Malarial Dihydrofolate Reductase As a Paradigm for Drug Development Against a Resistance-Compromised Target
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Load more
Recommended publications
-
Doxycycline and Hydroxychloroquine As Treatment for High-Risk COVID-19 Patients: Experience
medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.05.18.20066902; this version posted May 22, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license . Doxycycline and Hydroxychloroquine as Treatment for High-Risk COVID-19 Patients: Experience from Case Series of 54 Patients in Long-Term Care Facilities Imtiaz Ahmad, MD, MPH, FCCP1 Mohammud Alam, MD2 Ryan Saadi, MD, MPH3,6 Saborny Mahmud4 Emily Saadi, BS5 1Allergy, Sleep & Lung Care, 21st Century Oncology, Fort Myers, FL 2Infectious Disease Specialist, Cordial Medical PC, Farmingdale, NY 3Center for Market Access and Medical Innovation, Warren, NJ 4 Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD 5 Yale University, School of Public Health, New Haven, CT 6Quantaira Health, New York, NY Corresponding author : Imtiaz Ahmad, MD, Allergy, Sleep & Lung Care, 21st Century Oncology, Fort Myers, FL. email : [email protected] NOTE: This preprint reports new research that has not been certified by peer review and should not be used to guide clinical practice. medRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.05.18.20066902; this version posted May 22, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted medRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under a CC-BY-NC-ND 4.0 International license . Abstract: Importance: Patients in long-term care facilities (LTCF) are at a high-risk of contracting COVID-19 due to advanced age and multiple comorbidities. -
Folic Acid Antagonists: Antimicrobial and Immunomodulating Mechanisms and Applications
International Journal of Molecular Sciences Review Folic Acid Antagonists: Antimicrobial and Immunomodulating Mechanisms and Applications Daniel Fernández-Villa 1, Maria Rosa Aguilar 1,2 and Luis Rojo 1,2,* 1 Instituto de Ciencia y Tecnología de Polímeros, Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, CSIC, 28006 Madrid, Spain; [email protected] (D.F.-V.); [email protected] (M.R.A.) 2 Consorcio Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Bioingeniería, Biomateriales y Nanomedicina, 28029 Madrid, Spain * Correspondence: [email protected]; Tel.: +34-915-622-900 Received: 18 September 2019; Accepted: 7 October 2019; Published: 9 October 2019 Abstract: Bacterial, protozoan and other microbial infections share an accelerated metabolic rate. In order to ensure a proper functioning of cell replication and proteins and nucleic acids synthesis processes, folate metabolism rate is also increased in these cases. For this reason, folic acid antagonists have been used since their discovery to treat different kinds of microbial infections, taking advantage of this metabolic difference when compared with human cells. However, resistances to these compounds have emerged since then and only combined therapies are currently used in clinic. In addition, some of these compounds have been found to have an immunomodulatory behavior that allows clinicians using them as anti-inflammatory or immunosuppressive drugs. Therefore, the aim of this review is to provide an updated state-of-the-art on the use of antifolates as antibacterial and immunomodulating agents in the clinical setting, as well as to present their action mechanisms and currently investigated biomedical applications. Keywords: folic acid antagonists; antifolates; antibiotics; antibacterials; immunomodulation; sulfonamides; antimalarial 1. -
Plasmodium Falciparum Clinical Isolates: in Vitro Genotypic and Phenotypic Characterization Nonlawat Boonyalai1* , Brian A
Boonyalai et al. Malar J (2020) 19:269 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12936-020-03339-w Malaria Journal RESEARCH Open Access Piperaquine resistant Cambodian Plasmodium falciparum clinical isolates: in vitro genotypic and phenotypic characterization Nonlawat Boonyalai1* , Brian A. Vesely1, Chatchadaporn Thamnurak1, Chantida Praditpol1, Watcharintorn Fagnark1, Kirakarn Kirativanich1, Piyaporn Saingam1, Chaiyaporn Chaisatit1, Paphavee Lertsethtakarn1, Panita Gosi1, Worachet Kuntawunginn1, Pattaraporn Vanachayangkul1, Michele D. Spring1, Mark M. Fukuda1, Chanthap Lon1, Philip L. Smith2, Norman C. Waters1, David L. Saunders3 and Mariusz Wojnarski1 Abstract Background: High rates of dihydroartemisinin–piperaquine (DHA–PPQ) treatment failures have been documented for uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum in Cambodia. The genetic markers plasmepsin 2 (pfpm2), exonuclease (pfexo) and chloroquine resistance transporter (pfcrt) genes are associated with PPQ resistance and are used for moni- toring the prevalence of drug resistance and guiding malaria drug treatment policy. Methods: To examine the relative contribution of each marker to PPQ resistance, in vitro culture and the PPQ survival assay were performed on seventeen P. falciparum isolates from northern Cambodia, and the presence of E415G-Exo and pfcrt mutations (T93S, H97Y, F145I, I218F, M343L, C350R, and G353V) as well as pfpm2 copy number polymor- phisms were determined. Parasites were then cloned by limiting dilution and the cloned parasites were tested for drug susceptibility. Isobolographic analysis of several drug combinations for standard clones and newly cloned P. falciparum Cambodian isolates was also determined. Results: The characterization of culture-adapted isolates revealed that the presence of novel pfcrt mutations (T93S, H97Y, F145I, and I218F) with E415G-Exo mutation can confer PPQ-resistance, in the absence of pfpm2 amplifcation. -
Efficacy of Sulphadoxine and Pyrimethamine, Doxycycline and Their Combination in the Treatment of Chloroquine Resistant Falciparum Malaria
Efficacy of Sulphadoxine and Pyrimethamine, Doxycycline and their combination in the treatment of chloroquine resistant Falciparum Malaria Habab K. Elkheir, MPhar, El-Fatih I. Elkarim, MPhar, PhD, Idris B. Eltayeb, MPhar, PhD, Abd E. ElKadaru, MBBS, MD, Hamza A. Babiker, MSc, PhD, Adil M. Ibrahim, PhD, MIBiol. ABSTRACT Objective: The present in vivo study evaluates the 1996-1998. The study demonstrated that only 46% and efficacy of sulphadoxine/pyrimethamine, doxycycline and 78% of the patients were cured after 4 days of treatment their combination in the treatment of Sudanese patients by doxycycline and sulphadoxine/pyrimethamine. Patients infected by chloroquine resistant falciparum malaria. treated with sulphadoxine/pyrimethamine in combination Methods: Febrile patients with positive blood smears of with doxycycline had a cure rate of 90% and 100% after Plasmodium falciparum were given chloroquine 25mg- 3-4 days of treatment, a single recrudescent case was base/kg body weight and followed up for 3 days. Patients detected on day 6. No relapses occurred during the follow with recrudescence due to chloroquine resistance were up period. All patients were successfully treated by all readmitted for test treatment. Using simple number regimens with the exception of one case treated by randomization patients were divided into groups, A, B and doxycycline. All treatments were well tolerated but a few C. These were treated with doxycycline, sulphadoxine/ cases had complaints of nausea. pyrimethamine and a combination therapy of sulphadoxine/pyrimethamine plus doxycycline. Doxycycline was initially administered as a single dose of Conclusion: The combination therapy of doxycycline/ 200mg followed by 100mg daily for 6 days whereas sulphadoxine/pyrimethamine appeared to be significantly sulphadoxine/pyrimethamine was given as a single dose of effective in the treatment of patients with chloroquine sulphadoxine 1500mg and pyrimethamine 75mg. -
A Comparative Study on Ivermectin-Doxycycline and Hydroxychloroquine-Azithromycin Therapy on COVID-19 Patients
DOI: 10.14744/ejmo.2021.16263 EJMO 2021;5(1):63–70 Research Article A Comparative Study on Ivermectin-Doxycycline and Hydroxychloroquine-Azithromycin Therapy on COVID-19 Patients Abu Taiub Mohammed Mohiuddin Chowdhury,1 Mohammad Shahbaz,2 Md Rezaul Karim,3 Jahirul Islam, Guo Dan,1 Shuixiang He1 1Department of Gastroenterology, First Affiliated Hospital of Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an, Shaanxi, P.R. China 2Chakoria Upazilla Health Complex, Cox’s Bazar, Bangladesh 3Biomedical Research Institute of Hubei University of Medicine, Shiyan, China 4Department of Epidemiology and Health Statistics, Xi’an Jiaotong University, Xi’an, Shaanxi, P.R. China Abstract Objectives: We investigated the outcomes of Ivermectin-Doxycycline vs. Hydroxychloroquine-Azithromycin combina- tion therapy in mild to moderate COVID19 patients. Methods: Patients were divided randomly into two groups: Ivermectin 200µgm/kg single dose + Doxycycline 100mg BID for ten days in group A, and Hydroxychloroquine 400mg for the first day, then 200mg BID for nine days + Azithro- mycin 500mg daily for five days in group B (Control group). RT-PCR for SARS-CoV-2 infection was repeated in all symp- tomatic patients on the second day onward without symptoms. Repeat PCR was done every two days onward if the result found positive. Time to the negative PCR and symptomatic recovery was measured for each group. Results: All subjects in Group A reached a negative PCR, at a mean of 8.93 days, and reached symptomatic recovery, at a mean of 5.93 days, with 55.10% symptom-free by the fifth day. In group B, 96.36% reached a negative PCR at a mean of 9.33 days and were symptoms-free at 6.99 days. -
Doxycycline/Minocycline Step Therapy Criteria Program Summary
Doxycycline/Minocycline Step Therapy Criteria Program Summary This criteria applies to Commercial, NetResults F series and Health Insurance Marketplace formularies. OBJECTIVE The intent of the Doxycycline/Minocycline Step Therapy (ST) program is to encourage the use of both cost-effective preferred doxycycline and minocycline products prior to the use of nonpreferred brand or generic doxycycline or minocycline products and to accommodate for use of brand nonpreferred doxycycline or minocycline products when the generic products cannot be used due to previous trial, documented intolerance, FDA labeled contraindication, or hypersensitivity. Requests for nonpreferred doxycycline and minocycline products will be reviewed when patient-specific documentation has been provided. TARGET DRUGS Doxycycline Products: Acticlate™ (doxycycline hyclate tablet) Adoxa (doxycycline monohydrate tablet, capsule) Doryx, Doryx MPC® (doxycycline hyclate delayed-release tablet)a Doxycycline (doxycycline hyclate delayed-release capsulea, doxycycline hyclate tablet, doxycycline monohydrate delayed release capsule) Monodox (doxycycline monohydrate capsule) Oracea (doxycycline monohydrate delayed-release capsule) Vibramycin (doxycycline hyclate capsule, doxycycline monohydrate suspension, doxycycline calcium syrup Minocycline Products: Minocin (minocycline capsule) minocycline tablet Solodyn (minocycline extended-release tablet)a a - available as a generic; designated target PRIOR AUTHORIZATION CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL Brand and Nonpreferred generic doxycycline and minocycline products will be approved when BOTH of the following are met: 1. ONE of the following: a. The patient’s medication history includes use of a preferred generic doxycycline product OR b. The patient has a documented intolerance, FDA labeled contraindication, or hypersensitivity to a preferred generic doxycycline product AND 2. ONE of the following is met: a. The patient’s medication history includes use of a preferred generic minocycline product OR b. -
Clindamycin Plus Quinine for Treating Uncomplicated Falciparum Malaria: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Charles O Obonyo1* and Elizabeth a Juma1,2
Obonyo and Juma Malaria Journal 2012, 11:2 http://www.malariajournal.com/content/11/1/2 RESEARCH Open Access Clindamycin plus quinine for treating uncomplicated falciparum malaria: a systematic review and meta-analysis Charles O Obonyo1* and Elizabeth A Juma1,2 Abstract Background: Artemisinin-based combinations are recommended for treatment of uncomplicated falciparum malaria, but are costly and in limited supply. Clindamycin plus quinine is an alternative non-artemisinin-based combination recommended by World Health Organization. The efficacy and safety of clindamycin plus quinine is not known. This systematic review aims to assess the efficacy of clindamycin plus quinine versus other anti-malarial drugs in the treatment of uncomplicated falciparum malaria. Methods: All randomized controlled trials comparing clindamycin plus quinine with other anti-malarial drugs in treating uncomplicated malaria were included in this systematic review. Databases searched included: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE and LILACS. Two authors independently assessed study eligibility, extracted data and assessed methodological quality. The primary outcome measure was treatment failure by day 28. Dichotomous data was compared using risk ratio (RR), in a fixed effects model. Results: Seven trials with 929 participants were included. Clindamycin plus quinine significantly reduced the risk of day 28 treatment failure compared with quinine (RR 0.14 [95% CI 0.07 to 0.29]), quinine plus sulphadoxine- pyrimethamine (RR 0.17 [95% CI 0.06 to 0.44]), amodiaquine (RR 0.11 [95% CI 0.04 to 0.27]), or chloroquine (RR 0.11 [95% CI 0.04 to 0.29]), but had similar efficacy compared with quinine plus tetracycline (RR 0.33 [95% CI 0.01 to 8.04]), quinine plus doxycycline (RR 1.00 [95% CI 0.21 to 4.66]), artesunate plus clindamycin (RR 0.57 [95% CI 0.26 to 1.24]), or chloroquine plus clindamycin (RR 0.38 [95% CI 0.13 to 1.10]). -
Treatment Failure Due to the Potential Under-Dosing of Dihydroartemisinin-Piperaquine in a Patient with Plasmodium Falciparum Uncomplicated Malaria
INFECT DIS TROP MED 2019; 5: E525 Treatment failure due to the potential under-dosing of dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine in a patient with Plasmodium falciparum uncomplicated malaria I. De Benedetto1, F. Gobbi2, S. Audagnotto1, C. Piubelli2, E. Razzaboni3, R. Bertucci1, G. Di Perri1, A. Calcagno1 1Department of Medical Sciences, Unit of Infectious Diseases, University of Torino, Amedeo di Savoia Hospital, Torino, Italy 2Department of Infectious–Tropical Diseases and Microbiology, IRCCS Sacro Cuore Don Calabria Hospital, Verona, Italy 3Unit of Infectious Diseases, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Integrata di Verona, Verona, Italy ABSTRACT: — Background: Dihydroartemisinin/piperaquine (DHA-PPQ) 40/320 mg is approved for the treatment of Plasmodium falciparum uncomplicated malaria. Different recommendations are provided by WHO guidelines and drug data sheet about dosing in overweight patients. We report here a treatment failure likely caused by sub-optimal dosing of dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine in a case of uncomplicated P. fal- ciparum malaria in a returning traveler from Burkina Faso. INTRODUCTION kg). They, therefore, provided an updated dosing body weight dosing schedule in their 2015 guidelines for Dihydroartemisinin/piperaquine (DHA-PPQ) 40/320 malaria treatment that provides for a dose of 200/1600 mg tablet formulation is approved for the treatment mg (5 tablets) in individuals > 80 kg1. of Plasmodium falciparum uncomplicated malaria in adults and children > 6 months and > 5 kg of body weight. Following WHO guidelines, the daily -
Resistance to Antifolates
Oncogene (2003) 22, 7431–7457 & 2003 Nature Publishing Group All rights reserved 0950-9232/03 $25.00 www.nature.com/onc Resistance to antifolates Rongbao Zhao1 and I David Goldman*,1 1Departments of Medicine and Molecular, Pharmacology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York, USA The antifolates were the first class of antimetabolites to the kinetics of the interaction between MTX and DHFR enter the clinics more than 50 years ago. Over the was fully understood, and not until the late 1970s and following decades, a full understanding of their mechan- early 1980s when polyglutamate derivatives of MTX were isms of action and chemotherapeutic potential evolved detected and their pharmacologic importance clarified. along with the mechanisms by which cells develop Likewise, an understanding of tumor cell resistance to resistance to these drugs. These principals served as a antifolates evolved slowly, often paralleling the emergence basis for the subsequent exploration and understanding of of new molecular concepts. As the mechanisms of the mechanisms of resistance to a variety of diverse resistance to antifolates were characterized, this provided antineoplastics with different cellular targets. This section insights and principles that were broadly applicable to describes the bases for intrinsic and acquired antifolate other antineoplastics. Ultimately, this knowledge led to the resistance within the context of the current understanding development of a new generation of antifolates, in the late of the mechanisms of actions and cytotoxic determinants 1980s and 1990s, which are potent direct inhibitors of of these agents. This encompasses impaired drug transport tetrahydrofolate (THF)-cofactor-dependent enzymes. Sev- into cells, augmented drug export, impaired activation of eral of these drugs are now in clinical trials, and the antifolates through polyglutamylation, augmented hydro- activity of one, pemetrexed, has been confirmed in a large lysis of antifolate polyglutamates, increased expression Phase III trial (Vogelzang et al., 2003). -
Hydroxychloroquine Or Chloroquine for Treating Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) – a PROTOCOL for a Systematic Review of Individual Participant Data
