Dataset Information

Comparison of D? dopamine receptor occupancy after oral administration of quetiapine fumarate immediate-release and extended-release formulations in healthy subjects.

ABSTRACT: Quetiapine is an established drug for treatment of schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and major depressive disorder. While initially manufactured as an immediate-release (IR) formulation, an extended-release (XR) formulation has recently been introduced. Pharmacokinetic studies show that quetiapine XR provides a lower peak and more stable plasma concentration than the IR formulation. This study investigated if the pharmacokinetic differences translate into different time curves for central D? dopamine receptor occupancy. Eleven control subjects were examined with positron emission tomography (PET) and the radioligand [11C]raclopride. Eight subjects underwent all of the scheduled PET measurements. After baseline examination, quetiapine XR was administered once-daily for 8 d titrated to 300 mg/d on days 5-8, followed by 300 mg/d quetiapine IR on days 9-12. PET measurements were repeated after the last doses of quetiapine XR and IR at predicted times of peak and trough plasma concentrations. Striatal D? receptor occupancy was calculated using the simplified reference tissue model. Peak D? receptor occupancy was significantly higher with quetiapine IR than XR in all subjects (50 ± 4% and 32 ± 11%, respectively), consistent with lower peak plasma concentrations for the XR formulation. Trough D? receptor occupancy was similarly low for both formulations (IR 7 ± 7%, XR 8 ± 6%). The lower peak receptor occupancy associated with quetiapine XR may explain observed pharmacodynamic differences between the formulations. Assuming that our findings in control subjects are valid for patients with schizophrenia, the study supports the view that quetiapine, like the prototype atypical antipsychotic clozapine, may show antipsychotic effect at lower D? receptor occupancy than typical antipsychotics.

SUBMITTER: Nord M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3198174 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of D₂ dopamine receptor occupancy after oral administration of quetiapine fumarate immediate-release and extended-release formulations in healthy subjects.

Nord Magdalena M Nyberg Svante S Brogren Jacob J Jucaite Aurelija A Halldin Christer C Farde Lars L

The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology 20110411 10

Quetiapine is an established drug for treatment of schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and major depressive disorder. While initially manufactured as an immediate-release (IR) formulation, an extended-release (XR) formulation has recently been introduced. Pharmacokinetic studies show that quetiapine XR provides a lower peak and more stable plasma concentration than the IR formulation. This study investigated if the pharmacokinetic differences translate into different time curves for central D₂ dopa ...[more]

PMID: 21477416

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and objectivesUpadacitinib is a selective Janus kinase (JAK) 1 inhibitor being developed as an orally administered treatment for patients with moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and other autoimmune disorders. These analyses characterized the population pharmacokinetics of upadacitinib across phase I-III clinical trials using data for immediate-release (IR) and extended-release (ER) formulations.MethodsPharmacokinetic data from 4170 subjects taking IR doses of 1-48 mg and ER doses of 7.5-30 mg across 12 studies spanning phase I-III clinical trials, with a total of 29,372 upadacitinib plasma concentrations, were analyzed using non-linear mixed-effects modeling. The model was evaluated using bootstrap analyses and visual predictive checks.ResultsA two-compartment model with first-order absorption with lag time for the IR formulation, mixed zero- and first-order absorption with lag time for the ER formulation, and linear elimination, adequately described upadacitinib plasma concentration-time profiles. Population estimates of upadacitinib apparent oral clearance and steady-state volume of distribution in healthy volunteers for the ER formulation were 53.7 L/h and 294 L, respectively. The relative bioavailability of the ER formulation compared with the IR formulation was estimated to be 76.2%. Statistically significant covariates were patient population (RA subjects vs. healthy subjects), creatinine clearance, and baseline bodyweight on apparent clearance (CL/F) and bodyweight on volume of distribution of the central compartment (Vc/F). The intersubject variability for upadacitinib CL/F and Vc/F were estimated to be 21% and 24%, respectively, in the phase I studies, and 37% and 53%, respectively, in the phase II/III studies. Upadacitinib area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) was estimated to be only 5% higher or lower for RA patients who were?<?60 or?>?100 kg, respectively, relative to subjects with a bodyweight of 60-100 kg. RA subjects with mild or moderate renal impairment had 13% and 26% higher AUC, respectively, compared with RA subjects with normal renal function. Sex, race, concomitant use of pH-modifying drugs, moderate cytochrome P450 3A inhibitors, or methotrexate use had no effect on upadacitinib exposure.ConclusionsA robust population pharmacokinetic model was developed for upadacitinib using a large dataset from phase I-III clinical trials in healthy volunteers and subjects with RA. None of the identified covariates had a clinically meaningful effect on upadacitinib exposures. The model is appropriate to use for simulations and to evaluate the exposure-response relationship of upadacitinib.

Project description:OBJECTIVES:To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of once-daily extended release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR) monotherapy in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). PATIENTS AND METHODS:This was a 10-week (8-week active treatment/2-week post-treatment) randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled study (D1448C00004). Patients received quetiapine XR 150 mg/day, escitalopram 10 mg/day, or placebo; patients with an inadequate response (<20% improvement in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale [MADRS] total score) at week two received double-dose treatment. The primary end point was week eight change from randomization in MADRS total score. Secondary end points included MADRS response (?50% improvement) and remission (score ?8); Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression total and item 1; Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety total, psychic, and somatic; Clinical Global Impressions - Severity of Illness total; Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) global; and Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire - Short Form percentage maximum total scores. Tolerability was assessed throughout. RESULTS:A total of 471 patients was randomized. No significant improvements in MADRS total score were observed at week eight (last observation carried forward) with either active treatment (quetiapine XR, -17.21 [P=0.174]; escitalopram, -16.73 [P=0.346]) versus placebo (-15.61). There were no significant differences in secondary end points versus placebo, with the exception of week-eight change in PSQI global score (quetiapine XR, -4.96 [P<0.01] versus placebo, -3.37). Mixed-model repeated-measures analysis of observed-case data suggested that the primary analysis may not be robust. Most commonly reported adverse events included dry mouth, somnolence, and dizziness for quetiapine XR, and headache and nausea for escitalopram. CONCLUSION:In this study, neither quetiapine XR (150/300 mg/day) nor escitalopram (10/20 mg/day) showed significant separation from placebo. Both compounds have been shown previously to be effective in the treatment of MDD; possible reasons for this failed study are discussed. Quetiapine XR was generally well tolerated, with a profile similar to that reported previously.

Project description:Importance:The United States spends more money on medications than any other country. Most extended-release drugs have not consistently shown therapeutic or adherence superiority, and switching these medications to less expensive, generic, immediate-release formulations may offer an opportunity to reduce health care spending. Objective:To evaluate Medicare Part D and Medicaid spending on extended-release drug formulations and the potential savings associated with switching to generic immediate-release formulations. Design, Setting, and Participants:This cross-sectional study used the 2012 to 2017 Medicare Part D Drug Event and Medicaid Spending and Utilization data sets to analyze 20 extended-release drugs with 37 Medicare formulations and 36 Medicaid formulations. Only cardiovascular, diabetes, neurologic, and psychiatric extended-release drugs saving at most 1 additional daily dose compared with their immediate-release counterparts were included. Extended-release drugs with therapeutic superiority were excluded. Analyses were conducted from January to December 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures:Estimated Medicare Part D and Medicaid savings from switching extended-release to immediate-release drug formulations between 2012 and 2017. Results:Of the 6252 drugs screened for eligibility from the 2017 Medicaid Drug Utilization database and the 2017 Medicare Part D database, 67 drugs with extended-release formulations that were identified in the Medicare data set (20 distinct drugs with 37 formulations [19 brand, 18 generic]) were included in the analysis. In 2017, Medicare Part D spent $2.2 billion and Medicaid spent $952 million (a combined $3.1 billion) on 20 extended-release drugs. Between 2012 and 2017, Medicare Part D and Medicaid spent $12 billion and $5.9 billion, respectively, on extended-release formulations. Switching from brand-name to generic extended-release formulations was estimated to be associated with a $247 million reduction in Medicare spending and $299 million reduction in Medicaid spending in 2017, whereas switching all brand-name and generic extended-release formulations to immediate-release formulations in both Medicare and Medicaid was estimated to reduce spending by $2.6 billion ($1.8 billion for Medicare and $836 million for Medicaid) in 2017. During the study period, the estimated spending reduction associated with switching all patients receiving extended-release formulations (brand name extended-release and generic extended-release) to generic immediate-release formulations was $13.7 billion ($8.5 billion from Medicare and $5.2 billion from Medicaid). Conclusions and Relevance:The findings suggest that switching from extended-release drug formulations to therapeutically equivalent immediate-release formulations when available represents a potential option to reduce Medicare and Medicaid spending.

