Dataset Information

Evaluation of the pharmacokinetic interaction between lesogaberan (AZD3355) and esomeprazole in healthy subjects.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Transient lower esophageal sphincter relaxations (TLESRs) have been identified as a primary cause of reflux events in patients with gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD). GABA(B) receptor agonists such as lesogaberan (AZD3355) have been shown to inhibit TLESRs in healthy subjects and patients with GERD, and, therefore, offer a novel therapeutic add-on strategy to acid suppression for the management of GERD. As lesogaberan is being developed as an add-on treatment for the management of patients with GERD who have a partial response to proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy, it is important to rule out any clinically important pharmacokinetic drug-drug interaction between lesogaberan and PPIs.

Objective

To evaluate the effect of esomeprazole on the pharmacokinetics and safety of lesogaberan and vice versa.

Study design

This was an open-label, randomized, three-way crossover study. The study was open to healthy adult male and female subjects. The study subjects received treatment with, in random order, lesogaberan (150 mg twice daily [dose interval 12 hours]), esomeprazole (40 mg once daily), and a combination of both, during 7-day treatment periods.

Main outcome

The presence or absence of pharmacokinetic interactions between lesogaberan and esomeprazole was assessed by measuring the steady-state area under the plasma concentration-time curves during the dosing interval (AUC(τ)) and the maximum observed plasma concentration (C(max)) for lesogaberan and esomeprazole.

Results

Thirty male subjects (mean age 23.2 years, 97% Caucasian) were randomized to treatment and 28 subjects completed the study (one subject was lost to follow-up, and one subject discontinued due to an adverse event). The 95% confidence intervals of the geometric mean ratios for AUC(τ) and C(max) of lesogaberan and esomeprazole administered alone and concomitantly were within the recognized boundaries of bioequivalence (0.8-1.25). No new safety concerns were raised during this study. The number of patients with adverse events during treatment with lesogaberan alone (n = 17) and concomitantly with esomeprazole (n = 18) were comparable but higher than with esomeprazole alone (n = 10). Paresthesia (episodic, mild, and transient), pharyngitis, and flatulence were the most frequently reported adverse events.

Conclusions

There was no observed pharmacokinetic interaction between lesogaberan and esomeprazole when concomitantly administered to healthy subjects, and concomitant therapy was well tolerated. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER (clinicaltrials.gov): NCT00684190.

SUBMITTER: Niazi M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3586101 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background and objectiveRosuvastatin and ezetimibe are commonly applied in lipid-lowering pharmacotherapy. However, the pharmacokinetic (PK) interaction was not clear by the coadministration of rosuvastatin and ezetimibe. This study investigated the pharmacodynamic (PD) and PK interactions between rosuvastatin and ezetimibe through a crossover clinical trial.Subjects and methodsA randomized, open-label, multiple-dose, two-treatment, two-period, two-sequence crossover study with two treatment parts was conducted in healthy male subjects. Study part A involved rosuvastatin, and study part B involved ezetimibe. A total of 25 subjects in both parts completed the PK and PD evaluations. Rosuvastatin (20 mg) or ezetimibe (10 mg) was administered once daily for 7 days as monotherapy or co-therapy. The plasma concentrations of rosuvastatin, total ezetimibe and free ezetimibe were measured for 72 h after day 7. Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and total cholesterol (TC) were investigated for the PD assessments on day 1 (pretreatment) and day 8.ResultsRosuvastatin and ezetimibe presented multiple peaks. The 90% confidence intervals (CIs) of the geometric mean ratios for the peak plasma concentration at steady state (Cmax,ss) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve during the dosing interval at steady state (AUCτ,ss) of rosuvastatin and total ezetimibe were within the range 0.8-1.25. However, the coadministration increased the systemic exposure of free ezetimibe. In the PD assessments, rosuvastatin and ezetimibe monotherapy reduced the LDL-C and TC levels effectively. In addition, the lipid-lowering effects of the coadministration corresponded to an approximate summation of the effects of rosuvastatin and ezetimibe monotherapy. However, no significant changes in HDL-C were observed with rosuvastatin or ezetimibe treatment. No significant safety issue was noted.ConclusionThe coadministration of rosuvastatin and ezetimibe revealed a bioequivalent PK interaction. Additional lipid-lowering effects, including decreased LDL-C and TC, were observed as expected in combination therapy without significant safety concern.

