RESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Volixibat is a potent inhibitor of the apical sodium-dependent bile acid transporter in development for the treatment of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis. This phase 1, open-label study investigated the absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion of [14C]-volixibat in heathy men. METHODS: Eligible men (n = 8) aged 18-50 years (body mass index 18.0-30.0 kg/m2; weight >50 kg) received a single oral dose of [14C]-volixibat 50 mg containing ~5.95 µCi radioactivity. The primary objectives were to assess the pharmacokinetics of [14C]-volixibat and to determine the total radioactivity in whole blood, plasma, urine, and feces at pre-selected time points over 6 days. The secondary objectives were to characterize metabolites and to assess the safety and tolerability. RESULTS: Low concentrations of volixibat (range 0-0.179 ng/mL) were detected in plasma up to 8 h following administration; the pharmacokinetic parameters could not be calculated. No radioactivity was observed in plasma or whole blood. The percentage (mean ± standard deviation) of total radioactivity in urine was 0.01 ± 0.007%. The vast majority (92.3 ± 5.25%) of volixibat was recovered in feces (69.2 ± 33.1% within 24 h). Unchanged volixibat was the only radioactive component detected in feces. Adverse events were mild in severity and mostly gastrointestinal. Changes in laboratory values were not clinically meaningful. CONCLUSIONS: Following oral administration, [14C]-volixibat was excreted unchanged from the parent compound almost exclusively via fecal excretion, indicating that the drug is minimally absorbed. Consistent with other studies, adverse events were primarily gastrointestinal in nature. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02571192.
Asunto(s)
Benzotiepinas/farmacocinética , Glicósidos/farmacocinética , Adolescente , Adulto , Benzotiepinas/análisis , Benzotiepinas/sangre , Benzotiepinas/orina , Radioisótopos de Carbono/farmacocinética , Heces/química , Glicósidos/análisis , Glicósidos/sangre , Glicósidos/orina , Voluntarios Sanos , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: This 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. METHODS: Healthy 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. RESULTS: Geometric 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. CONCLUSIONS: Relative 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.
Asunto(s)
Dextroanfetamina/farmacocinética , Dimesilato de Lisdexanfetamina/farmacocinética , Administración Oral , Adolescente , Adulto , Área Bajo la Curva , Disponibilidad Biológica , Cápsulas/farmacocinética , Bebidas Gaseosas , Estudios Cruzados , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Profármacos/farmacocinética , Equivalencia Terapéutica , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Lisdexamfetamine (LDX) and D-amphetamine pharmacokinetics were assessed in individuals with normal and impaired renal function after a single LDX dose; LDX and D-amphetamine dialyzability was also examined. METHODS: Adults (N = 40; 8/group) were enrolled in 1 of 5 renal function groups [normal function, mild impairment, moderate impairment, severe impairment/end-stage renal disease (ESRD) not requiring hemodialysis, and ESRD requiring hemodialysis] as estimated by glomerular filtration rate (GFR). Participants with normal and mild to severe renal impairment received 30 mg LDX; blood samples were collected predose and serially for 96 hours. Participants with ESRD requiring hemodialysis received 30 mg LDX predialysis and postdialysis separated by a washout period of 7-14 days. Predialysis blood samples were collected predose, serially for 72 hours, and from the dialyzer during hemodialysis; postdialysis blood samples were collected predose and serially for 48 hours. Pharmacokinetic end points included maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) and area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time 0 to infinity (AUC0-∞) or to last assessment (AUClast). RESULTS: Mean LDX Cmax, AUClast, and AUC0-∞ in participants with mild to severe renal impairment did not differ from those with normal renal function; participants with ESRD had higher mean Cmax and AUClast than those with normal renal function. D-amphetamine exposure (AUClast and AUC0-∞) increased and Cmax decreased as renal impairment increased. Almost no LDX and little D-amphetamine were recovered in the dialyzate. CONCLUSIONS: There seems to be prolonged D-amphetamine exposure after 30 mg LDX as renal impairment increases. In individuals with severe renal impairment (GFR: 15 ≤ 30 mL·min·1.73 m), the maximum LDX dose is 50 mg/d; in patients with ESRD (GFR: <15 mL·min·1.73 m), the maximum LDX dose is 30 mg/d. Neither LDX nor D-amphetamine is dialyzable.
Asunto(s)
Dimesilato de Lisdexanfetamina/efectos adversos , Dimesilato de Lisdexanfetamina/farmacocinética , Insuficiencia Renal/sangre , Adulto , Anciano , Área Bajo la Curva , Dextroanfetamina/efectos adversos , Dextroanfetamina/sangre , Dextroanfetamina/farmacocinética , Femenino , Tasa de Filtración Glomerular/efectos de los fármacos , Humanos , Riñón/efectos de los fármacos , Dimesilato de Lisdexanfetamina/sangre , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Diálisis RenalRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Understanding the nature and time course of the pharmacodynamic effects of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) medications is useful. The Cognitive Drug Research Computerized Battery of Tests (CDR-CBT) is a 20-min battery of ten standardized, validated neuropsychometric tasks. OBJECTIVE: This pilot study examined the sensitivity and responsiveness of the CDR-CBT for assessing cognitive function in adults with ADHD prior to and up to 16 h postdose during treatment with lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) or mixed amphetamine salts immediate release (MAS-IR; various generics available). METHODS: This was a double-blind three-period crossover study. Participants received LDX 50 mg/day, MAS-IR 20 mg/day, and placebo (~7 a.m.) for 7 days each in randomized order. CDR-CBT was administered on day 1 of period 1 and day 7 of each period at scheduled times between -0.5 (predose) and 16 h postdose. Composite power of attention (PoA) score (sum of simple reaction time, choice reaction time, and digit vigilance speed) was the primary outcome measure. The Conners' Adult ADHD Rating Scales-Self-Report: Short Version (CAARS-S:S) was administered at baseline and on day 1 of period 1, and days 6 and 7 of each treatment period. Tertiary outcomes included CDR-CBT composite continuity of attention scores, its component task scores, cognitive reaction time, and response variability scores. No inferential statistical comparisons were conducted. Safety assessments included adverse events (AEs) and vital signs. RESULTS: This analysis included 18 participants (mean age 30.8 years); one withdrew because of AEs. Mean pretreatment PoA scores were 1175.9-1361.2 ms, scores commensurate with a normative age of >40 years. Maximum reductions in PoA scores with LDX and MAS-IR occurred at 5 h postdose at day 7 (least squares mean difference [95% CI] of -150.0 [-235.41 to -64.50] and -79.8 [-165.72 to 6.21] ms vs. placebo, respectively). CAARS-S:S scores were unchanged with LDX and MAS-IR (vs. placebo) at all postdose timepoints. Tertiary attention-related CDR-CBT outcomes were sensitive to LDX and MAS-IR (vs. placebo). Treatment-emergent AEs and vital signs were consistent with previous studies in adult ADHD. CONCLUSION: In adults with ADHD, PoA scores indicated impaired attention at baseline and response to treatment with LDX and MAS-IR (vs. placebo), demonstrating value for measuring the time course of pharmacologic treatment effects.
Asunto(s)
Anfetaminas/uso terapéutico , Trastorno por Déficit de Atención con Hiperactividad/tratamiento farmacológico , Cognición/efectos de los fármacos , Dextroanfetamina/uso terapéutico , Adulto , Anfetaminas/administración & dosificación , Estimulantes del Sistema Nervioso Central/administración & dosificación , Estimulantes del Sistema Nervioso Central/uso terapéutico , Estudios Cruzados , Dextroanfetamina/administración & dosificación , Método Doble Ciego , Femenino , Humanos , Dimesilato de Lisdexanfetamina , Masculino , Pruebas Neuropsicológicas , Proyectos Piloto , Psicometría , Tiempo de Reacción/efectos de los fármacos , Sensibilidad y Especificidad , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del Tratamiento , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Data on pharmacokinetic parameters of the prodrug stimulant lisdexamfetamine dimesylate via alternate routes of administration are limited. The pharmacokinetics of d-amphetamine derived from lisdexamfetamine dimesylate after single oral (PO) versus intranasal (IN) administration of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate were compared. METHODS: In this randomized, two-period, crossover study, healthy men without a history of substance abuse were administered single PO or IN (radiolabelled with ≤100 µCi (99m)Tc-diethylenetriamine-pentaacetic acid and confirmed by scintigraphy) lisdexamfetamine dimesylate 50 mg ≥7 days apart. Serial blood samples were drawn to measure d-amphetamine and intact lisdexamfetamine at 0 (pre-dose), 15, 30 and 45 minutes and at 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48 and 72 hours post-dose for PO administration and at 0 (pre-dose), 5, 10, 15, 20, 30, 45 minutes and 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 16, 24, 36, 48 and 72 hours post-dose for IN administration. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were assessed. RESULTS: Eighteen subjects were enrolled and completed the study. The mean ± SD maximum observed plasma concentration (C(max)) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to time of last measurable concentration (AUC(last)) of d-amphetamine following PO administration of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate were 37.6 ± 4.54 ng/mL and 719.1 ± 157.05 ng · h/mL, respectively; after IN administration, these parameters were 35.9 ± 6.49 ng/mL and 690.5 ± 157.05 ng · h/mL, respectively. PO and IN administration demonstrated similar median time to reach C(max) (t(max)) for d-amphetamine: 5 hours for PO administration versus 4 hours for IN administration. Mean ± SD elimination half-life (t(1/2)) values were also similar for PO (11.6 ± 2.8 hours) and IN (11.3 ± 1.8 hours) lisdexamfetamine dimesylate. TEAEs after PO and IN administration were reported by 27.8% of subjects (5/18) and 38.9% of subjects (7/18), respectively; all AEs were mild or moderate in severity, and TEAEs such as anorexia, dry mouth, headache and nausea were consistent with known amphetamine effects. CONCLUSION: IN administration of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate resulted in d-amphetamine plasma concentrations and systemic exposure to d-amphetamine comparable to those seen with PO administration. Subject variability for d-amphetamine pharmacokinetic parameters was low. Both PO and IN lisdexamfetamine dimesylate demonstrated a tolerability profile similar to that of other long-acting stimulants.