Why the study?
TPN171 is under development for male erectile dysfunction and pulmonary arterial hypertension, prompting an evaluation of its pharmacokinetics and safety in individuals with severe renal impairment.
Does severe renal impairment alter the pharmacokinetics and safety profile of a single 10 mg dose of TPN171 compared to normal renal function?
Does severe renal impairment alter the pharmacokinetics and safety profile of a single 10 mg dose of TPN171 compared to normal renal function?
A single 10 mg dose of TPN171 showed increased overall exposure and decreased clearance in severe renal impairment but was well tolerated, suggesting it can be cautiously used in this population.
Supports cautious TPN171 use in severe renal impairment; leaves open dose optimization in larger trials.
TPN171, a phosphodiesterase 5 inhibitor, is under development for the treatment of male erectile dysfunction and pulmonary arterial hypertension in China. To investigate the pharmacokinetic properties and safety of TPN171 in individuals with severe renal impairment and normal renal function, an open‐label, single‐dose, parallel‐group phase 1 study was conducted in 8 participants with severe renal impairment (glomerular filtration rate within 15‐29 mL/min) and 8 participants having normal renal function, who received TNP171 tablets (10 mg) in the fasting state. As compared with those with normal renal function, the geometric mean ratios for maximum plasma concentration (C max ), the area under the plasma concentration‐time curve from time zero to the last quantifiable concentration (AUC 0‐t ), and AUC extrapolated to infinite time (AUC 0‐∞ ) were 74.3%, 138%, and 137%, respectively. Elimination half‐life was prolonged and clearance was decreased in severe renal impairment group. The adverse reaction rate showed no significant difference. All adverse events were mild intensity, and no participant was discontinued in this study. In conclusion, TPN171 can be cautiously used in patients with mild to severe renal impairment.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Fu et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: