Absorption, metabolism and excretion of [14C]omarigliptin, a once-weekly DPP-4 inhibitor, in humans.

1. Omarigliptin (MARIZEV®) is a once-weekly DPP-4 inhibitor approved in Japan for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. The objective of this study was to investigate the absorption, metabolism and excretion of omarigliptin in humans. 2. Six healthy subjects received a single oral dose of 25 mg (2.1 µCi) [14 C]omarigliptin. Blood, plasma, urine and fecal samples were collected at various intervals for up to 20 days post-dose. Radioactivity levels in excreta and plasma/blood samples were determined by accelerator mass spectrometry (AMS). 3. [14 C]Omarigliptin was rapidly absorbed, with peak plasma concentrations observed at 0.5-2 h post-dose. The majority of the radioactivity was recovered in urine (∼74.4% of the dose), with less recovered in feces (∼3.4%), suggesting the compound was well absorbed. 4. Omarigliptin was the major component in urine (∼89% of the urinary radioactivity), indicating renal excretion of the unchanged drug as the primary clearance mechanism. Omarigliptin accounted for almost all the circulating radioactivity in plasma, with no major metabolites detected. 5. The predominantly renal elimination pathway, combined with the fact that omarigliptin is not a substrate of key drug transporters, suggest omarigliptin is unlikely to be subject to pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions with other commonly prescribed agents.

Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Effects of Multiple-dose Administration of Omarigliptin, a Once-weekly Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitor, in Obese Participants With and Without Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.

PURPOSE: Omarigliptin (MK-3102) is a potent, oral, long-acting dipeptidyl peptidase (DPP)-4 inhibitor approved in Japan and in global development as a once-weekly treatment for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The aim of this study was to investigate the pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) effects of omarigliptin in obese participants with and without T2DM. METHODS: This was a Phase I, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multiple-dose study of 50-mg omarigliptin administered once weekly for 4 weeks. Participants included 24 obese but otherwise healthy subjects (panel A; omarigliptin, n = 18; placebo, n = 6) and 8 obese patients with T2DM (treatment naive, hemoglobin A1c ≥ 6.5% and ≤ 10.0% [panel B]; omarigliptin, n = 6; placebo, n = 2). Participants were 45 to 65 years of age with a body mass index of ≥ 30 and ≤ 40 kg/m(2). Blood sampling occurred at select time points, depending on the study panel, to evaluate the PK properties of omarigliptin, DPP-4 activity, active glucagon-like peptide 1 levels, and plasma glucose concentrations. Body weight was an exploratory end point. Due to sparse sampling in panel A, a thorough PK analysis was performed in obese patients with T2DM (panel B) only. PD analyses were performed in the overall study population (pooled panels A and B). FINDINGS: PK profiles in obese participants with and without T2DM were similar to those observed in nonobese reference subjects (historical data). Steady state was achieved after 1 or 2 weekly doses in obese participants with and without T2DM. In obese patients with T2DM, omarigliptin was rapidly absorbed, with a median Tmax of 1 to 2.5 hours (days 1 and 22). Compared with those in reference subjects, the geometric mean ratios (95% CI) (Obese T2DM/reference) for steady-state plasma AUC0-168h, Cmax, and C168h were 0.80 (0.65-0.98), 0.86 (0.53-1.41), and 1.08 (0.88-1.33), respectively. Trough DPP-4 activity was inhibited by ~90%; postprandial (PP) 4-hour weighted mean active GLP-1 concentrations were increased ~2-fold; and PP glucose was significantly reduced with omarigliptin versus placebo in the pooled population. Omarigliptin was generally well-tolerated in the pooled population, and there were no hypoglycemic events. Consistent with other DPP-4 inhibitors, omarigliptin had no effect on body weight in this short-duration study. IMPLICATIONS: The administration of omarigliptin was generally well-tolerated in obese participants with and without T2DM, and the favorable PK and PD profiles support once-weekly dosing. Omarigliptin may provide an important once-weekly treatment option for patients with T2DM. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01088711.

Placebo- and amitriptyline-controlled evaluation of central nervous system effects of the NK1 receptor antagonist aprepitant and intravenous alcohol infusion at pseudo-steady state.

Recent interest in NK1 receptor antagonists has focused on a potential role in the treatment of drug addiction and substance abuse. In the present study, the potential for interactions between the NK1 receptor antagonist aprepitant and alcohol, given as an infusion at a target level of 0.65 g/L, was evaluated. Amitriptyline was included as positive control to provide an impression of the profile of central nervous system (CNS) effects. In a double-blind, randomized, placebo- and amitriptyline-controlled study, the pharmacokinetics and CNS effects of aprepitant and alcohol were investigated in 16 healthy volunteers. Cognitive and psychomotor function tests included the visual verbal learning test (VVLT), Bond and Lader visual analogue scales (VAS), digit symbol substitution test (DSST), visual pattern recognition, binary choice reaction time, critical flicker fusion (CFF), body sway, finger tapping, and adaptive tracking. Alcohol impaired finger tapping and body sway. Amitriptyline impaired DSST performance, VAS alertness, CFF, body sway, finger tapping, and adaptive tracking. No impairments were found after administration of aprepitant. Co-administration of aprepitant with alcohol was generally well tolerated and did not cause significant additive CNS effects, compared with alcohol alone. Therefore, our study found no indications for clinically relevant interactions between aprepitant and alcohol.

A single supratherapeutic dose of ridaforolimus does not prolong the QTc interval in patients with advanced cancer.

PURPOSE: This dedicated QTc study was designed to evaluate the effect of the mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor, ridaforolimus, on the QTc interval in patients with advanced malignancies. METHODS: We conducted a fixed-sequence, single-blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients (n = 23) received placebo on day 1 and a single 100-mg oral dose of ridaforolimus on day 2 in the fasted state. Holter electrocardiogram (ECG) monitoring was performed for 24 h after each treatment, and blood ridaforolimus concentrations were measured for 24 h after dosing. The ECGs were interpreted in a blinded fashion, and the QT interval was corrected using Fridericia's formula (QTcF). After a washout of at least 5 days, 22 patients went on to receive a therapeutic regimen of ridaforolimus (40 mg orally once daily for 5 days per week). RESULTS: The upper limit of the two-sided 90 % confidence interval for the placebo-adjusted mean change from baseline in QTcF was <10 ms at each time point. No patient had a QTcF change from baseline >30 ms or QTcF interval >480 ms. Geometric mean exposure to ridaforolimus after the single 100-mg dose was comparable to previous experience with the therapeutic regimen. There appeared to be no clear relationship between individual QTcF change from baseline and ridaforolimus blood concentrations. Ridaforolimus was generally well tolerated, with adverse events consistent with prior studies. CONCLUSIONS: Administration of the single 100-mg dose of ridaforolimus did not cause a clinically meaningful prolongation of QTcF, suggesting that patients treated with ridaforolimus have a low likelihood of delayed ventricular repolarization.

Effect of aprepitant on the pharmacokinetics of intravenous midazolam.

Oral aprepitant 125 mg, an antiemetic and a moderate inhibitor of the metabolism of oral midazolam, was assessed for interaction with intravenous midazolam in 12 subjects randomized to intravenous midazolam 2 mg +/- oral aprepitant 125 mg. The hypothesis was that midazolam AUC would not change by more than 2-fold (consistent with no more than weak inhibition) when midazolam + aprepitant was compared with midazolam alone. An AUC geometric mean ratio (midazolam + aprepitant/midazolam) with 90% confidence interval upper bound < or =2.0 (an increase in midazolam felt to be of modest clinical significance in the highly monitored perioperative period) was prespecified. Aprepitant increased intravenous midazolam AUC(0-infinity) 1.47-fold (90% confidence interval, 1.36-1.59), which fell within the prespecified criterion.