Favipiravir pharmacokinetics in saliva, tears and nasal secretions of hospitalized COVID-19 patients following intravenous favipiravir administration

IF 3.1 3区 医学 Q2 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY British journal of clinical pharmacology Pub Date : 2024-10-10 DOI:10.1111/bcp.16287
{"title":"Favipiravir pharmacokinetics in saliva, tears and nasal secretions of hospitalized COVID-19 patients following intravenous favipiravir administration","authors":"","doi":"10.1111/bcp.16287","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><b>8</b></p><p><b>Favipiravir pharmacokinetics in saliva, tears and nasal secretions of hospitalized COVID-19 patients following intravenous favipiravir administration</b></p><p>Elizabeth Challenger<sup>1</sup>, Tim Rowland<sup>2,3</sup>, Laura Else<sup>1</sup>, Laura Dickinson<sup>1</sup>, Colin Hale<sup>2</sup>, Rebecca Lyon<sup>2</sup>, Henry Pertinez<sup>4</sup>, Andrew Owen<sup>4</sup>, Helen Reynolds<sup>1</sup>, Justin Chiong<sup>1</sup>, Richard FitzGerald<sup>1</sup>, Saye Khoo<sup>1</sup> and Tom Fletcher<sup>3</sup></p><p><sup>1</sup><i>Centre for Experimental Therapeutics, University Of Liverpool;</i> <sup>2</sup><i>Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust;</i> <sup>3</sup><i>Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine;</i> <sup>4</sup><i>Centre of Excellence for Long Acting Therapeutics (CELT), Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Institute of Integrative, Systems and Molecular Biology, University of Liverpool</i></p><p><b>Background:</b> SARS-CoV-2 is transmitted between individuals when virions trapped in aerosols or large droplets are expelled through conversation, coughing or sneezing. Due to consistent emergence of new variants, evaluation of therapeutics for SARS-CoV-2 is crucial to maximize treatment options should more virulent or treatment resistant strains arise. Establishing the concentration of potential therapeutics in sites of SARS-CoV-2 transmission is essential to assess compartmentalization and prophylactic potential. Here we report favipiravir (FVP) concentrations in saliva, tears and nasal secretions in hospitalized COVID-19 patients enrolled on the AGILE CST-6 clinical trial.</p><p><b>Materials and methods:</b> AGILE CST-6 is a randomized, multicentre, seamless, adaptive, phase I/II platform study to evaluate safety and efficacy of intravenous (IV) FVP for the treatment of COVID-19. Patients with laboratory confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled 2:1 to receive IV FVP or standard of care (SoC); four cohorts of six patients (<i>n</i> = 4 FVP, <i>n</i> = 2 SoC) were enrolled, with escalating doses per cohort (600 mg, 1200 mg, 1800 mg, 2400 mg). Patients received IV FVP twice daily over 7 days, with paired plasma and non-plasma samples (saliva, nasal swabs, tear strips) collected between 6 and 12 h post-completion of IV infusion on days 1 and 3. FVP was quantified using validated LC-MS methods and FVP concentrations expressed as ng/mL. Descriptive statistics were computed (Phoenix 64, WinNonlin, v8.3) and FVP non-plasma:plasma ratios (NP:P) determined. Relationships between paired quantifiable non-plasma and plasma concentrations were evaluated by linear regression.</p><p><b>Results:</b> Sixteen individuals [seven females at birth; median (range) age, weight, number of days with COVID-19 symptoms were 76.5 years (52–93), 78.6 kg (52.1–125) and 5 days (2–11), respectively] received at least six doses of IV FVP. Analysis included 32 plasma/nasal, 31 saliva and 30 tear samples. FVP was quantifiable in 100%/91%/97% of saliva/nasal/tear samples collected 6.1–7.2 h post IV infusion. FVP concentrations increased with dose [600|1200|1800|2400 mg bd] although significant intra- and inter-subject variability was noted within the dosing cohorts. On day 3, median FVP concentrations were 1336/38 730/47 000/125 468 ng/mL in plasma, 69/1042/4218/9742 ng/mL in saliva, 2455/2247/7968/13 420 ng/mL in nasal secretions and 693/5762/3620/34 985 ng/mL in tears, respectively. Accumulation of FVP was observed in all matrices from day 1 to day 3. Median (range) NP:P ratios were saliva 0.06 (0.01–0.28), nasal 0.42 (0.03–21.28) and tears 0.30 (0.00–6.54).</p><p>Non-plasma and plasma concentrations were significantly correlated on day 3 (<i>r</i> &gt; 0.724; <i>p</i> &lt; .003). On day 1, 13% of plasma samples (all 2400 mg dose) were above the FVP SARS-CoV-2 in vitro EC90 (24.9 μg/mL); all non-plasma levels were below this threshold. At day 3, 56% of plasma samples (≥1200 mg dose), 12% of nasal and 6% of tear samples (2400 mg dose) exceeded this threshold.</p><p><b>Conclusions:</b> This is the first report of FVP measured at sites of SARS-CoV-2 transmission. These data suggest that achieving concentrations equivalent to the EC90 may be difficult to achieve in saliva, nasal and ocular compartments, even when administering higher dose IV FVP (2400 mg bd). FVP predominantly penetrates into nasal secretions, followed by tears and saliva, with substantial interindividual variability. PK/PD relationships for IV FVP are under evaluation.</p>","PeriodicalId":9251,"journal":{"name":"British journal of clinical pharmacology","volume":"90 S1","pages":"8"},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bcp.16287","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British journal of clinical pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bcp.16287","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

8

Favipiravir pharmacokinetics in saliva, tears and nasal secretions of hospitalized COVID-19 patients following intravenous favipiravir administration

Elizabeth Challenger1, Tim Rowland2,3, Laura Else1, Laura Dickinson1, Colin Hale2, Rebecca Lyon2, Henry Pertinez4, Andrew Owen4, Helen Reynolds1, Justin Chiong1, Richard FitzGerald1, Saye Khoo1 and Tom Fletcher3

1Centre for Experimental Therapeutics, University Of Liverpool; 2Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust; 3Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine; 4Centre of Excellence for Long Acting Therapeutics (CELT), Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Institute of Integrative, Systems and Molecular Biology, University of Liverpool

Background: SARS-CoV-2 is transmitted between individuals when virions trapped in aerosols or large droplets are expelled through conversation, coughing or sneezing. Due to consistent emergence of new variants, evaluation of therapeutics for SARS-CoV-2 is crucial to maximize treatment options should more virulent or treatment resistant strains arise. Establishing the concentration of potential therapeutics in sites of SARS-CoV-2 transmission is essential to assess compartmentalization and prophylactic potential. Here we report favipiravir (FVP) concentrations in saliva, tears and nasal secretions in hospitalized COVID-19 patients enrolled on the AGILE CST-6 clinical trial.

Materials and methods: AGILE CST-6 is a randomized, multicentre, seamless, adaptive, phase I/II platform study to evaluate safety and efficacy of intravenous (IV) FVP for the treatment of COVID-19. Patients with laboratory confirmed COVID-19 were enrolled 2:1 to receive IV FVP or standard of care (SoC); four cohorts of six patients (n = 4 FVP, n = 2 SoC) were enrolled, with escalating doses per cohort (600 mg, 1200 mg, 1800 mg, 2400 mg). Patients received IV FVP twice daily over 7 days, with paired plasma and non-plasma samples (saliva, nasal swabs, tear strips) collected between 6 and 12 h post-completion of IV infusion on days 1 and 3. FVP was quantified using validated LC-MS methods and FVP concentrations expressed as ng/mL. Descriptive statistics were computed (Phoenix 64, WinNonlin, v8.3) and FVP non-plasma:plasma ratios (NP:P) determined. Relationships between paired quantifiable non-plasma and plasma concentrations were evaluated by linear regression.

Results: Sixteen individuals [seven females at birth; median (range) age, weight, number of days with COVID-19 symptoms were 76.5 years (52–93), 78.6 kg (52.1–125) and 5 days (2–11), respectively] received at least six doses of IV FVP. Analysis included 32 plasma/nasal, 31 saliva and 30 tear samples. FVP was quantifiable in 100%/91%/97% of saliva/nasal/tear samples collected 6.1–7.2 h post IV infusion. FVP concentrations increased with dose [600|1200|1800|2400 mg bd] although significant intra- and inter-subject variability was noted within the dosing cohorts. On day 3, median FVP concentrations were 1336/38 730/47 000/125 468 ng/mL in plasma, 69/1042/4218/9742 ng/mL in saliva, 2455/2247/7968/13 420 ng/mL in nasal secretions and 693/5762/3620/34 985 ng/mL in tears, respectively. Accumulation of FVP was observed in all matrices from day 1 to day 3. Median (range) NP:P ratios were saliva 0.06 (0.01–0.28), nasal 0.42 (0.03–21.28) and tears 0.30 (0.00–6.54).

Non-plasma and plasma concentrations were significantly correlated on day 3 (r > 0.724; p < .003). On day 1, 13% of plasma samples (all 2400 mg dose) were above the FVP SARS-CoV-2 in vitro EC90 (24.9 μg/mL); all non-plasma levels were below this threshold. At day 3, 56% of plasma samples (≥1200 mg dose), 12% of nasal and 6% of tear samples (2400 mg dose) exceeded this threshold.

