Previous Article | Next Article 
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, March 1999, p. 568-572, Vol. 43, No. 3
0066-4804/99/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1999, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
Pharmacokinetics of Ethambutol under Fasting
Conditions, with Food, and with Antacids
Charles A.
Peloquin,1,2,3,*
Amy E.
Bulpitt,1
George S.
Jaresko,4,5
Roger W.
Jelliffe,5,6
James M.
Childs,1 and
David E.
Nix7
Department of Medicine, National Jewish
Medical and Research Center,1 and School
of Pharmacy2 and School of
Medicine,3 University of Colorado, Denver,
Colorado; School of Pharmacy,4
Laboratory of Applied
Pharmacokinetics,5 and School of
Medicine,6 University of Southern
California, Los Angeles, California; and College of
Pharmacy, University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona7
Received 12 March 1998/Returned for modification 13 August
1998/Accepted 7 December 1998
 |
ABSTRACT |
Ethambutol (EMB) is the most frequent "fourth drug" used for
the empiric treatment of Mycobacterium
tuberculosis and a frequently used drug for infections
caused by Mycobacterium avium complex. The pharmacokinetics
of EMB in serum were studied with 14 healthy males and females in a
randomized, four-period crossover study. Subjects ingested single doses
of EMB of 25 mg/kg of body weight under fasting conditions twice, with
a high-fat meal, and with aluminum-magnesium antacid. Serum was
collected for 48 h and assayed by gas chromatography-mass
spectrometry. Data were analyzed by noncompartmental methods and by a
two-compartment pharmacokinetic model with zero-order absorption and
first-order elimination. Both fasting conditions produced similar
results: a mean (± standard deviation) EMB maximum concentration of
drug in serum (Cmax) of 4.5 ± 1.0 µg/ml, time to maximum concentration of drug in serum (Tmax) of 2.5 ± 0.9 h, and area
under the concentration-time curve from 0 h to infinity
(AUC0-
) of 28.9 ± 4.7 µg · h/ml. In the
presence of antacids, subjects had a mean Cmax
of 3.3 ± 0.5 µg/ml, Tmax of 2.9 ± 1.2 h, and AUC0-
of 27.5 ± 5.9 µg · h/ml. In the presence of the Food and Drug Administration high-fat
meal, subjects had a mean Cmax of 3.8 ± 0.8 µg/ml, Tmax of 3.2 ± 1.3 h,
and AUC0-
of 29.6 ± 4.7 µg · h/ml. These
reductions in Cmax, delays in
Tmax, and modest reductions in
AUC0-
can be avoided by giving EMB on an empty stomach
whenever possible.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
Ethambutol (EMB) is the most
frequently used "fourth drug" for the empiric treatment of
tuberculosis (3). The standard short-course treatment
of tuberculosis consists of isoniazid (INH), rifampin (RIF), and
pyrazinamide (PZA), plus either EMB or streptomycin until
susceptibility data are available (3). Also, EMB is
frequently used for the treatment of infections caused by
Mycobacterium avium complex (2). Limited
information exists regarding the pharmacokinetics of EMB in
healthy or infected individuals or regarding the effect of food or
antacids on the gastrointestinal absorption of the drug (1,
12-15, 17-19, 21, 22). We examined the pharmacokinetics of EMB
in healthy volunteers under fasting conditions (two replicates), with
food, and with an aluminum-magnesium hydroxide antacid. This study
describes the concentrations in serum and the pharmacokinetic behavior
under optimal conditions, and the results can be used as benchmarks for
comparison with those for samples obtained in other clinical settings.
(Part of this study was presented at the 37th Interscience Conference
on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 28 September to 1 October 1997 [20].)
 |
MATERIALS AND METHODS |
We conducted a four-period, randomized crossover study of EMB.
The study protocol followed the guidelines of the Helsinki Declaration
of 1975 and its amendments and was approved by the institutional review
board at Millard Fillmore Hospital, Buffalo, N.Y. Written informed
consent was obtained from each subject before the study. Sixteen
healthy female and male volunteers were scheduled to participate.
