SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Nelfinavir”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 55 records · Page 3Linked to original sources

PubMed2003

Effects of nelfinavir and its M8 metabolite on lymphocyte P-glycoprotein activity during antiretroviral therapy.

The efflux pump P-glycoprotein decreases drug penetration into cells and tissues. To determine whether nelfinavir or its metabolites inhibit P-glycoprotein in lymphocytes from a healthy volunteer, whole blood cells from human immunodeficiency virus-negative donors were incubated either in human plasma to which nelfinavir or its M8 metabolite were added ex vivo or in plasma from human immunodeficiency virus-positive patients receiving nelfinavir. The 50% P-glycoprotein inhibitory concentrations of purified nelfinavir and M8 were 10.9 micromol/L and 29.5 micromol/L, respectively, for CD4(+) T cells and 19.3 micromol/L and >48 micromol/L, respectively, for CD8(+) T cells. Significant inhibitory activity was present in plasma from 27 of 46 patients (59%) receiving nelfinavir. Plasma nelfinavir concentrations correlated with percent inhibition on CD4(+) (rho = 0.85, P <.0001) and CD8(+) (rho = 0.83, P <.0001) T cells. The M8 concentrations correlated weakly with both inhibition and nelfinavir concentrations. On the basis of our findings in lymphocytes from a healthy volunteer exposed to plasma from human immunodeficiency virus-positive patients, we believe it is likely that CD4(+) and CD8(+) lymphocytes in patients receiving nelfinavir as therapy for human immunodeficiency virus may have P-glycoprotein inhibited by plasma concentrations of nelfinavir.

ATP Binding Cassette Transporter, Subfamily B, Mem↗

PubMed2001

Pharmacokinetics of nelfinavir in human immunodeficiency virus-infected infants.

BACKGROUND: Nelfinavir dosed at approximately 20 to 30 mg/kg three times a day (TID) in older children provides exposure similar to 750 mg TID in adults. However, the pharmacokinetics (PK) of nelfinavir in infants who are < 2 years of age is not well-described. The objective of this study was to determine the pharmacokinetics of nelfinavir in infants < 2 years of age. METHODS: Nelfinavir concentrations were evaluated in 22 HIV-infected infants between 15 days and 2 years of age receiving nelfinavir as part of Pediatric ACTG Study 356. Nelfinavir therapy was initiated at approximately 25 mg/kg TID (n = 18) or approximately 55 mg/kg twice a day (n = 4) and given in combination with nevirapine, stavudine and lamivudine. PK samples were obtained predose and 1.5 and 4 h postdose at approximately 6-month intervals. Eight infants (all < or = 3 months of age) also had intensive PK samples collected at Week 1. RESULTS: The median apparent clearance in the infants with intensive pharmacokinetic sampling was 2.7 liters/h/kg (range, 1.8 to > or = 10) and was similar between twice a day and TID dosing cohorts. Overall nelfinavir concentrations at all collection times were lower in these infants than previously reported in older pediatric patients. CONCLUSIONS: Nelfinavir concentrations in infants are highly variable and lower than those seen in adult or older pediatric populations receiving labeled dosing. Therefore it is necessary to further evaluate nelfinavir safety, effectiveness and pharmacokinetics at higher doses than used among other pediatric populations.

Anti-HIV Agents↗

PubMed2004

Conversion of the HIV protease inhibitor nelfinavir to a bioactive metabolite by human liver CYP2C19.