Conclusions: This is the first report of FVP measured at sites of SARS-CoV-2 transmission. These data suggest that achieving concentrations equivalent to the EC90 may be difficult to achieve in saliva, nasal and ocular compartments, even when administering higher dose IV FVP (2400 mg bd). FVP predominantly penetrates into nasal secretions, followed by tears and saliva, with substantial interindividual variability. PK/PD relationships for IV FVP are under evaluation.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
艾滋病、肝炎和其他抗病毒药物临床药理学国际研讨会摘要。
8 静脉注射法非拉韦后 COVID-19 住院患者唾液、眼泪和鼻腔分泌物中的法非拉韦药代动力学Colin Hale2、Rebecca Lyon2、Henry Pertinez4、Andrew Owen4、Helen Reynolds1、Justin Chiong1、Richard FitzGerald1、Saye Khoo1 和 Tom Fletcher31利物浦大学实验治疗中心;2 利物浦大学医院 NHS 基金会信托基金;3 利物浦热带医学院;4 利物浦大学综合、系统和分子生物学研究所药理学和治疗学系长效治疗卓越中心(CELT)背景:SARS-CoV-2 是通过交谈、咳嗽或打喷嚏时排出的滞留在气溶胶或大飞沫中的病毒在人与人之间传播。由于不断出现新的变种,因此评估 SARS-CoV-2 的治疗方法至关重要,以便在出现毒性更强或耐药性更强的病毒株时最大限度地增加治疗选择。确定潜在治疗药物在 SARS-CoV-2 传播场所的浓度对于评估分区和预防潜力至关重要。在此,我们报告了参加 AGILE CST-6 临床试验的 COVID-19 住院患者唾液、眼泪和鼻腔分泌物中的法非拉韦(FVP)浓度:AGILE CST-6 是一项随机、多中心、无缝、适应性 I/II 期平台研究,旨在评估静脉注射 (IV) FVP 治疗 COVID-19 的安全性和有效性。实验室确诊的COVID-19患者按2:1的比例入组,接受静脉注射FVP或标准治疗(SoC);共入组四组,每组六名患者(n = 4名FVP患者,n = 2名SoC患者),剂量依次递增(600毫克、1200毫克、1800毫克、2400毫克)。患者在 7 天内每天接受两次静脉输注 FVP,并在第 1 天和第 3 天静脉输注结束后的 6 至 12 小时内采集配对的血浆和非血浆样本(唾液、鼻拭子、泪液条)。采用经过验证的 LC-MS 方法对 FVP 进行定量,FVP 浓度以纳克/毫升表示。计算描述性统计(Phoenix 64,WinNonlin,v8.3)并确定 FVP 非血浆与血浆比率(NP:P)。通过线性回归评估了可配对量化的非血浆浓度与血浆浓度之间的关系:16人[出生时为7名女性;年龄、体重和出现COVID-19症状天数的中位数(范围)分别为76.5岁(52-93岁)、78.6千克(52.1-125千克)和5天(2-11天)]接受了至少6次静脉注射FVP。分析包括 32 份血浆/鼻腔样本、31 份唾液样本和 30 份泪液样本。在静脉注射后 6.1-7.2 小时采集的唾液/鼻腔/泪液样本中,100%/91%/97% 的 FVP 均可定量。FVP浓度随剂量[600|1200|1800|2400 毫克/天]的增加而增加,但在剂量组群中,受试者内部和受试者之间存在显著差异。第 3 天,血浆中的 FVP 中位浓度分别为 1336/38 730/47 000/125 468 纳克/毫升,唾液中的 FVP 中位浓度分别为 69/1042/4218/9742 纳克/毫升,鼻腔分泌物中的 FVP 中位浓度分别为 2455/2247/7968/13 420 纳克/毫升,泪液中的 FVP 中位浓度分别为 693/5762/3620/34 985 纳克/毫升。从第 1 天到第 3 天,在所有基质中都观察到了 FVP 的累积。非血浆和血浆浓度在第 3 天显著相关(r > 0.724; p <.003)。第 1 天,13% 的血浆样本(均为 2400 毫克剂量)高于 FVP SARS-CoV-2 体外 EC90(24.9 微克/毫升);所有非血浆浓度均低于该临界值。在第 3 天,56% 的血浆样本(≥1200 毫克剂量)、12% 的鼻腔样本和 6% 的泪液样本(2400 毫克剂量)超过了这一临界值:这是首次报道在 SARS-CoV-2 传播地点测量 FVP。这些数据表明,即使静脉注射较高剂量的 FVP(每日 2400 毫克),也很难在唾液、鼻腔和眼部达到相当于 EC90 的浓度。FVP 主要渗入鼻腔分泌物,其次是泪液和唾液,但个体间差异很大。目前正在评估静脉注射 FVP 的 PK/PD 关系。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
8.80%
发文量
419
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Published on behalf of the British Pharmacological Society, the British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology features papers and reports on all aspects of drug action in humans: review articles, mini review articles, original papers, commentaries, editorials and letters. The Journal enjoys a wide readership, bridging the gap between the medical profession, clinical research and the pharmaceutical industry. It also publishes research on new methods, new drugs and new approaches to treatment. The Journal is recognised as one of the leading publications in its field. It is online only, publishes open access research through its OnlineOpen programme and is published monthly.
期刊最新文献
Optimizing preclinical models of ageing for translation to clinical trials. Frailty in clinical drug trials: Frailty assessments, subgroup analyses and outcomes. Innovations in pharmacovigilance studies of medicines in older people. Mobile applications on app stores for deprescribing: A scoping review. The effects of diuretic deprescribing in adult patients: A systematic review to inform an evidence-based diuretic deprescribing guideline.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1