Penetration of anti-infective agents into pulmonary epithelial lining fluid: focus on antibacterial agents.

University of Illinois at Chicago, USA.
Clinical Pharmacokinetics (Impact Factor: 5.49). 10/2011; 50(10):637-64. DOI: 10.2165/11594090-000000000-00000
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The exposure-response relationship of anti-infective agents at the site of infection is currently being re-examined. Epithelial lining fluid (ELF) has been suggested as the site (compartment) of antimicrobial activity against lung infections caused by extracellular pathogens. There have been an extensive number of studies conducted during the past 20 years to determine drug penetration into ELF and to compare plasma and ELF concentrations of anti-infective agents. The majority of these studies estimated ELF drug concentrations by the method of urea dilution and involved either healthy adult subjects or patients undergoing diagnostic bronchoscopy. Antibacterial agents such as macrolides, ketolides, newer fluoroquinolones and oxazolidinones have ELF to plasma concentration ratios of >1. In comparison, β-lactams, aminoglycosides and glycopeptides have ELF to plasma concentration ratios of ≤1. Potential explanations (e.g. drug transporters, overestimation of the ELF volume, lysis of cells) for why these differences in ELF penetration occur among antibacterial classes need further investigation. The relationship between ELF concentrations and clinical outcomes has been under-studied. In vitro pharmacodynamic models, using simulated ELF and plasma concentrations, have been used to examine the eradication rates of resistant and susceptible pathogens and to explain why selected anti-infective agents (e.g. those with ELF to plasma concentration ratios of >1) are less likely to be associated with clinical treatment failures. Population pharmacokinetic modelling and Monte Carlo simulations have recently been used and permit ELF and plasma concentrations to be evaluated with regard to achievement of target attainment rates. These mathematical modelling techniques have also allowed further examination of drug doses and differences in the time courses of ELF and plasma concentrations as potential explanations for clinical and microbiological effects seen in clinical trials. Further studies are warranted in patients with lower respiratory tract infections to confirm and explore the relationships between ELF concentrations, clinical and microbiological outcomes, and pharmacodynamic parameters.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) have significantly impaired pulmonary diffusion, which may affect the pulmonary concentration of many drugs, including antibiotics. In this study, we compared the difference in pulmonary levofloxacin (LVFX) concentration between patients with normal lung function and IPF. The IPF group included 10 patients with a proven diagnosis of IPF and a diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide ranging from 40% to 70% of predicted values. The control group included 10 patients with normal pulmonary function. Blood and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) were taken at 3-3.5 hours after fasting. LVFX (500 mg) was administered orally. LVFX concentrations in the serum and BALF were determined using HPLC-MS/MC. The level of LVFX in alveolar epithelial lining fluid (ELF) was calculated using the following formula: LVFX ELF = LVFX BALF × (Urea serum/Urea BALF). No significant differences in age, body weight, height, and calculated creatinine clearance and BALF retrieval rate were observed between groups. LVFX serum concentrations in the IPF and control groups were (5.97±1.28) μg/ml and (6.84±3.43) μg/ml, respectively (P = 0.4727). ELF concentration of LVFX in the control group was (27.81±21.36) μg/ml, while the concentration in the IPF group was (10.17±2.46) μg/ml, less than half of that in the controls (P = 0.0058). The intrapulmonary concentration of LVFX in IPF patients was lower than those with normal lung function. Notably, however, the ELF LVFX concentration following 500 mg once-daily exceeded the MIC90 of common respiratory pathogens. Excellent antibacterial efficacy of LVFX can be expected for IPF patients in the treatment of respiratory tract infections.
    Pulmonary Pharmacology &amp Therapeutics 11/2013; · 2.54 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Infections in critically ill patients are associated with persistently poor clinical outcomes. These patients have severely altered and variable antibiotic pharmacokinetics and are infected by less susceptible pathogens. Antibiotic dosing that does not account for these features is likely to result in suboptimum outcomes. In this Review, we explore the challenges related to patients and pathogens that contribute to inadequate antibiotic dosing and discuss how to implement a process for individualised antibiotic therapy that increases the accuracy of dosing and optimises care for critically ill patients. To improve antibiotic dosing, any physiological changes in patients that could alter antibiotic concentrations should first be established; such changes include altered fluid status, changes in serum albumin concentrations and renal and hepatic function, and microvascular failure. Second, antibiotic susceptibility of pathogens should be confirmed with microbiological techniques. Data for bacterial susceptibility could then be combined with measured data for antibiotic concentrations (when available) in clinical dosing software, which uses pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic derived models from critically ill patients to predict accurately the dosing needs for individual patients. Individualisation of dosing could optimise antibiotic exposure and maximise effectiveness.
    The Lancet Infectious Diseases 04/2014; · 19.97 Impact Factor
  • Clinical Infectious Diseases 01/2014; · 9.37 Impact Factor