Paroxetine for the treatment of depression: a critical update

Pharmacokinetics of immediate and sustained-release formulations of paroxetine: Population pharmacokinetic approach to guide paroxetine personalized therapy in chinese psychotic patients

Paroxetine is one of the most potent selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) approved for treating depression, panic disorder, and obsessive-compulsive disorder. There is evidence linking genetic polymorphisms and nonlinear metabolism to the Paroxetine’s pharmacokinetic (PK) variability. The purpose of the present study was to develop a population PK (PPK) model of paroxetine in Chinese patients, which was used to define the paroxetine’s PK parameters and quantify the effect of clinical and baseline demographic factors on these PK characteristics. The study included 184 inpatients with psychosis (103 females and 81 males), with a total of 372 serum concentrations of paroxetine for PPK analyses. The total daily dosage ranged from 20 to 75 mg. One compartment model could fit the PKs characterize of paroxetine. Covariate analysis revealed that dose, formulation, and sex had a significant effect on the PK parameters of paroxetine; however, there was no evident genetic influence of CYP2D6 enzymes on paroxetine concentrations in Chinese patients. The study determined that the population’s apparent distribution volume (V/F) and apparent clearance (CL/F), respectively, were 8850 and 21.2 L/h. The CL/F decreased 1-2-fold for each 10 mg dose increase, whereas the different formulations caused a decrease in V/F of 66.6%. Sex was found to affect bioavailability (F), which decreased F by 47.5%. Females had higher F values than males. This PPK model described data from patients with psychosis who received paroxetine immediate-release tablets (IR-T) and/or sustained-release tablets (SR-T). Paroxetine trough concentrations and relative bioavailability were different between formulations and sex. The altered serum concentrations of paroxetine resulting from individual variants and additive effects need to be considered, to optimize the dosage regimen for individual patients.

Time-course of serotonin transporter occupancy by single dose of three SSRIs in human brain: A positron emission tomography study with [(11)C]DASB

Sixteen healthy volunteers were enrolled and divided into four groups according to the single administration of 10mg or 20mg escitalopram, 50mg sertraline, or 20mg paroxetine. Four positron emission tomography scans with [(11)C]DASB were performed on each subject, the first prior to taking the drug, followed by the others at 4, 24, and 48h after. Serotonin transporter occupancies of the drugs at each time point were calculated. All drugs showed maximum occupancy at 4h after dosing and then decreasing occupancies with time. Escitalopram and sertraline showed high occupancies of 69.1-77.9% at 4h, remaining at 52.8-57.8% after 48h. On the other hand, paroxetine showed relatively low occupancy of 44.6%, then decreasing to 10.3% at 48h. Escitalopram (both 10mg and 20mg) and sertraline (50mg) showed high and sustained occupancy. Paroxetine (20mg) showed relatively low and rapidly decreasing occupancy, possibly due to the low plasma concentration by single dosing schedule. Applying the reported concentration of multiple dosing, 20mg paroxetine will induce over 80% occupancy. The present study suggested that these drugs and doses would be sufficient for the treatment of depression.

Influence of the cytochrome P450 2D6 *10/*10 genotype on the pharmacokinetics of paroxetine in Japanese patients with major depressive disorder: a population pharmacokinetic analysis

OBJECTIVE

Although the reduced function of the cytochrome P450 2D6*10 (CYP2D6*10) allele is common among Asian populations, existing evidence does not support paroxetine therapy adjustments for patients who have the CYP2D6*10 allele. In this study, we attempted to evaluate the degree of the impact of different CYP2D6 genotypes on the pharmacokinetic (PK) variability of paroxetine in a Japanese population using a population PK approach.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 179 Japanese patients with major depressive disorder who were being treated with paroxetine. CYP2D6*1, *2, *5, *10, and *41 polymorphisms were observed. A total of 306 steady-state concentrations for paroxetine were collected from the patients. A nonlinear mixed-effects model identified the apparent Michaelis-Menten constant (Km) and the maximum velocity (Vmax) of paroxetine; the covariates included CYP2D6 genotypes, patient age, body weight, sex, and daily paroxetine dose.

