Efficacy and Safety of Dulaglutide 3.0 mg and 4.5 mg Versus Dulaglutide 1.5 mg in Metformin-Treated Patients With Type 2 Diabetes in a Randomized Controlled Trial (AWARD-11).

OBJECTIVE: To compare efficacy and safety of dulaglutide at doses of 3.0 and 4.5 mg versus 1.5 mg in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to once-weekly dulaglutide 1.5 mg, 3.0 mg, or 4.5 mg for 52 weeks. The primary objective was determining superiority of dulaglutide 3.0 mg and/or 4.5 mg over 1.5 mg in HbA1c reduction at 36 weeks. Secondary superiority objectives included change in body weight. Two estimands addressed efficacy objectives: treatment regimen (regardless of treatment discontinuation or rescue medication) and efficacy (on treatment without rescue medication) in all randomly assigned patients. RESULTS: Mean baseline HbA1c and BMI in randomly assigned patients (N = 1,842) was 8.6% (70 mmol/mol) and 34.2 kg/m2, respectively. At 36 weeks, dulaglutide 4.5 mg provided superior HbA1c reductions compared with 1.5 mg (treatment-regimen estimand: -1.77 vs. -1.54% [-19.4 vs. -16.8 mmol/mol], estimated treatment difference [ETD] -0.24% (-2.6 mmol/mol), P < 0.001; efficacy estimand: -1.87 vs. -1.53% [-20.4 vs. -16.7 mmol/mol], ETD -0.34% (-3.7 mmol/mol), P < 0.001). Dulaglutide 3.0 mg was superior to 1.5 mg for reducing HbA1c, using the efficacy estimand (ETD -0.17% [-1.9 mmol/mol]; P = 0.003) but not the treatment-regimen estimand (ETD -0.10% [-1.1 mmol/mol]; P = 0.096). Dulaglutide 4.5 mg was superior to 1.5 mg for weight loss at 36 weeks for both estimands (treatment regimen: -4.6 vs. -3.0 kg, ETD -1.6 kg, P < 0.001; efficacy: -4.7 vs. -3.1 kg, ETD -1.6 kg, P < 0.001). Common adverse events through 36 weeks included nausea (1.5 mg, 13.4%; 3 mg, 15.6%; 4.5 mg, 16.4%) and vomiting (1.5 mg, 5.6%; 3 mg, 8.3%; 4.5 mg, 9.3%). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled by metformin, escalation from dulaglutide 1.5 mg to 3.0 mg or 4.5 mg provided clinically relevant, dose-related reductions in HbA1c and body weight with a similar safety profile.

Efficacy and safety of an expanded dulaglutide dose range: A phase 2, placebo-controlled trial in patients with type 2 diabetes using metformin.

AIMS: Dulaglutide, a once weekly GLP-1 receptor agonist, is approved at two doses (1.5 and 0.75 mg) for treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D). Two higher doses of dulaglutide (3.0 and 4.5 mg) were evaluated for safety and efficacy to determine whether these doses warrant further study for improved control of glucose and body weight. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This 18-week, double-blind, phase 2 trial randomized 318 patients with T2D using ≥1500 mg metformin, to receive subcutaneous injection of placebo (n = 82), dulaglutide 1.5 mg (n = 81), dulaglutide 3.0 mg (n = 79) or dulaglutide 4.5 mg (n = 76). The primary objective was superiority of dulaglutide doses over placebo in reduction of HbA1c at 18 weeks. Secondary objectives included superiority of dulaglutide over placebo in change from baseline in body weight and fasting serum glucose (FSG) at 18 weeks. Investigational doses of dulaglutide were compared to the 1.5 mg dose as an exploratory objective. RESULTS: HbA1c reduction at 18 weeks was significantly greater with dulaglutide vs placebo (placebo, -0.44% ± 0.10% [-4.8 ± 1.1 mmol/mol]; dulaglutide 1.5 mg, -1.23% ± 0.10% [-13.5 ± 1.1 mmol/mol]; dulaglutide 3.0 mg, -1.31% ± 0.10% [-14.3 ± 1.1 mmol/mol]; dulaglutide 4.5 mg, -1.40% ± 0.10% [-15.3 ± 1.1 mmol/mol]; P < 0.001, each dose), as were changes in body weight (placebo, -1.6 ± 0.39 kg; dulaglutide 1.5 mg, -2.8 ± 0.39 kg; dulaglutide 3.0 mg, -3.9 ± 0.39 kg; dulaglutide 4.5 mg, -4.1 ± 0.41 kg; P < 0.001, each dose). All three dulaglutide doses significantly reduced FSG from baseline (1.5 mg, -36.2 ± 4.7 mg/dL [-2.0 ± 0.3 mmol/L]; 3.0 mg, -34.5 ± 4.5 mg/dL [-1.9 ± 0.3 mmol/L]; 4.5 mg, -38.0 ± 4.7 mg/dL [-2.1 ± 0.3 mmol/L]) vs placebo (-12.4 ± 4.5 mg/dL [-0.7 ± 0.3 mmol/L]) (P < 0.001, all). Safety profiles of the higher doses were consistent with the established safety profile for dulaglutide. Gastrointestinal events were mostly mild to moderate, and was dose-related for nausea. CONCLUSION: All three dulaglutide doses were superior to placebo in improving glycaemic control and reducing body weight in participants with T2D using metformin. The potential for doses of dulaglutide of 3.0 and 4.5 mg to provide additional glycaemic benefit and weight reduction with an acceptable safety profile, compared with the 1.5 mg dose, warrants further study in a phase 3 trial.

OPTIMIZED HUMAN REGULAR U-500 INSULIN TREATMENT IMPROVES ß-CELL FUNCTION IN SEVERELY INSULIN-RESISTANT PATIENTS WITH LONG-STANDING TYPE 2 DIABETES AND HIGH INSULIN REQUIREMENTS.

OBJECTIVE: To assess ß-cell function and insulin sensitivity following improvement in glycemic control in severely insulin-resistant patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes (T2D). METHODS: A subset of patients in a 24-week, open-label, randomized trial comparing thrice-daily (n = 14/162) versus twice-daily (n = 11/163) human regular U-500 insulin (U-500R) underwent mixed meal tolerance testing at baseline and endpoint. Baseline characteristics were similar between treatment groups (combined means: age, 54.0 years; diabetes duration, 13.6 years; body mass index, 38.8 kg/m(2); glycated hemoglobin [HbA1c], 8.3%; U-100 insulin dose, 287.6 units/day, 2.6 units/kg/day). Primary outcome measure was ratio of area under the curve (AUC) for C-peptide to glucose (AUCC-peptide/AUCglucose) at 24-week endpoint. RESULTS: Change from baseline HbA1c, daily U-500R dose, and weight were -1.17% (P = .0002), +80.8 units (P = .0003), and +5.9 kg (P = .33), respectively. ß-Cell function significantly improved after 24 weeks of U-500R therapy in combined treatment groups. The AUCC-peptide/AUCglucose increased 34.0% (ratio of least-squares geometric mean, 1.34; 95% confidence interval, 1.18 to 1.52; P = .0001). Integral of total insulin secretion rate increased from 27.0 to 33.7 nmol/m(2), and glucose sensitivity improved from 18.3 to 24.0 pmol/min/m(2)/mM (both, P = .02). Matsuda index improved from 0.8 to 1.3 (P = .008). CONCLUSION: Despite long-standing diabetes and poor glycemic control at baseline, functional recovery of ß-cells was observed with improved glycemic control in these severely insulin-resistant patients with T2D, possibly due to alleviation of glucotoxicity.

TWO TREATMENT APPROACHES FOR HUMAN REGULAR U-500 INSULIN IN PATIENTS WITH TYPE 2 DIABETES NOT ACHIEVING ADEQUATE GLYCEMIC CONTROL ON HIGH-DOSE U-100 INSULIN THERAPY WITH OR WITHOUT ORAL AGENTS: A RANDOMIZED, TITRATION-TO-TARGET CLINICAL TRIAL.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of 2 dosing regimens for human regular U-500 insulin (U-500R, 500 units/mL) replacing high-dose U-100 insulins with or without oral antihyperglycemic drugs in patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes (T2D). METHODS: We conducted a 24-week, open-label, parallel trial in 325 patients (demographics [means]: age, 55.4 years; diabetes duration, 15.2 years; body mass index, 41.9 kg/m(2); glycated hemoglobin [HbA1c], 8.7%; U-100 insulin dose, 287.5 units administered in 5 injections/day [median; range, 2 to 10]). Patients were randomized to thrice-daily (TID, n = 162) or twice-daily (BID, n = 163) U-500R after a 4-week lead-in period. The primary outcome was HbA1c change from baseline. RESULTS: After 24 weeks, both treatments demonstrated significant HbA1c reductions (TID, -1.12%; BID, -1.22%; both, P<.001) and clinical equivalence (difference, -0.10%; 95% confidence interval, -0.33 to 0.12%; noninferiority margin, 0.4%). Comparable increases in total daily U-500R dose (TID, 242.7 to 343.1 units; BID, 249.0 to 335.0 units) were observed. Incidence and rate of documented symptomatic hypoglycemia (≤70 mg/dL) were lower for TID versus BID (P = .003 and P = .02, respectively); severe hypoglycemia was similar between treatments. Weight gain was similar in both groups (TID, 5.4 kg; BID, 4.9 kg). CONCLUSION: Initiation and titration of U-500R using either algorithm (TID or BID) improves glycemic control effectively and safely with fewer injections in patients with T2D treated with high-dose/high-volume U-100 insulin. These results provide clinicians with a practical framework for using U-500R in severely insulin-resistant patients with suboptimally controlled T2D.

Relationship between exposure to prasugrel active metabolite and clinical outcomes in the TRITON-TIMI 38 substudy.

In TRITON-TIMI 38, levels of the prasugrel active metabolite (pras-AM) were measured in a population pharmacokinetic substudy that characterized the intrinsic and extrinsic factors influencing exposure. Higher exposure to the pras-AM was observed in low-weight or very elderly patients. The authors hypothesized that this higher exposure might explain the higher risk of non-coronary artery bypass graft (CABG)-related TIMI-related bleeding observed in these 2 patient populations. The relationship between estimated exposure to the pras-AM and clinical outcomes was assessed in 1159 prasugrel-treated patients enrolled in the substudy using multivariable logistic regression analysis. There was no relationship between pras-AM exposure and efficacy through 3 days or after 3 days. Higher estimated pras-AM exposure was associated with a higher incidence of non-CABG-related TIMI major or minor bleeding after 3 days (P < .05) but not through 3 days from start of study drug. Factors associated with increased risk for non-CABG-related TIMI bleeding (≥75 years and <60 kg) also identified subgroups with higher exposure to the pras-AM. Within low body weight and very elderly subgroups, bleeding was largely confined to patients having the highest exposure to the pras-AM, indicating that a prasugrel lower dose in these subgroups may reduce the risk of bleeding while maintaining efficacy.

The onset of inhibition of platelet aggregation with prasugrel compared with clopidogrel loading doses using gatekeeping analysis of integrated clinical pharmacology data.

The purpose of this analysis was to determine the time by which a prasugrel 60-mg loading dose (LD) achieved significantly greater inhibition of platelet aggregation (IPA) than the peak IPA after a clopidogrel 300-mg LD or 600-mg LD. Data were pooled from nine studies representing 587 individuals: 274 healthy subjects and 313 patients with stable coronary artery disease. The primary pharmacodynamic measure was IPA using 20 [mu]M adenosine-5'-diphosphate as the agonist. Gatekeeping analysis compared the peak IPA at 4, 6, and 24 hours after a clopidogrel 300-mg or 600-mg LD with IPA at various prior time points backwards after a prasugrel LD until a statistically nonsignificant difference was reached. Prasugrel 60-mg LD produced greater IPA by 30 minutes than the peak IPA after a clopidogrel 300-mg LD (P < 0.0001). Significantly greater IPA was achieved at 1 hour after prasugrel 60-mg LD compared with the peak IPA after 600-mg clopidogrel LD (P < 0.0001), regardless of sex, body weight, or age and as early as 30 minutes in the diabetic subgroup. A prasugrel 60-mg LD produces significantly faster onset and greater IPA compared with a clopidogrel 300-mg LD or 600-mg LD.

Integrated analysis of pharmacokinetic data across multiple clinical pharmacology studies of prasugrel, a new thienopyridine antiplatelet agent.

An integrated analysis of pharmacokinetic (PK) parameter estimates for prasugrel, from 16 phase I clinical pharmacology studies, consolidated exposure estimates from 506 healthy male and female participants and evaluated the effect of specific intrinsic and extrinsic factors on exposure to prasugrel's active metabolite (AM, R-138727). A linear mixed effect model was fitted with study and subject nested within study as random effects and subject factors as fixed effects. Prasugrel AM exposure was similar in males and females, in participants <65 years and ≥65 years, in smokers and nonsmokers, in drinkers and nondrinkers of alcohol, and in Asians, Caucasians, and participants of African and Hispanic descent. Prasugrel AM exposure increased as body weight decreased and was 40% higher in participants <60 kg than in participants ≥60 kg. Exposure in Asians was 40% higher than that in Caucasians, but this difference could be explained by the lower overall weight of the Asian participants and a disproportionately large difference between ethnic groups in lighter participants, especially those <60 kg. These results characterize prasugrel's PK across a range of studies and highlight body weight as the most influential covariate on prasugrel AM exposure, with implications for prasugrel maintenance dosing in clinical practice.

A comparison of the VerifyNow P2Y12 point-of-care device and light transmission aggregometry to monitor platelet function with prasugrel and clopidogrel: an integrated analysis.

We compared platelet function results obtained with the VerifyNow P2Y12 (VN-P2Y12) point-of-care device and the light transmission aggregometry (5 and 20 microM adenosine diphosphate) method using an integrated database of eight clinical trials with a total of 591 subjects. The study was performed in healthy subjects, patients with coronary artery disease, patients with end-stage renal disease, and patients with acute coronary syndrome after treatment with prasugrel or clopidogrel. Analyses focused on loading doses of 60 mg prasugrel or 600 mg clopidogrel and daily maintenance doses of 10 mg prasugrel or 75 or 150 mg clopidogrel. Similar patterns of platelet inhibition were observed for light transmission aggregometry versus VN-P2Y12 and assay results were well correlated (r approximately 0.7), although a sigmoidal model may more accurately represent the relationship between light transmission aggregometry and VN-P2Y12, because VN-P2Y12 was relatively less sensitive to low and high levels of inhibition. The percentage of poor responders was less with prasugrel compared with clopidogrel by both assays, but the percentages tended to differ between the assays. The VN-P2Y12 "BASE" channel appeared to be susceptible to high levels of P2Y12 blockade, which would underestimate the VN-P2Y12-reported percent inhibition in individuals who respond well to loading doses of thienopyridines. This integrated analysis supports the findings of earlier individual studies comparing these methodologies that assess platelet function.

Pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of single doses of prasugrel 30 mg and clopidogrel 300 mg in healthy Chinese and white volunteers: an open-label trial.

BACKGROUND: Prasugrel is an oral antiplatelet agent approved for the reduction of atherothrombotic cardiovascular events in patients presenting with acute coronary syndrome and undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Although the approved loading dose is 60 mg, earlier studies of prasugrel suggested that active-metabolite exposure and pharmacodynamic response may be higher in Asian subjects than in white subjects. OBJECTIVES: This study compared the pharmacodynamic response to a single 30-mg dose of prasugrel in healthy Chinese and white subjects and the response to a single 30-mg dose of prasugrel and a single 300-mg dose of clopidogrel in healthy Chinese subjects. The pharmacokinetics and tolerability of both drugs were also assessed. METHODS: This was an open-label, single-dose study conducted in Singapore. Chinese subjects were randomly allocated to receive prasugrel 30 mg or clopidogrel 300 mg; after a 14-day washout period, they received the alternative drug. White subjects received only prasugrel 30 mg. Blood samples for pharmaco-dynamic assessments were collected before dosing and at 0.5, 1, 2, 4, and 24 hours after dosing. Three methods were used to measure inhibition of platelet aggregation (IPA)-traditional light transmission aggregometry (LTA), the Verify Now P2Y12 (VN-P2Y12) assay, and a vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein (VASP) phosphorylation flow cytometry assay-and their results were compared. Blood samples for pharmacokinetic assessments were collected at 0.25, 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 4, 8, 12, and 24 hours after dosing. Concentrations of the active metabolite of prasugrel were measured using a validated LC-MS/MS method. RESULTS: The study enrolled 18 Chinese subjects and 14 white subjects. Chinese subjects had a mean (SD) age of 31 (10) years and a mean body weight of 65.2 (8.9) kg; 83% were male. The corresponding values for white subjects were 30 (10) years, 77.2 (12.4) kg, and 86%. Thirty of the 32 enrolled subjects completed the study. Two Chinese men were withdrawn from the study, one due to a low platelet-rich plasma count after receipt of prasugrel 30 mg and the other due to mild, intermittent rectal bleeding after bowel movements that began approximately 2 days after receipt of clopidogrel 300 mg. The mean IPA with prasugrel was significantly higher in Chinese than in white subjects at 0.5, 1, and 2 hours after dosing (P < 0.05), but not at 4 or 24 hours. In Chinese subjects, mean maximal IPA (87%) occurred 1 hour after prasugrel dosing; in white subjects, mean maximal IPA (78%) occurred 2 hours after prasugrel dosing. In Chinese subjects, the mean IPA was significantly higher at all time points after administration of prasugrel 30 mg than after administration of clopidogrel 300 mg (P <0.001). After administration of Clopidogrel 300 mg in Chinese subjects, mean maximal IPA (58%) occurred at 4 hours. The VN-P2Y12 and VASP phosphorylation assays yielded results comparable to those obtained by LTA. Mean exposure to prasugrel's active metabolite was higher in Chinese than in white subjects (geometric least squares mean ratio for AUC(0-t) = 1.47 (90% CI, 1.24-1.73). Both drugs were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, platelet inhibition was significantly higher in Chinese than in white subjects up to 2 hours after a single 30-mg dose of prasugrel. Platelet inhibition was significantly higher in Chinese subjects at all time points after a 30-mg dose of prasugrel than after a 300-mg dose of clopidogrel. Both treatments were generally well tolerated.

The pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of prasugrel in healthy Chinese, Japanese, and Korean subjects compared with healthy Caucasian subjects.

PURPOSE: Prasugrel is a novel thienopyridine prodrug metabolised to an active metabolite that binds irreversibly to the platelet P2Y(12) receptor and inhibits adenosine diphosphate (ADP)-induced platelet aggregation. We compared prasugrel pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and tolerability in healthy Chinese, Japanese, Korean and Caucasian subjects. METHODS: In an open-label, single-centre, parallel-design study, 89 healthy subjects (25 Chinese, 20 Japanese, 22 Korean and 22 Caucasian) aged 20-65 years were given a prasugrel 60-mg loading dose (LD) followed by daily 10-mg maintenance doses (MD) for 7 days and then 5-mg MD for 10 days. Plasma concentrations of prasugrel's active metabolite and inhibition of ADP-induced platelet aggregation (IPA) were determined. RESULTS: Mean exposure to prasugrel's active metabolite in all treatment regimens was higher in each of the Asian groups than in the Caucasian group, although there was considerable overlap between individual exposure estimates in Asians and Caucasians. The mean IPA was also higher in Asians than in Caucasians following a prasugrel 60-mg LD, although the difference did not consistently achieve statistical significance. Prasugrel 10-mg or 5-mg MD produced statistically significantly higher IPA in each Asian group compared with that in the Caucasians. Prasugrel was well tolerated during the LD and MD regimens by all groups. CONCLUSIONS: Mean exposure to the prasugrel active metabolite following prasugrel 60-mg LD and during daily 10-mg or 5-mg MD was higher in each of the Asian groups than in the Caucasian group, which resulted in greater platelet inhibition.

Effect of age on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of prasugrel during multiple dosing: an open-label, single-sequence, clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: A substantial portion of patients at risk for acute coronary syndrome (ACS) are >65 years old. Prasugrel is a novel antiplatelet agent approved for the treatment of ACS patients undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention, and will be used in this population. OBJECTIVE: This study assessed the effect of age >or=65 years on the pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of the active metabolite (R-138727) of prasugrel in healthy subjects taking aspirin (acetylsalicylic acid). METHODS: This was an open-label, single-sequence trial conducted in a single clinical research centre in the UK. A total of 17 subjects aged 65-80 years and 15 subjects aged 20-39 years received a prasugrel 5-mg once-daily maintenance dose for 10 days followed by 10-mg once daily maintenance doses for 10 days. All subjects also received aspirin 75 mg daily. Serial blood samples were collected pre-dose and at various times post-dose for measurement of the active metabolite of prasugrel in plasma on days 10 and 20, following the last 5- and 10-mg prasugrel dose, respectively. PK parameters of the active metabolite of prasugrel included area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) from time zero to the time of the last quantifiable concentration (AUC(last)), maximum plasma concentration (C(max)) and time to C(max) (t(max)). Maximal platelet aggregation (MPA), assessed by light transmission aggregometry using adenosine diphosphate (ADP) 20 micromol/L, was assessed at baseline and on day 10 (5-mg maintenance dose) and day 20 (10-mg maintenance dose). Bleeding times (BTs) were determined on days -5, 1, 10, 11, 20 and 21 using a modified Ivy technique. RESULTS: AUC(last) did not differ significantly between age groups. The steady-state trough MPA to ADP 20 micromol/L during 10-mg maintenance dosing was 30.6% and 26.6% in elderly and young subjects, respectively. Mean MPA was consistently higher in elderly subjects compared with young subjects; however, differences were generally less than ten percentage points. BTs did not differ between the two populations during 5-mg maintenance dosing; however, during 10-mg maintenance dosing, BTs were up to 67% longer in young compared with elderly subjects. A higher frequency of minor bleeding during 10-mg maintenance dosing was observed in elderly subjects compared with young subjects. CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate that prasugrel PK and MPA were similar in healthy subjects regardless of age. Compared with younger subjects, elderly subjects had shorter BTs but a greater frequency of mild bleeding-related adverse events.

Inhibition of platelet aggregation with prasugrel and clopidogrel: an integrated analysis in 846 subjects.

This integrated analysis compared speed of onset, level of platelet inhibition, and response variability to prasugrel and clopidogrel in healthy subjects and in patients with stable coronary artery disease with data pooled from 24 clinical pharmacology studies. Data from subjects (N = 846) were categorized into the following treatment groups: prasugrel 60 mg loading dose (LD)/10 mg maintenance dose (MD), clopidogrel 300 mg LD/75 mg MD, or clopidogrel 600 mg LD/75 mg MDs. Maximum platelet aggregation (MPA) and inhibition of platelet aggregation (IPA) to 5 and 20 muM ADP were assessed by turbidimetric aggregometry. A linear mixed-effect model compared the MPA and IPA between treatments over time points evaluated in the integrated database, and covariates affecting platelet inhibition were identified. Prasugrel 60 mg LD resulted in faster onset, greater magnitude, and more consistent levels of inhibition of platelet function compared to either clopidogrel 300 mg or 600 mg LDs. Greater and more consistent levels of platelet inhibition were observed with the prasugrel 10 mg MD compared to the clopidogrel 75 mg MD. This integrated analysis confirms the findings of earlier individual studies, that prasugrel achieves faster onset of greater extent and more consistent platelet inhibition compared to the approved and higher loading doses of clopidogrel. Gender, race, body weight, and age were identified as statistically significant covariates impacting platelet inhibition.

Population pharmacokinetic analyses to evaluate the influence of intrinsic and extrinsic factors on exposure of prasugrel active metabolite in TRITON-TIMI 38.

Serial pharmacokinetic (PK) sampling in 1159 patients from TRITON-TIMI 38 was undertaken. A multilinear regression model was used to quantitatively predict prasugrel's active metabolite (Pras-AM) concentrations from its 2 downstream inactive metabolites. Population-based methods were then applied to Pras-AM concentration data to characterize the PK. The potential influence of body weight, body mass index, age, sex, renal function, diabetes, tobacco use, and other disease status on Bayesian estimates of Pras-AM exposures was assessed. The PK of Pras-AM was adequately described by a multicompartmental model and consistent with results from previous studies. The systemic exposure of prasugrel was not appreciably affected by body mass index, gender, diabetes, smoking, and renal impairment. Pras-AM mean exposure in patients weighing <60 kg (4.1%) was 30% (90% confidence interval [CI] 1.16-1.45) higher than exposure in patients > or =60 kg. Mean Pras-AM exposures for patients > or =75 years (10.5%) were 19% (90% CI: 1.11-1.28) higher compared with patients <75 years.

Effect of atorvastatin on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of prasugrel and clopidogrel in healthy subjects.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To investigate the potential effect of atorvastatin 80 mg/day on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the thienopyridines prasugrel and clopidogrel. DESIGN: Open-label, randomized, crossover, two-arm, parallel-group study. SETTING: Single clinical research center in the United Kingdom. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty-nine healthy men aged 18-60 years. Intervention. Subjects received either a loading dose of prasugrel 60 mg followed by a maintenance dose of 10 mg/day or a loading dose of clopidogrel 300 mg followed by 75 mg/day. The drug was given as monotherapy for 10 days, and after a 6-day run-in period with atorvastatin 80 mg/day, the same dosage of atorvastatin was continued with the respective thienopyridine for 10 days. A 14-day washout period separated the treatment regimens. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Blood samples were collected before and at various time points after dosing on days 1 and 11 for determination of plasma concentrations of metabolites and for measurement of platelet aggregation induced by adenosine 5'-diphosphate 20 microM and vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein (VASP). Coadministration of atorvastatin did not alter exposure to active metabolites of prasugrel or clopidogrel after the loading dose and thus did not alter inhibition of platelet aggregation (IPA). During maintenance dosing, atorvastatin administration resulted in 17% and 28% increases in the area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) values of prasugrel's and clopidogrel's active metabolites, respectively. These small changes in AUC did not result in a significant change in IPA response to prasugrel but did result in a significant increase in IPA during clopidogrel maintenance dosing at some, but not all, of the time points on day 11. Coadministration of atorvastatin with either prasugrel or clopidogrel had no effect on VASP phosphorylation relative to the thienopyridine alone after the loading dose. CONCLUSION: Coadministration of atorvastatin 80 mg/day with prasugrel or clopidogrel did not negatively affect the antiplatelet response to either drug after a loading dose or during maintenance dosing. The lack of a clinically meaningful effect of high-dose atorvastatin on the pharmacodynamic response to prasugrel after the loading or maintenance dose indicates that no dosage adjustment should be necessary in patients receiving these drugs concomitantly.

