Two separate dose-dependent effects of paroxetine: mydriasis and inhibition of tramadol’s O-demethylation via CYP2D6

Safety implications of concomitant administration of antidepressants and opioid analgesics in surgical patients

BACKGROUND

Commonly prescribed antidepressants (paroxetine, fluoxetine, duloxetine, bupropion) inhibit bioconversion of several prodrug opioid medications to their active metabolite, potentially decreasing analgesic effect. There is a paucity of studies assessing the risk-benefit of concomitant administration of antidepressants and opioids.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Observational study of adult patients taking antidepressants prior to scheduled surgery using 2017-2019 electronic medical record data to assess perioperative use of opioids and to determine the incidence and risk factors for developing postoperative delirium. We conducted a generalized linear regression with the Gamma log-link to assess the association between use of antidepressants and opioids and a logistic regression to assess the association between antidepressants use and the likelihood of developing postoperative delirium.

RESULTS

After controlling for patient demographic and clinical characteristics, and postoperative pain, use of inhibiting antidepressants was associated with 1.67 times greater use of opioids per hospitalization day (p = 0.00154), a two-fold increase in the risk for developing postoperative delirium (p = 0.0224), and an estimated average of four additional days of hospitalization (p < 0.00001) compared to use of non-inhibiting antidepressants.

CONCLUSIONS

Careful consideration to drug-drug interactions and risk of related adverse events remains critical in the safe and optimal management of postoperative pain in patients taking concomitantly antidepressants.

Use of Drug Claims Data and a Medication Risk Score to Assess the Impact of CYP2D6 Drug Interactions among Opioid Users on Healthcare Costs

Cytochrome P450 2D6 (CYP2D6) activity is highly variable due to several factors, including genetic polymorphisms and drug-drug-gene interactions. Hydrocodone, oxycodone, codeine, and tramadol the most commonly prescribed CYP2D6-activated opioids for pain. However, the co-administration of CYP2D6 interacting drugs can modulate CYP2D6-medicated activation of these opioids, affecting drug analgesia, effectiveness, and safety, and can impact healthcare costs. A retrospective, observational cohort analysis was performed in a large (n = 50,843) adult population. This study used drug claims data to derive medication risk scores and matching propensity scores to estimate the effects of opioid use and drug-drug interactions (DDIs) on medical expenditures. 4088 individuals were identified as opioid users; 95% of those were prescribed CYP2D6-activated opioids. Among those, 15% were identified as being at risk for DDIs. Opioid users had a significant increase in yearly medical expenditure compared to non-opioid users ($2457 vs. $1210). In matched individuals, average healthcare expenditures were higher for opioid users with DDIs compared to those without DDIs ($7841 vs. $5625). The derived medication risk score was higher in CYP2D6 opioid users with interacting drug(s) compared to no DDI (15 vs. 12). Higher costs associated with CYP2D6 opioid use under DDI conditions suggest inadequate CYP2D6 opioid prescribing practices. Efforts to improve chronic opioid use in adults should reduce interacting drug combinations, especially among patients using CYP2D6 activated opioids.

The effects of cytochrome P450 2D6 inhibitors on a high-dose tramadol taper for medically supervised opioid withdrawal: a retrospective chart review

