M. Leyh, S. Zipperich, R. Winzer, P. Drechsel, J. Bogner, A. Trein, L. Schneider, H. Klinker, P. Langmann
{"title":"LPV/R-Meltrex制剂中洛匹那韦与LPV/R-Soft明胶胶囊在HIV感染者体内的药代动力学比较","authors":"M. Leyh, S. Zipperich, R. Winzer, P. Drechsel, J. Bogner, A. Trein, L. Schneider, H. Klinker, P. Langmann","doi":"10.4137/CMT.S2098","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The protease inhibitor Lopinavir (LPV) combined with low dose ritonavir (r) in the formulation of a soft gelatine capsule (SGC) has been widely used in antiretroviral therapy and has been shown to produce safe therapeutic plasma levels. In June 2006, the LPV/r combination was approved as a tablet (TBL) in Germany and since then has replaced the capsule form. The purpose of this study was to analyze and compare pharmacokinetics of Lopinavir both in the new meltrex tablet formulation and the LPV/r soft gelatine capsule during long-term treatment of HIV. Methods: Included in this study were all patients followed at multiple study centers between January 2003 and August 2007 for whom LPV plasma levels were archived during therapeutic drug monitoring. A total of 4010 LPV plasma levels from 721 patients met these inclusion criteria. From these, those patients for whom complete data sets were missing were excluded from the study. Complete data sets were defined as those data that included information regarding cumulative daily dose, the patient's anti-retroviral drug regimen, and the time of measurement after drug intake. A total of 571 LPV plasma levels from 138 patients met the full criteria for inclusion in this retrospective study. Additionally, a small prospective study of LPV plasma levels in 6 patients with 24 data points was conducted in order to increase the reliability of this report. Results: At 3 h after dosing, plasma levels of LPV were significantly higher in patients who had received the meltrex tablet (Mdn = 10030 ng/ml, min = 3323, max = 17280) compared to those who had received the soft gelatine capsule (Mdn = 7964 ng/ml, min = 120, max = 17900). This difference was statistically significant (p 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences between the LPV plasma levels of the tablet and the capsule at 6, 9 and 12 h after dosing. Additionally, there were no differences between the trough levels of LPV in the two formulations. However, great variances of plasma levels were detected at time 12 h after dosing for both treatment groups (s(capsule) = 3213 ng/ml, s(tablet) = 2273 ng/ml). Conclusion: The LPV/r tablet formulation is able to produce equivalent to significantly higher plasma levels of LPV when compared with the SGC formulation at time 3 h after drug intake. In addition, the known sex difference in the pharmacokinetic profile of the tablet formulation was verified in this study.","PeriodicalId":10428,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Medicine and Therapeutics","volume":"4 1","pages":"697-702"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pharmacokinetics of Lopinavir in the LPV/R-Meltrex Formulation Compared to the LPV/R-Soft Gelatine Capsule in HIV Infected Patients\",\"authors\":\"M. Leyh, S. Zipperich, R. Winzer, P. Drechsel, J. Bogner, A. Trein, L. Schneider, H. Klinker, P. Langmann\",\"doi\":\"10.4137/CMT.S2098\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The protease inhibitor Lopinavir (LPV) combined with low dose ritonavir (r) in the formulation of a soft gelatine capsule (SGC) has been widely used in antiretroviral therapy and has been shown to produce safe therapeutic plasma levels. In June 2006, the LPV/r combination was approved as a tablet (TBL) in Germany and since then has replaced the capsule form. The purpose of this study was to analyze and compare pharmacokinetics of Lopinavir both in the new meltrex tablet formulation and the LPV/r soft gelatine capsule during long-term treatment of HIV. Methods: Included in this study were all patients followed at multiple study centers between January 2003 and August 2007 for whom LPV plasma levels were archived during therapeutic drug monitoring. A total of 4010 LPV plasma levels from 721 patients met these inclusion criteria. From these, those patients for whom complete data sets were missing were excluded from the study. Complete data sets were defined as those data that included information regarding cumulative daily dose, the patient's anti-retroviral drug regimen, and the time of measurement after drug intake. A total of 571 LPV plasma levels from 138 patients met the full criteria for inclusion in this retrospective study. Additionally, a small prospective study of LPV plasma levels in 6 patients with 24 data points was conducted in order to increase the reliability of this report. Results: At 3 h after dosing, plasma levels of LPV were significantly higher in patients who had received the