4.5 Article

Dose titration of BAF312 attenuates the initial heart rate reducing effect in healthy subjects

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY
卷 75, 期 3, 页码 831-841

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.2012.04400.x

关键词

dose-response relationship; heart rate; lysosphingolipid; phase I as topic; receptors; sphingosine; analogues and derivatives

资金

  1. iMed Comms by Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aim Previous studies have shown transient decreases in heart rate (HR) following administration of sphingosine 1-phosphate (S1P) receptor modulators including BAF312. This study was conducted to determine whether dose titration of BAF312 reduces or eliminates these effects. Methods Fifty-six healthy subjects were randomized 1:1:1:1 to receive BAF312 in one of two dose titration (DT) regimens (DT1 and DT2: 0.2510mg over 910days), no titration (10mg starting dose) or placebo. Pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic parameters were assessed. Results Neither DT1 nor DT2 resulted in clinically significant bradycardia or atrioventricular conduction effects. Both titration regimens showed a favourable difference on each of days 112 vs. the non-titration regimen on day 1 for HR effects (P < 0.0001). On day 1, the geometric mean ratio of the fraction from the previous day in minimum daily HR between DT1 and non-titration was 1.18 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.13, 1.23) and 1.14 (95% CI 1.09, 1.18) for DT2 (both P < 0.05) with significant differences noted through to day 12. Non-titration HRs showed considerable separation from placebo throughout the study. There was no statistically significant reduction in HR vs. placebo on day1 in either titration regimen. On days 37 subjects in DT1 and DT2 experienced minor reductions in HR vs. placebo (approximately 5beatsmin1; P 0.0001). From days 912, HRs in both titration regimens were comparable with placebo. Conclusion Both titration regimens effectively attenuated the initial bradyarrhythmia observed on day 1 of treatment with BAF312 10mg.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据