Population Pharmacokinetic Evaluation of Amikacin Liposome Inhalation Suspension in Patients with Treatment-Refractory Nontuberculous Mycobacterial Lung Disease

Christopher M Rubino, Nikolas J Onufrak, Jakko van Ingen, David E Griffith, Sujata M Bhavnani, Dayton W Yuen, Kevin C Mange, Kevin L Winthrop, Christopher M Rubino, Nikolas J Onufrak, Jakko van Ingen, David E Griffith, Sujata M Bhavnani, Dayton W Yuen, Kevin C Mange, Kevin L Winthrop

Abstract

Background and objectives: Use of parenteral amikacin to treat refractory nontuberculous mycobacterial (NTM) lung disease is limited by systemic toxicity. A population pharmacokinetic model was developed using data pooled from two randomized trials to evaluate the pharmacokinetic properties of once-daily amikacin liposome inhalation suspension (ALIS) in patients with treatment-refractory NTM lung disease.

Methods: In phase 2 (TR02-112) and phase 3 (CONVERT) studies, patients with sputum cultures positive for Mycobacterium avium complex (both studies) or M. abscessus (TR02-112) despite ≥ 6 months of guideline-based therapy were treated with once-daily ALIS 590 mg.

Results: Fifty-three patients (28 Japanese; 25 White) were assessed. At baseline and ≈ 6 months after daily dosing, median maximum concentration (Cmax) was < 2 mg/L and median area under the concentration-time curve (AUC0-24) was < 20 mg·h/L, suggesting low systemic exposure at both time points. Exposure estimates were similar between Japanese and White patients. The median unchanged amikacin fraction excreted in urine was < 10% of inhaled dose throughout the TR02-112 study, indicating that relatively small amounts reached systemic circulation. Median t1/2 was 5.5 h. Amikacin concentrations were much higher in sputum than in serum, demonstrating the ability to achieve higher drug concentration at the site of infection. Median sputum amikacin concentrations in the CONVERT study were high at 1-4 h postdose (range 242-426 μg/g) and decreased by 8 h (median 7 μg/g).

Conclusions: Systemic exposure to amikacin in serum and urine following once-daily ALIS administration in patients with treatment-refractory NTM lung disease was notably lower than that previously reported for parenteral amikacin.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01315236 (registered March 15, 2011) and NCT02344004 (registered January 22, 2015).

Conflict of interest statement

ICPD Inc received funding from Insmed Incorporated to conduct the analysis and provide general consulting to Insmed. DEG has received consulting fees and research grants from Insmed. JvI is a member of the Insmed Advisory Board. DWY and KCM are employed by Insmed. KLW has received consulting fees and research grants from Insmed.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
3-compartment pharmacokinetic model. Absorption (lungs), central, and urine compartments, zero-order drug administration to the lungs via nebulization occurred in the lungs, a first-order process carried the drug from the lungs to the central compartment, and the drug was removed from the body by linear elimination. C1, C2, C3 compartments 1, 2, 3; CLr renal clearance; CLt/F apparent clearance; ka absorption rate constant; Vc/F apparent volume of the central compartment
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Observed serum amikacin concentration versus time since last dose. Closed and open circles represent individual values for patients in CONVERT and TR02-112 studies, respectively. Amikacin concentrations that were BLQ are shown at LLOQ (i.e., 0.15 mg/L). One BLQ concentration in the TR02-112 study, observed at > 500 h after the previous dose, was excluded; it was retained in the population pharmacokinetic dataset but did not impact the model fit. BLQ below the limit of quantification; LLOQ lower limit of quantification
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Goodness-of-fit plots for the pooled population pharmacokinetic model (individual fitted values) versus observed data. Panels a and b show the observed versus individual fitted concentrations for serum and urine, respectively. Closed circles represent individual values for patients in CONVERT and open circles represent individual values for patients in TR02-112; the solid line indicates the line of best fit, while the dashed line represents the line of identity. Panels c and d show conditional weighted residuals versus population fitted concentrations for serum and urine, respectively; the dashed line represents a conditional weighted residual of zero. r2 coefficient of determination
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Sputum amikacin concentrations (CONVERT). Each circle represents individual patient data. The solid line represents a smoother through the data, assuming a 3-compartment pharmacokinetic model; the shaded region is the 90% prediction interval from a simulation assuming a % coefficient of variation of 95 for all parameters

References

    1. Larsson LO, Polverino E, Hoefsloot W, Codecasa LR, Diel R, Jenkins SG, et al. Pulmonary disease by non-tuberculous mycobacteria – clinical management, unmet needs and future perspectives. Expert Rev Respir Med. 2017;11(12):977–989.
    1. Adjemian J, Olivier KN, Seitz AE, Holland SM, Prevots DR. Prevalence of nontuberculous mycobacterial lung disease in U.S. Medicare beneficiaries. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2012;185(8):881–886. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201111-2016OC.
    1. Prevots DR, Marras TK. Epidemiology of human pulmonary infection with nontuberculous mycobacteria: a review. Clin Chest Med. 2015;36(1):13–34. doi: 10.1016/j.ccm.2014.10.002.
    1. Daley CL, Iaccarino JM, Lange C, Cambau E, Wallace RJ, Andrejak C, et al. Treatment of nontuberculous mycobacterial pulmonary disease: an official ATS/ERS/ESCMID/IDSA clinical practice guideline: executive summary. Clin Infect Dis. 2020;71:905–913. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciaa1125.
    1. Malinin V, Neville M, Eagle G, Gupta R, Perkins WR. Pulmonary deposition and elimination of liposomal amikacin for inhalation and effect on macrophage function after administration in rats. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2016;60(11):6540–6549. doi: 10.1128/AAC.00700-16.
    1. Zhang J, Leifer F, Rose S, Chun DY, Thaisz J, Herr T, et al. Amikacin liposome inhalation suspension (ALIS) penetrates non-tuberculous mycobacterial biofilms and enhances amikacin uptake into macrophages. Front Microbiol. 2018;9:915. doi: 10.3389/fmicb.2018.00915.
    1. Griffith DE, Eagle G, Thomson R, Aksamit TR, Hasegawa N, Morimoto K, et al. Amikacin liposome inhalation suspension for treatment-refractory lung disease caused by Mycobacterium avium complex (CONVERT). a prospective, open-label, randomized study. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2018;198(12):1559–1569. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201807-1318OC.
    1. Olivier KN, Griffith DE, Eagle G, McGinnis JP, 2nd, Micioni L, Liu K, et al. Randomized trial of liposomal amikacin for inhalation in nontuberculous mycobacterial lung disease. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2017;195(6):814–823. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201604-0700OC.
    1. Amikacin sulfate injection . USP (For intramuscular or intravenous use) [package insert] Schaumburg: Sagent Pharmaceuticals; 2018.
    1. van Ingen J, Egelund EF, Levin A, Totten SE, Boeree MJ, Mouton JW, et al. The pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of pulmonary Mycobacterium avium complex disease treatment. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2012;186(6):559–565. doi: 10.1164/rccm.201204-0682OC.
    1. ARIKAYCE® [package insert]. Bridgewater, NJ: Insmed Incorporated; 2018
    1. Okusanya OO, Bhavnani SM, Hammel J, Minic P, Dupont LJ, Forrest A, et al. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic evaluation of liposomal amikacin for inhalation in cystic fibrosis patients with chronic pseudomonal infection. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2009;53(9):3847–3854. doi: 10.1128/AAC.00872-08.
    1. Okusanya OO, Bhavnani SM, Hammel JP, Forrest A, Bulik CC, Ambrose PG, et al. Evaluation of the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of liposomal amikacin for inhalation in cystic fibrosis patients with chronic pseudomonal infections using data from two phase 2 clinical studies. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2014;58(9):5005–5015. doi: 10.1128/AAC.02421-13.
    1. Begg EJ, Barclay ML, Kirkpatrick CM. The therapeutic monitoring of antimicrobial agents. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2001;52(Suppl 1):35S–43S.
    1. Fernandez E, Perez R, Hernandez A, Tejada P, Arteta M, Ramos JT. Factors and mechanisms for pharmacokinetic differences between pediatric population and adults. Pharmaceutics. 2011;3(1):53–72. doi: 10.3390/pharmaceutics3010053.
    1. Hasunuma T, Tohkin M, Kaniwa N, Jang IJ, Yimin C, Kaneko M, et al. Absence of ethnic differences in the pharmacokinetics of moxifloxacin, simvastatin, and meloxicam among three East Asian populations and Caucasians. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2016;81(6):1078–1090. doi: 10.1111/bcp.12884.
