AIM: Lamivudine is used as first line therapy in HIV-infected children. Yet, like many other paediatric drugs, its dose rationale has been based on limited clinical data, without thorough understanding of the effects of growth on drug disposition. Here we use lamivudine to show how a comprehensive population pharmacokinetic model can account for the influence of demographic covariates on exposure (i.e. AUC and Cmax ). METHODS: Data from three paediatric trials were used to describe the pharmacokinetics across the overall population. Modelling was based on a non-linear mixed effects approach. A stepwise procedure was used for covariate model building. RESULTS: A one compartment model with first order elimination best described the pharmacokinetics of lamivudine in children. The effect of weight on clearance (CL) and volume of distribution (V) was characterized by an exponential function, with exponents of 0.705 and 0.635, respectively. For a child with median body weight (17.6 kg), CL and V were 16.5 (95% CI 15.2, 17.7) l h⁻¹ and 46.0 (95% CI 42.4, 49.5) l, respectively. There were no differences between formulations (tablet and solution). The predicted AUC(0,12 h) after twice daily doses of 4 mg kg⁻¹ ranged from 4.44 mg l⁻¹ h for children <14 kg to 7.25 mg l⁻¹ h for children >30 kg. CONCLUSIONS: The use of meta-analysis is critical to identify the correct covariate-parameter relationships, which must be assessed before a model is applied for predictive purposes (e.g. defining dosing recommendations for children). In contrast to prior modelling efforts, we show that the covariate distribution in the target population must be considered.
AIM: Lamivudine is used as first line therapy in HIV-infectedchildren. Yet, like many other paediatric drugs, its dose rationale has been based on limited clinical data, without thorough understanding of the effects of growth on drug disposition. Here we use lamivudine to show how a comprehensive population pharmacokinetic model can account for the influence of demographic covariates on exposure (i.e. AUC and Cmax ). METHODS: Data from three paediatric trials were used to describe the pharmacokinetics across the overall population. Modelling was based on a non-linear mixed effects approach. A stepwise procedure was used for covariate model building. RESULTS: A one compartment model with first order elimination best described the pharmacokinetics of lamivudine in children. The effect of weight on clearance (CL) and volume of distribution (V) was characterized by an exponential function, with exponents of 0.705 and 0.635, respectively. For a child with median body weight (17.6 kg), CL and V were 16.5 (95% CI 15.2, 17.7) l h⁻¹ and 46.0 (95% CI 42.4, 49.5) l, respectively. There were no differences between formulations (tablet and solution). The predicted AUC(0,12 h) after twice daily doses of 4 mg kg⁻¹ ranged from 4.44 mg l⁻¹ h for children <14 kg to 7.25 mg l⁻¹ h for children >30 kg. CONCLUSIONS: The use of meta-analysis is critical to identify the correct covariate-parameter relationships, which must be assessed before a model is applied for predictive purposes (e.g. defining dosing recommendations for children). In contrast to prior modelling efforts, we show that the covariate distribution in the target population must be considered.
Authors: Chao Zhang; Paolo Denti; Jan-Stefan van der Walt; Yuan Ren; Peter Smith; Mats O Karlsson; Helen McIlleron Journal: Ther Drug Monit Date: 2012-08 Impact factor: 3.681
Authors: Marion Bouillon-Pichault; Rima Nabbout; Stephanie Chhun; Elisabeth Rey; Catherine Chiron; Olivier Dulac; Gerard Pons; Vincent Jullien Journal: Epilepsy Res Date: 2011-01-21 Impact factor: 3.045
Authors: Victor Musiime; Lindsay Kendall; Sabrina Bakeera-Kitaka; Wendy B Snowden; Florence Odongo; Margaret Thomason; Philippa Musoke; Kimberly Adkison; David Burger; Peter Mugyenyi; Adeodata Kekitiinwa; Diana M Gibb; A Sarah Walker Journal: Antivir Ther Date: 2010
Authors: P Kasirye; L Kendall; K K Adkison; C Tumusiime; M Ssenyonga; S Bakeera-Kitaka; P Nahirya-Ntege; T Mhute; A Kekitiinwa; W Snowden; D M Burger; D M Gibb; A S Walker Journal: Clin Pharmacol Ther Date: 2011-12-21 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: Esther J H Janssen; Diane E T Bastiaans; Pyry A J Välitalo; Annemarie M C van Rossum; Evelyne Jacqz-Aigrain; Hermione Lyall; Catherijne A J Knibbe; David M Burger Journal: Br J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2017-02-14 Impact factor: 4.335
Authors: Daniel G Glaze; Jeffrey L Neul; Walter E Kaufmann; Elizabeth Berry-Kravis; Sean Condon; George Stoms; Sean Oosterholt; Oscar Della Pasqua; Larry Glass; Nancy E Jones; Alan K Percy Journal: Neurology Date: 2019-03-27 Impact factor: 9.910
Authors: Hylke Waalewijn; Anna Turkova; Natella Rakhmanina; Tim R Cressey; Martina Penazzato; Angela Colbers; David M Burger Journal: Ther Drug Monit Date: 2019-08 Impact factor: 3.681