Mavacamten is a cardiac myosin inhibitor for adults with obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). Dose optimization is performed 4 weeks after starting mavacamten, guided by periodic echo measurements of Valsalva left ventricular outflow tract gradient (VLVOTg) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Previously, a population pharmacokinetic (PPK) model was developed and exposure-response (E-R) of VLVOTg (efficacy) and LVEF (safety) was used to identify the mavacamten titration regimen with the optimal benefit/risk ratio, now included in the US prescribing information. Mavacamten is metabolized primarily by cytochrome P450 2C19 (CYP2C19) (74%), a highly polymorphic enzyme. China has a higher prevalence of poor CYP2C19 metabolizer phenotype compared with the global population; therefore, a previous model was adapted to include Chinese patients with obstructive HCM to identify the optimal dosing regimen for this population. Data from a phase I (healthy Chinese volunteers) and a phase III (EXPLORER-CN, NCT05174416; Chinese patients with obstructive HCM) trial of mavacamten were added to the previous PPK and E-R models, and the observed VLVOTg and LVEF from EXPLORER-CN were successfully simulated. Next, five echocardiography-guided titration regimens (plus the EXPLORER-CN regimen) using representative or equal CYP2C19 phenotypes were simulated. The final simulated regimen recommended with an optimal benefit/risk profile across CYP2C19 phenotypes included: down-titration at Week 4 (if VLVOTg < 20 mmHg), restart at Week 12, and up-titration at Week 12 (for VLVOTg ≥ 30 mmHg and LVEF ≥ 55%), and every 12 weeks thereafter. This supports the previously recommended regimen for Chinese patients with obstructive HCM, now approved by the National Medicinal Products Administration.
{"title":"Model-Informed Recommendation of Mavacamten Posology for Chinese Adults With Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy.","authors":"Xiaojie Wu, Shilpa Puli, Nanye Chen, Zhuang Tian, Peiwen Hsu, Jing Sun, Cheng Lyu, Samira Merali, Jing Zhang","doi":"10.1002/psp4.13312","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/psp4.13312","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Mavacamten is a cardiac myosin inhibitor for adults with obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). Dose optimization is performed 4 weeks after starting mavacamten, guided by periodic echo measurements of Valsalva left ventricular outflow tract gradient (VLVOTg) and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF). Previously, a population pharmacokinetic (PPK) model was developed and exposure-response (E-R) of VLVOTg (efficacy) and LVEF (safety) was used to identify the mavacamten titration regimen with the optimal benefit/risk ratio, now included in the US prescribing information. Mavacamten is metabolized primarily by cytochrome P450 2C19 (CYP2C19) (74%), a highly polymorphic enzyme. China has a higher prevalence of poor CYP2C19 metabolizer phenotype compared with the global population; therefore, a previous model was adapted to include Chinese patients with obstructive HCM to identify the optimal dosing regimen for this population. Data from a phase I (healthy Chinese volunteers) and a phase III (EXPLORER-CN, NCT05174416; Chinese patients with obstructive HCM) trial of mavacamten were added to the previous PPK and E-R models, and the observed VLVOTg and LVEF from EXPLORER-CN were successfully simulated. Next, five echocardiography-guided titration regimens (plus the EXPLORER-CN regimen) using representative or equal CYP2C19 phenotypes were simulated. The final simulated regimen recommended with an optimal benefit/risk profile across CYP2C19 phenotypes included: down-titration at Week 4 (if VLVOTg < 20 mmHg), restart at Week 12, and up-titration at Week 12 (for VLVOTg ≥ 30 mmHg and LVEF ≥ 55%), and every 12 weeks thereafter. This supports the previously recommended regimen for Chinese patients with obstructive HCM, now approved by the National Medicinal Products Administration.</p>","PeriodicalId":10774,"journal":{"name":"CPT: Pharmacometrics & Systems Pharmacology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2025-01-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143051736","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abigail K Grosskopf, Antonio A Ginart, Phillip Spinosa, Vittal Shivva
Protein therapeutics have emerged as an exceedingly promising treatment modality in recent times but are predominantly given as intravenous administration. Transitioning to subcutaneous (SC) administration of these therapies could significantly enhance patient convenience by enabling at-home administration, thereby potentially reducing the overall cost of treatment. Approaches that enable sustained delivery of subcutaneously administered biologics offer further advantages in terms of less frequent dosing and better patient compliance. Controlled release technologies, such as hydrogels and subcutaneous implantable technologies, present exciting solutions by enabling the gradual release of biologics from the delivery system. Despite their substantial potential, significant hurdles remain in appropriately applying and integrating these technologies with the ongoing development of complex biologic-based therapies. We evaluate the potential impact of subcutaneously delivered controlled release systems on the downstream pharmacokinetics (PK) of several FDA-approved biologics by employing rigorous mathematical analysis and predictive PK simulations. By leveraging linear time-invariant (LTI) systems theory, we provide a robust framework for understanding and optimizing the release dynamics of these technologies. We demonstrate simple quantitative metrics and approaches that can inform the design and implementation of controlled release technologies. The findings highlight key opportunity areas to reduce dosing frequency, stabilize concentration profiles, and synergize the codelivery of biologics, calling for collaboration between drug delivery and PK scientists to create the most convenient, optimized, and effective precision therapies.
{"title":"Pharmacokinetics-Based Design of Subcutaneous Controlled Release Systems for Biologics.","authors":"Abigail K Grosskopf, Antonio A Ginart, Phillip Spinosa, Vittal Shivva","doi":"10.1002/psp4.13303","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/psp4.13303","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Protein therapeutics have emerged as an exceedingly promising treatment modality in recent times but are predominantly given as intravenous administration. Transitioning to subcutaneous (SC) administration of these therapies could significantly enhance patient convenience by enabling at-home administration, thereby potentially reducing the overall cost of treatment. Approaches that enable sustained delivery of subcutaneously administered biologics offer further advantages in terms of less frequent dosing and better patient compliance. Controlled release technologies, such as hydrogels and subcutaneous implantable technologies, present exciting solutions by enabling the gradual release of biologics from the delivery system. Despite their substantial potential, significant hurdles remain in appropriately applying and integrating these technologies with the ongoing development of complex biologic-based therapies. We evaluate the potential impact of subcutaneously delivered controlled release systems on the downstream pharmacokinetics (PK) of several FDA-approved biologics by employing rigorous mathematical analysis and predictive PK simulations. By leveraging linear time-invariant (LTI) systems theory, we provide a robust framework for understanding and optimizing the release dynamics of these technologies. We demonstrate simple quantitative metrics and approaches that can inform the design and implementation of controlled release technologies. The findings highlight key opportunity areas to reduce dosing frequency, stabilize concentration profiles, and synergize the codelivery of biologics, calling for collaboration between drug delivery and PK scientists to create the most convenient, optimized, and effective precision therapies.</p>","PeriodicalId":10774,"journal":{"name":"CPT: Pharmacometrics & Systems Pharmacology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2025-01-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143037089","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Mélanie Karlsen, Sonia Khier, David Fabre, David Marchionni, Jérôme Azé, Sandra Bringay, Pascal Poncelet, Elisa Calvier
A growing number of covariate modeling methods have been proposed in the field of popPK modeling, but limited information exists on how they all compare. The objective of this study was to perform a systematic review of all popPK covariate modeling methods, focusing on assessing the existing knowledge on their performances. For each method of each article included in this review, evaluation setting, performance metrics along with their associated values, and relative computational times were reported when available. Evaluation settings report was done for uncertainty assessment of communicated results. Results showed that EBEs-based ML methods stood out as the best covariate selection methods. AALASSO, a hybrid genetic algorithm, FREM with a clinical significance criterion and SCM+ with stagewise filtering were the best covariate model selection techniques-AALASSO being the very best one. Results also showed a lack of consensus on how to benchmark simulated datasets of different scenarios when evaluating method performances, but also on which metrics to use for method evaluation. We propose to systematically report TPR (sensitivity), FPR (Type I error), FNR (Type II error), TNR (specificity), covariate parameter error bias (MPE) and precision (RMSE), clinical relevance, and model fitness by means of BIC, concentration prediction error bias (MPE), and precision (RMSE) of new proposed methods and compare them with SCM. We propose to systematically combine covariate selection techniques to SCM or FFEM to allow for comparison with SCM. We also highlight the need for an open-source benchmark of simulated datasets on a representative set of scenarios.
