Dataset Information

Lisdexamfetamine Dimesylate Effects on the Pharmacokinetics of Cytochrome P450 Substrates in Healthy Adults in an Open-Label, Randomized, Crossover Study.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

This open-label, randomized, two-period drug interaction study assessed lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) effects on cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzyme (CYP1A2, CYP2D6, CYP2C19, and CYP3A) activity.

Methods

Thirty healthy volunteers were administered the Cooperstown cocktail (CYP1A2 [caffeine 200 mg], CYP2D6 [dextromethorphan 30 mg], CYP2C19 [omeprazole 40 mg], and CYP3A [midazolam 0.025 mg/kg] substrates) or Cooperstown cocktail + oral LDX 70 mg. Blood samples for pharmacokinetic analysis were collected pre-dose and serially for 72 h post-dose. Treatment differences in the primary endpoints, maximum plasma concentration (C max) and area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from 0 to infinity (AUC0-∞), were assessed using geometric mean ratios with 90 % CIs.

Results

Geometric least squares (LS) means (without versus with LDX) for C max (ng/mL) were 5370 versus 5246 for caffeine, 2.43 versus 2.87 for dextromethorphan, 35.23 versus 35.11 for midazolam, and 677.9 versus 466.9 for omeprazole; and for AUC0-∞ (ng · h/mL) were 56,207 versus 56,688 for caffeine, 34.85 versus 37.27 for dextromethorphan, 92.07 versus 93.04 for midazolam, and 1428 versus 1499 for omeprazole. Geometric LS mean ratios were within the standard bioequivalence testing range, except for omeprazole and dextromethorphan C max. Parent/metabolite C max and AUC0-∞ ratios were similar between treatments except for dextromethorphan/dextrorphan AUC0-∞ ratio, which was lower with LDX. No serious or severe treatment-emergent adverse events were reported.

Conclusions

LDX did not alter CYP1A2, CYP2D6, or CYP3A activity. A small C max reduction for omeprazole and its metabolite was observed, possibly reflecting an effect either on the activity of CYP2C19 or omeprazole absorption.

SUBMITTER: Ermer J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4488187 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThis open-label, crossover study examined lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) and D-amphetamine pharmacokinetics in healthy adults after administration of an intact LDX capsule or after the capsule was emptied into orange juice or yogurt and the contents consumed.MethodsHealthy adult volunteers (N = 30) were administered a 70-mg LDX capsule or the contents of a 70-mg capsule mixed with yogurt or orange juice using a 3-way crossover design. Blood samples were collected serially for up to 96 hours after dose. Pharmacokinetic endpoints included maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) and area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from zero to infinity (AUC0-∞) or to last assessment (AUClast). Relative LDX and D-amphetamine bioavailabilities from the contents of a 70-mg LDX capsule mixed with orange juice or yogurt were compared with those from the intact LDX capsule using bioequivalence-testing procedures.ResultsGeometric least squares mean ratios (90% confidence intervals [CIs]) for D-amphetamine (active moiety) were within the prespecified bioequivalence range (0.80-1.25) when the contents of a 70-mg LDX capsule were mixed with orange juice [Cmax: 0.971 (0.945, 0.998); AUC0-∞: 0.986 (0.955, 1.019); AUClast: 0.970 (0.937, 1.004)] or yogurt [Cmax: 0.970 (0.944, 0.997); AUC0-∞: 0.945 (0.915, 0.976); AUClast: 0.944 (0.912, 0.977)]. Geometric least squares mean ratios (90% CIs) for LDX (inactive prodrug) were below the accepted range when the contents of a 70-mg LDX capsule were mixed with orange juice [Cmax: 0.641 (0.582, 0.707); AUC0-∞: 0.716 (0.647, 0.792); AUClast: 0.708 (0.655, 0.766)]; the lower 90% CI for Cmax [0.828 (0.752, 0.912)] was below the accepted range when the contents of a 70-mg LDX capsule were mixed with yogurt.ConclusionsRelative bioavailability of D-amphetamine (the active moiety) did not differ across administrations, which suggests that emptying an LDX capsule into orange juice or yogurt and consuming it is an alternative to intact capsules.

Project description:BackgroundIn clinical practice, α₂-adrenoceptor agonists have been adjunctively administered with psychostimulants for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Two studies have examined the adjunctive use of guanfacine extended release (GXR, Intuniv®; Shire Development LLC, Wayne, PA, USA) with psychostimulants in children and adolescents with a suboptimal response to psychostimulant treatment. However, the potential for pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions (DDIs) between GXR and lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX, Vyvanse®; Shire US LLC, Wayne, PA, USA) has not been thoroughly evaluated.ObjectiveThe primary objective of this study was to examine the pharmacokinetics of GXR 4 mg and LDX 50 mg given as single doses alone and in combination.Study designThis was an open-label, randomized, three-period crossover, DDI study.SettingThe study was conducted in a single clinical research center.ParticipantsForty-two healthy adults were randomized in this study.InterventionsSubjects were administered single oral doses of GXR 4 mg, LDX 50 mg, or GXR and LDX in combination.Main outcome measuresBlood samples collected predose and up to 72 h postdose assessed guanfacine, LDX, and d-amphetamine levels. Bioequivalence was defined as the 90% confidence intervals (CIs) of the geometric mean ratios of the area under the plasma concentration-time curve extrapolated to infinity (AUC0-∞) and maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) falling within the bioequivalence reference interval (0.80-1.25). Safety measures included adverse events, vital signs, and electrocardiograms (ECGs).ResultsForty subjects completed the study. Following administration of LDX alone or in combination with GXR, the statistical comparisons of the AUC0-∞ and Cmax of d-amphetamine fell entirely within the reference interval. For guanfacine, the 90% CI of the geometric mean ratio of AUC∞ for the two treatments was within the bioequivalence criteria, but for Cmax the upper bound of the 90% CI exceeded the standard range for bioequivalence by 7%. This relatively small change is unlikely to be clinically meaningful. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported by 42.9% of subjects; the most commonly reported TEAEs included dizziness (5.0, 7.3, and 7.3%) and headache (7.5, 4.9, and 7.3%) following administration of GXR, LDX, and GXR and LDX in combination, respectively. Clinically significant ECG abnormalities occurred in one subject following administration of LDX and in one subject following coadministration of GXR and LDX.ConclusionsIn healthy adults, coadministration of GXR and LDX did not result in a clinically meaningful pharmacokinetic DDI compared with either treatment alone. No unique TEAEs were observed with coadministration of GXR and LDX compared with either treatment alone.

Project description:BackgroundLisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX), a prodrug consisting of d-amphetamine and l-lysine, is being studied in clinical trials of major depressive disorder. Additional drug-drug interaction studies were warranted.ObjectiveThis study aimed to describe the pharmacokinetics and safety of LDX and venlafaxine extended-release (VXR), alone or combined.Study designThe study was an open-label, two-arm, single-sequence crossover investigation with randomization to treatment sequence.Setting and participantsThe study was conducted at two clinical study centres and included healthy adult males and females (18-45 years of age).InterventionThe study included two single-sequence crossover designs: LDX alone followed by LDX + VXR (Treatment Arm A); and VXR alone followed by VXR + LDX (Treatment Arm B). Drug treatment was initiated on day 1 with once-daily LDX or VXR alone with 15 days' titration to final dose (LDX 30, 50 and 70 mg for 5 days each; VXR 75, 150 and 225 mg for 5 days each). On days 16-30, VXR, titrated to a final dose of 225 mg, or LDX, titrated to a final dose of 70 mg, was coadministered for participants in Treatment Arm A or B, respectively. On days 31-38, VXR doses were tapered.Main outcome measuresOn days 1-2, 15-16 and 30-31, safety evaluations and blood samples were obtained pre-dose through 24 h post-dose for analysis of LDX, d-amphetamine, venlafaxine (VEN), and O-desmethylvenlafaxine (ODV). Combination treatment was considered bioequivalent to single treatment if 90 % confidence intervals (CIs) for geometric mean ratios (GMRs) of analytes fell within the interval 0.80-1.25 based on maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) from time zero to time of last measurable concentration (AUCτ). Safety assessments included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), pulse rate and blood pressure (BP), clinical laboratory assessments, and 12-lead electrocardiograms (ECG).ResultsAmong 80 enrolled subjects, 77 were included in pharmacokinetic and safety analyses. Combination LDX + VXR was bioequivalent to LDX alone, based on exposure to d-amphetamine (GMR [95 % CI], Cmax (ng/mL): 0.97 [0.82, 1.14], AUCτ: 0.95 [0.81, 1.12]). Exposure to VEN with LDX + VXR (vs. VXR alone) was increased (Cmax: 1.10 [0.88, 1.38], AUCτ: 1.13 [0.88, 1.45]) and ODV decreased (Cmax: 0.91 [0.77, 1.06], AUCτ: 0.83 [0.71, 0.96]), whereas composite VEN + ODV was bioequivalent to VXR alone (Cmax: 0.96 [0.84, 1.09], AUCτ: 0.98 [0.85, 1.13]). TEAEs with LDX or LDX + VXR were similar. Maximum mean increases from baseline were: pulse rate, +8.73 to 12.76 beats/min with either treatment alone and +17.67 to 20.85 beats/min with LDX + VXR; systolic BP, +4.32 to 6.56 mmHg with either treatment alone and +12.96 to 13.78 mmHg with LDX + VXR; diastolic BP, +5.39 to 5.74 mmHg with either treatment alone and +12.09 to 12.46 mmHg with LDX + VXR. One participant was withdrawn due to a serious TEAE (presyncope). No unexpected, clinically meaningful trends or changes from baseline in mean laboratory or ECG parameters were observed during the trial.ConclusionIn healthy adults, combination LDX + VXR (vs. LDX alone) did not alter exposure to d-amphetamine. Although small changes in exposure to VEN (increased) and ODV (decreased) were seen with combination treatment, total VEN + ODV exposure showed no change (vs. VEN alone). LDX + VXR led to increases in BP and pulse rate, supporting existing recommendations for vital sign monitoring when using these medications.

