and breast cancer cell lines. Conclusions: Taken together, our results show the therapeutic potential of fenofibrate in the prevention of PIPN development.

Comparative In Vitro and In Vivo Evaluation of Fenofibric Acid as an Antihyperlipidemic Drug

Objectives

Fenofibric acid (FA) is antihyperlipidemic agent and commercially available as a tablet formulation that weighs 840 mg for 105 mg of active substance. A new formulation with less inactive substance was developed as an alternative to the conventional formulation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the dissolution and the relative bioavailability of the surface solid dispersion (SSD) and conventional formulations of FA by comparing them with the reference formulation in its commercial tablets. The in vitro-in vivo correlation among these tablet formulations was also evaluated.

Materials and Methods

The dissolution study was performed in phosphate buffer pH 6.8 and biorelevant fasted state simulated intestinal fluid. Dissolution efficiency and mean dissolution time (MDT) were used to compare the dissolution profiles. The bioavailability study, using nine healthy volunteers, was conducted based on a single-dose, fasted, randomized, crossover design. The in vivo performance was compared using the pharmacokinetic parameters C_max, T_max, AUC_0-72, and AUC_0-∞. A linear correlation model was tested using MDT and mean residence time (MRT).

Results

The results indicated that there were significant differences in the dissolution performances but no significant differences among the mean C_max, T_max, AUC_0-72, or AUC_0-∞ estimated from the SSD, conventional, and reference formulations. A poor correlation was found between MRT and MDT of the three formulations.

Conclusion

The SSD formulation led to an instantaneous dissolution of the drug due to the presence of the polymer and the physical structure of the SSD. The conventional formulation could not achieve rapid dissolution despite its satisfying the requirement for immediate drug release dosage form. Both formulations could be considered bioequivalent with the reference. The in vitro dissolution behavior of FA using a single medium did not reflect their in vivo properties in the fasted condition. There was no correlation between the in vitro dissolution and the in vivo bioavailability of FA in this condition.

The role of human carboxylesterases in drug metabolism: have we overlooked their importance?

Carboxylesterases are a multigene family of mammalian enzymes widely distributed throughout the body that catalyze the hydrolysis of esters, amides, thioesters, and carbamates. In humans, two carboxylesterases, hCE1 and hCE2, are important mediators of drug metabolism. Both are expressed in the liver, but hCE1 greatly exceeds hCE2. In the intestine, only hCE2 is present and highly expressed. The most common drug substrates of these enzymes are ester prodrugs specifically designed to enhance oral bioavailability by hydrolysis to the active carboxylic acid after absorption from the gastrointestinal tract. Carboxylesterases also play an important role in the hydrolysis of some drugs to inactive metabolites. It has been widely believed that drugs undergoing hydrolysis by hCE1 and hCE2 are not subject to clinically significant alterations in their disposition, but evidence exists that genetic polymorphisms, drug-drug interactions, drug-disease interactions and other factors are important determinants of the variability in the therapeutic response to carboxylesterase-substrate drugs. The implications for drug therapy are far-reaching, as substrate drugs include numerous examples from widely prescribed therapeutic classes. Representative drugs include angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, antiplatelet drugs, statins, antivirals, and central nervous system agents. As research interest increases in the carboxylesterases, evidence is accumulating of their important role in drug metabolism and, therefore, the outcomes of pharmacotherapy.

A Review of Currently Available Fenofibrate and Fenofibric Acid Formulations

Fenofibrate is a third-generation fibric acid derivative indicated as a monotherapy to reduce elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, total cholesterol, triglycerides, and apolipoprotein B; to increase high-density lipoprotein cholesterol in patients with primary hyperlipidemia or mixed dyslipidemia; and to reduce triglycerides in patients with severe hypertriglyceridemia. In this review, the key characteristics of available fenofibrate formulations are examined. A literature search was conducted, focusing on comparative studies examining bioavailability, food effects, absorption, and lipid efficacy. Fenofibrate is highly lipophilic, virtually insoluble in water, and poorly absorbed. Coadministration with meals was necessary to maximize bioavailability of early formulations. Micronized and nanoparticle formulations of fenofibrate with reduced particle sizes were developed, resulting in greater solubility, improved bioavailability, and in some cases, the ability to be given irrespective of food. A recently introduced hydrophilic choline salt of fenofibric acid also can be taken without regard to meals, is absorbed throughout the gastrointestinal tract, has the highest bioavailability among marketed formulations, and is approved for coadministration with a statin. Differences in bioavailability of fenofibrate formulations have resulted in low-dose (40 - 67) mg and standard-dose (120 - 200 mg) formulations. Different formulations are not equivalent on a milligram-to-milligram basis. In order to prevent medication errors, resulting in underdosing or overdosing with attendant consequences, it is important for healthcare providers to recognize that the formulations of fenofibrate and fenofibric acid that are currently available vary substantially in relation to food effect, equivalency on a milligram-to-milligram basis, and indication to be coadministered with a statin.

Peroxisome Proliferator-Activated Receptor-α Agonism With Fenofibrate Does Not Suppress Inflammatory Responses to Evoked Endotoxemia

Background

Data conflict with regard to whether peroxisome proliferator–activated receptor-α agonism suppresses inflammation in humans. We hypothesized that in healthy adults peroxisome proliferator–activated receptor-α agonism with fenofibrate would blunt the induced immune responses to endotoxin (lipopolysaccharide [LPS]), an in vivo model for the study of cardiometabolic inflammation.

Methods and Results

In the Fenofibrate and omega-3 Fatty Acid Modulation of Endotoxemia (FFAME) trial, 36 healthy volunteers (mean age 26±7 years, mean body mass index 24±3 kg/m², 44% female, 72% white) were randomized to fenofibrate 145 mg or placebo daily. After 6 to 8 weeks of treatment, subjects underwent a low-dose LPS challenge. Clinical and blood measurements were collected at randomization, before LPS administration, and serially for 24 hours after LPS administration. We examined area under the curve for evoked responses by treatment group. Compared to placebo, but before LPS challenge, fenofibrate reduced total cholesterol and tended to decrease triglycerides, consistent with achieved therapeutic plasma levels of fenofibric acid. In the placebo group, LPS induced a modest inflammatory response with increased cytokines and chemokines (2- to 4-hour post-LPS 8-fold increase in tumor necrosis factor-α, 9-fold increase in interleukin-6, 9-fold increase in interleukin-10, and 10-fold increase in monocyte chemotactic protein-1; all P<0.001) and acute-phase reactants (24-hour post-LPS 15-fold increase in serum amyloid A and 9-fold increase in C-reactive protein; both P<0.001). Compared to placebo, however, fenofibrate did not significantly attenuate LPS-induced levels of plasma cytokines, chemokines, or acute-phase proteins.

Conclusions

These data suggest a lack of systemic antiinflammatory properties of fenofibrate at clinically relevant dosing in humans.

Clinical Trial Registration

URL: http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01048502. Unique identifier: NCT01048502. (J Am Heart Assoc. 2012;1:e002923 doi: 10.1161/JAHA.112.002923.)