Enhanced antiarrhythmic efficacy of propafenone when used in combination with procainamide or quinidine

Control of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation recurrence using combined administration of propafenone and quinidine

The frequent recurrence of paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) despite the use of standard antiarrhythmic agents prompted the use of new therapeutic approaches. There are few data on systematic assessment of PAF control with stepwise dose escalation and the use of a drug combination. Low-dose quinidine may promote the efficacy of propafenone by inhibiting its degradation through the cytochrome P450 pathway (CYP2D6). We prescribed propafenone 300 to 450 mg/day to 60 patients with PAF for 8 weeks, and 62% were symptomatically controlled. The 19 refractory patients were randomized in a double-blinded fashion to receive either a higher dose of propafenone (450 to 675 mg/day) or the standard dose of propafenone with low-dose quinidine 150 mg/day, each for an 8-week study period, and subsequently crossed over to the alternative treatment. The resulting serum propafenone concentrations were 259 +/- 208 and 336 +/- 237 mg/day (p >0.5), respectively. Both treatment arms prolonged the time to the first symptomatic atrial fibrillation (AF) recurrence and the interval between attacks, and AF was controlled in 37% of patients. However, the higher dose of propafenone was associated with gastrointestinal side effects not present with the low-dose quinidine combination. Of the 10 refractory patients, 7 were further controlled with a standard dose of propafenone plus quinidine (600 mg/day). Overall, control of PAF was achieved in 85% of patients at the end of 8 months; adverse effects necessitating withdrawal were observed in 6%, and uncontrolled AF in 5% of patients. There was no difference in the mean AF rate during recurrences in all phases, and ventricular proarrhythmia was not seen. This study documents the role of stepwise antiarrhythmic treatment of PAF. The use of a standard dose of propafenone, followed by low-dose quinidine combination to reduce propafenone degradation, and the combined standard dose of propafenone and quinidine may be used to maximize efficacy and tolerability.

Antiarrhythmic agents: drug interactions of clinical significance

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

Genetically-determined interaction between propafenone and low dose quinidine: role of active metabolites in modulating net drug effect

1. Quinidine is a potent inhibitor of the genetically-determined debrisoquine 4-hydroxylation. Oxidation reactions of several other drugs, including the 5-hydroxylation of the new antiarrhythmic drug propafenone, depend on the isozyme responsible for debrisoquine 4-hydroxylation. 2. The effect of quinidine on the debrisoquine phenotype-dependent 5-hydroxylation and the pharmacological activity of propafenone was studied in seven 'extensive' metabolizers and two 'poor' metabolizers of the drug receiving propafenone for the treatment of ventricular arrhythmias. 3. In patients with the extensive metabolizer phenotype, quinidine increased mean steady-state plasma propafenone concentrations more than two fold, from 408 +/- 351 (mean +/- s.d.) to 1096 +/- 644 ng ml-1 (P less than 0.001), decreased 5-hydroxypropafenone concentrations from 242 +/- 196 to 125 +/- 97 ng ml-1 (P less than 0.02) and reduced propafenone oral clearance by 58 +/- 23%. 4. Despite these changes in plasma concentrations, electrocardiographic intervals and arrhythmia frequency were unaltered by quinidine coadministration, indicating that 5-hydroxypropafenone contributes to the pharmacologic effects of propafenone therapy in extensive metabolizers. 5. In contrasts, plasma concentrations of propafenone and 5-hydroxypropafenone remained unchanged in the two patients with the poor metabolizer phenotype. 6. Biotransformation of substrates for the debrisoquine pathway can be markedly perturbed by even low doses of quinidine; interindividual variability in drug interactions may have a genetic component.

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

Propafenone is a Class I antiarrhythmic agent with weak beta-adrenoceptor antagonist activity which can be given both intravenously and orally. Dosage must be individualised because of dose-dependent pharmacokinetics, a wide range of clinically effective plasma concentrations (64 to 3271 micrograms/L) after comparable doses, the presence of an active metabolite (5-hydroxy-propafenone) and genetically determined metabolic oxidation. In non-comparative studies propafenone 450 and 900 mg/day orally significantly suppressed premature ventricular complexes and couplets in 96% and 75% of patients, respectively, and abolished ventricular tachycardia in 75% of patients. Efficacy was confirmed in placebo-controlled studies in which propafenone 300 to 900mg daily suppressed premature ventricular complexes (greater than 80%) in 77% of patients; 87% of patients had significant reductions in couplets and abolition of ventricular tachycardia. In patients with ventricular arrhythmias refractory to other antiarrhythmic agents, propafenone 450 to 1200 mg/day suppressed arrhythmias in 63% of patients (in long term therapy 66%). Electrically induced arrhythmias were prevented by intravenously administered propafenone in 12 to 23% of patients. However, long term oral therapy was effective in 77% of patients selected using programmed electrical stimulation. Propafenone was also effective in suppressing atrial and AV nodal/junctional re-entrant tachycardias and Wolff-Parkinson-White tachycardias involving accessory pathways. A limited number of comparisons with other antiarrhythmic drugs indicate that the antiarrhythmic efficacy of propafenone is superior or similar to that of quinidine, disopyramide and tocainide, and comparable to that of lignocaine (lidocaine), flecainide and metoprolol against ventricular arrhythmias and a smaller number of atrial arrhythmias. Cardiovascular side effects indicate a proarrhythmic effect similar to that with other Class I drugs, occasional precipitation of congestive heart failure and conduction abnormalities; the latter two occur more often in patients with underlying ventricular dysfunction. Non-cardiovascular side effects (neurological, gastrointestinal) are well tolerated and generally resolve with continued therapy or dosage reduction. Thus, propafenone is an effective antiarrhythmic agent, and is a useful addition to currently available drugs, although further studies will be required to determine clearly its place in therapy compared with more established antiarrhythmic drugs.