XOFLUZA Film-coated tablet Ref.[9938] Active ingredients: Baloxavir marboxil

Cardiac Electrophysiology

At twice the expected exposure from recommended dosing, XOFLUZA did not prolong the QTc interval.

Exposure-Response Relationships

When XOFLUZA is dosed by weight, as recommended (40 mg in patients weighing 40-80 kg; and 80 mg in patients weighing at least 80 kg), no difference in baloxavir exposure-response (time to alleviation of influenza symptoms in the Otherwise Healthy population or time to improvement of influenza symptoms in the High Risk population) relationship has been observed.

Baloxavir marboxil is a prodrug that is almost completely converted to its active metabolite, baloxavir, following oral administration.

In Trial 2, at the recommended dose of 40 mg for subjects weighing less than 80 kg, the mean (CV%) values of baloxavir C_max and AUC_0-inf were 96.4 ng/mL (45.9%) and 6160 ng∙hr/mL (39.2%), respectively. At the recommended dose of 80 mg for subjects weighing 80 kg and more, the mean (CV%) values of baloxavir C_max and AUC_0-inf were 107 ng/mL (47.2%) and 8009 ng∙hr/mL (42.4%), respectively. Refer to Table 3 for pharmacokinetic parameters of baloxavir in healthy subjects. The pharmacokinetic profile of XOFLUZA was similar for adults and adolescents who were otherwise healthy and those at high risk of developing influenza-related complications.

Table 3. Pharmacokinetic Parameters of Plasma Baloxavir:

* Median
^† Meal: approximately 4 00 to 500 kcal including 150 kcal from fat
^‡ in vitro
^§ Geometric mean (geometric CV%)
^¶ Apparent terminal elimination half-life
^# Baloxavir is primarily metabolized by UGT1A3 with minor contribution from
CYP3A4
^Þ Ratio of radioactivity to radio-labeled [¹⁴C]-baloxavir marboxil dose in mass balance study

Specific Populations

There were no clinically significant differences in the pharmacokinetics of baloxavir based on age (adolescents as compared to adults), or sex.

Patients with Renal Impairment

A population pharmacokinetic analysis did not identify a clinically meaningful effect of renal function on the pharmacokinetics of baloxavir in patients with creatinine clearance (CrCl) 50 mL/min and above. The effects of severe renal impairment on the pharmacokinetics of baloxavir marboxil or its active metabolite, baloxavir, have not been evaluated.

Patients with Hepatic Impairment

In a clinical study comparing pharmacokinetics of baloxavir in subjects with moderate hepatic impairment (Child-Pugh class B) to subjects with normal hepatic function, no clinically meaningful differences in the pharmacokinetics of baloxavir were observed.

The pharmacokinetics in patients with severe hepatic impairment have not been evaluated.

Body Weight

Body weight had a significant effect on the pharmacokinetics of baloxavir (as body weight increases, baloxavir exposure decreases). When dosed with the recommended weight-based dosing, no clinically significant difference in exposure was observed between body weight groups.

Race/Ethnicity

Based on a population pharmacokinetic analysis, baloxavir exposure is approximately 35% lower in non-Asians as compared to Asians; this difference is not considered clinically significant when the recommended dose was administered.

Drug Interaction Studies

Clinical Studies

No clinically significant changes in the pharmacokinetics of baloxavir marboxil and its active metabolite, baloxavir, were observed when co-administered with itraconazole (combined strong CYP3A and P-gp inhibitor), probenecid (UGT inhibitor), or oseltamivir.

No clinically significant changes in the pharmacokinetics of the following drugs were observed when co-administered with baloxavir marboxil: midazolam (CYP3A4 substrate), digoxin (P-gp substrate), rosuvastatin (BCRP substrate), or oseltamivir.

In Vitro Studies Where Drug Interaction Potential Was Not Further Evaluated Clinically

Cytochrome P450 (CYP) Enzymes: Baloxavir marboxil and its active metabolite, baloxavir, did not inhibit CYP1A2, CYP2B6, CYP2C8, CYP2C9, CYP2C19, or CYP2D6. Baloxavir marboxil and its active metabolite, baloxavir, did not induce CYP1A2, CYP2B6, or CYP3A4.

Uridine diphosphate (UDP)-glucuronosyl transferase (UGT) Enzymes: Baloxavir marboxil and its active metabolite, baloxavir, did not inhibit UGT1A1, UGT1A3, UGT1A4, UGT1A6, UGT1A9, UGT2B7, or UGT2B15.

Transporter Systems: Both baloxavir marboxil and baloxavir are substrates of P-glycoprotein (P-gp). Baloxavir did not inhibit organic anion transporting polypeptides (OATP) 1B1, OATP1B3, organic cation transporter (OCT) 1, OCT2, organic anion transporter (OAT) 1, OAT3, multidrug and toxin extrusion (MATE) 1, or MATE2K.

Potential for Interactions with Polyvalent Cations: Baloxavir may form a chelate with polyvalent cations such as calcium, aluminum, or magnesium in food or medications. A significant decrease in baloxavir exposure was observed when XOFLUZA was co-administered with calcium, aluminum, magnesium, or iron in monkeys. No study has been conducted in humans.

Mechanism of Action

Baloxavir marboxil is a prodrug that is converted by hydrolysis to baloxavir, the active form that exerts anti-influenza virus activity. Baloxavir inhibits the endonuclease activity of the polymerase acidic (PA) protein, an influenza virus-specific enzyme in the viral RNA polymerase complex required for viral gene transcription, resulting in inhibition of influenza virus replication. The 50% inhibitory concentration (IC₅₀) values of baloxavir ranged from 1.4 to 3.1 nM (n=4) for influenza A viruses and 4.5 to 8.9 nM (n=3) for influenza B viruses in a PA endonuclease assay. Viruses with reduced susceptibility to baloxavir have amino acid substitutions in the PA protein.

Antiviral Activity

The antiviral activity of baloxavir against laboratory strains and clinical isolates of influenza A and B viruses was determined in an MDCK cell-based plaque reduction assay. The median 50% effective concentration (EC₅₀) values of baloxavir were 0.73 nM (n=31; range: 0.20-1.85 nM) for subtype A/H1N1 strains, 0.83 nM (n=33; range: 0.35-2.63 nM) for subtype A/H3N2 strains, and 5.97 nM (n=30; range: 2.67-14.23 nM) for type B strains. In an MDCK cell-based virus titer reduction assay, the 90% effective concentration (EC₉₀) values of baloxavir against avian subtypes A/H5N1 and A/H7N9 were in the range of 0.80 to 3.16 nM. The relationship between antiviral activity in cell culture and clinical response to treatment in humans has not been established.

Resistance

Cell culture: Influenza A virus isolates with reduced susceptibility to baloxavir were selected by serial passage of virus in cell culture in the presence of increasing concentrations of baloxavir. Reduced susceptibility of influenza A virus to baloxavir was conferred by amino acid substitutions I38T (A/H1N1 and A/H3N2) and E199G (A/H3N2) in the PA protein of the viral RNA polymerase complex.

Clinical studies: Influenza A and B viruses with treatment-emergent amino acid substitutions at positions associated with reduced susceptibility to baloxavir in cell culture were observed in clinical studies (Table 4). The overall frequencies of treatment-emergent amino acid substitutions associated with reduced susceptibility to baloxavir in Trials 1, 2, and 3 [see Clinical Studies (14)] were 2.7% (5/182), 11% (39/370), and 5.5% (16/290), respectively.

Table 4. Treatment-Emergent Amino Acid Substitutions in PA Associated with Reduced Susceptibility to Baloxavir:

None of the treatment-emergent substitutions associated with reduced susceptibility to baloxavir were identified in virus from pre-treatment respiratory specimens in the clinical studies. Strains containing substitutions known to be associated with reduced susceptibility to baloxavir were identified in approximately 0.05% of PA sequences in the National Center for Biotechnology Information/GenBank database (queried August 2018).

Prescribers should consider currently available surveillance information on influenza virus drug susceptibility patterns and treatment effects when deciding whether to use XOFLUZA.

Cross-Resistance

Cross-resistance between baloxavir and neuraminidase (NA) inhibitors, or between baloxavir and M2 proton pump inhibitors (adamantanes), is not expected, because these drugs target different viral proteins. Baloxavir is active against NA inhibitor-resistant strains, including A/H1N1 and A/H5N1 viruses with the NA substitution H275Y (A/H1N1 numbering), A/H3N2 virus with the NA substitutions E119V and R292K, A/H7N9 virus with the NA substitution R292K (A/H3N2 numbering), and type B virus with the NA substitutions R152K and D198E (A/H3N2 numbering). The NA inhibitor oseltamivir is active against viruses with reduced susceptibility to baloxavir, including A/H1N1 virus with PA substitutions E23K or I38F/T, A/H3N2 virus with PA substitutions E23G/K, A37T, I38M/T, or E199G, and type B virus with the PA substitution I38T. Influenza virus may carry amino acid substitutions in PA that reduce susceptibility to baloxavir and at the same time carry resistance-associated substitutions for NA inhibitors and M2 proton pump inhibitors. The clinical relevance of phenotypic cross-resistance evaluations has not been established.

Immune Response

Interaction studies with influenza vaccines and baloxavir marboxil have not been conducted.

Carcinogenesis

Carcinogenicity studies have not been performed with baloxavir marboxil.

Mutagenesis

Baloxavir marboxil and the active metabolite, baloxavir, were not mutagenic in in vitro and in in vivo genotoxicity assays which included bacterial mutation assays in S. typhimurium and E. coli, micronucleus tests with cultured mammalian cells, and in the rodent micronucleus assay.

Impairment of Fertility

In a fertility and early embryonic development study in rats, doses of baloxavir marboxil at 20, 200, or 1,000 mg/kg/day were administered to females for 2 weeks before mating, during mating and until day 7 of pregnancy. Males were dosed for 4 weeks before mating and throughout mating. There were no effects on fertility, mating performance, or early embryonic development at any dose level, resulting in systemic drug exposure (AUC) approximately 5 times the MRHD.

14.1 Treatment of Acute Uncomplicated Influenza – Otherwise Healthy Patients

Two randomized controlled double-blinded clinical trials conducted in two different influenza seasons evaluated efficacy and safety of XOFLUZA in otherwise healthy subjects with acute uncomplicated influenza.

In Trial 1, a placebo-controlled phase 2 dose-finding trial, a single oral dose of XOFLUZA was compared with placebo in 400 adult subjects 20 to 64 years of age in Japan. All subjects in Trial 1 were Asian, the majority of subjects were male (62%), and the mean age was 38 years. In this trial, among subjects who received XOFLUZA and had influenza virus typed, influenza A/H1N1 was the predominant strain (63%), followed by influenza B (25%), and influenza A/H3N2 (12%).

In Trial 2 (NCT02954354), a phase 3 active- and placebo-controlled trial, XOFLUZA was studied in 1,436 adults and adolescents with signs and symptoms of influenza in the U.S. and Japan. Subjects were 12 to 64 years of age and weighed at least 40 kg. Adults ages 20 to 64 years received weight-based XOFLUZA (subjects who weighed 40 to less than 80 kg received 40 mg and subjects who weighed 80 kg and above received 80 mg) or placebo as a single oral dose on Day 1 or oseltamivir twice a day for 5 days. Subjects in the XOFLUZA and placebo arms received a placebo for the duration of oseltamivir dosing after XOFLUZA or placebo dosing in that arm. Adolescent subjects 12 to less than 20 years of age received weight-based XOFLUZA or placebo as a single oral dose.

Seventy-eight percent of subjects in Trial 2 were Asian, 17% were White, and 4% were Black or African American. The mean age was 34 years, and 11% of subjects were less than 20 years of age; 54% of subjects were male and 46% female. In Trial 2, 1,062 of 1,436 enrolled subjects had influenza confirmed by RT-PCR and were included in the efficacy analysis (XOFLUZA N=455, placebo N=230, or oseltamivir N=377). Among subjects who received XOFLUZA and had influenza virus typed, influenza A/H3N2 was the predominant strain (90%), followed by influenza B (9%), and influenza A/H1N1 (2%).

In both Trials 1 and 2, eligible subjects had an axillary temperature of at least 38°C, at least one moderate or severe respiratory symptom (cough, nasal congestion, or sore throat), and at least one moderate or severe systemic symptom (headache, feverishness or chills, muscle or joint pain, or fatigue) and all were treated within 48 hours of symptom onset. Subjects participating in the trial were required to self-assess their influenza symptoms as “none”, “mild”, “moderate” or “severe” twice daily. The primary efficacy population was defined as those with a positive rapid influenza diagnostic test (Trial 1) or positive influenza RT-PCR (Trial 2) at trial entry.

The primary endpoint of both trials, time to alleviation of symptoms, was defined as the time when all seven symptoms (cough, sore throat, nasal congestion, headache, feverishness, myalgia, and fatigue) had been assessed by the subject as none or mild for a duration of at least 21.5 hours.

In both trials, XOFLUZA treatment at the recommended dose resulted in a statistically significant shorter time to alleviation of symptoms compared with placebo in the primary efficacy population (Tables 5 and 6).

Table 5. Time to Alleviation of Symptoms after Single Dose in Otherwise Healthy Adults with Acute Uncomplicated Influenza in Trial 1 (Median Hours):

* CI: Confidence interval
^† XOFLUZA treatment resulted in a statistically significant shorter time to alleviation of symptoms compared to placebo using the Gehan-Breslow’s generalized Wilcoxon test (p-value: 0.014, adjusted for multiplicity using the Bonferroni method). The primary analysis using the Cox Proportional Hazards Model did not reach statistical significance (p-value: 0.165).

Table 6. Time to Alleviation of Symptoms after Single Dose in Otherwise Healthy Subjects 12 Years of Age and Older with Acute Uncomplicated Influenza in Trial 2 (Median Hours):

* CI: Confidence interval
^† XOFLUZA treatment resulted in a statistically significant shorter time to alleviation of symptoms compared to placebo using the Peto-Prentice’s generalized Wilcoxon test (p-value: <0.001).

In Trial 2, there was no difference in the time to alleviation of symptoms between subjects (age ≥20) who received XOFLUZA (54 hours) and those who received oseltamivir (54 hours). For adolescent subjects (12 to 17 years of age) in Trial 2, the median time to alleviation of symptoms for subjects infected with influenza and who received XOFLUZA (N=63) was 54 hours (95% CI of 43, 81) compared to 93 hours (95% CI of 64, 118) in the placebo arm (N=27).

The number of subjects who received XOFLUZA at the recommended dose and who were infected with influenza type B virus was limited, including 24 subjects in Trial 1 and 38 subjects in Trial 2. In the influenza B subset in Trial 1, the median time to alleviation of symptoms in subjects who received 40 mg XOFLUZA was 63 hours (95% CI of 43, 70) compared to 83 hours (95% CI of 58, 93) in subjects who received placebo. In the influenza B subset in Trial 2, the median time to alleviation of symptoms in subjects who received 40 mg or 80 mg XOFLUZA was 93 hours (95% CI of 53, 135) compared to 77 hours (95% CI of 47, 189) in subjects who received placebo.

14.2 Treatment of Acute Uncomplicated Influenza – High Risk Patients

Trial 3 (NCT02949011) was a randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a single oral dose of XOFLUZA compared with placebo or oseltamivir, in adult and adolescent subjects 12 years of age or older with influenza who were at high risk of developing influenza-related complications.

A total of 2,182 subjects with signs and symptoms of influenza were randomized to receive a single oral dose of 40 mg or 80 mg of XOFLUZA according to body weight (subjects who weighed 40 to less than 80 kg received 40 mg and subjects who weighed 80 kg and above received 80 mg) (N=729), oseltamivir 75 mg twice daily for 5 days (N=725), or placebo (N=728). Twenty-eight percent of subjects were Asian, 59% were White, and 10% were Black or African American. The mean age was 52 years, and 3% of subjects were less than 18 years of age; 43% of subjects were male and 57% female.

High risk factors were based on the Centers for Disease Control definition¹ of health factors known to increase the risk of developing serious complications from influenza. The majority of subjects had underlying asthma or chronic lung disease, diabetes, heart disease, morbid obesity, or were 65 years of age or older.

In Trial 3, 1,158 of the 2,182 enrolled subjects had influenza confirmed by RT-PCR and were included in the efficacy analysis (XOFLUZA N=385, placebo N=385, or oseltamivir N=388). Among subjects in whom only one type/subtype of influenza virus was identified, 50% were infected with subtype A/H3N2, 43% were infected with type B, and 7% were infected with subtype A/H1N1.

Eligible subjects had an axillary temperature of at least 38°C, at least one moderate or severe respiratory symptom (cough, nasal congestion, or sore throat), and at least one moderate or severe systemic symptom (headache, feverishness or chills, muscle or joint pain, or fatigue) and all were treated within 48 hours of symptom onset. Subjects participating in the trial were required to self-assess their influenza symptoms as “none”, “mild”, “moderate” or “severe” twice daily. A total of 215 subjects (19%) had pre-existing symptoms (cough, muscle or joint pain, or fatigue) associated with their underlying high-risk condition that were worsened due to influenza infection. The primary efficacy endpoint was time to improvement of influenza symptoms (cough, sore throat, headache, nasal congestion, feverishness or chills, muscle or joint pain, and fatigue). This endpoint included alleviation of new symptoms and improvement of any pre-existing symptoms that had worsened due to influenza. A statistically significant improvement in the primary endpoint was observed for XOFLUZA when compared with placebo, see Table 7.

Table 7. Time to Improvement of Symptoms After Single Dose in High Risk Subjects 12 Years of Age and Older with Acute Uncomplicated Influenza in Trial 3 (Median Hours):

* CI: Confidence Interval
^† XOFLUZA treatment resulted in a significant reduction in Time to Improvement of Influenza Symptoms compared to placebo using Peto-Prentice’s generalized Wilcoxon test (p-value: <0.001).

There was no statistically significant difference in the median time to improvement of influenza symptoms in the subjects who received XOFLUZA (73 hours) and those who received oseltamivir (81 hours). The median time to improvement of influenza symptoms in the limited number of adolescent subjects aged 12 to 17 years infected with influenza virus was similar for subjects who received XOFLUZA (188 hours) or placebo (191 hours) (N=13 and N=12, respectively).

For subjects infected with type B virus, the median time to improvement of influenza symptoms was 75 hours in the XOFLUZA group (95% CI of 67, 90) compared to 101 hours in the placebo group (95% CI of 83, 116).