RESULTS

The allele frequencies of CYP2D6*1, *2, *5, *10, and *41 were 39.4, 14.5, 4.5, 41.1, and 0.6%, respectively. There was no poor metabolizer who had two nonfunctional CYP2D6*5 alleles. A one-compartment model showed that the apparent Km value was decreased by 20.6% in patients with the CYP2D6*10/*10 genotype in comparison with the other CYP2D6 genotypes. Female sex also influenced the apparent Km values. No PK parameters were affected by the presence of one CYP2D6*5 allele.

CONCLUSION

Unexpectedly, elimination was accelerated in individuals with the CYP2D6*10/*10 genotype. Our results show that the presence of one CYP2D6*5 allele or that of any CYP2D6*10 allele may have no major effect on paroxetine PKs in the steady state.

Paroxetine-mediated GRK2 inhibition reverses cardiac dysfunction and remodeling after myocardial infarction

Heart failure (HF) is a disease of epidemic proportion and is associated with exceedingly high health care costs. G protein (heterotrimeric guanine nucleotide-binding protein)-coupled receptor (GPCR) kinase 2 (GRK2), which is up-regulated in the failing human heart, appears to play a critical role in HF progression in part because enhanced GRK2 activity promotes dysfunctional adrenergic signaling and myocyte death. Recently, we found that the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) paroxetine could inhibit GRK2 with selectivity over other GRKs. Wild-type mice were treated for 4 weeks with paroxetine starting at 2 weeks after myocardial infarction (MI). These mice were compared with mice treated with fluoxetine, which does not inhibit GRK2, to control for the SSRI effects of paroxetine. All mice exhibited similar left ventricular (LV) dysfunction before treatment; however, although the control and fluoxetine groups had continued degradation of function, the paroxetine group had considerably improved LV function and structure, and several hallmarks of HF were either inhibited or reversed. Use of genetically engineered mice indicated that paroxetine was working through GRK2 inhibition. The beneficial effects of paroxetine were markedly greater than those of β-blocker therapy, a current standard of care in human HF. These data demonstrate that paroxetine-mediated inhibition of GRK2 improves cardiac function after MI and represents a potential repurposing of this drug, as well as a starting point for innovative small-molecule GRK2 inhibitor development.

The influence of paroxetine on the pharmacokinetics of atomoxetine and its main metabolite

Background and aims

To evaluate the effects of paroxetine on the pharmacokinetics of atomoxetine and its main metabolite, 4-hydroxyatomoxetine-O-glucuronide, after coadministration of atomoxetine and paroxetine in healthy volunteers.

Methods

22 healthy volunteers, extensive metabolizers, took part in this open-label, non-randomized, clinical trial. The study consisted of two periods: Reference, when a single oral dose of 25 mg atomoxetine was administrated to each subject and Test, when 25 mg atomoxetine and 20 mg paroxetine were coadministered. Between the two periods, the volunteers received an oral daily dose of 20–40 mg paroxetine, for 6 days. Atomoxetine and 4-hydroxyatomoxetine-O-glucuronide plasma concentrations were determined within the first 48 hours following drug administration. The pharmacokinetic parameters of both compounds were assessed using a non-compartmental method and the analysis of variance aimed at identifying any statistical significant differences between the pharmacokinetic parameters of atomoxetine and its main metabolite, corresponding to each study period.

Results

Paroxetine modified the pharmacokinetic parameters of atomoxetine. C_max increased from 221.26±94.93 to 372.53±128.28 ng/mL, while AUC_0-t and AUC_0-∞ also increased from 1151.19±686.52 to 6452.37±3388.76 ng*h/mL, and from 1229.15±751.04 to 7111.74±4195.17 ng*h/mL respectively. The main metabolite pharmacokinetics was also influenced by paroxetine intake, namely C_max, AUC_0-t and AUC_0-∞ decreased from 688.76±270.27 to 131.01±100.43 ng*h/mL, and from 4810.93±845.06 to 2606.04±923.88 and from 4928.55±853.25 to 3029.82 ±941.84 respectively.

Conclusions

Multiple-dose paroxetine intake significantly influenced atomoxetine and its active metabolite pharmacokinetics, causing a 5.8-fold increased exposure to atomoxetine and 1.6-fold reduced exposure to 4-hydroxyatomoxetine-O-glucuronide.

A comparative review of escitalopram, paroxetine, and sertraline: Are they all alike?

It is known that newer antidepressants, such as the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), provide advantages in tolerability over antidepressants such as the tricyclics. However, even within the SSRI class, differences in efficacy or tolerability exist between the individual drugs. Among the three most widely prescribed SSRIs are paroxetine, sertraline, and escitalopram. Escitalopram is commonly referred to as an SSRI, but also has well-documented allosteric properties, and thus can be further classed as an allosteric serotonin reuptake inhibitor. All three antidepressants are efficacious compared with placebo, but there is evidence that escitalopram is more effective than a range of other antidepressants. There are no direct data to regard either paroxetine or sertraline as a superior antidepressant. Escitalopram is superior compared with paroxetine, which has a less favorable tolerability profile. Paroxetine is associated with cholinergic muscarinic antagonism and potent inhibition of CYP2D6, and sertraline has moderate drug interaction issues in comparison with escitalopram. Overall, as an allosteric serotonin reuptake inhibitor that is somewhat different from classical SSRIs, escitalopram is the first choice judged by combined efficacy and tolerability, and nonclinical data have offered possible mechanisms through which escitalopram could be more efficacious, based on its interaction with orthosteric and allosteric binding sites at the serotonin transporter.

Possible impact of the CYP2D6*10 polymorphism on the nonlinear pharmacokinetic parameter estimates of paroxetine in Japanese patients with major depressive disorders

It has been suggested that the reduced function allele with reduced cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2D6 activity, CYP2D6*10, is associated with the interindividual differences in the plasma paroxetine concentrations, but there is no data presently available regarding the influence of the CYP2D6*10 polymorphism on the pharmacokinetic parameters, eg, Michaelis–Menten constant (K_m) and maximum velocity (V_max), in Asian populations. The present study investigated the effects of the CYP2D6 polymorphisms, including CYP2D6*10, on the pharmacokinetic parameters of paroxetine in Japanese patients with major depressive disorders. This retrospective study included 15 Japanese patients with major depressive disorders (four males and eleven females) who were treated with paroxetine. The CYP2D6*2, CYP2D6*4, CYP2D6*5, CYP2D6*10, CYP2D6*18, CYP2D6*39, and CYP2D6*41 polymorphisms were evaluated. A total of 56 blood samples were collected from the patients. The K_m and V_max values of paroxetine were estimated for each patient. The allele frequencies of CYP2D6*2, CYP2D6*4, CYP2D6*5, CYP2D6*10, CYP2D6*18, CYP2D6*39, and CYP2D6*41 were 6.7%, 0%, 10.0%, 56.7%, 0%, 26.7%, and 0%, respectively. The mean values of K_m and V_max were 50.5±68.4 ng/mL and 50.6±18.8 mg/day, respectively. Both the K_m and V_max values were significantly smaller in CYP2D6*10 allele carriers than in the noncarriers (24.2±18.3 ng/mL versus 122.5±106.3 ng/mL, P=0.008; 44.2±16.1 mg/day versus 68.3±15.0 mg/day, P=0.022, respectively). This is the first study to demonstrate that the CYP2D6*10 polymorphism could affect the nonlinear pharmacokinetic parameter estimates of paroxetine in Asian populations. The findings of this study suggest that the CYP2D6*10 polymorphism may be associated with the smaller values of both the K_m and V_max in Japanese patients with major depressive disorders, and these results need to be confirmed in further investigations with a larger number of patients.

A pharmacokinetic drug interaction study between nebivolol and paroxetine in healthy volunteers

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Nebivolol is a highly selective beta-blocker with additional vasodilator properties, widely used in the clinical practice for the treatment of hypertension and heart failure. Paroxetine is a second-generation antidepressant and a potent inhibitor of CYP2D6, the same isoenzyme involved in the metabolism of nebivolol. The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of multiple-dose paroxetine intake on the pharmacokinetics of nebivolol in healthy volunteers and its potential consequences upon nebivolol pharmacodynamics.

METHODS

The study included 23 healthy subjects and was designed as an open-label, single-centre, non-randomized, two-period clinical trial. During period 1 (reference), each volunteer received a single dose of 5 mg nebivolol, whereas during period 2 (test), each volunteer received a single dose of 5 mg nebivolol and 20 mg paroxetine, after a pretreatment regimen with paroxetine (20-40 mg/day for 6 days). The pharmacokinetic parameters of nebivolol and its active metabolite were analysed by non-compartmental modelling. The pharmacodynamic parameters (blood pressure and heart rate) were assessed at rest, after each nebivolol intake.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Pretreatment with paroxetine increased the mean peak plasma concentrations (Cmax ) for unchanged nebivolol (1·78 ± 1·17 vs. 4·24 ± 1·67 ng/mL) and for its active metabolite (0·58 ± 0·21 vs. 0·79 ± 0·24 ng/mL) compared to nebivolol alone. The time (tmax ) to reach Cmax was 1·37 ± 0·88 (h) and 3·11 ± 1·76 (h) for the parent compound and its active metabolite after nebivolol administered alone and 3·96 ± 1·76 (h), respectively, 7·33 ± 7·84 (h) after pretreatment with paroxetine. Also, the total areas under the curve (AUC0-∞ ) were significantly increased from 17·26 ± 43·06 to 106·20 ± 65·56 h ng/mL for nebivolol unchanged and 13·03 ± 11·29 to 74·56 ± 88·77 h ng/mL for its hydroxylated metabolite, before and after paroxetine intake. All the pharmacokinetic parameters presented statistically significant differences when paroxetine was administered with nebivolol. Nonetheless, statistical analysis did not show a significant difference between the vital signs measured during the two periods.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

After pretreatment with paroxetine, the exposure to nebivolol was increased by 6·1-fold for the parent drug and 5·7-fold for the hydroxylated active metabolite. Paroxetine influenced nebivolol pharmacokinetics in healthy volunteers, but it did not have a significant effect on nebivolol pharmacodynamic parameters measured at rest, although the clinical relevance of this drug interaction needs further investigation.

Paroxetine versus other anti-depressive agents for depression

BACKGROUND

Paroxetine is the most potent inhibitor of the reuptake of serotonin of all selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and has been studied in many randomised controlled trials (RCTs). However, these comparative studies provided contrasting findings and systematic reviews of RCTs have always considered the SSRIs as a group, and evidence applicable to this group of drugs might not be applicable to paroxetine alone. The present systematic review assessed the efficacy and tolerability profile of paroxetine in comparison with tricyclics (TCAs), SSRIs and newer or non-conventional agents.

OBJECTIVES

1. To determine the efficacy of paroxetine in comparison with other anti-depressive agents in alleviating the acute symptoms of Major Depressive Disorder.2. To review acceptability of treatment with paroxetine in comparison with other anti-depressive agents.3. To investigate the adverse effects of paroxetine in comparison with other anti-depressive agents.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Review Group's Specialized Register (CCDANCTR, to 30 September 2012), which includes relevant randomised controlled trials from the following bibliographic databases: The Cochrane Library (all years), EMBASE (1974 to date), MEDLINE (1950 to date) and PsycINFO (1967 to date). Reference lists of relevant papers and previous systematic reviews were handsearched. Pharmaceutical companies marketing paroxetine and experts in this field were contacted for supplemental data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials allocating participants with major depression to paroxetine versus any other antidepressants (ADs), both conventional (such as TCAs, SSRIs) and newer or non-conventional (such as hypericum). For trials which had a cross-over design, only results from the first randomisation period were considered.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently checked eligibility and extracted data using a standard form. Data were then entered in RevMan 5.2 with a double-entry procedure. Information extracted included study and participant characteristics, intervention details, settings and efficacy, acceptability and tolerability measures.

