ArticlePDF Available

Comparison of three galenic forms of lamivudine in young West African children living with Human Immunodeficiency Virus

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

Background Few pharmacokinetic data were reported on dispersible tablets despite their increasing use. One hundred fifty HIV-infected children receiving lamivudine were enrolled in the MONOD ANRS 12,206 trial. Three galenic forms were administered: liquid formulation, tablet form and dispersible scored tablet. Method HIV-infected children <4 years old were enrolled in the MONOD ANRS 12,206 trial designed to assess the simplification of a successful 12-months lopinavir-based antiretroviral treatment with efavirenz. Lamivudine plasma concentrations were analysed using nonlinear mixed effects modelling approach. Results One hundred and fifty children (age: 2.5 years (1.9–3.2), weight 11.1 (9.5–12.5) kg (median (IQR)) were included in this study. Over the study period, 79 received only the syrup form, 29 children switched from syrup form to tablet 3TC/AZT form, 36 from syrup to the orodispersible ABC/3TC form and two from the 3TC/AZT form to the orodispersible ABC/3TC form. The 630 lamivudine concentrations were best described by a two-compartment model allometrically scaled. Galenic form had no significant effect on 3TC pharmacokinetic. Conclusion This trial provided an opportunity to compare three galenic forms (liquid formulation, tablet form and dispersible scored tablet) of lamivudine in the target population of young HIV–1-infected children. Galenic form had no significant effect on lamivudine pharmacokinetics.
This content is subject to copyright.
Short Communication
Antiviral Therapy
2021, Vol. 26(6-7-8) 134140
© The Author(s) 2021
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/13596535211058267
journals.sagepub.com/home/avt
Comparison of three galenic forms of
lamivudine in young West African children
living with Human Immunodeciency Virus
Claire Pressiat, PharmD, PhD
1
, Evelyne Dainguy, MD, PhD
2
,
Jean-Marc Tr´
eluyer, MD, PhD
3,4
, Caroline Yonaba, MD
5
, Saik Urien, PhD
3
,
François Eboua, MD
6
, Frantz Foissac, PhD
3
,D
´
esir´
e Lucien Dahourou, MD, PhD
7,8,9
,
Na¨
ım Bouazza, PhD
3
, Karen Malateste
10
, Sophie Desmonde, MD
11
, Alain Pruvost, PhD
12
,
Val´
eriane Leroy, MD, PhD
11,
*, D´
eborah Hirt, Pharm, PhD
3,4,13,
* and
The MONOD ANRS Study Group
1
Pharmacology Department, AP-HP, Hˆ
opitaux Universitaires Henri Mondor, Paris Est-Cr´
eteil University, Cr´
eteil, France
2
Pediatric Department, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire of Cocody, Abidjan, Cˆ
ote dIvoire
3
Paris Descartes University, Paris, France
4
Clinical Pharmacology Department, AP-HP, Paris Centre Hospital Group, Paris, France
5
Pediatric Department, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Yalgado Ou´
edraogo, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso
6
Pediatric Department, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Yopougon, Abidjan, C ˆ
ote dIvoire
7
MONOD Project, Centre de Recherche Internationale pour la Sant´
e, Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso
8
Centre Muraz, Bobo-Dioulasso, Burkina Faso
9
Institut de Recherche en Sciences de la Sant´
e (IRSS), Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso
10
Inserm, Institut de Recherche pour le D´
eveloppement (IRD), University of Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France
11
Inserm, Unit´
e U1027, CERPOP, Universit´
e Paul Sabatier of Toulouse3, Toulouse, France
12
CEA, INRAE, SPI, Universit´
e Paris Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette, France
13
Inserm CESP, Hˆ
opital Bicˆ
etre, Le Kremlin-Bicˆ
etre, France
Abstract
Background: Few pharmacokinetic data were reported on dispersible tablets despite their increasing use. One hundred
fty HIV-infected children receiving lamivudine were enrolled in the MONOD ANRS 12,206 trial. Three galenic forms
were administered: liquid formulation, tablet form and dispersible scored tablet.
Method: HIV-infected children <4 years old were enrolled in the MONOD ANRS 12,206 trial designed to assess the
simplication of a successful 12-months lopinavir-based antiretroviral treatment with efavirenz. Lamivudine plasma
concentrations were analysed using nonlinear mixed effects modelling approach.
Results: One hundred and fty children (age: 2.5 years (1.93.2), weight 11.1 (9.512.5) kg (median (IQR)) were included in this
study. Over the study period, 79 received only the syrup form, 29 children switched from syrup form to tablet 3TC/AZT form, 36
from syrup to the orodispersible ABC/3TC form and two from the 3TC/AZT form to the orodispersible ABC/3TC form. The 630
*VL and DH contributed equally to the work.
See group composition in the appendix.
Corresponding author:
Claire Pressiat, Pharmacology Department, AP-HP, Hˆ
opitaux Universitaires Henri Mondor, Paris Est-Cr´
eteil University, 1 rue Gustave Eiffel, Cr´
eteil
94010, France.
Email: claire.pressiat@aphp.fr
lamivudine concentrations were best described by a two-compartment model allometrically scaled. Galenic form had no signicant
effect on 3TC pharmacokinetic.
Conclusion: This trial provided an opportunity to compare three galenic forms (liquid formulation, tablet form and
dispersible scored tablet) of lamivudine in the target population of young HIV1-infected children. Galenic form had no
signicant effect on lamivudine pharmacokinetics.
Keywords
pharmacokinetics, lamivudine, children, galenic form
Introduction
Immediate initiation of combined antiretroviral therapy (cART)
in all children living with HIV under 2 years of age regardless
of their immune or clinical status has been recommended by the
WHO since 2008.
1
However, the availability of drugs in ap-
propriate formulations remains limited for infants and toddlers.
