The effects of a salicylate, ibuprofen, and naproxen on the disposition of methotrexate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

Comprehensive Evaluation of OATP- and BCRP-Mediated Drug-Drug Interactions of Methotrexate Using Physiologically-Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling

Methotrexate (MTX) is an antifolate agent widely used for treating conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis and hematologic cancer. This study aimed to quantitatively interpret the drug-drug interactions (DDIs) of MTX mediated by drug transporters using physiologically-based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling. An open-label, randomized, 4-treatment, 6-sequence, 4-period crossover study was conducted to investigate the effects of rifampicin (RFP), an inhibitor of organic anionic transporting peptides (OATP) 1B1/3, and febuxostat (FBX), an inhibitor of breast cancer resistance protein (BCRP), on the pharmacokinetics of MTX in healthy volunteers. PBPK models of MTX, RFP, and FBX were developed based on in vitro and in vivo data, and the performance of the simulation results for final PBPK models was validated in a clinical study. In the clinical study, when MTX was co-administered with RFP or FBX, systemic exposure of MTX increased by 33% and 17%, respectively, compared with that when MTX was administered alone. When MTX was co-administered with RFP and FBX, systemic exposure increased by 52% compared with that when MTX was administered alone. The final PBPK model showed a good prediction performance for the observed clinical data. The PBPK model of MTX was well developed in this study and can be used as a potential mechanistic model to predict and evaluate drug transporter-mediated DDIs of MTX with other drugs.

Drug-drug interaction assessment based on a large-scale spontaneous reporting system for hepato- and renal-toxicity, and thrombocytopenia with concomitant low-dose methotrexate and analgesics use

BACKGROUND

Methotrexate (MTX) is the cornerstone of rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatment and is highly effective with low-dose intermittent administration. MTX is occasionally used in combination with non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and acetaminophen (APAP)/paracetamol for pain or inflammation control. With MTX treatment, the side effects, such as hepatotoxicity, renal failure, and myelosuppression should be considered. These are also seen with analgesics treatment.

METHODS

We used a large spontaneously reported adverse event database (FAERS [JAPIC AERS]) to analyze whether the reporting of adverse events increased upon MTX and analgesic therapy in patients with RA.

RESULTS

After identifying RA cases, the crude reporting odds ratios (cRORs) for hepatotoxicity, renal failure, and thrombocytopenia associated with the use of MTX, APAP, or NSAIDs were calculated by disproportionality analysis, which revealed significantly higher cRORs for these events. No analgesics showed consistent positive signals for drug-drug interaction (DDI) with concomitant low-dose MTX analyzed using four algorithms for DDI interaction (the Ω shrinkage measure, additive or multiplicative, and combination risk ratio models). However, in renal failure and thrombocytopenia, loxoprofen (Ω025 = 0.08) and piroxicam (Ω025 = 0.46), and ibuprofen (Ω025 = 0.74) and ketorolac (Ω025 = 3.52), respectively, showed positive signals in the Ω shrinkage measure model, and no consistency was found among adverse events or NSAIDs.

CONCLUSIONS

Studies using spontaneous reporting systems have limitations such as reporting bias or lack of patient background; however, the results of our comprehensive analysis support the results of previous clinical or epidemiological studies. This study also demonstrated the usefulness of FAERS for DDI assessment.

Methotrexate for inflammatory skin disease in pediatric patients: Consensus treatment guidelines

Methotrexate (MTX) is a readily accessible drug, first used in 1948 and employed for a wide variety of indications since then. However, despite widespread off-label use, FDA labeling does not include approved indications for the use of MTX for many inflammatory skin diseases in pediatric patients, including morphea, psoriasis, atopic dermatitis, and alopecia areata, among others. Without published treatment guidelines, some clinicians may be hesitant to use MTX off-label, or uncomfortable prescribing MTX in this population. To address this unmet need, an expert consensus committee was convened to develop evidence- and consensus-based guidelines for use of MTX to treat pediatric inflammatory skin disease. Clinicians with experience and expertise in clinical research, drug development, and treating inflammatory skin disease in pediatric patients with MTX were recruited. Five committees were created based on major topic areas: (1) indications and contraindications, (2) dosing, (3) interactions with immunizations and medications, (4) adverse effects (potential for and management of), and (5) monitoring needs. Pertinent questions were generated and addressed by the relevant committee. The entire group participated in a modified Delphi process to establish agreement on recommendations for each question. The committee developed 46 evidence- and consensus-based recommendations, each with >70% agreement among members, across all five topics. These are presented in tables and text, along with a discussion of supporting literature, and level of evidence. These evidence- and consensus-based recommendations will support safe and effective use of MTX for the underserved population of pediatric patients who may benefit from this valuable, time-honored medication.

Clinical relevance of potential self-medication drug interactions in antineoplastic and immune-modulating therapy among online pharmacy customers

Background

Modern oral antineoplastic and immune-modulating drugs offer an array of therapeutic advantages, and yet pose challenges in daily use for patients, physicians and pharmacists. In contrast to intravenous administration, these drugs are not subject to direct medical control. Recently, we have seen a huge rise in sales of non-prescription over-the-counter (OTC) medicines via the internet without any advice from a healthcare professional.

Objectives

The aim of this study was to investigate whether the risk of known potential drug-drug interactions between modern oral antineoplastic and immune-modulating drugs and OTC drugs differs between sales in traditional community pharmacies versus online pharmacies.

Design

Real-life sales data from community and online pharmacies were used as basis for the analysis.

Methods

We determined the most frequently purchased antineoplastic and immune-modulating drug-substances in 14 local community pharmacies within the Munich area, Germany and identified the OTC substance groups that could potentially cause interactions with oncological therapies. Using sales data from 11 local community pharmacies and three online pharmacies, we investigated whether OTC purchases differed between the two sales channels.

Results

We identified 10 relevant OTC substance classes and detected significant variations in patients' preferred sales channels between the drug classes. Certain OTC drugs, which seem to be bought more often over the internet, pose risks during antineoplastic and immune-modulating therapy.

Conclusion

Patients should therefore be proactively made aware of the corresponding risks in order not to jeopardize the activity of the antineoplastic and immune-modulating drugs and thus the success of their therapy.

Provider-directed analgesia for dental pain

INTRODUCTION

Extraction of impacted molar teeth is a common procedure performed by oral surgeons and general dentists, with postoperative pain being a significant adverse event post-surgery. If mismanaged, pain can lead to complications that impact oral and systemic health. The current scourge of the opioid epidemic has ushered in a new era of provider-directed analgesic (PDA) therapy in dentistry.

AREAS COVERED

This article provides an in-depth review on the major pharmacological and therapeutic properties of established and alternative analgesics used to manage dental pain.

EXPERT OPINION

Substantial evidence-based literature shows combination of a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID; e.g. ibuprofen) and acetaminophen provides superior pain relief than single-agent or combination opioid regimens. However, there are clinical scenarios (e.g. severe pain) when short-course opioid prescription is appropriate in select patients, in which a 2-3-day treatment duration is typically sufficient. Alternative agents (e.g. caffeine, gabapentin, phytotherapies), typically in combination with established agents, can mitigate postoperative dental pain. Some evidence suggests preemptive therapies (e.g. corticosteroids, NSAIDs) reduce amounts of postsurgical analgesic consumption and might lessen opioid prescription burden. In summary, this comprehensive review provides an opportune update on the evolving landscape of pharmacotherapy for acute postsurgical dental pain, informing best practices for PDA in the dental setting.

Kidney Drug Transporters in Pharmacotherapy

The kidney functions not only as a metabolite elimination organ but also plays an important role in pharmacotherapy. The kidney tubule epithelia cells express membrane carriers and transporters, which play an important role in drug elimination, and can determine drug nephrotoxicity and drug-drug interactions, as well as constituting direct drug targets. The above aspects of kidney transport proteins are discussed in the review.

Extracorporeal Treatment for Methotrexate Poisoning: Systematic Review and Recommendations from the EXTRIP Workgroup

Methotrexate is used in the treatment of many malignancies, rheumatological diseases, and inflammatory bowel disease. Toxicity from use is associated with severe morbidity and mortality. Rescue treatments include intravenous hydration, folinic acid, and, in some centers, glucarpidase. We conducted systematic reviews of the literature following published EXtracorporeal TReatments In Poisoning (EXTRIP) methods to determine the utility of extracorporeal treatments in the management of methotrexate toxicity. The quality of the evidence and the strength of recommendations (either "strong" or "weak/conditional") were graded according to the GRADE approach. A formal voting process using a modified Delphi method assessed the level of agreement between panelists on the final recommendations. A total of 92 articles met inclusion criteria. Toxicokinetic data were available on 90 patients (89 with impaired kidney function). Methotrexate was considered to be moderately dialyzable by intermittent hemodialysis. Data were available for clinical analysis on 109 patients (high-dose methotrexate [>0.5 g/m2]: 91 patients; low-dose [≤0.5 g/m2]: 18). Overall mortality in these publications was 19.5% and 26.7% in those with high-dose and low-dose methotrexate-related toxicity, respectively. Although one observational study reported lower mortality in patients treated with glucarpidase compared with those treated with hemodialysis, there were important limitations in the study. For patients with severe methotrexate toxicity receiving standard care, the EXTRIP workgroup: (1) suggested against extracorporeal treatments when glucarpidase is not administered; (2) recommended against extracorporeal treatments when glucarpidase is administered; and (3) recommended against extracorporeal treatments instead of administering glucarpidase. The quality of evidence for these recommendations was very low. Rationales for these recommendations included: (1) extracorporeal treatments mainly remove drugs in the intravascular compartment, whereas methotrexate rapidly distributes into cells; (2) extracorporeal treatments remove folinic acid; (3) in rare cases where fast removal of methotrexate is required, glucarpidase will outperform any extracorporeal treatment; and (4) extracorporeal treatments do not appear to reduce the incidence and magnitude of methotrexate toxicity.

Herb-Drug Interaction in Inflammatory Diseases: Review of Phytomedicine and Herbal Supplements

Many people worldwide use plant preparations for medicinal purposes. Even in industrialized regions, such as Europe, where conventional therapies are accessible for the majority of patients, there is a growing interest in and usage of phytomedicine. Plant preparations are not only used as alternative treatment, but also combined with conventional drugs. These combinations deserve careful contemplation, as the complex mixtures of bioactive substances in plants show a potential for interactions. Induction of CYP enzymes and pGP by St John's wort may be the most famous example, but there is much more to consider. In this review, we shed light on what is known about the interactions between botanicals and drugs, in order to make practitioners aware of potential drug-related problems. The main focus of the article is the treatment of inflammatory diseases, accompanied by plant preparations used in Europe. Several of the drugs we discuss here, as basal medication in chronic inflammatory diseases (e.g., methotrexate, janus kinase inhibitors), are also used as oral tumor therapeutics.

Concurrent Imatinib Dosing With High-dose Methotrexate Leads to Acute Kidney Injury and Delayed Methotrexate Clearance in Pediatric Patients With Philadelphia Chromosome-positive B-Cell Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia

Imatinib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor has improved survival in pediatric patients with Philadelphia chromosome-positive B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia. There are no formal drug interactions listed between methotrexate and tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Four pediatric patients with Philadelphia chromosome-positive B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia had delayed methotrexate clearance during their first cycle of high-dose methotrexate while receiving imatinib, resulting in acute kidney injury. For subsequent high-dose methotrexate cycles, imatinib was withheld resulting in decreased acute kidney injury, shorter time to methotrexate clearance, less toxicity, and shorter hospitalizations. For pediatric patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia receiving imatinib, we recommend escalated supportive care measures including increased hyperhydration and leucovoruin frequency. For patients with toxicities secondary to delayed clearance or need for glucarpidase, we recommend holding imatinib with subsequent high-dose methotrexate courses.

Treatment of Medicare Patients with Moderate-to-Severe Psoriasis who Cannot Afford Biologics or Apremilast

Elderly patients are a group with a high frequency of psoriasis. Their disease burden has negative impacts on their quality of life. While there is a clear need to treat these patients, there are challenges in doing so. This work seeks to define the challenges that exist in treating elderly Medicare patients, as well as to provide treatment suggestions for providers to follow if they encounter one or more of these challenges. Providers face the following challenges when creating treatment plants for elderly patients with psoriasis: difficulty in obtaining drug coverage through Medicare, increased medical comorbidities, and polypharmacy. Providers aim for regimens that are affordable, safe, and efficacious, but it is not always clear how to achieve this combination, especially in elderly Medicare patients. This work is relevant in that it aims to explain the logistical roadblocks posed by Medicare coverage and provide solutions for commonly encountered issues in the treatment of a disabling and common disease in a high-risk population. Specifically, alternative treatment options to biologics and small-molecule inhibitors are discussed and include topical therapies, phototherapy, methotrexate, acitretin, and cyclosporine and for psoriatic arthritis include corticosteroids and leflunomide. The specific risks and benefits of these therapies in the elderly population are provided, allowing providers to make patient-specific decisions about optimal regimens.

Transporter-Mediated Drug-Drug Interactions and Their Significance

Drug transporters are considered to be determinants of drug disposition and effects/toxicities by affecting the absorption, distribution, and excretion of drugs. Drug transporters are generally divided into solute carrier (SLC) family and ATP binding cassette (ABC) family. Widely studied ABC family transporters include P-glycoprotein (P-GP), breast cancer resistance protein (BCRP), and multidrug resistance proteins (MRPs). SLC family transporters related to drug transport mainly include organic anion-transporting polypeptides (OATPs), organic anion transporters (OATs), organic cation transporters (OCTs), organic cation/carnitine transporters (OCTNs), peptide transporters (PEPTs), and multidrug/toxin extrusions (MATEs). These transporters are often expressed in tissues related to drug disposition, such as the small intestine, liver, and kidney, implicating intestinal absorption of drugs, uptake of drugs into hepatocytes, and renal/bile excretion of drugs. Most of therapeutic drugs are their substrates or inhibitors. When they are comedicated, serious drug-drug interactions (DDIs) may occur due to alterations in intestinal absorption, hepatic uptake, or renal/bile secretion of drugs, leading to enhancement of their activities or toxicities or therapeutic failure. This chapter will illustrate transporter-mediated DDIs (including food drug interaction) in human and their clinical significances.

Multidrug resistance-associated protein 4 in pharmacology: Overview of its contribution to pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and pharmacogenetics

MRP4 is an ABC membrane transporter involved in clinical outcomes as it is located in many tissues that manages the transport and the elimination of many drugs. This review explores the implication of MRP4 in clinical pharmacology and the importance of its genetic variability. Although there is no specific recommendation regarding the study of MRP4 in drug development, it should be considered when drugs are eliminated by the kidney or liver or when drug-drug interactions are expected.

Concomitant use of low-dose methotrexate and NSAIDs and the risk of serious adverse events among patients with rheumatoid arthritis

PURPOSE

Case reports and pharmacokinetic studies have suggested that concomitant use of low-dose methotrexate and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) may be associated with increased risk of methotrexate toxicity. This study aimed to investigate the risk of serious adverse events associated with concomitant use of low-dose methotrexate and NSAIDs, compared with use of methotrexate alone, among patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

METHODS

The study was conducted as a register-based cohort study in Denmark, 2004 to 2015, including episodes of concomitant use of methotrexate and NSAIDs (n = 21 536) and control episodes of use of methotrexate alone (n = 21 725). The primary outcome was the composite end point any serious adverse event, including liver toxicity, acute renal failure, and cytopenia. Secondary outcomes were the individual outcome components. Analyses were conducted using proportional-hazards regression, with adjustment using inverse-probability-of-treatment weighting based on propensity scores.

RESULTS

During follow-up, 110 cases of the primary outcome occurred during concomitant use of methotrexate and NSAIDs (unadjusted incidence rate 12.1 per 1000 person-years) and 129 during control episodes (11.0 per 1000 person-years). Concomitant use of methotrexate and NSAIDs was associated with a significantly increased risk of any serious adverse event (weighted hazard ratio 1.40; 95% CI, 1.07-1.82). In secondary analyses, concomitant use of methotrexate and NSAIDs was associated with a significantly increased risk of acute renal failure and cytopenia.

CONCLUSIONS

Concomitant use of low-dose methotrexate and NSAIDs was associated with a significantly increased risk of serious adverse events, expanding on the evidence base for current regulatory recommendations that advocate caution when low-dose methotrexate and NSAID are coprescribed.

Inhibition of Methotrexate Uptake via Organic Anion Transporters OAT1 and OAT3 by Glucuronides of Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs

Combination therapy of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and methotrexate (MTX) sometimes triggers adverse effects, such as liver injury, renal failure, gastrointestinal disorders, and myelosuppression, owing to the reduction of MTX clearance. Previous reports have suggested that NSAIDs inhibit renal MTX uptake via organic anion transporters (OATs) and reduced folate transporter (RFC)-1 and efflux via multidrug resistance-associated proteins (MRPs). Recently, our laboratory found inhibitory effects of NSAIDs-glucuronide (NSAIDs-Glu), a major metabolite of NSAIDs, on MRP-mediated MTX transport as a new site of interaction between MTX and NSAIDs. However, it remains unclear that whether NSAIDs-Glu inhibit renal uptake of MTX. Therefore, the present study aimed to evaluate inhibitory effects of several NSAIDs-Glu (diclofenac, R- and S-ibuprofen, R- and S-flurbiprofen, and R- and S-naproxen) on human OAT1 and OAT3-mediated MTX transport. In this study, [³H]MTX uptake was observed by using human OAT1 and OAT3-overexpressing HEK293 cells in the presence or absence of NSAIDs-Glu. All examined NSAIDs-Glu exhibited concentration-dependent inhibitory effects on MTX uptake via OAT1 and OAT3. Our results indicated that NSAIDs-Glu are more potent (5- to 15-fold) inhibitors of OAT3 than OAT1. Moreover, stereoselective inhibitory effects of NSAIDs-Glu on OATs-mediated MTX uptake were not observed, unlike on MRPs-mediated transport. These findings suggest that inhibition of OAT1 and OAT3-mediated renal uptake of MTX by plasma NSAIDs-Glu may be one of the competitive sites underlying complex drug interaction between MTX and NSAIDs.

Drug-drug interactions in cancer chemotherapy: an observational study in a tertiary health care centre

BACKGROUND

The objective of this study was to evaluate the occurrence of drug-drug interactions (DDIs) in patients on cancer chemotherapy, with the identification of risk factors for these DDIs.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional, descriptive study carried out at the Department of Onco-Radiation at Guru Gobind Singh Medical College, Faridkot, Punjab. The DDIs were recorded with the help of a drug interaction/interplay information software.

RESULTS

In total, 354 interactions were identified from 283 patient records. The mean age of the patients in the study was 49.05±14.35 years. According to the mechanism of interaction, 306 (86.44%) drug interactions were classified as pharmacokinetic and 48 (13.56%) as pharmacodynamic in nature.

CONCLUSIONS

Sensitization of the treating oncologist and the establishment of alerts, such as electronic alerts or a novel fully digital computerized technology that gives a warning when a health expert enters a patient's prescription orders into the electronic medical documentation, can be helpful in controlling DDIs.

Renal Drug Transporters and Drug Interactions

Transporters in proximal renal tubules contribute to the disposition of numerous drugs. Furthermore, the molecular mechanisms of tubular secretion have been progressively elucidated during the past decades. Organic anions tend to be secreted by the transport proteins OAT1, OAT3 and OATP4C1 on the basolateral side of tubular cells, and multidrug resistance protein (MRP) 2, MRP4, OATP1A2 and breast cancer resistance protein (BCRP) on the apical side. Organic cations are secreted by organic cation transporter (OCT) 2 on the basolateral side, and multidrug and toxic compound extrusion (MATE) proteins MATE1, MATE2/2-K, P-glycoprotein, organic cation and carnitine transporter (OCTN) 1 and OCTN2 on the apical side. Significant drug-drug interactions (DDIs) may affect any of these transporters, altering the clearance and, consequently, the efficacy and/or toxicity of substrate drugs. Interactions at the level of basolateral transporters typically decrease the clearance of the victim drug, causing higher systemic exposure. Interactions at the apical level can also lower drug clearance, but may be associated with higher renal toxicity, due to intracellular accumulation. Whereas the importance of glomerular filtration in drug disposition is largely appreciated among clinicians, DDIs involving renal transporters are less well recognized. This review summarizes current knowledge on the roles, quantitative importance and clinical relevance of these transporters in drug therapy. It proposes an approach based on substrate-inhibitor associations for predicting potential tubular-based DDIs and preventing their adverse consequences. We provide a comprehensive list of known drug interactions with renally-expressed transporters. While many of these interactions have limited clinical consequences, some involving high-risk drugs (e.g. methotrexate) definitely deserve the attention of prescribers.

Significant Drug–Drug Interactions with Antineoplastics

Goal

The goal of this program is to inform the participant about the clinical and economic significance of drug interactions, review their potential mechanisms, present significant interactions related to antineoplastics, and provide resources for managing them.

Objectives

At the completion of this program, the participant will be able to: 1. Describe the scope and economic impact of preventable drug interactions. 2. Explain why oncology patients are at increased risk for drug interactions. 3. Define the pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic, and pharmaceutic principles underlying antineoplastic related drug–drug interactions. 4. List specific classes of antineoplastics involved in significant drug–drug interactions. 5. Identify multiple resources for obtaining drug interaction information.

Interaction Between Low-Dose Methotrexate and Nonsteroidal Anti-inflammatory Drugs, Penicillins, and Proton Pump Inhibitors

Objective: To review the potential drug interactions between low-dose methotrexate (LD-MTX) and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), penicillins, and proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) given the disparity between interactions reported for high-dose and low-dose MTX to help guide clinicians. Data Sources: A literature search was performed in MEDLINE (1946 to September 2016), EMBASE (1974 to September 2016), and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1970 to January 2015) to identify reports describing potential drug interactions between LD-MTX and NSAIDS, penicillins, or PPIs. Reference lists of included articles were reviewed to find additional eligible articles. Study Selection and Data Extraction: All English-language observational, randomized, and pharmacokinetic (PK) studies assessing LD-MTX interactions in humans were analyzed to determine clinical relevance in making recommendations to clinicians. Clinical case reports were assigned a Drug Interaction Probability Scale score. Data Synthesis: A total of 32 articles were included (28 with NSAIDs, 3 with penicillins, and 2 with PPIs [1 including both PPI and NSAID]). Although there are some PK data to describe increased LD-MTX concentrations when NSAIDs are used concomitantly, the clinical relevance remains unclear. Based on the limited data on LD-MTX with penicillins and PPIs, no clinically meaningful interaction was identified. Conclusion: Given the available evidence, the clinical importance of the interaction between LD-MTX and NSAIDs, penicillins, and PPIs cannot be substantiated. Health care providers should assess the benefit and risk of LD-MTX regardless of concomitant drug use, including factors known to predispose patients to MTX toxicity, and continue to monitor clinical and laboratory parameters per guideline recommendations.

A guide to clinically relevant drug interactions in oncology

This paper presents an overview of new information on clinically relevant drug-drug interactions, particular focuses on negative drug interactions in oncology. We have generated a concise table of drug-drug interactions that provides a synopsis of the clinical outcome of the interaction along with a recommendation for management. We have also generated other tables that describe specific interactions with methotrexate and dosing guidelines for cytotoxic drugs in the presence of renal or hepatic dysfunction. Since warfarin is one of the non-anticancer drugs that is commonly used in cancer patients for the treatment and prevention of venous thromboembolism, its interactions with other anticancer drugs that have been reported in literatures were also reviewed in this paper. In general, drug interactions observed in cancer patients may be categorized into pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic and pharmaceutic interactions. Pharmacokinetic interactions involve one drug altering the absorption, distribution, metabolism, or excretion of another drug. Interpatient variability in the pharmacokinetic profile of many anticancer agents often complicates the predictability of the antitumor response and toxicities. Among four pharmacokinetic characteristics, drug interactions involving hepatic metabolism is probably the most common and important mechanism responsible for oncologic drug interactions. For example, several anticancer drugs including taxanes, vinca alkaloids, and irinotecan are known to be metabolized by cytochrome CYP3A4. Enzyme-inducing anticonvulsants have been shown to significantly decrease the plasma levels of these anticancer drugs, thereby compromising the anti-tumor effects. N ephrotoxicity or changes in hepatic function caused by some anticancer drugs (e.g., cisplatin, asparaginase) may also have an impact on the pharmacokinetics of the interacting agents. Pharmacodynamic interactions may occur when two or more drugs acting at a common receptor-binding site impact on the pharmacologic action of the object drug, without influencing the pharmacokinetics of each interacting agent. In clinical setting, a decrease of antitumor efficacy was observed in breast cell lines when gemcitabine or vinorelbine were used in combination with paclitaxel. On the other hand, a decreased incidence of thrombocytopenia was seen in patients receiving combination of carboplatin and palcitaxel compared to those receiving carboplatin alone. The third type of drug-drug interaction is known as pharmaceutic interaction. When one drug may alter the physical or chemical compatibility of another drug that utlimately leads to a change in appearance of the solution or a decrease of effectiveness of the drug due to drug inactivation or degradation.

Measuring transaminases in patients with rheumatoid arthritis on weekly methotrexate: does timing of blood testing matter?

The change in transaminase levels over a single week during therapy with methotrexate (MTX) has not been investigated or reported to date. In clinical practice, it is common to observe abnormal transaminase levels upon routine blood work for toxicity monitoring. Many have suggested that such lab abnormalities can sometimes be attributed to sampling blood for toxicity monitoring proximately following MTX dosing. The aim of our study was to evaluate changes in transaminase levels (AST/ALT) over 1 week after MTX administration in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients. In this small proof of concept study, we evaluated 13 patients with RA taking stable doses of methotrexate and background medications (e.g., NSAIDs and prednisone), but no other disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs). All patients were on a stable dose of folic acid. Patients received their usual doses of MTX administered at a specified time, and then sequential blood samples were obtained over the course of 7 days. Peripheral blood was obtained at each time point to measure serum transaminases. We did not observe any significant change in sequential transaminases over 1 week in relationship to MTX administration. It is possible that MTX therapy alone does not lead to significant weekly transaminase variations, contrary to our clinical expectations. The addition of other medications (i.e., NSAIDs) to stable MTX regimen may result in transaminase abnormalities.

Adverse drug reactions and drug-drug interactions with over-the-counter NSAIDs

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) such as ibuprofen have a long history of safe and effective use as both prescription and over-the-counter (OTC) analgesics/antipyretics. The mechanism of action of all NSAIDs is through reversible inhibition of cyclooxygenase enzymes. Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) including gastrointestinal bleeding as well as cardiovascular and renal effects have been reported with NSAID use. In many cases, ADRs may occur because of drug-drug interactions (DDIs) between the NSAID and a concomitant medication. For example, DDIs have been reported when NSAIDs are coadministered with aspirin, alcohol, some antihypertensives, antidepressants, and other commonly used medications. Because of the pharmacologic nature of these interactions, there is a continuum of risk in that the potential for an ADR is dependent on total drug exposure. Therefore, consideration of dose and duration of NSAID use, as well as the type or class of comedication administered, is important when assessing potential risk for ADRs. Safety findings from clinical studies evaluating prescription-strength NSAIDs may not be directly applicable to OTC dosing. Health care providers can be instrumental in educating patients that using OTC NSAIDs at the lowest effective dose for the shortest required duration is vital to balancing efficacy and safety. This review discusses some of the most clinically relevant DDIs reported with NSAIDs based on major sites of ADRs and classes of medication, with a focus on OTC ibuprofen, for which the most data are available.

Drug safety: The concept, inception and its importance in patients' health

BACKGROUND

Drug safety is one of the hottest topics in daily medical practice, particularly with regard to approving new medication or questioning the possibility of withdrawing a drug from the market.

