Pharmacokinetic determinants of virological response to raltegravir in the in vitro pharmacodynamic hollow-fiber infection model system.

Daily administration (q24h) of raltegravir has been shown to be as efficacious as twice-daily administration (q12h) in the hollow-fiber infection model (HFIM) system. However, q24h regimens were not noninferior to q12h dosing in a clinical trial. We hypothesized that between-patient variability in raltegravir pharmacokinetics (PK) was responsible for the discordance in conclusions between the in vitro and in vivo studies. Hollow-fiber cartridges were inoculated with HIV-infected H9 cells and uninfected CEM-SS cells. Four cartridges received the total daily exposure (800 mg) q24h and four received half the daily exposure (400 mg) q12h. PK profiles with half-lives of 8, 4, 3, and 2 h were simulated for each dosing interval. Cell-to-cell viral spread was assessed by flow cytometry. Viral inhibition was similar between q24h and q12h dosing at the 8- and 4-h half-lives. The q24h dosing was not as efficacious as the q12h dosing when faster half-lives were simulated; a lack of viral suppression was observed at days 3 and 4 for the 2- and 3-h half-lives, respectively. The discrepancy in conclusions between the in vitro HFIM system studies and clinical trials is likely due to the large interindividual variation in raltegravir PK.

Pharmacodynamic analysis of a serine protease inhibitor, MK-4519, against hepatitis C virus using a novel in vitro pharmacodynamic system.

The development of new antiviral compounds active against hepatitis C virus (HCV) has surged in recent years. In order for these new compounds to be efficacious in humans, optimal dosage regimens for each compound must be elucidated. We have developed a novel in vitro pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic system, the BelloCell system, to identify optimal dosage regimens for anti-HCV compounds. In these experiments, genotype 1b HCV replicon-bearing cells (2209-23 cells) were inoculated onto carrier flakes in BelloCell bottles and treated with MK-4519, a serine protease inhibitor. Our dose-ranging studies illustrated that MK-4519 inhibited replicon replication in a dose-dependent manner, yielding a 50% effective concentration (EC(50)) of 1.8 nM. Dose-fractionation studies showed that shorter dosing intervals resulted in greater replicon suppression, indicating that the time that the concentration is greater than the EC(50) is the pharmacodynamic parameter for MK-4519 linked with inhibition of replicon replication. Mutations associated with resistance to serine protease inhibitors were detected in replicons harvested from all treatment arms. These data suggest that MK-4519 is highly active against genotype 1b HCV, but monotherapy is not sufficient to prevent the amplification of resistant replicons. In summary, our findings show that the BelloCell system is a useful and clinically relevant tool for predicting optimal dosage regimens for anti-HCV compounds.

Effect of half-life on the pharmacodynamic index of zanamivir against influenza virus delineated by a mathematical model.

Intravenous zanamivir is recommended for the treatment of hospitalized patients with complicated oseltamivir-resistant influenza virus infections. In a companion paper, we show that the time above the 50% effective concentration (time>EC(50)) is the pharmacodynamic (PD) index predicting the inhibition of viral replication by intravenous zanamivir. However, for other neuraminidase inhibitors, the ratio of the area under the concentration-time curve to the EC(50) (AUC/EC(50)) is the most predictive index. Our objectives are (i) to explain the dynamically linked variable of intravenous zanamivir by using different half-lives and (ii) to develop a new, mechanism-based population pharmacokinetic (PK)/PD model for the time course of viral load. We conducted dose fractionation studies in the hollow-fiber infection model (HFIM) system with zanamivir against an oseltamivir-resistant influenza virus. A clinical 2.5-h half-life and an artificially prolonged 8-h half-life were simulated for zanamivir. The values for the AUC from 0 to 24 h (AUC(0-24)) of zanamivir were equivalent for the two half-lives. Viral loads and zanamivir pharmacokinetics were comodeled using data from the present study and a previous dose range experiment via population PK/PD modeling in S-ADAPT. Dosing every 8 h (Q8h) suppressed the viral load better than dosing Q12h or Q24h at the 2.5-h half-life, whereas all regimens suppressed viral growth similarly at the 8-h half-life. The model provided unbiased and precise individual (Bayesian) (r(2), >0.96) and population (pre-Bayesian) (r(2), >0.87) fits for log(10) viral load. Zanamivir inhibited viral release (50% inhibitory concentration [IC(50)], 0.0168 mg/liter; maximum extent of inhibition, 0.990). We identified AUC/EC(50) as the pharmacodynamic index for zanamivir at the 8-h half-life, whereas time>EC(50) best predicted viral suppression at the 2.5-h half-life, since the trough concentrations approached the IC(50) for the 2.5-h but not for the 8-h half-life. The model explained data at both half-lives and holds promise for optimizing clinical zanamivir dosage regimens.

Zanamivir, at 600 milligrams twice daily, inhibits oseltamivir-resistant 2009 pandemic H1N1 influenza virus in an in vitro hollow-fiber infection model system.

In 2009, a novel H1N1 influenza A virus emerged and spread worldwide, initiating a pandemic. Various isolates obtained from disparate parts of the world were shown to be uniformly resistant to the adamantanes but sensitive to the neuraminidase inhibitors oseltamivir and zanamivir. Over time, resistance to oseltamivir became more prevalent among pandemic H1N1 virus isolates, while most remained susceptible to zanamivir. The government has proposed the use of intravenous (i.v.) zanamivir to treat serious influenza virus infections among hospitalized patients. To use zanamivir effectively for patients with severe influenza, it is necessary to know the optimal dose and schedule of administration of zanamivir that will inhibit the replication of oseltamivir-sensitive and -resistant influenza viruses. Therefore, we performed studies using the in vitro hollow-fiber infection model system to predict optimal dosing regimens for zanamivir against an oseltamivir-sensitive and an oseltamivir-resistant virus. Our results demonstrated that zanamivir, at a dose of 600 mg given twice a day (Q12h), inhibited the replication of oseltamivir-sensitive and oseltamivir-resistant influenza viruses throughout the course of the experiment. Thus, our findings suggest that intravenous zanamivir, at a dose of 600 mg Q12h, could be used to treat hospitalized patients suffering from serious infections with oseltamivir-sensitive or -resistant influenza viruses.

Oseltamivir-zanamivir combination therapy suppresses drug-resistant H1N1 influenza A viruses in the hollow fiber infection model (HFIM) system.

Drug-resistant influenza is a significant threat to global public health. Until new antiviral agents with novel mechanisms of action become available, there is a pressing need for alternative treatment strategies with available influenza antivirals. Our aims were to evaluate the antiviral activity of two neuraminidase inhibitors (oseltamivir and zanamivir) as combination therapy against H1N1 influenza A viruses, as these agents bind to the neuraminidase active site differently: oseltamivir requires a conformational change for binding whereas zanamivir does not. We performed pharmacodynamic studies in the hollow fiber infection model (HFIM) system with oseltamivir (75mg Q12h, t1/2: 8h) and zanamivir (600mg Q12h, t1/2: 2.5h), given as mono- or combination therapy, against viruses with varying susceptibilities to oseltamivir and zanamivir. Each antiviral suppressed the replication of influenza strains which were resistant to the other neuraminidase inhibitor, showing each drug does not engender cross-resistance to the other compound. Oseltamivir/zanamivir combination therapy was as effective at suppressing oseltamivir- and zanamivir-resistant influenza viruses and the combination regimen inhibited viral replication at a level that was similar to the most effective monotherapy arm. However, combination therapy offered a clear benefit by preventing the emergence and spread of drug-resistant viruses. These findings demonstrate that combination therapy with two agents that target the same viral protein through distinctly different binding interactions is a feasible strategy to combat resistance emergence. This is a novel finding that may be applicable to other viral and non-viral diseases for which different classes of agents do not exist.

Preclinical Evaluations To Identify Optimal Linezolid Regimens for Tuberculosis Therapy.

UNLABELLED: Linezolid is an oxazolidinone with potent activity against Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Linezolid toxicity in patients correlates with the dose and duration of therapy. These toxicities are attributable to the inhibition of mitochondrial protein synthesis. Clinically relevant linezolid regimens were simulated in the in vitro hollow-fiber infection model (HFIM) system to identify the linezolid therapies that minimize toxicity, maximize antibacterial activity, and prevent drug resistance. Linezolid inhibited mitochondrial proteins in an exposure-dependent manner, with toxicity being driven by trough concentrations. Once-daily linezolid killed M. tuberculosis in an exposure-dependent manner. Further, 300 mg linezolid given every 12 hours generated more bacterial kill but more toxicity than 600 mg linezolid given once daily. None of the regimens prevented linezolid resistance. These findings show that with linezolid monotherapy, a clear tradeoff exists between antibacterial activity and toxicity. By identifying the pharmacokinetic parameters linked with toxicity and antibacterial activity, these data can provide guidance for clinical trials evaluating linezolid in multidrug antituberculosis regimens. IMPORTANCE: The emergence and spread of multidrug-resistant M. tuberculosis are a major threat to global public health. Linezolid is an oxazolidinone that is licensed for human use and has demonstrated potent activity against multidrug-resistant M. tuberculosis. However, long-term use of linezolid has shown to be toxic in patients, often resulting in thrombocytopenia. We examined therapeutic linezolid regimens in an in vitro model to characterize the exposure-toxicity relationship. The antibacterial activity against M. tuberculosis was also assessed for these regimens, including the amplification or suppression of resistant mutant subpopulations by the chosen regimen. Higher exposures of linezolid resulted in greater antibacterial activity, but with more toxicity and, for some regimens, increased resistant mutant subpopulation amplification, illustrating the trade-off between activity and toxicity. These findings can provide valuable insight for designing optimal dosage regimens for linezolid that are part of the long combination courses used to treat multidrug-resistant M. tuberculosis.