A Phase 1 Study To Evaluate Safety and Pharmacokinetics following Administration of Single and Multiple Doses of the Antistaphylococcal Lysin LSVT-1701 in Healthy Adult Subjects.

Thirty-two healthy male subjects (8 per cohort) were randomized 6:2 to active:placebo. LSVT-1701, an antistaphylococcal lysin, was administered intravenously as a 6-mg/kg single dose and as 1.5, 3, and 4.5 mg/kg twice daily for 4 days. LSVT-1701 exposure increased in a greater than dose proportional manner and did not accumulate. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were predominantly of mild intensity. The most common TEAEs were chills, pyrexia, headache, infusion site events, cough, rhinorrhea, and increases in C-reactive protein. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under identifier NCT03446053.).

Evaluation of the pharmacokinetic drug-drug interaction between the antiretroviral agents fostemsavir and maraviroc: a single-sequence crossover study in healthy participants.

BACKGROUND: Fostemsavir is an oral prodrug of temsavir, a first-in-class attachment inhibitor that binds HIV-1 gp120, preventing initial HIV attachment and entry into host immune cells. OBJECTIVE: The pharmacokinetic interaction was determined between temsavir and maraviroc, a CCR5 allosteric inhibitor indicated for CCR5-tropic HIV-1 that may be co-administered with fostemsavir as part of combination antiretroviral therapy in heavily treatment-experienced adults with multidrug-resistant HIV-1 infection. METHODS: This was a Phase 1, open-label, single-sequence, 3-period crossover study evaluating the effect of fostemsavir on maraviroc pharmacokinetics and the effect of maraviroc on temsavir pharmacokinetics (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02480894). Fourteen healthy participants received fostemsavir 600 mg twice daily (BID) for 4 days in Period 1 (followed by a 3-day washout), maraviroc 300 mg BID for 5 days in Period 2, and fostemsavir 600 mg BID with maraviroc 300 mg BID for 7 days in Period 3. Study drugs were administered orally with a standard meal. RESULTS: Following fostemsavir and maraviroc co-administration, maraviroc area under the plasma concentration-time curve over the dosing interval (AUCτ) increased 25% (from 1914 to 2382 ng.h/mL) and maraviroc plasma concentration at the end of the dosing interval (Ctrough) increased 37% (from 36.5 to 49.9 ng/mL), but there was no change in maximum observed concentration (Cmax). Following fostemsavir and maraviroc co-administration, temsavir AUCτ and Cmax increased 10-13% and Ctrough decreased 10%. CONCLUSIONS: Co-administration of fostemsavir and maraviroc did not result in clinically relevant changes in maraviroc or temsavir exposure. Fostemsavir and maraviroc may be co-administered without dose adjustment of either antiretroviral agent.

Population pharmacokinetic modeling and simulation of amprenavir following fosamprenavir/ritonavir administration for dose optimization in HIV infected pediatric patients.

Fosamprenavir (FPV) is the phosphate ester prodrug of the HIV-1 protease inhibitor amprenavir (APV). A pediatric population pharmacokinetic model for APV was developed and simulation was used to identify dosing regimens for pediatric patients receiving FPV in combination with ritonavir (RTV) which resulted in concentrations similar to those in adults receiving FPV/RTV 700/100 mg BID. Pharmacokinetic data was obtained from HIV infected subjects aged 2 months to 18 years receiving either FPV or FPV/RTV. A two-compartment model with first order absorption and elimination was an appropriate structural model. Significant covariates in the model included RTV coadministration on clearance, fed status on bioavailability for the oral suspension, body weight on clearance and volume terms, black race on clearance, and age on clearance. The following FPV/RTV twice daily dosing regimens in pediatric patients delivered plasma APV exposure similar to adults: 45/7 mg/kg in patients weighing <11 kg, 30/3 mg/kg in patients weighing 11 to <15 kg, 23/3 mg/kg in patients weighing 15 to <20 kg, and 18/3 mg/kg in patients weighting ≥20 kg. Additionally children weighing ≥39 kg can receive the adult regimen.

Lack of clinically significant pharmacokinetic interaction between the thrombopoietin receptor agonist eltrombopag and hepatitis C virus protease inhibitors boceprevir and telaprevir.

