Literature DB >> 25020273

A randomized, placebo- and moxifloxacin-controlled thorough QT study of umeclidinium monotherapy and umeclidinium/vilanterol combination in healthy subjects.

Dennis Kelleher1, Lee Tombs2, Andrew Preece3, Noushin Brealey3, Rashmi Mehta4.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: The long-acting muscarinic antagonist umeclidinium (UMEC) and the combination of UMEC with the long-acting beta2 agonist vilanterol (VI) are approved maintenance treatments for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease in the US and EU.
OBJECTIVES: This study investigated the effect of UMEC and UMEC/VI on the QT interval corrected using Fridericia's correction (QTcF) following a 10-day treatment period.
METHODS: Randomized, placebo- and moxifloxacin-controlled, 4-period incomplete block crossover study of healthy non-smokers (n = 103). All treatments were double blind, except for moxifloxacin/moxifloxacin placebo controls which were single blinded. Subjects were randomized to a treatment sequence which consisted of 4 of 5 regimens. Each regimen consisted of once-daily doses on Days 1-10 via the ELLIPTA™ dry powder inhaler and a single tablet on Day 10 of the following: placebo + placebo; placebo + moxifloxacin; UMEC 500 μg + placebo; UMEC/VI 125/25 μg (delivered dose: 113/22 μg) + placebo; UMEC/VI 500/100 μg + placebo. QT interval, additional cardiac parameters, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and safety were assessed.
RESULTS: No clinically significant changes from baseline in QTcF occurred with UMEC 500 μg and UMEC/VI 125/25 μg compared with placebo, however, there was a change in QTcF from baseline of 6.4 ms (90% confidence interval [CI]: 4.3, 8.5) at 10 min and 8.2 ms (90%: 6.2, 10.2) at 30 min post dose following UMEC/VI 500/100 μg compared with placebo. On Day 10, categorical analysis demonstrated absolute QTcF values >450-480 ms for UMEC/VI 125/25 μg (1 subject) and moxifloxacin (3 subjects), and a change from baseline QTcF of >30-60 ms for UMEC/VI 125/25 μg, UMEC 500/100 μg and placebo (1 subject each) and moxifloxacin (2 subjects). On Day 10, the mean change from baseline in heart rate was increased with UMEC/VI 125/25 μg and UMEC 500/100 μg compared with placebo with the maximum increase occurring at 10 min post dose (8.4 bpm [90% CI: 7.0, 9.8] for UMEC/VI 125/25 μg; 20.3 bpm [90% CI: 18.9, 21.7] for UMEC/VI 500/100 μg); after this timepoint, heart rate rapidly returned to normal levels. UMEC and VI systemic exposures following UMEC/VI 500/100 μg were >4-fold higher than those following UMEC/VI 125/25 μg. All treatments were generally well tolerated in terms of adverse events, laboratory, vital signs and electrocardiogram data; the proportion of subjects with any adverse event was similar across treatments arms (39-59%)..
CONCLUSION: There was no clinically significant effect on QTcF observed following 10-days' treatment with inhaled UMEC/VI 125/25 μg or UMEC 500 μg compared with placebo. The supratherapeutic dose of UMEC/VI 500/100 μg prolonged QTcF by 6.4 ms (90% CI: 4.3, 8.5) at 10 min and 8.2 ms (90% CI: 6.2, 10.2) at 30 min compared with placebo, following which QTcF interval difference from placebo declined rapidly..
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; GSK573719; QT interval; Umeclidinium; Vilanterol

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25020273     DOI: 10.1016/j.pupt.2014.07.002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pulm Pharmacol Ther        ISSN: 1094-5539            Impact factor:   3.410


  11 in total

Review 1.  Umeclidinium/vilanterol: a review of its use as maintenance therapy in adults with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Authors:  Hannah A Blair; Emma D Deeks
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2015-01       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 2.  Umeclidinium bromide versus placebo for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD).

Authors:  Han Ni; Aung Htet; Soe Moe
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2017-06-20

Review 3.  Inhaled Umeclidinium in COPD Patients: A Review and Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Roy A Pleasants; Tiansheng Wang; Jinming Gao; Huilin Tang; James F Donohue
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 4.  Safety Considerations with Dual Bronchodilator Therapy in COPD: An Update.

Authors:  Maria Gabriella Matera; Paola Rogliani; Luigino Calzetta; Mario Cazzola
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 5.606

Review 5.  Umeclidinium in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: latest evidence and place in therapy.

Authors:  Kesavan Suresh Babu; Jaymin Bhagwanji Morjaria
Journal:  Ther Adv Chronic Dis       Date:  2017-03-24       Impact factor: 5.091

6.  Concentration-QT analysis of the randomized, placebo- and moxifloxacin-controlled thorough QT study of umeclidinium monotherapy and umeclidinium/vilanterol combination in healthy subjects.

Authors:  Rashmi Mehta; Michelle Green; Bela Patel; Jonathan Wagg
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2016-01-06       Impact factor: 2.745

Review 7.  Patient considerations in the treatment of COPD: focus on the new combination inhaler umeclidinium/vilanterol.

Authors:  Timothy E Albertson; Richart Harper; Susan Murin; Christian Sandrock
Journal:  Patient Prefer Adherence       Date:  2015-02-02       Impact factor: 2.711

Review 8.  Umeclidinium bromide/vilanterol combination in the treatment of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a review.

Authors:  Dionisios Spyratos; Lazaros Sichletidis
Journal:  Ther Clin Risk Manag       Date:  2015-03-25       Impact factor: 2.423

Review 9.  Positioning new pharmacotherapies for COPD.

Authors:  Igor Z Barjaktarevic; Anthony F Arredondo; Christopher B Cooper
Journal:  Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis       Date:  2015-07-24

Review 10.  Top-down, Bottom-up and Middle-out Strategies for Drug Cardiac Safety Assessment via Modeling and Simulations.

Authors:  Zofia Tylutki; Sebastian Polak; Barbara Wiśniowska
Journal:  Curr Pharmacol Rep       Date:  2016-04-05
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.