Antiretroviral therapy for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection includes treatment with both reverse transcriptase inhibitors and protease inhibitors, which markedly suppress viral replication and circulating HIV RNA levels. Cytochrome P450 (P450) enzymes in human liver, chiefly CYP3A4, play a pivotal role in protease inhibitor biotransformation, converting these agents to largely inactive metabolites. However, the protease inhibitor nelfinavir (Viracept) is metabolized mainly to nelfinavir hydroxy-t-butylamide (M8), which exhibits potent antiviral activity, and to other minor products (termed M1 and M3) that are inactive. Since indirect evidence suggests that CYP2C19 underlies M8 formation, we examined the role of this inducible, polymorphic P450 enzyme in nelfinavir t-butylamide hydroxylation by human liver. Rates of microsomal M8 formation were 50.6 +/- 28.3 pmol of product formed/min/nmol P450 (n = 5 subjects), whereas kinetic analysis of the reaction revealed a KM of 21.6 microM and a Vmax of 24.6 pmol/min/nmol P450. In reconstituted systems, CYP2C19 catalyzed nelfinavir t-butylamide hydroxylation at a turnover rate of 2.2 min(-1), whereas CYP2C9, CYP2C8, and CYP3A4 were inactive toward nelfinavir. Polyclonal anti-CYP2C9 (cross-reactive with CYP2C19) and monoclonal anti-CYP2C19 completely inhibited microsomal M8 production, whereas monoclonal CYP2C9 and polyclonal CYP3A4 antibodies were without effect. Similarly, the CYP2C19 substrate omeprazole strongly inhibited (75%) hepatic nelfinavir t-butylamide hydroxylation at a concentration of only 12.5 microM. Our study shows that CYP2C19 underlies formation in human liver of M8, a bioactive nelfinavir metabolite. The inducibility of CYP2C19 by agents (e.g., rifampicin) often taken concurrently with nelfinavir, together with this P450's known polymorphic nature, may thus be important determinants of nelfinavir's antiviral potency.

Antibodies, Monoclonal↗

PubMed2000

A study of the pharmacokinetics of azithromycin and nelfinavir when coadministered in healthy volunteers.

A two-way, open-label, crossover study in 12 subjects was undertaken to study the potential for azithromycin to alter the pharmacokinetics of nelfinavir and/or its active metabolite, M8. A secondary objective was to characterize any potential interaction that nelfinavir may have with azithromycin. During one dosing arm, subjects received a single 1200 mg oral dose of azithromycin. During the other, subjects received 11 days of nelfinavir 750 mg q8h with a single 1200 mg oral dose of azithromycin given concurrently with the Day 9 morning nelfinavir dose. Serum samples were collected after each azithromycin dose for 168 hours and after the Day 8 and 9 morning nelfinavir doses for 8 hours to characterize azithromycin, nelfinavir, and M8 pharmacokinetic parameters during both control and test periods. Both dosing regimens were well tolerated, with only mild to moderate GI side effects being the most frequently reported. Azithromycin was found to cause a statistically, though not clinically, significant decrease in nelfinavir and M8 exposures. In contrast, nelfinavir caused azithromycin Cmax and exposure (AUC) values to increase by > 100%. Inhibition of p-glycoprotein by nelfinavir may be responsible for this significant interaction. This increase in azithromycin exposure has the potential to increase clinical antibacterial efficacy without significantly increasing gastrointestinal side effects, though the impact on other systemic sites needs to be studied.

Adult↗

PubMed2005

The steady-state pharmacokinetics of nelfinavir in combination with tenofovir in HIV-infected patients.

BACKGROUND: The nucleotide analogue, tenofovir, has been shown to lower plasma atazanavir levels in pharmacokinetic trials, an interaction that may be partly reversed by the addition of ritonavir, whereas plasma tenofovir levels are themselves raised when the drug is combined with lopinavir/ritonavir. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of tenofovir coadministration on the steady-state pharmacokinetics of nelfinavir in HIV-infected patients. METHODS: Eighteen patients received nelfinavir 1250 mg twice daily plus prescribed nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors for at least 14 days, with pharmacokinetic measurements performed on day 15. Treatment with nelfinavir was continued for another 7 days with the addition of 300 mg tenofovir once daily. Pharmacokinetic measurements were repeated on day 22. Plasma samples were analysed by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry for nelfinavir, its primary metabolite, M8, and tenofovir. The parameters AUC0-12, C0, Cmax and Tmax were compared for nelfinavir with and without tenofovir by calculating geometric mean ratios (GMRs) of the pharmacokinetic parameters with associated 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs). Safety was assessed throughout the study. RESULTS: The addition of tenofovir to the nelfinavir-based regimen had no effect on the pharmacokinetics of nelfinavir. The GMR of the nelfinavir AUC0-12 values was 0.97 (95% CI: 0.80-1.17). There was a slight decrease in M8 metabolite (AUC0-12 ratio, 0.87; 95% CI: 0.68-1.11) but this was not significant. No serious adverse events occurred through the study period. CONCLUSION: Nelfinavir does not require dose adjustment when coadministered with tenofovir and appears to be well-tolerated by HIV-infected patients.

Adenine↗

PubMed2005

The impact of pharmacologic and genetic knockout of P-glycoprotein on nelfinavir levels in the brain and other tissues in mice.

Insufficient concentrations of protease inhibitors such as nelfinavir may reduce the effectiveness of HIV dementia treatment. The efflux transporter mdr1 product P-glycoprotein (P-gp) has been demonstrated to play a role in limiting nelfinavir brain levels. The goal of this study was to compare the effect of GF120918 (10 mg/kg, IV), a P-gp inhibitor, on intravenous nelfinavir (10 mg/kg) in vivo disposition and tissue penetration in P-gp-competent mdr1a/1b (+/+) mice versus P-gp double knockout mdr1a/1b (-/-) mice. Intravenous administration with the P-gp inhibitor GF120918 to mdr1a/1b (+/+) mice increased nelfinavir concentrations over a range of 2.3- to 27-fold, whereas nelfinavir distribution in mdr1a/1b (-/-) mice was 2- to 16-fold higher than that in their wild counterparts. Nelfinavir levels after GF120918 coadministration were higher in the heart, liver, and kidneys than those detected with mdr1a/1b knockout mice. In contrast, mdr1a/1b knockout mice exhibited higher nelfinavir levels in the brain (16.1-fold vs. 8.9-fold increase) and spleen (4.1-fold vs. 2.3-fold increase) compared to pharmacological inhibition with GF120918 in wild mice. Most notably, GF120918 provided tissue-specific effects in mdr1a/1b knockout mice with enhanced (p < 0.05) drug accumulation in the brain ( approximately 21-fold) and heart (3.3-fold). Our results suggest mdr1a/1b-independant mechanisms may also contribute to nelfinavir tissue distribution in mice.

ATP Binding Cassette Transporter, Subfamily B, Mem↗

PubMed2004

The pharmacokinetics of nelfinavir and M8 during pregnancy and post partum.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to explore the pharmacokinetics of nelfinavir and its active metabolite hydroxy-t-butylamidenelfinavir (M8) during pregnancy and post partum. METHODS: Eleven human immunodeficiency virus type 1-infected pregnant women receiving 1250 mg nelfinavir twice daily were enrolled. Pharmacokinetics of nelfinavir and M8 were assessed over a 12-hour period during pregnancy (median, 32 weeks' gestation; range, 31-36 weeks) and post partum (median, 8 weeks post partum; range, 6-15 weeks). Drug concentrations were analyzed by HPLC coupled to tandem mass spectroscopy, and pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated by use of noncompartmental methods. RESULTS: The median area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to 12 hours (AUC 0-12), the maximal plasma concentration (C max), and the concentration at the end of the dosing interval (C 12) for nelfinavir post partum were 33.5 h . microg/mL, 5.80 microg/mL, and 1.40 microg/mL, respectively. The values for the geometric mean ratio (GMR) (third trimester/post partum) for the nelfinavir AUC 0-12 , C max , and C 12 were 0.76 (90% confidence interval [CI], 0.54-1.06), 0.81 (90% CI, 0.57-1.15), and 0.43 (90% CI, 0.25-0.76), respectively. The GMR values for the M8 AUC 0-12 , C max , and C 12 were 0.32 (90% CI, 0.18-0.55), 0.31 (90% CI, 0.19-0.51), and 0.30 (90% CI, 0.14-0.64), respectively. The median ratio values of the AUC 0-12 of M8 and nelfinavir (M8/nelfinavir) during the third trimester and post partum were 11% and 27%, respectively (GMR, 0.42 [90% CI, 0.33-0.53]). CONCLUSIONS: Nelfinavir exposure was reduced during pregnancy, and the reduction was statistically significant for C 12 . M8 concentrations were about 70% lower during pregnancy compared with post partum, suggesting either induction of hepatic cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 or inhibition of CYP2C19, or both, during pregnancy. Because 8 of 11 women had subtherapeutic nelfinavir trough concentrations during pregnancy, the safety and efficacy of therapeutic drug monitoring should be investigated.

