Effect of rifampicin treatment on the kinetics of mexiletine

Mexiletine: Antiarrhythmic mechanisms, emerging clinical applications and mortality

Mexiletine, a class Ib antiarrhythmic drug, exhibits its major antiarrhythmic effect via inhibition of the fast and late Na+ currents in myocardial tissues that are dependent on the opening of Na+ channels for their excitation. Through a comprehensive examination of mexiletine's therapeutic benefits and potential risks, we aim to provide valuable insights that reinforce its role as a vital therapeutic option for patients with ventricular arrhythmias, long QT syndrome, and other heart rhythm disorders. This review will highlight the current understandings of the antiarrhythmic effects and rationales for recent off-label use and address the mortality and proarrhythmic effects of mexiletine utilizing published basic and clinical studies over the past five decades.

Drug Interactions Affecting Antiarrhythmic Drug Use

Antiarrhythmic drugs (AAD) play an important role in the management of arrhythmias. Drug interactions involving AAD are common in clinical practice. As AADs have a narrow therapeutic window, both pharmacokinetic as well as pharmacodynamic interactions involving AAD can result in serious adverse drug reactions ranging from arrhythmia recurrence, failure of device-based therapy, and heart failure, to death. Pharmacokinetic drug interactions frequently involve the inhibition of key metabolic pathways, resulting in accumulation of a substrate drug. Additionally, over the past 2 decades, the P-gp (permeability glycoprotein) has been increasingly cited as a significant source of drug interactions. Pharmacodynamic drug interactions involving AADs commonly involve additive QT prolongation. Amiodarone, quinidine, and dofetilide are AADs with numerous and clinically significant drug interactions. Recent studies have also demonstrated increased morbidity and mortality with the use of digoxin and other AAD which interact with P-gp. QT prolongation is an important pharmacodynamic interaction involving mainly Vaughan-Williams class III AAD as many commonly used drug classes, such as macrolide antibiotics, fluoroquinolone antibiotics, antipsychotics, and antiemetics prolong the QT interval. Whenever possible, serious drug-drug interactions involving AAD should be avoided. If unavoidable, patients will require closer monitoring and the concomitant use of interacting agents should be minimized. Increasing awareness of drug interactions among clinicians will significantly improve patient safety for patients with arrhythmias.

Adverse drug reactions in patients with cardiovascular disease

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) occur frequently in modern medical practice, increasing morbidity and mortality and inflating the cost of care. Patients with cardiovascular disease are particularly vulnerable to ADRs due to their advanced age, polypharmacy, and the influence of heart disease on drug metabolism. The ADR potential for a particular cardiovascular drug varies with the individual, the disease being treated, and the extent of exposure to other drugs. Knowledge of this complex interplay between patient, drug, and disease is a critical component of safe and effective cardiovascular disease management. The majority of significant ADRs involving cardiovascular drugs are predictable and therefore preventable. Better patient education, avoidance of polypharmacy, and clear communication between physicians, pharmacists, and patients, particularly during the transition between the inpatient to outpatient settings, can substantially reduce ADR risk.

Pharmacokinetic interactions with rifampicin : clinical relevance

The antituberculosis drug rifampicin (rifampin) induces a number of drug-metabolising enzymes, having the greatest effects on the expression of cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 in the liver and in the small intestine. In addition, rifampicin induces some drug transporter proteins, such as intestinal and hepatic P-glycoprotein. Full induction of drug-metabolising enzymes is reached in about 1 week after starting rifampicin treatment and the induction dissipates in roughly 2 weeks after discontinuing rifampicin. Rifampicin has its greatest effects on the pharmacokinetics of orally administered drugs that are metabolised by CYP3A4 and/or are transported by P-glycoprotein. Thus, for example, oral midazolam, triazolam, simvastatin, verapamil and most dihydropyridine calcium channel antagonists are ineffective during rifampicin treatment. The plasma concentrations of several anti-infectives, such as the antimycotics itraconazole and ketoconazole and the HIV protease inhibitors indinavir, nelfinavir and saquinavir, are also greatly reduced by rifampicin. The use of rifampicin with these HIV protease inhibitors is contraindicated to avoid treatment failures. Rifampicin can cause acute transplant rejection in patients treated with immunosuppressive drugs, such as cyclosporin. In addition, rifampicin reduces the plasma concentrations of methadone, leading to symptoms of opioid withdrawal in most patients. Rifampicin also induces CYP2C-mediated metabolism and thus reduces the plasma concentrations of, for example, the CYP2C9 substrate (S)-warfarin and the sulfonylurea antidiabetic drugs. In addition, rifampicin can reduce the plasma concentrations of drugs that are not metabolised (e.g. digoxin) by inducing drug transporters such as P-glycoprotein. Thus, the effects of rifampicin on drug metabolism and transport are broad and of established clinical significance. Potential drug interactions should be considered whenever beginning or discontinuing rifampicin treatment. It is particularly important to remember that the concentrations of many of the other drugs used by the patient will increase when rifampicin is discontinued as the induction starts to wear off.

Role of specific cytochrome P450 enzymes in the N-oxidation of the antiarrhythmic agent mexiletine

1. Mexiletine is extensively metabolized in man by C- and N-oxidation and the aim of the present study was to characterize major cytochrome P450 enzyme(s) involved in the formation of N-hydroxymexiletine. 2. Incubations with genetically engineered microsomes indicated that the formation rate of N-hydroxymexiletine was highest in the presence of microsomes expressing high levels of either CYP1A2 or CYP2E1 and the formation of N-hydroxymexiletine by human liver microsomes was inhibited about 40% by antibodies directed against CYP1A1/1A2 or CYP2E1. Additional incubations demonstrated that formation of N-hydroxymexiletine was decreased 47 and 51% by furafylline, 40 microm and 120 microm, respectively, and decreased 55 and 67% by alpha-naphthoflavone, 1 microm and 3 microm, respectively (all p < 0.05 versus control). 3. The formation rate of N-hydroxymexiletine in human liver microsomes was highly correlated with CYP2B6 (RS-mexiletine, r = 0.7827; R-(-)-enantiomer, r = 0.7034; S-(+)-enantiomer, r = 0.7495), CYP2E1 (S-(+)-enantiomer, r = 0.7057) and CYP1A2 (RS-mexiletine, r = 0.5334; S-(+)-enantiomer, r = 0.6035). 4. In conclusion, we have demonstrated that CYP1A2 is a major human cytochrome P450 enzyme involved in the formation of N-hydroxymexiletine. However, other cytochrome P450 enzymes (CYP2E1 and CYP2B6) also appear to play a role in the N-oxidation of this drug.

Clinically significant interactions with drugs used in the treatment of tuberculosis

Clinically significant interactions occurring during antituberculous chemotherapy principally involve rifampicin (rifampin), isoniazid and the fluoroquinolones. Such interactions between the antituberculous drugs and coadministered agents are definitely much more important than among antituberculous drugs themselves. These can be associated with consequences even amounting to therapeutic failure or toxicity. Most of the interactions are pharmacokinetic rather than pharmacodynamic in nature. The cytochrome P450 isoform enzymes are responsible for many interactions (especially those involving rifampicin and isoniazid) during drug biotransformation (metabolism) in the liver and/or intestine. Generally, rifampicin is an enzyme inducer and isoniazid acts as an inhibitor. The agents interacting significantly with rifampicin include anticoagulants, anticonvulsants, anti-infectives, cardiovascular therapeutics, contraceptives, glucocorticoids, immunosuppressants, psychotropics, sulphonylureas and theophyllines. Isoniazid interacts principally with anticonvulsants, theophylline, benzodiapines, paracetamol (acetaminophen) and some food. Fluoroquinolones can have absorption disturbance due to a variety of agents, especially the metal cations. Other important interactions of fluoroquinolones result from their enzyme inhibiting potential or pharmacodynamic mechanisms. Geriatric and immunocompromised patients are particularly at risk of drug interactions during treatment of their tuberculosis. Among the latter, patients who are HIV infected constitute the most important group. This is largely because of the advent of new antiretroviral agents such as the HIV protease inhibitors and the non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors in the armamenterium of therapy. Compounding the complexity of drug interactions, underlying medical diseases per se may also contribute to or aggravate the scenario. It is imperative for clinicians to be on the alert when treating tuberculosis in patients with difficult co-morbidity requiring polypharmacy. With advancement of knowledge and expertise, it is hoped that therapeutic drug monitoring as a new paradigm of care can enable better management of these drug interactions.

Evaluation of mexiletine clearance in a Japanese population

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate mexiletine clearance in a Japanese population and to clarify the roles of CYP2D6 and CYP1A2 in mexiletine disposition.

METHODS

Concentrations of serum and urinary mexiletine and its metabolites were determined and mexiletine clearances were estimated in 334 inpatients receiving mexiletine therapy. Concentrations of mexiletine and its metabolites in serum and urine samples were determined by HPLC.

RESULTS

Although interindividual variation of mexiletine clearance was small, the effect of age on mexiletine clearance was comparatively large. Mexiletine clearance in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) was decreased when compared with other diagnoses (Non-DCM). The fractional contents of p-hydroxymexiletine (POH) and 2-hydroxymexiletine (OHMEX) in urine amounted to approximately 50%. Almost all of the POH was conjugated, whereas less than one-third of the OHMEX was conjugated. Although no significant differences in POH and OHMEX were observed between patients with DCM and those without, a trend toward an increase in conjugation pathway of DCM patients was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

The interindividual variation of mexiletine clearance was small, while the effect of age on the mexiletine clearance in Non-DCM was comparatively large. A significant difference in mexiletine clearance between patients with DCM and those with Non-DCM was observed. Therefore, when mexiletine is administered to patients with DCM, careful monitoring is needed.

Antiarrhythmic agents: drug interactions of clinical significance

The management of cardiac arrhythmias has grown more complex in recent years. Despite the recent focus on nonpharmacological therapy, most clinical arrhythmias are treated with existing antiarrhythmics. Because of the narrow therapeutic index of antiarrhythmic agents, potential drug interactions with other medications are of major clinical importance. As most antiarrhythmics are metabolised via the cytochrome P450 enzyme system, pharmacokinetic interactions constitute the majority of clinically significant interactions seen with these agents. Antiarrhythmics may be substrates, inducers or inhibitors of cytochrome P450 enzymes, and many of these metabolic interactions have been characterised. However, many potential interactions have not, and knowledge of how antiarrhythmic agents are metabolised by the cytochrome P450 enzyme system may allow clinicians to predict potential interactions. Drug interactions with Vaughn-Williams Class II (beta-blockers) and Class IV (calcium antagonists) agents have previously been reviewed and are not discussed here. Class I agents, which primarily block fast sodium channels and slow conduction velocity, include quinidine, procainamide, disopyramide, lidocaine (lignocaine), mexiletine, flecainide and propafenone. All of these agents except procainamide are metabolised via the cytochrome P450 system and are involved in a number of drug-drug interactions, including over 20 different interactions with quinidine. Quinidine has been observed to inhibit the metabolism of digoxin, tricyclic antidepressants and codeine. Furthermore, cimetidine, azole antifungals and calcium antagonists can significantly inhibit the metabolism of quinidine. Procainamide is excreted via active tubular secretion, which may be inhibited by cimetidine and trimethoprim. Other Class I agents may affect the disposition of warfarin, theophylline and tricyclic antidepressants. Many of these interactions can significantly affect efficacy and/or toxicity. Of the Class III antiarrhythmics, amiodarone is involved in a significant number of interactions since it is a potent inhibitor of several cytochrome P450 enzymes. It can significantly impair the metabolism of digoxin, theophylline and warfarin. Dosages of digoxin and warfarin should empirically be decreased by one-half when amiodarone therapy is added. In addition to pharmacokinetic interactions, many reports describe the use of antiarrhythmic drug combinations for the treatment of arrhythmias. By combining antiarrhythmic drugs and utilising additive electrophysiological/pharmacodynamic effects, antiarrhythmic efficacy may be improved and toxicity reduced. As medication regimens grow more complex with the aging population, knowledge of existing and potential drug-drug interactions becomes vital for clinicians to optimise drug therapy for every patient.