Eltrombopag is an orally bioavailable thrombopoietin receptor agonist approved for the treatment of thrombocytopenia associated with chronic immune (idiopathic) thrombocytopenic purpura and chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. This study evaluated the potential drug-drug interactions between eltrombopag and the HCV protease inhibitors boceprevir and telaprevir. In this open-label, 3-period, single-sequence, and crossover study, 56 healthy adult subjects were randomized 1:1 to cohort 1 (boceprevir) or 2 (telaprevir). The dosing was as follows: period 1, single 200-mg dose of eltrombopag; period 2, 800 mg boceprevir or 750 mg telaprevir every 8 hours (q8h) for 10 days; and period 3, single 200-mg dose of eltrombopag with either 800 mg boceprevir or 750 mg telaprevir q8h (3 doses). All doses were administered with food, and eltrombopag was administered specifically with low-calcium food. There was a 3-day washout between periods 1 and 2 and no washout between periods 2 and 3. Serial pharmacokinetic samples were collected for 72 h in periods 1 and 3 and for 8 h in period 2. The coadministration of eltrombopag increased the rate of boceprevir absorption, resulting in a 20% increase in the maximum concentration in plasma (Cmax), a 1-h-earlier time to Cmax (Tmax) for boceprevir, a 32% decrease in the concentration at the end of the dosing interval (Cτ), and no change in the area under the concentration-time curve over the dosing interval (AUC0-τ). The coadministration of eltrombopag did not alter telaprevir pharmacokinetics, and the coadministration of boceprevir or telaprevir did not alter eltrombopag pharmacokinetics. Dysgeusia, headache, and somnolence occurred in ≥2 subjects. One subject withdrew because of nausea, headache, dizziness, sinus pressure, and vomiting. There were no severe or serious adverse events. Dose adjustment is not required when eltrombopag is coadministered with boceprevir or telaprevir given the lack of clinically significant pharmacokinetic interaction.

Pharmacokinetics, safety and antiviral activity of fosamprenavir/ritonavir-containing regimens in HIV-infected children aged 4 weeks to 2 years-48-week study data.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacokinetics, safety and antiviral activity of fosamprenavir (FPV) with ritonavir (RTV) twice daily were evaluated in HIV-1-infected infants and children 4 weeks to <2 years over 48 weeks. METHODS: Results from intensive pharmacokinetic sampling of subjects enrolled in single dose visits was used to determine individualized dosing for the first 6-10 subjects in each of 2 cohorts (4 weeks to <6 months, 6 months to <2 years); steady state pharmacokinetic data were then used to select the dosage regimen for the remaining subjects recruited to the cohort. Intensive pharmacokinetic sampling was performed at week 2 or 8; predose samples were collected every 4-12 weeks thereafter. Safety and plasma HIV-1 RNA were monitored every 4-12 weeks. RESULTS: Fifty-nine subjects received study medication. FPV 45 mg/kg boosted with RTV 7 to 10 mg/kg BID achieved average plasma amprenavir area under curve(0-τ) values 26% to 28% lower and Cmax similar to historical adult data for FPV/RTV 700/100 mg BID; amprenavir Cτ values were lower in the subjects <6 months of age. At week 48, 35 of 54 (65%) subjects had achieved plasma HIV-1 RNA <400 copies/mL and 33 of 54 (61%) had plasma HIV-1 RNA values <50 copies/mL. The most common adverse events were diarrhea, upper respiratory tract infection, gastroenteritis and otitis media. CONCLUSIONS: Final FPV/RTV dosing regimens achieved plasma amprenavir exposures comparable with those from regimens approved in adults, with the exception of trough exposures in the <6-month-old infants. The FPV/RTV regimens led to viral suppression in 61% of patients and were generally well tolerated.

Pharmacokinetics and 48-week safety and antiviral activity of fosamprenavir-containing regimens in HIV-infected 2- to 18-year-old children.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacokinetics, safety and antiviral activity of twice-daily fosamprenavir with or without ritonavir were evaluated in 2- to 18-year-old protease inhibitor-naïve and -experienced HIV-1-infected children. METHODS: Serial pharmacokinetic samples were collected at week 2 and predose samples every 4-12 weeks. Safety and plasma HIV-1 RNA were monitored every 4-12 weeks. RESULTS: Twenty protease inhibitor-naïve 2- to <6-year-old subjects received antiretroviral treatment including unboosted fosamprenavir twice-daily, whereas 89 protease inhibitor-naïve and -experienced 2- to 18-year-old subjects received fosamprenavir/ritonavir-containing therapy twice-daily. Median fosamprenavir exposure was 891 days (range 15-1805 days), with 88% exposed >48 weeks. Twice-daily doses of fosamprenavir/ritonavir 23/3 mg/kg in 2- to <6-year olds, 18/3 mg/kg in ≥6-year olds and 700/100 mg in adolescents achieved plasma amprenavir exposures comparable with or higher than 700/100 mg twice-daily in adults while fosamprenavir 30 mg/kg twice-daily in 2- to <6-year olds led to exposures higher than 1400 mg twice-daily in adults. The proportion of subjects with HIV-1 RNA <400 copies/mL at week 48 was 60% for fosamprenavir and 53-74% for fosamprenavir/ritonavir (intent-to-treat [exposed], snapshot analysis). Median increases in absolute and relative (percentage) CD4 counts from baseline to week 48 occurred in both the fosamprenavir (340 cells/mm; 8%) and fosamprenavir/ritonavir group (190 cells/mm; 8%). The most common adverse events were vomiting, cough, and diarrhea; 18 subjects experienced serious adverse events, including 9 with suspected abacavir hypersensitivity. CONCLUSIONS: Fosamprenavir regimens administered to HIV-1-infected children aged 2-18 years were generally well-tolerated and provided sustained antiviral activity over 48 weeks, with plasma amprenavir exposures comparable with or higher than adults.

