Skip to content
naulon
Not checkedNot checked for notices yet.

Exposure–response modeling of peficitinib efficacy in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Junko Toyoshima, Atsunori Kaibara, Mai Shibata and 3 more

Pharmacology Research & Perspectives · 2021

doi:10.1002/prp2.744 (opens in a new tab)

We email you when a new notice or a question about this paper appears.

Abstract

Abstract The aim was to analyze the relationship between peficitinib exposure and efficacy response according to American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20 criteria and 28‐joint disease activity score based on C‐reactive protein (DAS28‐CRP) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients, and to identify relevant covariates by developing exposure–response models. The analysis incorporated results from three multicenter, placebo‐controlled, double‐blind studies. As an exposure parameter, individual post hoc pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters were obtained from a previously constructed population PK model. Longitudinal ACR20 response rate and individual longitudinal DAS28‐CRP measurements were modeled by a non‐linear mixed effect model. Influential covariates were explored, and their effects on efficacy were quantitatively assessed and compared. The exposure–response models of effect of peficitinib on duration‐dependent increase in ACR20 response rate and decrease in DAS28‐CRP were adequately described by a continuous time Markov model and an indirect response model, respectively, with a sigmoidal Emax saturable of drug exposure in RA patients. The significant covariates were DAS28‐CRP and total bilirubin at baseline for the ACR20 response model, and CRP at baseline and concomitant methotrexate treatment for the DAS28–CRP model. The covariate effects were highly consistent between the two models. Our exposure–response models of peficitinib in RA patients satisfactorily described duration‐dependent improvements in ACR20 response rates and DAS28‐CRP measurements, and provided consistent covariate effects. Only the ACR20 model incorporated a patient's subjective high expectations just after the start of the treatment. Therefore, due to their similarities and differences, both models may have relevant applications in the development of RA treatment. Clinical trial registration NCT01649999 (RAJ1), NCT02308163 (RAJ3), NCT02305849 (RAJ4).

Abstract licence: CC BY-NC

Reads

Read by people on this page

None yet.

Checked or read by AI through naulon

None yet.

A person counts once a day per paper. We keep no cookie and no address: a reader is a hash that changes every day. Any month under five reads shows no number.

Are you an author?

Is this your paper?

Claim it to add your note and be paid when agents cite it. Free.