Population pharmacokinetic modelling of primaquine exposures in lactating women and breastfed infants.

Current guidelines advise against primaquine treatment for breastfeeding mothers to avoid the potential for haemolysis in infants with G6PD deficiency. To predict the haemolytic risk, the amount of drug received from the breast milk and the resulting infant drug exposure need to be characterised. Here, we develop a pharmacokinetic model to describe the drug concentrations in breastfeeding women using venous, capillary, and breast milk data. A mother-to-infant model is developed to mimic the infant feeding pattern and used to predict their drug exposures. Primaquine and carboxyprimaquine exposures in infants are <1% of the exposure in mothers. Therefore, even in infants with the most severe G6PD deficiency variants, it is highly unlikely that standard doses of primaquine (0.25-1 mg base/kg once daily given to the mother for 1-14 days) would cause significant haemolysis. After the neonatal period, primaquine should not be restricted for breastfeeding women (Clinical Trials Registration: NCT01780753).

Medication adherence framework: A population-based pharmacokinetic approach and its application in antimalarial treatment assessments.

We reported here on the development of a pharmacometric framework to assess patient adherence, by using two population-based approaches - the percentile and the Bayesian method. Three different dosing strategies were investigated in patients prescribed a total of three doses; (1) non-observed therapy, (2) directly observed administration of the first dose, and (3) directly observed administration of the first two doses. The percentile approach used population-based simulations to derive optimal concentration percentile cutoff values from the distribution of simulated drug concentrations at a specific time. This was done for each adherence scenario and compared to full adherence. The Bayesian approach calculated the posterior probability of each adherence scenario at a given drug concentration. The predictive performance (i.e., Youden index, receiver operating characteristic [ROC] curve) of both approaches were highly influenced by sample collection time (early was better) and interindividual variability (smaller was better). The complexity of the structural model and the half-life had a minimal impact on the predictive performance of these methods. The impact of the assay limitation (LOQ) on the predictive performance was relatively small if the fraction of LOQ data was less than 20%. Overall, the percentile method performed similar or better for adherence predictions compared to the Bayesian approach, with the latter showing slightly better results when investigating the adherence to the last dose only. The percentile approach showed acceptable adherence predictions (area under ROC curve > 0.74) when sampling the antimalarial drugs piperaquine at day 7 postdose and lumefantrine at day 3 postdose (i.e., 12 h after the last dose). This could be a highly useful approach when evaluating programmatic implementations of preventive and curative antimalarial treatment programs in endemic areas.

Efficacy of ultra-short, response-guided sofosbuvir and daclatasvir therapy for hepatitis C in a single-arm mechanistic pilot study.

Background: World Health Organization has called for research into predictive factors for selecting persons who could be successfully treated with shorter durations of direct-acting antiviral (DAA) therapy for hepatitis C. We evaluated early virological response as a means of shortening treatment and explored host, viral and pharmacokinetic contributors to treatment outcome. Methods: Duration of sofosbuvir and daclatasvir (SOF/DCV) was determined according to day 2 (D2) virologic response for HCV genotype (gt) 1- or 6-infected adults in Vietnam with mild liver disease. Participants received 4- or 8-week treatment according to whether D2 HCV RNA was above or below 500 IU/ml (standard duration is 12 weeks). Primary endpoint was sustained virological response (SVR12). Those failing therapy were retreated with 12 weeks SOF/DCV. Host IFNL4 genotype and viral sequencing was performed at baseline, with repeat viral sequencing if virological rebound was observed. Levels of SOF, its inactive metabolite GS-331007 and DCV were measured on days 0 and 28. Results: Of 52 adults enrolled, 34 received 4 weeks SOF/DCV, 17 got 8 weeks and 1 withdrew. SVR12 was achieved in 21/34 (62%) treated for 4 weeks, and 17/17 (100%) treated for 8 weeks. Overall, 38/51 (75%) were cured with first-line treatment (mean duration 37 days). Despite a high prevalence of putative NS5A-inhibitor resistance-associated substitutions (RASs), all first-line treatment failures cured after retreatment (13/13). We found no evidence treatment failure was associated with host IFNL4 genotype, viral subtype, baseline RAS, SOF or DCV levels. Conclusions: Shortened SOF/DCV therapy, with retreatment if needed, reduces DAA use in patients with mild liver disease, while maintaining high cure rates. D2 virologic response alone does not adequately predict SVR12 with 4-week treatment. Funding: Funded by the Medical Research Council (Grant MR/P025064/1) and The Global Challenges Research 70 Fund (Wellcome Trust Grant 206/296/Z/17/Z).

