The pharmacokinetics of florfenicol (FF) was studied in plasma after a single dose (40 mg/kg) of intramuscular (i.m.) or oral gavage (p.o.) administration to crucian carp (Carassius auratus cuvieri) in freshwater at 25 °C. Ten fish per sampling point were examined after treatment. The data were fitted to two-compartment open models follow both routes of administration. The estimates of total body clearance (CL(b) ), volume of distribution (V(d) /F), and absorption half-life (T(1/2(ka)) ) were 0.067 L/h/kg and 0.145 L/h/kg, 2.21 L/kg and 1.04 L/kg, 2.75 and 1.54/h following i.m. and p.o. administration, respectively. After i.m. injection, the elimination half-life (T(1/2(β)) ) was calculated to be 38.2h, the maximum plasma concentration (C(max) ) to be 16.82 μg/mL, the time to peak plasma FF concentration (T(max) ) to be 1.50 h, and the area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) to be 597.4 μg/mL·h. Following p.o. administration, the corresponding estimates were 2.17 h, 29.32 μg/mL, 1.61 h, and 276.1 μg/mL·h.
In this study, an oral physiologically based pharmacokinetics (PBPK) model was developed for florfenicol in crucian carp (Carassius auratus). Subsequently, oral-to-intramuscular extrapolation was performed and the two models were used to predict florfenicol concentrations in the edible tissues of crucian carp. The oral model gave good predictions in most tissues, except for kidney and liver in which the florfenicol concentrations were underestimated at the later time points. In contrast, using the intramuscular model, the concentrations in the kidney were overestimated at the later time points. Both models had the best predictive ability in the main edible tissue, the muscle. The oral model also accurately predicted the florfenicol concentrations in the muscle after multiple doses. The present study demonstrated the feasibility of predicting florfenicol concentrations in the edible tissues of crucian carp using a route-to-route extrapolation method.
Tildipirosin, a 16-membered-ring macrolide antimicrobial, has recently been approved for the treatment of swine respiratory disease and bovine respiratory disease. This macrolide is extensively distributed to the site of respiratory infection followed by slow elimination. Clinical efficacy has been demonstrated in cattle and swine clinical field trials. However, the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) index that best correlates with the efficacy of tildipirosin remains undefined. The objective of this study was to develop a PK/PD model following subcutaneous injection of tildipirosin against Pasteurella multocida in a murine lung infection model. The PK studies of unbound (f) tildipirosin in plasma were determined following subcutaneous injection of single doses of 1, 2, 4, 6, and 8 mg/kg of body weight in neutropenic lung-infected mice. The PD studies were conducted over 24 h based on twenty intermittent dosing regimens, of which total daily dose ranged from 1 to 32 mg/kg and dosage intervals included 6, 8, 12, and 24 h. The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of tildipirosin against P. multocida was determined in serum. The inhibitory effect Imax model was employed for PK/PD modeling. The area under the unbound concentration-time profile over 24 h to MIC (fAUC0-24 h/MIC) was the PK/PD index that best described the antibacterial activity in the murine infection model. The fAUC0-24 h/MIC targets required to achieve the bacteriostatic action, a 1-log10 kill and 2-log10 kill of bacterial counts were 19.93, 31.89, and 53.27 h, respectively. These results can facilitate efforts to define more rational designs of dosage regimens of tildipirosin using classical PK/PD concepts for the treatment of respiratory diseases in pigs and cattle.
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.