Comparative Pharmacokinetics of Tixagevimab/Cilgavimab (AZD7442) Administered Intravenously Versus Intramuscularly in Symptomatic SARS-CoV-2 Infection

Public Deposited
Analytics

Downloadable Content

Download PDF
Request Version for Screen Reader
Creator
  • Bender Ignacio, R.A.
    • Other Affiliation: University of Washington
  • Wohl, D.A.
    • Affiliation: School of Medicine, Institute for Global Health and Infectious Diseases
  • Arends, R.
    • Other Affiliation: AstraZeneca
  • Pilla Reddy, V.
    • Other Affiliation: AstraZeneca
  • Mu, Y.
    • Other Affiliation: University of Nebraska Medical Center
  • Javan, A.C.
    • Other Affiliation: National Institutes of Health
  • Hughes, M.D.
    • Other Affiliation: Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health
  • Eron, J.J.
    • Affiliation: School of Medicine, Institute for Global Health and Infectious Diseases
  • Currier, J.S.
    • Other Affiliation: University of California Los Angeles
  • Smith, D.
    • Other Affiliation: University of California – San Diego
  • Chew, K.W.
    • Other Affiliation: University of California Los Angeles
  • Gibbs, M.
    • Other Affiliation: AstraZeneca
  • Fletcher, C.V.
    • Other Affiliation: University of Nebraska Medical Center
Abstract
  • AZD7442 (Evusheld) is a combination of two human anti-severe acute respiratory syndrome-coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), tixagevimab (AZD8895) and cilgavimab (AZD1061). Route of administration is an important consideration to improve treatment access. We assessed pharmacokinetics (PKs) of AZD7442 absorption following 600 mg administered intramuscularly (i.m.) in the thigh compared with 300 mg intravenously (i.v.) in ambulatory adults with symptomatic COVID-19. PK analysis included 84 of 110 participants randomized to receive i.m. AZD7442 and 16 of 61 randomized to receive i.v. AZD7442. Serum was collected prior to AZD7442 administration and at 24 hours and 3, 7, and 14 days later. PK parameters were calculated using noncompartmental methods. Following 600 mg i.m., the geometric mean maximum concentration (Cmax) was 38.19 μg/mL (range: 17.30–60.80) and 37.33 μg/mL (range: 14.90–58.90) for tixagevimab and cilgavimab, respectively. Median observed time to maximum concentration (Tmax) was 7.1 and 7.0 days for tixagevimab and cilgavimab, respectively. Serum concentrations after i.m. dosing were similar to the i.v. dose (27–29 μg/mL each component) at 3 days. The area under the concentration-time curve (AUC)0–7d geometric mean ratio was 0.9 for i.m. vs. i.v. Participants with higher weight or body mass index were more likely to have lower concentrations with either route. Women appeared to have higher interparticipant variability in concentrations compared with men. The concentrations of tixagevimab and cilgavimab after administration i.m. to the thigh were similar to those achieved with i.v. after 3 days from dosing. Exposure in the i.m. group was 90% of i.v. over 7 days. Administration to the thigh can be considered to provide consistent mAb exposure and improve access.
Date of publication
DOI
Identifier
Resource type
  • Article
Rights statement
  • In Copyright
License
  • Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International
Journal title
  • Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics
Language
  • English
Version
  • Publisher
ISSN
  • 1532-6535

Relations

Parents:

This work has no parents.

In Collection:

Items

Thumbnail Title Date Uploaded Visibility Actions
file details Comparative_Pharmacokinetics_of_Tixagevimab_Cilgavimab.pdf 2022-08-02 Public Download