Richard Wilber

Long‐term monitoring shows hepatitis B virus resistance to entecavir in nucleoside‐naïve patients is rare through 5 years of therapy

Patients with chronic hepatitis B virus (HBV) infection who develop antiviral resistance lose benefits of therapy and may be predisposed to further resistance. Entecavir (ETV) resistance (ETVr) results from HBV reverse transcriptase substitutions at positions T184, S202, or M250, which emerge in the presence of lamivudine (LVD) resistance substitutions M204I/V ± L180M. Here, we summarize results from comprehensive resistance monitoring of patients with HBV who were continuously treated with ETV for up to 5 years. Monitoring included genotypic analysis of isolates from all patients at baseline and when HBV DNA was detectable by polymerase chain reaction (≥300 copies/mL) from Years 1 through 5. In addition, genotyping was performed on isolates from patients experiencing virologic breakthrough (≥1 log10 rise in HBV DNA). In vitro phenotypic ETV susceptibility was determined for virologic breakthrough isolates, and for HBV containing novel substitutions emerging during treatment. The results over 5 years of therapy showed that in nucleoside‐naïve patients, the cumulative probability of genotypic ETVr and genotypic ETVr associated with virologic breakthrough was 1.2% and 0.8%, respectively. In contrast, a reduced barrier to resistance was observed in LVD‐refractory patients, as the LVD resistance substitutions, a partial requirement for ETVr, preexist, resulting in a 5‐year cumulative probability of genotypic ETVr and genotypic ETVr associated with breakthrough of 51% and 43%, respectively. Importantly, only four patients who achieved <300 copies/mL HBV DNA subsequently developed ETVr. Conclusion: Long‐term monitoring showed low rates of resistance in nucleoside‐naïve patients during 5 years of ETV therapy, corresponding with potent viral suppression and a high genetic barrier to resistance. These findings support ETV as a primary therapy that enables prolonged treatment with potent viral suppression and minimal resistance. (HEPATOLOGY 2009.)

Atazanavir plus ritonavir or saquinavir, and lopinavir/ritonavir in patients experiencing multiple virological failures.

Objective:To evaluate atazanavir/ritonavir (ATV/RTV) (300/100 mg) once daily, atazanavir/saquinavir (ATV/SQV) (400/1200 mg) once daily, and lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/RTV) (400/100 mg) twice daily, each with tenofovir (300 mg) once daily and a nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor in treatment-experienced HIV-infected patients. Methods:Randomized, open-label, 48-week multicenter trial of 358 randomized adult patients who had failed two or more prior HAART regimens with baseline HIV RNA ≥ 1000 copies/ml and CD4 cell count ≥ 50 × 106 cells/l. Results:The primary efficacy endpoint [plasma HIV RNA reduction assessed by time-averaged difference (TAD)] was similar for ATV/RTV and LPV/RTV [TAD 0.13; 97.5% confidence interval, −0.12 to 0.39] at 48 weeks. Mean reductions from baseline for ATV/RTV and LPV/RTV were comparable at 1.93 and 1.87 log10 copies/ml, respectively. Mean CD4 cell count increases were 110 and 121 × 106 cells/l for ATV/RTV, and LPV/RTV, respectively. The efficacy of ATV/SQV was lower than LPV/RTV by both these parameters. Declines in total cholesterol and fasting triglycerides were greater with ATV/RTV and ATV/SQV than with LPV/RTV (P ≤ 0.005). Lipids in the LPV/RTV arm at week 48 generally increased from baseline. Lipid-lowering agents were used more frequently in the LPV/RTV arm than in the ATV arms (P < 0.05 versus ATV/RTV), as were antidiarrheal agents (P ≤ 0.04 versus both ATV treatments). No new or unique safety findings emerged. Conclusions:ATV boosted with RTV is as effective and well tolerated as LPV/RTV in treatment-experienced patients, with a more favorable impact on serum lipids. Pharmacokinetically enhanced ATV provides a suitable choice for therapy of treatment-experienced HIV-infected patients.

