Dataset Information

Coadministration of the prostaglandin F2? receptor antagonist preterm labour drug candidate OBE022 with magnesium sulfate, atosiban, nifedipine and betamethasone.

ABSTRACT:

Aims

To investigate presence or absence of clinically relevant drug interactions (pharmacokinetic and safety/tolerability) of OBE022 with standard-of-care medicines for preterm labour, enabling coadministration and further clinical development.

Methods

Part A: open-label, randomized, 3-period crossover assessing coadministration of single doses of OBE022 (1100 mg) and MgSO₄ . Part B: open-label, single-sequence crossover assessing the interactions following administration of OBE022 (1000 mg/day) at steady state coadministered with single doses of atosiban, nifedipine and betamethasone. Twenty-five healthy nonpregnant women of reproductive age were enrolled (Part A: n = 12; Part B: n = 13).

Results

OBE022, alone or in combination with standard-of-care medications, was well tolerated. Headache and dizziness were the most frequently reported adverse events; dizziness occurred more often with the nifedipine/OBE022 combination. There were no clinically significant pharmacokinetic interactions when coadministered with MgSO₄ . Co-administration had no notable effect on atosiban exposure. Atosiban reduced exposure to OBE002 (peak concentration [C_max ] 22%, area under the concentration-time curve [AUC] 19%). Coadministration with betamethasone slightly increased betamethasone exposure (C_max + 18%, AUC +27%) and OBE002 exposure (C_max + 35%, AUC +15%). These changes were not considered clinically significant. Coadministration with nifedipine slightly increased OBE002 exposure (C_max + 29%, AUC +24%) and markedly increased nifedipine exposure (C_max by 2-fold and AUC by 2-fold), which may be clinically significant.

Conclusions

The use of OBE022, a PGF2? antagonist prodrug, in combination with standard-of-care medicines may provide new treatment alternatives for preterm labour. All tested combinations were well tolerated. Nifedipine doses could potentially be reduced or staggered when coadministered with OBE022.

SUBMITTER: Pohl O

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6595366 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Coadministration of the prostaglandin F2α receptor antagonist preterm labour drug candidate OBE022 with magnesium sulfate, atosiban, nifedipine and betamethasone.

Pohl Oliver O Marchand Line L Gotteland Jean-Pierre JP Coates Simon S Täubel Jörg J Lorch Ulrike U

British journal of clinical pharmacology 20190511 7

<h4>Aims</h4>To investigate presence or absence of clinically relevant drug interactions (pharmacokinetic and safety/tolerability) of OBE022 with standard-of-care medicines for preterm labour, enabling coadministration and further clinical development.<h4>Methods</h4>Part A: open-label, randomized, 3-period crossover assessing coadministration of single doses of OBE022 (1100 mg) and MgSO<sub>4</sub> . Part B: open-label, single-sequence crossover assessing the interactions following administrati ...[more]

PMID: 30891820

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundWorldwide, nifedipine and atosiban are the two most commonly used tocolytic agents for the treatment of threatened preterm birth. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of nifedipine and atosiban in an individual participant data meta-analysis (IPDMA).MethodsWe investigated the occurrence of adverse neonatal outcomes in women with threatened preterm birth by performing an IPDMA, and sought to identify possible subgroups in which one treatment may be preferred. We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane for trials comparing nifedipine and atosiban for treatment of threatened preterm birth between 240/7 and 340/7 weeks' gestational age. Primary outcome was a composite of perinatal mortality and neonatal morbidities including respiratory distress syndrome, intraventricular haemorrhage, periventricular leucomalacia, necrotising enterocolitis, and sepsis. Secondary outcomes included NICU admission, prolongation of pregnancy and GA at delivery. For studies that did not have the original databases available, metadata was used. This led to a two-stage meta-analysis that combined individual participant data with aggregate metadata.ResultsWe detected four studies (N = 791 women), of which two provided individual participant data (N = 650 women). The composite neonatal outcome occurred in 58/364 (16%) after nifedipine versus 69/359 (19%) after atosiban (OR 0.76, 95%CI 0.47-1.23). Perinatal death occurred in 14/392 (3.6%) after nifedipine versus 7/380 (1.8%) after atosiban (OR 2.0, 95%CI 0.80-5.1). Nifedipine results in longer prolongation of pregnancy, with a 18 days to delivery compared with 10 days for atosiban (HR 0.83 (96% CI 0.69-0.99)). NICU admission occurred less often after nifedipine (46%) than after atosiban (59%), (OR 0.32, 95%CI 0.14-0.75). The sensitivity analysis revealed no difference in prolongation of pregnancy for 48 hours (OR 1.0, 95% CI 0.73-1.4) or 7 days (OR 1.3, 95% CI 0.85-5.8) between nifedipine and atosiban. There was a non-significant higher neonatal mortality in the nifedipine-exposed group (OR 1.4, 95% CI 0.60-3.4).ConclusionsIn this IPDMA, we found no differences in composite outcome between nifedipine and atosiban in the treatment of threatened preterm birth. However, the non-significant higher mortality after administering nifedipine warrants further investigation of the use of nifedipine as a tocolytic drug.Study registrationWe conducted this study according to a prospectively prepared protocol, registered with PROSPERO (the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews) under CRD42016024244.

Project description:BackgroundThe use of tocolytics is central in delaying birth; however, therapeutic options vary in effectiveness and adverse events profiles, which in turn could have consequences for medical resource use and cost of treatment. Betamimetics are commonly used tocolytic agents, but their mechanism of action affects multiple organ systems leading to numerous adverse events. The availability of an oxytocin receptor antagonist, specific for prevention of preterm labour, offers a treatment option that merits further evaluation. We aimed to compare economic implications of tocolysis using atosiban and betamimetics, considering treatment efficacy and safety, as well as cost consequences of treatment of associated adverse events.MethodsA systematic literature review identified six randomised clinical trials, three of them double-blinded, comparing atosiban with betamimetics, in which tocolysis was initiated within 48 hours of admission. Cost of drug treatment was calculated based on trial protocols and German hospital drug purchase costs. G-DRG Grouper was used to obtain cost per case. The drug regimen was concordant with the German guidelines for the management of preterm labour, with two alternative modalities of fenoterol analysed: continuous or bolus administrations.ResultsAccording to the results of the meta-analysis of the three double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trials, atosiban and betamimetics have similar efficacy (RR = 0.99, 95%CI:0.94-1.04, p = 0.772). Compared to betamimetics, use of atosiban was associated with a significantly lower frequency of adverse events for tachycardia, palpitation, vomiting, headache, hyperglycaemia, tremor, dyspnoea, chest pain, hypocalemia and foetal tachycardia. In our economic analysis, cost savings from using atosiban versus continuous, or bolus, fenoterol was 423euro per patient from the payer's perspective. From the hospital's perspective, savings from using atosiban versus continuous fenoterol ranged from 259euro for 18 hours of tocolysis to 105euro for 48 hours; the respective values for bolus fenoterol were 244euro and 55euro. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis atosiban was cost saving versus both continuous and bolus fenoterol in 87%-100% of scenarios.ConclusionIn a German setting, atosiban is cost saving versus betamimetics in the treatment of preterm labour from the payer, hospital and combined perspectives. Cost savings stem from the superior safety profile of atosiban.