N M Smith1, J R Lenhard2, K R Boissonneault1, C B Landersdorfer3, J B Bulitta4, P N Holden1, A Forrest5, R L Nation3, J Li6, B T Tsuji7. 1. Laboratory for Antimicrobial Pharmacodynamics, University at Buffalo, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Buffalo, NY, USA; New York State Center of Excellence in Life Sciences and Bioinformatics, Buffalo, NY, USA. 2. California Northstate University, College of Pharmacy, Elk Grove, CA, USA. 3. Drug Delivery, Disposition and Dynamics, Monash Institute of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Monash University, Parkville, Victoria, Australia. 4. Center for Pharmacometrics and Systems Pharmacology, College of Pharmacy, University of Florida, Orlando, FL, USA. 5. School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina Eshelman School of Pharmacy, Chapel Hill, NC, USA. 6. Monash Biomedicine Discovery Institute, Infection & Immunity Program and Department of Microbiology, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, Australia. 7. Laboratory for Antimicrobial Pharmacodynamics, University at Buffalo, School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, Buffalo, NY, USA; New York State Center of Excellence in Life Sciences and Bioinformatics, Buffalo, NY, USA. Electronic address: btsuji@buffalo.edu.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Increased rates of carbapenem-resistant strains of Acinetobacter baumannii have forced clinicians to rely upon last-line agents, such as the polymyxins, or empirical, unoptimized combination therapy. Therefore, the objectives of this study were: (a) to evaluate the in vitro pharmacodynamics of meropenem and polymyxin B (PMB) combinations against A. baumannii; (b) to utilize a mechanism-based mathematical model to quantify bacterial killing; and (c) to develop a genetic algorithm (GA) to define optimal dosing strategies for meropenem and PMB. METHODS: A. baumannii (N16870; MICmeropenem = 16 mg/L, MICPMB = 0.5 mg/L) was studied in the hollow-fibre infection model (initial inoculum 108 cfu/mL) over 14 days against meropenem and PMB combinations. A mechanism-based model of the data and population pharmacokinetics of each drug were used to develop a GA to define the optimal regimen parameters. RESULTS: Monotherapies resulted in regrowth to ~1010 cfu/mL by 24 h, while combination regimens employing high-intensity PMB exposure achieved complete bacterial eradication (0 cfu/mL) by 336 h. The mechanism-based model demonstrated an SC50 (PMB concentration for 50% of maximum synergy on meropenem killing) of 0.0927 mg/L for PMB-susceptible subpopulations versus 3.40 mg/L for PMB-resistant subpopulations. The GA had a preference for meropenem regimens that improved the %T > MIC via longer infusion times and shorter dosing intervals. The GA predicted that treating 90% of simulated subjects harbouring a 108 cfu/mL starting inoculum to a point of 100 cfu/mL would require a regimen of meropenem 19.6 g/day 2 h prolonged infusion (2 hPI) q5h + PMB 5.17 mg/kg/day 2 hPI q6h (where the 0 h meropenem and PMB doses should be 'loaded' with 80.5% and 42.2% of the daily dose, respectively). CONCLUSION: This study provides a methodology leveraging in vitro experimental data, a mathematical pharmacodynamic model, and population pharmacokinetics provide a possible avenue to optimize treatment regimens beyond the use of the 'traditional' indices of antibiotic action.
OBJECTIVES: Increased rates of carbapenem-resistant strains of Acinetobacter baumannii have forced clinicians to rely upon last-line agents, such as the polymyxins, or empirical, unoptimized combination therapy. Therefore, the objectives of this study were: (a) to evaluate the in vitro pharmacodynamics of meropenem and polymyxin B (PMB) combinations against A. baumannii; (b) to utilize a mechanism-based mathematical model to quantify bacterial killing; and (c) to develop a genetic algorithm (GA) to define optimal dosing strategies for meropenem and PMB. METHODS: A. baumannii (N16870; MICmeropenem = 16 mg/L, MICPMB = 0.5 mg/L) was studied in the hollow-fibre infection model (initial inoculum 108 cfu/mL) over 14 days against meropenem and PMB combinations. A mechanism-based model of the data and population pharmacokinetics of each drug were used to develop a GA to define the optimal regimen parameters. RESULTS: Monotherapies resulted in regrowth to ~1010 cfu/mL by 24 h, while combination regimens employing high-intensity PMB exposure achieved complete bacterial eradication (0 cfu/mL) by 336 h. The mechanism-based model demonstrated an SC50 (PMB concentration for 50% of maximum synergy on meropenem killing) of 0.0927 mg/L for PMB-susceptible subpopulations versus 3.40 mg/L for PMB-resistant subpopulations. The GA had a preference for meropenem regimens that improved the %T > MIC via longer infusion times and shorter dosing intervals. The GA predicted that treating 90% of simulated subjects harbouring a 108 cfu/mL starting inoculum to a point of 100 cfu/mL would require a regimen of meropenem 19.6 g/day 2 h prolonged infusion (2 hPI) q5h + PMB 5.17 mg/kg/day 2 hPI q6h (where the 0 h meropenem and PMB doses should be 'loaded' with 80.5% and 42.2% of the daily dose, respectively). CONCLUSION: This study provides a methodology leveraging in vitro experimental data, a mathematical pharmacodynamic model, and population pharmacokinetics provide a possible avenue to optimize treatment regimens beyond the use of the 'traditional' indices of antibiotic action.
Authors: Justin R Lenhard; Nicholas M Smith; Zackery P Bulman; Xun Tao; Visanu Thamlikitkul; Beom S Shin; Roger L Nation; Jian Li; Jürgen B Bulitta; Brian T Tsuji Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2017-02-23 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Neang S Ly; Jürgen B Bulitta; Gauri G Rao; Cornelia B Landersdorfer; Patricia N Holden; Alan Forrest; Phillip J Bergen; Roger L Nation; Jian Li; Brian T Tsuji Journal: J Antimicrob Chemother Date: 2015-02-23 Impact factor: 5.790
Authors: Anne Fournier; Philippe Eggimann; Jean-Luc Pagani; Jean-Pierre Revelly; Laurent A Decosterd; Oscar Marchetti; André Pannatier; Pierre Voirol; Yok-Ai Que Journal: Burns Date: 2015-02-10 Impact factor: 2.744
Authors: Cornelia B Landersdorfer; Rajbharan Yadav; Jürgen B Bulitta; Kate E Rogers; Tae Hwan Kim; Beom Soo Shin; John D Boyce; Roger L Nation Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2018-03-27 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Brian T Tsuji; Jason M Pogue; Alexandre P Zavascki; Mical Paul; George L Daikos; Alan Forrest; Daniele R Giacobbe; Claudio Viscoli; Helen Giamarellou; Ilias Karaiskos; Donald Kaye; Johan W Mouton; Vincent H Tam; Visanu Thamlikitkul; Richard G Wunderink; Jian Li; Roger L Nation; Keith S Kaye Journal: Pharmacotherapy Date: 2019-01 Impact factor: 6.251
Authors: Nicholas M Smith; Katie Rose Boissonneault; Liang Chen; Vidmantas Petraitis; Ruta Petraitiene; Xun Tao; Jieqiang Zhou; Yinzhi Lang; Povilas Kavaliauskas; Zackery P Bulman; Patricia N Holden; Raymond Cha; Jürgen B Bulitta; Barry N Kreiswirth; Thomas J Walsh; Brian T Tsuji Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2022-08-04 Impact factor: 5.938
Authors: Hajira Bilal; Jessica R Tait; Yinzhi Lang; Jieqiang Zhou; Phillip J Bergen; Anton Y Peleg; Jürgen B Bulitta; Antonio Oliver; Roger L Nation; Cornelia B Landersdorfer Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2022-01-18 Impact factor: 5.938