A population analysis of weight-related differences in lopinavir pharmacokinetics and possible consequences for protease inhibitor-naive and -experienced patients

Background Lopinavir is a potent protease inhibitor (PI) used for the treatment of HIV infection. Different lopinavir target trough concentrations (Ctroughs) were previously determined according to patient treatment histories: 1 mg/l for PI-naive patients, and 4 and 5.7 mg/l for PI-experienced patients. However, the probability to achieve these target Ctroughs with the current 400 mg twice-daily or 800 mg once-daily doses of the new tablet form, and the influence of body weight on this probability are unknown. Methods A population pharmacokinetic model for lopinavir was developed using data from 424 HIV type-1-infected patients, and the final model was used to estimate the probability to achieve target Ctroughs via Monte Carlo simulations. Results A one-compartment model adequately described the data. Mean population estimates (percentage inter-individual variability) were 4.61 l/h (36%) for apparent clearance (CL/F) and 63.2 l (70%) for apparent distribution volume. Body weight was found to explain the interindividual variability of lopinavir CL/F. Probability to achieve the 1 mg/l target Ctrough was >96% for the twice-daily dose and comprised between 80% and 90% for the once-daily dose. The probability to achieve the 4 and 5.7 mg/l target Ctroughs with the twice-daily dose significantly decreased when body weight increased (from 76% to 61% and from 56% to 37% respectively, for body weights increasing from 50 to 90 kg). Conclusions These results support lopinavir therapeutic drug monitoring and the use of higher lopinavir doses for PI-pretreated patients.

[1]  J. Binongo,et al.  Lopinavir/Ritonavir Pharmacokinetic Profile: Impact of Sex and Other Covariates Following a Change From Twice‐Daily to Once‐Daily Therapy , 2007, Journal of clinical pharmacology.

[2]  S. Brun,et al.  The Tablet Formulation of Lopinavir/Ritonavir Provides Similar Bioavailability to the Soft-Gelatin Capsule Formulation With Less Pharmacokinetic Variability and Diminished Food Effect , 2007, Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes.

[3]  D. Burger,et al.  A Retrospective TDM Database Analysis of Interpatient Variability in the Pharmacokinetics of Lopinavir in HIV-infected Adults , 2006, Therapeutic drug monitoring.

[4]  J. Galama,et al.  The genotypic inhibitory quotient and the (cumulative) number of mutations predict the response to lopinavir therapy , 2006, AIDS.

[5]  P. Jolliet,et al.  No Significant Influence of Saquinavir Hard-Gel Capsule Administration on Pharmacokinetics of Lopinavir in Combination With Ritonavir: A Population Approach , 2005, Therapeutic drug monitoring.

[6]  J. Ananworanich,et al.  Pharmacokinetics and 24-Week Efficacy/Safety of Dual Boosted Saquinavir/Lopinavir/Ritonavir in Nucleoside-Pretreated Children , 2005, The Pediatric infectious disease journal.

[7]  J. Beijnen,et al.  Population pharmacokinetics of lopinavir in combination with ritonavir in HIV-1-infected patients. , 2005, British journal of clinical pharmacology.

[8]  P. Jolliet,et al.  Pharmacokinetic evidence for the induction of lopinavir metabolism by efavirenz. , 2005, British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology.

[9]  G. Garber,et al.  Absence of circadian variation in the pharmacokinetics of lopinavir/ritonavir given as a once daily dosing regimen in HIV-1-infected patients. , 2005, British journal of clinical pharmacology.

[10]  P. Jolliet,et al.  A population approach to study the influence of nevirapine administration on lopinavir pharmacokinetics in HIV-1 infected patients , 2005, European Journal of Clinical Pharmacology.

[11]  B. Clotet,et al.  Steady-State Pharmacokinetics of a Double-Boosting Regimen of Saquinavir Soft Gel plus Lopinavir plus Minidose Ritonavir in Human Immunodeficiency Virus-Infected Adults , 2004, Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.

[12]  V. Soriano,et al.  Prediction of virological response to lopinavir/ritonavir using the genotypic inhibitory quotient. , 2004, AIDS research and human retroviruses.

[13]  D. Breilh,et al.  Virological, intracellular and plasma pharmacological parameters predicting response to lopinavir/ritonavir (KALEPHAR Study) , 2004, AIDS.

[14]  F. Clavel,et al.  Interactions Between Amprenavir and the Lopinavir‐ritonavir Combination in Heavily Pretreated Patients Infected with Human Immunodeficiency Virus , 2004, Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics.

[15]  J. Bartlett,et al.  Dual HIV-1 infection associated with rapid disease progression , 2004 .

[16]  V. Soriano,et al.  Correlation between lopinavir plasma levels and lipid abnormalities in patients taking lopinavir/ritonavir. , 2003, AIDS patient care and STDs.

[17]  F. Gutiérrez,et al.  Lopinavir Plasma Concentrations and Changes in Lipid Levels During Salvage Therapy with Lopinavir/Ritonavir‐Containing Regimens , 2003, Journal of acquired immune deficiency syndromes.

[18]  G. di Perri,et al.  Clinical use of lopinavir/ritonavir in a salvage therapy setting: pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. , 2002, AIDS.

[19]  Ann Daly,et al.  Sequence diversity in CYP3A promoters and characterization of the genetic basis of polymorphic CYP3A5 expression , 2001, Nature Genetics.