Hans Stieltjes

Food effects on abiraterone pharmacokinetics in healthy subjects and patients with metastatic castration‐resistant prostate cancer

Food effect on abiraterone pharmacokinetics and safety on abiraterone acetate coadministration with low‐fat or high‐fat meals was examined in healthy subjects and metastatic castration‐resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients. Healthy subjects (n = 36) were randomized to abiraterone acetate (single dose, 1000 mg) + low‐fat meal, + high‐fat meal, and fasted state. mCRPC patients received repeated doses (abiraterone acetate 1000 mg + 5 mg prednisone twice daily; days 1–7) in a modified fasting state followed by abiraterone acetate plus prednisone within 0.5 hours post–low‐fat (n = 6) or high‐fat meal (n = 18; days 8–14). In healthy subjects, geometric mean (GM) abiraterone area under plasma concentration–time curve (AUC) increased ∼5‐ and ∼10‐fold, respectively, with low‐fat and high‐fat meals versus fasted state (GM [coefficient of variation], 1942 [48] and 4077 [37] ng · h/mL vs 421 [67] ng · h/mL, respectively). In mCRPC patients, abiraterone AUC was ∼2‐fold higher with a high‐fat meal and similar with a low‐fat meal versus modified fasting state (GM [coefficient of variation]: 1992 [34] vs 973 [58] ng · h/mL and 1264 [65] vs 1185 [90] ng · h/mL, respectively). Adverse events (all grade ≤ 3) were similar, with high‐fat/low‐fat meals or fasted/modified fasting state. Short‐term dosing with food did not alter abiraterone acetate safety.

Effects of rifampin, cyclosporine A, and probenecid on the pharmacokinetic profile of canagliflozin, a sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor, in healthy participants.

Objective: Canagliflozin, a sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor, approved for the treatment of type-2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), is metabolized by uridine diphosphate-glucuronosyltransferases (UGT) 1A9 and UGT2B4, and is a substrate of P-glycoprotein (P-gp). Canagliflozin exposures may be affected by coadministration of drugs that induce (e.g., rifampin for UGT) or inhibit (e.g. probenecid for UGT; cyclosporine A for P-gp) these pathways. The primary objective of these three independent studies (single-center, open-label, fixed-sequence) was to evaluate the effects of rifampin (study 1), probenecid (study 2), and cyclosporine A (study 3) on the pharmacokinetics of canagliflozin in healthy participants. Methods: Participants received; in study 1: canagliflozin 300 mg (days 1 and 10), rifampin 600 mg (days 4 – 12); study 2: canagliflozin 300 mg (days 1 – 17), probenecid 500 mg twice daily (days 15 – 17); and study 3: canagliflozin 300 mg (days 1 – 8), cyclosporine A 400 mg (day 8). Pharmacokinetics were assessed at pre-specified intervals on days 1 and 10 (study 1); on days 14 and 17 (study 2), and on days 2 – 8 (study 3). Results: Rifampin decreased the maximum plasma canagliflozin concentration (Cmax) by 28% and its area under the curve (AUC) by 51%. Probenecid increased the Cmax by 13% and the AUC by 21%. Cyclosporine A increased the AUC by 23% but did not affect the Cmax. Conclusion: Coadministration of canagliflozin with rifampin, probenecid, and cyclosporine A was well-tolerated. No clinically meaningful interactions were observed for probenecid or cyclosporine A, while rifampin coadministration modestly reduced canagliflozin plasma concentrations and could necessitate an appropriate monitoring of glycemic control.

