Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26525798›Full record

Trial reportAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2016

No Need for Lopinavir Dose Adjustment during Pregnancy: a Population Pharmacokinetic and Exposure-Response Analysis in Pregnant and Nonpregnant HIV-Infected Subjects.

Ahmed Hamed Salem, Aksana Kaefer Jones, Marilia Santini-Oliveira, Graham P Taylor, Kristine B Patterson, Angela M Nilius, Cheri Enders Klein

Open access · bronzeAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 33% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 4 institutions in 4 countries.

Ahmed Hamed SalemClinical Pharmacology and Pharmacometrics, AbbVie, North Chicago, Illinois, USA Clinical Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmacy, Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt sale0074@umn.edu.
Aksana Kaefer JonesClinical Pharmacology and Pharmacometrics, AbbVie, North Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Marilia Santini-OliveiraLaboratório de Pesquisa Clínica em DST/AIDS, Instituto de Pesquisa Clínica Evandro Chagas, Fundação Oswaldo Cruz, Manguinhos, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Graham P TaylorSaint Mary's Hospital, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, United Kingdom Section of Infectious Diseases, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom.
Kristine B PattersonDepartment of Medicine, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
Angela M NiliusInfectious Diseases Development, AbbVie, North Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Cheri Enders KleinClinical Pharmacology and Pharmacometrics, AbbVie, North Chicago, Illinois, USA.
AbbVie (United States) · USFundação Oswaldo Cruz · BRImperial College London · GBUniversity of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · US

Funding

Virology, Immunology, and Microbiology CoreP30AI050410 · NIAID · UNIV OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL · PI DAVID M. MARGOLIS · 2001 to 2026
$76.9M
NIAID NIH HHS P30 AI050410
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Lopinavir-ritonavir is frequently prescribed to HIV-1-infected women during pregnancy. Decreased lopinavir exposure has been reported during pregnancy, but the clinical significance of this reduction is uncertain. This analysis aimed to evaluate the need for lopinavir dose adjustment during pregnancy. We conducted a population pharmacokinetic analysis of lopinavir and ritonavir concentrations collected from 84 pregnant and 595 nonpregnant treatment-naive and -experienced HIV-1-infected subjects enrolled in six clinical studies. Lopinavir-ritonavir doses in the studies ranged between 400/100 and 600/150 mg twice daily. In addition, linear mixed-effect analysis was used to compare the area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 12 h (AUC0-12) and concentration prior to dosing (Cpredose) in pregnant women and nonpregnant subjects. The relationship between lopinavir exposure and virologic suppression in pregnant women and nonpregnant subjects was evaluated. Population pharmacokinetic analysis estimated 17% higher lopinavir clearance in pregnant women than in nonpregnant subjects. Lopinavir clearance values postpartum were 26.4% and 37.1% lower than in nonpregnant subjects and pregnant women, respectively. As the tablet formulation was estimated to be 20% more bioavailable than the capsule formulation, no statistically significant differences between lopinavir exposure in pregnant women receiving the tablet formulation and nonpregnant subjects receiving the capsule formulation were identified. In the range of lopinavir AUC0-12 or Cpredose values observed in the third trimester, there was no correlation between lopinavir exposure and viral load or proportion of subjects with virologic suppression. Similar efficacy was observed between pregnant women and nonpregnant subjects receiving lopinavir-ritonavir at 400/100 mg twice daily. The pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic results support the use of a lopinavir-ritonavir 400/100-mg twice-daily dose during pregnancy.

Indexed as

AdultAnti-HIV AgentsArea Under CurveChromatography, High Pressure LiquidDrug Administration ScheduleDrug Therapy, CombinationFemaleHIV-1HIV InfectionsHumansLopinavirPregnancyPregnancy Trimester, ThirdRitonavirTabletsTandem Mass SpectrometryAnti-HIV AgentsLopinavirRitonavirTablets

Identifiers

PMID26525798
PMCPMC4704200
OpenAlexW1895374536

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.