Linezolid dose that maximizes sterilizing effect while minimizing toxicity and resistance emergence for tuberculosis

Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy

Volumn 61, Issue 8, 2017, Pages

  Srivastava, Shashikant ^a   Magombedze, Gesham ^a   Koeuth, Thearith ^a   Sherman, Carleton ^a   Pasipanodya, Jotam G ^a   Raj, Prithvi ^b   Wakeland, Edward ^b   Deshpande, Devyani ^a   Gumbo, Tawanda ^a,c  

^a BAYLOR RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS SOUTHWESTERN MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CAPE TOWN   (South Africa)

Author keywords

Efflux pump regulators; Efflux pumps; Mutations; Optimal dose; RNA sequencing; Whole genome sequencing

Indexed keywords

LINEZOLID; CARRIER PROTEIN; LUXR AUTOINDUCER BINDING PROTEINS; PROTEIN SYNTHESIS INHIBITOR; REPRESSOR PROTEIN; TRANSACTIVATOR PROTEIN; TUBERCULOSTATIC AGENT;

ANTIBACTERIAL ACTIVITY; ANTIBIOTIC RESISTANCE; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; BACTERIAL GENE; BACTERIAL GENOME; BACTERIAL LOAD; BACTERIAL MUTATION; BACTERIUM ISOLATE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DOSE RESPONSE; GENE EXPRESSION; HOLLOW FIBER; LUNG TUBERCULOSIS; MINIMUM INHIBITORY CONCENTRATION; MONTE CARLO METHOD; NONHUMAN; PLASMA CONCENTRATION-TIME CURVE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TRANSCRIPTOMICS; WHOLE GENOME SEQUENCING; DRUG EFFECTS; GENETICS; HUMAN; MICROBIAL SENSITIVITY TEST; MYCOBACTERIUM TUBERCULOSIS;

ANTITUBERCULAR AGENTS; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; DRUG RESISTANCE, BACTERIAL; GENOME, BACTERIAL; HUMANS; LINEZOLID; MEMBRANE TRANSPORT PROTEINS; MICROBIAL SENSITIVITY TESTS; MYCOBACTERIUM TUBERCULOSIS; PROTEIN SYNTHESIS INHIBITORS; REPRESSOR PROTEINS; TRANS-ACTIVATORS; TUBERCULOSIS, PULMONARY;

EID: 85026370504     PISSN: 00664804     EISSN: 10986596     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1128/AAC.00751-17     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Richter E, Rusch-Gerdes S, Hillemann D. 2007. First linezolid-resistant clinical isolates of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 51:1534–1536. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.01113-06.
2. Sander P, Belova L, Kidan YG, Pfister P, Mankin AS, Bottger EC. 2002. Ribosomal and non-ribosomal resistance to oxazolidinones: species-specific idiosyncrasy of ribosomal alterations. Mol Microbiol 46: 1295–1304. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2958.2002.03242.x.
3. 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. N Engl J Med 367:1508–1518. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1201964.
4. Sotgiu G, Centis R, D’Ambrosio L, Alffenaar JW, Anger HA, Caminero JA, Castiglia P, De Lorenzo S, Ferrara G, Koh WJ, Schecter GF, Shim TS, Singla R, Skrahina A, Spanevello A, Udwadia ZF, Villar M, Zampogna E, Zellweger JP, Zumla A, Migliori GB. 2012. Efficacy, safety and tolerability of linezolid containing regimens in treating MDR-TB and XDR-TB: systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur Respir J 40:1430–1442. https://doi.org/10.1183/09031936.00022912.
5. Agyeman AA, Ofori-Asenso R. 2016. Efficacy and safety profile of linezolid in the treatment of multidrug-resistant (MDR) and extensively drug-resistant (XDR) tuberculosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob 15:41. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12941-016-0156-y.
6. Koh WJ, Kang YR, Jeon K, Kwon OJ, Lyu J, Kim WS, Shim TS. 2012. Daily 300 mg dose of linezolid for multidrug-resistant and extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis: updated analysis of 51 patients. J Antimicrob Chemother 67:1503–1507. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dks078.
7. Srivastava S, Pasipanodya JG, Meek C, Leff R, Gumbo T. 2011. Multidrug-resistant tuberculosis not due to noncompliance but to between-patient pharmacokinetic variability. J Infect Dis 204:1951–1959. https://doi.org/10.1093/infdis/jir658.
8. Bolhuis MS, van Altena R, Alffenaar JW. 2012. Comment on: daily 300 mg dose of linezolid for multidrug-resistant and extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis: updated analysis of 51 patients. J Antimicrob Chemother 67:2055–2056. (Letter.) https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dks154. (Reply, 67:2056–2057, https://doi.org/10.1093.jac/dks211.)
9. Deshpande D, Srivastava S, Pasipanodya JG, Bush SJ, Nuermberger E, Swaminathan S, Gumbo T. 2016. Linezolid for infants and toddlers with disseminated tuberculosis: first steps. Clin Infect Dis 63:S80–S87. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciw482.
10. Deshpande D, Srivastava S, Nuermberger E, Pasipanodya JG, Swaminathan S, Gumbo T. 2016. Concentration-dependent synergy and antagonism of linezolid and moxifloxacin in the treatment of childhood tuberculosis: the dynamic duo. Clin Infect Dis 63:S88–S94. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciw473.
11. Deshpande D, Srivastava S, Nuermberger E, Pasipanodya JG, Swaminathan S, Gumbo T. 2016. A faropenem, linezolid, and moxifloxacin regimen for both drug-susceptible and multidrug-resistant tuberculosis in children: FLAME path on the milky way. Clin Infect Dis 63:S95–S101. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciw474.
12. Srivastava S, Deshpande D, Pasipanodya JG, Nuermberger E, Swaminathan S, Gumbo T. 2016. Optimal clinical doses of faropenem, linezolid, and moxifloxacin in children with disseminated tuberculosis: Goldilocks. Clin Infect Dis 63(Suppl 3):S102–S109. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciw483.
13. Honeybourne D, Tobin C, Jevons G, Andrews J, Wise R. 2003. Intrapulmonary penetration of linezolid. J Antimicrob Chemother 51:1431–1434. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkg262.
14. Gumbo T, Angulo-Barturen I, Ferrer-Bazaga S. 2015. Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic and dose-response relationships of antituberculosis drugs: recommendations and standards for industry and academia. J Infect Dis 211(Suppl 3):S96–S106. https://doi.org/10.1093/infdis/jiu610.
15. Conte JE, Jr, Golden JA, Kipps J, Zurlinden E. 2002. Intrapulmonary pharmacokinetics of linezolid. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 46: 1475–1480. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.46.5.1475-1480.2002.
16. 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(Suppl 1):S18–S24. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/civ426.
17. 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(Suppl 1):S25–S31. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/civ427.
18. Pasipanodya JG, Nuermberger E, Romero K, Hanna D, Gumbo T. 2015. Systematic analysis of hollow fiber model of tuberculosis experiments. Clin Infect Dis 61(Suppl 1):S10–S17. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/civ425.
19. Gumbo T, Louie A, Deziel MR, Parsons LM, Salfinger M, Drusano GL. 2004. Selection of a moxifloxacin dose that suppresses drug resistance in Mycobacterium tuberculosis, by use of an in vitro pharmacodynamic infection model and mathematical modeling. J Infect Dis 190: 1642–1651. https://doi.org/10.1086/424849.
20. Hall RG, Leff RD, Gumbo T. 2009. Treatment of active pulmonary tuberculosis in adults: current standards and recent advances. Insights from the Society of Infectious Diseases Pharmacists. Pharmacotherapy 29: 1468–1481.
21. Srivastava S, Pasipanodya JG, Ramachandran G, Deshpande D, Shuford S, Crosswell HE, Cirrincione KN, Sherman CM, Swaminathan S, Gumbo T. 2016. A long-term co-perfused disseminated tuberculosis-3D liver hollow fiber model for both drug efficacy and hepatotoxicity in babies. EBioMedicine 6:126–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ebiom.2016.02.040.
22. Pasipanodya JG, McIlleron H, Burger A, Wash PA, Smith P, Gumbo T. 2013. Serum drug concentrations predictive of pulmonary tuberculosis outcomes. J Infect Dis 208:1464–1473. https://doi.org/10.1093/infdis/jit352.
23. Schmalstieg AM, Srivastava S, Belkaya S, Deshpande D, Meek C, Leff R, van Oers NS, Gumbo T. 2012. The antibiotic resistance arrow of time: efflux pump induction is a general first step in the evolution of mycobacterial drug resistance. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 56:4806–4815. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.05546-11.
