Pharmacokinetic interactions between buprenorphine/naloxone and once-daily lopinavir/ritonavir

Evaluation of the Hepatotoxicity of Buprenorphine in Rat Pups Born to an Exposed Mother During Lactation

AIMS

This study aimed to evaluate the hepatotoxicity of buprenorphine in lactating rat pups of buprenorphine-injected mothers. Buprenorphine (BUP), a semisynthetic opioid, is increasingly administrated as a first-line standard maintenance treatment for opioid dependence due to its high safety and efficacy compared to other opioids. Numerous studies have confirmed the safety of BUP maintenance treatment in addicted patients.

OBJECTIVES

This study was designed to assess the effects of BUP on the activities of liver enzymes, oxidative parameters, and liver histopathological changes in pups born to a mother exposed to this drug during lactation.

METHODS

BUP at a dose of 0.5 or 0.1 mg/kg was subcutaneously administrated to lactating rats for 28 days. At the end of the experiment, the pups were anesthetized, and blood samples were obtained from their hearts for measuring liver enzymes. Then the livers of the animals were dissected to measure oxidative stress parameters. In addition, the liver samples were fixed for histopathological evaluation.

RESULTS

The findings indicated a decrease in the activities of serum liver enzymes (ALT and AST) of the pups born to mothers exposed to 0.5 and 1 mg/kg of BUP during lactation. BUP could not change malondialdehyde (MDA), glutathione (GSH), nitric oxide (NO) levels, nor superoxide dismutase (SOD) activity in the liver tissue of animals. Some vacuolated hepatocytes with dark, eccentric nuclei, necrosis with karyolytic nuclei, mitotic figures, and multiple binucleated cells were seen in the pups which received 1 mg/kg of BUP.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, BUP may induce liver dysfunction in pups born to mothers exposed to this drug during lactation.

Toward precision prescribing for methadone: Determinants of methadone deposition

BACKGROUND

Despite the World Health Organization listing methadone as an essential medication, effective dose selection is challenging, especially in racial and ethnic minority populations. Subtherapeutic doses can result in withdrawal symptoms while supratherapeutic doses can result in overdose and death. Although CYP3A4 was conventionally considered the principal methadone metabolizing enzyme, more recent data have identified CYP2B6 as the principal enzyme. CYP2B6 has ethnically-associated polymorphisms that affect the metabolic rate. Our objective was to investigate the effects of genetic and nongenetic factors on methadone metabolism.

METHODS

We measured trough plasma methadone levels in 100 participants with opioid use disorder. We assessed methadone metabolism by calculating the metabolite ratio (major metabolite: 2-ethylidene-1,5-dimethyl-3,3-diphenylpyrrolidine [EDDP] divided by methadone concentration). We assessed hepatic fibrosis and steatosis by transient elastography and CYP2B6 alleles, principally responsible for methadone metabolism. Mixed effects models modeled the data in 97 participants.

RESULTS

Participants were largely male (58%), minority (61% African American) and non-Hispanic (68%). Forty percent were HCV mono-infected, 40% were uninfected, and 20% were HCV/HIV co-infected. Female sex had significant effects on (R)- and (S)-methadone metabolism (p = 0.016 and p = 0.044, respectively). CYP2B6 loss of function (LOF) alleles significantly affected (S)-methadone metabolism (p = 0.012). Body mass index (BMI) significantly affected (R)-methadone metabolism (p = 0.034). Methadone metabolism appeared to be lower in males, in individuals with LOF alleles, and elevated BMI.

CONCLUSIONS

Genetic analysis, especially in minority populations, is essential to delivering individualized treatments. Although the principal methadone metabolizing enzyme remains controversial, our results suggest that sex, CYP2B6 genotype, and BMI should be incorporated into multivariate models to create methadone dosing algorithms. Methadone dosing algorithms should facilitate medication delivery, improve patient satisfaction, and diminish overdose potential.

