Pharmacokinetic-Pharmacodynamic Comparison of Amphotericin B (AMB) and Two Lipid-Associated AMB Preparations, Liposomal AMB and AMB Lipid Complex, in Murine Candidiasis Models

ABSTRACT It is generally accepted that the lipid formulations of amphotericin B (AMB) are not as potent as conventional AMB on a milligram-per-kilogram basis. We used a neutropenic murine disseminated candidiasis model to compare the in vivo potencies of AMB, liposomal AMB (L-AMB), and AMB lipid complex (ABLC) pharmacodynamically. The pharmacokinetics of the antifungals were examined in serum and in three organs commonly seeded in disseminated candidiasis (kidneys, liver, and lung). Both single-dose time-kill studies and multiple-dosing-regimen studies were used with each of the compounds. Determinations of the numbers of CFU in the kidneys were performed following the administration of three escalating single doses of the polyenes at various times over 48 h. The areas under the time-kill curves (AUTKs) for each dose level of the drugs were compared by analysis of variance (ANOVA). In the multiple-dosing-regimen studies with five Candida isolates, AMB, L-AMB, and ABLC were administered daily for 72 h. The organism burdens in the mouse kidneys were similarly used as the treatment end point. Additional multiple regimen-dosing-studies were performed with a single Candida albicans isolate, and the microbiologic outcomes in four internal organs (kidneys, liver, spleen, and lung) were examined at the end of therapy (48 h). The relationship between the dose and the drug exposure expressed by the pharmacokinetics of the dosing regimens in serum and organ tissue were analyzed by using a maximum-effect model. ANOVA was used to compare the drug exposures necessary to achieve the 25% effective dose (ED25), ED50, ED75, and 1 log10 killing. Comparison of AUTKs suggested that AMB was 4.3- to 5.9-fold more potent than either ABLC or L-AMB. The time-kill curves for both lipid formulations were very similar. In the multiple-dosing-regimen studies, AMB was 5.0- to 8.0-fold more potent than each of the lipid formulations against five Candida isolates in the kidneys. Similar differences in potency (5.1- to 7.2-fold) were observed in the other end organs. The difference in pharmacokinetics in serum accounted for much of the difference in potency between AMB and ABLC (ratio of serum ABLC area under the curve of effective doses to serum AMB area under the curve of effective doses, 1.2). The differences in the kinetics in the various end organs between AMB and L-AMB were better at explaining the disparate potencies at these infection sites (ratio of organ L-AMB area under the curve of effective doses to organ AMB area under the curve of effective doses, 1.1).

[1]  J. Adler-Moore,et al.  Alternative dosing regimens of liposomal amphotericin B (AmBisome) effective in treating murine systemic candidiasis. , 2004, The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy.

[2]  D. Stevens,et al.  Comparative Efficacies of Four Amphotericin B Formulations—Fungizone, Amphotec (Amphocil), AmBisome, and Abelcet—against Systemic Murine Aspergillosis , 2004, Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.

[3]  S. Piscitelli,et al.  Comparative Drug Disposition, Urinary Pharmacokinetics, and Renal Effects of Multilamellar Liposomal Nystatin and Amphotericin B Deoxycholate in Rabbits , 2003, Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.

[4]  D. Andes In Vivo Pharmacodynamics of Antifungal Drugs in Treatment of Candidiasis , 2003, Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.

[5]  A. Glasmacher,et al.  Clinical pharmacology of antifungal compounds. , 2003, Infectious disease clinics of North America.

[6]  R. Sobel,et al.  Efficacy of Intravenous Liposomal Amphotericin B (AmBisome) against Coccidioidal Meningitis in Rabbits , 2002, Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.

[7]  W. Craig,et al.  Animal model pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics: a critical review. , 2002, International journal of antimicrobial agents.

[8]  T. Walsh,et al.  Pharmacokinetics, Excretion, and Mass Balance of Liposomal Amphotericin B (AmBisome) and Amphotericin B Deoxycholate in Humans , 2002, Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.

[9]  E. Anaissie,et al.  Safety, Tolerance, and Pharmacokinetics of High-Dose Liposomal Amphotericin B (AmBisome) in Patients Infected withAspergillus Species and Other Filamentous Fungi: Maximum Tolerated Dose Study , 2001, Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.

[10]  K. Wasan,et al.  Amphotericin B Lipid Complex or Amphotericin B Multiple-Dose Administration to Rabbits with Elevated Plasma Cholesterol Levels: Pharmacokinetics in Plasma and Blood, Plasma Lipoprotein Levels, Distribution in Tissues, and Renal Toxicities , 2001, Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.

[11]  D. Andes,et al.  Pharmacodynamics of Amphotericin B in a Neutropenic-Mouse Disseminated-Candidiasis Model , 2001, Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.

[12]  A. Jackson,et al.  Dose-Dependent Pharmacokinetics of Amphotericin B Lipid Complex in Rabbits , 2000, Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.

[13]  S. Piscitelli,et al.  Comparative efficacy and distribution of lipid formulations of amphotericin B in experimental Candida albicans infection of the central nervous system. , 2000, The Journal of infectious diseases.

[14]  W. Wilson,et al.  Safety, Tolerance, and Pharmacokinetics of a Small Unilamellar Liposomal Formulation of Amphotericin B (AmBisome) in Neutropenic Patients , 1998, Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.

[15]  B. Guglielmo,et al.  Lipid formulations of amphotericin B: clinical efficacy and toxicities. , 1998, Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

[16]  D. Stevens,et al.  Comparison of Fungizone, Amphotec, AmBisome, and Abelcet for Treatment of Systemic Murine Cryptococcosis , 1998, Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.

[17]  T. Walsh,et al.  Toxicological Profile and Pharmacokinetics of a Unilamellar Liposomal Vesicle Formulation of Amphotericin B in Rats , 1998, Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.

[18]  M. T. ten Kate,et al.  Biodistribution of liposomal amphotericin B (AmBisome) and amphotericin B-desoxycholate (Fungizone) in uninfected immunocompetent mice and leucopenic mice infected with Candida albicans. , 1995, The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy.

[19]  S. Pahls,et al.  Comparison of the activity of free and liposomal amphotericin B in vitro and in a model of systemic and localized murine candidiasis. , 1994, The Journal of infectious diseases.

[20]  D. Crommelin,et al.  Liposomal and Lipid Formulations of Amphotericin B , 1992, Clinical pharmacokinetics.

[21]  E. Bruck,et al.  National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards. , 1980, Pediatrics.

[22]  J. Bennett,et al.  A pharmacologic guide to the clinical use of amphotericin B. , 1969, The Journal of infectious diseases.

[23]  Clinical,et al.  Reference method for broth dilution antifungal susceptibility testing of yeasts : Approved standard , 2008 .

[24]  V. Lorian Antibiotics in laboratory medicine , 2005 .

[25]  Gert Storm,et al.  Long-circulating sterically stabilized liposomes in the treatment of infections. , 2005, Methods in enzymology.

[26]  D. Reeves Clinical Antimicrobial Assays , 1999 .

[27]  W. Craig,et al.  Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic Parameters: Rationale for Antibacterial Dosing of Mice and Men Tions Were Associated with Only a Slight Reduction in Bacterial , 2022 .

[28]  J. Adler-Moore,et al.  Pharmacology and toxicology of a liposomal formulation of amphotericin B (AmBisome) in rodents. , 1991, The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy.