Why the study?
What are the pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability of single intravenous infusions of the adenosine agonist AMP 579 in healthy male volunteers?
What are the pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability of single intravenous infusions of the adenosine agonist AMP 579 in healthy male volunteers?
AMP 579 exhibits dose-proportional pharmacokinetics with rapid clearance and a dose-related increase in heart rate, providing data to inform future dosage regimens.
Informs AMP 579 dosing for early trials; extends PK profile of adenosine agonists in humans.
The pharmacokinetics of an adenosine agonist, AMP 579, following intravenous administration were evaluated. Single AMP 579 doses of 20 to 150 micrograms/kg were infused intravenously over 6 hours using a constant-rate or two-step rate of infusion to healthy male volunteers. Plasma and urine samples were collected for measurement of AMP 579 concentration using a validated HPLC assay. An assessment of safety and tolerability was also performed. Based on a noncompartmental method of analysis, the pharmacokinetics of AMP 579 were characterized by rapid systemic clearance (0.77 to 0.85 L/h/kg), a moderate steady-state volume of distribution (0.80 to 0.94 L/kg), and a short terminal elimination half-life (0.84 to 1.13 h). AMP 579 exhibited dose (infusion rate)-proportional pharmacokinetics over the dose range. In addition, little or no unchanged AMP 579 was found in the urine. The primary cardiovascular pharmacodynamic response that was observed was a dose-related increase in mean ventricular heart rate. Fifteen minutes prior to the end of the infusion, volunteers administered the highest dose (150 micrograms/kg) exhibited a mean (range) 59% (36%-69%) increase in heart rate as compared to a mean (range) 18% (0%-73%) increase for the placebo group. No clinically relevant changes in the systolic or diastolic blood pressure were observed. The information obtained in this study should allow the design of AMP 579 dosage regimens that would maximize plasma AMP 579 concentrations and minimize the incidence of adverse events.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zannikos et al. (1999) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 2 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: