ABT 378/r: a novel inhibitor of HIV-1 protease in haemodialysis

The Role of Natural Products in Drug Discovery and Development against Neglected Tropical Diseases

Endemic in 149 tropical and subtropical countries, neglected tropical diseases (NTDs) affect more than 1 billion people annually, including 875 million children in developing economies. These diseases are also responsible for over 500,000 deaths per year and are characterized by long-term disability and severe pain. The impact of the combined NTDs closely rivals that of malaria and tuberculosis. Current treatment options are associated with various limitations including widespread drug resistance, severe adverse effects, lengthy treatment duration, unfavorable toxicity profiles, and complicated drug administration procedures. Natural products have been a valuable source of drug regimens that form the cornerstone of modern pharmaceutical care. In this review, we highlight the potential that remains untapped in natural products as drug leads for NTDs. We cover natural products from plant, marine, and microbial sources including natural-product-inspired semi-synthetic derivatives which have been evaluated against the various causative agents of NTDs. Our coverage is limited to four major NTDs which include human African trypanosomiasis (sleeping sickness), leishmaniasis, schistosomiasis and lymphatic filariasis.

Clinical practice guideline for the management of chronic kidney disease in patients infected with HIV: 2014 update by the HIV Medicine Association of the Infectious Diseases Society of America

It is important to realize that guidelines cannot always account for individual variation among patients. They are not intended to supplant physician judgment with respect to particular patients or special clinical situations. IDSA considers adherence to these guidelines to be voluntary, with the ultimate determination regarding their application to be made by the physician in the light of each patient's individual circumstances.

Leishmaniasis: current status of available drugs and new potential drug targets

The control of Leishmania infection relies primarily on chemotherapy till date. Resistance to pentavalent antimonials, which have been the recommended drugs to treat cutaneous and visceral leishmaniasis, is now widespread in Indian subcontinents. New drug formulations like amphotericin B, its lipid formulations, and miltefosine have shown great efficacy to treat leishmaniasis but their high cost and therapeutic complications limit their usefulness. In addition, irregular and inappropriate uses of these second line drugs in endemic regions like state of Bihar, India threaten resistance development in the parasite. In context to the limited drug options and unavailability of either preventive or prophylactic candidates, there is a pressing need to develop true antileishmanial drugs to reduce the disease burden of this debilitating endemic disease. Notwithstanding significant progress of leishmanial research during last few decades, identification and characterization of novel drugs and drug targets are far from satisfactory. This review will initially describe current drug regimens and later will provide an overview on few important biochemical and enzymatic machineries that could be utilized as putative drug targets for generation of true antileishmanial drugs.

Management of the kidney transplant patient with chronic hepatitis C infection

Chronic Hepatitis C (HCV) infection is an important cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with end-stage renal disease. Renal transplantation confers a survival advantage in HCV-infected patients. Renal transplant candidates with serologic evidence of HCV infection should undergo a liver biopsy to assess for fibrosis and cirrhosis. Patients with Metavir fibrosis score ≤3 and compensated cirrhosis should be evaluated for interferon-based therapy. Achievement of sustained virological response (SVR) may reduce the risks for both posttransplantation hepatic and extrahepatic complications such as de novo or recurrent glomerulonephritis associated with HCV. Patients who cannot achieve SVR and have no live kidney donor may be considered for HCV-positive kidneys. Interferon should be avoided after kidney transplant except for treatment of life-threatening liver injury, such as fibrosing cholestatic hepatitis. Early detection, prevention, and treatment of complications due to chronic HCV infection may improve the outcomes of kidney transplant recipients with chronic HCV infection.

The pharmacokinetics and pharmacogenomics of efavirenz and lopinavir/ritonavir in HIV-infected persons requiring hemodialysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the pharmacokinetics and pharmacogenomics of efavirenz (EFV) and lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/RTV) in HIV-infected persons requiring hemodialysis.

DESIGN

Prospective, observational study of HIV-infected hemodialysis patients receiving one 600 mg tablet daily of EFV (N = 13) or three 133.3/33.3 mg capsules twice daily of LPV/RTV (N = 13).

METHODS

Twenty-four-hour EFV and 12-h LPV/RTV pharmacokinetics were assessed. Geometric mean ratios were calculated using historical controls with normal renal function. The effects of several candidate gene polymorphisms were also explored.

RESULTS

The geometric mean [95% confidence interval (CI); percentage of coefficient of variation (% CV)] Cmin, Cmax, and area under the curve (AUC) for the EFV group were 1.81 microg/ml (0.93, 3.53; 103%), 5.04 microg/ml (3.48, 7.29; 72%), and 71.5 microg h/ml (43.2, 118.3; 93%), respectively. These parameters were 2.76 microg/ml (1.86, 4.11; 53%), 8.45 microg/ml (6.41, 11.15; 52%), and 69.6 microg h/ml (55.6, 87.2; 37%) for LPV and 0.08 microg/ml (0.05, 0.14; 63%), 0.58 microg/ml (0.44, 0.76; 41%), and 3.74 microg h/ml (2.91, 4.80; 37%) for RTV. The AUC geometric mean ratios (90% CI) for EFV, LPV, and RTV were 132% (89, 197), 81% (67, 97), and 92% (76, 111), respectively. LPV Cmin was lower than expected in the hemodialysis group. Higher EFV concentrations were associated with the CYP2B6 516G>T polymorphism.

CONCLUSION

The pharmacokinetics of EFV and LPV/RTV in hemodialysis suggests that no dosing adjustments are necessary in treatment-naive patients. As HIV-infected hemodialysis patients are disproportionately black, the increased frequency of the CYP2B6 516G>T polymorphism may lead to higher EFV levels. The potentially lower LPV trough levels in this population suggest that LPV/RTV should be used with caution in protease-inhibitor-experienced patients.

FHD: an index to evaluate drug elimination by hemodialysis

BACKGROUND

In hemodialyzed patients, physicians have to (1) adjust drug dosage for a creatinine clearance lower than 10-15 ml/min and (2) know whether or not the drug will be removed by the dialysis session to decide whether it may be administered before or after the session on dialysis days. However, of several indices being used to evaluate drug removal by dialysis none is appropriate and we suggest a novel index named F(HD), which reflects the role of hemodialysis clearance of a drug in its overall clearance during the session.

METHODS

Pharmacokinetic simulations were performed to test the influence of dialysis on the pharmacokinetics of some drugs, whether F(HD) was considered or not, to determine when to administer the drug. F(HD) was then calculated for several drugs and its value compared with other indices. Five hemodialysis patients from our department for whom the time of drug administration was determined according to F(HD) were included in a small study and their drugs' trough concentrations were monitored.

RESULTS

F(HD) emphasized that considering hemodialysis clearance alone may lead to false interpretations of the potential dialyzability of some drugs. In our patients, who received their treatment according to the 'F(HD) rule', monitoring of trough levels gave satisfactory results.

CONCLUSION

The use of the 'F(HD) rule' should be tested on a long-term administration basis to confirm our conclusion. F(HD )could be the index of choice to determine when to administer a drug, before or after the session, in hemodialysis patients.

Use of highly active antiretroviral therapy in patients with renal insufficiency

Antiretroviral agents, especially nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, require significant dosage adjustments in patients who have renal dysfunction and the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Some antiretroviral agents and fixed combination preparations are contraindicated in this population. In addition, many preferred antiretroviral regimens may be difficult to administer conveniently in patients with decreased creatinine clearance or in those receiving renal replacement therapies. Some highly active antiretroviral therapy regimens, however, can be used conveniently in patients with HIV and altered renal function.

Safety of lopinavir/ritonavir for the treatment of HIV-infection

Kaletra, a fixed-dose co-formulation of lopinavir/ritonavir, was the first boosted protease inhibitor developed for the treatment of HIV-infection. In September 2000, the US FDA granted Kaletra fast-track approval as data showed a higher efficacy in the treatment of HIV-infection than standard protease inhibitors of that time. Although potency was of major concern in the early years of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART), presently, with the perspective of HIV-infection becoming a chronic but well controllable disease, other issues begin to draw increased attention in the long-term management of HIV-infected patients. Among general health issues such as cardiovascular disease, metabolic disorders or hepatitis co-infection, the long-term toxicity and safety of HAART is an important concern when choosing antiretroviral drugs for each individual patient. In this review, the authors report on the safety of lopinavir/ritonavir in the treatment of HIV-infected patients, and focus on special patient groups and relevant safety issues.

