The clinical pharmacology of elagolix was extensively evaluated in clinical studies in healthy subjects and in women with endometriosis. Elagolix pharmacokinetics (PK) show significant population variability, however they are minimally affected by patients' baseline characteristics and demographics, except for clinically relevant extrinsic and intrinsic factors such as coadministrated strong organic anion transporting polypeptide (OATP) 1B1 inhibitors and severe hepatic impairment, which are contraindications for the use of elagolix. These studies enabled a comprehensive understanding of elagolix mechanism of action and the downstream pharmacodynamic (PD) effects on gonadotropin and ovarian hormones, as well as full characterization of the PK/PD (PKPD) relationships of elagolix at various dosages, including the approved 150 mg once daily and 200 mg twice daily dosing regimens for the management of moderate to severe pain associated with endometriosis. Several model-based analyses have contributed to understanding of the benefit-risk profile of elagolix in patients with endometriosis, through characterization of the exposure relationship with responder rates, with changes in bone mineral density over time, as well as the interaction with coadministered drugs. Collectively, these studies and analyses served as supportive evidence for the effectiveness of the approved dosages and provided general dosing instructions of the first approved oral gonadotropin-releasing hormone receptor antagonist.
Anti-drug antibody formation occurs with most biological agents across disease states, but the mechanism by which they are formed is unknown. The formation of anti-drug antibodies to adalimumab (AAA) may decrease its therapeutic effects in some patients. HLA alleles have been reported to be associated with autoantibody formation against interferons and other TNF inhibitors, but not adalimumab. We analyzed samples from 634 subjects with either rheumatoid arthritis (RA) or hidradenitis suppurativa (HS): 37 subjects (17 RA and 20 HS) developed AAA (AAA+) during adalimumab treatment and 597 subjects (348 RA, 249 HS) did not develop AAA (AAA-) during the clinical trials. Using next-generation sequencing-based HLA typing, we identified three protective HLA alleles (HLA-DQB1*05, HLA-DRB1*01,and HLA-DRB1*07) that were less prevalent in AAA+ than AAA–subjects (ORs: 0.4, 0.25 and 0.28, respectively; and P values: 0.012, 0.012 and 0.018, respectively) and two risk HLA alleles (HLA-DRB1*03 and HLA-DRB1*011) that were more abundant in AAA+ than AAA–subjects (ORs: 2.52, and 2.64, respectively; and P values: 0.006 and 0.019). Similar to the finding of Billiet et al. who found that carriage of the HLA-DRB1*03 allele was more prevalent in those with anti-infliximab antibodies (OR = 3.6, p = 0.002, 95% CI: [1.5,8.6]).), we found HLA-DRB1*03 allele was also more prevalent in anti-adalimumab positive (OR = 2.52, p = 0.006, 95% CI: [1.37,4.63]). The results suggest that specific HLA alleles may play a key role in developing AAAs in RA and HS patients treated with adalimumab.
Elagolix pharmacokinetics were not affected by patient demographics and were similar between healthy women and women with endometriosis. Clinical Trial Registration Numbers NCT01403038, NCT01620528, NCT01760954, NCT01931670, NCT02143713.
Upadacitinib (ABT‐494) is a selective Janus kinase (JAK)1 inhibitor being developed for treatment of several inflammatory disorders. A population pharmacokinetic model was developed for upadacitinib using 11,658 plasma concentrations from 1145 subjects from 4 phase 1 and 5 phase 2 studies in healthy subjects and subjects with rheumatoid arthritis, Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis, or atopic dermatitis. A 2‐compartment model with first‐order absorption and lag time for the immediate‐release formulation and mixed zero‐ and first‐order absorption with lag time for the extended‐release formulation, and linear elimination adequately described upadacitinib plasma concentration–time profiles. The oral bioavailability of upadacitinib extended‐release formulation was estimated to be approximately 80% relative to the immediate‐release formulation. Covariates included in the final model were creatinine clearance, subject population (healthy subjects vs subjects with atopic dermatitis, ulcerative colitis, or Crohn's disease vs subjects with rheumatoid arthritis) and sex on apparent oral clearance and sex and body weight on apparent volume of distribution of the central compartment. Female subjects had 21% higher upadacitinib steady‐state area under the plasma concentration–time curve (AUC) compared to male subjects. Compared to healthy subjects, subjects with atopic dermatitis, ulcerative colitis, or Crohn's disease had 21% higher upadacitinib steady‐state AUC, while subjects with rheumatoid arthritis had 35% higher steady‐state AUC. Subjects with mild or moderate renal impairment were estimated to have 10% or 22% higher AUC, respectively, compared to subjects with normal renal function. Based on final model parameter estimates, effects of the tested covariates are not expected to result in clinically relevant changes in upadacitinib steady‐state exposures.
Exposure–response analyses of upadacitinib (UPA) key efficacy and safety end points (3,685 and 4,577 subjects for efficacy and safety, respectively) using data from phase II and phase III rheumatoid arthritis (RA) studies were conducted to support benefit–risk assessment. Percentage of subjects achieving American College of Rheumatology (ACR)20/50/70, disease activity score 28 (C‐reactive protein) (DAS28‐CRP) ≤ 3.2, and DAS28‐CRP < 2.6 increased with increasing UPA plasma exposures. With the small number of observed safety events, no clear trends for exposure–response relationships were identified for pneumonia, herpes zoster infection, changes in platelet count, lymphopenia (Grade ≥ 4), or neutropenia (Grade ≥ 3) up to Week 26. Shallow exposure–response relationships were observed for > 2 g/dL decrease in hemoglobin, lymphopenia Grade ≥ 3 at Week 12/14, and serious infections at Week 24/26. Exposure–efficacy analyses demonstrate that UPA 15 mg q.d. (once daily) dose provided the optimal benefit–risk in RA through maximizing efficacy with only small incremental benefit with 30 mg q.d.; and with consistency across RA subpopulations and with UPA monotherapy or combination with conventional synthetic disease‐modifying antirheumatic drugs.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.