Project description:This study assessed the effects of rifapentine or rifampin on the pharmacokinetics of a single dose of bedaquiline and its M2 metabolite in healthy subjects using a two-period single-sequence design. In period 1, subjects received a single dose of bedaquiline (400 mg), followed by a 28-day washout. In period 2, subjects received either rifapentine (600 mg) or rifampin (600 mg) from day 20 to day 41, as well as a single bedaquiline dose (400 mg) on day 29. The pharmacokinetic profiles of bedaquiline and M2 were compared over 336 h after the administration of bedaquiline alone and in combination with steady-state rifapentine or rifampin. Coadministration of bedaquiline with rifapentine or rifampin resulted in lower bedaquiline exposures. The geometric mean ratios (GMRs) and 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for the maximum observed concentration (Cmax), area under the concentration-time curve to the last available concentration time point (AUC0-t), and AUC extrapolated to infinity (AUC0-inf) of bedaquiline were 62.19% (53.37 to 72.47), 42.79% (37.77 to 48.49), and 44.52% (40.12 to 49.39), respectively, when coadministered with rifapentine. Similarly, the GMRs and 90% CIs for the Cmax, AUC0-t, and AUC0-inf of bedaquiline were 60.24% (51.96 to 69.84), 41.36% (37.70 to 45.36), and 47.32% (41.49 to 53.97), respectively, when coadministered with rifampin. The Cmax, AUC0-t, and AUC0-inf of M2 were also altered when bedaquiline was coadministered with rifapentine or rifampin. Single doses of bedaquiline, administered alone or with multiple doses of rifapentine or rifampin, were well tolerated, with no safety concerns related to coadministration. Daily administration of rifapentine to patients with tuberculosis presents the same drug interaction challenges as rifampin and other rifamycins. Strong inducers of the cytochrome P450 isoenzyme CYP3A4 should be avoided when considering the use of bedaquiline. (This study is registered at clinicaltrials.gov under identifier NCT02216331.).

Project description:This open-label, fixed-sequence, phase 1 study evaluated the pharmacokinetic interaction between maraviroc (MVC) and ritonavir-boosted fosamprenavir (FPV/r) in healthy subjects. In period 1, subjects received 300 mg of MVC twice daily (BID; cohort 1) or once daily (QD; cohort 2) for 5 days. In period 2, cohort 1 subjects received 700/100 mg of FPV/r BID alone on days 1 to 10 and then FPV/r at 700/100 mg BID plus MVC at 300 mg BID on days 11 to 20; cohort 2 subjects received FPV/r at 1,400/100 mg QD alone on days 1 to 10 and then FPV/r at 1,400/100 mg QD plus MVC at 300 mg QD on days 11 to 20. Pharmacokinetic parameters, assessed on day 5 of period 1 and on days 10 and 20 of period 2, included the maximum plasma concentration (Cmax), the concentration at end of dosing interval (Cτ), and the area under the curve over dosing interval (AUCτ). Safety and tolerability were also assessed. MVC geometric mean AUCτ, Cmax, and Cτ were increased by 149, 52, and 374%, respectively, after BID dosing with FPV/r, and by 126, 45, and 80%, respectively, after QD dosing. Amprenavir (the active form of the prodrug fosamprenavir) and ritonavir exposures were decreased in the presence of MVC with amprenavir AUCτ, Cmax, and Cτ decreased by 34 to 36% in the presence of FPV/r plus maraviroc BID and by 15 to 30% with FPV/r plus MVC QD both compared to FPV/r alone. The overall all-causality adverse-event (AE) incidence rate was 96.4%; all AEs were of mild or moderate severity. Commonly reported treatment-related AEs (>20% of patients overall) included diarrhea, fatigue, abdominal discomfort, headache, and nausea. No serious AEs or deaths occurred. In summary, maraviroc exposure increased in the presence of FPV/r, whereas MVC coadministration decreased amprenavir and ritonavir exposures. MVC dosed at 300 mg BID with FPV/r is not recommended due to concerns of lower amprenavir exposures; however, no dose adjustment is warranted with MVC at 150 mg BID in combination with FPV/r based on the available clinical data. MVC plus FPV/r was generally well tolerated; no new safety signals were detected.