MATERIALS AND METHODS: A randomized, 2-treatment, 2-period, 2-sequence, single dose, crossover with a washout period of 2 weeks, was conducted in 24 healthy Thai male volunteers. Blood samples were collected at 0, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.25, 1.5, 1.75, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 24, 36, 48, 72 and 96 h following drug administration. Plasma concentrations of risperidone and 9-hydroxyrisperidone were determined using a validated LC-MS-MS method. The pharmacokinetic parameters of risperidone and 9-hydroxyrisperidone were determined using a non-compartmental model.
RESULTS: The geometric means ratios (%) and 90% confidence interval (CI) of the test and reference products for the log-transformed pharmacokinetic parameters, Cmax, AUC0-t and AUC0-inf of risperidone were 104.49 % (92.79% - 117.66%), 100.96 % (92.15% - 110.61 %) and 97.99 % (90.72% - 105.85%). The 90% CI of geometric means ratios of the test and reference products for the log-transformed pharmacokinetic parameters, Cmax, AUC0-t and AUC0-inf of 9-hydroxyrisperidone were 97.00%, 96.97% and 97.49%.
CONCLUSIONS: The 90% CI for the geometric means ratios (test/reference) of the log-trasformed Cmax, AUC0-t and AUC0-inf of risperidone and its major active metabolite were within the bioequivalence acceptance criteria of 80% - 125% of the US-FDA.
METHODS: Gentamicin, amikacin and vancomycin are thought to be predominantly excreted by the kidneys. A mixed-effects joint model of the pharmacokinetics of these drugs was developed, with a wide dispersion of weight, age and serum creatinine. A dataset created from 18 sources resulted in 27,338 drug concentrations from 9,901 patients. Body size and composition, maturation and renal function were used to describe differences in drug clearance and volume of distribution.
RESULTS: This study demonstrates that GFR is a predictor of two distinct components of renal elimination clearance: (1) GFR clearance associated with normal GFR and (2) non-GFR clearance not associated with normal GFR. All three drugs had GFR clearance estimated as a drug-specific percentage of normal GFR (gentamicin 39%, amikacin 90% and vancomycin 57%). The total clearance (sum of GFR and non-GFR clearance), standardized to 70 kg total body mass, 176 cm, male, renal function 1, was 5.58 L/h (95% confidence interval [CI] 5.50-5.69) (gentamicin), 7.77 L/h (95% CI 7.26-8.19) (amikacin) and 4.70 L/h (95% CI 4.61-4.80) (vancomycin).
CONCLUSIONS: GFR provides a physiological basis for renal drug elimination. It has been used to distinguish two elimination components. This physiological approach has been applied to describe clearance and volume of distribution from premature neonates to elderly adults with a wide dispersion of size, body composition and renal function. Dose individualization has been implemented using target concentration intervention.
METHODS: A retrospective audit of heart transplant recipients (n = 87) treated with tacrolimus was performed. Relevant data were collected from the time of transplant to discharge. The concordance of tacrolimus dosing and monitoring according to hospital guidelines was assessed. The observed and software-predicted tacrolimus concentrations (n = 931) were compared for the first 3 weeks of oral immediate-release tacrolimus (Prograf) therapy, and the predictive performance (bias and imprecision) of the software was evaluated.
RESULTS: The majority (96%) of initial oral tacrolimus doses were guideline concordant. Most initial intravenous doses (93%) were lower than the guideline recommendations. Overall, 36% of initial tacrolimus doses were administered to transplant recipients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate of <60 mL/min/1.73 m despite recommendations to delay the commencement of therapy. Of the tacrolimus concentrations collected during oral therapy (n = 1498), 25% were trough concentrations obtained at steady-state. The software displayed acceptable predictions of tacrolimus concentration from day 12 (bias: -6%; 95%confidence interval, -11.8 to 2.5; imprecision: 16%; 95% confidence interval, 8.7-24.3) of therapy.
CONCLUSIONS: Tacrolimus dosing and monitoring were discordant with the guidelines. The Bayesian forecasting software was suitable for guiding tacrolimus dosing after 11 days of therapy in heart transplant recipients. Understanding the factors contributing to the variability in tacrolimus pharmacokinetics immediately after transplant may help improve software predictions.
METHODS: C0 were retrieved from a large neonatal vancomycin dataset. Individual estimates of AUC0-24 were obtained from Bayesian post hoc estimation. Various ML algorithms were used for model building to C0 and AUC0-24. An external dataset was used for predictive performance evaluation.
RESULTS: Before starting treatment, C0 can be predicted a priori using the Catboost-based C0-ML model combined with dosing regimen and nine covariates. External validation results showed a 42.5% improvement in prediction accuracy by using the ML model compared with the population pharmacokinetic model. The virtual trial showed that using the ML optimized dose; 80.3% of the virtual neonates achieved the pharmacodynamic target (C0 in the range of 10-20 mg/L), much higher than the international standard dose (37.7-61.5%). Once therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) measurements (C0) in patients have been obtained, AUC0-24 can be further predicted using the Catboost-based AUC-ML model combined with C0 and nine covariates. External validation results showed that the AUC-ML model can achieve an prediction accuracy of 80.3%.
CONCLUSION: C0-based and AUC0-24-based ML models were developed accurately and precisely. These can be used for individual dose recommendations of vancomycin in neonates before treatment and dose revision after the first TDM result is obtained, respectively.