Pharmacokinetics of mirtazapine and lithium in healthy male subjects

Drug Interactions with Lithium: An Update

Lithium has been used for the management of psychiatric illnesses for over 50 years and it continues to be regarded as a first-line agent for the treatment and prevention of bipolar disorder. Lithium possesses a narrow therapeutic index and comparatively minor alterations in plasma concentrations can have significant clinical sequelae. Several drug classes have been implicated in the development of lithium toxicity over the years, including diuretics and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory compounds, but much of the anecdotal and experimental evidence supporting these interactions is dated, and many newer medications and medication classes have been introduced during the intervening years. This review is intended to provide an update on the accumulated evidence documenting potential interactions with lithium, with a focus on pharmacokinetic insights gained within the last two decades. The clinical relevance and ramifications of these interactions are discussed.

Subchronic lithium treatment increases the anxiolytic-like effect of mirtazapine on the expression of contextual conditioned fear

Lithium not only has a mood-stabilizing effect but also the augmentation effect of an antidepressant, the mechanism of which remains unclear. Although lithium may augment the effect of mirtazapine, this augmentation has not been confirmed. Using a contextual fear conditioning test in rats, an animal model of anxiety or fear, we examined the effect of subchronic lithium carbonate (in diet) in combination with systemic mirtazapine on the expression of contextual conditioned fear. Mirtazapine (10mg/kg) reduced freezing one day after fear conditioning dose-dependently, whereas the anxiolytic-like effect of mirtazapine (10mg/kg) diminished seven days after fear conditioning. When the interval between fear conditioning and testing was seven days, only the combination of subchronic 0.2% Li2CO3 but not 0.05% Li2CO3 with acute mirtazapine (10mg/kg) reduced freezing significantly. These results indicate that subchronic 0.2% Li2CO3 treatment enhanced the anxiolytic-like effect of systemic mirtazapine. This augmentation therapy might be useful for the treatment of anxiety disorders.

Inhibitory metabolic drug interactions with newer psychotropic drugs: inclusion in package inserts and influences of concurrence in drug interaction screening software

BACKGROUND

Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulations mandate that package inserts (PIs) include observed or predicted clinically significant drug-drug interactions (DDIs), as well as the results of pharmacokinetic studies that establish the absence of effect.

OBJECTIVE

To quantify how frequently observed metabolic inhibition DDIs affecting US-marketed psychotropics are present in FDA-approved PIs and what influence the source of DDI information has on agreement between 3 DDI screening programs.

METHODS

The scientific literature and PIs were reviewed to determine all drug pairs for which there was rigorous evidence of a metabolic inhibition interaction or noninteraction. The DDIs were tabulated noting the source of evidence and the strength of agreement over chance. Descriptive statistics were used to examine the influence of source of DDI information on agreement among 3 DDI screening tools. Logistic regression was used to assess the influence of drug class, indication, generic status, regulatory approval date, and magnitude of effect on agreement between the literature and PI as well as agreement among the DDI screening tools.

RESULTS

Thirty percent (13/44) of the metabolic inhibition DDIs affecting newer psychotropics were not mentioned in PIs. Drug class, indication, regulatory approval date, generic status, or magnitude of effect did not appear to be associated with more complete DDI information in PIs. DDIs found exclusively in PIs were 3.25 times more likely to be agreed upon by all 3 DDI screening tools than were those found exclusively in the literature. Generic status was inversely associated with agreement among the DDI screening tools (odds ratio 0.11; 95% CI 0.01 to 0.89).

CONCLUSIONS

The presence in PIs of DDI information for newer psychotropics appears to have a strong influence on agreement among DDI screening tools. Users of DDI screening software should consult more than 1 source when considering interactions involving generic psychotropics.

Age-related changes in antidepressant pharmacokinetics and potential drug-drug interactions: a comparison of evidence-based literature and package insert information

BACKGROUND

Antidepressants are among the most commonly prescribed psychotropic agents for older patients. Little is known about the best source of pharmacotherapy information to consult about key factors necessary to safely prescribe these medications to older patients.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to synthesize and contrast information in the package insert (PI) with information found in the scientific literature about age-related changes of antidepressants in systemic clearance and potential pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions (DDIs).

METHODS

A comprehensive search of two databases (MEDLINE and EMBASE from January 1, 1975 to September 30, 2011) with the use of a combination of search terms (antidepressants, pharmacokinetics, and drug interactions) was conducted to identify relevant English language articles. This information was independently reviewed by two researchers and synthesized into tables. These same two researchers examined the most up-to-date PIs for the 26 agents available at the time of the study to abstract quantitative information about age-related decline in systemic clearance and potential DDIs. The agreement between the two information sources was tested with κ statistics.

RESULTS

The literature reported age-related clearance changes for 13 antidepressants, whereas the PIs only had evidence about 4 antidepressants (κ < 0.4). Similarly, the literature identified 45 medications that could potentially interact with a specific antidepressant, whereas the PIs only provided evidence about 12 potential medication-antidepressant DDIs (κ < 0.4).

CONCLUSION

The evidence-based literature compared with PIs is the most complete pharmacotherapy information source about both age-related clearance changes and pharmacokinetic DDIs with antidepressants. Future rigorously designed observational studies are needed to examine the combined risk of antidepressants with age-related decline in clearance and potential DDIs on important health outcomes such as falls and fractures in older patients.

Lithium but not carbamazepine augments antidepressant efficacy of mirtazapine in unipolar depression: an open-label study

BACKGROUND

The purpose of the present open-label study was to investigate the antidepressant efficacy of lithium and carbamazepine as augmentation strategies in unipolar depressed inpatients.

METHOD

Forty-six patients suffering from unipolar depression (major depressive episode according to DSM-IV criteria) were pre-treated with mirtazapine for 2 weeks initially (week -2 to week 0). Thereafter, the patients received either continuation of mirtazapine monotherapy (n = 23), combination treatment with mirtazapine and lithium (n = 13), or combination therapy with mirtazapine and carbamazepine (n = 10) for further 3 weeks (week 0 to week 3). Severity of depression was estimated weekly using the 21-item version of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (21-HAMD). Response was defined by a reduction of at least 50% in the 21-HAMD sum score after 3 weeks of pharmacotherapy (week 0-3).

RESULTS

Additional administration of lithium, but not adjunctive carbamazepine significantly augmented the antidepressant efficacy of mirtazapine in the unipolar depressed patients. Moreover, carbamazepine but not lithium significantly lowered the serum concentrations of mirtazapine.

CONCLUSION

Whereas the clinical importance of anticonvulsants in the treatment of bipolar disorder is not in doubt, the therapeutic efficacy of antiepileptic drugs such as carbamazepine is obviously limited in the pharmacotherapy of unipolar depression.

Mirtazapine: a review of its use in major depression and other psychiatric disorders

Mirtazapine (Remeron, Zispin) is a noradrenergic and specific serotonergic antidepressant (NaSSA) that is approved in many counties for use in the treatment of major depression. Monotherapy with mirtazapine 15-45 mg/day leads to rapid and sustained improvements in depressive symptoms in patients with major depression, including the elderly. It is as effective as other antidepressants and may have a more rapid onset of action than selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). Furthermore, it may also have a higher sustained remission rate than amitriptyline. Preliminary data suggest that mirtazapine may also be effective in the treatment of anxiety disorders (including post-traumatic stress disorder, panic disorder and social anxiety disorder), obsessive-compulsive disorder, undifferentiated somatoform disorder and, as add-on therapy, in schizophrenia, although large, well designed trials are needed to confirm these findings. Mirtazapine is generally well tolerated in patients with depression. In conclusion, mirtazapine is an effective antidepressant for the treatment of major depression and also has the potential to be of use in other psychiatric indications.

Lithium: updated human knowledge using an evidence-based approach. Part II: Clinical pharmacology and therapeutic monitoring

After a single dose, lithium, usually given as carbonate, reaches a peak plasma concentration at 1.0-2.0 hours for standard-release dosage forms, and 4-5 hours for sustained-release forms. Its bioavailability is 80-100%, its total clearance 10-40 mL/min and its elimination half-life is 18-36 hours. Use of the sustained-release formulation results in 30-50% reductions in peak plasma concentrations without major changes in the area under the plasma concentration curve. Lithium distribution to the brain, evaluated using 7Li magnetic resonance spectroscopy, showed brain concentrations to be approximately half those in serum, occasionally increasing to 75-80%. Brain concentrations were weakly correlated with serum concentrations. Lithium is almost exclusively excreted via the kidney as a free ion and lithium clearance is considered to decrease with aging. No gender- or race-related differences in kinetics have been demonstrated. Renal insufficiency is associated with a considerable reduction in renal clearance of lithium and is considered a contraindication to its use, especially if a sodium-poor diet is required. During the last months of pregnancy, lithium clearance increases by 30-50% as a result of an increase in glomerular filtration rate. Lithium also passes freely from maternal plasma into breast milk. Numerous kinetic interactions have been described for lithium, usually involving a decrease in the drug's clearance and therefore increasing its potential toxicity. Clinical pharmacology studies performed in healthy volunteers have investigated a possible effect of lithium on cognitive functions. Most of these studies reported a slight, negative effect on vigilance, alertness, learning and short-term memory after long-term administration only. Because of the narrow therapeutic range of lithium, therapeutic monitoring is the basis for optimal use and administration of this drug. Lithium dosages should be adjusted on the basis of the serum concentration drawn (optimally) 12 hours after the last dose. In patients receiving once-daily administration, the serum concentration at 24 hours should serve as the control value. The efficacy of lithium is clearly dose-dependent and reliably correlates with serum concentrations. It is now generally accepted that concentrations should be maintained between 0.6 and 0.8 mmol/L, although some authors still favour 0.8-1.2 mmol/L. With sustained-release preparations, and because of the later peak of serum lithium concentration, it is advised to keep serum concentrations within the upper range (0.8-1 mmol/L), rather than 0.6-0.8 mmol/L for standard formulations. It is controversial whether a reduced concentration is required in elderly people. The usual maintenance daily dose is 25-35 mmol (lithium carbonate 925-1300 mg) for patients aged <40 years; 20-25 mmol (740-925 mg) for those aged 40-60 years; and 15-20 mmol (550-740 mg) for patients aged >60 years. The initial recommended dose is usually 12-24 mmol (450-900 mg) per day, depending on age and bodyweight. The classical administration schedule is two or three times daily, although there is no strong evidence in favour of a three-times-daily schedule, and compliance with the midday dose is questionable. With a modern sustained-release preparation, the twice-daily schedule is well established, although one single evening dose is being recommended by a number of expert panels.

Effects of combination treatment with mood stabilizers and mirtazapine on plasma concentrations of neuroactive steroids in depressed patients

Antidepressants such as SSRIs or mirtazapine have been demonstrated to increase the concentrations of 3alpha-reduced neuroactive steroids throughout several weeks of treatment. However, no data are available on the impact of mood stabilizers such as lithium or carbamazepine on neuroactive steroid levels in depressed patients. Study 1 was performed in 26 drug-free depressed inpatients who were treated with either mirtazapine monotherapy (n=13) or combination therapy with mirtazapine and addition of lithium (n=13). Twenty drug-free depressed inpatients were included in study 2, receiving either mirtazapine monotherapy (n=10) or combination treatment with mirtazapine and carbamazepine (n=10). Plasma samples were taken weekly at 0800 h in the morning and quantified for neuroactive steroids by means of combined gas chromatography/mass spectrometry analysis. In study 1, the mirtazapine-induced rises in 3alpha,5alpha-tetrahydroprogesterone and 3alpha,5beta-tetrahydroprogesterone were abolished by additional lithium administration, as compared to mirtazapine monotherapy. In study 2, the mirtazapine-evoked increase in 3alpha,5alpha-tetrahydroprogesterone was reversed after additional administration of carbamazepine, presumably due to lowered mirtazapine levels after induction of cytochrome P450 enzymes. Apparently, the mood stabilizers lithium and carbamazepine do not enhance but rather reverse the increase in plasma concentrations of 3alpha-reduced neuroactive steroids in depressed patients pretreated with antidepressants such as mirtazapine.

Mirtazapine in combination with amitriptyline: a drug-drug interaction study in healthy subjects

OBJECTIVE

To assess the steady-state pharmacokinetics of mirtazapine (30 mg/day orally) and amitriptyline (75 mg/day orally) during combined administration compared with that of either drug administered alone. To evaluate the tolerability and effects on psychometric tests of acute and subchronic administration of both drugs combined and alone.

METHODS

In a single-blind, three-way cross-over study, 24 (12 male and 12 female) healthy subjects were randomly assigned to six different sequences of three 9-day treatments, i.e. racemic mirtazapine (30 mg/day), amitriptyline (75 mg/day) or the combination of these drugs. To control for acute pharmacodynamic assessments, during the first treatment period, a placebo group (n = 8; 4 females and 4 males) was added. Serial blood samples were drawn for plasma level measurements that were subsequently subjected to pharmacokinetic analysis. Psychometric tests assessed attentional performance, and a computer-assisted telephone questionnaire assessed self-ratings of drowsiness/alertness and sleep quality.

RESULTS

Amitriptyline increased the C(max) of mirtazapine (+ 36%, p < 0.05) in male subjects only. Mirtazapine altered the C(max) of amitriptyline in both male (+ 23%, p < 0.05) and female (- 23%, p < 0.05) subjects. No changes were observed for other pharmacokinetic parameters. Metabolite parameters were not affected. Changes in parent compound levels mainly resulted from effects on absorption. The psychometric test results did not reveal significant changes between combined and single drug treatments. The telephone registrations of VAMRS and LSEQ did not show clinically relevant differences between the active treatments.

