The effect of erythromycin on the pharmacokinetics of rosuvastatin

In Vivo Activity of Intestinal P-Glycoprotein and Hepatic Organic Anion Transporters Polypeptide in Pregnancy and Postpartum

This study investigates the influence of pregnancy on the in vivo activity of the intestinal P-glycoprotein (P-gp) and hepatic organic anion transporters polypeptide (OATP/BCRP) using, respectively, fexofenadine and rosuvastatin as probe drugs. Eleven healthy participants were investigated during the third trimester of pregnancy (Phase 1, 28 to 38 weeks of gestation) and in the postpartum period (Phase 2, 8 to 12 weeks postpartum). In both phases, after administration of a single oral dose of fexofenadine (60 mg) and rosuvastatin (5 mg), serial blood samples were collected for up to 24 h. Rosuvastatin and fexofenadine in plasma were analyzed by LC-MS/MS using previously validated methods. The pharmacokinetic parameters of fexofenadine and rosuvastatin (Phoenix WinNonLin software) with normal distribution (Shapiro-Wilk test) are presented as geometric mean and 90% confidence interval. Phases 1 and 2 were compared using the t test (P < .05). Fexofexadine AUC0-24 values do not differ (P-value: .0715) between Phase 1 (641.9 ng h/mL [500.6-823.1]) and Phase 2 (823.8 ng h/mL [641.5-1057.6]) showing that pregnancy (third trimester) does not alter intestinal P-gp activity. However, rosuvastatin AUC0-24 values are higher (P-value: .00005) in Phase 1 (18.7 ng h/mL [13.3-26.4]) when compared to Phase 2 (9.5 ng h/mL [6.7-13.4]), suggesting inhibition of OATP1B1/OATP1B3 transporters. In conclusion, pregnancy assessed during the third trimester does not alter the intestinal P-gp activity but reduces the activity of hepatic OATP1B1/OATP1B3 transporters. Therefore, adjustments in dosage regimens may be necessary for drugs with low therapeutic index, substrates of the OATP1B1/OATP1B3 transporters, administered during the third trimester of pregnancy.

Pharmacokinetics of Rosuvastatin: A Systematic Review of Randomised Controlled Trials in Healthy Adults

BACKGROUND

Rosuvastatin is a lipid-lowering drug that works by inhibiting 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase, the rate-limiting enzyme responsible for producing cholesterol in humans. The pharmacokinetic data of rosuvastatin are considerably variable across studies.

OBJECTIVE

To review the pharmacokinetics of rosuvastatin from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in healthy adults.

METHODS

A review of the pharmacokinetics of rosuvastatin was performed using systematic search strategies. The Sheiner method was used to summarise the pharmacokinetics of the drug.

RESULTS

Randomised controlled studies (n = 70) involving healthy subjects (n = 2355) that examined the pharmacokinetics of rosuvastatin following single and multiple doses were included in the review. Rosuvastatin is given once daily in the dose range of 5-80 mg, with 40 mg being the maximum approved daily dose. Rosuvastatin achieves maximum plasma concentration at a median of 5 h (range: 0.5-6 h) under fasting conditions following single and multiple doses. Following single doses, rosuvastatin has a mean absolute oral availability of 20%, an overall mean total clearance of 28.3 L/h and an average terminal elimination half-life of approximately 20 h. The overall mean total clearance of the drug in Caucasian subjects was 1.7-fold higher than that in healthy Chinese subjects. The systemic exposure of rosuvastatin is characterised by a large coefficient of variation (48%.) There is a small accumulation with repeated dosing. The interaction of rosuvastatin with darunavir/ritonavir was considered statistically and clinically relevant. Interactions of rosuvastatin single doses with erythromycin, fluconazole, itraconazole and antacid were statistically significant.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

There is considerable variation in the pharmacokinetics of rosuvastatin between races. The clinical relevance of the statistically significant drug interactions is yet to be investigated following repeated co-administration for at least 15 days, consistent with a half-life of low-density lipoprotein of 3 days.

Examination of Physiologically-Based Pharmacokinetic Models of Rosuvastatin

Physiologically‐based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling is increasingly used to predict drug disposition and drug–drug interactions (DDIs). However, accurately predicting the pharmacokinetics of transporter substrates and transporter‐mediated DDIs (tDDIs) is still challenging. Rosuvastatin is a commonly used substrate probe in DDI risk assessment for new molecular entities (NMEs) that are potential organic anion transporting polypeptide 1B or breast cancer resistance protein transporter inhibitors, and as such, several rosuvastatin PBPK models have been developed to try to predict the clinical DDI and support NME drug labeling. In this review, we examine five representative PBPK rosuvastatin models, discuss common challenges that the models have come across, and note remaining gaps. These shared learnings will help with the continuing efforts of rosuvastatin model validation, provide more information to understand transporter‐mediated drug disposition, and increase confidence in tDDI prediction.

The Fe-N-C Nanozyme with Both Accelerated and Inhibited Biocatalytic Activities Capable of Accessing Drug-Drug Interactions

Emerging as a cost-effective and robust enzyme mimic, nanozymes have drawn increasing attention with broad applications ranging from cancer therapy to biosensing. Developing nanozymes with both accelerated and inhibited biocatalytic properties in a biological context is intriguing to peruse more advanced functions of natural enzymes, but remains challenging, because most nanozymes are lack of enzyme-like molecular structures. By re-visiting and engineering the well-known Fe-N-C electrocatalyst that has a heme-like Fe-N_x active sites, herein, it is reported that Fe-N-C could not only catalyze drug metabolization but also had inhibition behaviors similar to cytochrome P450 (CYP), endowing it a potential replacement of CYP for preliminary evaluation of massive potential chemicals, drug dosing guide, and outcome prediction. In addition, in contrast to electrocatalysts, the highly graphitic framework of Fe-N-C may not be obligatory for a competitive CYP-like activity.

Interaction potential between clarithromycin and individual statins-A systematic review

The high prevalence of statin and clarithromycin utilization creates potential for overlapping use. The objectives of this MiniReview were to investigate the evidence base for drug-drug interactions between clarithromycin and currently marketed statins and to present management strategies for these drug combinations. We conducted a systematic literature review following PRISMA guidelines with English language studies retrieved from PubMed and EMBASE (from inception through March 2019). We included 29 articles (16 case reports, 5 observational, 5 clinical pharmacokinetic and 3 in vitro studies). Based on mechanistic/clinical studies involving clarithromycin or the related macrolide erythromycin (both strong inhibitors of CYP3A4 and of hepatic statin uptake transporters OATP1B1 and OATP1B3), clarithromycin is expected to substantially increase systemic exposure to simvastatin and lovastatin (>5-fold increase in area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC)), moderately increase AUCs of atorvastatin and pitavastatin (2- to 4-fold AUC increase) and slightly increase pravastatin exposure (≈2-fold AUC increase) while having little effect on fluvastatin or rosuvastatin. The 16 cases of statin-clarithromycin adverse drug reactions (rhabdomyolysis (n = 14) or less severe clinical myopathy) involved a CYP3A4-metabolized statin (simvastatin, lovastatin or atorvastatin). In line, a cohort study found concurrent use of clarithromycin and CYP3A4-metabolized statins to be associated with a doubled risk of hospitalization with rhabdomyolysis or other statin-related adverse events as compared with azithromycin-statin co-administration. If clarithromycin is necessary, we recommend (a) avoiding co-administration with simvastatin, lovastatin or atorvastatin; (b) withholding or dose-reducing pitavastatin; (c) continuing pravastatin therapy with caution, limiting pravastatin dose to 40 mg daily; and (d) continuing fluvastatin or rosuvastatin with caution.

The clinical significance of statins-macrolides interaction: comprehensive review of in vivo studies, case reports, and population studies

The objectives of this article were to review the mechanism and clinical significance of statins-macrolides interaction, determine which combination has the highest risk for the interaction, and identify key patients' risk factors for the interaction in relation to the development of muscle toxicity. A literature review was conducted in PubMed and Embase (1946 to December 2018) using combined terms: statins - as group and individual agents, macrolides - as group and individual agents, drug interaction, muscle toxicity, rhabdomyolysis, CYP3A4 inhibitors, and OAT1B inhibitors, with forward and backward citation tracking. Relevant English language in vivo studies in healthy volunteers, case reports, and population studies were included. The interaction between statins and macrolides depends on the type of statin and macrolide used. The mechanism of the interaction is due to macrolides' inhibition of CYP3A4 isoenzyme and OAT1B transporter causing increased exposure to statins. The correlation of this increased statin's exposure to the development of muscle toxicity could not be established, unless the patient had other risk factors such as advanced age, cardiovascular diseases, renal impairment, diabetes, and the concomitant use of other CYP3A4 inhibitors. Simvastatin, lovastatin, and to lesser extent atorvastatin are the statins most affected by this interaction. Rosuvastatin, fluvastatin, and pravastatin are not significantly affected by this interaction. Telithromycin, clarithromycin, and erythromycin are the most "offending" macrolides, while azithromycin appears to be safe to use with statins. This review presented a clear description of the clinical significance of this interaction in real practice. Also, it provided health care professionals with clear suggestions and recommendations on how to overcome this interaction. In conclusion, understanding the different characteristics of each statin and macrolide, as well as key patients' risk factors, will enable health care providers to utilize both groups effectively without compromising patient safety.

Progress in the Consideration of Possible Sex Differences in Drug Interaction Studies

Background:

Anecdotal evidence suggests that there may be sex differences in Drug-drug Interactions (DDI) involving specific drugs. Regulators have provided general guidance for the inclusion of females in clinical studies. Some clinical studies have reported sex differences in the Pharmacokinetics (PK) of CYP3A4 substrates, suggesting that DDI involving CYP3A4 substrates could potentially show sex differences.

Objective:

The aim of this review was to investigate whether recent prospective DDI studies have included both sexes and whether there was evidence for the presence or absence of sex differences with the DDIs.

Methods:

The relevant details from 156 drug interaction studies within 124 papers were extracted and evaluated.

Results:

Only eight studies (five papers) compared the outcome of the DDI between males and females. The majority of the studies had only male volunteers. Five studies had females only while 60 had males only, with 7.7% of the studies having an equal proportion of both sexes. Surprisingly, four studies did not specify the sex of the subjects.

:

Based on the limited number of studies comparing males and females, no specific trends or conclusions were evident. Sex differences in the interaction were reported between ketoconazole and midazolam as well as clarithromycin and midazolam. However, no sex difference was observed with the interaction between clarithromycin and triazolam or erythromycin and triazolam. No sex-related PK differences were observed with the interaction between ketoconazole and domperidone, although sex-related differences in QT prolongation were observed.

Conclusion:

This review has shown that only limited progress had been made with the inclusion of both sexes in DDI studies.

More Power to OATP1B1: An Evaluation of Sample Size in Pharmacogenetic Studies Using a Rosuvastatin PBPK Model for Intestinal, Hepatic, and Renal Transporter-Mediated Clearances

Rosuvastatin is a substrate of choice in clinical studies of organic anion-transporting polypeptide (OATP)1B1- and OATP1B3-associated drug interactions; thus, understanding the effect of OATP1B1 polymorphisms on the pharmacokinetics of rosuvastatin is crucial. Here, physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling was coupled with a power calculation algorithm to evaluate the influence of sample size on the ability to detect an effect (80% power) of OATP1B1 phenotype on pharmacokinetics of rosuvastatin. Intestinal, hepatic, and renal transporters were mechanistically incorporated into a rosuvastatin PBPK model using permeability-limited models for intestine, liver, and kidney, respectively, nested within a full PBPK model. Simulated plasma rosuvastatin concentrations in healthy volunteers were in agreement with previously reported clinical data. Power calculations were used to determine the influence of sample size on study power while accounting for OATP1B1 haplotype frequency and abundance in addition to its correlation with OATP1B3 abundance. It was determined that 10 poor-transporter and 45 intermediate-transporter individuals are required to achieve 80% power to discriminate the AUC0-48h of rosuvastatin from that of the extensive-transporter phenotype. This number was reduced to 7 poor-transporter and 40 intermediate-transporter individuals when the reported correlation between OATP1B1 and 1B3 abundance was taken into account. The current study represents the first example in which PBPK modeling in conjunction with power analysis has been used to investigate sample size in clinical studies of OATP1B1 polymorphisms. This approach highlights the influence of interindividual variability and correlation of transporter abundance on study power and should allow more informed decision making in pharmacogenomic study design.

Mechanistic understanding of the nonlinear pharmacokinetics and intersubject variability of simeprevir: A PBPK-guided drug development approach

Simeprevir, a hepatitis C virus (HCV) NS3/4A protease inhibitor, displays nonlinear pharmacokinetics (PK) at therapeutic doses. Using physiologically based PK modeling, various drug-drug interactions were simulated with simeprevir as victim drug to identify whether saturation of the predominant metabolic enzyme (CYP3A4) or the active hepatic transporters (organic anion-transporting polypeptide (OATP)1B1/3) could account for the nonlinear PK. Interactions with ritonavir, a strong CYP3A4 inhibitor that does not affect OATP (at 100 mg dose), erythromycin, a moderate CYP3A4 inhibitor, and efavirenz, a moderate CYP3A inducer that does not affect OATP, demonstrated the involvement of CYP3A4. Interaction studies with low-dose cyclosporine confirmed the role of OATP. The interplay between hepatic uptake and CYP3A4 metabolism was verified by simulations with rifampicin, a potent CYP3A4 inducer and OATP1B1/3 inhibitor, and maintenance doses of cyclosporine. Saturation of gut and liver metabolism by CYP3A4, and saturation of hepatic uptake by OATP1B1/3, seem to account for the observed nonlinear PK of simeprevir.

A pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic drug interaction between rosuvastatin and valsartan in healthy subjects

PURPOSE

Valsartan, an angiotensin-receptor blocker, and rosuvastatin, a competitive inhibitor of the 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase, are frequently coadministered to treat patients with hypertension and dyslipidemia. The study reported here sought to evaluate the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions between rosuvastatin and valsartan in healthy Korean subjects.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Thirty healthy male Korean subjects were administered with rosuvastatin (20 mg/day), valsartan (160 mg/day), and both drugs concomitantly for 4 days in a randomized, open-label, multiple-dose, three-treatment, three-period crossover study. Plasma concentrations of rosuvastatin, N-desmethyl rosuvastatin, and valsartan were determined using validated high-performance liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry. Lipid profiles and vital signs (systolic and diastolic blood pressure and pulse rate) were measured for the pharmacodynamic assessment.

RESULTS

For rosuvastatin, the geometric mean ratios (90% confidence intervals [CIs]) of coadministration to mono-administration were 0.8809 (0.7873-0.9857) for maximum plasma concentration at steady state and 0.9151 (0.8632-0.9701) for area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) over a dosing interval at steady state. For valsartan, the geometric mean ratios (90% CIs) of those were 0.9300 (0.7946-1.0884) and 1.0072 (0.8893-1.1406), respectively. There were no significant differences in the metabolic ratio of N-desmethyl rosuvastatin AUC to rosuvastatin AUC between coadministration and rosuvastatin alone. No interaction was found in terms of systolic or diastolic blood pressure or lipid profiles. Combined treatment with valsartan and rosuvastatin was generally well tolerated without serious adverse events.

CONCLUSION

The pharmacokinetic profiles of rosuvastatin and valsartan in combination were comparable with those of rosuvastatin and valsartan administered individually, suggesting that their individual pharmacokinetics were not affected by their coadministration. No dose adjustment was required and the results are supportive of a study in a larger patient population.

Evaluation of the pharmacokinetics of the DPP-4 inhibitor gemigliptin when coadministered with rosuvastatin or irbesartan to healthy subjects

OBJECTIVE

Gemigliptin is a selective DPP4 inhibitor used to treat type 2 diabetes. The objective of this study was to evaluate the pharmacokinetics (PKs) of gemigliptin, rosuvastatin, and irbesartan monotherapies and combination therapies.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Randomized, open-label, three-treatment, six-sequence, three-period, crossover studies were performed on healthy male volunteers. The three treatments were: 50 mg gemigliptin alone; 20 mg rosuvastatin (part A) or 300 mg irbesartan alone (part B); and rosuvastatin or irbesartan with concomitant gemigliptin. Each drug was administered as part of once daily, 7 day, repeated dosing regimens with a 14 day washout period.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01823133 (part A) and NCT01825850 (part B).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary PK parameters - Cmax and AUCτ - were compared to the geometric mean ratios (GMRs) and 90% confidence intervals (90% CIs) that were determined for the combination therapies and monotherapies.

RESULTS

A total of 60 participants were administered the study drugs, and 52 participants (27 participants in part A; 25 participants in part B) were analyzed as part of the PK dataset. In part A, the GMRs (gemigliptin + rosuvastatin/gemigliptin) of the Cmax and AUCτ values of gemigliptin were 0.955 (90% CI = 0.874-1.044) and 1.023 (90% CI = 0.991-1.057), and those of rosuvastatin were 1.012 (90% CI = 0.946-1.084) and 1.086 (90% CI = 1.032-1.142), respectively. In part B, the GMRs of the Cmax and AUCτ values of gemigliptin were 1.046 (90% CI = 0.964-1.134) and 1.035 (90% CI = 1.005-1.065), and those of irbesartan were 0.966 (90% CI = 0.897-1.040) and 1.050 (90% CI = 0.993-1.111), respectively. The limitations of this study include its relatively short treatment period and small sample size, as only healthy participants were included.

CONCLUSIONS

Gemigliptin does not affect the PK properties of rosuvastatin or irbesartan; also, rosuvastatin and irbesartan do not affect the PKs of gemigliptin.

A mechanistic framework for in vitro-in vivo extrapolation of liver membrane transporters: prediction of drug-drug interaction between rosuvastatin and cyclosporine

Background and Objectives

The interplay between liver metabolising enzymes and transporters is a complex process involving system-related parameters such as liver blood perfusion as well as drug attributes including protein and lipid binding, ionisation, relative magnitude of passive and active permeation. Metabolism- and/or transporter-mediated drug–drug interactions (mDDIs and tDDIs) add to the complexity of this interplay. Thus, gaining meaningful insight into the impact of each element on the disposition of a drug and accurately predicting drug–drug interactions becomes very challenging. To address this, an in vitro–in vivo extrapolation (IVIVE)-linked mechanistic physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) framework for modelling liver transporters and their interplay with liver metabolising enzymes has been developed and implemented within the Simcyp Simulator^®.

Methods

In this article an IVIVE technique for liver transporters is described and a full-body PBPK model is developed. Passive and active (saturable) transport at both liver sinusoidal and canalicular membranes are accounted for and the impact of binding and ionisation processes is considered. The model also accommodates tDDIs involving inhibition of multiple transporters. Integrating prior in vitro information on the metabolism and transporter kinetics of rosuvastatin (organic-anion transporting polypeptides OATP1B1, OAT1B3 and OATP2B1, sodium-dependent taurocholate co-transporting polypeptide [NTCP] and breast cancer resistance protein [BCRP]) with one clinical dataset, the PBPK model was used to simulate the drug disposition of rosuvastatin for 11 reported studies that had not been used for development of the rosuvastatin model.

Results

The simulated area under the plasma concentration–time curve (AUC), maximum concentration (C_max) and the time to reach C_max (t_max) values of rosuvastatin over the dose range of 10–80 mg, were within 2-fold of the observed data. Subsequently, the validated model was used to investigate the impact of coadministration of cyclosporine (ciclosporin), an inhibitor of OATPs, BCRP and NTCP, on the exposure of rosuvastatin in healthy volunteers.

Conclusion

The results show the utility of the model to integrate a wide range of in vitro and in vivo data and simulate the outcome of clinical studies, with implications for their design.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40262-013-0097-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Co-administration of rivaroxaban with drugs that share its elimination pathways: pharmacokinetic effects in healthy subjects

AIMS

The anticoagulant rivaroxaban is an oral, direct Factor Xa inhibitor for the management of thromboembolic disorders. Metabolism and excretion involve cytochrome P450 3A4 (CYP3A4) and 2J2 (CYP2J2), CYP-independent mechanisms, and P-glycoprotein (P-gp) and breast cancer resistance protein (Bcrp) (ABCG2).

METHODS

The pharmacokinetic effects of substrates or inhibitors of CYP3A4, P-gp and Bcrp (ABCG2) on rivaroxaban were studied in healthy volunteers.

RESULTS

Rivaroxaban did not interact with midazolam (CYP3A4 probe substrate). Exposure to rivaroxaban when co-administered with midazolam was slightly decreased by 11% (95% confidence interval [CI] -28%, 7%) compared with rivaroxaban alone. The following drugs moderately affected rivaroxaban exposure, but not to a clinically relevant extent: erythromycin (moderate CYP3A4/P-gp inhibitor; 34% increase [95% CI 23%, 46%]), clarithromycin (strong CYP3A4/moderate P-gp inhibitor; 54% increase [95% CI 44%, 64%]) and fluconazole (moderate CYP3A4, possible Bcrp [ABCG2] inhibitor; 42% increase [95% CI 29%, 56%]). A significant increase in rivaroxaban exposure was demonstrated with the strong CYP3A4, P-gp/Bcrp (ABCG2) inhibitors (and potential CYP2J2 inhibitors) ketoconazole (158% increase [95% CI 136%, 182%] for a 400 mg once daily dose) and ritonavir (153% increase [95% CI 134%, 174%]).

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest that rivaroxaban may be co-administered with CYP3A4 and/or P-gp substrates/moderate inhibitors, but not with strong combined CYP3A4, P-gp and Bcrp (ABCG2) inhibitors (mainly comprising azole-antimycotics, apart from fluconazole, and HIV protease inhibitors), which are multi-pathway inhibitors of rivaroxaban clearance and elimination.

Rosuvastatin: a highly potent statin for the prevention and management of coronary artery disease

Since the identification of a fungal metabolite that inhibits HMG-CoA reductase in 1976, statins have emerged rapidly as the global leader in pharmacotherapeutics designed to lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C). In conjunction, practice guidelines have recommended increasingly aggressive measures to improve coronary heart disease (CHD) outcomes by lowering LDL-C. By virtue of unique chemical characteristics, enhanced binding thermodynamics and limited cytochrome P450 3A4 metabolism, rosuvastatin calcium has a safety profile in line with currently marketed statins, but a different efficacy profile. Mirroring this chemical profile, the GALAXY program represents a comprehensive evaluation of the efficacy, safety and cost-effectiveness of rosuvastatin in individuals representing various clinical diagnoses, pathophysiological states and ethnicities. Also results from the Justification for the Use of statins in Primary prevention: an Intervention Trial Evaluating Rosuvastatin (JUPITER) study could provide further evidence for the use of rosuvastatin in individuals with traditional and emerging CHD risk factors, such as an elevated high sensitivity C-reactive protein level. This review will provide a comprehensive evaluation of the chemistry, clinical efficacy, safety and tolerability of rosuvastatin, and discuss the future role in the management of CHD and atherosclerosis.

Evaluation of the pharmacokinetics and drug interactions of the two recently developed statins, rosuvastatin and pitavastatin

INTRODUCTION

Statins are the cornerstone of lipid-lowering therapy to reduce the risk of coronary heart disease. Rosuvastatin and pitavastatin are the two recently developed statins with less potential for drug interaction resulting in improved safety profiles.

AREAS COVERED

This review summarizes the pharmacokinetics and drug interactions of rosuvastatin and pitavastatin. The materials reviewed were identified by searching PubMed for publications using 'rosuvastatin', 'pitavastatin', 'statins', 'pharmacokinetics' and 'drug interaction' as the search terms.

EXPERT OPINION

Rosuvastatin and pitavastatin have favorable pharmacokinetic and safety profiles as their disposition does not depend on or is only marginally influenced by cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzymes, thus potentially reducing the risk of drug-drug interactions of these two statins with other drugs known to inhibit CYP enzymes. However, drug transporters play a significant role in the disposition of rosuvastatin and pitavastatin and drug interactions may occur through these. Genetic polymorphisms in drug transporters may also affect the pharmacokinetics, drug interactions and/or the lipid-lowering effect of these statins to a different extent.

Adherence to drug label recommendations for avoiding drug interactions causing statin-induced myopathy--a nationwide register study

PURPOSE

To investigate the extent to which clinicians avoid well-established drug-drug interactions that cause statin-induced myopathy. We hypothesised that clinicians would avoid combining erythromycin or verapamil/diltiazem respectively with atorvastatin or simvastatin. In patients with statin-fibrate combination therapy, we hypothesised that gemfibrozil was avoided to the preference of bezafibrate or fenofibrate. When combined with verapamil/diltiazem or fibrates, we hypothesized that the dispensed doses of atorvastatin/simvastatin would be decreased.

METHODS

Cross-sectional analysis of nationwide dispensing data. Odds ratios of interacting erythromycin, verapamil/diltiazem versus respective prevalence of comparator drugs doxycycline, amlodipine/felodipine in patients co-dispensed interacting statins simvastatin/atorvastatin versus patients unexposed (pravastatin/fluvastatin/rosuvastatin) was calculated. For fibrates, OR of gemfibrozil versus fenofibrate/bezafibrate in patients co-dispensed any statin was assessed.

RESULTS

OR of interacting erythromycin versus comparator doxycycline did not differ between patients on interacting and comparator statins either in patients dispensed high or low statin doses (adjusted OR 0.87; 95% CI 0.60-1.25 and 0.92; 95% CI 0.69-1.23). Interacting statins were less common among patients dispensed verapamil/diltiazem as compared to patients on amlodipine/felodipine (OR high dose 0.62; CI 0.56-0.68 and low dose 0.63; CI 0.58-0.68). Patients on any statin were to a lesser extent dispensed gemfibrozil compared to patients not dispensed a statin (OR high dose 0.65; CI 0.55-0.76 and low dose 0.70; CI 0.63-0.78). Mean DDD (SD) for any statin was substantially higher in patients co-dispensed gemfibrozil 178 (149) compared to patients on statin monotherapy 127 (93), (p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Prescribers may to some extent avoid co-prescription of statins with calcium blockers and fibrates with an increased risk of myopathy. We found no evidence for avoiding co-prescriptions of statins and antibiotics with an increased risk of statin-induced adverse drug reactions. Co-prescription of statins and gemfibrozil is paradoxically associated with a marked increased statin dose, further aggravating the risk for severe myopathy.

Effects of piperine, cinnamic acid and gallic acid on rosuvastatin pharmacokinetics in rats

The purpose of this study was to investigate the potential pharmacokinetic interactions with natural products (such as piperine (PIP), gallic acid (GA) and cinnamic acid (CA)) and rosuvastatin (RSV) (a specific breast cancer resistance protein, BCRP substrate) in rats. In Caco2 cells, the polarized transport of RSV was effectively inhibited by PIP, CA and GA at concentration of 50 μM. After per oral (p.o.) coadministration of PIP, CA and GA (10 mg/kg) significantly increased intravenous exposure (AUC(last)) of RSV (1 mg/kg) by 73.5%, 62.9% and 53.3% (p < 0.05), respectively than alone group (control). Compared with the control (alone) group, p.o. coadministration of PIP, CA and GA (10 mg/kg) significantly increased the oral exposure (AUC(last)) of RSV (5 mg/kg) by 2.0-fold, 1.83-fold (p < 0.05) and 2.34 -fold (p < 0.05), respectively. Moreover, the cumulative biliary excretion of RSV (5 mg/kg, p.o.) was significantly decreased by 53.3, 33.4 and 39.2% at the end of 8 h after p.o. co-administration of PIP, CA and GA (10 mg/kg), respectively. Taken together, these results indicate that the natural products such as PIP, CA and GA significantly inhibit RSV transport in to bile and increased the plasma exposure (AUC(last)) of RSV.

The effect of herbal medicine danshensu and ursolic acid on pharmacokinetics of rosuvastatin in rats

The aim of this study was to explore potential herb-drug interaction between danshensu or ursolic acid and rosuvastatin. Compared to the control group given rosuvastatin alone, the concurrent use of danshensu (46 mg/kg) or ursolic acid (80 mg/kg) prior to the oral administration of rosuvastatin (100 mg/kg) increased the systemic exposure of rosuvastatin more than twofold. The plasma clearance of rosuvastatin was reduced to more than 57% in the presence of danshensu or ursolic acid. Rosuvastatin is minimally metabolized in the CYP2C9 isoenzyme pathway and to an even lesser extent in the CYP2C19 isoenzyme pathway. Rosuvastatin is a substrate of drug transporters such as human OATP1B1, OATP 1B3, OATP 1A2, BCRP and NTCP. Therefore, the present results suggested that the potential drug interaction between danshensu or ursolic acid and rosuvastatin may be mediated by one or more transporters (OATP1B1, OATP 1B3, OATP 1A2, BCRP and NTCP) and/or CYPs.

Pharmacokinetic drug interactions of antimicrobial drugs: a systematic review on oxazolidinones, rifamycines, macrolides, fluoroquinolones, and Beta-lactams

Like any other drug, antimicrobial drugs are prone to pharmacokinetic drug interactions. These drug interactions are a major concern in clinical practice as they may have an effect on efficacy and toxicity. This article provides an overview of all published pharmacokinetic studies on drug interactions of the commonly prescribed antimicrobial drugs oxazolidinones, rifamycines, macrolides, fluoroquinolones, and beta-lactams, focusing on systematic research. We describe drug-food and drug-drug interaction studies in humans, affecting antimicrobial drugs as well as concomitantly administered drugs. Since knowledge about mechanisms is of paramount importance for adequate management of drug interactions, the most plausible underlying mechanism of the drug interaction is provided when available. This overview can be used in daily practice to support the management of pharmacokinetic drug interactions of antimicrobial drugs.

The role of OATP1B1 and BCRP in pharmacokinetics and DDI of novel statins

The aim of this review is to provide useful information not only for studying the effect of OATP1B1 and/or BCRP gene mutation on pharmacokinetics of novle statins of pitavastatin and rosuvastatin but also for studying drug-drug interactions (DDI) between the novle statins and other substrates of OATP1B1 and/or BCRP. Intra- and inter-ethnic differences in pharmacokinetic profiles of clinically relevant drugs are important issues reported in many papers not only for scenes of appropriate drug used in clinical settings but also for those of the drug development. Pharmacogenomics is extremely useful for understanding these racial differences. Recent pharmacogenetics study have disclosed important roles of drug transporters in the pharmacokinetic (PK) profiles of some clinically relevant drugs. In this presentation, we introduce single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of OATP1B1 and BCRP and review the contribution of genetic polymorphisms of the transporters to the pharmacokinetics of dual substrates as pitavastatin and rosuvastatin from recent study. At the same time, the DDIs between pitavastatin or rosuvastatin and other drug have been extensively concerned because of inhibiting OATP1B1-mediated hepatic uptake or BCRP-mediated hepatic efflux of pitavastatin and rosuvastatin. This review summarized the current studies about the role of OATP1B1 and BCRP in DDIs between pitavastatin or rosuvastatin and other clinically relevant drugs. The role of OATP1B1 and BCRP gene mutation can affect the PK profiles of pitavastatin and rosuvastatin. The DDIs between the novle statins and other substrates of OATP1B1 or BCRP may occur and cause change in the pharmacokinetic of the novle statins.

Organic anion transporting polypeptide 1B1: a genetically polymorphic transporter of major importance for hepatic drug uptake

The importance of membrane transporters for drug pharmacokinetics has been increasingly recognized during the last decade. Organic anion transporting polypeptide 1B1 (OATP1B1) is a genetically polymorphic influx transporter expressed on the sinusoidal membrane of human hepatocytes, and it mediates the hepatic uptake of many endogenous compounds and xenobiotics. Recent studies have demonstrated that OATP1B1 plays a major, clinically important role in the hepatic uptake of many drugs. A common single-nucleotide variation (coding DNA c.521T>C, protein p.V174A, rs4149056) in the SLCO1B1 gene encoding OATP1B1 decreases the transporting activity of OATP1B1, resulting in markedly increased plasma concentrations of, for example, many statins, particularly of active simvastatin acid. The variant thereby enhances the risk of statin-induced myopathy and decreases the therapeutic indexes of statins. However, the effect of the SLCO1B1 c.521T>C variant is different on different statins. The same variant also markedly affects the pharmacokinetics of several other drugs. Furthermore, certain SLCO1B1 variants associated with an enhanced clearance of methotrexate increase the risk of gastrointestinal toxicity by methotrexate in the treatment of children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Certain drugs (e.g., cyclosporine) potently inhibit OATP1B1, causing clinically significant drug interactions. Thus, OATP1B1 plays a major role in the hepatic uptake of drugs, and genetic variants and drug interactions affecting OATP1B1 activity are important determinants of individual drug responses. In this article, we review the current knowledge about the expression, function, substrate characteristics, and pharmacogenetics of OATP1B1 as well as its role in drug interactions, in parts comparing with those of other hepatocyte-expressed organic anion transporting polypeptides, OATP1B3 and OATP2B1.

Rosuvastatin-associated adverse effects and drug-drug interactions in the clinical setting of dyslipidemia

HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) are the mainstay in the pharmacologic management of dyslipidemia. Since they are widely prescribed, their safety remains an issue of concern. Rosuvastatin has been proven to be efficacious in improving serum lipid profiles. Recently published data from the JUPITER study confirmed the efficacy of this statin in primary prevention for older patients with multiple risk factors and evidence of inflammation. Rosuvastatin exhibits high hydrophilicity and hepatoselectivity, as well as low systemic bioavailability, while undergoing minimal metabolism via the cytochrome P450 system. Therefore, rosuvastatin has an interesting pharmacokinetic profile that is different from that of other statins. However, it remains to be established whether this may translate into a better safety profile and fewer drug-drug interactions for this statin compared with others. Herein, we review evidence with regard to the safety of this statin as well as its interactions with agents commonly prescribed in the clinical setting. As with other statins, rosuvastatin treatment is associated with relatively low rates of severe myopathy, rhabdomyolysis, and renal failure. Asymptomatic liver enzyme elevations occur with rosuvastatin at a similarly low incidence as with other statins. Rosuvastatin treatment has also been associated with adverse effects related to the gastrointestinal tract and central nervous system, which are also commonly observed with many other drugs. Proteinuria induced by rosuvastatin is likely to be associated with a statin-provoked inhibition of low-molecular-weight protein reabsorption by the renal tubules. Higher doses of rosuvastatin have been associated with cases of renal failure. Also, the co-administration of rosuvastatin with drugs that increase rosuvastatin blood levels may be deleterious for the kidney. Furthermore, rhabdomyolysis, considered a class effect of statins, is known to involve renal damage. Concerns have been raised by findings from the JUPITER study suggesting that rosuvastatin may slightly increase the incidence of physician-reported diabetes mellitus, as well as the levels of glycated hemoglobin in older patients with multiple risk factors and low-grade inflammation. Clinical trials proposed no increase in the incidence of neoplasias with rosuvastatin treatment compared with placebo. Drugs that antagonize organic anion transporter protein 1B1-mediated hepatic uptake of rosuvastatin are more likely to interact with this statin. Clinicians should be cautious when rosuvastatin is co-administered with vitamin K antagonists, cyclosporine (ciclosporin), gemfibrozil, and antiretroviral agents since a potential pharmacokinetic interaction with those drugs may increase the risk of toxicity. On the other hand, rosuvastatin combination treatment with fenofibrate, ezetimibe, omega-3-fatty acids, antifungal azoles, rifampin (rifampicin), or clopidogrel seems to be safe, as there is no evidence to support any pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic interaction of rosuvastatin with any of these drugs. Rosuvastatin therefore appears to be relatively safe and well tolerated, sharing the adverse effects that are considered class effects of statins. Practitioners of all medical practices should be alert when rosuvastatin is prescribed concomitantly with agents that may increase the risk of rosuvastatin-associated toxicity.

Does Simvastatin Cause More Myotoxicity Compared with Other Statins?

Objective:

To review the literature regarding statins and myotoxicity and evaluate these data to determine whether incidence rates are higher with simvastatin.

Data Sources:

Literature was identified from a search of MEDLINE (1966–August 2009) and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1970–August 2009), as well as references of selected articles. Key search terms included the names of individual statins, rhabdomyolysis, myopathy, myalgia, myotoxicity, statins, and drug interactions.

Study Selection and Data Extraction:

All English-language articles discussing statin-related myotoxicity and relevant drug interactions that involved human subjects were examined.

Data Synthesis:

Simvastatin is a commonly prescribed, moderately potent statin. Recent evidence suggests that the risk of severe muscle toxicity with simvastatin may be higher than that with other statins, particularly when used in combination with cytochrome P450 isoenzyme inhibitors. However, the lack of direct comparative clinical trials assessing the risk of myotoxicity among the statins in equivalent doses precludes definitive conclusions. Data sources examining low-to-mode rate doses of simvastatin suggest that myotoxicity with this agent is infrequent, with rates similar to those seen with other statins. Conversely, findings from clinical trials using the maximum daily dose (80 mg) and a clinical trials database of varying doses of simvastatin suggest a possible increase in rates of myotoxicity with the 80-mg dose compared with lower doses and a higher incidence rate when compared with maximum doses of other statins.

Conclusions:

Overall, the rates of severe myotoxicity with all statins are low, especially with low-to-moderate doses. However, recent trials for those using simvastatin 80 mg daily suggest a higher incidence of myotoxicity compared with maximum approved doses of other statins. Practitioners should be aware of these possible risks and individualize therapy to limit myotoxicity.

Successful strategy to improve the specificity of electronic statin-drug interaction alerts

PURPOSE

A considerable weakness of current clinical decision support systems managing drug-drug interactions (DDI) is the high incidence of inappropriate alerts. Because DDI-induced, dose-dependent adverse events can be prevented by dosage adjustment, corresponding DDI alerts should only be issued if dosages exceed safe limits. We have designed a logical framework for a DDI alert-system that considers prescribed dosage and retrospectively evaluates the impact on the frequency of statin-drug interaction alerts.

METHODS

Upper statin dose limits were extracted from the drug label (SPC) (20 statin-drug combinations) or clinical trials specifying the extent of the pharmacokinetic interaction (43 statin-drug combinations). We retrospectively assessed electronic DDI alerts and compared the number of standard alerts to alerts that took dosage into account.

RESULTS

From among 2457 electronic prescriptions, we identified 73 high-risk statin-drug pairs. Of these, SPC dosage information classified 19 warnings as inappropriate. Data from pharmacokinetic trials took quantitative dosage information more often into consideration and classified 40 warnings as inappropriate. This is a significant reduction in the number of alerts by 55% compared to SPC-based information (26%; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This retrospective study of pharmacokinetic statin interactions demonstrates that more than half of the DDI alerts that presented in a clinical decision support system were inappropriate if DDI-specific upper dose limits are not considered.

Computing with evidence Part II: An evidential approach to predicting metabolic drug-drug interactions

We describe a novel experiment that we conducted with the Drug Interaction Knowledge-base (DIKB) to determine which combinations of evidence enable a rule-based theory of metabolic drug-drug interactions to make the most optimal set of predictions. The focus of the experiment was a group of 16 drugs including six members of the HMG-CoA-reductase inhibitor family (statins). The experiment helped identify evidence-use strategies that enabled the DIKB to predict significantly more interactions present in a validation set than the most rigorous strategy developed by drug experts with no loss of accuracy. The best-performing strategies included evidence types that would normally be of lesser predictive value but that are often more accessible than more rigorous types. Our experimental methods represent a new approach to leveraging the available scientific evidence within a domain where important evidence is often missing or of questionable value for supporting important assertions.

Population pharmacokinetics of rosuvastatin: implications of renal impairment, race, and dyslipidaemia

OBJECTIVES

To build the structural model of pharmacokinetics for rosuvastatin and evaluate the impact of demographic characteristics including renal function on its pharmacokinetic parameters.

METHODS

A population pharmacokinetic analysis of rosuvastatin in healthy volunteers, subjects with dyslipidaemia, and renal failure patients was performed using non-linear mixed-effects modelling and a two-compartment pharmacokinetic model with simultaneous first- and zero-order absorption. Demographic covariates, dyslipidaemic state and renal function were evaluated for their impact on pharmacokinetic parameters by step-wise additions or deletions using the likelihood ratio test.

RESULTS

Typical pharmacokinetic parameters were estimated for a healthy white male subject. For example, apparent oral clearance (CL/F) was estimated to be 257 L/h. Age, smoking status, weight, body surface area, and lean body mass had no significant effect on rosuvastatin pharmacokinetics. The model predicted that CL/F for subjects with creatinine clearance (CLCR) of 30 mL/min (moderate renal impairment) and of 50 mL/min (mild renal impairment) was 17% and 9.7% lower, respectively, relative to subjects with CLCR of 94 mL/min, the data set median value. CL/F was reduced by 71.1% and 43.7% in subjects with dyslipidaemia and in Asian subjects, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Reduction of CL/F of rosuvastatin is not considered clinically significant for patients with mild-to-moderate renal impairment. Rosuvastatin CL/F was reduced in subjects with dyslipidaemia, but it is important to realise that the safety/efficacy profile of rosuvastatin has been well established in this population. However, the potential for increased exposure in Asian subjects should be considered when initiating rosuvastatin treatment or increasing dose in this population.

Drug/Drug interaction between lopinavir/ritonavir and rosuvastatin in healthy volunteers

OBJECTIVES

This open-label, single-arm, pharmacokinetic (PK) study in HIV-seronegative volunteers evaluated the bioequivalence of rosuvastatin and lopinavir/ritonavir when administered alone and in combination. Tolerability and lipid changes were also assessed.

METHODS

Subjects took 20 mg of rosuvastatin alone for 7 days, then lopinavir/ritonavir alone for 10 days, and then the combination for 7 days. Intensive PK sampling was performed on days 7, 17, and 24.

RESULTS

Twenty subjects enrolled, and PK data were available for 15 subjects. Geometric mean (+/-SD) rosuvastatin area under the concentration time curve (AUC)[0,tau] and maximum concentration (Cmax) were 47.6 ng.h/mL (+/-15.3) and 4.34 ng/mL (+/-1.8), respectively, when given alone versus 98.8 ng.h/mL (+/-65.5) and 20.2 ng/mL (+/-16.9) when combined with lopinavir/ritonavir (P < 0.0001). The geometric mean ratio was 2.1 (90% confidence interval [CI]: 1.7 to 2.6) for rosuvastatin AUC[0,tau] and 4.7 (90% CI: 3.4 to 6.4) for rosuvastatin Cmax with lopinavir/ritonavir versus rosuvastatin alone (P < 0.0001). There was 1 asymptomatic creatine phosphokinase elevation 17 times the upper limit of normal (ULN) and 1 liver function test elevation between 1.1 and 2.5 times the ULN with the combination.

CONCLUSIONS

Rosuvastatin low-density lipoprotein reduction was attenuated with lopinavir/ritonavir. Rosuvastatin AUC and Cmax were unexpectedly increased 2.1- and 4.7-fold in combination with lopinavir/ritonavir. Rosuvastatin and lopinavir/ritonavir should be used with caution until the safety, efficacy, and appropriate dosing of this combination have been demonstrated in larger populations.

Hepatic nuclear factor 1alpha inhibitor ursodeoxycholic acid influences pharmacokinetics of the organic anion transporting polypeptide 1B1 substrate rosuvastatin and bilirubin

Expression of the organic anion transporting polypeptide 1B1 (OATP1B1) is regulated by transcription factor hepatic nuclear factor (HNF) 1alpha. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of ursodeoxycholic acid (UDCA), an inhibitor of transcription factor HNF1alpha, on rosuvastatin and bilirubin kinetics in human healthy volunteers. Both substances are substrates of OATP1B1. Twelve subjects with OATP1B1(*)1b/(*)1b genotype predicting high transport activity were recruited for this randomized, crossover study. Each subject received a single p.o. dose of 20 mg of rosuvastatin after 14 days of p.o. intake of either 500 mg of UDCA or placebo. Plasma concentrations of rosuvastatin were determined on days 15 to 18 of each study period. Subjects were randomly assigned to UDCA or placebo group. Intake of UDCA led to a significant increase in rosuvastatin area under the curve (AUC)(0-72) from 128.5 ng/ml.h to 182.1 ng/ml.h(P = 0.008) compared with the control group. The oral clearance decreased from 155.2 l/h with placebo to 109.8 l/h with UDCA. In addition, the mean values of total bilirubin, conjugated bilirubin, and unconjugated bilirubin significantly increased to 139 +/- 39% (P = 0.003), 127 +/- 29% (P = 0.005), and 151 +/- 52% (P = 0.004), respectively, after UDCA treatment. These results in healthy volunteers confirm the findings from in vitro studies that UDCA inhibits OATP1B1 activity by inhibition of the transcription factor HNF1alpha. They highlight a novel mechanism of OATP1B1-based interaction that is mediated by transcription factor HNF1alpha.

