Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2013 Aug 14.
Published in final edited form as: Antivir Ther. 2012;17(1):25–33. doi: 10.3851/IMP1915

Table 2.

Population pharmacokinetic parameter estimates for both lopinavir and ritonavir in final combined model

Bootstrap
Parameters Final model estimates Mean 95% CIa
Lopinavir
CL/F, l/hb 4.18 4.42 3.41,5.42
V/F, lc 11.6 11.8 9.20, 14.49
ka, h−1 0.74 0.771 0.432, 1.108
Sloped 0.021
RIF on Fe 0.832
Ff
 Super-boosted dase 40.5% 45.9% 36.3, 55.5%
 Double dose 22.6% 22.5% 14.1, 30.9%
IIVV, %CV 56.6 54.5 32.1,70.2
10V ka, % CV 76.2 78.7 37.5, 100.7
10V F, % CV 51.8 50.8 30.9, 64.8
RUV 0.304 0.311 0.252, 0.349
Ritonavir
CL/F, l/hb
 No TB and after TB 12.8 13.0 10.5, 15.5
 With TB 19.1 18.5 13.9, 23.1
V/F, Ic 105 105 80.7, 129.5
ka h−1 2.31 2.55 0.54, 4.57
MTT, h 1.28 1.21 0.80, 1.62
IIV CL, % CV 72.8 72.7 61.2, 81.6
10V CI, % CV 41.6 40.0 21.2, 52.6
IIVV, % CV 43.3 42.4 30.3, 56.2
10V MTT, % CV 31.1 46.9 23.6, 65.8
IOV ka, % CV 98.1 104.3 78.5, 120.3
RUV 0.339 0.342 0.291, 0.372
Lopinavrr-ritonavir interactiong
Emax 0.9 (fix)
EC50, mg/l 0.0519 0.0492 0.0270, 0.0715
a

CI from 250 bootstraps.

b

(1).

c

(2).

d

Slope between ritonavir dose (mg/kg) and bioavailability of lopinavir.

e

The reduction of bioavailability of lopinavir caused by rifampicin (4).

f

Relative bioavailability of lopinavir.

g

(3). CI, oral clearance; CV, coefficient of variation; EC50; the ritonavir concentration needed to reach half of maximum inhibition effect on lopinavir oral clearance by ritonavir (Emax); F, bioavailability; IIV, interindividual variability; IOV, interoecasional variability; ka, oral absorption rate; MTT, mean transit time; RIF, rifampicin; RUV, residual unexplained variability; TB, antituberculosis treatment; V, volume of distribution.