CONCLUSION

Combined administration of mirtazapine (30 mg/day) and amitriptyline (75 mg/day) alters the pharmacokinetics of either compound to a minor extent. Adding one drug to the other and substituting one drug by the other had no major effects on tolerability. Nevertheless, caution is warranted when combining amitriptyline and mirtazapine.

Mirtazapine and paroxetine: a drug-drug interaction study in healthy subjects

Paroxetine inhibits cytochrome P(450) 2D6, which is involved in the metabolism of mirtazapine. The possible drug-drug interaction between two pharmacologically distinct antidepressants, mirtazapine and paroxetine, has been investigated in a randomized, three-way crossover study in 24 healthy male and female subjects. After a titration phase of 3 days, each subject received single daily doses of 30 mg mirtazapine, 40 mg paroxetine or the combination for 6 days. Assessments included serial blood sampling for pharmacokinetics at steady state, cognitive testing using the test battery of CDR Ltd, a visual analogue mood rating scale (Bond and Lader) and the Leeds Sleep Evaluation Questionnaire. Paroxetine inhibits the metabolism of mirtazapine, as shown by increases of approximately 17% and 25% of the 24 h AUC's of mirtazapine and its demethyl metabolite, respectively. Mirtazapine did not alter the pharmacokinetics of paroxetine. The combined administration of mirtazapine and paroxetine probably does not alter cognitive functioning or result in major changes on the visual analogue mood rating scale and Sleep Evaluation Questionnaire, compared with the administration of either drug alone. The incidence of adverse events was lower during combined administration of mirtazapine and paroxetine than during administration of either drug alone. Fatigue, dizziness, headache, nausea, anxiety and somnolence were the most common adverse events during combined administration. These data suggest that the combination of mirtazapine and paroxetine is unlikely to lead to clinically relevant drug-drug interactions and can be used without dose adjustment of either drug. The combination may even be better tolerated than either drug alone. Copyright 2001 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Drug-drug interaction studies with mirtazapine and carbamazepine in healthy male subjects

In two studies, the effects of the potentially interacting drugs mirtazapine and carbamazepine on their pharmacokinetics have been investigated. Subjects were treated with carbamazepine combined with placebo for 21 days and subsequently with carbamazepine combined with mirtazapine for another 7 days (Study A) or with mirtazapine combined with placebo for 7 days and subsequently mirtazapine combined with carbamazepine for another 21 days (Study B). Pharmacokinetic results indicate that carbamazepine decreased significantly AUC and Cmax values for mirtazapine and increased values for demethyl-mirtazapine Cmax. Mirtazapine had no effect on carbamazepine pharmacokinetic parameters, but did lower carbamazepine-10,11-epoxide levels. Mirtazapine did not affect the single dose kinetics or the enzyme inducing properties of carbamazepine. VAMRS alertness scores reflected the somnolence-inducing effects of carbamazepine and mirtazapine and psychometric test results revealed impairment of specific tasks. The combination was safe and routine laboratory testing did not reveal clinically relevant abnormalities. The dose of mirtazapine in patients on carbamazepine may have to be increased for optimal antidepressant efficacy.

A review of the pharmacological and clinical profile of mirtazapine

The novel antidepressant mirtazapine has a dual mode of action. It is a noradrenergic and specific serotonergic antidepressant (NaSSA) that acts by antagonizing the adrenergic alpha2-autoreceptors and alpha2-heteroreceptors as well as by blocking 5-HT2 and 5-HT3 receptors. It enhances, therefore, the release of norepinephrine and 5-HT1A-mediated serotonergic transmission. This dual mode of action may conceivably be responsible for mirtazapine's rapid onset of action. Mirtazapine is extensively metabolized in the liver. The cytochrome (CYP) P450 isoenzymes CYP1A2, CYP2D6, and CYP3A4 are mainly responsible for its metabolism. Using once daily dosing, steady-state concentrations are reached after 4 days in adults and 6 days in the elderly. In vitro studies suggest that mirtazapine is unlikely to cause clinically significant drug-drug interactions. Dry mouth, sedation, and increases in appetite and body weight are the most common adverse effects. In contrast to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), mirtazapine has no sexual side effects. The antidepressant efficacy of mirtazapine was established in several placebo-controlled trials. In major depression, its efficacy is comparable to that of amitriptyline, clomipramine, doxepin, fluoxetine, paroxetine, citalopram, or venlafaxine. Mirtazapine also appears to be useful in patients suffering from depression comorbid with anxiety symptoms and sleep disturbance. It seems to be safe and effective during long-term use.