The lower limit of quantification was 5.00 ng/mL. The between- and within-run precision for quality controls, expressed as CVs, were no greater than 7.40% and 8.16%, respectively, with deviations

from nominal concentrations of no more than 8.0%. The plasma methotrexate concentrations were analyzed by a non-compartmental method, and the following parameters were assessed: Cmax, tmax, t1/2,λz, AUCt, and AUC∞. Statistical Analyses All statistical analyses were conducted using SAS® version 9.1 software (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA). For the pharmacokinetic analyses of the four clinical studies, the descriptive statistics analysis included arithmetic DNA Damage inhibitor means and CVs for Cmax, AUC, t1/2,λz, Ae24h, and CLR24h; the medians and ranges for tmax; and the geometric means and CVs for Rac(AUC) and Frel. Clinical safety was addressed by assessing AEs, physical examinations, laboratory assessments, ECGs, and vital sign results in a descriptive manner. Descriptive statistics and shift tables (according to normal ranges) were calculated for each parameter at every timepoint and in each treatment group. A treatment-emergent AE analysis MK2206 was performed. The following inferential statistics were performed

for each study, with a statistical significance level of p < 0.0500. Study 1 Dose proportionality was tested on dose-normalized and natural log–transformed GLPG0259 parameters (Cmax normalized to a 1 mg dose [Cmax/dose] and AUC from 0 to 24 hours [AUC24h] normalized to a 1 mg dose [AUC24h/dose]) after single fed dosing by means of mixed-effects analysis of variance (ANOVA) with the cohort and dose as fixed effects and the subject (nested within the cohort) as a random effect. In the case of a significant dose effect being observed on the parameters listed above, comparison between doses was performed using Tukey’s test. The tmax, being a discrete variable, was analyzed using a non–parametric Kruskal-Wallis test to assess the dose proportionality. For part 2, a mixed-effects ANOVA was performed on natural log–transformed Rucaparib price GLPG0259 parameters (Cmax/dose, AUC24h/dose, t1/2,λz, Ae24h, and CLR24h) with the day, dose, and

day-by-dose interaction as fixed effects and the subject as a random effect. Dose proportionality for Rac(AUC) was evaluated from the adapted mixed-effects ANOVA of AUC24h/dose. A Wilcoxon–Mann-Whitney non-parametric test was used to assess the dose proportionality of tmax. The time to reach steady state was assessed by visual inspection of the trough plasma drug concentrations as well as by means of a mixed-effects ANOVA on Ln-transformed GLPG0259 trough plasma drug concentrations. Comparison between days was performed using Tukey’s test. The food effect was assessed using geometric mean ratios of the observed pharmacokinetic parameters (Cmax, AUC24h, AUC∞, and t1/2,λz) for GLPG0259, with and without food, and the corresponding 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for the ratios.