Enhanced uptake of doxorubicin into bronchial carcinoma: beta-glucuronidase mediates release of doxorubicin from a glucuronide prodrug (HMR 1826) at the tumor site.

Lack of tumor selectivity is a severe limitation of cancer chemotherapy. Consequently, reducing dose-limiting organ toxicities such as the cardiac toxicity of doxorubicin (Dox) is of major clinical relevance. Approaches that would facilitate a more tumor-selective anticancer therapy by using nontoxic prodrugs that are converted to active anticancer agents at the tumor site have been the subject of intensive research. One potential method to overcome the cardiac toxicity of Dox is to apply a nontoxic, glucuronide prodrug (HMR 1826) from which Dox is released by the action of beta-glucuronidase, an enzyme present at high levels in many tumors. Using a recently developed, isolated, perfused human lung model, we compared the uptake of Dox into normal lung and lung tumors after a 2.5-h lung perfusion with doxorubicin (n = 8) and with the novel doxorubicin glucuronide prodrug (n = 8). Dox showed a poor uptake into lung tumors as compared with normal lung [mean Dox concentration at the end of perfusion, 1.78 +/- 3.11 (median, 0.66) microg/g versus 22.03 +/- 10.4 (median, 18.5) microg/g; P < 0.001]. However, after perfusion with HMR 1826, the level of Dox in tumor tissue was about 7-fold higher than after perfusion with Dox itself [14.04 +/- 12.9 (median, 12.9) microg/g versus 1.78 +/- 3.11 (median, 0.66) microg/g, P < 0.05, n = 8]. In vitro experiments showed a significantly higher beta-glucuronidase expression and activity in the tumors. The extent of in vitro cleavage of HMR 1826 by homogenized lung tissue was closely related to the content of beta-glucuronidase (r = 0.9834, P < 0.0001). When D-saccharolactone, a specific inhibitor of beta-glucuronidase, was added to the perfusate containing HMR 1826, no accumulation of Dox in lung tissue was seen. These data indicate that the high Dox levels achieved in the tumors with HMR 1826 resulted from cleavage of the prodrug by beta-glucuronidase at the tumor site. Thus, the problem of poor Dox uptake into lung tumors could be circumvented by applying the doxorubicin glucuronide prodrug. Several lines of evidence based on both ex vivo and in vitro results indicate that the approach described using a glucuronide prodrug may be useful in facilitating more selective delivery of chemotherapy to tumors in humans.

Analysis of CYP2D6 expression in human lung: implications for the association between CYP2D6 activity and susceptibility to lung cancer.

We have studied whether CYP2D6 is expressed in human lung tissue, using a specific and sensitive reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction method and immunohistochemistry. Seven out of the eight patients were extensive metabolizers as shown by genotyping for the CYP2D6 (debrisoquine-sparteine) polymorphism. To investigate whether expression of CYP2D6 in lung tumours is different from that in normal lung tissue, tumour tissue samples were also obtained from the same eight patients. Correctly spliced CYP2D6 mRNA was detected by RT-PCR analysis in human liver and duodenum but not in any of the lung samples. In accordance with these negative results, immunoreactivity for CYP2D6 protein, using specific monoclonal and polyclonal antibodies, was very low or absent. No specific cell type of lung tissue showed strong immunoreactivity for CYP2D6, although expression of CYP3A could be clearly demonstrated in the same tissue samples. Moreover, a Western blot analysis revealed no signal in lung microsomes from two additional extensive metabolizers. Taken together, these results indicate that expression of CYP2D6 in human lung is absent or very low. These findings thus argue against a significant local metabolic activation of procarcinogenic agents by CYP2D6 in the lung.

Enhancement of absorption and effect of glipizide by magnesium hydroxide.

The effects of magnesium hydroxide on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of glipizide were studied in eight healthy volunteers in a randomized crossover trial. After an overnight fast, 5 mg glipizide was given with either 150 ml water or water containing 850 mg magnesium hydroxide. Magnesium hydroxide increased the areas under the plasma glipizide concentration-time curves (AUC) from 0 to 1/2 hour and from 0 to 1 hour by 180% (p less than 0.05) and 69% (p less than 0.05), respectively. The peak plasma concentration, time to peak, total AUC, elimination half-life, and mean residence time of glipizide remained unchanged. The incremental plasma insulin area from 0 to 1/2 hour increased by 85% (p less than 0.05), and the time to maximal insulin response was reduced (p less than 0.05) during the magnesium hydroxide phase. The corresponding decremental plasma glucose area increased fourfold (p less than 0.05), and the maximal glucose decrease was 35% greater (p less than 0.05) than during the control phase. We conclude that the concomitant ingestion of magnesium hydroxide and glipizide may result in accelerated absorption of glipizide and increased early insulin and glucose responses.

Different effects of products containing metal ions on the absorption of lomefloxacin.

The effects of different cation containing products on the absorption of lomefloxacin were evaluated in eight healthy volunteers in a five-way randomized crossover study. The treatments were lomefloxacin alone, lomefloxacin with milk (300 ml), lomefloxacin with calcium carbonate (corresponding to 500 mg calcium), lomefloxacin with ferrous sulfate (corresponding to 100 mg elemental iron), and lomefloxacin with sucralfate (1 gm). Treatments were separated by a 7-day washout period. The bioavailability of lomefloxacin was significantly reduced when it was given with sucralfate; the area under the plasma drug concentration-time curve (AUC) from 0 to 24 hours was reduced by 51% (p < 0.05). Ferrous sulfate reduced the maximum plasma concentration of lomefloxacin by 26% (p < 0.05), the total amount of lomefloxacin recovered in urine by 15% (p < 0.05), and the AUC by 13% (p = 0.26). Calcium carbonate and milk had no significant effects on the bioavailability of lomefloxacin. We conclude that concomitant use of lomefloxacin and sucralfate should be avoided. It may also be advisable not to take lomefloxacin with ferrous sulfate, although this interaction is probably of no clinical significance. Calcium carbonate and milk do not affect lomefloxacin absorption.

Interference of dairy products with the absorption of ciprofloxacin.

The effects of milk and yogurt on the bioavailability of ciprofloxacin were studied in seven healthy volunteers in a randomized crossover trial. After an overnight fast, 500 mg ciprofloxacin was given with 300 ml water, milk, or yogurt. Plasma ciprofloxacin concentrations were significantly (p less than 0.05) lower during the milk and yogurt phases from 1/2 to 10 hours; at 1/2 hour the concentration was reduced by 70% by milk and by 92% by yogurt. Milk reduced the peak plasma concentration by 36% (p less than 0.05) and yogurt by 47% (p less than 0.05). The extent of bioavailability, measured as the total area under the plasma concentration-time curve and 24-hour urinary excretion of ciprofloxacin, was reduced by 30% to 36% by milk and yogurt (p less than 0.05). We conclude that the absorption of ciprofloxacin can be reduced by concomitant ingestion of milk or yogurt. To avoid therapeutic failures in infections where the causative organism is only moderately susceptible, ingestion of large amounts of dairy products in liquid form with ciprofloxacin is not recommended.

The effect of rifampin on the pharmacokinetics of oral and intravenous ondansetron.

BACKGROUND: Ondansetron is an antiemetic agent metabolized by cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzymes. Rifampin (INN, rifampicin) is a potent inducer of CYP3A4 and some other CYP enzymes. We examined the possible effect of rifampin on the pharmacokinetics of orally and intravenously administered ondansetron. METHODS: In a randomized crossover study with 4 phases and a washout of 4 weeks, 10 healthy volunteers took either 600 mg rifampin (in 2 phases) or placebo (in 2 phases) once a day for 5 days. On day 6, 8 mg ondansetron was administered either orally (after rifampin and placebo) or intravenously (after rifampin and placebo). Ondansetron concentrations in plasma were measured up to 12 hours. RESULTS: The mean total area under the plasma concentration-time curve [AUC(0-infinity)] of orally administered ondansetron after rifampin pretreatment was reduced by 65% compared with placebo (P < .001). Rifampin decreased the peak plasma concentration of oral ondansetron by about 50% (from 27.2+/-3.0 to 13.8+/-1.5 ng/mL [mean +/- SEM]; P < .001]) and the elimination half-life (t1/2) by 38% (P < .01). The bioavailability of oral ondansetron was reduced from 60% to 40% (P < .01) by rifampin. The clearance of intravenous ondansetron was increased 83% (from 440+/-38.4 to 805+/-44.6 mL/min [P < .001]) by rifampin. Rifampin reduced the t1/2 of intravenously administered ondansetron by 46% (P < .001) and the AUC(0-infinity) by 48% (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Rifampin considerably decreases the plasma concentrations of ondansetron after both oral and intravenous administration. The interaction is most likely the result of induction of the CYP3A4-mediated metabolism of ondansetron. Concomitant use of rifampin or other potent inducers of CYP3A4 with ondansetron may result in a reduced antiemetic effect, particularly after oral administration of ondansetron.

