A Comparison of Differences Between the Systemic Pharmacokinetics of Levobupivacaine and Ropivacaine During Continuous Epidural Infusion: A Prospective, Randomized, Multicenter, Double-Blind Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Epidural infusion of levobupivacaine and ropivacaine provides adequate postoperative pain management by minimizing side effects related to IV opioids and improving patient outcome. The safety profile of different drugs can be better estimated by comparing their pharmacokinetic profiles than by considering their objective side effects. Because levobupivacaine and ropivacaine have different pharmacokinetic properties, our aim was to investigate whether there is a difference in the pharmacokinetic variability of the 2 drugs in a homogeneous population undergoing continuous epidural infusion. This double-blind, multicenter, randomized, controlled trial study was designed to compare the pharmacokinetics of continuous thoracic epidural infusion of levobupivacaine 0.125% or ropivacaine 0.2% for postoperative pain management in adult patients who had undergone major abdominal, urological, or gynecological surgery. This study is focused on the evaluation of the coefficient of variation (CV) to assess the equivalence in the systemic exposure and interindividual variability between levobupivacaine and ropivacaine and, therefore, the possible differences in the predictability of the plasmatic concentrations of the 2 drugs during thoracic epidural infusion. METHODS: One hundred eighty-one adults undergoing major abdominal surgery were enrolled in the study. Patients were randomized to receive an epidural infusion of levobupivacaine 0.125% + sufentanil 0.75 µg/mL or of ropivacaine 0.2% + sufentanil 0.75 µg/mL at 5 mL/h for 48 hours. The primary end point of this study was to analyze the variability of plasma concentration of levobupivacaine and ropivacaine via an area under the curve within a range of 15% of the CV during 48 hours of continuous epidural infusion. The CV shows how the concentration values of local anesthetics are scattered around the median concentration value, thus indicating the extent to which plasma concentration is predictable during infusion. Secondary end points were to assess the pharmacologic profile of the local anesthetics used in the study, including an analysis of mean peak plasma concentrations, and also to assess plasma clearance, side effects, pain intensity (measured with a verbal numeric ranging score, i.e., static Numeric Rating Scale [NRS] and dynamic NRS]), and the need for rescue doses. RESULTS: The comparison between the 2 CVs showed no statistical difference: the difference between area under the curve was within the range of 15%. The CV was 0.54 for levobupivacaine and 0.51 for ropivacaine (P = 0.725). The plasma concentrations of ropivacaine approached the Cmax significantly faster than those of levobupivacaine. Clearance of ropivacaine decreases with increasing patient age. There were no significant differences in NRS, dynamic NRS scores, the number of rescue doses, or in side effects between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Considering the CV, the interindividual variability of plasma concentration for levobupivacaine and ropivacaine is equivalent after thoracic epidural infusion in adults. We found a reduction in clearance of ropivacaine depending on patient age, but this finding could be the result of some limitations of our study. The steady-state concentration was not reached during the 48-hour infusion and the behavior of plasma concentrations of ropivacaine and levobupivacaine during continuous infusions lasting more than 48 hours remains to be investigated, because they could reach toxic levels. Finally, no differences in the clinical efficacy or in the incidence of adverse effects between groups were found for either local anesthetic.

Interindividual and intra-individual variabilities of darunavir and ritonavir plasma trough concentrations in multidrug experienced HIV patients receiving salvage regimens.

BACKGROUND: There is no consensus on darunavir (DRV) target levels in plasma for clinical use, and information about variability in plasma concentrations is limited. AIM: : To investigate the variability in DRV plasma trough concentrations in the clinical setting, evaluating interindividual and intraindividual variabilities of plasma drug levels among HIV-infected patients receiving ritonavir (RTV)-boosted DRV (DRV/r) within salvage regimens, and evaluate the potential correlation between variability and virological response. METHODS: Sixty-two patients taking DRV/r (600/100 mg twice a day) were evaluated for trough plasma concentrations and immunovirological parameters after 6 months from the start of the regimen. A subgroup of patients (n = 21) was also evaluated for intraindividual variability (expressed as coefficient of variation) on 2 samples taken at different time points. Drug concentrations were assayed by high-performance liquid chromatography with ultraviolet detection, and the values were expressed as medians with interquartile range (IQR). Genotypic sensitivity score and genotypic inhibitory quotient were calculated. RESULTS: DRV/r was used with a median of 3 other antiretroviral drugs (raltegravir use 88.7%). Median plasma concentrations were 3.22 mcg/mL (IQR, 2.04-5.69) for DRV and 0.44 mcg/mL (IQR, 0.21-0.70) for RTV. Both drugs showed a high interindividual variability in plasma concentrations (61% and 99.3%, respectively). Only 3 patients (4.8%) had undetectable DRV plasma levels. DRV plasma concentrations showed a significant positive correlation with age (r = 0.298, P = 0.019), but no significant correlation between DRV genotypic inhibitory quotient and HIV-RNA plasma levels (P = 0.614) was found. Intraindividual coefficients of variation were 58.4% for DRV and 47.1% for RTV. Patients with undetectable HIV-RNA showed a trend for lower intraindividual coefficients of variation compared with patients with detectable HIV-RNA (55.9% versus 83.8%, P = 0.156). No major interaction effects with other antiretroviral drugs were found. CONCLUSIONS: In a context of salvage therapy, both DRV and RTV plasma levels showed high interindividual and intraindividual variabilities. Lower intraindividual variability could be beneficial in maintaining viral suppression.

Pharmacokinetics of colistin in cerebrospinal fluid after intraventricular administration of colistin methanesulfonate.

Intraventricular colistin, administered as colistin methanesulfonate (CMS), is the last resource for the treatment of central nervous system infections caused by panresistant Gram-negative bacteria. The doses and daily regimens vary considerably and are empirically chosen; the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) pharmacokinetics of colistin after intraventricular administration of CMS has never been characterized. Nine patients (aged 18 to 73 years) were treated with intraventricular CMS (daily doses of 2.61 to 10.44 mg). Colistin concentrations were measured using a selective high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) assay. The population pharmacokinetics analysis was performed with the P-Pharm program. The pharmacokinetics of colistin could be best described by the one-compartment model. The estimated values (means ± standard deviations) of apparent CSF total clearance (CL/Fm, where Fm is the unknown fraction of CMS converted to colistin) and terminal half-life (t(1/2λ)) were 0.033 ± 0.014 liter/h and 7.8 ± 3.2 h, respectively, and the average time to the peak concentration was 3.7 ± 0.9 h. A positive correlation between CL/Fm and the amount of CSF drained (range 40 to 300 ml) was observed. When CMS was administered at doses of ≥5.22 mg/day, measured CSF concentrations of colistin were continuously above the MIC of 2 µg/ml, and measured values of trough concentration (C(trough)) ranged between 2.0 and 9.7 µg/ml. Microbiological cure was observed in 8/9 patients. Intraventricular administration of CMS at doses of ≥5.22 mg per day was appropriate in our patients, but since external CSF efflux is variable and can influence the clearance of colistin and its concentrations in CSF, the daily dose of 10 mg suggested by the Infectious Diseases Society of America may be more prudent.

Systemic exposure to rifampicin in patients with tuberculosis and advanced HIV disease during highly active antiretroviral therapy in Burkina Faso.

OBJECTIVES: Low plasma concentrations of rifampicin, an essential antituberculosis drug, have been reported particularly among HIV co-infected persons. In a prospective, longitudinal study we measured rifampicin systemic exposure at different timepoints during highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART). PATIENTS AND METHODS: From May 2006 to April 2007, 16 tuberculosis (TB)/HIV co-infected patients were enrolled in Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso. All patients received fixed dose combinations of rifampicin, isoniazid, pyrazinamide and ethambutol under direct observation and HAART, consisting of a fixed dose combination of stavudine, lamivudine and nevirapine. Rifampicin concentrations during the dosing interval were determined by HPLC at three different timepoints: (i) after 2 weeks of TB therapy and before starting HIV therapy (T0); (ii) after 4 weeks of combined therapy (T1); and (iii) after 10 weeks of combined therapy (T2). RESULTS: The median values of the area under the curve (AUC(0-24)) of rifampicin increased by 39% at T1 (15.69 µg ·â€Šh/mL; P = 0.01) and by 83% at T2 (20.65 µg ·â€Šh/mL; P = 0.001) compared with T0 (11.28 µg ·â€Šh/mL). Similar variations were observed for the median C(max) at T0 (2.24 µg/mL) compared with T2 (2.83 µg/mL; P = 0.003). However, none of the subjects had C(max) levels >8 µg/mL at either T0 or T2. CONCLUSIONS: Rifampicin systemic exposure increased during combined TB and HIV therapy, possibly due to increased drug absorption or decreased oral clearance, but remained invariably low in this population. Studies to define the C(max) rifampicin concentrations, which are associated with a significantly increased risk of treatment failure, are urgently warranted.

Lopinavir pharmacokinetic profiles in HIV-infected patients during rifabutin-based anti-mycobacterial therapy.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the pharmacokinetic profile of ritonavir-boosted lopinavir in HIV-infected patients during rifabutin-based anti-mycobacterial therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A longitudinal, cross-over pharmacokinetic evaluation of lopinavir with and without rifabutin in HIV-infected subjects with mycobacterial disease was done. All received lopinavir/ritonavir (400/100 mg twice a day) + an adjusted rifabutin dose of 150 mg every other day. Twelve-hour lopinavir pharmacokinetic sampling occurred at 2 weeks (T1) and 6 weeks (T2) after starting combined therapy and 10 weeks after completion of adjusted rifabutin (T3). Plasma was assayed using an HPLC method; lopinavir plasma concentration-time data were analysed using non-compartmental methods. RESULTS: In 10 patients with complete lopinavir curves at T1, T2 and T3 pharmacokinetic values were, respectively: AUC(0-12), 187.5, 161.8 and 121.1 µg ·â€Šh/mL; C(trough), 13.2, 10.0 and 7.7 µg/mL; C(max), 18.7, 15.9 and 13.3 µg/mL; and apparent oral clearance (CL/F), 0.035, 0.037 and 0.045 L/h/kg. Lopinavir C(trough) and AUC(0-12) were significantly higher at T1 compared with T3 while CL/F remained unchanged throughout. Combined treatment was well tolerated and none of the patients experienced moderate to severe lopinavir-related adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Lopinavir serum concentrations are not reduced when the drug is administered together with an adjusted dose of 150 mg of rifabutin every other day.

Therapeutic monitoring and variability of atazanavir in HIV-infected patients, with and without HCV coinfection, receiving boosted or unboosted regimens.

BACKGROUND: Adequate plasma trough concentrations (Ctrough) of protease inhibitors are required to maintain antiviral activity throughout the dosing interval. Therapeutic drug monitoring is used in clinical practice to optimize dosage and avoid toxic or subtherapeutic drug exposure. The pharmacokinetic variability of Atazanavir (ATV) can be relatively large, as a result of several factors. One of the affecting factors may be hepatic impairment due to hepatitis C virus (HCV) coinfection. METHODS: We collected trough plasma samples from human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-1-infected outpatients, with and without HCV coinfection and/or cirrhosis, receiving stable highly active antiretroviral therapy containing ATV. In the total population, we mainly compared the 2 regimens: 300ATV + 100RTV OD [ritonavir (RTV), once daily (OD)] versus 400ATV OD. We used a threshold value of 0.15 µg/mL, based on the proposed therapeutic range (0.15-0.85 µg/mL). Plasma concentrations of ATV were determined by a validated assay using high-performance liquid chromatography with ultraviolet detection. A total of 214 HIV-infected outpatients were included. For each regimen, we compared 3 groups of subjects: HIV+/HCV-, HIV+/HCV+, and HIV+/HCV+ with cirrhosis. RESULTS: In the whole study population, we observed a large variability and found suboptimal Ctrough levels (<0.15 µg/mL) in 23 subjects (2 belonging to the 300/100 OD group and 21 to the 400 OD group). For the standard dosage regimen of 300ATV + 100RTV OD, we did not find a statistical difference between HIV-infected patients without HCV coinfection versus HIV-infected patients with HCV coinfection: median 0.85 (interquartile range 0.53-1.34) and 0.95 (0.70-1.36) µg/mL, respectively. In HIV+/HCV+-infected patients with cirrhosis, we found a median Ctrough of 0.70 (0.43-1.0) µg/mL, with no statistical difference when compared with HIV+/HCV- infected patients. For the 400ATV OD (n=90) dosage regimen, the total median ATV Ctrough was 0.40 (0.23-1.0) µg/mL. In this group, we found a statistically significant difference between HIV+/HCV- and HIV+/HCV+-infected patients: median Ctrough was 0.23 (0.11-0.42) and 0.52 (0.20-1.0) µg/mL, respectively. In HIV+/HCV+ subjects with cirrhosis, the Ctrough median value was 0.42 (0.13-0.75) µg/mL, and there was a significant difference when compared with HIV patients without coinfection. CONCLUSIONS: Therapeutic drug monitoring of ATV in patients receiving unboosted regimen may be useful to identify those HIV-infected subjects, with or without HCV coinfection, who may benefit from adding low RTV doses, or the subset of patients in whom removal of RTV could be attempted without the risk of suboptimal plasma ATV exposure.

Flip-flop kinetics of ropivacaine during continuous epidural infusion influences its accumulation rate.

BACKGROUND: Ropivacaine has an optimal toxicity profile for epidural anesthesia in adults, but there are currently no studies concerning its pharmacokinetics during continuous infusion. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the pharmacokinetics and safety of ropivacaine in adults during a 48-h continuous epidural infusion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We enrolled 43 adults (ASA I-II) scheduled for major abdominal or urologic surgery with postoperative continuous epidural analgesia with ropivacaine 0.2% (5 mL/h) and sufentanil 0.75 µg/mL for 48 h. Ropivacaine blood samples were collected during continuous epidural infusion before the bolus and 3, 6, 12, 24, 48, 54, 60 h after the bolus; plasma concentrations were measured on HPLC-UV. The concentration-time relationship of ropivacaine levels was analyzed using a population pharmacokinetic method based on a mixed-effect-model approach (P-PHARM software). RESULTS: Mean plasma concentration of ropivacaine at the end of epidural infusion (C(48 h)) was 1.69 µg/mL (0.21-3.8 µg/mL). Mean (range) C(max) was 1.82 µg/mL (0.61-4.0 µg/mL); the area under the plasma concentration curve, AUC ((0-60)), was 67.48 ± 30.60 µg·h/mL. Total plasma ropivacaine concentrations fell mainly within (84%) or below (12%) the range reported to be safe in adults (1.0-3.0 µg/mL). Only two patients (5%) reached ropivacaine plasma levels higher than 3 µg/mL, namely 3.8 and 4.0 µg/mL at 48 and 54 h, respectively. Total ropivacaine concentrations up to 4.0 µg/mL were tolerated during long-term epidural ropivacaine infusion. Mean clearance for total ropivacaine was 5.33 L/h. Age was the only covariable to significantly reduce clearance variability: CL (L/h)=15.04-0.148 × age (years). The volume of distribution (Vd) was 92.15 L. The infusion dosing period half-life (t(1/2,DP)=0.693 × Vd/CL) was 10.8 h. CONCLUSIONS: Exposure to ropivacaine during epidural infusion is highly variable. The apparent infusion dosing half-life t(1/2,DP) is the most appropriate parameter to predict drug accumulation upon epidural infusion since it appears to better reflect the interplay interference between volume distribution and absorption rate during the accumulation phase. Prediction of ropivacaine accumulation can be improved by considering patient age.

Raltegravir plasma concentrations in treatment-experienced patients receiving salvage regimens based on raltegravir with and without maraviroc coadministration.

BACKGROUND: Raltegravir and maraviroc represent new, important resources for HIV-infected patients with intolerance or resistance to other antiretroviral agents. The safety and efficacy of both drugs have been investigated, but there is no information on possible pharmacokinetic interactions between these 2 drugs in clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate raltegravir plasma concentrations in heavily treatment-experienced patients receiving salvage regimens and explore, in a preliminary assessment, the potential influence of maraviroc coadministration and other cofactors on raltegravir trough concentrations (C(trough)). METHODS: Fifty-four HIV-infected patients with triple class (nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor, protease inhibitor) treatment experience starting raltegravir 400 mg twice daily, with (n = 11) or without (n = 43) concomitant maraviroc 300 mg twice daily, were evaluated. All regimens included at least 3 drugs of at least 2 different classes. Raltegravir plasma Ctrough, after at least 1 month of treatment, were analyzed to compare groups of patients taking raltegravir only and raltegravir plus maraviroc. Immunovirological (CD4, HIV-RNA) and clinical data after 6 months of treatment were also collected and described. RESULTS: Raltegravir plasma Ctrough showed a large variability (range <0.020-2.47 microg/mL). Median levels were similar in the 2 groups (raltegravir + maraviroc 0.104 microg/mL, range 0.025-0.826; raltegravir 0.090 microg/mL, range <0.020-2.47, p = 0.400). Detectable (>0.02 microg/mL) raltegravir concentrations were observed in all patients receiving raltegravir + maraviroc and in 74% of patients receiving raltegravir alone (p = 0.060). After 6 months of treatment, the 2 groups had similar clinical, virologic, and immunologic conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Coadministration of maraviroc does not seem to have any relevant effects on raltegravir plasma Ctrough in heavily treatment-experienced patients receiving salvage regimens. Further studies should evaluate the potential additional benefits of maraviroc coadministration in terms of virologic and immunologic response.

Long-term efficacy and safety of TDM-assisted combination of voriconazole plus efavirenz in an AIDS patient with cryptococcosis and liver cirrhosis.

OBJECTIVE: To report the efficacy, tolerability, and pharmacokinetic effects of combined voriconazole and efavirenz treatment administered at therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM)-based adjusted doses to a patient with AIDS, cryptococcosis, and mild liver cirrhosis. CASE SUMMARY: A 40-year-old man with AIDS (hemophiliac, antiretroviral-naïve, plasma HIV-RNA = 290,000 copies/mL, CD4+ lymphocytes = 0), hepatitis C virus-related liver cirrhosis (Child-Pugh class A), and cryptococcal meningitis was failing standard antifungal therapies. He received an antifungal-antiretroviral combination treatment based on the association of voriconazole plus efavirenz. Doses of both drugs were serially adjusted based on their plasma concentrations, which were evaluated at steady-state of each dose combination at least once (week 3.1 or later) as full concentration-time profile (samples collected at 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 12 h postdose). Adequate concentrations of voriconazole in both plasma and cerebrospinal fluid were obtained and target plasma concentrations of efavirenz were achieved at the final dose adjustment (voriconazole 200 mg twice daily plus efavirenz 300 mg once daily, both administered orally). The patient showed prompt and stable suppression of cryptococcosis and plasma viremia of HIV at long-term follow-up (66 wk), with no significant adverse events. DISCUSSION: Standard therapies for cryptococcosis in patients with AIDS are often not effective. Voriconazole, despite its promising anticryptococcal efficacy, is currently not approved for cryptococcosis therapy in the US and Europe, nor is it recommended for combination with efavirenz due to the significant pharmacokinetic interactions between the 2 compounds. Thus far, published studies regarding the effects of voriconazole in human cryptococcosis are scarce and none has described the clinical and pharmacokinetic outcomes of a voriconazole/efavirenz combination in patients with AIDS, either with or without liver cirrhosis. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of voriconazole and efavirenz at TDM-assisted doses may represent a valuable therapeutic option in AIDS patients with cryptococcosis and mild liver cirrhosis.

Pharmacokinetics of anorectal nifedipine and lidocaine (lignocaine) ointment following haemorrhoidectomy: an open-label, single-dose, phase IV clinical study.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess whether topical anorectal application of an ointment containing nifedipine (0.3% w/w) and lidocaine (lignocaine) [1.5% w/w] to patients undergoing Milligan-Morgan haemorrhoidectomy achieves pharmacologically relevant serum concentrations of the active ingredients and has any haemodynamic effects or adverse effects. METHODS: A single dose of 3 g of study ointment was circumferentially applied inside the anus to 24 patients (17 males and 7 females) aged 23-71 years (mean +/- SD: 42.9 +/- 4.9 years) during postoperative dressing after Milligan-Morgan haemorrhoidectomy from March 2007 to January 2008. Blood samples for the determination of nifedipine and lidocaine serum concentrations were drawn before surgery and at 20, 40, 60, 90, 120, 240, 360, 480 and 720 minutes after application. Serum concentrations of nifedipine and lidocaine were determined by a high-performance liquid chromatography method in order to calculate pharmacokinetic parameters. Patients' BP, heart rate and ECG readings were monitored during the study. RESULTS: Chromatographic signals of nifedipine were sporadically observed in only five patients (20.8%), consistent with therapeutically negligible concentrations and insufficient to permit calculation of any pharmacokinetic parameters. The serum concentrations of nifedipine in these five patients ranged from 5.9 to 18.8 ng/mL. Lidocaine concentrations were detectable in all patients. The means +/- SD and medians of pharmacokinetic parameters for lidocaine were as follows: maximum serum concentration (C(max)) 245.1 +/- 370.8 ng/mL, 73.6 ng/mL; time to reach C(max) (t(max)) 69.2 +/- 78.3 minutes, 40 minutes; area under the serum concentration-time curve from 0 to 6 hours (AUC(6)) 756.5 +/- 1254.1 ng.h/mL, 238.2 ng.h/mL. Only three patients had maximum serum concentrations above 1000 ng/mL (1037.8, 1044.75 and 1364.1 ng/mL). These outlier concentrations were four to five times lower than the threshold of CNS lidocaine toxicity (5000-6000 ng/mL). No serious local or systemic adverse events were observed throughout the study, and no subjects developed arrhythmias or significant ECG changes. Neither BP nor mean heart rate varied significantly after application of a single dose. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that single-dose topical application of an ointment containing nifedipine (0.3% w/w) and lidocaine (1.5% w/w) to patients undergoing Milligan-Morgan haemorrhoidectomy is safe to use. Following application onto damaged anorectal mucosa, nifedipine and lidocaine are absorbed into the bloodstream in small quantities that do not have any major implications for the safety of the product. Further studies are required to evaluate nifedipine and lidocaine concentrations in serum using a multiple-dose regimen.

Trough concentrations of lopinavir, nelfinavir, and nevirapine with standard dosing in human immunodeficiency virus-infected pregnant women receiving 3-drug combination regimens.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the plasma drug concentrations in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected pregnant women receiving highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) and to define the rate of occurrence of subtherapeutic concentrations for some commonly used antiretroviral drugs during pregnancy. We evaluated HIV-infected women (n = 68) in the third trimester of pregnancy in steady-state treatment with an HAART regimen administrated on a twice a day basis, which included 2 nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors plus nelfinavir (NFV), lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r), or nevirapine (NVP). Blood samples were collected at predose (C(trough)). The following thresholds were used to define therapeutic drug concentrations-NFV: 0.8 microg/mL; LPV: 4.0 microg/mL/1.0 microg/mL (experienced/naive); and NVP: 3.1 microg/mL. At predose sampling, adequate drug concentrations were found in a higher proportion of women receiving NFV (70.8%) and LPV (75.0%) than NVP (55.6%). Median C(trough) plasma concentrations were 1.2 microg/mL for NFV, 5.5 microg/mL for LPV, and 3.1 microg/mL for NVP. Women receiving lopinavir/ritonavir had the lowest rates of detectable (>50 copies/mL) HIV RNA (15.4%) compared with rates of 22.2% and 41.7% among women receiving NVP and NFV, respectively. Genotypic resistance was detected in 50% of women with detectable HIV RNA for whom samples were available for testing. Subtherapeutic predose concentrations among HIV-infected pregnant women were more commonly found with NVP than with protease inhibitors. LPV administration was associated with the best viral load suppression.

Adherence and plasma drug concentrations are predictors of confirmed virologic response after 24-week salvage highly active antiretroviral therapy.

Data from 197 patients for whom highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) failed, who started a new regimen chosen under the guide of resistance testing results interpreted by experts, were retrospectively studied, provided that at least 2 determinations of adherence and plasma drug concentrations were performed during the follow-up. Univariate and multivariable logistic regression analyses were conducted, using confirmed virologic response at week 24 as outcome measure (i.e., achievement of undetectable HIV plasma viral load at any time point before week 24 and its maintenance up to week 24). Suboptimal drug concentrations (odds ratio [OR]: 0.3; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.2-0.7; p = 0.006) and suboptimal adherence (OR: 0.4; 95% CI 0.2-0.8; p = 0.014) were both negative independent predictors of sustained virologic response, while the use of boosted protease inhibitor-containing regimens resulted to be protective (OR: 2.4; 95% CI 1.1-5.3; p = 0.032).

Peritoneal Nebulization of Ropivacaine during Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy: Dose Finding and Pharmacokinetic Study.

Background. Intraperitoneal nebulization of ropivacaine reduces postoperative pain and morphine consumption after laparoscopic surgery. The aim of this multicenter double-blind randomized controlled trial was to assess the efficacy of different doses and dose-related absorption of ropivacaine when nebulized in the peritoneal cavity during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Methods. Patients were randomized to receive 50, 100, or 150 mg of ropivacaine 1% by peritoneal nebulization through a nebulizer. Morphine consumption, pain intensity in the abdomen, wound and shoulder, time to unassisted ambulation, discharge time, and adverse effects were collected during the first 48 hours after surgery. The pharmacokinetics of ropivacaine was evaluated using high performance liquid chromatography. Results. Nebulization of 50 mg of ropivacaine had the same effect of 100 or 150 mg in terms of postoperative morphine consumption, shoulder pain, postoperative nausea and vomiting, activity resumption, and hospital discharge timing (>0.05). Plasma concentrations did not reach toxic levels in any patient, and no significant differences were observed between groups (P > 0.05). Conclusions. There is no enhancement in analgesic efficacy with higher doses of nebulized ropivacaine during laparoscopic cholecystectomy. When administered with a microvibration-based aerosol humidification system, the pharmacokinetics of ropivacaine is constant and maintains an adequate safety profile for each dosage tested.

Steady-state pharmacokinetics and BAL concentration of colistin in critically Ill patients after IV colistin methanesulfonate administration.

BACKGROUND: Infections caused by multidrug-resistant gram-negative bacteria have caused a resurgence of interest in colistin. To date, information about pharmacokinetics of colistin is very limited in critically ill patients, and no attempts have been made to evaluate its concentration in BAL. METHODS: In this prospective, open-label study, 13 adult patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia caused by gram-negative bacteria were treated with colistin methanesulfonate (CMS) IV, 2 million International Units (174 mg) q8h, a usually recommended dose, for at least 2 days. Blood samples were collected from each patient at time intervals after the end of infusion. BAL was performed at 2 h. Colistin was measured by a selective, sensitive high-performance liquid chromatography-based method. Pharmacokinetic parameters were determined by noncompartmental analysis. RESULTS: Patients received 2.19 ± 0.38 mg/kg (range, 1.58-3.16) of CMS per dose. At steady state, mean ± SD plasma colistin maximum (Cmax) and trough (Ctrough) concentrations were 2.21 ± 1.08 and 1.03 ± 0.69 µg/mL, respectively. Mean ± SD area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to 8 h (AUC(0-8)), apparent elimination half-life, and apparent volume of distribution were 11.5 ± 6.2 µg × h/mL, 5.9 ± 2.6 h, and 1.5 ± 1.1 L/kg, respectively. Cmax/minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) ratio and AUC(0-24)/MIC ratio (MIC = 2 µg/mL) were 1.1 ± 0.5 and 17.3 ± 9.3, respectively. Colistin was undetectable in BAL. Nephrotoxicity was not observed. CONCLUSIONS: Although the pharmacodynamic parameters that better predict the efficacy of colistin are not known in humans, in critically ill adult patients the IV administration of CMS 2 million International Units (174 mg) q8h results in apparently suboptimal plasma concentrations of colistin, which is undetectable in BAL. A better understanding of the pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic relationship of colistin is urgently needed to determine the optimal dosing regimen.

Lopinavir/ritonavir pharmacokinetics in HIV/HCV-coinfected patients with or without cirrhosis.

Liver disease may alter the pharmacokinetics of antiretrovirals and produce changes in plasma protein binding. The aim was to evaluate the pharmacokinetics of total and unbound lopinavir (LPV) in HIV-infected patients with and without hepatitis C virus (HCV) coinfection. Fifty-six HIV+ patients receiving lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) (group I = 24 controls; II = 23 HIV/HCV-coinfected; III = 9 cirrhotic HIV/HCV-coinfected) were included. Total (n = 56) and unbound (n = 36) LPV pharmacokinetic parameters were determined at steady-state using validated high-performance liquid chromatography with ultraviolet detection and high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry methods, respectively. Pharmacokinetic parameters (plasma concentration just before drug administration, peak concentrations in plasma, times to maximum plasma concentration, areas under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to 12 hours, and CL/F/kg) of both total and unbound LPV were calculated by standard noncompartmental methods and differences among groups evaluated (Kruskal-Wallis test).LPV apparent oral clearance normalized to body weight (median, interquartile range) was 55 (40-68), 59 (44-69), and 71 (53-78) mL/h/kg for groups I, II, and III, respectively (II vs. I, P = 0.52; III vs. I, P = 0.16). The areas under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to 12 hours were 110.4 (80.9-135.2), 103.4 (85.5-131.3), and 92.8 (87.4-116.3) microg h/mL for groups I, II, and III, respectively (II vs. I, P = 0.68; III vs. I, P = 0.71). Chronic liver impairment produced a slight, although not significant, decrease in plasma protein binding. The free-fraction of LPV increased ( approximately 21%) from 0.97% (0.80-1.06) in HIV+/HCV- patients to 1.18% (0.89-1.65) in HIV/HCV+ cirrhotic patients. The apparent oral clearance of unbound LPV (CLu/F/kg) in cirrhotic patients did not change significantly, supporting the concept that the clearance of unbound LPV in liver disease is not affected after being inhibited by low-dose ritonavir co-administration.LPV total and unbound pharmacokinetics were not affected by hepatic impairment, suggesting that no adjustment of LPV/r dose is required for HIV/HCV-coinfected patients with and without cirrhosis and moderate impairment of liver function.

Multiple-dose pharmacokinetics of efavirenz with and without the use of rifampicin in HIV-positive patients.

Rifampicin (RIF) decreases serum concentrations of several antiretroviral drugs. We carried out a prospective, comparative study to define efavirenz (EFV) pharmacokinetics in 16 cases and 13 controls. Cases were HIV and tuberculosis (TB) co-infected adults assuming RIF 600 mg once daily and EFV 800 mg once daily. Patients on EFV at standard 600 mg dose without RIF were taken as controls. EFV levels in plasma were assayed by high-performance liquid chromatography (HLPC) predose (C(trough)) and at 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16, 18, 22 and 24 hours post-dose, and pharmacokinetic parameters were determined by non-compartmental methods. Among cases, 81% were males, mean age was 37 years, 50% were Caucasians, mean weight was 64 kg, mean CD4 cell counts and log HIV RNA copies were 160/microl and 5.2 /microl, respectively. Cases had a significantly higher Cl/F/kg if compared with controls (0.269 +/- 0.12 versus 0.167 + 0.05 L/h/kg, p<0.01). Otherwise, dose-dependent pharmacokinetic parameters of EFV were similar between cases and controls. Interindividual variability was consistently higher among TB cases compared to controls for all considered parameters. All cases completed combined treatment and no increased EFV toxicity was observed. These results suggest that a dose of 800 mg of EFV in association with rifampicin may be appropriate for patients of weight > 60 kg in Europe. Therapeutic drug monitoring may be beneficial for patients on combination therapy with RIF.

Triple antiretroviral prophylaxis administered during pregnancy and after delivery significantly reduces breast milk viral load: a study within the Drug Resource Enhancement Against AIDS and Malnutrition Program.

BACKGROUND: The administration of antiretroviral therapy to lactating women could represent a possible strategy to reduce postnatal HIV transmission. In this study, we assessed the effect of antiretroviral treatment on breast milk viral load and determined plasma and breast milk drug concentrations in pregnant women receiving highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART). METHODS: We studied 40 women receiving zidovudine, lamivudine, and nevirapine from 28 weeks of gestation to 1 month postpartum (group A) and 40 untreated pregnant women (group B). Blood and breast milk samples were collected at delivery and 7 days postpartum. RESULTS: Women in group A had received a median of 85 days of therapy before delivery. Median breast milk concentrations of nevirapine, lamivudine, and zidovudine were 0.6, 1.8, and 1.1 times, respectively, those in maternal plasma. HIV RNA levels in breast milk were significantly lower in group A than in group B (median of 2.3 vs. 3.4 log at delivery and 1.9 vs. 3.6 log at day 7; P < 0.001 for both comparisons). CONCLUSIONS: Antiretroviral drugs administered during the last trimester of pregnancy and after delivery reach levels similar to or higher than plasma concentrations in breast milk and can significantly reduce HIV RNA levels. Our data support the potential role of maternal HAART prophylaxis in reducing the risk of breast-feeding-associated transmission.

Steady-state pharmacokinetics of atazanavir given alone or in combination with saquinavir hard-gel capsules or amprenavir in HIV-1-infected patients.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this pilot study was to examine the pharmacokinetics of atazanavir (ATV) when given in combination with amprenavir (APV) or saquinavir hard-gel capsules (SQV) to human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-positive patients. METHODS: Included in the study were 34 HIV-infected patients enrolled in the ATV Early Access Program, who were treated with unboosted ATV alone (group 1) or with the double protease inhibitor combinations, ATV plus APV (group 2) or ATV plus SQV (group 3). ATV was given at a daily dose of 400 mg q.d. with the morning meal with SQV 1200 mg per day or APV 1200 mg per day. Serial blood samples for steady-state ATV pharmacokinetics were collected before the morning dose and at 1, 2, 3, 6, 8 and 24 h post-dosing. ATV plasma concentrations were measured using a high-performance liquid chromatography method with ultraviolet detection. RESULTS: Of the patients, 12 received ATV as a single protease inhibitor; 12 received ATV in combination with APV; and 10 in combination with SQV. Geometric mean (coefficient of variation) ATV C(trough) was 110 ng/ml (2.38), 86 ng/ml (0.84) and 149 ng/ml (2.01) in groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively. ATV C(trough) in both double protease inhibitor combination regimens was not significantly different from that as a single protease inhibitor [geometric mean ratio (GMR): 0.77; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.38-1.58, P=not significant for group 2 versus group 1 and 1.34, 0.40-4.49, P=not significant, for group 3 versus group 1). Patients treated with ATV plus APV had a 40.2% lower ATV C(max) and a 30.8% smaller ATV AUC than the reference group treated with unboosted ATV alone: both these differences were statistically significant (GMR, 95% CI: 0.59, 0.41-0.85, P=0.005 and 0.69, 0.48-0.99, P=0.056, respectively). No difference was observed for either C(max) or AUC between the group treated with ATV plus SQV and the reference group (GMR, 95% CI: 0.78, 0.47-1.30, P=not significant and 1.24, 0.73-2.10, P=not significant, respectively). CONCLUSION: ATV pharmacokinetics does not seem to be influenced by the concomitant administration of SQV, whereas APV significantly lowers plasma ATV levels.