Subjects were eligible to participate if they were >18 years of age
and were determined to be in good health as assessed by history,
physical examination, and laboratory studies including serum
chemistries, complete blood count with differential, and 12-lead
electrocardiogram. Individuals were excluded if they had histories of a
major disease of the kidneys (estimated creatinine clearance
[CLCR],
50 ml/min), the liver (transaminases, alkaline phosphatase, or bilirubin
2 times normal), or the cardiovascular system (New York class I to IV heart failure) or a hematocrit
36% at
screening. They were also excluded if they had known gastrointestinal diseases that might affect the absorption of the drugs; known positive
human immunodeficiency virus serology; AIDS; or histories of adverse
reactions to INH, RIF, PZA, EMB, or related drugs. They were also
excluded if they weighed >130% of ideal body weight, were pregnant or
nursing, or donated blood within 30 days prior to the study
(4). The subjects agreed to refrain from the use of
prescription or nonprescription drugs (including vitamins) and alcohol
during the entire study period. Women who were taking oral
contraceptives at the start of the study were allowed to continue these
during the study. They were required to agree to use additional
contraceptive methods during the study period and for a week after the
last dose of RIF. At the conclusion of the study, each subject
underwent a brief physical examination and had blood drawn for serum
chemistry and hematology, and female subjects had a repeat pregnancy test.
Experimental design.
Sixteen subjects were randomized in
four blocks of four subjects. The four treatments were fasting
conditions (twice, to determine intrasubject variability), a high-fat
meal, and aluminum-magnesium antacid. The subjects were housed at the
study center from 10 h before to 24 h after dosing and
returned for the 36- and 48-h collections. After eating a light snack
prior to 2300, they fasted overnight. For three of the treatments, they
continued to fast for 4 h after the dose. On one of these three
fasting occasions, they also took 30 ml of aluminum-magnesium hydroxide
(Mylanta) 9 h before dosing, at the time of the dose, after meals,
and at bedtime postdose. For the fourth treatment, they consumed the standard Food and Drug Administration high-fat breakfast beginning 0.25 h before dosing. This meal consisted of 8 oz of whole milk, two scrambled eggs, two strips of bacon, two slices of toast with two
butter pads, and one hash brown potato patty. The meal provided an
estimated 53 g of carbohydrate, 33 g of protein, and 51 g of fat, for 792 kcal, 57% as fat. For all four treatments, subjects received single oral doses of 25 mg of EMB (median, 1,950 mg; dosed to
the nearest 100 mg, with scored 500-mg tablets [Wyeth-Lederle, Philadelphia, Pa.) per kg of body weight with 240 ml of tap water. They
also received 300 mg of INH, 600 mg of RIF, and 30 mg of PZA (median,
2,386 mg) per kg. Doses for all treatment periods were based on the
subjects' prestudy weights. The subjects were allowed to ingest water
ad libitum after the doses were given, and identical, nutritionally
balanced meals were provided to all subjects during the remainder of
the study period. There was a 14-day washout between each study period.
Sample collection.
A 20-gauge angiocatheter was inserted
into a forearm vein for the collection of blood samples and was
maintained patent with a dilute heparin solution (10 to 15 U/ml). Two
milliliters of blood was withdrawn and discarded prior to collection of
each blood sample (12 ml) into plain red-top vacuum tubes. Serial blood samples for serum drug concentration analyses were collected at 0, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, 16, 24, 36, and
48 h after the doses. Samples were allowed to clot for 30 min and
then centrifuged at 2,500 to 3,000 × g for 10 min. Serum samples were then harvested and frozen at 
70°C until assay.
Urine samples were collected within 30 min of dosing (baseline).
Subsequently, all urine was collected from 0 to 12 h and from 12 to 24 h. Samples were kept refrigerated during the period of
collection. The total volume was measured at the end of the collection
period, and 10-ml aliquots from each collection were frozen at

70°C until assay.
Sample analysis.
All assays were performed with a validated
assay on a Hewlett-Packard (Wilmington, Del.) model 5890 Series II gas
chromatograph with a Hewlett-Packard model 5971A mass selective
detector. The serum standard curves for EMB ranged from 0.05 to 10 µg/ml. The absolute recovery of EMB from serum was 95.8%. The
within-day precision (percent coefficient of variation [% CV]) of
validation quality control (QC) samples was 2.2 to 4.1%, and the
overall validation precision was 2.8 to 3.3%. The urine standard
curves for EMB ranged from 0.05 to 50 µg/ml, with similar
reproducibility. EMB urine samples were diluted 1:10 prior to
extraction. The assay error pattern was determined from QC samples
assayed over the course of the study. A line was fitted to the plot of
the QC standard deviations (y) versus their means
(x) at the three QC ranges (low, medium, and high). The
assay error pattern used for the subsequent nonlinear regression was
variance (standard deviation squared [SD2]) =
(0.024 + 0.024x)2 (11).
Pharmacokinetic analysis.
Concentrations in serum below the
quantification lower limit were treated as zeros in averaging the
concentrations at a given collection time. The observed maximal serum
concentration (Cmax) and the time at which it
occurred (Tmax) were determined for each subject
by inspection of the serum concentration-versus-time graphs. The area
under the serum concentration-versus-time curve (AUC) from time zero to
the time of the last quantifiable concentration (AUC0-t*) was determined by the linear trapezoidal rule. The last quantifiable concentration was designated C*. The AUC from time zero to infinity
(AUC0-
) was determined as
AUC0-t* + C*/
, with
determined by ADAPT II (see below). The potential for accumulation of
these drugs with multiple doses was evaluated by the principle of
superposition (8). The accumulation of EMB with eight daily doses was simulated with the median serum concentration data from 0 to
24 h (first fasting treatment) and extrapolated from 24 h to
day 8 with the median
.
Compartmental analysis.
ADAPT II software was used to
construct candidate pharmacokinetic models, with nonlinear
least-squares regression, weighted by the inverse of the assay
variance, as described above (6). The Akaike information
criteria were used to discriminate among candidate models, and a
two-compartment model with apparent zero-order absorption was selected.
The model included the zero-order absorption time
(Tabs [milligrams per hour]), the absorption
lag time (Tlag [hours]), the volume in the
central compartment (V1 [liters per kilogram]), the intercompartmental transfer rate constant
(K21 [1/h]), and the
and
elimination
rate constants (1/h). The rate constant K10 was
calculated as [(
×
)/K21],
K12 was calculated as [(
+
)
K21
K10], and total
body clearance (CL [liters per hour]) was calculated as
(V1 × K10). The
steady-state volume of distribution (VSS
[liters per kilogram]) was calculated as [V1 × (1 + K21/K12)].
The terminal elimination half-life (t1/2) was
calculated as ln(2)/
.
D-optimal sampling time analysis was performed by using ADAPT II
software and the compartmental parameter estimates. The linear assay
error pattern described above was used. Sampling times were analyzed
with the parameters Tabs,
VSS, and
over the period 0.5 to 24.0 h,
with various initial sampling times and sampling time constraints. A
two-sample strategy (achieved by fixing Tabs and
fitting only VSS and
) and a three-sample
strategy (achieved by fitting all three parameters) were tested. In
addition, an analysis of Cmax was performed over
the period 0.5 to 4.0 h, calculating the maximum, median, and
minimum percentages for the measured concentration divided by
Cmax. CLCR was calculated by the
method of Cockroft and Gault (5).
The amount of EMB recovered in the urine was calculated as the measured
volume of urine multiplied by the corresponding EMB
concentration.
Total recovery (milligrams) was calculated as the
sum of the recoveries
from the collection periods 0 to 12 h and
12 to 24 h, and the
percent dose recovered was calculated as total
recovery divided by dose
multiplied by 100%. Renal clearance (CL
R)
was calculated
as total recovery divided by AUC
0-24.
Statistical analysis.
Data analysis was performed with JMP
version 3.1.6 (SAS Institute, Cary, N.C.), with supplemental analyses
done with Excel version 4.0 (Microsoft, Seattle, Wash.). Frequency
distributions (JMP) included plots of the data, distribution curves to
test for normality, parametric and nonparametric measures of central tendency and dispersion, and the Shapiro-Wilk W test for normality. Means are reported ± the SD. The percent CV was calculated as SD/mean multiplied by 100%. Differences among the treatment groups were determined with an analysis of variance model that tested differences based on period, treatment, sequence, and subject (sequence). Pairwise differences across the four treatments were evaluated with individual linear contrasts. Bioequivalence criteria were tested according to the 1992 Food and Drug Administration guidelines (7). Cmax and
AUC0-
were log transformed and were analyzed with the
analysis of variance model described above. Mean estimates and standard
errors were obtained from the linear contrasts, and these were used to
calculate the geometric means and the lower and upper 90% confidence
limits. Comparison treatments were considered bioequivalent to the
reference treatment (fasting treatment 2) if the comparison parameter
90% lower limit was
80% and the upper limit was
125%.
Correlation analysis (JMP) was performed across the subject and outcome
variables by nonparametric techniques (Spearman rho).
The dependence of
outcome variables (the pharmacokinetic parameters)
upon subject
characteristics (demographic data such as age, weight,
CL
CR, etc.) was determined with
y by
x analyses, one parameter
at a time (JMP). Subsequently,
models with multiple
x variables
were constructed by forward
addition and backward deletion. Differences
between groups (JMP) were
determined by the analysis of log likelihood
with the Pearson
chi-square statistic (contingency tables). Student's
t test
or analysis of variance (two or more than two groups, respectively)
of
normally distributed data (one-way layouts and linear regression),
the
Wilcoxon or the Kruskal-Wallis tests (rank sums) for nonnormally
distributed data (one-way layouts), and the whole-model test table
with
chi-square statistic (logistic regression). Differences between
groups
or correlations between parameters and covariates were
considered
statistically significant at
P 
0.05.
 |
RESULTS |
Fourteen subjects completed all four treatments: six white
females, three black males, and five white males. The remaining subjects dropped out for personal reasons. The mean age was 39.1 ± 7.4 years, and the mean weight was 79.3 ± 13.2 kg. The
subjects received a mean EMB dose of 1,936 ± 343 mg (24.9 ± 0.4 mg/kg). All subjects denied the use of any nonprotocol medications
during the study period. CLCR estimates were a mean of
103 ± 25 ml/min.
The absorption characteristics for EMB with the four treatments are
described in Table 1, and the
corresponding mean EMB serum concentration-versus-time profiles across
the 14 subjects are shown in Fig. 1.
Under fasting conditions, variability in absorption of EMB was small
(Table 1) and the individual results were quite reproducible (Fig.
2). The mean EMB
Cmax was significantly reduced by antacids
(
29%) and, to a lesser extent, by food (
17%) (P = 0.0003). The mean EMB Tmax was increased by
antacids (+17%) and, to a greater extent, by food (+29%)
(P = 0.0787). The mean EMB AUC0-
was
modestly decreased by antacids (
10%) and minimally by food (
4%)
(P = 0.1625). With the bioequivalence criteria, food
did not significantly affect the Cmax (90%
confidence interval [CI], 88.3 to 100.0%) or the
AUC0-
(90% CI, 96.4 to 103.6%). Antacids did not
significantly affect the Cmax (90% CI, 83.6 to
94.6) or AUC0-
(90% CI, 93.2 to 100.2).

View larger version (12K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIG. 2.
Pairings of individual 2.5-h serum concentrations for 14 subjects between the two fasting treatments.
|
|
Simulated multiple daily doses of EMB with the median
value showed
that, on day 4, after 6 to 7 EMB half-lives, the 2.5-h EMB
concentration (Cmax) was 7.7% higher than that
on day 1 but only 1.8% higher than that on day 2 and 0.4% higher than
that on day 3. Subsequent simulated Cmax values
remained constant. Given the day 1 Cmax range of
2.0 to 6.0 µg/ml (first fasting treatment [Table 1]), the
calculated steady-state Cmax range for EMB
(~25-mg/kg dose) was 2.1 to 6.4 µg/ml.
Table 2 shows the parameter estimates for
EMB following the 25-mg/kg dose as calculated with ADAPT II (first
fasting treatment). The various parameter estimates were not
significantly different across the four treatments.
Tabs was somewhat longer in the feeding treatment, but this did not reach statistical significance
(P = 0.0856).
The D-optimal sampling times for all subjects over the period 0.5 to
24.0 h were 0.6 and 11 h for the two-sample strategy and 0.5, 6.2, and 6.2 h (duplicate) for the three-sample strategy if the
entire interval was available for sampling. D-optimal sampling times
were not affected by changes in the initial sampling times chosen but
did change based on the constraints placed on the sampling times.
Restriction of the D-optimal sampling period from
Tmax to 24 h resulted in the selection of
Tmax as the first sampling time. Table
3 shows that the 2.5-h sample came
closest to Cmax for the greatest number of the
14 subjects, followed by the 2- and 3-h samples.
The recovery of EMB in the urine is shown in Table
4. Most of the urinary excretion of EMB
occurred during the first 12 h postdose, with about 30% of the
dose recovered unchanged in the urine over 24 h. Intersubject
variability was small. The total recovery of EMB in the urine, the
percentage of the dose recovered in the urine, and the CLR
were not different across the four treatments. Subjects receiving
antacid treatment had the lowest recovery in the period 0 to 12 h
(415 mg versus first fasting result of 498 mg) but the highest recovery
in the period 12 to 24 h (123 mg versus first fasting result of
102 mg, P < 0.03 for each comparison), resulting in a
total recovery comparable to those of the other treatments.
The EMB results were analyzed with JMP, and the nonparametric measures
of association are reported (Spearman rho). Cmax
and Tmax showed a modest negative correlation
(r =
0.5192, P = 0.0571), with early absorbers
showing the higher Cmax values.
AUC0-
was somewhat higher in those with higher serum
creatinine levels (r = 0.7603, P = 0.0016), but it
did not correlate with CLCR (r =
0.1736,
P = 0.5528). The EMB CL correlated with CLCR
(r = 0.5341, P = 0.0492) and with EMB
CLR (r = 0.5385, P = 0.0470). EMB
pharmacokinetic parameters were not dependent upon age, gender, or race
in this group of 14 subjects.
 |
DISCUSSION |
Determinations of the absolute bioavailability of EMB from the
tablets versus an intravenous dosage form were not performed. All
parameters were estimated assuming F = 1.
EMB was not rapidly absorbed, with most Tmax
values near 2.5 h. Similar results were described by Lee et al.,
who studied six healthy volunteers (two females and four males) and
determined Tmax values of 2.8 ± 0.7 h
(12). They also determined Cmax
values of 4.0 ± 0.8 µg/ml following smaller doses of 15 mg/kg,
given as tablets. Under fasting conditions, variability across our 14 subjects was small, especially for the Cmax and
AUC0-
values, and was highly reproducible between the
two fasting treatments. Concentrations in serum increased by 7.7% over
4 days of simulated dosing. However, sampling as early as the second
day of treatment will reflect steady-state serum concentrations. EMB
taken with food or antacids was bioequivalent to EMB taken in the
fasting state.
Antacids reduced the EMB Cmax by 29% and
reduced the EMB AUC0-
by 10%. Therefore, antacids
should be avoided near the time of EMB dosing. These findings are
generally consistent with the work of Mattila et al., who measured EMB
serum concentrations 2, 4, and 10 h postdose (15). In
our study, food reduced the EMB Cmax by 17% but
reduced the EMB AUC0-
by only 4%. Ameer et al.
previously showed a similar lack of effect by food on the EMB AUC,
although the standardized meal given to their subjects was not
described (1). Their paper does not describe the effect on
Cmax or Tmax. Place and
Thomas found slightly higher serum concentrations in the nonfasted
state, again, without a detailed description of the study conditions
(21). Therefore, it may be preferable to give EMB on an
empty stomach whenever possible. However, when this is not possible,
the absorption of EMB should still be adequate. This may facilitate the
dosing of EMB with other drugs such as nelfinavir, ritonavir,
saquinavir, or rifapentine that are preferentially given with food,
assuming that there are no direct interactions with these drugs
(16, 23).
While a two-compartment model with first-order absorption produced good
results, the two-compartment model with apparent zero-order absorption
was superior based on the Akaike information criteria. The small
Tlag corresponds to the first sampling time.
This is consistent with the assay's low limit of quantification, which produced measurable concentrations for nearly all subjects and treatments from 0.25 to 48 h. EMB displayed a large
V1 and VSS, which in part
reflects its binding to erythrocytes and its uptake by macrophages
(12, 14, 17). Both Peets and Lee found erythrocyte/plasma concentration ratios of 1.1 to 1.8 in vitro, with higher ratios described by Peets for human subjects (12, 17). Entry into macrophages is particularly useful, since a portion of the total body
burden of Mycobacterium tuberculosis and M. avium
complex is found within macrophages. Previous estimates of the EMB
V1 and VSS have been
smaller (12, 13). Our CL estimates were quite similar across
the 14 subjects, whether or not normalized to body weight. These also
were larger than previously described (12, 13).
The EMB serum concentrations clearly displayed a biexponential decline,
with a median t1/2
of about 1.3 h and a
t1/2
of about 12.4 h. Visual inspection
of the serum concentration-versus-time data shows an apparent decrease
in the slope occurring about 12 h postdose. Similar findings were
described previously by Lee et al. (12, 13). Following oral
doses, they described a decline of concentrations in serum over the
first 12 h postdose, with a least-squares regression
t1/2 of 4.0 ± 0.5 h. They showed a second phase from 12 to 24 h with a least-squares regression
t1/2 of 8.8 ± 2.2 h. Differences
between our curve fitting techniques and theirs account for the
discrepancies in the apparent t1/2s. Reanalysis
of our data by their techniques produced a t1/2
over the first 12 h of 3.3 ± 0.8 h and a secondary
t1/2 over 12 to 48 h of 13.9 ± 2.1 h. EMB's long terminal t1/2 renders it
suitable for once-daily dosing, particularly since it is used against
the slow-growing M. tuberculosis and M. avium,
which have doubling times of
24 h.
The clearance of EMB has been described as occurring
predominantly through renal mechanisms. We recovered only
30% of the single oral doses unchanged in the urine over 24 h. The serum AUC0-24 represented a median 83% of the
AUC0-
, so longer collection periods might have resulted
in roughly 36% recovery, assuming that CLR is constant
over the range of concentrations in serum. The completeness of oral
absorption, and other sources of elimination, including metabolites,
were not determined in this study. In two studies, Lee et al.
documented 24-h urinary recoveries of 53% after oral EMB doses and
73% after intravenous EMB doses (12). The reasons for lower
recovery in our study are not apparent but may include incomplete
absorption from the oral doses here versus the intravenous doses used
by Lee. Also, there may be some differences in specificity between the
two methods of detection used. Renal dysfunction has been shown
previously to have a significant impact on the CL of EMB, and frequency
of dosing should be reduced in patients with renal dysfunction
(18, 24).
If the sampling times were not restricted to begin at
Tmax, the EMB D-optimal sampling times included
a point during the absorptive phase and one point in the elimination
phase, but not the true Cmax. The three-point
strategy produced identical sampling times for the second and third
parameters. Samples collected at 2.5 h postdose captured most of
the Cmax values and would be preferred for that parameter.
EMB has modest activity against both M. tuberculosis and
M. avium (9, 10). Using radiometric techniques,
Heifets determined the MIC of EMB to be 1 to 4 µg/ml against M. tuberculosis and to be 4 to 8 µg/ml against M. avium
(9). Against an isolate of M. tuberculosis having
a MIC of 1 µg/ml, the EMB Cmax/MIC ratio may
range from 2:1 to 6:1, with a time above MIC from 5 to 12 h.
However, EMB barely achieves inhibitory concentrations in serum against
M. avium, even with good absorption. Since the absorption of
EMB has been shown to be poor in patients with AIDS, EMB doses higher
than 25 mg/kg may be required for some of these patients in order to
inhibit the pathogens (19).
To conclude, the concentrations in serum found in this study were
consistent with those previously described. In contrast, our
V1, VSS, and CL estimates
were larger than previously described. The kinetic behavior of EMB was
consistent between the two fasting treatments. Food had a minimal
effect on the absorption of EMB, while antacids should be avoided near
the time of EMB dosing. Samples drawn between 2 and 3 h postdose
approach Cmax for most subjects, and samples
drawn as early as day 2 of daily EMB therapy will produce
concentrations in serum that approach steady-state values.
 |
ACKNOWLEDGMENT |
This study was supported, in part, by NIH grant 1 RO1 AI37845.
 |
FOOTNOTES |
*
Corresponding author. Mailing address: Infectious
Disease Pharmacokinetics Laboratory, National Jewish Medical and
Research Center, 1400 Jackson St., Denver, CO 80206. Phone: (303)
398-1427. Fax: (303) 270-2229. E-mail: peloquinc{at}njc.org.
 |
REFERENCES |
| 1.
|
Ameer, B.,
R. E. Polk,
B. J. Kline, and J. P. Grisafe.
1982.
Effect of food on ethambutol absorption.
Clin. Pharm.
1:156-158[Medline].
|
| 2.
|
American Thoracic Society.
1997.
Diagnosis and treatment of disease caused by nontuberculosis mycobacteria.
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med.
156:S1-S25.
|
| 3.
|
American Thoracic Society/Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
1994.
Treatment of tuberculosis and tuberculosis infection in adults and children.
Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med.
149:1359-1374[Abstract].
|
| 4.
|
Anonymous.
1983.
1983 Metropolitan height and weight tables.
Stat. Bull. Metrop. Life Found.
64:3-9[Medline].
|
| 5.
|
Cockroft, D. W., and M. H. Gault.
1976.
Prediction of creatinine clearance from serum creatinine.
Nephron
10:31-41.
|
| 6.
|
D'Argenio, D., and A. Schumitzky.
1992.
ADAPT II user's guide. Biomedical Simulations Resource
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, Calif.
|
| 7.
|
Food and Drug Administration.
1992.
Bioavailability and bioequivalence requirements.
Fed. Regist.
57:17997-18001.
|
| 8.
|
Gibaldi, M., and D. Perrier.
1982.
Pharmacokinetics, 2nd ed.
Marcel Dekker, Inc., New York, N.Y.
|
| 9.
|
Heifets, L. B.
1991.
Antituberculosis drugs: anti-microbial activity in vitro, p. 13-58.
In
L. B. Heifets (ed.), Drug susceptibility in the chemotherapy of mycobacterial infections. CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, Fla.
|
| 10.
|
Iwainsky, H.
1988.
Mode of action, biotransformation and pharmacokinetics of antituberculosis drugs in animals and man, p. 399-553.
In
K. Bartmann (ed.), Antituberculosis drugs. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Germany.
|
| 11.
|
Jelliffe, R. W.
1989.
Explicit determination of laboratory assay error patterns: a useful aid in therapeutic drug monitoring, p. 1-6.
In
ASCP clinical pharmacology check sample 10, no. DM 89-4 (DM 56). American Society of Clinical Pathologists, Chicago, Ill.
|
| 12.
|
Lee, C. S.,
J. G. Gambertoglio,
D. C. Brater, and L. Z. Benet.
1977.
Kinetics of oral ethambutol in the normal subject.
Clin. Pharmacol. Ther.
22:615-621[Medline].
|
| 13.
|
Lee, C. S.,
D. C. Brater,
J. G. Gambertoglio, and L. Z. Benet.
1980.
Disposition kinetics of ethambutol in man.
J. Pharmacokinet. Biopharm.
8:335-346[Medline].
|
| 14.
|
Liss, R. H.,
R. J. Letouneau, and J. P. Schepis.
1981.
