Search

Purpose: To characterize the effect of glasdegib on cardiac repolarization (QTc) in patients with advanced cancer., Methods: A concentration-QTc model was developed using data from two glasdegib single-agent, dose-escalation trials. Triplicate electrocardiogram was performed at pre-specified timepoints paired with pharmacokinetic blood collections after a single dose and at steady-state. Changes in QTc from baseline were predicted by model-based simulations at the clinical dose (100 mg QD) and in a supratherapeutic setting., Results: Glasdegib did not affect the heart rate, but had a positive effect on the corrected QT interval, described by a linear mixed-effects model with ΔQTcF (QTc using Fridericia's formula) as the dependent variable with glasdegib plasma concentrations from doses of 5-640 mg QD. The predicted mean QTcF change (upper bound of the 95% CI) was 5.30 (6.24) msec for the therapeutic 100-mg QD dose; at supratherapeutic concentrations (40% and 100% increase over the therapeutic C max ), it was 7.42 (8.74) and 12.09 (14.25) msec, respectively., Conclusions: The relationship of glasdegib exposure and QTc was well characterized by the model. The effect of glasdegib on the QTc interval did not cross the threshold of clinical concern for an oncology drug., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT01286467 and NCT00953758.

This phase I open-label trial (NCT03627754) assessed glasdegib pharmacokinetics and safety in otherwise healthy participants with moderate (Child-Pugh B) or severe (Child-Pugh C) hepatic impairment. Participants with hepatic impairment and age/weight-matched controls with normal hepatic function received a single oral 100-mg glasdegib dose under fasted conditions. The primary end points were area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity (AUC inf ) and maximum plasma concentration (C max ). Twenty-four participants (8/cohort) were enrolled. Glasdegib plasma exposures in moderate hepatic impairment were similar to controls, with adjusted geometric mean ratios (GMRs) of 110.8% (90% confidence interval [CI], 78.0-157.3) for AUC inf and 94.8% (69.9-128.4) for C max versus controls. In severe hepatic impairment, glasdegib plasma exposures were lower than controls (AUC inf GMR, 75.7%; 90%CI, 51.5-111.0; C max GMR, 58.0%; 90%CI, 37.8-89.0). Unbound glasdegib exposures were similar to controls for moderate (AUC inf,u GMR, 118.1%; 90%CI, 88.7-157.2; C max,u GMR, 101.1%; 90%CI, 78.4-130.3) and severe hepatic impairment (AUC inf,u GMR, 116.3%; 90%CI 81.8-165.5; C max,u GMR, 89.2%, 90%CI, 60.2-132.3). No treatment-related adverse events or clinically significant changes in laboratory values, vital signs, or electrocardiograms were observed. Together with previous findings, this suggests glasdegib dose modifications are not required based on hepatic impairment., (© 2020 Pfizer Inc. Clinical Pharmacology in Drug Development published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Clinical Pharmacology.)

Glasdegib is a potent, selective oral inhibitor of the Hedgehog signaling pathway. This phase 1 double-blind thorough QT study (NCT03162900) evaluated the effects of glasdegib on QTc interval. The study enrolled 36 healthy volunteers to receive a single dose of 150 mg glasdegib (representing a therapeutic dose), 300 mg glasdegib (representing a supratherapeutic dose), 400 mg moxifloxacin (positive control), or placebo under fasted conditions. The study demonstrated that therapeutic and supratherapeutic doses of glasdegib had no significant effect on QTc interval; the upper bound of the 2-sided 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for all time-matched least-squares mean differences in QT interval corrected using Fridericia's formula (QTcF) between glasdegib and placebo was below the prespecified criterion of 20 milliseconds (Food and Drug Administration correspondence reviewed and accepted). Based on an exposure-response analysis, glasdegib was determined not to have a meaningful effect on heart rate (change in RR interval). The mean (90%CI) model-derived baseline and placebo-adjusted QTcF at the average maximum observed concentration values corresponding to therapeutic and supratherapeutic glasdegib doses was 7.3 milliseconds (6.5-8.2 milliseconds) and 13.7 milliseconds (12.0-15.5 milliseconds), respectively. Together these results demonstrated that following therapeutic and supratherapeutic glasdegib dosing, the change in QTc from baseline was well below the 20-millisecond threshold of clinical concern in oncology., (© 2020 Pfizer Inc. Clinical Pharmacology in Drug Development published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Clinical Pharmacology.)

Glasdegib is approved for treating acute myeloid leukemia in elderly patients at 100 mg once daily in combination with low-dose cytarabine. Exposure-efficacy analysis showed that the survival benefit of glasdegib was not glasdegib exposure-dependent. The relationship between glasdegib exposure and adverse event (AE) cluster terms of clinical concern was explored in this analysis. The incidence and severity of dysgeusia, muscle spasms, renal toxicity, and QT interval prolonged was modeled using ordinal logistic regression. AEs were graded using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (version 4.03). Estimated pharmacokinetic parameters were used to derive glasdegib exposure metrics. Demographic characteristics, disease factors, and other variables of interest as potential moderators of safety signals were evaluated. Clinical trial data from patients who received single-agent glasdegib (N = 70; 5-640 mg once daily); or glasdegib (N = 202, 100-200 mg once daily) with low-dose cytarabine, decitabine, or daunorubicin and cytarabine were analyzed. Glasdegib exposure was statistically significantly associated with the cluster term safety end points dysgeusia, muscle spasms, renal toxicity, and QT interval prolonged. The impact of age on muscle spasms and baseline body weight and creatinine clearance on renal toxicity helped explain the AE grade distribution. At the 100 mg once daily clinical dose, the predicted probabilities of the highest AE grade were 11.3%, 6.7%, 7.7%, and 2.5% for dysgeusia, muscle spasms, renal toxicity, and QT interval prolonged, respectively. Overall, the predicted probability of developing an AE of any severity for these safety end points was low. Therefore, no starting dose adjustments are recommended for glasdegib based on the observed safety profile., (© 2020 Pfizer Inc. The Journal of Clinical Pharmacology published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Clinical Pharmacology.)

Purpose: Glasdegib is being developed for indications in myeloid malignancies. The effect of renal impairment on the pharmacokinetics (PK) of a single, oral, 100-mg glasdegib dose under fasted conditions was assessed., Methods: Open-label, parallel-group study (NCT03596567). Participants of good general health were selected and categorized, based on their estimated glomerular filtration rate, into normal (≥ 90 mL/min), moderate (≥ 30 to < 60 mL/min), or severe (< 30 mL/min) renal impairment groups. Blood samples were collected up to 120 h post-dose. PK exposure parameters were calculated using non-compartmental analysis., Results: All 18 participants completed the study. Respectively, ratios of adjusted geometric means (90% confidence interval) for glasdegib area under the curve from time 0 to infinity and peak plasma concentration versus normal participants were 205% (142-295%) and 137% (97-193%) in the moderate group, and 202% (146-281%) and 120% (77-188%) in the severe group. Glasdegib median time to peak plasma concentration was 2.0 h in both impairment groups and 1.5 h in the normal group. Mean oral clearance was decreased by approximately 50% in both renal impairment groups compared with the normal group. The plasma-free fraction of glasdegib was not altered by renal impairment. Five all-causality adverse events were reported in three participants; two were considered treatment-related., Conclusion: The similar changes in exposure observed for participants with renal impairment, coupled with the known safety data from clinical experience, suggest that a lower starting dose of glasdegib may not be required for moderate or severe renal impairment., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03596567 (started May 17, 2018).

Purpose: Glasdegib, an oral inhibitor of the Hedgehog signaling pathway, is approved in the United States in combination with low-dose cytarabine (LDAC) to treat patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) ineligible to receive intensive chemotherapy. This population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic analysis characterized the time course of survival with glasdegib + LDAC relative to LDAC alone, and explored whether the differences in glasdegib exposure at the clinical dose of 100 mg once daily (QD) significantly affected overall survival (OS)., Methods: Data from the BRIGHT AML 1003 trial in patients with AML were included in treatment-response (glasdegib + LDAC, n = 78; LDAC alone, n = 38) and exposure-response (glasdegib + LDAC, n = 75) analyses., Results: The analyses demonstrate that patients treated with glasdegib + LDAC (vs LDAC alone) at any time point during the study period were 58% less likely to die, translating to prolonging of median OS by ~ 5 months (hazard ratio 0.42 [95% confidence interval 0.28-0.66]). Variability in glasdegib exposures did not impact the risk of death. Additionally, potential covariates such as patient demographics, prior treatment with a hypomethylating agent, baseline safety laboratory values, and disease characteristics, did not impact the probability of OS., Conclusion: Together these results confirm that glasdegib + LDAC treatment (vs. LDAC alone) is associated with a significant survival benefit in patients with newly diagnosed AML, and that variability in glasdegib doses (e.g., for dose reductions) and exposures do not compromise the survival benefit of glasdegib 100 mg QD., Clinical Trial Number: NCT01546038.

Glasdegib (PF-04449913) is an oral small-molecule inhibitor of the Hedgehog signaling pathway under development for treating myeloid malignancies. This was an open-label phase 1, randomized, 2-sequence, 2-treatment, 2-period, crossover study evaluating the absolute bioavailability of glasdegib in healthy volunteers under fasting condition (NCT03270878). In period 1, 12 eligible subjects received either a single oral dose of glasdegib 100 mg (tablet) or a single intravenous (IV) dose of glasdegib 50 mg. Following ≥6-day washout, subjects received the treatment that they did not receive in the first period. Blood samples were collected for up to 96 hours after dosing. Drug plasma concentrations were determined by high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. Glasdegib pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated using noncompartmental analysis. The mean terminal half-life was 14.3 hours for oral tablet treatment vs 13.8 hours for glasdegib IV treatment. The absolute oral bioavailability measured as the ratios (oral/IV) of adjusted geometric mean (90% confidence interval) of dose normalized area under the plasma concentration-time curve was 77.12% (71.83%-82.81%). Two adverse events (1 mild and 1 moderate in severity) were reported by 2 subjects following oral tablet administration; these were fully resolved by the end of the study., (© 2019 The Authors. Clinical Pharmacology in Drug Development Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. on behalf of The American College of Clinical Pharmacology.)

