Nelfinavir, a protease inhibitor, increases sirolimus levels in a liver transplantation patient: a case report

Pharmacologic Treatment of Transplant Recipients Infected With SARS-CoV-2: Considerations Regarding Therapeutic Drug Monitoring and Drug-Drug Interactions

COVID-19 is a novel infectious disease caused by the severe acute respiratory distress (SARS)-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). Several therapeutic options are currently emerging but none with universal consensus or proven efficacy. Solid organ transplant recipients are perceived to be at increased risk of severe COVID-19 because of their immunosuppressed conditions due to chronic use of immunosuppressive drugs (ISDs). It is therefore likely that solid organ transplant recipients will be treated with these experimental antivirals.

Solid Organ Transplantation in HIV-Infected Recipients: History, Progress, and Frontiers

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

End-stage organ disease prevalence is increasing among HIV-infected (HIV+) individuals. Trial and registry data confirm that solid organ transplantation (SOT) is efficacious in this population. Optimizing access to transplant and decreasing complications represent active frontiers.

RECENT FINDINGS

HIV+ recipients historically experienced 2-4-fold higher rejection. Integrase strand transferase inhibitors (INSTIs) minimize drug interactions and may reduce rejection along with lymphodepleting induction immunosuppression. Hepatitis C virus (HCV) coinfection has been associated with inferior outcomes, yet direct-acting antivirals (DAAs) may mitigate this. Experience in South Africa and the US HIV Organ Policy Equity (HOPE) Act support HIV+ donor to HIV+ recipient (HIV D+/R+) transplantation. SOT is the optimal treatment for end-stage organ disease in HIV+ individuals. Recent advances include use of INSTIs and DAAs in transplant recipients; however, strategies to improve access to transplant are needed. HIV D+/R+ transplantation is under investigation and may improve access and provide insights for HIV cure and pathogenesis research.

Drug interactions and antiretroviral drug monitoring

Owing to the improved longevity afforded by combination antiretroviral therapy (cART), HIV-infected individuals are developing several non-AIDS-related comorbid conditions. Consequently, medical management of the HIV-infected population is increasingly complex, with a growing list of potential drug-drug interactions (DDIs). This article reviews some of the most relevant and emerging potential interactions between antiretroviral medications and other agents. The most common DDIs are those involving protease inhibitors or non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, which alter the cytochrome P450 enzyme system and/or drug transporters such as p-glycoprotein. Of note are the new agents for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus infection. These new classes of drugs and others drugs that are increasingly used in this patient population represent a significant challenge with regard to achieving the goals of effective HIV suppression and minimization of drug-related toxicities. Awareness of DDIs and a multidisciplinary approach are imperative in reaching these goals.

Drug interactions with solid tumour-targeted therapies

Drug interactions are an on-going concern in the treatment of cancer, especially when targeted therapies, such as tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) or mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors, are being used. The emergence of elderly patients and/or patients with both cancer and other chronic co-morbidities leads to polypharmacy. Therefore, the risk of drug-drug interactions (DDI) becomes a clinically relevant issue, all the more so as TKIs and mTOR inhibitors are essentially metabolised by cytochrome P450 enzymes. These DDIs can result in variability in anticancer drug exposure, thus favouring the selection of resistant cellular clones or the occurrence of toxicity. This review provides a comprehensive overview of DDIs that involve targeted therapies approved by the FDA for the treatment of solid tumours for more than 3 years (sorafenib, sunitinib, erlotinib, gefitinib, imatinib, lapatinib, everolimus, temsirolimus) and medicinal herb or drugs. This review also provides some guidelines to help oncologists and pharmacists in their clinical practice.

Drug-drug interactions between antiretroviral and immunosuppressive agents in HIV-infected patients after solid organ transplantation: a review

Since the introduction of combination antiretroviral therapy (cART) resulting in the prolonged survival of HIV-infected patients, HIV infection is no longer considered to be a contraindication for solid organ transplantation (SOT). The combined management of antiretroviral and immunosuppressive therapy proved to be extremely challenging, as witnessed by high rates of allograft rejection and drug toxicity, but the profound drug-drug interactions between immunosuppressants and cART, especially protease inhibitors (PIs) also play an important role. Caution and frequent drug level monitoring of calcineurin inhibitors, such as tacrolimus are necessary when PIs are (re)introduced or withdrawn in HIV-infected recipients. Furthermore, the pharmacokinetics of glucocorticoids and mTOR inhibitors are seriously affected by PIs. With the introduction of integrase inhibitors, CCR5-antagonists and fusion inhibitors which cause significantly less pharmacokinetic interactions, have minor overlapping toxicity, and offer the advantage of pharmacodynamic synergy, it is time to revaluate what may be considered the optimal antiretroviral regimen in SOT recipients. In this review we provide a brief overview of the recent success of SOT in the HIV population, and an update on the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions between currently available cART and immunosuppressants in HIV-infected patients, who underwent SOT.

