Jay Ariyawansa

Pharmacokinetics, Pharmacodynamics, and Safety of Single-Dose Rivaroxaban in Chronic Hemodialysis.

Background: This study aimed to characterize the single-dose pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) profile of rivaroxaban 15 mg administered before and after dialysis in subjects with end-stage renal disease (ESRD), and to compare this profile in subjects with ESRD to that in healthy control subjects (creatinine clearance ≥80 ml/min). Methods: This was an open-label, single-dose, single-center, parallel-group study of rivaroxaban in ESRD subjects who had been clinically stable on maintenance hemodialysis for ≥3 months. In 8 subjects with ESRD, a 15-mg dose of rivaroxaban was administered 2 ± 0.5 h before a hemodialysis session and repeated 7-14 days later at 3 h after a 4-h hemodialysis session. Eight healthy control subjects, matched for age, sex, and body mass index, received one 15-mg rivaroxaban dose. Results: Compared to healthy subjects, area under the rivaroxaban plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) increased by 56% following post-dialysis administration. Assuming similar bioavailability between groups, this reflects an approximate 35% decrease in overall drug clearance in ESRD subjects. Pre-dialysis dosing resulted in only 5% lowering of AUC versus post-dialysis dosing, confirming the minimal impact of dialysis on the PK of rivaroxaban. PD effects, as assessed by change in prothrombin time, percent factor Xa inhibition, and anti-Xa activity, were generally concordant with observed changes in plasma PK. Conclusions: Changes in PK and PD parameters in chronic dialysis patients were generally comparable to changes observed previously in patients with moderate-to-severe renal impairment who were not undergoing dialysis, and support use of a 15-mg dose in this patient population.

Effect of multiple doses of omeprazole on the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and safety of a single dose of rivaroxaban.

Abstract Many patients with acute coronary syndrome receive chronic dual antiplatelet therapy (acetylsalicylic acid and clopidogrel) for secondary event prophylaxis, and new oral anticoagulants are being investigated as adjunctive therapy in this indication. Gastrointestinal side effects such as bleeding are commonly associated with antiplatelet use; accordingly, many patients receive proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) to mitigate this. PPIs can reduce the antiplatelet activity of clopidogrel through cytochrome P450 2C19 inhibition, and pantoprazole reduces the bioavailability of dabigatran, a direct thrombin inhibitor that acts via cytochrome P450 2C19-independent mechanisms. These observations support the investigation of potential pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions between PPIs and anticoagulants. We evaluated the influence of administering once-daily omeprazole 40 mg for 5 days on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of a single 20-mg dose of the oral direct factor Xa inhibitor, rivaroxaban, in a randomized, open-label, 2-way, crossover, drug–drug interaction study in healthy subjects. No clinically meaningful interactions were observed; geometric mean ratios were 101%, 101%, and 93.5% for rivaroxaban area under the plasma concentration–time curve from time 0 to the time of the last quantifiable concentration (AUClast), or until infinity (AUC∞), and maximum plasma concentration (Cmax), respectively. Prothrombin time increased similarly in both treatment groups, with maximal values observed approximately 4 hours post rivaroxaban administration. A single 20-mg rivaroxaban dose appears well tolerated when administered alone or after 5 days of once-daily omeprazole 40 mg administration.

An open-label study to estimate the effect of steady-state erythromycin on the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and safety of a single dose of rivaroxaban in subjects with renal impairment and normal renal function

Two previously conducted rivaroxaban studies showed that, separately, renal impairment (RI) and concomitant administration of erythromycin (P‐glycoprotein and moderate cytochrome P450 3A4 [CYP3A4] inhibitor) can result in increases in rivaroxaban exposure. However, these studies did not assess the potential for combined drug–drug–disease interactions, which—in theory—could lead to additive or synergistic increases in exposure. This study investigated rivaroxaban pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics when co‐administered with steady‐state (SS) erythromycin in subjects with either mild or moderate RI. Similar to previous studies, rivaroxaban administered alone in RI subjects, or when co‐administered with SS erythromycin in normal renal function (NRF) subjects, increased rivaroxaban exposure. When combined, the co‐administration of rivaroxaban 10 mg with SS erythromycin in subjects with mild or moderate RI produced mean increases in rivaroxaban AUC∞ and Cmax of approximately 76% and 56%, and 99% and 64%, respectively, relative to NRF subjects, with PD changes displaying a similar trend. No serious adverse events occurred and no persistent adverse events were reported at the end of study. Although these increases were slightly more than additive, rivaroxaban should not be used in patients with RI receiving concomitant combined P‐glycoprotein and moderate CYP3A4 inhibitors, unless the potential benefit justifies the potential risk.

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 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.

Drug-Drug Interaction Studies of Paliperidone and Divalproex Sodium Extended-Release Tablets in Healthy Participants and Patients with Psychiatric Disorders

The objective of these 2 phase 1, open‐label, 2‐treatment, single‐sequence studies was to evaluate the effect of repeated oral doses of divalproex sodium extended‐release (ER) on the pharmacokinetics (PK) of a single dose of paliperidone ER in healthy participants (study 1), and the effect of multiple doses of paliperidone ER on the steady‐state PK of valproic acid (VPA) in patients with psychiatric disorders (study 2), respectively. In study 1 healthy participants received, in a fixed sequential order, treatment A, paliperidone ER 12 mg (day 1); treatment B, VPA 1000 mg (2 × 500 mg divalproex sodium ER) once daily (days 5 to 18) and paliperidone ER 12 mg (day 15). In study 2 patients received treatment A, VPA (days 1–7); treatment B, VPA + paliperidone ER 12 mg (days 8–12). Divalproex sodium ER doses (study 2) were individualized such that systemic therapeutic VPA exposure from prior treatment was maintained on entry into the study. PK assessments were performed at prespecified time points (paliperidone days 1 and 15 [study 1]; VPA days 7 and 12 [study 2]). The oral bioavailability of paliperidone was increased by an estimated 51% (Cmax) and 51%–52% (AUCs) when coadministered with divalproex sodium ER. No effect on the steady‐state plasma concentration of VPA was observed following repeated coadministration with paliperidone ER: the 90%CI around the VPA exposure ratios for the 2 treatments was within the 80%–125% bioequivalence criteria for Cmax,ss and AUCτ. Both VPA and paliperidone ER were well tolerated, and no new safety concerns were identified.

Switching from rivaroxaban to warfarin: an open label pharmacodynamic study in healthy subjects

Aims The primary objective was to explore the pharmacodynamic changes during transition from rivaroxaban to warfarin in healthy subjects. Safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics were assessed as secondary objectives. Methods An open label, non-randomized, sequential two period study. In treatment period 1 (TP1), subjects received rivaroxaban 20 mg once daily (5 days), followed by co-administration with a warfarin loading dose regimen of 5 or 10 mg (for the 10 mg regimen, the dose could be uptitrated to attain target international normalized ratio [INR] ≥2.0) once daily (2–4 days). When trough INR values ≥2.0 were attained, rivaroxaban was discontinued and warfarin treatment continued as monotherapy (INR 2.0–3.0). During treatment period 2, subjects received the same warfarin regimen as in TP1, but without rivaroxaban. Results During co-administration, maximum INR and prothrombin time (PT) values were higher than with rivaroxaban or warfarin monotherapy. The mean maximum effect (Emax) for INR after co-administration was 2.79–4.15 (mean PT Emax 41.0–62.7 s), compared with 1.41–1.74 (mean PT Emax 20.1–25.2 s) for warfarin alone. However, rivaroxaban had the smallest effect on INR at trough rivaroxaban concentrations. Neither rivaroxaban nor warfarin significantly affected maximum plasma concentrations of the other drug. Conclusions The combined pharmacodynamic effects during co-administration of rivaroxaban and warfarin were greater than additive, but the pharmacokinetics of both drugs were unaffected. Co-administration was well tolerated. When transitioning from rivaroxaban to warfarin, INR monitoring during co-administration should be performed at the trough rivaroxaban concentration to minimize the effect of rivaroxaban on INR.

Safety, Tolerability, and Pharmacokinetics of Therapeutic and Supratherapeutic Doses of Tramadol Hydrochloride in Healthy Adults: A Randomized, Double‐Blind, Placebo‐Controlled Multiple‐Ascending‐Dose Study

This randomized, double‐blind, parallel‐group multiple‐ascending‐dose study evaluated the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of tramadol hydrochloride in healthy adults to inform dosage and design for a subsequent QT/QTc study. Healthy men and women, 18 to 45 years old (inclusive), were sequentially assigned to the tramadol 200, 400, or 600 mg/day treatment cohort and within each cohort, randomized (4:1) to either tramadol or placebo every 6 hours for 9 oral doses. Of the 24 participants randomized to tramadol (n = 8/cohort), 22 (91.7%) completed the study. The AUCtau,ss of tramadol increased approximately 2.2‐ and 3.6‐fold for the (+) enantiomer and 2.0‐ and 3.5‐fold for the (‐) enantiomer with increasing dose from 200 to 400 and 600 mg/day, whereas the Cmax,ss increased 2.1‐ and 3.3‐fold for the (+) enantiomer and 2.0‐ and 3.2‐fold for the (‐) enantiomer. Overall, 21 participants (87.5%) participants reported ≥1 treatment‐emergent adverse event; most frequent were nausea (17 of 24, 70.8%) and vomiting (7 of 24, 29.2%). Vomiting (affected participants and events) increased with increasing dose from 200 to 600 mg/day but was mild (5 of 24) or moderate (2 of 24) in severity. All tested dosage regimens of tramadol showed acceptable safety and tolerability profile for further investigation in a thorough QT/QTc study.

Comparison of Capillary and Venous Plasma Drug Concentrations After Repeated Administration of Risperidone, Paliperidone, Quetiapine, Olanzapine, or Aripiprazole

Quantification of blood levels of antipsychotic drugs may be useful for managing medication therapy. This open‐label, parallel‐group study was performed to compare finger‐stick‐based capillary with corresponding venous plasma concentrations for risperidone, paliperidone, quetiapine, olanzapine, and aripiprazole and their major metabolites after repeated dosing in patients with schizophrenia or related illnesses. Finger‐stick‐based capillary and venous blood samples were collected at various times within a dosing interval. All drug concentration measurements in the derived plasma samples were performed with validated liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry methods. Finger‐stick‐based capillary and venous plasma drug concentrations after repeated dosing were generally similar. Olanzapine capillary plasma concentrations, however, were on average approximately 20% higher than venous concentrations, with a trend for a relatively greater difference occurring shortly after dosing. In addition, smaller capillary–venous differences were observed for extended‐release and long‐acting intramuscular formulations and for aripiprazole, a drug with a long half‐life, compared with drugs administered as an immediate‐release formulation (risperidone, olanzapine). After repeated dosing, plasma derived from finger‐stick‐based blood was observed to be predictive of the venous concentrations. Capillary sampling may be an appropriate alternative to venous sampling to readily evaluate systemic drug concentrations.

Tramadol Hydrochloride at Steady State Lacks Clinically Relevant QTc Interval Increases in Healthy Adults

We evaluated the effects of therapeutic and supratherapeutic doses of tramadol hydrochloride on the corrected QT (QTc) interval in healthy adults (aged 18‐55 years) in a randomized, phase I, double‐blind, placebo‐ and positive‐controlled, multiple‐dose, 4‐way crossover study. Participants were randomized to receive 1 of 4 treatments (A‐D), 1 each in 4 treatment periods (1‐4), separated by a washout period (7‐15 days). Treatment A comprised tramadol 400 mg (therapeutic dose) on days 1 through 3, tramadol 100 mg and moxifloxacin‐matched placebo on day 4, and placebo on all 4 days. Treatment B comprised tramadol 600 mg (supratherapeutic dose) on days 1 through 3, and tramadol 150 mg and moxifloxacin‐matched placebo on day 4. Treatment C comprised placebo on days 1 through 4 and moxifloxacin‐matched placebo on day 4. Treatment D comprised placebo on days 1 through 4 and moxifloxacin 400 mg on day 4. Of 68 participants enrolled, 57 (83.8%) completed the study. Both therapeutic and supratherapeutic doses of tramadol were shown to be noninferior to placebo regarding their effect on QTc prolongation. Sixty‐one of 68 (89.7%) participants reported at least 1 treatment‐emergent adverse event (mild); nausea was the most frequently reported treatment‐emergent adverse event. Summarizing, tramadol at doses up to 600 mg/day did not cause clinically relevant QTc interval prolongation in healthy adults.