Dataset Information

CYP3A4-mediated lopinavir bioactivation and its inhibition by ritonavir.

ABSTRACT: The combination of lopinavir (LPV) and ritonavir (RTV) is one of the preferred regimens for the treatment of HIV infection with confirmed efficacy and relatively low toxicity. LPV alone suffers the poor bioavailability due to its rapid and extensive metabolism. RTV boosts the plasma concentration of LPV by suppressing its metabolism and thus increasing LPV efficacy. In the current study, we found that RTV also inhibits LPV bioactivation. LPV bioactivation was investigated in human liver microsomes and cDNA-expressed human cytochromes P450. Twelve GSH-trapped reactive metabolites of LPV were identified by using a metabolomic approach. Semicarbazide-trapped reactive metabolites of LPV were also detected. RTV effectively suppressed all pathways of LPV bioactivation via CYP3A4 inhibition. Our data together with previous reports suggest that LPV plus RTV is an ideal combination because RTV not only boosts LPV plasma concentration, but it decreases LPV bioactivation.

SUBMITTER: Li F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3250054 | biostudies-literature | 2012 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

CYP3A4-mediated lopinavir bioactivation and its inhibition by ritonavir.

Li Feng F Lu Jie J Ma Xiaochao X

Drug metabolism and disposition: the biological fate of chemicals 20110927 1

The combination of lopinavir (LPV) and ritonavir (RTV) is one of the preferred regimens for the treatment of HIV infection with confirmed efficacy and relatively low toxicity. LPV alone suffers the poor bioavailability due to its rapid and extensive metabolism. RTV boosts the plasma concentration of LPV by suppressing its metabolism and thus increasing LPV efficacy. In the current study, we found that RTV also inhibits LPV bioactivation. LPV bioactivation was investigated in human liver microsom ...[more]

PMID: 21953914

Similar Datasets

Project description:Several genetic single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in biotransformation enzymes (CYP3A4, CYP3A5) or transporter proteins (multidrug resistance MDR1 gene product, P-gp) are involved in PI metabolism so that PI pharmacokinetics is characterized by a large inter-individual variability. The aim of this study was: (i) to develop an in-house PCR/direct sequencing, based on DNA purification of full-length CYP3A4 and CYP3A5 genes (SNPs) and MDR1 C3435T variant; (ii) to investigate association of CYP3A4 and CYP3A5 reported or unreported genetic polymorphisms and MDR1-C3435T (CC homozygote, CT heterozygote, TT homozygote) with clinical outcome of HIV-1 infected subjects treated with PI.Overall, 39 HIV-1 infected patients receiving boosted Lopinavir (LPV/r) monotherapy after virological suppression were genotyped and analyzed through PCR and direct sequencing of full-length CYP3A4 and CYP3A5 gene sequences (1) and MDR1 gene (C3435T). CD4+T-cell counts and plasma viral load were analyzed before and after LPV/r initiation; LPV/r therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) was determined at 12-hours.LPV/r TDM (ng/ml) did not show significant differences among CYP3A4 or CYP3A5 SNPs, although a mean lower level of LPV/r was associated with detection of several SNPs: CYP3A5*3 rs776746; CYP3A5 rs28365088, CYP3A5 rs15524, CYP3A4 rs2687116, and a not already described polymorphism CYP3A4 nt20338. In follow-up analysis, <90% adherence was the main factor associated with virological failure of LPV/r monotherapy (83.3% of failure vs 34.4%, p<0.001 at log-rank test). Adjusting for adherence, the detection of a single CYP3A5*3 rs776746 and CYP3A5 rs15524 SNPs was associated with higher probability of LPV/r monotherapy failure (p<0.01), and in general, detection of any CYP3A5 SNP was associated with failure (26.2% vs 58.3%, p=0.067). No-association with detection of any CYP3A4 SNPs was found. MDR1 TT variants showed significant lower frequency of treatment failure (0.0% vs 47.7%, p=0.026), since non-TT homozygote patient failed LPV/r monotherapy.Efficacy of PI monotherapy is strongly dependent from patient adherence, but, in adherent patients, genetic factors, such as CYP3A5 and MDR1-C3435T gene variants, may affect the response to treatment, though their role, as well of other genetic variants, need further investigation.

Project description:BackgroundNevirapine-based antiretroviral therapy is the predominant (and often the only) regimen available for children in resource-limited settings. Nevirapine resistance after exposure to the drug for prevention of maternal-to-child human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) transmission is common, a problem that has led to the recommendation of ritonavir-boosted lopinavir in such settings. Regardless of whether there has been prior exposure to nevirapine, the performance of nevirapine versus ritonavir-boosted lopinavir in young children has not been rigorously established.MethodsIn a randomized trial conducted in six African countries and India, we compared the initiation of HIV treatment with zidovudine, lamivudine, and either nevirapine or ritonavir-boosted lopinavir in HIV-infected children 2 to 36 months of age who had no prior exposure to nevirapine. The primary end point was virologic failure or discontinuation of treatment by study week 24.ResultsA total of 288 children were enrolled; the median percentage of CD4+ T cells was 15%, and the median plasma HIV type 1 (HIV-1) RNA level was 5.7 log(10) copies per milliliter. The percentage of children who reached the primary end point was significantly higher in the nevirapine group than in the ritonavir-boosted lopinavir group (40.8% vs. 19.3%; P<0.001). Among the nevirapine-treated children with virologic failure for whom data on resistance were available, more than half (19 of 32) had resistance at the time of virologic failure. In addition, the time to a protocol-defined toxicity end point was shorter in the nevirapine group (P=0.04), as was the time to death (P=0.06).ConclusionsOutcomes were superior with ritonavir-boosted lopinavir among young children with no prior exposure to nevirapine. Factors that may have contributed to the suboptimal results with nevirapine include elevated viral load at baseline, selection for nevirapine resistance, background regimen of nucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors, and the standard ramp-up dosing strategy. The results of this trial present policymakers with difficult choices. (Funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and others; P1060 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00307151.).

Project description:ObjectivesWe evaluated the clinical, virological and safety outcomes of lopinavir/ritonavir, lopinavir/ritonavir-interferon (IFN)-β-1a, hydroxychloroquine or remdesivir in comparison to standard of care (control) in coronavirus 2019 disease (COVID-19) inpatients requiring oxygen and/or ventilatory support.MethodsWe conducted a phase III multicentre, open-label, randomized 1:1:1:1:1, adaptive, controlled trial (DisCoVeRy), an add-on to the Solidarity trial (NCT04315948, EudraCT2020-000936-23). The primary outcome was the clinical status at day 15, measured by the WHO seven-point ordinal scale. Secondary outcomes included quantification of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) in respiratory specimens and pharmacokinetic and safety analyses. We report the results for the lopinavir/ritonavir-containing arms and for the hydroxychloroquine arm, trials of which were stopped prematurely.ResultsThe intention-to-treat population included 583 participants-lopinavir/ritonavir (n = 145), lopinavir/ritonavir-IFN-β-1a (n = 145), hydroxychloroquine (n = 145), control (n = 148)-among whom 418 (71.7%) were male, the median age was 63 years (IQR 54-71), and 211 (36.2%) had a severe disease. The day-15 clinical status was not improved with the investigational treatments: lopinavir/ritonavir versus control, adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.83, (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55-1.26, p 0.39), lopinavir/ritonavir-IFN-β-1a versus control, aOR 0.69 (95%CI 0.45-1.04, p 0.08), and hydroxychloroquine versus control, aOR 0.93 (95%CI 0.62-1.41, p 0.75). No significant effect of investigational treatment was observed on SARS-CoV-2 clearance. Trough plasma concentrations of lopinavir and ritonavir were higher than those expected, while those of hydroxychloroquine were those expected with the dosing regimen. The occurrence of serious adverse events was significantly higher in participants allocated to the lopinavir/ritonavir-containing arms.ConclusionIn adults hospitalized for COVID-19, lopinavir/ritonavir, lopinavir/ritonavir-IFN-β-1a and hydroxychloroquine improved neither the clinical status at day 15 nor SARS-CoV-2 clearance in respiratory tract specimens.

Dataset Information

CYP3A4-mediated lopinavir bioactivation and its inhibition by ritonavir.

Publications

CYP3A4-mediated lopinavir bioactivation and its inhibition by ritonavir.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets