Cimetidine alters pethidine disposition in man

Simultaneously Predicting the Pharmacokinetics of CES1-Metabolized Drugs and Their Metabolites Using Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Model in Cirrhosis Subjects

Hepatic carboxylesterase 1 (CES1) metabolizes numerous prodrugs into active ingredients or direct-acting drugs into inactive metabolites. We aimed to develop a semi-physiologically based pharmacokinetic (semi-PBPK) model to simultaneously predict the pharmacokinetics of CES1 substrates and their active metabolites in liver cirrhosis (LC) patients. Six prodrugs (enalapril, benazepril, cilazapril, temocapril, perindopril and oseltamivir) and three direct-acting drugs (flumazenil, pethidine and remimazolam) were selected. Parameters such as organ blood flows, plasma-binding protein concentrations, functional liver volume, hepatic enzymatic activity, glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and gastrointestinal transit rate were integrated into the simulation. The pharmacokinetic profiles of these drugs and their active metabolites were simulated for 1000 virtual individuals. The developed semi-PBPK model, after validation in healthy individuals, was extrapolated to LC patients. Most of the observations fell within the 5th and 95th percentiles of simulations from 1000 virtual patients. The estimated AUC and Cmax were within 0.5-2-fold of the observed values. The sensitivity analysis showed that the decreased plasma exposure of active metabolites due to the decreased CES1 was partly attenuated by the decreased GFR. Conclusion: The developed PBPK model successfully predicted the pharmacokinetics of CES1 substrates and their metabolites in healthy individuals and LC patients, facilitating tailored dosing of CES1 substrates in LC patients.

The Analysis of Pethidine Pharmacokinetics in Newborn Saliva, Plasma, and Brain Extracellular Fluid After Prenatal Intrauterine Exposure from Pregnant Mothers Receiving Intramuscular Dose Using PBPK Modeling

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Pethidine (meperidine) can decrease labor pain-associated mother's hyperventilation and high cortisol-induced newborn complications. However, prenatal transplacentally acquired pethidine can cause side effects in newborns. High pethidine concentrations in the newborn brain extracellular fluid (bECF) can cause a serotonin crisis. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) in newborns' blood distresses them and increases infection incidence, which can be overcome by using salivary TDM. Physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling can predict drug concentrations in newborn plasma, saliva, and bECF after intrauterine pethidine exposure.

METHODS

A healthy adult PBPK model was constructed, verified, and scaled to newborn and pregnant populations after intravenous and intramuscular pethidine administration. The pregnancy PBPK model was used to predict the newborn dose received transplacentally at birth, which was used as input to the newborn PBPK model to predict newborn plasma, saliva, and bECF pethidine concentrations and set correlation equations between them.

RESULTS

Pethidine can be classified as a Salivary Excretion Classification System class II drug. The developed PBPK model predicted that, after maternal pethidine intramuscular doses of 100 mg and 150 mg, the newborn plasma and bECF concentrations were below the toxicity thresholds. Moreover, it was estimated that newborn saliva concentrations of 4.7 µM, 11.4 µM, and 57.7 µM can be used as salivary threshold concentrations for pethidine analgesic effects, side effects, and the risk for serotonin crisis, respectively, in newborns.

CONCLUSION

It was shown that saliva can be used for pethidine TDM in newborns during the first few days after delivery to mothers receiving pethidine.

Opioid Drug-Drug Interactions: A Review

Opioid analgesics are among the most commonly prescribed medications. Frequently, they are combined with other therapeutic agents and pharmacodynamic or pharmacokinetic interactions may ensue. This review summarizes published case reports and studies of potential opioid drug interactions. A MED-LINE computer literature search (1966-1998) was undertaken to retrieve all pertinent case reports and studies of opioid drug interactions published in the English language. The results of the search indicate that numerous compounds from various therapeutic classes may participate in clinically significant pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions. Pharmacodynamic interactions usually involved additive central nervous system depression. Additionally, propoxyphene and tramadol can potentiate a hyperserotonergic state when coadministered with the SSRIs and MAOIs. Pharmacokinetic interactions typically involved inhibition or induction by specific hepatic cytochrome P-450 isoenzymes. Agents with enzyme inhibiting ability such as erythromycin, cimetidine, and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors have been shown to potentiate the effects of certain opioid analgesics while codeine, which requires metabolic conversion via CYP 2D6 for pharmacological effectiveness, has reduced analgesic efficacy in the presence of inhibitors. The enzyme inducers rifampin and several anticonvulsants have been involved in the emergence of methadone withdrawal when added to existing methadone treatment. Additionally, enzyme inducers can increase the formation of the toxic metabolite of meperidine. Genetic polymorphism also potentially impacts the effectiveness of agents such as codeine since reduced active metabolite formation and analgesic efficacy has been demonstrated in individuals who lack CYP 2D6 activity.

Liver enzyme induction and inhibition: implications for anaesthesia

Recent breakthroughs in molecular biology have enabled a reclassification of drug metabolising enzymes based on their amino acid sequence. This has led to a better understanding of drug metabolism and drug interactions. The majority of these drug metabolising enzymes may be either induced or inhibited by drugs or by extraneous substances including foodstuffs, cigarette smoke and environmental pollutants. Virtually all drugs used in anaesthesia are metabolised by either hepatic phase 1 or phase II enzymes. This review considers the classification of drug metabolising enzymes, explains the mechanisms of enzyme induction and inhibition, and also considers how the action of drugs commonly used by anaesthetists, including opioids and neuromuscular blocking drugs, may be altered by this mechanism.

Morphine, pethidine and buprenorphine disposition in the cat

Pharmacokinetics of morphine, buprenorphine and pethidine were determined in 10 cats. Six cats received morphine (0.2 mg/kg) intravenously and four intramuscularly. Five received buprenorphine (0.01 mg/kg) intravenously and six intramuscularly. Six received pethidine (5 mg/kg) intramuscularly. Jugular venous blood samples were collected at time points to 24 h, and plasma morphine concentrations were measured by high performance liquid chromatograpy (HPLC), buprenorphine by radioimmunoassay (RIA) and pethidine by gas chromatography. Our data for morphine show elimination half-life (t1/2el) 76.3 min intravenous (i.v.) and 93.6 min intramuscular (i.m.); mean residence time (MRT) 105.0 and 120.5 min; clearance (Clp) 24.1 and 13.9 mL/kg/min; and volume of distribution (V(dss)) 2.6 and 1.7 L/kg, respectively. Comparable data for buprenorphine are t1/2el 416.8 and 380.2 min; MRT 417.6 and 409.8 min; Clp 16.7 and 23.7 mL/kg/min; and V(dss) 7.1 and 8.9 L/kg. For i.m. pethidine, t1/2el 216.4 min; MRT 307.5 min; Clp 20.8 mL/kg/min and V(dss) 5.2 L/kg. For i.m. dosing, the tmax for morphine, buprenorphine and pethidine were 15, 3 and 10 min, respectively. The pharmacokinetics of the three opioids in cats are broadly comparable with those of the dog, although there is a suggestion that the cat may clear morphine more slowly.

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.

Standards of laboratory practice: analgesic drug monitoring

Analgesics are the most commonly consumed over-the-counter preparations in the United States. They are used in the treatment of various pain syndromes and other medical conditions. Although analgesics are generally perceived to be safe agents, serious toxicity may occur in the setting of acute overdose, chronic abuse, or overuse. The indications for therapeutic drug monitoring in patients using these medications appropriately is as yet not well defined. The emphasis of this discussion, therefore, is on recommendations for monitoring in situations where toxicity is suspected. Preanalytical, analytical, and practice issues including drug interactions, frequency of monitoring, pertinent ancillary tests, reporting, and special patient groups at risk for toxicity are reviewed. Recent information from a major manufacturer of evacuated tubes arguing against the use of gel tubes for blood collection for drug monitoring is included. Colorimetric/enzymatic/immunoassays for the routine/stat monitoring of acetaminophen and salicylate and diflunisal cross-reactivity with most of the currently used salicylate assays are presented. Achiral and chiral chromatographic assays and newly introduced columns such as restricted access media and/or automated chromatographic systems are reviewed for the analysis of ibuprofen, naproxen, and the recently introduced tramadol. Finally, concepts regarding future directions including drug chirality and chiral analysis are presented.

