Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the work of artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Pharmacodynamic Indices Johan W. Mouton Canisius-Wilhelmina Hospital, Nijmegen, The Netherlands JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 therapeutic success Dosing should be such that the level of antmicrobial activity is associated with a high likelihood of therapeutic success. DOSE JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 Dose Finding - The Past JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 How can PK/PD help here? Efficacy of the drug Potency of a drug (MIC) Exposure to the bug In vivo (PK) JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 Lowest concentration with no visible growth after 18 hour incubation MIC 10 PK conc mg/l 8 6 X-acin 500 mg 4 .25 .5 1 2 4 2 0 0 4 8 12 16 20 24 MIC = 2 mg/L time h JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 8 Pharmacokinetic Parameter (and Dose) MIC • Thus, we have to: – Establish a relationship between the MIC in vitro and concentrations in vivo (thus, dosing regimens) – Determine which dosing regimens are optimal for Treatment in relation to the MIC JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 Any idea where we are today? No idea… may be a mouse? Might be a human, though… JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 PK/PD • Neutropenic mouse thigh model • Various doses and dosing regimens (q1 to q24) • Outcome parameter: cfu counts after 24 h • Plot PD parameter (AUC, Peak T>MIC) to effect JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 K. pneumoniae, imipenem 3 2 dcfu 1 0 -1 -2 -3 10 0 10 1 10 2 auc Based on data from Craig JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 For K.pneumoniae, there is no clear relation between total daily dose of imipenem and efficacy in an in vivo model of infection JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 K. pneumoniae, imipenem 3 2 dcfu 1 0 -1 -2 -3 10 100 time > mic Based on data from Craig JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 For beta-lactams, there is a direct relation between Time > MIC and efficacy JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 8 8 6 6 10 8 cfu 10 cfu cfu 10 6 4 4 4 2 2 2 0 0 0 20 40 60 T >mic % 80 100 0 0 1 2 log (peak) mg/l 1 2 log (auc) mg.h/l Relationship between T>MIC , Peak, AUC and effect of levofloxacin for S. pneumoniae in mice. Each dot represents one mouse / dosingregimen. Based on data from Scaglione & Mouton, 2001, 2003 JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 Log10 CFU/Thigh at 24 Hrs PK/PD relationship is Class Dependent 10 8 6 levofloxacin 4 2 0 10 100 1000 1 10 Log10 CFU/Thigh at 24 Hrs 24-Hr AUC/MIC 1000 0 100 25 50 75 100 Time Above MIC Peak/MIC 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 ceftazidime 3 2 Andes IJAA 2002 10 100 1000 24-Hr AUC/MIC 1 10 100 1000 Peak/MIC 0 25 50 75 100 Time Above MIC JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 Relationship PkPd and Effect T>MIC Penicillins Cephalosporins Carbapenems Monobactams Tribactams AUC Aminoglycosides Fluoroquinolones Metronidazole Lipopeptides Ketolides Macrolides Clindamycin Streptogramins Glycopeptides Glycylcyclines Oxazolidinones Tetracyclines Azoles JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 Relationship AUC and effect • What has the MIC to do with this? Scaglione et al., AAC 2003 JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 Fluconazole efficacy in mice Dose vs MIC Andes et al ISHAM 2003 JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 Pharmacokinetic parameters : Measures of Exposure PEAK AUC and Peak are usually linearly related to Dose AUC MIC T > MIC JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 'Normalizing pk/pd relationships' Pharmacokinetic parameter MIC Pharmacodynamic index (AUC/MIC, Peak/MIC, T>MIC) JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 Change in Log10 CFU/Kidneys Fluconazole Pharmacodynamics Against Isogenic Strain Pairs of Susceptible and Resistant C. albicans 2 R = 84% 0.0 1649 MIC 0.25 2183 MIC 4.0 - CDR 1002 MIC 1.0 2823 MIC 32 - MDR1, ERG 11 2-76 MIC 1.0 12-99 MIC 64 - CDR, MDR1, ERG 11 412 MIC 0.25 2307 MIC 128 - CDR, ERG 11 580 MIC 0.50 2438 MIC 32 FH1 MIC 1.0 FH5 MIC 4.0 - CDR -0.5 -1.0 -1.5 -2.0 -2.5 -3.0 -3.5 0.1 1 10 100 24-h Total Dose Andes et al ISHAM 2003 1000 0.01 0.1 1 10 100 100010000 24-hr AUC/MIC JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 MIC 0.4 10 conc mg/l 8 0.2 0.1 0.0 6 4 2 0 -0.1 -6 -5 -4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 0 6 4 8 12 16 20 24 time h 2log fluconazole mg/L In vivo CT profile dynamic concentrations In vitro effect at fixed concentrations 1.0 0.8 prob cure extinction 0.3 Response Curve 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 0 1 2 3 fluconazole (auc/mic) JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 Fluconazole efficacy, OPC N=123 1.0 EC50 prob cure 0.8 R² 43.69 0.9938 0.6 0.4 0.2 0.0 0 1 2 3 log dose/mic L Rodriguez-Tudela et al, AAC 2007 JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 Thus, 2 factors influence the value of the pk/pd index: MIC and its Errors/variation Pharmacokinetics and its variation JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 Why is the term pk/pd index used instead of pk/pd parameter? -a ratio (e.g.) of two independent parameters, not a parameter by itself Mouton et al, J Antmicrob Chemother 2005. Available from ISAP site JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 The MIC JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 MIC The MIC is a result of : •kill over time (kill rate) by the antibiotic •growth over time (growth rate) •for a certain number of micro-organisms (the inoculum) AT STATIC CONCENTRATIONS JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 Kahlmeter et al, JAC 2003 JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 •Growth and/or kill rate dependent : –strain, species –medium composition, brand –MH, supplements, ISO –number of bacteria –inoculum –5.105 (CLSI) vs 105 (BSAC) –temperature (35o vs 37o) –growth phase –CO2 –etc. JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 2 log normalized MIC 0 -1 -2 -3 -4 -5 -6 0.0 microdilution r² 0.9457 0.5 10 Mouton, icaac 2000 1.0 1.5 2.0 log MH dilution JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 A reference MIC method has been described by ISO/CEN Accepted by member States, pending final vote ALL METHODS USED UN THE FUTURE SHOULD BE VALIDATED AGAINST THIS METHOD The method complies with CLSI and EUCAST Several Posters at this ECCMID JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 The reproducibility of the MIC is within 2 2-fold dilutions. The variation introduced in the AUC/MIC and Peak/MIC values by the MIC is there for at least 0.5 tot 2 x the pk/pd index value! JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 MIC vs SC (Stationary Concentration) • SC= The concentration of antimicrobial at which growth equals kill, i.e. no net growth or kill at a certain point in time • =NOT equal to MIC (which includes time) • Distinguish between MIC in vitro and in vivo. Mouton & Vinks Clin Pharmacokinet 2005 44:201-10 JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 MISCONCEPTION: 'Drug is active for a prolonged period of time, and remains above the MIC long enough to…. The SC may be lower or higher than the MIC, depending on its kill kinetics In general the SC is lower, especially for concentration dependent drugs MIC Mouton & Vinks Clin Pharmacokinet 2005 44:201-10 JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 PHARMACOKINETIC parameters JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 AUC Definition :The Area under the Concentration-time curve over 24 hours. Note: ….. It should be stated how the AUC is determined : based on (log) linear trapezoideal rule, based on clearance, or based on microconstants. Dimensions : concentration x time e.g. mg.h/L or g.h/mL Mouton et al, J Antmicrob Chemother 2005. Available from ISAP site JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 concentration 200 100 0 0 10 AUC 0-24 = 3033 AUC inf = 5100 AUC 0-24 sd = 1361 AUC inf sd =1700 20 30 40 time Mg.h/L JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 WHICH AUC? • AUC or AUC • Steady State? • (log) trapezodeal rule? • Derived ? (A/ +B/ or other) 0-24h JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 AUC/MIC Definition : The area under the concentration-time curve over 24 hours in steady state divided by the MIC. …. Note : ….For unbound fraction of the drug, use fAUC/MIC Dimensions : no dimensions Mouton et al, J Antmicrob Chemother 2005 Available from ISAP site JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 AUIC Definition :The Area under the inhibitory curve over 24 hours. Note: the AUIC should be reserved for those cases where actual inhibitory titers have been measured and used in the calculations. The AUIC is not equal to the AUC/MIC. See also Flaherty et al, AAC 1988;32(12):1825-29; Hyatt JM et al AAC 1994;38(12):2730-7; Occhipinti DJ et al, AAC 1997;41(11):2511-7. Dimensions : none Mouton et al, J Antmicrob Chemother 2005 Available from ISAP site JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 Peak/MIC Definition : the peak level divided by the MIC. Dimensions : no dimensions. Mouton et al, J Antmicrob Chemother 2005 Available from ISAP site JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 WHICH PEAK LEVEL? • After the 1st, 2nd or simulation of 1.25 mg/kg q1h concentration mg/L 2.0 simulated conc. measured conc. 1.5 1.0 0.5 fig 2a 0.0 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 later dose? time (h) • If more than one simulation 10 mg/kg + 1.25 mg/kg q1h concentration mg/L 10 8 simulated conc. 6 4 2 fig 2b 0 0 4 8 12 16 20 24 time (h) simulation 10 mg/kg + 1.25 mg/kg q1h concentration mg/L 10 simulated conc. 8 6 4 compartment, the peak level in compartment 1, 2 or even 3? fig 2c 2 0 0 4 8 12 16 20 24 time (h) JWMal, Grindelwald Scaglione et AAC30-01-2008 2003 fraction unbound 1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.1 fu lev fu cip 1 10 100 concentration mg/l fig 1 Scaglione et al, AAC 2003 JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 Time > MIC Definition : the % of time above the MIC over a period of 24 hours. Note : if the period is other than 24 h, this should be stated explicitly. Dimensions : %. Mouton et al, J Antmicrob Chemother 2005 Available from ISAP site JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 Variation in methods, definitions Variation in estimation Variation in population JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008 For all indices : how are they determined how are they calculated what is the error? Only when these questions have been answered do we know the true impact and value of the index. JWM Grindelwald 30-01-2008