Search

The urgent global public health need presented by severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has brought scientists from diverse backgrounds together in an unprecedented international effort to rapidly identify interventions. There is a pressing need to apply clinical pharmacology principles and this has already been recognized by several other groups. However, one area that warrants additional specific consideration relates to plasma and tissue protein binding that broadly influences pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. The principles of free drug theory have been forged and applied across drug development but are not currently being routinely applied for SARS-CoV-2 antiviral drugs. Consideration of protein binding is of critical importance to candidate selection but requires correct interpretation, in a drug-specific manner, to avoid either underinterpretation or overinterpretation of its consequences. This paper represents a consensus from international researchers seeking to apply historical knowledge, which has underpinned highly successful antiviral drug development for other viruses, such as HIV and hepatitis C virus for decades., (© 2020 The Authors. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

Introduction: In December 2019, an outbreak of a novel severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) began, resulting in a number of antivirals and immune modulators being repurposed to treat the associated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Many patients requiring treatment for COVID-19 may have either pre-existing renal or hepatic disease or experience acute renal/hepatic injury as a result of the acute infection. Altered renal or hepatic function can significantly affect drug concentrations of medications due to impaired drug metabolism and excretion, resulting in toxicity or reduced efficacy. The aim of this paper is to review the pharmacokinetics and available study data for the experimental COVID-19 therapies in patients with any degree of renal or hepatic impairment to make recommendations for dosing., Methods: COVID-19 agents included in these recommendations were listed as primaries on the University of Liverpool COVID-19 drug interaction website ( www.covid19-druginteractions.org ), initially identified from Clinicialtrials.gov and ChicCTR.org.cn. A literature search was performed using PubMed and EMBASE as well as product licences and pharmacokinetic databases., Findings: Remdesivir, dexamethasone, azithromycin, favipiravir, lopinavir/ritonavir, atazanavir, hydroxychloroquine, interferon beta, ribavirin, tocilizumab, anakinra and sarilumab were identified as experimental drugs being used in COVID-19 trials as of November 2020. Limited study data was found for these drugs in patients with renal or hepatic impairment for COVID-19 or other indications. Recommendations were made based on available data, consideration of pharmacokinetic properties (including variability), the dosing and anticipated treatment duration of each regimen in COVID-19 and known toxicities., Conclusion: Dosing of drugs used to treat COVID-19 in patients with renal or hepatic impairment is complex. These recommendations were produced to provide guidance to clinicians worldwide who are treating patients with COVID-19, many of whom will have some degree of acute or chronic renal or hepatic impairment.

As global health services respond to the coronavirus pandemic, many prescribers are turning to experimental drugs. This review aims to assess the risk of drug-drug interactions in the severely ill COVID-19 patient. Experimental therapies were identified by searching ClinicalTrials.gov for 'COVID-19', '2019-nCoV', '2019 novel coronavirus' and 'SARS-CoV-2'. The last search was performed on 30 June 2020. Herbal medicines, blood-derived products and in vitro studies were excluded. We identified comorbidities by searching PubMed for the MeSH terms 'COVID-19', 'Comorbidity' and 'Epidemiological Factors'. Potential drug-drug interactions were evaluated according to known pharmacokinetics, overlapping toxicities and QT risk. Drug-drug interactions were graded GREEN and YELLOW: no clinically significant interaction; AMBER: caution; RED: serious risk. A total of 2378 records were retrieved from ClinicalTrials.gov, which yielded 249 drugs that met inclusion criteria. Thirteen primary compounds were screened against 512 comedications. A full database of these interactions is available at www.covid19-druginteractions.org. Experimental therapies for COVID-19 present a risk of drug-drug interactions, with lopinavir/ritonavir (10% RED, 41% AMBER; mainly a perpetrator of pharmacokinetic interactions but also risk of QT prolongation particularly when given with concomitant drugs that can prolong QT), chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine (both 7% RED and 27% AMBER, victims of some interactions due to metabolic profile but also perpetrators of QT prolongation) posing the greatest risk. With management, these risks can be mitigated. We have published a drug-drug interaction resource to facilitate medication review for the critically ill patient., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

There is a rapidly expanding literature on the in vitro antiviral activity of drugs that may be repurposed for therapy or chemoprophylaxis against severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). However, this has not been accompanied by a comprehensive evaluation of the target plasma and lung concentrations of these drugs following approved dosing in humans. Accordingly, concentration 90% (EC 90 ) values recalculated from in vitro anti-SARS-CoV-2 activity data was expressed as a ratio to the achievable maximum plasma concentration (C max ) at an approved dose in humans (C max /EC 90 ratio). Only 14 of the 56 analyzed drugs achieved a C max /EC 90 ratio above 1. A more in-depth assessment demonstrated that only nitazoxanide, nelfinavir, tipranavir (ritonavir-boosted), and sulfadoxine achieved plasma concentrations above their reported anti-SARS-CoV-2 activity across their entire approved dosing interval. An unbound lung to plasma tissue partition coefficient (K p U lung ) was also simulated to derive a lung C max /half-maximal effective concentration (EC 50 ) as a better indicator of potential human efficacy. Hydroxychloroquine, chloroquine, mefloquine, atazanavir (ritonavir-boosted), tipranavir (ritonavir-boosted), ivermectin, azithromycin, and lopinavir (ritonavir-boosted) were all predicted to achieve lung concentrations over 10-fold higher than their reported EC 50 . Nitazoxanide and sulfadoxine also exceeded their reported EC 50 by 7.8-fold and 1.5-fold in lung, respectively. This analysis may be used to select potential candidates for further clinical testing, while deprioritizing compounds unlikely to attain target concentrations for antiviral activity. Future studies should focus on EC 90 values and discuss findings in the context of achievable exposures in humans, especially within target compartments, such as the lungs, in order to maximize the potential for success of proposed human clinical trials., (© 2020 The Authors. Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

Intense efforts are underway to evaluate potential therapeutic agents for the treatment of COVID-19. In order to respond quickly to the crisis, the repurposing of existing drugs is the primary pharmacological strategy. Despite the urgent clinical need for these therapies, it is imperative to consider potential safety issues. This is important due to the harm-benefit ratios that may be encountered when treating COVID-19, which can depend on the stage of the disease, when therapy is administered and underlying clinical factors in individual patients. Treatments are currently being trialled for a range of scenarios from prophylaxis (where benefit must greatly exceed risk) to severe life-threatening disease (where a degree of potential risk may be tolerated if it is exceeded by the potential benefit). In this perspective, we have reviewed some of the most widely researched repurposed agents in order to identify potential safety considerations using existing information in the context of COVID-19., (© 2020 The Authors. British Journal of Pharmacology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Pharmacological Society.)

The development of therapeutic agents against SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19  faces numerous barriers and a multidisciplinary approach to evaluating drug efficacy and toxicity is essential. Experimental and preclinical data should be integrated into a comprehensive analysis, where drug potency, the timing of therapy initiation, drug combinations, variability in systemic and local drug exposure and short- and long-term toxicities represent fundamental factors for the rational identification of candidates and prioritization of clinical investigations. Although the identification of SARS-CoV-2 therapeutics is a priority, rigorous and transparent methodologies are crucial to ensure that accelerated research programmes result in high-quality and reproducible findings., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

It has been estimated by the World Health Organization (WHO) that over 71 million people were infected with the hepatitis C virus (HCV) in 2015. Since then, a number of highly effective direct-acting antiviral (DAA) regimens have been licensed for the treatment of chronic HCV infection: sofosbuvir/daclatasvir, sofosbuvir/ledipasvir, elbasvir/grazoprevir, sofosbuvir/velpatasvir, glecaprevir/pibrentasvir, and sofosbuvir/velpatasvir/voxilaprevir. With these treatment regimens, almost all chronic HCV-infected patients, even including prior DAA failures, can be treated effectively and safely. It is therefore likely that further development of DAAs will be limited. In this descriptive review we provide an overview of the clinical pharmacokinetic characteristics of currently available DAAs by describing their absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion. Potential drug-drug interactions with the DAAs are briefly discussed. Furthermore, we summarize what is known about the pharmacodynamics of the DAAs in terms of efficacy and safety. We briefly discuss the relationship between the pharmacokinetics of the DAAs and efficacy or toxicity in special populations, such as hard to cure patients and patients with liver cirrhosis, liver transplantation, renal impairment, hepatitis B virus or HIV co-infection, bleeding disorders, and children. The aim of this overview is to educate/update prescribers and pharmacists so that they are able to safely and effectively treat HCV-infected patients even in the presence of underlying co-infections or co-morbidities.

Although direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) for chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection are highly efficacious and safe, treatment initiation is often limited in patients with neuropsychiatric disorders due to concerns over reduced treatment adherence and drug-drug interactions. Here, we report adherence, efficacy, safety and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from an integrated analysis of registrational studies using the pangenotypic DAA regimen of glecaprevir and pibrentasvir (G/P). Patients with chronic HCV genotypes 1-6 infection with compensated liver disease (with or without cirrhosis) receiving G/P for 8, 12 or 16 weeks were included in this analysis. Patients were classified as having a psychiatric disorder based on medical history and/or co-medications. Primary analyses assessed treatment adherence, efficacy (sustained virologic response at post-treatment week 12; SVR12), safety and PROs. Among 2522 patients receiving G/P, 789 (31%) had a psychiatric disorder with the most common diagnoses being depression (64%; 506/789) and anxiety disorders (27%; 216/789). Treatment adherence was comparably high (>95%) in patients with and without psychiatric disorders. SVR12 rates were 97.3% (768/789; 95% CI = 96.2-98.5) and 97.5% (1689/1733; 95% CI = 96.7-98.2) in patients with and without psychiatric disorders, respectively. Among patients with psychiatric disorders, SVR12 rates remained >96% by individual psychiatric diagnoses and co-medication classes. Overall, most adverse events (AEs) were mild-to-moderate in severity with serious AEs and AEs leading to G/P discontinuation occurring at similarly low rates in both patient populations. In conclusion, G/P treatment was highly efficacious, well-tolerated and demonstrated high adherence rates in patients with chronic HCV infection and psychiatric disorders., (© 2019 The Authors. Journal of Viral Hepatitis Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir ± dasabuvir ± ribavirin (OBV/PTV/r ± DSV ± RBV) regimens show high efficacy and good tolerability in clinical trials for chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotypes (GT) 1 or 4. To evaluate whether these results translate to clinical practice, data were pooled from observational studies across 13 countries. Treatment-naïve or -experienced patients, with or without cirrhosis, received OBV/PTV/r ± DSV ± RBV according to approved local labels and clinical practice. Sustained virologic response at post-treatment Week 12 (SVR12), adverse events (AEs) and comedication management were assessed for patients initiating treatment before 1 June 2017. The safety population included 3850 patients who received ≥1 dose of study drug. The core population (N = 3808) further excluded patients with unknown GT or cirrhosis status, or who received off-label treatment. Patients had HCV GT1a (n = 732; 19%), GT1b (n = 2619; 69%) or GT4 (n = 457; 12%). In 3546 patients with sufficient follow-up data at post-treatment Week 12, the SVR12 rate was 96% (n/N = 3401/3546 [95% CI 95.2-96.5]). In patients with or without cirrhosis, SVR12 was comparable (96%). In patients with HCV GT1a, GT1b or GT4, SVR12 rates were 93%, 97% and 94%. In GT1b-infected patients with planned treatment for 8 weeks, SVR12 was 96%. In patients with ≥1 comorbidity (67%), SVR12 was 95%. 58% of patients received ≥1 comedication, and there was minimal impact on SVR12 rates using comedications for peptic ulcers and gastro-esophageal reflux disease, statins, antipsychotics or antiepileptics. Most comedications were maintained during treatment although 58% of patients changed their statin medication. AEs and serious AEs occurred in 26% and 3% of patients. Post-baseline Grade 3-4 laboratory abnormalities were rare (<3%), and discontinuation rates were low (<4%). Real-world evidence confirms the effectiveness of OBV/PTV/r ± DSV ± RBV in patients with HCV GT1 or GT4, regardless of common comorbidities or comedications, and is consistent with clinical trial results. Adverse safety outcomes may be limited by underreporting in the real-world setting., (© 2019 The Authors. Journal of Viral Hepatitis Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Introduction: Inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) require long-term administration of immunomodulatory treatments to maintain disease remission. Due to the high worldwide prevalence of hepatitis B (HBV) or C (HCV) virus infections, presence of concurrent hepatitis can be a relevant clinical issue to manage when treating IBD. Areas covered: The paper summarizes epidemiological data about IBD and HBV/HCV infection and reviews current knowledge about the natural history of HBV and HCV in the IBD setting, concentrating on risk of hepatitis reactivation during immunosuppressive treatment. Most updated recommendations for management of HBV and HCV infections in IBD patients are discussed. Expert commentary: The development of new drugs for IBD with different molecular targets and the availability of potent and efficacious antiviral drugs for HBV and HCV will simplify management of hepatitis infection in IBD patients in the near future.

Background: With the approval of direct-acting antivirals (DAAs), the management of drug-drug interactions (DDIs) has become an important challenge while treating individuals with hepatitis C. To date, the potential of causing DDIs for the recently approved DAAs has not been systematically investigated. We aimed to assess the clinical significance of DDI between the regular outpatient medications and DAA therapies in a large real-world cohort., Methods: Overall, 261 hepatitis C virus monoinfected patients who were selected for DAA therapy at 2 intervals between 2011 and 2014 were asked about their regular outpatient medications. The potential for DDIs between all these drugs and sofosbuvir/ribavirin, ledipasvir/sofosbuvir, sofosbuvir/daclatasvir, sofosbuvir/simeprevir, ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir ± dasabuvir as well as boceprevir and telaprevir triple therapy was assessed using www.hep-druginteractions.org and the relevant prescribing information., Results: The 261 patients took a median number of 2 drugs (range 0-15); 20% of patients did not take any medication. Sofosbuvir/ribavirin had the lowest risk to cause a potentially significant DDI (9.6%). In contrast, for ombitasvir/paritaprevir/ritonavir ± dasabuvir potentially significant DDIs could be expected in 66.3% of the patients. Significant DDIs for sofosbuvir/simeprevir would be expected in 31.4%, for sofosbuvir/daclatasvir in 36.8%, and for sofosbuvir/ledipasvir in 40.2%. Proton pump inhibitors, thyroid hormones, and dihydropyridine derivatives were frequently used and presented a risk of interacting with the antiviral regimen., Conclusions: A significant number of patients are at risk for DDIs if treated with the recently approved DAA regimens. A careful evaluation of potential DDI is essential to prevent adverse effects or unnecessary risk of treatment failure., (© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America. All rights reserved. For permissions, e-mail journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objectives: Boceprevir is a first-generation direct-acting antiviral licensed for the treatment of hepatitis C infection. Sildenafil is an oral therapy for erectile dysfunction. As boceprevir is a potent inhibitor of CYP3A4, potential pharmacokinetic interactions may occur when it is coadministered with sildenafil. The aim of this study was to assess the pharmacokinetic profile of sildenafil and boceprevir when dosed separately and together in healthy volunteers., Methods: Thirteen male subjects completed the following study procedures: phase 1 (Day 0), a single dose of 25 mg of sildenafil was administered; washout period (Days 1-9); phase 2 (Days 10-15), 800 mg of boceprevir three times a day was administered; and phase 3 (Day 16), 800 mg of boceprevir and 25 mg of sildenafil were administered. All drugs were administered in the fed state. Intensive pharmacokinetic sampling was undertaken on Days 0, 15 and 16. Differences in the pharmacokinetic parameters of sildenafil, N-desmethyl-sildenafil and boceprevir between phase 3 and the earlier phases were evaluated by changes in the geometric mean ratios (GMRs)., Results: All the drugs were well tolerated with no safety concerns arising. In the presence of boceprevir (phase 3 versus phase 1), the GMR for the plasma Cmax and the AUC24 for sildenafil increased by 1.9-fold (95% CI 1.5-2.4) and 2.7-fold (95% CI 2.1-3.4), respectively, whereas a reduction in the Cmax of N-desmethyl-sildenafil was observed (GMR 0.5, 95% CI 0.4-0.7). No significant changes in boceprevir exposure were observed between phases 3 and 2., Conclusions: Exposure of sildenafil is increased in the presence of boceprevir. A dose adjustment of sildenafil is therefore necessary. An initial dose of 25 mg of sildenafil is suggested., (© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: St John's wort (SJW; Hypericum perforatum) induces CYP3A4 that is involved in the metabolism of the hepatitis C virus (HCV) protease inhibitor boceprevir. Reduced boceprevir exposure and efficacy would contribute to therapeutic failure and increase the risk for resistance development. Boceprevir is co-administered with interferon/ribavirin, and depression has been described frequently in patients undergoing HCV treatment. Patients may purchase over-the-counter herbals to manage depression, and knowing the interaction between SJW and boceprevir is desirable., Methods: This Phase I, open-label, three-period, cross-over pharmacokinetic study enrolled healthy males and females who, following consent and screening procedures, were randomized to receive SJW on days 1-14, SJW plus boceprevir (SJW on days 22-35 and together on days 31-35) and boceprevir on days 52-56, separated by 7 day washout periods, or the same treatment in the opposite order. Pharmacokinetic sampling was performed at the end of each phase., Results: Seventeen (11 female) subjects completed the study and no serious adverse events were reported. Geometric mean ratios (GMRs) and 90% CIs for boceprevir (with SJW versus alone) AUC(0-8), C(max) and C8 were 0.91 (0.87-0.96), 0.94 (0.82-1.07) and 1.00 (0.79-1.27), respectively. GMRs and 90% CIs for hypericin, the active component of SJW, (with boceprevir versus alone) AUC(0-8), C(max) and C(8) were 1.23 (1.10-1.38), 1.32 (1.16-1.52) and 1.37 (1.19-1.58), respectively., Conclusions: SJW did not have a clinically significant effect on boceprevir plasma concentrations (or those of its metabolite), suggesting that SJW and boceprevir can be safely co-administered., (© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

With the licensing of the direct acting antivirals telaprevir and boceprevir the topic of drug-drug interactions has come to the forefront. These first generation hepatitis C virus protease inhibitors are metabolized by and inhibit the key drug metabolizing enzyme CYP3A4, which means that knowledge of drug-drug interactions has become an essential component of the evaluation of a patient starting triple therapy. The number of potential co-medications means that many drugs will be used in hepatitis C virus patients where there are no pharmacokinetic study data. Here we have to use the data that are available and seek to extrapolate to unstudied drugs using key principles of clinical pharmacology (disposition characteristics, concentration-effect relationships, therapeutic window) in order to give some guidance for management of patients. This is a rapidly moving area in hepatitis C therapy, both in terms of understanding the drug interaction profile of telaprevir and boceprevir, interaction mechanisms that sometimes appear counterintuitive and that may involve enzymes other than CYP3A4 or transporters, but then seeking to understand the interaction potential of the next wave of drugs that will soon be with us., (Copyright © 2013 Editrice Gastroenterologica Italiana S.r.l. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

A sensitive high-performance reverse phase liquid chromatography-positive ion electrospray tandem mass spectrometry method was developed and validated for the quantification of telaprevir and its inactive R-diastereomer (VRT-127394) in human plasma. The analytes and the internal standard (telaprevir-d11) were extracted from plasma by liquid-liquid extraction using tert-Butyl methyl ether (TBME). Chromatographic separation was achieved on a reversed-phase Accucore C18 column with a gradient programme consisting of water:ammonia (25%), 100:0.01 (v/v) (mobile phase A) and ACN:MeOH:ammonia (25%), 15:85:0.01 (v/v/v) (mobile phase B). The MS acquisition was performed with selective reaction monitoring mode using the respective [M+H](+) ions, m/z 680.59→322.42 for telaprevir and VRT-127394, and 691.15→110.13 for telaprevir-d11. The assay exhibited a linear dynamic range of 5-5000ng/mL for telaprevir and VRT-127394. Acceptable precision (%RSD<6.5%) and accuracy (94-108%) were obtained for concentrations over the range of the standard curve. A procedure was established to stabilise the plasma to prevent ex vivo interconversion of the isomers., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infected patients often take multiple co-medications to treat adverse events related to HCV therapy, or to manage other co-morbidities. Drug-drug interactions associated with this polypharmacy are relatively new to the field of HCV pharmacotherapy. With the advent of the direct-acting antivirals telaprevir and boceprevir, which are both substrates and inhibitors of the cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A iso-enzyme, knowledge and awareness of drug-drug interactions have become a cornerstone in the evaluation of patients starting and continuing HCV combination therapy. In our opinion, an overview of conducted drug-drug interaction studies and a list of contraindicated medications is not enough for the clinical management of these drug-drug interactions. Knowledge of pharmacokinetic profiles and concentration-effect relationships is key for the interpretation of these data, and insight into how to manage these interactions (e.g., dose adjustments, safe alternatives and therapeutic drug monitoring) is of equal importance. This review provides a practical overview of the safe and effective management of these clinical challenges., (Copyright © 2012 European Association for the Study of the Liver. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Purpose of Review: Boceprevir and telaprevir are directly acting antivirals (DAAs) that have recently been licensed for treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. Data in both untreated and previously treated patients indicate a significantly increased sustained virological response (SVR) compared with that observed with conventional therapy. However, the advent of DAA therapy poses specific challenges for HCV treatment in terms of managing drug-drug interactions (DDIs). This review aims to provide a comprehensive summary of DDI with the recently licensed DAAs, including pharmacokinetic data and current recommendations made by the manufacturers and with particular reference to antiretrovirals. Potential for DDIs with the DAAs in clinical development and the mechanisms of interaction are also discussed., Recent Findings: Targeted pharmacokinetic drug interaction studies have demonstrated that both boceprevir and telaprevir are potent inhibitors of the metabolic enzyme cytochrome P4503A4, making them perpetrators of interactions with co-administered medications which are metabolized by this enzyme. In addition, co-administered medications may affect plasma levels of boceprevir and telaprevir via various mechanisms, some of which remain to be fully elucidated., Summary: As a result of DDIs, the concomitant use of some medicines with DAA will be contraindicated, whereas other combinations may require caution, monitoring, or dose modification of the co-administered drug. Management of DDIs with these novel agents will pose a new challenge, and prescriber awareness of the potential for DDIs is fundamental for safe prescribing. Online resources are likely to play a key role in prescriber education and clinical decision-making.

Recent advances in the development of agents that act specifically to inhibit hepatitis C virus (HCV) are set to fundamentally change the way that patients will be treated. New directly acting anti-HCV agents such as protease and polymerase inhibitors will initially be added to standard of care with pegylated interferon-alpha and ribavirin. However, future therapy is likely to constitute combinations of agents which act at distinct stages of viral replication and have differing resistance profiles. While directly acting anti-HCV agents will undoubtedly improve treatment outcomes, the introduction of combination therapy may not be without complications in some patient groups. HIV-positive patients who are receiving antiretrovirals (ARVs) are relatively highly represented among those with HCV infection, and are at high risk of drug-drug interactions (DDIs). As combination anti-HCV treatment gradually evolves to resemble anti-HIV therapy, it is essential to consider the increased potential for DDIs in patients receiving combination anti-HCV therapy, and particularly in HCV/HIV-co-infected individuals. Therapeutic drug monitoring is likely to play a role in the clinical management of such interactions.

Aims: Direct‐acting antiviral agents (DAAs) for the treatment of hepatitis C (HCV) can be associated with drug–drug interactions (DDIs) with concomitant medications. The practical clinical implications of such DDIs are poorly understood. We assessed the clinical impact of possible pharmacokinetic (PK) interactions between simeprevir and frequently prescribed concomitant medications. Methods: This post hoc analysis pooled data from nine studies which evaluated simeprevir (SMV)‐based interferon‐free HCV treatment. Three classes of frequently used concomitant medications of interest (CMOIs) were analysed [antihypertensive drugs (AHDs), anxiolytic drugs (AXDs) and lipid‐lowering drugs (LLDs)] and categorized as amber or green according to their DDI potential with SMV (green: no DDIs; amber: potential/known PK interactions). Concomitant medications not recommended to be coadministered with SMV were not included. The composite primary endpoint was defined as the frequency of either discontinuation, interruption or dose modification of the CMOI during 12 weeks of SMV treatment. Results: Few patients met the composite endpoint in the various subgroups. Patients on amber CMOIs tended to experience CMOI modification more often (13.4–19.4%) than those on green CMOIs (3.1–10.8%). There was no difference in the frequency of adverse events between patients taking green and those taking amber CMOIs. Conclusions: In this large pooled analysis, coadministration of the evaluated commonly prescribed medications with known or potential PK interactions with SMV was manageable and resulted in few adjustments of concomitant medications. Our method could serve as a blueprint for the evaluation of the impact of DDIs. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives The pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic effects of antiretroviral therapy may differ in older compared with younger subjects with HIV infection. We aimed to assess factors associated with plasma antiretroviral drug exposure, including age, within a large HIV-infected cohort undergoing therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). Methods Data from the Liverpool TDM Registry were linked with the UK Collaborative HIV Cohort (CHIC) Study. All TDM of protease inhibitors (PIs) and non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs) was included and in order to account for different antiretroviral drugs the plasma concentrations were standardized by group measurements according to drug, dosing and timing of TDM. Regression modelling was used to evaluate associations of drug exposure with age and clinical parameters, including hepatic transaminase results and time to antiretroviral treatment modification. Results Data from 3589 TDM samples were available from 2447 subjects. The greatest numbers of plasma concentrations were assessed for lopinavir (22.4%), efavirenz (18.5%), atazanavir (17.0%) and saquinavir (11.6%). As age increased, median standardized NNRTI concentrations remained constant, whereas PI concentrations increased (correlation coefficient 0.04, P = 0.033). In a regression analysis stratified by antiretroviral drug class, standardized plasma concentrations were significantly associated with age for PIs (0.05 increase in standard deviation of drug concentration with each 10 year increase in age, P = 0.044), but not for NNRTIs or other clinical parameters, including hepatic transaminase results or time to antiretroviral treatment modification. Conclusions With increasing age, statistically significant rises in plasma PI exposure, but not NNRTI exposure, were observed. The clinical relevance of this observation merits further investigation. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background Treatment of HIV/malaria-coinfected patients with antiretroviral therapy (ART) and artemisinin-based combination therapy has potential for drug interactions. We investigated the pharmacokinetics of artemether, dihydroartemisinin and lumefantrine after administration of a single dose of 80/480 mg of artemether/lumefantrine to HIV-infected adults, taken with and without lopinavir/ritonavir. Methods A two-arm parallel study of 13 HIV-infected ART-naive adults and 16 HIV-infected adults stable on 400/100 mg of lopinavir/ritonavir plus two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT 00619944). Each participant received a single dose of 80/480 mg of artemether/lumefantrine under continuous cardiac function monitoring. Plasma concentrations of artemether, dihydroartemisinin and lumefantrine were measured. Results Co-administration of artemether/lumefantrine with lopinavir/ritonavir significantly reduced artemether maximum concentration (Cmax) and area under the concentration–time curve (AUC) [median (range): 112 (20–362) versus 56 (17–236) ng/mL, P = 0.03; and 264 (92–1129) versus 151 (38–606) ng · h/mL, P < 0.01]. Dihydroartemisinin Cmax and AUC were not affected [66 (10–111) versus 73 (31–224) ng/mL, P = 0.55; and 213 (68–343) versus 175 (118–262) ng · h/mL P = 0.27]. Lumefantrine Cmax and AUC increased during co-administration [2532 (1071–5957) versus 7097 (2396–9462) ng/mL, P < 0.01; and 41 119 (12 850–125 200) versus 199 678 (71 205–251 015) ng · h/mL, P < 0.01]. Conclusions Co-administration of artemether/lumefantrine with lopinavir/ritonavir significantly increases lumefantrine exposure, but decreases artemether exposure. Population pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic trials will be highly valuable in evaluating the clinical significance of this interaction and determining whether dosage modifications are indicated. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Objectives To assess the pharmacokinetics (PK) of raltegravir and ezetimibe when co-administered to healthy volunteers. Methods This was a prospective, open-label, crossover study, with subjects randomly assigned to group 1 (raltegravir 400 mg twice daily, raltegravir plus ezetimibe 10 mg once daily, wash-out period, ezetimibe) or group 2 (ezetimibe, raltegravir plus ezetimibe, wash-out period, raltegravir); all phases lasted for 10 days. Steady-state full PK sampling was performed at days 10, 20 and 40. Raltegravir and ezetimibe PK parameters were determined by non-compartmental methods and comparisons in the presence of the potentially interactive drug measured by geometric mean ratio (GMR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results Twenty subjects (10 females) completed the study. Raltegravir PK parameters did not change significantly in the presence of ezetimibe: GMRs (95% CI) were 1.16 (0.89–1.51) for AUC0–12, 1.13 (0.81–1.58) for maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) and 1.12 (0.72–1.74) for trough concentration (Ctrough). Ezetimibe AUC0–24 and Ctrough were lower in the presence of raltegravir [GMRs (95% CI) were 0.79 (0.68–0.91) for AUC0–24 and 0.78 (0.60–0.99) for Ctrough], while ezetimibe glucuronide Cmax was 40% higher (90% CI 1.17–1.66). There was marked inter-individual variability in the PK of the two drugs, especially during co-administration. Conclusions There were no significant changes in raltegravir PK parameters with or without ezetimibe. However, in the presence of raltegravir, ezetimibe AUC0–24 and Ctrough were significantly lower (>20%) and ezetimibe glucuronide Cmax was higher. Clinical data to assess the importance of the change in ezetimibe concentrations are warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Background: Clinically significant drug-drug interactions (CSDIs) involving antiretrovirals are frequent and under-recognized in developed countries, but data are lacking for developing countries. Methodology and Principal Findings: To investigate the prevalence of CSDIs between antiretrovirals and coadministered drugs, we surveyed prescriptions dispensed in a large HIV clinic in Kenya. Of 1040 consecutive patients screened, 996 were eligible for inclusion. CSDIs were defined as 'major' (capable of causing severe or permanent damage, contraindicated, avoid or not recommended by the manufacturer, or requiring dose modification) or 'moderate' (manufacturers advise caution, or close monitoring, or capable of causing clinical deterioration). A total of 334 patients (33.5%) were at risk for a CSDI, potentially lowering antiretroviral drug concentrations in 120 (12%) patients. Major interactions most frequently involved rifampicin (12.4%, mostly with efavirenz) and azoles (2.7%) whereas moderate interactions were frequently azoles (13%), steroids (11%), and antimalarials (3%). Multivariable analyses suggested that patients at risk for CSDIs had lower CD4 counts (P = 0.006) and baseline weight (P = 0.023) and WHO Stage 3 or 4 disease (P≤0.007). Risk for CSDIs was not associated with particular regimens, although only 116 (11.6%) patients were receiving WHO second line regimens. Conclusions: One in three patients receiving antiretrovirals in our programme were at risk of CSDIs. Strategies need to be urgently developed to avoid important drug interactions, to identify early markers of toxicity and to manage unavoidable interactions safely in order to reduce risk of harm, and to maximize the effectiveness of mass antiretroviral deployment in Africa. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ABOUT THIS SUBJECT • Antiretroviral protease inhibitors such as lopinavir and saquinavir have been shown to be substrates of ABCB1. Co-administration with the potent ABCB1 and CYP3A4 inhibitor, ritonavir, has shown improved pharmacokinetics and subsequent therapeutic effects of protease inhibitors. Darunavir is a recently licensed protease inhibitor with potent antiretroviral effects but has yet to be characterized as a potential substrate for drug transporters. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS • Darunavir was shown to be a substrate of ABCB1 using different in vitro models. Inhibition of ABCB1 alone does not increase cellular accumulation of darunavir in PBMCs. However, inhibition of ABCB1 and ABCCs significantly increased cellular accumulation of darunavir whereas inhibition of influx transporters significantly reduced the cellular accumulation of darunavir in PBMCs. AIMS ABCB1, some ABCCs and SLCOs have been reported to affect the intracellular accumulation of various protease inhibitors in vitro and ex vivo. Darunavir is the most recently licensed protease inhibitor and we sought to investigate the ability of transport inhibitors to influence its intracellular accumulation in lymphocytes from healthy volunteers. METHODS The intracellular accumulation of radiolabelled darunavir was assessed using CEM cells and ABCB1-overexpressing CEMVBL cells. Apical and basolateral transport of radiolabelled darunavir through MDCKII monolayers was also studied. Finally the ability of known inhibitors to influence intracellular accumulation of darunavir in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) was investigated. RESULTS CEMVBL cells (1.4 ± 0.6, P < 0.001, 95% CI for the difference = 0.46, 0.80, n= 7) had significantly lower accumulation of darunavir compared with CEM cells (5.6 ± 0.7, n= 7) and this was reversed by addition of tariquidar (30 nm, 4.6 ± 0.8, P < 0.001, 95% CI =−0.64, −0.41, n= 4). In MDCKII-ABCBI cells, transport from the basal to the apical compartment was observed and this was also reversible with the addition of tariquidar. In PBMCs, dipyridamole (6.9 ± 1.3, P < 0.01, 95% CI for the difference =−1.16, −0.30, ( n= 8) significantly increased whilst montelukast (5.7 ± 1.0, P < 0.01, 95% CI for the difference = 0.16, 0.79, n= 8) significantly decreased the intracellular accumulation of darunavir when compared with control (6.2 ± 1.1, n= 8). CONCLUSIONS Darunavir is a substrate for efflux and influx transporters in PBMC and intracellular concentrations can be manipulated using known inhibitors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To study the effect of mycophenolate mofetil therapy on the pharmacokinetic parameters of a number of antiretroviral drugs, on intracellular pools of deoxycytidine triphosphate (dCTP) and deoxyguanosine triphosphate (dGTP), and on intracellular concentrations of the triphosphate of lamivudine (3TCTP).Design: Randomised pharmacokinetic study.Participants: Nineteen HIV-1-infected patients.Methods: Antiretroviral-naive men starting treatment with didanosine 400 mg once daily, lamivudine 150 mg twice daily, abacavir 300 mg twice daily, indinavir 800 mg twice daily, ritonavir 100 mg twice daily and nevirapine 200 mg twice daily were randomised to a group with or without mycophenolate mofetil 500 mg twice daily. After 8 weeks of therapy, the plasma pharmacokinetic profiles of mycophenolic acid (the active metabolite of mycophenolate mofetil), abacavir, indinavir and nevirapine, and triphosphate concentrations (dCTP, dGTP and 3TCTP) in peripheral blood mononuclear cells, were determined.Results: Nine of the 19 patients received mycophenolate mofetil. There was no difference in plasma clearance of indinavir or abacavir between the two groups. The clearance of nevirapine was higher in patients using mycophenolate mofetil (p = 0.04). In 12 patients, of whom five also received mycophenolate mofetil, intracellular triphosphates were measured. There was no significant difference in intracellular dCTP, dGTP or 3TCTP concentrations between the two groups.Conclusion: In this small cohort of patients, mycophenolate mofetil therapy reduced the plasma concentration of nevirapine but had no effect on plasma concentrations of indinavir and abacavir. There were no consistent effects of mycophenolic acid on the intracellular concentrations of dCTP, dGTP or 3TCTP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Focuses on the role of therapeutic drug monitoring in the treatment of HIV infection. Difficulty in establishing relationship between plasma concentration and antiviral effect; Lists of licensed antiretrovirals; Variability in plasma drug concentration.

An abstract of the article "New drug interactions in HIV and HCV," by David Back is presented.

The article presents a study which discusses the effect of pregnancy on steady-state nevirapine pharmacokinetics (PK). It mentions that the Ugandan pregnant women were tested who are receiving nevirapine-based antiretroviral therapy. The authors concluded that the exposure to nevirapine were reduced during the third trimester of pregnant Ugandan women and asserts that the long-term impact of intermittent supoptimal nevirapine concentrations during pregnancy is unknown.

The article reports on the assessment of adipokine expression and mitochondrial toxicity in HIV patients with lipoatrophy on stavudine. In study, it was analyzed the relations between mitochondrial toxicity, adipokine expression, and clinical LA in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) and adipose samples from individuals treated with stavudine (d4T) or zidovudine (ZDV) in comparison to patients undergoing highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) as well as HIV-negative individuals.