Dataset Information

Population Pharmacokinetic Evaluation of Amikacin Liposome Inhalation Suspension in Patients with Treatment-Refractory Nontuberculous Mycobacterial Lung Disease.

ABSTRACT:

Background and objectives

Use of parenteral amikacin to treat refractory nontuberculous mycobacterial (NTM) lung disease is limited by systemic toxicity. A population pharmacokinetic model was developed using data pooled from two randomized trials to evaluate the pharmacokinetic properties of once-daily amikacin liposome inhalation suspension (ALIS) in patients with treatment-refractory NTM lung disease.

Methods

In phase 2 (TR02-112) and phase 3 (CONVERT) studies, patients with sputum cultures positive for Mycobacterium avium complex (both studies) or M. abscessus (TR02-112) despite ≥ 6 months of guideline-based therapy were treated with once-daily ALIS 590 mg.

Results

Fifty-three patients (28 Japanese; 25 White) were assessed. At baseline and ≈ 6 months after daily dosing, median maximum concentration (C_max) was < 2 mg/L and median area under the concentration-time curve (AUC_0-24) was < 20 mg·h/L, suggesting low systemic exposure at both time points. Exposure estimates were similar between Japanese and White patients. The median unchanged amikacin fraction excreted in urine was < 10% of inhaled dose throughout the TR02-112 study, indicating that relatively small amounts reached systemic circulation. Median t_1/2 was 5.5 h. Amikacin concentrations were much higher in sputum than in serum, demonstrating the ability to achieve higher drug concentration at the site of infection. Median sputum amikacin concentrations in the CONVERT study were high at 1-4 h postdose (range 242-426 μg/g) and decreased by 8 h (median 7 μg/g).

Conclusions

Systemic exposure to amikacin in serum and urine following once-daily ALIS administration in patients with treatment-refractory NTM lung disease was notably lower than that previously reported for parenteral amikacin.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01315236 (registered March 15, 2011) and NCT02344004 (registered January 22, 2015).

SUBMITTER: Rubino CM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7935831 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionThis study aimed to gain insight from patients with refractory Mycobacterium avium complex lung disease (MAC-LD) into strategies used to manage adverse events (AEs) associated with amikacin liposome inhalation suspension (ALIS).MethodsWe conducted semi-structured interviews with US patients with refractory MAC-LD prescribed ALIS in a real-world setting. Interview transcripts were analyzed and coded to identify patterns in participants' descriptions of their ALIS treatment experiences, including AEs and their disruptiveness, and AE mitigation strategies, including participants' ratings of strategies' effectiveness. Concept saturation was also assessed.ResultsTwenty participants (mean age 48.7 years; 80% women; mean ALIS duration 5.45 months) were interviewed. At the time of the interview, 15 participants (75%) had received ALIS for > 1 month and 13 (65%) were currently receiving ALIS. Participants described 44 unique AE mitigation strategies, which can be categorized into three groups: prepare for treatment; prevent increased emergence of AEs; and persist on treatment by mitigating AEs. Common strategies (reported by ≥ 50% of participants) included use of educational materials from the patient support program, localized management of throat irritation, and symptom management to reduce fatigue. Evidence of concept saturation was observed: no new strategies were identified in the last five interviews, which suggests the sample was robust enough to identify all mitigation strategies likely to be used by the broader patient population.ConclusionsThis real-world study identified a diverse set of potential AE mitigation strategies intended to help individual patients prepare for ALIS treatment, prevent the increased emergence of certain AEs, and mitigate the impact of AEs on treatment persistence. Developing a comprehensive accounting of the types of mitigation strategies in use among patients in real-world settings can inform future investigation of the effectiveness of such strategies, and support evidence-based recommendations for treatment management.