Back

Establishing a framework for human dose prediction in anti-tuberculosis drug development

Patel, A.; Li, A. T.; Solans, B.; Savic, R.

2026-05-28 infectious diseases
10.64898/2026.05.26.26354063 medRxiv
Show abstract

Rationale: Efficacious dose selection for anti-tuberculosis drugs has traditionally relied on achieving plasma exposures above the minimum inhibitory concentration, but this approach has not consistently aligned with clinical outcomes. Objectives: We sought to identify early pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic targets most predictive of clinical efficacious dose. Methods: We conducted a back-translational, pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic simulation-based analysis of 15 anti-tuberculosis drugs. Using pharmacokinetic data from multiple biological matrices and a range of pharmacodynamic metrics, we established candidate exposure-response targets for attainment. We systematically evaluated the predictive accuracy of each target pair against established clinical doses to formulate a decision-making framework linking key drug properties to the most predictive targets. Measurements and Main Results: Depending on the target used, projected clinical doses varied widely - both within and across compounds - highlighting the importance of target selection for dose projection and go/no-go decisions. In general, targeting cellular lesion-level drug exposures relative to in vivo preclinical potency provided an effective approach for early dose selection. However, for highly penetrating drugs, targeting site-of-action therapeutic exposures in the caseum was more predictive of clinical dose. Based on these findings, we developed a preliminary dose prediction tool that enables drug developers to estimate clinically relevant dose ranges of compounds using in vitro and early in vivo data. Conclusions: This work establishes and validates a simple, evidence-based framework to standardize early translational decision-making on dose selection of anti-tuberculosis candidates in development.

Matching journals

The top 8 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.