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of sedatives and analgesics in the treatment of agitated critically ill patients

The pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of sedatives and analgesics are significantly altered in the critically ill. These changes may account for the large differences in drug dosage requirements compared with other patient populations. Drugs that in other settings may be considered short-acting often have significantly altered onset and duration of action in critically ill patients, necessitating a change in dosage. Of the benzodiazepines, lorazepam is the drug whose parameters are the least likely to be altered in critical illness. The presence of active metabolites with other benzodiazepines complicates their use during periods of prolonged use. Similarly, the presence of active metabolites of morphine and pethidine (meperidine) warrants caution in patients with renal insufficiency. The fewer cardiovascular effects seen with high-potency opioids, such as fentanyl and sufentanil, increase their usefulness in haemodynamically compromised patients. The pharmacodynamics of propofol are not significantly altered in the critically ill. Ketamine should be used with a benzodiazepine to prevent the emergence of psychomimetic reactions. Lower sedative doses of benzodiazepines and anaesthetics may not provide reliable amnesia. Barbiturates and propofol probably do not induce hyperalgesia and lack intrinsic analgesic activity. The antipsychotic agent haloperidol has a calming effect on patients and administration to the point of sedation is generally not necessary. Combinations of sedatives and analgesics are synergistic in producing sedation. The costs of sedation and analgesia are very variable and closely linked to the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the drug. Monitoring of sedation and analgesia is difficult in uncooperative patients in the intensive care unit. In the future, specific monitoring tools may assist clinicians in the regulation of infusions of sedative and analgesic agents.

Drug interactions of clinical significance with opioid analgesics

Opioid analgesics and other drugs interact through multiple mechanisms, resulting in pharmacological effects that depend upon the pharmacodynamic action studied, the interacting agents and the route of administration. Many interactions result from induction or inhibition of the hepatic cytochrome P450 mono-oxygenase system. The elimination of opioids is largely dependent on hepatic metabolism, and drug interactions involving this mechanism can therefore be clinically significant. Antibiotics are often used concomitantly with opioids in patients undergoing medical or surgical procedures; the best documented metabolic interactions are with erythromycin and rifampicin (rifampin). Erythromycin increases and rifampicin decreases the effects of opioids. Cimetidine may increase the effects of opioids by increasing their duration of action; there have been no documented cases of interactions with ranitidine. Carbamazepine, phenytoin and the barbiturates can enhance the metabolism of opioids that rely on hepatic metabolism. Other pharmacokinetic interactions include those with benzodiazepines, tricyclic antidepressants, phenothiazines and metoclopramide. Interactions involving pharmacodynamic mechanisms are more common than pharmacokinetic ones. Such interactions are manifested clinically as as a summation (additive or synergistic) of similar or opposing pharmacological effects on the same body system. Idiosyncratic interactions also occur, the mechanisms of which have not been proven to be solely modulated by either pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic means. The knowledge of particular opioid-drug interactions, and the causative pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic, and idiosyncratic mechanisms, allows for the safer administration of opioid analgesics.