Drug-drug interactions and clinical considerations with co-administration of antiretrovirals and psychotropic drugs

Psychotropic medications are frequently co-prescribed with antiretroviral therapy (ART), owing to a high prevalence of psychiatric illness within the population living with HIV, as well as a 7-fold increased risk of HIV infection among patients with psychiatric illness. While ART has been notoriously associated with a multitude of pharmacokinetic drug interactions involving the cytochrome P450 enzyme system, the magnitude and clinical impact of these interactions with psychotropics may range from negligible effects on plasma concentrations to life-threatening torsades de pointes or respiratory depression. This comprehensive review summarizes the currently available information regarding drug-drug interactions between antiretrovirals and pharmacologic agents utilized in the treatment of psychiatric disorders-antidepressants, stimulants, antipsychotics, anxiolytics, mood stabilizers, and treatments for opioid use disorder and alcohol use disorder-and provides recommendations for their management. Additionally, overlapping toxicities between antiretrovirals and the psychotropic classes are highlighted. Knowledge of the interaction and adverse effect potential of specific antiretrovirals and psychotropics will allow clinicians to make informed prescribing decisions to better promote the health and wellness of this high-risk population.

Voriconazole greatly increases the exposure to oral buprenorphine

PURPOSE

Buprenorphine has low oral bioavailability. Regardless of sublingual administration, a notable part of buprenorphine is exposed to extensive first-pass metabolism by the cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4. As drug interaction studies with buprenorphine are limited, we wanted to investigate the effect of voriconazole, a strong CYP3A4 inhibitor, on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of oral buprenorphine.

METHODS

Twelve healthy volunteers were given either placebo or voriconazole (orally, 400 mg twice on day 1 and 200 mg twice on days 2-5) for 5 days in a randomized, cross-over study. On day 5, they ingested 0.2 mg (3.6 mg during placebo phase) oral buprenorphine. We measured plasma and urine concentrations of buprenorphine and norbuprenorphine and monitored their pharmacological effects. Pharmacokinetic parameters were normalized for a buprenorphine dose of 1.0 mg.

RESULTS

Voriconazole greatly increased the mean area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC_0-18) of buprenorphine (4.3-fold, P < 0.001), its peak concentration (C_max) (3.9-fold), half-life (P < 0.05), and excretion into urine (A_e; P < 0.001). Voriconazole also markedly enhanced the C_max (P < 0.001), AUC_0-18 (P < 0.001), and A_e (P < 0.05) of unconjugated norbuprenorphine but decreased its renal clearance (P < 0.001). Mild dizziness and nausea occurred during both study phases.

CONCLUSIONS

Voriconazole greatly increases exposure to oral buprenorphine, mainly by inhibiting intestinal and liver CYP3A4. Effect on some transporters may explain elevated norbuprenorphine concentrations. Although oral buprenorphine is not commonly used, this interaction may become relevant in patients receiving sublingual buprenorphine together with voriconazole or other CYP3A4 or transporter inhibitors.

Voriconazole more likely than posaconazole increases plasma exposure to sublingual buprenorphine causing a risk of a clinically important interaction

PURPOSE

This study aimed to determine possible effects of voriconazole and posaconazole on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacological effects of sublingual buprenorphine.

METHODS

We used a randomized, placebo-controlled crossover study design with 12 healthy male volunteers. Subjects were given a dose of 0.4 mg (0.6 mg during placebo phase) sublingual buprenorphine after a 5-day oral pretreatment with either (i) placebo, (ii) voriconazole 400 mg twice daily on the first day and 200 mg twice daily thereafter or (iii) posaconazole 400 mg twice daily. Plasma and urine concentrations of buprenorphine and its primary active metabolite norbuprenorphine were monitored over 18 h and pharmacological effects were measured.

RESULTS

Compared to placebo, voriconazole increased the mean area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC_0-∞) of buprenorphine 1.80-fold (90 % confidence interval 1.45-2.24; P < 0.001), its peak concentration (C_max) 1.37-fold (P < 0.013) and half-life (t _½ ) 1.37-fold (P < 0.001). Posaconazole increased the AUC0_0-∞ of buprenorphine 1.25-fold (P < 0.001). Most of the plasma norbuprenorphine concentrations were below the limit of quantification (0.05 ng/ml). Voriconazole, unlike posaconazole, increased the urinary excretion of norbuprenorphine 1.58-fold (90 % confidence interval 1.18-2.12; P < 0.001) but there was no quantifiable parent buprenorphine in urine. Plasma buprenorphine concentrations correlated with the pharmacological effects, but the effects did not differ significantly between the phases.

CONCLUSIONS

Voriconazole, and to a minor extent posaconazole, increase plasma exposure to sublingual buprenorphine, probably via inhibition of cytochrome P450 3 A and/or P-glycoprotein. Care should be exercised in the combined use of buprenorphine with triazole antimycotics, particularly with voriconazole, because their interaction can be of clinical importance.

Drug-Drug Interactions With Antiviral Agents in People Who Inject Drugs Requiring Substitution Therapy

OBJECTIVE

To describe potential drug-drug interactions in the area of HIV/hepatitis C virus (HCV) coinfection and injection drug use, including those between antiretrovirals (ARVs), direct-acting antivirals (DAAs), and opioid-agonist therapy, and to supply a practical approach to their management.

DATA SOURCES

We searched PubMed for relevant articles published up until February 2015 as well as conference reports and drug-drug-interaction Web sites.

DATA SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

We used the following search terms: pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic drug-drug interaction, opioid substitution, HIV, hepatitis and the individual names of the relevant agents of the following drug classes and the drug classes itself: reverse transcriptase inhibitors, nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, protease inhibitors, direct-acting antivirals, opioide, benzodiazepines, anticonvulsants, antidepressants and antipsychotics. Additional references were identified from a review of literature citations and drug-drug interaction Web sites. In our evaluation, we included German- and English-language studies and reports addressing drug-drug interactions between opioid agonist therapy and ARVs or DAAs.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Pharmacokinetic data were available for all ARVs and DAAs except rilpivirine, indinavir, saquinavir, maraviroc, dolutegravir, and MK-8742 with buprenorphine as well as maraviroc with methadone Drug-drug interactions of potential clinical relevance are most likely to occur between opioid-replacement therapy and ARVs, particularly the nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, efavirenz and nevirapine, and HIV protease inhibitors.

CONCLUSION

Integrase inhibitors may be safely coadministered with opioid-replacement therapy. With respect to HCV DAAs, most currently approved and late-stage investigational agents do not have clinically significant interactions with opioid-replacement therapy. ARV and DAAs may interact with other drug classes commonly used in the opioid-dependent population, including benzodiazepines, antidepressants, anticonvulsants, and antipsychotics.

New developments in the management of opioid dependence: focus on sublingual buprenorphine-naloxone

Opioid maintenance therapy is a well-established first-line treatment approach in opioid dependence. Buprenorphine, a partial opioid agonist, has been found by numerous studies to be an effective and safe medication in the treatment of opioid dependence. At present, buprenorphine is available as a monodrug or in a fixed 4:1 ratio combination with naloxone. A diminished risk of diversion and abuse for the buprenorphine-naloxone combination is likely but not firmly established. Conventional formulations are given sublingually to avoid the hepatic first-pass effect. A novel film tablet is available only in the US and Australia. Other novel, sustained-release formulations (implant, depot) are currently being developed and tested. Recent studies, including a Cochrane meta-analysis, suggest that the retention with buprenorphine is lower than for methadone, but that buprenorphine may be associated with less drug use. Higher doses of buprenorphine are associated with better retention rates. Buprenorphine has a ceiling effect at the opioid receptor with regard to respiratory depression, and may cause fewer fatal intoxications than methadone. Possible antidepressant effects of buprenorphine and its use in comorbid psychiatric patients has not been studied in much detail. Clinical implications are discussed.

A review of pharmacological interactions between HIV or hepatitis C virus medications and opioid agonist therapy: implications and management for clinical practice

Global access to opioid agonist therapy and HIV/hepatitis C virus (HCV) treatment is expanding but when used concurrently, problematic pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions may occur. Articles published from 1966 to 2012 in Medline were reviewed using the following keywords: HIV, AIDS, HIV therapy, HCV, HCV therapy, antiretroviral therapy, highly active antiretroviral therapy, drug interactions, methadone and buprenorphine. In addition, a review of abstracts from national and international meetings and conference proceedings was conducted; selected reports were reviewed as well. The metabolism of both opioid and antiretroviral therapies, description of their known interactions and clinical implications and management of these interactions were reviewed. Important pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic drug interactions affecting either methadone or HIV medications have been demonstrated within each class of antiretroviral agents. Drug interactions between methadone, buprenorphine and HIV medications are known and may have important clinical consequences. Clinicians must be alert to these interactions and have a basic knowledge regarding their management.

Important Drug-Drug Interactions in HIV-Infected Persons on Antiretroviral Therapy: An Update on New Interactions Between HIV and Non-HIV Drugs

Advances in antiretroviral therapy have turned HIV into a chronic, manageable disease. Patients often require treatment for co-morbid conditions as well as HIV, and consequently, pharmacokinetic interactions between antiretrovirals (ARVs) and other drug classes are an increasing concern. Protease inhibitors and non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors are involved in the CYP450 or other transporter systems, and may be associated with higher risk of clinically significant drug interactions. One reverse transcriptase inhibitor, abacavir, has demonstrated weak inhibition of CYP3A4, 2D6 and 2C9 in vitro, but is not associated with any clinically significant interactions involving the CYP450 system. The integrase inhibitor raltegravir is not involved in the CYP450 system, and may be a suitable option to use when trying to minimize interactions with other drug classes. This review summarizes recently published data on clinically significant drug interactions between ARVs and other drug classes including antineoplastics, immunosuppressant transplant drugs, directly acting antivirals for hepatitis C, antifungals, antimalarials, corticosteroids, psychotropics, hormonal contraceptives, anticoagulants, drugs for pulmonary hypertension, and herbal products. In situations of suspected or potential interactions, close monitoring is warranted, and dose adjustments or substitutions may be required.

Can the chronic administration of the combination of buprenorphine and naloxone block dopaminergic activity causing anti-reward and relapse potential?

Opiate addiction is associated with many adverse health and social harms, fatal overdose, infectious disease transmission, elevated health care costs, public disorder, and crime. Although community-based addiction treatment programs continue to reduce the harms of opiate addiction with narcotic substitution therapy such as methadone maintenance, there remains a need to find a substance that not only blocks opiate-type receptors (mu, delta, etc.) but also provides agonistic activity; hence, the impetus arose for the development of a combination of narcotic antagonism and mu receptor agonist therapy. After three decades of extensive research, the federal Drug Abuse Treatment Act 2000 (DATA) opened a window of opportunity for patients with addiction disorders by providing increased access to options for treatment. DATA allows physicians who complete a brief specialty-training course to become certified to prescribe buprenorphine and buprenorphine/naloxone (Subutex, Suboxone) for treatment of patients with opioid dependence. Clinical studies indicate that buprenorphine maintenance is as effective as methadone maintenance in retaining patients in substance abuse treatment and in reducing illicit opioid use. With that stated, we must consider the long-term benefits or potential toxicity attributed to Subutex or Suboxone. We describe a mechanism whereby chronic blockade of opiate receptors, in spite of only partial opiate agonist action, may ultimately block dopaminergic activity causing anti-reward and relapse potential. While the direct comparison is not as yet available, toxicity to buprenorphine can be found in the scientific literature. In considering our cautionary note in this commentary, we are cognizant that, to date, this is what we have available, and until such a time when the real magic bullet is discovered, we will have to endure. However, more than anything else this commentary should at least encourage the development of thoughtful new strategies to target the specific brain regions responsible for relapse prevention.

Therapeutic drug monitoring of protease inhibitors and efavirenz in HIV-infected individuals with active substance-related disorders

BACKGROUND

Achieving targeted antiretroviral (ARV) plasma concentrations during long-term treatment in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients with substance-related disorders (SRDs) may be challenging due to a number of factors, including medication adherence, coinfection with hepatitis B or C virus, medication intolerance, and drug interactions. One approach to investigate these factors is to conduct therapeutic drug monitoring to measure ARV exposure during treatment. The objective of this study was to utilize therapeutic drug monitoring to compare efavirenz (EFV) and protease inhibitor pharmacokinetics in patients with and without SRDs.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, cross-sectional open-label study in patients with HIV-1 infection receiving antiretroviral therapy (ART), with active (n=129) or without (n=146) SRD according to National Institute on Drug Abuse criteria. Two hundred seventy-five subjects who were receiving either protease inhibitor-based or EFV-based ART regimens for >6 months were enrolled at 4 HIV treatment centers with an equal distribution of SRD and non-SRD at each site. The patients were instructed during enrollment visits with regard to the importance of adherence before and after study visits. Demographics and routine clinical laboratory tests were recorded.

RESULTS

Among the 275 patients, 47% had SRD with at least 1 substance. There were no significant differences between SRD and non-SRD groups for race, gender, age, or CD4 count at entry. A significantly higher proportion of patients with SRD had an entry HIV RNA plasma concentration>75 copies per milliliter compared with patients without SRD (40% vs 28%, P=0.044). Logistic regression modeling revealed an association between HIV RNA plasma concentration and African American race (P=0.017). A significantly higher proportion of SRDs also had an EFV or protease inhibitor trough concentration below the desired range (23% vs 9%, P=0.048). Significantly lower trough concentrations were noted in patients with SRDs receiving atazanavir (0.290 vs 0.976 μg/mL) or lopinavir (3.75 vs 5.30 μg/mL).

CONCLUSIONS

The pharmacokinetic data indicate differences between HIV-infected patients with and without SRDs that may influence viral load suppression during long-term ART. These findings require additional investigation in a randomized design with more intensive pharmacokinetic assessment to identify individual factors that are contributing to suboptimal ARV exposure in patients with SRDs.

Efficacy of Tat-conjugated ritonavir-loaded nanoparticles in reducing HIV-1 replication in monocyte-derived macrophages and cytocompatibility with macrophages and human neurons

Human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-1 targets mononuclear phagocytes (MP), which disseminate infection to organs such as brain, spleen and lymph. Thus MP, which include microglia, tissue macrophages and infiltrating monocyte-derived macrophages (MDM), are important target of anti-HIV-1 drug therapy. Most of the currently used antiretroviral drugs are effective in reducing viral loadin the periphery but cannot effectively eradicate infection from tissue reservoirs such as brain MP. HIV-1 infection of the central nervous system can lead to a wide variety of HIV-1-associated neurocognitive disorders. In this study, we demonstrate that ritonavir-loaded nanoparticles (RNPs) are effective in inhibiting HIV-1 infection of MDM. Reduced infection is observed in multiple read-out systems including reduction of cytopathic effects, HIV-1 p24 protein secretion and production of progeny virions. Furthermore, the RNPs retained antiretroviral efficacy after being removed from MDM cultures. As HIV-1-infected cells in the brain are likely to survive for a long period of time, both acute and chronic infection paradigms were evaluated. Tat-peptide-conjugated RNPs (Tat-RNP) were effective in both short-term and long-term HIV-1-infected MDM. Importantly, we confirm that delivery of RNPs, both with and without Tat-peptide conjugation, is toxic neither to MDM nor to neural cells, which may be bystander targets of the nanoformulations. In conclusion, Tat-NPs could be a safe and effective way of delivering anti-HIV-1 drugs for controlling viral replication occurring within brain MP.

Hepatic safety and lack of antiretroviral interactions with buprenorphine/naloxone in HIV-infected opioid-dependent patients

BACKGROUND

The safety of buprenorphine/naloxone (bup/nx) in HIV-infected patients has not been established. Prior reports raise concern about hepatotoxicity and interactions with atazanavir.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective cohort study of 303 opioid-dependent HIV-infected patients initiating bup/nx treatment. We assessed changes in aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) over time. We compared bup/nx doses in patients receiving the antiretroviral atazanavir to those not receiving atazanavir. We conducted surveillance for pharmacodynamic interactions.

RESULTS

Median AST [37.0 vs. 37.0 units/liter (U/L) respective interquartile ranges (IQRs) 26-53 and 26-59] and ALT (33.0 vs. 33.0 U/L, respective IQRs 19-50 and 18-50) values did not change over time among 141 patients comparing pre-bup/nx exposure with post-bup/nx exposure measures. During bup/nx exposure, 207 subjects demonstrated no significant change in median AST (36.0 vs. 35.0 U/L, respective IQRs 25-57 and 25-61) and ALT (29.0 vs. 31.0 U/L, respective IQRs 19-50 and 18-50) values collected a median of 6 months apart. Analyses restricted to patients with hepatitis C and HIV co-infection yielded similar results, except a small but significant decrease in first to last AST, during treatment with bup/nx (P = 0.048). Mean bup/nx dose, ranging 16.0-17.8 mg, did not differ over time or with co-administration of atazanavir. No pharmacodynamic interactions were noted.

CONCLUSIONS

Buprenorphine/naloxone did not produce measurable hepatic toxicity or pharmacodynamic interaction with atazanavir in HIV-infected opioid-dependent patients.