The effect of a combination antacid preparation containing aluminium hydroxide and magnesium hydroxide on rosuvastatin pharmacokinetics

OBJECTIVE

Rosuvastatin, a 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitor used for the treatment of dyslipidaemia, may be co-administered with antacids in clinical practice. This trial assessed the effect of simultaneous and separated administration of an antacid preparation containing aluminium hydroxide 220 mg/5 mL and magnesium hydroxide 195 mg/5 mL (co-magaldrox 195/220) on the pharmacokinetics of rosuvastatin.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A randomised, open-label, three-way crossover trial was performed. Healthy male volunteers (n = 14) received a single dose of rosuvastatin 40 mg alone, rosuvastatin 40 mg plus 20 mL antacid suspension taken simultaneously, and rosuvastatin 40 mg plus 20 mL antacid suspension taken 2 h after rosuvastatin on three separate occasions with a washout of > or = 7 days between each.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary parameters were area under the rosuvastatin plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to the last quantifiable concentration (AUC(0-t)) and maximum observed rosuvastatin plasma concentration (C(max)) in the absence and presence of antacid.

RESULTS

When rosuvastatin and antacid were given simultaneously, the antacid reduced the rosuvastatin AUC(0-t) by 54% (90% confidence interval [CI] for the treatment 0.40-0.53) and C(max) by 50% (90% CI 0.41-0.60). When the antacid was given 2 h after rosuvastatin, the antacid reduced the rosuvastatin AUC(0-t) by 22% (90% CI 0.68-0.90) and the C(max) by 16% (90% CI 0.70-1.01). The effect of repeated antacid administration was not studied and it cannot be discounted that this may have resulted in a stronger interaction than that observed here.

CONCLUSIONS

Simultaneous dosing with rosuvastatin and antacid resulted in a decrease in rosuvastatin systemic exposure of approximately 50%. This effect was mitigated when antacid was administered 2 h after rosuvastatin.

Rosuvastatin in elderly patients

A progressive accumulation of atherosclerotic lesions beginning early in life puts elderly persons at a greater absolute risk of cardiovascular disease and coronary events than other segments of the population. HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor (statin) therapy has been shown to be both efficacious and well tolerated in most elderly patients. Among the statins, rosuvastatin has advantages in treating older patients: at low starting doses it is very efficacious compared with other statins, and thus more likely to enable patients to reach their low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol goals without the need for titration or combination therapy. Lack of clinically significant interactions with most drugs metabolised by cytochrome P450 enzyme 3A4 may also make rosuvastatin safer for patients taking multiple medications. Furthermore, rosuvastatin has shown efficacy in treating patients with many of the co-morbidities common in the elderly, including renal impairment and diabetes mellitus. As yet, however, cardiovascular endpoint data for rosuvastatin are not available.

Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Combined use of Lopinavir/Ritonavir and Rosuvastatin in HIV-Infected Patients

Background

Lopinavir/ritonavir-containing antiretro-viral therapy can cause hyperlipidaemia. However, most statins are contraindicated due to drug-drug interactions. Rosuvastatin undergoes minimal metabolism by CYP450, so no CYP450-based interaction with lopinavir/ritonavir is expected. This study explored the lipid-lowering effect of rosuvastatin and assessed the effect of lopinavir/ritonavir on the pharmacokinetics of rosuvastatin and vice versa.

Methods

HIV-infected patients on lopinavir/ritonavir (viral load <400 copies/ml) with total cholesterol (TC) >6.2 mmol/l were treated with rosuvastatin for 12 weeks, starting on 10 mg once daily. If fasting target values (TC<5.0 mmol/l, high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol >1.0 mmol/l, low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol [LDL-c] <2.6 mmol/l and triglycerides <2.0 mmol/l) were not reached, rosuvastatin was escalated to 20 mg or 40 mg at week 4 and 8, respectively. Plasma lopinavir/ritonavir trough levels (Cmin) were determined at week 0, 4, 8 and 12 and rosuvastatin Cmin, at week 4, 8 and 12.

Results

Twenty-two patients completed the study. Mean reductions in TC and LDL-c from baseline to week 4 (on rosuvastatin 10 mg once a day) were 27.6% and 31.8%, respectively. Lopinavir/ritonavir concentrations were not influenced by rosuvastatin ( P=0.44 and 0.26, repeated-measures analysis). Median (interquartile range) rosuvastatin Cmin for 10 mg, 20 mg and 40 mg once daily were 0.97 (0.70–1.5), 2.5 (1.3–3.3) and 5.5 (3.3–8.8) ng/ml, respectively.

Conclusions

Rosuvastatin appeared to be an effective statin in hyperlipidaemic HIV-infected patients. Lopinavir/ritonavir levels were not affected by rosuvastatin, but rosuvastatin levels unexpectedly appeared to be increased 1.6-fold compared with data from healthy volunteers. Until safety and efficacy have been confirmed in larger studies, the combination of rosuvastatin and lopinavir/ritonavir should be used with caution.

Lipid-lowering effects of statins: a comparative review

The pharmacological regulation of lipid metabolism in patients with dyslipidaemia is unequivocally associated with significant reductions in risk for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. There is strong clinical trial data to support of the use of statin therapies in the settings of both primary and secondary prevention. This paper addresses: i) the mechanisms of action of antilipidaemic medications; ii) dosing regimens and the pharmacokinetic differences among drugs of the same class; iii) risk for drug interactions; and iv) reviews the clinical trial evidence used to support the use of particular antilipidaemic medications in specific physiological settings.

Simvastatin-Associated Rhabdomyolysis After Coadministration of Macrolide Antibiotics in Two Patients

Two men, aged 83 and 78 years, who received stable therapy with simvastatin 80 mg/day were hospitalized 1-2 weeks after completion of short-term treatment with erythromycin and clarithromycin, respectively. Both patients were admitted with myalgia, muscle weakness, functional disability (inability to raise arms and legs), and serum creatine kinase levels more than 60 times the upper limit of normal (ULN). Substantial elevations in aspartate aminotransferase (> 30 times the ULN) and alanine aminotransferase (> 7 times the ULN) levels were also observed. Rhabdomyolysis was diagnosed in both patients. Both recovered, but the combined events resulted in almost 40 days of hospitalization, the cost of which is considerable. According to the Naranjo adverse drug reaction probability scale, the likelihood that the rhabdomyolysis was secondary to a simvastatin-macrolide interaction was probable. Four cases of rhabdomyolysis after therapy with combined simvastatin and clarithromycin have been reported previously, but this is apparently the first report of rhabdomyolysis after coadministration of erythromycin. The interacting mechanism likely was inhibited cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 metabolism and possibly P-glycoprotein transport of simvastatin as well. Previous reports of simvastatin-clarithromycin-related events involved additional drugs that inhibited CYP3A4 and P-glycoprotein. However, this was not the situation with our two patients. To prevent future events, it is crucial that clinicians recognize the interaction risk associated with concurrent use of simvastatin and clarithromycin or erythromycin. The risk could be managed by temporary interruption of simvastatin treatment or administration of a noninteracting antimicrobial agent.

