Pharmacokinetic interaction between ritonavir and didanosine when administered concurrently to HIV-infected patients

Identification of a potential pharmacological sanctuary for HIV type 1 in a fraction of CD4(+) primary cells

We have identified a subset of HIV-susceptible CD4(+)CCR5(+) cells in human PBMCs that can efficiently exclude protease inhibitors (PI) due to high P-glycoprotein (P-gp) efflux activity. Phenotypically these cells are heterogeneous, include both T and non-T cells, and some display markers of memory cells. Cells with high P-gp represent 16-56% (median = 37.3) of all CD4(+)CCR5(+) cells in healthy donors, and are selectively depleted in HIV-1-infected individuals (4.1-33%, median = 10.1). A fraction of primary cells productively infected by HIV-1, in vitro, have high P-gp pump activity, demonstrating that infection does not inhibit P-gp function. In agreement with these data, HIV-susceptible cells expressing high levels of P-gp require higher levels of PI for complete inhibition of virus spread. We conclude that the PI concentrations achieved in plasma could be suboptimal for full inhibition of virus spread in high P-gp cells, indicating that they may represent a pharmacological sanctuary for HIV-1.

Interactions between protease inhibitors and acid-reducing agents: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this article is to provide a systematic review of the available pharmacokinetic and clinical data on drug interactions between protease inhibitors (PIs) and acid-reducing agents, and their clinical relevance.

METHODS

A literature search was performed using Medline and EMBASE, abstracts of the previous 2 years of major conferences were searched and the drug information service of the manufacturer of every currently available PI was contacted. All data were summarized, and verified by at least two authors.

RESULTS

A total of 1231 references were identified, 22 of which were studies of pharmacokinetic interactions between PIs and acid-suppressive agents and a further 12 of which provided pharmacokinetic and/or clinical data.

CONCLUSIONS

Many pharmacokinetic studies show a lack of a drug interaction between at least one acid-reducing agent and most PIs. Little clinical information is available, except on interactions between atazanavir and acid-reducing agents. This is probably a consequence of the complexity of the interaction.

Effects of didanosine formulations on the pharmacokinetics of amprenavir

STUDY OBJECTIVES

To determine the effects of concurrent, single doses of didanosine (both buffered and encapsulated enteric-coated bead formulations) on amprenavir steady-state pharmacokinetics, and to determine the effect of staggered dosing of the buffered formulation.

DESIGN

Two-period, single-sequence, prospective, open-label drug interaction study with a 10-day washout interval.

SETTING

Clinical research unit.

SUBJECTS

Sixteen healthy volunteers without human immunodeficiency virus infection.

INTERVENTION

Amprenavir 600 mg twice/day was given for the first 4 days of each treatment period, with 12-hour pharmacokinetic evaluations conducted on the last 2 days of each period. Amprenavir was administered according to the following sequential treatments (all fasting): amprenavir alone, concurrent with buffered didanosine, 1 hour before buffered didanosine, and concurrent with the encapsulated enteric-coated bead formulation of didanosine.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Plasma was collected 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, and 12 hours after dosing and assayed for amprenavir by using high-performance liquid chromatography. Noncompartmental pharmacokinetic parameters were determined. Geometric mean ratios for each treatment relative to amprenavir alone were determined and reported with 90% confidence intervals (CIs). No significant trends were noted in predose concentrations measured during either period. Area under the concentration-time curve during one 12-hour dosing interval (AUC12) was found to be bioequivalent for all treatments. Peak drug concentration (Cmax) was reduced by 15% on average with concurrent administration of buffered didanosine, and bioequivalence was not demonstrated for this parameter. For concurrent enteric-coated didanosine, geometric mean ratios for Cmax and AUC12 were 0.93 and 0.94, respectively. For buffered didanosine given 1 hour after amprenavir, geometric mean ratios were 1.06 and 1.10 for the same parameters, respectively. No differences were observed in 12-hour concentration (C12) with concurrent administration of buffered or enteric-coated didanosine.

CONCLUSION

Amprenavir AUC12 and C12 are not significantly affected by concurrent administration of the buffered or enteric-coated formulations of didanosine. Therefore, amprenavir may be administered concurrently with either the buffered or the encapsulated enteric-coated bead formulation of didanosine in the fasting state.

Didanosine: an updated review of its use in HIV infection

Didanosine, like zidovudine, stavudine and lamivudine, is a nucleoside analogue reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NRTI). In the target cell for HIV, didanosine is converted to its active moiety, dideoxyadenosine-5'-triphosphate (ddATP), which inhibits HIV reverse transcriptase and terminates viral DNA growth. It is now well established that didanosine therapy produces beneficial effects on virological and immunological markers of HIV disease and improves clinical outcome in adults or children with HIV infection. In numerous clinical trials, pronounced and sustained decreases in plasma HIV RNA levels and increases in CD4+ cell counts occurred in previously untreated or antiretroviral therapy-experienced patients treated with didanosine in combination with at least 1 other antiretroviral drug; zidovudine, stavudine, lamivudine, nevirapine, nelfinavir and hydroxyurea (hydroxycarbamide) are among the drugs that have been given in combination with didanosine. Of note, HIV RNA levels decreased to below the limits of detection in some patients receiving triple or dual therapy with didanosine-containing regimens. In double-blind, placebo-controlled trials, triple therapy with didanosine, zidovudine and nevirapine was significantly more effective than dual therapy with various combinations of these agents in improving surrogate disease markers in treatment-naive patients and in delaying disease progression or death in treatment-experienced patients with advanced disease. Improvements in virological and immunological markers were greater with didanosine-containing triple regimens than with dual therapy or monotherapy in comparative trials. Triple therapy with didanosine, stavudine and indinavir showed efficacy similar to that of various other triple therapy regimens in nonblind comparative trials. Comparator regimens included combinations of stavudine, lamivudine plus indinavir, zidovudine, lamivudine plus indinavir and didanosine, stavudine and nevirapine. Combination therapy with didanosine plus hydroxyurea as dual therapy or with a third agent produced marked and sustained decreases in HIV RNA levels in the plasma and in lymph nodes. Combination therapy with didanosine and zidovudine delays disease progression and prolongs survival in patients with intermediate or advanced HIV infection. In large, randomised, double-blind, clinical trials, dual therapy with didanosine plus zidovudine was significantly more effective than zidovudine monotherapy in preventing disease progression and prolonging survival in previously untreated or antiretroviral therapy-experienced patients with intermediate or advanced HIV infection. Pancreatitis and peripheral neuropathy are serious adverse effects of didanosine. These effects are dose-related and usually reversible after discontinuation of treatment. Nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea and/or abdominal pain have been reported in patients receiving treatment with the drug.

CONCLUSIONS

Didanosine is an effective and generally well tolerated drug in previously untreated and antiretroviral therapy-experienced patients with HIV infection. Given once or twice daily, it has an important role as a component of triple combination regimens for the treatment of patients with symptomatic or asymptomatic HIV infection.

Ritonavir. Clinical pharmacokinetics and interactions with other anti-HIV agents

Ritonavir is 1 of the 4 potent synthetic HIV protease inhibitors, approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) between 1995 and 1997, that have revolutionised HIV therapy. The extent of oral absorption is high and is not affected by food. Within the clinical concentration range, ritonavir is approximately 98 to 99% bound to plasma proteins, including albumin and alpha 1-acid glycoprotein. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) drug concentrations are low in relation to total plasma concentration. However, parallel decreases in the viral burden have been observed in the plasma, CSF and other tissues. Ritonavir is primarily metabolised by cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A isozymes and, to a lesser extent, by CYP2D6. Four major oxidative metabolites have been identified in humans, but are unlikely to contribute to the antiviral effect. About 34% and 3.5% of a 600 mg dose is excreted as unchanged drug in the faeces and urine, respectively. The clinically relevant t1/2 beta is about 3 to 5 hours. Because of autoinduction, plasma concentrations generally reach steady state 2 weeks after the start of administration. The pharmacokinetics of ritonavir are relatively linear after multiple doses, with apparent oral clearance averaging 7 to 9 L/h. In vitro, ritonavir is a potent inhibitor of CYP3A. In vivo, ritonavir significantly increases the AUC of drugs primarily eliminated by CYP3A metabolism (e.g. clarithromycin, ketoconazole, rifabutin, and other HIV protease inhibitors, including indinavir, saquinavir and nelfinavir) with effects ranging from an increase of 77% to 20-fold in humans. It also inhibits CYP2D6-mediated metabolism, but to a significantly lesser extent (145% increase in desipramine AUC). Since ritonavir is also an inducer of several metabolising enzymes [CYP1A4, glucuronosyl transferase (GT), and possibly CYP2C9 and CYP2C19], the magnitude of drug interactions is difficult to predict, particularly for drugs that are metabolised by multiple enzymes or have low intrinsic clearance by CYP3A. For example, the AUC of CYP3A substrate methadone was slightly decreased and alprazolam was unaffected. Ritonavir is minimally affected by other CYP3A inhibitors, including ketoconazole. Rifampicin (rifampin), a potent CYP3A inducer, decreased the AUC of ritonavir by only 35%. The degree and duration of suppression of HIV replication is significantly correlated with the plasma concentrations. Thus, the large increase in the plasma concentrations of other protease inhibitors when coadministered with ritonavir forms the basis of rational dual protease inhibitor regimens, providing patients with 2 potent drugs at significantly reduced doses and less frequent dosage intervals. Combination treatment of ritonavir with saquinavir and indinavir results in potent and sustained clinical activity. Other important factors with combination regimens include reduced interpatient variability for high clearance agents, and elimination of the food effect on the bioavailibility of indinavir.