    1. Yasuda SU, Zhang L, Huang SM. The role of ethnicity in variability in response to drugs: focus on clinical pharmacology studies. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2008;84(3):417–423. doi: 10.1038/clpt.2008.141.
    1. Griffith DE, Aksamit T, Brown-Elliott BA, Catanzaro A, Daley C, Gordin F, et al. An official ATS/IDSA statement: diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of nontuberculous mycobacterial diseases. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2007;175(4):367–416. doi: 10.1164/rccm.200604-571ST.
    1. Beal SL. Ways to fit a PK model with some data below the quantification limit. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn. 2001;28(5):481–504. doi: 10.1023/A:1012299115260.
    1. Bauer RJ. S-ADAPT Software. Biomedical Simulations Resource. University of Southern California. [cited 2020 January 15]; Available from:
    1. D'Argenio DZ, Schumitzky A. A program package for simulation and parameter estimation in pharmacokinetic systems. Comput Programs Biomed. 1979;9(2):115–134. doi: 10.1016/0010-468X(79)90025-4.
    1. Olivier KN, Maas-Moreno R, Whatley M, Cheng K, Lee JH, Fiorentino C, et al. Airway deposition and retention of liposomal amikacin for inhalation in patients with pulmonary nontuberculous mycobacterial disease. San Francisco: Am J Respir Crit Care Med. American Thoracic Society; 2016.
    1. Byl B, Baran D, Jacobs F, Herschuelz A, Thys JP. Serum pharmacokinetics and sputum penetration of amikacin 30 mg/kg once daily and of ceftazidime 200 mg/kg/day as a continuous infusion in cystic fibrosis patients. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2001;48(2):325–327. doi: 10.1093/jac/48.2.325.
    1. Garraffo R, Drugeon HB, Dellamonica P, Bernard E, Lapalus P. Determination of optimal dosage regimen for amikacin in healthy volunteers by study of pharmacokinetics and bactericidal activity. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1990;34(4):614–621. doi: 10.1128/AAC.34.4.614.
    1. Modongo C, Pasipanodya JG, Zetola NM, Williams SM, Sirugo G, Gumbo T. Amikacin concentrations predictive of ototoxicity in multidrug-resistant tuberculosis patients. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2015;59(10):6337–6343. doi: 10.1128/AAC.01050-15.
    1. Peloquin CA. Mycobacterium avium complex infection. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic considerations that may improve clinical outcomes. Clin Pharmacokinet. 1997;32(2):132–144. doi: 10.2165/00003088-199732020-00004.
    1. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute . Performance standards for susceptibility testing of mycobacteria, Nocardia spp., and other aerobic actinomycetes. CLSI Guideline M62. 1. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2018.
    1. Ferro BE, Srivastava S, Deshpande D, Sherman CM, Pasipanodya JG, van Soolingen D, et al. Amikacin pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics in a novel hollow-fiber Mycobacterium abscessus disease model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2015;60(3):1242–1248. doi: 10.1128/AAC.02282-15.
    1. Kelly C, Jefferies C, Cryan SA. Targeted liposomal drug delivery to monocytes and macrophages. J Drug Deliv. 2011;2011:727241. doi: 10.1155/2011/727241.
    1. Lanvers-Kaminsky C, Ciarimboli G. Pharmacogenetics of drug-induced ototoxicity caused by aminoglycosides and cisplatin. Pharmacogenomics. 2017;18(18):1683–1695. doi: 10.2217/pgs-2017-0125.
    1. Rybak MJ, Abate BJ, Kang SL, Ruffing MJ, Lerner SA, Drusano GL. Prospective evaluation of the effect of an aminoglycoside dosing regimen on rates of observed nephrotoxicity and ototoxicity. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1999;43(7):1549–1555. doi: 10.1128/AAC.43.7.1549.
    1. DiStefano JJ., 3rd Noncompartmental vs. compartmental analysis: some bases for choice. Am J Physiol. 1982;243(1):R1–6. doi: 10.1152/ajpcell.1982.243.1.C1.
    1. Sou T, Kukavica-Ibrulj I, Soukarieh F, Halliday N, Levesque RC, Williams P, et al. Model-based drug development in pulmonary delivery: pharmacokinetic analysis of novel drug candidates for treatment of Pseudomonas aeruginosa lung infection. J Pharm Sci. 2019;108(1):630–640. doi: 10.1016/j.xphs.2018.09.017.

Source: PubMed

3
Tilaa