In antidiabetic drug development, phase I studies usually involve short-term glucose provocations. Multiple designs are available for these provocations (e.g., meal tolerance tests (MTTs) and graded glucose infusions (GGIs)). With a highly nonlinear, complex system as the glucose homeostasis, the various provocations will contribute with different information offering a rich choice. Here, we investigate the most appropriate study design in phase I for several hypothetical mechanisms of action of a study drug. Five drug effects in diabetes therapeutic areas were investigated using six study designs. Power to detect drug effect was assessed using the likelihood ratio test, whereas precision and accuracy of the quantification of drug effect was assessed using stochastic simulation and estimations. An overall summary was developed to aid designing the studies of antihyperglycemic drug development using model-based analysis. This guidance is to be used when the integrated glucose insulin model is used, involving the investigated drug mechanisms of action.
In antihyperglycemic drug development, drug effects are usually characterized using glucose provocations. Analyzing provocation data using pharmacometrics has shown powerful, enabling small studies. In preclinical drug development, high power is attractive due to the experiment sizes; however, insulin is not always available, which potentially impacts power and predictive performance. This simulation study was performed to investigate the implications of performing model-based drug characterization without insulin. The integrated glucose-insulin model was used to simulate and re-estimated oral glucose tolerance tests using a crossover design of placebo and study compound. Drug effects were implemented on seven different mechanisms of action (MOA); one by one or in two-drug combinations. This study showed that exclusion of insulin may severely reduce the power to distinguish the correct from competing drug effect, and to detect a primary or secondary drug effect, however, it did not affect the predictive performance of the model.
Carbapenemase-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae (KP) resistant to multiple antibiotic classes necessitates optimized combination therapy. Our objective is to build a workflow leveraging omics and bacterial count data to identify antibiotic mechanisms that can be used to design and optimize combination regimens. For pharmacodynamic (PD) analysis, previously published static time-kill studies (J Antimicrob Chemother 70, 2015, 2589) were used with polymyxin B (PMB) and chloramphenicol (CHL) mono and combination therapy against three KP clinical isolates over 24 h. A mechanism-based model (MBM) was developed using time-kill data in S-ADAPT describing PMB-CHL PD activity against each isolate. Previously published results of PMB (1 mg/L continuous infusion) and CHL (Cmax : 8 mg/L; bolus q6h) mono and combination regimens were evaluated using an in vitro one-compartment dynamic infection model against a KP clinical isolate (108 CFU/ml inoculum) over 24 h to obtain bacterial samples for multi-omics analyses. The differentially expressed genes and metabolites in these bacterial samples served as input to develop a partial least squares regression (PLSR) in R that links PD responses with the multi-omics responses via a multi-omics pathway analysis. PMB efficacy was increased when combined with CHL, and the MBM described the observed PD well for all strains. The PLSR consisted of 29 omics inputs and predicted MBM PD response (R2 = 0.946). Our analysis found that CHL downregulated metabolites and genes pertinent to lipid A, hence limiting the emergence of PMB resistance. Our workflow linked insights from analysis of multi-omics data with MBM to identify biological mechanisms explaining observed PD activity in combination therapy.