Low minimal inhibitory concentrations of linezolid against multidrug-resistant tuberculosis strains

Mutation detection and minimum inhibitory concentration determination against linezolid and clofazimine in confirmed XDR-TB clinical isolates

BACKGROUND

The emergence of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) has complicated the situation due to the decline in potency of second-line anti-tubercular drugs. This limits the treatment option for extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis (XDR-TB). The aim of this study was to determine and compare the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) by agar dilution and resazurin microtiter assay (REMA) along with the detection of mutations against linezolid and clofazimine in confirmed XDR-TB clinical isolates.

RESULTS

A total of 169 isolates were found positive for Mycobacterium tuberculosis complex (MTBC). The MIC was determined by agar dilution and REMA methods. The isolates which showed non-susceptibility were further subjected to mutation detection by targeting rplC gene (linezolid) and Rv0678 gene (clofazimine). The MIC for linezolid ranged from 0.125 µg/ml to > 2 µg/ml and for clofazimine from 0.25 µg/ml to > 4 µg/ml. The MIC₅₀ and MIC₉₀ for linezolid were 0.5 µg/ml and 1 µg/ml respectively while for clofazimine both were 1 µg/ml. The essential and categorical agreement for linezolid was 97.63% and 95.26% and for clofazimine, both were 100%. The sequencing result of the rplC gene revealed a point mutation at position 460 bp, where thymine (T) was substituted for cytosine (C) while seven mutations were noted between 46 to 220 bp in Rv0678 gene.

CONCLUSION

REMA method has been found to be more suitable in comparison to the agar dilution method due to lesser turnaround time. Mutations in rplC and Rv0678 genes were reasons for drug resistance against linezolid and clofazimine respectively.

Population pharmacokinetics and target attainment analysis of linezolid in multidrug-resistant tuberculosis patients

AIM

This study investigates the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) target attainment of linezolid in patients infected with multidrug-resistant (MDR) tuberculosis (TB).

METHODS

A pharmacometric model was developed including 244 timed linezolid concentration samples from 39 patients employing NONMEM 7.4. The probability of target attainment (PTA, PK/PD target: unbound (f) area-under-the-concentration-time-curve (AUC)/minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) of 119) as well as a region-specific cumulative fraction of response (CFR) were estimated for different dosing regimens.

RESULTS

A one-compartment model with linear elimination with a clearance (CL) of 7.69 L/h (interindividual variability 34.1%), a volume of distribution (Vd) of 45.2 L and an absorption constant (KA) of 0.679 h^-1 (interoccasion variability 143.7%) allometric scaled by weight best described the PK of linezolid. The PTA at an MIC of 0.5 mg/L was 55% or 97% if patients receiving 300 or 600 mg twice daily, respectively. CFRs varied greatly among populations and geographic regions. A desirable global CFR of ≥90% was achieved if linezolid was administered at a dose of 600 mg twice daily but not at a dose of 300 mg twice daily.

CONCLUSION

This study showed that a dose of 300 mg twice daily of linezolid might not be sufficient to treat MDR-TB patients from a PK/PD perspective. Thus, it might be recommendable to start with a higher dose of 600 mg twice daily to ensure PK/PD target attainment. Hereby, therapeutic drug monitoring and MIC determination should be performed to control PK/PD target attainment as linezolid shows high variability in its PK in the TB population.

Linezolid pharmacokinetics in MDR-TB: a systematic review, meta-analysis and Monte Carlo simulation

Objectives

The oxazolidinone linezolid is an effective component of drug-resistant TB treatment, but its use is limited by toxicity and the optimum dose is uncertain. Current strategies are not informed by clinical pharmacokinetic (PK)/pharmacodynamic (PD) data; we aimed to address this gap.

Methods

We defined linezolid PK/PD targets for efficacy (fAUC_0–24:MIC >119 mg/L/h) and safety (fC_min <1.38 mg/L). We extracted individual-level linezolid PK data from existing studies on TB patients and performed meta-analysis, producing summary estimates of fAUC_0–24 and fC_min for published doses. Combining these with a published MIC distribution, we performed Monte Carlo simulations of target attainment.

Results

The efficacy target was attained in all simulated individuals at 300 mg q12h and 600 mg q12h, but only 20.7% missed the safety target at 300 mg q12h versus 98.5% at 600 mg q12h. Although suggesting 300 mg q12h should be used preferentially, these data were reliant on a single centre. Efficacy and safety targets were missed by 41.0% and 24.2%, respectively, at 300 mg q24h and by 44.6% and 27.5%, respectively, at 600 mg q24h. However, the confounding effect of between-study heterogeneity on target attainment for q24h regimens was considerable.