Rapamycin with antiretroviral therapy in AIDS-associated Kaposi sarcoma: an AIDS Malignancy Consortium study

PURPOSE

The mammalian target of rapamycin is activated in Kaposi sarcoma (KS) and its inhibitor, rapamycin, has induced KS regression in transplant-associated KS. This study aimed to evaluate rapamycin's safety and toxicity in HIV-infected individuals with KS receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART), investigate rapamycin interactions with both protease inhibitor (PI)-containing and nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI)-containing ART regimens, and assess clinical and biological endpoints including KS response and mammalian target of rapamycin-dependent signaling.

METHODS

Seven participants, 4 on PI-based and 3 on NNRTI-based ART, had rapamycin titrated to achieve trough concentrations of 5-10 ng/mL. Patients were monitored for safety and KS response. KS biopsies were evaluated for changes in phosphoribosomal S6 protein, and phospho-Akt expression. Interleukin 6 and vascular endothelial growth factor levels, HIV and KS-associated herpesvirus viral loads, and CD4 counts were monitored.

RESULTS

Despite pharmacokinetic interactions resulting in >200-fold differences in cumulative weekly rapamycin doses between participants on PI-containing and NNRTI-containing regimens, treatment was well tolerated. There were no significant changes in viral loads or cytokine levels; modest initial decreases in CD4 counts occurred in some patients. Three participants, all on PI-containing regimens and with higher rapamycin exposure, showed partial KS responses. Three of 4 subjects whose biopsies were studied at ≥day 50 showed decreased phosphoribosomal S6 protein staining.

CONCLUSIONS

Rapamycin seems safe in HIV-infected individuals with KS and can, in some cases, induce tumor regression and affect its molecular targets. Significant pharmacokinetic interactions require careful titration to achieve target drug trough concentrations but may be exploited to achieve therapeutic benefit.

Liver transplant outcomes in HIV-infected patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis with synthetic cohort

OBJECTIVES

The relative success of liver transplantation in those with HIV compared to HIV-uninfected individuals remains a point of intense debate. We aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of liver transplantation in HIV-hepatitis co-infected patients using a meta-analysis and individual patient data meta-analysis as a synthetic cohort.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE via PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, AIDSLINE (inception to 2010), AMED, CINAHL, TOXNET, Development and Reproductive Toxicology, Hazardous Substances Databank, Psych-info and relevant conferences. We included cohort studies and individual case-reports evaluating survival of co-infected transplant patients. We abstracted data on cohort and case demographics and outcomes. We pooled cohorts using a random-effects analysis and created a synthetic cohort of cases using individual patient data. We confirmed this with the pooled cohort analysis.

RESULTS

We included 15 cohort studies and 49 case series with individual patient data. At 12 months, 84.4% [95% confidence interval (CI) 81.1-87.8%] of patients had survived. Within the HIV-infected population evaluated, HIV-hepatitis B virus (HBV) co-infection was associated with optimal survival. In an adjusted model, individuals positive for HBV were 8.28 (95% CI 2.26-30.33) times more likely to survive when compared to those without HBV. Further, individuals with an undetectable HIV viral load at the time of transplantation were 2.89 (95% CI 1.41-5.91) times more likely to survive when compared to those with detectable HIV viremia. Hepatitis C virus was not a predictor of patient survival when adjusted for by other key predictors [0.54 (95% CI 0.17-1.80)].

Drug interactions in transplant patients: what everyone should know

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Adverse events due to drug-drug interactions remain a challenge in the postsurgical care of transplant recipients. A combination of potent and selective immunosuppressive drugs, which have a narrow therapeutic index, with medications for the treatment of comorbidities such as dyslipidemia, infection, psychiatric conditions, and hypertension, can lead to life-threatening drug-drug interactions.

RECENT FINDINGS

There are a number of important drug-drug interactions which are important for physicians to consider. It is critical to understand the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of drug-drug interactions, their potential impact on patient care, and the management strategies.

SUMMARY

Close therapeutic drug monitoring and evaluation of drug-specific side effects continue to be an important key to minimize adverse events due to drug-drug interactions.

Immunotherapy in elderly transplant recipients: a guide to clinically significant drug interactions

Currently, >50% of candidates for solid organ transplantation in Europe and the US are aged >50 years while approximately 15% of potential recipients are aged >or=65 years. Elderly transplant candidates are characterized by specific co-morbidity profiles that compromise graft and patient outcome after transplantation. The presence of coronary artery or peripheral vascular disease, cerebrovascular disease, history of malignancy, chronic obstructive lung disease or diabetes mellitus further increases the early post-transplant mortality risk in elderly recipients, with infections and cardiovascular complications as the leading causes of death. Not only are elderly patients more prone to developing drug-related adverse effects, but they are also more susceptible to pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic drug interactions because of polypharmacy. The majority of currently used immunosuppressant drugs in organ transplantation are metabolized by cytochrome P450 (CYP) or uridine diphosphate-glucuronosyltransferases and are substrates of the multidrug resistance (MDR)-1 transporter P-glycoprotein, the MDR-associated protein 2 or the canalicular multispecific organic anion transporter, which predisposes these immunosuppressant compounds to specific interactions with commonly prescribed drugs. In addition, important drug interactions between immunosuppressant drugs have been identified and require attention when choosing an appropriate immunosuppressant drug regimen for the frail elderly organ recipient. An age-related 34% decrease in total body clearance of the calcineurin inhibitor ciclosporin was observed in elderly renal recipients (aged >65 years) compared with younger patients, while older recipients also had 44% higher intracellular lymphocyte ciclosporin concentrations. Similarly, using a Bayesian approach, an inverse relationship was noted between sirolimus clearance and age in stable kidney recipients. Ciclosporin and tacrolimus have distinct pharmacokinetics, but both are metabolized by intestinal and hepatic CYP3A4/3A5 and transported across the cell membrane by P-glycoprotein. The most common drug interactions with ciclosporin are therefore also observed with tacrolimus, but the two drugs do not interact identically when administered with CYP3A inhibitors or inducers. The strongest effects on calcineurin-inhibitor disposition are observed with azole antifungals, macrolide antibacterials, rifampicin, calcium channel antagonists, grapefruit juice, St John's wort and protease inhibitors. Drug interactions with mycophenolic acids occur mainly through inhibition of their enterohepatic recirculation, either by interference with the intestinal flora (antibacterials) or by limiting drug absorption (resins and binders). Rifampicin causes a reduction in mycophenolic acid exposure probably through induction of uridine diphosphate-glucuronosyltransferases. Proliferation signal inhibitors (PSIs) such as sirolimus and everolimus are substrates of CYP3A4 and P-glycoprotein and have a macrolide structure very similar to tacrolimus, which explains why common drug interactions with PSIs are comparable to those with calcineurin inhibitors. Ciclosporin, in contrast to tacrolimus, inhibits the enterohepatic recirculation of mycophenolic acids, resulting in significantly lower concentrations and hence risk of underexposure. Therefore, when switching from tacrolimus to ciclosporin and vice versa or when reducing or withdrawing ciclosporin, this interaction needs to be taken into account. The combination of ciclosporin with PSIs requires dose reductions of both drugs because of a synergistic interaction that causes nephrotoxicity when left uncorrected. Conversely, when switching between calcineurin inhibitors, intensified monitoring of PSI concentrations is mandatory. Increasing age is associated with structural and functional changes in body compartments and tissues that alter absorptive capacity, volume of distribution, hepatic metabolic function and renal function and ultimately drug disposition. While these age-related changes are well-known, few specific effects of the latter on immunosuppressant drug metabolism have been reported. Therefore, more clinical data from elderly organ recipients are urgently required.

Differential dose adjustments of immunosuppressants after resuming boosted versus unboosted HIV-protease inhibitors postliver transplant

Pharmacokinetic (PK) interactions between protease inhibitors (PI(s)) and immunosuppressive agents (IS) are critical elements in the management of HIV-infected patients who undergo liver transplantation (LT(x)). The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the decreases in IS dosages necessary to maintain an appropriate therapeutic window (TW) after initiating PI-based antiretroviral therapy regimens post-LT(x). Single-center, PK cross-sectional study of consecutive HIV-infected adult patients who underwent LT(x) was done. Blood trough concentrations (C(t)) of IS were obtained using a commercial MEIA test; plasma C(t) of PI(s) were measured using HPLC. Twelve consecutive HIV-infected adult patients (11 males, 1 female) were enrolled. More rapid increases in IS plasma C(t) were observed 48 h after initiating ritonavir (RTV)-boosted PI therapy post-LT(x) than when using unboosted PI(s). Seven patients developed acute renal failure. The median fold decrease in IS dosages required to regain IS concentrations that were in the TW was 7.5 (range 6-14) after resuming boosted PI(s) and 2.9 (range 2-4) after unboosted PI(s). The overall median time necessary to reach IS TW after dose adjustment was 3.5 days (range 0-15). Unboosted PI(s) exhibited lesser PK interactions with IS than did RTV-boosted PI(s) and were thus more amenable to use in the post-LT(x) setting.

Drug-drug interaction in a kidney transplant recipient receiving HIV salvage therapy and tacrolimus

Concomitant use of immunosuppressive agents and antiretroviral drugs may lead to complex drug-drug interactions. The calcineurin inhibitor tacrolimus is metabolized by cytochrome P-450 3A4 (encoded by the CYP3A4 gene) and is a substrate of P-glycoprotein (encoded by the ABCB1 gene). Both pathways can be inhibited by protease inhibitors (PIs). The reduction in first-pass and postabsorptive metabolism of tacrolimus by PIs can lead to extreme prolongation of the elimination half-life and significantly increase tacrolimus trough levels. In a patient with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-associated focal segmental glomerulosclerosis leading to kidney cadaveric transplantation, HIV salvage therapy was started with the new PI darunavir and boosted with ritonavir, another PI. The reduction in first-pass and postabsorptive metabolism of tacrolimus by PIs led to a dramatic increase in tacrolimus trough levels and extreme prolongation of the elimination half-life. Trough levels of tacrolimus levels were as high as 106.7 ng/mL. A decrease in tacrolimus dosage to a single dose of 0.5 mg/wk, corresponding to 3.5% of the usual dose, enabled maintenance of stable tacrolimus trough levels. Our case highlights that coadministration of a PI and tacrolimus is feasible through intense reduction in dose and prolongation of the dosing interval of the calcineurin inhibitor. Complex drug interactions may become more frequent because more HIV-infected patients are undergoing transplantation and newer HIV drugs are being used. Close monitoring and excellent adherence are mandatory to avoid the risk of harm for the graft and patient.

Effect of highly active antiretroviral therapy on tacrolimus pharmacokinetics in hepatitis C virus and HIV co-infected liver transplant recipients in the ANRS HC-08 study

OBJECTIVE

To characterise the interactions between tacrolimus and antiretroviral drug combinations in hepatitis C virus-HIV co-infected patients who had received a liver transplant.

DESIGN

An observational, open-label, multiple-dose, two-period, one-sequence design clinical trial in which patients received tacrolimus as an immunosuppressive therapy during the postoperative period and then had an antiretroviral drug regimen added. Tacrolimus pharmacokinetics were evaluated at steady state during these two periods.

METHODS

Fourteen patients participated in the study and seven participated in the intensified pharmacokinetic protocol. Patients were included if they had undergone liver transplantation for end-stage chronic hepatitis C, absence of opportunistic infection, a CD4 cell count of >150 cells/microL and an undetectable HIV plasma viral load (<50 copies/mL) under highly active antiretroviral therapy. During the posttransplantation period, the tacrolimus dose was adjusted according to blood concentrations. When liver function and the tacrolimus dose were stable, antiretroviral therapy was reintroduced.

RESULTS

When lopinavir/ritonavir were added to the tacrolimus regimen (seven patients), the tacrolimus dose was reduced by 99% to maintain the tacrolimus concentration within the therapeutic range. Only two patients were treated with nelfinavir, which led to a wide variation in inhibition of tacrolimus metabolism. When efavirenz (four patients) or a nucleoside analogue combination (one patient) was added, very little change in tacrolimus dosing was required.

CONCLUSION

The lopinavir/ritonavir combination markedly inhibited tacrolimus metabolism, whereas the effect of efavirenz was small. Tacrolimus dosing must be optimised according to therapeutic drug monitoring and the antiretroviral drug combination.

Liver transplantation in HIV-positive patients

This article reviews the worldwide evolution of liver transplantation as a therapeutic intervention in HIV-infected patients. Since the introduction of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART), liver disease secondary to viral hepatitis has become a leading cause of morbidity and mortality among HIV-positive individuals. The authors contrast survival data from pilot studies in the pre-HAART era to those data emerging from more recent trials. Particular emphasis is placed on current selection criteria for HIV-positive transplant candidates. Additional consideration is given to the effect of prolonged transplant waiting time on survival outcome. The complexity of the post-transplant medication regime, including drug interactions, optimal immunosuppression and most appropriate HAART regimes, are discussed in detail. Postoperative challenges including optimal management of hepatitis B virus and recurrent hepatitis C virus post-transplant are reviewed separately. The ethical and practical arguments relating to the use of a scarce and valuable resource in this population are debated. The authors conclude with several recommendations to assist pretransplant assessment and postoperative management of such complex patients and speculate on the direction and evolution of this field in the coming years.

