Farkad Ezzet

Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Lumefantrine (Benflumetol) in Acute Falciparum Malaria

ABSTRACT The objective of this study was to conduct a prospective population pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic evaluation of lumefantrine during blinded comparisons of artemether-lumefantrine treatment regimens in uncomplicated multidrug-resistant falciparum malaria. Three combination regimens containing an average adult lumefantrine dose of 1,920 mg over 3 days (four doses) (regimen A) or 2,780 mg over 3 or 5 days (six doses) (regimen B or C, respectively) were given to 266 Thai patients. Detailed observations were obtained for 51 hospitalized adults, and sparse data were collected for 215 patients of all ages in a community setting. The population absorption half-life of lumefantrine was 4.5 h. The model-based median (5th and 95th percentiles) peak plasma lumefantrine concentrations were 6.2 (0.25 and 14.8) μg/ml after regimen A, 9.0 (1.1 and 19.8) μg/ml after regimen B, and 8 (1.4 and 17.4) μg/ml after regimen C. During acute malaria, there was marked variability in the fraction of drug absorbed by patients (coefficient of variation, 150%). The fraction increased considerably and variability fell with clinical recovery, largely because food intake was resumed; taking a normal meal close to drug administration increased oral bioavailability by 108% (90% confidence interval, 64 to 164) (P, 0.0001). The higher-dose regimens (B and C) gave 60 and 100% higher areas under the concentration-time curves (AUC), respectively, and thus longer durations for which plasma lumefantrine concentrations exceeded the putative in vivo MIC of 280 μg/ml (median for regimen B, 252 h; that for regimen C, 298 h; that for regimen A, 204 h [P, 0.0001]) and higher cure rates. Lumefantrine oral bioavailability is very dependent on food and is consequently poor in acute malaria but improves markedly with recovery. The high cure rates with the two six-dose regimens resulted from increased AUC and increased time at which lumefantrine concentrations were above the in vivo MIC.

Pharmacokinetic interaction trial between co-artemether and mefloquine

Forty-two healthy subjects were randomized in a parallel three-group design trial to investigate potential electrocardiographic and pharmacokinetic interactions between the new antimalarial co-artemether, a combination of artemether and lumefantrine (both of which are predominantly metabolized through CYP3A4), and mefloquine, another antimalarial described as a substrate (and possible inhibitor) of CYP3A4. Subjects were assigned to one of the three possible treatment groups (i.e., co-artemether alone or mefloquine alone or the combination of both). The dosage was 1000 mg mefloquine (divided into three doses over 12 h) followed 12 h later by six applications of co-artemether (40 mg artemether+480 mg lumefantrine each) over 60 h. The study medications were generally well tolerated after all treatments. Concomitant administration with mefloquine caused statistically significant lower (around 30-40%) plasma concentrations of lumefantrine than when co-artemether was administered alone. Even if important, this decrease in lumefantrine exposure was considered unlikely to impact clinical efficacy given the wide therapeutic index of co-artemether and the usual high variability in lumefantrine plasma levels, mostly and more importantly influenced by food intake. However, patients should be encouraged to eat at dosing times to compensate for this decreased bioavailability. The pharmacokinetics of artemether, DHA or mefloquine were not affected. Artemether concentrations significantly decreased over doses, independently of mefloquine co-administration, while DHA concentrations slightly (not significantly) increased. Therefore, no clinically relevant risks due to pharmacokinetic drug-drug interaction are expected at the enzymatic level following co-administration of co-artemether with CYP3A4 substrates with similar affinity to that of mefloquine.

A random effects model for binary data from crossover clinical trials

The use of a random effects model for binary data in the interpretation of crossover studies is described. The model incorporates normally distributed subject effects, common to all responses from the same subject, into the linear part of the logistic regression model. The case of two treatments and two periods is considered, although extensions of the methodology to more general cases are possible. The paper describes how the model can be fitted and how the results can be interpreted. It is shown how data from subjects who miss the second period of treatment can be included in the analysis. Implications of the model on sample size calculations are studied, and a table to aid such calculations is provided. The methodology is illustrated with data from a recent pharmarceutical study of inhalation devices.

Cardiac effects of co-artemether (artemether/lumefantrine) and mefloquine given alone or in combination to healthy volunteers.