Effect of itraconazole on the pharmacokinetics of atorvastatin.

BACKGROUND: Itraconazole, a potent inhibitor of CYP3A4, increases the risk of skeletal muscle toxicity of some 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors by increasing their serum concentrations. The aim of this study was to characterize the effect of itraconazole on the pharmacokinetics of atorvastatin, a new HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor that is metabolized at least in part by CYP3A4. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind, two-phase crossover study, 10 healthy volunteers took 200 mg itraconazole or matched placebo orally once daily for 4 days. On day 4, 40 mg atorvastatin was administered orally, and a further dose of 200 mg itraconazole or placebo was taken 24 hours after atorvastatin intake. Serum concentrations of atorvastatin acid, atorvastatin lactone, 2-hydroxyatorvastatin acid and lactone, 4-hydroxyatorvastatin acid and lactone, active and total HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors, itraconazole, and hydroxyitraconazole were measured up to 72 hours. RESULTS: Itraconazole increased the area under the concentration--time curve from time zero to 72 hours [AUC(0-72)] and the elimination half-life of atorvastatin acid about threefold (p < 0.001), whereas the peak serum concentration was not significantly changed. The AUC(0-72) of atorvastatin lactone was increased about fourfold (p < 0.001), and the peak serum concentration and half-life were increased more than twofold (p < 0.01). Itraconazole decreased the peak serum concentration and AUC(0-72) of 2-hydroxyatorvastatin acid (p < 0.01) and 2-hydroxyatorvastatin lactone (p < 0.01). Itraconazole significantly (p < 0.01) increased the half-life of 2 hydroxyatorvastatin lactone. The AUC(0-72) values of active and total HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors were increased 1.6-fold (p < 0.001) and 1.7-fold (p < 0.001), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Itraconazole has a significant interaction with atorvastatin. The mechanism of increased serum concentrations of atorvastatin and HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors is inhibition of CYP3A4-mediated metabolism of atorvastatin and its metabolites by itraconazole. Concomitant use of itraconazole and other potent inhibitors of CYP3A4 with atorvastatin should be avoided or the dose of atorvastatin should be reduced accordingly.

Erythromycin and verapamil considerably increase serum simvastatin and simvastatin acid concentrations.

OBJECTIVE: To study the effects of erythromycin and verapamil on the pharmacokinetics of simvastatin, an inhibitor of 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase. METHODS: A randomized, double-blind crossover study was performed with three phases separated by a washout period of 3 weeks. Twelve young, healthy volunteers took orally either 1.5 gm/day erythromycin, 240 mg/day verapamil, or placebo for 2 days. On day 2, 40 mg simvastatin was administered orally. Serum concentrations of simvastatin, simvastatin acid, erythromycin, verapamil, and norverapamil were measured for up to 24 hours. RESULTS: Erythromycin and verapamil increased mean peak serum concentration (Cmax) of unchanged simvastatin 3.4-fold (p < 0.001) and 2.6-fold (p < 0.05) and the area under the serum simvastatin concentration-time curve from time zero to 24 hours [AUC(0-24)] 6.2-fold (p < 0.001) and 4.6-fold (p < 0.01). Erythromycin increased the mean Cmax of active simvastatin acid fivefold (p < 0.001) and the AUC(0-24) 3.9-fold (p < 0.001). Verapamil increased the Cmax of simvastatin acid 3.4-fold (p < 0.001) and the AUC(0-24) 2.8-fold (p < 0.001). There was more than tenfold interindividual variability in the extent of simvastatin interaction with both erythromycin and verapamil. CONCLUSIONS: Both erythromycin and verapamil interact considerably with simvastatin, probably by inhibiting its cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4-mediated metabolism. Concomitant administration of erythromycin, verapamil, or other potent inhibitors of CYP3A4 with simvastatin should be avoided. As an alternative, the dosage of simvastatin should be reduced considerably, that is, by about 50% to 80%, at least when a simvastatin dosage higher than 20 mg/day is used. Possible adverse effects, such as elevation of creatine kinase level and muscle tenderness, should be closely monitored when such combinations are used.

Simvastatin but not pravastatin is very susceptible to interaction with the CYP3A4 inhibitor itraconazole.

BACKGROUND: Itraconazole increases the risk of skeletal muscle toxicity of some 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A' (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors by increasing their serum concentrations. We studied possible interactions of itraconazole with simvastatin and pravastatin. METHODS: Two randomized, double-blind, two-phase crossover studies were performed with use of an identical design, one with simvastatin (study I) and one with pravastatin (study II). In both studies, 10 healthy volunteers received either 200 mg itraconazole or placebo orally once a day for 4 days. On day 4, each subject ingested a single 40 mg dose of simvastatin (study I) or pravastatin (study II). Serum concentrations of simvastatin, simvastatin acid, pravastatin, HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors, itraconazole, and hydroxyitraconazole were determined. RESULTS: In study I, itraconazole increased the peak serum concentrations (Cmax) and the areas under the serum concentration-time curve [AUC(0-infinity)] of simvastatin and simvastatin acid at least tenfold (p < 0.001). The Cmax and AUC(0-infinity) of total simvastatin acid (naive simvastatin acid plus that derived by hydrolysis of the lactone) were increased 17-fold and 19-fold (p < 0.001), respectively, and the half-life (t1/2) was increased by 25% (p < 0.05). The AUC(0-infinity) of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors was increased fivefold (p < 0.001) and the Cmax and t1/2 were increased threefold (p < 0.001). In study II, itraconazole slightly increased the AUC(0-infinity) and Cmax of pravastatin, but the changes were statistically nonsignificant (p = 0.052 and 0.172, respectively). The t1/2 was not altered. The AUC(0-infinity) and Cmax of HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors were increased less than twofold (p < 0.05 and p = 0.063, respectively) by itraconazole. There were no differences in the serum concentrations of itraconazole and hydroxyitraconazole between studies I and II. CONCLUSIONS: Itraconazole greatly increased serum concentrations of simvastatin, simvastatin acid, and HMG CoA reductase inhibitors, probably by inhibiting CYP3A-mediated metabolism, but it had only a minor effect on pravastatin. Concomitant use of potent inhibitors of CYP3A with simvastatin should be avoided or its dosage should be greatly reduced.

Grapefruit juice greatly increases serum concentrations of lovastatin and lovastatin acid.

BACKGROUND: Grapefruit juice increases the bioavailability of several drugs known to be metabolized by CYP3A4. We wanted to investigate a possible interaction of grapefruit juice with lovastatin, a cholesterol-lowering agent that is partially metabolized by CY P3A4. METHODS: An open, randomized, two-phase crossover study with an interval of 2 weeks between the phases was carried out. Ten healthy volunteers took either 200 ml double-strength grapefruit juice or water orally three times a day for 2 days. On day 3, each subject ingested 80 mg lovastatin with either 200 ml grapefruit juice or water, and an additional dose of 200 ml was ingested 1/2 and 1 1/2 hours after lovastatin intake. Serum concentrations of lovastatin and lovastatin acid were measured up to 12 hours. RESULTS: Grapefruit juice greatly increased the serum concentrations of both lovastatin and lovastatin acid. The mean peak serum concentration (Cmax) of lovastatin was increased about 12-fold (range, 5.2-fold to 19.7-fold; p < 0.001) and the area under the concentration-time curve [AUC(0-12)] was increased 15-fold (range, 5.7-fold to 26.3-fold; p < 0.001) by grapefruit juice. The mean Cmax and AUC(0-12) of lovastatin acid were increased about fourfold (range, 1.8-fold to 11.5-fold; p < 0.001) and fivefold (range, 2.4-fold to 23.3-fold; p < 0.001) by grapefruit juice, respectively. The half-lives of lovastatin and lovastatin acid remained unchanged. CONCLUSIONS: Grapefruit juice can greatly increase serum concentrations of lovastatin and its active metabolite, lovastatin acid, probably by preventing CYP3A4-mediated first-pass metabolism in the small intestine. The concomitant use of grapefruit juice with lovastatin and simvastatin should be avoided, or the dose of these 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors should be reduced accordingly.

Effect of gemfibrozil on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of glimepiride.

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to study the effects of gemfibrozil on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of glimepiride, a new sulfonylurea antidiabetic drug and a substrate of cytochrome P4502C9 (CYP2C9). METHODS: In a randomized, 2-phase crossover study, 10 healthy volunteers were treated for 2 days with 600 mg oral gemfibrozil or placebo twice daily. On day 3, they received a single dose of 600 mg gemfibrozil or placebo and 1 hour later a single dose of 0.5 mg glimepiride orally. Plasma glimepiride, serum insulin, and blood glucose concentrations were measured up to 12 hours. RESULTS: Gemfibrozil increased the mean total area under the plasma concentration-time curve of glimepiride by 23% (range, 6%-56%; P <.005). The mean elimination half-life of glimepiride was prolonged from 2.1 to 2.3 hours (P <.05) by gemfibrozil. No statistically significant differences were found in the serum insulin or blood glucose variables between the two phases. CONCLUSIONS: Gemfibrozil modestly increases the plasma concentrations of glimepiride. This may be caused by inhibition of CYP2C9.