2
Development of orodispersible xed dose combinations
(FDCs) has improved adherence, but little is known about the
evaluation of these galenic forms.
Lamivudine (3TC) is used in combination with highly
active antiretroviral therapy for children living with HIV,
available in solid and liquid forms, in single entity and xed
dose combination products. However, little information is
given on the dosage forms used. Contradictory results were
reported in studies comparing solid and liquid formula-
tions, from no difference to an increase of 55% of the
exposure to 3TC.
35
This study allows to compare three
different galenic forms of lamivudine.
Methods
The ANRS 12,206 MONOD randomised trial (see group
composition in appendix 1) was aimed to assess a simplied
once daily cART based on efavirenz versus a twice daily
regimen based on lopinavir/ritonavir among West African
children living with HIVand virologically suppressed after a 12-
month cART based on LPV/r initiated before the age of two.
6
Lamivudine was part of the NRTI regimen used in both
arms. The dosage used was 8 mg/kg/day divided twice
daily into the lopinavir group and once daily into the
efavirenz group. Daily dose regimen was adapted ac-
cording to the treatment strategy, as follows:
Therapeutic education was given systematically by the
assistant pharmacist and the social worker when the drugs
were given to families. Three galenic forms were subse-
quently used over the MONOD trial duration: rst, a liquid
formulation (lamivudine 10 mg/mL); then, a tablet form
(3TC/zidovudine [AZT] 30 mg/60 mg Avocomb Kid
®
); last,
a dispersible, scored tablet (Abacavir [ABC]/[3TC] 60 mg/
30 mg produced by Cipla
®
). The dosage used using syrup
formulation was 10 mg/mL (4 mg/kg every 12 h in the
lopinavir group or 8 mg/kg every 24 h in the efavirenz
group), tting with WHO weight-bands (M6). Then, tablets
or orodispersible xed dose formulation tablets for ABC-
3TC using WHO weight-bands dosing was done to sub-
stitute for the syrup formulations at M19 and M25. In order
to come as close as possible to the dosage in mg/kg, the
tablets were given either whole or in half a tablet.
Study design and procedures were already published.
7
For the MONOD non-inferiority trial, the statistical pa-
rameter of interest was the difference in viral success rate
12 months after the switch, dened as the rate in the LPV
arm (control) minus the rate in the EFV arm, using a chi-
square test. We aimed to obtain a viral success of at least
76% at 12 months post-switch. We pre-specied that the
margin of the 95% condence interval of the difference in
the primary outcome between the two arms less than 14%
would meet our criteria for non-inferiority. Based on our
anticipated enrolment of 146 children with 73 children per
arm, we expected an 80% power to detect this difference.
7
The pharmacological data analyses (time, concentra-
tion) have been done with a population approach using the
MONOLIX software.
Pharmacokinetic specic blood sample were scheduled
during the initial cohort phase of the trial at visit M6 and
after that during the randomised simplication phase at
visit M19 and visit M25. The pharmacokinetic parameters
(PK) of each antiretroviral drug received by children have
been measured by one or two blood samples per child
during each visit drawn at two random points in time after
the drug intake. The times of last drug intakes were
recorded precisely to allow an estimation of different
pharmacokinetic parameters. Different time samples were
dened as follows:
- T0, just before taking the drugs;
- T1, 1/2 h at 1:30 after taking;
- T2, 2:3035 h after taking
- T3, about 8 h after taking.
Plasma 3TC concentrations were determined according to a
validated method. After a simple protein precipitation of 10 μL
of plasma with methanol, the chromatographic separation was
performed using an UPLC coupled to a mass spectrometric
detection MS/MS (Xevo TQ-S from Waters). The analytical
Pressiat et al. 135
column was an Acquity BEH phenyl (1.7 μm, 2.1*50 mm). The
range of quantication was 13000 ng/mL. The nonlinear
mixed effect modelling programme MONOLIX 2019R2, with
SAEM algorithm and left censoring of concentrations below the
LOQ was used to analyse the data. One- or two-compartment
structural models, multiplicative, additive or combined residual
variability, and exponential inter-subject variability on
each parameter were tested. An allometric model was
added to represent physiological evolution: P
i
=P
STD
×
(BW
i
/BW
STD
)
PWR
,whereP
STD
is the standard value of
parameter for a patient with the standard body weight
value and P
i
and BW
i
are the parameter and body weight
of the ith individual, allowed to standardise the parameters
estimates for a median weight. From the data, the PWR
(power) exponents could be estimated. However, these
were typically 0.75 for clearance parameters and 1 for
volumes of distribution parameters according to the
theory of the allometric scale. Four covariates have been
tested: sex, age, body-weight and galenic forms. All of the
covariates were tested via an upward model building. A
covariate was selected if (i) its effect was biologically
plausible, (ii) it produced a minimum decrease of 6.63 U
(chi-square test, 1 df, p< 0.01) in the objective function
value (OFV) and (iii) it produced a reduction in the
variability of the pharmacokinetic parameter, assessed by
the associated inter-subject variability. The most signif-
icant covariate of all the covariates tested was added in an
intermediate model. In this intermediate model, all other
covariates were tested and the most signicant one was
selected. This process was repeated until no more co-
variate was signicant. Models were evaluated thanks to
diagnostic graphics and prediction corrected visual pre-
dictive check.
Results
One hundred and fty children (77 females and 73 males) and
630 plasma concentrations were available for pharmacokinetic
evaluation. Median [IQR] age was 2.5 years [1.93.2] and 11.1
[9.512.5] kgs for body-weight. The median lamivudine dose
per day administered was 100 mg, for doses ranging from 50 to
300 mg. Since children were included in the lamivudine study
prior to the lopinavir/efavirenz switch, 142 children received
twice daily and 58 received once daily. Indeed, some children
received a twice daily dose rstandthenaoncedailydoseif
they were randomised to the efavirenz arm.
Out of the 150 children, some have only received a galenic
form: 79 received only the syrup form, two only the tablet 3TC/
AZT form, and two only the orodispersible ABC/3TC form;
others received two dosage forms: thus, 29 children switched
from syrup form to tablet 3TC/AZT form, 36 from the syrup
shape to the orodispersible ABC/3TC form and two from the
3TC/AZT form to the orodispersible ABC/3TC form. No child
received all three dosages forms. Tab le 1 shows the dosages of
3TCusedatM6,M19andM15inthetwoarmsofthetrialasa
function of the dosage form used. The dosage adapted to the
weight was not different between the dosage forms.
A two-compartment model adequately described the
data (Tab le 2 ), with a multiplicative residual variability and
exponential inter-subject variabilities (ISV) on apparent
clearance and central volume of distribution. Interindividual
variability was added on Q/F and Vp/F but this did not improve
Table 1. Median 3TC dose by month, trial arm and dosage form.
Months Syrup AZT/3TC tablet
ABC/3TC
orodispersible form
M6 n 138 2 2
BW (kg) [IQR] 8.5 [710.5] 9.2 [9.19.3] 9.4 [9.39.5]
3TC median dose (mg) [IQR] 45 [4545] 45 [4545] 45 [4545]
M19 Lopinavir arm
n53822
BW (kg) [IQR] 12 [1213] 12 [1112] 11.5 [11.2511.75]
3TC median dose (mg) [IQR] 60 [5060] 60 [4560] 45 [4560]
Efavirenz arm
n33 34
BW (kg) [IQR] 13 [12.513.5] 12.5 [1114.25]
3TC median dose (mg) [IQR] 100 [80120] 120 [90120]
M25 Lopinavir arm
n412811
BW (kg) [IQR] 13 [11.514] 12 [11.513.75] 12.5 [11.712.7]
3TC median dose (mg) [IQR] 60 [6060] 60 [6060] 60 [4560]
Efavirenz arm
n6 28
BW (kg) [IQR] 14 [1414] 13 [1214]
3TC median dose (mg) [IQR] 105 [92.5117.5] 120 [120120]
136 Antiviral Therapy 26(6-8)
the model, thus they were not kept. The allometric scaling of
clearance (CL/F and Q/F) and volume terms (V
c
/F and V
p
/F)
resulted in a 79-U decrease in the objective function value and
improved substantially the goodness of ts plots. Adding an
ISV on a bioavailability xed to 1, as reference for the syrup
was not signicant. Thus, the effects of each form, solid and
dispersible scored tablets were tested as a similar effect on all
apparent clearances and volumes. For both forms, apparent
parameters were increased by less than 10% compared to syrup
and the effect was not signicant. Tabl e 1 summarises the nal
population pharmacokinetic estimates. PC-VPC that the av-
erage prediction matches the observed concentration time-
courses and that the variability is reasonably estimated
(Figure 1).Thedosageformwasrst tested as a covariate on
Cl/F and Vc/F. It was not signicant. Then, the galenic form
was tested on bioavailability, taking as a reference the syrup
form where the bioavailability was set at 1. Table 3 summarises
median (95% CI) value obtained from the model with an
estimated bioavailability value for each of the three galenic
forms. Since the value 1 (taken as reference for the syrup form)
is included in the two 95% CI of the bioavailability estimates of
the two tablet galenic forms, the three dosage forms were not
statistically different.
Discussion
A two-compartment model with rst order absorption and
elimination best described lamivudine pharmacokinetics, as in
previous studies in adults and children.
3,811
The apparent
elimination clearance (CL/F= 33 L/h/70 kg) was consistent
with previous adult studies,
13,14
and the effect of body-weight,
here in allometric scale, was also added on lamivudine apparent
clearances and volumes of distribution.
3,4,9,11,12,15,16
This
population model allowed to investigate the effect of three
Figure 1. Prediction-corrected visual-predictive check for lamivudine twice daily (left) and once daily (right). Grey areas represent 95%
CIs of 5th, 50th and 95th simulated percentiles. Lines are empirical (observed) 5th, 50th and 95th percentiles. Circles are the non-
censored, cross the censored observations. Black circles are observations from the syrup form, green circles from the tablet form and
red circles from the orodispersible form.
Phase 1: Therapeutic cohort (for the rst year of the trial) M0M12
Two NRTI among
- ZDV: Syrup 10 mg/mL (4 mg/kg ou 180 mg/m
2
every 12 h) orABC: Syrup 20 mg/mL (8 mg/kg every 12 h)
- 3TC: Syrup 10 mg/mL (4mg/kg
®
every 12 h)
- LPV/r: Syrup 80/20 mg/mL (12 mg/kg every 12 h)
Phase 2: Randomised simplication phase (during the second year of the trial) M13-M25
Arm 1: Initial strategy (control group)
- ZDV: Syrup 10 mg/mL (4 mg/kg ou 180 mg/m
2
every 12 h) orABC: Syrup 20 mg/mL (8 mg/kg every 12 h)
- 3TC: Syrup 10 mg/mL (4 mg/kg every 12 h)
- LPV/r: Syrup 80/20 mg/mL (12 mg/kg every 12 h)
Arm 2: Once daily simplied strategy
- ABC: Syrup 20 mg/mL (16 mg/kg every morning)
- 3TC: Syrup 10 mg/mL (8 mg/kg every morning)
- EFV: Syrup 30 mg/mL (25 mg/kg every morning on an empty stomach)
Pressiat et al. 137
galenic forms on 3TC pharmacokinetic. Indeed, there are few
pharmacokinetic data on new galenic forms, especially or-
odispersible forms. In order to expand access to treatment for
these children, appropriate drug formulations are required,
particularly the simpler dose combination mini- or scored
tablets preferred by caregivers and children as young as three
years of age.
16
Solid formulations also reduce cost and promote
adherence as compared to solutions, which often require re-
frigeration, have a short shelf-life, often require clean water
(which is not available everywhere), are not easy to store or
transport, and are often complicated for health-care workers to
prescribe and for caregivers to administer.
17
The MONOD trial
provided a unique opportunity to compare three galenic forms
(liquid formulation, tablet form and dispersible scored tablet) of
lamivudine in the target population of young HIV1-infected
children who were ready to change from liquid formulation to
solid formulations of lamivudine. We showed that the three
galenic forms were not statistically different in terms of
pharmacokinetic properties. These results can be extrapolated
to younger and lighter children because the model is an al-
lometric model. Thus, if we know the weight of each child, this
model can be estimated; however, it should be conrmed by
prospective data. For both forms, apparent parameters were
increased by less than 10% compared to syrup and the effect
was not signicant. Even if the study was not designed for the
comparison of galenic forms and does not allow to have a
signicant coefcient, the value of the effect is very low and
makes it possible to conclude that there will be no clinical
impact. These results are consistent with those of Bouazza
et al.
3
and Piana et al.
4
who reported there were no differences
in the pharmacokinetics of lamivudine after administration of
the solid or liquid dosage form.
18,20
In contrast, Vanprapar
et al.
19
and Kassirye et al.
5
have observed higher 3TC exposure
in children with the dispersible tablets versus oral liquid. These
studies, including our current study, are population PK studies,
in which it is more difcult to identify a difference in ab-
sorption. Increased absorption could be an explanation for the
higher exposure of the dispersible tablet formulation versus oral
liquid in two other studies with full PK curves (as Cmax was
increased with 55 and 59%). Finally, an explanation for this
differencefoundinthesetwostudiescouldbethewayof
splitting the tablets which is not necessarily very reproducible.
In conclusion, the three dosage forms (syrup, tablet,
orodispersible tablet) had no inuence on the pharmaco-
kinetics of lamivudine. Our results provide reassuring
added value for the use of cART drug regimen among
young children living with HIV in the context of scarce
therapeutic options.
Declaration of Conicting Interests
The authors declared no potential conicts of interest with respect
to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Funding
The authors received no nancial support for the research, au-
thorship, and/or publication of this article.
ORCID iD
Claire Pressiat https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0728-2701
References
1. World Health Organisation. Consolidated Guidelines on the
Use of Antiretroviral Drugs for Treating and Preventing HIV
infection. Recommendations for a Public Health Approach.
2nd ed. Geneva: WHO, UNAIDS, 2016.
2. Nebot Giralt A, N¨
ostlinger C, Lee J, et al. Understanding the
acceptability and adherence to paediatric antiretroviral
treatment in the new formulation of pellets (LPV/r): The
protocol of a realist evaluation. BMJ Open 2017; 7: e014528.
3. Bouazza N, Hirt D, Blanche S, et al. Developmental phar-
macokinetics of lamivudine in 580 pediatric patients ranging
from neonates to adolescents. Antimicrob Agents Chemother
2011; 55: 34983504.
Table 3. Median (95% CI) value obtained from the model with
an estimated bioavailability value for each of the three galenic
forms.
Syrup
AZT/3TC
tablet
ABC/3TC
orodispersible
form
Median (95% CI)
value
1 (as
reference)
0.96 (0.84
1.11)
0.92 (0.77
1.07)
Table 2. Population pharmacokinetic parameters of lamivudine.
Model type and parameters
a
Mean (RSE %
b
) value for
the nal model
Structural models
Ka (h
1
) 0.33 (12)
CL/F (liters/h/70 kg) 31.7 (4)
V
c
/F (liters/70 kg) 62.8 (18)
V
p
/F (liters/70 kg) 53.4 (24)
Q/F (liters/h/70 kg) 3.67 (48)
Statistical models
ϖ(CL/f) 0.323 (10)
ϖ(V) 0.608 (15)
Σ0.521 (4)
a
The typical parameters represent a patient weighing 70 kg according to an
allometric model: (typical value) (typical parameter) (body weight/70)
PWR
,
where PWR 0.75 for the CL and Qterms and 1 for the V
c
and V
p
terms. K
a
,
absorption rate constant; CL/F, apparent elimination clearance, V
c
/Fap-
parent central volume of distribution; V
p
/F, apparent peripheral volume of
distribution; Q/F, inter-compartmental clearance; residual variability es-
timates; and, interindividual variability estimates.
b
RSE %, relative standard error (standard error of estimate/estimate 100).
138 Antiviral Therapy 26(6-8)
4. Piana C, Zhao W, Adkison K, et al. Covariate effects and
population pharmacokinetics of lamivudine in HIV-infected
children. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2014; 77: 861872.
5. Kasirye P, Kendall L, Adkison KK, et al. Pharmacokinetics
of antiretroviral drug varies with formulation in the target
population of children with HIV-1. Clin Pharmacol Ther
2012; 91: 272280.
6. Dahourou DL, Amorissani-Folquet M, Malateste K, et al.
Efavirenz-based simplication after successful early lopinavir-
boosted-ritonavir-based therapy in HIV-infected children in
Burkina Faso and C ˆ
ote dIvoire: the MONOD ANRS 12206
non-inferiority randomised trial. BMC Med 2017; 15:85.
7. Pressiat C, Mea-Assande V, Yonaba C, et al. Suboptimal
cotrimoxazole prophylactic concentrations in HIV-infected
children according to the WHO guidelines. Br J Clin
Pharmacol 2017; 83: 27292740.
8. Bouazza N, Hirt D, Bardin C, et al. Is the recommended
once-daily dose of lamivudine optimal in West African HIV-
infected children? Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2010; 54:
32803286.
9. Mueller BU, Lewis LL, Yuen GJ, et al. Serum and cerebro-
spinal uid pharmacokinetics of intravenous and oral lam-
ivudine in human immunodeciency virus-infected children.
Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1998; 42:31873192.
10. Zhang C, Denti P, van der Walt J-S, et al. Population
pharmacokinetic model for adherence evaluation using
lamivudine concentration monitoring. Ther Drug Monit
2012; 34: 481484.
11. Janssen EJH, Bastiaans DET, V ¨
alitalo PAJ, et al. Dose
evaluation of lamivudine in human immunodeciency virus-
infected children aged 5 months to 18 years based on a
population pharmacokinetic analysis. Br J Clin Pharmacol
2017; 83: 12871297.
12. Moore KHP, Yuen GJ, Hussey EK, et al. Population phar-
macokinetics of lamivudine in adult human immunode-
ciency virus-infected patients enrolled in two phase III
clinical trials. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1999; 43:
30253029.
13. Heald AE, Hsyu PH, Yuen GJ, et al. Pharmacokinetics of
lamivudine in human immunodeciency virus-infected pa-
tients with renal dysfunction. Antimicrob Agents Chemother
1996; 40: 15141519.
14. Tremoulet AH, Nikanjam M, Cressey TR, et al. Develop-
mental pharmacokinetic changes of Lamivudine in infants
and children. J Clin Pharmacol 2012; 52: 18241832.
15. Tremoulet AH, Capparelli EV, Patel P, et al. Pediatric AIDS
clinical trials group population pharmacokinetics of lam-
ivudine in human immunodeciency virus-exposed and
-infected infants. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2007; 51:
42974302.
16. Cook A, Gibb DM, Spyer M, et al. Tablets Are More Ac-
ceptable and Give Fewer Problems than Syrups Among
Young HIV-Infected Children in Resource-Limited Settings
in the aRROW Trial. In: Presentation from 4th National
Paediatric HIV/AIDS conference, Kampala, Uganda, 28-30
September, 2010.
17. American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Pediatric
AIDS, Section on International Child Health, Havens PL,
and Gibb DM. Increasing antiretroviral drug access for
children with HIV infection. Pediatrics 2007; 119 : 838845.
18. Corbett AH, Hosseinipour MC, Nyirenda J, et al. Pharma-
cokinetics of generic and trade formulations of lamivudine,
stavudine and nevirapine in HIV-infected Malawian chil-
dren. Antivir Ther 2010; 15:8390.
19. Vanprapar N, Cressey TR, Chokephaibulkit K, et al.. A
chewable pediatric xed-dose combination tablet of stavu-
dine, lamivudine, and nevirapine: pharmacokinetics and
safety compared with the individual liquid formulations in
human immunodeciency virus-infected children in Thai-
land. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2010; 29: 940944.
20. Waning B, Diedrichsen E, Jambert E, et al. The global
pediatric antiretroviral market: Analyses of product avail-
ability and utilization reveal challenges for development of
pediatric formulations and HIV/AIDS treatment in children.
BMC Pediatr 2010; 10: 74.
Appendix 1
The ANRS 12206 MONOD Collaboration
Study Group (as of July 7th, 2015).
Participating sites:
Burkina Faso, Ouagadougou: Centre de Recherche In-
ternational pour la Sant´
e: Malik Coulibaly, D´
esir´
e Lucien
Dahourou, Nicolas Meda (co-investigator) Colette Ou´
e-
draogo, Mamadou Sawadogo, Wilfried Som´
e, D´
esir´
e
Sondo, Elisabeth Thio. CHU Charles De Gaulle : Ma-
madou Barry, William Hiembo, Fla Kou´
eta, Adama
Ouattara, Moussa Ou´
edraogo, Rasmata Ou´
edraogo, Sylvie
Ou´
edraogo, Bernadette Congo, Rose Barry, Diarra Y´
e,
CHU Yalgado Ou ´
edraogo: Malika Congo, Edouard Min-
´
en´
e, Marie Coulibaly, Pierre Innocent Guissou Angèle
Kalmogho, Ludovic Kam, Emile Ou´
edraogo, Lassana
Sangar´
e, Caroline Yonaba. Programme Sectoriel Sant´
ede
Lutte contre le SIDA et les IST : Sylvestre Tiendrebeogo.
Programme dAppui au Monde Associatif et Commu-
nautaire (PAMAC) : Odette Ky-Zerbo.
Cˆ
ote dIvoire, Abidjan: Programme PACCI: Xavier
Anglaret, Clarisse Amani-Boss´
e, Divine Avit, Christine
Danel, Serge Eholi´
e, Didier Ekou´
evi, Eulalie Kanga, Su-
zanne Kouadio, S´
everin Lennaud, Maxime Aim´
e Oga,
Th´
erèse NDri-Yoman. CHU Cocody : Madeleine
Pressiat et al. 139
Amorissani-Folquet, Evelyne Dainguy, Beugre Kouassi,
Jean-Claude Kouassi, Gladys Oka. CHU Yopougon : Kader
Keita, Jean Yves Lambin, François Eboua Tanoh, Mar-
guerite Timit´
e-Konan (co-investigator). Site Abobo-Avo-
catier : V´
eronique Mea-Assande, Site CePReF-enfants :
Addi Edmond Aka, Hortense Aka-Dago, Sylvie NGbeche,
Eugène Messou. Laboratory CeDReS : Arlette Emieme,
Fatoumata Kon ´
e, Herv´
e Menan, Thomas Toni, Vincent
Yapo. Programme National de Prise en Charge : Kouam´
e
Abo, Irma Ahoba, David Aka. FSU Abobo-Avocatier :
Gbam´
en´
e Kouassi. Pharmacie de la Sant´
e Publique : Carine
Kodo ; Implementers : Tour´
e Siaka, Pety Tour´
e (ACONDA),
Fassinou Ekouevi (EGPAF), Ida Viho (ICAP), Anthony
Richard Tanoh, Olivier Bl´
e (Fondation ARIEL GLASER).
Community representants: Yaya Coulibaly (RIP+), Phil-
omène Takouo (ONG Bayema).Programme ESTHER : Jean
Marie Massumbuko. CIRBA : Kouadio Kouakou, Pro-
gramme National de Sant´
e Infantile: Doroth´
ee Koumi,
Programme Elargi de Vaccination : Bert´
eKon
´
e.
Methodology and Data Management Center: Inserm
U897, Institut de Sant´
e Publique, d´
Epid´
emiologie et de
D´
eveloppement, University of Bordeaux, France: Sophie
Dattez, Sophie Desmonde, Julie Jesson, Sophie Karcher,
J´
erˆ
ome Le Carrou, Val ´
eriane Leroy (Coordinating inves-
tigator), Karen Malateste, Camille Ndondoki, Pierre
Touret. Methodological Support: Caroline Bouyssou,
Geneviève Chˆ
ene, Val´
erie Conte, Delphine Gabillard,
Va l ´
erie Journot, Roger Salamon.
MEREVA, Bordeaux. Website: http://mereva.isped.u-
bordeaux2.fr/monod/Accueil.aspx
Supporting teams: Luxembourg Institute of Health,
Luxemburg: Vic Arendt (co-investigator), Carole Devaux,
Jean-Claude Schmit.
Hˆ
opital Universitaire Des Enfants Reine Fabiola,
Bruxelles, Belgique: Philippe Lepage (co-investigator).
Hˆ
opital Necker-Enfants Malades Assistance Publique-
Hopitaux de Paris and EA8, Paris-Descartes: St ´
ephane
Blanche (co-investigator), Deborah Hirt, Christine Rou-
zioux, Claire Pressiat, Jean-Marc Treluyer, Saik Urien.
Commissariat `
alEnergie Atomique: Alain Pruvost (CEA),
Laboratoire de virologie, Hopital Saint-Louis : Marie-
Laure Chaix-Baudier.
UMR 1058 "Pathogenesis and Control of Chronic In-
fections" INSERM - Universit´
e Montpellier EFS,
Montpellier, France: Philippe Van de Perre (co-
investigator).
Administrative Team: Elodie Vernoux (Bordeaux,
France), Aminata Par´
e-Karambiri (Ouagadougou, Burkina
Faso), Zouma Tinto (Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso),
Adoulaye Cisse (Abidjan, C ˆ
ote dIvoire), Madikona Dosso
(Abidjan, Cˆ
ote dIvoire).
MONOD ANRS 12206 Scientic Steering Commit-
tee: Roger Salamon (Chair, Bordeaux, France), Val ´
eriane
Leroy (Coordinating investigator, Bordeaux, France),
Nicolas Meda (Co-Investigator, Ouagadougou, Burkina
Faso), Marguerite Timite-Konan (Co-Investigator, Abid-
jan, Cˆ
ote dIvoire), Vic Arendt (Co-Investigateur, Lux-
embourg), St´
ephane Blanche (Co-Investigator, Paris,
France), Philippe Lepage (Co-Investigator, Bruxelles,
Belgique), Philippe Van de Perre (Co-Investigator,
Montpellier, France), François Dabis (Bordeaux,
France), Jean-Claude Schmit (CRP-Sant´
e, Luxembourg).
MONOD ANRS 12206 trial independent data
monitoring committee meeting: Dominique Costagliola
(Chair, Paris, France), Mark Cotton (Cape Town, South
Africa), Carlo Giaquito (Bologna, Italie), Diana Gibb
(London, UK), Elisabeth Menu (Paris, France).
Promotor: Inserm-ANRS, France: Jean-François Del-
fraissy (Director), Brigitte Bazin, Marie de Solère, Claire
Rekacewicz.
ClinicalTrial.gov registry n°NCT01127204: The
content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does
not necessarily represent the ofcial views of the French
INSERM-ANRS, EDCTP, or University of Bordeaux.
140 Antiviral Therapy 26(6-8)
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Article
Full-text available
Background: The 2016 World Health Organization guidelines recommend all children <3 years start antiretroviral therapy (ART) on protease inhibitor-based regimens. But lopinavir/ritonavir (LPV/r) syrup has many challenges in low-income countries, including limited availability, requires refrigeration, interactions with anti-tuberculous drugs, twice-daily dosing, poor palatability in young children, and higher cost than non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor (NNRTI) drugs. Successfully initiating LPV/r-based ART in HIV-infected children aged <2 years raises operational challenges that could be simplified by switching to a protease inhibitor-sparing therapy based on efavirenz (EFV), although, to date, EFV is not recommended in children <3 years. Methods: The MONOD ANRS 12026 study is a phase 3 non-inferiority open-label randomised clinical trial conducted in Abidjan, Côte d'Ivoire, and Ouagadougou, Burkina Faso (ClinicalTrial.gov registry: NCT01127204). HIV-1-infected children who were tuberculosis-free and treated before the age of 2 years with 12-15 months of suppressive twice-daily LPV/r-based ART (HIV-1 RNA viral load (VL) <500 copies/mL, confirmed) were randomised to two arms: once-daily combination of abacavir (ABC) + lamivudine (3TC) + EFV (referred to as EFV) versus continuation of the twice-daily combination zidovudine (ZDV) or ABC + 3TC + LPV/r (referred to as LPV). The primary endpoint was the difference in the proportion of children with virological suppression by 12 months post-randomisation between arms (14% non-inferiority bound, Chi-squared test). Results: Between May 2011 and January 2013, 156 children (median age 13.7 months) were initiated on ART. After 12-15 months on ART, 106 (68%) were randomised to one of the two treatment arms (54 LPV, 52 EFV); 97 (91%) were aged <3 years. At 12 months post-randomisation, 46 children (85.2%) from LPV versus 43 (82.7%) from EFV showed virological suppression (defined as a VL <500 copies/mL; difference, 2.5%; 95% confidence interval (CI), -11.5 to 16.5), whereas seven (13%) in LPV and seven (13.5%) in EFV were classed as having virological failure (secondary outcome, defined as a VL ≥1000 copies/mL; difference, 0.5%; 95% CI, -13.4 to 12.4). No significant differences in adverse events were observed, with two adverse events in LPV (3.7%) versus four (7.7%) in EFV (p = 0.43). On genotyping, 13 out of 14 children with virological failure (six out of seven EFV, seven out of seven LPV) had a drug-resistance mutation: nine (five out of six EFV, four out of seven LPV) had one or more major NNRTI-resistance mutations whereas none had an LPV/r-resistance mutation. Conclusions: At the VL threshold of 500 copies/mL, we could not conclusively demonstrate the non-inferiority of EFV on viral suppression compared to LPV because of low statistical power. However, non-inferiority was confirmed for a VL threshold of <1000 copies/mL. Resistance analyses highlighted a high frequency of NNRTI-resistance mutations. A switch to an EFV-based regimen as a simplification strategy around the age of 3 years needs to be closely monitored. Trial registration: ClinicalTrial.gov registry n° NCT01127204 , 19 May 2010.
Article
Full-text available
The bioequivalence of formulations is usually evaluated in healthy adult volunteers. In our study in 19 HIV-1-infected Ugandan children (1.8-4 years of age, weight 12 to <15 kg) receiving zidovudine, lamivudine, and abacavir solutions twice a day for ≥24 weeks, the use of scored tablets allowed comparison of plasma pharmacokinetics of oral solutions vs. tablets. Samples were collected 0, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, and 12 h after each child's last morning dose of oral solution before changing to scored tablets of Combivir (coformulated zidovudine + lamivudine) and abacavir; this was repeated 4 weeks later. Dose-normalized area under curve (AUC)(0-12) and peak concentration (C(max)) for the tablet formulation were bioequivalent with those of the oral solution with respect to zidovudine and abacavir (e.g., dose-normalized geometric mean ratio (dnGMR) (tablet:solution) for zidovudine and abacavir AUC(0-12) were 1.01 (90% confidence interval (CI) 0.87-1.18) and 0.96 (0.83-1.12), respectively). However, lamivudine exposure was ~55% higher with the tablet formulation (AUC(0-12) dnGMR = 1.58 (1.37-1.81), C(max) dnGMR = 1.55 (1.33-1.81)). Although the clinical relevance of this finding is unclear, it highlights the impact of the formulation and the importance of conducting bioequivalence studies in target pediatric populations.
Article
Full-text available
This Policy Statement was reaffirmed April 2010, April 2016, and October 2021 Although there have been great gains in the prevention of pediatric HIV infection and provision of antiretroviral therapy for children with HIV infection in resource-rich countries, many barriers remain to scaling up HIV prevention and treatment for children in resource-limited areas of the world. Appropriate testing technologies need to be made more widely available to identify HIV infection in infants. Training of practitioners in the skills required to care for children with HIV infection is required to increase the number of children receiving antiretroviral therapy. Lack of availability of appropriate antiretroviral drug formulations that are easily usable and inexpensive is a major impediment to optimal care for children with HIV. The time and energy spent trying to develop liquid antiretroviral formulations might be better used in the manufacture of smaller pill sizes or crushable tablets, which are easier to dispense, transport, store, and administer to children.
Article
Full-text available
Lamivudine concentration-time courses were described for a very large range of ages to study the effects of body weight and maturation on lamivudine pharmacokinetics and to check the consistency of dosing recommendations. Lamivudine concentrations were monitored on a routine basis to produce concentrations similar to the known values in adults. Concentrations were measured in 580 children from 2 days to 18 years old. A total of 2,106 plasma lamivudine concentrations were measured, and a population pharmacokinetic analysis was performed using the stochastic approximation expectation maximization algorithm implemented in MONOLIX 3.1 software. A two-compartment model adequately described the data. After standardization for a mean standard body weight by using an allometric model, age also had a significant effect on clearance maturation. Typical population estimates (percent interindividual variability) standardized for 70 kg of the apparent clearance, including central and peripheral volumes of distribution, intercompartmental clearance, and absorption rate constant, were 31 liters · h(-1) (32%), 76.4 liters (77%), 129 liters, 5.83 liters · h(-1), and 0.432 h(-1), respectively. According to the model, elimination clearance (liters/h/70 kg) increases gradually during the first years of life. Theoretical doses needed to reach the range of 24 h of exposure observed in adults were calculated: to be closer to adult exposure, children should receive 4 mg/kg/day from birth to 8 weeks of age, 5 mg/kg/day from 8 to 16 weeks of age, 6 mg/kg from 16 to 25 weeks of age, 8 mg/kg/day from 25 weeks of age to 14 kg of body weight, 150 mg/day from 14 to 25 kg of body weight, 225 mg/day from 25 to 35 kg of body weight, and 300 mg/day thereafter.
Article
Background Improving access to paediatric HIV treatment requires both large-scale treatment programmes and medication that is adapted to infants and children's needs. The WHO recommends lopinavir/ritonavir as first-line antiretroviral therapy for all HIV-infected children younger than 3 years. There is currently little evidence on the acceptability of, and adherence to, a formulation of this combination treatment if given in the form of pellets. This protocol presents how we will carry a realist evaluation to assess the factors that contribute to the acceptability and adherence to the new pellets formulation in 3 hospitals in Kenya. Methods We structured the protocol along the realist evaluation cycle following 4 steps: (1) the initial programme theory, (2) the study design, (3) the data collection methods and (4) the data analysis plan. Theories of behavioural sciences were reviewed for frames that could provide insights into how using such new formulations may contribute to better acceptability and adherence. Ethics and dissemination This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Institute of Tropical Medicine, the Ethical Committee of the University Hospital Antwerp and the Kenyatta National Hospital/University of Nairobi Ethics and Research Committee. We aim to disseminate the findings through international conferences and peer-reviewed journals and to share them with Drugs for Neglected Diseases initiative's (DNDi) programme managers and with the Kenyan healthcare providers. Discussion In developing this study, we encountered some challenges. First, methods to measure the acceptability of any formulation and adherence to it are not standardised. The second challenge is common in realist evaluation and relates to how to choose from different potentially interesting theoretical frameworks. We identified relevant and empirically tested theories from behavioural science that may be helpful in our study. We will test them in 3 settings by exploring the multilevel factors that influence acceptability and adherence of this new paediatric Antiretroviral (ARV) formulation.
Article
Aim: The objectives of this study were to characterise age-related changes in lamivudine pharmacokinetics in children and evaluate lamivudine exposure, followed by dose recommendations for subgroups in which target steady state AUC0-24h is not reached. Methods: Population pharmacokinetic modelling was performed in NONMEM using data from two model building datasets and two external datasets (n = 180 (age 0.4-18 years, bodyweight 3.4-60.5 kg); 2,061 samples (median 12 per child); daily oral dose 60-300 mg (3.9-17.6 mg/kg)). Steady state AUC0-24h was calculated per individual (adult target 8.9 mg · h/L). Results: A two-compartment model with sequential zero order and first order absorption best described the data. Apparent clearance and central volume of distribution (% RSE) were 13.2 L/h (4.2%) and 38.9 L (7.0%) for a median individual of 16.6 kg, respectively. Bodyweight was identified as covariate on apparent clearance and volume of distribution using power functions (exponents 0.506 (20.2%) and 0.489 (32.3%), respectively). The external evaluation supported the predictive ability of the final model. In 94.5% and 35.8% of the children with a bodyweight > and <14 kg, respectively, the target AUC0-24h was reached. Conclusion: Bodyweight best predicted the developmental changes in apparent lamivudine clearance and volume of distribution. For children aged 5 months - 18 years with a bodyweight <14 kg, the dose should be increased from 8 to 10 mg/kg/day if the adult target for AUC0-24h is aimed for. In order to identify whether bodyweight influences bioavailability, clearance and/or volume of distribution, future analysis including data on intravenously administered lamivudine is needed.
Article
Lamivudine is used as first-line therapy in HIV-infected children. Yet, like many other paediatric drugs, its dose rationale has been based on limited clinical data, without thorough understanding of the effects of growth on drug disposition. Here we use lamivudine to show how a comprehensive population pharmacokinetic model can account for the influence of demographic covariates on exposure (i.e., AUC, Cmax). Data from 3 paediatric trials were used to describe the pharmacokinetics across the overall population. Modelling was based on a nonlinear mixed-effects approach. A stepwise procedure was used for covariate model building. A one-compartment model with first-order elimination best described the pharmacokinetics of lamivudine in children. The effect of weight on clearance (CL) and volume of distribution (V) was characterised by an exponential function, with exponents of 0.705 and 0.635, respectively. For a child with median body weight (17.6 kg), CL and V were 16.5 (CI 15.2-17.7) L/h and 46.0 (CI 42.4-49.5) L, respectively. There were no differences between formulations (tablet and solution). The predicted AUC0-12 after twice-daily doses of 4 mg/kg ranged from 4.44 mg.h/L for children < 14 kg to 7.25 mg.h/L for children > 30 kg. The use of meta-analysis is critical to identify the correct covariate-parameter relationships, which must be assessed before a model is applied for predictive purposes (e.g., defining dosing recommendations for children). In contrast to prior modelling efforts, we show that the covariate distribution in the target population must be considered.
Article
Interpretation of antiretroviral drug concentration measurements could be aided by information about adherence to recent doses. We developed a population pharmacokinetic model of lamivudine in young children to propose reference lamivudine concentrations for evaluation of adherence to recent treatment doses. The steady state pharmacokinetics of lamivudine were evaluated in 68 young HIV-infected children receiving antiretroviral treatment twice daily. A population pharmacokinetic analysis was conducted using NONMEM 7. A 2-compartment model with transit absorption best described lamivudine pharmacokinetics. After adjustment for maturation and body weight (using allometric scaling), the variability of clearance was small, hence simulations could accurately predict lamivudine concentrations. Higher lamivudine trough concentrations were detected before the morning dose, possibly owing to slower overnight clearance. Reference values for lamivudine concentrations that can be used to evaluate adherence to recent doses are proposed. Lamivudine concentration measurement can be used to assess recent treatment adherence.
Article
Lamivudine is a nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor widely used in infants and children in combination antiretroviral therapy to treat human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. Developmental changes in lamivudine pharmacokinetic disposition were assessed by combining data from 7 studies of lamivudine (Pediatric AIDS Clinical Trials Group 300, 353, 356, 358, 386, 1056, and 1069) representing subjects across the pediatric age continuum. A population pharmacokinetic model was developed to identify factors that influence lamivudine disposition. Age and Thai race were independent predictors of apparent clearance (CL/F), whereas the use of a fixed drug combination formulation (GPO-VIR) was an independent predictor of bioavailability, with CL/F more than doubling from birth to adolescence. Serum creatinine was not associated with CL/F. Monte Carlo simulations were used to compare the lamivudine exposure achieved with World Health Organization (WHO) weight band and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) label dosing recommendations. WHO dosing yielded higher exposure during the first few months of life, but this difference was less pronounced between 6 months and 14 years of age. Overall, both FDA and WHO dosing provided similar AUC values to those previously reported in HIV-infected adults. Lamivudine WHO weight band dosing results in therapeutic exposure in infants and children and may improve drug dosing in resource-limited countries.