A randomized, open-label, 5-period, balanced crossover study to evaluate the relative bioavailability of eltrombopag powder for oral suspension (PfOS) and tablet formulations and the effect of a high-calcium meal on eltrombopag pharmacokinetics when administered with or 2 hours before or after PfOS.

BACKGROUND: Bioavailability of the tablet formulation of eltrombopag, an oral thrombopoietin receptor agonist indicated for the treatment of chronic immune thrombocytopenia, is reduced by chelation of polyvalent cations (eg, calcium). A powder for oral suspension (PfOS) formulation has been developed for use in pediatrics. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the bioavailability of eltrombopag PfOS relative to the tablet formulation and the effect of a high-calcium meal on PfOS bioavailability. METHODS: In this single-dose, open-label, randomized-sequence, crossover study, healthy subjects received 25 mg eltrombopag orally as a tablet fasted and as PfOS fasted or with, 2 hours before, or 2 hours after a high-calcium meal. Noncompartmental pharmacokinetic parameters were estimated from plasma concentration-time data collected over 72 hours post-dose. Tolerability was assessed by laboratory tests, physical examinations, and adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: The 40 enrolled subjects included 22 males and 18 females of white/European (60%) or African-American/African (40%) heritage with mean (SD) (mininum, maximum) age of 34 (12) (19, 62) years, weight of 75 (12) (54, 101) kg, and body mass index of 25.8 (2.9) (19.7, 30) kg/m(2). Plasma eltrombopag AUC(0-∞) was higher for the PfOS than the tablet (geometric least-squares mean ratio [GMR]: 1.22; 90% CI: 1.08-1.38). Plasma eltrombopag AUC(0-∞) was reduced when the PfOS was administered with a high-calcium meal (GMR: 0.25; 90% CI: 0.224-0.287) or 2 hours after a meal (GMR: 0.53; 90% CI: 0.470-0.601), and, to a lesser extent, when administered 2 hours before a meal (GMR: 0.80; 90% CI: 0.711-0.908). The absorption lag time and t(½) did not differ between treatments; T(max) was delayed 1 hour when the PfOS was dosed with a high-calcium meal. AEs were not serious and mild or moderate in intensity. AEs reported in >1 subject included headache (11 subjects; 27.5%), presyncope (3 subjects, 7.5%), and vomiting (2 subjects, 5%). No clinically significant trends in laboratory tests or vital signs were observed. CONCLUSIONS: In a healthy adult volunteer population, bioavailability of eltrombopag PfOS was greater than the tablet and was reduced when administered with or 2 hours before or after a high-calcium meal; this effect was attenuated with PfOS dosing 2 hours before the meal. Eltrombopag was generally well tolerated.

Metabolism and disposition of eltrombopag, an oral, nonpeptide thrombopoietin receptor agonist, in healthy human subjects.

The metabolism and disposition of eltrombopag, the first-in-class small molecule human thrombopoietin receptor agonist, were studied in six healthy men after a single oral administration of a solution dose of [(14)C]eltrombopag (75 mg, 100 µCi). Eltrombopag was well tolerated. The drug was quickly absorbed and was the predominant circulating component in plasma (accounting for 63% of the total plasma radioactivity). A mono-oxygenation metabolite (M1) and acyl glucuronides (M2) of eltrombopag were minor circulating components. The predominant route of elimination of radioactivity was fecal (58.9%). Feces contained approximately 20% of dose as glutathione-related conjugates (M5, M6, and M7) and another 20% as unchanged eltrombopag. The glutathione conjugates were probably detoxification products of a p-imine methide intermediate formed by metabolism of M1, which arises through cytochrome P450-dependent processes. Low levels of covalently bound drug-related intermediates to plasma proteins, which could result from the reaction of the imine methide or acyl glucuronide conjugates with proteins, were detected. The bound material contributes to the longer plasma elimination half-life of radioactivity. Renal elimination of conjugates of hydrazine cleavage metabolites (mostly as M3 and M4) accounted for 31% of the radiodose, with no unchanged eltrombopag detected in urine.