Effect of Hepatic or Renal Impairment on the Pharmacokinetics of Canagliflozin, a Sodium Glucose Co-transporter 2 Inhibitor

PURPOSE Canagliflozin is a sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor approved for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Because T2DM is often associated with renal or hepatic impairment, understanding the effects of these comorbid conditions on the pharmacokinetics of canagliflozin, and further assessing its safety, in these special populations is essential. Two open-label studies evaluated the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics (renal study only), and safety of canagliflozin in participants with hepatic or renal impairment. METHODS Participants in the hepatic study (8 in each group) were categorized based on their Child-Pugh score (normal hepatic function, mild impairment [Child-Pugh score of 5 or 6], and moderate impairment [Child-Pugh score of 7-9]) and received a single oral dose of canagliflozin 300 mg. Participants in the renal study (8 in each group) were categorized based on their creatinine clearance (CLCR) (normal renal function [CLCR ≥80 mL/min]; mild [CLCR 50 to <80 mL/min], moderate [CLCR 30 to <50 mL/min], or severe [CLCR <30 mL/min] renal impairment; and end-stage renal disease [ESRD]) and received a single oral dose of canagliflozin 200 mg; the exception was those with ESRD, who received 1 dose postdialysis and 1 dose predialysis (10 days later). Canagliflozins pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics (urinary glucose excretion [UGE] and renal threshold for glucose excretion [RTG]) were assessed at predetermined time points. FINDINGS Mean maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to infinite (AUC)0-∞ values differed by <11% between the group with normal hepatic function and those with mild and moderate hepatic impairment. In the renal study, the mean Cmax values were 13%, 29%, and 29% higher and the mean AUC0-∞ values were 17%, 63%, and 50% higher in participants with mild, moderate, and severe renal impairment, respectively; values were similar in the ESRD group relative to the group with normal function, however. The amount of UGE declined as renal function decreased, whereas RTG was not suppressed to the same extent in the moderate to severe renal impairment groups (mean RTG, 93-97 mg/dL) compared with the mild impairment and normal function groups (mean RTG, 68-77 mg/dL). IMPLICATIONS Canagliflozins pharmacokinetics were not affected by mild or moderate hepatic impairment. Systemic exposure to canagliflozin increased in the renal impairment groups relative to participants with normal renal function. Pharmacodynamic response to canagliflozin, measured by using UGE and RTG, declined with increasing severity of renal impairment. A single oral dose of canagliflozin was well tolerated by participants in both studies. ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT01186588 and NCT01759576.

Absolute oral bioavailability and pharmacokinetics of canagliflozin: A microdose study in healthy participants

Absolute oral bioavailability of canagliflozin was assessed by simultaneous oral administration with intravenous [14C]‐canagliflozin microdose infusion in nine healthy men. Pharmacokinetics of canagliflozin, [14C]‐canagliflozin, and total radioactivity, and safety and tolerability were assessed at prespecified timepoints. On day 1, single‐dose oral canagliflozin (300 mg) followed 105 minutes later by intravenous [14C]‐canagliflozin (10 µg, 200 nCi) was administered. After oral administration, the mean (SD) Cmax of canagliflozin was 2504 (482) ng/mL at 1.5 hours, AUC∞ 17,375 (3555) ng.h/mL, and t1/2 11.6 (0.70) hours. After intravenous administration, the mean (SD) Cmax of unchanged [14C]‐canagliflozin was 17,605 (6901) ng/mL, AUC∞ 27,100 (10,778) ng.h/mL, Vdss 83.5 (29.2) L, Vdz 119 (41.6) L, and CL 12.2 (3.79) L/h. Unchanged [14C]‐canagliflozin and metabolites accounted for about 57% and 43% of the plasma total [14C] radioactivity AUC∞, respectively. For total [14C] radioactivity, the mean (SD) Cmax was 15,981 (2721) ng‐eq/mL, and AUC∞ 53,755 (15,587) ng‐eq.h/mL. Renal (34.5% in urine) and biliary (34.1% in feces) excretions were the major elimination pathways for total [14C] radioactivity. The absolute oral bioavailability of canagliflozin was 65% (90% confidence interval: 55.41; 76.07). Overall, oral canagliflozin 300 mg coadministered with intravenous [14C]‐canagliflozin (10 µg) was generally well‐tolerated in healthy men, with no treatment‐emergent adverse events.