Disposition of ethambutol in primate tissues and cells.
Am. Rev. Respir. Dis.
123:529-532[Medline].
|
| 15.
|
Mattila, M. J.,
M. Linnoila,
T. Seppälä, and R. Koskinen.
1978.
Effect of aluminum hydroxide and glycopyrronium on the absorption of ethambutol and alcohol in man.
Br. J. Clin. Pharm.
5:161-166[Medline].
|
| 16.
|
Owens, R. C.,
A. C. F. Keung,
S. Gardner,
M. G. Eller,
S. J. Eller,
S. J. Weir, and D. P. Nicolau.
1997.
Pharmacokinetic and food effect evaluation of rifapentine in subjects seropositive for the human immunodeficiency virus, abstr. A2, p. 1.
In
Abstracts of the 37th Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy. American Society for Microbiology, Washington, D.C.
|
| 17.
|
Peets, E. A.,
W. M. Sweeney,
V. A. Place, and D. A. Buyske.
1965.
The absorption, excretion, and metabolic fate of ethambutol in man.
Am. Rev. Respir. Dis.
91:51-58.
|
| 18.
|
Peloquin, C. A.
1991.
Antituberculosis drugs: pharmacokinetics, p. 59-88.
In
L. B. Heifets (ed.), Drug susceptibility in the chemotherapy of mycobacterial infections. CRC Press, Inc., Boca Raton, Fla.
|
| 19.
|
Peloquin, C. A.
1997.
Using therapeutic drug monitoring to dose the antimycobacterial drugs.
Clin. Chest Med.
18:79-87[Medline].
|
| 20.
|
Peloquin, C. A.,
A. E. Bulpitt,
G. S. Jaresko,
R. W. Jelliffe, and D. E. Nix.
1997.
Effect of food and antacids on the pharmacokinetics (PK) of ethambutol (EMB) and pyrazinamide (PZA), abstr. A3, p. 1.
In
Abstracts of the 37th Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy. American Society for Microbiology, Washington, D.C.
|
| 21.
|
Place, V. A., and J. P. Thomas.
1963.
Clinical pharmacology of ethambutol.
Am. Rev. Respir. Dis.
87:901-904.
|
| 22.
|
Place, V. A.,
E. A. Peets,
D. A. Buyske, and R. R. Little.
1966.
Metabolic and special studies of ethambutol in normal volunteers and tuberculosis patients.
Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci.
135:775-795[Medline].
|
| 23.
|
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
1997.
Guidelines for the use of antiretroviral agents in HIV-infected adults and adolescents.
Fed. Regist.
62:118.
|
| 24.
|
Varughese, A.,
D. C. Brater,
L. Z. Benet, and C. S. Lee.
1986.
Ethambutol kinetics in patients with impaired renal function.
Am. Rev. Respir. Dis.
134:34-38[Medline].
|
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, March 1999, p. 568-572, Vol. 43, No. 3
0066-4804/99/$04.00+0
Copyright © 1999, American Society for Microbiology. All rights reserved.
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Graham, S. M., Bell, D. J., Nyirongo, S., Hartkoorn, R., Ward, S. A., Molyneux, E. M.
(2006). Low Levels of Pyrazinamide and Ethambutol in Children with Tuberculosis and Impact of Age, Nutritional Status, and Human Immunodeficiency Virus Infection. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
50: 407-413
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Wiens, T., Redelmeier, T., Av-Gay, Y.
(2004). Development of a Liposome Formulation of Ethambutol. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
48: 1887-1888
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Conte, J. E. Jr., Golden, J. A., Kipps, J., Lin, E. T., Zurlinden, E.
(2001). Effects of AIDS and Gender on Steady-State Plasma and Intrapulmonary Ethambutol Concentrations. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
45: 2891-2896
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
-
Auclair, B., Nix, D. E., Adam, R. D., James, G. T., Peloquin, C. A.
(2001). Pharmacokinetics of Ethionamide Administered under Fasting Conditions or with Orange Juice, Food, or Antacids. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother.
45: 810-814
[Abstract]
[Full Text]