Randomised clinical trial: safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of repeated doses of TAK-438 (vonoprazan), a novel potassium-competitive acid blocker, in healthy male subjects

H Jenkins, Y Sakurai, A Nishimura, H Okamoto, M Hibberd, R Jenkins, T Yoneyama, K Ashida, Y Ogama, S Warrington, H Jenkins, Y Sakurai, A Nishimura, H Okamoto, M Hibberd, R Jenkins, T Yoneyama, K Ashida, Y Ogama, S Warrington

Abstract

Background: TAK-438 (vonoprazan) is a potassium-competitive acid blocker that reversibly inhibits gastric H(+) , K(+) -ATPase.

Aim: To evaluate the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of TAK-438 in healthy Japanese and non-Japanese men.

Methods: In two Phase I, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies, healthy men (Japan N = 60; UK N = 48) received TAK-438 10-40 mg once daily at a fixed dose level for 7 consecutive days. Assessments included safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics (intragastric pH).

Results: Plasma concentration-time profiles of TAK-438 at all dose levels showed rapid absorption (median Tmax ≤2 h). Mean elimination half-life was up to 9 h. Exposure was slightly greater than dose proportional, with no apparent time-dependent inhibition of metabolism. There was no important difference between the two studies in AUC0-tau on Day 7. TAK-438 caused dose-dependent acid suppression. On Day 7, mean 24-h intragastric pH>4 holding time ratio (HTR) with 40 mg TAK-438 was 100% (Japan) and 93.2% (UK), and mean night-time pH>4 HTR was 100% (Japan) and 90.4% (UK). TAK-438 was well tolerated. The frequency of adverse events was similar at all dose levels and there were no serious adverse events. There were no important increases in serum alanine transaminase activity. Serum gastrin and pepsinogen I and II concentrations increased with TAK-438 dose.

Conclusions: TAK-438 in multiple rising oral dose levels of 10-40 mg once daily for 7 days was safe and well tolerated in healthy men and caused rapid, profound and sustained suppression of gastric acid secretion throughout each 24-h dosing interval. Clinicaltrials.gov identifiers: NCT02123953 and NCT02141711.

© 2015 The Authors. Alimentary Pharmacology and Therapeutics published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Time course of mean plasma TAK-438 concentrations in the Phase I, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, repeated-dose Japanese (top panel) and UK (bottom panel) studies in healthy male subjects receiving TAK-438 10–40 mg once daily at a fixed dose level for 7 consecutive days (Pharmacokinetic analysis set: Japan N = 60; UK N = 48).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Mean intragastric pH on Day 1 in healthy male subjects after a single dose of TAK-438 10–40 mg after overnight fasting in the Japanese (left panel) and UK (right panel) studies (Pharmacodynamic analysis set: Japan N = 60; UK N = 48).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Mean steady-state intragastric pH vs. time profiles after TAK-438 on Day 7 in the Japanese (left) and UK studies (right) in healthy male subjects receiving TAK-438 10–40 mg once daily after overnight fasting at a fixed dose level for 7 consecutive days (Pharmacodynamic analysis set: Japan N = 60; UK N = 48).
Figure 4
Figure 4
Mean 24-h (left panel) and night-time (12–24 h post dose in the Japanese study, 20:00–08:00 hours in the UK study; right panel) pH> 4 HTR in healthy male subjects receiving TAK-438 10–40 mg once daily at a fixed dose level for 7 consecutive days (Pharmacodynamic analysis set: Japan N = 60; UK N = 48).
Figure 5
Figure 5
Dose–response for pH >4 HTR (left) and pH>5 HTR (right) on Day 7 in the Japanese and UK studies in healthy male subjects receiving TAK-438 10–40 mg once daily at a fixed dose level for 7 consecutive days (Pharmacodynamic analysis set: Japan N = 60; UK N = 48).
Figure 6
Figure 6
Time course of mean serum gastrin (left), pepsinogen I (middle) and pepsinogen II (right) concentrations in healthy male subjects receiving TAK-438 10–40 mg once daily at a fixed dose level for 7 consecutive days in the Japanese (top three panels) and UK (bottom three panels) studies (Pharmacodynamic analysis set: Japan N = 60; UK N = 48).

References

    1. Mejia A, Kraft WK. Acid peptic diseases: pharmacological approach to treatment. Expert Rev Clin Pharmacol. 2009;2:295–314.
    1. Modlin IM, Sachs G. Acid Related Diseases: Biology and Treatment. 2nd ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2004.
    1. Shin JM, Vagin O, Munson K, et al. Molecular mechanisms in therapy of acid-related diseases. Cell Mol Life Sci. 2008;65:264–81.
    1. Cicala M, Emerenziani S, Guarino MPL, Ribolsi M. Proton pump inhibitor resistance, the real challenge in gastro-esophageal reflux disease. World J Gastroenterol. 19:6529–35.
    1. Sachs G, Shin JM, Vagin O, et al. The gastric H, K ATPase as a drug target: past, present, and future. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2007;41(Suppl. 2):S226–42.
    1. Vakil NB, Shaker R, Johnson DA, et al. The new proton pump inhibitor esomeprazole is effective as a maintenance therapy in GERD patients with healed erosive oesophagitis: a 6-month, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of efficacy and safety. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2001;15:927–35.
    1. Fennerty MB, Johanson JF, Hwang C, et al. Efficacy of esomeprazole 40 mg vs. lansoprazole 30 mg for healing moderate to severe erosive oesophagitus. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2005;21:455–63.
    1. Scarpignato C, Pelosini I. Review article: the opportunities and benefits of extended acid suppression. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2006;23(Suppl. 2):23–34.
    1. Katz PO, Castell DO, Chen Y, et al. Intragastric acid suppression and pharmacokinetics of twice-daily esomeprazole: a randomized, three-way crossover study. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2004;20:399–406.
    1. Chey WD, Mody R, Chen L, et al. Nighttime symptoms and sleep impairment among patients with gastro-esophageal reflux disease (GERD) receiving prescription (Rx) proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) Gastroenterology. 2008;134(4 Suppl. 1):A323–4.
    1. Shin JM, Sachs G. Long lasting inhibitors of the gastric H,K-ATPase. Expert Rev Clin Pharmacol. 2009;2:461–8.
    1. Dent J, Kahrilas PJ, Hatlebakk J, et al. A randomized, comparative trial of a potassium-competitive acid blocker (AZD0865) and esomeprazole for the treatment of patients with nonerosive reflux disease. Am J Gastroenterol. 2008;103:20–6.
    1. Arikawa Y, Nishida H, Kurasawa O, et al. Discovery of a novel pyrrole derivative 1-[5-(2-fluorophenyl)-1(pyridin-3-ylsulfonyl)-1H-pyrrol-3-yl]-N-methylmethanamine fumarate (TAK-438) as a potassium-competitive acid blocker (P-CAB) J Med Chem. 2012;55:4446–56.
    1. Nishida H, Hasuoka A, Arikawa Y, et al. Discovery, synthesis, and biological evaluation of novel pyrrole derivatives as highly selective potassium-competitive acid blockers. Bioorg Med Chem. 2012;20:3925–38.
    1. Shin JM, Inatomi N, Muson K, et al. Characterization of a novel potassium-competitive acid blocker of the gastric H, K-ATPase, 1-[5-(2-fluorophenyl)-1(pyridin-3-ylsulfonyl)-1H-pyrrol-3-yl]-N-methylmethanamine monofumarate (TAK-438) J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2011;339:412–20.
    1. Matsukawa J, Hori Y, Nishida H, et al. A comparative study on the modes of action of TAK-438, a novel potassium-competitive acid blocker, and lansoprazole in primary cultured rabbit gastric glands. Biochem Pharmacol. 2011;81:1145–51.
    1. Hori Y, Matsukawa J, Takeuchi T, et al. A study comparing the antisecretory effect of TAK-438, a novel potassium-competitive acid blocker, with lansoprazole in animals. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2011;337:797–804.
    1. Hori Y, Imanishi A, Matsukawa J, et al. 1-[5-(2-Fluorophenyl)-1-(pyridin-3-ylsulfonyl)-1H-pyrrol-3-yl]-N-methylmethanamine monofumarate (TAK-438), a novel and potent potassium-competitive acid blocker for the treatment of acid-related diseases. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2010;335:231–8.
    1. Sakurai Y, Nishimura A, Kennedy G, et al. Gastric acid suppression effect of TAK-438, a potassium-competitive acid blocker following ascending single doses in healthy subjects. Abstract presentation at UEGW 2012.
    1. Gough K, Hutchison M, Keene O, et al. Assessment of dose proportionality: report from pharmaceutical industry. Drug Inf J. 1995;29:1039–48.
    1. Bell NJV, Burget D, Howden CW, et al. Appropriate acid suppression for the management of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease. Digestion. 1992;51(Suppl. 1):59–67.
    1. Kalaitzakis E, Björnsson E. A review of esomeprazole in the treatment of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Ther Clin Risk Manag. 2007;3:653–63.
    1. Yuan Y, Hunt RH. Intragastric pH holding time of pH <4 predicts low erosive esophagitis (EE) healing rate. Gastroenterology. 2010;138(5 Suppl. 1):S651.
    1. Tutuian R, Castell DO. Nocturnal acid breakthrough — approach to management. MedGenMed. 2004;6:11. [Published online Oct 26, 2004]. Available at:
    1. Orlando LA, Lenard L, Orlando RC. Chronic hypergastrinemia: causes and consequences. Dig Dis Sci. 2007;52:2482–9.
    1. Biemond I, Klinkenberg-Knol E, Lamers CBHW, Meuwissen SGM. Serum pepsinogens after interruption of long-term maintenance therapy with omeprazole in patients with reflux esophagitis. Dig Dis Sci. 1993;38:932–6.
    1. Chiba T, Sakurai Y, Nishimura A, et al. A phase 2, active comparative, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter, dose-ranging study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a novel potassium-competitive acid blocker (P-CAB) TAK-438 in patients with erosive esophagitis. Abstract presentation at DDW 2013.

Source: PubMed

3
S'abonner