Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
País de afiliação
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Clin Infect Dis ; 78(6): 1680-1689, 2024 Jun 14.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38462673

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: The optimal dosing strategy for rifampicin in treating drug-susceptible tuberculosis (TB) is still highly debated. In the phase 3 clinical trial Study 31/ACTG 5349 (NCT02410772), all participants in the control regimen arm received 600 mg rifampicin daily as a flat dose. Here, we evaluated relationships between rifampicin exposure and efficacy and safety outcomes. METHODS: We analyzed rifampicin concentration time profiles using population nonlinear mixed-effects models. We compared simulated rifampicin exposure from flat- and weight-banded dosing. We evaluated the effect of rifampicin exposure on stable culture conversion at 6 months; TB-related unfavorable outcomes at 9, 12, and 18 months using Cox proportional hazard models; and all trial-defined safety outcomes using logistic regression. RESULTS: Our model-derived rifampicin exposure ranged from 4.57 mg · h/L to 140.0 mg · h/L with a median of 41.8 mg · h/L. Pharmacokinetic simulations demonstrated that flat-dosed rifampicin provided exposure coverage similar to the weight-banded dose. Exposure-efficacy analysis (n = 680) showed that participants with rifampicin exposure below the median experienced similar hazards of stable culture conversion and TB-related unfavorable outcomes compared with those with exposure above the median. Exposure-safety analysis (n = 722) showed that increased rifampicin exposure was not associated with increased grade 3 or higher adverse events or serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Flat-dosing of rifampicin at 600 mg daily may be a reasonable alternative to the incumbent weight-banded dosing strategy for the standard-of-care 6-month regimen. Future research should assess the optimal dosing strategy for rifampicin, at doses higher than the current recommendation.


Assuntos
Rifampina , Tuberculose , Rifampina/farmacocinética , Rifampina/administração & dosagem , Humanos , Masculino , Adulto , Feminino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Tuberculose/tratamento farmacológico , Adulto Jovem , Antituberculosos/farmacocinética , Antituberculosos/administração & dosagem , Antituberculosos/efeitos adversos , Resultado do Tratamento , Adolescente , Relação Dose-Resposta a Droga , Idoso
2.
Clin Pharmacol Ther ; 2024 Jul 28.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-39072721

RESUMO

Targeted covalent inhibitors (TCIs) are an emerging class of anticancer therapeutics. TCIs are designed to selectively engage their targeted proteins via covalent warheads. From the drug development standpoint, the covalent inhibition mechanism is anticipated to elicit the following theoretical benefits: (i) an extended duration of therapeutic action that is determined by the target protein turnover rate and not necessarily by drug half-life, (ii) a lower therapeutic dose owing to greater pharmacological potency, (iii) lower risk of off-target binding and associated adverse events, and (iv) reduced drug-drug interaction (DDI) liability due to high selectivity and low dose. Elucidating the clinical relevance of these expected benefits requires an integrated assessment of pharmacokinetics (PK), efficacy, safety, and DDI data. In this review, we compared the clinical pharmacology attributes of FDA-approved oncology TCIs within the last 10 years against their reversible inhibitor (RI) counterparts. Our findings indicated that (i) PK half-lives of TCIs were typically shorter and (ii) at their respective recommended clinical doses per drug label, the molar unbound steady state areas under the concentration-time curve (AUCss) of TCIs were lower than those of RIs, but with longer clinically observed durations of response. However, (iii) there was no conclusive evidence supporting improved clinical safety profiles for TCIs, and (iv) DDI perpetrator profiles appeared to be similar between TCIs and RIs. The overall clinical pharmacology comparison of TCI vs. RI surveyed in this paper suggested that at least two of the four forecasted clinical benefits were achieved by TCIs.

SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA