Pharmacokinetics Of Linezolid Research Articles

Assessing potential drug-drug interactions between clofazimine and other frequently used agents to treat drug-resistant tuberculosis.

Clofazimine is included in drug regimens to treat rifampicin/drug-resistant tuberculosis (DR-TB), but there is little information about its interaction with other drugs in DR-TB regimens. We evaluated the pharmacokinetic interaction between clofazimine and isoniazid, linezolid, levofloxacin, and cycloserine, dosed as terizidone. Newly diagnosed adults with DR-TB at Klerksdorp/Tshepong Hospital, South Africa, were started on the then-standard treatment with clofazimine temporarily excluded for the initial 2 weeks. Pharmacokinetic sampling was done immediately before and 3 weeks after starting clofazimine, and drug concentrations were determined using validated liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry assays. The data were interpreted with population pharmacokinetics in NONMEM v7.5.1 to explore the impact of clofazimine co-administration and other relevant covariates on the pharmacokinetics of isoniazid, linezolid, levofloxacin, and cycloserine. Clofazimine, isoniazid, linezolid, levofloxacin, and cycloserine data were available for 16, 27, 21, 21, and 6 participants, respectively. The median age and weight for the full cohort were 39 years and 52 kg, respectively. Clofazimine exposures were in the expected range, and its addition to the regimen did not significantly affect the pharmacokinetics of the other drugs except levofloxacin, for which it caused a 15% reduction in clearance. A posteriori power size calculations predicted that our sample sizes had 97%, 90%, and 87% power at P < 0.05 to detect a 30% change in clearance of isoniazid, linezolid, and cycloserine, respectively. Although clofazimine increased the area under the curve of levofloxacin by 19%, this is unlikely to be of great clinical significance, and the lack of interaction with other drugs tested is reassuring.

Rifampicin reduces plasma concentration of linezolid in patients with infective endocarditis.

Linezolid in combination with rifampicin has been used in treatment of infective endocarditis especially for patients infected with staphylococci. Because rifampicin has been reported to reduce the plasma concentration of linezolid, the present study aimed to characterize the population pharmacokinetics of linezolid for the purpose of quantifying an effect of rifampicin cotreatment. In addition, the possibility of compensation by dosage adjustments was evaluated. Pharmacokinetic measurements were performed in 62 patients treated with linezolid for left-sided infective endocarditis in the Partial Oral Endocarditis Treatment (POET) trial. Fifteen patients were cotreated with rifampicin. A total of 437 linezolid plasma concentrations were obtained. The pharmacokinetic data were adequately described by a one-compartment model with first-order absorption and first-order elimination. We demonstrated a substantial increase of linezolid clearance by 150% (95% CI: 78%-251%), when combined with rifampicin. The final model was evaluated by goodness-of-fit plots showing an acceptable fit, and a visual predictive check validated the model. Model-based dosing simulations showed that rifampicin cotreatment decreased the PTA of linezolid from 94.3% to 34.9% and from 52.7% to 3.5% for MICs of 2 mg/L and 4 mg/L, respectively. A substantial interaction between linezolid and rifampicin was detected in patients with infective endocarditis, and the interaction was stronger than previously reported. Model-based simulations showed that increasing the linezolid dose might compensate without increasing the risk of adverse effects to the same degree.

Acute-on-chronic liver failure alters linezolid pharmacokinetics in critically ill patients with continuous hemodialysis: an observational study

BackgroundIn acute-on-chronic liver failure (ACLF), adequate antibiotic dosing is challenging due to changes of drug distribution and elimination. We studied the pharmacokinetics of linezolid in critically ill patients with ACLF during continuous renal replacement therapy compared to patients without concomitant liver failure (NLF).MethodsIn this prospective cohort study, patients received linezolid 600 mg bid. Linezolid serum samples were analyzed by high-performance liquid chromatography. Population pharmacokinetic modelling was performed followed by Monte-Carlo simulations of 150 mg bid, 300 mg bid, 450 mg bid, 600 mg bid, and 900 mg bid to assess trough concentration target attainment of 2–7 mg/L.ResultsEighteen patients were included in this study with nine suffering from ACLF. Linezolid body clearance was lower in the ACLF group with mean (standard deviation) 1.54 (0.52) L/h versus 6.26 (2.43) L/h for NLF, P < 0.001. A trough concentration of 2–7 mg/L was reached with the standard dose of 600 mg bid in the NLF group in 47%, with 42% being underexposed and 11% overexposed versus 20% in the ACLF group with 77% overexposed and 3% underexposed. The highest probability of target exposure was attained with 600 mg bid in the NLF group and 150 mg bid in the ACLF group with 53%.ConclusionLinezolid body clearance in ACLF was markedly lower than in NLF. Given the overall high variability, therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) with dose adjustments seems required to optimize target attainment. Until TDM results are available, a dose reduction may be considered in ACLF patients to prevent overexposure.

Linezolid dosing in critically ill patients undergoing various modalities of renal replacement therapy: a pooled population pharmacokinetic analysis

Altered pharmacokinetics (PK) of linezolid is pronounced in critically ill patients undergoing different modalities of renal replacement therapy (RRT). This study aimed to provide a pooled population PK analysis of linezolid in RRT patients and to evaluate the pharmacodynamic (PD) target attainment of linezolid standard dosing (600 mg q12h). A total of 414 pooled linezolid concentration observations from 69 patients undergoing intermittent hemodialysis (IHD), sustained low-efficiency dialysis (SLED), or continuous renal replacement therapy were used to develop the population PK model. Probability of target attainment (PTA) for the efficacy markers of 85% T>MIC and AUC/MIC>100 was evaluated, and the risk of toxicity was estimated based on the trough concentration threshold of 10 mg/L. Linezolid concentration data were adequately described by a two compartmental model. Renal function and body weight were identified as significant modifiers for endogenous clearance of linezolid. Simulations demonstrated that the PTA of 85% T>MIC and AUC/MIC>100 targets was all unacceptably low (0-58.6%, MIC ≥ 1 mg/L) in RRT patients with preserved renal function, while desirable 85% T>MIC attainment (≥ 90%, MIC ≤ 2 mg/L) was achieved in anuric RRT patients. The predicted risk of toxicity is negligible (<1.0%) in the patients with preserved renal function (regardless of the RRT modalities), while the probability of reaching the trough level of 10 mg/L was high (17.9-20.9%) for anuric patient population undergoing IHD or SLED. In conclusion, standard linezolid dosing is adequate for anuric RRT patients with an MIC ≤ 2 mg/L.

Linezolid Pharmacokinetics and Its Association with Adverse Drug Reactions in Patients with Drug-Resistant Pulmonary Tuberculosis.

We evaluated the relationship between the pharmacokinetic parameters of linezolid (LZD) and development of adverse drug reactions (ADRs) in patients with pulmonary drug-resistant tuberculosis. A prospective cohort of adults with pulmonary multidrug-resistant tuberculosis with additional resistance to fluoroquinolone (MDR-TBFQ+) received treatment with bedaquiline, delamanid, clofazimine, and LZD. Blood samples were collected during weeks 8 and 16 at eight time points over 24 h. The pharmacokinetic parameters of LZD were measured using high-performance liquid chromatography and associated with ADRs. Of the 165 MDR-TBFQ+ patients on treatment, 78 patients developed LZD-associated anemia and 69 developed peripheral neuropathy. Twenty-three patients underwent intense pharmacokinetic testing. Plasma median trough concentration was 2.08 µg/mL and 3.41 µg/mL, (normal <2 µg/mL) and AUC0-24 was 184.5 µg/h/mL and 240.5 µg/h/mL at weeks 8 and 16, respectively, showing a linear relationship between duration of intake and plasma levels. Nineteen patients showed LZD-associated ADRs-nine at week 8, twelve at week 16, and two at both weeks 8 and 16. Thirteen of the nineteen had high plasma trough and peak concentrations of LZD. A strong association between LZD-associated ADRs and plasma LZD levels was noted. Trough concentration alone or combinations of trough with peak levels are potential targets for therapeutic drug monitoring.

Pharmacokinetic analysis of linezolid for multidrug resistant tuberculosis at a tertiary care centre in Mumbai, India.

Linezolid is an oxazolidinone used to treat multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB), including in the recently-endorsed shorter 6-month treatment regimens. Due to its narrow therapeutic index, linezolid is often either dose-adjusted or discontinued due to intolerance or toxicity during treatment, and the optimal balance between linezolid efficacy and toxicity remains unclear. India carries a significant burden of MDR-TB cases in the world, but limited information on the pharmacokinetics of linezolid and minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) distribution is available from Indian MDR-TB patients. We enrolled participants from a tertiary care centre in Mumbai, India, treated for MDR-TB and receiving linezolid daily doses of 600 or 300mg. Pharmacokinetic visits were scheduled between 1 and 15 months after treatment initiation to undergo intensive or sparse blood sampling. Linezolid concentration versus time data were analysed using non-linear mixed-effects modelling, with simulations to evaluate doses for different scenarios. We enrolled 183 participants (121 females), with a median age of 26 years (interquartile range [IQR] 21-35), weight 55.0kg (IQR 45.6-65.8), and fat-free mass 38.7kg (IQR 32.7-46.0). Linezolid pharmacokinetics was best described by a one-compartment model with first-order elimination allometrically scaled by fat-free mass and transit compartment absorption. The typical clearance value was 3.81L/h. Simulations predicted that treatment with 300mg daily achieves a high probability of target attainment (PTA) when linezolid MIC was ≤0.25mg/L (61.5% of participant samples tested), while 600mg daily would be required if MIC were 0.5mg/L (29% of samples). While linezolid 300mg daily is predicted to achieve effective targets for the majority of adults with MDR-TB, it failed to achieve the therapeutic target for 21% participants. A dose of 600mg had a PTA >90% for all susceptible samples, but with a higher likelihood of exceeding toxicity thresholds (31% vs 9.6%). These data suggest potential benefit to individualized dosing taking host and microbial characteristics into account to improve the likelihood of treatment efficacy while minimizing risk of toxicity from linezolid for the treatment of MDR-TB. Further prospective evaluation in different clinical settings is urgently needed to inform safety and efficacy of these lower doses.

Linezolid pharmacokinetics: a systematic review for the best clinical practice

To summarize the pharmacokinetics of linezolid to optimize the dosing regimen in special populations. A literature search was performed in three largest medical databases, including Embase, Scopus, and PubMed. The main applied keywords were linezolid and pharmacokinetics. Of 3663 retrieved publications in the English language, 35 original research articles, clinical studies, and case reports about linezolid pharmacokinetics in different populations such as pregnant women, pediatrics, elderly subjects, obese people, individuals with organ dysfunction, and critically ill patients were included. RESULTSAND CONCLUSION: Dose adjustment is not currently recommended for linezolid in patients with mild to moderate renal or hepatic impairment, older adults, and pregnant women. Although dose adjustment is not recommended in patients with severe renal or hepatic impairment, it should be considered that these patients are more vulnerable to linezolid adverse effects and drug interactions. In pediatrics, reducing the linezolid dosing interval to 8h is suggested. Despite the lack of sufficient information in obese individuals, dosing based on body weight or use of higher dose seems to be justifiable to prevent sub-therapeutic concentrations. Although dose adjustment of linezolid is not recommended in critically ill patients, administration of linezolid as continuous intravenous infusion is suggested in this population. Blood level monitoring should be considered in populations that are vulnerable to linezolid underexposure (such as critically ill patients with augmented renal clearance, pediatrics, overweight, and obese patients) or overexposure (such as elderly, patients with hepatic and renal impairment). To assess the efficacy and safety of linezolid, the area under the concentration-time curve over 24h to minimum inhibitory concentration (AUC0-24h/MIC) equal to 80-120, percentage of time above the MIC ≥ 85%, and serum trough concentration between 2 and 7mg/L are suggested.

Population Pharmacokinetics and Dosing Regimen Optimization of Linezolid in Cerebrospinal Fluid and Plasma of Post-operative Neurosurgical Patients

BackgroundLinezolid is a valuable therapeutic option for infections of the central nervous system caused by multi-drug resistant Gram-positive pathogens. Data regarding linezolid pharmacokinetics in cerebrospinal fluid from post-operative neurosurgical patients have revealed wide inter-individual variability. The objectives of this study were to establish a population pharmacokinetic model for linezolid in plasma and cerebrospinal fluid, as well as to optimize dosing strategies in this susceptible population. MethodsThis was a prospective pharmacokinetic study in post-operative neurosurgical patients receiving intravenous linezolid. Parallel blood and cerebrospinal fluid samples were collected and analyzed. The population pharmacokinetic modelling and Monte Carlo simulations were performed using the Phoenix NLME software. ResultsA two-compartment model (central plasma and cerebrospinal fluid compartments) fit the linezolid data well, with creatinine clearance and serum procalcitonin as significant variables. Linezolid demonstrated highly variable penetration into cerebrospinal fluid, with a mean cerebrospinal fluid/plasma ratio of 0.53. A strong correlation was found between plasma trough concentration and cerebrospinal fluid exposure of linezolid. Based on simulation results, optimal dosage regimens stratified by various renal functions and inflammatory status were proposed. ConclusionA modeling and simulating strategy was employed in dose individualization to improve the efficacy and safety of linezolid treatment.

Optimization and Validation of Glycerol-induced Acute Renal Failure Model in Rats in Predicting the Pharmacokinetics in Patients with Acute Renal Failure

The study standardized the glycerol induced (intra-peritoneal and intra-muscular) acute renal failure (ARF) models in Sprague-Dawley rats and validated its potential to predict the change in pharmacokinetics of the selected probe drugs in renal impairment. We assessed the induction of ARF by measuring the serum creatinine and blood-urea-nitrogen (BUN) levels at different time points (baseline, 6 h, 12 h, 24 h, 48 h and 72 h). Glycerol administrations via both intra-peritoneal and intra-muscular routes caused a significant increase in serum creatinine and BUN levels in rats at 6 h; however, the levels decreased within 24 h with intra-peritoneal administration. In contrast, with intra-muscular administration, a sustained increase in serum creatinine and BUN levels was observed up to 72 h post glycerol treatment demonstrating a sustained ARF like condition in rats that was suitable to evaluate the pharmacokinetics of drugs. Therefore, intra-muscular glycerol administration model was used to evaluate the pharmacokinetics of selected probe drugs including metformin, digoxin, atorvastatin and linezolid. The pharmacokinetics of metformin and digoxin were significantly altered in ARF versus control rats with increase in plasma exposure, prolonged elimination half-life and decreased systemic clearance. However, the pharmacokinetics of atorvastatin and linezolid did not show significant differences between ARF and control rats. These results demonstrated the utility of the ARF model in rats in predicting pharmacokinetic changes in patients with renal impairment. Such models may prove useful in early discovery work to screen and prioritize compounds requiring dose adjustment in patients with renal impairment.

Population pharmacokinetics of linezolid and its major metabolites PNU-142300 and PNU-142586 in adult patients.

Only a few reports are available on the population pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis of linezolid and its main metabolites. Therefore, we investigated the population PK of linezolid and its metabolites in adult patients treated with intravenous linezolid to identify the causative factors affecting pharmacokinetics, and evaluated the relationship between the parent compound and major metabolites PNU-142300 and PNU-142586. Population PK analysis was performed using medical data collected from patients who were treated with intravenous linezolid (600 mg twice daily). We examined the impact of covariate candidates such as demographic characteristics and laboratory parameters. Simulations using the final model were investigated and used to estimate the plasma concentrations, trough concentrations (Cmin ), and area under the curve (AUC) of linezolid and its metabolites, and the metabolite-to-parent ratios for Cmin and AUC were used to assess the accumulation of metabolites over linezolid. A total of 82 plasma concentrations from 23 patients were analyzed. The volume of distribution was estimated to be 47.1L, assuming that linezolid and its metabolites were the same. The total clearance (CL) of linezolid, and CLs of PNU-142300 and PNU-142586 were influenced by creatinine clearance (CLcr), with population mean CLs of 3.86, 7.27, and 13.54 L/h, respectively. The Cmin and AUCs of linezolid and its metabolites and the ratios of metabolites per linezolid were predicted to increase exponentially with decreasing renal function. We developed the first population PK model in which CLcr was incorporated as a covariate in the CL of linezolid and its metabolites. Using the final model, it was possible to predict the plasma concentration, Cmin , and AUC appropriately. The model was found to be a potentially useful tool for future studies on optimal dosing and toxicity analysis.

Comparing the pharmacokinetics and organ/tissue distribution of anti-methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus agents using a rat model of sepsis

Sepsis is a major cause of death, and sepsis-derived physiological changes complicate the understanding of drug distribution in organs/tissues, which determines the efficacy and toxicity of antimicrobial agents. In this study, we evaluated and compared the pharmacokinetics of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus treatment agents in sepsis with that of vancomycin, arbekacin, linezolid, and daptomycin. Rat models of sepsis were prepared using caecal ligation puncture. The pharmacokinetics of vancomycin, arbekacin, linezolid, and daptomycin were evaluated using their drug concentration profiles in plasma, kidneys, liver, lungs, skin, and muscles after intravenous administration in normal and septic rats. The kidney/plasma concentration ratio was higher in septic rats than in normal rats for vancomycin, arbekacin, and daptomycin but not for linezolid. The increase in the kidney/plasma concentration ratio for vancomycin was time-dependent, indicating an association between sepsis and stasis of vancomycin in the kidneys. In contrast, the distribution of linezolid from the blood to the organs/tissues in septic rats was comparable to that in normal rats. Sepsis-induced nephrotoxicity results in the stasis of vancomycin in the kidney, suggesting that this exacerbates proximal tubular epithelial cell injury. No dose modification of linezolid may be required for patients with sepsis.

A Review of Population Pharmacokinetic Analyses of Linezolid.

In recent years, many studies on population pharmacokinetics of linezolid have been conducted. This comprehensive review aimed to summarize population pharmacokinetic models of linezolid, by focusing on dosage optimization to maximize the probability of attaining a certain pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic parameter in special populations. We searched the PubMed and EMBASE databases for population pharmacokinetic analyses of linezolid using a parametric non-linear mixed-effect approach, including both observational and prospective trials. Of the 32 studies, 26 were performed in adults, four in children, and one in both adults and children. High between-subject variability was determined in the majority of the models, which was in line with the variability of linezolid concentrations previously detected in observational studies. Some studies found that patients with renal impairment, hepatic failure, advanced age, or low body weight had higher exposure and adverse reactions rates. In contrast, lower concentrations and therapeutic failure were associated with obese patients, young patients, and patients who had undergone renal replacement techniques. In critically ill patients, the inter-individual and intra-individual variability was even greater, suggesting that this population is at an even higher risk of underexposure and overexposure. Therapeutic drug monitoring may be warranted in a large proportion of patients given that the Monte Carlo simulations demonstrated that the one-size-fits-all labeled dosing of 600 mg every 12 h could lead to toxicity or therapeutic failure for high values of the minimum inhibitory concentration of the target pathogen. Further research on covariates, including renal function, hepatic function, and drug–drug interactions related to P-glycoprotein could help to explain variability and improve linezolid dosing regimens.Supplementary InformationThe online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40262-022-01125-2.

Parametric population pharmacokinetics of linezolid: A systematic review.

Linezolid is often used for the infections caused by drug-resistant Gram-positive bacteria. Recent studies suggest that large between-subject variability (BSV) and within-subject variability could alter drug pharmacokinetics (PK) during linezolid therapy due to pathophysiological changes. This review synthesized information on linezolid population PK studies and summarized the significant covariates that influence linezolid PK. A literature search was performed using PubMed, Web of Science and Embase from their inception to 30 September 2021. Published studies were included if they contained data analysing linezolid PK parameters in humans using a population approach with a nonlinear mixed-effects model. Twenty-five studies conducted in adults and five in paediatrics were included. One- and two-compartment models were the commonly used structural models for linezolid. Body size (weight, lean body weight and body surface area), creatinine clearance (CLcr) and age significantly influenced linezolid PK. The median clearance (CL) values (ranges) in infants (0.128 L/h/kg [0.121-0.135]] and children (0.107 L/h/kg [0.088-0.151]] were higher than in adults (0.098 L/h/kg [0.044-0.237]]. For patients with severe renal impairment (CLcr ≤ 30 mL/min), the CL was 37.2% (15.2-55.3%) lower than in patients with normal renal function. The optimal linezolid dosage should be adjusted based on the patient's body size, renal function and age. More studies are needed to explore the exact mechanism of linezolid elimination and evaluate the PK characteristics in paediatric patients.

