scholarly journals Effect of Cilostazol on the Pharmacokinetics of Simvastatin in Healthy Subjects

2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jung-Ryul Kim ◽  
Jin Ah Jung ◽  
Seokuee Kim ◽  
Wooseong Huh ◽  
Jong-Lyul Ghim ◽  
...  

Purpose. We evaluated potential drug-drug interactions between cilostazol and simvastatin, both CYP3A substrates, in healthy subjects. Methods. An open-label, two-period, fixed-sequence clinical study was conducted. Seventeen subjects were given a single oral dose of simvastatin 40 mg on day 1 and multiple oral doses of cilostazol 100 mg twice daily on days 2 to 5 followed by a single dose of cilostazol and simvastatin on day 6. Plasma concentrations of simvastatin and its active metabolite, simvastatin acid, were measured using liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry for pharmacokinetic assessment. Moreover, serum lipid profiles under fasting conditions were determined. Results. The geometric mean ratios of the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to time infinity of simvastatin combined with cilostazol to that of simvastatin alone were 1.64 (90% CI, 1.38-1.95) for simvastatin and 1.31 (1.04-1.66) for simvastatin acid. In addition, coadministration with cilostazol significantly increased the maximum concentration of simvastatin and simvastatin acid, up to 1.8-fold and 1.6-fold, respectively. However, the effects of a single dose of simvastatin on serum lipid profiles were not affected notably when simvastatin was coadministered with cilostazol. Conclusions. Multiple doses of cilostazol increased the systemic exposure of simvastatin and simvastatin acid following a single dose of simvastatin.

Hypertension ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 62 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hsiu-Ling Hsiao ◽  
Michael Greeley ◽  
Parasar Pal ◽  
Thomas Langenickel ◽  
Gangadhar Sunkara ◽  
...  

Objective: LCZ696 is a first-in-class angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) being developed for the treatment of cardiovascular diseases, including hypertension and heart failure. Ingestion of LCZ696 results in systemic exposure to AHU377 (inactive prodrug of LBQ657, a neprilysin inhibitor) and valsartan (angiotensin receptor blocker). Hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) is indicated as first line treatment of hypertension. Since LCZ696 and HCTZ may be co-administered for optimal blood pressure control, this study was conducted to evaluate the pharmacokinetic (PK) drug-drug interaction potential between LCZ696 and HCTZ. Methods: An open-label, three-period, single sequence study in 27 healthy subjects was conducted. In Period 1, subjects received oral HCTZ 25 mg qd x 4 days and were discharged for a 4-10 day washout. In Period 2, subjects received LCZ696 400 mg qd x 5 days, and in Period 3, HCTZ 25 mg qd + LCZ696 400 mg qd x 4 days. Serial PK samples were collected and analyzed by a validated LC-MS/MS method. PK parameters (AUCtau,ss,Cmax,ss) of LCZ696 analytes (LBQ657, valsartan) and HCTZ in plasma were determined using non-compartmental analysis, and the results were statisticallyevaluated. Results: The 90% CIs confidence intervals (CIs) for the geometric mean ratio for AUCtau,ss of HCTZ fell within the ( 0.8 - 1.25) range, while those of Cmax,ss (0.74, 0.70-0.78) fell outside the range, indicating Cmax,ss of HCTZ decreased by 26% when co-administered with LCZ696. Those for AUCtau,ss of LBQ657 fell within the range but the upper bound for Cmax,ss (1.19, 1.10-1.28) was outside the range, indicating Cmax of LBQ657 increased by 19%; the upper bound for valsartan exposures(AUCtau,ss: 1.14, 1.00-1.29; Cmax,ss: 1.16, 0.98-1.37) were above the range, indicating AUCtau,ss and Cmax,ss of valsartan increased by 14%and 16%, respectively. Conclusion: When LCZ696 400mg qd and HCTZ 25mg qd were co- administered, AUCtau,ss of HCTZ was unchanged but Cmax,ss decreased by 26%; AUCtau,ss of LBQ657 was unchanged but Cmax,ss increased by 19%; and lastly, AUCtau,ss and Cmax,ss of valsartan increased by 14%and 16%, respectively. LCZ696 400 mg qd was safe and well tolerated in healthy subjects when administered alone and in combination with HCTZ 25 mg qd.


2013 ◽  
Vol 57 (12) ◽  
pp. 6158-6164 ◽  
Author(s):  
Manoli Vourvahis ◽  
Anna Plotka ◽  
Laure Mendes da Costa ◽  
Annie Fang ◽  
Jayvant Heera

ABSTRACTThis 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, andCτwere 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, andCτdecreased 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.


2016 ◽  
Vol 61 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ka Lai Yee ◽  
Rosa I. Sanchez ◽  
Patrice Auger ◽  
Rachael Liu ◽  
Li Fan ◽  
...  

ABSTRACT Doravirine is a novel, potent nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) for the treatment of patients with human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) infection that demonstrates a high genetic barrier to resistance and that has been well tolerated in studies to date. Doravirine is a candidate for patients switching from less-well-tolerated NNRTIs, such as efavirenz. While doravirine is a cytochrome P450 3A4 (CYP3A4) substrate, efavirenz induces CYP3A4; therefore, the pharmacokinetics of both drugs following a switch from efavirenz to doravirine were assessed. This was a 3-period, fixed-sequence, open-label study. Healthy adults were dosed with doravirine at 100 mg for 5 days once daily (QD) (period 1). Following a 7-day washout, efavirenz was administered at 600 mg QD for 14 days (period 2). Subsequently, doravirine was administered at 100 mg QD for 14 days (period 3). Blood samples were collected for pharmacokinetic analyses. Twenty healthy subjects were enrolled, and 17 completed the study. One day after efavirenz cessation, the doravirine area under the concentration-time curve from predosing to 24 h postdosing (AUC0–24), maximum observed plasma concentration (C max), and observed plasma concentration at 24 h postdosing (C 24) were reduced by 62%, 35%, and 85%, respectively, compared with the values with no efavirenz pretreatment. These decreases recovered to 32%, 14%, and 50% for AUC0–24, C max, and C 24, respectively, by day 14 after efavirenz cessation. The doravirine C 24 reached projected therapeutic trough concentrations, based on in vitro efficacy, on day 2 following efavirenz cessation. Geometric mean efavirenz concentrations were 3,180 ng/ml on day 1 and 95.7 ng/ml on day 15, and efavirenz was present at therapeutic concentrations (>1,000 ng/ml) until day 4. Though doravirine exposure was transiently decreased following efavirenz treatment cessation, dose adjustment may not be necessary to maintain therapeutic concentrations of at least one drug during switching in a virologically suppressed population.


2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (6) ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Young-Ran Yoon ◽  
◽  
Sook Jin Seong ◽  

Characterizing potential interactions between red ginseng, an herb with desirable health effects, and metformin, a commonly used drug for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus, is of high clinical importance. In this study, we evaluate the effects of Korean red ginseng on the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of metformin in healthy subjects. The study was conducted in an open-label, two-period and single-sequence design. A total of 11 subjects received multiple doses of metformin in the first study period followed by multiple doses of metformin and red ginseng in the second study period. The Geometric Mean Ratio (GMR) (90% Confidence Interval (CI)) between the groups for area under the plasma drug concentration-time curve within a dosing interval (tau) at steady state (AUCtau,ss) of metformin was out of the range of bioequivalence, indicating that the systemic exposure of metformin when combined with red ginseng was reduced compared with administration of metformin alone. However, the pharmacodynamic analysis showed that the GMR (90% CI) between the groups for area under the blood glucose values–time curve from time zero to the time of the last measurable value (AUClast) and maximum blood glucose value (Gmax) were within the range of bioequivalence. We concluded that the observed reduction in the systemic exposure of metformin when administered with red ginseng is clinically insignificant. This study demonstrated that Korean red ginseng did not have clinically significant pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic herb–drug interactions with metformin in healthy subjects.


2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 2572-2572
Author(s):  
L. Musib ◽  
C. Darstein ◽  
J. Suico ◽  
J. Baldwin ◽  
P. Welch

2572 Background: Enzastaurin (ENZ) targets the PKCβ and PI3K/AKT pathways to induce tumor cell apoptosis, reduce proliferation, and suppress tumor-induced angiogenesis. ENZ is metabolized by CYP3A in vitro. This study examined the potential clinical effects of a potent CYP3A4 inhibitor, ketoconazole (KETO), on the pharmacokinetics and safety of ENZ. Methods: In this open-label, fixed-sequence, three-period, crossover study (duration = 6 weeks), healthy subjects received an oral, 200- mg, single dose of ENZ (period 1); 400-mg daily doses of KETO for 4 days to assess QT (period 2); and 400-mg daily doses of KETO for 14 days, with a 200-mg single dose of ENZ given on day 4 (period 3). Plasma samples for PK analysis were collected predose and after ENZ administration in periods 1 and 3 at scheduled intervals. Results: Of the 16 women enrolled, 13 completed the study. Changes in PK parameters of ENZ and its metabolite, LY326020, in the presence of KETO are summarized in the table . No serious adverse events (AEs) occurred. A similar number of AEs possibly related to enzastaurin occurred in period 1 (6) and period 3 (7). Headache (n=4) and nausea (n=3) were more frequent in period 3, but were also the most common AEs related to KETO. Three patients had hepatic transaminase elevations, but no consistent pattern with dosing period or ENZ exposures was observed. At 4 hours post-dose, QT intervals were prolonged by a mean 5.88 (95% CI: 1.767–10.00) msec after four daily doses of KETO and by a mean 9.29 (95% CI: 5.165–13.41) msec when coadministered with ENZ. Conclusion: In the presence of KETO, plasma concentrations of ENZ and its metabolites increased significantly. ENZ alone did not increase QT intervals. Ketoconazole plus ENZ caused a slightly greater increase in QT intervals compared to KETO alone, but this very small change may not be clinically significant. ENZ was generally well tolerated, alone or with KETO. [Table: see text] No significant financial relationships to disclose.


Hypertension ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 62 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hsiu-Ling Hsiao ◽  
Michael Greeley ◽  
Parasar Pal ◽  
Thomas Langenickel ◽  
Gangadhar Sunkara ◽  
...  

Objective: LCZ696 is a first-in-class angiotensin receptor neprlysin inhibitor (ARNI) being developed for the treatment of hypertension and heart failure. Ingestion of LCZ696 results in systemic exposure to AHU377 (inactive prodrug of LBQ657, a neprilysin inhibitor) and valsartan (angiotensin receptor blocker). Carvedilol is a third-generation, non-selective beta-blocker with vasodilating properties and one of three beta-blockers with efficacy in reducing the risk of death in patients with heart failure. Since LCZ696 may be co-administered with carvedilol for optimal blood pressure control, this study was conducted to evaluate the pharmacokinetic (PK) drug-drug interaction potential between LCZ696 and carvedilol. Methods: An open-label, three-period, single sequence study in 28 healthy subjects was conducted. In Period 1, subjects received oral LCZ696 400 mg qd x 5 days and were discharged for a 4-10 day washout. In Period 2, subjects received oral carvedilol 12.5 mg bid x first 2 days, then 25 mg bid x 4 days, and in Period 3, LCZ696 400 mg qd + carvedilol 25 mg bid x 5 days. Serial PK samples were collected and analyzed by a validated LC-MS/MS method. PK parameters (AUCtau,ss, Cmax,ss) of LCZ696 analytes(LBQ657, valsartan) and carvedilol (R(+)-and S(-)-carvedilol) in plasma were determined using non-compartmental analysis, and results were statistically evaluated. Results: The 90% CIs of the geometric mean ratio for AUCtau,ss and Cmax,ss of LBQ657, and AUCtau,ss of valsartan fell within the range of (0.80-1.25); the lower bound for Cmax,ss of valsartan (0.88, 0.78-0.98) was below the range, indicating PK of LBQ567 was not altered but Cmax,ss of valsartan decreased by 12% when co-administered with carvedilol. Those for AUCtau,ss and Cmax,ss of both R(+)-and S(-)carvedilol fell within the range (0.80-1.25), indicating no change in PK of Carvedilol in combination with LCZ696. Conclusion: When LCZ696 400 mg qd and carvedilol 25 mg bid were co-dministered, PK of carvedilol (R(+)-and S(-)-carvedilol) was unchanged. PK of LBQ657 or AUCtau,ss of valsartan was unchanged, while Cmax,ss decreased by 12%. LCZ696 400 mg qd was safe and well tolerated in healthy subjects when administered alone and in combination with carvedilol 25 mg bid.


Hypertension ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 62 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Surya Ayalasomayajula ◽  
Pierre Jordaan ◽  
Parasar Pal ◽  
Diego Albrecht ◽  
Thomas Langenickel ◽  
...  

Objective: LCZ696 is a first-in-class angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor (ARNI) being developed for the treatment of cardiovascular diseases including hypertension and heart failure. Ingestion of LCZ696 results in systemic exposure to AHU377 (an inactive prodrug converted to LBQ657, a neprilysin inhibitor) and valsartan (angiotensin receptor inhibitor). Digoxin, a narrow therapeutic index drug, is a commonly administered medication to heart failure patients. Since LCZ696 and digoxin may be co-administered in this patient population, this study was conducted to evaluate the pharmacokinetic drug-drug interaction potential between LCZ696 and digoxin. Methods: This study employed an open label, two-period, single sequence study design in 24 healthy subjects. In period 1, subjects received 200 mg LCZ696 b.i.d for 3 days and a single dose of 200 mg LCZ696 on Day 4 morning. Following a 4-7 day washout, in period 2, all subjects received 0.25 mg digoxin q.d. for 14 days and 200 mg LCZ696 b.i.d co-administered from Day 11 to Day 14. Serial PK samples were collected in both treatment periods and analyzed using validated LC/MS/MS bioanalytical methods. The PK parameters including Cmaxss and AUCtau of LCZ696 analytes (LBQ657, valsartan) and digoxin were determined using non-compartmental analysis and the results were statistically evaluated. Results: The 90% confidence intervals of the geometric mean ratios (test/reference) for Cmaxss and AUCtau of digoxin were within the 0.8-1.25 range indicating that LCZ696 did not affect the PK of digoxin. Similarly, the 90% confidence intervals of the geometric mean ratios for Cmaxss and AUCtau for both LBQ657 and valsartan were within the 0.8-1.25 range indicating that digoxin did not affect the PK of LCZ696 analytes. Conclusion: After co-administration of LCZ696 200 mg b.i.d with digoxin 0.25 mg q.d., exposures of digoxin and the LCZ696 analytes (LBQ657 and valsartan) remained unchanged. LCZ696 200 mg b.i.d was safe and well tolerated in healthy subjects when administered alone and in combination with digoxin 0.25 mg qd.


2010 ◽  
Vol 55 (1) ◽  
pp. 326-330 ◽  
Author(s):  
José Moltó ◽  
Marta Valle ◽  
Cristina Miranda ◽  
Samandhy Cedeño ◽  
Eugenia Negredo ◽  
...  

ABSTRACTThe aim of this open-label, fixed-sequence study was to investigate the potential ofEchinacea purpurea, a commonly used botanical supplement, to interact with the boosted protease inhibitor darunavir-ritonavir. Fifteen HIV-infected patients receiving antiretroviral therapy including darunavir-ritonavir (600/100 mg twice daily) for at least 4 weeks were included.E. purpurearoot extract capsules were added to the antiretroviral treatment (500 mg every 6 h) from days 1 to 14. Darunavir concentrations in plasma were determined by high-performance liquid chromatography immediately before and 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 h after a morning dose of darunavir-ritonavir on days 0 (darunavir-ritonavir) and 14 (darunavir-ritonavir plus echinacea). Individual darunavir pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated by noncompartmental analysis and compared between days 0 and 14 with the geometric mean ratio (GMR) and its 90% confidence interval (CI). The median age was 49 (range, 43 to 67) years, and the body mass index was 24.2 (range, 18.7 to 27.5) kg/m2. Echinacea was well tolerated, and all participants completed the study. The GMR for darunavir coadministered with echinacea relative to that for darunavir alone was 0.84 (90% CI, 0.63-1.12) for the concentration at the end of the dosing interval, 0.90 (90% CI, 0.74-1.10) for the area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 12 h, and 0.98 (90% CI, 0.82-1.16) for the maximum concentration. In summary, coadministration ofE. purpureawith darunavir-ritonavir was safe and well tolerated. Individual patients did show a decrease in darunavir concentrations, although this did not affect the overall darunavir or ritonavir pharmacokinetics. Although no dose adjustment is required, monitoring darunavir concentrations on an individual basis may give reassurance in this setting.


2016 ◽  
Vol 36 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Walter Kraft ◽  
Jocelyn Gilmartin ◽  
Derek L Chappell ◽  
Srikanth Nagalla ◽  
Uhlas P Naik ◽  
...  

Vorapaxar is a novel PAR-1 inhibitor approved in the US and EU to reduce risk of thrombotic CV events in patients with a history of MI, and in the US also in patients with PAD. It does not affect coagulation tests (TT, PT, aPTT, ACT, ECT). Aspirin and P2Y 12 inhibitors prolong human bleeding time (BT); does vorapaxar? Methods: In this randomized, active controlled, parallel group, 2-period, single-blind, open-label trial, healthy men (n=31) and women (n=5), in Period 1, received either 81 mg aspirin (ASA) QD for 7 days (N=18), or a 7 day regimen of vorapaxar (N=18) achieving steady state plasma concentrations equivalent to chronic 2.5 mg QD doses. In Period 2, each group added 7 days of the therapy alternate to that of Period 1 without washout. BT and platelet aggregation (PA) using arachidonic acid, ADP, and TRAP agonists were collected predose in Periods 1 (baseline) and 2, and 24 h after Period 2 last dose. A linear mixed effects model with fixed effect for treatment analyzed data. Results: BT geometric mean ratio (90% CI) for (vorapaxar/baseline) was 1.01 (0.88, 1.15), (ASA/baseline) was 1.32 (1.15, 1.51), (vorapaxar+ASA/vorapaxar) was 1.47 (1.26, 1.70), (vorapaxar+ASA/ASA) was 1.12 (0.96, 1.30). Each antiplatelet inhibited PA only as expected. See figure. Conclusions: Unlike ASA, vorapaxar did not prolong BT compared to baseline. When given with ASA, there is a slight numerical increase in BT beyond that of ASA. Implications for clinical spontaneous or surgical bleeding await further analyses of clinical trial data.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document