Dataset Information

Abacavir Exposure in Children Cotreated for Tuberculosis with Rifampin and Superboosted Lopinavir-Ritonavir.

ABSTRACT: In children requiring lopinavir coformulated with ritonavir in a 4:1 ratio (lopinavir-ritonavir-4:1) and rifampin, adding ritonavir to achieve a 4:4 ratio with lopinavir (LPV/r-4:4) overcomes the drug-drug interaction. Possible drug-drug interactions within this regimen may affect abacavir concentrations, but this has never been studied. Children weighing <15?kg needing rifampin and LPV/r-4:4 were enrolled in a pharmacokinetic study and underwent intensive pharmacokinetic sampling on 3 visits: (i) during the intensive and (ii) continuation phases of antituberculosis treatment with LPV/r-4:4 and (iii) 1 month after antituberculosis treatment completion on LPV/r-4:1. Pharmacometric modeling and simulation were used to compare exposures across weight bands with adult target exposures. Eighty-seven children with a median (interquartile range) age and weight of 19 (4 to 64) months and 8.7 (3.9 to 14.9) kg, respectively, were included in the abacavir analysis. Abacavir pharmacokinetics were best described by a two-compartment model with first-order elimination and transit compartment absorption. After allometric scaling adjusted for the effect of body size, maturation could be identified: clearance was predicted to be fully mature at about 2 years of age and to reach half of this mature value at about 2 months of age. Abacavir bioavailability decreased 36% during treatment with rifampin and LPV/r-4:4 but remained within the median adult recommended exposure, except for children in the 3- to 4.9-kg weight band, in which the exposures were higher. The observed predose morning trough concentrations were higher than the evening values. Though abacavir exposure significantly decreased during concomitant administration of rifampin and LPV/r-4:4, it remained within acceptable ranges. (This study is registered in ClinicalTrials.gov under identifier NCT02348177.).

SUBMITTER: Rabie H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7179606 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Abacavir Exposure in Children Cotreated for Tuberculosis with Rifampin and Superboosted Lopinavir-Ritonavir.

Rabie Helena H Tikiso Tjokosela T Lee Janice J Fairlie Lee L Strehlau Renate R Bobat Raziya R Liberty Afaaf A McIlleron Helen H Andrieux-Meyer Isabelle I Cotton Mark M Lallemant Marc M Denti Paolo P

Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy 20200421 5

In children requiring lopinavir coformulated with ritonavir in a 4:1 ratio (lopinavir-ritonavir-4:1) and rifampin, adding ritonavir to achieve a 4:4 ratio with lopinavir (LPV/r-4:4) overcomes the drug-drug interaction. Possible drug-drug interactions within this regimen may affect abacavir concentrations, but this has never been studied. Children weighing <15 kg needing rifampin and LPV/r-4:4 were enrolled in a pharmacokinetic study and underwent intensive pharmacokinetic sampling on 3 visits: ( ...[more]

PMID: 32071055

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundLopinavir/ritonavir plasma concentrations are profoundly reduced when co-administered with rifampicin. Super-boosting of lopinavir/ritonavir is limited by nonavailability of single-entity ritonavir, while double-dosing of co-formulated lopinavir/ritonavir given twice-daily produces suboptimal lopinavir concentrations in young children. We evaluated whether increased daily dosing with modified 8-hourly lopinavir/ritonavir 4:1 would maintain therapeutic plasma concentrations of lopinavir in children living with HIV receiving rifampicin-based antituberculosis treatment.MethodsChildren with HIV/tuberculosis coinfection weighing 3.0 to 19.9 kg, on rifampicin-based antituberculosis treatment were commenced or switched to 8-hourly liquid lopinavir/ritonavir 4:1 with increased daily dosing using weight-band dosing approach. A standard twice-daily dosing of lopinavir/ritonavir was resumed 2 weeks after completing antituberculosis treatment. Plasma sampling was conducted during and 4 weeks after completing antituberculosis treatment.ResultsOf 20 children enrolled; 15, 1-7 years old, had pharmacokinetics sampling available for analysis. Lopinavir concentrations (median [range]) on 8-hourly lopinavir/ritonavir co-administered with rifampicin (n = 15; area under the curve0-24 55.32 mg/h/L [0.30-398.7 mg/h/L]; Cmax 3.04 mg/L [0.03-18.6 mg/L]; C8hr 0.90 mg/L [0.01-13.7 mg/L]) were lower than on standard dosing without rifampicin (n = 12; area under the curve24 121.63 mg/h/L [2.56-487.3 mg/h/L]; Cmax 9.45 mg/L [0.39-26.4 mg/L]; C12hr 3.03 mg/L [0.01-17.7 mg/L]). During and after rifampicin cotreatment, only 7 of 15 (44.7%) and 8 of 12 (66.7%) children, respectively, achieved targeted pre-dose lopinavir concentrations ≥1mg/L.ConclusionsModified 8-hourly dosing of lopinavir/ritonavir failed to achieve adequate lopinavir concentrations with concurrent antituberculosis treatment. The subtherapeutic lopinavir exposures on standard dosing after antituberculosis treatment are of concern and requires further evaluation.

