AIMS: To define the pharmacokinetic profile of efavirenz (EFV) in HIV-1 infected patients, when administered alone or with nelfinavir (NFV). METHODS: Eleven HIV-positive patients, in steady-state treatment with EFV and 11 patients in steady-state treatment with EFV+NFV, were evaluated. Blood samples for pharmacokinetic analysis were obtained during a dosage interval. Plasma concentrations of EFV were determined by h.p.l.c. RESULTS: No significant difference was found between the principal pharmacokinetic parameters of EFV when administered alone or in combination with NFV (mean AUC: 57.1-7727.3 vs 60.9+/-12.3 microg ml-1 h; mean CL/F: 0.18+/-0.072 vs 0.16+/-0.04 l h-1 kg-1; mean Cmax: 4.0+/-1.7 vs 4.3+/-1.2 microg ml-1, and mean tmax: 4.1+/-1.7 vs 3.5+/-0.5 h) Mean trough plasma concentrations (C0) of EFV were 1.64+/-0.93 microg ml-1, with and without NFV. A good correlation was found between C0 and AUC(0,24h) (r=0.96; P<0. 01). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the common metabolic pathway, there was no significant influence of NFV on the pharmacokinetics of EFV. EFV exhibits a relatively low interindividual variability and a dosing regimen of 600 mg day-1 assures plasma concentrations that are adequate for inhibition of viral replication.
AIMS: To define the pharmacokinetic profile of efavirenz (EFV) in HIV-1 infectedpatients, when administered alone or with nelfinavir (NFV). METHODS: Eleven HIV-positive patients, in steady-state treatment with EFV and 11 patients in steady-state treatment with EFV+NFV, were evaluated. Blood samples for pharmacokinetic analysis were obtained during a dosage interval. Plasma concentrations of EFV were determined by h.p.l.c. RESULTS: No significant difference was found between the principal pharmacokinetic parameters of EFV when administered alone or in combination with NFV (mean AUC: 57.1-7727.3 vs 60.9+/-12.3 microg ml-1 h; mean CL/F: 0.18+/-0.072 vs 0.16+/-0.04 l h-1 kg-1; mean Cmax: 4.0+/-1.7 vs 4.3+/-1.2 microg ml-1, and mean tmax: 4.1+/-1.7 vs 3.5+/-0.5 h) Mean trough plasma concentrations (C0) of EFV were 1.64+/-0.93 microg ml-1, with and without NFV. A good correlation was found between C0 and AUC(0,24h) (r=0.96; P<0. 01). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the common metabolic pathway, there was no significant influence of NFV on the pharmacokinetics of EFV. EFV exhibits a relatively low interindividual variability and a dosing regimen of 600 mg day-1 assures plasma concentrations that are adequate for inhibition of viral replication.
Authors: P Villani; M Pregnolato; S Banfo; M Rettani; D Burroni; E Seminari; R Maserati; M B Regazzi Journal: Ther Drug Monit Date: 1999-06 Impact factor: 3.681
Authors: S D Young; S F Britcher; L O Tran; L S Payne; W C Lumma; T A Lyle; J R Huff; P S Anderson; D B Olsen; S S Carroll Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 1995-12 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Patrick F Smith; Gregory K Robbins; Robert W Shafer; Hulin Wu; Song Yu; Martin S Hirsch; Thomas C Merigan; Jeong-Gun Park; Alan Forrest; Margaret A Fischl; Gene D Morse Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2005-08 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Natella Y Rakhmanina; John N van den Anker; Steven J Soldin; Ron H van Schaik; Nick Mordwinkin; Michael N Neely Journal: Ther Drug Monit Date: 2010-06 Impact factor: 3.681
Authors: P Villani; P Viale; L Signorini; B Cadeo; F Marchetti; A Villani; C Fiocchi; M B Regazzi; G Carosi Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2001-07 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Marc Pfister; Line Labbé; Scott M Hammer; John Mellors; Kara K Bennett; Susan Rosenkranz; Lewis B Sheiner Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 5.191