非临床安全性评价研究中注射用阿奇霉素豚鼠过敏试验研究

doi:10.19803/j.1672-8629.20220377

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 目的通过对注射用阿奇霉素进行豚鼠过敏试验研究,评价非临床安全性评价研究中过敏试验方法。方法主动全身过敏试验中,试验I为将豚鼠随机分为阴性对照组、阳性对照组、低剂量组（2.5 mg·kg^-1）和高剂量组（10 mg·kg^-1）,隔日致敏1次,共致敏3次,于末次致敏后第14天和第21天激发观察豚鼠是否出现过敏反应症状。试验II除高剂量组剂量调整为5 mg·kg^-1外,其余同试验I;被动皮肤过敏试验中,2次试验剂量同全身主动过敏试验,在末次致敏后第11天采血制备抗血清,皮内注射各对应组的抗血清被动致敏。24 h后静脉注射激发,测量皮肤内层的蓝斑直径。结果全身主动过敏试验中,试验I在第14天激发后,注射用阿奇霉素给药组均未见过敏反应症状,第21天激发后,高剂量组3只豚鼠出现搔鼻、哮鸣等过敏反应症状。试验II结果为在第14天和第21天激发后均未见过敏反应症状。被动皮肤过敏试验两次试验阳性对照组结果均为阳性,致敏率100%,注射用阿奇霉素组对豚鼠均无被动皮肤过敏反应。结论过敏反应的发生与剂量和致敏时间有一定关系,但方法存在一定局限性,在符合指导原则的情况下,临床也可能引起过敏反应,在新药非临床安全性评价研究中需关注。

关键词: 阿奇霉素, 注射剂, 主动全身过敏试验, 被动皮肤过敏试验, 过敏反应, 方法评价

Abstract: Objective To evaluate the allergic test methods in non-clinical safety evaluation by investigating allergic reaction of guinea pigs induced by azithromycin for injection. Methods The active systemic anaphylaxis(ASA): Guinea pigs were randomly divided into negative control group, positive control group, low-dose group(2.5 mg·kg^-1) and high-dose group(10 mg·kg^-1) in experiment I．The intraperitoneal injections of azithromycin for injection were administrated to guinea pigs once every other day for three times. On the 14th and 21st days after the last sensitization, the symptom of allergic reaction was observed by intravenous administration of azithromycin for injection. The other methods were same as the experiment I, except the dose of high-dose group was set at 5 mg·kg^-1 in experiment II.The doses of passive cutaneous anaphylaxis (PCA) were as same as the ASA. On the 11th day after the last sensitization, antiserums were prepared. Guinea pigs of each group were injected intradermally by diluted antiserum. The blue spot diameter in skin was measured after intravenous administration of the same doses after 24 hours. Results No systemic allergic reaction was observed on guinea pigs administrated of azithromycin on the 14th day after the last sensitization in experiment I of ASA. The symptom of nose-scratching or wheezing sound was observed in high-dose group after intravenous administration of azithromycin on the 21st day in experiment I of ASA. No systemic hypersensitive reaction was observed both on the 14th and 21st days in experiment II of ASA. The positive reaction was observed in positive control group, while no allergic reaction was observed in the azithromycin administration group of PCA. Conclusion The occurrence of allergic reactions may be related with the dose and the sensitization time. The method has its own limitations. More focus may be given to the allergic test in non-clinical safety evaluation, because even if it meets the guiding principles, allergic reactions may also be caused.

Key words: azithromycin, injection, active systemic anaphylaxis, passive cutaneous anaphylaxis, allergic reaction, evaluation of the method

中图分类号:

R965

刘春, 王巨才, 黄裕昌, 叶小青, 赵映淑, 詹媚媚, 王晨. 非临床安全性评价研究中注射用阿奇霉素豚鼠过敏试验研究[J]. 中国药物警戒, 2022, 19(11): 1161-1164.

LIU Chun, WANG Jucai, HUANG Yuchang, YE Xiaoqing, ZHAO Yingshu, ZHAN Meimei, WANG Chen. Allergic test of azithromycin for injection in guinea pigs in non-clinical safety evaluation[J]. Chinese Journal of Pharmacovigilance, 2022, 19(11): 1161-1164.

参考文献

[1] ZHANG RX, LIN HX, TANG NP, et al.In vitro alternatives to safety assessment of drug-induced hypersensitivity reactions[J]. Chinese Journal of New Drugs(中国新药杂志), 2012, 21(13): 1494-1497.
[2] WENG XC, FAN X, WANG QX, et al.Research on the methods of active systemic anaphylaxis on guinea pig in drug safety evaluation[J]. Chinese Journal of Comparative Medicine(中国比较医学杂志), 2012, 22(5): 51-55.
[3] ZHOU L, WANG Y, YANG CL, et al.Comparison of methods for active systemic anaphylactic reaction of guinea pigs induced by breviscapine injection[J]. Chin J Pharmacol Toxicol(中国药理学与毒理学杂志), 2015, 29(2): 265-270.
[4] National Food and Medical Products Administration. Technical Guidelines for the Study of Drug Irritation, Allergy and Hemolysis(药物刺激型性、过敏性和溶血性研究技术指导原则)[S]. Beijing: National Food and Medical Products Administration, 2014.
[5] CHEN Q.Pharmacological study method of Chinese Medicine(中药药理研究方法学)[M]. 2nd ed. Beijing: People’s Health Publishing House, 2006: 1169.
[6] LI H, ZENG YW, LIU XL, et al.Consistency evaluation of hemolytic, local irritant and allergic reactions of ceftriaxone sodium for injection[J]. Drug Evaluation Research(药物评价研究), 2022, 45(6): 1113-1117.
[7] Chinese Pharmacopoeia Commission.Pharmacopoeia of the People’s Republic of China,Volume IV(中华人民共和国药典, 四部)[M]. Beijing: China Medical Science Press, 2020.
[8] CHEN HY, LI XF, JIN RM, et al.Active systemic anaphylaxis test in rats[J]. Chinese Traditional Patent Medicine(中成药), 2012, 34(7): 1209-1215.
[9] WEI W, WU XM, LI YJ, et al.Experimental methodology of pharmacology(药理实验方法学)[M]. 4th ed. Beijing: People's Health Publishing House,2010: 499.
[10] ZHANG DB, PU XF, YANG K, et al.Study on the test methods about hypersensitive reaction of guinea pig[J]. Drug Standards of China(中国药品标准), 2009, 10(2): 112-116.
[11] CUI P, SUN J, LI M, et al.Analysis of 6492 cases of adverse drug reactions/events with azithromycin injections[J]. Pharmaceutical and Clinical Research(药学与临床研究), 2018, 26(1): 66-68.
[12] ZHANG DB, YANG YQ, FENG C, et al.Study on the relations between hypersensitivity and the doses of allergen or immune time[J]. Drug Standards of China(中国药品标准), 2007, 8(3): 18-20.
[13] HANG JY, YI Y, LIANG AH, et al.Review on requirements of drug allergy or pseudoallergic reactions in pre-clinical evaluation[J]. China Journal of Chinese Materia Medica(中国中药杂志), 2015, 40(14) : 2685-2689.
[14] BALA S, WEAVER J, HASTINGS KL.Clinical relevance of preclinical testing for allergic side effects[J]. Toxicology, 2005, 209: 195-200.
[15] HANG Z, YANG W.Discussion on the pre-clinical safety evaluation of the allergic reactions in the cephalosporin antibiotics[J]. World Notes on Antibiotics(国外医药抗生素分册), 2009, 30(3): 135-138.
[16] WEAVER JL, STATEN D, SWANN J, et al.Detection of systemic hypersensitivity to drugs using standard guinea pig assays[J]. Toxicology, 2003, 193: 203.