Search

The cytomegalovirus (CMV) viral terminase inhibitor letermovir is indicated for prevention of CMV infection in CMV‐seropositive allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients. In this analysis, functional variants in solute carrier organic anion transporter family member 1B1 (SLCO1B1), uridine diphosphate‐glucuronosyltransferase 1A1 (UGT1A1), and breast cancer resistance protein (BCRP) were assessed for effects on letermovir pharmacokinetics (PK) using pooled genetic information from 296 participants in 12 phase 1 studies. Letermovir area under the plasma concentration‐time curve (AUC) was increased in carriers of the SLCO1B1 variant rs4149056 C allele relative to noncarriers with a geometric mean ratio (GMR) of 1.18 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.06–1.30) for carriers of 1 copy and 1.42 (1.10–1.84) for carriers of 2 copies of the risk allele C compared with noncarriers. The SLCO1B1 variant rs4149032 T allele was associated with a decrease in letermovir AUC with GMR (95%CI) of 0.93 (0.85–1.02) and 0.82 (0.73–0.92) for carriers of 1 and 2 copies of the risk allele T, respectively, compared with noncarriers. The UGT1A1*6 variant rs4148323 A allele was present predominantly in Asian participants and was associated with an increase in letermovir AUC compared with noncarriers (GMR, 1.36; 95%CI, 1. 1.07–1.74). SLCO1B1 variant rs2306283, UGT1A1*28 TA promoter repeat, and BCRP variant rs2231142 had no effect on letermovir PK. Together, these data suggest that variants of enzymes and transporters that are involved in the disposition of letermovir in vitro may account for some variability in letermovir PK, but do not affect exposure to a clinically relevant extent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Elbasvir/grazoprevir is a once-daily fixed-dose combination therapy for the treatment of chronic HCV infection, including HCV/HIV coinfection.Objectives: To evaluate the pharmacokinetic interaction of elbasvir and grazoprevir with raltegravir or dolutegravir.Methods: Three open-label trials in healthy adult participants were conducted. In the raltegravir trials, participants received a single dose of raltegravir 400 mg, a single dose of elbasvir 50 mg or grazoprevir 200 mg, and raltegravir with either elbasvir or grazoprevir. In the dolutegravir trial, participants received a single dose of dolutegravir 50 mg alone or co-administered with once-daily elbasvir 50 mg and grazoprevir 200 mg.Results: The raltegravir AUC0-∞ geometric mean ratio (GMR) (90% CI) was 1.02 (0.81-1.27) with elbasvir and 1.43 (0.89-2.30) with grazoprevir. Dolutegravir AUC0-∞ GMR (90% CI) was 1.16 (1.00-1.34) with elbasvir and grazoprevir. The elbasvir AUC0-∞ GMR (90% CI) was 0.81 (0.57-1.17) with raltegravir and 0.98 (0.93-1.04) with dolutegravir. The grazoprevir AUC0-24 GMR (90% CI) was 0.89 (0.72-1.09) with raltegravir and 0.81 (0.67-0.97) with dolutegravir.Conclusions: Elbasvir or grazoprevir co-administered with raltegravir or dolutegravir resulted in no clinically meaningful drug-drug interactions and was generally well tolerated. These results support the assertion that no dose adjustments for elbasvir, grazoprevir, raltegravir or dolutegravir are needed for co-administration in HCV/HIV-coinfected people. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aims of these phase I trials were to evaluate the pharmacokinetic interaction between elbasvir (EBR) or grazoprevir (GZR) and buprenorphine/naloxone (BUP/NAL). Trial 1 was a single‐dose trial in healthy participants. Trial 2 was a multiple‐dose trial in participants on BUP/NAL maintenance therapy. Coadministration of EBR or GZR with BUP/NAL had minimal effect on the pharmacokinetics of BUP/NAL, EBR, and GZR. The geometric mean ratios (GMRs (90% CI)) for BUP, norbuprenorphine, and NAL AUC0‐∞ were 0.98 (0.89–1.08), 0.97 (0.86–1.09), and 0.88 (0.78–1.00) in the presence/absence of EBR; 0.98 (0.81–1.19), 1.13 (0.97–1.32), and 1.10 (0.82–1.47) in the presence/absence of GZR. The GMRs (90% CI) for EBR and GZR AUC0‐∞ in the absence/presence of BUP/NAL were 1.22 (0.98–1.52) and 0.86 (0.63–1.18). In conclusion, no dose adjustment for BUP/NAL, EBR, or GZR is required for patients with HCV infection receiving EBR/GZR and BUP/NAL maintenance therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We conducted two phase I trials to evaluate the pharmacokinetic interactions between elbasvir (EBR), grazoprevir (GZR), and methadone (MK‐8742‐P010 and MK‐5172‐P030) in non‐hepatitis C virus (HCV)‐infected participants on methadone maintenance therapy. Coadministration of EBR or GZR with methadone had no clinically meaningful effect on EBR, GZR, or methadone pharmacokinetics. The geometric mean ratios (GMRs) for R‐ and S‐methadone AUC0‐24 were 1.03 (90% confidence interval (CI), 0.92–1.15) and 1.09 (90% CI, 0.94–1.26) in the presence/absence of EBR; and 1.09 (90% CI, 1.02–1.17) and 1.23 (90% CI, 1.12–1.35) in the presence/absence of GZR. The GMRs for EBR and GZR AUC0‐24 in participants receiving methadone relative to a healthy historical cohort not receiving methadone were 1.20 (90% CI, 0.94–1.53) and 1.03 (90% CI, 0.76–1.41), respectively. These results indicate that no dose adjustment is required for individuals with HCV infection receiving stable methadone therapy and the EBR/GZR fixed‐dose regimen. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Elbasvir (EBR)/grazoprevir (GZR) may be coadministered with immunosuppressant drugs in posttransplant people who are infected with hepatitis C virus. The aim of the present study was to assess the safety and pharmacokinetic interactions between EBR and GZR and single doses of cyclosporine, tacrolimus, mycophenolate mofetil (MMF), and prednisone. This was a 4‐part, open‐label study in 58 healthy volunteers. Participants received single doses of cyclosporine 400 mg, tacrolimus 2 mg, MMF 1 g, or prednisone 40 mg alone or in the presence of once‐daily EBR 50 mg/GZR 200 mg. Multiple oral doses of EBR + GZR had no significant effect on cyclosporine. However, in the presence of cyclosporine, the 24‐hour area under the concentration‐time curve of GZR was increased by approximately 15‐fold (geometric mean ratio [90%CI] 15.21 [12.83; 18.04]); the concentration of EBR was increased approximately 2‐fold in the presence of cyclosporine. Coadministration of EBR/GZR and tacrolimus did not affect the pharmacokinetics of EBR or GZR, but resulted in an increase in tacrolimus AUC (geometric mean ratio [90%CI] 1.43 [1.24; 1.64]). There were no clinically relevant interactions between EBR/GZR and either MMF or prednisone. Data from the present study indicate that EBR/GZR may be coadministered in people receiving tacrolimus, MMF, and prednisolone. EBR/GZR is contraindicated in people receiving cyclosporine because the significantly higher concentrations of GZR may increase the risk of transaminase elevations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Oral contraceptive pills (OCPs) are an important element of hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment in women of childbearing potential. These studies evaluated the safety and pharmacokinetic interactions between elbasvir (EBR) and grazoprevir (GZR) and ethinyl estradiol/levonorgestrel (EE/LNG). Methods: Both studies were open-label, single-site, two-period, fixed-sequence, one-way interaction studies. In period 1, subjects received one tablet of EE/LNG (0.03 mg/0.15 mg). In period 2, subjects received EBR (50 mg once daily) for 13 days or GZR (200 mg once daily) for 10 days, with one tablet of EE/LNG on day 7 (GZR group) or 10 (EBR group). Each study enrolled 20 healthy, nonsmoking adult females. Results: There was no clinically meaningful effect of multiple doses of EBR or GZR on the pharmacokinetics of EE or LNG. Geometric mean ratios (GMRs) for AUC and C in the presence and absence of EBR were 1.01 and 1.10 for EE and 1.14 and 1.02 for LNG, with 90% confidence intervals (CIs) that were contained in the interval [0.80, 1.25]. Similarly, the AUC and C GMRs in the presence and absence of GZR were 1.10 and 1.05 for EE and 1.23 and 0.93 for LNG, respectively. The 90% CIs for EE AUC and for EE and LNG C were contained in the interval [0.80, 1.25]; however, the 90% CI for the LNG AUC [1.15, 1.32] slightly exceeded the upper bound. Conclusions: These results suggest that EBR/GZR can be co-administered to female patients with HCV of childbearing potential who are on OCPs to prevent pregnancy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]