Aberrantly controlled activation of the complement system contributes to inflammatory diseases. Safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of singleascending doses of ACT-1014-6470, a novel orally available complement factor 5a receptor 1 antagonist, were assessed in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase 1 study. Six ACT-1014-6470 doses (0.5-200 mg) were selected after predictions from a Complex Dedrick plot. In each group, ACT-1014-6470 or matching placebo was administered to six and two healthy male individuals under fed conditions, respectively, including a cross-over part with 10 mg administered also under fasted conditions. Pharmacokinetic blood sampling and safety assessments (adverse events, clinical laboratory, vital signs, 12-lead electrocardiogram, and QT telemetry) were performed. ACT-1014-6470 was absorbed with a time to maximum plasma concentration (t max ) of 3 h across dose levels and eliminated with a terminal half-life of 30-46 h at doses ≥ 2.5 mg. Exposure increased approximately dose proportionally. Under fed compared to fasted conditions, ACT-1014-6470 exposure was 2.2-fold higher and t max delayed by 1.5 h. Pharmacokinetic modelling predicted that twicedaily oral administration is warranted in a subsequent multiple-dose study. No clinically relevant findings were observed in safety assessments. ACT-1014-6470 was well tolerated at all doses and could provide a novel therapy with more patient-friendly administration route compared to biologicals.

No abstract

No abstract

AimsDaridorexant is a dual orexin receptor antagonist developed for the treatment of insomnia. The solubility of daridorexant is pH‐dependent and daridorexant has been shown to be a sensitive CYP3A4 substrate when co‐administered with moderate CYP3A4 inhibitors. The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of an increased gastric pH on daridorexant pharmacokinetics (PK) and the extent of interaction when daridorexant is co‐administered with a moderate CYP3A4 inducer.MethodsIn this prospective, single‐centre, randomized, open‐label study, 24 male subjects consecutively received four treatments, i.e., daridorexant 50 mg single dose; famotidine 40 mg single dose + daridorexant 50 mg single dose; efavirenz 600 mg once a day (o.d.) for 10 days; and daridorexant 50 mg single dose + efavirenz 600 mg o.d. for 2 days. Plasma PK parameters of daridorexant were derived by noncompartmental analysis. Standard safety and tolerability evaluations were analysed descriptively.ResultsWhen daridorexant administration was preceded by administration of famotidine, daridorexant Cmax decreased by 39%, geometric means ratio (GMR) (90% confidence interval [90% CI]): 0.61 (0.50, 0.73). AUC0‐∞ remained unchanged. In the presence of steady‐state efavirenz, daridorexant Cmax, AUC0‐∞ and t½ decreased by approximately 35% (GMR [90% CI]): 0.65 (0.54, 0.78), 61% (0.39 (0.348, 0.44), and 35% (0.65 (0.58, 0.73), respectively. tmax remained unaffected. All treatments containing daridorexant were well tolerated.ConclusionDaridorexant 50 mg can be administered concomitantly with gastric pH modifiers or with moderate CYP3A4 inducers without dose adaptation based on efficacy observed at lower doses in Phase 3 studies.

BackgroundMacitentan is a clinically approved endothelin receptor antagonist for the treatment of pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH). Increasing use of combination drug therapy in PAH means that it is important to recognize potential drug–drug interactions (DDIs) that could affect the efficacy and safety of macitentan in patients with PAH.ObjectiveTwo Phase 1 studies were conducted to investigate the effect of macitentan at steady-state on the pharmacokinetics of the breast cancer resistance protein (BCRP) substrates, rosuvastatin and riociguat in healthy male subjects. Another objective was to determine the safety and tolerability of concomitant administration of rosuvastatin or riociguat with macitentan.MethodsHealthy male subjects received a single oral dose of rosuvastatin 10 mg (n = 20) or riociguat 1 mg (n = 20) on Day 1 (reference treatment). A loading oral dose of macitentan 30 mg was administered on Day 5 followed by macitentan 10 mg once-daily from Day 6 to Day 15 (riociguat study) or Day 6 to Day 16 (rosuvastatin study). A concomitant oral dose of rosuvastatin 10 mg or riociguat 1 mg was administered on Day 10 (test treatment). Pharmacokinetics were evaluated for 96 h after treatment on Day 1 and for 144 h (riociguat study) or 168 h (rosuvastatin study) after treatment on Day 10. To compare the reference and test treatments, the geometric mean ratio was calculated for the maximum plasma concentration (Cmax), the area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) from zero (pre-dose) to time of the last measured concentration above the limit of quantification (AUC0–t), the AUC from zero to infinity (AUC0–∞) and the terminal elimination half-life (t½) of rosuvastatin, riociguat and riociguat’s metabolite, M1. The difference in the time to reach maximum plasma concentration (tmax) was determined by the Wilcoxon test. Trough levels of macitentan and its metabolite, ACT-132577, were measured and safety was monitored throughout.ResultsNinety percent confidence intervals of the geometric mean ratios were within the bioequivalence criteria of 0.80–1.25. There was no significant difference between test and reference tmax. Rosuvastatin or riociguat did not affect the steady-state concentrations of macitentan and ACT-132577. The adverse event profile was consistent with the known safety profiles of the drugs.ConclusionsMacitentan 10 mg did not affect the pharmacokinetics of BCRP substrates, rosuvastatin or riociguat in healthy male subjects.EudraCT numbers: 2017–003095–31 and 2017–003502–41.