Project description:BACKGROUND:SPD489-404 was the first 2-year safety study of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate in the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder in children and adolescents. In accordance with advice from the European Medicines Agency, assessment of cognitive function was a predefined safety outcome in SPD489-404. OBJECTIVE:The objective of this study was to assess cognitive function over 2 years in study SPD489-404, using the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB). METHODS:Participants aged 6-17 years received dose-optimised open-label lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (30, 50 or 70 mg/day) for 104 weeks. Cognition was assessed using four CANTAB tasks; Delayed Matching to Sample (DMS), Spatial Working Memory (SWM), Stop Signal Task (SST) and Reaction Time (RTI). Key and additional variables were pre-specified for each CANTAB task; groupwise mean percentage changes in key variables from baseline of > 5% were considered potentially clinically significant. RESULTS:All 314 enrolled participants received lisdexamfetamine dimesylate and were included in the safety population, and 191 (60.8%) completed the study. No potentially clinically significant deteriorations from baseline were observed in any key CANTAB variable over the 2 years of the study. Based on predefined thresholds, potentially clinically significant improvements from baseline were observed at 6 months (DMS median reaction time, mean per cent change, - 6.6%; SWM total between-search errors, - 22.8%; SST stop signal reaction time, -18.9%), and at the last on-treatment assessment (DMS median reaction time, - 6.5%; SWM total between-search errors, - 32.6%; SST stop signal reaction time, - 25.7%). CONCLUSIONS:Lisdexamfetamine dimesylate treatment for 2 years was not associated with deterioration of cognitive function in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Although improvements in some cognitive measures were observed, lack of a control group makes interpretation of the findings difficult. Further studies of the impact of stimulants on cognition are required. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER:NCT01328756.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Stimulant medications for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder have a history of safe and effective use; however, concerns exist that they may adversely affect growth trajectories in children and adolescents. OBJECTIVE:The objective of this study was to evaluate the longer-term effects of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate on weight, height, body mass index and pubertal development in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. METHODS:Children and adolescents aged 6-17 years with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder took open-label lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (30, 50 or 70 mg/day) in this open-label 2-year safety and efficacy study. Safety evaluations included treatment-emergent adverse events, measurement of weight, height and body mass index, and self-reported pubertal status using Tanner staging. RESULTS:The safety analysis population comprised all enrolled participants (N = 314) and 191 (60.8%) completed the study. Weight decrease was reported as a treatment-emergent adverse event in 63 participants (20.1%) and two participants (0.6%) discontinued the study as a result of treatment-emergent adverse events of weight decrease. Growth retardation of moderate intensity was reported as a treatment-emergent adverse event for two participants. From baseline to the last on-treatment assessment, there were increases in mean weight of 2.1 kg (standard deviation 5.83) and height of 6.1 cm (standard deviation 4.90), and a body mass index decrease of 0.5 kg/m2 (standard deviation 1.72). Mean weight, height and body mass index z-scores decreased over the first 36 weeks of the study and then stabilised. Changes from baseline to the last on-treatment assessment in mean z-scores for weight, height and body mass index were significantly less than zero (- 0.51, - 0.24 and - 0.59, respectively; nominal p < 0.0001). The proportion of participants with a z-score of < - 1 ranged from 5.1% (baseline) to 22.1% (week 84) for weight, 8.2% (baseline) to 12.6% (week 96) for height, and 8.3% (baseline) to 28.8% (week 96) for body mass index. Thirteen participants (4.1%) shifted to a weight below the fifth percentile at the last on-treatment assessment from a higher weight category at baseline. At the last on-treatment assessment, most participants remained at their baseline Tanner stage or had shifted higher. CONCLUSIONS:Findings from this comprehensive examination of growth outcomes associated with lisdexamfetamine dimesylate treatment over 2 years were consistent with previous studies of stimulant medications. Whilst mean weight and height increased over the course of the study, there was a small but transient reduction in mean weight, height and body mass index z-scores. A small increase in the proportion of participants in the lowest weight and body mass index categories highlights the importance of the regular monitoring of weight and height. There was no evidence of delayed onset of puberty. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER:NCT01328756.