Advanced Drug Delivery Group, Faculty of Pharmacy, The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Department of Industrial and Physical Pharmacy, College of Pharmacy, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, USA.
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2017 Oct 24;61(11). doi: 10.1128/AAC.00973-17. Print 2017 Nov.
Colistin has been administered via nebulization for the treatment of respiratory tract infections. Recently, dry powder inhalation (DPI) has attracted increasing attention. The current study aimed to investigate the pharmacokinetics (PK) of colistin in epithelial lining fluid (ELF) and plasma following DPI and intravenous (i.v.) administration in healthy Sprague-Dawley rats. Rats were given colistin as DPI intratracheally (0.66 and 1.32 mg base/kg of body weight) or i.v. injection (0.66 mg base/kg). Histopathological examination of lung tissue was performed at 24 h. Colistin concentrations in both ELF and plasma were quantified, and a population PK model was developed and compared to a previously published PK model of nebulized colistin in rats. A two-compartment structural model was developed to describe the PK of colistin in both ELF and plasma following pulmonary or i.v. administration. The model-estimated clearance from the central plasma compartment was 0.271 liter/h/kg (standard error [SE] = 2.51%). The transfer of colistin from the ELF compartment to the plasma compartment was best described by a first-order rate constant (clearance of colistin from the ELF compartment to the plasma compartment = 4.03 × 10 liter/h/kg, SE = 15%). DPI appeared to have a higher rate of absorption (time to the maximum concentration in plasma after administration of colistin by DPI, ≤10 min) than nebulization (time to the maximum concentration in plasma after administration of colistin by nebulization, 20 to 30 min), but the systemic bioavailabilities by the two routes of administration were similar (∼46.5%, SE = 8.43%). Histopathological examination revealed no significant differences in inflammation in lung tissues between the two treatments. Our findings suggest that colistin DPI is a promising alternative to nebulization considering the similar PK and safety profiles of the two forms of administration. The PK and histopathological information obtained is critical for the development of optimal aerosolized colistin regimens with activity against lung infections caused by Gram-negative bacteria.
多黏菌素已被雾化用于治疗呼吸道感染。最近,干粉吸入(DPI)越来越受到关注。本研究旨在研究健康 Sprague-Dawley 大鼠经 DPI 和静脉(i.v.)给药后,多黏菌素在肺上皮衬液(ELF)和血浆中的药代动力学(PK)。大鼠经 DPI 气管内给药(0.66 和 1.32 mg 碱基/kg 体重)或 i.v. 注射(0.66 mg 碱基/kg)给予多黏菌素。24 小时时进行肺组织的组织病理学检查。定量检测 ELF 和血浆中的多黏菌素浓度,并建立群体 PK 模型,并与之前发表的大鼠雾化多黏菌素 PK 模型进行比较。建立了一个两室结构模型来描述肺内或 i.v. 给药后多黏菌素在 ELF 和血浆中的 PK。模型估计中央血浆隔室的清除率为 0.271 升/小时/千克(标准误差 [SE] = 2.51%)。多黏菌素从 ELF 隔室向血浆隔室的转移最好用一级速率常数来描述(多黏菌素从 ELF 隔室向血浆隔室的清除率=4.03×10 升/小时/千克,SE=15%)。与雾化相比,DPI 似乎具有更高的吸收速度(经 DPI 给药后多黏菌素在血浆中的最大浓度时间,≤10 分钟),但两种给药途径的系统生物利用度相似(约 46.5%,SE=8.43%)。组织病理学检查显示,两种治疗方法在肺组织中的炎症无明显差异。我们的研究结果表明,考虑到两种给药方式的 PK 和安全性相似,多黏菌素 DPI 是雾化的一种有前途的替代方法。获得的 PK 和组织病理学信息对于开发针对革兰氏阴性菌引起的肺部感染的最佳雾化多黏菌素方案至关重要。