Conclusions

Linezolid dosing at 300 mg q12h may retain the efficacy of the 600 mg q12h licensed dosing with improved safety. Data to evaluate commonly used 300 mg q24h and 600 mg q24h doses are limited. Comprehensive, prospectively obtained PK/PD data for linezolid doses in drug-resistant TB treatment are required.

Linezolid Dose That Maximizes Sterilizing Effect While Minimizing Toxicity and Resistance Emergence for Tuberculosis

Linezolid has an excellent sterilizing effect in tuberculosis patients but high adverse event rates. The dose that would maximize efficacy and minimize toxicity is unknown. We performed linezolid dose-effect and dose-scheduling studies in the hollow fiber system model of tuberculosis (HFS-TB) for sterilizing effect. HFS-TB units were treated with several doses to mimic human-like linezolid intrapulmonary pharmacokinetics and repetitively sampled for drug concentration, total bacterial burden, linezolid-resistant subpopulations, and RNA sequencing over 2 months. Linezolid-resistant isolates underwent whole-genome sequencing. The expression of genes encoding efflux pumps in the first 1 to 2 weeks revealed the same exposure-response patterns as the linezolid-resistant subpopulation. Linezolid-resistant isolates from the 2nd month of therapy revealed mutations in several efflux pump/transporter genes and a LuxR-family transcriptional regulator. Linezolid sterilizing effect was linked to the ratio of unbound 0- to 24-h area under the concentration-time curve (AUC_0–24) to MIC. Optimal microbial kill was achieved at an AUC_0–24/MIC ratio of 119. The optimal sterilizing effect dose for clinical use was identified using Monte Carlo simulations. Clinical doses of 300 and 600 mg/day (or double the dose every other day) achieved this target in 87% and >99% of 10,000 patients, respectively. The susceptibility breakpoint identified was 2 mg/liter. The simulations identified that a 300-mg/day dose did not achieve AUC_0–24s associated with linezolid toxicity, while 600 mg/day achieved those AUC_0–24s in <20% of subjects. The linezolid dose of 300 mg/day performed well and should be compared to 600 mg/day or 1,200 mg every other day in clinical trials.

Simple strategy to assess linezolid exposure in patients with multi-drug-resistant and extensively-drug-resistant tuberculosis

Linezolid is used increasingly for the treatment of multi-drug-resistant (MDR) and extensively-drug-resistant (XDR) tuberculosis (TB). However, linezolid can cause severe adverse events, such as peripheral and optical neuropathy or thrombocytopenia related to higher drug exposure. This study aimed to develop a population pharmacokinetic model to predict the area under the concentration curve (AUC) for linezolid using a limited number of blood samples. Data from patients with MDR-/XDR-TB who received linezolid and therapeutic drug monitoring as part of their TB treatment were used. Mw\Pharm 3.82 (Mediware, Zuidhorn, The Netherlands) was used to develop a population pharmacokinetic model and limited sampling strategy (LSS) for linezolid. LSS was evaluated over a time span of 6 h. Blood sampling directly before linezolid administration and 2 h after linezolid administration were considered to be the most clinically relevant sampling points. The model and LSS were evaluated by analysing the correlation between AUC_12h,observed and AUC_{12h,estimated}. In addition, LSS was validated with an external group of patients with MDR-/XDR-TB from Sondalo, Italy. Fifty-two pharmacokinetic profiles were used to develop the model. Thirty-three profiles with a 300 mg dosing regimen and 19 profiles with a 600 mg dosing regimen were obtained. Model validation showed prediction bias of 0.1% and r² of 0.99. Evaluation of the most clinically relevant LSS showed prediction bias of 4.8% and r² of 0.97. The root mean square error corresponding to the most relevant LSS was 6.07%. The developed LSS could be used to enable concentration-guided dosing of linezolid.

Linezolid in the treatment of drug-resistant tuberculosis: the challenge of its narrow therapeutic index

INTRODUCTION

Linezolid is an oxazolidinone with potent activity against M tuberculosis, and improves culture conversion and cure rates when added to treatment regimens for drug resistant tuberculosis. However, linezolid has a narrow therapeutic window, and the optimal dosing strategy that minimizes the substantial toxicity associated with linezolid's prolonged use in tuberculosis treatment has not been determined, limiting the potential impact of this anti-mycobacterial agent.

AREAS COVERED

This paper aims to review and summarize the current knowledge on linezolid for the treatment of drug-resistant tuberculosis. The focus is on the pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic determinants of linezolid's efficacy and toxicity in tuberculosis, and how this relates to defining an optimal dose. Mechanisms of linezolid toxicity and resistance, and the potential role of therapeutic drug monitoring are also covered. Expert commentary: Prospective pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic studies are required to define optimal therapeutic targets and to inform improved linezolid dosing strategies for drug-resistant tuberculosis.