Hepatitis C is a blood-borne virus that causes thousands of deaths from liver cirrhosis and liver cancer each year. Antiviral therapies can cure most cases of infection in 12 weeks. Unfortunately, treatment is expensive, and sticking with the regimen for 12 weeks can be difficult. It may be especially challenging for unhoused people or those who use injection drugs and who have high rates of hepatitis C infection. Shorter durations of therapy may make it more accessible, especially for high-risk populations. But studies of shorter antiviral treatment durations have yet to produce high enough cure rates. Finding ways to identify patients who would benefit from shorter therapy is a key goal of the World Health Organization. Potential characteristics that may predict a faster treatment response include low virus levels before initiating treatment, patient genetics, drug resistance mutations in the virus, and higher drug levels in the patient's blood during treatment. For example, previous research showed that a rapid decrease in virus levels in a patient's blood two days after starting antiviral therapy with three drugs predicted patient cures after three weeks of treatment. To test if high cure rates could be achieved in just four weeks of treatment, Flower et al. enrolled 52 patients with hepatitis C in a study to receive the most widely accessible dual antiviral treatment (sofosbuvir and daclatasvir). Participants received four or eight weeks of treatment, depending on the amount of viral RNA in their blood after two days of treatment. The results indicate that a rapid decrease in virus levels in the blood does not adequately predict cure rates with four weeks of two-drug combination therapy. However, eight weeks may be highly effective, regardless of viral levels early in treatment. Thirty-four individuals with low virus levels on the second day of treatment received four weeks of therapy, which cured 21 or 62% of them. All seventeen individuals with higher viral levels on day two were cured after eight weeks of treatment. Twelve weeks of retreatment was sufficient to cure the 13 individuals who did not achieve cure with four weeks of therapy. Even patients with drug resistance genes after the first round of therapy responded to a longer second round. Flower et al. show that patient genetics, virus subtype, drug levels in the patient's blood, and viral drug resistance genes before therapy, were not associated with patient cures after four weeks of treatment. Given that retreatment is safe and effective, larger studies are now needed to determine whether eight weeks of therapy with sofosbuvir and daclatasvir may be enough to cure patients with mild liver disease. More studies are also necessary to identify patients that may benefit from shorter therapy durations. Finding ways to shorten antiviral therapy for hepatitis C could help make treatment more accessible and reduce therapy costs for both individuals and governments.

Need for a Standardized Translational Drug Development Platform: Lessons Learned from the Repurposing of Drugs for COVID-19.

In the absence of drugs to treat or prevent COVID-19, drug repurposing can be a valuable strategy. Despite a substantial number of clinical trials, drug repurposing did not deliver on its promise. While success was observed with some repurposed drugs (e.g., remdesivir, dexamethasone, tocilizumab, baricitinib), others failed to show clinical efficacy. One reason is the lack of clear translational processes based on adequate preclinical profiling before clinical evaluation. Combined with limitations of existing in vitro and in vivo models, there is a need for a systematic approach to urgent antiviral drug development in the context of a global pandemic. We implemented a methodology to test repurposed and experimental drugs to generate robust preclinical evidence for further clinical development. This translational drug development platform comprises in vitro, ex vivo, and in vivo models of SARS-CoV-2, along with pharmacokinetic modeling and simulation approaches to evaluate exposure levels in plasma and target organs. Here, we provide examples of identified repurposed antiviral drugs tested within our multidisciplinary collaboration to highlight lessons learned in urgent antiviral drug development during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our data confirm the importance of assessing in vitro and in vivo potency in multiple assays to boost the translatability of pre-clinical data. The value of pharmacokinetic modeling and simulations for compound prioritization is also discussed. We advocate the need for a standardized translational drug development platform for mild-to-moderate COVID-19 to generate preclinical evidence in support of clinical trials. We propose clear prerequisites for progression of drug candidates for repurposing into clinical trials. Further research is needed to gain a deeper understanding of the scope and limitations of the presented translational drug development platform.

A pharmacometric approach to evaluate drugs for potential repurposing as COVID-19 therapeutics.

INTRODUCTION: Developing and evaluating novel compounds for treatment or prophylaxis of emerging infectious diseases is costly and time-consuming. Repurposing of already available marketed compounds is an appealing option as they already have an established safety profile. This approach could substantially reduce cost and time required to make effective treatments available to fight the COVID-19 pandemic. However, this approach is challenging since many drug candidates show efficacy in in vitro experiments, but fail to deliver effect when evaluated in clinical trials. Better approaches to evaluate in vitro data are needed, in order to prioritize drugs for repurposing. AREAS COVERED: This article evaluates potential drugs that might be of interest for repurposing in the treatment of patients with COVID-19 disease. A pharmacometric simulation-based approach was developed to evaluate in vitro activity data in combination with expected clinical drug exposure, in order to evaluate the likelihood of achieving effective concentrations in patients. EXPERT OPINION: The presented pharmacometric approach bridges in vitro activity data to clinically expected drug exposures, and could therefore be a useful compliment to other methods in order to prioritize repurposed drugs for evaluation in prospective randomized controlled clinical trials.

Pre-clinical evaluation of antiviral activity of nitazoxanide against SARS-CoV-2.

BACKGROUND: To address the emergence of SARS-CoV-2, multiple clinical trials in humans were rapidly started, including those involving an oral treatment by nitazoxanide, despite no or limited pre-clinical evidence of antiviral efficacy. METHODS: In this work, we present a complete pre-clinical evaluation of the antiviral activity of nitazoxanide against SARS-CoV-2. FINDINGS: First, we confirmed the in vitro efficacy of nitazoxanide and tizoxanide (its active metabolite) against SARS-CoV-2. Then, we demonstrated nitazoxanide activity in a reconstructed bronchial human airway epithelium model. In a SARS-CoV-2 virus challenge model in hamsters, oral and intranasal treatment with nitazoxanide failed to impair viral replication in commonly affected organs. We hypothesized that this could be due to insufficient diffusion of the drug into organs of interest. Indeed, our pharmacokinetic study confirmed that concentrations of tizoxanide in organs of interest were always below the in vitro EC50. INTERPRETATION: These preclinical results suggest, if directly applicable to humans, that the standard formulation and dosage of nitazoxanide is not effective in providing antiviral therapy for Covid-19. FUNDING: This work was supported by the Fondation de France "call FLASH COVID-19", project TAMAC, by "Institut national de la santé et de la recherche médicale" through the REACTing (REsearch and ACTion targeting emerging infectious diseases), by REACTING/ANRS MIE under the agreement No. 21180 ('Activité des molécules antivirales dans le modèle hamster'), by European Virus Archive Global (EVA 213 GLOBAL) funded by the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation program under grant agreement No. 871029 and DNDi under support by the Wellcome Trust Grant ref: 222489/Z/21/Z through the COVID-19 Therapeutics Accelerator".

Pharmacometric and Electrocardiographic Evaluation of Chloroquine and Azithromycin in Healthy Volunteers.

Chloroquine and azithromycin were developed in combination for the preventive treatment of malaria in pregnancy, and more recently were proposed as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatment options. Billions of doses of chloroquine have been administered worldwide over the past 70 years but concerns regarding cardiotoxicity, notably the risk of torsades de pointes (TdP), remain. This investigation aimed to characterize the pharmacokinetics and electrocardiographic effects of chloroquine and azithromycin observed in a large previously conducted healthy volunteer study. Healthy adult volunteers (n = 119) were randomized into 5 arms: placebo, chloroquine alone (600 mg base), or chloroquine with either 500 mg, 1,000 mg, or 1,500 mg of azithromycin all given daily for 3 days. Chloroquine and azithromycin levels, measured using liquid-chromatography tandem mass spectrometry, and electrocardiograph intervals were recorded at frequent intervals. Time-matched changes in the PR, QRS, and heart rate-corrected JT, and QT intervals were calculated and the relationship with plasma concentrations was evaluated using linear and nonlinear mixed-effects modeling. Chloroquine and azithromycin pharmacokinetics were described satisfactorily by two- and three-compartment distribution models, respectively. No drug-drug interaction between chloroquine and azithromycin was observed. Chloroquine resulted in concentration-dependent prolongation of the PR, QRS, JTc and QTc intervals with a minimal additional effect of azithromycin. QRS widening contributed ~ 28% of the observed QT prolongation. Chloroquine causes significant concentration-dependent delays in both ventricular depolarization and repolarization. Co-administration of azithromycin did not significantly increase these effects. The arrhythmogenic risk of TdP associated with chloroquine may have been substantially overestimated in studies which did not separate electrocardiograph QRS and JT prolongation.

Drug development for the treatment of onchocerciasis: Population pharmacokinetic and adverse events modeling of emodepside.

BACKGROUND: To accelerate the progress towards onchocerciasis elimination, a macrofilaricidal drug that kills the adult parasite is urgently needed. Emodepside has shown macrofilaricidal activity against a variety of nematodes and is currently under clinical development for the treatment of onchocerciasis. The aims of this study were i) to characterize the population pharmacokinetic properties of emodepside, ii) to link its exposure to adverse events in healthy volunteers, and iii) to propose an optimized dosing regimen for a planned phase II study in onchocerciasis patients. METHODOLOGY / PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Plasma concentration-time profiles and adverse event data were obtained from 142 subjects enrolled in three phase I studies, including a single-dose, and a multiple-dose, dose-escalation study as well as a relative bioavailability study. Nonlinear mixed-effects modeling was used to evaluate the population pharmacokinetic properties of emodepside. Logistic regression modeling was used to link exposure to drug-related treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Emodepside pharmacokinetics were well described by a transit-absorption model, followed by a 3-compartment disposition model. Body weight was included as an allometric function and both food and formulation had a significant impact on absorption rate and relative bioavailability. All drug-related TEAEs were transient, and mild or moderate in severity. An increase in peak plasma concentration was associated with an increase in the odds of experiencing a drug-related TEAE of interest. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Pharmacokinetic modeling and simulation was used to derive an optimized, body weight-based dosing regimen, which allows for achievement of extended emodepside exposures above target concentrations while maintaining acceptable tolerability margins.

Triple therapy with artemether-lumefantrine plus amodiaquine versus artemether-lumefantrine alone for artemisinin-resistant, uncomplicated falciparum malaria: an open-label, randomised, multicentre trial.

BACKGROUND: Late treatment failures after artemisinin-based combination therapies (ACTs) for falciparum malaria have increased in the Greater Mekong subregion in southeast Asia. Addition of amodiaquine to artemether-lumefantrine could provide an efficacious treatment for multidrug-resistant infections. METHODS: We conducted an open-label, randomised trial at five hospitals or health centres in three locations (western Cambodia, eastern Cambodia, and Vietnam). Eligible participants were male and female patients aged 2-65 years with uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1 in blocks of eight to 12) to either artemether-lumefantrine alone (dosed according to WHO guidelines) or artemether-lumefantrine plus amodiaquine (10 mg base per kg/day), both given orally as six doses over 3 days. All received a single dose of primaquine (0·25 mg/kg) 24 h after the start of study treatment to limit transmission of the parasite. Parasites were genotyped, identifying artemisinin resistance. The primary outcome was Kaplan-Meier 42-day PCR-corrected efficacy against recrudescence of the original parasite, assessed by intent-to-treat. Safety was a secondary outcome. This completed trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03355664). FINDINGS: Between March 18, 2018, and Jan 30, 2020, 310 patients received randomly allocated treatment; 154 received artemether-lumefantrine alone and 156 received artemether-lumefantrine plus amodiaquine. Parasites from 305 of these patients were genotyped. 42-day PCR-corrected treatment efficacy was noted in 151 (97%, 95% CI 92-99) of 156 patients with artemether-lumefantrine plus amodiaquine versus 146 (95%, 89-97) of 154 patients with artemether-lumefantrine alone; hazard ratio (HR) for recrudescence 0·6 (95% CI 0·2-1·9, p=0·38). Of the 13 recrudescences, 12 were in 174 (57%) of 305 infections with pfkelch13 mutations indicating artemisinin resistance, for which 42-day efficacy was noted in 89 (96%) of 93 infections with artemether-lumefantrine plus amodiaquine versus 73 (90%) of 81 infections with artemether-lumefantrine alone; HR for recrudescence 0·44 (95% CI 0·14-1·40, p=0·17). Artemether-lumefantrine plus amodiaquine was generally well tolerated, but the number of mild (grade 1-2) adverse events, mainly gastrointestinal, was greater in this group compared with artemether-lumefantrine alone (vomiting, 12 [8%] with artemether-lumefantrine plus amodiaquine vs three [2%] with artemether-lumefantrine alone, p=0·03; and nausea, 11 [7%] with artemether-lumefantrine plus amodiaquine vs three [2%] with artemether-lumefantrine alone, p=0·05). Early vomiting within 1 h of treatment, requiring retreatment, occurred in no patients of 154 with artemether-lumefantrine alone versus five (3%) of 156 with artemether-lumefantrine plus amodiaquine, p=0·06. Bradycardia (≤54 beats/min) of any grade was noted in 59 (38%) of 154 patients with artemether-lumefantrine alone and 95 (61%) of 156 with artemether-lumefantrine plus amodiaquine, p=0·0001. INTERPRETATION: Artemether-lumefantrine plus amodiaquine provides an alternative to artemether-lumefantrine alone as first-line treatment for multidrug-resistant P falciparum malaria in the Greater Mekong subregion, and could prolong the therapeutic lifetime of artemether-lumefantrine in malaria-endemic populations. FUNDING: Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Wellcome Trust.

The oral protease inhibitor (PF-07321332) protects Syrian hamsters against infection with SARS-CoV-2 variants of concern.

There is an urgent need for potent and selective antivirals against SARS-CoV-2. Pfizer developed PF-07321332 (PF-332), a potent inhibitor of the viral main protease (Mpro, 3CLpro) that can be dosed orally and that is in clinical development. We here report that PF-332 exerts equipotent in vitro activity against the four SARS-CoV-2 variants of concerns (VoC) and that it can completely arrest replication of the alpha variant in primary human airway epithelial cells grown at the air-liquid interface. Treatment of Syrian Golden hamsters with PF-332 (250 mg/kg, twice daily) completely protected the animals against intranasal infection with the beta (B.1.351) and delta (B.1.617.2) SARS-CoV-2 variants. Moreover, treatment of SARS-CoV-2 (B.1.617.2) infected animals with PF-332 completely prevented transmission to untreated co-housed sentinels.

Mechanistic Modeling of Primaquine Pharmacokinetics, Gametocytocidal Activity, and Mosquito Infectivity.

Clinical studies have shown that adding a single 0.25 mg base/kg dose of primaquine to standard antimalarial regimens rapidly sterilizes Plasmodium falciparum gametocytes. However, the mechanism of action and overall impact on malaria transmission is still unknown. Using data from 81 adult Malians with P. falciparum gametocytemia who received the standard dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine treatment course and were randomized to receive either a single dose of primaquine between 0.0625 and 0.5 mg base/kg or placebo, we characterized the pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic relationships for transmission blocking activity. Both gametocyte clearance and mosquito infectivity were assessed. A mechanistically linked pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic model adequately described primaquine and carboxy-primaquine pharmacokinetics, gametocyte dynamics, and mosquito infectivity at different clinical doses of primaquine. Primaquine showed a dose-dependent gametocytocidal effect that precedes clearance. A single low dose of primaquine (0.25 mg/kg) rapidly prevented P. falciparum transmissibility.

Development of weight and age-based dosing of daily primaquine for radical cure of vivax malaria.

BACKGROUND: In many endemic areas, Plasmodium vivax malaria is predominantly a disease of young adults and children. International recommendations for radical cure recommend fixed target doses of 0.25 or 0.5 mg/kg/day of primaquine for 14 days in glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase normal patients of all ages. However, for many anti-malarial drugs, including primaquine, there is evidence that children have lower exposures than adults for the same weight-adjusted dose. The aim of the study was to develop 14-day weight-based and age-based primaquine regimens against high-frequency relapsing tropical P. vivax. METHODS: The recommended adult target dose of 0.5 mg/kg/day (30 mg in a 60 kg patient) is highly efficacious against tropical P. vivax and was assumed to produce optimal drug exposure. Primaquine doses were calculated using allometric scaling to derive a weight-based primaquine regimen over a weight range from 5 to 100 kg. Growth curves were constructed from an anthropometric database of 53,467 individuals from the Greater Mekong Subregion (GMS) to define weight-for-age relationships. The median age associated with each weight was used to derive an age-based dosing regimen from the weight-based regimen. RESULTS: The proposed weight-based regimen has 5 dosing bands: (i) 5-7 kg, 5 mg, resulting in 0.71-1.0 mg/kg/day; (ii) 8-16 kg, 7.5 mg, 0.47-0.94 mg/kg/day; (iii) 17-40 kg, 15 mg, 0.38-0.88 mg/kg/day; (iv) 41-80 kg, 30 mg, 0.37-0.73 mg/kg/day; and (v) 81-100 kg, 45 mg, 0.45-0.56 mg/kg/day. The corresponding age-based regimen had 4 dosing bands: 6-11 months, 5 mg, 0.43-1.0 mg/kg/day; (ii) 1-5 years, 7.5 mg, 0.35-1.25 mg/kg/day; (iii) 6-14 years, 15 mg, 0.30-1.36 mg/kg/day; and (iv) ≥ 15 years, 30 mg, 0.35-1.07 mg/kg/day. CONCLUSION: The proposed weight-based regimen showed less variability around the primaquine dose within each dosing band compared to the age-based regimen and is preferred. Increased dose accuracy could be achieved by additional dosing bands for both regimens. The age-based regimen might not be applicable to regions outside the GMS, which must be based on local anthropometric data. Pharmacokinetic data in small children are needed urgently to inform the proposed regimens.

Arterolane-piperaquine-mefloquine versus arterolane-piperaquine and artemether-lumefantrine in the treatment of uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria in Kenyan children: a single-centre, open-label, randomised, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Triple antimalarial combination therapies combine potent and rapidly cleared artemisinins or related synthetic ozonides, such as arterolane, with two, more slowly eliminated partner drugs to reduce the risk of resistance. We aimed to assess the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of arterolane-piperaquine-mefloquine versus arterolane-piperaquine and artemether-lumefantrine for the treatment of uncomplicated falciparum malaria in Kenyan children. METHODS: In this single-centre, open-label, randomised, non-inferiority trial done in Kilifi County Hospital, Kilifi, coastal Kenya, children with uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria were recruited. Eligible patients were aged 2-12 years and had an asexual parasitaemia of 5000-250 000 parasites per µL. The exclusion criteria included the presence of an acute illness other than malaria, the inability to tolerate oral medications, treatment with an artemisinin derivative in the previous 7 days, a known hypersensitivity or contraindication to any of the study drugs, and a QT interval corrected for heart rate (QTc interval) longer than 450 ms. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1), by use of blocks of six, nine, and 12, and opaque, sealed, and sequentially numbered envelopes, to receive either arterolane-piperaquine, arterolane-piperaquine-mefloquine, or artemether-lumefantrine. Laboratory staff, but not the patients, the patients' parents or caregivers, clinical or medical officers, nurses, or trial statistician, were masked to the intervention groups. For 3 days, oral artemether-lumefantrine was administered twice daily (target dose 5-24 mg/kg of bodyweight of artemether and 29-144 mg/kg of bodyweight of lumefantrine), and oral arterolane-piperaquine (arterolane dose 4 mg/kg of bodyweight; piperaquine dose 20 mg/kg of bodyweight) and oral arterolane-piperaquine-mefloquine (mefloquine dose 8 mg/kg of bodyweight) were administered once daily. All patients received 0·25 mg/kg of bodyweight of oral primaquine at hour 24. All patients were admitted to Kilifi County Hospital for at least 3 consecutive days and followed up at day 7 and, thereafter, weekly for up to 42 days. The primary endpoint was 42-day PCR-corrected efficacy, defined as the absence of treatment failure in the first 42 days post-treatment, of arterolane-piperaquine-mefloquine versus artemether-lumefantrine, and, along with safety, was analysed in the intention-to-treat population, which comprised all patients who received at least one dose of a study drug. The 42-day PCR-corrected efficacy of arterolane-piperaquine-mefloquine versus arterolane-piperaquine was an important secondary endpoint and was also analysed in the intention-to-treat population. The non-inferiority margin for the risk difference between treatments was -7%. The study is registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03452475, and is completed. FINDINGS: Between March 7, 2018, and May 2, 2019, 533 children with P falciparum were screened, of whom 217 were randomly assigned to receive either arterolane-piperaquine (n=73), arterolane-piperaquine-mefloquine (n=72), or artemether-lumefantrine (n=72) and comprised the intention-to-treat population. The 42-day PCR-corrected efficacy after treatment with arterolane-piperaquine-mefloquine (100%, 95% CI 95-100; 72/72) was non-inferior to that after treatment with artemether-lumefantrine (96%, 95% CI 88-99; 69/72; risk difference 4%, 95% CI 0-9; p=0·25). The 42-day PCR-corrected efficacy of arterolane-piperaquine-mefloquine was non-inferior to that of arterolane-piperaquine (100%, 95% CI 95-100; 73/73; risk difference 0%). Vomiting rates in the first hour post-drug administration were significantly higher in patients treated with arterolane-piperaquine (5%, 95% CI 2-9; ten of 203 drug administrations; p=0·0013) or arterolane-piperaquine-mefloquine (5%, 3-9; 11 of 209 drug administrations; p=0·0006) than in patients treated with artemether-lumefantrine (1%, 0-2; three of 415 drug administrations). Upper respiratory tract complaints (n=26 for artemether-lumefantrine; n=19 for arterolane-piperaquine-mefloquine; n=23 for arterolane-piperaquine), headache (n=13; n=4; n=5), and abdominal pain (n=7; n=5; n=5) were the most frequently reported adverse events. There were no deaths. INTERPRETATION: This study shows that arterolane-piperaquine-mefloquine is an efficacious and safe treatment for uncomplicated falciparum malaria in children and could potentially be used to prevent or delay the emergence of antimalarial resistance. FUNDING: UK Department for International Development, The Wellcome Trust, The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Sun Pharmaceutical Industries.

Pharmacokinetic Study of Rectal Artesunate in Children with Severe Malaria in Africa.

When severe malaria is suspected in children, the WHO recommends pretreatment with a single rectal dose of artesunate before referral to an appropriate facility. This was an individually randomized, open-label, 2-arm, crossover clinical trial in 82 Congolese children with severe falciparum malaria to characterize the pharmacokinetics of rectal artesunate. At admission, children received a single dose of rectal artesunate (10 mg/kg of body weight) followed 12 h later by intravenous artesunate (2.4 mg/kg) or the reverse order. All children also received standard doses of intravenous quinine. Artesunate and dihydroartemisinin were measured at 11 fixed intervals, following 0- and 12-h drug administrations. Clinical, laboratory, and parasitological parameters were measured. After rectal artesunate, artesunate and dihydroartemisinin showed large interindividual variability (peak concentrations of dihydroartemisinin ranged from 5.63 to 8,090 nM). The majority of patients, however, reached previously suggested in vivo IC50 and IC90 values (98.7% and 92.5%, respectively) of combined concentrations of artesunate and dihydroartemisinin between 15 and 30 min after drug administration. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) time above IC50 and IC90 was 5.68 h (2.90 to 6.08) and 2.74 h (1.52 to 3.75), respectively. The absolute rectal bioavailability (IQR) was 25.6% (11.7 to 54.5) for artesunate and 19.8% (10.3 to 35.3) for dihydroartemisinin. The initial 12-h parasite reduction ratio was comparable between rectal and intravenous artesunate: median (IQR), 84.3% (50.0 to 95.4) versus 69.2% (45.7 to 93.6), respectively (P = 0.49). Despite large interindividual variability, rectal artesunate can initiate and sustain rapid parasiticidal activity in most children with severe falciparum malaria while they are transferred to a facility where parenteral artesunate is available. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under identifier NCT02492178.).

Semimechanistic Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Modeling of Piperaquine in a Volunteer Infection Study with Plasmodium falciparum Blood-Stage Malaria.

Dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine is a recommended first-line artemisinin combination therapy for Plasmodium falciparum malaria. Piperaquine is also under consideration for other antimalarial combination therapies. The aim of this study was to develop a pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic model that might be useful when optimizing the use of piperaquine in new antimalarial combination therapies. The pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic model was developed using data from a previously reported dose-ranging study where 24 healthy volunteers were inoculated with 1,800 blood-stage Plasmodium falciparum parasites. All volunteers received a single oral dose of piperaquine (960 mg, 640 mg, or 480 mg) on day 7 or day 8 after parasite inoculation in separate cohorts. Parasite densities were measured by quantitative PCR (qPCR), and piperaquine levels were measured in plasma samples. We used nonlinear mixed-effect modeling to characterize the pharmacokinetic properties of piperaquine and the parasite dynamics associated with piperaquine exposure. The pharmacokinetics of piperaquine was described by a three-compartment disposition model. A semimechanistic parasite dynamics model was developed to explain the maturation of parasites, sequestration of mature parasites, synchronicity of infections, and multiplication of parasites, as seen in natural clinical infections with P. falciparum malaria. Piperaquine-associated parasite killing was estimated using a maximum effect (Emax) function. Treatment simulations (i.e., 3-day oral dosing of dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine) indicated that to be able to combat multidrug-resistant infections, an ideal additional drug in a new antimalarial triple-combination therapy should have a parasite reduction ratio of ≥102 per life cycle (38.8 h) with a duration of action of ≥2 weeks. The semimechanistic pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic model described here offers the potential to be a valuable tool for assessing and optimizing current and new antimalarial drug combination therapies containing piperaquine and the impact of these therapies on killing multidrug-resistant infections. (This study has been registered in the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry under no. ANZCTRN12613000565741.).

Population Pharmacokinetic Properties of Antituberculosis Drugs in Vietnamese Children with Tuberculous Meningitis.

Optimal dosing of children with tuberculous meningitis (TBM) remains uncertain and is currently based on the treatment of pulmonary tuberculosis in adults. This study aimed to investigate the population pharmacokinetics of isoniazid, rifampin, pyrazinamide, and ethambutol in Vietnamese children with TBM, to propose optimal dosing in these patients, and to determine the relationship between drug exposure and treatment outcome. A total of 100 Vietnamese children with TBM were treated with an 8-month antituberculosis regimen. Nonlinear mixed-effects modeling was used to evaluate the pharmacokinetic properties of the four drugs and to simulate different dosing strategies. The pharmacokinetic properties of rifampin and pyrazinamide in plasma were described successfully by one-compartment disposition models, while those of isoniazid and ethambutol in plasma were described by two-compartment disposition models. All drug models included allometric scaling of body weight and enzyme maturation during the first years of life. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) penetration of rifampin was relatively poor and increased with increasing protein levels in CSF, a marker of CSF inflammation. Isoniazid and pyrazinamide showed good CSF penetration. Currently recommended doses of isoniazid and pyrazinamide, but not ethambutol and rifampin, were sufficient to achieve target exposures. The ethambutol dose cannot be increased because of ocular toxicity. Simulation results suggested that rifampin dosing at 50 mg/kg of body weight/day would be required to achieve the target exposure. Moreover, low rifampin plasma exposure was associated with an increased risk of neurological disability. Therefore, higher doses of rifampin could be considered, but further studies are needed to establish the safety and efficacy of increased dosing.

COVID-19 prevention and treatment: A critical analysis of chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine clinical pharmacology.

Nicholas White and coauthors discuss chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine pharmacology in the context of possible treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection.

Concentration-dependent mortality of chloroquine in overdose.

Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine are used extensively in malaria and rheumatological conditions, and now in COVID-19 prevention and treatment. Although generally safe they are potentially lethal in overdose. In-vitro data suggest that high concentrations and thus high doses are needed for COVID-19 infections, but as yet there is no convincing evidence of clinical efficacy. Bayesian regression models were fitted to survival outcomes and electrocardiograph QRS durations from 302 prospectively studied French patients who had taken intentional chloroquine overdoses, of whom 33 died (11%), and 16 healthy volunteers who took 620 mg base chloroquine single doses. Whole blood concentrations of 13.5 µmol/L (95% credible interval 10.1-17.7) were associated with 1% mortality. Prolongation of ventricular depolarization is concentration-dependent with a QRS duration >150 msec independently highly predictive of mortality in chloroquine self-poisoning. Pharmacokinetic modeling predicts that most high dose regimens trialled in COVID-19 are unlikely to cause serious cardiovascular toxicity.

Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine are closely-related drugs used for the treatment of malaria and rheumatological conditions, such as lupus. Laboratory tests have indicated that these drugs could also be used against the virus that causes COVID-19. Given the urgent need, these drugs have been fast-tracked into large-scale clinical trials, bypassing the usual stages that would provide estimates for suitable dosage. The dosage is a critical factor in a clinical trial: too low and the drug will not have an effect, too high and the side effects may counteract any potential benefits. Laboratory tests suggest that higher doses of chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine are needed for treating COVID-19 compared to malaria or lupus. However, there are concerns about the high doses used in some trials, as the drugs can have lethal side effects. Indeed, chloroquine has been used extensively in suicide attempts, particularly in France. To address these concerns, Watson et al. set out to determine the highest dosage of chloroquine (and thus of hydroxychloroquine, approximately) that does not cause unacceptable side effects. First, data was analysed regarding the concentration of chloroquine in the blood of 302 patients who had intentionally overdosed on the drug, since this concentration is tightly correlated with their risk of death. Watson et al. used a statistical model to calculate the maximal chloroquine concentration in a person's blood associated with a one per cent risk of death. This is taken to be the threshold above which any potential benefit of chloroquine treatment would be outweighed by the possibility of lethal toxicity. Watson et al. also estimated the relationship between chloroquine concentrations and changes in electrocardiogram patterns, which record the electrical activity of the heart. This makes it possible to determine whether a high dose of chloroquine has led to dangerous levels in the blood. Using a mathematical model of how chloroquine is metabolised, Watson et al. predicted that most of the trials that tested chloroquine as a treatment for COVID-19 did not reach the calculated threshold concentration. An exception was the CloroCovid-19 trial in Brazil, which was stopped early because people in the higher dosage group suffered more heart problems and died in greater numbers than those in the lower dosage group. Two large randomised trials, RECOVERY and SOLIDARITY, have shown no benefit of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine in the treatment of COVID-19, changing clinical practice worldwide. Both of these trials used high doses resulting in higher hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine concentrations than normally observed in the treatment of malaria or rheumatological conditions. The results from Watson et al demonstrate that the lack of benefit seen in these two large clinical trials is not due to the drug dosage being too high.

Triple artemisinin-based combination therapies versus artemisinin-based combination therapies for uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria: a multicentre, open-label, randomised clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Artemisinin and partner-drug resistance in Plasmodium falciparum are major threats to malaria control and elimination. Triple artemisinin-based combination therapies (TACTs), which combine existing co-formulated ACTs with a second partner drug that is slowly eliminated, might provide effective treatment and delay emergence of antimalarial drug resistance. METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label, randomised trial, we recruited patients with uncomplicated P falciparum malaria at 18 hospitals and health clinics in eight countries. Eligible patients were aged 2-65 years, with acute, uncomplicated P falciparum malaria alone or mixed with non-falciparum species, and a temperature of 37·5°C or higher, or a history of fever in the past 24 h. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to one of two treatments using block randomisation, depending on their location: in Thailand, Cambodia, Vietnam, and Myanmar patients were assigned to either dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine or dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine plus mefloquine; at three sites in Cambodia they were assigned to either artesunate-mefloquine or dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine plus mefloquine; and in Laos, Myanmar, Bangladesh, India, and the Democratic Republic of the Congo they were assigned to either artemether-lumefantrine or artemether-lumefantrine plus amodiaquine. All drugs were administered orally and doses varied by drug combination and site. Patients were followed-up weekly for 42 days. The primary endpoint was efficacy, defined by 42-day PCR-corrected adequate clinical and parasitological response. Primary analysis was by intention to treat. A detailed assessment of safety and tolerability of the study drugs was done in all patients randomly assigned to treatment. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02453308, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Aug 7, 2015, and Feb 8, 2018, 1100 patients were given either dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (183 [17%]), dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine plus mefloquine (269 [24%]), artesunate-mefloquine (73 [7%]), artemether-lumefantrine (289 [26%]), or artemether-lumefantrine plus amodiaquine (286 [26%]). The median age was 23 years (IQR 13 to 34) and 854 (78%) of 1100 patients were male. In Cambodia, Thailand, and Vietnam the 42-day PCR-corrected efficacy after dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine plus mefloquine was 98% (149 of 152; 95% CI 94 to 100) and after dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine was 48% (67 of 141; 95% CI 39 to 56; risk difference 51%, 95% CI 42 to 59; p<0·0001). Efficacy of dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine plus mefloquine in the three sites in Myanmar was 91% (42 of 46; 95% CI 79 to 98) versus 100% (42 of 42; 95% CI 92 to 100) after dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (risk difference 9%, 95% CI 1 to 17; p=0·12). The 42-day PCR corrected efficacy of dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine plus mefloquine (96% [68 of 71; 95% CI 88 to 99]) was non-inferior to that of artesunate-mefloquine (95% [69 of 73; 95% CI 87 to 99]) in three sites in Cambodia (risk difference 1%; 95% CI -6 to 8; p=1·00). The overall 42-day PCR-corrected efficacy of artemether-lumefantrine plus amodiaquine (98% [281 of 286; 95% CI 97 to 99]) was similar to that of artemether-lumefantrine (97% [279 of 289; 95% CI 94 to 98]; risk difference 2%, 95% CI -1 to 4; p=0·30). Both TACTs were well tolerated, although early vomiting (within 1 h) was more frequent after dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine plus mefloquine (30 [3·8%] of 794) than after dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (eight [1·5%] of 543; p=0·012). Vomiting after artemether-lumefantrine plus amodiaquine (22 [1·3%] of 1703) and artemether-lumefantrine (11 [0·6%] of 1721) was infrequent. Adding amodiaquine to artemether-lumefantrine extended the electrocardiogram corrected QT interval (mean increase at 52 h compared with baseline of 8·8 ms [SD 18·6] vs 0·9 ms [16·1]; p<0·01) but adding mefloquine to dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine did not (mean increase of 22·1 ms [SD 19·2] for dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine vs 20·8 ms [SD 17·8] for dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine plus mefloquine; p=0·50). INTERPRETATION: Dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine plus mefloquine and artemether-lumefantrine plus amodiaquine TACTs are efficacious, well tolerated, and safe treatments of uncomplicated P falciparum malaria, including in areas with artemisinin and ACT partner-drug resistance. FUNDING: UK Department for International Development, Wellcome Trust, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, UK Medical Research Council, and US National Institutes of Health.