Clin Pharmacol Ther.
Published online 2021 Apr 09
Evaluating the potential of new drugs and their metabolites to cause drug‐drug interactions (DDIs) is critical for understanding drug safety and efficacy. Although multiple analyses of proprietary metabolite testing data have been published, no systematic analyses of metabolite data collected according to current testing criteria have been conducted. To address this knowledge gap, 120 new molecular entities approved between 2013 and 2018 were reviewed. Comprehensive data on metabolite‐to‐parent area‐under‐the‐curve ratios (AUCM/AUCP), inhibitory potency of parent and metabolites, and clinical drug‐drug interactions (DDI) were collected. 64% of the metabolites quantified in vivo had AUCM/AUCP≥25% and 75% of these metabolites were tested for cytochrome P450 (CYP) inhibition in vitro, resulting in 15 metabolites with potential DDI risk identification. While 50% of the metabolites with AUCM/AUCP<25% were also tested in vitro, none of them showed meaningful CYP inhibition potential. The metabolite % plasma total radioactivity cutoff of ≥10% did not appear to add value to metabolite testing strategies. No relationship between metabolite versus parent drug polarity and inhibition potency was observed. Comparison of metabolite and parent maximum concentration (Cmax) divided by inhibition constant Ki values suggested that metabolites can contribute to in vivo DDIs and hence, quantitative prediction of clinical DDI magnitude may require both parent and metabolite data. This systematic analysis of metabolite data for newly approved drugs supports an AUCM/AUCP cutoff of ≥25% to warrant metabolite in vitro CYP screening to adequately characterize metabolite inhibitory DDI potential and support quantitative DDI predictions.
Identification and Quantification of Drugs, Metabolites, Drug Metabolizing Enzymes, and Transporters – Concepts, Methods, and Translational Sciences. Second Edition 2020, Chapter 11, 339-358.
New drug application reviews contain critical drug interaction study results with newly approved drugs tested both as victims and as perpetrators of drug-drug interactions (DDIs). Pharmacokinetic-based DDI data for drugs approved by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2013–2017 (N = 137) were analyzed using the University of Washington Drug Interaction Database. For the largest metabolism- and transporter-based drug interactions, defined as a change in exposure ≥ 5-fold in victim drugs, the mechanisms and clinical relevance were characterized. Consistent with the major role of CYP3A in drug disposition, CYP3A inhibition and induction explained a majority of the observed interactions (new drugs as victims or as perpetrators). However, transporter-mediated interactions were also prevalent, with OATP1B1/1B3 playing a significant role. As victims, 17 and 4 new molecular entities (NMEs) were identified to be sensitive substrates of enzymes and transporters, respectively. When considered as perpetrators, three drugs showed strong inhibition of CYP3A, one was a strong CYP3A inducer, and two showed strong inhibition of transporters (OATP1B1/1B3 and/or BCRP). All DDIs with AUC changes ≥ 5-fold had labeling recommendations in their respective drug labels, contraindicating or limiting the coadministration with known substrates or perpetrators of the enzyme/transporter involved. The majority of sensitive substrates or strong inhibitors were oncology and antiviral treatments, suggesting a significant risk of DDIs in these patient populations for whom therapeutic management is already complex due to poly-therapy. Pharmacogenetic studies and physiologically based pharmacokinetic models were commonly used to assess the drug interaction potential in specific populations and clinical scenarios. Finally, absorption-based DDIs were evaluated in approximately 30% of drug applications, and 14 NMEs had label recommendations based on the results.
J Clin Pharmacol. 2020 Aug; 60(8); 1087-1098.
Published online 2020 Mar 20
Organic anion-transporting polypeptides (OATPs) 1B1 and 1B3 are the primary hepatic transporters responsible for uptake of drugs into the liver and, as such, an area of growing research focus. Currently, evaluation of these transporters as potential mediators of drug-drug interactions (DDIs) is recommended by regulatory agencies worldwide during the drug development process. Despite the growing focus on OATP1B1/1B3 as mediators of DDIs, only 2 drugs are recommended as index inhibitors for use in clinical studies, single-dose rifampin and cyclosporine, each with limitations for the utility of the resulting data. In this study a thorough analysis of the available in vitro and clinical data was conducted to identify drugs that are clinically relevant inhibitors of OATP1B1/1B3 and, from those, to select any novel index inhibitors. A total of 13 drugs and 16 combination products were identified as clinical inhibitors of OATP1B1/1B3, showing significant changes in exposure for sensitive substrates of the transporters, with strong supporting in vitro evidence. Although none of the identified inhibitors qualified as index inhibitors, this study confirmed the utility of cyclosporine and single-dose rifampin as index inhibitors to evaluate the effect of broad, multiple-pathway inhibition and more selective OATP1B1/1B3 inhibition, respectively.
