Amikacin optimal exposure targets in the hollow-fiber system model of tuberculosis

Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy

Volumn 60, Issue 10, 2016, Pages 5922-5927

  Srivastava, Shashikant ^a   Modongo, Chawanga ^b,c   Dona, Chandima W Siyambalapitiyage ^a   Pasipanodya, Jotam G ^a   Deshpande, Devyani ^a   Gumbo, Tawanda ^a,d  

^a BAYLOR RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^c BOTSWANA UPENN PARTNERSHIP   (Botswana)

^d UNIVERSITY OF CAPE TOWN   (South Africa)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AMIKACIN; PYRAZINAMIDE; STREPTOMYCIN; TUBERCULOSTATIC AGENT;

AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; BACTERICIDAL ACTIVITY; COLONY FORMING UNIT; CONCENTRATION RESPONSE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG EXPOSURE; DRUG PROTEIN BINDING; EC50; EC90; HOLLOW FIBER; MAXIMUM PLASMA CONCENTRATION; METHICILLIN RESISTANT STAPHYLOCOCCUS AUREUS; MINIMUM INHIBITORY CONCENTRATION; MYCOBACTERIUM TUBERCULOSIS; NONHUMAN; PH; PLASMA CONCENTRATION-TIME CURVE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; DOSE RESPONSE; DRUG EFFECTS; HUMAN; MICROBIAL SENSITIVITY TEST; MICROBIOLOGY; TUBERCULOSIS; TUBERCULOSIS, MULTIDRUG-RESISTANT;

AMIKACIN; ANTITUBERCULAR AGENTS; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; HUMANS; HYDROGEN-ION CONCENTRATION; MICROBIAL SENSITIVITY TESTS; MYCOBACTERIUM TUBERCULOSIS; TUBERCULOSIS; TUBERCULOSIS, MULTIDRUG-RESISTANT;