Population pharmacokinetics and toxicodynamics of continuously infused linezolid in critically ill patients

Linezolid is a treatment option against multi-drug-resistant Gram-positive pathogens. Continuous infusion of linezolid has been proposed to optimize antimicrobial exposure, although pharmacokinetic data from large patient cohorts are lacking. Population pharmacokinetics and the time-dependent association between linezolid exposure and the occurrence of thrombocytopenia in 120 critically ill patients were described. Monte Carlo simulations evaluated pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic/toxicodynamic target attainment in relation to body weight and creatinine clearance for continuously infused doses of 300-2400 mg/day. Linezolid pharmacokinetics were highly variable (interindividual variability of clearance: 52.8% coefficient of variation). Non-linear clearance was quantified, which decreased from 6.82 to 3.82 L/h within 3-6 days in the population. A relationship between linezolid exposure and platelet count over time was established. For standard dosing (1200 mg/day), the model predicted Grade 2, 3 or 4 thrombocytopenia (<75×103/µL, <50×103/µL and <25×103/µL) in 21.7%, 10.4% and 2.5% of patients at day 14, respectively. Patients with impaired renal function displayed higher risk. The overall probability of Grade 3 thrombocytopenia could be reduced from 10.4% using standard dosing to 6.3% if a linezolid steady state plasma concentration of 7 mg/L is targeted, suggesting a value of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). Dosing linezolid by continuous infusion should include considerations of creatinine clearance and body weight to maximize the achievement of therapeutic exposures. However, due to the high variability in individual dose, optimization using TDM seems necessary to optimize linezolid dosing under continuous infusion to avoid toxicity, particularly if longer treatment courses are expected.

A Regression Model to Predict Linezolid Induced Thrombocytopenia in Neonatal Sepsis Patients: A Ten-Year Retrospective Cohort Study.

Background: Linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia (LIT) is the main factor limiting the clinical application of linezolid (LZD). The incidence and risk factors of LIT in neonatal patients were possibly different from other populations based on pathophysiological characteristics. The purpose of this study was to establish a regression model for predicting LIT in neonatal sepsis patients. Methods: We retrospectively included 518 patients and divided them into the LIT group and the non-LIT group. A logistic regression analysis was used to analyze the factors related to LIT, and a regression model was established. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was drawn to evaluate the model’s predictive value. We prospectively collected 39 patients’ data to validate the model and evaluate the effect of LZD pharmacokinetics on LIT. Results: Among the 518 patients, 103 patients (19.9%) developed LIT. The Kaplan–Meier plot revealed that the overall median time from the initiation of LZD treatment to the onset of LIT in preterm infants was much shorter when compared with term infants [10 (6, 12) vs. 13 (9.75, 16.5), p = 0.004]. Multiple logistic regression analysis indicated that the independent risk factors of LIT were lower weight at medication, younger gestational ages, late-onset sepsis, necrotizing enterocolitis, mechanical ventilation, longer durations of LZD treatment, and lower baseline of platelet level. We established the above seven-variable prediction regression model and calculated the predictive probability. The ROC curve showed that the predicted probability of combined body weight, gestational age, duration of LZD treatment, and baseline of platelet had better sensitivity (84.4%), specificity (74.2%), and maximum AUC (AUC = 0.873). LIT occurred in 9 out of 39 patients (23.1%), and the accuracies of positive and negative predictions of LIT were 88.9 and 76.7%, respectively. Compared with the non-LIT patients, the LIT patients had higher trough concentration [11.49 (6.86, 15.13) vs. 5.51 (2.80, 11.61) mg/L; p = 0.028] but lower apparent volume of distribution (Vd) [0.778 (0.687, 1.421) vs. 1.322 (1.099, 1.610) L; p = 0.010]. Conclusion: The incidence of LIT was high in neonatal sepsis patients, especially in preterm infants. LIT occurred earlier in preterm infants than in term infants. The regression model of seven variables had a high predictive value for predicting LIT. LIT was correlated with higher trough concentration and lower Vd.

Linezolid Metabolism Is Catalyzed by Cytochrome P450 2J2, 4F2, and 1B1.

The oxazolidinone antibacterial linezolid has been in clinical use for over 20 years, yet knowledge of the contributions of specific cytochrome (CYP) 450 enzymes to the metabolic clearance of this drug were mostly unknown. In this investigation, it was revealed that three P450 enzymes that had not been previously explored in linezolid metabolism, CYP2J2, CYP4F2, and CYP1B1, catalyzed the 2-hydroxylation and de-ethyleneation of the morpholine moiety of linezolid. The intrinsic clearance for linezolid metabolism in pooled human liver microsomes was low at 0.51 μL/min/mg protein, consistent with its in vivo clearance in humans, and the KM was high (>200 μM). In recombinant human P450 enzymes, a rank order of intrinsic clearance values for linezolid 2-hydroxylation were CYP2J2 ≫ CYP4F2 > CYP2C8 > CYP1B1 ≈ CYP2D6 ≈ CYP3A4 > CYP1A1 > CYP3A5, with nine other P450 enzymes showing no linezolid metabolism. The effect of selective inhibitors for these eight P450 enzymes on linezolid metabolism in pooled human liver microsomes was evaluated to provide estimates of the relative fractional contributions of these enzymes to linezolid metabolism. These experiments suggest that CYP2J2 and CYP4F2 contribute about 50% each to linezolid hepatic metabolism. It is proposed that the oxidative metabolic clearance of linezolid is primarily catalyzed by these two unusual P450 enzymes and that this explains the lack of observation of meaningful effects of common perpetrators of drug interactions on linezolid pharmacokinetics. SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Linezolid is an important antibacterial drug, but the enzymes involved in its oxidative metabolism were unknown. In this study, evidence is shown that supports an important role for two enzymes not frequently associated with the metabolism of drugs: cytochrome P450 2J2 and cytochrome P450 4F2. These observations offer insight to understand the results of clinical drug-drug interaction studies conducted on linezolid.

Linezolid Population Pharmacokinetics in South African Adults with Drug-Resistant Tuberculosis.

Linezolid is widely used for drug-resistant tuberculosis (DR-TB) but has a narrow therapeutic index. To inform dose optimization, we aimed to characterize the population pharmacokinetics of linezolid in South African participants with DR-TB and explore the effect of covariates, including HIV coinfection, on drug exposure. Data were obtained from pharmacokinetic substudies in a randomized controlled trial and an observational cohort study, both of which enrolled adults with drug-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis. Participants underwent intensive and sparse plasma sampling. We analyzed linezolid concentration data using nonlinear mixed-effects modeling and performed simulations to estimate attainment of putative efficacy and toxicity targets. A total of 124 participants provided 444 plasma samples; 116 were on the standard daily dose of 600 mg, while 19 had dose reduction to 300 mg due to adverse events. Sixty-one participants were female, 71 were HIV-positive, and their median weight was 56 kg (interquartile range [IQR], 50 to 63). In the final model, typical values for clearance and central volume were 3.57 liters/h and 40.2 liters, respectively. HIV coinfection had no significant effect on linezolid exposure. Simulations showed that 600-mg dosing achieved the efficacy target (area under the concentration-time curve for the free, unbound fraction of the drug [[Formula: see text] at a MIC level of 0.5 mg/liter) with 96% probability but had 56% probability of exceeding safety target ([Formula: see text]. The 300-mg dose did not achieve adequate efficacy exposures. Our model characterized population pharmacokinetics of linezolid in South African patients with DR-TB and supports the 600-mg daily dose with safety monitoring.

Dosage Individualization of Linezolid: Precision Dosing of Linezolid To Optimize Efficacy and Minimize Toxicity.

