Persistent drug interaction between aprepitant and warfarin in patients receiving anticancer chemotherapy

Elevation of tacrolimus concentration after administration of methotrexate for treatment of graft-versus-host disease in pediatric patients received allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation

BACKGROUND

Methotrexate (MTX) is used to treat graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) following allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT). Recently, a case was encountered in which the blood concentration of tacrolimus (TCR) at steady state increased after intravenous MTX administration for GVHD treatment (therapeutic IV-MTX administration). Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the effect of therapeutic IV-MTX administration on the pharmacokinetics of TCR.

METHODS

This single-center, retrospective, observational study included patients who underwent allo-HSCT and received therapeutic IV-MTX administration during immunosuppressive therapy with continuous intravenous infusion (CIV) of TCR from April 2004 to December 2021. Here, each therapeutic IV-MTX administration was defined as a case and independently subjected to subsequent analyses. The blood concentration of TCR at steady state (Css), ratio of Css to daily TCR dose (C/D), and clinical laboratory data were compared before and after therapeutic IV-MTX administration. In addition, dose changes in the TCR after therapeutic IV-MTX administration were evaluated.

RESULTS

Ten patients (23 cases) were included in this study. The C/D value significantly increased after therapeutic IV-MTX administration (median: 697 vs. 771 (ng/mL)/(mg/kg), 1.16-fold increase, P < 0.05), indicating a reduction in the apparent clearance of TCR. Along with the increase in C/D, significant increases were observed in aspartate transaminase level (median: 51.0 vs. 92.9 U/L, P < 0.01) and alanine aminotransferase level (median: 74.5 vs. 99.4 U/L, P < 0.01) indicating that liver injury after therapeutic IV-MTX administration contributes to the observed C/D increase. In addition, the daily dose of TCR was reduced in 11 cases (47.8%) after therapeutic IV-MTX administration, and the relative frequency of dose reduction tended to be higher than that of dose increase (median: 37.5% vs. 0.0%, P = 0.0519, permuted Brunner-Munzel test). The magnitude of dose reduction was 18.8% (7.4-50.0%) in the 11 cases with dose reduction.

CONCLUSIONS

Therapeutic IV-MTX administration cause a significant increase in C/D, which requires TCR dose reduction. Careful therapeutic drug monitoring of TCR is needed after therapeutic IV-MTX administration in patients receiving immunosuppressive therapy with TCR after allo-HSCT.

Induction of CYP3A activity by dexamethasone may not be strong, even at high doses: insights from a case of tacrolimus co-administration

BACKGROUND

Dexamethasone (DEX) induces CYP3A activity in a concentration-dependent manner. However, no study has examined changes in the blood concentration of CYP3A substrate drugs when DEX is administered at high doses. Herein, we present a case in which tacrolimus (TAC), a typical CYP3A substrate drug, was co-administered with a chemotherapy regimen that included high-dose DEX.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 71-year-old woman underwent liver transplantation for hepatocellular carcinoma 18 years prior to her inclusion in this case study. She was receiving TAC orally at 2 mg/day and had a stable trough blood concentration of approximately 4 ng/mL and a trough blood concentration/dose (C/D) ratio of approximately 2. The patient was diagnosed with post-transplant lymphoproliferative disease (histological type: Burkitt's lymphoma) after admission. Thereafter, the patient received cyclophosphamide-prednisolone (CP), followed by two courses of R-HyperCVAD (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and DEX) and R-MA (rituximab, methotrexate, and cytarabine) replacement therapy. DEX (33 mg/day) was administered intravenously on days 1-4 and days 11-14 of R-HyperCVAD treatment, and aprepitant (APR) was administered on days 1-5 in both courses. The TAC C/D ratio decreased to approximately 1 on day 11 during both courses, and then increased. Furthermore, a decreasing trend in the TAC C/D ratio was observed after R-MA therapy. The decrease in the TAC C/D ratio was attributed to APR administration rather than to DEX.

CONCLUSION

The induction of CYP3A activity by a high dose of DEX may not be strong. The pharmacokinetic information on DEX and in vitro enzyme activity induction studies also suggested that CYP3A activity induction is not prominent under high-dose DEX treatment.

Drug Interactions Affecting Oral Anticoagulant Use

Oral anticoagulants (OACs) are medications commonly used in patients with atrial fibrillation and other cardiovascular conditions. Both warfarin and direct oral anticoagulants are susceptible to drug-drug interactions (DDIs). DDIs are an important cause of adverse drug reactions and exact a large toll on the health care system. DDI for warfarin mainly involve moderate to strong inhibitors/inducers of cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2C9, which is responsible for the elimination of the more potent S-isomer of warfarin. However, inhibitor/inducers of CYP3A4 and CYP1A2 may also cause DDI with warfarin. Recognition of these precipitating agents along with increased frequency of monitoring when these agents are initiated or discontinued will minimize the impact of warfarin DDI. Direct oral anticoagulants are mainly affected by medications strongly affecting the permeability glycoprotein (P-gp), and to a lesser extent, strong CYP3A4 inhibitors/inducers. Dabigatran and edoxaban are affected by P-gp modulation. Strong inducers of CYP3A4 or P-gp should be avoided in all patients taking direct oral anticoagulant unless previously proven to be otherwise safe. Simultaneous strong CYP3A4 and P-gp inhibitors should be avoided in patients taking apixaban and rivaroxaban. Concomitant antiplatelet/anticoagulant use confers additive risk for bleeding, but their combination is unavoidable in many cases. Minimizing duration of concomitant anticoagulant/antiplatelet therapy as indicated by evidence-based clinical guidelines is the best way to reduce the risk of bleeding.

Onco-cardiology: Drug-drug interactions of antineoplastic and cardiovascular drugs

Cardiovascular diseases (CVD) and cancer are still the leading causes of death. There are many common etiologic factors, especially smoking and obesity. Therefore, it is not uncommon for CVD and cancer to coexist. Drug-drug interactions (DDIs) inevitably occur in this group of patients, where polypharmacy is increasing due to older age and multiple comorbidities. However, multidisciplinary studies, especially close collaboration of medical oncologists and cardiologists, who deals with the diagnosis and treatment of these diseases, awareness and preventive approaches to DDIs may reduce serious morbidity and mortality. In this review, information about the common treatments used in cardiology and oncology and possible DDIs are discussed.

[Quantitative Prediction of Drug-Drug Interaction Caused by CYP Inhibition and Induction from In Vivo Data and Its Application in Daily Clinical Practices-Proposal for the Pharmacokinetic Interaction Significance Classification System (PISCS)]

　Drug-drug interactions (DDIs) can affect the clearance of various drugs from the body; however, these effects are difficult to sufficiently evaluate in clinical studies. This article outlines our approach to improving methods for evaluating and providing drug information relative to the effects of DDIs. In a previous study, total exposure changes to many substrate drugs of CYP caused by the co-administration of inhibitor or inducer drugs were successfully predicted using in vivo data. There are two parameters for the prediction: the contribution ratio of the enzyme to oral clearance for substrates (CR), and either the inhibition ratio for inhibitors (IR) or the increase in clearance of substrates produced by induction (IC). To apply these predictions in daily pharmacotherapy, the clinical significance of any pharmacokinetic changes must be carefully evaluated. We constructed a pharmacokinetic interaction significance classification system (PISCS) in which the clinical significance of DDIs was considered in a systematic manner, according to pharmacokinetic changes. The PISCS suggests that many current 'alert' classifications are potentially inappropriate, especially for drug combinations in which pharmacokinetics have not yet been evaluated. It is expected that PISCS would contribute to constructing a reliable system to alert pharmacists, physicians and consumers of a broad range of pharmacokinetic DDIs in order to more safely manage daily clinical practices.

Aprepitant and fosaprepitant drug interactions: a systematic review

AIMS

Aprepitant and fosaprepitant, commonly used for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, alter cytochrome P450 activity. This systematic review evaluates clinically significant pharmacokinetic drug interactions with aprepitant and fosaprepitant and describes adverse events ascribed to drug interactions with aprepitant or fosaprepitant.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed the literature to September 11, 2016, to identify articles evaluating drug interactions involving aprepitant/fosaprepitant. The clinical significance of each reported pharmacokinetic drug interaction was evaluated based on the United States Food and Drug Administration guidance document on conducting drug interaction studies. The probability of an adverse event reported in case reports being due to a drug interaction with aprepitant/fosaprepitant was determined using the Drug Interaction Probability Scale.

RESULTS

A total of 4377 publications were identified. Of these, 64 met inclusion eligibility criteria: 34 described pharmacokinetic drug interactions and 30 described adverse events ascribed to a drug interaction. Clinically significant pharmacokinetic interactions between aprepitant/fosaprepitant and bosutinib PO, cabazitaxel IV, cyclophosphamide IV, dexamethasone PO, methylprednisolone IV, midazolam PO/IV, oxycodone PO and tolbutamide PO were identified, as were adverse events resulting from an interaction between aprepitant/fosaprepitant and alcohol, anthracyclines, ifosfamide, oxycodone, quetiapine, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors/serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors and warfarin.

CONCLUSIONS

The potential for a drug interaction with aprepitant and fosaprepitant should be considered when selecting antiemetic therapy.

Assessment of Drug-Drug Interaction between Warfarin and Aprepitant and Its Effects on PT-INR of Patients Receiving Anticancer Chemotherapy

Aprepitant is a known inducer of CYP2C9, the main warfarin-metabolizing enzyme. Consequently, co-administration of these two drugs may result in reduction of the anticoagulation activity of warfarin. However, the nature and degree of time-dependent changes in prothrombin time international normalized ratio (PT-INR) after aprepitant and warfarin co-treatment in patients receiving anticancer chemotherapy has not been elucidated. We retrospectively examined the changes in warfarin dose, PT-INR, and warfarin sensitivity index (WSI; average of PT-INR value/average of daily warfarin dose) during four weeks, i.e., one week before and three weeks after aprepitant administration. The mean and standard deviation values of WSI for one week before and one, two, and three weeks after the beginning of aprepitant administration were 0.51±0.22 (1.00, n=34), 0.74±0.30 (1.53±0.59, n=30), 0.38±0.15 (0.82±0.22, n=28), and 0.46±0.29 (0.87±0.23, n=24), respectively. Values in parentheses represent relative changes versus WSI of one week before and number of subjects. Although the mean value of WSI significantly increased one week after aprepitant administration compared to that at one week before the administration, it in turn significantly decreased two weeks after compared to one week before (paired t-test, p<0.05 after Bonferoni correction). In patients taking warfarin, PT-INR should be carefully monitored for at least two weeks after the beginning of aprepitant administration because it may fluctuate with both aprepitant and chemotherapy during this period.

Drug interactions with aprepitant or fosaprepitant: Review of literature and implications for clinical practice

Purpose Aprepitant and its parenteral formulation fosaprepitant are widely used for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Aprepitant exerts modest inhibitory effect on CYP3A4 and modest inductive effect on CYP2C9 substrates such as some antineoplastics and multiple other medications. This article is aimed to provide pharmacists and other healthcare professionals with an updated summary of drug-drug interactions of aprepitant/fosaprepitant and implications for clinical practice. Method We reviewed publications reporting drug-drug interactions between aprepitant/fosaprepitant and other medications. Results Coadministration of aprepitant with antineoplastics or opiods may result in significant elevations in the serum levels of the agents metabolized via CYP3A4, with the best documentation for cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide, erlotinib and oxycodone. These alterations did not translate into adverse outcomes and/or necessitate dosing adjustments. The levels of warfarin were significantly decreased by aprepitant requiring prolonged monitoring after discontinuation of aprepitant. Among direct oral anticoagulants, a theoretical interaction between aprepitant and rivaroxaban or apixaban exists. Interactions between aprepitant and quetiapine or diltiazem or sirolimus required dose reductions to avoid adverse outcomes. The intravenous route had a weaker inhibitory effect on CYP3A4 than the oral pathway. Conclusion The evidence on drug interactions of aprepitant with other medications is limited, and the impact on therapeutic outcomes remains to be determined. The intravenous regimen may be a preferred option. As utilization of aprepitant is expanding, practitioners and patients need to be educated about the potential for drug interactions and a need for careful monitoring of patients concurrently receiving aprepitant and CYP2C9 or CYP3A4 substrates, especially those with a narrow therapeutic window.