Markus Hinder

The effect of LCZ696 (sacubitril/valsartan) on amyloid-β concentrations in cerebrospinal fluid in healthy subjects

Aims LCZ696 (angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor) is a novel drug developed for the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Neprilysin is one of multiple enzymes degrading amyloid‐β (Aβ). Its inhibition may increase Aβ levels. The potential exists that treatment of LCZ696, through the inhibition of neprilysin by LBQ657 (an LCZ696 metabolite), may result in accumulation of Aβ. The aim of this study was to assess the blood–brain‐barrier penetration of LBQ657 and the potential effects of LCZ696 on cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) concentrations of Aβ isoforms in healthy human volunteers. Methods In a double‐blind, randomized, parallel group, placebo‐controlled study, healthy subjects received once daily LCZ696 (400 mg, n = 21) or placebo (n = 22) for 14 days. Results LCZ696 had no significant effect on CSF AUEC(0,36 h) of the aggregable Aβ species 1–42 or 1–40 compared with placebo (estimated treatment ratios 0.98 [95% CI 0.73, 1.34; P = 0.919] and 1.05 [95% CI 0.82, 1.34; P = 0.702], respectively). A 42% increase in CSF AUEC(0,36 h) of soluble Aβ 1–38 was observed (estimated treatment ratio 1.42 [95% CI 1.05, 1.91; P = 0.023]). CSF levels of LBQ657 and CSF Aβ 1–42, 1–40, and 1–38 concentrations were not related (r 2 values 0.022, 0.010, and 0.008, respectively). Conclusions LCZ696 did not cause changes in CSF levels of aggregable Aβ isoforms (1–42 and 1–40) compared with placebo, despite achieving CSF concentrations of LBQ657 sufficient to inhibit neprilysin. The clinical relevance of the increase in soluble CSF Aβ 1–38 is currently unknown.

The effect of LCZ696 on amyloid‐β concentrations in cerebrospinal fluid in healthy subjects

Aims LCZ696 (angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor) is a novel drug developed for the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. Neprilysin is one of multiple enzymes degrading amyloid‐β (Aβ). Its inhibition may increase Aβ levels. The potential exists that treatment of LCZ696, through the inhibition of neprilysin by LBQ657 (an LCZ696 metabolite), may result in accumulation of Aβ. The aim of this study was to assess the blood–brain‐barrier penetration of LBQ657 and the potential effects of LCZ696 on cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) concentrations of Aβ isoforms in healthy human volunteers. Methods In a double‐blind, randomized, parallel group, placebo‐controlled study, healthy subjects received once daily LCZ696 (400 mg, n = 21) or placebo (n = 22) for 14 days. Results LCZ696 had no significant effect on CSF AUEC(0,36 h) of the aggregable Aβ species 1–42 or 1–40 compared with placebo (estimated treatment ratios 0.98 [95% CI 0.73, 1.34; P = 0.919] and 1.05 [95% CI 0.82, 1.34; P = 0.702], respectively). A 42% increase in CSF AUEC(0,36 h) of soluble Aβ 1–38 was observed (estimated treatment ratio 1.42 [95% CI 1.05, 1.91; P = 0.023]). CSF levels of LBQ657 and CSF Aβ 1–42, 1–40, and 1–38 concentrations were not related (r 2 values 0.022, 0.010, and 0.008, respectively). Conclusions LCZ696 did not cause changes in CSF levels of aggregable Aβ isoforms (1–42 and 1–40) compared with placebo, despite achieving CSF concentrations of LBQ657 sufficient to inhibit neprilysin. The clinical relevance of the increase in soluble CSF Aβ 1–38 is currently unknown.

Changing R&D models in research-based pharmaceutical companies

New drugs serving unmet medical needs are one of the key value drivers of research-based pharmaceutical companies. The efficiency of research and development (R&D), defined as the successful approval and launch of new medicines (output) in the rate of the monetary investments required for R&D (input), has declined since decades. We aimed to identify, analyze and describe the factors that impact the R&D efficiency. Based on publicly available information, we reviewed the R&D models of major research-based pharmaceutical companies and analyzed the key challenges and success factors of a sustainable R&D output. We calculated that the R&D efficiencies of major research-based pharmaceutical companies were in the range of USD 3.2–32.3 billion (2006–2014). As these numbers challenge the model of an innovation-driven pharmaceutical industry, we analyzed the concepts that companies are following to increase their R&D efficiencies: (A) Activities to reduce portfolio and project risk, (B) activities to reduce R&D costs, and (C) activities to increase the innovation potential. While category A comprises measures such as portfolio management and licensing, measures grouped in category B are outsourcing and risk-sharing in late-stage development. Companies made diverse steps to increase their innovation potential and open innovation, exemplified by open source, innovation centers, or crowdsourcing, plays a key role in doing so. In conclusion, research-based pharmaceutical companies need to be aware of the key factors, which impact the rate of innovation, R&D cost and probability of success. Depending on their company strategy and their R&D set-up they can opt for one of the following open innovators: knowledge creator, knowledge integrator or knowledge leverager.

Pharmacokinetics of otamixaban, a direct factor Xa inhibitor, in healthy male subjects: pharmacokinetic model development for phase 2/3 simulation of exposure.

The pharmacokinetics of otamixaban was investigated in healthy male subjects over a wide range of intravenous doses, with duration of administration varying between 1‐minute infusions (bolus dose) and 24‐hour infusions, using noncompartmental and multicompartmental methods. A global compartmental analysis (2 and 3 compartments) generated a single set of pharmacokinetic parameters, regardless of infusion rate and duration, and took into account the 30% decrease in clearance and volume of distribution observed over the dose range. The 2‐compartment model was retained to predict bolus plus 3‐hour‐infusion doses of otamixaban for future phase 2/3 studies. Otamixaban exhibited in healthy subjects several interesting pharmacokinetic features in view of its potential therapeutic use in coronary thrombosis: a rapid plasma distribution and elimination, a well‐described dose‐exposure relationship, a low intersubject variability in plasma exposure, and a mixed renal and biliary excretion with constant renal clearance.

Direct and rapid inhibition of factor Xa by otamixaban: A pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic investigation in patients with coronary artery disease

New anticoagulants that combine effective anticoagulation with low bleeding rates are still sought after. We investigated the safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of otamixaban, a direct factor Xa inhibitor, in patients with stable coronary artery disease.

Effects of Sacubitril/Valsartan (LCZ696) on Natriuresis, Diuresis, Blood Pressures, and NT-proBNP in Salt-Sensitive Hypertension.

Salt-sensitive hypertension (SSH) is characterized by impaired sodium excretion and subnormal vasodilatory response to salt loading. Sacubitril/valsartan (LCZ696) was hypothesized to increase natriuresis and diuresis and result in superior blood pressure control compared with valsartan in Asian patients with SSH. In this randomized, double-blind, crossover study, 72 patients with SSH received sacubitril/valsartan 400 mg and valsartan 320 mg once daily for 4 weeks each. SSH was diagnosed if the mean arterial pressure increased by ≥10% when patients switched from low (50 mmol/d) to high (320 mmol/d) sodium diet. The primary outcome was cumulative 6- and 24-hour sodium excretion after first dose administration. Compared with valsartan, sacubitril/valsartan was associated with a significant increase in natriuresis (adjusted treatment difference: 24.5 mmol/6 hours, 50.3 mmol/24 hours, both P<0.001) and diuresis (adjusted treatment difference: 291.2 mL/6 hours, P<0.001; 356.4 mL/24 hours, P=0.002) on day 1, but not on day 28, and greater reductions in office and ambulatory blood pressure on day 28. Despite morning dosing of both drugs, ambulatory blood pressure reductions were more pronounced at nighttime than at daytime or the 24-hour average. Compared with valsartan, sacubitril/valsartan significantly reduced N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide levels on day 28 (adjusted treatment difference: −20%; P=0.001). Sacubitril/valsartan and valsartan were safe and well tolerated with no significant changes in body weight or serum sodium and potassium levels with either treatments. In conclusion, sacubitril/valsartan compared with valsartan was associated with short-term increases in natriuresis and diuresis, superior office and ambulatory blood pressure control, and significantly reduced N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide levels in Asian patients with SSH. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01681576.

Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic relationships for otamixaban, a direct factor Xa inhibitor, in healthy subjects.

Direct pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic relationships for otamixaban were investigated after rising doses in healthy subjects using mixed‐effect modeling. Activated partial thromboplastin time, prothrombin time, dilute prothrombin time, and Russells viper venom—induced clotting time (RVVT) related linearly, whereas Heptest clotting time (HCT) followed a sigmoidal Emax model. The pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic response (slope) and their corresponding interindividual variability (seconds per ng/mL, [% coefficient of variation]) were 0.263 (29%) for Russells viper venom—induced clotting time, 0.117 (10%) for dilute prothrombin time, 0.058 (19%) for activated partial thromboplastin time, and 0.021 (11%) for prothrombin time. For Heptest clotting time, the parameter estimates with their corresponding interindividual variability (% coefficient of variation) were 71 ng/mL (30%) for EC50, 186 seconds (64%) for Emax, and 17 seconds (16%) for E0. The model predicted otamixaban plasma concentrations to double the clotting times that were close to those observed. These pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic relationships, together with the predictable pharmacokinetics, allowed the anticoagulant effect at given doses of otamixaban to be foreseen in healthy subjects.

Value Creation in the Pharmaceutical IndustryThe Critical Path to Innovation

A team of editors and authors with extensive experience in academia and industry and at some of the most prestigious business schools in Europe discusses in detail the innovation process in pharma as well as common and new research and innovation strategies. In doing so, they cover collaboration and partnerships, open innovation, biopharmaceuticals, translational medicine, good manufacturing practice, regulatory affairs, and portfolio management. Each chapter covers controversial aspects of recent developments in the pharmaceutical industry, with the aim of stimulating productive debates on the most effective and efficient innovation processes.

Open innovation and external sources of innovation. An opportunity to fuel the R&D pipeline and enhance decision making?

Historically, research and development (R&D) in the pharmaceutical sector has predominantly been an in-house activity. To enable investments for game changing late-stage assets and to enable better and less costly go/no-go decisions, most companies have employed a fail early paradigm through the implementation of clinical proof-of-concept organizations. To fuel their pipelines, some pioneers started to complement their internal R&D efforts through collaborations as early as the 1990s. In recent years, multiple extrinsic and intrinsic factors induced an opening for external sources of innovation and resulted in new models for open innovation, such as open sourcing, crowdsourcing, public–private partnerships, innovations centres, and the virtualization of R&D. Three factors seem to determine the breadth and depth regarding how companies approach external innovation: (1) the company’s legacy, (2) the company’s willingness and ability to take risks and (3) the company’s need to control IP and competitors. In addition, these factors often constitute the major hurdles to effectively leveraging external opportunities and assets. Conscious and differential choices of the R&D and business models for different companies and different divisions in the same company seem to best allow a company to fully exploit the potential of both internal and external innovations.

Developing Drugs for Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction: What Have We Learned From Clinical Trials?

There remains a large unmet need for new therapies in the treatment of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). In the early drug development phase, the therapeutic potential of a drug is not yet fully understood and trial endpoints other than mortality are needed to guide drug development decisions. While a true surrogate marker for mortality in heart failure (HF) remains elusive, the successes and failures of previous trials can reveal markers that support clinical Go/NoGo decisions.