Clin Transl Sci.
Published online 2020 Jan 25
A systematic analysis of the inhibition transporter data available in New Drug Applications of drugs approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2018 (N = 42) was performed. In vitro‐to‐in vivo predictions using basic models were available for the nine transporters currently recommended for evaluation. Overall, 29 parents and 16 metabolites showed in vitro inhibition of at least one transporter, with the largest number of drugs found to be inhibitors of P‐gp followed by BCRP. The most represented therapeutic areas were oncology drugs and anti‐infective agents, each comprising 31%. Among drugs with prediction values greater than the FDA recommended cutoffs and further evaluated in vivo, 56% showed positive clinical interactions (area under the concentration‐time curve ratio (AUCRs) ≥ 1.25). Although all the observed or simulated inhibitions were weak (AUCRs < 2), seven of the nine interactions (involving five drugs) resulted in labeling recommendations. Interestingly, more than half of the drugs with predictions greater than the cutoffs had no further evaluations, highlighting that current basic models represent a useful, simple first step to evaluate the clinical relevance of in vitro findings, but that multiple other factors are considered when deciding the need for clinical studies. Four drugs had prediction values less than the cutoffs but had clinical evaluations or physiologically‐based pharmacokinetic simulations available. Consistent with the predictions, all of them were confirmed not to inhibit these transporters in vivo (AUCRs of 0.94–1.09). Overall, based on the clinical evaluations available, drugs approved in 2018 were found to have a relatively limited impact on drug transporters, with all victim AUCRs < 2.
Clin Transl Sci. 2020 Jan; 13(1): 47–52.
Published online 2019 Aug 29
As the research into the organic anion transporting polypeptides (OATPs) continues to grow, it is important to ensure that the data generated are accurate and reproducible. In the in vitro evaluation of OATP1B1/1B3 inhibition, there are many variables that can contribute to variability in the resulting inhibition constants, which can then, in turn, contribute to variable results when clinical predictions (R-values) are performed. Currently, the only experimental condition recommended by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is the inclusion of a pre-incubation period.1 To identify other potential sources of variability, a descriptive analysis of available in vitro inhibition data was completed. For each of the 21 substrate/inhibitor pairs evaluated, cell type and pre-incubation were found to have the greatest effect on half-maximal inhibitory concentration (IC50 ) variability. Indeed, when only HEK293 cells and co-incubation conditions were included, the observed variability for the entire data set (highest IC50 /lowest) was reduced from 12.4 to 5.2. The choice of probe substrate used in the study also had a significant effect on inhibitor constant variability. Interestingly, despite the broad range of inhibitory constants identified, these two factors showed little effect on the calculated R-values relative to the FDA evaluation cutoff of 1.1 triggering a clinical evaluation for the inhibitors evaluated. However, because of the small data set available, further research is needed to confirm these preliminary results and define best practice for the study of OATPs.
Pharmacol Ther. 2019 Apr; 196; 204-215
The importance of uptake transporters in determining drug disposition is increasingly appreciated. While the focus of regulatory agencies worldwide has been on the hepatic organic anion transporting polypeptides (OATPs)-1B1 and-1B3, there is another isoform of the OATP sub-family, OATP2B1, which should be considered equally relevant. Unlike the other members of the OATP sub-family, OATP2B1 is expressed in multiple organs in humans, including in the intestine and the liver. Similar to other OATPs, OATP2B1 mediates the hepatic and intestinal uptake of many drugs and endogenous compounds. The importance of OATP2B1 in the disposition of many drugs is highlighted by the growing recognition of its role in significant in vivo drug-drug or food-drug interactions. The dramatic changes in drug exposure attributable to inhibition of OATP2B1 highlight the importance of developing a better understanding of the clinical role of OATP2B1. This review aims to provide a thorough summary of the current understanding of the pharmacogenetics, regulation, expression and abundance of OATP2B1 in humans, as well as its clinical relevance in drug-drug and food-drug interactions.
Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2019 Jun; 105(6); 1378-1385.
Published online 2019 Feb 16
Despite recent advances in recognizing and reducing the risk of drug-drug interactions (DDIs) in developed countries, there are still significant challenges in managing DDIs in low-income countries (LICs) worldwide. In the treatment of major infectious diseases in these regions, multiple factors contribute to ineffective management of DDIs that lead to loss of efficacy or increased risk of adverse events to patients. Some of these difficulties, however, can be overcome. This review aims to evaluate the inherent complexities of DDI management in LICs from pharmacological standpoints and illustrate the unique barriers to effective management of DDIs, such as the challenges of co-infection and treatment settings. A better understanding of comprehensive drug-related properties, population-specific attributes, such as physiological changes associated with infectious diseases, and the use of modeling and simulation techniques are discussed, as they can facilitate the implementation of optimal treatments for infectious diseases at the individual patient level.
Clin Transl Sci. 2019 Jul; 12(4): 379-387
Published online 2019 Feb 01
Organic anion transporting polypeptides (OATPs) 1B1 and 1B3 facilitate the uptake of drugs and endogenous compounds into the liver. In recent years, the impact of these transporters on drug-drug interactions (DDIs) has become a focus of research, and the evaluation of their role in drug disposition is recommended by regulatory agencies worldwide.1-3 Although sensitive substrates of OATP1B1/1B3 have been identified in the literature and probe drugs have been proposed by regulatory agencies, there is no general consensus on the ideal in vivo substrate for clinical DDI studies as analysis may be confounded by contribution from other metabolic and/or transport pathways.1-3 A thorough analysis of the available in vitro and in vivo data regarding OATP1B1/1B3 substrates was performed using the in vitro, clinical, and pharmacogenetic modules in the University of Washington Drug Interaction Database. A total of 34 compounds were identified and further investigated as possible clinical substrates using a novel indexing system. By analyzing the compounds for in vivo characteristics, including sensitivity to inhibition by known OATP1B1/1B3 inhibitors, selectivity for OATP1B1/1B3 compared with other transport and metabolic pathways, and safety profiles, a total of six compounds were identified as potential clinical markers of OATP1B1/1B3 activity.
Drug Metab Dispos. 2019 Feb; 47(2); 135-144
Pharmacokinetic-based drug-drug interaction (DDI) data for drugs approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 2017 (N = 34) were analyzed using the University of Washington Drug Interaction Database. The mechanisms and clinical relevance of these interactions were characterized based on information from new drug application reviews. CYP3A inhibition and induction explained most of the observed drug interactions (new drugs as victims or as perpetrators), and transporters mediated about half of all DDIs, alone or with enzymes. Organic anion transporting polypeptide (OATP)1B1/1B3 played a significant role, mediating more than half of the drug interactions with area under the time-plasma curve (AUC) changes ≥5-fold. As victims, five new drugs were identified as sensitive substrates: abemeciclib, midostaurin, and neratinib for CYP3A and glecaprevir and voxilaprevir for OATP1B1/1B3. As perpetrators, three drugs were considered strong inhibitors: ribociclib for CYP3A, glecaprevir/pibrentasvir for OATP1B1/1B3, and sofosbuvir/velpatasvir/voxilaprevir for OATP1B1/1B3 and breast cancer resistance protein. No strong inducer of enzymes or transporters was identified. DDIs with AUC changes ≥5-fold and almost all DDIs with AUC changes 2- to 5-fold had dose recommendations in their respective drug labels. A small fraction of DDIs with exposure changes <2-fold had a labeling impact, mostly related to drugs with narrow therapeutic indices. As with drugs approved in recent years, all drugs found to be sensitive substrates or strong inhibitors of enzymes or transporters were among oncology or antiviral treatments, suggesting a serious risk of DDIs in these patient populations for whom effective therapy is already complex because of polytherapy.