Development and validation of an LC-MS/MS method for quantification of favipiravir in human plasma

Favipiravir (FVP) is a broad-spectrum antiviral that selectively inhibits viral RNA-dependent RNA polymerase, first trialled for the treatment of influenza infection. It has been shown to be effective against a number of RNA virus families including arenaviruses, flaviviruses and enteroviruses. Most recently, FVP has been investigated as a potential therapeutic for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 infection. A liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry method for the quantification of FVP in human plasma has been developed and validated for use in clinical trials investigating favipiravir as treatment for coronavirus disease-2019. Samples were extracted by protein precipitation using acetonitrile, using C, N- Favipiravir as internal standard. Elution was performed on a Synergi Polar-RP 150 × 2.1 mm 4 µm column using a gradient mobile phase programme consisting of 0.2% formic acid in water and 0.2% formic acid in methanol. The assay was validated over the range 500-50,000 ng/mL; this method was found to be precise and accurate and recovery of FVP from the matrix was high. Stability experiments confirmed and expanded on the known stability of FVP, including under heat treatment and for a period of 10 months at - 80 °C

A novel LC-MS/MS method for the determination of favipiravir ribofuranosyl-5'-triphosphate (T-705-RTP) in human peripheral mononuclear cells.

Favipiravir is a broad-spectrum antiviral that is metabolised intracellularly into the active form, favipiravir ribofuranosyl-5'-triphosphate (F-RTP). Measurement of the intracellular concentration of F-RTP in mononuclear cells is a crucial step to characterising the pharmacokinetics of F-RTP and to enable more appropriate dose selection for the treatment of COVID-19 and emerging infectious diseases. The described method was validated over the range 24 - 2280 pmol/sample. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) were isolated from whole blood and lysed using methanol-water (70:30, v/v) before cellular components were precipitated with acetonitrile and the supernatant further cleaned by weak anion exchange solid phase extraction. The method was found to be both precise and accurate and was successfully utilised to analyse F-RTP concentrations in patient samples collected as part of the AGILE CST-6 clinical trial

Distinguishing Type 1 from Type 2 Myocardial Infarction Using CT Coronary Angiography

PURPOSE: To determine whether quantitative plaque characterization by using CT coronary angiography (CTCA) can discriminate between type 1 and type 2 myocardial infarction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of two prospective studies (ClinicalTrials.gov registration nos. NCT03338504 [2014–2019] and NCT02284191 [2018–2020]) that performed blinded quantitative plaque analysis on findings from CTCA in participants with type 1 myocardial infarction, type 2 myocardial infarction, and chest pain without myocardial infarction. Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify predictors of type 1 myocardial infarction. RESULTS: Overall, 155 participants (mean age, 64 years ± 12 [SD]; 114 men) and 36 participants (mean age, 67 years ± 12; 19 men) had type 1 and type 2 myocardial infarction, respectively, and 136 participants (62 years ± 12; 78 men) had chest pain without myocardial infarction. Participants with type 1 myocardial infarction had greater total (median, 44% [IQR: 35%–50%] vs 35% [IQR: 29%–46%]), noncalcified (39% [IQR: 31%–46%] vs 34% [IQR: 29%–40%]), and low-attenuation (4.15% [IQR: 1.88%–5.79%] vs 1.64% [IQR: 0.89%–2.28%]) plaque burdens (P < .05 for all) than those with type 2. Participants with type 2 myocardial infarction had similar low-attenuation plaque burden to those with chest pain without myocardial infarction (P = .4). Low-attenuation plaque was an independent predictor of type 1 myocardial infarction (adjusted odds ratio, 3.44 [95% CI: 1.84, 6.96]; P < .001), with better discrimination than noncalcified plaque burden and maximal area of coronary stenosis (C statistic, 0.75 [95% CI: 0.67, 0.83] vs 0.62 [95% CI: 0.53, 0.71] and 0.61 [95% CI: 0.51, 0.70] respectively; P ≤ .001 for both). CONCLUSION: Higher low-attenuation coronary plaque burden in patients with type 1 myocardial infarction may help distinguish these patients from those with type 2 myocardial infarction. Keywords: Ischemia/Infarction, CT Angiography, Quantitative CT Clinical trial registration nos. NCT03338504 and NCT02284191 Supplemental material is available for this article. © RSNA, 202

Drug Interactions between Dolutegravir and Artemether-Lumefantrine or Artesunate-Amodiaquine