Abstract Co-artemether is an oral tablet of artemether (20 mg) and lumefantrine (120 mg) for the treatment of falciparum malaria. Administration in the presence of mefloquine is likely, as co-artemether may be used following failure of antimalarial prophylaxis or treatment with mefloquine. Objective: The effects on the QTc interval were compared among treatment with three doses of mefloquine (500, 250, 250 mg over 12 h) followed by six doses of co-artemether (6 × 4 tablets over 60 h) and either treatment alone. The study was performed in a randomised, double-blind, parallel group design in 14 healthy male subjects per dose group. Methods: Electrocardiograms (ECGs) were recorded before dosing and repeatedly thereafter. The Bazett formula was used to calculate the QTc interval. The maximum and average QTc intervals for the first, third and sixth dosing intervals of co-artemether treatment were compared among treatments. Drug plasma concentrations were determined at identical times with the ECG recordings for exploratory pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic evaluation. Results: No clinically relevant differences in the QTc interval were observed after sequential administration of mefloquine and co-artemether relative to either treatment given alone, and there were no clinically relevant study drug-related effects on the QTc interval after either treatment. Plasma drug measurements revealed adequate systemic exposure to artemether, dihydroartemisinin, lumefantrine and mefloquine, well in line with the clinical setting. No correlation between the length of the QTc interval and plasma drug concentrations was found for any of the compounds. Conclusions: Untoward effects on the QTc interval are unlikely to occur when co-artemether is administered following prophylaxis or treatment with mefloquine.

Clinical cross-over trials in phase I.

We review the role of cross-over trials in pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies, in particular as applied in phase I. Design and analysis considerations are covered. We also consider the use of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic theories in planning cross-over trials. Finally some practical considerations are covered.

Artemether-lumefantrine dosing for malaria treatment in young children and pregnant women: A pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic meta-analysis

Background The fixed dose combination of artemether-lumefantrine (AL) is the most widely used treatment for uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria. Relatively lower cure rates and lumefantrine levels have been reported in young children and in pregnant women during their second and third trimester. The aim of this study was to investigate the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of lumefantrine and the pharmacokinetic properties of its metabolite, desbutyl-lumefantrine, in order to inform optimal dosing regimens in all patient populations. Methods and findings A search in PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, Google Scholar, conference proceedings, and the WorldWide Antimalarial Resistance Network (WWARN) pharmacology database identified 31 relevant clinical studies published between 1 January 1990 and 31 December 2012, with 4,546 patients in whom lumefantrine concentrations were measured. Under the auspices of WWARN, relevant individual concentration-time data, clinical covariates, and outcome data from 4,122 patients were made available and pooled for the meta-analysis. The developed lumefantrine population pharmacokinetic model was used for dose optimisation through in silico simulations. Venous plasma lumefantrine concentrations 7 days after starting standard AL treatment were 24.2% and 13.4% lower in children weighing <15 kg and 15–25 kg, respectively, and 20.2% lower in pregnant women compared with non-pregnant adults. Lumefantrine exposure decreased with increasing pre-treatment parasitaemia, and the dose limitation on absorption of lumefantrine was substantial. Simulations using the lumefantrine pharmacokinetic model suggest that, in young children and pregnant women beyond the first trimester, lengthening the dose regimen (twice daily for 5 days) and, to a lesser extent, intensifying the frequency of dosing (3 times daily for 3 days) would be more efficacious than using higher individual doses in the current standard treatment regimen (twice daily for 3 days). The model was developed using venous plasma data from patients receiving intact tablets with fat, and evaluations of alternative dosing regimens were consequently only representative for venous plasma after administration of intact tablets with fat. The absence of artemether-dihydroartemisinin data limited the prediction of parasite killing rates and recrudescent infections. Thus, the suggested optimised dosing schedule was based on the pharmacokinetic endpoint of lumefantrine plasma exposure at day 7. Conclusions Our findings suggest that revised AL dosing regimens for young children and pregnant women would improve drug exposure but would require longer or more complex schedules. These dosing regimens should be evaluated in prospective clinical studies to determine whether they would improve cure rates, demonstrate adequate safety, and thereby prolong the useful therapeutic life of this valuable antimalarial treatment.