Simulation-Based Evaluation of PK/PD Indices for Meropenem Across Patient Groups and Experimental Designs
- 557 Downloads
Antibiotic dose predictions based on PK/PD indices rely on that the index type and magnitude is insensitive to the pharmacokinetics (PK), the dosing regimen, and bacterial susceptibility. In this work we perform simulations to challenge these assumptions for meropenem and Pseudomonas aeruginosa.
A published murine dose fractionation study was replicated in silico. The sensitivity of the PK/PD index towards experimental design, drug susceptibility, uncertainty in MIC and different PK profiles was evaluated.
The previous murine study data were well replicated with fT > MIC selected as the best predictor. However, for increased dosing frequencies fAUC/MIC was found to be more predictive and the magnitude of the index was sensitive to drug susceptibility. With human PK fT > MIC and fAUC/MIC had similar predictive capacities with preference for fT > MIC when short t1/2 and fAUC/MIC when long t1/2.
A longitudinal PKPD model based on in vitro data successfully predicted a previous in vivo study of meropenem. The type and magnitude of the PK/PD index were sensitive to the experimental design, the MIC and the PK. Therefore, it may be preferable to perform simulations for dose selection based on an integrated PK-PKPD model rather than using a fixed PK/PD index target.
KEY WORDSantibiotic dose selection meropenem pharmacometric pseudomonas aeruginosa
Area under the curve
Unbound AUC divided by the MIC
Unbound Cmax divided by the MIC
- fT > MIC
Unbound time above the MIC
Minimum inhibitory concentration
Inter compartmental CL
Coefficient of determination
Half-life of the β-phase
Therapeutic drug monitoring
Central Volume (of distribution)
Peripheral volume (of distribution)
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS AND DISCLOSURES
This work was in part supported by funding from F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Switzerland and by the Swedish Foundation for Strategic Research.
Compliance with ethical standards
The authors have no conflicts of interest related to the content of this study.
- 1.European Medicines Agency. CHMP/EWP/2655/99 - Points to consider on pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in the development of antibacterial medicinal products. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2009/09/WC500003420.pdf. Accessed 29 Jan 2015.
- 2.European Medicines Agency. Concept Paper on revision of the points to consider on pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in the development of antibacterial medicinal products (CHMP/EWP/2655/99) and conversion to a CHMP guideline. http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/Scientific_guideline/2014/02/WC500162135.pdf. Accessed 29 Jan 2015.
- 3.U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Developing antimicrobial drugs — General considerations for clinical trials (Draft Guidance). http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/ucm064980.htm. Accessed 20 Jan 2015.
- 4.Craig WA. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic parameters: rationale for antibacterial dosing of mice and men. Clin Infect Dis: Off Publ Infect Dis Soc Am. 1998;26:1–10.Google Scholar
- 6.Lodise TP, Lomaestro BM, Drusano GL, P. Society of Infectious Diseases. Application of antimicrobial pharmacodynamic concepts into clinical practice: focus on beta-lactam antibiotics: insights from the Society of Infectious Diseases Pharmacists. Pharmacotherapy. 2006;26:1320–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 10.Mohamed AF, Cars O, Friberg LE. A pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic model developed for the effect of colistin on Pseudomonas aeruginosa in vitro with evaluation of population pharmacokinetic variability on simulated bacterial killing. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2014;69:1350–1361.Google Scholar
- 11.Mohamed AF, Karaiskos I, Plachouras D, Karvanen M, Pontikis K, Jansson B, et al. Application of a loading dose of colistin methanesulfonate in critically ill patients: population pharmacokinetics, protein binding, and prediction of bacterial kill. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2012;56:4241–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 15.Mohamed AF, Kristoffersson AN, Karvanen M, Cars O, Nielsen EI, Friberg LE. Interaction of colistin and meropenem on a wild-type and a resistant strain of pseudomonas aeruginosa in-vitro as quantified in a mechanism-based model. J Antimicrob Chemother (in press).Google Scholar
- 17.Roberts JA, Paul SK, Akova M, Bassetti M, De Waele JJ, Dimopoulos G, et al. DALI: defining antibiotic levels in intensive care unit patients: are current beta-lactam antibiotic doses sufficient for critically ill patients? Clin Infect Dis: Off Publ Infect Dis Soc Am. 2014;58:1072–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 18.Huttner A, Harbarth S, Hope WW, Lipman J, Roberts JA. Therapeutic drug monitoring of the β-lactam antibiotics: what is the evidence and which patients should we be using it for? J J Antimicrob Chemother. 2015;70:3178–3183Google Scholar
- 23.Sugihara K, Sugihara C, Matsushita Y, Yamamura N, Uemori M, Tokumitsu A, et al. In vivo pharmacodynamic activity of tomopenem (formerly CS-023) against Pseudomonas aeruginosa and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in a murine thigh infection model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2010;54:5298–302.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 27.Kitamura Y, Yoshida K, Kusama M, Sugiyama Y. A proposal of a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) index map for selecting an optimal PK/PD index from conventional indices (AUC/MIC, Cmax/MIC, and TAM) for antibiotics. Drug Metab Pharmacokinet. 2014;29:455–462.Google Scholar
- 29.EUCAST. Meropenem - Rationale for the EUCAST clinical breakpoints. www.eucast.org. Accessed 29 Jan 2015.
- 32.Craig W, Ebert S. Killing and regrowth of bacteria in vitro: a review. Scand J Infect Dis Suppl. 1989;74:63–70.Google Scholar