Early Hepatitis B Virus DNA Reduction in Hepatitis B e Antigen-Positive Patients with Chronic Hepatitis B : A Randomized International Study of Entecavir Versus Adefovir

This study was undertaken to compare the early antiviral activity and viral kinetic profiles of entecavir (ETV) versus adefovir (ADV) in hepatitis B e antigen positive nucleoside‐naïve adults with chronic hepatitis B (CHB). Sixty‐nine nucleoside‐naïve CHB patients with baseline HBV DNA of 108 copies/mL or more were randomized 1:1 to open‐label treatment with entecavir 0.5 mg/day or adefovir 10 mg/day for a minimum of 52 weeks. The primary efficacy analysis compared mean reduction in HBV DNA at week 12 adjusted for baseline levels using linear regression. Entecavir was superior to adefovir for mean change from baseline in HBV DNA at week 12 (−6.23 log10 copies/mL versus −4.42 log10 copies/mL, respectively; mean difference −1.58 log10 copies/mL; P < 0.0001). Both drugs demonstrated biphasic viral kinetics, with a first phase of rapid decline lasting 10 days. A significant difference favoring ETV was reached at day 10 (day 10 ETV−ADV difference estimate: −0.66 log10 copies/mL; 95% CI [−0.30, −0.01]). Early virological response was found to be predictive of subsequent virological response, with those having lower HBV DNA levels at day 10 being more likely to achieve HBV DNA of less than 300 copies/mL at week 48. In addition, there was considerably less variability in the extent of HBV DNA reductions in patients treated with entecavir versus adefovir. Both the mean decrease in serum HBV DNA and the proportion of patients achieving HBV DNA less than 300 copies/mL were greater in entecavir‐treated than adefovir‐treated patients at weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 48. At week 48, one (3%) ETV‐treated versus 15 (47%) ADV‐treated patients had HBV DNA of 105 copies/mL or more. Both antivirals were well tolerated. Conclusion: Entecavir therapy resulted in earlier and superior reduction in HBV DNA compared with adefovir in nucleoside‐naïve HBeAg‐positive patients with CHB. (HEPATOLOGY 2009;49:72‐79.)

Comparison of cefprozil and cefaclor pharmacokinetics and tissue penetration.

The pharmacokinetics and tissue penetration, as judged by skin blister fluid, of cefprozil and cefaclor were examined in 12 healthy male volunteers. Doses of 250 and 500 mg of each drug were given to fasting subjects in a crossover fashion. Serially obtained plasma, skin blister fluid, and urine samples were analyzed for cefprozil or cefaclor by validated high-pressure liquid chromatographic methods. After oral administration of 250 and 500 mg of cefprozil, mean concentrations in plasma rose to peak levels (Cmax) of 6.1 and 11.2 micrograms/ml, respectively, and those of cefaclor were 10.6 and 17.3 micrograms/ml, respectively. The elimination half-life of cefprozil (1.3 h) was significantly longer than that of cefaclor (0.6 h), and as a result, the area under the curve for cefprozil was about two times greater than that for cefaclor. Both cephalosporins were primarily excreted unchanged in urine. The mean skin blister Cmax values were 3.0 and 5.8 micrograms/ml for cefprozil and 3.6 and 6.5 micrograms/ml for cefaclor after the 250- and 500-mg oral doses, respectively. The mean Cmax values in skin blister fluid for both cephalosporins were comparable and were significantly lower than the corresponding Cmax values in plasma. However, the levels of cefprozil and cefaclor in skin blister fluid declined more slowly than they did in plasma. The skin blister fluid half-life estimates for cefprozil were significantly longer than they were for cefaclor. Parallel to the observation in plasma, the mean skin blister fluid areas under the curve for cefprozil were significantly higher than they were for cefaclor. The plasma and skin blister fluid pharmacokinetic analyses suggest that the exposure of humans to cefprozil is significantly greater than that to cefaclor at the same dose.

Phase I study of multiple-dose cefprozil and comparison with cefaclor.

The objectives of this study were to assess the safety and tolerance of cefprozil, to characterize the pharmacokinetics of cefprozil after administration of multiple doses of the drug, and to compare these pharmacokinetic parameters with those obtained with cefaclor. The volunteers received 28 doses of 250, 500, or 1,000 mg of cefprozil or 500 mg of cefaclor every 8 h for 10 days. Serial blood samples and the total volume of urine voided by each individual were collected for pharmacokinetic evaluation on days 1, 5, and 10. Both cephalosporins were well tolerated after multiple oral dosing. The peak levels in plasma (Cmax) of cefprozil ranged from 5.7 to 18.3 micrograms/ml after oral administration of 250- to 1,000-mg doses. The regression analysis of Cmax on cefprozil dose showed a dose-linear response. The mean Cmax of cefaclor ranged from 15.2 to 16.7 micrograms/ml and did not change significantly on multiple dosing. The overall mean terminal half-life of cefprozil was 1.2 h and was invariant with respect to dose or duration of dosing. The area under the plasma-concentration-versus-time curve from 0 h to infinity (AUC0-infinity) of cefprozil increased in a dose-proportional manner with an increase in dose. The overall urinary recovery (61% of dose) and renal clearance values of cefprozil were generally invariant with respect to dose and duration of dosing. While cefprozil was apparently absorbed less rapidly and achieved lower Cmax values than cefaclor, the AUC0-infinity of cefprozil was nearly twofold greater than that of cefaclor. The half-life of cefprozil was also twofold longer than that observed for cefaclor. Although the urinary recovery of cefaclor (75% of dose) was significantly higher than that of cefprozil (61% of dose), the concentrations of cefprozil in urine remained significantly higher than those of cefaclor from 2 to 8 h postdosing. If the therapeutic concept is maintained that levels of beta-lactam antibiotics in plasma should exceed the MIC for the offending organisms over a period that approximates the dosing interval, then cefprozil would appear to be suitable for twice-daily administration, whereas cefaclor should probably be administered three or even four times a day.