MAIN RESULTS

A total of 115 randomised controlled trials (26,134 participants) were included. In 54 studies paroxetine was compared with older ADs, in 21 studies with another SSRI, and in 40 studies with a newer or non-conventional antidepressant other than SSRIs. For the primary outcome (patients who responded to treatment), paroxetine was more effective than reboxetine at increasing patients who responded early to treatment (Odds Ratio (OR): 0.66, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.50 to 0.87, number needed to treat to provide benefit (NNTb) = 16, 95% CI 10 to 50, at one to four weeks, 3 RCTs, 1375 participants, moderate quality of evidence), and less effective than mirtazapine (OR: 2.39, 95% CI 1.42 to 4.02, NNTb = 8, 95% CI 5 to 14, at one to four weeks, 3 RCTs, 726 participants, moderate quality of evidence). Paroxetine was less effective than citalopram in improving response to treatment (OR: 1.54, 95% CI 1.04 to 2.28, NNTb = 9, 95% CI 5 to 102, at six to 12 weeks, 1 RCT, 406 participants, moderate quality of evidence). We found no clear evidence that paroxetine was more or less effective compared with other antidepressants at increasing response to treatment at acute (six to 12 weeks), early (one to four weeks), or longer term follow-up (four to six months). Paroxetine was associated with a lower rate of adverse events than amitriptyline, imipramine and older ADs as a class, but was less well tolerated than agomelatine and hypericum. Included studies were generally at unclear or high risk of bias due to poor reporting of allocation concealment and blinding of outcome assessment, and incomplete reporting of outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Some possibly clinically meaningful differences between paroxetine and other ADs exist, but no definitive conclusions can be drawn from these findings. In terms of response, there was a moderate quality of evidence that citalopram was better than paroxetine in the acute phase (six to 12 weeks), although only one study contributed data. In terms of early response to treatment (one to four weeks) there was moderate quality of evidence that mirtazapine was better than paroxetine and that paroxetine was better than reboxetine. However there was no clear evidence that paroxetine was better or worse compared with other antidepressants at increasing response to treatment at any time point. Even if some differences were identified, the findings from this review are better thought as hypothesis forming rather than hypothesis testing and it would be reassuring to see the conclusions replicated in future trials. Finally, most of included studies were at unclear or high risk of bias, and were sponsored by the drug industry. The potential for overestimation of treatment effect due to sponsorship bias should be borne in mind.

Sesamol induces apoptosis in human platelets via reactive oxygen species-mediated mitochondrial damage

Platelets play an indispensable role in human health and disease. Platelets are very sensitive to oxidative stress, as it leads to the damage of mitochondrial DNA, which is the initial step of a sequence of events culminating in the cell death through the intrinsic pathway of apoptosis. Owing to a lot of reports on secondary complications arising from oxidative stress caused by therapeutic drug overdose, the present study concentrated on the influence of sesamol on oxidative stress-induced platelet apoptosis. Sesamol, a phenolic derivative present in sesame seeds is an exceptionally promising drug with lots of reports on its protective functions, including its inhibitory effects on platelet aggregation at concentrations below 100 μM, and its anti-cancer effect at 1 mM. However, the present study explored the toxic effects of sesamol on human platelets. Sesamol at the concentration of 0.25 mM and above induced platelet apoptosis through endogenous generation of ROS, depletion of thiol pool, and Ca(2+) mobilization. It also induced mitochondrial membrane potential depolarization, caspase activation, cytochrome c translocation and phosphatidylserine exposure, thus illustrating the pro-apoptotic effect of sesamol at higher concentration. However, even at high concentration of 2 mM sesamol effectively inhibited collagen/ADP/epinephrine-induced platelet aggregation. The study demonstrates that even though sesamol inhibits platelet aggregation, it has the tendency to elicit platelet apoptosis at higher concentrations. Sesamol has a potential as thrombolytic agent, nevertheless the current work highlights the significance of an appropriate dosage of sesamol when it is used as a therapeutic drug.

A 6-week randomized controlled trial with 4-week follow-up of acupuncture combined with paroxetine in patients with major depressive disorder

Acupuncture possesses the antidepressant potential. In this 6-week randomized controlled trial with 4-week follow-up, 160 patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) were randomly assigned to paroxetine (PRX) alone (n = 48) or combined with 18 sessions of manual acupuncture (MA, n = 54) or electrical acupuncture (EA, n = 58). Treatment outcomes were measured mainly using the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-17), Self-rating Depression Scale (SDS), clinical response and remission rates. Average PRX dose taken and proportion of patients who required an increased PRX dose due to symptom aggravation were also obtained. Both additional MA and EA produced a significantly greater reduction from baseline in score on HAMD-17 and SDS at most measure points from week 1 through week 6 compared to PRX alone. The clinical response was markedly greater in MA (69.8%) and EA (69.6%) groups than the group treated with PRX alone (41.7%, P = 0.004). The proportion of patients who required an increase dose of PRX due to symptom aggravation was significantly lower with MA (5.7%) and EA (8.9%) than PRX alone (22.9%, P = 0.019). At 4 weeks follow-up after completion of acupuncture treatment, patients with EA, but not MA, continued to show significantly greater clinical improvement. Incidence of adverse events was not different in the three groups. Our study indicates that acupuncture can accelerate the clinical response to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and prevent the aggravation of depression. Electrical acupuncture may have a long-lasting enhancement of the antidepressant effects (Trial Registration: ChiCTR-TRC-08000278).