Project description:ObjectiveQuetiapine is an atypical antipsychotic with demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of adolescent schizophrenia and pediatric bipolar mania. Large, placebo-controlled studies of interventions in pediatric bipolar depression are lacking. The current study investigated the efficacy and safety of quetiapine extended-release (XR) in patients 10-17 years of age, with acute bipolar depression.MethodsThis multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study investigated quetiapine XR (dose range, 150-300 mg/day) in pediatric outpatients with an American Psychiatric Association, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed., Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) diagnosis of bipolar I or bipolar II disorder (current or most recent episode depressed) treated for up to 8 weeks (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00811473). The primary study outcome was mean change in Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R) total score. Secondary efficacy outcomes included CDRS-R-based response and remission rates.ResultsOf 193 patients randomized to treatment, 144 patients completed the study (75.3% of quetiapine XR group [n=70]; 74.0% of placebo group [n=74]). Least squares mean changes in CDRS-R total score at week 8 were: -29.6 (SE, 1.65) with quetiapine XR and -27.3 (SE, 1.60) with placebo, a between-treatment group difference of -2.29 (SE, 1.99; 95% CI, -6.22, 1.65; p=0.25; mixed-model for repeated measures analysis). Rates of response and remission did not differ significantly between treatment groups. The safety profile of quetiapine XR was broadly consistent with the profile reported previously in adult studies of quetiapine XR and pediatric studies of quetiapine immediate-release (IR). Potentially clinically significant elevations in clinical chemistry values included triglycerides (9.3%, quetiapine XR; 1.4%, placebo group) and thyroid stimulating hormone (4.7%, quetiapine XR; 0%, placebo group). An adverse event potentially related to diabetes mellitus occurred in 3.3% of the quetiapine XR versus no adverse events in the placebo group.ConclusionsQuetiapine XR did not demonstrate efficacy relative to placebo in this 8 week study of pediatric bipolar depression. Quetiapine XR was generally safe and well tolerated.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Bipolar manic episodes often require hospital admission to ensure patient safety. The antipsychotic quetiapine is a common treatment for bipolar mania and is available in immediate release (IR) and extended release (XR) formulations; however, outcomes in patients receiving these different formulations have not been directly compared in an acute hospital setting. METHODS: We conducted a multinational, observational, retrospective cohort study to describe and compare hospital stay in patients admitted for an acute bipolar manic episode treated with quetiapine IR or XR from 1 October 2009-1 October 2010. The primary outcome measure was comparison of length of stay (LOS) using zero-truncated negative binomial regression. RESULTS: In total, 1230 patients were included (659 in the IR cohort; 571 in the XR cohort). The median LOS (interquartile range) was 18.0 days (12.0, 28.0) in the IR cohort and 20.0 days (12.0, 34.0) in the XR cohort, respectively. LOS was not significantly associated with quetiapine formulation irrespective of whether or not clinical characteristics were taken into account (p = 0.820 and p = 0.386, respectively). Overall, 84.2% and 84.4% of patients in the IR and XR cohorts, respectively, had not previously used quetiapine; of these patients, 78.7% and 68.9% received one total daily dose, and 14.4% and 23.9% received dose titration. Over half of patients received antipsychotic monotherapy (53.1% and 58.3% in the IR and XR cohorts, respectively) and most received a daily quetiapine dose ? 400 mg (64.9% and 71.8%, respectively, for quetiapine monotherapy and 59.9% and 80.3%, respectively, for combination treatment). As a secondary outcome, multivariate analysis was used to identify other factors that affect LOS. Factors associated with a longer hospital stay included public funding versus private, maximum number of new medications administered, did not receive lithium and did not receive anxiolytics, sedatives/hypnotics (all p < 0.0001). Factors associated with a shorter hospital stay included presence of drug/alcohol abuse, living accompanied and having a psychiatric medical history (all p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: LOS was not found to be associated with quetiapine formulation. However, most patients received only one total daily dose of quetiapine without dose titration, which was unexpected and contrary to current recommendations. TRIAL REGISTRATION: TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01239589.

Dataset Information

Comparison of D? dopamine receptor occupancy after oral administration of quetiapine fumarate immediate-release and extended-release formulations in healthy subjects.

Publications

Comparison of D₂ dopamine receptor occupancy after oral administration of quetiapine fumarate immediate-release and extended-release formulations in healthy subjects.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure