370 likes | 657 Views
Barcelona, 2 6 de febrero de 20 10. Farmacocinética e Interacciones. Dr. Esteve Ribera Servei de Malalties Infeccioses Hospital Universitari Vall d’Hebron. Barcelona. Total: 44 comunicaciones. CROI 2009: Farmacología. Interacciones ARV – ARV Interacciones ARV – otros fármacos
E N D
Barcelona, 26 de febrero de 2010 Farmacocinética e Interacciones Dr. Esteve Ribera Servei de Malalties Infeccioses Hospital Universitari Vall d’Hebron. Barcelona
CROI 2009: Farmacología • Interacciones ARV – ARV • Interacciones ARV – otros fármacos • Farmacocinética • Farmacogenómica • Tejidos y reservorios • Embarazo • Pediatría
Interacciones • Entre ARV: • ETR-RAL-DRV/r (606) • ATV y ATV/r – GSK1349572 (616)
ATV ATV/r AUC 91 62 % Cmax 50 34 % Ctr180 121 % • Well tolerated in healthy adult subjects. • No dose adjustment is necessary
Interacciones • ARV – otros fármacos: • LPV/r – buprenorf/naloxona (620) • FPV – posaconazol (621) • EFV – levonorgestrel (934) • NVP – lumefantrina (603) • NVP – RFP (602)
Plasma Concentration (ng/mL) • HIV-seronegative subjects • LPV/r did not have effect on [BUP]or [naloxone] • LPV/r did reduce [norBUP] (BUP metabolite). • Dosage modification of BUP/NLX is not likely to be required when it is co-administered with LPV/r.
Posaconazole (400mgBID) • FPV/ritonavir (700/100 mg BID) • Posaconaz + FPV (700mgBID) • FPV no potenciado reduce las conc. de posaconazol. • Posaconazol no puede sustituir a ritonavir como potenciador.
AUC 58%; Cmax 45%;Cmin 69% • Higher LNG doses may be required to prevent pregnancy. • These results reinforce the importance of dual methods of contraception, including a barrier device, in women taking EFV.
Comparison of NVP C12 in Escalation and Full dose NVP arms 3000 ng/mL (MEC) DAY 7 (Esc, n=7) DAY 14 (Esc, n=6) DAY 21 (Esc, n=5) • With rifampicin NVP PK with dose escalation is less favorable than that of full dose. • Using NVP 400mg daily, NVP concentrations were also below the MEC in both arms. • Evaluation of the PK and safety of higher NVP doses (e.g 600mg daily) after the first 14 days should be considered.
Farmacocinética ARV: • EFV en pelo (604) • TDF/FTC/EFV solución (605) • RAL intracelular (614)
Only hair EFV levels remain strongly correlated with viral load undetectability
90% CI for FTC Cmax and AUC fell within the range of 0.8-1.25 (bioequivalence was met) • EFV Cmax below the range of bioequivalence, AUC slightly above the range and • TDF Cmax and AUC fell above the range (40% and 20% higher). • Both formulations are not bioequivalent for two drugs; the clinical implications are unknown.
RALCtotarewellcorrelatedwithCcell(r=0.86),supportingtheuseofTherapeuticDrugMonitoringbasedonCtotasasurrogateofCcell.RALCtotarewellcorrelatedwithCcell(r=0.86),supportingtheuseofTherapeuticDrugMonitoringbasedonCtotasasurrogateofCcell. • Despitethisgoodgeneralcorrelation,eachpatientexhibitedadistinctintracellularaccumulationforRAL,withCcell/Ctotratiosrangingfrom0.013to0.196(a15-folddifference).
Concentración de ARV en tejidos y reservorios: • RAL genital (608, 609) • DRV genital (610, 611) • MVC LCR y genital (oral 85, 612)
N=14 • Good penetration of RAL in the genital tract of HIV-1 infected women with a ratio CVF/BP=2.3and a concentration 16 fold higher than the IC95 on wild type HIV-1 • Likely contributing to virological control in the compartment • These dataalsosuggest a potential use of raltegravir in combination with others ARVs with known penetration in the genital tract of HIV infected women when targetting an impact on prevention of transmission and resistance.
[DRV] Seminal plasma 8.6% (5.7-22.2%) the Blood Plasma concentrations. • DRV Seminal Plasma (344 ng/ml) 6 fold above EC50 of WT HIV-1strains (55 ng/ml). • Only 3 DRV SP concentrations were < 55 ng/mL. • No relationship between DRV concentrationsand HIV-RNA was evidenced.
Semen (SP) vs Blood (BP) Darunavir Concentrations in 18 HIV Men & SP AUC0-24h vs BP AUC0-24h Blood Semen n=18 SP:BP DRV AUC 0-24h ratio = 0.17 (0.07-0.19)
124,7 150 0,723 2,6 0,022 Median Ratio to plasma • MVC achieves levels in CSF within the range of IC50 or higher. • In semen, MVC exceeds severaltimes the IC50. • Most patients undetectable plasma/reservoirs VL (some viralreplication in semen)
Men Women ddI 992% b TVFdp>1000%h Rectal Tissue MVC 2800 % * 3TC 667% g RAL 642% 84LB 600% ZDV 590% b P609 ABC 560% d Semen/BP ratios paired samples Semen/BP AUC ratios GT/BP AUC ratios GT/BP ratios paired samples TVF 515% b TVF 510% h 500% Higher Genital Tract Exposures 3TC 460% o 3TC 411% c 400% FTC 395% c IDV/r 380% aa d4T 350% v TVF 330% i ZDV 330% g 300% 3TC 319% b P608 MVC 273% a Vaginal Tissue MVC 200% * RAL 230 % ZDV 235% c P609 ZDV 228% y 200% ZDV 190% o MVC 190% a* FTC 150% b RAL 160% Equivalent Blood and Genital Tract Exposures ABC 150% z RAL 142% m DRV 150% n IDV 145% bb IDV/r 132% aa ETR 130% n IDV 140% p NVP 130% bb ddI 114% b* TVF* 110% c 100% IDV 100% z 3TCtp 100% g TVF 90% o RAL 93% f 84LB 80% RTV 81% b NVP 80% bb MVC 72% TVF 75% c 84LB IDV 70% bb* MVC 71% MVC 62% P612 NVP 61% v 60% ABC 58% b Lower Genital Tract Exposures NFV 54% o RTV 54% o APV 50% bb 40% ZDVtp 33% g LPV 30% b RTV 26% c APV 20% cc 20% ddI 21% c P610 DLV 16% x P611 DLV 20% bb *DRV 17% ATV 18% c RTV 19 b *DRV 12% ATV 10% k EFV 9% w *DRV 9% P611 LPV 6% q NFV 7% r RTV 7% j LPV 12% b LPV 5 % j ABC 8% c LPV 8% c DLV 5% bb LPV 5% bb d4T 2% v SQV 3% p RTV 3% q LPV 2-3% t LPV 3% b EFV 3.3% s d4T 5% c RTV 3% b 0% EFV 1% b EFV 0.4% c EFV ND i ENF ND s RTV ND p SQV ND d LPV ND u SQV bb *CROI 2010; P611; Taylor, Jayasuryia , Dufty et al From Dumond, Cohen and Kashuba 2007; adapted by Taylor and Davies 2010
PK – embarazo y neonatos: • LPV (906) • ATV (907) • FPV (908) • NVP (910, 911)
The reduction of LPV drug exposure compared to non-pregnant women was less pronounced in Thai women than in US women (~ 25% versus 50%). • In this PK study all women achieved an HIV RNA viral load <400 copies/mL before delivery. • Standard LPV/r dosing in during the 3rd trimester provides adequate drug exposure.
Postpartum 3rd trimester • Dose adjustment for ATV/r in pregnancy is not required. • ATV/r, in combination with AZT/3TC, was well tolerated in pregnant women.
APV 3rd Tri Postpart Ratio (90CI) AUC0-12 32.4 50.7 0.69 (0.51-0.94) Cmax 5.93 5.68 0.95(0.64-1.40) Cmin 1.70 2.43 0.86 (0.55-1.34) • Boosted FPV is well tolerated and was associated with good viral suppression (all VL<400). • APV AUC is reduced during the 3rd trimester vs. post-partum and historical controls. • APV concentrations during the 3rd trimester are greater than seen with unboosted FPV and trough concentrations achieved during the 3rd trimester are adequate for patients without PI resistance mutations.
PK - pediatría: • RAL (oral 161,872, 873) • LPV/r (877)
Overall, the C12hr was similar for all three formulations. • Both pediatric formulations had moderately higher AUC and Cmax values vs POL formulation. • A high-fat meal slowed the rate of absorption from the EC formulation, with no statistically meaningful change in extent of absorption. • These data support further clinical investigation of the OG and EC pediatric formulations
Open label study of RAL in treatment experienced HIV+ youth • Cohort I: 12-18 yrs adult formulation • Cohort IIA: 6-11 yrs adult formulation • Cohort IIB: 6-11 yrs chewable (OCT) formulation • Cohort III: 2-5 yrs chewable (OCT) formulation
Cohort IIA Cohort IIA Cohort IIB Cohort IIB Adults Adults Parameter Parameter (400 mg bid, fasting) (400 mg bid, fasting) 6 mg/kg bid, fasting) 6 mg/kg bid, fasting) (400 mg bid, fasting)** (400 mg bid, fasting)** N=11 N=11 N=10 N=10 N=45 N=45 · · m m · · m m · · m m · · AUC AUC (mg (mg h/L) h/L) 7.0 (15.8 7.0 (15.8 M M h h ) ) 10.0 (22.5 10.0 (22.5 M M h) h) 7.4 (16.7 7.4 (16.7 M M h) h) 12 12 C C (ng/mL) (ng/mL) 109 (246 nM) 109 (246 nM) 56.8 (128 nM) 56.8 (128 nM) 80.7 (182 nM) 80.7 (182 nM) min min CL/F (L/hr, %CV) CL/F (L/hr, %CV) 49.6 (152%) 49.6 (152%) 21.2 (38%) 21.2 (38%) 51.2 (68%) 51.2 (68%) RAL chewable tablets safe and well tolerated. Wk 12 efficacy data were favorable **Adult Data - Luber et al. 49th ICAAC, September 12-15, 2009, San Francisco, CA
n=12, aleatorizado • Niños con VIH en tto con LPV/r • Dosis única de 2 compr. de LPV/r enteros o triturados. LPVWholeCrushed Ratio (90CI) AUC0-12 141 92 0.60 (0.48 –0.72) Cmax 10.4 9.2 0.81 (0.65 –0.98) Cmin 6.3 4.8 0.67 (0.48 –0.86) • Administration of a single dose of two crushed 200/50 mg LPV/RTV tablets to pediatric patients decreased oral absorption of LPV and RTV by approximately 40%. • The reduced and variable exposure and lack of steady-state pharmacokinetic data with crushed tablet dosing reinforces the need to discourage this dosing practice.
PK: Resumen y Conclusiones • ETR-RAL-DRV/r: No interacción clín. significativa • ATV, ATV/r: [GSK12349572] (similar RAL, no toxicidad) • ARV- otros fármacos: • LPV/r: [buprenorfina/naloxona] (no ajuste dosis) • EFV: [anticonceptivos orales] (levonorgestrol) • NVP: rifampicina ¿iniciar con dosis plena?, ¿mayor dosis? • Buena correlación entre [EFV] en pelo y eficacia • RAL: correlación [plasma] – [intracelular] • Atripla compr vs jarabe casero: No bioequivalencia (casi !!)
PK: Resumen y Conclusiones • Tracto genital masculino y femenino: • RAL y MVC: excelentes concentraciones • DRV: concentraciones aceptables • Embarazo: • [LPV/r] y [FPV/r] pero eficaz (no ajustar dosis) • [ATV/r], eficaz y bien tolerado (no ajustar dosis) • Pediatría: • RAL: compr. adultos, gránulos y masticable (OK) • LPV/r: desaconsejable triturar los comprimidos!