AIM

The aim of this review is to highlight the importance of the drug safety concept and its impact on patients' health.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using Pubmed®, EMBASE®, EBSCO and Medline in the period between 1980 and 2013. The terms used in the search included "Drug Safety", "Medication Safety", "Patient Safety", "Drug Interaction", "Drug Pharmacokinetic", and "Adverse Drug Reaction". All retrieved abstracts were evaluated within the context of the review objectives. The full texts of the selected articles were included in this review. Studies in non-English language were excluded in this review.

RESULTS

Since the early days of the past century, many acts, laws, or amendments have been created to make sure that approved drugs are first safe and then effective. Furthermore, these regulations are continuing to change to make sure that these drugs have a positive benefit-risk balance. Personalized medicine should be considered when medications are given to patients because the pharmacokinetic process inside the body varies from patient to patient and from one specific disease state to another. However, adverse drug reactions can be minimized if more precautions are taken by healthcare professionals, especially including the patient as one pillar of the therapeutic plan and providing more patient counseling, which will improve drug safety.

CONCLUSION

The drug safety concept has earned a lot of attention during the past decade due to the fact it plays a major role in patients' health. Recent laws stress this concept should be included in the process of new medications' approval and continued conduct of post-marketing drug evaluations. Benefit-risk assessment should be considered by all health care professionals when they need to give specific drugs to specific groups of patients. Therefore, more care should be given to some patients, such as pregnant women, children and the elderly, since they are considered vulnerable populations.

Characteristics of pemetrexed transport by renal basolateral organic anion transporter hOAT3

PURPOSE

Pemetrexed transport by human organic anion transporters, hOAT1 (SLC22A6) and hOAT3 (SLC22A8), were characterized in comparison with methotrexate.

METHODS

Accumulation of pemetrexed and methotrexate in hOAT1- and hOAT3-expressing cells were evaluated. Pemetrexed and methotrexate were determined by HPLC. Kinetic parameters were calculated by Eadie-Hofstee plot.

RESULTS

When HEK-hOAT3 and -hOAT1 cells were incubated with 100 µM pemetrexed for 30 min, pemetrexed was accumulated at 14- and 1.7-fold greater than that in control cells, respectively. Pemetrexed and methotrexate transport by hOAT3 was saturated at high concentrations with apparent Km values 28.2 µM and 76.6 µM, respectively. In addition, intrinsic activity (Vmax/Km) of pemetrexed and methotrexate transport by hOAT3 was 4.82 and 0.42 µl/min/mg protein, respectively, suggesting 11-fold higher transport of pemetrexed than methotrexate by hOAT3. Furthermore, loxoprofen, ibuprofen, pravastatin, and cefazolin, transport substrates of hOAT3, inhibited pemetrexed transport by hOAT3 with IC50 values, 34.2, 27.9, 76.3 and 650 µM, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Pemetrexed is a superior substrate to methotrexate for hOAT3. Loxoprofen, ibuprofen, and cefazolin could cause drug-drug interactions when attaining high blood concentrations.

Coadministration of Lansoprazole and Naproxen Does Not Affect the Pharmacokinetic Profile of Methotrexate in Adult Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis

Drugs prescribed for rheumatoid arthritis are often associated with gastrointestinal toxicity, and proton pump inhibitors may be coadministered for gastroprotection. In this open-label study, the effect of lansoprazole 30 mg qd and naproxen 500 mg bid on the pharmacokinetic profile of methotrexate was investigated. Twenty-seven adult rheumatoid arthritis patients on stable oral methotrexate doses (7.5-15 mg/week) for a minimum of 3 months were enrolled. Methotrexate pharmacokinetics were assessed on days -1 (methotrexate alone) and 7 (methotrexate with lansoprazole and naproxen). Pharmacokinetics of methotrexate and 7-hydroxymethotrexate were not altered by coadministration of methotrexate with lansoprazole and naproxen; point estimates and 90% confidence intervals for the peak plasma concentration and area under the plasma concentration-time curve of methotrexate and 7-hydroxymethotrexate were within the 0.80 to 1.25 boundaries. Therefore, coadministration of naproxen and lansoprazole for 7 days does not affect the pharmacokinetic profile of low doses of methotrexate.

Symmetric dimethyl arginine and N-acetyl-β-D-glucosaminidase lysozimuria of proximal renal tubules as a target for nephrotoxicity in patients with rheumatoid arthritis treated with disease modifying antirheumatic drugs

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to determine the effect of initial therapy with some disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) (Methotrexate and Ketoprofen) on glomerular and tubular integrity in patients with Rheumatoid arthritis (RA).

OBJECTIVES

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether there is a change in clinical and laboratory indicators of renal function in course of the follow up of treatment and whether that change correlates with the dynamics of the quantity of enzymes excreted in urine and reactants of the acute phase.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using colorimetric method for determination of NAG, samples of 70 participants were examined (35 RA patients treated with Ketoprofen only, 35 RA patients treated with combined use of Methotrexate and Ketoprofen). The follow up was 5 time-intervals in the course of 24 weeks.

RESULTS

There was moderate correlation between NAG and microalbuminuria (r=0,34) in the group of patients treated with Ketoprofen only, while statistically significant correlation (r=0,21) was seen in group of patients with combined use of Methotrexate and Ketoprofen. NAG enzymuria in size, number of patients registered, and time of appearance were greater and appears earlier in the group with the combined use of Methotrexate and Ketoprofen compared with the mono-therapy with Ketoprofen. Mean urinary NAG induction was increasing with the concomitant use of Methotrexate and Ketoprofen.

CONCLUSIONS

Methotrexate is more potent NAG inductor than Ketoprofen and provokes greater tubular enzymuria than Ketoprofen.

Safety of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, including aspirin and paracetamol (acetaminophen) in people receiving methotrexate for inflammatory arthritis (rheumatoid arthritis, ankylosing spondylitis, psoriatic arthritis, other spondyloarthritis)

BACKGROUND

Methotrexate is routinely used in the treatment of inflammatory arthritis. There have been concerns regarding the safety of using concurrent non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), including aspirin, or paracetamol (acetaminophen), or both, in these people.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically appraise and summarise the scientific evidence on the safety of using NSAIDs, including aspirin, or paracetamol, or both, with methotrexate in inflammatory arthritis; and to identify gaps in the current evidence, assess the implications of those gaps and to make recommendations for future research to address these deficiencies.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, second quarter 2010); MEDLINE (from 1950); EMBASE (from 1980); the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) and the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE). We also handsearched the conference proceedings for the American College of Rheumatology (ACR) and European League against Rheumatism (EULAR) (2008 to 2009) and checked the websites of regulatory agencies for reported adverse events, labels and warnings.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials and non-randomised studies comparing the safety of methotrexate alone to methotrexate with concurrent NSAIDs, including aspirin, or paracetamol, or both, in people with inflammatory arthritis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed the search results, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of the included studies.

MAIN RESULTS

Seventeen publications out of 8681 identified studies were included in the review, all of which included people with rheumatoid arthritis using various NSAIDs, including aspirin. There were no identified studies for other forms of inflammatory arthritis.For NSAIDs, 13 studies were included that used concurrent NSAIDs, of which nine studies examined unspecified NSAIDs. The mean number of participants was 150.4 (range 19 to 315), mean duration 2182.9 (range 183 to 5490) days, although the study duration was not always clearly defined, and the studies were mainly of low to moderate quality. Two of these studies reported no evidence for increased risk of methotrexate-induced pulmonary disease; one study assessed the effect of concurrent NSAIDs on renal function and found no adverse effect; one study identified no adverse effect on liver function; three studies demonstrated no increase in methotrexate withdrawal; and one study showed no increase in all adverse events, including major toxic reactions. However, transient thrombocytopenia was demonstrated in one study, specifically when NSAIDs were taken on the same week day as methotrexate. This study was a retrospective review that involved small numbers only and was of moderate quality; these finding have not been replicated since.Four studies looked at specific NSAIDs (etodolac, piroxicam, celecoxib and etoricoxib), with a mean number of participants of 25.8 (range 14 to 50) and mean study duration of 16.8 (range 14 to 23) days. These studies were mainly of moderate quality. The studies were primarily pharmacokinetic studies but also reported adverse events as secondary outcomes. There were no clinically significant adverse effects with concomitant piroxicam or etodolac; and only mild adverse events with celecoxib or etoricoxib, such as nausea and vomiting, and headaches.For aspirin, seven studies provided data on adverse events with the use of aspirin and methotrexate. These studies included a mean number of participants of 100 (range 11 to 232), had a mean duration of 1325 (range 8 to 2928) days and were mainly of low to moderate quality. Two of the studies reported no evidence for increased risk of methotrexate-induced pulmonary disease and two studies showed no increase in all adverse events including major toxic reactions; however, none of these studies specified the dose of aspirin that was used. One study demonstrated that concurrent aspirin adversely affected liver function at a mean dose of 6.84 tablets of aspirin per day, which is a possible daily dose of 2.1 g presuming that 300 mg aspirin tablets were given. A further study described a partially reversible decline in renal function with 2 g daily of aspirin. One study reported no increase in adverse events with 975 g aspirin daily, however the study duration was only one week.For paracetamol, no studies were identified for inclusion.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In the management of rheumatoid arthritis, the concurrent use of NSAIDs with methotrexate appears to be safe provided appropriate monitoring is performed. The use of anti-inflammatory doses of aspirin should be avoided.

Mechanisms of drug toxicity or intolerance

Classically, adverse drug reactions had been considered as type A reactions which are related to the main pharmacological action of the drug and therefore are predictable. Such reactions are predictable, reversible, and usually can be managed by lowering the dose of the offending drug. However, other adverse effects of drugs can occur which are unrelated to the main pharmacological action of the drug - type B reactions. Such adverse effects are termed idiosyncratic and are often initiated by metabolites of the parent drug or by other indirect mechanisms. The detailed understanding of adverse drug events has become a major focus of the regulatory agencies throughout the world. The pharmacotherapy of gastrointestinal and liver disorders is becoming increasingly complex. In recent years, with the advent of novel therapeutic agents to treat a host of disorders, including viral hepatitis, gastrointestinal motility disorders, inflammatory bowel disease and others, the potential for serious clinically relevant drug reactions has increased. In the pharmacotherapy of gastrointestinal and liver diseases, a significant number of adverse events that occur can be explained by drug interactions. Some pharmacokinetic drug interactions are based on the competitive inhibition of the rate of drug metabolism of one of the drugs, leading to an increased concentration of the drug which was not intended. In other examples, the interaction can be mechanistic in which one or more drugs when co-administered potentiate each other's actions without any change in drug levels, termed pharmacodynamic interactions.

Potential drug interactions in cancer therapy: a prevalence study using an advanced screening method

BACKGROUND

In cancer patients, drug interactions may intensify adverse events or reduce antitumour effects. We assessed the prevalence of potential drug interactions (PDIs) among ambulatory cancer patients on i.v. treatment using an advanced screening method.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data on drugs used for comorbidities, anticancer agents, over-the-counter (OTC) drugs, and comorbidities were collected by means of a structured interview among the patients and review of medical charts. PDIs were identified using electronic (Drug Interaction Facts software, version 4.0) and manual screening methods (peer-reviewed reports).

RESULTS

In this study, 278 patients were enrolled. We identified 348 PDIs. Of all patients, 161 (58%) had at least one PDI. Of all PDIs, 34% was classified as major and 60% as moderate. Coumarins, quinolones, antiepileptics, and hydrochlorothiazide were frequently part of a PDI. Interactions that potentially cause QT interval prolongation, gastrointestinal toxicity, and central nervous system depression were also common. In multivariate analysis, an increasing number of drugs [odds ratio (OR) = 1.4, confidence interval (CI) 1.23-1.52; P < 0.001] and the use of an OTC drug (OR = 0.56, CI 0.32-0.97; P = 0.045) were risk factors.

CONCLUSIONS

PDIs are common in patients treated for an (haemato-) oncological disease. Screening for potential interactions should take place routinely before administering chemotherapy.

Influence of methotrexate exposure on outcome in patients treated with MBVP chemotherapy for primary central nervous system lymphoma

WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN ABOUT THIS SUBJECT

Although treated using the same high-dose methotrexate (HD-MTX)-based multiagent chemotherapy, patients with primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) have significant differences in outcome. However, little information has been published about factors influencing outcome in PCNSL. As it is known that the pharmacokinetics of MTX vary considerably between subjects leading to different exposure in patients receiving the same dose, it is important to evaluate its role in response to chemotherapy.

WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS

This study is the first to evaluate the exposure-response relationship in patients treated with MBVP chemotherapy. We found that patients who were early non-responders to MBVP chemotherapy had poor survival, whatever the salvage regimen. Tumour response at early evaluation was not associated with MTX pharmacokinetics and increasing the dose would probably not improve results.

AIMS

Although the standard treatment for primary central nervous system lymphoma (PCNSL) consists of three cycles of MBVP (methotrexate, BCNU, VP16, methylprednisolone) and radiotherapy, early failure of treatment may require modification of the treatment. However, our understanding of the outcome in such patients and of the factors involved in early failure of treatment is poor. In addition to known prognostic factors, we evaluated the influence of methotrexate (MTX) exposure on the response to MBVP chemotherapy in patients treated for PCNSL after the first two cycles.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed all patients with PCNSL treated with the MBVP regimen over the previous 10 years. Clinical, personal data and known prognostic factors were studied. The parameters of MTX exposure were estimated using a population pharmacokinetic approach with NONMEM. Objective response (OR), overall survival (OS) and failure-free survival (FFS) were evaluated in all patients.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven patients were studied. We observed lower FFS and OS (0.49 years) in patients who were not able to receive the planned treatment (group 1, n=12) than in those who received three cycles (8.04 years) (group 2, n=25). Known prognostic factors were comparable in both groups, but mean dose of MTX and mean AUC tended to be lower in patients who failed prematurely or showed no response after two cycles.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that patients who were early non-responders to MBVP chemotherapy had poor survival, without major influence of MTX exposure. It is thus probably unlikely that increasing the dose of MTX would improve outcome.

Drug interactions in childhood cancer

Children with cancer are increasingly benefiting from new treatment strategies and advances in supportive care, as shown by improvements in both survival and quality-of-life. However, the continuous emergence of new cancer drugs and supportive-care drugs has increased the possibility of harmful drug interactions; health-care providers need to be very cautious when combining drugs. We discuss the most common interactions between chemotherapeutic drugs and supportive-care drugs-such as anticonvulsants, antiemetics, uric-acid-lowering compounds, acid suppressants, antimicrobials, and pain-management medications in paediatric patients. We also review the interactions between chemotherapy drugs and food and herbal supplements, and provide recommendations to avoid unwanted and potentially fatal interactions in children with cancer. Because of the constant release of new drugs, health-care providers need to check the most recent references before making recommendations about drug interactions.

Canadian recommendations for use of methotrexate in patients with rheumatoid arthritis

OBJECTIVE

To develop recommendations for the use of methotrexate (MTX) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

METHODS

Canadian rheumatologists who participated in the international 3e Initiative in Rheumatology (evidence, expertise, exchange) in 2007-2008 formulated 5 unique Canadian questions. A bibliographic team systematically reviewed the relevant literature on these 5 topics. An expert committee consisting of 26 rheumatologists from across Canada was convened, and a set of recommendations was proposed based on the results of systematic reviews combined with expert opinions using a nominal group consensus process.

RESULTS

The 5 questions addressed drug interactions, predictors of response, strategies to reduce non-serious side effects, variables to assess clinical response, and incorporating patient preference into decision-making. The systematic review retrieved 93 pertinent articles; this evidence was presented to the expert committee during the interactive workshop. After extensive discussion and voting, a total of 9 recommendations were formulated: 2 on drug interactions, 1 on predictors of response, 2 on strategies to reduce non-serious side effects, 3 on variables to assess clinical response, and 1 on incorporating patient preferences into decision-making. The level of evidence and the strength of recommendations are reported. Agreement among panelists ranged from 85% to 100%.

CONCLUSION

Nine recommendations pertaining to the use of MTX in daily practice were developed using an evidence-based approach followed by expert/physician consensus with high level of agreement.

Drug interaction between celecoxib and methotrexate in organic anion transporter 3-transfected renal cells and in rats in vivo

Methotrexate has a clinically important pharmacokinetic interaction with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) mainly through its competition for tubular secretion via the renal organic anion transporter 3 (OAT3). We have previously reported the usefulness of OAT3-transfected renal tubular cells for screening of the drugs which interfere with the pharmacokinetics of methotrexate. Celecoxib, a cyclooxygenase (COX) 2 inhibitor, has not been reported to interact with methotrexate, but the mechanisms are unclear why the interaction did not occur. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of celecoxib on methotrexate tubular secretion using a renal cell line stably expressing human OAT3 (S2-hOAT3), and to evaluate the pharmacokinetic interaction of the two drugs in rats. [3H]methotrexate uptake into S2-hOAT3 cells was significantly inhibited by celecoxib in a concentration-dependent manner and the Ki value was 35.3 microM. However, methotrexate serum concentrations and urinary excretion of methotrexate over 24 h in rats were not affected by celecoxib (50, 200 mg/kg). Celecoxib serum concentrations were increased by the increase in celecoxib dosage and the maximum drug concentration (Cmax) was 20.6 microM (celecoxib 200 mg/kg), which did not reach the Ki value obtained in the in vitro study. These results indicated that celecoxib inhibited the secretion of methotrexate via hOAT3, which suggested that celecoxib was a substrate of hOAT3. However, co-administration of the two drugs at clinical dosage did not affect the pharmacokinetics of methotrexate, because the serum concentrations did not reach the Ki value. Although the accumulation study using S2-hOAT3 cells was useful to predict the interaction between the new drug and methotrexate in vivo, a comparison of the Ki value with the Cmax in clinical dosage was necessary to evaluate the degree of this interaction.

Methotrexate drug interactions in the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

Patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) often have comorbidities that require multiple medications. Several of these medications may alter the efficacy or increase the toxicity of methotrexate (MTX). The purpose of our study was to determine which drugs used in combination with MTX (excluding disease modifying antirheumatic drugs, folic and folinic acid, corticosteroids, and biologic agents) enhance side effects or toxicity of MTX or lower its efficacy.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed with Medline, Embase, Cochrane Register and Database, and abstracts from the 2006/2007 annual congresses of the American College of Rheumatology and the European League Against Rheumatism. A manual search of the citation lists of retrieved publications was performed.

RESULTS

Of the 1172 articles identified, 67 were included: 21 pharmacokinetics studies, 5 observational studies, and 78 case reports. Most medications do not significantly affect the pharmacokinetics profile of MTX. Among the clinical studies, cytopenia and elevation of liver enzymes were the main reported toxicities. The use of trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) was mentioned as a risk factor for developing cytopenia in one observational study and in 17 case reports. Thirty case reports of cytopenia were attributed to the use of concomitant nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, including acetylsalicylic acid. Two studies described mild abnormalities of liver enzymes with the use of isoniazid, and one study with the use of high-dose ASA.

CONCLUSION

Based on the published literature, MTX has limited drug interactions, with the exception of TMP-SMX and high-dose ASA, which can exacerbate toxicity of MTX. The clinical significance of these interactions has not been substantiated by extensive clinical observations.

Clinically significant drug-drug interactions between oral anticancer agents and nonanticancer agents: a Delphi survey of oncology pharmacists

BACKGROUND

Drug-drug interactions (DDIs) can lead to adverse clinical outcomes, particularly in oncology, because of the narrow therapeutic index of chemotherapeutic agents and because patients with cancer are at a high risk due to polypharmacy and age-related organ dysfunction. In a previously published study, drug profiles were developed based on primary and tertiary literature reviews for a list of clinically significant DDIs involving 28 oral anticancer agents (OAAs).

OBJECTIVE

This study was based on a Delphi survey of oncology pharmacists; the survey results were used to develop a consensus list of clinically significant DDIs involving OAAs and nonanticancer agents.

METHODS

In this study, the DDI profiles previously developed were updated, and the DDI pairs that were listed both in the 2009 Drug Interaction Facts (DIF) and the Thomson Micromedex DrugDex System compendia and that also met the predetermined criteria for clinical significance were selected for further evaluation. In a 2-round, electronically administered Delphi survey of oncology pharmacists, a 5-point Likert scale (1-5, where 1 = strongly agree and 5 = strongly disagree) was used to evaluate the DDI pairs based on 8 clinical aspects (clinical importance; irreversible morbidity and mortality; quality of data; quantity of data; patient's organ functions; comorbid conditions; awareness of interaction; and management burden). International pharmacists who specialized in oncology pharmacy practice and had > or =5 years of practice experience were eligible to participate.

RESULTS

Nine of the 23 surveyed pharmacists responded, giving a response rate of 39.1%. A total of 37 DDI pairs were selected from DIF and DrugDex and evaluated by the survey respondents, resulting in the identification, via consensus, of 12 clinically significant DDI pairs. The clinical aspects with the most DDIs that reached consensus of agreement were clinical importance (82.9%) and awareness of interaction (73.2%).

CONCLUSION

An expert panel identified 12 clinically significant DDIs involving OAAs.

