Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analysis of TS-943, a selective non-peptide platelet glycoprotein-IIb/IIIa (GPIIb/IIIa) receptor antagonist, using a nonlinear mixed effect model in dogs

Comparison of the Anticancer Effects of Arvanil and Olvanil When Combined with Cisplatin and Mitoxantrone in Various Melanoma Cell Lines-An Isobolographic Analysis

Due to the unique structures of arvanil and olvanil, the drugs combine certain properties of both cannabinoids and vanilloids, which makes them able to stimulate both TPRV1 and CB1 receptors and causes them to be interesting agents in the setting of carcinoma treatment. The aim of this study was to investigate the cytotoxic and anti-proliferative effects of arvanil and olvanil when administered alone and in combination with cisplatin (CDDP) and mitoxantrone (MTX), using various primary (A375, FM55P) and metastatic (SK-MEL 28, FM55M2) human malignant melanoma cell lines. The results indicate that both arvanil and olvanil inhibited (dose-dependently) the viability and proliferation of various malignant melanoma cells, as demonstrated by MTT and BrdU assays. The safety profile of both arvanil and olvanil tested in human keratinocytes (HaCaT) and normal human melanocytes (HEMa-LP) revealed that neither arvanil nor olvanil caused significant cytotoxicity in HaCaT and HEMa-LP cell lines in LDH and MTT assays. Isobolographically, it was found that both arvanil and olvanil exerted additive interactions with MTX and antagonistic interactions with CDDP in the studied malignant melanoma cell lines. In conclusion, the combinations of arvanil or olvanil with MTX may be considered as a part of melanoma multi-drug therapy; however, the combination of these compounds with CDDP should be carefully considered due to the antagonistic interactions observed in the studied malignant melanoma cell lines.

Antiplatelet Effect of a Pulaimab [Anti-GPIIb/IIIa F(ab)2 Injection] Evaluated by a Population Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic Model

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular disease has one of the highest mortality rates among all the diseases. Platelets play an important role in the pathogenesis of cardiovascular diseases. Platelet membrane glycoprotein GPIIb/IIIa antagonists are the most effective antiplatelet drugs, and pulaimab is one of these. The study aims to promote individual medication of pulaimab [anti-GPIIb/IIIa F(ab)2 injection] by discovering the pharmacological relationship among the dose, concentration, and effects. The goal of this study is to establish a population pharmacokineticpharmacodynamic model to evaluate the antiplatelet effect of intravenous pulaimab injection.

METHODS

Data were collected from 59 healthy subjects who participated in a Phase-I clinical trial. Plasma concentration was used as the pharmacokinetic index, and platelet aggregation inhibition rate was used as the pharmacodynamic index. The basic pharmacokinetics model was a two-compartment model, whereas the basic pharmacodynamics model was a sigmoid-EMAX model with a direct effect. The covariable model was established by a stepwise method. The final model was verified by a goodness-of-fit method, and predictive performance was assessed by a Bootstrap (BS) method.

RESULTS

In the final model, typical population values of the parameters were as follows: central distribution Volume (V1), 183 L; peripheral distribution Volume (V2), 349 L; Central Clearance (CL), 31 L/h; peripheral clearance(Q), 204 L/h; effect compartment concentration reaching half of the maximum effect (EC50), 0.252 mg/L; maximum effect value (EMAX), 54.0%; and shape factor (γ), 0.42. In the covariable model, thrombin time had significant effects on CL and EMAX. Verification by the goodness-of-fit and BS methods showed that the final model was stable and reliable.

CONCLUSION

A model was successfully established to evaluate the antiplatelet effect of intravenous pulaimab injection that could provide support for the clinical therapeutic regimen.

Base Controlled Three-Component Regioselective Synthesis of 2-Imino Thiazolines and 2-Thioxoimidazolin-4-ones

Base-controlled regioselective synthesis of 2-imino thiazolines and 2-thioxoimidazolin-4-ones was achieved to use a one-pot reaction between chiral amino esters, isothiocyanates, and α-bromoketones/alkyl halides. This three-component coupling reaction in acetonitrile provides 2-imino thiazolines, whereas the formation of 2-thioxoimidazolin-4-ones was observed under basic conditions at ambient temperature. The corresponding products were obtained in good to excellent yield with broad substrate scope. Isolation of thiourea and thiohydantoin intermediates disclosed the course of the reaction mechanism.

Approaches to handling pharmacodynamic baseline responses

A few approaches for handling baseline responses are available for use in pharmacokinetic (PK)-pharmacodynamic (PD) analysis. They include: (method 1-B1) estimation of the typical value and interindividual variability (IIV) of baseline in the population, (B2) inclusion of the observed baseline response as a covariate acknowledging the residual variability, (B3) a more general version of B2 as it also takes the IIV of the baseline in the population into account, and (B4) normalization of all observations by the baseline value. The aim of this study was to investigate the relative performance of B1-B4. PD responses over a single dosing interval were simulated from an indirect response model in which a drug acts through stimulation or inhibition of the response according to an Emax model. The performance of B1-B4 was investigated under 22 designs, each containing 100 datasets. NONMEM VI beta was used to estimate model parameters with the FO and the FOCE method. The mean error (ME, %) and root mean squared error (RMSE, %) of the population parameter estimates were computed and used as an indicator of bias and imprecision. Absolute ME (|ME|) and RMSE from all methods were ranked within the same design, the lower the rank value the better method performance. Average rank of each method from all designs was reported. The results showed that with B1 and FOCE, the average of |ME| and RMSE across all typical individual parameters and all conditions was 5.9 and 31.8%. The average rank of |ME| for B1, B2, B3, and B4 was 3.7, 3.8, 3.3, and 5.2 for the FOCE method, and 4.6, 4.3, 4.7, and 6.4 for the FO method. The smallest imprecision was noted with the use of B1 (rank of 3.1 for FO, and 2.9 for FOCE) and increased, in order, with B3 (3.9-FO and 3.6-FOCE), B2 (4.8-FO; 4.7-FOCE), and B4 (6.4-FO; 6.5-FOCE). We conclude that when considering both bias and imprecision B1 was slightly better than B3 which in turn was better than B2. Differences between these methods were small. B4 was clearly inferior. The FOCE method led to a smaller bias, but no marked reduction in imprecision of parameter estimates compared to the FO method.