ABSTRACTAcross sub-Saharan Africa, patients with HIV on antiretrovirals often get malaria and need cotreatment with artemisinin-containing therapies. We undertook two pharmacokinetic studies in healthy volunteers, using standard adult doses of artmether-lumefantrine (AL) or artesunate-amodiaquine (AS-AQ) given with 50mg once daily dolutegravir (DTG) to investigate the drug-drug interaction between artmether-lumefantrine or artesunate-amodiaquine and DTG. The DTG/artmether-lumefantrine interaction was evaluated in a two-way cross-over study and measured artemether (ARM), dihydroartemisinin (DHA), lumefantrine (LF), desbutyl-lumefantrine (DBL) over 264h. The DTG/artesunate-amodiaquine interaction was investigated using a parallel study design due to long half-life of the amodiaquine metabolite, desethylamodiaquine (DEAQ) and measured artesunate (ARS), amodiaquine (AQ), DEAQ over 624h. Non-compartmental analysis was performed, and geometric mean ratios and 90% confidence intervals generated for evaluation of both interactions. Dolutegravir did not significantly change the maximum concentration in plasma, time to maximum concentration and area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) for ARM, DHA, LF and DBL nor significantly alter AUC for ARS, DHA, AQ and DEAQ. Co-administration of dolutegravir with AL resulted in a 37% decrease in DTG trough concentrations. Co-administration of dolutegravir with AS-AQ resulted in a decrease of approximately 42% and 24% in DTG trough concentrations and AUC respectively. Study drugs were well-tolerated with no serious adverse events. Standard doses of artmether-lumefantrine and artesunate-amodiaquine should be used in patients receiving DTG. The significant decreases in DTG trough concentrations with artemether-lumefantrine and artesunate-amodiaquine and DTG exposure with artesunate-amodiaquine are unlikely to be of clinical significance as DTG trough concentrations were above DTG target concentrations of 64ng/mL.</jats:p

72 weeks post-partum follow-up of dolutegravir versus efavirenz initiated in late pregnancy (DolPHIN-2): an open-label, randomised controlled study.

Late initiation of antiretrovirals in pregnancy is associated with increased risk of perinatal transmission and higher infant mortality. We report the final 72-week postpartum results for efficacy and safety of dolutegravir-based compared with efavirenz-based regimens in mothers and infants. DolPHIN-2 was a randomised, open-label trial. Pregnant women in South Africa and Uganda aged at least 18 years, with untreated but confirmed HIV infection and an estimated gestation of at least 28 weeks, initiating antiretroviral therapy in third trimester were eligible for inclusion. Eligible women were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either dolutegravir-based (50 mg dolutegravir, 300 mg tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, and either 200 mg emtricitabine in South Africa or 300 mg lamivudine in Uganda) or efavirenz-based (fixed dose combination 600 mg tenofovir disoproxil fumarate plus either emtricitabine in South Africa or lamivudine in Uganda) therapy. The primary efficacy outcome was the time to a viral load of less than 50 copies per mL measured at 6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 weeks postpartum with a Cox model adjusting for viral load and CD4 cell count. Safety endpoints were summarised by the number of women and infants with events. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03249181. Between Jan 23 and Aug 15, 2018, 280 women were screened for inclusion, of whom 268 (96%) women were randomly assigned: 133 (50%) to the efavirenz group and 135 (50%) to the dolutegravir group. 250 (93%; 125 [50%] in the efavirenz group and 125 [50%] in the dolutegravir group) women were included in the intention-to-treat analysis of efficacy. Median time to viral load of less than 50 copies per mL was 4·1 weeks (IQR 4·0-5·1) in the dolutegravir group compared with 12·1 weeks (10·7-13·3) in the efavirenz group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1·93 [95% CI 1·5-2·5]). At 72 weeks postpartum, 116 (93%) mothers in the dolutegravir group and 114 (91%) in the efavirenz group had a viral load of less than 50 copies per mL. Of 57 (21%) mothers with a severe adverse event, three (2%) in the dolutegravir group and five (4%) in the efavirenz group were related to the drug (dolutegravir drug-related events were one woman each with suicidal ideation, suicide attempt, herpes zoster meningitis; efavirenz drug-related events were one woman each with suicide attempt and liver cirrhosis, and three people with drug-induced liver injury). Of 136 (56%) infants in whom severe adverse events were recorded, none were related to the study drugs. In addition to the three infant HIV infections detected at birth in the dolutegravir group that have been previously reported, an additional transmission in the efavirenz group occurred during breastfeeding despite optimal maternal viral suppression and serial negative infant tests in the first year of life. Dolutegravir was safe and well tolerated, supporting updated WHO treatment recommendations in pregnant and breastfeeding women. Infant HIV transmissions can occur during breastfeeding despite persistently undetectable maternal viral load highlighting the need for continued infant testing

AGILE: a seamless phase I/IIa platform for the rapid evaluation of candidates for COVID-19 treatment: an update to the structured summary of a study protocol for a randomised platform trial letter.

Funder: UnitaidBACKGROUND: There is an urgent unmet clinical need for the identification of novel therapeutics for the treatment of COVID-19. A number of COVID-19 late phase trial platforms have been developed to investigate (often repurposed) drugs both in the UK and globally (e.g. RECOVERY led by the University of Oxford and SOLIDARITY led by WHO). There is a pressing need to investigate novel candidates within early phase trial platforms, from which promising candidates can feed into established later phase platforms. AGILE grew from a UK-wide collaboration to undertake early stage clinical evaluation of candidates for SARS-CoV-2 infection to accelerate national and global healthcare interventions. METHODS/DESIGN: AGILE is a seamless phase I/IIa platform study to establish the optimum dose, determine the activity and safety of each candidate and recommend whether it should be evaluated further. Each candidate is evaluated in its own trial, either as an open label single arm healthy volunteer study or in patients, randomising between candidate and control usually in a 2:1 allocation in favour of the candidate. Each dose is assessed sequentially for safety usually in cohorts of 6 patients. Once a phase II dose has been identified, efficacy is assessed by seamlessly expanding into a larger cohort. AGILE is completely flexible in that the core design in the master protocol can be adapted for each candidate based on prior knowledge of the candidate (i.e. population, primary endpoint and sample size can be amended). This information is detailed in each candidate specific trial protocol of the master protocol. DISCUSSION: Few approved treatments for COVID-19 are available such as dexamethasone, remdesivir and tocilizumab in hospitalised patients. The AGILE platform aims to rapidly identify new efficacious and safe treatments to help end the current global COVID-19 pandemic. We currently have three candidate specific trials within this platform study that are open to recruitment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT Number: 2020-001860-27 14 March 2020 ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04746183  19 February 2021 ISRCTN reference: 27106947

Modelling the intradermal delivery of microneedle array patches for long-acting antiretrovirals using PBPK

Introduction Existing HIV therapy using oral antiretrovirals (ARVs) can result in pill fatigue and sub-optimal adherence. Microneedle array patches (MAPs) offer non-invasive, blood-free and painless drug delivery, and may improve patient adherence. The objective of this study was to develop a novel physiologically-based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model to simulate the systemic pharmacokinetics of cabotegravir and rilpivirine MAPs using the intradermal route. Methods The developed PBPK models were qualified against observed pharmacokinetic data after intramuscular (IM) and intradermal administration of long-acting nanoformulated rilpivirine to rats, and for IM administration of both drugs to healthy adults. Qualified models were then utilised to estimate suitable MAP characteristics (e.g. nanoformulation dose and release rates) and inform dosing strategies to maintain plasma concentrations above target trough concentrations for the designated dosing interval. Results PBPK models simulated q4-weekly loading and maintenance doses of 360 mg and 180 mg for long-acting formulated cabotegravir between the release rates of 1 × 10−3–3 × 10−3h−1 and 1 × 10−3–1.5 × 10−3h−1 respectively, for a 70 kg adult. Estimated patch size was 60 cm2 for a 360 mg dose of cabotegravir. For q4-weekly dosing, rilpivirine required a 1080 mg loading dose and a 540 mg maintenance dose with release rates of 1.5 × 10−3–2.5 × 10−3h−1 and 5 × 10−4–1 × 10−3h−1, respectively. Weekly dosing was also evaluated to assess the potential application from a smaller patch size. The ability to self-administer via a patch that is only left in place for a short duration makes longer durations less important than for some other long-acting approaches. Weekly cabotegravir required 60 mg between release rates 7 × 10−3–9 × 10−3h−1 and rilpivirine required 270 mg and 180 mg respectively between release rates of 7 × 10−3–9 × 10−3h−1. Discussion This model estimated optimal dose and release rates for cabotegravir and rilpivirine MAPs. Our approach provides a computational platform to support rational development of intradermal administration strategies to tackle problems associated with chronic oral ARV administration