Effect of ketoconazole on the pharmacokinetic profile of buprenorphine following administration of a once-weekly buprenorphine transdermal system

Physiologically-Based Pharmacokinetic (PBPK) Modeling of Buprenorphine in Adults, Children and Preterm Neonates

Buprenorphine plays a crucial role in the therapeutic management of pain in adults, adolescents and pediatric subpopulations. However, only few pharmacokinetic studies of buprenorphine in children, particularly neonates, are available as conducting clinical trials in this population is especially challenging. Physiologically-based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling allows the prediction of drug exposure in pediatrics based on age-related physiological differences. The aim of this study was to predict the pharmacokinetics of buprenorphine in pediatrics with PBPK modeling. Moreover, the drug-drug interaction (DDI) potential of buprenorphine with CYP3A4 and P-glycoprotein perpetrator drugs should be elucidated. A PBPK model of buprenorphine and norbuprenorphine in adults has been developed and scaled to children and preterm neonates, accounting for age-related changes. One-hundred-percent of the predicted AUC_last values in adults (geometric mean fold error (GMFE): 1.22), 90% of individual AUC_last predictions in children (GMFE: 1.54) and 75% in preterm neonates (GMFE: 1.57) met the 2-fold acceptance criterion. Moreover, the adult model was used to simulate DDI scenarios with clarithromycin, itraconazole and rifampicin. We demonstrate the applicability of scaling adult PBPK models to pediatrics for the prediction of individual plasma profiles. The novel PBPK models could be helpful to further investigate buprenorphine pharmacokinetics in various populations, particularly pediatric subgroups.

Voriconazole greatly increases the exposure to oral buprenorphine

PURPOSE

Buprenorphine has low oral bioavailability. Regardless of sublingual administration, a notable part of buprenorphine is exposed to extensive first-pass metabolism by the cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4. As drug interaction studies with buprenorphine are limited, we wanted to investigate the effect of voriconazole, a strong CYP3A4 inhibitor, on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of oral buprenorphine.

METHODS

Twelve healthy volunteers were given either placebo or voriconazole (orally, 400 mg twice on day 1 and 200 mg twice on days 2-5) for 5 days in a randomized, cross-over study. On day 5, they ingested 0.2 mg (3.6 mg during placebo phase) oral buprenorphine. We measured plasma and urine concentrations of buprenorphine and norbuprenorphine and monitored their pharmacological effects. Pharmacokinetic parameters were normalized for a buprenorphine dose of 1.0 mg.

RESULTS

Voriconazole greatly increased the mean area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC_0-18) of buprenorphine (4.3-fold, P < 0.001), its peak concentration (C_max) (3.9-fold), half-life (P < 0.05), and excretion into urine (A_e; P < 0.001). Voriconazole also markedly enhanced the C_max (P < 0.001), AUC_0-18 (P < 0.001), and A_e (P < 0.05) of unconjugated norbuprenorphine but decreased its renal clearance (P < 0.001). Mild dizziness and nausea occurred during both study phases.

CONCLUSIONS

Voriconazole greatly increases exposure to oral buprenorphine, mainly by inhibiting intestinal and liver CYP3A4. Effect on some transporters may explain elevated norbuprenorphine concentrations. Although oral buprenorphine is not commonly used, this interaction may become relevant in patients receiving sublingual buprenorphine together with voriconazole or other CYP3A4 or transporter inhibitors.

Treating Chronic Pain: An Overview of Clinical Studies Centered on the Buprenorphine Option

The buprenorphine receptor binding profile is unique in that it binds to all three major opioid receptors (mu, kappa, delta), and also binds to the orphan-like receptor, the receptor for orphanin FQ/nociceptin, with lower affinity. Within the mu receptor group, buprenorphine analgesia in rodents is dependent on the recently discovered arylepoxamide receptor target in brain, which involves a truncated 6-transmembrane mu receptor gene protein, distinguishing itself from morphine and most other mu opioids. Although originally designed as an analgesic, buprenorphine has mainly been used for opioid maintenance therapy and only now is increasingly recognized as an effective analgesic with an improved therapeutic index relative to certain potent opioids. Albeit a second-, third-, or fourth-line analgesic, buprenorphine is a reasonable choice in certain clinical situations. Transdermal patches and buccal film formulations are now commercially available as analgesics. This review discusses buprenorphine pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics, use in certain populations, and provides a synopsis of systematic reviews and randomized analgesic trials. We briefly discuss postoperative management in patients receiving buprenorphine maintenance therapy, opioid equivalence to buprenorphine, rotations to buprenorphine from other opioids, and clinical relevance of buprenorphine-related QTc interval changes.

Opioid analgesics-related pharmacokinetic drug interactions: from the perspectives of evidence based on randomized controlled trials and clinical risk management

BACKGROUND

Multimorbidity results in complex polypharmacy which may bear a risk of drug interactions. A better understanding of opioid analgesics combination therapy used for pain management could help warrant medication safety, efficacy, and economic relevance. Until now there has been no review summarizing the opioid analgesics-related pharmacokinetic drug interactions from the perspective of evidence based on randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHOD

A literature search was performed using PubMed, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Library, using a PRISMA flowchart.

RESULTS

Fifty-two RCTs were included for data interpretation. Forty-two RCTs (80.8%) were conducted in healthy volunteers, whereas 10 RCTs (19.2%) enrolled true patients. None of the opioid-drug/herb pairs was listed as contraindications of opioids involved in this review. Circumstances in which opioid is comedicated as a precipitant drug include morphine-P2Y12 inhibitors, morphine-gabapentin, and methadone-zidovudine. Circumstances in which opioid is comedicated as an object drug include rifampin-opioids (morphine, tramadol, oxycodone, methadone), quinidine-opioids (morphine, fentanyl, oxycodone, codeine, dihydrocodeine, methadone), antimycotics-opioids (buprenorphine, fentanyl, morphine, oxycodone, methadone, tilidine, tramadol), protease inhibitors-opioids (ritonavir, ritonavir/lopinavir-oxycodone, ritonavir-fentanyl, ritonavir-tilidine), grapefruit juice-opioids (oxycodone, fentanyl, methadone), antidepressants-opioids (paroxetine-tramadol, paroxetine-hydrocodone, paroxetine-oxycodone, escitalopram-tramadol), metoclopramide-morphine, amantadine-morphine, sumatriptan-butorphanol nasal sprays, ticlopidine-tramadol, St John's wort-oxycodone, macrolides/ketolides-oxycodone, and levomepromazine-codeine. RCTs investigating the same combination, almost unanimously, drew consistent conclusions, except two RCTs on amantadine-intravenous morphine combination where a different amantadine dose was used and two RCTs on morphine-ticagrelor combination where healthy volunteers and true patients were enrolled, respectively. RCTs investigating in true patients may reflect a realistic clinical scenario and overcome the limitation of RCTs performed in healthy volunteers under standardized conditions. Further research opportunities are also presented in this review.

CONCLUSION

Effective and safe combination therapy of opioids can be achieved by promoting the awareness of potential changes in therapeutic efficacy and toxicities, prescribing alternatives or changing administration strategy, tailoring dose, reviewing the appropriateness of orders, and paying attention to medication monitoring.

Rifampicin decreases exposure to sublingual buprenorphine in healthy subjects

Buprenorphine is mainly metabolized by the cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 enzyme. The aim of this study was to evaluate the role of first‐pass metabolism in the interaction of rifampicin and analgesic doses of buprenorphine. A four‐session paired cross‐over study design was used. Twelve subjects ingested either 600 mg oral rifampicin or placebo once daily in a randomized order for 7 days. In the first part of the study, subjects were given 0.6‐mg (placebo phase) or 0.8‐mg (rifampicin phase) buprenorphine sublingually on day 7. In the second part of the study, subjects received 0.4‐mg buprenorphine intravenously. Plasma concentrations of buprenorphine and urine concentrations of buprenorphine and its primary metabolite norbuprenorphine were measured over 18 h. Adverse effects were recorded. Rifampicin decreased the mean area under the dose‐corrected plasma concentration–time curve (AUC_0–18) of sublingual buprenorphine by 25% (geometric mean ratio (GMR): 0.75; 90% confidence interval (CI) of GMR: 0.60, 0.93) and tended to decrease the bioavailability of sublingual buprenorphine, from 22% to 16% (P = 0.31). Plasma concentrations of intravenously administered buprenorphine were not influenced by rifampicin. The amount of norbuprenorphine excreted in the urine was decreased by 65% (P < 0.001) and 52% (P < 0.001) after sublingual and intravenous administration, respectively, by rifampicin. Adverse effects were frequent. Rifampicin decreases the exposure to sublingual but not intravenous buprenorphine. This can be mainly explained by an enhancement of CYP3A‐mediated first‐pass metabolism, which sublingual buprenorphine only partially bypasses. Concomitant use of rifampicin and low‐dose sublingual buprenorphine may compromise the analgesic effect of buprenorphine.

[Update palliative pain therapy]

Cancer pain and pain associated with non-neoplastic diseases can be associated with pain mechanisms, such as a peripheral or central sensitization or deafferentation. The clarification allows indirect conclusions about the underlying mechanisms based on clinical signs, such as allodynia or hyperalgesia. Non-opioid analgesics are the basis of cancer pain therapy according to the World Health Organization (WHO) pain ladder. In the case of severe cancer pain, treatment can be escalated directly from level 1 to level 3. Opioids are highly effective for the treatment of cancer pain even with a neuropathic component, which can occur in up to 40 % of cases as amixed pain syndrome. Coanalgesics represent a valuable therapeutic adjunct for better pain control and can address treatment of comorbidities, such as anxiety, depression and sleep disorders. When liver and/or renal function is reduced, the dosage of many drugs has to be adapted. Treatment of multimorbid or critically ill patients with opioids and antidepressants/anticonvulsants requires consideration of numerous possible pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic interactions.

Voriconazole more likely than posaconazole increases plasma exposure to sublingual buprenorphine causing a risk of a clinically important interaction

PURPOSE

This study aimed to determine possible effects of voriconazole and posaconazole on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacological effects of sublingual buprenorphine.

METHODS

We used a randomized, placebo-controlled crossover study design with 12 healthy male volunteers. Subjects were given a dose of 0.4 mg (0.6 mg during placebo phase) sublingual buprenorphine after a 5-day oral pretreatment with either (i) placebo, (ii) voriconazole 400 mg twice daily on the first day and 200 mg twice daily thereafter or (iii) posaconazole 400 mg twice daily. Plasma and urine concentrations of buprenorphine and its primary active metabolite norbuprenorphine were monitored over 18 h and pharmacological effects were measured.

RESULTS

Compared to placebo, voriconazole increased the mean area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC_0-∞) of buprenorphine 1.80-fold (90 % confidence interval 1.45-2.24; P < 0.001), its peak concentration (C_max) 1.37-fold (P < 0.013) and half-life (t _½ ) 1.37-fold (P < 0.001). Posaconazole increased the AUC0_0-∞ of buprenorphine 1.25-fold (P < 0.001). Most of the plasma norbuprenorphine concentrations were below the limit of quantification (0.05 ng/ml). Voriconazole, unlike posaconazole, increased the urinary excretion of norbuprenorphine 1.58-fold (90 % confidence interval 1.18-2.12; P < 0.001) but there was no quantifiable parent buprenorphine in urine. Plasma buprenorphine concentrations correlated with the pharmacological effects, but the effects did not differ significantly between the phases.

CONCLUSIONS

Voriconazole, and to a minor extent posaconazole, increase plasma exposure to sublingual buprenorphine, probably via inhibition of cytochrome P450 3 A and/or P-glycoprotein. Care should be exercised in the combined use of buprenorphine with triazole antimycotics, particularly with voriconazole, because their interaction can be of clinical importance.

Clinically significant drug-drug interactions involving opioid analgesics used for pain treatment in patients with cancer: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Opioids are the most frequently used drugs to treat pain in cancer patients. In some patients, however, opioids can cause adverse effects and drug-drug interactions. No advice concerning the combination of opioids and other drugs is given in the current European guidelines.

OBJECTIVE

To identify studies that report clinically significant drug-drug interactions involving opioids used for pain treatment in adult cancer patients.

DESIGN AND DATA SOURCES

Systematic review with searches in Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from the start of the databases (Embase from 1980) through January 2014. In addition, reference lists of relevant full-text papers were hand-searched.

RESULTS

Of 901 retrieved papers, 112 were considered as potentially eligible. After full-text reading, 17 were included in the final analysis, together with 15 papers identified through hand-searching of reference lists. All of the 32 included publications were case reports or case series. Clinical manifestations of drug-drug interactions involving opioids were grouped as follows: 1) sedation and respiratory depression, 2) other central nervous system symptoms, 3) impairment of pain control and/or opioid withdrawal, and 4) other symptoms. The most common mechanisms eliciting drug-drug interactions were alteration of opioid metabolism by inhibiting the activity of cytochrome P450 3A4 and pharmacodynamic interactions due to the combined effect on opioid, dopaminergic, cholinergic, and serotonergic activity in the central nervous system.

CONCLUSION

Evidence for drug-drug interactions associated with opioids used for pain treatment in cancer patients is very limited. Still, the cases identified in this systematic review give some important suggestions for clinical practice. Physicians prescribing opioids should recognize the risk of drug-drug interactions and if possible avoid polypharmacy.

High-sensitivity analysis of buprenorphine, norbuprenorphine, buprenorphine glucuronide, and norbuprenorphine glucuronide in plasma and urine by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry

A new method using ultra-fast liquid chromatography and tandem mass spectrometry (UFLC-MS/MS) was developed for the simultaneous determination of buprenorphine and the metabolites norbuprenorphine, buprenorphine-3β-glucuronide, and norbuprenorphine-3β-glucuronide in plasma and urine. Sample handling, sample preparation and solid-phase extraction procedures were optimized for maximum analyte recovery. All four analytes of interest were quantified by positive ion electrospray ionization tandem mass spectrometry after solid-phase microextraction. The lower limits of quantification in plasma were 1pg/mL for buprenorphine and buprenorphine glucuronide, and 10pg/mL for norbuprenorphine and norbuprenorphine glucuronide. The lower limits of quantitation in urine were 10pg/mL for buprenorphine, norbuprenorphine and their glucuronides. Overall extraction recoveries ranged from 68-100% in both matrices. Interassay precision and accuracy was within 10% for all four analytes in plasma and within 15% in urine. The method was applicable to pharmacokinetic studies of low-dose buprenorphine.