Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
2.
Br J Clin Pharmacol ; 88(3): 1043-1053, 2022 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34318516

ABSTRACT

AIMS: To assess the potential of interleukin-6 (IL-6) signalling blockade in the lung to treat SARS-CoV-2 infection via model-based simulation by exploring soluble IL-6 receptor (sIL-6R) sequestration by tocilizumab (TCZ) and IL-6 sequestration by siltuximab (SIL). METHODS: Literature values of IL-6, IL-6 antagonist SIL, sIL-6R, IL-6R antagonist TCZ and their respective binding constants were used to develop a model to predict the impact of treatment on IL-6 signalling. Models were used to generate simulated bronchoalveolar lavage fluid concentrations for normal subjects, subjects at risk of developing acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and subjects with ARDS under 4 conditions: without treatment; treatment with TCZ; treatment with SIL; and treatment with TCZ + SIL. RESULTS: With TCZ intervention, IL-6 levels are unaffected and sIL-6R is reduced somewhat below the Normal case. IL-6:sIL-6R complex only slightly decreased relative to the no-intervention case. With SIL intervention, sIL-6R levels are unaffected and IL-6 is greatly reduced below the Normal case. IL-6:sIL-6R complex is greatly decreased relative to the no-intervention case. With TCZ + SIL intervention, IL-6 and sIL-6R levels are reduced below the Normal case and achieve suppression equivalent to monotherapy results for their respective targets. IL-6:sIL-6R complex reduction is predicted to be greater than that achieved with monotherapy. This reflects sequestration of both components of the complex and the nonlinear binding equilibrium. CONCLUSION: Coadministration of both IL-6 and IL-6R sequestering products such as SIL and TCZ may be necessary to effectively treat COVID-19 patients who have or are at risk of developing ARDS.


Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Respiratory Distress Syndrome , Computer Simulation , Drug Therapy, Combination , Humans , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/drug therapy , Respiratory Distress Syndrome/virology , SARS-CoV-2
3.
Br J Clin Pharmacol ; 87(9): 3388-3397, 2021 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33534138

ABSTRACT

During a pandemic caused by a novel pathogen (NP), drug repurposing offers the potential of a rapid treatment response via a repurposed drug (RD) while more targeted treatments are developed. Five steps of model-informed drug repurposing (MIDR) are discussed: (i) utilize RD product label and in vitro NP data to determine initial proof of potential, (ii) optimize potential posology using clinical pharmacokinetics (PK) considering both efficacy and safety, (iii) link events in the viral life cycle to RD PK, (iv) link RD PK to clinical and virologic outcomes, and optimize clinical trial design, and (v) assess RD treatment effects from trials using model-based meta-analysis. Activities which fall under these five steps are categorized into three stages: what can be accomplished prior to an NP emergence (preparatory stage), during the NP pandemic (responsive stage) and once the crisis has subsided (retrospective stage). MIDR allows for extraction of a greater amount of information from emerging data and integration of disparate data into actionable insight.


Subject(s)
Drug Repositioning , Pandemics , Research Design , Retrospective Studies
4.
Bone Marrow Transplant ; 55(9): 1744-1753, 2020 09.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32127657

ABSTRACT

This study (NCT01288573) investigated plerixafor's safety and efficacy in children with cancer. Stage 1 investigated the dosage, pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and safety of plerixafor + standard mobilization (G-CSF ± chemotherapy). The stage 2 primary endpoint was successful mobilization (doubling of peripheral blood CD34+ cell count in the 24 h prior to first apheresis) in patients treated with plerixafor + standard mobilization vs. standard mobilization alone. In stage 1, three patients per age group (2-<6, 6-<12, and 12-<18 years) were treated at each dose level (160, 240, and 320 µg/kg). Based on PK and PD data, the dose proposed for stage 2 was 240 µg/kg (patients 1-<18 years), in which 45 patients were enrolled (30 plerixafor arm, 15 standard arm). Patient demographics and characteristics were well balanced across treatment arms. More patients in the plerixafor arm (24/30, 80%) met the primary endpoint of successful mobilization than in the standard arm (4/14, 28.6%, p = 0.0019). Adverse events reported as related to study treatment were mild, and no new safety concerns were identified. Plerixafor + standard G-CSF ± chemotherapy mobilization was generally well tolerated and efficacious when used to mobilize CD34+ cells in pediatric cancer patients.


Subject(s)
Heterocyclic Compounds , Neoplasms , Adolescent , Autografts , Benzylamines , Child , Cyclams , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Mobilization , Humans , Neoplasms/therapy
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...