Background: Tramadol is used off-label for medically supervised opioid withdrawal. Tramadol is metabolized by CYP2D6 to an active metabolite with significantly more pharmacologic activity compared to the parent compound.Objectives: The objective of this study is to evaluate the effects of CYP2D6 inhibitors on patient response to a tramadol taper for medically supervised opioid withdrawal.Methods: A retrospective chart review of patients who received a tramadol taper for medically supervised opioid withdrawal was conducted comparing patients who received concomitant moderate-to-strong CYP2D6 inhibitors to patients without concomitant therapy. The primary outcome was the change in Clinical Institute Narcotic Assessment (CINA) scores from baseline to discharge. Secondary outcomes included area under the curve of CINA scores over time, additional CINA outcomes, length of stay, and readmissions.Results: Of 100 charts reviewed, 30 patients received a concomitant moderate-to-strong CYP2D6 inhibitor. There were no statistically significant differences between the baseline demographics of the two groups. Change from baseline CINA to discharge did not differ significantly between the Non-2D6 group and the 2D6 group (-4.0 ± 3.83 and -4.5 ± 4.48 respectively; p = 0.606). The average CINA score for nausea and vomiting was significantly higher in the Non-2D6 group compared to the 2D6 group (0.34 ± 0.35 and 0.18 ± 0.33 respectively; p = 0.019). Otherwise there were no significant differences found in any secondary outcomes.Conclusions: Based on these results, moderate-to-strong CYP2D6 inhibitors do not appear to have a significant impact on the withdrawal course for patients treated with a high-dose tramadol taper.

Desmetramadol Has the Safety and Analgesic Profile of Tramadol Without Its Metabolic Liabilities: Consecutive Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo- and Active Comparator-Controlled Trials

Desmetramadol is an investigational analgesic consisting of (+) and (-) enantiomers of the tramadol metabolite O-desmethyltramadol (M1). Tramadol is racemic and exerts analgesia by monoaminergic effects of (-)-tramadol and (-)-M1, and by the opioid (+)-M1. Tramadol labeling indicates cytochrome P450 (CYP) isozyme 2D6 ultrarapid metabolizer can produce dangerous (+)-M1 levels, and CYP2D6 poor metabolizers insufficient (+)-M1 for analgesia. We hypothesized that desmetramadol could provide the safety and analgesia of tramadol without its metabolic liabilities. We conducted consecutive double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, 3 segment cross-over trials A and B to investigate the steady-state pharmacokinetics and analgesia of 20 mg desmetramadol and 50 mg tramadol in 103 healthy participants without (n = 43) and with (n = 60) cotreatment with the CYP inhibitor paroxetine. In the absence of CYP inhibition (trial A), 20 mg desmetramadol and 50 mg tramadol dosed every 6 hours gave equivalent steady-state (+)-M1, similar adverse events, and analgesia significantly greater than placebo, but equal to each other. In trial B, CYP inhibition significantly depressed tramadol steady-state (+)-M1, reduced its adverse events, and led to insignificant analgesia comparable with placebo. In contrast, CYP inhibition in trial B had no deleterious effect on desmetramadol (+)-M1 or (-)-M1, which gave significant analgesia as in trial A and superior to tramadol (P = .003). Desmetramadol has the safety and efficacy of tramadol without its metabolic liabilities. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV REGISTRATIONS: NCT02205554, NCT03312777 PERSPECTIVE: To our knowledge, this is the first study of desmetramadol in humans and the first to show it provides the same safety and analgesia as tramadol, but without tramadol's metabolic liabilities and related drug-drug interactions. Desmetramadol could potentially offer expanded safety and usefulness to clinicians seeking an alternative to schedule II opioids.

Efficacy of Tramadol for Pain Management in Patients Receiving Strong Cytochrome P450 2D6 Inhibitors

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Tramadol is metabolized by cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2D6 to form an active metabolite that exhibits its analgesic effect. Medications that inhibit this enzyme are used often in practice, yet the clinical impact of this interaction on the analgesic effects of tramadol has yet to be fully described. The objective was to determine whether a clinically relevant decrease in pain control is observed in patients taking scheduled tramadol concomitantly with a strong CYP2D6 inhibitor.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Large health care system.

PATIENTS

One hundred fifty-two adult inpatients who received scheduled tramadol for at least 24 hours with (76 patients) or without (76 patients) a strong CYP2D6 inhibitor between January 1, 2012, and February 28, 2017, were included in the analysis. Patients hospitalized for opioid use disorder or those receiving substandard dosing of tramadol were excluded.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The primary outcome was mean breakthrough opiate consumption in the presence and absence of CYP2D6 inhibitors. Secondary outcomes included mean pain scores, length of hospital stay, tramadol discontinuation rates, and prespecified subgroup analyses based on patient sex, race, and specific CYP2D6 inhibitor administered. Patients receiving concurrent CYP2D6 inhibitors required significantly more breakthrough morphine milligram equivalents per day compared with patients receiving scheduled tramadol without CYP2D6 inhibitors (geometric mean ± SD 18.2 ± 6.3 vs 5.7 ± 6.7 mg morphine milligram equivalents, p<0.001). No significant differences existed between cohorts for mean pain score, length of hospital stay, or tramadol discontinuation rate.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated a clinically relevant decrease in the efficacy of tramadol when used for pain control in patients receiving a strong CYP2D6 inhibitor. These results should encourage clinicians to review medication lists for this interaction and adjust regimens accordingly to ensure adequate pain control.

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.

The burden and management of cytochrome P450 2D6 (CYP2D6)-mediated drug-drug interaction (DDI): co-medication of metoprolol and paroxetine or fluoxetine in the elderly

PURPOSE

Metoprolol and paroxetine/fluoxetine are inevitably co-prescribed because cardiovascular disorders and depression often coexist in the elderly. This leads to CYP2D6-mediated drug-drug interactions (DDI). Because systematic evaluations are lacking, we assessed the burden of metoprolol-paroxetine/fluoxetine interaction in the elderly and how these interactions are managed in Dutch community pharmacies.

METHOD

Dispensing data were collected from the University of Groningen pharmacy database (IADB.nl, 1999-2014) for elderly patients (≥60 years) starting beta-blockers and/or antidepressants. Based on the two main DDI alert systems (G-Standard and Pharmabase), incidences were divided between signalled (metoprolol-fluoxetine/paroxetine) and not-signalled (metoprolol-alternative antidepressants and alternative beta-blockers-paroxetine/fluoxetine) combinations. Incident users were defined as patients starting at least one signalled or a non-signalled combination. G-Standard signalled throughout the study period, whereas Pharmabase stopped after 2005.

RESULTS

A total of 1763 patients had 2039 metoprolol-paroxetine/fluoxetine co-prescriptions, despite DDI alert systems, and about 57.3% were signalled. The number of metoprolol-alternative antidepressant combinations (incidences = 3150) was higher than alternative beta-blocker-paroxetine/fluoxetine combinations (incidences = 1872). Metoprolol users are more likely to be co-medicated with an alternative antidepressant (incidences = 2320) than paroxetine/fluoxetine users (incidences = 1232) are. The number of paroxetine/fluoxetine users co-prescribed with alternative beta-blockers was comparable to those co-medicated with metoprolol (about 50%). Less than 5% of patients received a substitute therapy after using metoprolol-paroxetine/fluoxetine. Most of the metoprolol users (90%) received a low dose (mean DDD = 0.47) regardless whether they were prescribed paroxetine/fluoxetine.

CONCLUSION

Despite the signalling software, metoprolol-paroxetine/fluoxetine combinations are still observed in the elderly population. The clinical impact of these interactions needs further investigation. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

A review of significant pharmacokinetic drug interactions with antidepressants and their management

Treatment of depression often requires long-term management with medication. Practitioners should be aware of potentially significant drug interactions with the use of antidepressants in order to effectively prevent or manage adverse events while optimizing patient response to treatment. Most antidepressants are metabolized by the liver, primarily via the CYP450 system. Pharmacokinetic profiles of the most recently approved antidepressants are reviewed in addition to evidence supporting potentially significant interactions. In addition, pharmacokinetic interactions between multiple antidepressants and other drug classes, including opiates, antineoplastics, antiepileptics, and antipsychotics, are discussed. This article provides recommendations for the monitoring and management of drug interactions. In addition, limitations of the evidence are reviewed.

Impact of fraction unbound, CYP3A, and CYP2D6 in vivo activities, and other potential covariates to the clearance of tramadol enantiomers in patients with neuropathic pain

The pharmacokinetics of tramadol is characterized by a large interindividual variability, which is partially attributed to polymorphic CYP2D6 metabolism. The contribution of CYP3A, CYP2B6, fraction unbound, and other potential covariates remains unknown. This study aimed to investigate the contribution of in vivo activities of cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2D6 and 3A as well as other potential covariates (CYP2B6 genotype to the SNP g.15631G>T, fraction unbound, age, body weight, creatinine clearance) to the enantioselective pharmacokinetics of tramadol. Thirty patients with neuropathic pain and phenotyped as CYP2D6 extensive metabolizers were treated with a single oral dose of 100 mg tramadol. Multiple linear regressions were performed to determine the contribution of CYP activities and other potential covariates to the clearance of tramadol enantiomers. The apparent total clearances were 44.9 (19.1-102-2) L/h and 55.2 (14.8-126.0) L/h for (+)- and (-)-tramadol, respectively [data presented as median (minimum-maximum)]. Between 79 and 83% of the overall variation in apparent clearance of tramadol enantiomers was explained by fraction unbound, CYP2D6, and CYP3A in vivo activities and body weight. Fraction unbound explained 47 and 41% of the variation in clearance of (+)-tramadol and (-)-tramadol, respectively. Individually, CYP2D6 and CYP3A activities were shown to have moderate contribution on clearance of tramadol enantiomers (11-16% and 11-18%, respectively). In conclusion, factors affecting fraction unbound of drugs (such as hyperglycemia or co-administration of drugs highly bound to plasma proteins) should be monitored, because this parameter dominates the elimination of tramadol enantiomers.

Pharmacogenetics of drug oxidation via cytochrome P450 (CYP) in the populations of Denmark, Faroe Islands and Greenland

Denmark, the Faroe Islands and Greenland are three population-wise small countries on the northern part of the Northern Hemisphere, and studies carried out here on the genetic control over drug metabolism via cytochrome P450 have led to several important discoveries. Thus, CYP2D6 catalyzes the 2-hydroxylation, and CYP2C19 in part catalyzes the N-demethylation of imipramine. The phenomenon of phenocopy with regard to CYP2D6 was first described when Danish patients changed phenotype from extensive to poor metabolizers during treatment with quinidine. It was a Danish extensive metabolizer patient that became a poor metabolizer during paroxetine treatment, and this was due to the potent inhibition of CYP2D6 by paroxetine, which is also is metabolized by this enzyme. Fluoxetine and norfluoxetine are also potent inhibitors of CYP2D6, and fluvoxamine is a potent inhibitor of both CYP1A2 and CYP2C19. The bioactivation of proguanil to cycloguanil is impaired in CYP2C19 poor metabolizers. The O-demethylation of codeine and tramadol to their respective my-opioid active metabolites, morphine and (+)-O-desmethyltramadol was markedly impaired in CYP2D6 poor metabolizers compared to extensive metabolizers, and this impairs the hypoalgesic effect of the two drugs in the poor metabolizers. The frequency of CYP2D6 poor metabolizers is 2%-3% in Greenlanders and nearly 15% in the Faroese population. The frequency of CYP2C19 poor metabolizers in East Greenlanders is approximately 10%. A study in Danish mono and dizygotic twins showed that the non-polymorphic 3-N-demethylation of caffeine catalyzed by CYP1A2 is subject to approximately 70% genetic control.

Paroxetine markedly increases plasma concentrations of ophthalmic timolol; CYP2D6 inhibitors may increase the risk of cardiovascular adverse effects of 0.5% timolol eye drops

Although ophthalmic timolol is generally well tolerated, a significant fraction of topically administered timolol can be systemically absorbed. We investigated the effect of the strong CYP2D6 inhibitor paroxetine on the pharmacokinetics of timolol after ophthalmic administration. In a four-phase crossover study, 12 healthy volunteers ingested either paroxetine (20 mg) or placebo daily for 3 days. In phases 1-2, timolol 0.1% gel, and in phases 3-4, timolol 0.5% drops were administered to both eyes. Paroxetine increased the plasma concentrations of timolol with both timolol formulations to a similar degree. The geometric mean ratio (95% confidence interval) of timolol peak concentration was 1.53-fold (1.23-1.91) with 0.1% timolol and 1.49-fold (0.94-2.36) with 0.5% timolol, and that of timolol area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) from time 0 to 12 hours was 1.61-fold (1.26- to 2.06-fold) and 1.78-fold (1.21-2.62), respectively. During paroxetine administration, six subjects on 0.5% timolol drops, but none on 0.1% timolol gel, had plasma timolol concentrations exceeding 0.7 ng/ml, which can cause systemic adverse effects in patients at risk. There was a positive correlation between the AUC from time 0 to 13 hours of paroxetine and the placebo phase AUC from time 0 to infinity of timolol after timolol 0.5% drops (P < 0.05), and a nonsignificant trend after timolol 0.1% gel, consistent with the role of CYP2D6 in the metabolism of both agents. In the orthostatic test, heart rate immediately after upright standing was significantly lower (P < 0.05) during the paroxetine phase than during the placebo phase at 1 and 3 hours after 0.5% timolol dosing. In conclusion, paroxetine and other CYP2D6 inhibitors can have a clinically important interaction with ophthalmic timolol, particularly when patients are using 0.5% timolol formulations.

Effects of MDMA alone and after pretreatment with reboxetine, duloxetine, clonidine, carvedilol, and doxazosin on pupillary light reflex

RATIONALE

Pupillometry can be used to characterize autonomic drug effects.

OBJECTIVE

This study was conducted to determine the autonomic effects of 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA, ecstasy), administered alone and after pretreatment with reboxetine, duloxetine, clonidine, carvedilol, and doxazosin, on pupillary function.

METHODS

Infrared pupillometry was performed in five placebo-controlled randomized studies. Each study included 16 healthy subjects (eight men, eight women) who received placebo-MDMA (125 mg), placebo-placebo, pretreatment-placebo, or pretreatment-MDMA using a crossover design.

RESULTS

MDMA produced mydriasis, prolonged the latency, reduced the response to light, and shortened the recovery time. The impaired reflex response was associated with subjective, cardiostimulant, and hyperthermic drug effects and returned to normal within 6 h after MDMA administration when plasma MDMA levels were still high. Mydriasis was associated with changes in plasma MDMA concentration over time and longer-lasting. Both reboxetine and duloxetine interacted with the effects of MDMA on pupillary function. Clonidine did not significantly reduce the mydriatic effects of MDMA, although it produced miosis when administered alone. Carvedilol and doxazosin did not alter the effects of MDMA on pupillary function.

CONCLUSIONS

The MDMA-induced prolongation of the latency to and reduction of light-induced miosis indicate indirect central parasympathetic inhibition, and the faster recovery time reflects an increased sympathomimetic action. Both norepinephrine and serotonin mediate the effects of MDMA on pupillary function. Although mydriasis is lasting and mirrors the plasma concentration-time curve of MDMA, the impairment in the reaction to light is associated with the subjective and other autonomic effects of MDMA and exhibits acute tolerance.

Mechanism based medicine in infancy: complex interplay between developmental pharmacology and pharmacogenetics

Introduction of the available knowledge on pharmacogenetics very likely is one of the tools to close the gap between 'population' focused evidence based and 'individual' mechanism based medicine. However, besides pharmacogenetics, other covariates like age, renal function and/or co-medication should also be considered simultaneously when aiming for a 'tailored' pharmacotherapy. To illustrate this, we further extended the tramadol example used by Wilffert et al. to illustrate the complex interplay between developmental pharmacology and pharmacogenetics.