Shenkoya Babajide, Atoyebi Shakir, Eniayewu Ibrahim, Akinloye Abdulafeez, Olagunju Adeniyi
Department of Pharmaceutical Chemistry, Obafemi Awolowo University, Ile-Ife, Nigeria.
Department of Pharmacology and Therapeutics, Institute of Systems, Molecular and Integrative Biology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom.
Front Pediatr. 2021 Sep 20;9:734122. doi: 10.3389/fped.2021.734122. eCollection 2021.
Pregnancy-induced changes in plasma pharmacokinetics of many antiretrovirals (ARV) are well-established. Current knowledge about the extent of ARV exposure in lymphoid tissues of pregnant women and within the fetal compartment is limited due to their inaccessibility. Subtherapeutic ARV concentrations in HIV reservoirs like lymphoid tissues during pregnancy may constitute a barrier to adequate virological suppression and increase the risk of mother-to-child transmission (MTCT). The present study describes the pharmacokinetics of three ARVs (efavirenz, dolutegravir, and rilpivirine) in lymphoid tissues and fetal plasma during pregnancy using materno-fetal physiologically-based pharmacokinetic models (m-f-PBPK). Lymphatic and fetal compartments were integrated into our previously validated adult PBPK model. Physiological and drug disposition processes were described using ordinary differential equations. For each drug, virtual pregnant women ( = 50 per simulation) received the standard dose during the third trimester. Essential pharmacokinetic parameters, including Cmax, Cmin, and AUC (0-24), were computed from the concentration-time data at steady state for lymph and fetal plasma. Models were qualified by comparison of predictions with published clinical data, the acceptance threshold being an absolute average fold-error (AAFE) within 2.0. AAFE for all model predictions was within 1.08-1.99 for all three drugs. Maternal lymph concentration 24 h after dose exceeded the reported minimum effective concentration (MEC) for efavirenz (11,514 vs. 800 ng/ml) and rilpivirine (118.8 vs. 50 ng/ml), but was substantially lower for dolutegravir (16.96 vs. 300 ng/ml). In addition, predicted maternal lymph-to-plasma AUC ratios vary considerably (6.431-efavirenz, 0.016-dolutegravir, 1.717-rilpivirine). Furthermore, fetal plasma-to-maternal plasma AUC ratios were 0.59 for efavirenz, 0.78 for dolutegravir, and 0.57 for rilpivirine. Compared with rilpivirine (0 h), longer dose forgiveness was observed for dolutegravir in fetal plasma (42 h), and for efavirenz in maternal lymph (12 h). The predicted low lymphoid tissue penetration of dolutegravir appears to be significantly offset by its extended dose forgiveness and adequate fetal compartment exposure. Hence, it is unlikely to be a predictor of maternal virological failure or MTCT risks. Predictions from our m-f-PBPK models align with recommendations of no dose adjustment despite moderate changes in exposure during pregnancy for these drugs. This is an important new application of PBPK modeling to evaluate the adequacy of drug exposure in otherwise inaccessible compartments.
许多抗逆转录病毒药物(ARV)在孕期血浆中的药代动力学变化已得到充分证实。由于难以获取孕妇淋巴组织和胎儿体内的样本,目前关于ARV在孕妇淋巴组织和胎儿体内暴露程度的了解有限。孕期淋巴组织等HIV储存库中ARV浓度低于治疗水平可能会阻碍病毒学的充分抑制,并增加母婴传播(MTCT)的风险。本研究使用母婴生理药代动力学模型(m-f-PBPK)描述了孕期三种ARV(依非韦伦、多替拉韦和利匹韦林)在淋巴组织和胎儿血浆中的药代动力学。将淋巴和胎儿部分整合到我们之前验证过的成人PBPK模型中。使用常微分方程描述生理和药物处置过程。对于每种药物,虚拟孕妇(每次模拟50名)在妊娠晚期接受标准剂量。从淋巴和胎儿血浆稳态下的浓度-时间数据计算出包括Cmax、Cmin和AUC(0-24)在内的基本药代动力学参数。通过将预测结果与已发表的临床数据进行比较来验证模型,接受阈值为绝对平均倍数误差(AAFE)在2.0以内。三种药物所有模型预测的AAFE在1.08-1.99之间。给药后24小时母体淋巴浓度超过了报道的依非韦伦(11,514对800 ng/ml)和利匹韦林(118.8对50 ng/ml)的最低有效浓度(MEC),但多替拉韦的浓度则低得多(16.96对300 ng/ml)。此外,预测的母体淋巴与血浆AUC比值差异很大(依非韦伦为6.431、多替拉韦为0.016、利匹韦林为1.717)。此外,依非韦伦的胎儿血浆与母体血浆AUC比值为0.59,多替拉韦为0.78,利匹韦林为0.57。与利匹韦林(0小时)相比,多替拉韦在胎儿血浆中的剂量宽恕时间更长(42小时),依非韦伦在母体淋巴中的剂量宽恕时间更长(12小时)。多替拉韦预测的低淋巴组织穿透力似乎被其延长的剂量宽恕时间和胎儿体内充足的暴露所显著抵消。因此,它不太可能成为母体病毒学失败或MTCT风险的预测指标。我们的m-f-PBPK模型的预测结果与这些药物孕期暴露虽有适度变化但无需调整剂量的建议一致。这是PBPK模型在评估难以获取样本的部位药物暴露充足性方面的一项重要新应用。