In study 2, assessments took place on day 0, day 1 (predose and at 2, 6, 8, 12, and 14 hours after dose), daily over

the treatment period, after the last Buparlisib supplier day of dosing (day 11 for cohort A and day 4 for cohort B), and at multiple time points during the follow-up period. The HCV RNA was quantified using the Abbott RealTime HCV polymerase chain reaction assay according to manufacturer’s instructions (lower detection limit of 12 IU/mL; Abbott Laboratories, Abbott Park, IL). In study 1, full PK profiles of filibuvir were obtained on days 1 and 8. Predose samples were collected on days 2 through 7. Starting on day 8, samples were collected up to 48 hours after dose. In study 2, full PK profiles were obtained on day 1 and following the last dose administered (day 10 for cohort A and day 3 for cohort B). Predose

samples were obtained on days 2 through 9 for cohort A and days 2 and 3 for cohort B. Plasma concentrations of filibuvir were measured using a validated high-performance liquid chromatography–tandem XAV-939 clinical trial mass spectrometric method (Bioanalytical Systems, Ltd., Warwickshire, UK). PK parameters were calculated by noncompartmental analysis of concentration–time data for days on which a full PK profile was obtained using internally validated PK analytical software (eNCA, Pfizer). The maximum observed concentration (Cmax) and the

time to reach the Cmax (Tmax) were obtained directly from the data. AUC0-tau (area under the curve) over the dosing interval (0-tau, BID = 12 hours; TID = 8 hours) was estimated using the linear/log trapezoidal approximation. Filibuvir exposures achieved over 24 hours (AUC24) derived from AUC0-tau obtained from noncompartmental analysis in individual patients in studies 1 and 2 were used to inform the exposure-response analysis of the maximum log change in HCV RNA concentration from baseline. Analysis was performed using a nonlinear mixed 上海皓元 effects approach using the first-order conditional estimation (FOCE) method in NONMEM VI (Icon Development Solutions, Ellicott City, MD). The relationship was described by an Emax model as follows: The mixed effect model had an additive residual error component. The primary analysis of the effect of covariates on the model parameters was conducted by developing a full covariate model.18 The full model included the effect of baseline HCV RNA concentration on Emax and of genotype (1a versus 1b) on E0, Emax, and AUC24,50. This full model was then bootstrapped to obtain the 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The CIs were used to identify influential covariates based on the exclusion of either 0 (for continuous variable) or 1 (for categorical variable).