17
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A Two-Period Open-Label, Single-Dose Crossover Study in Healthy Volunteers to Evaluate the Drug–Drug Interaction Between Cimetidine and Inhaled Extrafine CHF 5993

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background and Objectives

          CHF 5993 is an extrafine ‘triple therapy’ combination of the long-acting muscarinic antagonist glycopyrronium bromide (GB), the long-acting β 2-agonist formoterol fumarate (FF), and the inhaled corticosteroid beclometasone dipropionate (BDP). It is in development for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and asthma delivered via pressurised metered-dose inhaler.

          Methods

          This two-period, open-label, crossover study examined the drug–drug interaction of CHF 5993 and cimetidine. In one period, subjects received cimetidine 800 mg twice daily for 6 days; on the fourth day they also received CHF 5993 (BDP/FF/GB 400/24/100 µg). In the other, they received CHF 5993 alone. Primary objective was to compare the area under the plasma concentration–time curve from time 0 to last quantifiable concentration (AUC 0–t) of GB, with and without cimetidine. Secondary endpoints included GB AUC 0–12h, maximum concentration ( C max), time to C max ( t max), elimination half-life ( t ½) and urinary excretion. Pharmacokinetic parameters of BDP, beclometasone-17-monopropionate (B17MP; active metabolite of BDP) and formoterol were also evaluated.

          Results

          Twenty-six subjects were randomised; 25 completed. Co-administration of CHF 5993 and cimetidine resulted in small, statistically significant increases in GB AUC 0–t, AUC 0–12h and C max vs CHF 5993 (ratios 1.16, 1.21 and 1.26, respectively); t ½, t max and urinary excretion were unaffected. There were small, statistically significant increases in formoterol AUC 0–t, AUC 0–24h and t ½ following co-administration of cimetidine and CHF 5993; urinary excretion was unaffected. There were no significant differences for either BDP or B17MP. There were few adverse events (AEs), and no serious AEs.

          Conclusions

          Overall, this study indicates that there is no clinically relevant drug–drug interaction between CHF 5993 and cimetidine.

          Electronic supplementary material

          The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s13318-016-0345-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

          Related collections

          Most cited references26

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Membrane transporters in drug development.

          Membrane transporters can be major determinants of the pharmacokinetic, safety and efficacy profiles of drugs. This presents several key questions for drug development, including which transporters are clinically important in drug absorption and disposition, and which in vitro methods are suitable for studying drug interactions with these transporters. In addition, what criteria should trigger follow-up clinical studies, and which clinical studies should be conducted if needed. In this article, we provide the recommendations of the International Transporter Consortium on these issues, and present decision trees that are intended to help guide clinical studies on the currently recognized most important drug transporter interactions. The recommendations are generally intended to support clinical development and filing of a new drug application. Overall, it is advised that the timing of transporter investigations should be driven by efficacy, safety and clinical trial enrolment questions (for example, exclusion and inclusion criteria), as well as a need for further understanding of the absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion properties of the drug molecule, and information required for drug labelling.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: found
            Is Open Access

            Management of COPD in the UK primary-care setting: an analysis of real-life prescribing patterns

            Background Despite the availability of national and international guidelines, evidence suggests that chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) treatment is not always prescribed according to recommendations. This study evaluated the current management of patients with COPD using a large UK primary-care database. Methods This analysis used electronic patient records and patient-completed questionnaires from the Optimum Patient Care Research Database. Data on current management were analyzed by the Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (GOLD) group and presence or absence of a concomitant asthma diagnosis, in patients with a COPD diagnosis at ≥35 years of age and with spirometry results supportive of the COPD diagnosis. Results A total of 24,957 patients were analyzed, of whom 13,557 (54.3%) had moderate airflow limitation (GOLD Stage 2 COPD). The proportion of patients not receiving pharmacologic treatment for COPD was 17.0% in the total COPD population and 17.7% in the GOLD Stage 2 subset. Approximately 50% of patients in both cohorts were receiving inhaled corticosteroids (ICS), either in combination with a long-acting β2-agonist (LABA; 26.7% for both cohorts) or a LABA and a long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA; 23.2% and 19.9%, respectively). ICS + LABA and ICS + LABA + LAMA were the most frequently used treatments in GOLD Groups A and B. Of patients without concomitant asthma, 53.7% of the total COPD population and 50.2% of the GOLD Stage 2 subset were receiving ICS. Of patients with GOLD Stage 2 COPD and no exacerbations in the previous year, 49% were prescribed ICS. A high proportion of GOLD Stage 2 COPD patients were symptomatic on their current management (36.6% with modified Medical Research Council score ≥2; 76.4% with COPD Assessment Test score ≥10). Conclusion COPD is not treated according to GOLD and National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommendations in the UK primary-care setting. Some patients receive no treatment despite experiencing symptoms. Among those on treatment, most receive ICS irrespective of severity of airflow limitation, asthma diagnosis, and exacerbation history. Many patients on treatment continue to have symptoms.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Efficacy and safety of NVA237 versus placebo and tiotropium in patients with COPD: the GLOW2 study

              NVA237 (glycopyrronium bromide) is a once-daily long-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA) in development for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). The GLycopyrronium bromide in COPD airWays clinical Study 2 (GLOW2) evaluated the efficacy and safety of NVA237 in moderate-to-severe COPD over 52 weeks. Patients were randomised 2:1:1 to NVA237 50 μg, placebo or open-label tiotropium 18 μg for 52 weeks. Primary end-point was trough forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) at 12 weeks. 1,066 patients were randomised, 810 completed the study. At week 12, trough FEV1 increased significantly by 97 mL with NVA237 (95% CI 64.6–130.2; p<0.001) and 83 mL with tiotropium (95% CI 45.6–121.4; p<0.001). Compared with placebo, NVA237 produced significant improvements in dyspnoea (Transition Dyspnoea Index at week 26; p=0.002) and health status (St George's Respiratory Questionnaire at week 52; p<0.001). NVA237 significantly reduced the risk of moderate-to-severe COPD exacerbations by 34% (p=0.001) and the use of rescue medication (p=0.039), versus placebo. NVA237-placebo and tiotropium-placebo differences were comparable for all outcomes. Safety profiles were similar across groups. NVA237 50 μg provided significant improvements in lung function, dyspnoea, health status, exacerbations and rescue medication use, versus placebo, and was comparable to tiotropium. NVA237 can potentially be an alternative choice of LAMA for COPD patients.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                +39 0521 279808 , F.Mariotti@chiesi.com
                Journal
                Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet
                Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet
                European Journal of Drug Metabolism and Pharmacokinetics
                Springer International Publishing (Cham )
                0378-7966
                2107-0180
                21 May 2016
                21 May 2016
                2017
                : 42
                : 2
                : 269-279
                Affiliations
                GRID grid.467287.8, ISNI 0000000417616733, Global Clinical Development, , Chiesi Farmaceutici SpA, ; Largo Belloli 11/A, 43122 Parma, Italy
                Article
                345
                10.1007/s13318-016-0345-2
                5340825
                27209586
                07369b2c-eb56-41c1-b2c4-1205199a5974
                © The Author(s) 2016

                Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

                History
                Funding
                Funded by: Chiesi Farmaceutici SpA
                Award ID: N/A
                Categories
                Original Research Article
                Custom metadata
                © Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2017

                Pharmacology & Pharmaceutical medicine
                Pharmacology & Pharmaceutical medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article