The effect of multiple doses of ritonavir on the pharmacokinetics of rifabutin

Clinically Relevant Interactions Between Ritonavir-Boosted Nirmatrelvir and Concomitant Antiseizure Medications: Implications for the Management of COVID-19 in Patients with Epilepsy

Ritonavir-boosted nirmatrelvir (RBN) has been authorized recently in several countries as an orally active anti-SARS-CoV-2 treatment for patients at high risk of progressing to severe COVID-19 disease. Nirmatrelvir is the active component against the SARS-CoV-2 virus, whereas ritonavir, a potent CYP3A inhibitor, is intended to boost the activity of nirmatrelvir by increasing its concentration in plasma to ensure persistence of antiviral concentrations during the 12-hour dosing interval. RBN is involved in many clinically important drug–drug interactions both as perpetrator and as victim, which can complicate its use in patients treated with antiseizure medications (ASMs). Interactions between RBN and ASMs are bidirectional. As perpetrator, RBN may increase the plasma concentration of a number of ASMs that are CYP3A4 substrates, possibly leading to toxicity. As victims, both nirmatrelvir and ritonavir are subject to metabolic induction by concomitant treatment with potent enzyme-inducing ASMs (carbamazepine, phenytoin, phenobarbital and primidone). According to US and European prescribing information, treatment with these ASMs is a contraindication to the use of RBN. Although remdesivir is a valuable alternative to RBN, it may not be readily accessible in some settings due to cost and/or need for intravenous administration. If remdesivir is not an appropriate option, either bebtelovimab or molnupiravir may be considered. However, evidence about the clinical efficacy of bebtelovimab is still limited, and molnupiravir, the only orally active alternative, is deemed to have appreciably lower efficacy than RBN and remdesivir.

[Drug-induced uveitis]

In recent years, an increasing amount of attention has been paid to medicinal products as possible risk factors in the development of eye diseases. The frequency of diagnosed drug-induced uveitis is growing yearly, which can be attributed to the appearance of new drugs - biological agents (immune checkpoint inhibitors, BRAF and MEK inhibitors, vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors, tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitors), as well as systemic bisphosphonates and some antiviral drugs. The time interval between the beginning of the drug use and the appearance of uveitis symptoms varies from several days to months. Common symptoms include eye pain, photophobia, the appearance of floating opacities, and reduced vision associated with active inflammatory changes in the retina and optic nerve and outcomes of those inflammations. Timely diagnosis, cancellation of the drug that caused uveitis and appointment of adequate anti-inflammatory therapy in most cases effectively stops the symptoms of the disease, which determines the relevance of attention to the prevalence, pathogenesis, diagnosis and treatment of drug-induced uveitis.

Pharmacology, Dosing, and Side Effects of Rifabutin as a Possible Therapy for Antibiotic-Resistant Acinetobacter Infections

Acinetobacter baumannii has among the highest rates of antibiotic resistance encountered in hospitals. New therapies are critically needed. We found that rifabutin has previously unrecognized hyperactivity against most strains of A. baumannii. Here we review the pharmacology and adverse effects of rifabutin to inform potential oral dosing strategies in patients with A. baumannii infections. Rifabutin demonstrates dose-dependent increases in blood levels up to 900 mg per day, but plateaus thereafter. Furthermore, rifabutin induces its own metabolism after prolonged dosing, lowering its blood levels. Pending future development of an intravenous formulation, a rifabutin oral dose of 900-1200 mg per day for 1 week is a rational choice for adjunctive therapy of A. baumannii infections. This dosage maximizes AUC₂₄ to drive efficacy while simultaneously minimizing toxicity. Randomized controlled trials will be needed to definitively establish the safety and efficacy of rifabutin to treat A. baumannii infections.

Nanotechnology approaches for delivery of cytochrome P450 substrates in HIV treatment

Introduction: Antiretroviral therapy (ART) has led to a significant reduction in HIV-1 morbidity and mortality. Many antiretroviral drugs (ARVs) are metabolized by cytochrome P450 (CYP) pathway, and the majority of these drugs are also either CYP inhibitors or inducers and few possess both activities. These CYP substrates, when used for HIV treatment in the conventional dosage form, have limitations such as low systemic bioavailability, potential drug-drug interactions, and short half-lives. Thus, an alternative mode of delivery is needed in contrast to conventional ARVs. Areas covered: In this review, we summarized the limitations of conventional ARVs in HIV treatment, especially for ARVs which are CYP substrates. We also discussed the preclinical and clinical studies using the nanotechnology strategy to overcome the limitations of these CYP substrates. The preclinical studies and clinical studies published from 2000 to February 2019 were discussed. Expert opinion: Since preclinical and clinical studies for prevention and treatment of HIV using nanotechnology approaches have shown considerable promise in recent years, nanotechnology could become an alternative strategy for daily oral therapy as a future treatment.

Official American Thoracic Society/Centers for Disease Control and Prevention/Infectious Diseases Society of America Clinical Practice Guidelines: Treatment of Drug-Susceptible Tuberculosis

The American Thoracic Society, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and Infectious Diseases Society of America jointly sponsored the development of this guideline for the treatment of drug-susceptible tuberculosis, which is also endorsed by the European Respiratory Society and the US National Tuberculosis Controllers Association. Representatives from the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Canadian Thoracic Society, the International Union Against Tuberculosis and Lung Disease, and the World Health Organization also participated in the development of the guideline. This guideline provides recommendations on the clinical and public health management of tuberculosis in children and adults in settings in which mycobacterial cultures, molecular and phenotypic drug susceptibility tests, and radiographic studies, among other diagnostic tools, are available on a routine basis. For all recommendations, literature reviews were performed, followed by discussion by an expert committee according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology. Given the public health implications of prompt diagnosis and effective management of tuberculosis, empiric multidrug treatment is initiated in almost all situations in which active tuberculosis is suspected. Additional characteristics such as presence of comorbidities, severity of disease, and response to treatment influence management decisions. Specific recommendations on the use of case management strategies (including directly observed therapy), regimen and dosing selection in adults and children (daily vs intermittent), treatment of tuberculosis in the presence of HIV infection (duration of tuberculosis treatment and timing of initiation of antiretroviral therapy), as well as treatment of extrapulmonary disease (central nervous system, pericardial among other sites) are provided. The development of more potent and better-tolerated drug regimens, optimization of drug exposure for the component drugs, optimal management of tuberculosis in special populations, identification of accurate biomarkers of treatment effect, and the assessment of new strategies for implementing regimens in the field remain key priority areas for research. See the full-text online version of the document for detailed discussion of the management of tuberculosis and recommendations for practice.

Population pharmacokinetic drug-drug interaction pooled analysis of existing data for rifabutin and HIV PIs

OBJECTIVES

Extensive but fragmented data from existing studies were used to describe the drug-drug interaction between rifabutin and HIV PIs and predict doses achieving recommended therapeutic exposure for rifabutin in patients with HIV-associated TB, with concurrently administered PIs.

METHODS

Individual-level data from 13 published studies were pooled and a population analysis approach was used to develop a pharmacokinetic model for rifabutin, its main active metabolite 25-O-desacetyl rifabutin (des-rifabutin) and drug-drug interaction with PIs in healthy volunteers and patients who had HIV and TB (TB/HIV).