24. Modongo C, Pasipanodya JG, Magazi BT, Srivastava S, Zetola NM, Williams SM, Sirugo G, Gumbo T. 2016. Artificial intelligence and amikacin exposures predictive of outcomes in multidrug-resistant tuberculosis patients. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 60:5928–5932. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.00962-16.
25. Srivastava S, Modongo C, Dona CWS, Pasipanodya JG, Deshpande D, Gumbo T. 2016. Amikacin optimal exposure targets in the hollow-fiber system model of tuberculosis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 60: 5922–5927. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.00961-16.
26. Song T, Lee M, Jeon HS, Park Y, Dodd LE, Dartois V, Follman D, Wang J, Cai Y, Goldfeder LC, Olivier KN, Xie Y, Via LE, Cho SN, Barry CE, III, Chen RY. 2015. Linezolid trough concentrations correlate with mitochondrial toxicity-related adverse events in the treatment of chronic extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis. EBioMedicine 2:1627–1633. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ebiom.2015.09.051.
27. Black PA, Warren RM, Louw GE, van Helden PD, Victor TC, Kana BD. 2014. Energy metabolism and drug efflux in Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 58:2491–2503. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.02293-13.
28. Sarathy JP, Dartois V, Lee EJ. 2012. The role of transport mechanisms in Mycobacterium tuberculosis drug resistance and tolerance. Pharmaceuticals (Basel) 5:1210–1235. https://doi.org/10.3390/ph5111210.
29. Liu F, Hu Y, Wang Q, Li HM, Gao GF, Liu CH, Zhu B. 2014. Comparative genomic analysis of Mycobacterium tuberculosis clinical isolates. BMC Genomics 15:469. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-15-469.
30. Malinga LA, Abeel T, Desjardins CA, Dlamini TC, Cassell G, Chapman SB, Birren BW, Earl AM, van der Walt M. 2016. Draft genome sequences of two extensively drug-resistant strains of Mycobacterium tuberculosis belonging to the Euro-American S lineage. Genome Announc 4:e01771-15. https://doi.org/10.1128/genomeA.01771-15.
31. Jena L, Nayak T, Deshmukh S, Wankhade G, Waghmare P, Harinath CC. 2016. Isoniazid with multiple mode of action on various mycobacterial enzymes resulting in drug resistance. J Infect Dis Ther 4:5. https://doi.org/10.4172/2332-0877.1000297.
32. Bhatt K, Banerjee SK, Chakraborti PK. 2000. Evidence that phosphate specific transporter is amplified in a fluoroquinolone resistant Mycobacterium smegmatis. Eur J Biochem 267:4028–4032. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1432-1327.2000.01437.x.
33. Pasipanodya JG, Gumbo T. 2011. A new evolutionary and pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic scenario for rapid emergence of resistance to single and multiple anti-tuberculosis drugs. Curr Opin Pharmacol 11: 457–463. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.coph.2011.07.001.
34. Srivastava S, Musuka S, Sherman C, Meek C, Leff R, Gumbo T. 2010. Efflux-pump-derived multiple drug resistance to ethambutol monotherapy in Mycobacterium tuberculosis and the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of ethambutol. J Infect Dis 201:1225–1231. https://doi.org/10.1086/651377.
35. Musuka S, Srivastava S, Siyambalapitiyage Dona CW, Meek C, Leff R, Pasipanodya J, Gumbo T. 2013. Thioridazine pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic parameters “wobble” during treatment of tuberculosis: a theoretical basis for shorter-duration curative monotherapy with congeners. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 57:5870–5877. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.00829-13.
36. MacGowan AP. 2003. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profile of linezolid in healthy volunteers and patients with Gram-positive infections. J Antimicrob Chemother 51(Suppl 2):ii17–ii25. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkg248.
37. Srivastava S, Sherman C, Meek C, Leff R, Gumbo T. 2011. Pharmacokinetic mismatch does not lead to emergence of isoniazid- or rifampin-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis but to better antimicrobial effect: a new paradigm for antituberculosis drug scheduling. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 55:5085–5089. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.00269-11.
38. Srivastava S, Garg A, Ayyagari A, Nyati KK, Dhole TN, Dwivedi SK. 2006. Nucleotide polymorphism associated with ethambutol resistance in clinical isolates of Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Curr Microbiol 53:401– 405. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00284-006-0135-1.
39. D’Argenio DZ, Schumitzky A, Wang X. 2009. ADAPT 5 user’s guide: pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic systems analysis software, Biomedical Simulations Resource, Los Angeles, CA.
40. Abe S, Chiba K, Cirincione B, Grasela TH, Ito K, Suwa T. 2009. Population pharmacokinetic analysis of linezolid in patients with infectious disease: application to lower body weight and elderly patients. J Clin Pharmacol 49:1071–1078. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091270009337947.
41. Rodriguez JC, Ruiz M, Lopez M, Royo G. 2002. In vitro activity of moxifloxacin, levofloxacin, gatifloxacin and linezolid against Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Int J Antimicrob Agents 20:464–467. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0924-8579(02)00239-X.
42. Yang C, Lei H, Wang D, Meng X, He J, Tong A, Zhu L, Jiang Y, Dong M. 2012. In vitro activity of linezolid against clinical isolates of Mycobacterium tuberculosis, including multidrug-resistant and extensively drug-resistant strains from Beijing, China. Jpn J Infect Dis 65:240–242. https://doi.org/10.7883/yoken.65.240.
43. Weiss T, Schonfeld N, Otto-Knapp R, Bos L, Bettermann G, Mauch H, Bauer TT, Russmann H. 2015. Low minimal inhibitory concentrations of linezolid against multidrug-resistant tuberculosis strains. Eur Respir J 45:285–287. https://doi.org/10.1183/09031936.00084614.
44. Boselli E, Breilh D, Caillault-Sergent A, Djabarouti S, Guillaume C, Xuereb F, Bouvet L, Rimmele T, Saux MC, Allaouchiche B. 2012. Alveolar diffusion and pharmacokinetics of linezolid administered in continuous infusion to critically ill patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia. J Antimicrob Chemother 67:1207–1210. https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dks022.
45. Gumbo T, Dona CS, 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. https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.01681-08.