Cargando…
Relative bioavailability of three formulations of galunisertib administered as monotherapy in patients with advanced or metastatic cancer
OBJECTIVE: Galunisertib (LY2157299 monohydrate), an inhibitor of the transforming growth factor β (TGFβ) pathway, is currently under investigation in several clinical trials involving multiple tumor types. The primary objective of this study was to assess relative bioavailability of two new galunise...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Just Medical Media Limited
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5147053/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27990167 http://dx.doi.org/10.7573/dic.212303 |
_version_ | 1782473604005363712 |
---|---|
author | Gueorguieva, Ivelina Cleverly, Ann Desaiah, Durisala Azaro, Analia Seoane, Joan Braña, Irene Sicart, Elisabet Miles, Colin Lahn, Michael M Mitchell, Malcolm I Rodon, Jordi |
author_facet | Gueorguieva, Ivelina Cleverly, Ann Desaiah, Durisala Azaro, Analia Seoane, Joan Braña, Irene Sicart, Elisabet Miles, Colin Lahn, Michael M Mitchell, Malcolm I Rodon, Jordi |
author_sort | Gueorguieva, Ivelina |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: Galunisertib (LY2157299 monohydrate), an inhibitor of the transforming growth factor β (TGFβ) pathway, is currently under investigation in several clinical trials involving multiple tumor types. The primary objective of this study was to assess relative bioavailability of two new galunisertib formulations developed using the roller compaction (RC) dry-milled (RCD) and RC slurry-milled (RCS) processes, compared with the existing formulation developed using the high-sheer wet granulation (HSWG) process. The secondary objective was to report the safety profile after a single dose of the three formulations. METHODS: Patients with advanced or metastatic cancer were enrolled into this single-center, 3-period, 6-sequence crossover study. Patients were assigned sequentially to 1 of 6 sequences in blocks of 6 to ensure that all 6 sequences have the same number of completers. A patient entering a sequence received a different galunisertib formulation as a single 150 mg dose orally during each of the 3 periods. Each period was separated from the next by a washout interval of at least 48 hours. Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters, including area under curve (AUC) and C(max), were computed using standard non-compartmentalized methods of analysis. For comparison of exposures between formulations, log-transformed AUC and C(max) values were analyzed using a linear mixed-effects model. Safety assessments included adverse event monitoring, physical examinations, and laboratory tests. RESULTS: Of the 14 patients who entered and completed the study, 13 patients were included in the final statistical analysis. AUC(0-t(last)), AUC(0–48 h), and AUC(0-∞) for the RC formulations and the HSWG formulation were similar. C(max) was reduced by approximately 22% and t(max) was longer by at least 1.00 h for the RCD and RCS formulations compared with the HSWG formulation. The RC formulations demonstrated a safety profile after a single dose similar to the HSWG formulation. CONCLUSIONS: In this relative bioavailability study comparing galunisertib formulations after a single dose, RCD and RCS formulations had similar exposure and safety profile compared with the HSWG formulation. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5147053 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | Just Medical Media Limited |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-51470532016-12-16 Relative bioavailability of three formulations of galunisertib administered as monotherapy in patients with advanced or metastatic cancer Gueorguieva, Ivelina Cleverly, Ann Desaiah, Durisala Azaro, Analia Seoane, Joan Braña, Irene Sicart, Elisabet Miles, Colin Lahn, Michael M Mitchell, Malcolm I Rodon, Jordi Drugs Context Original Research OBJECTIVE: Galunisertib (LY2157299 monohydrate), an inhibitor of the transforming growth factor β (TGFβ) pathway, is currently under investigation in several clinical trials involving multiple tumor types. The primary objective of this study was to assess relative bioavailability of two new galunisertib formulations developed using the roller compaction (RC) dry-milled (RCD) and RC slurry-milled (RCS) processes, compared with the existing formulation developed using the high-sheer wet granulation (HSWG) process. The secondary objective was to report the safety profile after a single dose of the three formulations. METHODS: Patients with advanced or metastatic cancer were enrolled into this single-center, 3-period, 6-sequence crossover study. Patients were assigned sequentially to 1 of 6 sequences in blocks of 6 to ensure that all 6 sequences have the same number of completers. A patient entering a sequence received a different galunisertib formulation as a single 150 mg dose orally during each of the 3 periods. Each period was separated from the next by a washout interval of at least 48 hours. Pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters, including area under curve (AUC) and C(max), were computed using standard non-compartmentalized methods of analysis. For comparison of exposures between formulations, log-transformed AUC and C(max) values were analyzed using a linear mixed-effects model. Safety assessments included adverse event monitoring, physical examinations, and laboratory tests. RESULTS: Of the 14 patients who entered and completed the study, 13 patients were included in the final statistical analysis. AUC(0-t(last)), AUC(0–48 h), and AUC(0-∞) for the RC formulations and the HSWG formulation were similar. C(max) was reduced by approximately 22% and t(max) was longer by at least 1.00 h for the RCD and RCS formulations compared with the HSWG formulation. The RC formulations demonstrated a safety profile after a single dose similar to the HSWG formulation. CONCLUSIONS: In this relative bioavailability study comparing galunisertib formulations after a single dose, RCD and RCS formulations had similar exposure and safety profile compared with the HSWG formulation. Just Medical Media Limited 2016-12-02 /pmc/articles/PMC5147053/ /pubmed/27990167 http://dx.doi.org/10.7573/dic.212303 Text en Copyright © 2016 Gueorguieva I, Cleverly A, Desaiah D, Azaro A, Seoane J, Braña I, Sicart E, Miles C, Lahn MM, Mitchell MI, Rodon J. Distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons License Deed CC BY NC ND 3.0 which allows anyone to copy, distribute, and transmit the article provided it is properly attributed in the manner specified below. No commercial use without permission. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Gueorguieva, Ivelina Cleverly, Ann Desaiah, Durisala Azaro, Analia Seoane, Joan Braña, Irene Sicart, Elisabet Miles, Colin Lahn, Michael M Mitchell, Malcolm I Rodon, Jordi Relative bioavailability of three formulations of galunisertib administered as monotherapy in patients with advanced or metastatic cancer |
title | Relative bioavailability of three formulations of galunisertib administered as monotherapy in patients with advanced or metastatic cancer |
title_full | Relative bioavailability of three formulations of galunisertib administered as monotherapy in patients with advanced or metastatic cancer |
title_fullStr | Relative bioavailability of three formulations of galunisertib administered as monotherapy in patients with advanced or metastatic cancer |
title_full_unstemmed | Relative bioavailability of three formulations of galunisertib administered as monotherapy in patients with advanced or metastatic cancer |
title_short | Relative bioavailability of three formulations of galunisertib administered as monotherapy in patients with advanced or metastatic cancer |
title_sort | relative bioavailability of three formulations of galunisertib administered as monotherapy in patients with advanced or metastatic cancer |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5147053/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27990167 http://dx.doi.org/10.7573/dic.212303 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT gueorguievaivelina relativebioavailabilityofthreeformulationsofgalunisertibadministeredasmonotherapyinpatientswithadvancedormetastaticcancer AT cleverlyann relativebioavailabilityofthreeformulationsofgalunisertibadministeredasmonotherapyinpatientswithadvancedormetastaticcancer AT desaiahdurisala relativebioavailabilityofthreeformulationsofgalunisertibadministeredasmonotherapyinpatientswithadvancedormetastaticcancer AT azaroanalia relativebioavailabilityofthreeformulationsofgalunisertibadministeredasmonotherapyinpatientswithadvancedormetastaticcancer AT seoanejoan relativebioavailabilityofthreeformulationsofgalunisertibadministeredasmonotherapyinpatientswithadvancedormetastaticcancer AT branairene relativebioavailabilityofthreeformulationsofgalunisertibadministeredasmonotherapyinpatientswithadvancedormetastaticcancer AT sicartelisabet relativebioavailabilityofthreeformulationsofgalunisertibadministeredasmonotherapyinpatientswithadvancedormetastaticcancer AT milescolin relativebioavailabilityofthreeformulationsofgalunisertibadministeredasmonotherapyinpatientswithadvancedormetastaticcancer AT lahnmichaelm relativebioavailabilityofthreeformulationsofgalunisertibadministeredasmonotherapyinpatientswithadvancedormetastaticcancer AT mitchellmalcolmi relativebioavailabilityofthreeformulationsofgalunisertibadministeredasmonotherapyinpatientswithadvancedormetastaticcancer AT rodonjordi relativebioavailabilityofthreeformulationsofgalunisertibadministeredasmonotherapyinpatientswithadvancedormetastaticcancer |