PHARMACOKINETICS OF CEFPROZIL IN HEALTHY SUBJECTS AND PATIENTS WITH HEPATIC IMPAIRMENT

The pharmacokinetics of cefprozil were studied in 12 (9 men, 3 women) subjects with hepatic impairment and in 12 healthy subjects who were matched for age, sex, and weight. Each subject received a single 1000 mg oral dose of cefprozil, which consists of cis and trans isomers in approximately a 90:10 ratio. Serial blood and urine samples were collected and analyzed using validated HPLC/UV methods for the concentration of each isomer. The results of the plasma and urine analyses were subjected to noncompartmental pharmacokinetic analysis. The values for the peak plasma concentrations (Cmax), area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC0–∞), apparent total body clearance (Clt/F), renal clearance (Clr), and percent of drug excreted in urine (% UR) of each isomer were not significantly different in healthy subjects and patients with hepatic impairment. The only parameters that were significantly (P ≤ .05) longer in patients with hepatic impairment were mean residence time in the body (MRT) and half‐life; the MRT for the cis isomer in healthy subjects and subjects with hepatic impairment were 3.33 hr and 3.88 hr, respectively, and for the trans isomer 3.17 hr and 3.68 hr; the half‐life for the cis isomer was 1.62 hr and 2.22 hr, respectively, and for the trans isomer 1.21 hr and 1.54 hr. The pharmacokinetics of the cis and trans isomers of cefprozil were virtually identical in healthy subjects as well as those with hepatic impairment. The results of the study showed that the pharmacokinetics of cefprozil are not significantly affected in patients with hepatic dysfunction, and as a result, the dosage of cefprozil does not require adjustment in patients with hepatic dysfunction.

Excretion of cefprozil into human breast milk.

The excretion of cefprozil into breast milk in nine healthy, lactating female subjects was investigated. Each subject received a single 1,000-mg oral dose of cefprozil consisting of cis and trans isomers in an approximately 90:10 ratio. Serial blood, urine, and breast milk samples were collected and analyzed for the concentrations of the cis and trans isomers by a specific high-pressure liquid chromatography-UV assay. The mean pharmacokinetic parameters for both isomers were essentially the same. The mean peak concentrations in plasma for the cis isomer were 14.8 micrograms/ml, and the area under the concentration curve was 54.8 micrograms.h/ml. The mean values of elimination half-life, renal clearance, and urinary excretion for the cis isomer were 1.69 h, 164 ml/min, and 60%, respectively. The mean concentrations in milk of the cis isomer over a 24-h period ranged from 0.25 to 3.36 micrograms/ml, with the maximum concentration appearing at 6 h after dosing. The average maximum concentration in milk of the trans isomer was less than 0.26 micrograms/ml. The concentrations of the trans isomer in plasma and in breast milk were about 1/10 of those for the cis isomer. Less than 0.3% of the dose was excreted in breast milk for both isomers of cefprozil. Even if one assumes that the concentration of cefprozil in milk remains constant at 3.36 micrograms/ml (the highest concentration of cefprozil observed in breast milk), an infant ingesting an average of 800 ml of milk per day will be exposed to a maximum amount of about 3 mg of cefprozil per day. This value represents about 0.3% of the maternal dose. Low excretion of cefprozil in breast milk and the excellent safety profile of cefprozil suggest that this cephalosporin may be administered to nursing mothers when indicated.

Penetration of cefprozil into tonsillar and adenoidal tissues.