The high interindividual variability in the pharmacokinetics (PK) of linezolid has been described, which results in an unacceptably high proportion of patients with either suboptimal or potentially toxic concentrations following the administration of a fixed regimen. The aim of this study was to develop a population pharmacokinetic model of linezolid and use this to build and validate alogorithms for individualized dosing. A retrospective pharmacokinetic analysis was performed using data from 338 hospitalized patients (65.4% male, 65.5 [±14.6] years) who underwent routine therapeutic drug monitoring for linezolid. Linezolid concentrations were analyzed by using high-performance liquid chromatography. Population pharmacokinetic modeling was performed using a nonparametric methodology with Pmetrics, and Monte Carlo simulations were employed to calculate the 100% time >MIC after the administration of a fixed regimen of 600 mg administered every 12 h (q12h) intravenously (i.v.). The dose of linezolid needed to achieve a PTA ≥ 90% for all susceptible isolates classified according to EUCAST was estimated to be as high as 2,400 mg q12h, which is 4 times higher than the maximum licensed linezolid dose. The final PK model was then used to construct software for dosage individualization, and the performance of the software was assessed using 10 new patients not used to construct the original population PK model. A three-compartment model with an absorptive compartment with zero-order i.v. input and first-order clearance from the central compartment best described the data. The dose optimization software tracked patients with a high degree of accuracy. The software may be a clinically useful tool to adjust linezolid dosages in real time to achieve prespecified drug exposure targets. A further prospective study is needed to examine the potential clinical utility of individualized therapy.

Evaluation of Linezolid Pharmacokinetics in Critically Ill Obese Patients with Severe Skin and Soft Tissue Infections.

Linezolid standard dosing is fixed at 600 mg every 12 h (q12h) for adults. Literature suggests critically ill, obese patients require higher doses. The study aim is 2-fold: (i) to describe linezolid pharmacokinetics (PK), and (ii) to evaluate if PK/pharmacodynamic (PD) target attainment is achieved with standard dosing in critically ill, obese patients with severe skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs). Adult patients with a body mass index (BMI) of ≥30 kg/m2 and receiving intravenous (i.v.) linezolid from August 2018 to April 2019 were eligible for consent in this prospective study. Severe SSTIs were defined as necrotizing fasciitis, myonecrosis, or SSTI with sepsis syndrome. Four blood samples were collected at steady state at 1, 3, 5 h postinfusion and as a trough. Target attainment was defined as achieving area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h to MIC (AUC0-24h/MIC) of ≥100 h*mg/liter. Monte Carlo simulations were used to determine the probability of target attainment (PTA). Eleven patients were included in the study. The median BMI was 45.7 kg/m2, and median total body weight (TBW) was 136.0 kg. Seven patients received standard linezolid doses, and four received 600 mg q8h. A one-compartment model described linezolid PK. Based on AUC0-24h/MIC targets, for noncirrhotic patients at 140 kg, the PTA with standard linezolid doses was 100%, 98.8%, 34.1%, and 0% for MICs of 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 mg/liter, respectively. In conclusion, target attainment of ≥90% is not achieved with standard linezolid doses for noncirrhotic patients ≥140 kg with MICs of ≥2 mg/liter. This study adds to accumulating evidence that standard linezolid doses may not be adequate for all patients.

High-throughput and wide-range simultaneous determination of linezolid, daptomycin and tedizolid in human plasma using ultra-performance liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry

Several recent studies on pharmacokinetics of linezolid (LZD) and daptomycin (DAP) reported that plasma concentration was linked to efficacy and adverse effects, suggesting the usefulness of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). The usefulness of TDM for tedizolid (TZD) has not been reported, but a previous report showed individual differences in area under the curve depending on body weight. In intensive care unit (ICU) patients, pharmacokinetics was reported to fluctuate due to various factors. Here, we developed a high-throughput and wide-range simultaneous quantification method for LZD, DAP and TZD in human plasma using ultra-performance liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry (UPLC-MS/MS). Plasma samples were pretreated by solid-phase extraction using Oasis® HLB μElution Plate. The assay fulfilled the requirements of US Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency for bioanalytical method validation. The assay for LZD, DAP and TZD showed good linearity over wide ranges of 100−100000, 150−150000 and 5−5000 ng/mL, respectively. Within-batch accuracy and precision as well as batch-to-batch accuracy and precision for all three drugs fulfilled the criteria of the above guidance. Extraction recovery rates were more than 92.2 % for LZD, 44.7 % for DAP, and 84.8 % for TZD. Matrix effect showed no remarkable differences among low, medium and high quality control samples for the three drugs. The maximum and trough concentrations of three patients each who received LZD, DAP or TZD in ICU were measured by the novel UPLC-MS/MS method. In all patients, the measured concentrations were within the ranges of the calibration curves, demonstrating the feasibility of clinical application of the novel method. In conclusion, we have succeeded to develop the first method for simultaneous quantification of plasma concentrations of LZD, DAP and TZD.