1 / 23

Anti-Infective Perspective

Anti-Infective Perspective. Anti-Viral Advisory Committee Meeting July 25th, 2000 Alexander Rakowsky, M.D. Medical Team Leader/DAIDP/ODE4/CDER. Proper Perspective. Focus can be on: new drug development versus changes in dosing/formulation/combinations with approved drugs

nicola
Télécharger la présentation

Anti-Infective Perspective

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Anti-Infective Perspective • Anti-Viral Advisory Committee Meeting • July 25th, 2000 • Alexander Rakowsky, M.D. Medical Team Leader/DAIDP/ODE4/CDER

  2. Proper Perspective • Focus can be on: new drug development versus changes in dosing/formulation/combinations with approved drugs • Focus can be on: systemic agents versus topical agents • Looking at approved, systemic agents in this presentation

  3. Documents/Guidances • 1992 Anti-Infectives Points to Consider and also the IDSA/FDA guidances • Recent re-writes of guidance for various indications • Clinical Effectiveness Document • Again, focus here is on approved drugs with changes in dosing/formulation/combinations which lead to a NON-bioequivalent state

  4. Outline of this Talk • “Don’t kill the messenger” • Brief primer on PK/PD parameters used in antibacterials (HFD-520 and HFD-590) • Discussion of how these parameters have or could be used • Example

  5. CONCENTRATION-DEPENDENT AUC:MIC Peak Conc:MIC Fluoroquinolones, aminoglycosides TIME-DEPENDENT Time>MIC Beta-lactams, vancomycin Basic Divide

  6. MIC????? • “Mean inhibitory concentration” • MBC is similar concept • Based on standardized in vitro work using specified conditions, growth media, concentrations, nutrient additives for fastidious organisms, etc. • Reproducibility

  7. MIC?cont • Difficulty is in interpretation of MIC (S/I/R) • Based on achievable drug levels (ADME parameters) • Clinical data is of importance • Defined after discussions by committee (NCCLS) or review (FDA) • Even then, occasional disagreement

  8. Time-Dependent • Major parameter is Time>MIC • Based on animal studies (e.g., Craig’s work with AOM) • “Confirmed” by clinical trials

  9. Time-Dependentcont • “Time >” dependent on ADME parameters: • Cmax achieved • distribution of drug (e.g. serum versus tissue, protein binding, etc.) • half-life of drug (metabolism, excretion)

  10. Time-Dependentcont • MIC: • pathogen dependent • resistant strains • inoculum effect, effect of pH on activity, etc.

  11. Time-Dependentcont • Animal and human studies: • T>MIC in 40-60% range is PREDICTIVE of clinical success • 100% correlation? NO • Varies also among members of the same class • Other variables which need to be accounted for but not as well defined: Post-antimicrobial effect

  12. Concentration Dependent • Major parameters are Peak:MIC and AUC:MIC ratios • Animal studies conducted • Human studies done with more recent FQs (Drusano’s work)

  13. Concentration Dependentcont • Still dependent on ADME parameters • absorption • distribution • local levels/penetration • local effects (e.g., pH) • Clinical studies predictive, but again, not 100% correlations.

  14. Conclusions so far • Variables are based on ADME ranges • Work has shown good predictiveness but not 1:1 correlation • Variability in the MICs • Most work done on beta-lactams and FQs

  15. So What is the Role of PK/PD? • Several recent meetings to discuss: • DAIDP Advisory Committee: 7/98 and 10/98 • July 1998: FDA/Industry meeting • March 1999: FDA/ISAP Workshop • ISAP: The International Society of Anti-Infective Pharmacology

  16. Other Difficulties Raised • Emphasis has been on effectiveness,not safety • Most work done with single drug/bug • Acute models used (chronic use/chronic illness not well studied) • Moving targets (resistance development), esp. with chronic use, use over time

  17. Is All Lost? • Overall, positive impressions • PK/PD for certain antimicrobial drug classes is well worked out • Models used (both animal and human) are improving greatly • Can be seen, in the proper context, as strong supportive evidence

  18. Coming Full Circle • Augmentin 7:1 NDAs (submitted in 1994/1995) • Adults: 500 mg tid to 875 mg bid of amoxicillin and 250 mg tid to 500 mg bid • Pediatrics: 40/mg/kg/day divided tid to 45 mg/kg/day divided bid of amoxicillin • In all formulations, clavulanic acid amount remained the same. Led to 1/3rd less daily clavulanate

  19. Augmentin (cont) • In all settings, AUC and half-life comparable between new and old dosing regimens • Cmax higher by 50-80% in bid dosing regimens • T>MIC lower in bid regimens • on average, bid regimens with 10 hours (out of 24) • on average, tid regimens with 11 hours (out of 24) • concerns also with 1/3rd lower beta-lactamase inhibitor activity

  20. Augmentincont • Post-antibiotic and post-beta-lactamase inhibitor effects were studied and proposed • Animal studies showed comparable efficacy rates for the bid and tid dosing regimens • Due to concerns with lower T>MIC and clavulanic acid, clinical studies were asked for

  21. Augmentincont • One study per indication was conducted (historically, two would have been required) • NDAs were approved based on: • in vitro microbiology and animal work • PK/PD data from humans • one adequate, well-controlled study per indication • agreement to study as q12 not bid

  22. Augmentincont • Ultimately these NDAs were approved with approximately 50% less subjects enrolled then historically required • See this as a good example of where/how PK/PD parameters can be used

  23. Conclusions • Certain parameters/drug classes well worked out • Still issues with variability (with ADME parameters, MICs, local effects, etc.) • Multiple meetings held where, at this time, PK/PD is seen as strong supportive evidence but that for reasons listed, should not be used in lieu of clinical evidence

More Related