EID: 84992707477     PISSN: 00664804     EISSN: 10986596     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1128/AAC.00961-16     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Dheda K, Gumbo T, Gandhi NR, Murray M, Theron G, Udwadia Z, Migliori GB, Warren R. 2014. Global control of tuberculosis: from extensively drug-resistant to untreatable tuberculosis. Lancet Respir Med 2:321-338. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S2213-2600(14)70031-1.
2. Diacon AH, Pym A, Grobusch M, Patientia R, Rustomjee R, Page-Shipp L, Pistorius C, Krause R, Bogoshi M, Churchyard G, Venter A, Allen J, Palomino JC, De MT, van Heeswijk RP, Lounis N, Meyvisch P, Verbeeck J, Parys W, De BK, Andries K, Mc Neeley DF. 2009. The diarylquinoline TMC207 for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. N Engl J Med 360:2397-2405. http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0808427.
3. Gler MT, Skripconoka V, Sanchez-Garavito E, Xiao H, Cabrera-Rivero JL, Vargas-Vasquez DE, Gao M, Awad M, Park SK, Shim TS, Suh GY, Danilovits M, Ogata H, Kurve A, Chang J, Suzuki K, Tupasi T, Koh WJ, Seaworth B, Geiter LJ, Wells CD. 2012. Delamanid for multidrugresistant pulmonary tuberculosis. N Engl J Med 366:2151-2160. http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1112433.
4. Lee M, Lee J, Carroll MW, Choi H, Min S, Song T, Via LE, Goldfeder LC, Kang E, Jin B, Park H, Kwak H, Kim H, Jeon HS, Jeong I, Joh JS, Chen RY, Olivier KN, Shaw PA, Follmann D, Song SD, Lee JK, Lee D, Kim CT, Dartois V, Park SK, Cho SN, Barry CE, III. 2012. Linezolid for treatment of chronic extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis.NEngl J Med 367:1508-1518. http://dx.doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1201964.
5. World Health Organization. 2010. Treatment of tuberculosis: guidelines, 4th ed. WHO/HTM/TB/2009.420. World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland.
6. Craig WA, Redington J, Ebert SC. 1991. Pharmacodynamics of amikacin in vitro and in mouse thigh and lung infections. J Antimicrob Chemother 27(Suppl C):29-40.
7. Craig WA. 1998. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic parameters: rationale for antibacterial dosing of mice and men. Clin Infect Dis 26:1-10. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/516284.
8. Srivastava S, Gumbo T. 2011. In vitro and in vivo modeling of tuberculosis drugs and its impact on optimization of doses and regimens. Curr Pharm Des 17:2881-2888. http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/138161211 797470192.
9. Gumbo T, Angulo-Barturen I, Ferrer-Bazaga S. 2015. Pharmacokineticpharmacodynamic and dose-response relationships of antituberculosis drugs: recommendations and standards for industry and academia. J Infect Dis 211(Suppl 3):S96-S106. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/infdis/jiu610.
10. Cavaleri M, Manolis E. 2015. Hollow fiber system model for tuberculosis: the European Medicines Agency experience. Clin Infect Dis 61:S1-S4. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cid/civ484.
11. Gumbo T, Pasipanodya JG, Nuermberger E, Romero K, Hanna D. 2015. Correlations between the hollow fiber model of tuberculosis and therapeutic events in tuberculosis patients: learn and confirm. Clin Infect Dis 61:S18-S24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cid/civ426.
12. Gumbo T, Pasipanodya JG, Romero K, Hanna D, Nuermberger E. 2015. Forecasting accuracy of the hollow fiber model of tuberculosis for clinical therapeutic outcomes. Clin Infect Dis 61:S25-S31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cid/civ427.
13. Pasipanodya JG, Nuermberger E, Romero K, Hanna D, Gumbo T. 2015. Systematic analysis of hollow fiber model of tuberculosis experiments. Clin Infect Dis 61:S10-S17. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/cid/civ425.
14. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. 2003. Susceptibility testing of mycobacteria, nocardiae, and other aerobic actinomycetes; approved standard. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, Wayne, PA.
15. Gumbo T, Siyambalapitiyage Dona C, Meek C, Leff R. 2009. Pharmacokinetics-pharmacodynamics of pyrazinamide in a novel in vitro model of tuberculosis for sterilizing effect: a paradigm for faster assessment of new antituberculosis drugs. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 53:3197-3204. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AAC.01681-08.
16. Modongo C, Pasipanodya JG, Zetola NM, Williams SM, Sirugo G, Gumbo T. 2015. Amikacin concentrations predictive of ototoxicity in multidrug-resistant tuberculosis patients. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 59:6337-6343. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AAC.01050-15.
17. Dull WL, Alexander MR, Kasik JE. 1979. Bronchial secretion levels of amikacin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 16:767-771. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AAC.16.6.767.
18. Ferro BE, Srivastava S, Deshpande D, Sherman CM, Pasipanodya JG, van Mouton JW, IJ van, Gumbo T. 2016. Amikacin pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics in a novel hollow-fiber Mycobacterium abscessus disease model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 60:1242-1248.
19. Srivastava S, Pasipanodya JG, Meek C, Leff R, Gumbo T. 2011. Multidrug-resistant tuberculosis not due to noncompliance but to betweenpatient pharmacokinetic variability. J Infect Dis 204:1951-1959. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/infdis/jir658.
20. Srivastava S, Sherman C, Meek C, Leff R, Gumbo T. 2011. Pharmacokinetic mismatch does not lead to emergence of isoniazid-or rifampinresistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis but to better antimicrobial effect: a new paradigm for antituberculosis drug scheduling. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 55:5085-5089. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AAC.00269-11.
21. Akaike H. 1974. A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Trans Automat Control 19:716-723. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TAC .1974.1100705.
22. Pasipanodya J, Gumbo T. 2011. An oracle: antituberculosis pharmacokinetics-pharmacodynamics, clinical correlation, and clinical trial simulations to predict the future. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 55:24-34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AAC.00749-10.
23. D'Argenio DZ, Schumitzky A. 1997. ADAPT II. A program for simulation, identification, and optimal experimental design. User manual. Biomedical Simulations Resource, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
24. Donald PR, Sirgel FA, Venter A, Smit E, Parkin DP, Van de Wal BW, Mitchison DA. 2001. The early bactericidal activity of amikacin in pulmonary tuberculosis. Int J Tuberc Lung Dis 5:533-538.
25. Mitchison DA, Selkon JB. 1956. The bactericidal activities of antituberculous drugs. Am Rev Tuberc 74:109-116.
26. Baudoux P, Bles N, Lemaire S, Mingeot-Leclercq MP, Tulkens PM, Van BF. 2007. Combined effect of pH and concentration on the activities of gentamicin and oxacillin against Staphylococcus aureus in pharmacodynamic models of extracellular and intracellular infections. J Antimicrob Chemother 59:246-253.
27. Schlessinger D. 1988. Failure of aminoglycoside antibiotics to kill anaerobic, low-pH, and resistant cultures. Clin Microbiol Rev 1:54-59. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/CMR.1.1.54.
28. König C, Simmen HP, Blaser J. 1993. Effect of pathological changes of pH, pO2 and pCO2 on the activity of antimicrobial agents in vitro. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 12:519-526. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01970957.
29. Anonymous. 1948. Streptomycin treatment of pulmonary tuberculosis. Br Med J 2:769-782. http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmj.2.4582.769.
30. Jindani A, Dore CJ, Mitchison DA. 2003. Bactericidal and sterilizing activities of antituberculosis drugs during the first 14 days. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 167:1348-1354. http://dx.doi.org/10.1164/rccm.200210-1125OC.
31. Modongo C, Sobota RS, Kesenogile B, Ncube R, Sirugo G, Williams SM, Zetola NM. 2014. Successful MDR-TB treatment regimens including amikacin are associated with high rates of hearing loss. BMC Infect Dis 14:542. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1471-2334-14-542.
32. Modongo C, Pasipanodya JG, Magazi BT, Srivastava S, Zetola NM, Williams SM, Sirugo G, Gumbo T. 2016. Artificial intelligence and amikacin exposures predictive of outcome in multidrug-resistant tuberculosis patients. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 60:5928-5932. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AAC.00962-16.
33. Mpagama SG, Ndusilo N, Stroup S, Kumburu H, Peloquin CA, Gratz J, Houpt ER, Kibiki GS, Heysell SK. 2014. Plasma drug activity in patients on treatment for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 58:782-788. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AAC .01549-13.
34. Rodvold KA, George JM, Yoo L. 2011. Penetration of anti-infective agents into pulmonary epithelial lining fluid: focus on antibacterial agents. Clin Pharmacokinet 50:637-664. http://dx.doi.org/10.2165/11594090-000000000-00000.
35. Santré C, Georges H, Jacquier JM, Leroy O, Beuscart C, Buguin D, Beaucaire G. 1995. Amikacin levels in bronchial secretions of 10 pneumonia patients with respiratory support treated once daily versus twice daily. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 39:264-267. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/AAC.39.1.264.
36. Jureen P, Angeby K, Sturegard E, Chryssanthou E, Giske CG, Werngren J, Nordvall M, Johansson A, Kahlmeter G, Hoffner S, Schon T. 2010. Wild-type MIC distributions for aminoglycoside and cyclic polypeptide antibiotics used for treatment of Mycobacterium tuberculosis infections. J Clin Microbiol 48:1853-1858. http://dx.doi.org/10.1128/JCM.00240-10.
37. Craig WA, Redington J, Ebert SC. 1991. Pharmacodynamics of amikacin in vitro and in mouse thigh and lung infections. J Antimicrob Chemother 27(Suppl C):29-40.