Tropomyosin Receptor Antagonism in Cylindromatosis (TRAC), an early phase trial of a topical tropomyosin kinase inhibitor as a treatment for inherited CYLD defective skin tumours: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with germline mutations in a tumour suppressor gene called CYLD develop multiple, disfiguring, hair follicle tumours on the head and neck. The prognosis is poor, with up to one in four mutation carriers requiring complete surgical removal of the scalp. There are no effective medical alternatives to treat this condition. Whole genome molecular profiling experiments led to the discovery of an attractive molecular target in these skin tumour cells, named tropomyosin receptor kinase (TRK), upon which these cells demonstrate an oncogenic dependency in preclinical studies. Recently, the development of an ointment containing a TRK inhibitor (pegcantratinib - previously CT327 - from Creabilis SA) allowed for the assessment of TRK inhibition in tumours from patients with inherited CYLD mutations. METHODS/DESIGN: Tropomysin Receptor Antagonism in Cylindromatosis (TRAC) is a two-part, exploratory, early phase, single-centre trial. Cohort 1 is a phase 1b open-labelled trial, and cohort 2 is a phase 2a randomised double-blinded exploratory placebo-controlled trial. Cohort 1 will determine the safety and acceptability of applying pegcantratinib for 4 weeks to a single tumour on a CYLD mutation carrier that is scheduled for a routine lesion excision (n = 8 patients). Cohort 2 will investigate if CYLD defective tumours respond following 12 weeks of treatment with pegcantratinib. As patients have multiple tumours, we intend to treat 10 tumours in each patient, 5 with active treatment and 5 with placebo. Patients will be allocated both active and placebo treatments to be applied randomly to tumours on the left or right side. The target is to treat 150 tumours in a maximum of 20 patients. Tumour volume will be measured at baseline and at 4 and 12 weeks. The primary outcome measure is the proportion of tumours responding to treatment by 12 weeks, based on change in tumour volume, with secondary measures based on adverse event profile, treatment compliance and acceptability, changes in tumour volume and surface area, patient quality of life and pain. DISCUSSION: Interventions for rare genetic skin diseases are often difficult to assess in an unbiased way due to small patient numbers and the challenges of incorporating adequate controls into trial design. Here we present a single-centre, randomised, placebo-controlled trial design that leverages the multiplicity of tumours seen in an inherited skin tumour syndrome that may inform the design of other studies in similar genetic diseases. TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number Registry, ISRCTN75715723 . Registered on 22 October 2014.

Effects of multiple doses of voriconazole on the vision of healthy volunteers: a double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

PURPOSE: To investigate the effects, and their reversibility, of multiple oral voriconazole doses on a variety of visual tests in healthy male volunteers. METHODS: Single-center, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study in 36 volunteers who received voriconazole (n=18, 400 mg every 12 h on day 1, then 300 mg every 12 h for 27.5 days) or matched placebo (n=18). Electroretinograms (ERGs) and ophthalmological examinations were performed at screening, throughout the study and at follow-up. RESULTS: Fifteen (83.3%) volunteers treated with voriconazole experienced ≥1 treatment-related visual adverse events (AEs); these included enhanced visual perceptions, blurred vision, color vision changes and photophobia. No serious AEs were reported. Voriconazole reduced from baseline scotopic maximal a- and b-wave amplitude, shortened implicit time and decreased oscillatory potential amplitude compared with placebo. Under photopic conditions, the 30-Hz flicker response amplitude was significantly reduced and was accompanied by a slight but nonsignificant prolongation of peak time. These effects did not progress in degree over the treatment period, and mean changes from baseline in ERG parameters were similar to placebo by day 43 (14 days after end of treatment). In the first week, color vision discrimination was impaired in the tritan axis, although this resolved by end of treatment and was similar to placebo by day 43. Mean deviation in the static visual field indicated increased sensitivity following voriconazole treatment, correlating with decreased amplitude in conjunction with shortened implicit time. CONCLUSIONS: Effects of voriconazole on altered visual perception, ERG, color vision and static visual field thresholds are nonprogressive over a treatment period and reversible. It is hypothesized that voriconazole has a pharmacological effect on rod and cone pathways including a possible mechanism of disinhibition that reversibly puts the retina in a more light-adapted state and leads to increased relative contrast sensitivity.

Pharmacokinetic interactions of maraviroc with darunavir-ritonavir, etravirine, and etravirine-darunavir-ritonavir in healthy volunteers: results of two drug interaction trials.