Pharmacokinetic drug interactions in anaesthetic practice

Patients receive on average 10 different drugs while in hospital; when fewer than 6 are administered the probability of an adverse drug interaction is about 5%, but when more than 15 are given the probability increases to over 40%. Patients presenting for anaesthesia and surgery are likely to receive multiple preoperative drug therapy and also many perioperative medications as part of their anaesthetic regimen. Thus, there is a considerable potential for interactions to occur in anaesthetic practice. Pharmacokinetic interactions occur when the administration of 1 drug alters the disposition of another, and hence alters the concentration of drug at the receptor site, leading to altered drug response. These changes in drug concentration at the receptor site may be produced by alteration of (a) drug absorption and uptake into the body, (b) drug distribution, (c) drug metabolism and (d) drug elimination or excretion by nonmetabolic routes. Interactions affecting the absorption of orally administered medications are often due to the indirect effect of 1 drug on gastric motility and emptying, which leads to reduced, delayed or variable systemic drug availability. Gastric emptying time before elective surgery is normal, but premedication with morphine, pethidine (meperidine) and anticholinergics all delay gastric emptying and hence drug absorption. Inhalational anaesthesia of short duration does not appear to affect drug absorption, although halothane anaesthetic used for longer periods produces a slight delay in gastric emptying. Volatile anaesthetics have been shown to delay the intramuscular absorption of ketamine. Anaesthetic agents may affect drug distribution, and peak concentrations of propranolol, for example, are 4 times higher during halothane anaesthesia in dogs, accompanied by a marked decrease in volume of distribution. This effect has been noted for other drugs, including thiopental and verapamil. Volatile anaesthetics also affect plasma protein binding, leading to displacement interactions in some cases. Volatile anaesthetics affect the metabolism of concomitantly administered drug (a) by altering the rate of delivery to the organ of clearance (e.g. decreasing hepatic blood flow) and (b) by altering the activity of drug metabolising enzymes. It is now well recognised that all the volatile anaesthetics currently in use inhibit the metabolism of a large variety of drugs, e.g. propranolol, lidocaine (lignocaine), fentanyl and pethidine. Other examples of interactions of clinical importance to anaesthesiologists include those between cimetidine and the local anaesthetics and benzodiazepines; inhibition of plasma cholinesterase by drugs such as ecothiopate; interactions between monoamine oxidase inhibitors and sympathomimetics or pethidine and between monoamine oxidase inhibitors and sympathomimetics or pethidine and between isoniazid and enflurane.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Clinical pharmacokinetics of drugs used in the treatment of gastrointestinal diseases (Part II)

Part I of this article, which appeared in the previous issue of the Journal, covered the following agents: histamine H2-receptor antagonists (cimetidine, ranitidine, famotidine, nizatidine); muscarinic-M1-receptor antagonists (pirenzepine); proton pump inhibitors (omeprazole); site-protective agents (colloidal bismuth subcitrate, sucralfate); antacids and prostaglandin analogues; antiemetics and prokinetics (metoclopramide, domperidone, cisapride); and antispasmodics. In Part II, we consider the anti-inflammatory salicylates, nonspecific antidiarrhoeal agents, laxatives and cathartics.

Pharmacokinetic interactions of cimetidine 1987

The number of studies on drug interactions with cimetidine has increased at a rapid rate over the past 5 years, with many of the interactions being solely pharmacokinetic in origin. Very few studies have investigated the clinical relevance of such pharmacokinetic interactions by measuring pharmacodynamic responses or clinical endpoints. Apart from pharmacokinetic studies, invariably conducted in young, healthy subjects, there have been a large number of in vitro and in vivo animal studies, case reports, clinical observations and general reviews on the subject, which is tending to develop an industry of its own accord. Nevertheless, where specific mechanisms have been considered, these have undoubtedly increased our knowledge on the way in which humans eliminate xenobiotics. There is now sufficient information to predict the likelihood of a pharmacokinetic drug-drug interaction with cimetidine and to make specific clinical recommendations. Pharmacokinetic drug interactions with cimetidine occur at the sites of gastrointestinal absorption and elimination including metabolism and excretion. Cimetidine has been found to reduce the plasma concentrations of ketoconazole, indomethacin and chlorpromazine by reducing their absorption. In the case of ketoconazole the interaction was clinically important. Cimetidine does not inhibit conjugation mechanisms including glucuronidation, sulphation and acetylation, or deacetylation or ethanol dehydrogenation. It binds to the haem portion of cytochrome P-450 and is thus an inhibitor of phase I drug metabolism (i.e. hydroxylation, dealkylation). Although generally recognised as a nonspecific inhibitor of this type of metabolism, cimetidine does demonstrate some degree of specificity. To date, theophylline 8-oxidation, tolbutamide hydroxylation, ibuprofen hydroxylation, misonidazole demethylation, carbamazepine epoxidation, mexiletine oxidation and steroid hydroxylation have not been shown to be inhibited by cimetidine in humans but the metabolism of at least 30 other drugs is affected. Recent evidence indicates negligible effects of cimetidine on liver blood flow. Cimetidine reduces the renal clearance of drugs which are organic cations, by competing for active tubular secretion in the proximal tubule of the kidney, reducing the renal clearances of procainamide, ranitidine, triamterene, metformin, flecainide and the active metabolite N-acetylprocainamide. This previously unrecognised form of drug interaction with cimetidine may be clinically important for both parent drug, and metabolites which may be active.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Adverse reactions and interactions with H2-receptor antagonists

Histamine H2-receptor antagonists have been used in the treatment of gastrointestinal diseases for more than a decade and during this period have become one of the most commonly prescribed groups of drugs in the world. The deserved popularity of the H2-receptor antagonists reflects, in part, their therapeutic efficacy, which has revolutionised the treatment of peptic ulcer disease. An equally, or more, important reason for the widespread use of H2-receptor antagonists is their remarkably low toxicity. We have attempted, in this review, to present a detailed account of the minor and more serious adverse reactions, while emphasising the low incidence of the former and the rarity of the latter. The toxicology of the H2-receptor antagonists is discussed under two main headings: adverse effects; and drug interactions. The latter category is potentially the more significant, since the frequent use of therapy with multiple drugs may give rise to drug interactions, some of which are serious and may even be lethal. These drug interactions occur especially in the gastrointestinal tract, the liver and the kidneys. Thus, the absorption of other drugs may be altered because the H2-receptor antagonists inhibit gastric secretion--an effect illustrated by ketoconazole, the absorption of which is reduced when given in combination with cimetidine. Very important drug interactions are caused by inhibition of the hepatic microsomal enzyme cytochrome P450 by some of the H2-receptor antagonists. This effect appears to be related to the chemical structure of the individual H2-receptor antagonists and is not attributable to histamine H2-receptor blockade. For example, cimetidine is a powerful inhibitor of cytochrome P450, while the interaction of ranitidine with this system is weaker. Consequently, cimetidine reduces the metabolism of many drugs which are normally degraded by phase I reactions, leading to potentially toxic plasma concentrations of therapeutic agents such as some oral anticoagulants, beta-blockers, anticonvulsants, benzodiazepines and xanthines. Some of the H2-receptor antagonists are actively secreted by the renal tubules and may thus compete with other drugs for cationic tubular transport mechanisms, resulting in reduced urinary excretion and hence potentially toxic plasma concentrations. This type of drug interaction has been reported after administration of both cimetidine and ranitidine with procainamide or quinidine.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Ranitidine does not alter pethidine disposition in man

The effect of concurrent ranitidine administration on the disposition of pethidine was investigated in eight healthy male volunteers (19-33 years). The subjects received 70 mg i.v. pethidine HCl doses before and during ranitidine treatment (150 mg p.o. twice daily). Ranitidine therapy was not associated with significant alterations in pethidine elimination rate constant, volume of distribution at steady state, total body clearance, and 24 h urinary excretion. No alteration in pethidine oxidation to norpethidine was noted, as suggested by nonsignificant changes in lag time to appearance of quantifiable norpethidine in serum, time to peak concentration, peak concentration, area under the curve from time 0.24 h, and 24 h urinary excretion. It would appear that, unlike cimetidine, ranitidine does not interact pharmacokinetically with pethidine. Further studies are necessary to evaluate the potential clinical advantages of ranitidine vs cimetidine therapy in patients also receiving pethidine.