A simple high-performance liquid chromatography for the determination of linezolid in human plasma and saliva

Monitoring Salivary Concentrations of Tedizolid and Linezolid Using Rats

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is an effective tool for the management of patients who are administered linezolid. The use of saliva for TDM has potential advantages over the use of plasma; however, only a few reports have compared drug concentrations in the saliva and plasma. Moreover, there are no reports on the salivary concentration of tedizolid, an oxazolidinone antibiotic similar to linezolid. In the present study, the concentrations of tedizolid and linezolid in rat submandibular saliva were compared with those measured in the plasma.

METHODS

Tedizolid (10 mg/kg, n = 6) and linezolid (12 mg/kg, n = 5) were administered via the rat tail vein. Submandibular saliva and plasma samples were collected for up to 8 h after the initiation of drug administration, and assayed for the concentrations of tedizolid and linezolid.

RESULTS

A strong correlation was found between the saliva and plasma concentrations of tedizolid (r = 0.964, p < 0.001) and linezolid (r = 0.936, p < 0.001). The value of tedizolid maximum concentration of drug (C_max) was 0.99 ± 0.08 µg/mL in the saliva and 14.46 ± 1.71 µg/mL in the plasma. Meanwhile, the C_max of linezolid was 8.01 ± 1.42 µg/mL in the saliva and 13.00 ± 1.90 µg/mL in the plasma. According to these results, the saliva/plasma concentration ratios of tedizolid and linezolid in rats were 0.0513 ± 0.0080 and 0.6341 ± 0.0339, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the correlation between saliva and plasma concentrations of tedizolid and linezolid, as well as the characteristics of saliva, the results of this study suggest that saliva is a useful matrix for TDM.

A simple HPLC-UV Method for Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Linezolid in human Plasma in low-resourced settings

OBJECTIVE: A high-performance liquid chromatography method for the estimation of Linezolid in human plasma was developed and validated. METHODS: Samples (100µµL) were deproteinized with acetonitrile and analyzed using LiChrospher 100, RP18e column with PDA detection at 254 nm. The flow rate of the isocratic mobile phase comprising of 0.1% formic acid in 1000 ml of water and acetonitrile in the ratio of 60:40 (v/v) was set at 1.0 ml/min. RESULTS: The calibration curve ranged from 0.50 to 20.0 µg/ml and was linear. The recovery ranged from 96% to 101%. The accuracy ranged from 98 to 101% and intra- and inter-day relative standard deviation was <4.58%. The method reliably eliminated interfering materials from plasma and R2 was 0.9973. The method described was applied to the determination of plasma LZD concentration in multi-drug-resistant tuberculosis patients who are treated with a dose of 600 mg LZD once daily. CONCLUSIONS: The developed method is suitable for determination of plasma LZD in routine care and considered feasible in less-resourced settings

Method Development and Validation for the Determination of Linezolid Drug in Human Plasma by Reversed-Phase High-Performance Liquid Chromatography

Objective:

Linezolid is a significant antibiotic used against severe infections initiated by multi-resistant bacterial pathogens.

Method:

Linezolid extraction from plasma is obtained using methanol. Chromatographic separation is achieved isocratically on a C18 column [Zorbax C18, 5 µm particle size, 150 mm ˟ 4.6 mm] making use of a mobile phase of acetonitrile / 0.05 M phosphate buffer, pH = 4.5 (30 : 70 v/v) at a flow rate of 1.2 mL/min with photodiode array detector DAD, at a wavelength of 256 nm.

Method:

Linezolid extraction from plasma is obtained using methanol. Chromatographic separation is achieved isocratically on a C18 column [Zorbax C18, 5 µm particle size, 150 mm ˟ 4.6 mm] making use of a mobile phase of acetonitrile / 0.05 M phosphate buffer, pH = 4.5 (30 : 70 v/v) at a flow rate of 1.2 mL/min with photodiode array detector DAD, at a wavelength of 256 nm.

Results :

The retention time of linezolid was 2.5 min. The analytical method was linear (r2 > 0.998) over the calibration range of 0.30 to 50.0 µg/mL. The extraction recoveries of linezolid range from 71.03 to 91.93 %. The limit of quantification and the limit of detection were 0.112 µg and 0.037 µg, respectively. The RSDs for intraday and interday assays were < 7.77 and 4.32 %, respectively. The intraday and interday accuracies were in the range 80.6-112 % and 77.44-104.85 %, respectively.

Conclusion:

The applied method is precise, accurate and appropriate for pharmacokinetic studies and therapeutic drug monitoring of linezolid in routine clinical practice.

Saliva-based linezolid monitoring on a mobile UV spectrophotometer

BACKGROUND

In TB, therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is recommended for linezolid; however, implementation is challenging in endemic settings. Non-invasive saliva sampling using a mobile assay would increase the feasibility of TDM.

OBJECTIVES

To validate a linezolid saliva assay using a mobile UV spectrophotometer.

METHODS

The saliva assay was developed using NanoPhotometer NP80® and linezolid concentrations were quantified using second-order derivative spectroscopy. Sample preparation involved liquid-liquid extraction of saliva, using saturated sodium chloride and ethyl acetate at 1:1:3 (v/v/v). The assay was validated for accuracy, precision, selectivity, specificity, carry-over, matrix effect, stability and filters. Acceptance criteria were bias and coefficient of variation (CV) <15% for quality control (QC) samples and <20% for the lower limit of quantification (LLOQ).

RESULTS

Linezolid concentrations correlated with the amplitude between 250 and 270 nm on the second-order derivative spectra. The linezolid calibration curve was linear over the range of 3.0 to 25 mg/L (R2 = 0.99) and the LLOQ was 3.0 mg/L. Accuracy and precision were demonstrated with bias of -7.5% to 2.7% and CV ≤5.6%. The assay met the criteria for selectivity, matrix effect, carry-over, stability (tested up to 3 days) and use of filters (0.22 μM Millex®-GV and Millex®-GP). Specificity was tested with potential co-medications. Interferences from pyrazinamide, levofloxacin, moxifloxacin, rifampicin, abacavir, acetaminophen and trimethoprim were noted; however, with minimal clinical implications on linezolid dosing.

CONCLUSIONS

We validated a UV spectrophotometric assay using non-invasive saliva sampling for linezolid. The next step is to demonstrate clinical feasibility and value to facilitate programmatic implementation of TDM.

Review of Chromatographic Methods Coupled with Modern Detection Techniques Applied in the Therapeutic Drugs Monitoring (TDM)

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is a tool used to integrate pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamics knowledge to optimize and personalize various drug therapies. The optimization of drug dosing may improve treatment outcomes, reduce toxicity, and reduce the risk of developing drug resistance. To adequately implement TDM, accurate and precise analytical procedures are required. In clinical practice, blood is the most commonly used matrix for TDM; however, less invasive samples, such as dried blood spots or non-invasive saliva samples, are increasingly being used. The choice of sample preparation method, type of column packing, mobile phase composition, and detection method is important to ensure accurate drug measurement and to avoid interference from matrix effects and drug metabolites. Most of the reported procedures used liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) techniques due to its high selectivity and sensitivity. High-performance chromatography with ultraviolet detection (HPLC-UV) methods are also used when a simpler and more cost-effective methodology is desired for clinical monitoring. The application of high-performance chromatography with fluorescence detection (HPLC-FLD) with and without derivatization processes and high-performance chromatography with electrochemical detection (HPLC-ED) techniques for the analysis of various drugs in biological samples for TDM have been described less often. Before chromatographic analysis, samples were pretreated by various procedures-most often by protein precipitation, liquid-liquid extraction, and solid-phase extraction, rarely by microextraction by packed sorbent, dispersive liquid-liquid microextraction. The aim of this article is to review the recent literature (2010-2020) regarding the use of liquid chromatography with various detection techniques for TDM.

Developing an isotope dilution UHPLC-MS/MS method to quantify linezolid in human plasma: application to therapeutic drug monitoring

Aim: To optimize clinical efficacy and reduce the drug-exposure-related toxicity of linezolid, whose concentrations show wide inter-variabilities, a simple and reliable quantitative assay for therapeutic drug monitoring is necessary. Results: A UHPLC-MS/MS assay has been established for determination of linezolid in human plasma and fully validated according to the US FDA guidelines. After a simple, isotope-dilluted precipitation with methanol, the analytes were separated by a straightforward isocratic mode and the MS/MS was conducted under the ESI⁺ mode fitted with SRM. The calibration curves proved acceptable linearity in the range of 0.1-30.0 µg/ml. Conclusion: The present assay is currently used in routine clinical practice, being applied to therapeutic drug monitoring and helps to optimize individual dosing regimens and manage adverse effects in ICU patients.

A critical review of HPLC-based analytical methods for quantification of Linezolid

Linezolid is a synthetic antimicrobial agent belonging to the oxazolidinone class. Since its approval in the year 2000 until now, linezolid remains the main representative drug for the oxazolidinone class of drugs, which is used in therapy due to its unique mode of action, which involves inhibition of protein synthesis. As linezolid holds great importance in antimicrobial therapy, it is necessary to compile the various analytical methods that have been reported in the literature for its analysis. Analytical techniques used for pharmaceutical analyses and therapeutic drug monitoring play an important role in comprehending the aspects regarding bioavailability, bioequivalence, and therapeutic monitoring during patient follow-ups. Even though linezolid has had the approval for clinical use for more than 18 years now, most of the analytical methods for its determination reported in the scientific literature are the ones which utilize HPLC. Therefore, the present review provides a summary of the HPLC-based methods used in the determination and quantification of linezolid in different matrices since the time of its discovery.

Linezolid-A Review of Analytical Methods in Pharmaceuticals and Biological Matrices

Bacterial resistance to antibiotics is a growing phenomenon in the world. Considering the relevance of antimicrobials for population and the reduction in the registration of new antimicrobials by regulatory agencies, proper quality control is required to minimize the spread of bacterial resistance and ensure the effectiveness of a treatment, as well as safety for the patient. The recent addition to the antimicrobial world is the oxazolidinone classes of antibiotics, especially useful to treat infections caused by Gram-positive bacteria. Eperezolid and linezolid (LIN) are the two members of the oxazolidinone class of antibiotics. LIN was the first oxazolidinone approved by the Food and Drug Administration. The present review focuses on the analytical methods for the assessment of LIN in pharmaceuticals and biological matrices. The critical validation parameters like the linearity, limit of detection, limit of quantification are discussed for the individual method. Also the critical quality attributes like the sensitivity and the sample preparation techniques for bioanalytical methods are also discussed. Furthermore, some future trends that can be incorporated in the determination of similar drugs are also suggested.

Voltammetric monitoring of linezolid, meropenem and theophylline in plasma

Treatment of healthcare associated Pneumonia (HCAP) caused by Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) requires therapeutic protocols formed of linezolid (LIN) either alone or in combination with meropenem (MERO) and theophylline (THEO). The inter-individual pharmacokinetic variations require the development of reliable therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) tools especially in immunocompromised patients. A sensitive square wave voltammetric sensor using multiwalled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs) modified carbon paste electrode in Britton-Robinson buffer was developed and validated. Experimental parameters such as pH, percentage of MWCNTs, and pre-concentration time were optimized. The sensor was employed at pH 11.0 for the determination of LIN in plasma within a concentration range of 2.5 × 10^-8 - 8.0 × 10^-6 mol L^-1without interference from co-administered medications. On the other hand, simultaneous monitoring of LIN, MERO and THEO in plasma was feasible at pH 3.0 over concentration ranges of 4.0 × 10^-7- 9.0 × 10^-5, 8.0 × 10^-7- 9.0 × 10^-5 and 8.0 × 10^-7 - 9.0 × 10^-5 mol L^-1, respectively. The performance of the proposed sensor was validated and the applicability for TDM has been demonstrated in plasma of healthy volunteers.