Eltrombopag increases plasma rosuvastatin exposure in healthy volunteers.

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ABOUT THIS SUBJECT: OATP1B1 is important for hepatic uptake of rosuvastatin and BCRP is important for rosuvastatin absorption and elimination. Eltrombopag inhibits OATP1B1 and BCRP in vitro at clinically relevant concentrations. Inhibition of these transporters could change cholesterol-lowering efficacy and increase the risk of exposure-dependent toxicities. To determine if co-administration of eltrombopag with rosuvastatin alters plasma rosuvastatin exposure, an open-label study was conducted in 42 healthy adult subjects. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS: Concomitant administration of eltrombopag with rosuvastatin was associated with increased rosuvastatin exposure via inhibition of drug transporters. The therapeutic index of HMG Co-A reductase inhibitors may be reduced by the concomitant use of eltrombopag. In subjects taking eltrombopag, a reduced dose of HMG Co-A reductase inhibitors may be needed. AIM: Eltrombopag, an oral, nonpeptide thrombopoietin receptor agonist, inhibits the organic anion transporting polypeptide 1B1 (OATP1B1) and breast cancer resistance protein (BCRP) in vitro. OATP1B1 is important for hepatic uptake of rosuvastatin and inhibition of this transporter could reduce cholesterol-lowering efficacy and increase the risk of exposure-dependent toxicities. In contrast, BCRP is an efflux transporter and inhibition of this transporter could increase both hepatic and plasma rosuvastatin concentrations, resulting in increased efficacy and toxicity. To determine if co-administration of eltrombopag with rosuvastatin alters plasma rosuvastatin exposure, an open-label study was conducted in 42 healthy adult subjects. METHODS: Subjects received rosuvastatin and eltrombopag orally: day 1, rosuvastatin 10 mg single dose; days 6 to 9, eltrombopag 75 mg once daily; day 10, eltrombopag 75 mg once daily and rosuvastatin 10 mg single dose. Adverse event assessments were performed daily and at the follow-up visit. Plasma samples for pharmacokinetic analysis were collected days 1 to 5 and days 10 to 14. RESULTS: Co-administration of eltrombopag with rosuvastatin increased geometric mean (90% confidence interval) plasma rosuvastatin AUC(0,∞) by 55% (42%, 69%) and C(max) by 103% (82%, 126%) in the overall study population, with a larger interaction in the non-Asian compared with Asian subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Concomitant administration of eltrombopag with rosuvastatin was associated with increased rosuvastatin exposure. The therapeutic index of HMG Co-A reductase inhibitors may be reduced by the concomitant use of eltrombopag. In subjects taking eltrombopag, a reduced dose of HMG Co-A reductase inhibitors may be needed.

Clinical pharmacokinetics, platelet response, and safety of eltrombopag at supratherapeutic doses of up to 200 mg once daily in healthy volunteers.

This was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, parallel, dose-escalation study to assess the pharmacokinetics, platelet response, safety, and tolerability of supratherapeutic doses of eltrombopag (100 mg, 150 mg, and 200 mg once daily) administered for 5 days to 33 healthy adult volunteers. Plasma eltrombopag concentrations accumulated between days 1 and 5, with average increases of 66% to 81% for area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to the end of the 24-hour dosing interval (AUC(0-τ)) and 32% to 45% for maximum observed plasma concentration (C(max)) across doses. After 5 days of dosing, AUC(0-τ) was dose-proportional and C(max) was less than dose-proportional over eltrombopag 100 to 200 mg with slope estimates (90% confidence intervals) of 0.92 (0.45-1.39) and 0.76 (0.29-1.22), respectively. Platelet counts peaked at day 14, and maximum change from baseline platelet count increased dose-dependently, with mean platelet count increases of 14, 67, 107, and 150 Gi/L for placebo and eltrombopag 100 mg, 150 mg, and 200 mg, respectively. There was no notable difference in day 14 mean platelet aggregation between eltrombopag (59 to 74%) and placebo (67%), although this was not tested statistically. There was no notable difference in adverse event frequency across eltrombopag doses. Eltrombopag pharmacokinetics and platelet response were dose-dependent, and doses up to 200 mg/d were well tolerated, with safety profiles similar to placebo.

Similar virologic and immunologic efficacy with fosamprenavir boosted with 100 mg or 200 mg of ritonavir in HIV-infected patients: results of the LESS trial.

PURPOSE: ritonavir (RTV) effectively boosts most protease inhibitors but is associated with significant dose-dependent adverse events (AEs). In an effort to better manage toxicities through a reduced dose of RTV, this study compared fosamprenavir (FPV) boosted with RTV 100 mg (FPV/r100) or with RTV 200 mg (FPV/r200) daily. METHODS: this 24-week, open-label study enrolled patients taking a FPV/r 200-containing regimen who had HIV RNA <400 copies/mL and randomized them 1:2 to continue that regimen or simplify to FPV/r100 once daily. Other medications were not altered. The primary endpoint was the percentage of patients without suspected or confirmed virologic failure (HIV RNA ≥ 400 copies/mL) through week 24 by a missing/discontinuation equals failure (M/D=F) analysis. Noninferiority criteria were demonstrated if the lower bound of the 95% confidence interval (CI) for the difference in the primary endpoint rates between groups was greater than -12. RESULTS: the 2 regimens met prespecified noninferiority criteria (FPV/r100, 92%; FPV/r 200, 94%; 95% CI, -9.36 to 5.12). At week 24, the percentage of patients with HIV RNA <50 copies/mL by M/ D=F was 83% in the FPV/r100 group and 85% in the FPV/r 200 group. Drug-related grade 2-4 AEs were uncommon (FPV/r100, 4%; FPV/r 200, 7%). Median changes in lipids were similar in both groups, with the exception of triglycerides (FPV/r100, -21 mg/dL; FPV/r 200, -2 mg/dL). CONCLUSIONS: this 24-week study demonstrated that among previously suppressed patients, once-daily FPV/r100 was similar to FPV/r 200 in virologic and immunologic effects but was associated with greater decreases from baseline in triglyceride levels.

Eltrombopag does not affect cardiac repolarization: results from a definitive QTc study in healthy subjects.

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ABOUT THIS SUBJECT: Some non-anti-arrhythmic drugs delay cardiac repolarization, which can be measured as an increase in the QT interval. Delays in cardiac repolarization create an electrophysiological environment that favours the development of cardiac arrhythmias, which may lead to torsade de pointes, which can be fatal. As part of the clinical development of eltrombopag, a thorough QT(c) study was conducted to evaluate the effects of eltrombopag on cardiac repolarization at both therapeutic and supratherapeutic doses and to characterize the relationship between plasma eltrombopag concentrations and change in QT(c). WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS: This study found no clinically significant QT prolongation for eltrombopag when administered as 50 mg or 150 mg every day for 5 days. There were no safety or tolerability signals of clinical concern. A small incidence of ventricular premature beats was observed, but this was consistent with previously reported incidences in healthy volunteers without apparent heart disease. AIM: To evaluate the effect of eltrombopag on cardiac repolarization and to characterize the relationship between plasma eltrombopag concentrations and change in QT(c). METHODS: This was a double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled, randomized, balanced four-period, crossover study in healthy men and women. Subjects were randomized to receive eltrombopag 50 mg and 150 mg, moxifloxacin 400 mg (positive control) and placebo in one of four sequences. RESULTS: Eighty-seven subjects entered the study and 48 completed. There was no prolongation of QT(c) (Fridericia) following eltrombopag treatment, as the upper limit of the 90% confidence interval (CI) for the time-matched change from baseline in QT(c)F between drug and placebo (ddQT(c)F) did not exceed 10 ms for eltrombopag at either dose. Maximum observed mean treatment difference was 2.29 ms (90% CI 0.34, 4.24) for eltrombopag 150 mg at 1 h post-dose and 11.64 ms (90% CI 9.64, 13.64) for moxifloxacin 400 mg at 4 h. Eltrombopag C(max) and AUC(0,24 h) increased in a dose proportional manner between 50 mg and 150 mg after 5 days' dosing. Proportions of subjects with adverse events were similar across treatments (52-66% of subjects). Most withdrawals (26/39 subjects) were due to elevated platelets. Three subjects were withdrawn for ventricular premature beats (one following each active treatment) reported as related to the study drug. CONCLUSIONS: No clinically significant QT(c) prolongation was observed for eltrombopag at therapeutic and supratherapeutic doses.

Pharmacokinetics of fosamprenavir plus ritonavir in human immunodeficiency virus type 1-infected adult subjects with hepatic impairment.