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:BackgroundThe most-used protease-inhibitor in children is Lopinavir-ritonavir (LPV/r), which provides durable suppression of viral load and increases CD4+T-counts. This study describes the virological outcome of the HIV-1-infected paediatric population exposed to LPV/r during 15 years in Spain.MethodologyPatients from the Madrid Cohort of HIV-1-infected-children and adolescents exposed to LPV/r as different line therapy during 2000-2014 were selected. The baseline epidemiological-clinical features, viral suppression, changes in CD4+T-CD8+T cell counts and drug susceptibility were recorded before and during LPV/r exposure. Drug resistance mutations (DRM) were identified in viruses from samples collected until 2011. We predicted drug susceptibility to 19 antiretrovirals among those carrying DRM using the Stanford's HIVdb Algorithm.ResultsA total of 199 (37.3%) of the 534 patients from the cohort were exposed to LPV/r during 2000-2014 in first (group 1), second (group 2) or more line-therapies (group 3). Patients were mainly Spaniards (81.9%), perinatally infected (96.5%) with subtype-B (65.3%) and HIV-diagnosed before year 2000 (67.8%). The mean age at first LPV/r exposure was 9.7 years. After protease-inhibitor exposure, viral suppression was higher in groups 1 and 2 than in group 3. Viral suppression occurred in 87.5%, 68.6% and 64.8% patients from groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively. Among the 64 patients with available resistance data during LPV/r treatment, 27(42.3%) carried DRM to protease-inhibitor, 28 (58.3%) to reverse-transcriptase-inhibitors and 21 (43.7%) to non-reverse-transcriptase-inhibitors. Darunavir/ritonavir, atazanavir-ritonavir and tipranavir/ritonavir presented the highest susceptibility and nelfinavir the lowest.ConclusionsA better lymphocyte recovering occurred when protease-inhibitor was taken as part of a first-line regimen and a higher number of patients reached viral suppression. The least compromised antiretrovirals for rescue antiretroviral regimens, according to DRM in the LPV/r-exposed-paediatric cohort, were mainly the new protease inhibitors.

Project description:There is scant data on young children receiving protease inhibitor-based therapy in real-life resource-limited settings and on the optimal timing of therapy among children who survive infancy. Our aim was to evaluate outcomes at the Hospital del Niño, Panama, where children have been routinely treated with lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r)-based therapy since 2002.Retrospective cohort analysis of all HIV-infected children enrolled in care between January 1, 1991, and June 1, 2011. Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards regression were used to evaluate death, virologic suppression and virologic rebound.Of 399 children contributing 1944 person-years of follow-up, 254 (63.7%) were treated with LPV/r and 94 (23.6%) were never treated with antiretrovirals (ARVs). Among infants, improved survival was associated with male gender (hazard rate of death[HRdeath] 0.54, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.32-0.92) and treatment with highly active antiretroviral therapy (HRdeath 0.32, 95% CI: 0.12-0.83), whereas residence outside of Panama City was associated with poorer survival (HRdeath 1.72, 95% CI: 1.01-2.94). Among children who survived to 1 year of age without exposure to ARVs, LPV/r-based therapy improved survival (HRdeath 0.07, 95% CI: 0.01-0.33). Virologic suppression was achieved in 42.1%, 70.5% and 85.1% by 12, 24 and 60 months of follow-up among children treated with LPV/r. Virologic suppression was not associated with prior ARV exposure or age at initiation of therapy but was associated with residence outside of Panama City (HR suppression 1.93, 95% CI: 1.19-3.14). Patients with a baseline viral load >100,000 copies/mL were less likely to achieve suppression (HR suppression 0.37, 95% CI: 0.21-0.66). No children who achieved virologic suppression after initiating LPV/r died.LPV/r-based therapy improved survival not only in infants but also in children over 1 year of age. Age at initiation of LPV/r-based therapy or prior ARVs did not impact virologic outcomes.

Dataset Information

Abacavir Exposure in Children Cotreated for Tuberculosis with Rifampin and Superboosted Lopinavir-Ritonavir.

Publications

Abacavir Exposure in Children Cotreated for Tuberculosis with Rifampin and Superboosted Lopinavir-Ritonavir.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets