Related Experiment Video
Updated: Mar 23, 2026
Amplifying and Quantifying HIV-1 RNA in HIV Infected Individuals with Viral Loads Below the Limit of Detection by Standard Clinical Assays
Published on: September 26, 2011
Cervicovaginal and Rectal Fluid as a Surrogate Marker of Antiretroviral Tissue Concentration: Implications for
Mackenzie L Cottrell1, Heather M A Prince, Andrew Allmon
1*Division of Pharmacotherapy and Experimental Therapeutics, UNC Eshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC; †University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Medicine, Division of Infectious Diseases, Chapel Hill, NC; and ‡University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Gillings School of Global Public Health, Department of Biostatistics, Chapel Hill, NC.
Background:
Quantifying tissue drug concentrations can yield important information during drug development, but complicates pharmacokinetic study design. Mucosal fluids collected by direct aspiration (cervicovaginal fluid; CVF) or swab (rectal fluid; RF) might be used as tissue concentration surrogates, but these relationships are not well characterized.
Methods:
Forty-nine healthy women, given a single oral dose of tenofovir, maraviroc, emtricitabine, or raltegravir at 50%-200% of the treatment dose, provided 13 plasma, 12 CVF, 12 RF and one cervical, vaginal and rectal tissue biopsy over 48 hours. Relationships between these paired samples were characterized by linear and multiple linear regression. Adjusted r values were used to select the final predictive models.
Results:
CVF exposure increased linearly with dose for all antiretrovirals (r(2) ≥ 0.23, P ≤ 0.02) except raltegravir (r(2) = 0.08, P = 0.19). In RF, only emtricitabine increased linearly with dose (r(2) = 0.27, P = 0.01). For all antiretrovirals, CVF and RF concentrations significantly correlated with mucosal tissue concentrations (female genital tract r(2) ≥ 0.37, rectal tissue (2)r ≥ 0.50, P ≤ 0.001). In the final multivariate models, plasma and fluid concentrations were both associated with FGT concentrations for all antiretrovirals (r(2) ≥ 0.81, P < 0.001). The same was noted for rectal tissue (r(2) ≥ 0.58, P < 0.001) except for tenofovir, for which RF alone was predictive of tissue concentration (r(2) = 0.91, P < 0.001).
Conclusions:
Mucosal fluids were positively correlated with tissue concentrations and including plasma concentrations improved the regression models in most cases. Dose linearity in CVF, but not RF, suggests a saturation process in lower gastrointestinal tract tissue. These findings suggest that mucosal fluid and plasma concentrations may be used for qualitative inference of tissue concentrations for these antiretrovirals.