RESULTS

Key parameters of rifabutin affected by drug-drug interaction in TB/HIV were clearance to routes other than des-rifabutin (reduced by 76%-100%), formation of the metabolite (increased by 224% in patients), volume of distribution (increased by 606%) and distribution to the peripheral compartment (reduced by 47%). For des-rifabutin, clearance was reduced by 35%-76% and volume of distribution increased by 67%-240% in TB/HIV. These changes resulted in overall increased exposure to rifabutin in TB/HIV patients by 210% because of the effects of PIs and 280% with ritonavir-boosted PIs.

CONCLUSIONS

Given together with non-boosted or ritonavir-boosted PIs, rifabutin at 150 mg once daily results in similar or higher exposure compared with rifabutin at 300 mg once daily without concomitant PIs and may achieve peak concentrations within an acceptable therapeutic range. Although 300 mg of rifabutin every 3 days with boosted PI achieves an average equivalent exposure, intermittent doses of rifamycins are not supported by current guidelines.

Drug-induced uveitis

INTRODUCTION

Drug-induced uveitis is a well described but often overlooked and/or misdiagnosed adverse reaction to medication. There are an increasing number of medications that have been related to the onset of intraocular inflammation. Identification of these inciting agents may decisively help the diagnostic algorithm involving new cases of uveitis.

AREAS COVERED

This review intends to be an updated comprehensive, practical guide for practitioners regarding the main drugs that have been associated with uveitis. A classification proposed by Naranjo et al. in 1981 for establishing potential causality is applied examining possible mechanisms of action. A guide for clinicians about the rationale of these observations when dealing with patients with uveitis is provided.

EXPERT OPINION

Several agents with different routes of administration (systemic, topical and/or intraocular) may cause intraocular inflammation. The mechanism behind ocular inflammation is frequently unknown. Clinicians should be aware of the potential drug effect to optimize diagnosis and management of such patients.

Drug-induced uveitis

A number of medications have been associated with uveitis. This review highlights both well-established and recently reported systemic, topical, intraocular, and vaccine-associated causes of drug-induced uveitis, and assigns a quantitative score to each medication based upon criteria originally described by Naranjo and associates.

TB and HIV Therapeutics: Pharmacology Research Priorities

An unprecedented number of investigational drugs are in the development pipeline for the treatment of tuberculosis. Among patients with tuberculosis, co-infection with HIV is common, and concurrent treatment of tuberculosis and HIV is now the standard of care. To ensure that combinations of anti-tuberculosis drugs and antiretrovirals are safe and are tested at doses most likely to be effective, selected pharmacokinetic studies based on knowledge of their metabolic pathways and their capacity to induce or inhibit metabolizing enzymes of companion drugs must be conducted. Drug interaction studies should be followed up by evaluations in larger populations to evaluate safety and pharmacodynamics more fully. Involving patients with HIV in trials of TB drugs early in development enhances the knowledge gained from the trials and will ensure that promising new tuberculosis treatments are available to patients with HIV as early as possible. In this review, we summarize current and planned pharmacokinetic and drug interaction studies involving investigational and licensed tuberculosis drugs and antiretrovirals and suggest priorities for tuberculosis-HIV pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic, and drug-drug interaction studies for the future. Priority studies for children and pregnant women with HIV and tuberculosis co-infection are briefly discussed.

Clinical outcomes and management of mechanism-based inhibition of cytochrome P450 3A4

Mechanism-based inhibition of cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 is characterized by NADPH-, time-, and concentration-dependent enzyme inactivation, occurring when some drugs are converted by CYPs to reactive metabolites. Such inhibition of CYP3A4 can be due to the chemical modification of the heme, the protein, or both as a result of covalent binding of modified heme to the protein. The inactivation of CYP3A4 by drugs has important clinical significance as it metabolizes approximately 60% of therapeutic drugs, and its inhibition frequently causes unfavorable drug–drug interactions and toxicity. The clinical outcomes due to CYP3A4 inactivation depend on many factors associated with the enzyme, drugs, and patients. Clinical professionals should adopt proper approaches when using drugs that are mechanism-based CYP3A4 inhibitors. These include early identification of drugs behaving as CYP3A4 inactivators, rational use of such drugs (eg, safe drug combination regimen, dose adjustment, or discontinuation of therapy when toxic drug interactions occur), therapeutic drug monitoring, and predicting the risks for potential drug–drug interactions. A good understanding of CYP3A4 inactivation and proper clinical management are needed by clinical professionals when these drugs are used.

Determination of rifabutin dosing regimen when administered in combination with ritonavir-boosted atazanavir

OBJECTIVES

Treatment of HIV/tuberculosis (TB) co-infected patients is complex due to drug-drug interactions for these chronic diseases. This study evaluates an intermittent dosing regimen for rifabutin when it is co-administered with ritonavir-boosted atazanavir.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A randomized, multiple-dose, parallel-group study was conducted in healthy subjects and these subjects received a daily dose of rifabutin 150 mg (n = 15, reference group) or a twice weekly dose with atazanavir 300 mg/ritonavir 100 mg once daily (n = 18, test group). Serial blood samples were collected at steady-state for pharmacokinetic analysis. Modelling and simulation techniques were utilized, integrating data across several healthy subject studies. This study is known as Study AI424-360 and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00646776.

RESULTS

The pharmacokinetic parameters (C(max), AUC(24avg) and C(min)) for rifabutin (149%, 48% and 40% increase, respectively) and 25-O-desacteyl rifabutin (6.77-, 9.90- and 10.45-fold increases, respectively) were both increased when rifabutin was co-administered with atazanavir/ritonavir than rifabutin 150 mg once daily alone. The study was stopped because subjects experienced more severe declines in neutrophil counts when rifabutin was given with atazanavir/ritonavir than alone. A post-hoc simulation analysis showed that when rifabutin 150 mg was given three times weekly with atazanavir/ritonavir, the average daily exposure of rifabutin was comparable to rifabutin 300 mg once daily, a dose necessary for reducing rifamycin resistance in HIV/TB co-infected patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The benefits to HIV/TB co-infected patients receiving rifabutin 150 mg three times weekly or every other day may outweigh the risks of neutropenia observed here in non-HIV-infected subjects, provided that patients on combination therapy will be closely monitored for safety and tolerability.

Pharmacokinetic interaction study of ritonavir-boosted saquinavir in combination with rifabutin in healthy subjects

The effect of multiple doses of rifabutin (150 mg) on the pharmacokinetics of saquinavir-ritonavir (1,000 mg of saquinavir and 100 mg of ritonavir [1,000/100 mg]) twice daily (BID) was assessed in 25 healthy subjects. Rifabutin reduced the area under the plasma drug concentration-time curve from 0 to 12 h postdose (AUC(0-12)), maximum observed concentration of drug in plasma (C(max)), and minimum observed concentration of drug in plasma at the end of the dosing interval (C(min)) for saquinavir by 13%, 15%, and 9%, respectively, for subjects receiving rifabutin (150 mg) every 3 days with saquinavir-ritonavir BID. No effects of rifabutin on ritonavir AUC(0-12), C(max), and C(min) were observed. No adjustment of the saquinavir-ritonavir dose (1,000/100 mg) BID is required when the drugs are administered in combination with rifabutin. The effect of multiple doses of saquinavir-ritonavir on rifabutin pharmacokinetics was evaluated in two groups of healthy subjects. In group 1 (n = 14), rifabutin (150 mg) was coadministered every 3 days with saquinavir-ritonavir BID. The AUC(0-72) and C(max) of the active moiety (rifabutin plus 25-O-desacetyl-rifabutin) increased by 134% and 130%, respectively, compared with administration of rifabutin (150 mg) once daily alone. Rifabutin exposure increased by 53% for AUC(0-72) and by 86% for C(max). In group 3 (n = 13), rifabutin was coadministered every 4 days with saquinavir-ritonavir BID. The AUC(0-96) and C(max) of the active moiety increased by 60% and 111%, respectively, compared to administration of 150 mg of rifabutin once daily alone. The AUC(0-96) of rifabutin was not affected, and C(max) increased by 68%. Monitoring of neutropenia and liver enzyme levels is recommended for patients receiving rifabutin with saquinavir-ritonavir BID.

Pharmacokinetic interactions between ritonavir and quinine in healthy volunteers following concurrent administration

AIMS

To evaluate the pharmacokinetic interactions between ritonavir and quinine in healthy volunteers.

METHODS

Ten healthy volunteers were each given 600-mg single oral doses of quinine alone, ritonavir alone (200 mg every 12 h for 9 days), and quinine in combination with ritonavir, in a three-period pharmacokinetic nonrandomized sequential design study. Quinine was co-administered with the 15th dose of ritonavir. Blood samples collected at predetermined time intervals were analysed for ritonavir, quinine and its major metabolite, 3-hydroxyquinine, using a validated high-performance liquid chromatography method.

RESULTS

Concurrent ritonavir administration resulted in about fourfold increases in both the C(max) and AUC(T)[C(max) 2.79 +/- 0.22 vs. 10.72 +/- 0.32 mg l(-1), 95% confidence interval (CI) 7.81, 8.04; AUC 50.06 +/- 2.52 vs. 220.47 +/- 6.68 mg h(-1) l(-1), 95% CI 166.3, 175.3], a significant increase (P < 0.01) in the elimination half-life (11.15 +/- 0.80 vs. 13.37 +/- 0.33 h, 95% CI 1.64, 2.77) and about a 4.5-fold decrease in CL/F (12.01 +/- 0.61 vs. 2.71 +/- 0.09 l h(-1)) of quinine. Also, with ritonavir, there was a pronounced reduction of AUC(metabolite)/AUC(unchanged drug) ratio of quinine (1.35 +/- 0.10 vs. 0.13 +/- 0.02) along with a marked decrease in C(max) (1.80 +/- 0.12 vs. 0.96 +/- 0.09 mg l(-1)) and AUC(0-48h) (62.80 +/- 6.30 vs. 25.61 +/- 2.44 mg h(-1) l(-1)) of the metabolite. Similarly, quinine caused modest but significant increases (P < 0.01) in the C(max), AUC and elimination T((1/2)) of ritonavir.

CONCLUSIONS

Downward dosage adjustment of quinine appears necessary when concurrently administered with ritonavir.

Multidrug-resistant and extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis: a threat to global control of tuberculosis

Although progress has been made to reduce global incidence of drug-susceptible tuberculosis, the emergence of multidrug-resistant (MDR) and extensively drug-resistant (XDR) tuberculosis during the past decade threatens to undermine these advances. However, countries are responding far too slowly. Of the estimated 440,000 cases of MDR tuberculosis that occurred in 2008, only 7% were identified and reported to WHO. Of these cases, only a fifth were treated according to WHO standards. Although treatment of MDR and XDR tuberculosis is possible with currently available diagnostic techniques and drugs, the treatment course is substantially more costly and laborious than for drug-susceptible tuberculosis, with higher rates of treatment failure and mortality. Nonetheless, a few countries provide examples of how existing technologies can be used to reverse the epidemic of MDR tuberculosis within a decade. Major improvements in laboratory capacity, infection control, performance of tuberculosis control programmes, and treatment regimens for both drug-susceptible and drug-resistant disease will be needed, together with a massive scale-up in diagnosis and treatment of MDR and XDR tuberculosis to prevent drug-resistant strains from becoming the dominant form of tuberculosis. New diagnostic tests and drugs are likely to become available during the next few years and should accelerate control of MDR and XDR tuberculosis. Equally important, especially in the highest-burden countries of India, China, and Russia, will be a commitment to tuberculosis control including improvements in national policies and health systems that remove financial barriers to treatment, encourage rational drug use, and create the infrastructure necessary to manage MDR tuberculosis on a national scale.

Interaction studies of tipranavir-ritonavir with clarithromycin, fluconazole, and rifabutin in healthy volunteers

Three separate controlled, two-period studies with healthy volunteers assessed the pharmacokinetic interactions between tipranavir-ritonavir (TPV/r) in a 500/200-mg dose and 500 mg of clarithromycin (CLR), 100 mg of fluconazole (FCZ), or 150 mg of rifabutin (RFB). The CLR study was conducted with 24 subjects. The geometric mean ratios (GMR) and 90% confidence intervals (90% CI; given in parentheses) of the areas under the concentration-time curve (AUC), the maximum concentrations of the drugs in serum (C(max)), and the concentrations in serum at 12 h postdose (Cp12h) for multiple-dose TPV/r and multiple-dose CLR, indicating the effect of TPV/r on the CLR parameters, were 1.19 (1.04-1.37), 0.95 (0.83-1.09), and 1.68 (1.42-1.98), respectively. The formation of the metabolite 14-OH-CLR was decreased by 95% in the presence of TPV, and the TPV AUC increased 66% compared to that for human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-negative historical controls. The FCZ study was conducted with 20 subjects. The GMR (and 90% CI) of the AUC, C(max), and Cp24h, indicating the effect of multiple-dose TPV/r on the multiple-dose FCZ parameters, were 0.92 (0.88-0.95), 0.94 (0.91-0.98), and 0.89 (0.85-0.92), respectively. The TPV AUC increased by 50% compared to that for HIV-negative historical controls. The RFB study was conducted with 24 subjects. The GMR (and 90% CI) of the AUC, C(max), and Cp12h for multiple-dose TPV/r and single-dose RFB, indicating the effect of TPV/r on the RFB parameters, were 2.90 (2.59-3.26), 1.70 (1.49-1.94), and 2.14 (1.90-2.41), respectively. The GMR (and 90% CI) of the AUC, C(max), and Cp12h of TPV/r and RFB with 25-O-desacetyl-RFB were 4.33 (3.86-4.86), 1.86 (1.63-2.12), and 2.76 (2.44-3.12), respectively. Coadministration of TPV with a single dose of RFB resulted in a 16% increase in the TPV Cp12h compared to that for TPV alone. In the general population, no dose adjustments are necessary for the combination of TPV/r and CLR or FCZ. Combining TPV/r with RFB should be done with caution, while toxicity and RFB drug levels should be monitored. Study medications were generally well-tolerated in these studies.

Pharmacokinetic interaction between fosamprenavir-ritonavir and rifabutin in healthy subjects

Rifabutin (RFB) is administered for treatment of tuberculosis and Mycobacterium avium complex infection, including use for patients coinfected with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Increased systemic exposure to RFB and its equipotent active metabolite, 25-O-desacetyl-RFB (dAc-RFB), has been reported during concomitant administration of CYP3A4 inhibitors, including ritonavir (RTV), lopinavir, and amprenavir (APV); therefore, a reduction in the RFB dosage is recommended when it is coadministered with these protease inhibitors. Fosamprenavir (FPV), the phosphate ester prodrug of the HIV type 1 protease inhibitor APV, is administered either with or without RTV. A randomized, open-label, two-period, two-sequence, balanced, crossover drug interaction study was conducted with 22 healthy adult subjects to compare steady-state plasma RFB pharmacokinetic parameters during concomitant administration of FPV-RTV (700/100 mg twice a day [BID]) with a 75%-reduced RFB dose (150 mg every other day [QOD]) to the standard RFB regimen (300 mg once per day [QD]) by geometric least-squares mean ratios. Relative to results with RFB (300 mg QD), coadministration of dose-adjusted RFB with FPV-RTV resulted in an unchanged RFB area under the concentration-time curve for 0 to 48 h (AUC(0-48)) and a 14% decrease in the maximum concentration of drug in plasma (C(max)), whereas the AUC(0-48) and C(max) of dAc-RFB were increased by 11- and 6-fold, respectively, resulting in a 64% increase in the total antimycobacterial AUC(0-48). Relative to historical controls, the plasma APV AUC from 0 h to the end of the dosing interval (AUC(0-tau)) and C(max) were increased approximately 35%, and the concentration at the end of the dosing interval at steady state was unchanged following coadministration of RFB with FPV-RTV. The safety profile of the combination of RFB and FPV-RTV was consistent with previously described events with RFB or FPV-RTV alone. Based on the results of this study, a reduction in the RFB dose by > or =75% (to 150 mg QOD or three times per week) is recommended when it is coadministered with FPV-RTV (700/100 mg BID).

Fosamprenavir

Fosamprenavir is one of the most recently approved HIV-1 protease inhibitors (PIs) and offers reductions in pill number and pill size, and omits the need for food and fluid requirements associated with the earlier-approved HIV-1 PIs. Three fosamprenavir dosage regimens are approved by the US FDA for the treatment of HIV-1 PI-naive patients, including fosamprenavir 1,400 mg twice daily, fosamprenavir 1,400 mg once daily plus ritonavir 200mg once daily, and fosamprenavir 700 mg twice daily plus ritonavir 100mg twice daily. Coadministration of fosamprenavir with ritonavir significantly increases plasma amprenavir exposure. The fosamprenavir 700 mg twice daily plus ritonavir 100mg twice daily regimen maintains the highest plasma amprenavir concentrations throughout the dosing interval; this is the only approved regimen for the treatment of HIV-1 PI-experienced patients and is the only regimen approved in the European Union. Fosamprenavir is the phosphate ester prodrug of the HIV-1 PI amprenavir, and is rapidly and extensively converted to amprenavir after oral administration. Plasma amprenavir concentrations are quantifiable within 15 minutes of dosing and peak at 1.5-2 hours after fosamprenavir dosing. Food does not affect the absorption of amprenavir following administration of the fosamprenavir tablet formulation; therefore, fosamprenavir tablets may be administered without regard to food intake. Amprenavir has a large volume of distribution, is 90% bound to plasma proteins and is a substrate of P-glycoprotein. With <1% of a dose excreted in urine, the renal route is not an important elimination pathway, while the principal route of amprenavir elimination is hepatic metabolism by cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4. Amprenavir is also an inhibitor and inducer of CYP3A4. Furthermore, fosamprenavir is commonly administered in combination with low-dose ritonavir, which is also extensively metabolised by CYP3A4, and is a more potent CYP3A4 inhibitor than amprenavir. This potent CYP3A4 inhibition contraindicates the coadministration of certain CYP3A4 substrates and requires others to be co-administered with caution. However, fosamprenavir can be co-administered with many other antiretroviral agents, including drugs of the nucleoside/nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitor, non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor and HIV entry inhibitor classes. Coadministration with other HIV-1 PIs continues to be studied.The extensive fosamprenavir and amprenavir clinical drug interaction information provides guidance on how to co-administer fosamprenavir and fosamprenavir plus ritonavir with many other commonly co-prescribed medications, such as gastric acid suppressants, HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors, antibacterials and antifungal agents.

Evaluation of the Drug Interaction between Rifabutin and Efavirenz in Patients with HIV Infection and Tuberculosis

BACKGROUND

Because of drug-drug interactions mediated by hepatic cytochrome P450, tuberculosis treatment guidelines recommend an increase in rifabutin from 300 mg to 450 or 600 mg when combined with efavirenz-based antiretroviral therapy. To assess this recommendation, rifabutin and efavirenz pharmacokinetic parameters were investigated.

METHODS

Plasma concentrations of rifabutin were determined as a baseline control in 15 patients with tuberculosis and human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection who were treated with rifabutin 300 mg and isoniazid 15 mg/kg (up to 900 mg) twice weekly. Rifabutin, isoniazid, and efavirenz concentrations were determined after a median of 21 days (interquartile range, 20-34 days) of daily efavirenz-based antiretroviral therapy with twice-weekly rifabutin 600 mg and isoniazid 15 mg/kg.

RESULTS

The mean rifabutin area under the concentration-time curve (AUC(0-24)) increased 20% from the baseline value (geometric mean, 5.0 vs. 4.2 microg.h/mL; ratio of geometric means, 1.2 [90% confidence interval, 1.0-1.4]). Also, the mean efavirenz AUC(0-24) in the 15 patients taking concomitant rifabutin 600 mg twice-weekly was 10% higher than that in 35 historical subjects with HIV infection who were not taking rifabutin. Efavirenz-based antiretroviral therapy was effective; HIV load decreased 2.6 log copies/mL, and the median CD4+ T cell count increased from 141 to 240 cells/mm3 after a median of 21 days of efavirenz-based antiretroviral therapy. No statistically significant differences in isoniazid pharmacokinetic parameters were found.

CONCLUSIONS

The rifabutin dose increase from 300 mg to 600 mg was adequate to compensate for the efavirenz drug interaction in most patients, and no drug interaction with isoniazid was detected. Efavirenz therapy administered at a standard 600-mg dose achieved adequate plasma concentrations in patients receiving intermittent rifabutin and isoniazid therapy, was generally well tolerated, and demonstrated potent antiretroviral activity.

Drug–drug interactions and tolerance in combining antituberculosis and antiretroviral therapy

Worldwide, tuberculosis (TB) is one of the most important infectious diseases in subjects with HIV infection. Although effective therapy is available for both conditions, there are major problems in the concurrent treatment of HIV and TB co-infection. In this article the knowledge available on drug-drug interactions between anti-HIV and anti-TB compounds is analysed, particularly with regard to pharmacological interactions secondary to interference with cytochrome P450 enzymes. Within the same setting, facts and possible interpretations of the problems encountered in terms of tolerance and safety of the concurrent treatment of TB and HIV are also reviewed. Current guidelines, as well as additional possible strategies to be adopted in this particular co-morbidity setting are discussed.

Mechanism-based inhibition of cytochrome P450 3A4 by therapeutic drugs

Consistent with its highest abundance in humans, cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A is responsible for the metabolism of about 60% of currently known drugs. However, this unusual low substrate specificity also makes CYP3A4 susceptible to reversible or irreversible inhibition by a variety of drugs. Mechanism-based inhibition of CYP3A4 is characterised by nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate hydrogen (NADPH)-, time- and concentration-dependent enzyme inactivation, occurring when some drugs are converted by CYP isoenzymes to reactive metabolites capable of irreversibly binding covalently to CYP3A4. Approaches using in vitro, in silico and in vivo models can be used to study CYP3A4 inactivation by drugs. Human liver microsomes are always used to estimate inactivation kinetic parameters including the concentration required for half-maximal inactivation (K(I)) and the maximal rate of inactivation at saturation (k(inact)). Clinically important mechanism-based CYP3A4 inhibitors include antibacterials (e.g. clarithromycin, erythromycin and isoniazid), anticancer agents (e.g. tamoxifen and irinotecan), anti-HIV agents (e.g. ritonavir and delavirdine), antihypertensives (e.g. dihydralazine, verapamil and diltiazem), sex steroids and their receptor modulators (e.g. gestodene and raloxifene), and several herbal constituents (e.g. bergamottin and glabridin). Drugs inactivating CYP3A4 often possess several common moieties such as a tertiary amine function, furan ring, and acetylene function. It appears that the chemical properties of a drug critical to CYP3A4 inactivation include formation of reactive metabolites by CYP isoenzymes, preponderance of CYP inducers and P-glycoprotein (P-gp) substrate, and occurrence of clinically significant pharmacokinetic interactions with coadministered drugs. Compared with reversible inhibition of CYP3A4, mechanism-based inhibition of CYP3A4 more frequently cause pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic drug-drug interactions, as the inactivated CYP3A4 has to be replaced by newly synthesised CYP3A4 protein. The resultant drug interactions may lead to adverse drug effects, including some fatal events. For example, when aforementioned CYP3A4 inhibitors are coadministered with terfenadine, cisapride or astemizole (all CYP3A4 substrates), torsades de pointes (a life-threatening ventricular arrhythmia associated with QT prolongation) may occur.However, predicting drug-drug interactions involving CYP3A4 inactivation is difficult, since the clinical outcomes depend on a number of factors that are associated with drugs and patients. The apparent pharmacokinetic effect of a mechanism-based inhibitor of CYP3A4 would be a function of its K(I), k(inact) and partition ratio and the zero-order synthesis rate of new or replacement enzyme. The inactivators for CYP3A4 can be inducers and P-gp substrates/inhibitors, confounding in vitro-in vivo extrapolation. The clinical significance of CYP3A inhibition for drug safety and efficacy warrants closer understanding of the mechanisms for each inhibitor. Furthermore, such inactivation may be exploited for therapeutic gain in certain circumstances.

Issues in the management of HIV-related tuberculosis

This article focuses on the ways in which HIV infection and the associated immunodeficiency affect the management of active tuberculosis. Controversies in the management of HIV-related tuberculosis can be grouped into issues about tuberculosis treatment itself and issues posed by the use of combination antiretroviral therapy. The author reviews these controversies and makes recommendations for the management of HIV-related tuberculosis.

Drug interactions between antiretroviral drugs and comedicated agents

HIV-infected individuals usually receive a wide variety of drugs in addition to their antiretroviral drug regimen. Since both non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors and protease inhibitors are extensively metabolised by the cytochrome P450 system, there is a considerable potential for pharmacokinetic drug interactions when they are administered concomitantly with other drugs metabolised via the same pathway. In addition, protease inhibitors are substrates as well as inhibitors of the drug transporter P-glycoprotein, which also can result in pharmacokinetic drug interactions. The nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors are predominantly excreted by the renal system and may also give rise to interactions. This review will discuss the pharmacokinetics of the different classes of antiretroviral drugs and the mechanisms by which drug interactions can occur. Furthermore, a literature overview of drug interactions is given, including the following items when available: coadministered agent and dosage, type of study that is performed to study the drug interaction, the subjects involved and, if specified, the type of subjects (healthy volunteers, HIV-infected individuals, sex), antiretroviral drug(s) and dosage, interaction mechanism, the effect and if possible the magnitude of interaction, comments, advice on what to do when the interaction occurs or how to avoid it, and references. This discussion of the different mechanisms of drug interactions, and the accompanying overview of data, will assist in providing optimal care to HIV-infected patients.

Assessment of adherence to HIV protease inhibitors: comparison and combination of various methods, including MEMS (electronic monitoring), patient and nurse report, and therapeutic drug monitoring

BACKGROUND

Adherence to protease inhibitor-containing antiretroviral therapy is crucial, but difficult to measure.

OBJECTIVE

To compare and combine various methods of measuring adherence to the strict protease inhibitor-containing regimens.

METHODS

The following methods were used: medication event monitoring system (MEMS) caps (electronic monitoring), therapeutic drug monitoring, pill count, pharmacy refill data, questionnaires, diaries (for registration of food patterns and special events related to the use of MEMS), adherence assessment by the physician and clinical nurse specialist, and in-depth interviews. In addition, ultrasensitive viral load and resistance testing was performed.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight patients were included; data could be evaluated in 26. According to MEMS data, 25% of the patients took fewer than 95% of all doses, and two thirds of the patients took fewer than 95% of the doses on time. Only 43% of the patients showed good adherence with food restrictions. Methods that showed significant correlations with MEMS results were patients' self-reported adherence; therapeutic drug monitoring, indicating plasma levels outside predefined ranges; and estimation of adherence by a clinical nurse specialist, especially by in-depth interview.

CONCLUSION

Diary-corrected MEMS data gave a detailed insight into patients' adherence patterns. Patients' self-report and therapeutic drug monitoring were significantly correlated with the MEMS data, and the clinical nurse specialist may also play a role in identifying patients who are imperfectly adherent.

Clinically significant interactions with drugs used in the treatment of tuberculosis

Clinically significant interactions occurring during antituberculous chemotherapy principally involve rifampicin (rifampin), isoniazid and the fluoroquinolones. Such interactions between the antituberculous drugs and coadministered agents are definitely much more important than among antituberculous drugs themselves. These can be associated with consequences even amounting to therapeutic failure or toxicity. Most of the interactions are pharmacokinetic rather than pharmacodynamic in nature. The cytochrome P450 isoform enzymes are responsible for many interactions (especially those involving rifampicin and isoniazid) during drug biotransformation (metabolism) in the liver and/or intestine. Generally, rifampicin is an enzyme inducer and isoniazid acts as an inhibitor. The agents interacting significantly with rifampicin include anticoagulants, anticonvulsants, anti-infectives, cardiovascular therapeutics, contraceptives, glucocorticoids, immunosuppressants, psychotropics, sulphonylureas and theophyllines. Isoniazid interacts principally with anticonvulsants, theophylline, benzodiapines, paracetamol (acetaminophen) and some food. Fluoroquinolones can have absorption disturbance due to a variety of agents, especially the metal cations. Other important interactions of fluoroquinolones result from their enzyme inhibiting potential or pharmacodynamic mechanisms. Geriatric and immunocompromised patients are particularly at risk of drug interactions during treatment of their tuberculosis. Among the latter, patients who are HIV infected constitute the most important group. This is largely because of the advent of new antiretroviral agents such as the HIV protease inhibitors and the non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors in the armamenterium of therapy. Compounding the complexity of drug interactions, underlying medical diseases per se may also contribute to or aggravate the scenario. It is imperative for clinicians to be on the alert when treating tuberculosis in patients with difficult co-morbidity requiring polypharmacy. With advancement of knowledge and expertise, it is hoped that therapeutic drug monitoring as a new paradigm of care can enable better management of these drug interactions.

Summary of information on human CYP enzymes: human P450 metabolism data

This chapter is an update of the data on substrates, reactions, inducers, and inhibitors of human CYP enzymes published previously by Rendic and DiCarlo (1), now covering selection of the literature through 2001 in the reference section. The data are presented in a tabular form (Table 1) to provide a framework for predicting and interpreting the new P450 metabolic data. The data are formatted in an Excel format as most suitable for off-line searching and management of the Web-database. The data are presented as stated by the author(s) and in the case when several references are cited the data are presented according to the latest published information. The searchable database is available either as an Excel file (for information contact the author), or as a Web-searchable database (Human P450 Metabolism Database, www.gentest.com) enabling the readers easy and quick approach to the latest updates on human CYP metabolic reactions.

Clinical pharmacology and pharmacokinetics of amprenavir

OBJECTIVE

To review the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, drug interactions, and dosage and administration information of amprenavir.

DATA SOURCE

An extensive review of the literature (MEDLINE search from 1994 to April 2001) relating to the clinical pharmacology of the HIV protease inhibitors was conducted. Meeting abstracts or full presentations and data submitted to the Food and Drug Administration were also reviewed.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

The data on pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, drug interactions, and drug resistance were obtained from in vitro studies and open-label and controlled clinical trials.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Like all HIV protease inhibitors, amprenavir interrupts the maturation phase of the HIV replicative cycle by forming an inhibitor-enzyme complex, which prevents HIV protease from binding with its normal substrates (biologically inactive viral polyproteins). Amprenavir has an enzyme inhibition constant (Ki = 0.6 nM) that falls within the Ki range of the other protease inhibitors. Amprenavir's in vitro 50% inhibitory concentration (IC50) against wild-type clinical HIV isolates is 14.6 +/- 12.5 ng/mL (mean +/- SD). Pharmacodynamic modeling indicates that, as is the case with other protease inhibitors, the concentration-response curve for amprenavir plateaus at amprenavir trough values above the IC50 for these isolates. This exposure-activity relationship, plus such favorable pharmacokinetic parameters as a long terminal elimination half-life (7-10 h), makes amprenavir an attractive drug of choice when considering potent antiretrovirals. The higher trough exposure obtained with amprenavir coadministered with ritonavir may allow effective treatment of patients with decreased susceptibility viral isolates and once-daily dosing. Amprenavir has been approved for adults and children; the recommended capsule doses are 1200 mg twice daily for adults and 20 mg/kg twice daily or 15 mg/kg 3 times daily for children < 13 years of age or adolescents < 50 kg. The recommended dose for amprenavir oral solution is 1.5 mL/kg twice daily or 1.1 mL/kg 3 times daily.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinical pharmacology, exposure-activity relationship, and drug resistance profile of amprenavir support the use of this potent HIV protease inhibitor in combination antiretroviral regimens, especially for persons who have experienced virologic failure while on protease inhibitor-containing regimens.

Pharmacokinetic and other drug interactions in patients with AIDS

A variety of medications are used in treating patients infected with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). These medications are used to control viremia and to prevent and treat opportunistic infections. An individual is often required to take numerous drugs at the same time and thus clinicians are confronted with potential drug interactions, some of which are significant. Three different groups of anti-HIV drugs are used to treat patients. These groups include nucleoside reverse transcription inhibitors, non-nucleoside reverse transcription inhibitors, and protease inhibitors. This article reviews the most relevant drug interactions that occur during the treatment of HIV-infected patients with traditional and also alternative drugs. The role of therapeutic drug monitoring in the routine management of HIV-infected patients is discussed.

Comparative pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the rifamycin antibacterials

The rifamycin antibacterials, rifampicin (rifampin), rifabutin and rifapentine, are uniquely potent in the treatment of patients with tuberculosis and chronic staphylococcal infections. Absorption is variably affected by food; the maximal concentration of rifampicin is decreased by food, whereas rifapentine absorption is increased in the presence of food. The rifamycins are well-known inducers of enzyme systems involved in the metabolism of many drugs, most notably those metabolised by cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A. The relative potency of the rifamycins as CYP3A inducers is rifampin > rifapentine > rifabutin; rifabutin is also a CYP3A substrate. The antituberculosis activity of rifampicin is decreased by a modest dose reduction from 600 to 450mg. This somewhat surprising finding may be due to the binding of rifampicin to serum proteins, limiting free, active concentrations of the drug. However, increasing the administration interval (after the first 2 to 8 weeks of therapy) has little effect on the sterilising activity of rifampicin, suggesting that relatively brief exposures to a critical concentration of rifampicin are sufficient to kill intermittently metabolising mycobacterial populations. The high protein binding of rifapentine (97%) may explain the suboptimal efficacy of the currently recommended dose of this drug. The toxicity of rifampicin is related to dose and administration interval, with increasing rates of presumed hypersensitivity with higher doses combined with administration frequency of once weekly or less. Rifabutin toxicity is related to dose and concomitant use of CYP3A inhibitors. The rifamycins illustrate the complexity of predicting the pharmacodynamics of treatment of an intracellular pathogen with the capacity for dormancy.

Effect of ritonavir/saquinavir on stereoselective pharmacokinetics of methadone: results of AIDS Clinical Trials Group (ACTG) 401

The effect of ritonavir 400 mg/saquinavir 400 mg twice daily on the stereoselective pharmacokinetics of methadone was examined in 12 HIV-infected, methadone-using study subjects.

DESIGN

A 24-hour methadone pharmacokinetic study was performed before antiretroviral therapy was begun and after 15 days of therapy. Methadone concentration was measured by a chiral plasma assay because the drug is administered as a racemic mixture of R- and S-methadone, but only the R-isomer is active. Both changes in plasma protein binding and changes in objective and subjective opioid effect were monitored.

RESULTS

Ritonavir/saquinavir administration was associated with 40% decrease in total S-methadone AUC0-24hr and 32% decrease in R-methadone area under the curve (AUC)0-24hr, and both changes were statistically significant (p =.001 for both). When AUC was corrected for the changes in protein binding induced by ritonavir/saquinavir, R-methadone free AUC0-24hr decreased 19.6% whereas the S-methadone decreased 24.6%, neither of these changes was statistically significant (p =.129 and p =.0537, respectively). This change in methadone exposure was not associated with any evidence of withdrawal from narcotics and no modification of methadone dose was required.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data indicate that ritonavir/saquinavir administration is associated with induction of metabolism of methadone but this is greater for the inactive S-methadone. However, approximately 37% of the decrease in the total R-methadone exposure can be explained by protein binding displacement. Ritonavir/saquinavir can be used in HIV-infected people taking methadone without routine dose adjustments.