Glasdegib is a potent and selective oral inhibitor of the Hedgehog pathway. We report data from the single-arm, lead-in cohort of an open-label phase 1b/2 trial of glasdegib in patients with primary/secondary myelofibrosis (MF) previously treated with at least one Janus kinase inhibitor (JAKi). Patients received glasdegib 100 mg orally once daily until there was no further clinical benefit. Primary endpoints included adverse events (AEs). Secondary endpoints included patients with spleen volume reduction (SVR) ≥35% at week 24, patients with ≥50% total symptom score (TSS) reduction, and pharmacokinetics. All 21 treated patients had one or more AE and five (23.8%) had serious AEs. Most common (>30%) AEs were dysgeusia (61.9%), muscle spasms (57.1%), alopecia (38.1%), fatigue (33.3%), and decreased appetite (33.3%). Although no patient had ≥35% SVR at week 24, one patient previously treated with ruxolitinib had an SVR of 32.9%. At week 12, two (9.5%) patients had ≥50% reduction in TSS from baseline and ˜40% had ≥20% reduction. One patient had an anaemia response. Following administration of glasdegib 100 mg once daily, the median time to peak plasma concentrations at steady-state generally occurred at 1 h post-dose. The safety profile of glasdegib monotherapy was manageable in patients with primary/secondary MF. Further study of glasdegib in combination with JAKi in a MF population may be warranted., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: To demonstrate the bioequivalence of the planned maleate salt-based commercial glasdegib tablet formulation [International Council for Harmonization (ICH) glasdegib] to the clinical di-hydrochloride (di-HCl) salt-based glasdegib formulation (di-HCl glasdegib). Additionally, to estimate the effects of a high-fat, high-calorie meal and proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) on the pharmacokinetics of ICH glasdegib., Methods: This Phase I open-label study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03130556) enrolled 24 healthy subjects to receive two different tablet formulations of single-dose 100-mg glasdegib under fasted conditions. A subset of healthy volunteers (n = 12) received single-dose 100-mg ICH glasdegib following a high-fat, high-calorie meal or concurrently with a PPI (rabeprazole)., Results: The adjusted geometric mean ratio (ICH glasdegib:di-HCl glasdegib) and 90% confidence intervals (CI) of area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity (AUC inf ) and maximum plasma concentration (C max ) were 104.0% (99.7‒108.5%) and 101.6% (96.1‒107.4%), respectively, within the acceptance range for bioequivalence (80‒125%). The adjusted geometric mean ratio (90% CIs) for AUC inf and C max under fed conditions were 84.3% (78.6‒90.6%) and 69.0% (61.8‒77.0%), respectively, relative to fasted conditions. When ICH glasdegib was administered concurrently with the PPI, the adjusted geometric mean ratio (90% CI) of AUC inf and C max were 100.6% (93.2‒108.6%) and 80.5% (70.7‒91.6%), respectively, relative to fasted conditions. Glasdegib was generally well tolerated under all conditions studied., Conclusions: The ICH glasdegib tablet formulation was bioequivalent to the clinical di-HCl formulation under fasted conditions. A high-fat, high-calorie meal or concurrent PPI treatment had a minimal effect on glasdegib exposure, and was not considered clinically meaningful.

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and safety of periprocedural dabigatran during atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation., Background: AF ablation requires optimal periprocedural anticoagulation for minimizing bleeding and thromboembolic complications. The safety and efficacy of dabigatran as a periprocedural anticoagulant for AF ablation are unknown., Methods: We performed a multicenter, observational study from a prospective registry including all consecutive patients undergoing AF ablation in 8 high-volume centers in the United States. All patients receiving dabigatran therapy who underwent AF ablation on periprocedural dabigatran, with the dose held on the morning of the procedure, were matched by age, sex, and type of AF with an equal number of patients undergoing AF ablation with uninterrupted warfarin therapy over the same period., Results: A total of 290 patients, including 145 taking periprocedural dabigatran and an equal number of matched patients taking uninterrupted periprocedural warfarin, were included in the study. The mean age was 60 years with 79% being male and 57% having paroxysmal AF. Both groups had a similar CHADS(2) score, left atrial size, and left ventricular ejection fraction. Three thromboembolic complications (2.1%) occurred in the dabigatran group compared with none in the warfarin group (p = 0.25). The dabigatran group had a significantly higher major bleeding rate (6% vs. 1%; p = 0.019), total bleeding rate (14% vs. 6%; p = 0.031), and composite of bleeding and thromboembolic complications (16% vs. 6%; p = 0.009) compared with the warfarin group. Dabigatran use was confirmed as an independent predictor of bleeding or thromboembolic complications (odds ratio: 2.76, 95% confidence interval: 1.22 to 6.25; p = 0.01) on multivariate regression analysis., Conclusions: In patients undergoing AF ablation, periprocedural dabigatran use significantly increases the risk of bleeding or thromboembolic complications compared with uninterrupted warfarin therapy., (Copyright © 2012 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)