Effect of ranitidine on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of prasugrel and clopidogrel.

OBJECTIVE: Clopidogrel is an oral thienopyridine antiplatelet agent indicated for the treatment of atherothrombotic events in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Prasugrel, a novel oral thienopyridine, is under investigation for the reduction of atherothrombotic events in patients with ACS undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Prasugrel's solubility decreases with increasing pH, suggesting that concomitantly-administered medications that increase gastric pH may lower the rate and/or extent of prasugrel absorption. This study evaluated the influence of ranitidine coadministration on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the respective active metabolite of prasugrel and clopidogrel. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In this open-label, two-period, two-treatment, crossover study, 47 healthy male subjects were randomized to one of two study arms, receiving either prasugrel (60-mg loading dose [LD], 10-mg maintenance dose [MD] for 7 days; n = 23) or clopidogrel (600-mg LD, 75-mg MD for 7 days; n = 24). In one treatment period, subjects received prasugrel or clopidogrel alone, and in the alternate period received the same thienopyridine with ranitidine (150 mg twice daily, starting 1 day before the LD). Pharmacokinetic parameter estimates (AUC(0-t last), C(max), and t(max)) and inhibition of platelet aggregation (IPA) by light transmission aggregometry were assessed at multiple time points after the LD and final MD. RESULTS: Ranitidine had no clinically significant effect on the area under the plasma-concentration-time curve (AUC) and did not affect the time to C(max) (t(max)) for active metabolites of either prasugrel or clopidogrel. It reduced the geometric mean maximum concentrations of active metabolite (C(max)) after a prasugrel and clopidogrel LD by 14% and 10%, respectively, but these differences were not statistically significant. When coadministered with a 60-mg prasugrel LD, ranitidine did not affect the time to, or magnitude of, peak IPA, but did result in a modest reduction at 0.5 h from 67.4 to 55.1% (p < 0.001). Ranitidine did not affect prasugrel IPA during MD. For clopidogrel, IPA was not affected by ranitidine. Prasugrel and clopidogrel were both well-tolerated, with/without ranitidine. CONCLUSIONS: Results from this study suggest that there is no significant drug-drug interaction between oral ranitidine therapy and concomitantly-administered prasugrel or clopidogrel.

Switching directly to prasugrel from clopidogrel results in greater inhibition of platelet aggregation in aspirin-treated subjects.

Prasugrel, a novel P2Y(12) antagonist, achieves faster onset and greater inhibition of platelet aggregation than clopidogrel 300 and 600 mg loading doses (LD). We studied the safety, time course, and level of platelet inhibition when switching directly from clopidogrel 75 mg maintenance dose (MD) to a prasugrel 60 mg LD/10 mg MD or 10 mg MD regimen. Healthy subjects (n = 39) on aspirin (81 mg/d) received a clopidogrel 600 mg LD followed by 10 days of clopidogrel MD (75 mg/d). Subjects were then randomized without a washout period to prasugrel 60 mg LD (n = 16) followed by 10 days of prasugrel MD (10 mg/d) or to prasugrel MD (10 mg/d, n = 19) for 11 days. Maximal platelet aggregation (MPA) to 20 microM ADP was measured by turbidimetric aggregometry. In subjects on clopidogrel 75 mg MD, mean MPA decreased from 39 to 12% by 30 minutes, and to 5% by 1 hour after a prasugrel 60 mg LD (p < 0.001 for both) and from 37 to 28% (p < 0.001) by 1 hour after a prasugrel 10 mg MD. During prasugrel MD, a new pharmacodynamic steady state MPA of approximately 24% (p < 0.01 vs. clopidogrel MD) occurred within four to five days of switching from clopidogrel. Changing from clopidogrel to prasugrel did not increase bleeding episodes or other adverse events. Switching directly from clopidogrel MD to either prasugrel LD or MD was well tolerated and resulted in significantly greater levels of platelet inhibition than a clopidogrel 75 mg MD.

Effects of the proton pump inhibitor lansoprazole on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of prasugrel and clopidogrel.

Prasugrel and clopidogrel, thienopyridine prodrugs, are each metabolized to an active metabolite that inhibits the platelet P2Y(12) ADP receptor. In this open-label, 4-period crossover study, the effects of the proton pump inhibitor lansoprazole on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of prasugrel and clopidogrel were assessed in healthy subjects given single doses of prasugrel 60 mg and clopidogrel 300 mg with and without concurrent lansoprazole 30 mg qd. C(max) and AUC(0-tlast) of prasugrel's active metabolite, R-138727, and clopidogrel's inactive carboxylic acid metabolite, SR26334, were assessed. Inhibition of platelet aggregation (IPA) was measured by turbidimetric aggregometry 4 to 24 hours after each treatment. Lansoprazole (1) decreased R-138727 AUC(0-tlast) and C(max) by 13% and 29%, respectively, but did not affect IPA after the prasugrel dose, and (2) did not affect SR62334 exposure but tended to lower IPA after a clopidogrel dose. A retrospective tertile analysis showed in subjects with high IPA after a clopidogrel dose alone that lansoprazole decreased IPA, whereas IPA was unaffected in these same subjects after a prasugrel dose. The overall data suggest that a prasugrel dose adjustment is not likely warranted in an individual taking prasugrel with a proton pump inhibitor such as lansoprazole.

The use of the VerifyNow P2Y12 point-of-care device to monitor platelet function across a range of P2Y12 inhibition levels following prasugrel and clopidogrel administration.

Variability in response to antiplatelet agents has prompted the development of point-of-care (POC) technology. In this study, we compared the VerifyNow P2Y12 (VN-P2Y12) POC device with light transmission aggregometry (LTA) in subjects switched directly from clopidogrel to prasugrel. Healthy subjects on aspirin were administered a clopidogrel 600 mg loading dose (LD) followed by a 75 mg/d maintenance dose (MD) for 10 days. Subjects were then switched to a prasugrel 60 mg LD and then 10 mg/d MD for 10 days (n = 16), or to a prasugrel 10 mg/d MD for 11 days (n = 19). Platelet function was measured by LTA and VN-P2Y12 at baseline and after dosing. Clopidogrel 600 mg LD/75 mg MD treatment led to a reduction in P2Y(12) reaction units (PRU) from baseline. A switch from clopidogrel MD to prasugrel 60 mg LD/10 mg MD produced an immediate decrease in PRU, while a switch to prasugrel 10 mg MD resulted in a more gradual decline. Consistent with the reduction in PRU, device-reported percent inhibition increased during both clopidogrel and prasugrel regimens. Inhibition of platelet aggregation as measured by LTA showed a very similar pattern to that found with VN-P2Y12 measurement, irrespective of treatment regimens. The dynamic range of VN-P2Y12 appeared to be narrower than that of LTA. With two different thienopyridines, the VN-P2Y12 device, within a somewhat more limited range, reflected the overall magnitude of change in aggregation response determined by LTA. The determination of the clinical utility of such POC devices will require their use in clinical outcome studies.

A comparison of the antiplatelet effects of prasugrel and high-dose clopidogrel as assessed by VASP-phosphorylation and light transmission aggregometry.

Platelet inhibition as measured by vasodilator-stimulated phosphoprotein (VASP) and light transmission aggregometry (LTA) have shown concordance following dosing of clopidogrel. No reports have directly compared the VASP assay and LTA at the levels of P2Y(12) blockade after loading doses (LDs) of prasugrel or high dose clopidogrel (600 and 900 mg). The aim was to compare the VASP assay and LTA during the loading dose phase of a comparative study of prasugrel and clopidogrel. Prasugrel 60 mg LD/10 mg maintenance dose (MD) and clopidogrel 300 mg/75 mg and 600 mg/75 mg LD/MD regimens were compared in a 3-way crossover study in 41 healthy, aspirin-free subjects. Each LD was followed by seven daily MDs and a 14-day washout period. P2Y(12) receptor blockade was estimated using the VASP assay, expressed as platelet reactivity index (VASP-PRI). Platelet aggregation was assessed by light transmission aggregometry (20 and 5 microM ADP). Twenty-four hours after prasgurel 60 mg or clopidogrel 300 mg and 600 mg, respectively, VASP-PRI decreased from approximately 80% to 8.9%, 54.7%, and 39.0%, and maximal platelet aggregation (MPA) decreased from approximately 79% to 10.8%, 42.7%, and 31.2%, with an overall VASP:MPA correlation of 0.88 (p < 0.01). VASP assay responses after the clopidogrel LDs showed a wider range of values (300 mg: 0-93%; 600 mg: 0-80%) than prasugrel (0-13%); MPA responses followed a similar trend. Pearson's correlation suggested a strong agreement between VASP and LTA (20 microM ADP) for MPA (r = 0.86, p < 0.0001). VASP and LTA demonstrated concordance across the response range of P2Y(12) receptor blockade following thienopyridine LDs.