Penetration of cefprozil into tonsillar and/or adenoidal tissues was investigated for patients undergoing tonsillectomy and/or adenoidectomy. A total of 29 patients ranging in age from 2 to 14 years participated in the study. The tonsils and/or the adenoids were removed at times ranging from 0.33 to 3.17 h after oral administration of a dose of either 7.5 or 20 mg/kg of body weight. A blood sample was also collected as soon as the tissue sample was removed. Plasma, tonsil, and adenoid samples were analyzed for cis and trans isomers of cefprozil by high-performance liquid chromatographic assays. The concentrations of the cis isomer of cefprozil in plasma ranged from 0.60 to 9.87 micrograms/ml at the 7.5-mg/kg dose level and from 1.04 to 20.40 micrograms/ml at the 20-mg/kg dose level. The corresponding concentrations of the cis isomer in tonsil tissue ranged from 0.48 to 2.42 micrograms/g and from 1.00 to 4.29 micrograms/g, respectively. The corresponding concentrations of the cis isomer in adenoid tissue ranged from 0.40 to 4.20 micrograms/g and from 1.74 to 4.94 micrograms/g, respectively. The concentrations of the trans isomer were about 1/10 of those observed for the cis isomer. The median ratios of the cefprozil concentration in tonsillar tissue to that in plasma were 0.37 and 0.47 for patients receiving a 7.5- or a 20-mg/kg oral dose of cefprozil, respectively. The corresponding median ratios for the adenoidal tissue were 0.46 and 0.82, respectively. The cefprozil concentrations in either the tonsillar or the adenoidal tissue at both dose levels over 3.17 h after dosing are much higher than the MICs for common pathogens which cause pharyngitis or tonsillitis.

Effect of antacid on the bioavailability of cefprozil.

The effect of antacid on the bioavailability of cefprozil was investigated in a two-way crossover study. Eight healthy male subjects received a single 500-mg oral dose of cefprozil with and without coadministration of 30 ml of an antacid suspension containing magnesium hydroxide and aluminum hydroxide (Maalox). Cefprozil consists of cis and trans isomers in an approximate 90:10 ratio. When cefprozil was administered alone (treatment A), the mean maximum concentrations (Cmax) of the cis and trans isomers were 9.2 and 1.2 micrograms/ml, respectively. When cefprozil was coadministered with Maalox (treatment B), the Cmax values of the cis and trans isomers were 8.7 and 1.3 micrograms/ml, respectively. The mean values of the area under the curve from time zero to infinity (AUC0-infinity) were 27.7 and 3.5 micrograms.h/ml for treatment A and 27.5 and 3.5 micrograms.h/ml for treatment B for the cis and trans isomers, respectively. The other pharmacokinetic parameters, time to Cmax, elimination half-life, mean residence time, renal clearance, and percent urinary excretion, were essentially the same for the two isomers. The respective values of the elimination half-life for the cis and trans isomers were 1.36 and 1.32 h for treatment A and 1.36 and 1.42 h for treatment B. Mean urinary excretion was 63 and 60% for treatment A and 58 and 56% for treatment B for the cis and trans isomers, respectively. No significant differences between the two treatments were found for any of the pharmacokinetic parameters for either isomer. For the cis isomer, bioavailability point estimates (90% confidence intervals) of the mean Cmax and AUG0-infinity values for the Maalox treatment relative to those for the reference treatment were 95% (87%, 103%) and 99% (95%, 104%), respectively. For the trans isomer, the value were 109% (92%, 126%) for Cmax and 97% (88%, 106%) for AUC0-infinity. On the basis of the results of this study, it is concluded that the bioavailability of cefprozil is not affected by the coadministration of Maalox.

Oral Absolute Bioavailability and Intravenous Dose-Proportionality of Cefprozil in Humans

The absolute bioavailability (F) and dose proportionality of cefprozil were investigated in a parallel design study with an embedded two‐way crossover leg. Twenty‐four healthy male subjects divided into 3 dosing groups received a single 250‐, 500‐, or 1000‐mg dose of cefprozil by a 30‐minute intravenous infusion. Subjects assigned to the 500‐mg dose group also received a 500‐mg oral dose of cefprozil in crossover manner with a wash‐out period of 7 days between each treatment. Cefprozil consists of cis and trans isomers in an approximate 90:10 ratio. Serial blood and urine samples were collected and analyzed for the concentrations of the cis and trans isomers of the cephalosporin using high‐pressure liquid chromatographic assay with UV detection methods. After the 250‐, 500‐, and 1000‐mg intravenous administration of cefprozil, the peak concentrations were 13.2, 26.0, and 48.5 μg/mL, and area under the plasma concentration versus time proxies were 17.2, 31 A, and 58.1 μg · hour/mL, respectively, for the cis isomer increasing in a dose proportional manner. Total body clearance, renal clearance, and volume of distribution at steady state, adjusted for body weight, were not significantly different among all groups. Mean residence time, elimination half‐life, and urinary recovery were invariant with the dose. Based on the plasma and urine data, the estimates of F were 89% and 94% for the cis isomer, respectively. The plasma concentrations of the trans isomer were about 1/10th of the cis isomer, and all parameters were similar to those observed for the cis isomer. In summary, cefprozil exhibits linear pharmacokinetics and is essentially completely absorbed after oral administration.