Absence of interaction between cyclosporine and spiramycin

Chlamydia pneumoniae infection in patients after kidney transplantation treated with spiramycin

INTRODUCTION

Previous research has pointed to a role of Chlamydia pneumoniae infection in the development of chronic renal allograft dysfunction, chronic liver rejection, and vasculopathy in the transplanted heart. The aim of this study was to evaluate the presence of C. pneumoniae prior to and after kidney transplantation as well as to determine the role of spiramycin therapy among kidney transplant recipients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study group consisted of 50 patients (25 pairs) who received kidney transplants from cadaveric donors. One of the 2 kidneys from a donor was transplanted to a patient randomized to spiramycin (2 x 3 million U/d orally for 3 months; group S) and the other to a patient assigned as control (group C). Markers of infection were assessed on day 1 posttransplantation and 3 months later (average, 94 days). All 50 patients were examined for the presence of bacterial DNA in peripheral blood leukocytes using real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and for titers of serum anti C. pneumoniae immunoglobulin (IgG) and IgA antibodies using microimmunofluorescence (MIF). C. pneumoniae infection was diagnosed by the presence of C. pneumoniae DNA in peripheral blood leukocytes or positive antibodies of both classes.

RESULTS

C. pneumoniae infection was initially diagnosed in 14 patients among group S and 8 patients among group C (P = not significant [ns]) and after 3 months in 12 and 9 patients, respectively (P = ns). Conversion from positive to negative C. pneumoniae status occured in 7 patients among group S and 1 patient among group C (P = .04). Conversion from negative to positive C. pneumoniae status occured in 5 patients from group S and 2 patients from group C (P = ns).

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest a possible role for spiramycin treatment of C pneumoniae infection in kidney allograft recipients. C. pneumoniae infection diagnosis and treatment should be considered to be routine for every patient awaiting transplantation.

Considerations in the medical management of pregnancy in transplant recipients

Pregnancy, although rare in the patient with end-stage renal disease, is not uncommon in the transplant recipient. Physicians taking care of transplant recipients must be able to inform patients about the potential risks of pregnancy in this setting. The patient and her partner must know that the risks associated with pregnancy increase with worsening kidney function and hypertension. Current consensus opinion is that pregnancy can be relatively safely undertaken by 1 year after transplant if the patient has had no rejections during the year, allograft function is adequate, there are no infections that could affect the fetus, the patient is not taking teratogenic medications, and immunosuppressive medication dosing is stable. Consideration must be given to immunosuppression during pregnancy both with respect to the specific agents as well as the level of dosing. None of the medications are FDA category A; all are B or higher. Part of planning for pregnancy should include an evaluation of immunosuppression medication and a plan to modify the regimen prior to conception if its use may be risky for the developing fetus. Rejection can occur during a kidney transplant, so maintaining adequate immunosuppression is important. Other issues that need to be managed when caring for a pregnant transplant patient include: potential for infection (urinary tract infections are very common), hypertension, and anemia. The type of delivery, posttransplant contraception, and breast-feeding also need to be addressed.

Macrolides versus azalides: a drug interaction update

OBJECTIVE

To describe the current drug interaction profiles for all approved and investigational macrolide and azalide antimicrobials, and to comment on the clinical impact of these interactions when appropriate.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE was searched to identify all pertinent studies, review articles, and case reports from 1975 to 1995. When appropriate information was not available in the literature, data were obtained from the product manufacturers.

STUDY SELECTION

All available data were reviewed to give an unbiased account of possible drug interactions.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data for some of the interactions were not available from the literature, but were available from abstracts or from company-supplied materials. Although the data were not always entirely explicative, the best attempt was made to deliver the pertinent information that clinical practitioners would need to formulate practice opinions. When more in-depth information was supplied in the form of a review or study report, a thorough explanation of pertinent methodology was supplied.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Since the introduction of erythromycin into clinical practice, there have been several clinically significant drug interactions identified throughout the literature associated with this drug. These interactions have been caused mostly by inhibition of the CYP3A subclass of hepatic enzymes, thereby decreasing the metabolism of any other agent given concurrently that is also cleared through this mechanism. With the development and marketing of several new macrolides, it was hoped that the drug interaction profile associated with this class would improve. This has been met with variable success. Although some of the extensions of the 14-membered ring macrolides have shown an incidence of interactions equal to that of erythromycin, others have shown improved profiles. In contrast, the 16-membered ring macrolides have demonstrated a much improved, though not absent, interaction profile. The most success in avoiding drug interactions through structure modification has been accomplished with the development of the azalide class, of which azithromycin is the first to be approved for marketing. This agent has to date produced none of the classic drug interactions that most macrolides have demonstrated in patient care.

CONCLUSIONS

The introduction of new 14- and 16-membered ring macrolides appears to have had a variable effect in modifying the incidence of drug interactions associated with this class. Azithromycin, a member of the new azalide class, has to date produced fewer clinically significant interactions than other azalides with any agent that is cleared through the CYP3A system.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Macrolide antibacterials. Drug interactions of clinical significance

Macrolide antibiotics can interact adversely with commonly used drugs, usually by altering metabolism due to complex formation and inhibition of cytochrome P-450 IIIA4 (CYP3A4) in the liver and enterocytes. In addition, pharmacokinetic drug interactions with macrolides can result from their antibiotic effect on microorganisms of the enteric flora, and through enhanced gastric emptying due to a motilin-like effect. Macrolides may be classified into 3 different groups according to their affinity for CYP3A4, and thus their propensity to cause pharmacokinetic drug interactions. Troleandomycin, erythromycin and its prodrugs decrease drug metabolism and may produce drug interactions (group 1). Others, including clarithromycin, flurithromycin, midecamycin, midecamycin acetate (miocamycin; ponsinomycin), josamycin and roxithromycin (group 2) rarely cause interactions. Azithromycin, dirithromycin, rikamycin and spiramycin (group 3) do not inactivate CYP3A4 and do not engender these adverse effects. Drug interactions with carbamazepine, cyclosporin, terfenadine, astemizole and theophylline represent the most frequently encountered interactions with macrolide antibiotics. If the combination of a macrolide and one of these compounds cannot be avoided, serum concentrations of concurrently administered drugs should be monitored and patients observed for signs of toxicity. Rare interactions and those of dubious clinical importance are those with alfentanil and sufentanil, antacids and cimetidine, oral anticoagulants, bromocriptine, clozapine, oral contraceptive steroids, digoxin, disopyramide, ergot alkaloids, felodipine, glibenclamide (glyburide), levodopa/carbidopa, lovastatin, methylprednisolone, phenazone (antipyrine), phenytoin, rifabutin and rifampicin (rifampin), triazolam and midazolam, valproic acid (sodium valproate) and zidovudine.

Pharmacokinetic drug interactions of macrolides

The macrolide antibiotics include natural members, prodrugs and semisynthetic derivatives. These drugs are indicated in a variety of infections and are often combined with other drug therapies, thus creating the potential for pharmacokinetic interactions. Macrolides can both inhibit drug metabolism in the liver by complex formation and inactivation of microsomal drug oxidising enzymes and also interfere with microorganisms of the enteric flora through their antibiotic effects. Over the past 20 years, a number of reports have incriminated macrolides as a potential source of clinically severe drug interactions. However, differences have been found between the various macrolides in this regard and not all macrolides are responsible for drug interactions. With the recent advent of many semisynthetic macrolide antibiotics it is now evident that they may be classified into 3 different groups in causing drug interactions. The first group (e.g. troleandomycin, erythromycins) are those prone to forming nitrosoalkanes and the consequent formation of inactive cytochrome P450-metabolite complexes. The second group (e.g. josamycin, flurithromycin, roxithromycin, clarithromycin, miocamycin and midecamycin) form complexes to a lesser extent and rarely produce drug interactions. The last group (e.g. spiramycin, rokitamycin, dirithromycin and azithromycin) do not inactivate cytochrome P450 and are unable to modify the pharmacokinetics of other compounds. It appears that 2 structural factors are important for a macrolide antibiotic to lead to the induction of cytochrome P450 and the formation in vivo or in vitro of an inhibitory cytochrome P450-iron-nitrosoalkane metabolite complex: the presence in the macrolide molecules of a non-hindered readily accessible N-dimethylamino group and the hydrophobic character of the drug. Troleandomycin ranks first as a potent inhibitor of microsomal liver enzymes, causing a significant decrease of the metabolism of methylprednisolone, theophylline, carbamazepine, phenazone (antipyrine) and triazolam. Troleandomycin can cause ergotism in patients receiving ergot alkaloids and cholestatic jaundice in those taking oral contraceptives. Erythromycin and its different prodrugs appear to be less potent inhibitors of drug metabolism. Case reports and controlled studies have, however, shown that erythromycins may interact with theophylline, carbamazepine, methylprednisolone, warfarin, cyclosporin, triazolam, midazolam, alfentanil, disopyramide and bromocriptine, decreasing drug clearance. The bioavailability of digoxin appears also to be increased by erythromycin in patients excreting high amounts of reduced digoxin metabolites, probably due to destruction of enteric flora responsible for the formation of these compounds. These incriminated macrolide antibiotics should not be administered concomitantly with other drugs known to be affected metabolically by them, or at the very least, combined administration should be carried out only with careful patient monitoring.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Pharmacokinetic drug interactions with cyclosporin (Part II)

Part I of this article, which appeared in the previous issue of the Journal, considered the potential mechanisms of drug interactions with cyclosporin, and divided the interacting drugs into 2 categories. Drugs that decrease cyclosporin concentrations (e.g. anti-convulsants, rifampicin, etc.) were dealt with first; the authors then moved on to consider the second category, those that increase cyclosporin concentration (macrolide antibiotics, azole antifungal drugs). Part II continues the survey of this category.