Guidelines of care for the management of psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis: section 4. Guidelines of care for the management and treatment of psoriasis with traditional systemic agents

Psoriasis is a common, chronic, inflammatory, multisystem disease with predominantly skin and joint manifestations affecting approximately 2% of the population. In this fourth of 6 sections of the guidelines of care for psoriasis, we discuss the use of traditional systemic medications for the treatment of patients with psoriasis. Treatment should be tailored to meet individual patients' needs. We will discuss in detail the efficacy and safety, and offer recommendations for the use of the 3 most commonly used, and approved, traditional systemic agents: methotrexate, cyclosporine, and acitretin. We will also briefly discuss the available data for the use of azathioprine, fumaric acid esters, hydroxyurea, leflunomide, mycophenolate mofetil, sulfasalazine, tacrolimus, and 6-thioguanine in psoriasis.

Methotrexate and psoriasis: 2009 National Psoriasis Foundation Consensus Conference

BACKGROUND

Methotrexate remains a valuable option for the treatment of psoriasis. This report will summarize studies regarding the use of methotrexate since the last guidelines were published in 1998.

OBJECTIVE

A task force of the National Psoriasis Foundation Medical Board was convened to evaluate treatment options. Our aim was to achieve a consensus on new updated guidelines for the use of methotrexate in the treatment of psoriasis.

METHODS

Reports in the literature were reviewed regarding methotrexate therapy.

RESULTS

A consensus was achieved on use of methotrexate in psoriasis including specific recommendations on dosing and monitoring. The consensus received unanimous approval from members of the Medical Board of the National Psoriasis Foundation.

LIMITATIONS

There are few evidence-based studies on the treatment of psoriasis with methotrexate. Many of the reviewed reports are for the treatment of rheumatoid arthritis.

CONCLUSIONS

Methotrexate is a safe and effective drug for the treatment of psoriasis. Appropriate patient selection and monitoring will significantly decrease the risks of side effects. In patients without risk factors for hepatic fibrosis, liver biopsies may not be indicated or the frequency of liver biopsies may be markedly reduced.

Clinically Significant Drug–Drug Interactions Between Oral Anticancer Agents and Nonanticancer Agents: Profiling and Comparison of Two Drug Compendia

Background:

Use of oral anticancer agents is gaining wide acceptance in the treatment of cancer. However, patients receiving oral therapy are at high risk for drug–drug interactions (DDIs).

Objective:

To create a drug profile for each clinically significant DDI involving selected oral anticancer agents and evaluate the agreement between 2 commonly used DDI compendia: Drug Interaction Facts (DIF) 2008 and Micromedex DRUGDEX.

Methods:

DDI profiles were developed based on primary and tertiary literature reviews. DIF 2008 and Micromedex DRUGDEX were compared to assess the consistency of listings, severity, and scientific evidence ratings of DDIs involving the oral anticancer agents that were selected. The Spearman correlation test was used to assess the correlation of the severity ratings between the 2 compendia.

Results:

A total of 184 DDIs were identified. A DDI profile was created for 40 of these that met the predetermined criteria for clinically significant interactions. The comparative assessment showed inconsistency in DDI listings (15.2% of those identified were listed in DIF only and 46.7% were listed in Micromedex only), severity ratings (Spearman correlation coefficient 0.49), and scientific evidence ratings (disagreement 25.8%).

Conclusions:

The discrepancies in DDI listing and rating systems between the compendia evaluated here reflect the need for more studies to standardize the definitions and classifications of DDIs.

The Diagnostic Value of N-Acetyl-β-D-Glucosaminidase and Microalbumin Concentrations in Rheumatoid Arthritis

The purpose of this research was to compare the diagnostic values of laboratory variables, to present quantitative evaluations of the diagnostic sifted test with reference to sensitivity and specificity, the predictive value of the positive and negative test and precision of the test for N-acetyl-β-D-glucosa-minidase (NAG), microalbumin, rheumatoid factor (RF), Creactive protein (CRP), DAS 28 index, in early diagnosis of untreated rheumatoid arthritis (RA), and to define the effect of untreated rheumatoid arthritis on glomerular and tubular function. Using a colorimetric assay for the determination of Nacetyl-β-D-glucosaminidase and an immunoturbidimetric assay for the determination of urinary albumin, the samples of serum and urine have been examined in 70 participants (35 RA who were not treated, 35 healthy controls). RF was defined with the test for agglutination (Latex RF test) in the same participants. Out of 35 examined patients with RA, in 13 we found the presence of NAG enzymuria (sensitivity of the test 37.14%), while microalbuminuria appeared in 4 patients (sensitivity of the test 11.42%). RF appeared in 17 patients (sensitivity of the test 48.57%). Four patients were NAG and RF positive, while 3 patients were microalbuminuria and RF positive. Among 18 RF negative patients, 9 patients were NAG positive, and 1 patient presented with microalbuminuria. Among 17 RF positive RA, the presence of NAG was found in 4 patients, and the presence of microalbuminuria in 3 patients. Among 18 RF negative RA, NAG enzymuria appeared in 9 patients. Microalbuminuria was present in 1 patient. In the healthy control group, 8 patients were NAG positive, 2 patients were positive for microalbuminuria. RF appeared in 2 patients. NAG has higher sensitivity than microalbuminuria in the detection of asymptomatic renal lesions in untreated RA.

Species Difference in the Inhibitory Effect of Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs on the Uptake of Methotrexate by Human Kidney Slices

Simultaneous use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), probenecid, and other drugs has been reported to delay the plasma elimination of methotrexate in patients. Previously, we have reported that inhibition of the uptake process cannot explain such drug-drug interactions using rats. The present study quantitatively evaluated the possible role of the transporters in such drug-drug interactions using human kidney slices and membrane vesicles expressing human ATP-binding cassette (ABC) transporters. The uptake of methotrexate by human kidney slices was saturable with a K(m) of 45 to 49 microM. Saturable uptake of methotrexate by human kidney slices was markedly inhibited by p-aminohippurate and benzylpenicillin, but only weakly by 5-methyltetrahydrofolate. These transport characteristics are similar to those of a basolateral organic anion transporter (OAT) 3/SLC22A8. NSAIDs and probenecid inhibited the uptake of methotrexate by human kidney slices, and, in particular, salicylate, indomethacin, phenylbutazone, and probenecid were predicted to exhibit significant inhibition at clinically observed plasma concentrations. Among ABC transporters, such as BCRP/ABCG2, multidrug resistance-associated protein (MRP) 2/ABCC2, and MRP4/ABCC4, which are candidates for the luminal efflux of methotrexate, ATP-dependent uptake of methotrexate by MRP4-expressing membrane vesicles was most potently inhibited by NSAIDs. Salicylate and indomethacin were predicted to inhibit MRP4 at clinical plasma concentrations. Diclofenac-glucuronide significantly inhibited MRP2-mediated transport of methotrexate in a concentration-dependent manner, whereas naproxen-glucuronide had no effect. Inhibition of renal uptake (via OAT3) and efflux processes (via MRP2 and MRP4) explains the possible sites of drug-drug interaction for methotrexate with probenecid and some NSAIDs, including their glucuronides.