The cytochrome P4503A4 inhibitor clarithromycin increases the plasma concentrations and effects of repaglinide.

OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to study the effects of the macrolide antibiotic clarithromycin on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of repaglinide, a novel short-acting antidiabetic drug. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind, 2-phase crossover study, 9 healthy volunteers were treated for 4 days with 250 mg oral clarithromycin or placebo twice daily. On day 5 they received a single dose of 250 mg clarithromycin or placebo, and 1 hour later a single dose of 0.25 mg repaglinide was given orally. Plasma repaglinide, serum insulin, and blood glucose concentrations were measured up to 7 hours. RESULTS: Clarithromycin increased the mean total area under the concentration-time curve of repaglinide by 40% (P <.0001) and the peak plasma concentration by 67% (P <.005) compared with placebo. The mean elimination half-life of repaglinide was prolonged from 1.4 to 1.7 hours (P <.05) by clarithromycin. Clarithromycin increased the mean incremental area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 3 hours of serum insulin by 51% (P <.05) and the maximum increase in the serum insulin concentration by 61% (P <.01) compared with placebo. No statistically significant differences were found in the blood glucose concentrations between the placebo and clarithromycin phases. CONCLUSIONS: Even low doses of the cytochrome P4503A4 (CYP3A4) inhibitor clarithromycin increase the plasma concentrations and effects of repaglinide. Concomitant use of clarithromycin or other potent inhibitors of CYP3A4 with repaglinide may enhance its blood glucose-lowering effect and increase the risk of hypoglycemia.

Plasma buspirone concentrations are greatly increased by erythromycin and itraconazole.

BACKGROUND: The oral bioavailability of buspirone is very low as a result of extensive first-pass metabolism. Erythromycin and itraconazole are potent inhibitors of CYP3A4, and they increase plasma concentrations and effects of certain drugs, for example, oral midazolam and triazolam. The possible interactions of buspirone with erythromycin and itraconazole have not been studied before. METHODS: The pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of buspirone were investigated in a randomized, double-blind, double-dummy crossover study with three phases. Eight young healthy volunteers took either 1.5 gm/day erythromycin, 200 mg/day itraconazole, or placebo orally for 4 days. On day 4, 10 mg buspirone was administered orally. Timed blood samples were collected up to 18 hours, and the effects of buspirone were measured with four psychomotor tests up to 8 hours. RESULTS: Erythromycin and itraconazole increased the mean area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity [AUC(0-infinity] of buspirone about sixfold (p < 0.05) and 19-fold (p < 0.01), respectively, compared with placebo. The mean peak plasma concentration (Cmax) of buspirone was increased about fivefold (p < 0.01) and 13-fold (p < 0.01) by erythromycin and itraconazole, respectively. These interactions were evident in each subject, although a striking interindividual variability in the extent of both interactions was observed. The elimination half-life of buspirone did not seem to be prolonged by either erythromycin or itraconazole. The effect of itraconazole on the Cmax and AUC(0-infinity) of buspirone was significantly (p < 0.01) greater than that of erythromycin. The greatly elevated plasma buspirone concentrations resulted in increased (p < 0.05) pharmacodynamic effects (as measured by the Digit Symbol Substitution test and the Critical Flicker Fusion test) and in side effects of buspirone. CONCLUSIONS: Both erythromycin and itraconazole greatly increased plasma buspirone concentrations, obviously by inhibiting its CYP3A4-mediated first-pass metabolism. These pharmacokinetic interactions were accompanied by impairment of psychomotor performance and side effects of buspirone. The dose of buspirone should be greatly reduced during concomitant treatment with erythromycin, itraconazole, or other potent inhibitors of CYP3A4.

Diltiazem and mibefradil increase the plasma concentrations and greatly enhance the adrenal-suppressant effect of oral methylprednisolone.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the possible interaction of the calcium channel blockers diltiazem and mibefradil with orally administered methylprednisolone. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, three-phase crossover study, nine healthy SUBJECTS received 60 mg diltiazem three times a day, 50 mg mibefradil once a day, or placebo orally for 3 days. On day 3, each subject received a 16-mg oral dose of methylprednisolone. Plasma concentrations of methylprednisolone and cortisol were determined by HPLC up to 47 hours. RESULTS: Compared with placebo, diltiazem and mibefradil increased the total area under the plasma concentration-time curve of methylprednisolone [AUC(0-infinity)] 2.6-fold (P < .001) and 3.8-fold (P < .001), the peak plasma concentration 1.6-fold (P < .001) and 1.8-fold (P < .001), and the elimination half-life 1.9-fold (P < .001) and 2.7-fold (P < .001), respectively. The nighttime exposure to methylprednisolone [AUC(12-23)] was increased 28.2-fold (P < .01) and 72.1-fold (P < .001) by diltiazem and mibefradil, respectively, and correlated negatively (r = -0.81, P < .001) with the morning plasma cortisol concentration (measured at 8 AM, 23 hours after the administration of methylprednisolone). During the diltiazem phase, the morning plasma cortisol concentration was 12% of that during the placebo phase (P < .001); during the mibefradil phase, the morning plasma cortisol concentration was 2% of that during the placebo phase (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Coadministration of diltiazem or mibefradil with methylprednisolone resulted in increased plasma concentrations and a greatly enhanced adrenal-suppressant effect of oral methylprednisolone. Care should be taken if methylprednisolone is coadministered with a potent CYP3A4 inhibitor for a long period.

Duration of effect of grapefruit juice on the pharmacokinetics of the CYP3A4 substrate simvastatin.

BACKGROUND: Grapefruit juice is a potent inhibitor of CYP3A4-mediated drug metabolism. We wanted to investigate how long the inhibitory effect of grapefruit juice lasts, with the CYP3A4 substrate simvastatin used as a model drug. METHODS: This crossover study consisted of 5 study days, during which 10 healthy volunteers ingested 40 mg simvastatin with water (control), with "high-dose" grapefruit juice (200 mL double-strength grapefruit juice three times a day for 3 days), or 1, 3, and 7 days after ingestion of "high-dose" grapefruit juice. For safety reasons, the study was performed in three parts to allow simvastatin-free days between the study days. Serum concentrations of simvastatin and simvastatin acid were measured by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry up to 12 hours. RESULTS: When simvastatin was taken with grapefruit juice, the mean peak serum concentration (Cmax) and the mean area under the serum concentration-time curve [AUC(0-infinity)] of simvastatin were increased 12.0-fold (P < .001) and 13.5-fold (P < .001), respectively, compared with control. When simvastatin was administered 24 hours after ingestion of the last dose of grapefruit juice, the Cmax and AUC(0-infinity) were increased 2.4-fold (P < .01) and 2.1-fold (P < .001), respectively, compared with control. When simvastatin was given 3 days after ingestion of grapefruit juice, the Cmax and AUC(0-infinity) were increased 1.5-fold (P = .12) and 1.4-fold (P = .09), respectively, compared with control. Seven days after ingestion of grapefruit juice, no differences in the Cmax or AUC(0-infinity) of simvastatin were seen. The mean Cmax and AUC(0-infinity) of simvastatin acid were increased 5.0-fold and 4.5-fold, respectively (P < .001), compared with control when simvastatin was taken with grapefruit juice and 1.7-fold (P < .01) when it was taken 24 hours after ingestion of grapefruit juice. After an interval of 3 or 7 days between ingestion of grapefruit juice and simvastatin, the pharmacokinetic variables of simvastatin acid did not differ significantly from those in the control phase. CONCLUSIONS: When simvastatin is taken 24 hours after ingestion of "high-dose" grapefruit juice, the effect of grapefruit juice on the AUC of simvastatin is only about 10% of the effect observed during concomitant intake of grapefruit juice and simvastatin. The interaction potential of even high amounts of grapefruit juice with CYP3A4 substrates dissipates within 3 to 7 days after ingestion of the last dose of grapefruit juice.

The cytochrome P450 3A4 inhibitor itraconazole markedly increases the plasma concentrations of dexamethasone and enhances its adrenal-suppressant effect.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the possible interaction of itraconazole with orally and intravenously administered dexamethasone. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study with four phases, eight healthy subjects took either 200 mg itraconazole (in two phases) or placebo (in two phases) orally once daily for 4 days. On day 4 each subject received an oral dose of 4.5 mg dexamethasone or an intravenous dose of 5.0 mg dexamethasone sodium phosphate during both itraconazole and placebo phases. Plasma dexamethasone and cortisol concentrations were determined by HPLC up to 71 hours, itraconazole and hydroxyitraconazole up to 23 hours. RESULTS: Itraconazole decreased the systemic clearance of intravenously administered dexamethasone by 68% (P < .001), increased the total area under the plasma dexamethasone concentration-time curve [AUC(0-infinity)] 3.3-fold (P < .001), and prolonged the elimination half-life of dexamethasone 3.2-fold (P < .001). The AUC(0-infinity) of oral dexamethasone was increased 3.7-fold (P < .001), the peak plasma concentration 1.7-fold (P < .001), and the elimination half-life 2.8-fold (P < .001) by itraconazole. The morning plasma cortisol concentrations measured 47 and 71 hours after administration of dexamethasone were substantially lower after exposure to itraconazole than to placebo (P < .001). Accordingly, the adrenal-suppressant effect of dexamethasone was greatly enhanced during the itraconazole phases. CONCLUSIONS: Itraconazole markedly increases the systemic exposure to and effects of dexamethasone. A careful follow-up is recommended when itraconazole or other potent inhibitors of the cytochrome P450 3A4 are added to the drug regimen of patients receiving dexamethasone.

Grapefruit juice increases serum concentrations of atorvastatin and has no effect on pravastatin.

BACKGROUND: Grapefruit juice greatly increases the bioavailability of lovastatin and simvastatin. We studied the effect of grapefruit juice on the pharmacokinetics of atorvastatin and pravastatin. METHODS: Two randomized, two-phase crossover studies were performed--study I with atorvastatin in 12 healthy volunteers and study II with pravastatin in 11 healthy volunteers. In both studies, volunteers took 200 mL double-strength grapefruit juice or water three times a day for 2 days. On day 3, each subject ingested a single 40 mg dose of atorvastatin (study I) or pravastatin (study II) with either 200 mL grapefruit juice or water, and an additional 200 mL was ingested 1/2 hour and 1 1/2 hours later. In addition, subjects took 200 mL grapefruit juice or water three times a day on days 4 and 5 in study I. In study I, serum concentrations of atorvastatin acid, atorvastatin lactone, 2-hydroxyatorvastatin acid, 2-hydroxyatorvastatin lactone, and active and total 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors were measured up to 72 hours. In study II, pravastatin, pravastatin lactone, and active and total HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors were measured up to 24 hours. RESULTS: Grapefruit juice increased the area under the serum concentration-time curve of atorvastatin acid from time zero to 72 hours [AUC(0-72)] 2.5-fold (P < .01), whereas the peak serum concentration (Cmax) was not significantly changed. The time of the peak concentration (tmax) and the elimination half-life (t1/2) of atorvastatin acid were increased (P < .01). The AUC(0-72) of atorvastatin lactone was increased 3.3-fold (P < .01) and the Cmax 2.6-fold (P < .01) by grapefruit juice, and the tmax and t1/2 were also increased (P < .05). Grapefruit juice decreased the Cmax (P < .001) and AUC(0-72) (P < .001) of 2-hydroxyatorvastatin acid and increased its tmax and t1/2 (P < .01). Grapefruit juice also decreased the Cmax (P < .001) and AUC(O-72) (P < .05) of 2-hydroxyatorvastatin lactone. The AUC(0-72) values of active and total HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors were increased 1.3-fold (P < .05) and 1.5-fold (P < .01), respectively, by grapefruit juice. In study II, the only significant change observed in the pharmacokinetics of pravastatin was prolongation of the tmax of active HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors by grapefruit juice (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Grapefruit juice significantly increased serum concentrations of atorvastatin acid, atorvastatin lactone, and active and total HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors, probably by decreasing CYP3A4-mediated first-pass metabolism of atorvastatin in the small intestine. On the other hand, grapefruit juice had no effect on the pharmacokinetics of pravastatin. Concomitant use of atorvastatin and at least large amounts of grapefruit juice should be avoided, or the dose of atorvastatin should be reduced accordingly.

Plasma concentrations and effects of oral methylprednisolone are considerably increased by itraconazole.