meltrex tablet (Mdn = 10030 ng/ml, min = 3323, max = 17280) compared to those who had received the soft gelatine capsule (Mdn = 7964 ng/ml, min = 120, max = 17900). This difference was statistically significant (p 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences between the LPV plasma levels of the tablet and the capsule at 6, 9 and 12 h after dosing. Additionally, there were no differences between the trough levels of LPV in the two formulations. However, great variances of plasma levels were detected at time 12 h after dosing for both treatment groups (s(capsule) = 3213 ng/ml, s(tablet) = 2273 ng/ml). Conclusion: The LPV/r tablet formulation is able to produce equivalent to significantly higher plasma levels of LPV when compared with the SGC formulation at time 3 h after drug intake. In addition, the known sex difference in the pharmacokinetic profile of the tablet formulation was verified in this study.\",\"PeriodicalId\":10428,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical Medicine and Therapeutics\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"697-702\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2009-06-29\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical Medicine and Therapeutics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4137/CMT.S2098\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Medicine and Therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4137/CMT.S2098","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
蛋白酶抑制剂洛匹那韦(Lopinavir, LPV)与低剂量利托那韦(ritonavir, r)联合制成的软明胶胶囊(SGC)已被广泛用于抗逆转录病毒治疗,并已被证明可产生安全的治疗血浆水平。2006年6月,LPV/r组合在德国被批准为片剂(TBL),从此取代了胶囊形式。本研究的目的是分析和比较洛匹那韦在新型美曲斯片剂和LPV/r软明胶胶囊中长期治疗HIV的药代动力学。方法:本研究纳入了2003年1月至2007年8月在多个研究中心随访的所有患者,这些患者在治疗药物监测期间记录了LPV血浆水平。来自721名患者的4010个LPV血浆水平符合这些纳入标准。从中,那些缺少完整数据集的患者被排除在研究之外。完整的数据集被定义为包括累积每日剂量、患者抗逆转录病毒药物治疗方案和药物摄入后测量时间等信息的数据。138例患者的571例LPV血浆水平符合本回顾性研究的全部标准。此外,为了提高本报告的可靠性,对6例患者的LPV血浆水平进行了一项小型前瞻性研究,共有24个数据点。结果:在给药后3小时,接受美曲斯片剂(Mdn = 10030 ng/ml, min = 3323, max = 17280)的患者血浆LPV水平明显高于接受软明胶胶囊(Mdn = 7964 ng/ml, min = 120, max = 17900)的患者。差异有统计学意义(p 0.05)。给药后6、9、12 h,片剂与胶囊的血浆LPV水平差异无统计学意义。此外,两种制剂中LPV的低谷水平没有差异。然而,在给药后12小时,两组血浆水平差异很大(s(胶囊)= 3213 ng/ml, s(片剂)= 2273 ng/ml)。结论:与SGC制剂相比,LPV/r片剂制剂在服药后3 h的血浆LPV水平显著高于SGC制剂。此外,已知的片剂配方药代动力学特征的性别差异在本研究中得到了验证。
Pharmacokinetics of Lopinavir in the LPV/R-Meltrex Formulation Compared to the LPV/R-Soft Gelatine Capsule in HIV Infected Patients
The protease inhibitor Lopinavir (LPV) combined with low dose ritonavir (r) in the formulation of a soft gelatine capsule (SGC) has been widely used in antiretroviral therapy and has been shown to produce safe therapeutic plasma levels. In June 2006, the LPV/r combination was approved as a tablet (TBL) in Germany and since then has replaced the capsule form. The purpose of this study was to analyze and compare pharmacokinetics of Lopinavir both in the new meltrex tablet formulation and the LPV/r soft gelatine capsule during long-term treatment of HIV. Methods: Included in this study were all patients followed at multiple study centers between January 2003 and August 2007 for whom LPV plasma levels were archived during therapeutic drug monitoring. A total of 4010 LPV plasma levels from 721 patients met these inclusion criteria. From these, those patients for whom complete data sets were missing were excluded from the study. Complete data sets were defined as those data that included information regarding cumulative daily dose, the patient's anti-retroviral drug regimen, and the time of measurement after drug intake. A total of 571 LPV plasma levels from 138 patients met the full criteria for inclusion in this retrospective study. Additionally, a small prospective study of LPV plasma levels in 6 patients with 24 data points was conducted in order to increase the reliability of this report. Results: At 3 h after dosing, plasma levels of LPV were significantly higher in patients who had received the meltrex tablet (Mdn = 10030 ng/ml, min = 3323, max = 17280) compared to those who had received the soft gelatine capsule (Mdn = 7964 ng/ml, min = 120, max = 17900). This difference was statistically significant (p 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences between the LPV plasma levels of the tablet and the capsule at 6, 9 and 12 h after dosing. Additionally, there were no differences between the trough levels of LPV in the two formulations. However, great variances of plasma levels were detected at time 12 h after dosing for both treatment groups (s(capsule) = 3213 ng/ml, s(tablet) = 2273 ng/ml). Conclusion: The LPV/r tablet formulation is able to produce equivalent to significantly higher plasma levels of LPV when compared with the SGC formulation at time 3 h after drug intake. In addition, the known sex difference in the pharmacokinetic profile of the tablet formulation was verified in this study.