The effect of hepatic impairment on fosamprenavir/ritonavir pharmacokinetics was investigated. Sixty human immunodeficiency virus type 1-infected subjects, including 13, 20, and 10 subjects with mild, moderate, and severe hepatic impairment, respectively, and a comparator group of 17 subjects with normal hepatic function, were enrolled. Subjects with normal hepatic function received fosamprenavir at 700 mg plus ritonavir at 100 mg twice daily, whereas subjects with hepatic impairment received adjusted doses in anticipation of increased exposures. For subjects with mild hepatic impairment, the studied regimen of fosamprenavir 700 mg twice daily plus ritonavir 100 mg once daily delivered 17% higher values for the maximum plasma amprenavir concentration at the steady state (C(max)), 22% higher values for the area under the plasma concentration versus time curve over the dosing interval at the steady state [AUC(0-tau)], similar values for the concentration at the end of the dosing interval (C(tau)), and 114% higher unbound C(tau) values. For subjects with moderate hepatic impairment, the studied dosage regimen of fosamprenavir at 300 mg twice daily plus ritonavir at 100 mg once daily delivered 27% lower plasma amprenavir C(max) values, 27% lower AUC(0-24) values, 57% lower C(tau) values, and 21% higher unbound amprenavir C(tau) values. For subjects with severe hepatic impairment, the studied dosage regimen of fosamprenavir at 300 mg twice daily plus ritonavir at 100 mg once daily delivered 19% lower plasma amprenavir C(max) values, 23% lower AUC(0-24) values, 38% lower C(tau) values, and similar unbound amprenavir C(tau) values. With a reduced ritonavir dosing frequency of 100 mg once daily, the plasma ritonavir AUC(0-24) values were 39% lower, similar, and 40% higher for subjects with mild, moderate, and severe hepatic impairment, respectively. The results of the study support the use of reduced fosamprenavir/ritonavir doses or dosing frequencies in the treatment of patients with hepatic impairment. No significant safety issues were identified; however, plasma amprenavir and ritonavir exposures were more variable in subjects with hepatic impairment, and those patients should be closely monitored for safety and virologic response.

Fosamprenavir/ritonavir in advanced HIV disease (TRIAD): a randomized study of high-dose, dual-boosted or standard dose fosamprenavir/ritonavir in HIV-1-infected patients with antiretroviral resistance.

BACKGROUND: APV102002 was an open-label study comparing a dual-boosted HIV-1 protease inhibitor (PI) [fosamprenavir/lopinavir/ritonavir (FPV/LPV/RTV; 1400 mg/533 mg/133 mg twice daily)] and a high dose of FPV/RTV 1400 mg/100 mg twice daily (HD-FPV/RTV) versus the standard FPV/RTV 700 mg/100 mg twice-daily (STD-FPV/RTV) regimen for 24 weeks. METHODS: Adult patients with prior failure to two or more PI-based regimens and on a failing PI regimen were randomized to STD-FPV/RTV (n = 24), HD-FPV/RTV (n = 25) or FPV/LPV/RTV (n = 25). The primary aim was to test week 24 superiority of HD-FPV/RTV and FPV/LPV/RTV over STD-FPV/RTV as measured by plasma HIV-1 RNA average area under the curve minus baseline (AAUCMB). RESULTS: There was no difference in the week 24 AAUCMB between the regimens. The proportion of patients with <50 copies/mL of plasma HIV RNA was 21%, 24% and 20%, respectively, by time to loss of virological response (TLOVR) analysis. High baseline drug resistance provided some explanation for the low efficacy. A lower baseline background drug resistance and higher fosamprenavir genotypic inhibitory quotient led to better antiviral responses. The plasma amprenavir trough concentartion (C(tau)) was 49% higher in the HD-FPV/RTV arm than in the STD-FPV/RTV arm and similar in the FPV/LPV/RTV and STD-FPV/RTV arms. The plasma lopinavir C(tau) was similar to historical data with standard LPV/RTV 400 mg/100 mg twice daily. All regimens were relatively well tolerated, although diarrhoea was more frequent in the HD-FPV/RTV and FPV/LPV/RTV arms, and hypertriglyceridaemia and increased total cholesterol were more common in the FPV/LPV/RTV arm. CONCLUSIONS: While the strategies of higher dose FPV/RTV and dual FPV/LPV/RTV were relevant at the time of study initiation, new therapies for antiretroviral-experienced patients make such strategies of limited interest. In addition, this study failed to demonstrate antiviral superiority of the HD-FPV/RTV or FPV/LPV/RTV regimen over the STD-FPV/RTV twice-daily regimen in highly treatment-experienced patients.

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of methadone enantiomers after coadministration with fosamprenavir-ritonavir in opioid-dependent subjects.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare steady-state pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of methadone enantiomers when coadministered with fosamprenavir 700 mg-ritonavir 100 mg twice/day. DESIGN: Open-label, single-sequence, two-period crossover, drug-interaction study. SETTING: Two university-affiliated research centers. SUBJECTS: Twenty-six opioid-dependent, methadone-maintained, healthy adults. INTERVENTION: Subjects received their usual daily dose of methadone alone for 4 days (period 1). Subjects then received the same daily dose of methadone plus fosamprenavir 700 mg-ritonavir 100 mg twice/day for 14 days (period 2). MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Blood was collected on days 1-4 (period 1) and on days 11-14 (period 2) for plasma R- and S-methadone concentrations; amprenavir concentrations were assessed during period 2. Opioid-effect measures were assessed in each study period. Subjects served as their own controls for comparison of period 1 with period 2. Coadministration of fosamprenavir-ritonavir with methadone reduced plasma total R-methadone area under the plasma concentration-time curve over the dosing interval at steady state (AUC tau-ss) by 18%, maximum concentration at steady state (Cmax-ss) by 21%, and concentration at the end of the dosing interval at steady state (Ctau-ss) by 11%; time to reach Cmax-ss (Tmax) was delayed by 1.75 hours. Coadministration of fosamprenavir-ritonavir with methadone also reduced plasma total S-methadone AUC tau-ss and Cmax-ss by 43% each, Ctau-ss by 41%, and delayed Tmax by 0.85 hours. Fosamprenavir-ritonavir administered with methadone did not alter plasma amprenavir pharmacokinetics compared with historical control data; nor did it alter the unbound R-methadone at 2 and 6 hours after methadone dosing. Pharmacodynamic indexes remained essentially unchanged after adding fosamprenavir-ritonavir to methadone. No subject demonstrated opioid intoxication or withdrawal, or requested methadone dosage modification. CONCLUSION: No adjustment in the dosages of either methadone or fosamprenavir 700 mg-ritonavir 100 mg twice/day is required during coadministration, on the basis of the small reduction in total R-methadone exposure, no change in unbound R-methadone, no clinically important opioid effects, and no change in amprenavir exposure.

Plasma amprenavir pharmacokinetics and tolerability following administration of 1,400 milligrams of fosamprenavir once daily in combination with either 100 or 200 milligrams of ritonavir in healthy volunteers.

Once-daily (QD) fosamprenavir (FPV) at 1,400 mg boosted with low-dose ritonavir (RTV) at 200 mg is effective when it is used in combination regimens for the initial treatment of human immunodeficiency virus infection. Whether a lower RTV boosting dose (i.e., 100 mg QD) could ensure sufficient amprenavir (APV) concentrations with improved safety/tolerability is unknown. This randomized, two 14-day-period, crossover pharmacokinetic study compared the steady-state plasma APV concentrations, safety, and tolerability of FPV at 1,400 mg QD boosted with either 100 mg or 200 mg of RTV QD in 36 healthy volunteers. Geometric least-square (GLS) mean ratios and the associated 90% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated for plasma APV maximum plasma concentrations (Cmax), the area under the plasma concentration-time curve over the dosing period (AUC0-tau), and trough concentrations (Ctau) during each dosing period. Equivalence between regimens (90% CIs of GLS mean ratios, 0.80 to 1.25) was observed for the plasma APV AUC0-tau (GLS mean ratio, 0.90 [90% CI, 0.84 to 0.96]) and Cmax (0.97 [90% CI, 0.91 to 1.04]). The APV Ctau was 38% lower with RTV at 100 mg QD than with RTV at 200 mg QD (GLS mean ratio, 0.62 [90% CI, 0.55 to 0.69]) but remained sixfold higher than the protein-corrected 50% inhibitory concentration for wild-type virus, with the lowest APV Ctau observed during the 100-mg QD period being nearly threefold higher. The GLS mean APV Ctau was 2.5 times higher than the historical Ctau for unboosted FPV at 1,400 mg twice daily. Fewer clinical adverse drug events and smaller increases in triglyceride levels were observed with the RTV 100-mg QD regimen. Clinical trials evaluating the efficacy and safety of FPV at 1,400 mg QD boosted by RTV at 100 mg QD are now under way with antiretroviral therapy-naïve patients.

Interaction between fosamprenavir, with and without ritonavir, and nevirapine in human immunodeficiency virus-infected subjects.

Fosamprenavir (FPV) with and without ritonavir (RTV) was added to the antiretroviral regimens of human immunodeficiency virus-infected subjects receiving nevirapine (NVP) to evaluate this drug interaction. Significant reductions in plasma amprenavir exposure (25 to 35%) were observed following coadministration of 1,400 mg of FPV twice a day (BID) and 200 mg of NVP BID. A regimen of 700 mg of FPV BID plus 100 mg of RTV BID may be coadministered with NVP without dose adjustment.

Pharmacokinetic and safety evaluation of high-dose combinations of fosamprenavir and ritonavir.

High-dose combinations of fosamprenavir (FPV) and ritonavir (RTV) were evaluated in healthy adult subjects in order to select doses for further study in multiple protease inhibitor (PI)-experienced patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus type 1. Two high-dose regimens, FPV 1,400 mg twice a day (BID) plus RTV 100 mg BID and FPV 1,400 mg BID plus RTV 200 mg BID, were planned to be compared to the approved regimen, FPV 700 mg BID plus RTV 100 mg BID, in a randomized three-period crossover study. Forty-two healthy adult subjects were enrolled, and 39 subjects completed period 1. Due to marked hepatic transaminase elevations, predominantly with FPV 1,400 mg BID plus RTV 200 mg BID, the study was terminated prematurely. For FPV 1,400 mg BID plus RTV 100 mg BID, the values for plasma amprenavir (APV) area under the concentration-time profile over the dosing interval (tau) at steady state [AUC(0-tau)], maximum concentration of drug in plasma (C(max)), and plasma concentration at the end of tau at steady state (C(tau)) were 54, 81, and 26% higher, respectively, and the values for plasma RTV AUC(0-tau), C(max), and C(tau) were 49% higher, 71% higher, and 11% lower, respectively, than those for FPV 700 mg BID plus RTV 100 mg BID. For FPV 1,400 mg BID plus RTV 200 mg BID, the values for plasma APV AUC(0-tau), C(max), and C(tau) were 26, 48, and 32% higher, respectively, and the values for plasma RTV AUC(0-tau), C(max), and C(tau) increased 4.15-fold, 4.17-fold, and 3.99-fold, respectively, compared to those for FPV 700 mg BID plus RTV 100 mg BID. FPV 1,400 mg BID plus RTV 200 mg BID is not recommended due to an increased rate of marked hepatic transaminase elevations and lack of pharmacokinetic advantage. FPV 1,400 mg BID plus RTV 100 mg BID is currently under clinical evaluation in multiple PI-experienced patients.

Fosamprenavir : clinical pharmacokinetics and drug interactions of the amprenavir prodrug.

Fosamprenavir is one of the most recently approved HIV-1 protease inhibitors (PIs) and offers reductions in pill number and pill size, and omits the need for food and fluid requirements associated with the earlier-approved HIV-1 PIs. Three fosamprenavir dosage regimens are approved by the US FDA for the treatment of HIV-1 PI-naive patients, including fosamprenavir 1,400 mg twice daily, fosamprenavir 1,400 mg once daily plus ritonavir 200mg once daily, and fosamprenavir 700 mg twice daily plus ritonavir 100mg twice daily. Coadministration of fosamprenavir with ritonavir significantly increases plasma amprenavir exposure. The fosamprenavir 700 mg twice daily plus ritonavir 100mg twice daily regimen maintains the highest plasma amprenavir concentrations throughout the dosing interval; this is the only approved regimen for the treatment of HIV-1 PI-experienced patients and is the only regimen approved in the European Union. Fosamprenavir is the phosphate ester prodrug of the HIV-1 PI amprenavir, and is rapidly and extensively converted to amprenavir after oral administration. Plasma amprenavir concentrations are quantifiable within 15 minutes of dosing and peak at 1.5-2 hours after fosamprenavir dosing. Food does not affect the absorption of amprenavir following administration of the fosamprenavir tablet formulation; therefore, fosamprenavir tablets may be administered without regard to food intake. Amprenavir has a large volume of distribution, is 90% bound to plasma proteins and is a substrate of P-glycoprotein. With <1% of a dose excreted in urine, the renal route is not an important elimination pathway, while the principal route of amprenavir elimination is hepatic metabolism by cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4. Amprenavir is also an inhibitor and inducer of CYP3A4. Furthermore, fosamprenavir is commonly administered in combination with low-dose ritonavir, which is also extensively metabolised by CYP3A4, and is a more potent CYP3A4 inhibitor than amprenavir. This potent CYP3A4 inhibition contraindicates the coadministration of certain CYP3A4 substrates and requires others to be co-administered with caution. However, fosamprenavir can be co-administered with many other antiretroviral agents, including drugs of the nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitor, non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor and HIV entry inhibitor classes. Coadministration with other HIV-1 PIs continues to be studied.The extensive fosamprenavir and amprenavir clinical drug interaction information provides guidance on how to co-administer fosamprenavir and fosamprenavir plus ritonavir with many other commonly co-prescribed medications, such as gastric acid suppressants, HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors, antibacterials and antifungal agents.