• 1. Baker H, Sidorowicz A, Sehgal SN, et al. Rapamycin (AY-22,989), a new antifungal antibiotic III. In vitro and in vivo evaluation. J Antibiot (Tokyo) 1978; 31: 539545.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2. Huang S, Bjornsti MA, Houghton PJ. Rapamycins: mechanism of action and cellular resistance. Cancer Biol Ther 2003; 2: 222232.

  • 3. Dancey JE. Inhibitors of the mammalian target of rapamycin. Expert Opin Investig Drugs 2005; 14: 313328.

  • 4. Guba M, Von Breitenbuch P, Steinbauer M, et al. Rapamycin inhibits primary and metastatic tumor growth by antiangiogenesis: involvement of vascular endothelial growth factor. Nat Med 2002; 8: 128135.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5. Fasolo A, Sessa C. Targeting mTOR pathways in human malignancies. Curr Pharm Des 2012; 18: 27662777.

  • 6. Beck JT, Ismail A, Tolomeo C. Targeting the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K)/AKT/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway: an emerging treatment strategy for squamous cell lung carcinoma. Cancer Treat Rev 2014; 40: 980989.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7. Fumarola C, Bonelli MA, Petronini PG, et al. Targeting PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway in non small cell lung cancer. Biochem Pharmacol 2014; 90: 197207.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8. Martin-Liberal J, Gil-Martin M, Sáinz-Jaspeado M, et al. Phase I study and preclinical efficacy evaluation of the mTOR inhibitor sirolimus plus gemcitabine in patients with advanced solid tumours. Br J Cancer 2014; 111: 858865.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9. Gordon IK, Ye F, Kent MS. Evaluation of the mammalian target of rapamycin pathway and the effect of rapamycin on target expression and cellular proliferation in osteosarcoma cells from dogs. Am J Vet Res 2008; 69: 10791084.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10. Murai A, Asa SA, Kodama A, et al. Immunohistochemical analysis of the Akt/mTOR/4E–BP1 signaling pathway in canine hemangiomas and hemangiosarcomas. J Comp Pathol 2012; 147: 430440.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11. Murai A, Asa SA, Kodama A, et al. Constitutive phosphorylation of the mTORC2/Akt/4E–BP1 pathway in newly derived canine hemangiosarcoma cell lines. BMC Vet Res [serial online] 2012; 8: 128. Available at: www.biomedcentral.com/1746-6148/8/128. Accessed January 23, 2015.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12. Kent MS, Collins CJ, Ye F. Activation of the AKT and mammalian target of rapamycin pathways and the inhibitory effects of rapamycin on those pathways in canine malignant melanoma cell lines. Am J Vet Res 2009; 70: 263269.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13. Collier DS, Calne R, Thiru S, et al. Rapamycin in experimental renal allografts in dogs and pigs. Transplant Proc 1990; 22: 16741675.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14. Knight R, Ferraresso M, Serino F, et al. Low-dose rapamycin potentiates the effects of subtherapeutic doses of cyclosporine to prolong renal allograft survival in the mongrel canine model. Transplantation 1993; 55: 947949.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15. Hartner WC, Van der Werf WJ, Lodge PA, et al. Effect of rapamycin on renal allograft survival in canine recipients treated with antilymphocyte serum, donor bone marrow, and cyclosporine. Transplantation 1995; 60: 13471350.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16. Yi H, Brooks ED, Thurberg BL. Correction of glycogen storage disease type III with rapamycin in a canine model. J Mol Med 2014; 92: 641650.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17. Paoloni MC, Mazcko C, Fox E, et al. Rapamycin pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic relationships in osteosarcoma: a comparative oncology study in dogs. PLoS ONE [serial online] 2010; 5: e11013. Available at: journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0011013. Accessed January 23, 2015.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18. Clavijo C, Strom T, Moll V, et al. Development and validation of a semi-automated assay for the highly sensitive quantification of Biolumus A9 in human whole blood using high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry. J Chromatogr B Analyt Technol Biomed Life Sci 2009; 877: 35063514.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19. Deters M, Kirchner G, Resch K, et al. Simultaneous quantification of sirolimus, everolimus, tacrolimus, and cyclosporine by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS). Clin Chem Lab Med 2002; 40: 285292.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20. Bansel S, DeStefano A. Key elements of bioanalytical method validation for small molecules. AAPS J 2007; 9: E109E114.

  • 21. Lampen A, Zhang Y, Hackbarth I, et al. Metabolism and transport of the macrolide immunosuppressant sirolimus in the small intestine. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1998; 285: 11041112.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22. Davis NM, Takemoto JK, Brocks DR, et al. Multiple peaking phenomena in pharmacokinetic disposition. Clin Pharmacokinet 2010; 49: 351377.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23. Guba M, Koehl GE, Neppl E, et al. Dosing of rapamycin is critical to achieve an optimal antiangiogenic effect against cancer. Transpl Int 2005; 18: 8994.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24. Salm P, Tresillian MJ, Taylor PJ, et al. Stability of sirolimus (rapamycin) in whole blood. Ther Drug Monit 2000; 22: 423426.