{"title":"Covariate Model Selection Approaches for Population Pharmacokinetics: A Systematic Review of Existing Methods, From SCM to AI.","authors":"Mélanie Karlsen, Sonia Khier, David Fabre, David Marchionni, Jérôme Azé, Sandra Bringay, Pascal Poncelet, Elisa Calvier","doi":"10.1002/psp4.13306","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/psp4.13306","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A growing number of covariate modeling methods have been proposed in the field of popPK modeling, but limited information exists on how they all compare. The objective of this study was to perform a systematic review of all popPK covariate modeling methods, focusing on assessing the existing knowledge on their performances. For each method of each article included in this review, evaluation setting, performance metrics along with their associated values, and relative computational times were reported when available. Evaluation settings report was done for uncertainty assessment of communicated results. Results showed that EBEs-based ML methods stood out as the best covariate selection methods. AALASSO, a hybrid genetic algorithm, FREM with a clinical significance criterion and SCM+ with stagewise filtering were the best covariate model selection techniques-AALASSO being the very best one. Results also showed a lack of consensus on how to benchmark simulated datasets of different scenarios when evaluating method performances, but also on which metrics to use for method evaluation. We propose to systematically report TPR (sensitivity), FPR (Type I error), FNR (Type II error), TNR (specificity), covariate parameter error bias (MPE) and precision (RMSE), clinical relevance, and model fitness by means of BIC, concentration prediction error bias (MPE), and precision (RMSE) of new proposed methods and compare them with SCM. We propose to systematically combine covariate selection techniques to SCM or FFEM to allow for comparison with SCM. We also highlight the need for an open-source benchmark of simulated datasets on a representative set of scenarios.</p>","PeriodicalId":10774,"journal":{"name":"CPT: Pharmacometrics & Systems Pharmacology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2025-01-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143001251","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a progressive metabolic disorder that could be an underlying cause of long-term complications that increase mortality. The assessment of the probability of such events could be essential for mortality risk management. This work aimed to establish a framework for risk predictions of macrovascular complications (MVC) and diabetic kidney disease (DKD) in patients with T2D, using real-world data from the Swedish National Diabetes Registry (NDR), in the presence of mortality as a competing risk. The study consisted of 41,517 patients with T2D registered in NDR between 2005 and 2013. At inclusion, patients were newly diagnosed (T2D < 1 year) and had no prior evidence of DKD or MVC. Using three-quarters of the data, a five-state multistate model was established to describe competing events of MVC, DKD, a combination thereof, and the terminal state, death. Two hypotheses were investigated: (1) the risk of MVC and DKD are mutually independent, and (2) mortality is independent of morbidities. At the end of the study, the majority of individuals remained in uncomplicated T2D; however, the probability of transition to complications and death increased over time. The mortality hazard depended on the presence of morbidities and was quantified as a life expectancy decreased by 5.0, 9.7, and 12.2 years for MVC, DKD, and the combined morbidity, respectively, compared to uncomplicated T2D. An established framework with a five-state model incorporating competing events was shown to be a useful tool for comorbidities risk assessment in newly diagnosed patients with T2D.
{"title":"Modeling of Disease Progression of Type 2 Diabetes Using Real-World Data: Quantifying Competing Risks of Morbidity and Mortality.","authors":"Hanna Kunina, Stefan Franzén, Maria C Kjellsson","doi":"10.1002/psp4.13301","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/psp4.13301","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a progressive metabolic disorder that could be an underlying cause of long-term complications that increase mortality. The assessment of the probability of such events could be essential for mortality risk management. This work aimed to establish a framework for risk predictions of macrovascular complications (MVC) and diabetic kidney disease (DKD) in patients with T2D, using real-world data from the Swedish National Diabetes Registry (NDR), in the presence of mortality as a competing risk. The study consisted of 41,517 patients with T2D registered in NDR between 2005 and 2013. At inclusion, patients were newly diagnosed (T2D < 1 year) and had no prior evidence of DKD or MVC. Using three-quarters of the data, a five-state multistate model was established to describe competing events of MVC, DKD, a combination thereof, and the terminal state, death. Two hypotheses were investigated: (1) the risk of MVC and DKD are mutually independent, and (2) mortality is independent of morbidities. At the end of the study, the majority of individuals remained in uncomplicated T2D; however, the probability of transition to complications and death increased over time. The mortality hazard depended on the presence of morbidities and was quantified as a life expectancy decreased by 5.0, 9.7, and 12.2 years for MVC, DKD, and the combined morbidity, respectively, compared to uncomplicated T2D. An established framework with a five-state model incorporating competing events was shown to be a useful tool for comorbidities risk assessment in newly diagnosed patients with T2D.</p>","PeriodicalId":10774,"journal":{"name":"CPT: Pharmacometrics & Systems Pharmacology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1,"publicationDate":"2025-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"143001260","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Ritlecitinib is an orally bioavailable, small molecule that has been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as a once-daily oral treatment option for people 12 years of age and older with severe alopecia areata. This article assessed the exposure–response (ER) relationship of eyebrow and eyelash assessment (EBA/ELA) scores on ritlecitinib and compared them to the Severity of Alopecia Tool (SALT) score (primary endpoint) ER relationship on ritlecitinib. EBA and ELA both are numeric rating scales (NRS) with four levels (0 the most severe, 3 the normal). Longitudinal ER modeling with ordinal regression was conducted to describe ritlecitinib efficacy regarding the hair regrowth in eyebrows and eyelashes separately. The average concentration in the time interval between two adjacent EBA/ELA records was used as the exposure metric. The developed models described the longitudinal EBA/ELA profile and the responder rates adequately. The ER models and the model-based simulations implied that the tested doses in the phase IIb/III clinical trial are in the ascending region, but the magnitude of loading dose effect on earlier efficacy is different across the efficacy endpoints of EBA, ELA, and SALT scores (which could be explained by the estimated