The benzothiazinone lead compound, BTZ043, kills Mycobacterium tuberculosis by inhibiting the essential flavo‐enzyme DprE1, decaprenylphosphoryl‐beta‐D‐ribose 2‐epimerase. Here, we synthesized a new series of piperazine‐containing benzothiazinones (PBTZ) and show that, like BTZ043, the preclinical candidate PBTZ169 binds covalently to DprE1. The crystal structure of the DprE1‐PBTZ169 complex reveals formation of a semimercaptal adduct with Cys387 in the active site and explains the irreversible inactivation of the enzyme. Compared to BTZ043, PBTZ169 has improved potency, safety and efficacy in zebrafish and mouse models of tuberculosis (TB). When combined with other TB drugs, PBTZ169 showed additive activity against M. tuberculosis in vitro except with bedaquiline (BDQ) where synergy was observed. A new regimen comprising PBTZ169, BDQ and pyrazinamide was found to be more efficacious than the standard three drug treatment in a murine model of chronic disease. PBTZ169 is thus an attractive drug candidate to treat TB in humans.

Several cancer treatments are shifting from traditional, time-limited, nonspecific cytotoxic chemotherapy cycles to continuous oral treatment with specific protein-targeted therapies. In this line, imatinib mesylate, a selective tyrosine kinases inhibitor (TKI), has excellent efficacy in the treatment of chronic myeloid leukemia. It has opened the way to the development of additional TKIs against chronic myeloid leukemia, including nilotinib and dasatinib. TKIs are prescribed for prolonged periods, often in patients with comorbidities. Therefore, they are regularly co-administered along with treatments at risk of drug-drug interactions. This aspect has been partially addressed so far, calling for a comprehensive review of the published data. We review here the available evidence and pharmacologic mechanisms of interactions between imatinib, dasatinib, and nilotinib and widely prescribed co-medications, including known inhibitors or inducers of cytochromes P450 or drug transporters. Information is mostly available for imatinib mesylate, well introduced in clinical practice. Several pharmacokinetic aspects yet remain insufficiently investigated for these drugs. Regular updates will be mandatory and so is the prospective reporting of unexpected clinical observations.

Aims: The aims of this observational study were to assess the variability in imatinib pharmacokinetics and to explore the relationship between its disposition and various biological covariates, especially plasma α₁‐acid glycoprotein concentrations.Methods: A population pharmacokinetic analysis was performed using NONMEM based on 321 plasma samples from 59 patients with either chronic myeloid leukaemia or gastrointestinal stromal tumours. The influence of covariates on oral clearance and volume of distribution was examined. Furthermore, the in vivo intracellular pharmacokinetics of imatinib was explored in five patients.Results: A one‐compartment model with first‐order absorption appropriately described the data, giving a mean (± SEM) oral clearance of 14.3 l h⁻¹ (± 1.0) and a volume of distribution of 347 l (± 62). Oral clearance was influenced by body weight, age, sex and disease diagnosis. A large proportion of the interindividual variability (36% of clearance and 63% of volume of distribution) remained unexplained by these demographic covariates. Plasma α₁‐acid glycoprotein concentrations had a marked influence on total imatinib concentrations. Moreover, we observed an intra/extracellular ratio of 8, suggesting substantial uptake of the drug into the target cells.Conclusion: Because of the high pharmacokinetic variability of imatinib and the reported relationships between its plasma concentration and efficacy and toxicity, the usefulness of therapeutic drug monitoring as an aid to optimizing therapy should be further investigated. Ideally, such an approach should take account of either circulating α₁‐acid glycoprotein concentrations or free imatinib concentrations.