Search

ObjectiveIntravenous (IV) midazolam is the preferred cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A probe for phenotyping, with systemic clearance (CL) estimating hepatic CYP3A activity. A limited sampling strategy was conducted to determine whether partial area under the concentration-time curves (AUCs) could reliably estimate midazolam systemic CL during conditions of CYP3A baseline activity, inhibition, and induction/activation.MethodsMidazolam plasma concentrations during CYP3A baseline (n = 93), inhibition (n = 40), and induction/activation (n = 33) were obtained from 7 studies in healthy adults. Noncompartmental analysis determined observed CL (CL(obs)) and partial AUCs. Linear regression equations were derived from partial AUCs to estimate CL (CL(pred)) during CYP3A baseline, inhibition, and induction/activation. Preestablished criterion for linear regression analysis was r(2) ≥ 0.9. CL(pred) was compared with CL(obs), and relative bias and precision were assessed using percent mean prediction error and percent mean absolute error.ResultsDuring CYP3A baseline and inhibition, all evaluated partial AUCs failed to meet criterion of r(2) ≥ 0.9 and/or percent mean absolute error

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 (AUCinf) and maximum plasma concentration (Cmax). 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 AUCinf and 94.8% (69.9–128.4) for Cmax versus controls. In severe hepatic impairment, glasdegib plasma exposures were lower than controls (AUCinf GMR, 75.7%; 90%CI, 51.5–111.0; Cmax GMR, 58.0%; 90%CI, 37.8–89.0). Unbound glasdegib exposures were similar to controls for moderate (AUCinf,u GMR, 118.1%; 90%CI, 88.7–157.2; Cmax,u GMR, 101.1%; 90%CI, 78.4–130.3) and severe hepatic impairment (AUCinf,u GMR, 116.3%; 90%CI 81.8–165.5; Cmax,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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents the discussion on American College of Clinical Pharmacology strongly opposing the nonmedical use of ketamine for law enforcement purposes. Topics include direction of physicians experienced in the administration of general anesthetics, maintenance of a patent airway, and oxygenation and ventilation; and health care providers issuing similar statements clearly opposing the use of ketamine for such nonmedical purposes.

The article focuses on COVID-19 pandemic the most critical international health emergency in a century has claimed a million lives worldwide in the U.S. alone as of November 24, 2020. Topics include the resurgence of infection rates underway in many parts of the world number of deaths will continue to increase, and the transmission rate and rapid spread of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 resulting in the ongoing pandemic.

Background Antibody drug conjugates (ADCs) utilize a monoclonal antibody to deliver a cytotoxic payload specifically to tumor cells, limiting exposure to healthy tissues. Major clinical toxicities of ADCs include hematologic, hepatic, neurologic, and ophthalmic events, which are often dose-limiting. These events may be off-target effects caused by premature release of payload in circulation. A meta-analysis was performed to summarize key clinical safety data for ADCs by payload, and data permitting, establish a dose-response model for toxicity incidence as a function of payload, dose/regimen, and cancer type. Methods A literature search was performed to identify and extract data from clinical ADC studies. Toxicity incidence and severity were collected by treatment arm for anemia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, leukopenia, hepatic toxicity, peripheral neuropathy, and ocular toxicity. Exploratory plots, descriptive summaries, and logistic regression modelling were used to explore Grade ≥ 3 (G3/4) toxicities and assess the impact of covariates, including cancer type and dose/regimen. Results The dataset contained 70 publications; quantitative analysis included 43 studies with G3/4 toxicity information reported for the endpoints above. G3/4 anemia, neutropenia and peripheral neuropathy were consistently reported for MMAE ADCs, thrombocytopenia and hepatic toxicity for DM1, and ocular toxicity for MMAF. Safety profiles of MMAE, DM1, and DM4 ADCs differed between solid and hematologic cancers. Conclusions Published ADC clinical data is limited by non-uniform reporting for toxicity and lack of dosing information, limiting the ability to develop quantitative models relating toxicity to exposure. However, the current analysis suggests that key G3/4 toxicities of ADCs in the clinic are likely off-target and related to payload. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Chemotherapy can potentially enhance the activity of immune checkpoint inhibitors by promoting immune priming. The phase Ib/II JAVELIN Chemotherapy Medley trial (NCT03317496) evaluated first-line avelumab + concurrent chemotherapy in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma or non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)., Materials and Methods: Avelumab 800 or 1,200 mg was administered continuously every 3 weeks with standard doses of cisplatin + gemcitabine in patients with urothelial carcinoma, or carboplatin + pemetrexed in patients with nonsquamous NSCLC. Dual primary endpoints were dose-limiting toxicity (DLT; phase Ib) and confirmed objective response (phase Ib/II)., Results: In phase Ib, urothelial carcinoma and NSCLC cohorts received avelumab 800 mg (n = 13 and n = 6, respectively) or 1,200 mg (n = 6 each) + chemotherapy. In evaluable patients with urothelial carcinoma treated with avelumab 800 or 1,200 mg + chemotherapy, DLT occurred in 1/12 (8.3%) and 1/6 (16.7%), respectively; no DLT occurred in the NSCLC cohort. In phase II, 35 additional patients with urothelial carcinoma received avelumab 1,200 mg + chemotherapy. Across all treated patients, safety profiles were similar irrespective of avelumab dose. Objective response rates (95% confidence internal) with avelumab 800 or 1,200 mg + chemotherapy, respectively, across phase Ib/II, were 53.8% (25.1-80.8) and 39.0% (24.2-55.5) in urothelial carcinoma, and 50.0% (11.8-88.2) and 33.3% (4.3-77.7) in NSCLC., Conclusions: Preliminary efficacy and safety findings with avelumab + chemotherapy in urothelial carcinoma and NSCLC were consistent with previous studies of similar combination regimens. Conclusions about clinical activity are limited by small patient numbers., Significance: This phase Ib/II trial evaluated avelumab (immune checkpoint inhibitor) administered concurrently with standard first-line chemotherapy in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma or advanced nonsquamous NSCLC without actionable mutations. Efficacy and safety appeared consistent with previous studies of similar combinations, although patient numbers were small., (© 2024 The Authors; Published by the American Association for Cancer Research.)