Pharmacokinetic Interaction between amprenavir and rifabutin or rifampin in healthy males

The objective of this study was to determine if there is a pharmacokinetic interaction when amprenavir is given with rifabutin or rifampin and to determine the effects of these drugs on the erythromycin breath test (ERMBT). Twenty-four healthy male subjects were randomized to one of two cohorts. All subjects received amprenavir (1,200 mg twice a day) for 4 days, followed by a 7-day washout period, followed by either rifabutin (300 mg once a day [QD]) (cohort 1) or rifampin (600 mg QD) (cohort 2) for 14 days. Cohort 1 then received amprenavir plus rifabutin for 10 days, and cohort 2 received amprenavir plus rifampin for 4 days. Serial plasma and urine samples for measurement of amprenavir, rifabutin, and rifampin and their 25-O-desacetyl metabolites, were measured by high-performance liquid chromatography. Rifabutin did not significantly affect amprenavir's pharmacokinetics. Amprenavir significantly increased the area under the curve at steady state (AUC(ss)) of rifabutin by 2.93-fold and the AUC(ss) of 25-O-desacetylrifabutin by 13.3-fold. Rifampin significantly decreased the AUC(ss) of amprenavir by 82%, but amprenavir had no effect on rifampin pharmacokinetics. Amprenavir decreased the results of the ERMBT by 83%. The results of the ERMBT after 2 weeks of rifabutin and rifampin therapy were increased 187 and 156%, respectively. Amprenavir plus rifampin was well tolerated. Amprenavir plus rifabutin was poorly tolerated, and 5 of 11 subjects discontinued therapy. Rifampin markedly increases the metabolic clearance of amprenavir, and coadministration is contraindicated. Amprenavir significantly decreases clearance of rifabutin and 25-O-desacetylrifabutin, and the combination is poorly tolerated. Amprenavir inhibits the ERMBT, and rifampin and rifabutin are equipotent inducers of the ERMBT.

Drug-Drug interactions of clinical significance in the treatment of patients with Mycobacterium avium complex disease

Therapeutic and prophylactic regimens directed specifically against Mycobacterium avium complex (MAC) are increasingly being used in patients infected with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Several of the drugs used in the management of MAC have been associated with significant drug interactions involving the cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzyme system. This enzyme system is also highly influenced by other drugs used in the management of patients with HIV, particularly the protease inhibitors, non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs) and azole antifungals. This article reviews the published concentrations or subtherapeutic concentrations of other drugs have been described. In particular, concurrent use of rifabutin with clarithromycin or fluconazole has resulted in increased concentrations of rifabutin and an accompanying increase in the incidence of rifabutin toxicities, including uveitis and leucopenia. Similar results have been seen when rifabutin is combined with protease inhibitors or delavirdine. The macrolides, clarithromycin and azithromycin, have also been associated with significant drug interactions. Clarithromycin has a higher affinity for CYP than azithromycin and, thus, is more frequently associated with clinically significant drug interactions. Clarithromycin is an inhibitor of CYP and may result in toxic concentrations of other drugs metabolised by this enzyme system. Such interactions have been described with rifabutin and the statin lipid-lowering agents. In addition, nevirapine and efavirenz have been shown to significantly reduce clarithromycin concentrations, whereas the protease inhibitors and delavirdine may increase clarithromycin concentrations. Other drugs used in the management of patients with MAC are not metabolised by CYP and thus have a lower incidence of interactions, although the absorption of ciprofloxacin may be impaired when it is given with products containing multivalent cations, such as didanosine. However, clinicians must remain vigilant for drug interactions when reviewing a patient's medication profile, keeping in mind both interactions that have been described in the literature and those that may be predicted based upon known pharmacokinetic profiles.

Effects of fluconazole and clarithromycin on rifabutin and 25-O-desacetylrifabutin pharmacokinetics

Ten human immunodeficiency virus-infected patients were given rifabutin in addition to fluconazole and clarithromycin. There was a 76% increase in the area under the concentration-time curve of rifabutin when either fluconazole or clarithromycin was given alone and a 152% increase when both drugs were given together with rifabutin. Patients should be monitored for adverse effects of rifabutin administered concomitantly with clarithromycin and/or fluconazole.

Drug interactions with cisapride: clinical implications

Cisapride, a prokinetic agent, has been used for the treatment of a number of gastrointestinal disorders, particularly gastro-oesophageal reflux disease in adults and children. Since 1993, 341 cases of ventricular arrhythmias, including 80 deaths, have been reported to the US Food and Drug Administration. Marketing of the drug has now been discontinued in the US; however, it is still available under a limited-access protocol. Knowledge of the risk factors for cisapride-associated arrhythmias will be essential for its continued use in those patients who meet the eligibility criteria. This review summarises the published literature on the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions of cisapride with concomitantly administered drugs, providing clinicians with practical recommendations for avoiding these potentially fatal events. Pharmacokinetic interactions with cisapride involve inhibition of cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4, the primary mode of elimination of cisapride, thereby increasing plasma concentrations of the drug. The macrolide antibacterials clarithromycin, erythromycin and troleandomycin are inhibitors of CYP3A4 and should not be used in conjunction with cisapride. Azithromycin is an alternative. Similarly, azole antifungal agents such as fluconazole, itraconazole and ketoconazole are CYP3A4 inhibitors and their concomitant use with cisapride should be avoided. Of the antidepressants nefazodone and fluvoxamine should be avoided with cisapride. Data with fluoxetine is controversial, we favour the avoidance of its use. Citalopram, paroxetine and sertraline are alternatives. The HIV protease inhibitors amprenavir, indinavir, nelfinavir, ritonavir and saquinavir inhibit CYP3A4. Clinical experience with cisapride is lacking but avoidance with all protease inhibitors is recommended, although saquinavir is thought to have clinically insignificant effects on CYP3A4. Delavirdine is also a CYP3A4 inhibitor and should be avoided with cisapride. We also recommend avoiding coadministration of cisapride with amiodarone, cimetidine (alternatives are famotidine, nizatidine, ranitidine or one of the proton pump inhibitors), diltiazem and verapamil (the dihydropyridine calcium antagonists are alternatives), grapefruit juice, isoniazid, metronidazole, quinine, quinupristin/dalfopristin and zileuton (montelukast is an alternative). Pharmacodynamic interactions with cisapride involve drugs that have the potential to have additive effects on the QT interval. We do not recommend use of cisapride with class Ia and III antiarrhythmic drugs or with adenosine, bepridil, cyclobenzaprine, droperidol, haloperidol, nifedipine (immediate release), phenothiazine antipsychotics, tricyclic and tetracyclic antidepressants or vasopressin. Vigilance is advised if anthracyclines, cotrimoxazole (trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole), enflurane, halothane, isoflurane, pentamidine or probucol are used with cisapride. In addition, uncorrected electrolyte disturbances induced by diuretics may increase the risk of torsade de pointes. Patients receiving cisapride should be promptly treated for electrolyte disturbances.

The effect of ritonavir on the pharmacokinetics of meperidine and normeperidine

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To determine the effects of ritonavir on the pharmacokinetics of meperidine and normeperidine.

DESIGN

Open-label, crossover, pharmacokinetic study.

SETTING

United States government research hospital.

SUBJECTS

Eight healthy volunteers who tested negative for the human immunodeficiency virus.

INTERVENTION

Subjects received oral meperidine 50 mg and had serial blood samples collected for 48 hours. They then received ritonavir 500 mg twice/day for 10 days, followed by administration of a second 50-mg meperidine dose and collection of serial samples.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Plasma samples were assayed for meperidine, normeperidine, and ritonavir. Meperidine's area under the curve (AUC) decreased in all subjects by a mean of 67+/-4% in the presence of ritonavir (p<0.005). Mean +/- SD maximum concentration was decreased from 126+/-47 to 51+/-21 ng/ml. Normeperidine's mean AUC was increased 47%, suggesting induction of hepatic metabolism.

CONCLUSION

Meperidine's AUC is significantly reduced, not increased, by concomitant ritonavir. Based on these findings, the risk of narcotic-related adverse effects from this combination appears to be minimal. However, increased concentrations of normeperidine suggest a potential for toxicity with increased dosages or long-term therapy.

Pharmacokinetic interactions between HIV-protease inhibitors in rats

The interactions of four HIV-protease inhibitors, ritonavir (RIT), saquinavir (SAQ), indinavir (IND) and nelfinavir (NEL), were examined by in vitro metabolic studies using rat liver microsomal fractions. The substrate concentrations employed were 0.75 approximately 12 microM, and the inhibitor concentrations were 2.5 approximately 60 microM. The metabolic clearance rates of SAQ, NEL and IND as determined by V(max)/K(m) were 170.9+/-10.9, 126.0+/-4.4 and 73.0+/-2.0 microL/min/mg protein, respectively. RIT was a potent inhibitor of the other three protease inhibitors, and the inhibition constants (K(i)) were 1.64 microM for SAQ, 0.95 microM for IND and 1. 01 microM for NEL. NEL was the second strongest inhibitor with a K(i) for NEL inhibition of IND metabolism of 2.14 microM. IND was the third strongest inhibitor with K(i)s of 2.76 microM for inhibition of NEL and 3.55 microM for inhibition of SAQ. As SAQ has the highest metabolic clearance rate, the K(i) for the SAQ inhibition of IND metabolism was high, 9.50 microM. Based on these in vitro results, drug interactions between NEL and IND or RIT were studied after oral administration to rats where the dose of each drug was 20 mg/kg. The C(max) and AUC of NEL were increased 3.6- and 8.5-fold by the co-administration with RIT. However, in contrast to co-administration of NEL and RIT, the effect of IND on the pharmacokinetics of NEL was negligible and the t(1/2) of NEL was not significantly increased by IND. Therefore, the combination of NEL and IND is recommended as a combination therapy for AIDS patients.

HIV protease inhibitors: advances in therapy and adverse reactions, including metabolic complications

Protease inhibitors (PIs) effectively inhibit replication of the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), and reduce mortality and prolong survival in patients with HIV infection. Newer PIs saquinavir (soft gelatin capsule) and amprenavir, as well as other PIs, may be effective when administered twice/day. Adverse reactions may occur, as well as metabolic complications and interactions between PIs and other drugs, including other PIs. The strategy of combining PIs is based on specific pharmacologic interactions among the agents.

Analysis of ritonavir in plasma/serum and tissues by high-performance liquid chromatography

A method has been developed to quantify ritonavir concentrations in human plasma and in mouse serum, liver, and brain using high-performance liquid chromatography. Extraction recoveries for ritonavir and its internal standard averaged greater than 95%. Within-day variability, expressed as a coefficient of variation, averaged 6% over the concentration range 0.5 microg/mL to 15 microg/mL ritonavir, and between-day variability averaged 5.6% over 5 microg/mL to 15 microg/mL ritonavir. The method was applied to quantitation of ritonavir in mouse serum and tissue. Measured values deviated less than 5% from the actual values in mouse serum, liver, and brain samples containing 5 microg/mL ritonavir. The slopes of calibration curves for extracted calf serum, mouse serum, mouse liver and mouse brain standards were nearly identical to the calibration slope of standards which were not extracted. All curves were linear through zero, and r2 was no less than 0.998 for any form of calibration. In addition, there was no chromatographic interference from commonly prescribed medications.

Ritonavir. Clinical pharmacokinetics and interactions with other anti-HIV agents

Ritonavir is 1 of the 4 potent synthetic HIV protease inhibitors, approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) between 1995 and 1997, that have revolutionised HIV therapy. The extent of oral absorption is high and is not affected by food. Within the clinical concentration range, ritonavir is approximately 98 to 99% bound to plasma proteins, including albumin and alpha 1-acid glycoprotein. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) drug concentrations are low in relation to total plasma concentration. However, parallel decreases in the viral burden have been observed in the plasma, CSF and other tissues. Ritonavir is primarily metabolised by cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A isozymes and, to a lesser extent, by CYP2D6. Four major oxidative metabolites have been identified in humans, but are unlikely to contribute to the antiviral effect. About 34% and 3.5% of a 600 mg dose is excreted as unchanged drug in the faeces and urine, respectively. The clinically relevant t1/2 beta is about 3 to 5 hours. Because of autoinduction, plasma concentrations generally reach steady state 2 weeks after the start of administration. The pharmacokinetics of ritonavir are relatively linear after multiple doses, with apparent oral clearance averaging 7 to 9 L/h. In vitro, ritonavir is a potent inhibitor of CYP3A. In vivo, ritonavir significantly increases the AUC of drugs primarily eliminated by CYP3A metabolism (e.g. clarithromycin, ketoconazole, rifabutin, and other HIV protease inhibitors, including indinavir, saquinavir and nelfinavir) with effects ranging from an increase of 77% to 20-fold in humans. It also inhibits CYP2D6-mediated metabolism, but to a significantly lesser extent (145% increase in desipramine AUC). Since ritonavir is also an inducer of several metabolising enzymes [CYP1A4, glucuronosyl transferase (GT), and possibly CYP2C9 and CYP2C19], the magnitude of drug interactions is difficult to predict, particularly for drugs that are metabolised by multiple enzymes or have low intrinsic clearance by CYP3A. For example, the AUC of CYP3A substrate methadone was slightly decreased and alprazolam was unaffected. Ritonavir is minimally affected by other CYP3A inhibitors, including ketoconazole. Rifampicin (rifampin), a potent CYP3A inducer, decreased the AUC of ritonavir by only 35%. The degree and duration of suppression of HIV replication is significantly correlated with the plasma concentrations. Thus, the large increase in the plasma concentrations of other protease inhibitors when coadministered with ritonavir forms the basis of rational dual protease inhibitor regimens, providing patients with 2 potent drugs at significantly reduced doses and less frequent dosage intervals. Combination treatment of ritonavir with saquinavir and indinavir results in potent and sustained clinical activity. Other important factors with combination regimens include reduced interpatient variability for high clearance agents, and elimination of the food effect on the bioavailibility of indinavir.