This international guideline proposes improving clozapine package inserts
worldwide by using ancestry-based dosing and titration. Adverse drug reaction
(ADR) databases suggest that clozapine is the third most toxic drug in the
United States (US), and it produces four times higher worldwide pneumonia
mortality than that by agranulocytosis or myocarditis. For trough steady-state
clozapine serum concentrations, the therapeutic reference range is narrow, from
350 to 600 ng/mL with the potential for toxicity and ADRs as
concentrations increase. Clozapine is mainly metabolized by CYP1A2 (female
non-smokers, the lowest dose; male smokers, the highest dose). Poor metabolizer
status through phenotypic conversion is associated with co-prescription of
inhibitors (including oral contraceptives and valproate), obesity, or
inflammation with C-reactive protein (CRP) elevations. The Asian population
(Pakistan to Japan) or the Americas’ original inhabitants have lower
CYP1A2 activity and require lower clozapine doses to reach concentrations of
350 ng/mL. In the US, daily doses of
300–600 mg/day are recommended. Slow personalized
titration may prevent early ADRs (including syncope, myocarditis, and
pneumonia). This guideline defines six personalized titration schedules for
inpatients: 1) ancestry from Asia or the original people from the Americas with
lower metabolism (obesity or valproate) needing minimum therapeutic dosages of
75–150 mg/day, 2) ancestry from Asia or the original
people from the Americas with average metabolism needing
175–300 mg/day, 3) European/Western Asian
ancestry with lower metabolism (obesity or valproate) needing
100–200 mg/day, 4) European/Western Asian
ancestry with average metabolism needing 250–400 mg/day,
5) in the US with ancestries other than from Asia or the original people from
the Americas with lower clozapine metabolism (obesity or valproate) needing
150–300 mg/day, and 6) in the US with ancestries other
than from Asia or the original people from the Americas with average clozapine
metabolism needing 300–600 mg/day. Baseline and weekly
CRP monitoring for at least four weeks is required to identify any inflammation,
including inflammation secondary to clozapine rapid titration.
Background
In resource-limited settings, many patients, with no prior PI treatment on a second-line, high genetic barrier, ritonavir boosted protease inhibitor (PI) containing regimen have virologic failure.
Methods
We conducted a cross-sectional survey to investigate the aetiology of virologic failure in two public health antiretroviral clinics in South Africa documenting the prevalence of virologic failure (HIV RNA load > 500 copies/ml) and genotypic antiretroviral resistance; and lopinavir hair and plasma concentrations in a nested case-control study.
Results
Ninety three patients treated with a second-line regimen including lopinavir boosted with ritonavir were included, of whom 50 (25 cases, with virologic failure and 25 controls) were included in a nested case control study. Of 93 patients 37(40%) had virological failure, only 2 of which had had major protease inhibitor mutations. The negative predictive values: probability of failure with lopinavir plasma concentration > 1μg/mL or hair concentrations > 3.63ng/mg for virologic failure were 86% and 89%, and positive predictive values of low concentrations 73% and 79%, respectively, whereas all virologic failures with HIV RNA loads above 1000 copies/ml, of patients without protease inhibitor resistance, could be explained by either having a low lopinavir concentration in plasma or hair.
Conclusions
Most patients who fail a LPV/r regimen, in our setting, have poor lopinavir exposure. A threshold plasma lopinavir concentration (indicating recent LPV/r use) and/or hair concentration (indicating longer term lopinavir exposure) are valuable in determining the aetiology of virologic failure and identifying patients in need of adherence counselling or resistance testing.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.