Urinary metabolites after intravenous propofol bolus in neonates

Quantitation of propofol metabolites by LC-MS/MS demonstrating long detection window for urine drug monitoring

Introduction

Chromatographic methods for analysis of propofol and its metabolites have been widely used in pharmacokinetic studies of propofol distribution, metabolism, and clearance. Application of chromatographic methods is also needed in clinical and forensic laboratories for detecting and monitoring propofol misuse.

Objective

We report a method for sensitive analysis of propofol, propofol 1-glucuronide (PG), 4-hydroxypropofol 1-glucuronide (1-QG), 4-hydroxypropofol 4-glucuronide (4-QG) and 4-hydroxypropofol 4-sulfate (4-QS) in urine by LC-MS/MS analysis. The method employs a simple dilute-and-analyze sample preparation with stable isotope internal standardization.

Results

Validation studies demonstrate a linear calibration model (100-10,000 ng/mL), with dilution integrity verified for the extended range of concentrations experienced in propofol use. Criteria-based validation was achieved, including an average coefficient of variation of 6.5 % and a percent bias of -4.2 ng/mL. The method was evaluated in 12 surgical patients, with monitoring periods lasting up to 30 days following intravenous propofol administrations of 100-3000 mg on the day of surgery. While the concentration ratio of PG to 4-hydroxy propofol metabolite decreased significantly in the days following surgery, PG maintained the highest concentration in all specimens. Both PG and 1-QG were detectable throughout the monitoring periods, including in a patient monitored for 30 days. Lower concentrations were determined for 4-QG and 4-QS, with evidence of detection up to 20 days. Propofol was not detectable in any urine specimens, thereby proving ineffective for identifying drug use.

Conclusion

The validated method for quantifying propofol metabolites demonstrates its applicability for the sensitive detection of propofol misuse over a long window of drug-use detection.

Population pharmacokinetics of propofol in neonates and infants: Gestational and postnatal age to determine clearance maturation

AIMS

Develop a population pharmacokinetic model describing propofol pharmacokinetics in (pre)term neonates and infants, that can be used for precision dosing (e.g. during target-controlled infusion) of propofol in this population.

METHODS

A nonlinear mixed effects pharmacokinetic analysis (Monolix 2018R2) was performed, based on a pooled study population in 107 (pre)term neonates and infants.

RESULTS

In total, 836 blood samples were collected from 66 (pre)term neonates and 41 infants originating from 3 studies. Body weight (BW) of the pooled study population was 3.050 (0.580-11.440) kg, postmenstrual age (PMA) was 36.56 (27.00-43.00) weeks and postnatal age (PNA) was 1.14 (0-104.00) weeks (median and min-max range). A 3-compartment structural model was identified and the effect of BW was modelled using fixed allometric exponents. Elimination clearance maturation was modelled accounting for the maturational effect on elimination clearance until birth (by gestational age [GA]) and postpartum (by PNA and GA). The extrapolated adult (70 kg) population propofol elimination clearance (1.64 L min^-1 , estimated relative standard error = 6.02%) is in line with estimates from previous population pharmacokinetic studies. Empirical scaling of BW on the central distribution volume in function of PNA improved the model fit.

CONCLUSIONS

It is recommended to describe elimination clearance maturation by GA and PNA instead of PMA on top of size effects when analyzing propofol pharmacokinetics in populations including preterm neonates. Changes in body composition in addition to weight changes or other physio-anatomical changes may explain the changes in central distribution volume. The developed model may serve as a prior for propofol dose finding and target-controlled infusion in (preterm) neonates.

Neonatal pain management: still in search for the Holy Grail

Inadequate pain management but also inappropriate use of analgesics in early infancy has negative effects on neurodevelopmental outcome. As a consequence, neonatal pain management is still in search for the Holy Grail. At best, effective pain management is based on prevention, assessment, and treatment followed by a re-assessment of the pain to determine if additional treatment is still necessary. Unfortunately, epidemiological observations suggest that neonates are undergoing painful procedures very frequently, unveiling the need for effective preventive, non-pharmacological strategies. In addition, assessment is still based on validated, multimodal, but subjective pain assessment tools. Finally, in neonatal intensive care units, there is a shift in clinical practices (e.g., shorter intubation and ventilation), and this necessitates the development and validation of new pharmacological treatment modalities. To illustrate this, a shift in the use of opioids to paracetamol has occurred and short-acting agents (remifentanil, propofol) are more commonly administered to neonates. In addition to these new modalities and as part of a more advanced approach of the developmental pharmacology of analgesics, pharmacogenetics also emerged as a tool for precision medicine in neonates. To assure further improvement of neonatal pain management the integration of pharmacogenetics with the usual covariates like weight, age and/or disease characteristics is needed.

Neonatal clinical pharmacology

Effective and safe drug administration in neonates should be based on integrated knowledge on the evolving physiological characteristics of the infant who will receive the drug and the pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of a given drug. Consequently, clinical pharmacology in neonates is as dynamic and diverse as the neonates we admit to our units while covariates explaining the variability are at least as relevant as median estimates. The unique setting of neonatal clinical pharmacology will be highlighted based on the hazards of simple extrapolation of maturational drug clearance when only based on 'adult' metabolism (propofol, paracetamol). Second, maturational trends are not at the same pace for all maturational processes. This will be illustrated based on the differences between hepatic and renal maturation (tramadol, morphine, midazolam). Finally, pharmacogenetics should be tailored to neonates, not just mirror adult concepts. Because of this diversity, clinical research in the field of neonatal clinical pharmacology is urgently needed and facilitated through PK/PD modeling. In addition, irrespective of already available data to guide pharmacotherapy, pharmacovigilance is needed to recognize specific side effects. Consequently, pediatric anesthesiologists should consider to contribute to improved pharmacotherapy through clinical trial design and collaboration, as well as reporting on adverse effects of specific drugs.