Review article: drug hepatotoxicity

BACKGROUND

Drug toxicity is the leading cause of acute liver failure in the United States. Further understanding of hepatotoxicity is becoming increasingly important as more drugs come to market.

AIMS

(i) To provide an update on recent advances in our understanding of hepatotoxicity of select commonly used drug classes. (ii) To assess the safety of these medications in patients with pre-existing liver disease and in the post-liver transplant setting. (iii) To review relevant advances in toxicogenomics which contribute to the current understanding of hepatotoxic drugs.

METHODS

A Medline search was performed to identify relevant literature using search terms including 'drug toxicity, hepatotoxicity, statins, thiazolidinediones, antibiotics, antiretroviral drugs and toxicogenomics'.

RESULTS

Amoxicillin-clavulanic acid is one of the most frequently implicated causes of drug-induced liver injury worldwide. Statins rarely cause clinically significant liver injury, even in patients with underlying liver disease. Newer thiazolidinediones are not associated with the degree of liver toxicity observed with troglitazone. Careful monitoring for liver toxicity is warranted in patients who are taking antiretrovirals, especially patients who are co-infected with hepatitis B and C. Genetic polymorphisms among enzymes involved in drug metabolism and HLA types may account for some of the differences in individual susceptibility to drug hepatotoxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

Drug-induced hepatotoxicity will remain a problem that carries both clinical and regulatory significance as long as new drugs continue to enter the market. Future results from ongoing multicentre collaborative efforts may help contribute to our current understanding of hepatotoxicity associated with drugs.

Liver transplantation for fulminant hepatitis related to nevirapine therapy

Drug-induced hepatotoxicity is an important cause of hepatocellular injury. Non-nucleoside retroviral transcriptase inhibitors are known to cause hepatotoxicity. We describe a detailed case of fulminant hepatitis induced by nevirapine (Viramune) and treated by liver transplantation.

A review of nelfinavir for the treatment of HIV infection

Nelfinavir (NFV) is a protease inhibitor that has been widely used for several years for the treatment of HIV infection. This has led to extensive experience with NFV-containing regimens, in which the drug has shown prolonged viral suppression, good tolerability and a unique resistance profile. In recent years, several antiretroviral drugs with some advantages over NFV have been developed. Nevertheless, NFV has favourable characteristics that make it a suitable antiretroviral compound for many HIV-infected patients. It can be used in patients who do not tolerate ritonavir even at low doses, and it is well tolerated in pregnant women, has a low-grade interaction with methadone and may be well tolerated in hepatitis C virus-co-infected patients. In addition, its new simplified posology may contribute to improved adherence.

[GESIDA/GESITRA-SEIMC, PNS and ONT consensus document on solid organ transplant (SOT) in HIV-infected patients in Spain (March, 2005)]

Solid organ transplant may be the only therapeutic alternative in some HIV-infected patients. Experience in North America and Europe during the last five years shows that survival at three years after an organ transplant is similar to that observed in HIV-negative patients. The criteria agreed upon to select HIV patients for transplant are: no opportunistic infections (except tuberculosis, oesophageal candidiasis or P. jiroveci -previously carinii- pneumonia), CD4 lymphocyte count above 200 cells/.L (100 cells/.L in the case of liver transplant) and an HIV viral load which is undetectable or suppressible with antiretroviral therapy. Another criterion is a two-year abstinence from heroin and cocaine, although the patient may be in a methadone programme. The main problems in the post-transplant period are pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions between antiretorivirals and immunosuppressors, rejection and the management of relapse of HCV infection, which is one of the main causes of post-liver transplant mortality. Up to now, experience with pegylated interferon and ribavirin is scarce in this population. The English version of the manuscript is available at http://www.gesidaseimc.com.

Ribavirin Levels in Post Liver Transplant Patients Treated for Recurrent Hepatitis C Viral Infection

Hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is the most common indication for liver transplantation (LTx) in the United States. Ribavirin with pegylated interferon is the only treatment option for HCV recurrence in post-LTx patients. In clinical practice, for more than 50% of patients, ribavirin dose needs to be modified.