Adult↗

PubMed2002

Determination of nelfinavir free drug concentrations in plasma by equilibrium dialysis and liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry: important factors for method optimization.

A method was developed and validated for measuring the free fraction of nelfinavir in plasma employing equilibrium dialysis for the separation of free (unbound) drug and liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry for quantitation. Nelfinavir, widely used to treat HIV infection, is a highly bound HIV protease inhibitor with the fraction bound in plasma being greater than 98%. Thus variations in the free fraction may be clinically important when interpreting total drug concentrations. Optimization of the method was carried out considering the influence of sample matrix and physicochemical and absorptive properties of nelfinavir. Nelfinavir free fraction averaged 0.41 +/- 0.094, 0.43 +/- 0.087 and 0.41 +/- 0.063% at nelfinavir plasma concentrations of 1000, 2000 and 3000 ng/ml, respectively. Free nelfinavir concentrations were underestimated with this assay by approximately 25% because of unavoidable losses to adsorption. However, the adsorptive loss was reproducible and consistent across the concentration range of the assay. Within-day and between-day precisions ranged from 6.0 to 9.4% and 15.2 to 27.3%, respectively. The lower limit of quantitation of the unbound concentration of nelfinavir was 1.0 ng/ml, permitting analysis of samples with total concentrations of nelfinavir in plasma that are > or = 400 ng/ml. This developed method proves reproducible and sensitive and its application to patient plasma samples is also reported.

Adsorption↗

PubMed2002

Nelfinavir, a protease inhibitor, increases sirolimus levels in a liver transplantation patient: a case report.

With the increasing success of liver transplantation and the proven effectiveness of highly active retroviral therapy in HIV-positive patients, liver transplantation has been performed successfully in selected HIV-positive recipients with CD4 and an HIV viral load response to highly active antiretroviral therapy. In these patients, an interaction between a protease inhibitor (nelfinavir) and tacrolimus has been shown. The effect of nelfinavir on the pharmacokinetics of sirolimus, a newer immunosuppressive drug, is currently not known. The goal of the present case report is to document the interaction between sirolimus and nelfinavir in a liver transplantation patient. A 40-year-old woman who was HIV positive underwent a cadaveric liver transplantation for acute fulminant liver failure secondary to nevirapine (a nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor). Postoperatively, she was treated with tacrolimus and steroids. She experienced steroid-resistant rejection and was started on sirolimus on the 17th postoperative day. Kinetic parameters were determined after a 2-mg oral dose of sirolimus and 250 mg of nelfinavir by collecting multiple peripheral venous blood samples before and after sirolimus administration. The kinetic parameters were compared with parameters from three liver transplantation patients on sirolimus who were not on nelfinavir. After normalizing the kinetic parameters to sirolimus dose of 1 mg/d, 0-hour and 24-hour trough sirolimus concentrations were nine-fold and five-fold higher for the patient who was on nelfinavir, compared with those who were not on nelfinavir. The maximum concentration was 3.2 times higher, the area under the concentration curve was 1.6 times higher, and the terminal disposition half-life was prolonged by 60%. The time to reach the peak concentration was 1 hour in all patients. Increase in trough concentration, peak concentration area under the curve concentration, and prolongation of half-life of sirolimus has been shown in a patient who was on a low dose (one fifth the recommended dose) of nelfinavir.

Adult↗

PubMed2002

Lopinavir-ritonavir versus nelfinavir for the initial treatment of HIV infection.

BACKGROUND: Lopinavir is a newly developed inhibitor of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) protease that, when formulated with ritonavir, yields mean trough plasma lopinavir concentrations that are at least 75 times as high as that needed to inhibit replication of wild-type HIV by 50 percent. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind trial in which 653 HIV-infected adults who had not received antiretroviral therapy for more than 14 days were randomly assigned to receive either lopinavir-ritonavir (400 mg of lopinavir plus 100 mg of ritonavir twice daily) with nelfinavir placebo or nelfinavir (750 mg three times daily) with lopinavir-ritonavir placebo. All patients also received open-label stavudine and lamivudine. The primary efficacy end points were the presence of fewer than 400 HIV RNA copies per milliliter of plasma at week 24 and the time to the loss of virologic response through week 48. RESULTS: At week 48, greater proportions of patients treated with lopinavir-ritonavir than of patients treated with nelfinavir had fewer than 400 copies of HIV RNA per milliliter (75 percent vs. 63 percent, P<0.001) and fewer than 50 copies per milliliter (67 percent vs. 52 percent, P<0.001). The time to the loss of virologic response was greater in the lopinavir-ritonavir group than in the nelfinavir group (hazard ratio, 2.0; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.5 to 2.7; P<0.001). The estimated proportion of patients with a persistent virologic response through week 48 was 84 percent for patients receiving lopinavir-ritonavir and 66 percent for those receiving nelfinavir. Both regimens were well tolerated, with the rate of discontinuation related to the study drugs at 3.4 percent among patients receiving lopinavir-ritonavir and 3.7 percent among patients receiving nelfinavir. Among patients with more than 400 copies of HIV RNA per milliliter at some point from week 24 through week 48, resistance mutations in HIV protease were demonstrated in viral isolates from 25 of 76 nelfinavir-treated patients (33 percent) and none of 37 patients treated with lopinavir-ritonavir (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: For the initial treatment of HIV-infected adults, a combination regimen that includes lopinavir-ritonavir is well tolerated and has antiviral activity superior to that of a nelfinavir-containing regimen.

Adult↗

PubMed2005

Pharmacogenetics of long-term responses to antiretroviral regimens containing Efavirenz and/or Nelfinavir: an Adult Aids Clinical Trials Group Study.

BACKGROUND: Efavirenz and nelfinavir are metabolized by cytochrome P-450 (CYP) 2B6 and CYP2C19, respectively, with some involvement by CYP3A. Nelfinavir is a substrate for P-glycoprotein, which is encoded by MDR1. The present study examined associations between genetic variants and long-term responses to treatment. METHODS: Adult AIDS Clinical Trials Group study 384 randomized antiretroviral-naive subjects to receive efavirenz and/or nelfinavir plus 2 nucleoside analogues, with follow-up lasting up to 3 years. Population pharmacokinetics were estimated from a nonlinear mixed-effects model. Polymorphisms in CYP2B6, CYP2C19, CYP3A4, CYP3A5, and MDR1 were characterized. RESULTS: The 504 participants in the genetic study included 340 efavirenz recipients and 348 nelfinavir recipients (184 of the 504 participants received both efavirenz and nelfinavir). Of the participants, 49% were white, 31% were black, and 19% were Hispanic. Plasma exposure to efavirenz and nelfinavir in each population was significantly associated with the polymorphisms CYP2B6 516G-->T and CYP2C19 681G-->A, respectively. Among efavirenz recipients, the MDR1 position 3435 TT genotype was associated with decreased likelihood of virologic failure and decreased emergence of efavirenz-resistant virus but not with plasma efavirenz exposure. Among nelfinavir recipients, a trend toward decreased virologic failure was associated with the polymorphism CYP2C19 681G-->A. CONCLUSIONS: Genetic variants predict plasma exposure to efavirenz and nelfinavir, and they may predict virologic failure and/or emergence of drug-resistant virus. These associations with treatment responses must be validated in other studies.

ATP Binding Cassette Transporter, Subfamily B, Mem↗

PubMed2000

A randomized, comparative study of lamivudine plus stavudine, with indinavir or nelfinavir, in treatment-experienced HIV-infected patients.

OBJECTIVE: To compare adherence and clinical outcome with two modalities of highly active antiretroviral therapy (HAART), in HIV-infected patients. DESIGN: Randomized, open-label, prospective study. SETTING: Tertiary care centre in Spain. PATIENTS: A total of 112 non-naive HIV-infected patients, recruited from March 1998 through August 1998, were studied. INTERVENTIONS: Triple drug therapy with stavudine and lamivudine, plus indinavir or nelfinavir. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Adherence, side-effects, and immunological, virological, and clinical efficacy of treatment were assessed at 3-month intervals. RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 9 months, 32% of patients in the indinavir group versus 50% of those in the nelfinavir group showed adequate adherence in all clinical appointments (P= 0.0559). Adherence was superior in the nelfinavir group in every visit. After 6 months of treatment 48% of subjects in the indinavir group and 70% of those in the nelfinavir group exhibited adequate adherence (P= 0.0311). After 9 months 35% of patients in the indinavir group and 59% of those in the nelfinavir group showed adequate adherence (P= 0.0291). Side-effects provoked discontinuation of treatment in 34% of patients in the indinavir group and 12% of patients in the nelfinavir group (P= 0.0073). Immunological and virological efficacy were similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: Adherence to a HAART regimen with stavudine plus lamivudine plus nelfinavir was superior to a regimen with stavudine plus lamivudine plus indinavir. Side-effects provoked more discontinuation of treatment in the indinavir group than in the nelfinavir group.

Adult↗

PubMed2003

Pharmacokinetics of nelfinavir and its active metabolite, hydroxy-tert-butylamide, in infants perinatally infected with human immunodeficiency virus type 1.

BACKGROUND: In children younger than 2 years of age vertically infected with HIV-1, the recommended pediatric dosing regimen for nelfinavir (20 to 30 mg/kg three times a day) provides insufficient drug exposure. This study was conducted to determine the steady state pharmacokinetics of nelfinavir and its active metabolite, M8, in this population. METHODS: Fourteen infants (2.3 to 8.5 months) underwent 18 intensive pharmacokinetic studies of nelfinavir and M8 at steady state. Nelfinavir and M8 concentrations were measured by high performance liquid chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry, and individual pharmacokinetic values were determined. RESULTS: A mean nelfinavir daily dose of 135.7 +/- 18.8 mg/kg (twice or three times a day) resulted in median C(min), C(max), area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC(0-24 h)) and CL/ for nelfinavir of 0.627 mg/l, 2.39 mg/l, 30.6 mg*h/l and 4.2 liters/h/kg, respectively. When normalized for a daily dose of nelfinavir of 150 mg/kg/day, 16.7% of C(max) and 27.8% of AUC(0-24 h) values were below the tenth percentile for adult values. CONCLUSIONS: During the first year of life, nelfinavir requirement is much higher than in older children and adults to obtain similar drug exposure. The mechanisms underlying such differences may involve higher first past metabolism and/or drug interactions or might be related to feeding conditions.

Didanosine↗

PubMed2006

Nelfinavir induces liposarcoma apoptosis and cell cycle arrest by upregulating sterol regulatory element binding protein-1.

"HIV protease-induced lipodystrophy syndrome" is associated with the use of HIV protease inhibitors for treatment of HIV infection. In-vitro studies suggest that alteration of sterol regulatory element binding protein-1 levels underlie its pathogenesis. We postulated that HIV protease inhibitors may represent a novel class of antiliposarcoma agents. SW872, FU-DDLS-1 and LiSa-2 liposarcoma, and HT1080 and 293 nonliposarcoma cell lines were treated with HIV protease inhibitors (nelfinavir, ritonavir, saquinavir, indinavir and amprenavir), and clonogenic assays were performed. Nelfinavir exhibited the most potent inhibition of clonogenicity, and further assays for proliferation, cell cycle and apoptosis were performed with nelfinavir. Immunoblots were performed for sterol regulatory element binding protein-1, proapoptotic and cell cycle-related protein expression after nelfinavir treatment. Finally, a sterol regulatory element binding protein-1-inducible SW872 cell line was developed to examine the phenotype resulting from upregulated sterol regulatory element binding protein-1. Nelfinavir selectively inhibited clonogenicity and proliferation, and induced G1 cell cycle block and induced apoptosis in a dose-dependent manner in SW872 and LiSa-2 cells, whereas it had minimal or no effect on these parameters in FU-DDLS-1 or nonliposarcoma cells. Nelfinavir induced significant sterol regulatory element binding protein-1 expression in a dose-dependent and time-dependent fashion in sensitive SW872 and LiSa-2 cells, modestly in HT1080 cells, but not in nelfinavir-insensitive FU-DDLS-1 and 293 cells without inducing adipocytic differentiation. Forced expression of sterol regulatory element binding protein-1 in inducible-SW872 cells led to the induction of proapoptotic and antiproliferative proteins, and consequent reduction of cellular proliferation. Our data indicate that nelfinavir represents a novel class of antiliposarcoma agent that acts by selectively upregulating sterol regulatory element binding protein-1 expression in liposarcomas.

Antineoplastic Agents↗

PubMed2006

Population pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of nelfinavir and its active metabolite M8 in HIV-1-infected children.

BACKGROUND: The objectives of this study are to develop and validate a population pharmacokinetic model that adequately describes the pharmacokinetics of nelfinavir and its active metabolite M8 in HIV-1-infected children; to define factors involved in the pharmacokinetic variability, which could aid in defining dosing strategies; and to correlate the pharmacokinetics to the treatment response. METHODS: Protease inhibitor-naive, HIV-1-infected children were included. A population pharmacokinetic model of nelfinavir and M8 was developed using NONMEM. Bayesian analysis was used to estimate pharmacokinetic values. A pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic analysis was performed to study relationships between these values and the virologic response to therapy. RESULTS: From 38 children, 724 nelfinavir and 636 M8 plasma concentrations were available. The pharmacokinetics of both compounds were described simultaneously with a one-compartment model with first-order elimination. Clearance (CL/F) and volume of distribution (V/F) were 32.6 L/h (interindividual variability [IIV]: 31.6%) and 281 L/h (IIV: 29.7%) for nelfinavir and 86.2 L/h (IIV: 43.1%) and 42.3 L/h for M8. No factors could be defined that affected the pharmacokinetics of nelfinavir or M8. The overall virologic response was 78% (HIV-1 RNA <500 copies/mL, on-treatment analysis). No differences in exposure to nelfinavir and M8 were observed between responders and nonresponders. The only factor distinguishing the two groups was a higher baseline HIV-1 RNA concentration in nonresponders. CONCLUSION: A model was developed and validated that adequately described the population pharmacokinetics of nelfinavir and M8 in a childhood population. No factors affecting dosing strategies were identified, and no correlation could be demonstrated between the exposure to nelfinavir and M8 and the virologic treatment response.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2004

Effect of efavirenz treatment on the pharmacokinetics of nelfinavir boosted by ritonavir in healthy volunteers.

AIMS: A once-daily (q.d.) nucleoside-sparing regimen can prevent mitochondrial toxicity, overcome viral resistance and improve compliance. In the present study the effect of efavirenz on the pharmacokinetics and tolerability of once-daily nelfinavir/ritonavir was evaluated in healthy subjects. METHODS: This was a multiple-dose, open-label, single-group, two-period study in 24 healthy subjects. Each received from days 1-10 (period 1): 1875 mg nelfinavir plus 200 mg ritonavir q.d. with a 300-kcal snack. During days 11-20 (period 2) efavirenz 600 mg q.d. was added to the regimen. Blood samples were collected up to 24 h after dosing on days 10 (period 1) and 20 (period 2). High-performance liquid chromatography methods were used for the determination of the concentrations of all compounds. The main pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated using noncompartmental methods. RESULTS: All subjects completed the study. After the first period mean nelfinavir AUC(0-24 h), C(max) and C(24) were 49.6 mg h(-1) l(-1), 5.0 mg l(-1) and 0.37 mg l(-1), and the sum of nelfinavir plus its active metabolite M8 C(24) was 0.83 mg l(-1). The relative bioavailability, expressed as a geometric mean ratio (90% confidence interval) for nelfinavir AUC(0-24 h), C(max) and C(24) of period 2 compared with period 1 was: 1.30 (1.21, 1.40), 1.29 (1.19, 1.40) and 1.48 (1.32, 1.66). The sum of nelfinavir and M8 C(24) in period 2 was 0.99 mg l(-1), an increase of 19%. No serious adverse events occurred. CONCLUSIONS: The studied regimens were well tolerated. Nelfinavir/ritonavir given together with efavirenz resulted in a 48% higher mean C(24) concentration for nelfinavir, and the sum of nelfinavir and M8 C(24) concentrations was 0.99 mg l(-1). Efavirenz exposure in this study was similar to that reported previously, and therefore can be used effectively in combination with ritonavir and nelfinavir.

Alkynes↗

PubMed2005

Population pharmacokinetic analysis for nelfinavir and its metabolite M8 in virologically controlled HIV-infected patients on HAART.

AIMS: To describe the pharmacokinetics of nelfinavir and its main metabolite M8 in HIV-infected patients with a sustained virological response, to characterize the effect of covariates and to estimate inter- and intra-individual variability in the pharmacokinetics. METHODS: Three hundred and twenty concentrations of both nelfinavir and M8 were measured in 46 patients enrolled in the COPHAR 1-ANRS 102 study. Blood samples were taken at a first visit (one sample before drug administration and four samples at fixed times after) and at a second visit 1 to 3 months later (one before and one 3 h after drug administration). The data from both visits on nelfinavir and M8 were modelled jointly in all patients using a population approach. RESULTS: A one-compartment model with first-order absorption and elimination best described nelfinavir data, with an additional compartment incorporating a first order rate-constant describing the metabolism of the drug to M8. For nelfinavir, the apparent volume of distribution (V/F ) (95% confidence interval for the mean), was 309 l (185, 516), the absorption rate constant (k(a)) was 0.4 h(-1) (0.2, 0.8), and the apparent clearance (CL/F ) was 37.3 l h(-1) (32, 44). For M8, V(m) /(Fk(m)) and CL(m)/(Fk(m)) were 866 l h(-1) (351, 2161) and 1670 l (965, 2894), respectively. The interindividual variabilities were 34.9%, 34.3% and 62.2% for V/F, CL/F and CL(m)/(Fk(m)), respectively. The interoccasion variability was 27.8% for CL/F. The mean half-lives were 05.38 h and 00.44 h for nelfinavir and M8, respectively. Significant but opposite effects of comedication with zidovudine were found on nelfinavir CL/F and M8 CL(m)/(Fk(m)), but they were not considered to be clinically relevant. CONCLUSIONS: A joint model was found to describe adequately nelfinavir and M8 concentrations and was used to estimate pharmacokinetic parameters for M8. The model can be used to build reference pharmacokinetic profiles for therapeutic drug monitoring of the drug.

Adult↗

PubMed2005

The long-term pharmacokinetics and safety of adding low-dose ritonavir to a nelfinavir 1,250 mg twice-daily regimen in HIV-infected patients.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the long-term pharmacokinetics and safety of adding ritonavir 100 mg twice-daily to a nelfinavir 1250 mg twice-daily regimen in HIV-infected patients. METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, open-label, controlled 24-week study. Sixteen patients receiving a nelfinavir 1250 mg twice-daily regimen with plasma viral load <1000 HIV-1 RNA copies/mL were randomized to continue treatment or to have ritonavir 100 mg twice-daily added. Safety, including fasting lipid levels, was evaluated at weeks 4, 12 and 24. Patients who were randomized to have ritonavir added (n=9) participated in three 12-h pharmacokinetic evaluations at baseline, week 4 and week 24. RESULTS: Increases in median nelfinavir steady-state plasma concentrations at 12 h (C(12)) from 512 to 773 ng/mL [median difference 450 ng/mL; 95% confidence interval (CI) 116--1510 ng/mL] and in median active nelfinavir metabolite M 8 C(12) from 107 to 603 ng/mL (median difference 545 ng/mL; 95% CI 370--891) were seen after the addition of low-dose ritonavir (baseline to week 24). There were no differences between the nelfinavir or M 8 pharmacokinetic parameters at weeks 4 and 24. No significant changes or differences in the concentration of fasting total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol or total triglycerides or in the occurrence of adverse events were observed within or between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Nelfinavir and especially M 8 concentrations are increased when low-dose ritonavir is added to a nelfinavir-containing regimen. The combination seems to be safe and the nelfinavir/ritonavir regimen could be an option in patients with low nelfinavir+M 8 concentrations.

Adult↗