Search

This study evaluated four different formulations of itraconazole and amiodarone. Formulation 1 was Vida's combination tablet containing both active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs). Formulation 2 was separate, commercially available human generic capsules and tablets of itraconazole and amiodarone, respectively. Formulation 3 was separate, compounded suspensions of itraconazole and amiodarone. Formulation 4 was a compounded chewable tablet of itraconazole. Eight female dogs were dosed with 5 mg/kg of itraconazole and 15 mg/kg amiodarone (except for formulation 4, which only received 5 mg/kg itraconazole) once weekly for 4 weeks using a modified Latin Square design, ensuring that all dogs received all formulations with a 7‐day washout between treatments. Animals were fasted overnight prior to each dose administration, with food returned to all animals 4 h post‐dose. Blood samples (3 mL) were collected pre‐treatment (0) and at appropriate time points over 72 h after each dose for a total of 14 samples per dog per treatment. There was high variability in the serum concentration data within treatment groups for itraconazole. The compounded suspensions were difficult to dose due to the nature of the formulations. The volumes dosed were accurate and consistent, but the suspension was thin and settled immediately when shaking was stopped for both itraconazole and amiodarone. All serum samples following itraconazole chewable tablet administration were not detectable or just above itraconazole's LOQ and thus did not allow for pharmacokinetic determination. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

To date, there is no clear standard to monitor drug treatment for canine Chagas disease. We used 2 real-time PCR (rtPCR) assays targeting Trypanosoma cruzi kinetoplast DNA (kDNA) and nuclear satellite DNA (nDNA) to detect T. cruzi in canine whole blood. Samples were collected randomly from 131 untreated dogs with unknown T. cruzi infection status in Texas. The kDNA-based rtPCR was slightly more sensitive (diagnostic sensitivity of kDNA = 49% vs. nDNA = 44%; p = 0.5732) but slightly less specific (diagnostic specificity of kDNA = 96% vs. nDNA = 97%; p > 0.9999) than the nDNA-based rtPCR. However, the differences in sensitivity and specificity between the nDNA- and kDNA-based rtPCR assays were not statistically significant. Using the nDNA- and kDNA-based qualitative rtPCR assays to monitor parasitemia from 137 itraconazole- and amiodarone-treated cases with nDNA- and kDNA-based PCR–positive baselines showed that the PCR positive rate decreased to 0% in 30 d. Using kDNA-based quantitative rtPCR to monitor normalized T. cruzi DNA copies in 4 representative dogs demonstrated that drug treatment could reduce parasite loads within 7–30 d. The kDNA-based qualitative rtPCR may be used for routine parasitemia screening of drug-treated Chagas-positive dogs, whereas nDNA-based qualitative rtPCR may be used for confirmation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]