AIM

The aim of this study was to examine the role of ribavirin level and its relevance in the management of post-LTx patients in terms of renal dysfunction, efficacy, toxicity, and potential drug interactions.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Thirty-four blood samples were available from 22 post-LTx patients. Ribavirin concentrations in plasma (all samples) and whole blood concentrations (16 samples) were examined. The dose of ribavirin ranged from 400 mg/d to 1000 mg/d, but concentrations were normalized to 800 mg/d.

RESULTS

There was a wide variation in plasma concentration of ribavirin, ranging from 1.8 to 122.1 mg/mL. The concentrations were similar in whole blood and plasma. Dose-normalized concentration with creatinine clearance below 70 mL/min were significantly higher when compared with creatinine clearance above 70 mL/min (P = .015). Eleven patients required erythropoietin; their mean ribavirin dosage was higher but mean ribavirin concentration was lower compared to the 11 patients who did not require erythropoietin factor. There was no difference in mean ribavirin concentration in patients who cleared the virus (n = 7) compared and who did not clear the virus (n = 9). Three patients were on nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTI) had significantly higher concentration (mean 87.1 microg/mL) compared to those who did not receive NRTI (mean 34.4 microg/mL, P = .00)

CONCLUSION

Ribavirin concentration in plasma and whole blood were similar, with a wide variation. Patients with impaired renal function and those who were on NRTI had significantly higher concentrations of ribavirin. The ribavirin concentrations did not predict either the clearance of HCV RNA or the need for erythropoitin factor.

Cyclosporine Pharmacokinetics and Dosing Modifications in Human Immunodeficiency Virus-Infected Liver and Kidney Transplant Recipients

BACKGROUND

With advances in antiretroviral therapy, many human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected individuals are living longer and developing end-stage renal or hepatic disease requiring transplantation. Maintaining the viability of the transplant and suppressing HIV replication requires concomitant use of immunosuppressants (e.g., cyclosporine) and antiretrovirals (e.g., protease inhibitors or nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors), which leads to drug interactions. To assist in appropriate clinical management of HIV-infected transplant recipients, the authors describe the pharmacokinetic interactions between cyclosporine and the antiretroviral medications, and required modifications of cyclosporine dosing.

METHODS

Eighteen HIV-infected subjects with end-stage kidney or liver disease underwent transplantation. Subjects had pharmacokinetic studies before transplantation and for up to 2 years posttransplantation (at weeks 2-4, 12, 28, 52, and 104). Protease inhibitors, nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, and cyclosporine concentrations were measured by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry in plasma and whole blood, respectively.

RESULTS

Subjects using protease inhibitors and cyclosporine had a threefold increase in cyclosporine area under the curve (4,190+/-2,180-11,900+/-1,600 ng*hr/mL, P<0.01), necessitating an 85% reduction in cyclosporine dose over a 2-year period (1.3+/-1.5-0.2+/-0.0 mg/kg/dose), leading to a progressive increase in oral cyclosporine bioavailability (R=0.92, P<0.02). Subjects on nonnucleoside reverse-transcriptase inhibitors showed minimal interactions with cyclosporine, and subjects on both HIV treatments had intermediate responses.

CONCLUSIONS

HIV-infected transplant recipients on protease inhibitors require markedly lower doses of cyclosporine, with continued lowering of the cyclosporine dose over time and ongoing cyclosporine trough monitoring because of progressively increasing cyclosporine bioavailability. Medication changes must be carefully managed to avoid insufficient immunosuppression or toxicity resulting from drug interactions.

Drug interactions in the management of HIV infection

The availability of antiretroviral therapy has significantly reduced the morbidity and mortality of HIV infection. In addition, improved treatment of opportunistic infections and comorbidities common to patients with HIV is further prolonging the lives of patients. Improvement in the treatment of HIV has led to a significant increase in the number of medications which caregivers are able to utilise to manage HIV/AIDS. Antiretroviral medications, as well as many of the drugs used in the management of opportunistic infections and primary care (e.g., macrolide antibiotics, azole antifungals, cholesterol-lowering medications), are particularly prone to drug interactions. The interpretation of clinically significant interactions is complicated by the rate at which new information on drug metabolism and transport is becoming available. Management of drug interactions in HIV is further confounded by conflicting study results and differences between documented and theoretical inter-actions. The mechanisms and significance of interactions involving antiretrovirals, drugs used for opportunistic infections, and other medications commonly used in HIV patients will be reviewed.

Liver transplantation in HIV-infected recipients

Liver transplantation is being evaluated as a therapeutic option for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients with end-stage liver disease, but experience is still scarce. We describe the outcome of 4 HIV-infected patients who underwent liver transplantation in our hospital between July 2002 and April 2003. HIV-infected liver transplant recipients meet the same standard criteria for transplantation as do HIV-negative candidates. In addition, HIV infected persons are required to have a CD4 T-cell count greater than 100/mL (CD4 T-cells are targets for HIV infection). Immunosuppressive regimens, perioperative surgical prophylaxis, and prophylaxis for opportunistic infections are standard in the Liver Transplantation Unit in our hospital. Four patients, including 3 former intravenous drug users, received a liver transplant (2 from deceased donors and 2 from living donors), with a median follow-up of 510 days. Three patients (75%) are alive, with 1 death occurring 17 months posttransplantation in a patient who developed fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis. Rejection occurred in 1 patient, and was managed with no complications. Hepatitis C virus (HCV) recurrence occurred in 3 patients. HIV-infection has remained under control with antiretroviral treatment. A combination of 3 nucleoside analogs was used in 3 patients, with no need for drug adjustments. No opportunistic infections or other significant infectious complications developed. In conclusion, orthotopic liver transplantation seems a safe therapeutic option in the short term for HIV-infected persons with end stage liver disease, including patients with a history of drug abuse. If indicated, an antiretroviral regimen consisting of 3 nucleosides could be used to avoid interactions with immunosuppressive drugs.

Immunosuppressive drug monitoring of sirolimus and cyclosporine in pediatric patients

Sirolimus is primarily used as a rescue agent in pediatric transplant recipients, particularly in cases of cyclosporine or tacrolimus toxicity. Preliminary data indicate a higher apparent oral clearance in younger children (4-10 years of age). Various drug interactions have been described between sirolimus and drugs that are substrates/inhibitors or inducers of CYP3A and the P-glycoprotein transporter. Close monitoring of trough sirolimus blood levels is therefore recommended for pediatric transplant recipients. In de novo adult kidney transplant recipients on triple therapy with cyclosporine, corticosteroids and sirolimus, a therapeutic window of 4-12 microg/l is recommended for sirolimus trough concentrations determined by HPLC or LC/MS-MS. In maintenance adult patients after conversion to a calcineurin inhibitor-free regimen, sirolimus trough concentrations of 5-10 microg/l are proposed in combination with mycophenolate mofetil. These therapeutic ranges may also serve as a guide for pediatric renal transplant recipients. The concept of C2 monitoring still needs to be critically evaluated in pediatric patients. The crucial importance of achieving an adequate cyclosporine exposure early after transplantation has been demonstrated for adult transplant recipients. A cyclosporine concentration taken 2 h after dosing is a good surrogate marker of the AUC0-4h in adults. Various clinical studies have shown that in pediatric patients, the C2 concentration shows a substantially better correlation with cyclosporine exposure compared to the trough level (C0). In an outcome study with pediatric renal transplant recipients, it could be demonstrated that the AUC(0-4h) was a predictor of acute rejection in the first 3 weeks after transplantation, whereas C2 levels showed no significant association. Abbreviated AUC strategies may be preferable for optimization of CsA exposure in pediatric patients.

Antiretroviral and immunosuppressive drug-drug interactions: an update

With the introduction of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART), human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection has become a chronic disease with more frequent end-stage organ failures. As a result, the question of transplantation in HIV patients is raised more often. However, some of the HAART regimen medications require elimination or metabolism via the P-glycoprotein (P-gp) and multidrug-resistant protein (MRP) transporters or via the cytochrome P450 enzyme system. Since these transporters and enzymes are also responsible for the clearance of immunosuppressive drugs, drug-drug interactions are likely to occur. Indeed, profound drug-drug interactions between protease inhibitors and immunosuppressive drugs have been observed and they required reductions in drug dosage. In contrast, HAART using nucleoside or nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors without the use of protease inhibitors has been shown to produce less significant drug-drug interactions. It is thus crucial to take into account those potential pharmacokinetic and/or pharmacodynamic drug-drug interactions in order to avoid drug toxicity or a lack of efficacy. The aim of this work was to review and synthesize the international literature on this field in order to give practical recommendations on how to manage immunosuppressive drugs in HIV patients who get transplanted and on how to handle HAART therapy in transplant-recipient patients who get infected with HIV.

Liver transplantation in patients with HIV infection

1. Liver transplantation for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-positive patients with end-stage liver disease in the era of highly active retroviral therapy has proven to be an effective treatment. The concerns of HIV progression have not been borne out by the growing worldwide experience. 2. CD4 counts are stable and HIV viral load is controllable with medication following liver transplantation. 3. Hepatitis C virus (HCV) coinfection in HIV-positive recipients is universal, but the severity of recurrence does not appear to be different from that in HIV-negative patients with HCV liver disease. 4. Complex pharmacokinetic interactions between the calcineurin inhibitors used for immunosuppression along with protease inhibitors are present, but management directed at recognizing the need for monitoring levels does not appear to increase the risk of toxicity. 5. The degree of immunosuppression from iatrogenic drug therapy and HIV does not lead to increased risk of infectious complications.

Antiretrovirals, Part 1: Overview, History, and Focus on Protease Inhibitors

This column is the first in a series on HIV/AIDS antiretroviral drugs. This first review summarizes the history of HIV/AIDS and the development of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART) and highlights why it is important for non-HIV specialists to know about these drugs. There are four broad classes of HIV medications used in varying combinations in HAART: the protease inhibitors, nucleoside analogue reverse transcriptase inhibitors, the non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, and cell membrane fusion inhibitors. This paper reviews the mechanism of action, side effects, toxicities, and drug interactions of the protease inhibitors.

Trasplante hepático en pacientes con infección por el VIH: una realidad en el año 2004

According to current estimates, there are 60,000 to 80,000 HIV and HCV coinfected individuals in Spain, and 5,000 to 10,000 HIV and HBV coinfected individuals. Among these patients, 10% to 15% have liver cirrhosis. Thus, end-stage liver disease is one of the major causes of death in our country. Liver transplantation is the only therapeutic option for these patients. Accumulated experience in North America and Europe in the last five years indicates that three-year survival in HIV-positive liver transplant recipients is similar to that of HIV-negative recipients. The selection criteria for HIV transplant candidates includes the following: no history of opportunistic infections, CD4 lymphocyte count higher than 100 cells/mm3, and HIV viral load suppressible with antiretroviral treatment. In Spain, where the majority of patients are former drug abusers, complete abstinence from heroin or cocaine use during two years is also required, with the possibility of the patient being in a methadone program. To date 26 hepatic transplants have been performed in the same number of patients, with only two deaths (7%) after a median follow-up of eight months (1-28). The main problems in the post-transplantation period in all the series has been recurrent HCV infection, which is the principle cause of post-transplantation mortality, and pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions between the antiretroviral and immunosuppressive agents. There is little experience with pegylated interferon and ribavirin treatment in this population.

Effect of coadministered lopinavir and ritonavir (Kaletra) on tacrolimus blood concentration in liver transplantation patients

With the advent of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART), HIV positivity is no longer a contraindication for liver transplantation. Some of the antiretroviral agents, particularly protease inhibitors (e.g., ritonavir, indinavir, and nelfinavir) have been described as potent inhibitors of the metabolism of certain immunosuppressive drugs. In this article we describe a profound interaction between tacrolimus and Kaletra (Abbott Laboratories, Chicago, IL) (a combination of lopinavir and ritonavir) in 3 liver transplantation patients. Patient 1, who was maintained on a 5 mg twice daily dose of tacrolimus with a trough blood concentration around 10.6 ng/mL, required only 0.5 mg of tacrolimus per week after addition of Kaletra to achieve similar tacrolimus blood concentrations, with a half-life of 10.6 days. In patient 2, the area under the blood concentration versus time curve for tacrolimus increased from 31 ng/mL/h to 301 ng/mL/h after addition of Kaletra, with a corresponding half-life of 20 days. When the patient was subsequently switched to nelfinavir, the half-life decreased to 10.3 days. Patient 3, who was maintained with 4 to 8 mg/d of tacrolimus and a corresponding blood concentration of 10 ng/mL before Kaletra, required a tacrolimus dose of 1 mg/wk and tacrolimus concentrations of 5 ng/mL with Kaletra. In conclusion, a combination of lopinavir and ritonavir led to a much more profound increase in tacrolimus blood concentrations than use of single protease inhibitor, nelfinavir. A tacrolimus dose of less than 1 mg/wk may be sufficient to maintain adequate blood tacrolimus concentrations in patients on Kaletra. Patients may not need a further dose of tacrolimus for 3 to 5 weeks depending on liver function when therapy with Kaletra is initiated. Great caution is required in the management of tacrolimus dosage when Kaletra is introduced or withdrawn in HIV-positive patients after liver transplantation, particularly in the presence of hepatic dysfunction.