The effects of darunavir-ritonavir at 600 and 100 mg twice daily (b.i.d.) alone, 200 mg of etravirine b.i.d. alone, or 600 and 100 mg of darunavir-ritonavir b.i.d. with 200 mg etravirine b.i.d. at steady state on the steady-state pharmacokinetics of maraviroc, and vice versa, in healthy volunteers were investigated in two phase I, randomized, two-period crossover studies. Safety and tolerability were also assessed. Coadministration of 150 mg maraviroc b.i.d. with darunavir-ritonavir increased the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to 12 h (AUC12) for maraviroc 4.05-fold relative to 150 mg of maraviroc b.i.d. alone. Coadministration of 300 mg maraviroc b.i.d. with etravirine decreased the maraviroc AUC12 by 53% relative to 300 mg maraviroc b.i.d. alone. Coadministration of 150 mg maraviroc b.i.d. with etravirine-darunavir-ritonavir increased the maraviroc AUC12 3.10-fold relative to 150 mg maraviroc b.i.d. alone. Maraviroc did not significantly affect the pharmacokinetics of etravirine, darunavir, or ritonavir. Short-term coadministration of maraviroc with darunavir-ritonavir, etravirine, or both was generally well tolerated, with no safety issues reported in either trial. Maraviroc can be coadministered with darunavir-ritonavir, etravirine, or etravirine-darunavir-ritonavir. Maraviroc should be dosed at 600 mg b.i.d. with etravirine in the absence of a potent inhibitor of cytochrome P450 3A (CYP3A) (i.e., a boosted protease inhibitor) or at 150 mg b.i.d. when coadministered with darunavir-ritonavir with or without etravirine.

Pharmacokinetics, safety and tolerability of a single oral dose of maraviroc in HIV-negative subjects with mild and moderate hepatic impairment.

BACKGROUND: Maraviroc is the first CCR5 antagonist and only oral entry inhibitor approved for the treatment of HIV type-1 infection. Maraviroc is extensively metabolized, primarily by cytochrome P450 3A4 and hence its pharmacokinetics might be affected by impaired hepatic function. The objective of this study was to evaluate the pharmacokinetics of maraviroc in subjects with mild or moderate hepatic impairment compared with subjects with normal hepatic function. Safety and tolerability were also assessed. METHODS: This was an open-label, non-randomized, single-centre, parallel-group study. A total of 24 subjects with mild (n=8) or moderate (n=8) hepatic impairment, or normal hepatic function (n=8) received a single dose of 300 mg maraviroc. RESULTS: Relative to those with normal hepatic function, the geometric mean ratio (90% confidence interval) for the maximum observed plasma concentration (C(max)) of maraviroc was 111% (74.6-166) and 132% (89.6-194) for those with mild and moderate hepatic impairment, respectively; the area under the concentration-time curve from time 0 to the last quantifiable concentration (AUC(last)) was 125% (84.7-185) and 146% (100-212); oral clearance was 89% (53.2-150) and 83% (49.2-139); and renal clearance was 94% (70.5-126) and 131% (98.6-173), respectively. Maraviroc was well tolerated in all subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Although differences in maraviroc pharmacokinetics were noted in subjects with hepatic impairment compared with those with normal hepatic function, these do not currently support a dose modification. The single 300 mg dose of maraviroc was well tolerated by subjects with normal and impaired hepatic function.

Effect of omeprazole on the steady-state pharmacokinetics of voriconazole.

AIMS: Voriconazole, a novel triazole antifungal agent, is metabolized by the cytochrome P450 isoenzymes CYP2C19, CYP2C9, and to a lesser extent by CYP3A4. Omeprazole, a proton pump inhibitor used widely for the treatment of gastric and duodenal ulcers, is predominantly metabolized by CYP2C19 and CYP3A4. The aim of this study was to determine the effects of omeprazole on the steady-state pharmacokinetics of voriconazole. A secondary objective was to characterize the pharmacokinetic profile of an oral loading dose regimen of 400 mg twice-daily voriconazole on day 1. METHODS: This was an open, randomized, placebo-controlled, two-way crossover study of 18 healthy male volunteers. Subjects received oral voriconazole (400 mg twice daily on day 1 followed by 200 mg twice daily on days 2-9 and a single 200-mg dose on day 10) with either omeprazole (40 mg once daily) or matched placebo for 10 days. There was a minimum 7-day washout between treatment periods. RESULTS: Mean Cmax and AUCtau of voriconazole were increased by 15%[90% confidence interval (CI) 5, 25] and 41% (90% CI 29, 55), respectively, with no effect on tmax during coadministration of omeprazole. Visual inspection of predose plasma concentrations (Cmin) indicated that steady-state plasma concentrations were achieved following the second loading dose. One subject withdrew from the study during the voriconazole + omeprazole treatment period because of treatment-related abnormal liver function test values. All other treatment-related adverse events resolved without intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Omeprazole had no clinically relevant effect on voriconazole exposure, suggesting that no voriconazole dosage adjustment is necessary for patients in whom omeprazole therapy is initiated. Administration of a 400-mg twice-daily oral loading dose regimen on day 1 resulted in steady-state plasma levels of voriconazole being achieved following the second loading dose.