Impact on abiraterone pharmacokinetics and safety: Open-label drug–drug interaction studies with ketoconazole and rifampicin

We evaluated the impact of a strong CYP3A4 inhibitor, ketoconazole, and a strong inducer, rifampicin, on the pharmacokinetic (PK) exposure of abiraterone in two studies in healthy men. All subjects received 1,000 mg of abiraterone acetate on Days 1 and 14. Study A subjects (n = 20) received 400 mg ketoconazole on Days 11–16. Study B subjects (n = 19) received 600 mg rifampicin on Days 8–13. Serial PK sampling was done on Days 1 and 14. Study A: When given with ketoconazole, abiraterone exposure increased by 9% for maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) and 15% for area under the plasma concentration–time curve from 0 to time of the last quantifiable concentration (AUClast) and AUC from time 0 to infinity (AUC∞) compared to abiraterone acetate alone. Study B: When given with rifampicin, abiraterone exposure was reduced to 45% for Cmax and AUC∞ and to 42% for AUClast compared to abiraterone acetate alone. Ketoconazole had no clinically meaningful impact on abiraterone exposure. Rifampicin decreased abiraterone exposure by half. Hence, strong CYP3A4 inducers should be avoided or used with careful evaluation of clinical efficacy when administered with abiraterone acetate.

Single‐dose pharmacokinetic studies of abiraterone acetate in men with hepatic or renal impairment

Three open‐label, single‐dose studies investigated the impact of hepatic or renal impairment on abiraterone acetate pharmacokinetics and safety/tolerability in non‐cancer patients. Patients (n = 8 each group) with mild/moderate hepatic impairment or end‐stage renal disease (ESRD), and age‐, BMI‐matched healthy controls received a single oral 1,000 mg abiraterone acetate (tablet dose); while patients (n = 8 each) with severe hepatic impairment and matched healthy controls received 125‐ and 2,000‐mg abiraterone acetate (suspension doses), respectively (systemic exposure of abiraterone acetate suspension is approximately half to that of tablet formulation). Blood was sampled at specified timepoints up to 72 or 96 hours postdose to measure plasma abiraterone concentrations. Abiraterone exposure was comparable between healthy controls and patients with mild hepatic impairment or ESRD, but increased by 4‐fold in patients with moderate hepatic impairment. Despite a 16‐fold reduction in dose, abiraterone exposure in patients with severe hepatic impairment was about 22% and 44% of the Cmax and AUC∞ of healthy controls, respectively. These results suggest that abiraterone pharmacokinetics were not changed markedly in patients with ESRD or mild hepatic impairment. However, the capacity to eliminate abiraterone was substantially compromised in patients with moderate or severe hepatic impairment. A single‐dose administration of abiraterone acetate was well‐tolerated.

Single- and multiple-dose pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of canagliflozin, a selective inhibitor of sodium glucose co-transporter 2, in healthy participants.

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the pharmacokinetics of oral canagliflozin and its O-glucuronide metabolites (M7 and M5) after single and multiple doses in healthy adult participants. The pharmacodynamics, safety, and tolerability of canagliflozin were also evaluated. METHODS In this open-label, single- (day 1) and multiple-dose (days 4-9), parallel-group, phase 1 study, 27 healthy participants were randomized into three groups (1:1:1) to receive 50, 100, or 300 mg canagliflozin. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics were assessed at pre-pecified timepoints on days 1, 9, and 10. RESULTS Mean area under the plasma concentration-time curve, and the maximum observed plasma concentration of canagliflozin, M7, and M5 increased in a dose-dependent manner, across all the 3 doses, following single- and multiple-dose administration. The mean apparent elimination half-lives of canagliflozin, M7, and M5 were independent of the dose. Canagliflozin decreased the renal threshold for glucose (RTG) and increased the urinary glucose excretion (UGE) in a concentration- and dose-dependent manner. The relationship between drug concentrations and RTG was described by a sigmoidal relationship with RTGmin (minimum value of RTG) of 37.5 ng/mL (95% confidence interval (CI): 34.3, 40.8) and half-maximal effective concentration (EC50) of 21 ng/mL (95% CI: 18.3, 23.8). No deaths, serious adverse events, hypoglycemic events, or discontinuations due to adverse events were observed. CONCLUSION Pharmacokinetics of canagliflozin and its metabolites (M7 and M5) were linear, and no time-dependent changes were observed after single- and multiple-dose administration. Similarly, pharmacodynamic effects of canagliflozin on RTG and UGE were found to be dose- and concentration-dependent. Overall, canagliflozin was well-tolerated in healthy participants.

