| Literature DB >> 32194415 |
Chang-He Niu1, Hua Xu1, Liu-Liu Gao1, Ying-Ming Nie2, Li-Peng Xing1, Li-Peng Yu1, San-Lan Wu3, Yang Wang1.
Abstract
Caspofungin is the first echinocandin antifungal agent that licented for pediatric use in invasive candidiasis and aspergillosis. In this study, we evaluated the population pharmacokinetics of caspofungin and investigate appropriate dosing optimization against Candida spp. in children with allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) in order to improve therapeutic efficacy. All participants received a recommended caspofungin 70 mg/m2 loading dose followed by 50 mg/m2 maintenance dose. A one-compartment model with first-order elimination was best fitted the data from 48 pediatric patients. Body surface area and aspartate aminotransferase had significant influence on caspofungin clearance from covariate analysis. Our results reviewed that dose adjustment is not necessary in patients with mild liver dysfunction. Monte Carlo simulations were performed using pharmacokinetic data from our study to evaluate the probability of target attainment (PTA) of caspofungin regimen in terms of AUC24/MIC targets against Candida spp. The results of simulations predicted that a caspofungin 70 mg/m2 at first dose, 50 mg/m2 of daily dose may have a high probability of successful outcome against C. albicans and C. glabrata whilst 60 mg/m2 maintenance dose was required for fungistatic target against C. parapsilosis but may be not sufficient to achieve optimal fungicidal activity. Caspofungin standard regimen had high probability of successful outcome against C. albicans (MIC ⩽ 0.25 mg/L) and C. glabrata (MIC ⩽ 0.5 mg/L) but insufficient for C. parapsilosis with MIC > 0.25 mg/L. That may provide an evidence based support to caspofungin individualized administration and decrease the risk of therapeutic failure in allo-HSCT pediatric patients.Entities:
Keywords: allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation; caspofungin; children; dosing; pharmacokinetics
Year: 2020 PMID: 32194415 PMCID: PMC7061854 DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2020.00184
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Pharmacol ISSN: 1663-9812 Impact factor: 5.810
Baseline characteristics of 48 children.
| Number | Mean(SD) | Median(Range) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Patients | 48 | ||
| Gender | 31M:17F | ||
| Samples | 139 | ||
| Samples per patient | 2.9 (0.6) | ||
| Sampling time after the last dose (h) | 17.5 (2.2) | 18 (7.5–21) | |
| Age (years) | 6.58 (3.7) | 6.2 (0.61–14) | |
| Weight (kg) | 21.7 (10.3) | 20 (7.5–54) | |
| Height (cm) | 112.9 (23.6) | 113 (69–160) | |
| Body surface area (BSA) m2 | 0.8 (0.27) | 0.8 (0.4–1.5) | |
| BUN (mmol/L) | 5.18 (4.11) | 4.3 (1.6–23.2) | |
| SCR (μmol/L) | 0.45 (0.3) | 0.3 (0.2–4.4) | |
| UA (μmol/L) | 206.2 (113.4) | 187 (142.3–770) | |
| Cys-C (mg/L) | 1.2 (0.6) | 1.02 (1.0–13.2) | |
| eGFR (ml/min·1.73 m2) | 125.6 (45.7) | 126.2 (126–263.3) | |
| TBIL (μmol/L) | 15.4 (10.9) | 12.9 (9.3–157.8) | |
| AL T (U/L) | 57.9 (184.6) | 14 (14–5147) | |
| AST (U/L) | 82.5 (262.5) | 26 (25–11123) | |
| gama-GT (U/L) | 25.8 (30.3) | 15 (11–202) |
Gender: M for male, F for female; Range: minimum value-maximum value; WT, current body weight; BSA, body surface area; BUN, blood urea nitrogen; SCR, serum creatinine concentration; UA, uria acid; Cyc-C, serum cystatin C; eGFR, estimated glomerular filtration rate; TBIL, total bilirubin; ALT, alanine aminotransferase; AST, aspartate aminotransferase; gama-GT, gama-glutamyltranspeptidase.
Figure 1Caspofungin concentrations versus time.
Figure 2Correlation analysis of covariates.
Hypothesis test results of clinical characteristics factors affecting on caspofungin pharmacokinetic parameters.
| Hypothesis test | OFV | △OFV | P-value | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Basic model | 603.1 | |||
| Dose BSA affect CL? | 563.5 | −41.3 | <0.01 | YES |
| Dose weight affect CL? | 591.8 | −39.6 | <0.01 | YES |
| Dose CR affect CL? | 600.8 | −11.3 | <0.01 | YES |
| Dose eGFR affect CL? | 602.7 | −2.3 | >0.05 | NO |
| Dose ALB affect CL? | 602.6 | −0.4 | >0.05 | NO |
| Dose TBIL affect CL? | 602.9 | −0.5 | >0.05 | NO |
| Dose DBIL affect CL? | 601.8 | −0.2 | >0.05 | NO |
| Dose ALT affect CL? | 578.6 | −1.3 | >0.05 | NO |
| Dose AST affect CL? | 599.9 | −24.5 | <0.01 | YES |
| Dose gama-GT affect CL? | −453.5 | −3.2 | >0.05 | NO |
Population pharmacokinetic parameters of caspofungin and bootstrap results.
| Parameter | Final model | Bootstrap analysis | Bias | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estimate | SE(%) | 2.5th | Median | 97.5th | (%) | |
| θVd (L) | 1.36 | 15.58 | 0.75 | 1.34 | 1.87 | −1.47 |
| θCL (L·h−1) | 0.14 | 8.50 | 0.10 | 0.14 | 0.17 | 0 |
| θ1 | 0.89 | 11.36 | 0.62 | 0.91 | 1.20 | 2.25 |
| θ2 | −0.23 | 39.13 | −0.49 | −0.25 | −0.01 | −8.70 |
| Inter-individual variability | ||||||
| ωVd(%) | 32.9 | 14.5 | 23.5 | 32.9 | 42.3 | 0 |
| ωCL(%) | 33.3 | 21.3 | 19.5 | 35.1 | 50.8 | 5.4 |
| Residual variability | ||||||
| σ (%) | 26.6 | 8.0 | 24.0 | 26.8 | 33.3 | 0.6 |
PopPK: population pharmacokinetic; SE(%), percent standard error; θVd,typical value of apparent clearance; θCL, typical value of apparent volume of distribution; θ1, exponent for BSA as covariate for Vd; θ2, exponent for lnAST as covariate for CL; ωVd. square root of inter-individual variance for Vd;ωCL, square root of inter-individual variance for CL; σ, residual variability Bias(%)= (Median Estimate Bootstrap – Estimate Final model)/Estimate Final model× 100%.
Figure 3The relationship between caspofungin clearance (CL) versus body surface area (BSA) (A) and lnAST (B). The shaded area represents 95% intervals for the locally weighted acatterplot smoothing (LOWESS) fit.
Figure 4Model evaluation for caspofungin. (A) Observed concentrations (DV) versus individual prediction (IPRED); (B) DV versus population prediction (PRED); (C) Conditional weighted residuals (CWRES) versus PRED; (D) CWRES versus time.
Figure 5Normalized prediction distribution errors (NPDE) of the final population pharmacokinetic model. (A) Q-Q plot of NPDE versus the expected theoretical distribution; (B) Histogram of NPDE with the density of the standard normal distribution overlaid; (C) Scatterplot of NPDE versus time; (D) Scatterplot of NPDE versus population prediction (PRED).
Figure 6Validation of the model by the visual predictive check. The observed caspofungin concentrations are shown as orange circles. Red solid and dashed lines present the median, 2.5th percentile, and 97.5th percentile of the observed concentrations, and black solid and dashed lines represent the median, 2.5th percentile, and 97.5th percentile of the simulated concentrations.
The area under the concentration-time curve (AUC)/minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) target probability of target attainment (PTA) values(%) against Candida albicans, Candida glabrata, and Candida parapsilosis for caspofungin in pediatric patients.
| Regimen | AUC/MIC target PTA(%) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fungistatic target | Fungicidal target | Fungistatic target | Fungicidal target | Fungistatic target | Fungicidal target | |
| Infants 50 mg/m2 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 35.68 | 0 |
| Infants 70 mg/m2 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 0 |
| Children | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 43.75 | 0 |
| Children | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 97.48 | 0.29 |
| Adolescents | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 53.73 | 0.05 |
| Adolescents | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 94.75 | 3.31 |
| Infants 40 mg/m2 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 9.99 | 0 |
| Infants 50 mg/m2 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 65.21 | 0 |
| Infants 60 mg/m2 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 97.03 | 0.01 |
| Children 40 mg/m2 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 21.50 | 0 |
| Children 50 mg/m2 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 62.57 | 0.05 |
| Children 60 mg/m2 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 90.01 | 0.65 |
| Adolescents 40 mg/m2 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 33.34 | 0.20 |
| Adolescents 50 mg/m2 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 65.63 | 1.40 |
| Adolescents 60 mg/m2 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 | 90.98 | 5.30 |
Figure 7(A–F) Probability of target attainment of AUC24/MIC for various loading doses and maintenance doses of caspofungin in patients with C. albicans, C. glabrata, and C. parapsilosis.