Lopinavir/ritonavir: a review of its use in the management of HIV infection

Lopinavir is a novel protease inhibitor (PI) developed from ritonavir. Coadministration with low-dose ritonavir significantly improves the pharmacokinetic properties and hence the activity of lopinavir against HIV-1 protease. Coformulated lopinavir/ritonavir was developed for ease of administration and to ensure both drugs are taken together, as part of combination therapy with other antiretroviral agents. Coformulated lopinavir/ritonavir-based regimens provide adequate and durable suppression of viral load and sustained improvements in CD4+ cell counts, as demonstrated in randomised trials in antiretroviral therapy-naive and -experienced adults and children. To date, development of primary resistance to lopinavir/ritonavir has not been observed in 470 antiretroviral therapy-naive patients treated for >48 weeks. The lopinavir/ritonavir-based regimen was more effective than nelfinavir in antiretroviral therapy-naive HIV-1-infected patients in a phase III trial. The coformulation is also effective as 'salvage' therapy, as shown by low cross-resistance rates in patients who failed to respond to treatment with other PIs in phase II trials. Coformulated lopinavir/ritonavir was well tolerated in both antiretroviral therapy-naive and -experienced HIV-1-infected adults and children with low rates of study drug-related treatment discontinuations. The most common adverse event in adults associated with lopinavir/ritonavir was diarrhoea, followed by other gastrointestinal disturbances, asthenia, headache and skin rash. The incidence of moderate-to-severe adverse events in children was low, skin rash being the most common. Changes in body fat composition occurred with equal frequency in lopinavir/ritonavir- and nelfinavir-treated naive patients, through week 60 in a phase III study. Although laboratory abnormalities occurred with similar frequency in both treatment groups, triglycerides grade 3/4 elevations were significantly more frequent with lopinavir/ritonavir. Total cholesterol and triglycerides grade 3/4 elevations appear to occur more frequently in PI-experienced than in PI-naive lopinavir/ritonavir-treated patients. A number of clinically important drug interactions have been reported with lopinavir/ritonavir necessitating dosage adjustments of lopinavir/ritonavir and/or the interacting drugs, and several other drugs are contraindicated in patients receiving the coformulation.

CONCLUSION

Coformulated lopinavir/ritonavir is a novel PI that, in combination with other antiretroviral agents, suppresses plasma viral load and enhances immunological status in therapy-naive and -experienced patients with HIV-1 infection. Lopinavir/ritonavir appears more effective than nelfinavir in 'naive' patients and is also suitable for 'salvage' therapy, because of its high barrier to development of resistance. Given its clinical efficacy, a tolerability profile in keeping with this class of drugs, favourable resistance profile and easy-to-adhere-to administration regimen, coformulated lopinavir/ritonavir should be regarded as a first-line option when including a PI in the management of HIV-1 infection.

OVERVIEW OF PHARMACODYNAMIC PROPERTIES

Lopinavir/ritonavir is a coformulation of two structurally related protease inhibitor (PI) antiretroviral agents. Lopinavir is a highly potent and selective inhibitor of the HIV type 1 (HIV-1) protease, an essential enzyme for production of mature, infective virus. It acts by arresting maturation of HIV-1 thereby blocking its infectivity. Thus, the main antiviral action of lopinavir is to prevent subsequent infections of susceptible cells; it has no effect on cells with already integrated viral DNA. Lopinavir has an approximate, equals 10-fold higher in vitro activity against both wild-type and mutant HIV-1 proteases than ritonavir; however, its in vivo activity is greatly attenuated by a high first-pass hepatic metabolism. The low-dose ritonavir coadministered with lopinavir inhibits metabolic inactivation of lopinavir and acts only as its pharmacokinetic enhancer. Therefore, the antiretroviral activity of roviral activity of coformulated lopinavir/ritonavir 400/100mg twice daily is derived solely from lopinavir plasma concentrations. Combining lopinavir with low-dose ritonavir produces lopinavir concentrations far exceeding those needed to suppress 50% of in vitro and in vivo viral replication in CD4+ cells and monocyte/macrophages (main human reservoirs of HIV-1 infection). Thus far, no resistance to lopinavir has been detected in clinical trials in antiretroviral therapy-naive patients treated for up to 204 weeks and only 12% of HIV-1 strains from patients in whom prior treatment with multiple PIs have failed, have been observed to develop resistance to coformulated lopinavir/ritonavir. A strong negative correlation was found between the number of PI mutations at baseline and the viral response rates achieved with lopinavir/ritonavir-based regimens in PI-experienced patients, indicating that resistance to lopinavir increases with increasing number of PI mutations and that five PI mutations represent the clinically relevant genotypic breakpoint for lopinavir.

OVERVIEW OF PHARMACOKINETIC PROPERTIES

The absolute bioavailability of lopinavir coformulated with ritonavir in humans has not yet been established. Multiple-dosage absorption pharmacokinetics of lopinavir/ritonavir 400/100mg twice daily (the mean peak [C(max)] and trough [C(trough)] plasma concentrations at steady-state and the 12-hour area under the plasma concentration-time curve [AUC(12)] of either drug) were stable in antiretroviral therapy-naive and single PI-experienced adult patients receiving therapy over a 24-week evaluation period. The C(trough) values of lopinavir, achieved with lopinavir/ritonavir 400/100mg twice daily, were median 84-fold higher than the protein binding-adjusted 50% effective concentration (EC(50)) of lopinavir against wild-type HIV-1 in antiretroviral therapy-naive HIV-1-infected patients in a phase II study. Bioavailability of lopinavir administered in either the capsule or the liquid lopinavir/ritonavir formulation can be increased substantially with concurrent ingestion of food with moderate-to-high fat content. At steady state, lopinavir is approximately 98-99% plasma protein bound and the percentage of its unbound (i.e. pharmacologically active) fraction is dependent on total drug plasma concentration. Both lopinavir and ritonavir penetrate poorly into the human genital tracts and the cerebrospinal fluid. Both agents undergo extensive and rapid first-pass metabolism by hepatic cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 isoenzyme. However, ritonavir also potently inhibits this enzyme and acts as a pharmacokinetic enhancer of lopinavir. The elimination half-life and apparent oral clearance of lopinavir average approximately 4-6 hours and approximately 6-7 L/h, respectively, with lopinavir/ritonavir 400/100mg twice daily administration. Less than 3% and 20% of the lopinavir dose is excreted unchanged in the urine and faeces, respectively. Limited data show similar pharmacokinetics of lopinavir in children as in adults.

DRUG INTERACTIONS

Coformulated lopinavir/ritonavir has the potential to interact with wide variety of drugs via several mechanisms, mostly involving the CYP enzymes. Coadministration of lopinavir/ritonavir is contraindicated with certain drugs (i.e. flecainide, propafenone, astemizole, terfenadine, ergot derivatives, cisapride, pimozide, midazolam and triazolam) that are highly dependent on CYP3A or CYP2D6 for clearance and for which elevated plasma concentrations are associated with serious and/or life-threatening events. Coadministration with lopinavir/ritonavir is also not recommended for drugs or herbal products (i.e. rifampicin [rifampin] and St. John's wort [Hypericum perforatum]) that may substantially reduce lopinavir plasma concentrations, or drugs whose plasma concentrations elevated by the coformulation may lead to serious adverse reactions (i.e. simvastatin and lovastatin). However, a recent study in healthy volunteers suggests that adequate lopinavir concentrations may be achieved during rifampicin coadministration by increasing the twice-daily dosage of lopinavir/ritonavir in conjunction with therapeutic drug monitoring. The liquid (but not the capsule) formulation of lopinavir/ritonavir contains 42.4% ethanol (v/v) and should not be coadministered with drugs capable of producing disulfiram-like reactions (e.g. disulfiram, metronidazole). Coadministration with saquinavir or indinavir requires no dosage adjustment, whereas coadministration with amprenavir, nevirapine or efavirenz requires a dosage increase of the coformulation typically by 33%. As the oral bioavailability of both didanosine and lopinavir/ritonavir is significantly affected by concurrent food ingestion, didanosine should be administered 1 hour before or 2 hours after lopinavir/ritonavir has been taken with food. Interactions between lopinavir/ritonavir and other nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) are not expected. The coformulation is also likely to increase plasma concentrations of non-antiretroviral drugs metabolised through the CYP3A pathway. To reduce the risk of their toxicity when coadministered with lopinavir/ritonavir, the recommended actions include: (i) monitoring of the drug plasma concentration (antiarrhythmics and immunosuppressants) or the international normalised ratio (warfarin); (ii) the use of alternative treatment (atorvastatin) or birth control methods (ethinylestradiol); and (iii) dosage adjustment (clarithromycin [only in patients with renal failure], rifabutin, dihydropyridine calcium-channel blockers, atorvastatin, ketoconazole and itraconazole). (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)