Clinical pharmacokinetics of mexiletine

Mexiletine, a class Ib antiarrhythmic agent, is rapidly and completely absorbed following oral administration with a bioavailability of about 90%. Peak plasma concentrations following oral administration occur within 1 to 4 hours and a linear relationship between dose and plasma concentration is observed in the dose range of 100 to 600 mg. Mexiletine is weakly bound to plasma proteins (70%). Its volume of distribution is large and varies from 5 to 9 L/kg in healthy individuals. Mexiletine is eliminated slowly in humans (with an elimination half-life of 10 hours). It undergoes stereoselective disposition caused by extensive metabolism. Eleven metabolites of mexiletine are presently known, but none of these metabolites possesses any pharmacological activity. The major metabolites are hydroxymethyl-mexiletine, p-hydroxy-mexiletine, m-hydroxy-mexiletine and N-hydroxy-mexiletine. Formation of hydroxymethyl-mexiletine, p-hydroxy-mexiletine and m-hydroxy-mexiletine is genetically determined and cosegregates with polymorphic debrisoquine 4-hydroxylase [cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2D6] activity. On the other hand, CYP1A2 seems to be implicated in the N-oxidation of mexiletine. Various physiological, pathological, pharmacological and environmental factors influence the disposition of mexiletine. Myocardial infarction, opioid analgesics, atropine and antacids slow the rate of absorption, whereas metoclopramide enhances it. Rifampicin (rifampin), phenytoin and cigarette smoking significantly enhance the rate of elimination of mexiletine, whereas ciprofloxacin, propafenone and liver cirrhosis decrease it. Cimetidine, ranitidine, fluconazole and omeprazole do not modify the disposition of mexiletine. Conversely, mexiletine is known to alter the disposition of other drugs, such as caffeine and theophylline. Factors affecting the elimination of mexiletine may be clinically important and dosage adjustments are often necessary.

Mexiletine. A review of its therapeutic use in painful diabetic neuropathy

Mexiletine is an orally active local anaesthetic agent which is structurally related to lidocaine (lignocaine) and has been used for alleviating neuropathic pain of various origins. Mexiletine has been evaluated in several randomised, placebo-controlled trials in patients with painful diabetic neuropathy. The drug decreased mean visual analogue scale (VAS) pain ratings in all studies that used this measure, although in only 2 studies was this effect significantly greater than the often substantial responses seen with placebo. The clinical significance of these decreases is not clear. Statistically significant (vs placebo) reductions in VAS pain ratings were observed in 16 patients receiving mexiletine 10 mg/kg/day for 10 weeks in 1 study and in nocturnal (but not diurnal) pain in 31 patients receiving mexiletine 675 mg/day for 3 weeks in another. Retrospective analysis of another study revealed that mexiletine recipients (225 to 675 mg/day) who described their pain as stabbing, burning or formication on the pain-rating-index-total instrument of the McGill Pain Questionnaire, experienced statistically significant reductions in VAS pain scores after 5 weeks, compared with placebo recipients. Mexiletine generally did not have a significant influence on the quality of sleep in patients with diabetic neuropathy. In Japanese patients, statistically significant reductions in subjective pain ratings were achieved with mexiletine 300 mg/day in 1 study and with 450 mg/day in a further study. In controlled trials, the frequency of adverse events in patients receiving mexiletine for painful diabetic neuropathy ranged from 13.5 to 50%. Gastrointestinal complaints, of which nausea was the most frequent, were the most common adverse events in mexiletine recipients. Central nervous system complaints were uncommon, but included: sleep disturbance, headache, shakiness, dizziness and tiredness. Serious cardiac arrhythmias have not been reported in patients receiving mexiletine for painful diabetic neuropathy; however, transient tachycardia and palpitations have been reported. There are significant differences in the metabolism of mexiletine between people who have cytochrome P450 2D6 [CYP2D6; extensive metabolisers (EMs)] and those who lack this isoenzyme [poor metabolisers (PMs)]. EMs, but not PMs, are susceptible to drug interactions between mexiletine and drugs that inhibit CYP2D6 (e.g. quinidine). Moreover, mexiletine inhibits CYP2D6-mediated metabolism of metoprolol and cytochrome P450 1A2-mediated metabolism of theophylline. Phenytoin and rifampicin (rifampin) induce the metabolism of mexiletine. Clearance of mexiletine is impaired in patients with hepatic, but not renal, dysfunction. Hence, dosage adjustments may be necessary in patients with liver disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) are the agents of choice for painful diabetic neuropathy; however, they are ineffective in approximately 50% of patients and are generally not well tolerated. Mexiletine is an alternative agent for the treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy in patients who have not had a satisfactory response to, or cannot tolerate, TCAs and/or other drugs.

Pharmacokinetic drug interactions with rifampicin

Rifampicin, an antituberculosis drug, is usually administered for 4 to 12 months with other antituberculosis drugs or medications from other classes. A potential for drug interactions often exists because rifampicin is a potent inducer of hepatic drug metabolism, as evidenced by a proliferation of smooth endoplasmic reticulum and an increase in the cytochrome P450 content in the liver. The induction is a highly selective process and not every drug metabolised via oxidation is affected. Case reports and studies have demonstrated enhanced metabolism of several drugs; most of these interactions are clinically important. At the start of rifampicin treatment, and again at the end, clinicians must check the dosages of any accompanying medications with which rifampicin may potentially interact. Monitoring of clinical response and blood drug concentrations is essential to adjust the drug dosage during rifampicin therapy. Rifampicin also interacts with cholephils such as bilirubin and bromosulphthalein. Its pharmacokinetics are reported to be altered by ethambutol, p-aminosalicylic acid (through its excipient component), ketoconazole, cyclosporin, clofazimine, probenecid and phenobarbital through one or other of the following mechanisms--impaired absorption of rifampicin, competition between the drug and rifampicin for hepatic uptake and altered hepatic metabolism of rifampicin. Most interactions affecting rifampicin have been relatively minor or are not expected to alter its therapeutic efficacy.

The metabolism of mexiletine in relation to the debrisoquine/sparteine-type polymorphism of drug oxidation

1. The relationship between the metabolism of the antiarrhythmic drug mexiletine and the debrisoquine/sparteine-type polymorphism was studied in vitro, using microsomes from six human livers, and in vivo, in nine healthy drug-free volunteers with wide variation in their ability to hydroxylate debrisoquine. 2. There was a strong and similar correlation between the formation rate of both major mexiletine metabolites, p-hydroxymexiletine (PHM) and hydroxymethylmexiletine (HMM), and the high affinity component of dextromethorphan O-demethylase activity in human liver microsomes (rs = 0.94; P less than 0.01). 3. There were marked interindividual differences in the amounts of PHM and HMM excreted in the urine over 48 h after a single 200 mg oral dose of mexiletine hydrochloride. Recoveries of both metabolites were correlated inversely with the debrisoquine/4-hydroxydebrisoquine (D/HD) urinary metabolic ratio (rs = -0.83; P = 0.006 and rs = -0.85; P = 0.004, respectively) and were lower in poor metabolisers of debrisoquine (PM) than in extensive metabolisers (EM). Moreover, PM had the highest values of mexiletine/PHM and mexiletine/HMM urinary ratios. In addition, there was a strong correlation between these two indices of mexiletine hydroxylation and the D/HD metabolic ratios (rs = 0.92; P = 0.001 and rs = 0.90; P = 0.001, respectively). 4. After mexiletine pretreatment, the values for D/HD ratio were significantly increased in EM while corresponding values in PM were similar. 5. These findings are in accordance with previous in vitro data suggesting that PHM and HMM formation is predominantly catalyzed by the genetically variable human liver cytochrome P450IID6 isoenzyme responsible for the debrisoquine/sparteine-type polymorphism of drug oxidation.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Resolution and electrophysiological effects of mexiletine enantiomers

Resolution of mexiletine enantiomers from the racemic mixture has been achieved by fractional crystallization through the formation of diastereoisomeric p-toluoyl tartrate salts. Following three crystallization steps in methanol, R-(-)- and S-(+)-mexiletine were resolved with an optical purity greater than 98% (yield approximately 30%) and their hydrochloride salts formed. Incremental doses of mexiletine enantiomers were administered to dogs with experimentally-induced arrhythmias to investigate the stereoselective antiarrhythmic and electrophysiological effects of these compounds. Using up to three extrastimuli, programmed electrical stimulation was performed in conscious animals 7-30 days after coronary ligation. R-(-)-Mexiletine prevented ventricular tachycardia in 3/6 dogs (2 after 0.5 mg kg-1, 1 after 8 mg kg-1); two animals died after 1 and 8 mg kg-1, respectively; one remained unchanged even at the highest dosage (16 mg kg-1). S-(+)-Mexiletine prevented ventricular tachycardia in only one dog (after 1 mg kg-1); two died after 4 and 8 mg kg-1, respectively; 2/5 remained unchanged even after the administration of 16 mg kg-1. No significant changes in any electrocardiographic intervals (PR, QRS, QTc) or refractory periods were induced by mexiletine enantiomers at any doses used (0.5-16.0 mg kg-1). These results suggest that R-(-)-mexiletine possesses greater antiarrhythmic properties than the opposite enantiomer.

Mechanism of interaction between theophylline and mexiletine

The mechanism of an interaction between theophylline and mexiletine hydrochloride was investigated in 6 male inpatients coadministered both drugs and 16 inpatients (13 men, 3 women) administered theophylline only. Serum theophylline and mexiletine concentrations and urinary concentrations of theophylline and its metabolites were monitored. Theophylline clearance was 0.0278 +/- 0.0047 L/kg/h (mean +/- SD) in patients coadministered theophylline and mexiletine and 0.0441 +/- 0.0096 in patients administered theophylline only (p less than 0.05). The fractional urine contents of 1-methyluric acid and 3-methylxanthine were 18.7 +/- 2.5 and 12.6 +/- 2.1 percent in the former group and 26.5 +/- 6.0 and 17.1 +/- 2.0 percent in the latter group, respectively (p less than 0.05). The fractional urine content of 1,3-dimethyluric acid was 51.8 +/- 3.2 in the former and 44.7 +/- 4.1 percent in the latter, respectively (p less than 0.05). An inverse correlation was obtained between serum mexiletine concentrations and total fractional urine content of 1-methyluric acid and 3-methylxanthine (r = 0.704). These results suggest that the mechanism of an interaction between theophylline and mexiletine is an inhibition of demethylation of theophylline by mexiletine.

Practical optimisation of antiarrhythmic drug therapy using pharmacokinetic principles

The optimisation of antiarrhythmic drug therapy is dependent on the definitions and methods of short term efficacy testing and the characteristics of those drugs used for rhythm disturbances. The choice of an initial antiarrhythmic drug dosage is highly empirical, and will remain so until the measurement of free concentrations, enantiomeric fractions and genetic phenotyping becomes routine. However, the clinician can devise an efficient initial dosage for efficacy testing procedures based on pharmacokinetic principles and disposition variables in the literature. In this regard, a nomogram for commonly used agents and dosages was constructed and is offered as a guide to accomplish this goal. Verification of the accuracy and usefulness of this nomogram in a prospective manner in patients with symptomatic tachyarrhythmias is still required. On a long term basis, dosage regimens can be modified by the use of pharmacokinetic principles and patient-specific target concentrations, in accordance with the methods used to monitor arrhythmia recurrence and drug-related side effects.

Mexiletine. A review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties, and therapeutic use in the treatment of arrhythmias

As a member of the class Ib antiarrhythmic drugs mexiletine's primary mechanism of action is blocking fast sodium channels, reducing the phase 0 maximal upstroke velocity of the action potential. It increases the ratio of effective refractory period to action potential duration, but has little effect on conductivity. Unlike quinidine it does not prolong QRS and QT (QTc) intervals. In the dosage range 600 to 900 mg daily mexiletine effectively suppresses premature ventricular contractions (PVCs) in 25% to 79% of patients, with or without underlying cardiac disease. In comparative studies the response rate was comparable to that with quinidine or disopyramide. However, the use of antiarrhythmic therapy in patients with asymptomatic arrhythmias is controversial. More importantly, mexiletine abolishes spontaneous or inducible ventricular tachycardia or fibrillation in the short term in 20% to 50% of patients with refractory arrhythmias. Arrhythmia suppression is maintained in 57% to over 80% of these early therapeutic successes in the long term, with mexiletine alone or in combination with another antiarrhythmic drug. As with other antiarrhythmic drugs, there is no substantial evidence that administration of mexiletine after acute myocardial infarction improves long term prognosis. Although the incidence of adverse effects associated with mexiletine is high, the majority are minor gastrointestinal or neurological effects which can be adequately controlled through dosage adjustment. Furthermore, mexiletine has minimal effects on haemodynamic variables, or on cardiac function in patients with or without pre-existing deterioration of left ventricular function, and it appears to have a low proarrhythmic potential. Thus, while the therapeutic efficacy of mexiletine for the prevention or suppression of symptomatic ventricular arrhythmias may be no greater than that of other antiarrhythmic drugs, and less than that of some (e.g. amiodarone), it is effective in a significant proportion of patients refractory to other treatments and can be administered without causing adverse haemodynamic effects to patients with complicating factors such as acute myocardial infarction or congestive heart failure.

Interaction between theophylline and mexiletine

Drugs influencing hepatic microsomal enzyme systems, such as mexiletine, may affect the elimination pattern of theophylline. The three patients reported here had a history of asthma and premature ventricular contractions, and were receiving theophylline therapy. A few days after starting the coadministration of mexiletine and theophylline, theophylline serum concentrations increased about twofold over concentrations during theophylline therapy. In one case, theophylline serum concentrations increased by 2.6 fold, and the patient developed nausea and anorexia. Mexiletine serum concentrations did not change. It seems that with mexiletine therapy, lower doses of theophylline may be required and careful monitoring of serum concentrations is necessary.

Mexiletine: pharmacology and therapeutic use

Mexiletine is a Class IB antiarrhythmic which has basic and clinical electrophysiologic properties similar to lidocaine. Like other Class I antiarrhythmic agents, mexiletine blocks the rapid inward sodium current responsible for phase 0 of the action potential. It has been noted in the clinical electrophysiology laboratory to have minimal effect on sinus node function and AV nodal and His-Purkinje system conduction. Pharmacokinetic studies have shown that oral absorption is rapid with bioavailability of 80-90%. Mexiletine is predominantly metabolized by the liver with elimination half-life of 9 to 12 hours. The antiarrhythmic effects of the primary drug's metabolites remain to be defined. Hemodynamic studies have shown mexiletine to have a lesser negative inotropic effect than procainamide or disopyramide. Although mexiletine as a single agent successfully suppresses 60 to 80% of spontaneous ventricular arrhythmias, it has lower efficacy in suppression of induced ventricular arrhythmias. Multiple studies have shown that as monotherapy mexiletine is effective in preventing the induction of ventricular tachycardia in approximately 20% of patients. When used in combination with a Class IA antiarrhythmic drug for suppression of induced ventricular arrhythmias, multiple investigators have reported greater efficacy. Neurological side effects (tremor, dizziness, memory loss) occur in approximately 10% of patients while gastrointestinal side effects (nausea, anorexia, gastric irritation) occur in up to 40% of patients. Proarrhythmia or other serious toxicity from the drug is uncommon.

Inhibitory studies of mexiletine and dextromethorphan oxidation in human liver microsomes

The cytochrome P-450dbl isozyme (P-450bdl) is responsible for the genetic sparteine-debrisoquine type polymorphism of drug oxidation in humans. To investigate the relationship between mexiletine oxidation and the activity of this isozyme, cross-inhibition studies were performed in human liver microsomes with mexiletine and dextromethorphan, a prototype substrate for P-450dbl. The formation of hydroxymethylmexiletine and p-hydroxymexiletine, two major mexiletine metabolites, was competitively inhibited by dextromethorphan. Mexiletine competitively inhibited the high affinity component of dextromethorphan O-demethylation. In addition, there was a good agreement between the apparent Km values for the formation of both mexiletine metabolites and the high affinity component of dextromethorphan O-demethylation and their respective apparent Ki values. Several drugs were tested for their ability to inhibit mexiletine oxidation. Quinidine, quinine, propafenone, oxprenolol, propranolol, ajmaline, desipramine, imipramine, chlorpromazine and amitryptiline were competitive inhibitors for the formation of hydroxymethylmexiletine and p-hydroxymexiletine as for prototype reactions of the sparteine-debrisoquine type polymorphism. Amobarbital, valproic acid, ethosuximide, caffeine, theophylline, disopyramide and phenytoin, known to be non-inhibitors of P-450dbl activity, were found not to inhibit the formation of these mexiletine metabolites. Moreover, the formation of both metabolites was strongly inhibited by an antiserum containing anti-liver/kidney microsomes antibodies type I (anti-LKMI) directed against P-450dbl. These data suggest that the formation of two major metabolites of mexiletine is predominantly catalysed by the genetically variable human liver P-450dbl.

Pharmacokinetics of midazolam following intravenous and oral administration in patients with chronic liver disease and in healthy subjects

To study the effects of cirrhosis of the liver on the pharmacokinetics of midazolam single IV (7.5 mg as base) and p.o. (15.0 mg as base) doses of midazolam were administered to seven patients with cirrhosis of the liver and to seven healthy control subjects. One cirrhotic patient did not receive the oral dose. The distribution of midazolam in both study groups was alike as indicated by similar values of t1/2 alpha, V1 and Vss. Also the plasma protein binding of midazolam was unchanged in the patients with cirrhosis. The elimination of midazolam was significantly retarded in the patients as indicated by its lower total clearance (3.34 vs. 5.63 ml/min/kg), lower total elimination rate constant (0.400 vs. 0.721 h-1), and longer elimination half-life (7.36 vs. 3.80 h). The bioavailability of oral midazolam was significantly (P less than 0.05) higher in patients than controls (76% vs. 38%). The antipyrine-half-life was 32.4 h in the patients and 11.8 h in the controls. There were statistically significant (P less than 0.01) correlations between the clearances of the two drugs (r = 0.680) and between their half-lives (r = 0.755). The hypnotic effects of midazolam were similar in both groups. However, on a pharmacokinetic basis a reduced dosage of midazolam to patients with advanced cirrhosis of the liver is recommended.

Enhanced pirmenol elimination by rifampin

The potential for drug-drug interaction between pirmenol, an extensively metabolized antiarrhythmic agent, and rifampin, a potent inducer of hepatic drug-metabolizing enzymes, was evaluated in 12 healthy adults. After administration of a single 150-mg oral dose of pirmenol on day 1, pirmenol plasma and urine concentrations were determined for 72 hours postdose. On days 4 through 17, subjects received 600 mg of rifampin once daily. On day 15, subjects were given a second single 150-mg oral dose of pirmenol concomitantly with rifampin, and plasma and urine concentrations were again determined. Coadministration of rifampin with pirmenol resulted in significant (P less than .005) changes in pirmenol pharmacokinetic parameters. A sixfold decrease in pirmenol AUC and sevenfold increase in the apparent plasma clearance of pirmenol were found. Elimination half-life decreased more than twofold. Based on these findings, pirmenol dosage adjustment will be required when pirmenol is given to patients concurrently receiving rifampin. These results suggest that the administration of pirmenol with other agents that induce hepatic enzymes may result in accelerated pirmenol clearance.

High-performance liquid chromatographic assay for mexiletine hydroxylation in microsomes of human liver

A simple high-performance liquid chromatographic assay, using fluorescence detection, is described for determining simultaneously the production of the two major hydroxylated metabolites of mexiletine in human liver microsomes. The detection limits of hydroxymethylmexiletine and p-hydroxymexiletine are 0.35 and 0.08 nmol/ml, respectively. The assay is specific, reproducible and allows the simultaneous kinetic characterization of the reactions in small amounts of liver tissue. The assay may be used to acquire a better knowledge of the kinetic behaviour of mexiletine and of its metabolites, and to investigate if the large inter-individual variations of the mexiletine pharmacokinetics are of metabolic origin, due to variations of its hydroxylation processes.

Overview of the clinical pharmacology of antiarrhythmic drugs

Antiarrhythmic drugs have been recognized to possess 1 or more classes of antiarrhythmic action. This classification scheme is useful, but has major limitations because the available drugs and their metabolites have multiple actions. This report presents an overview of the distinguishing features of the most frequently used agents having class I or III actions. Agents with class I actions are local anesthetic agents that depress the fast inward depolarizing sodium current and thereby slow the rate of the rise of the action potential (phase 0). This category is further divided into classes IA, IB, and IC according to the degree of potency as sodium channel inhibitors, and the individual effects of the drug on action potential, conduction velocity and repolarization. Included in the spectrum of agents with class I action are quinidine, procainamide, disopyramide, lidocaine, tocainide, mexiletine, flecainide, amiodarone, encainide and lorcainide. The antiarrhythmic drugs that exert class III action lengthen repolarization and refractoriness; included in this category are amiodarone, quinidine, bretylium and sotalol. Because of the broad range of effects that antiarrhythmic agents may exert, safe and effective therapy requires a thorough familiarity with the pharmacologic profile of each drug administered and a careful evaluation of the presenting condition and the patient history. In some cases, a multiple drug regimen may be most appropriate. Various combinations such as class IA and IB agents, have been shown to slow conduction synergistically and increase refractoriness while keeping adverse effects to a minimum.

Pharmacologic causes of arrhythmogenic actions of antiarrhythmic drugs

All currently known antiarrhythmic agents can induce or worsen arrhythmias. Inappropriate dosage selection, mistakenly based on pharmacokinetic data from "normal" subjects, may result in adverse reactions when an antiarrhythmic drug is given to patients. Unexpected variations in drug clearance can increase plasma concentration of antiarrhythmic agents and aggravate arrhythmias. Changes in the rate of drug metabolism by the liver, e.g., due to cessation of alcohol or drugs that induce hepatic metabolism, can reduce drug clearance, making a previously well-tolerated dose toxic. Another possible explanation for adverse drug reactions is nonlinear protein binding. Recently, genetic determinants of drug metabolism have been identified as explanations of interindividual variations in drug responsiveness. Finally, the interactions of antiarrhythmic agents may also lead to aggravation of arrhythmias. A better understanding of the pharmacology of antiarrhythmic agents can reduce, if not prevent, the occurrence of potentially lethal proarrhythmic events.

Pharmacology and clinical use of mexiletine

Mexiletine is an antiarrhythmic agent with structural and electrophysiologic properties similar to those of lidocaine. Mexiletine decreases ventricular automaticity while shortening both action potential duration and effective refractory period. The drug may be administered orally or intravenously. Hepatic metabolism is the major route of elimination. The elimination half-life is approximately 10 hours, but longer in patients with acute myocardial infarction, chronic congestive heart failure or hepatic insufficiency. Mexiletine suppresses ventricular ectopy in the acute phase of myocardial infarction. The drug is effective for some patients in whom lidocaine has failed. It suppresses chronic ventricular ectopy and is well tolerated in approximately two-thirds of stable outpatients treated with this agent. In that population, mexiletine is comparable in efficacy to quinidine, procainamide and disopyramide. It is effective in 30-50% of patients with ventricular arrhythmias refractory to other antiarrhythmic drugs. In patients with refractory arrhythmias, the efficacy of mexiletine may be enhanced by combination with propranolol, quinidine or amiodarone. Adverse reactions limit use of mexiletine in approximately 20% of patients. Gastrointestinal and central nervous system side effects are the most common. Mexiletine does not depress myocardial function. Aggravation of arrhythmias is uncommonly observed. The usual intravenous dose of mexiletine is 150-250 mg over at least 10 minutes. Long-term oral dosages are usually 200-300 mg 3 or 4 times daily.

Cirrhosis of the liver markedly impairs the elimination of mexiletine

To study the effects of cirrhosis of the liver on the pharmacokinetics of mexiletine a single i.v. dose of 200 mg was administered to six cirrhotic patients and to six healthy controls. The distribution of mexiletine in both study groups was similar, as indicated by similar values of V1 and Vss, but it tended to occur more slowly in the cirrhotics. The plasma protein binding of mexiletine was unchanged in the patients with cirrhosis. The elimination of mexiletine was markedly retarded in the cirrhotics, as indicated by its lower total clearance (2.31 vs. 8.27 ml/kg/h,) lower total elimination rate constant (0.059 vs 0.353 h-1), and longer elimination half-life (28.7 vs 9.9 h). The antipyrine half-life was 38.3 h in the patients and 14.7 h in the controls. One healthy volunteer had a Morgagni-Stokes-Adams type of syncopal attack 5 min after administration of mexiletine due to disturbance of AV conduction induced by the drug. Thus, on a pharmacokinetic basis the loading dose of mexiletine need not be modified in cirrhotic patients, whereas the maintenance dosage should be reduced to one fourth - one third of the usual dose.

Clinical pharmacokinetics of the newer antiarrhythmic agents

This article reviews clinical pharmacokinetic data on 8 new antiarrhythmic agents. Some of these drugs have been studied extensively while others are relatively new, with incomplete data due to limited evaluation. Amiodarone is a class III antiarrhythmic drug which is effective in treating many atrial and ventricular arrhythmias that are refractory to other drugs. Amiodarone accumulates extensively in tissues and its disposition characteristics are best described by models with 3 and 4 compartments. Its apparent volume of distribution is very large (1300 to 11,000L) and its elimination half-life very long (53 days). A delay of up to 28 days from of treatment to onset of antiarrhythmic effect may be observed, and the antiarrhythmic effect may persist for weeks to months following cessation of therapy. Clinically significant drug interactions have been observed with amiodarone and warfarin, digoxin, quinidine and procainamide. Encainide is a class Ic antiarrhythmic drug. Although it has a short elimination half-life (1 to 3h), 2 major metabolites with antiarrhythmic effects accumulate in the plasma of patients during long term therapy. Plasma concentrations of O-demethyl encainide appear to correlate with the antiarrhythmic effect. Flecainide, another class Ic antiarrhythmic agent, has an elimination half-life of 14 hours which makes it suitable for twice daily dosing. Flecainide elimination is prolonged in patients with low output heart failure. Significant drug interactions with digoxin and cimetidine have been reported. Lorcainide is also a class Ic antiarrhythmic drug, the bioavailability of which is nonlinear. Clearance of the drug is reduced during long term therapy. A major active metabolite, norlorcainide, accumulates in the plasma of patients during long term therapy and its concentration exceeds that of lorcainide by a factor of 2. The elimination half-lives of lorcainide (9h) and norlorcainide (28h) allow for once or twice daily dosing. Mexiletine, a class Ib antiarrhythmic drug, is structurally similar to lignocaine (lidocaine). A sustained release formulation provides effective plasma concentrations when administered twice daily. The apparent volume of distribution of mexiletine is 5.0 to 6.6 L/kg, and the elimination half-life varies from 6 to 12 hours in normal subjects and from 11 to 17 hours in cardiac patients. Mexilitine is extensively metabolised but the metabolites are not pharmacologically active. Renal elimination of mexiletine is pH dependent. Drugs which induce hepatic metabolism significantly alter the pharmacokinetics of mexiletine.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

The interaction of mexiletine with other cardiovascular drugs

Drug-drug interactions can be adverse or beneficial and can be classified as pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic. Several adverse pharmacokinetic drug interactions have been described for mexiletine. Because it is a weak base, mexiletine undergoes several pH-dependent drug interactions in the gastrointestinal tract and kidney. Since mexiletine is metabolized by hepatic mixed-function oxidases, its metabolic rate can be altered by drugs that induce or inhibit this drug metabolizing system. Phenytoin and rifampin have been shown to increase mexiletine clearance and decrease its plasma concentration. Striking examples of beneficial pharmacodynamic interactions occur with mexiletine. Combining mexiletine with either beta-adrenergic blocking drugs or with quinidine markedly increases antiarrhythmic efficacy and substantially decreases the incidence of adverse effects. These beneficial interactions will have a major impact on the clinical use of mexiletine.

Pharmacology, electrophysiology, and pharmacokinetics of mexiletine

Mexiletine is a class I antiarrhythmic agent that is active after both oral and intravenous administration and similar in structure and activity to lidocaine. It decreases phase O maximal rate of depolarization (Vmax) by fast sodium channel blockade. The marked rate dependence of Vmax depression may explain mexiletine's lack of effect on normal conduction and its efficacy against ventricular tachyarrhythmias. Mexiletine significantly decreases the relative refractory period in His-Purkinje fibers without changing the sinus rate or atrioventricular and His-Purkinje conduction times. Action potential duration is usually shortened. Mexiletine may aggravate preexisting impairment of impulse generation and conduction. Uptake and distribution of mexiletine are rapid, systemic bioavailability is about 90%, and tissue distribution is extensive. Mexiletine is primarily metabolized in the liver; 10% to 15% is excreted unchanged in the urine. Elimination half-life is 9 to 11 hours after intravenous or oral administration. Microsomal enzyme induction shortens mexiletine's elimination half-life, whereas hepatic disease and acute myocardial infarction prolong it. Renal disease has little effect, although hemodialysis increases mexiletine clearance. Plasma concentrations from 0.75 to 2.0 mg/L are usually associated with a desirable therapeutic response.

Clinical profiles of newer class I antiarrhythmic agents--tocainide, mexiletine, encainide, flecainide and lorcainide

New class I antiarrhythmic drugs differ in potency, adverse effects and pharmacokinetics. Encainide and flecainide can totally suppress arrhythmias in some patients, but arrhythmia induction can also occur. At effective dose levels, neurologic and gastrointestinal adverse effects are uncommon. Flecainide pharmacokinetics are suitable for oral use but encainide disposition is complex with variable bioavailability and active metabolites that contribute substantially to activity. Lorcainide is also potent, but neurologic adverse effects are common and dose-dependent bioavailability and an active metabolite may complicate long-term oral therapy. Tocainide and mexiletine can suppress arrhythmias in acute myocardial infarction, during convalescence from myocardial infarction and in patients with arrhythmias resistant to other therapy. Dose-related neurologic and gastrointestinal adverse effects are common, but hemodynamic effects are minor and arrhythmia induction is rare. Tocainide disposition is reasonably predictable and stable in patients, but mexiletine disposition is less so because of variation in distribution and clearance. Although all of the newer agents have some disadvantages, their availability should increase the likelihood of success in the high-risk patient.

Mexiletine disposition: individual variation in response to urine acidification and alkalinisation

The disposition of mexiletine has been studied in five subjects on two occasions with urine pH controlled at 5.0 and at 8.0. With acid urine total plasma clearance was similar in all subjects (462 to 497 ml min-1) and the plasma half-life ranged from 3.8 to 9.2 h (mean 6.7 h). With alkaline urine the total plasma clearance varied considerably (239 to 441 ml min-1); the mean half-life, 9.7 h, (range 7.6 to 12.7 h) was not significantly different from that in the acid urine study. Renal clearance fell greatly in every subject on alkalinisation of the urine. The total plasma clearance fell by a similar amount in two. In the remaining three the fall in total clearance was much smaller because of an increase in non-renal clearance. The reduction in total plasma clearance only just achieved statistical significance. The increase in predicted steady-state plasma mexiletine concentrations during infusion with change in urine pH from 5 to 8 varied between +5% and +95% (mean +39%). Changes in urine pH have a predictable effect upon renal clearance of mexiletine. However, disposition is changed in an unpredictable manner and inter-subject variation in distribution volume and non-renal clearance are important factors.

Pharmacokinetics of oral mexiletine in patients with acute myocardial infarction

To study the effects of acute myocardial infarction on its pharmacokinetics a single oral dose of 400 mg mexiletine HCl was administered to seven patients. The study was performed within 24 h of the onset of pain (Study I) and was repeated 10-14 days later, during the recovery phase (Study II). Mexiletine in plasma and urine was quantified by a GLC method. The peak plasma concentrations of mexiletine were 0.65 +/- 0.05 (SEM) microgram ml and 1.08 +/- 0.11 micrograms/ml (p less than 0.05) in Studies I and II, respectively. The corresponding peak times were 4.68 +/- 2.04 h and 1.46 +/- 0.17 h (N.S.). The lag time averaged 0.48 +/- 0.08 h in Study I and 0.39 +/- 0.05 h in Study II (N.S.). The area under the plasma concentration-time curve remained unchanged. The elimination half-life was 15.03 +/- 0.61 h and 11.75 +/- 0.80 h (p less than 0.01) in Studies I and II, respectively. The recovery of unchanged mexiletine in urine and its renal clearance was also the same in both studies. The plasma protein binding of mexiletine was similar in Studies I and II (61 +/- 2% and 63 +/- 3%; N.S.). Thus, the rate of gastrointestinal absorption of mexiletine was definitely slowed in the acute phase of myocardial infarction, whereas the extent of absorption was not altered. The prolongation of the elimination half-life of mexiletine in the acute phase of myocardial infarction is probably related to an increase in its volume of distribution.