  • 25. Capone D, Gentile A, Polichetti G, et al. Stability of sirolimus and everolimus measured by immunoassay techniques in whole blood samples from kidney transplant patients. Int J Immunopathol Pharmacol 2008; 21: 297307.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 26. Kahan BD, Napoli KL, Kelly PA, et al. Therapeutic drug monitoring of sirolimus: correlations with efficacy and toxicity. Clin Transplant 2000; 14: 97109.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation

Advertisement

Pharmacokinetics of orally administered low-dose rapamycin in healthy dogs

View More View Less
  • 1 Departments of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996.
  • | 2 Departments of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996.
  • | 3 Department of Veterinary Clinical Medicine, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Illinois, Urbana, IL 61801.
  • | 4 National Institute of Health, National Cancer Institute, Center for Cancer Research, Comparative Oncology Program, Bethesda, MD 20892.
  • | 5 Flint Animal Cancer Center, Colorado State University, Fort Collins CO 80523.
  • | 6 Flint Animal Cancer Center, Colorado State University, Fort Collins CO 80523.
  • | 7 Flint Animal Cancer Center, Colorado State University, Fort Collins CO 80523.
  • | 8 Departments of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996.
  • | 9 Departments of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996.
  • | 10 Departments of Small Animal Clinical Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996.
  • | 11 Biomedical and Diagnostic Sciences, College of Veterinary Medicine, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To determine the pharmacokinetics of orally administered rapamycin in healthy dogs.

ANIMALS 5 healthy purpose-bred hounds.

PROCEDURES The study consisted of 2 experiments. In experiment 1, each dog received rapamycin (0.1 mg/kg, PO) once; blood samples were obtained immediately before and at 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 hours after administration. In experiment 2, each dog received rapamycin (0.1 mg/kg, PO) once daily for 5 days; blood samples were obtained immediately before and at 3, 6, 24, 27, 30, 48, 51, 54, 72, 75, 78, 96, 96.5, 97, 98, 100, 102, 108, 120, 144, and 168 hours after the first dose. Blood rapamycin concentration was determined by a validated liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry assay. Pharmacokinetic parameters were determined by compartmental and noncompartmental analyses.

RESULTS Mean ± SD blood rapamycin terminal half-life, area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 48 hours after dosing, and maximum concentration were 38.7 ± 12.7 h, 140 ± 23.9 ng•h/mL, and 8.39 ± 1.73 ng/mL, respectively, for experiment 1, and 99.5 ± 89.5 h, 126 ± 27.1 ng•h/mL, and 5.49 ± 1.99 ng/mL, respectively, for experiment 2. Pharmacokinetic parameters for rapamycin after administration of 5 daily doses differed significantly from those after administration of 1 dose.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE Results indicated that oral administration of low-dose (0.1 mg/kg) rapamycin to healthy dogs achieved blood concentrations measured in nanograms per milliliter. The optimal dose and administration frequency of rapamcyin required to achieve therapeutic effects in tumor-bearing dogs, as well as toxicity after chronic dosing, need to be determined.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE To determine the pharmacokinetics of orally administered rapamycin in healthy dogs.

ANIMALS 5 healthy purpose-bred hounds.

PROCEDURES The study consisted of 2 experiments. In experiment 1, each dog received rapamycin (0.1 mg/kg, PO) once; blood samples were obtained immediately before and at 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 hours after administration. In experiment 2, each dog received rapamycin (0.1 mg/kg, PO) once daily for 5 days; blood samples were obtained immediately before and at 3, 6, 24, 27, 30, 48, 51, 54, 72, 75, 78, 96, 96.5, 97, 98, 100, 102, 108, 120, 144, and 168 hours after the first dose. Blood rapamycin concentration was determined by a validated liquid chromatography–tandem mass spectrometry assay. Pharmacokinetic parameters were determined by compartmental and noncompartmental analyses.

RESULTS Mean ± SD blood rapamycin terminal half-life, area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 48 hours after dosing, and maximum concentration were 38.7 ± 12.7 h, 140 ± 23.9 ng•h/mL, and 8.39 ± 1.73 ng/mL, respectively, for experiment 1, and 99.5 ± 89.5 h, 126 ± 27.1 ng•h/mL, and 5.49 ± 1.99 ng/mL, respectively, for experiment 2. Pharmacokinetic parameters for rapamycin after administration of 5 daily doses differed significantly from those after administration of 1 dose.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE Results indicated that oral administration of low-dose (0.1 mg/kg) rapamycin to healthy dogs achieved blood concentrations measured in nanograms per milliliter. The optimal dose and administration frequency of rapamcyin required to achieve therapeutic effects in tumor-bearing dogs, as well as toxicity after chronic dosing, need to be determined.

Contributor Notes

Drs. LeBlanc and Martin-Jimenez contributed equally to the study.

Dr. LeBlanc's present address is National Institute of Health, National Cancer Institute, Center for Cancer Research, Comparative Oncology Program, Bethesda, MD 20892.

Address correspondence to Dr. Larson (jeannelarsondvm@gmail.com).