Systematic Review of Salivary Versus Blood Concentrations of Antituberculosis Drugs and Their Potential for Salivary Therapeutic Drug Monitoring

BACKGROUND

Therapeutic drug monitoring is useful in the treatment of tuberculosis to assure adequate exposure, minimize antibiotic resistance, and reduce toxicity. Salivary therapeutic drug monitoring could reduce the risks, burden, and costs of blood-based therapeutic drug monitoring. This systematic review compared human pharmacokinetics of antituberculosis drugs in saliva and blood to determine if salivary therapeutic drug monitoring could be a promising alternative.

METHODS

On December 2, 2016, PubMed and the Institute for Scientific Information Web of Knowledge were searched for pharmacokinetic studies reporting human salivary and blood concentrations of antituberculosis drugs. Data on study population, study design, analytical method, salivary Cmax, salivary area under the time-concentration curve, plasma/serum Cmax, plasma/serum area under the time-concentration curve, and saliva-plasma or saliva-serum ratio were extracted. All included articles were assessed for risk of bias.

RESULTS

In total, 42 studies were included in this systematic review. For the majority of antituberculosis drugs, including the first-line drugs ethambutol and pyrazinamide, no pharmacokinetic studies in saliva were found. For amikacin, pharmacokinetic studies without saliva-plasma or saliva-serum ratios were found.

CONCLUSIONS

For gatifloxacin and linezolid, salivary therapeutic drug monitoring is likely possible due to a narrow range of saliva-plasma and saliva-serum ratios. For isoniazid, rifampicin, moxifloxacin, ofloxacin, and clarithromycin, salivary therapeutic drug monitoring might be possible; however, a large variability in saliva-plasma and saliva-serum ratios was observed. Unfortunately, salivary therapeutic drug monitoring is probably not possible for doripenem and amoxicillin/clavulanate, as a result of very low salivary drug concentrations.

Therapeutic Dose Monitoring for Linezolid in a Patient with MRSA Pneumonia with Bacteremia in Diabetes Insipidus

INTRODUCTION

Few studies have investigated the effect of increased creatinine clearance (CrCl) on linezolid (LZD) concentration. Herein, we report the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) profile of LZD used in the management of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) pneumonia with concomitant bacteremia in a patient with high CrCl caused by diabetes insipidus (DI).

CASE REPORT

A 19-year-old man was admitted to the intensive care unit following a traumatic brain injury. After admission, he underwent a craniotomy for the severe brain injury. However, he developed DI after the operation. Despite treatment with vasopressin, his urine output reached 5-6 L/day as a result of the DI, and his CrCl increased to 180-278 mL/min. We were required to administer 6-7 L of fluid a day to compensate for the high urinary fluid output. On day 55, MRSA pneumonia with sepsis was suspected and, consequently, LZD was administrated intravenously (600 mg every 12 h). He was treated with LZD for 14 days. The patient has since successfully recovered from MRSA pneumonia with concomitant bacteremia, and was transferred to the general ward on day 82. Blood LZD levels from days 60-68, which were measured after the patient's transfer to the general ward, showed that the trough levels were lower than the threshold level of detection. The blood 24-h area under the plasma LZD concentration-time curve (AUC)24/minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) was 69.3.

CONCLUSION

In spite of the low level of LZD AUC24/MIC caused by the high CrCl with DI, MRSA pneumonia with concomitant bacteremia was successfully treated with LZD.