The systemic bioavailability of free fatty acid (FFA) forms of eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) compared with ethyl ester (EE) forms is dependent on the presence of intestinal lipases and is highest during consumption of high-fat meals. Given that patients with cardiovascular disease are advised to reduce dietary fat intake, potentially lowering the bioavailability and therapeutic benefit, the hypothesis that FFA forms provide for higher bioavailability compared with EE forms under low-fat diet conditions was tested where the pharmacokinetics of the FFA form (Epanova™) were compared with those of an ethyl ester form (Lovaza®) following repeat dosing. Fifty-two healthy male and female subjects were equally allocated to one of two open-label, parallel-group cohorts. Following a Therapeutic Lifestyle Changes diet for a minimum of 7 days, blood samples were drawn for endogenous values for EPA and DHA over a 24-hour period. Subjects were then administered 4 × 1 g capsules of either Epanova (OM3 FFA) or Lovaza (OM3 EE) once daily for 14 days, following which serial blood samples were drawn over a 24-hour period to characterize the bioavailability of EPA and DHA from the respective formulations. In addition, changes from baseline in lipid profile were explored. Systemic bioavailability, as measured by area under the curve from time zero to 24 hours (AUC0-τ) and the maximum measured plasma concentrations during the 0–24 hour dosing interval (Cmax,ss) of unadjusted total plasma EPA + DHA were approximately 3-fold and 3.9-fold higher, respectively, for Epanova relative to Lovaza. Following baseline adjustment, the magnitude of difference in bioavailability was approximately 5.8-fold and 6.5-fold higher in AUC0-τ and Cmax, respectively, for Epanova relative to Lovaza. Serum triglycerides were reduced by a significantly greater extent (P = 0.013) for Epanova relative to Lovaza (21% versus 8%). The bioavailability of the FFA forms of EPA and DHA in Epanova are significantly greater than the bioavailability from the EE forms present in Lovaza under low-fat dietary conditions normally recommended for patients with cardiovascular disease. This increased bioavailability may lead to improved triglyceride-lowering in patients with hypertriglyceridemia.

Objectives.—The purpose of this study was to directly compare the pharmacokinetic (PK) profile of 22-mg sumatriptan powder delivered intranasally with a novel Breath Powered™ device (11 mg in each nostril) vs a 20-mg sumatriptan liquid nasal spray, a 100-mg oral tablet, and a 6-mg subcutaneous injection.Background.—A prior PK study found that low doses of sumatriptan powder delivered intranasally with a Breath Powered device were efficiently and rapidly absorbed. An early phase clinical trial with the same device and doses found excellent tolerability with high response rates and rapid onset of pain relief, approaching the benefits of injection despite significantly lower predicted drug levels.Methods.—An open-label, cross-over, comparative bioavailability study was conducted in 20 healthy subjects at a single center in the USA. Following randomization, fasted subjects received a single dose of each of the 4 treatments separated by a 7-day washout. Blood samples were taken pre-dose and serially over 14 hours post-dose for PK analysis.Results.—Quantitative measurement of residuals in used Breath Powered devices demonstrated that the devices delivered 8 ± 0.9 mg (mean ± standard deviation) of sumatriptan powder in each nostril (total dose 16 mg). Although the extent of systemic exposure over 14 hours was similar following Breath Powered delivery of 16-mg sumatriptan powder and 20-mg liquid nasal spray (area under the curve [AUC]0-∞ 64.9 ng*hour/mL vs 61.1 ng*hour/mL), sumatriptan powder, despite a 20% lower dose, produced 27% higher peak exposure (Cmax 20.8 ng/mL vs 16.4 ng/mL) and 61% higher exposure in the first 30 minutes compared with the nasal spray (AUC0-30 minutes 5.8 ng*hour/mL vs 3.6 ng*hour/mL). The magnitude of difference is larger on a per-milligram basis. The absorption profile following standard nasal spray demonstrated bimodal peaks, consistent with lower early followed by higher later absorptions. In contrast, the profile following Breath Powered delivery showed higher early and lower late absorptions. Relative to the 100-mg oral tablet (Cmax 70.2 ng/mL, AUC0-∞, 308.8 ng*hour/mL) and 6-mg injection (Cmax 111.6 ng/mL, AUC0-∞ 128.2 ng*hour/mL), the peak and overall exposure following Breath Powered intranasal delivery of sumatriptan powder was substantially lower.Conclusions.—Breath Powered intranasal delivery of sumatriptan powder is a more efficient form of drug delivery, producing a higher peak and earlier exposure with a lower delivered dose than nasal spray and faster absorption than either nasal spray or oral administration. It also produces a significantly lower peak and total systemic exposure than oral tablet or subcutaneous injection.

Brigatinib is a kinase inhibitor indicated for patients with advanced anaplastic lymphoma kinase–positive non‐small cell lung cancer who progressed on or are intolerant to crizotinib. Approval was based on results from a randomized, dose‐ranging phase II study (ALK in Lung Cancer Trial of AP26113 (ALTA)). Despite an apparent dose–response relationship for efficacy in ALTA, an exposure–response relationship was not discernable using static models driven by time‐averaged exposure. However, exposure–response modeling using daily time‐varying area under the concentration curve as the predictor in time‐to‐event models predicted that increasing the dose of brigatinib (range, 30 mg once daily (q.d.) to 240 mg q.d.) would result in clinically meaningful improvements in progression‐free survival (PFS), intracranial PFS, and overall survival. Grade ≥ 2 rash and amylase elevation were predicted to significantly increase with brigatinib exposure. These results provided support for a favorable benefit‐risk profile with the approved dosing regimen (180 mg q.d. with 7‐day lead‐in at 90 mg) versus 90 mg q.d.

Background and objectives Brigatinib is an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved in multiple countries for the treatment of patients with anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive metastatic non-small cell lung cancer who have progressed on or are intolerant to crizotinib. We report a population pharmacokinetic model-based analysis for brigatinib. Methods Plasma concentration–time data were collected from 442 participants (105 healthy volunteers and 337 patients with cancer) who received single or multiple doses of oral brigatinib in one of five trials. Data were analyzed using non-linear mixed-effects modeling (NONMEM software version 7.3). Results Brigatinib plasma concentrations were best described by a three-compartment model with a transit compartment input (number of transit compartments = 2.35; mean transit time = 0.9 h). The final model included albumin as a covariate on apparent clearance. None of the additional covariates examined, including sex, age, race, body weight, mild or moderate renal impairment, total bilirubin, aspartate aminotransferase, and alanine aminotransferase, were found to meaningfully explain variability in apparent clearance, suggesting that no dose adjustment is required based on these covariates. Conclusions Results from these population pharmacokinetic analyses informed the prescribing guidance for patients with mild or moderate renal impairment in the US Prescribing Information and the European Summary of Product Characteristics for brigatinib. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s40262-020-00929-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.