The influence of macrolide antibiotics on the uptake of organic anions and drugs mediated by OATP1B1 and OATP1B3

Macrolides may cause severe drug interactions due to the inhibition of metabolizing enzymes. Transporter-mediated uptake of drugs into cells [e.g., by members of the human organic anion transporting polypeptide (OATP) family] is a determinant of drug disposition and a prerequisite for subsequent metabolism. However whether macrolides are also inhibitors of uptake transporters, thereby providing an additional mechanism of drug interactions, has not been systematically studied. The human OATP family members OATP1B1 and OATP1B3 mediate the uptake of endogenous substances and drugs such as antibiotics and HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) into hepatocytes. In this study we investigated the potential role of these uptake transporters on macrolide-induced drug interactions. By using sulfobromophthalein (BSP) and the HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor pravastatin as substrates, the effects of the macrolides azithromycin, clarithromycin, erythromycin, and roxithromycin and of the ketolide telithromycin on the OATP1B1- and OATP1B3-mediated uptake were analyzed. These experiments demonstrated that the OATP1B1- and OATP1B3-mediated uptake of BSP and pravastatin can be inhibited by increasing concentrations of all macrolides except azithromycin. The IC50 values for the inhibition of OATP1B3-mediated BSP uptake were 11 microM for telithromycin, 32 microM for clarithromycin, 34 microM for erythromycin, and 37 microM for roxithromycin. These IC50 values were lower than the IC50 values for inhibition of OATP1B1-mediated BSP uptake (96-217 microM). These macrolides also inhibited in a concentration-dependent manner the OATP1B1- and OATP1B3-mediated uptake of pravastatin. In summary, these results indicate that alterations of uptake transporter function by certain macrolides/ketolides have to be considered as a potential additional mechanism underlying drug-drug interactions.

Role of P-glycoprotein in statin drug interactions

Understanding the mechanisms of drug interactions with 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors (statins) has become increasingly important because of the potential for serious adverse effects, most notably myopathy. Most of the evidence supports the role of cytochrome P450 (CYP) isoenzymes in many of these drug interactions. However, P-glycoprotein (P-gp), an efflux protein located in the gastrointestinal tract, placenta, kidneys, brain, and liver, may also play a role. Results of several studies with in vitro models have shown that lovastatin, simvastatin, and atorvastatin are inhibitors for P-gp and may be substrates for this transporter as well. Pravastatin and fluvastatin consistently demonstrate no significant inhibition of P-gp. Drug interaction studies involving statins and digoxin support a role for P-gp. Many additional drugs such as diltiazem, verapamil, itraconazole, ketoconazole, and cyclosporine, as well as dietary supplements such as St. John's wort and grapefruit juice, interact with statins and are modulators of both CYP3A4 and P-gp. However, the role of P-gp in these specific drug interactions remains unclear.

Biliary secretion of rosuvastatin and bile acids in humans during the absorption phase

AIM

The aim of this study was to investigate the biliary secretion of rosuvastatin in healthy volunteers using an intestinal perfusion method after administration of 10mg rosuvastatin dispersion in the intestine.

METHODS

The Loc-I-Gut tube was positioned in the distal duodenum/proximal jejunum and a semi-open segment was created by inflating the proximal balloon in ten volunteers. A dispersion of 10mg rosuvastatin was administered below the inflated balloon and bile was collected proximally of the inflated balloon. Bile and plasma samples were withdrawn every 20 min during a 4h period (absorption phase) and additional plasma samples were collected 24 and 48 h post-dose.

RESULTS

The study showed that there is a substantial and immediate transport of rosuvastatin into the human bile, with the maximum concentration appearing 42 min after dosing, 39,000+/-31,000 ng/ml. Approximately 11% of the administered intestinal dose was recovered in the bile after 240 min. At all time points the biliary concentration exceeded the plasma concentration, and the average bile to plasma ratio was 5200+/-9200 (range 89-33,900, median 2000). We were unable to identify any bile-specific metabolites of rosuvastatin in the present study.

CONCLUSION

Rosuvastatin is excreted via the biliary route in humans, and the transport and accumulation of rosuvastatin in bile compared to that in plasma is rapid and extensive. This intestinal perfusion technique offers a successful way to estimate the biliary secretion for drugs, metabolites and endogenous substances during the absorption phase in healthy volunteers.

Rosuvastatin: a risk-benefit assessment for intensive lipid lowering

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death in the US and other industrialised societies. Rosuvastatin, a 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitor, is the most efficacious lipid-lowering agent of the statin class. New guidelines and recent evidence-based studies confirm the benefit of intensive reduction of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol in terms of cardiovascular risk reduction. Both naturally occurring and synthetic statins have demonstrated significant lowering of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, the primary target of cholesterol-lowering therapy. Rosuvastatin, specifically, is a synthetic statin shown to lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, total cholesterol, apolipoprotein B, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and triglycerides, in addition to increasing high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Compared with other statins, there is a similar low risk of serious muscle damage (myopathy and rhabdomyolysis), and no consistent pattern of renal failure or renal injury, despite mild transient tubular proteinuria, as seen with all statins. Therefore, rosuvastatin offers an effective alternative in the clinical management of hyperlipidaemia, while awaiting the results of ongoing cardiovascular risk reduction trials.

Determination of rosuvastatin in rat plasma by HPLC: validation and its application to pharmacokinetic studies

A specific, accurate, precise and reproducible high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) method was developed for the estimation of rosuvastatin (RST), a novel, synthetic and potent HMG-CoA inhibitor in rat plasma. The assay procedure involved simple liquid-liquid extraction of RST and internal standard (IS, ketoprofen) from a small plasma volume directly into acetonitrile. The organic layer was separated and evaporated under a gentle stream of nitrogen at 40 degrees C. The residue was reconstituted in the mobile phase and injected onto a Kromasil KR 100-5C18 column (4.6 x 250 mm, 5 microm). Mobile phase consisting of 0.05 m formic acid and acetonitrile (55:45, v/v) was used at a flow rate of 1.0 mL/min for the effective separation of RST and IS. The detection of the analyte peak was achieved by monitoring the eluate using a UV detector set at 240 nm. The ratio of peak area of analyte to IS was used for quantification of plasma samples. Nominal retention times of RST and IS were 8.6 and 12.5 min, respectively. The standard curve for RST was linear (r2 > 0.999) in the concentration range 0.02-10 microg/mL. Absolute recoveries of RST and IS were 85-110 and >100%, respectively, from rat plasma. The lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) of RST was 0.02 microg/mL. The inter- and intra-day precisions in the measurement of quality control (QC) samples, 0.02, 0.06, 1.6 and 8.0 microg/mL, were in the range 7.24-12.43% relative standard deviation (RSD) and 2.28-10.23% RSD, respectively. Accuracy in the measurement of QC samples was in the range 93.05-112.17% of the spiked nominal values. Both analyte and IS were stable in the battery of stability studies, viz. benchtop, autosampler and freeze-thaw cycles. RST was found to be stable for a period of 30 days on storage at -80 degrees C. The application of the assay to determine the pharmacokinetic disposition after a single oral dose to rats is described.