Grace Chen

Population pharmacokinetic meta-analysis of vortioxetine in healthy individuals.

The objective was to describe the pharmacokinetics of vortioxetine and evaluate the effect of intrinsic and extrinsic factors in the healthy population. Data from 26 clinical pharmacology studies were pooled. A total of 21,758 vortioxetine quantifiable plasma concentrations were collected from 887 subjects with corresponding demography. The doses ranged from 2.5 to 75 mg (single dose) and 2.5–60 mg (multiple QD doses). The pharmacokinetics of vortioxetine was best characterised by a two‐compartment model with first‐order absorption, lag‐time and linear elimination, with interindividual error terms for absorption rate constant, oral clearance and central volume of distribution. The population mean was 32.7 L/hr for oral clearance and 1.97∙103 L for the central volume of distribution. The average elimination half‐life was 65.8 hr. CYP2D6 inferred metabolic status (ultra, extensive, intermediate or poor metabolisers) and age on oral clearance and height on central volume of distribution were identified as statistically significant covariate–parameter relationships. For CYP2D6 poor metabolisers, CL/F was approximately 50% to that seen in CYP2D6 extensive metabolisers. The impact of height on V2/F and age on CL/F was low and not considered to be clinically relevant. The final model was found to be reliable, stable and predictive. A reliable, stable and predictive pharmacokinetic model was developed to characterise pharmacokinetics of vortioxetine in the healthy population.

Lack of effect of multiple doses of vortioxetine on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of aspirin and warfarin

Vortioxetine is an antidepressant with multimodal activity approved for the treatment of major depressive disorder. Two separate randomized, placebo‐controlled trials evaluated the effects of multiple doses of vortioxetine (10 mg/day) on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of aspirin and warfarin in healthy volunteers. In the aspirin study, subjects received vortioxetine 10 mg or placebo once daily for 14 days, followed by coadministration with aspirin 150 mg once daily for 6 days, in 2 periods with a crossover design. In the warfarin study, subjects were randomized after reaching target international normalized ratio (INR) values on warfarin to receive vortioxetine 10 mg or matching placebo once daily for 14 days, with all subjects receiving a maintenance dose of warfarin (1–10 mg). Vortioxetine had no effect on the steady‐state pharmacokinetic parameters of aspirin or its metabolite salicylic acid, and no statistically significant effect on the inhibition of arachidonic acid‐, adenosine‐5′‐diphosphate‐, or collagen‐induced platelet aggregation at any time points. Coadministration of vortioxetine did not alter the pharmacokinetics of (R)‐ and (S)‐warfarin enantiomers, or the mean coagulation parameters of warfarin treatment alone. Coadministration of vortioxetine doses in healthy volunteers had no effect on aspirin or warfarin pharmacokinetics or pharmacodynamics. Vortioxetine was well tolerated when coadministered with aspirin or warfarin.

A Population Pharmacokinetic–Pharmacodynamic Meta-Analysis of Vortioxetine in Patients with Major Depressive Disorder

Vortioxetine is approved for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD). This analysis aimed to develop pharmacokinetic (PK) and PK/Efficacy models to evaluate the exposure–response relationship for vortioxetine in patients with MDD. PK data from 10 MDD and two generalized anxiety disorder studies of vortioxetine (3160 patients), and efficacy data [Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS)] from seven MDD studies (2537 patients), were used for the development of PK and PK/Efficacy models. One‐ and two‐compartment models were evaluated as structural PK models, and linear and nonlinear (Emax) models were used to describe the relationship between average vortioxetine concentration at steady‐state (Cav) and change in MADRS score from baseline (ΔMADRS). The impact of selected covariates on the PK and efficacy parameters of vortioxetine was also investigated. PK of vortioxetine was best characterized by a two‐compartment model with first‐order absorption and elimination. Mean estimates for oral clearance (CL/F) and volume of distribution for the central compartment of vortioxetine were 42 L/hr and 2920 L. Creatinine clearance, height and geographic region had statistically significant effects on vortioxetine CL/F, but the effect of each of these covariates was not considered clinically relevant, as they lead to ±26% change in area under the curve or Cmax of vortioxetine. An Emax model best described the relationship between ΔMADRS and Cav. Half‐maximal effective concentration (EC50) and Emax estimates were 24.9 ng/mL and 7.0. No identified covariates, except region, had clinically meaningful effects on vortioxetine efficacy. These PK/Efficacy models adequately characterized the vortioxetine exposure–response relationship.

Lack of Effect of Vortioxetine on the Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Ethanol, Diazepam, and Lithium

IntroductionBecause the multimodal antidepressant vortioxetine is likely to be coadministered with other central nervous system (CNS)-active drugs, potential drug–drug interactions warrant examination.ObjectiveThese studies evaluated whether there are pharmacokinetic and/or pharmacodynamic interactions between vortioxetine and ethanol, diazepam, or lithium.MethodsThis series of phase I studies included healthy men and women (only men in the lithium study) aged 18–45 years. The ethanol study was a randomized, double-blind, two-parallel group, four-period crossover study in which subjects received a single dose of vortioxetine (20 or 40 mg) or placebo with or without ethanol, and the diazepam study was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, two-sequence, two-period crossover study in which subjects received a single dose of diazepam following multiple doses of vortioxetine 10 mg/day or placebo. These two studies evaluated the effect of coadministration on standardized psychomotor parameters and on selected pharmacokinetic parameters of each drug. The lithium study was a single-blind, single-sequence study evaluating the effect of multiple doses of vortioxetine 10 mg/day on the steady-state pharmacokinetics of lithium.ResultsConcomitant administration of vortioxetine and single doses of either ethanol or diazepam had no significant effect on the psychomotor performance of subjects compared with administration of ethanol or diazepam alone. Vortioxetine had no significant effect on the pharmacokinetics of ethanol, diazepam, or lithium, and ethanol had no significant effect on the pharmacokinetics of vortioxetine.ConclusionsConcomitant administration of these agents with vortioxetine was generally well tolerated, with no clinically relevant drug–drug pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic interactions identified.

Pharmacokinetics and Safety of Vortioxetine in Pediatric Patients

Abstract Objective: The primary objectives of this study were to evaluate the pharmacokinetics (PK) and tolerability of single and multiple doses of vortioxetine in children and adolescents with a depressive or anxiety disorder and to provide supportive information for appropriate dosing regimens for pediatric clinical trials. Methods: This prospective, open-label, multinational, multisite, multiple-dose trial enrolled 48 patients (children and adolescents; 1:1 ratio) divided into 8 cohorts (4 adolescent and 4 child), with each cohort including 6 patients. The cohorts in each age group were assigned to receive one of four dosing regimens: vortioxetine 5, 10, 15, or 20 mg q.d. for 14 days. The total treatment period lasted 14–20 days with patients in the higher dose cohorts uptitrated over 2–6 days. Plasma samples for PK analysis were obtained on the first and last days of dosing. Results: Among children and adolescents, respectively, 62% and 92% had depression and 58% and 33% had anxiety disorder. Comorbid attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) was present in 50% of children and 38% of adolescents. After 14 days q.d. at the target dose, the PK of vortioxetine concentrations was generally proportional to the dose in both age groups. Exposure, as assessed by maximum plasma concentrations and area under the plasma concentration–time curve from time 0 to 24 hours, was 30%–40% lower in adolescents than in children. There was no significant relationship between sex, height, or ADHD diagnosis and PK parameters. Most adverse events were mild in severity and consistent with those seen in adults. Conclusion: The results suggest that the dosages of vortioxetine evaluated (5–20 mg q.d.; approved for treatment in adults) and the uptitration schedule used are appropriate for pediatric efficacy and safety trials.

A 6-Month Open-Label Extension Study of Vortioxetine in Pediatric Patients with Depressive or Anxiety Disorders

Abstract Objectives: In this 6-month open-label extension (OLE) of NCT01491035 (a 14-day, open-label, pharmacokinetic/safety lead-in study), the long-term safety and tolerability of vortioxetine (5–20 mg/day) were investigated in children and adolescents with a DSM-IV-TR™ diagnosis of depressive or anxiety disorder in the United States or Germany. The study also was designed to provide data to inform dose selection and titration in future pediatric studies with vortioxetine. Methods: Safety evaluations included spontaneously reported adverse events (AEs), the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS), and the Pediatric Adverse Events Rating Scale (PAERS; clinician administered). Clinical effectiveness was determined by Clinical Global Impressions. Comorbid attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder was permitted, including concomitant use of stimulant medication (US sites only). Results: Of the 47 patients who completed the lead-in period, 41 continued into the OLE. Most patients (n = 39 [95%]) continued their previous dose regimen. Twenty-one patients (51%) withdrew during the OLE; the most common primary reasons were administrative [n = 8], AEs [n = 4], and lack of efficacy [n = 3]. Thirty-five patients (85%) had ≥1 AE, 86% of which were mild or moderate in severity. Five patients (12%) reported a severe AE, none of which was considered related to study medication. The most common AEs (≥10%) were headache (27%), nausea (20%), dysmenorrhea (females; 19%), and vomiting (15%), with no relationship between AE intensity and age or dose. Five patients reported instances of suicidal ideation during the OLE, one of whom also reported this during the lead-in period. Two patients had nonsuicidal self-injurious behavior; one had a nonfatal suicide attempt. Throughout the study, there was a decrease over time in the incidence and intensity of AEs collected using the PAERS. Effectiveness assessment indicated a trend toward improvement based on numeric results. Conclusion: This OLE confirms the findings from the lead-in study, which concluded that a dosing strategy of 5–20 mg/day is safe, well tolerated, and suitable for future clinical studies of vortioxetine in pediatric patients.

Effects of Intrinsic Factors on the Clinical Pharmacokinetics of Vortioxetine

Vortioxetine is an antidepressant agent with multimodal activity that is approved for the treatment of major depressive disorder at doses of 5 to 20 mg once daily. Vortioxetine is a medium‐clearance drug that undergoes extensive metabolism via several cytochrome P450 isozymes. A series of single‐ and multiple‐dose pharmacokinetic studies were performed to evaluate the impact of intrinsic (ie, subject‐related) factors, such as age, sex, race, and renal and hepatic function, on the pharmacokinetics of vortioxetine. The point estimates on the ratios and their 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for the central values of AUC (area under the concentration‐time curve) and Cmax (maximum plasma concentration) were obtained by taking the antilog of the differences and 90%CIs in the log‐transformed least‐squares means. The results demonstrate that there were no clinically meaningful differences (defined as exposure difference between 50% and 2‐fold change) in the exposure to vortioxetine (as assessed by AUC and Cmax) between elderly and younger subjects, men and women, and blacks and whites and among subjects with varying degrees of renal or hepatic impairment. These results suggest that no dosing adjustments of vortioxetine are required for the intrinsic factors investigated in these studies.