Effect of grapefruit juice and food on the pharmacokinetics of pirfenidone in healthy Chinese volunteers: a diet-drug interaction study

Prolonged release pirfenidone pharmacokinetics is modified in cirrhosis GENESIS study

BACKGROUND

In both clinical and experimental trials, pirfenidone (PFD) showed anti-inflammatory and antifibrogenic effects. Considering the wide variation in hepatic functional reserve in patients with cirrhosis, we decided to learn more about the pharmacokinetics of a new formulation of prolonged release PFD in this population (PR-PFD), focusing on assessing changes on AUC0-∞, AUC0-t, and Cmax.

METHODS

In this study, 24 subjects with cirrhosis were included: eight subjects with mild liver impairment (Child-Pugh A) and eight with moderate liver impairment (Child-Pugh B), and a third group of eight age-matched subjects without fibrosis. All participants were under fasting conditions before receiving orally two 600-mg tablets of a prolonged-release formulation of pirfenidone (PR-PFD) and remained in the clinical unit for 36 h after PR-PFD administration. Serial blood samples were collected after dosing (0.5-36 h). A validated high-performance liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry method was used to determine PFD plasma concentrations.

RESULTS

The exposure to PR-PFD was 3.6- and 4.4-fold greater in subjects with Child-Pugh A and Child-Pugh B than in subjects without cirrhosis, and Cmax was 1.6- and 1.8-fold greater in subjects with Child-Pugh B and Child-Pugh-A than in patients without cirrhosis, without significant differences between the two cirrhotic groups. PFD was well tolerated.

CONCLUSION

The pharmacokinetic parameters of PR-PFD are significantly modified in patients with cirrhosis compared with those in controls, indicating that liver impairment should be considered in clinical practice.

Multicenter Population Pharmacokinetics and Exposure-Efficacy Analysis of Pirfenidone in Patients with Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Pirfenidone is an antifibrotic agent that has been proven to slow down the progression of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF). This study aimed to characterize the population pharmacokinetics (PK) and exposure-efficacy analysis of pirfenidone in patients with IPF.

METHODS

Data from 10 hospitals with 106 patients were used to develop a population PK model. The annual decline in forced vital capacity (FVC) over 52 weeks was integrated with pirfenidone plasma concentration to characterize the exposure-efficacy relationship.

RESULTS

A linear one-compartment model with first-order absorption and elimination processes and lag time best described the pirfenidone PK. The population estimates of clearance and central volume of distribution at steady-state were 13.37 L/h and 53.62 L, respectively. Bodyweight and food were statistically correlated with PK variability but had no significant influence on pirfenidone exposure. Annual decline in FVC with pirfenidone plasma concentration was described by a maximum drug effect (Emax) model. The typical EC50 was 1.73 mg/L (1.18-2.31 mg/L) and the corresponding EC80 was 2.18 mg/L (1.49-2.87 mg/L). Simulations showed that two dosing regimens of 500 and 600 mg three times daily were predicted to generate 80% of the Emax.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with IPF, covariates such as bodyweight and food might not be sufficient for dose adjustment, and a low dose of 1500 mg/day could also provide 80% of the Emax, as the standard dose (1800 mg/day).

Pirfenidone 5-hydroxylation is mainly catalysed by CYP1A2 and partly catalysed by CYP2C19 and CYP2D6 in the human liver

Pirfenidone is a first-line drug for the treatment of idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. The primary metabolic pathways of pirfenidone in humans are 5-hydroxylation and subsequent oxidation to 5-carboxylpirfenidone. The aims of this study were to determine the cytochrome P450 isoforms responsible for pirfenidone 5-hydroxylation and to evaluate their contributions in human liver microsomes (HLM).Among the recombinant P450 isoforms, CYP1A2, CYP2D6, CYP2C19, CYP2A6, and CYP2B6 were shown to catalyse the 5-hydroxylation of pirfenidone. Pirfenidone 5-hydroxylase activity by HLM was inhibited by α-naphthoflavone (by 45%), 8-methoxypsolaren (by 84%), tranylcypromine (by 53%), and quinidine (by 15%), which are CYP1A2, CYP1A2/CYP2A6/CYP2C19, CYP2A6/CYP2C19, and CYP2D6 inhibitors, respectively.In 17 individual HLM donors, pirfenidone 5-hydroxylase activity was significantly correlated with phenacetin O-deethylase (r = 0.89, P < 0.001) and S-mephenytoin 4'-hydroxylase activities (r = 0.51, P < 0.05), which are CYP1A2 and CYP2C19 marker activities, respectively.By using the relative activity factors, the contributions of CYP1A2, CYP2C19, and CYP2D6 to pirfenidone 5-hydroxylation in the human liver were 72.8%, 11.8%, and 8.9%, respectively.In conclusion, we clearly demonstrated the predominant P450 involved in pirfenidone 5-hydroxylation in the human liver is CYP1A2, with CYP2C19 and CYP2D6 playing a minor role.