Effect of canagliflozin on the pharmacokinetics of glyburide, metformin, and simvastatin in healthy participants

Drug–drug interactions between canagliflozin, a sodium glucose co‐transporter 2 inhibitor, and glyburide, metformin, and simvastatin were evaluated in three phase‐1 studies in healthy participants. In these open‐label, fixed sequence studies, participants received: Study 1‐glyburide 1.25 mg/day (Day 1), canagliflozin 200 mg/day (Days 4–8), canagliflozin with glyburide (Day 9); Study 2‐metformin 2,000 mg/day (Day 1), canagliflozin 300 mg/day (Days 4–7), metformin with canagliflozin (Day 8); Study 3‐simvastatin 40 mg/day (Day 1), canagliflozin 300 mg/day (Days 2–6), simvastatin with canagliflozin (Day 7). Pharmacokinetic parameters were assessed at prespecified intervals. Co‐administration of canagliflozin and glyburide did not affect the overall exposure (maximum plasma concentration [Cmax] and area under the plasma concentration–time curve [AUC]) of glyburide and its metabolites (4‐trans‐hydroxy‐glyburide and 3‐cis‐hydroxy‐glyburide). Canagliflozin did not affect the peak concentration of metformin; however, AUC increased by 20%. Though Cmax and AUC were slightly increased for simvastatin (9% and 12%) and simvastatin acid (26% and 18%) following coadministration with canagliflozin, compared with simvastatin administration alone; however, no effect on active 3‐hydroxy‐3‐methyl‐glutaryl‐CoA (HMG‐CoA) reductase inhibitory activity was observed. There were no serious adverse events or hypoglycemic episodes. No drug–drug interactions were observed between canagliflozin and glyburide, metformin, or simvastatin. All treatments were well‐tolerated in healthy participants.

The application of capillary microsampling in GLP toxicology studies

AIM Capillary microsampling (CMS) to collect microplasma volumes is gradually replacing traditional, larger volume sampling from rats in GLP toxicology studies. METHODOLOGY About 32 µl of blood is collected with a capillary, processed to plasma and stored in a 10- or 4-µl capillary which is washed out further downstream in the laboratory. CMS has been standardized with respect to materials, assay validation experiments and application for sample analysis. CONCLUSION The implementation of CMS has resulted in blood volume reductions in the rat from 300 to 32 µl per time point and the elimination of toxicokinetic satellite groups in the majority of the rat GLP toxicology studies. The technique has been successfully applied in 26 GLP studies for 12 different projects thus far.

Effect of food on the pharmacokinetics of canagliflozin, a sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor, and assessment of dose proportionality in healthy participants

Canagliflozin, an orally active inhibitor of sodium glucose co‐transporter 2, is approved for the treatment of type‐2 diabetes mellitus. The effect of food on the pharmacokinetics of 300 mg canagliflozin, and dose proportionality of 50, 100, and 300 mg canagliflozin, were evaluated, in two studies, in healthy participants. Study 1 used a randomized, 2‐way crossover design: canagliflozin 300 mg/day was administered under fasted (Period‐1) and fed (Period‐2) conditions or vice versa. Study 2 was a 3‐way crossover: participants were randomized to receive three single‐doses of canagliflozin (50, 100, and 300 mg), one in each period. In both studies, treatment periods were separated by washout intervals of 10–14 days, and pharmacokinetics assessed up to 72 hours postdose of each treatment period. No clinically relevant food effects on canagliflozin exposure parameters were observed: 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for the fed/fasted geometric mean ratios of AUC∞ (ratio: 100.51; 90% CI: 89.47–112.93) and Cmax (ratio: 108.09; 90% CI: 103.45–112.95) were entirely within bioequivalence limits (80–125%). Plasma canagliflozin exposures were dose‐proportional as the 90% CI of the slope of the regression line for dose‐normalized AUC∞ and Cmax fell entirely within the prespecified limits of −0.124 to 0.124. No clinically significant safety issues were noted, and canagliflozin was generally well‐tolerated.