View
29
Download
0
Category
Tags:
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
WHICH PK-PD MEASURE FOR WHICH DRUG?. The Life and Times of Dr. William A. Craig. Sujata M. Bhavnani, Pharm.D, MS Institute for Clinical Pharmacodynamics Ordway Research Institute Latham, New York. ROAD MAP Objectives. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
WHICH PK-PD MEASURE FOR WHICH DRUG?
Sujata M. Bhavnani, Pharm.D, MS Institute for Clinical
Pharmacodynamics Ordway Research Institute Latham, New York
The Life and Times of Dr. William A. Craig
ROAD MAP Objectives
• To provide a review of the PK-PD measure associated with efficacy in animal infection models
• To review an example where consideration of the PK-PD measure most closely associated with efficacy did not completely tell the entire story
THINGS DR. CRAIG HAS TAUGHT US Factors that Influence the Magnitude of the PK-PD Measure
Associated with Efficacy
Major Effect Minor Effect
Infecting pathogen Resistant organisms
Drug class Dosing regimen
Protein binding
Site of infection
Presence or absence of neutrophils
Starting inoculums
Data by WA Craig, shamelessly stolen by PG Ambrose and given to SM Bhavnani
Z
EXPOSURE & RESPONSE IN MICE Ceftazidime and Klebsiella
pneumoniae
Craig WA. Interrelationship between pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in determining dosing regimens for broad spectrum cephalosporins. Diagn Micro Infect Dis 1995;22:89-96.
EXPOSURE & RESPONSE IN MICE Amoxicillin and Pneumococci
Andes DR and Craig WA. In vivo activities of amoxicillin and amoxicillin-clavulanate against Streptococcus pneumoniae: application to breakpoint determinations. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1998;42:2375-2379.
Z
Andes DR and Craig WA. Pharmacodynamic activity of dorpenem against multiple bacteria in a murine-thigh infection model. 2003 ICAAC, Abstract A-308.
EXPOSURE & RESPONSE IN MICE Doripenem Against Pneumococci
EXPOSURE & RESPONSE IN MICE Impact of β-Lactams on % Time > MIC
One of hundreds of Dr. Craig’s slides for which I cannot find the correct reference.
THE PK-PD GOAL OF THERAPY(% T>MIC) Beta-Lactams
Class Organism Stasis Maximum Kill
Penicillin Gram-negative 30-40 60-70
Pneumococci 25-35 35-50
Staphylococci 20-30 40-50
Cephalosporin Gram-negative 40-50 70-80
Pneumococci 35-40 40-50
Staphylococci 20-30 40-50
Carbpenem Gram-negative 20-30 40-50
Pneumococci 15-25 30-45
Staphylococci 10-20 25-40
Data by WA Craig, yet another slide shamelessly stolen by PG Ambrose and given to SM Bhavnani
EXPOSURE & RESPONSE IN MICE Impact of ESBL-Producing
Enterobacteriaciae on % Time > MIC for Cephalosporins1
Time Above MIC (percent)
0 20 40 60 80 100
Cha
nge
in L
og10
CF
U/T
high
over
24
Hou
rs
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
0 20 40 60 80 100
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3ESBLs Non-ESBLs
Ambrose PG, Bhavnani SM, Jones RN, Craig WA, Dudley MN. Use of PK-PD and Monte Carlo simulation as decision support for the re-evaluation of NCCLS cephem susceptibility breakpoints for Enterobacteriaceae. 44th ICAAC, Washington, DC, October 30-November 2, 2004 [Abstract No. A-138].
1. Ceftazidime, ceftriaxone, cefepime and cefotaxime.
EXPOSURE & RESPONSE IN MICE Aminoglycosides and Pseudomonas
aeruginosa & Serratia marcescens
Q 6 hr Q 12 hr Q 24 hr Control
1 10 100 1000 10000-4
-2
0
2
4
AUC:MIC Ratio
Ch
ang
e i
n L
og
(C
FU
/g)
ove
r 24
hrs R2=0.852
0.1 1 10 100 1000
Cmax:MIC Ratio
R2=0.826
% Time > MIC
R2=0.766
0 20 40 60 80 100
Craig WA, Andes DR, Bhavnani SM, Drusano GL, Ambrose PG. Pharmacokinetics-pharmacodynamics of amikacin against gram-negative Bacilli in a murine-thigh infection model and examination of the PK-PD variance in humans. 44th Annual Meeting of the Infectious Diseases Society of America, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, October 12-15, 2006.
• Neutropenic mice were inoculated with 106 CFU/thigh of either P. aeruginosa (MIC = 4 mg/L) or S. marcescens (MIC = 8 mg/L)
EXPOSURE & RESPONSE IN MICE Quinolones vs. Gram-Negative Bacilli
AUC0-24:MIC Ratio
2.5 10 25 100 250 1000
Mort
ality
(%
)
0
20
40
60
80
100
Craig WA. Pharmacodynamics of Antimicrobials: General Concepts and Applications. In: Nightingale CH, Murakawa T, Ambrose PG ed. Antimicrobial Pharmacodynamics in Theory and Practice. New York, Marcel Dekker Publishers, 2002.
Z
EXPOSURE & RESPONSE IN MICE Levofloxacin vs. Pneumococci
Andes & Craig, Int J Antimicrob Agents, 2002
24-Hr AUC/MIC
10 100 1000
Log
10 C
FU /
Thig
h at
24
Hrs
0
2
4
6
8
10
Peak/MIC
1 10 100 1000
Time Above MIC
0 25 50 75 100
PRE-CLINICAL PK-PD ANALYSESResults of Dose-Fractionation Studies
Cmax:MIC Ratio0.1 1 10
ΔL
og1
0 C
FU
/Thi
gh
-4
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
AUC0-24:MIC Ratio1 10 100
% Time>MIC0 20 40 60 80 100
R2 = 87% R2 = 89%R2 = 96%
van Ogtrop ML, Andes D, Stamstad TJ, Conklin B, Weiss WJ, Craig WA, and Vesga O. In vivo pharmacodynamic activities of two glycylcyclines (GAR-936 and WAY 152,288) against various gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2000 44: 943-949.
EXPOSURE & RESPONSE IN MICE Tigecycline versus Staphylococcus
aureus
Ambrose PG, Forrest A, Craig WA, Rubino CM, Chavnani SM, Drusano GL, Heine HS. Pharmacokinetics-Pharmacodynamics of Gatifloxacin in a Lethal Murine Bacillus anthracis Inhalation Infection Model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2007;51:4351-4355
EXPOSURE & RESPONSE IN VIVO Gatifloxacin Against Bacillus anthracis
• 6-8 week old non-neutropenic female BALB/c mice received aerosol challenges of 50 to 100 times the established 50% lethal dose (3.4 x 104 CFU) of B. anthracis (Ames strain, gatifloxacin MIC = 0.125 mg/L)
THE PK-PD GOAL OF THERAPY Various Drug Classes That I Did Not Have
Time to Mention
Class Organism Bacterial endpoint
Net bacterial stasis
Maximum kill
Macrolides Pneumococci 20-35 40-50
Clindamycin Pneumococci 20-35 40-50
Staphylococci 30-40 60-80
Tetracyclines
Staphylococci 60-80 90-120
Linezolid Staphylococci 80-90 100-150
Vancomycin Staphylococci 150-320 400-800
• We evaluated the effect on H. influenzae of delivering the same cumulative dose three different ways:
o Simulated sustained release single dose
o Simulated divided doses over 3 days
o Simulated divided doses over 5 days
• The pharmacokinetic profile in gerbils was humanized to better reflect the human pharmacokinetic profile
• Two strains were studied, MIC values of 0.5 and 2 mg/L
AZITHROMYCINMongolian Gerbil-Otitis Infection Model
Okusanya OO, Forrest A, Booker BM, Bhavnani SM, Girard D, Ambrose PG. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of azithromycin in gerbils with Haemophilus influenzae middle ear infection. Presented at 106th American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 2005
AZITHROMYCIN IN THE GERBIL-OTITIS MODEL
Exposure-Response Relationship: Single Dose
Okusanya OO, Forrest A, Booker BM, Bhavnani SM, Girard D, Ambrose PG. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of azithromycin in gerbils with Haemophilus influenzae middle ear infection. Presented at 106th American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 2005
H.flu Strain 54A1325: Sustained Release Azithromycin Regimen
Time (hrs)
0 20 40 60 80
Con
c (m
g/L)
0
2
4
6
8
10
LogC
FU
0
2
4
6
8
AZITHROMYCIN IN THE GERBIL-OTITIS MODEL
Exposure-Response Relationship: 3-Day Regimen
Okusanya OO, Forrest A, Booker BM, Bhavnani SM, Girard D, Ambrose PG. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of azithromycin in gerbils with Haemophilus influenzae middle ear infection. Presented at 106th American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 2005
H.flu Strain 54A1325: 3-Day Azithromycin Regimen
Time (hrs)
0 20 40 60 80
Con
c (m
g/L)
0
2
4
6
8
10
LogC
FU
0
2
4
6
8
AZITHROMYCIN IN THE GERBIL-OTITIS MODEL
Exposure-Response Relationship: 5-Day Regimen
Okusanya OO, Forrest A, Booker BM, Bhavnani SM, Girard D, Ambrose PG. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of azithromycin in gerbils with Haemophilus influenzae middle ear infection. Presented at 106th American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics, 2005
H.flu Strain 54A1325: 5-Day Azithromycin Regimen
Time (hrs)
0 20 40 60 80
Con
c (m
g/L)
0
2
4
6
8
10
LogC
FU
0
2
4
6
8
IMPLICATIONSAzithromycin in the Gerbil-Otitis Model
• Front-loading the exposure results in a more rapid and complete bacterial kill
• Extending the therapy duration increases the exposure intensity required to effect bacterial eradication
• Having the highest exposure at the time of greatest bacterial count results in the greatest kill possible Optimizes the likelihood of positive clinical outcome, This reduces the likelihood of spontaneous mutation, and Should eliminate a preexisting resistant subpopulation
CONCLUSIONSApplications and Path Forward
• By understanding the PK-PD measure and magnitude associated with efficacy, we have been able to assess the translational value of these data • Non-clinical and clinical are generally concordant!
• Identification of the PK-PD measure associated with efficacy early in drug development provides the opportunity to positively impact the selection of dosing regimens for further clinical study• Decreases risk of drug development failure
• Application of these principles has provided a paradigm for the evaluation of susceptibility breakpoints• Better definitions of susceptibility will better
influence prescribing
Thank you Dr. Craig for all that have you done!!!
EXPOSURE & RESPONSE IN MICE Penicillin and Pneumococci
Dose (mg/kg/6h)
1 10 100 1000
Lo
g 10
CF
U/T
hig
h a
t 2
4 H
rs
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
SP 10813SP 145SP 146Starting CFU
Forrest A, Rubino CM, Craig Craig WA. Andes DR. Sorgel F, Kinzig-Schippers M, Rodamer M, Jones RN, Ambrose PG. Use of Pharmacokinetics-Pharmacodynamics and Monte Carlo Simulations as Decision Support for Determination of Penicillin VK Susceptibility Breakpoints for Streptococcus pneumonia. 2007 ICAAC, Abstract A-782.
Studied Strain of S. pneumoniae
Effect ExposureSP ATCC 10813
SP CDC 145
SP CDC 146
Stasis f%T>MIC 23.9 20.0 20.3
mg/kg/6h 26 96 1102 log10
Kill f%T>MIC 35.6 32.3 31.2
mg/kg/6h 87.8 736 567
EXPOSURE & RESPONSE IN MICE Linezolid and
Staphylococcus aureus
Andes D, van Ogtrop ML, Peng J, Craig WA, In vivo pharmacodynamic of a new oxazolidinone (linezolid. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2000 46: 3484-3489.
EXPOSURE & RESPONSE IN MICE Doxycycline and Streptococcus pneumoniae
Andes D, Craig WA. In: Nightingale CH, Murakawa T, Ambrose PG, Drusano GL. ed. Antimicrobial Pharmacodynamics in Theory and Practice. New York, Marcel Dekker Publishers, 2nd Ed. 2006.
Recommended