Robert R. LaBadie

Steady-State Pharmacokinetic and Safety Profiles of Voriconazole and Ritonavir in Healthy Male Subjects

ABSTRACT Since there is a likelihood of coadministration of voriconazole and ritonavir, two studies were conducted to evaluate the potential of drug interaction. Study A was a randomized, placebo-controlled, two-period, parallel-group trial (n = 34). Study B had the same design without the placebo group (n = 17). In period 1, subjects received 200 mg voriconazole or placebo twice daily (BID) for 3 days (400 mg BID on day 1). In period 2, following a 7-day washout, subjects received ritonavir alone at 400 mg BID (study A) or 100 mg BID (study B) for 10 days (days 11 to 20), and then ritonavir was coadministered with 200 mg BID voriconazole or placebo for the next 10 days (days 21 to 30). Serial plasma samples were collected on days 3, 20, and 30, and safety data were collected throughout the study. High-dose (400 mg BID) ritonavir substantially reduced the steady-state mean voriconazole exposure (area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 12 h [AUC0-12], −82%; maximum concentration [Cmax], −66%). However, the effect of low-dose (100 mg BID) ritonavir was less pronounced (AUC0-12, −39%; Cmax, −24%). The decrease in voriconazole exposure was probably due to the induction of CYP2C19 and CYP2C9 by ritonavir. It is interesting that one subject in each study exhibited the opposite effect of ritonavir on voriconazole exposure (a 2.5- to 3-fold increase), probably due to lack of CYP2C19. Voriconazole had no apparent effect on the exposure of high-dose ritonavir but slightly decreased the exposure of low-dose ritonavir (AUC0-12, −14%; Cmax, −24%). The safety profile of combination therapy was not notably different from that of voriconazole or ritonavir alone. Due to the significant effect of ritonavir on voriconazole exposure, coadministration of voriconazole with 400 mg BID ritonavir is contraindicated; coadministration with 100 mg BID ritonavir should be avoided, unless an assessment of the benefit/risk to the patient justifies the use.

Pharmacokinetic Interaction Between Voriconazole and Efavirenz at Steady State in Healthy Male Subjects

A randomized, placebo–controlled (with respect to voriconazole), 2‐period, multiple‐dose intragroup fixed‐dose sequence study was conducted in 34 healthy male subjects to evaluate the interactions between voriconazole (triazole antifungal agent) and efavirenz (reverse transcriptase inhibitor). In period 1, subjects received 200 mg twice‐daily (bid) voriconazole (n = 17) or placebo (n = 17) for 3 days (400‐mg bid loading doses on day 1). In period 2, following a 7‐day washout, subjects received 400 mg once‐daily (qd) efavirenz alone for 10 days (days 11–20). Then efavirenz was coadministered with 200 mg bid voriconazole or placebo for the next 9 days (days 21–29). Serial plasma voriconazole and efavirenz concentrations were measured on days 3, 19, and 29, and the safety data were collected throughout the study. The 400‐mg qd efavirenz dose substantially reduced the steady‐state mean voriconazole area under the curve over the dosing interval (AUC0–12) by 80% (90% confidence interval [CI], 75%–84%) and peak concentration (Cmax) by 66% (90% CI, 57%–73%). The decrease in voriconazole exposure during coadministration is probably mainly due to the induction of CYP2C19 and CYP2C9 by efavirenz. The 200 mg bid voriconazole increased the steady‐state mean AUC0–24 and Cmax of efavirenz by 43% (90% CI, 36%–51%) and 37% (90% CI, 29%–46%), respectively. The increase in efavirenz exposure during coadministration is probably due to the inhibition of CYP3A4 by voriconazole. Coadministration of 200 mg bid voriconazole with 400 mg (or higher) qd efavirenz is contraindicated due to the clinically significant effect of efavirenz on voriconazole pharmacokinetics.

Pharmacokinetic Interaction between Voriconazole and Methadone at Steady State in Patients on Methadone Therapy

ABSTRACT This trial was aimed to estimate the pharmacokinetic interaction between voriconazole and methadone at steady state in male patients on methadone therapy and to characterize the safety and tolerability profile during the coadministration. Twenty-three patients on individualized methadone therapy (30 to 100 mg once daily) were enrolled into this randomized, patient- and investigator-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study. Methadone pharmacokinetic samples were collected from patients receiving methadone alone as the baseline before they were randomized to coadminister either 200 mg voriconazole twice daily (BID) (400-mg BID loading doses on the first day) (n = 16) or matching placebo (n = 7) for the next 5 days. Pharmacokinetic samples for methadone and voriconazole were collected on the last day of voriconazole dosing. The safety data were collected throughout the study. Voriconazole increased the steady-state exposure of pharmacologically active enantiomer (R)-methadone: the mean area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h (AUC0-24) was increased by 47.2% (90% confidence intervals [CI]: 37.7%, 57.4%), and the mean peak concentration (Cmax) was increased by 30.7% (90% CI: 22.2%, 39.8%). The magnitude of increase in (S)-methadone exposure was greater than that of (R)-methadone: the AUC0-24 was increased by 103.4% (90% CI: 85.0%, 123.6%), and the Cmax was increased by 65.4% (90% CI: 52.6%, 79.2%). Methadone appeared to have no effect on the steady-state voriconazole pharmacokinetics compared to the historical data for voriconazole alone. Methadone patients receiving voriconazole showed no signs or symptoms of significant opioid withdrawal or overdose. Coadministration of 200 mg voriconazole BID with methadone was generally safe and well tolerated. Nevertheless, caution should be exercised when voriconazole is coadministered with methadone due to the increase in (R)-methadone exposure, which in turn may require a dose reduction of methadone.

Pharmacokinetics and tolerability of voriconazole and a combination oral contraceptive co-administered in healthy female subjects

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ABOUT THIS SUBJECT * Voriconazole, a broad-spectrum antifungal drug, is a substrate and inhibitor of CYP2C19 and CYP3A4 isozymes. * Ethinyl oestradiol and norethindrone, components of the combination oral contraceptive drug Ortho-Novum 1/35, also are substrates of cytochrome P450 CYP2C19 and CYP3A4 isozymes. * Because co-administration of voriconazole and Ortho-Novum 1/35 could potentially result in pharmacokinetic interactions that increase systemic exposure of one or both drugs to unsafe levels, clinical studies are needed to define better the two-way pharmacokinetic interaction between these drugs. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS * Although co-administered voriconazole and oral contraceptive did result in increased systemic exposures of all three drugs relative to respective monotherapy, co-administered treatment was generally safe and well tolerated. * It is recommended, however, that patients receiving co-administered voriconazole and oral contraceptives be monitored for the development of adverse events commonly associated with these medications. AIM To assess the two-way pharmacokinetic interaction between voriconazole and Ortho-Novum 1/35, an oral contraceptive containing norethindrone 1 mg and ethinyl oestradiol 35 microg. METHODS In this open-label, three-period, fixed-sequence study, 16 healthy females received voriconazole (400 mg q12 h, day 1; 200 mg q12 h, days 2-4) (period 1), oral contraceptive (q24 h, days 12-32) (period 2), and combination voriconazole (400 mg q12 h, day 57; 200 mg q12 h, days 58-60) and oral contraceptive (q24 h, days 40-60) (period 3). RESULTS Voriconazole geometric mean AUC(tau) and C(max) increased 46% (12 682-18 495 ng h ml(-1); 90% confidence interval [CI] 32, 61) and 14% (2485-2840 ng ml(-1); 90% CI 3, 27), respectively, when co-administered with oral contraceptive vs. voriconazole alone. Ethinyl oestradiol geometric mean AUC(tau) and C(max) increased 61% (1031-1657 ng h ml(-1); 90% CI 50, 72) and 36% (119-161 ng ml(-1); 90% CI 28, 45), respectively, and norethindrone geometric mean AUC(tau) and C(max) increased 53% (116-177 ng h ml(-1); 90% CI 44, 64) and 15% (18-20 ng ml(-1); 90% CI 3, 28), respectively, during voriconazole co-administration vs. oral contraceptive alone. Neither ethinyl oestradiol nor norethindrone levels were reduced in subjects following voriconazole co-administration. Adverse events (AEs) were generally mild, occurring less in subjects receiving voriconazole alone (36 events) vs. oral contraceptive alone (88 events) or combination treatment (68 events); four subjects experienced a severe AE. CONCLUSIONS Co-administration of voriconazole and oral contraceptive increased systemic exposures of all analytes relative to respective monotherapy. Although generally safe and well tolerated, it is recommended that patients receiving co-administered voriconazole and oral contraceptive be monitored for development of AEs commonly associated with these medications.

Co-administration of the JAK inhibitor CP-690,550 and methotrexate is well tolerated in patients with rheumatoid arthritis without need for dose adjustment

AIMS To investigate the effects of methotrexate (MTX) on the pharmacokinetics (PK) of CP-690,550, a novel Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor in development as a therapy for rheumatoid arthritis (RA), to determine the effects of multiple doses of CP-690,550 on the PK of MTX, and to evaluate the short-term safety and tolerability of co-administration of CP-690,550 and MTX. METHODS This was a fixed-dose drug-drug interaction study. Twelve patients diagnosed with RA for at least 6 months were enrolled in a Phase I, open-label study of the PK of multiple doses of CP-690,550 (30 mg b.i.d.) and single doses of MTX (15-25 mg per week). RESULTS All patients completed the study and were evaluated for PK and safety. CP-690,550 exposure was not affected by co-administration with MTX; AUC(12) ratio (CP-690,550 + MTX/CP-690,550) was 103.06% [90% confidence interval (CI) 99.00, 107.29]. MTX exposure decreased by 10%; AUC(12) ratio (CP-690,550 + MTX/MTX) was 89.53% (90% CI 77.38, 103.57), which was not considered clinically significant. Co-administration of CP-690,550 and MTX was safe and well tolerated. There were no serious adverse events or withdrawals from the study and there was no trend in the incidence or severity of adverse events across treatments. CONCLUSIONS Co-administration of CP-690,550 and MTX was safe and well tolerated. There was no clinically significant effect on the PK profile of either drug. Therefore, dose adjustments should not be required when co-administering CP-690,550 and MTX.

Pharmacokinetic interactions of efavirenz and voriconazole in healthy volunteers.

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ABOUT THIS SUBJECT * Efavirenz 400 mg q24 h reduces exposure to voriconazole 200 mg q12 h when the two drugs are co-administered. * Furthermore, voriconazole increases the systemic exposure of efavirenz. * Co-administration was therefore initially contraindicated. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS * The doses of efavirenz and voriconazole can be adjusted to provide adequate exposure to both drugs when the two are co-administered, without compromising safety. * Appropriate adjustment of doses for both drugs may thus represent an alternative to a mere contraindication. AIMS Co-administration of standard-dose voriconazole and efavirenz results in a substantial decrease in voriconazole levels, while concurrently increasing efavirenz levels. Hence, concomitant use of standard doses of these drugs was initially contraindicated. This study assessed different dose combinations of efavirenz and voriconazole, with the goal of attaining a dose combination that provides systemic exposures similar to standard-dose monotherapy with each drug. METHODS This was an open-label, four-treatment, multiple-dose, fixed-sequence study in 16 healthy males. Steady-state pharmacokinetics were assessed following two test treatments (voriconazole 300 mg q12 h + efavirenz 300 mg q24 h and voriconazole 400 mg q12 h + efavirenz 300 mg q24 h) and compared with standard-dose monotherapy (voriconazole 200 mg q12 h or efavirenz 600 mg q24 h). RESULTS Dose adjustment to voriconazole 300 mg q12 h with efavirenz 300 mg q24 h decreased voriconazole area under the concentration-time curve (AUC(tau)) and maximum concentration (C(max)), with changes of -55% [90% confidence interval (CI) -62, -45] and -36% (90% CI -49, -21), respectively, when compared with monotherapy. Voriconazole 400 mg q12 h plus efavirenz 300 mg q24 h decreased voriconazole AUC(tau) (-7%; 90% CI -23, 13) and increased C(max) (23%; 90% CI -1, 53), while increasing efavirenz AUC(tau) (17%; 90% CI 6, 29) and not changing C(max) when compared with the respective monotherapy regimens. No serious adverse events were observed with voriconazole plus efavirenz. CONCLUSIONS When co-administered, voriconazole dose should be increased to 400 mg q12 h and efavirenz dose decreased to 300 mg q24 h in order to provide systemic exposures similar to standard-dose monotherapy.

Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Gastrointestinal Tolerability of a Novel Extended-Release Microsphere Formulation of Azithromycin

Background and objectiveA novel oral, extended-release, microsphere formulation of azithromycin (AZSR) was developed to improve the gastrointestinal tolerability profile while allowing administration of an entire treatment course of azithromycin in a single dose. Several phase I clinical pharmacology studies were conducted to (i) identify a well-tolerated single-dose formulation that met a predefined exposure target; and (ii) evaluate the effect of food and antacid on the absorption of this formulation. Of these, five pivotal studies are described here.MethodsThe pharmacokinetic profile of AZSR was compared with that of the commercially available immediate-release azithromycin formulation (AZM) in an open-label, crossover, single-dose study (Study A), and their gastrointestinal tolerability profiles were compared in an observer-blind, parallel group, single-dose study (Study B). The effects of food (a high-fat meal and a standard meal) and antacid (a single 20mL dose of Maalox® Regular Strength, containing magnesium hydroxide, aluminium hydroxide and simethicone) on the absorption of azithromycin from AZSR were evaluated in three separate open-label, crossover, single-dose studies (Studies C, D and E). Healthy adult subjects were enrolled in all five studies, and all subjects were evaluable for tolerability. The dose used for all azithromycin formulations was 2.0g. Serum azithromycin concentrations were determined using a validated high-performance liquid chromatography/electrochemical detection method, and pharmacokinetic parameters were analysed using noncompartmental methods.Results377 subjects received a single 2.0g dose of azithromycin as AZSR and/or AZM in the five studies. Compared with AZM, AZSR had a slower absorption rate (57% decrease in the mean peak concentration [Cmax] and an approximate 2.5-hour delay in the time to reach Cmax [tmax]), with a mean relative bioavailability of 82.8%, which met the predefined exposure target (at least 80% bioavailability relative to AZM). Compared with AZM, AZSR was associated with significantly lower rates of nausea and vomiting. A high-fat meal increased the mean area under the serum concentration-time curve [AUC] from time zero to 72 hours post-dose (AUC72h) by 23% and increased the Cmax of azithromycin by 115%. A standard meal increased the mean Cmax by 119% but had no clinically significant effect on the AUC72h. AZSR appeared to be better tolerated in the fasted state than in the fed state. The AUC72h and Cmax of AZSR were not significantly affected by co-administration with a single dose of antacid.ConclusionsThe extended-release microsphere formulation of azithromycin, AZSR, allows administration of an entire therapeutic course of azithromycin as a well-tolerated single 2.0g dose. This formulation should be administered on an empty stomach and can be co-administered with antacids.

Significant decrease in nelfinavir systemic exposure after omeprazole coadministration in healthy subjects.

Study Objectives. To assess the effect of omeprazole on the multiple‐dose (steady‐state) pharmacokinetics and safety of nelfinavir, and to evaluate the safety and tolerability of nelfinavir when administered alone and with omeprazole.

Pharmacokinetics of a Novel Orodispersible Tablet of Sildenafil in Healthy Subjects

BACKGROUND Sildenafil citrate is indicated for the treatment of erectile dysfunction. An orally disintegrating tablet (ODT) of sildenafil citrate has been developed for the benefit of patients who have difficulty swallowing solid dosage forms. OBJECTIVE The main goal of this study was to evaluate the bioequivalence of sildenafil ODT with and without water versus marketed sildenafil oral film-coated tablets. A secondary objective was to evaluate the effects of a high-fat meal on the pharmacokinetics of sildenafil ODT. METHODS The bioequivalence study of sildenafil ODT given with and without water versus marketed sildenafil citrate film-coated oral tablets was conducted in 36 subjects. In a food-effect study, the effect of a standard high-fat meal on the pharmacokinetics of sildenafil ODT was evaluated in 12 subjects. Both studies were randomized, open-label, crossover, single-dose (50 mg) studies in healthy men aged ≥45 years. Plasma samples were collected for 14 hours postdose, and pharmacokinetics were determined by using noncompartmental analyses. RESULTS All subjects in both studies were Asian males between the ages of 45 and 69 years. Sildenafil ODT without water was bioequivalent to the marketed sildenafil film-coated oral tablet as the 90% CI for the ratio of geometric means of Cmax, AUC0-∞, and AUC0-last were contained within equivalence limits (80%-125%). When sildenafil ODTs were given with water, the 90% CIs for sildenafil AUC0-∞ and AUC0-last were contained within the range of 80% to 125%; however, the 90% CI for sildenafil Cmax was not (79.76-92.78). This difference in Cmax is unlikely to have any clinically meaningful impact. High-fat meals reduced the rate but not the extent of absorption of sildenafil. Mean Cmax was reduced by 59%, and median Tmax was delayed from 0.625 hour (fasting) to 4 hours (high-fat meal). However, AUC values were comparable between fed and fasted treatments. CONCLUSIONS Sildenafil ODT, given with or without water, provides equivalent systemic exposure compared with marketed sildenafil film-coated oral tablets, thus offering a convenient alternative method of administration. Considering the results of the food-effect study, sildenafil ODT should be taken on an empty stomach. ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT01254383 (bioequivalence) and NCT01254396 (food effect).

A phase I open‐label study to investigate the potential drug–drug interaction between single‐dose dacomitinib and steady‐state paroxetine in healthy volunteers

Dacomitinib is currently in development for the treatment of non‐small cell lung cancer. Formation of the major circulating metabolite (PF‐05199265) is mediated by cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2D6 and CYP2C9. This phase I, single fixed‐sequence, two‐period study evaluated the effect of paroxetine, a CYP2D6 inactivator, on dacomitinib pharmacokinetics in healthy volunteers who were extensive CYP2D6 metabolizers. Subjects received a single 45‐mg dacomitinib dose alone and in combination with paroxetine (30 mg/day for 10 consecutive days, with dacomitinib administered on day 4) at steady‐state levels. Blood samples were collected through 240 hours post‐dacomitinib dosing. Dacomitinib exposure (area under the concentration–time curve from 0 to infinity; AUCinf) increased 37%; however a reduction in PF‐05199265 AUCinf of approximately 90% was observed during the paroxetine treatment period. The maximum concentration of dacomitinib changed minimally. Adverse events reported with single‐dose dacomitinib administered alone or in the presence of steady‐state levels of paroxetine were mostly mild, and no serious adverse events were reported. While paroxetine significantly inhibited CYP2D6‐mediated metabolism of a single dose of dacomitinib, the modest effect on dacomitinib exposure is unlikely to be clinically relevant when dacomitinib is given daily. Dose adjustment of dacomitinib may therefore not be required upon coadministration with a CYP2D6 inhibitor.