INSERM U738, 75018 Paris, France.
Clin Pharmacokinet. 2010;49(1):17-45. doi: 10.2165/11318110-000000000-00000.
In patients infected by HIV, the efficacy of highly active antiretroviral (ARV) therapy through the blockade of different steps of the retrovirus life cycle is now well established. As HIV is a retrovirus that replicates within the cells of the immune system, intracellular drug concentrations are important to determine ARV drug efficacy and toxicity. Indeed, nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs), non-NRTIs (NNRTIs), newly available integrase inhibitors and protease inhibitors (PIs) act on intracellular targets. NRTIs are prodrugs that require intracellular anabolic phosphorylation to be converted into their active form of triphosphorylated NRTI metabolites, most of which have longer plasma half-lives than their parent compounds. The activity of intracellular kinases and the expression of uptake transporters, which may depend on cell functionality or their activation state, may greatly influence intracellular concentrations of triphosphorylated NRTI metabolites. In contrast, NNRTIs and PIs are not prodrugs, and they exert their activity by inhibiting enzyme targets directly. All PIs are substrates of cytochrome P450 3A, which explains why most of them display poor pharmacokinetic properties with intensive presystemic first-pass metabolism and short elimination half-lives. There is evidence that intracellular concentrations of PIs depend on P-glycoprotein and/or the activity of other efflux transporters, which is modulated by genetic polymorphism and coadministration of drugs with inhibiting or inducing properties. Adequate assay of the intracellular concentrations of ARVs is still a major technical challenge, together with the isolation and counting of peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs). Furthermore, intracellular drug could be bound to cell membranes or proteins; the amount of intracellular ARV available for ARV effectiveness is never measured, which is a limitation of all published studies. In this review, we summarize the findings of 31 studies that provided results of intracellular concentrations of ARVs in HIV-infected patients. Most studies also measured plasma concentrations, but few of them studied the relationship between plasma and intracellular concentrations. For NRTIs, most studies could not establish a significant relationship between plasma and triphosphate concentrations. Only eight published studies reported an analysis of the relationships between intracellular concentrations and the virological or immunological efficacy of ARVs in HIV patients. In prospective studies that were well designed and had a reasonable number of patients, virological efficacy was found to correlate significantly with intracellular concentrations of NRTIs but not with plasma concentrations. For PIs, the only prospectively designed trial of lopinavir found that virological efficacy was influenced by both trough plasma concentrations and intracellular concentrations. ARVs are known to cause important adverse effects through interference with cellular endogenous processes. The relationship between intracellular concentrations of ARVs and their related toxicity was investigated in only four studies. For zidovudine, the relative strength of the association between a decrease in haemoglobin levels and plasma zidovudine concentrations, as compared with intracellular zidovudine triphosphate concentrations, is still unknown. Similarly, for efavirenz and neuropsychological disorders, methodological differences confound the comparison between studies. In conclusion, intracellular concentrations of ARVs play a major role in their efficacy and toxicity, and are influenced by numerous factors. However, the number of published clinical studies in this area is limited; most studies have been small and not always adequately designed. In addition, standardization of assays and PBMC counts are warranted. Larger and prospectively designed clinical studies are needed to further investigate the links between intracellular concentrations of ARVs and clinical endpoints.
在感染 HIV 的患者中,通过阻断逆转录病毒生命周期的不同步骤来实现高效抗逆转录病毒 (ARV) 治疗的疗效已经得到充分证实。由于 HIV 是一种在免疫系统细胞内复制的逆转录病毒,细胞内药物浓度对于确定 ARV 药物的疗效和毒性非常重要。事实上,核苷逆转录酶抑制剂 (NRTIs)、非核苷逆转录酶抑制剂 (NNRTIs)、新型整合酶抑制剂和蛋白酶抑制剂 (PIs) 作用于细胞内靶点。NRTIs 是前体药物,需要细胞内的合成磷酸化才能转化为其三磷酸化 NRTI 代谢物的活性形式,其中大多数代谢物的血浆半衰期比其母体化合物长。细胞内激酶的活性和摄取转运体的表达可能取决于细胞功能或其激活状态,这可能会极大地影响三磷酸化 NRTI 代谢物的细胞内浓度。相比之下,NNRTIs 和 PIs 不是前体药物,它们通过直接抑制酶靶标发挥作用。所有 PIs 都是细胞色素 P450 3A 的底物,这解释了为什么它们中的大多数药物具有较差的药代动力学特性,具有强烈的首过代谢和短的消除半衰期。有证据表明,PIs 的细胞内浓度取决于 P-糖蛋白和/或其他外排转运体的活性,而 P-糖蛋白和/或其他外排转运体的活性受遗传多态性和具有抑制或诱导作用的药物的共同给药调节。充分测定 ARV 的细胞内浓度仍然是一个主要的技术挑战,同时还需要分离和计数外周血单核细胞 (PBMCs)。此外,细胞内药物可能与细胞膜或蛋白质结合;用于 ARV 有效性的细胞内 ARV 量从未被测量过,这是所有已发表研究的局限性。在这篇综述中,我们总结了 31 项研究的结果,这些研究提供了 HIV 感染患者中 ARV 细胞内浓度的结果。大多数研究还测量了血浆浓度,但很少有研究研究了血浆和细胞内浓度之间的关系。对于 NRTIs,大多数研究未能建立血浆和三磷酸浓度之间的显著关系。只有 8 项已发表的研究报告了分析 HIV 患者中细胞内浓度与 ARV 病毒学和免疫学疗效之间关系的结果。在设计良好且患者数量合理的前瞻性研究中,发现病毒学疗效与 NRTIs 的细胞内浓度显著相关,但与血浆浓度无关。对于 PIs,只有前瞻性设计的洛匹那韦试验发现病毒学疗效受血浆浓度和细胞内浓度的影响。众所周知,ARVs 通过干扰细胞内的内源性过程而导致重要的不良反应。只有四项研究调查了 ARVs 的细胞内浓度与其相关毒性之间的关系。对于齐多夫定,与细胞内齐多夫定三磷酸浓度相比,血红蛋白水平下降与血浆齐多夫定浓度之间的相关性的相对强度仍不清楚。同样,对于依非韦伦和神经认知障碍,方法学差异使研究之间的比较复杂化。总之,ARV 的细胞内浓度在其疗效和毒性中起着重要作用,并且受到许多因素的影响。然而,该领域发表的临床研究数量有限;大多数研究规模较小,并不总是设计合理。此外,需要对检测和 PBMC 计数进行标准化。需要更大规模和前瞻性设计的临床研究来进一步研究 ARV 细胞内浓度与临床终点之间的联系。