Hydroxychloroquine or Chloroquine for treating Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) – a PROTOCOL for a systematic review of Individual Participant Data Authors Fontes LE, Riera R, Miranda E, Oke J, Heneghan CJ, Aronson JK, Pacheco RL, Martimbianco ALC, Nunan D BACKGROUND In the face of the pandemic of SARS CoV2, urgent research is needed to test potential therapeutic agents against the disease. Reliable research shall inform clinical decision makers. Currently, there are several studies testing the efficacy and safety profiles of different pharmacological interventions. Among these drugs, we can cite antimalarial, antivirals, biological drugs, interferon, etc. As of 6 April 2020 there are three published reportsand 100 ongoing trials testing hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine alone or in association with other drugs for COVID-19. This prospective systematic review with Individual Participant data aims to assess the rigour of the best-available evidence for hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine as treatment for COVID-19 infection. The PICO framework is: P: adults with COVID-19 infection I: chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine (alone or in association) C: placebo, other active treatments, usual standard care without antimalarials O: efficacy and safety outcomes OBJECTIVES To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of COVID-19 infection. METHODS Criteria for considering studies for this review Types of studies We shall include randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a parallel design. We intend to include even small trials (<50 participants), facing the urgent need for evidence to respond to the current pandemic. Quasi-randomized, non-randomized, or observational studies will be excluded due to a higher risk of confounding and selection bias (1). -
DHFR Inhibitors: Reading the Past for Discovering Novel Anticancer Agents
molecules Review DHFR Inhibitors: Reading the Past for Discovering Novel Anticancer Agents Maria Valeria Raimondi 1,*,† , Ornella Randazzo 1,†, Mery La Franca 1 , Giampaolo Barone 1 , Elisa Vignoni 2, Daniela Rossi 2 and Simona Collina 2,* 1 Department of Biological, Chemical and Pharmaceutical Sciences and Technologies (STEBICEF), University of Palermo, via Archirafi 32, 90123 Palermo, Italy; [email protected] (O.R.); [email protected] (M.L.F.); [email protected] (G.B.) 2 Drug Sciences Department, Medicinal Chemistry and Pharmaceutical Technology Section, University of Pavia, via Taramelli 12, 27100 Pavia, Italy; [email protected] (E.V.); [email protected] (D.R.) * Correspondence: [email protected] (M.V.R.); [email protected] (S.C.); Tel.: +390-912-389-1915 (M.V.R.); +390-382-987-379 (S.C.) † These Authors contributed equally to this work. Academic Editors: Simona Collina and Mariarosaria Miloso Received: 25 February 2019; Accepted: 20 March 2019; Published: 22 March 2019 Abstract: Dihydrofolate reductase inhibitors are an important class of drugs, as evidenced by their use as antibacterial, antimalarial, antifungal, and anticancer agents. Progress in understanding the biochemical basis of mechanisms responsible for enzyme selectivity and antiproliferative effects has renewed the interest in antifolates for cancer chemotherapy and prompted the medicinal chemistry community to develop novel and selective human DHFR inhibitors, thus leading to a new generation of DHFR inhibitors. This work summarizes the mechanism of action, chemical, and anticancer profile of the DHFR inhibitors discovered in the last six years. New strategies in DHFR drug discovery are also provided, in order to thoroughly delineate the current landscape for medicinal chemists interested in furthering this study in the anticancer field. -
REACTIONS of QUININE, CHLOROQUINE, and QUINACRINE the Synthetic Antimalarial Compounds, Chloroquine
VOL. 55, 1966 BIOCHEMISTRY: O'BRIEN, OLENICK, AND HAHN 1511 * Supported by grant no. AI-05320 VR from the U.S. Public Health Service and by grant no. B-14646 from the National Science Foundation. t Address, as of July 1, 1966: The Public Health Research Institute of the City of New York, Inc., New York. 1 Fenwick, M. L., R. L. Erikson, and R. M. Franklin, Science, 146, 527 (1964). 2 Erikson, R. L., M. L. Fenwick, and R. M. Franklin, J. Mol. Biol., 13, 399 (1965). 3 Erikson, R. L., and R. M. Franklin, Bacteriol. Rev., in press. 4Erikson, R. L., M. L. Fenwick, and R. M. Franklin, J. Mol. Biol., 10, 519 (1964). 6 Franklin, R. M., and M. L. Fenwick, unpublished observations. 6 Bernardi, G., and S. N. Timasheff, Biochem. Biophys. Res. Commun., 6, 58 (1961). 7Franklin, R. M., unpublished observations. 8 Barber, R., Biochim. Biophys. Acta, 114, 422 (1966). 9 Franklin, R. M., and N. Granboulan, J. Bacteriol., 91, 834 (1966). 10 Sinsheimer, R. L., B. Starman, C. Nagler, and S. Guthrie, J. Mol. Biol., 4, 142 (1962). 11 Spiegelman, S., I. Haruna, I. B. Holland, G. Beaudreau, and D. Mills, these PROCEEDINGS, 54, 919 (1965). 12 Gros, F., W. Gilbert, H. H. Hiatt, G. Attardi, P. F. Spahr, and J. D. Watson, in Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology, vol. 26 (1961), p. 111. 13 Shatkin, A. J., these PROCEEDINGS, 54, 1721 (1965). 14 Ammann, J., H. Delius, and P. H. Hofschneider, J. Mol. Biol., 10, 557 (1964). 15 Gesteland, R. F., and H.