A Questionnaire-Based Survey to Assess the Level of Knowledge and Awareness about Drug-Food Interactions among General Public in Western Saudi Arabia

Introduction: Various drug-food interactions exist that may hinder treatment and can sometimes be lethal. Our aim was to assess the level of public knowledge and awareness in Jeddah city, Western Saudi Arabia, about drug-food interactions, along with the effects of demographics on their knowledge. Methods: A survey questionnaire was administered in this cross-sectional study to participants spread across multiple locations in Jeddah, including in malls and public gatherings. Participants included both males and females. Sample size was calculated through Raosoft^® software. Data analysis was executed using IBM Statistic SPSS and the level of statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. Results: A total of 410 people participated in the study and only 92.68% (380) of responses were enrolled in the study; 7.32% (30) were not enrolled due to the exclusion criteria. Surprisingly, only six out of eighteen questions regarding drug-food interactions in the administered questionnaire were correctly answered by 380 participants. Data indicated that the participants had a poor to intermediate level of both knowledge and awareness with respect to drug-food interactions. Furthermore, participants showed moderate to strong awareness of the effects of alcohol and tea generally, and their interaction with medication. Conclusion: Participants in our study showed inadequate knowledge of basic and fundamental information about drug-food interactions, which highlights the dire need to increase awareness.

Gastrointestinal interactions, absorption, splanchnic metabolism and pharmacokinetics of orally ingested phenolic compounds

The positive health effects of phenolic compounds (PCs) have been extensively reported in the literature. An understanding of their bioaccessibility and bioavailability is essential for the elucidation of their health benefits. Before reaching circulation and exerting bioactions in target tissues, numerous interactions take place before and during digestion with either the plant or host's macromolecules that directly impact the organism and modulate their own bioaccessibility and bioavailability. The present work is focused on the gastrointestinal (GI) interactions that are relevant to the absorption and metabolism of PCs and how these interactions impact their pharmacokinetic profiles. Non-digestible cell wall components (fiber) interact intimately with PCs and delay their absorption in the small intestine, instead carrying them to the large intestine. PCs not bound to fiber interact with digestible nutrients in the bolus where they interfere with the digestion and absorption of proteins, carbohydrates, lipids, cholesterol, bile salts and micronutrients through the inhibition of digestive enzymes and enterocyte transporters and the disruption of micelle formation. PCs internalized by enterocytes may reach circulation (through transcellular or paracellular transport), be effluxed back into the lumen (P-glycoprotein, P-gp) or be metabolized by phase I and phase II enzymes. Some PCs can inhibit P-gp or phase I/II enzymes, which can potentially lead to drug-nutrient interactions. The absorption and pharmacokinetic parameters are modified by all of the interactions within the digestive tract and by the presence of other PCs. Undesirable interactions have promoted the development of nanotechnological approaches to promote the bioaccessibility, bioavailability, and bioefficacy of PCs.

A Pharmacokinetic Bioequivalence Study Comparing Pirfenidone Tablet and Capsule Dosage Forms in Healthy Adult Volunteers

Introduction

Pirfenidone film-coated tablets were developed to offer an alternative to the marketed capsule formulation. This study assessed the bioequivalence of the tablet and capsule formulations under fed and fasted states.

Methods

A Phase I, open-label, randomized, four-treatment-period, four-sequence, crossover pharmacokinetics study (NCT02525484) was conducted. Each subject received an 801-mg single dose of pirfenidone as three 267-mg capsules or one 801-mg tablet under fasted and fed conditions. Pirfenidone plasma C_max, AUC_0–t and AUC_0–∞ were used to assess bioequivalence.

Results

Forty-four subjects were randomized to treatment. The 801-mg tablet in the fasted state met bioequivalence criteria [90% confidence intervals (CI) 80.00–125.00%] for the GLSM ratios of natural log-transformed C_max, AUC_0–t and AUC_0–∞. Under fed conditions, the 801-mg tablet met the bioequivalence criteria for AUC_0–t and AUC_0–∞, but slightly exceeded the bioequivalence criteria for the C_max (90% CI of 108.26–125.60%). The tablet C_max was approximately 17% higher than that of the capsules. In the fed state, the tablet C_max, and both AUC_0–t and AUC_0–∞ were reduced by 39% and 17%, respectively, relative to the fasted state. The tablet and capsules had acceptable tolerability profiles.

Conclusions

The pirfenidone 801-mg tablet met bioequivalence criteria when compared with three 267-mg capsules in the fasted state. The tablet C_max was slightly higher relative to capsules in the fed state, but this is not expected to have a clinically meaningful impact on the benefit–risk profile of pirfenidone.

Funding

This work was supported by F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s12325-017-0594-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.