BACKGROUND: Methylprednisolone is a widely used glucocorticoid. In this study, a possible interaction of itraconazole, a potent inhibitor of CYP3A4, with orally administered methylprednisolone was examined. METHODS: In this double-blind, randomized, 2-phase crossover study, 10 healthy volunteers received either 200 mg itraconazole or placebo orally once a day for 4 days. On day 4, each subject ingested a dose of 16 mg methylprednisolone. Plasma concentrations of methylprednisolone, cortisol, itraconazole, and hydroxyitraconazole were determined by HPLC up to 24 hours. RESULTS: Itraconazole increased the total area under the plasma methylprednisolone concentration-time curve 3.9-fold compared with placebo (1968 +/- 470 ng.hr/mL versus 520 +/- 125 ng.hr/mL [mean +/- SD]; P < .001). The peak plasma concentration of methylprednisolone was increased 1.9-fold (221 +/- 49 ng/mL versus 118 +/- 25 ng/mL; P < .001), and its elimination half-life was increased 2.4-fold (4.4 +/- 0.7 hours versus 1.9 +/- 0.3 hours; P < .001) by itraconazole. The mean plasma cortisol concentration during the itraconazole phase, measured 24 hours after ingestion of methylprednisolone, was only about 13% of that during the placebo phase (18 +/- 23 ng/mL versus 139 +/- 60 ng/mL; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Itraconazole considerably increases plasma concentrations and effects of oral methylprednisolone, probably by inhibiting its CYP3A4-mediated metabolism. Care should be taken if itraconazole or other potent inhibitors of CYP3A4 are used concomitantly with oral methylprednisolone, particularly during long-term use.

Grapefruit juice-simvastatin interaction: effect on serum concentrations of simvastatin, simvastatin acid, and HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors.

BACKGROUND: Simvastatin is a cholesterol-lowering agent that is metabolized through CYP3A4. We studied the effect of grapefruit juice on the pharmacokinetics of orally administered simvastatin. METHODS: In a randomized, 2-phase crossover study, 10 healthy volunteers took either 200 mL double-strength grapefruit juice or water 3 times a day for 2 days. On day 3, each subject ingested 60 mg simvastatin with either 200 mL grapefruit juice or water, and an additional 200 mL was ingested 1/2 and 1 1/2 hours after simvastatin administration. Serum concentrations of simvastatin and simvastatin acid were measured by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS-MS) and those of active (naive) and total (after hydrolysis) 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors by a radioenzyme inhibition assay. RESULTS: Grapefruit juice increased the mean peak serum concentration (Cmax) of unchanged simvastatin about 9-fold (range, 5.1-fold to 31.4-fold; P < .01) and the mean area under the serum simvastatin concentration-time curve [AUC(0-infinity)] 16-fold (range, 9.0-fold to 37.7-fold; P < .05). The mean Cmax and AUC(0-infinity) of simvastatin acid were both increased about 7-fold (P < .01). Grapefruit juice increased the mean AUC(0-infinity) of active and total HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors 2.4-fold (P < .01) and 3.6-fold (P < .01), respectively. The time of the peak concentration of active and total HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors was increased by grapefruit juice (P < .05). CONCLUSION: Grapefruit juice greatly increased serum concentrations of simvastatin and simvastatin acid and, to a lesser extent, those of active and total HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors. The probable mechanism of this interaction was inhibition of CYP3A4-mediated first-pass metabolism of simvastatin by grapefruit juice in the small intestine. Concomitant use of grapefruit juice and simvastatin, at least in large amounts, should be avoided, or the dose of simvastatin should be greatly reduced.

Effects of verapamil and diltiazem on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of buspirone.

BACKGROUND: Buspirone has an extensive first-pass metabolism, which makes it potentially susceptible to drug interactions. The aim of this study was to investigate possible interactions of buspirone with verapamil and diltiazem. METHODS: In a randomized, placebo-controlled, three-phase crossover study, nine healthy volunteers received either 80 mg verapamil, 60 mg diltiazem, or placebo orally three times a day. On day 2, after the fifth dose, 10 mg buspirone was given orally. Plasma concentrations of buspirone, verapamil, and diltiazem were determined up to 18 hours, and the effects of buspirone were measured up to 8 hours. RESULTS: Verapamil and diltiazem increased the area under the buspirone plasma concentration-time curve [AUC (0-infinity)] 3.4-fold (p < 0.001) and 5.5-fold (p < 0.001), respectively. The peak plasma concentration of buspirone was increased 3.4-fold (p < 0.001) and 4.1-fold (p < 0.001) by verapamil and diltiazem, respectively. The effect of diltiazem on the AUC(0-infinity) of buspirone was significantly (p < 0.05) greater than that of verapamil. The elimination half-life of buspirone was not changed by verapamil and diltiazem. Of the six pharmacodynamic variables, only the subjective overall drug effect of buspirone was significantly increased with verapamil (p < 0.05) and diltiazem (p < 0.05). Side effects of buspirone occurred more often (p < 0.05) with diltiazem than with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Both verapamil and diltiazem considerably increase plasma buspirone concentrations, probably by inhibiting its CYP3A4-mediated first-pass metabolism. Thus enhanced effects and side effects of buspirone are possible when it is used with verapamil, diltiazem, or other inhibitors of CYP3A4.