The effect of ranitidine, cimetidine or famotidine on low-dose post-prandial alcohol absorption

Is there an interaction between H2-antagonists and alcohol?

H2-antagonists are commonly prescribed drugs and alcohol use is widespread in the community. Any possible interaction may be important because of the frequent co-administration of both drugs and the potential for unexpected impairment of pyschomotor function, in particular, driving skills. Hepatic ADH is the major site of alcohol metabolism. ADH is also found in the stomach, but it is uncertain whether gastric ADH is able to metabolise a significant amount of alcohol in vivo. Significant first-pass metabolism can be demonstrated at lower doses of alcohol, and if alcohol is given after meals. Varying degrees of extraction of alcohol from the portal circulation probably explains the data regarding first pass metabolism rather than gastric metabolism by gastric ADH. H2-receptor antagonists inhibit gastric ADH activity to a variable extent. If gastric metabolism of alcohol is negligible then this inhibition has no relevance. Given the uncertainty regarding a mechanism of interaction, only carefully conducted studies in controlled environments will answer the question. The large inter-subject variability of alcohol absorption means that any study which seeks to determine the effect of an H2-receptor antagonist on ethanol metabolism must have sufficient numbers. A cross-over design, with each subject acting as his own control, is preferable to avoid ascribing an effect to treatment rather than to chance. The alcohol dosing studies are reviewed and the results summarised according to dose of alcohol given. At a dose of 0.15 g/kg of alcohol, four commonly used H2-antagonists may cause a small increase in blood alcohol concentrations in certain conditions. This absolute increase is very small. The magnitude of effect is far less than the effect of taking a meal before alcohol. At doses of 0.3 g/kg and above the majority of evidence favours no interaction between H2-antagonists and alcohol. There is no interaction at doses that would be expected to impair psychomotor skills (above 25 mg/dl). There remains a question regarding the cumulative effect of repeated small doses of alcohol and further studies are required. The relationship between ethanol absorption and gastric emptying raises the possibility that the effects of H2-receptor antagonists observed at very low doses of alcohol may be due to the acceleration of gastric emptying by these drugs. This is an attractive hypothesis that explains many aspects of the debate, but studies of the effect of H2-antagonists on gastric emptying have been conflicting.

Effect of histamine-2 receptor antagonists on blood alcohol levels: a meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect, if any, of histamine type 2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) on serum alcohol levels under various conditions including type of H2RA receptor antagonist, alcohol dose, and fed status of the subject.

STUDY DESIGN

Meta-analysis of the published literature.

DATA SOURCES

Studies were identified by MEDLINE (January 1982 through December 1997) using the key words H2 receptor antagonists and alcohol. Other studies were identified by reviewing bibliographies of retrieved articles and by discussion with colleagues.

STUDY SELECTION

Studies were selected if they involved the coadministration of H2RAs and alcohol in healthy, human volunteers. Studies that may have addressed this goal but were performed in another context, for instance the measurement of ulcer healing, were excluded.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data were extracted on the design, number of participants, participant characteristics, type and dose of H2RA administered, serum alcohol levels (measured as Cmax) along with standard deviations, dose of alcohol received, and fed or fasted status of participants. Alcohol dose was arbitrarily divided into low dose (< or = 0.5 g/kg body weight) versus high dose (> 0.5 g/kg body weight). In addition, studies involving ranitidine and cimetidine were stratified by sample size into small (n < or = 10) versus not small (n > 10).

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-four trials met selection criteria. Small elevations in Cmax were noted when cimetidine (2.71 mg/DL; 95% confidence internal [CI] 1.60, 3.83) or ranitidine (6.95 mg/DL; 95% CI 5.83, 8.08) were coadministered with alcohol. No such differences were noted for famotidine (0.28 mg/DL; 95% CI -1.24, 1.80) or nizatidine (2.33 mg/DL;, 95% CI -0.06, 4.72). The elevation detected with cimetidine and ranitidine was most pronounced in smaller studies (n < 10). Separate analyses investigating the effect of alcohol dose and fed or fasted status of participants revealed no clinically important differences.

CONCLUSIONS

Cimetidine and ranitidine, but not the other H2RAs, can cause small elevations of serum alcohol level when alcohol and drug are administered concurrently. Studies with larger numbers of participants were less likely to demonstrate this effect. Relative to accepted, legal definitions of intoxication, the effect of any H2RA on blood alcohol level is unlikely to be clinically relevant.

Pharmacokinetic interactions between alcohol and other drugs

The frequent use of alcohol (ethanol) together with prescription drugs gives any described pharmacokinetic interaction significant clinical implications. The issue is both the effect of alcohol on the pharmacokinetics of various drugs and also the effect of those drugs on the pharmacokinetics of alcohol. This review discusses these pharmacokinetic interactions but also briefly describes some other effects of alcohol that are clinically relevant to drug prescribing. The use of several different study designs may be required before we can confidently state the presence or absence of any alcohol-drug interaction. Short term administration of alcohol in volunteers is the most common study design but studies of social drinking and prolonged moderate alcohol intake can be important in some situations. Community-based studies may illustrate the clinical relevance of any interaction. Alcohol can affect the pharmacokinetics of drugs by altering gastric emptying or liver metabolism (by inducing cytochrome P450 2E1). Drugs may affect the pharmacokinetics of alcohol by altering gastric emptying and inhibiting gastric alcohol dehydrogenase. The role of gastric alcohol dehydrogenase in the first-pass metabolism of alcohol is reviewed in this article and the arguments for and against any potential interaction between alcohol and H2 receptor antagonists are also discussed. The inhibition of the metabolism of acetaldehyde may cause disulfiram-like reactions. Pharmacodynamic interactions between alcohol and prescription drugs are common, particularly the additive sedative effects with benzodiazepines and also with some of the antihistamine drugs; other interactions may occur with tricyclic antidepressants. Alcohol intake may be a contributing factor to the disease state which is being treated and may complicate treatment because of various pathophysiological effects (e.g. impairment of gluconeogenesis and the risk of hypoglycaemia with oral hypoglycaemic agents). The combination of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and alcohol intake increases the risk of gastrointestinal haemorrhage.

First-pass metabolism of alcohol. Absence of diurnal variation and its inhibition by cimetidine after evening meal

To determine whether the first-pass metabolism (FPM) of orally consumed alcohol varies with the time of day, 12 healthy male subjects were tested with both oral and intravenous alcohol (0.3 g/kg), in the morning and evening, always 1 hr after the same standard meal. The results revealed no significant differences in FPM (81.6 +/- 11.6 vs 92.8 +/- 10.6 mg/kg) or in any other index of alcohol absorption and metabolism. Eleven subjects were also tested in the evening after treatment with cimetidine, an H2-antagonist that inhibits gastric alcohol dehydrogenase activity in vitro. Compared to baseline, cimetidine (1 g/day for eight days) significantly decreased FPM (from 100.1 +/- 8.0 to 52.6 +/- 11.4 mg/kg, P < 0.01) and increased the systemic bioavailability of alcohol (from 66 +/- 3 to 82 +/- 4%, P < 0.01), as well as peak blood alcohol concentrations (from 4.3 +/- 0.4 to 5.9 +/- 0.5 mM, P < 0.05) and areas under the curve (from 5.1 +/- 0.5 to 7.0 +/- 0.5 mM/hr, P < 0.01). The results indicate the absence of diurnal variation in FPM and suggest that patients given cimetidine should be warned of its possible interaction with alcohol regardless of the time of day.

Inter-individual and intra-individual variability of ethanol concentration-time profiles: comparison of ethanol ingestion before or after an evening meal

1. The magnitude of the variability of ethanol absorption is an important factor for studies that seek to determine the significance of potential interactions between ethanol and drugs. The aim of this study was to determine the extent of inter- and intra-individual variability of ethanol concentration-time profiles in fasted and fed subjects. 2. Twenty-four healthy male subjects were randomized to receive ethanol 0.3 g kg-1 before an evening meal on two study days and ethanol 0.3 g kg-1 after an evening meal on two study days. Plasma ethanol concentrations were measured at intervals from 0-240 min. 3. There were significant differences in the mean area under the ethanol concentration-time curve (AUC), the mean peak ethanol concentration (Cmax), the mean ethanol elimination slope and the time to peak ethanol concentration between the fed and fasted subjects. There were no significant differences between the first and second study days for either fed or fasting subjects for all parameters. 4. There was no statistically significant difference in inter- or intra-subject variance between fed and fasted studies although the coefficients of variation (standard deviation expressed as a percentage of the mean) for the differences between the first and second study day were higher for fed studies. 5. The large inter- and intra-individual variability of alcohol absorption for both fasted and fed subjects must be considered in the design of alcohol-drug interaction studies.

Metabolism of ethanol in rat gastric cells and its inhibition by cimetidine

BACKGROUND/AIMS

Several studies have shown that the stomach has sufficient alcohol dehydrogenase activity to metabolize a significant amount of alcohol and that cimetidine depresses this alcohol dehydrogenase activity. However, both gastric metabolism of ethanol and its inhibition by cimetidine remain controversial. Given the difficulty in assessing gastric metabolism of ethanol in vivo, this subject was investigated in vitro.

METHODS

Cultured rat gastric epithelial cells were incubated with 200 mmol/L [1-14C]ethanol for 90 minutes with and without cimetidine (0.1-1 mmol/L) or omeprazole (1 mmol/L). The quantity of ethanol oxidized by gastric cells was measured by the amount of acetate produced using ion exchange chromatography.

RESULTS

The majority of cells at confluency had typical features of mucous cells. The gastric cells metabolized significant amounts of ethanol, sufficient to account for in vivo first-pass metabolism of ethanol in rats. Cimetidine, but not omeprazole, reduced ethanol metabolism by 39.9% +/- 4.9% (P < 0.01), an inhibition comparable with that previously reported for first-pass metabolism in vivo.

CONCLUSIONS

Gastric cells in tissue culture are capable of significant ethanol oxidation, the in vitro rates are sufficient to account for first-pass metabolism of ethanol in vivo, and cimetidine inhibits ethanol metabolism in tissue culture, an effect that parallels its decrease of first-pass metabolism in vivo.

Safety of acid-suppressing drugs

There is an extensive literature on the adverse effects of drugs that inhibit gastric acid secretion. This study presents a critical examination of interactions between antisecretory drugs and other compounds, the frequency of serious adverse effects relating to various body systems, the safety of antisecretory drugs in pregnancy, and longer-term safety data from postmarketing surveillance studies. While interactions with some other drugs, alcohol, and certain carcinogens are of potential concern, in practice clinically significant reactions appear to be rare if they occur at all. A small number of major side-effects have been documented, but they occur rarely, and postmarketing surveillance has not detected other longer-term sequelae. Safety of these drugs in pregnancy is not established, as data are so few. It is concluded that antisecretory agents, by comparison with most other classes of drugs, are remarkably well tolerated.

Helicobacter infection and gastric ethanol metabolism

The organism frequently colonizing the stomach of patients suffering from chronic active gastritis and peptic ulcer disease--Helicobacter pylori--possesses marked alcohol dehydrogenase (ADH) activity. Consequently, Helicobacter infection may contribute to the capacity of the stomach to metabolize ethanol and lead to increased acetaldehyde production. To study this hypothesis, we first determined ADH activity in a variety of H. pylori strains originally isolated from human gastric mucosal biopsies. ADH activity was also measured in endoscopic gastric mucosal specimens obtained from H. pylori-positive and -negative patients. Furthermore, we used a mouse model of Helicobacter infection to determine whether infected animals exhibit more gastric ethanol metabolism than noninfected controls. Most of the 32 H. pylori strains studied possessed clear ADH activity and produced acetaldehyde. In humans, gastric ADH activity of corpus mucosa did not differ between H. pylori-positive and -negative subjects, whereas in antral biopsies ADH activity was significantly lower in infected patients. In mice, gastric ADH activity was similar or even lower in infected animals than in controls, depending on the duration of infection, despite the fact that the infectious agent used--Helicobacter felis--showed ADH activity in vitro. In accordance with this, Helicobacter infection tended to decrease rather than increase gastric ethanol metabolism in mice. In humans, it remains to be established whether the observed decrease in antral ADH activity associated with H. pylori infection can lead to reduced gastric first-pass metabolism of ethanol.

Acetaldehyde and ethanol production by Helicobacter pylori

By virtue of possessing alcohol dehydrogenase activity, cytosol prepared from Helicobacter pylori produces toxic acetaldehyde from ethanol in vitro. To approach the in vivo situation in the stomach, we have now investigation whether intact H. pylori--without addition of exogenous nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide--also forms acetaldehyde. Furthermore, to assess the energy metabolism of H. pylori, we determined whether the alcohol dehydrogenase-catalyzed reaction can run in the opposite direction with ethanol as the end-product and thereby yield energy for the organism. Intact H. pylori formed acetaldehyde already at low ethanol concentrations (at 0.5% ethanol, acetaldehyde, 64 +/- 21 and 75 +/- 9 mumol/l (mean +/- SEM) for strains NCTC 11637 and NCTC 11638, respectively). H. pylori produced ethanol in concentrations that can be significant for the energy metabolism of the organism. Acetaldehyde production by H. pylori may be an important factor in the pathogenesis of gastroduodenal diseases associated with the organism. The primary function of H. pylori alcohol dehydrogenase may, however, be alcoholic fermentation and consequent energy production under microaerobic conditions.

H2-antagonists and alcohol. Do they interact?

There are conflicting data on the existence of significant first-pass metabolism of alcohol (ethanol) in the human stomach and its inhibition by histamine H2-receptor antagonists. Alcohol is predominantly metabolised in the liver by the microsomal alcohol oxidising system, alcohol dehydrogenase (ADH) and a catalase enzyme. Histochemical and kinetic studies have revealed several ADH isoenzymes in the gastric mucosa with different kinetic properties. After small oral doses of alcohol first-pass metabolism in the stomach occurs, as shown by reduced area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) compared with intravenous or intraduodenal administration. The activity of gastric ADH is reduced in women, the elderly, Asian individuals, the fasting state, chronic alcoholism and after gastrectomy. The effect is only present with small (< or = 0.3 g/kg) alcohol doses and with a high alcohol concentration. In a number of studies, cimetidine in therapeutic doses over 7 days produced a significant increase in the AUC and in the peak plasma concentration after administration of alcohol 0.15 and 0.30 g/kg. This was related to an inhibition of gastric ADH activity, as shown by in vitro studies. Ranitidine inhibited gastric ADH to a similar extent on a molar basis, but its effect on alcohol levels in vivo was less constant in various studies. Nizatidine also reduced gastric alcohol first-pass metabolism, but famotidine and roxatidine did not show this effect. In other studies, H2-receptor antagonists did not change AUC and peak alcohol concentration. The controversy is not easy to resolve, since a number of the positive studies did not use a placebo-controlled, randomised, crossover design, while some of the negative studies did not exclude habitual alcohol consumers and included Oriental volunteers, although both groups have been shown to lack significant gastric ADH activity. In this case, when first-pass metabolism of alcohol does not exist, this by definition cannot be abolished by H2-antagonists. The inclusion of oral and intravenous dosage data of alcohol is mandatory to positively identify first-pass metabolism in any individuals. The significance of the effect of H2-antagonists on blood alcohol concentrations is minor. It only occurs in young, male, nonalcoholic, non-Asian individuals, and alcohol must be given in a small (social) dose, in a high concentration, and after meals. An increase in alcohol levels in predisposed patients during treatment with some H2-antagonists cannot be excluded, although the likelihood is small. Furthermore, carefully designed studies are needed to clarify fully the significance of this interaction.

Inhibition of gastric alcohol dehydrogenase activity by histamine H2-receptor antagonists has no influence on the pharmacokinetics of ethanol after a moderate dose

Ethanol undergoes gastric first pass metabolism by alcohol dehydrogenase (ADH). We have shown that cimetidine and famotidine both cause competitive inhibition of human gastric ADH in vitro. However, in a randomized 4-way cross-over study in 12 healthy subjects a 7-day course of treatment with cimetidine (800 mg day-1), ranitidine (300 mg day-1) or famotidine (40 mg day-1), did not modify the pharmacokinetics of ethanol given as a post-prandial 0.3 g kg-1 dose. We conclude that gastric mucosal concentrations of histamine H2-receptor blockers achieved after oral dosing are probably too low to cause significant inhibition of gastric ADH in vivo.

Famotidine increases plasma alcohol concentration in healthy subjects

The effect of famotidine on plasma alcohol concentration was studied in 24 healthy male subjects who demonstrated high apparent ethanol first-pass metabolism after oral (p.o.) and intravenous (i.v.) ethanol administration (i.e. AUC(po) < or = 40% of AUC(i.v.), where AUC is area under the plasma ethanol concentration-time curve). Six of the original 30 subjects screened (20%) did not demonstrate high first-pass metabolism and were excluded. In a randomized open crossover study, oral ethanol pharmacokinetics were assessed after breakfast in the morning following a 3-day regimen of famotidine, 40 mg/day, and following a no-drug control period. Famotidine increased the area under the plasma ethanol concentration-time curve (AUC0-t) by 29% (7.1 vs 5.5 mg.h/dL, P = 0.006) and maximal plasma concentration (Cmax) by 23% (9.2 vs 7.5 mg/dL, P = 0.013). The changes in ethanol AUC0-t and Cmax may have been associated with changes in gastric emptying, as they were inversely correlated with changes in the time at which maximal plasma concentration was attained. There was considerable intra-individual variation in ethanol AUC and Cmax. As a result, regression to the mean is a potentially confounding problem in ethanol pharmacokinetic studies when subjects are selected on the basis of having low AUC(po), and properly controlled randomized studies of substantial size are required to detect modest drug effects. Small effects on ethanol pharmacokinetics have now been demonstrated with all four of the major H2-receptor antagonists, but these effects are seen only under specific experimental conditions and appear to be unimportant clinically.

Characteristics of Helicobacter pylori alcohol dehydrogenase

BACKGROUND

Helicobacter pylori shows alcohol dehydrogenase activity, which in the presence of ethanol leads to in vitro production of acetaldehyde, a toxic and highly reactive substance. The present study was undertaken to further define H. pylori-related ethanol and acetaldehyde metabolism by characterizing H. pylori alcohol dehydrogenase and by determining whether the organism possesses aldehyde dehydrogenase.

METHODS

Cytosolic alcohol and aldehyde dehydrogenase activities were determined spectrophotometrically. Acetaldehyde produced by cytosol during incubation with ethanol was measured by head space gas chromatography. Isoenzyme pattern was studied using isoelectric focusing.

RESULTS

Significant alcohol dehydrogenase activity was observed at a neutral pH known to occur in gastric mucus. The Km for ethanol oxidation was approximately 100 mmol/L for the two strains tested. Acetaldehyde was formed already from a low ethanol concentration known to prevail in the stomach endogenously. Isoelectric focusing of the enzyme showed activity bands with pI at 7.1-7.3, a pattern different from that of gastric mucosal alcohol dehydrogenase. 4-methylpyrazole inhibited enzyme activity in a competitive manner and suppressed the growth of the organism during culture. Neither Helicobacter strain studied showed aldehyde dehydrogenase activity and can thus not remove acetaldehyde by that pathway.

CONCLUSIONS

Acetaldehyde production by H. pylori from exogenous or endogenous ethanol may be a pathogenetic mechanism behind mucosal injury associated with the organism.

Comparative trial in volunteers to investigate possible ethanol-ranitidine interaction

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of ranitidine on ethanol absorption after ethanol 0.5 g/kg is given in three single doses of 0.167 g/kg to simulate normal social drinking.

DESIGN

A double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover trial was performed in 16 healthy men. Ethanol serum concentrations were measured on day 6 of each of the three treatment periods (placebo, ranitidine 150 mg bid, or ranitidine 300 mg bid).

METHODS

Ethanol 0.167 g/kg was administered followed by a standard meal at 1700. The last tablet of the test medication was given 15 minutes later. Thirty and 60 minutes after the first intake, the same amount of ethanol was given again. Serum ethanol concentrations were measured multiple times during the four-hour period following oral ingestion of the first dose.

RESULTS

Comparison of median serum ethanol concentrations, the areas under the curve, peak and time to peak serum ethanol concentrations showed no significant differences during medication with placebo, ranitidine 150 mg bid, or ranitidine 300 mg bid. Peak ethanol concentrations (median values) were 153, 140, and 155 mg/L, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that treatment with ranitidine, in a dose up to 300 mg bid, has no significant effect on serum ethanol concentrations, even when ethanol was given in divided doses to simulate normal patterns of social drinking. This implies that concomitant dosing with ranitidine will not increase the adverse effects of moderate doses of ethanol on concentration and psychomotor function.

Review article: lack of clinical significance of the interaction between H2-receptor antagonists and ethanol

It has been proposed that an appreciable fraction of ingested ethanol is metabolized in the gastric mucosa and that inhibition of this metabolism by H2-receptor antagonists produces clinically important increases in blood ethanol. This paper reviews available data concerning gastric metabolism of ethanol and the influence of H2-antagonists on ethanol metabolism. It concludes that very little, if any, metabolism of ethanol is likely to occur in the gastric mucosa, and the interaction between H2-antagonists and ethanol is clinically insignificant.