Lack of Smoking Effects on Pharmacokinetics of Oral Paliperidone-analysis of a Naturalistic Therapeutic Drug Monitoring Sample.

INTRODUCTION: Major smoking effects have been reported for a series of psychotropic agents, mainly including substrates of CYP450 1A2, although smoking may also affect alternative metabolic pathways. To our knowledge, smoking effects on paliperidone pharmacokinetics have not been assessed yet. METHODS: We compared plasma concentrations of paliperidone as well as dose-corrected-plasma concentrations (C/D) from a naturalistic database between smokers and nonsmokers using nonparametrical tests, such as the Mann-Whitney U-test (MWU). Additionally, we compared light and heavy smokers with nonsmokers separately. RESULTS: Comparing 55 smokers with 37 nonsmokers treated with oral paliperidone, no differences in the percentage of females, age, body weight, body mass index, and daily paliperidone dose were reported (p=0.709 for χ2, p=0.26, p=0.38, p=0.67, and p=0.8 for MWU). No differences were detected in plasma concentrations or C/D values (p=0.50 and p=0.96 for MWU). Likewise, differences in daily dose, plasma concentrations, or C/D values were not significant between light smokers (n=17) and nonsmokers (p=0.61, p=0.81, and p=0.33 for MWU) or heavy smokers (n=22) and nonsmokers (p=0.874, p=0.38, and p=0.59; MWU in all cases). DISCUSSION: Paliperidone is not affected by smoking, and paliperidone dose-adjustments in smokers may not be necessary. This may be seen as an essential difference to risperidone, whose cytochrome-mediated metabolism might be affected by smoking.

Pharmacokinetic interactions between clozapine and sertraline in smokers and non-smokers.

Clozapine is an effective antipsychotic drug for treatment-resistant schizophrenia. Sertraline is a widely prescribed antidepressant and often concomitantly applied to address negative symptoms or depression. However, data on interactions between clozapine and sertraline are inconsistent. The aim of our study was to evaluate pharmacokinetic interactions between clozapine and sertraline analysing a therapeutic drug monitoring database of 1644 clozapine-medicated patients. We compared four groups: non-smokers (n = 250) and smokers (n = 326) with co-medication without known effects on cytochrome P450 and without sertraline, and non-smokers (n = 18) and smokers (n = 17) with sertraline co-medication. Measured and dose-corrected concentrations (C/D) of clozapine were compared between the groups using non-parametrical tests with a significance level of 0.05. Post hoc analyses included pairwise comparisons to account for smoking status. Although we detected significant differences for clozapine levels and C/D values between study groups (P < .001 for Kruskal-Wallis test in both cases), post hoc analyses revealed no differences for concentrations and C/D values of clozapine (P > .05 for Mann-Whitney U test in both cases). A negative correlation between the sertraline dose and the clozapine concentration was found in non-smokers (Spearman's rank correlation, rs = -0.535, P = .048). A potential pharmacokinetic interaction between clozapine and a standard therapeutic sertraline dose seems to be of minor clinical importance.

Cytochrome P450-mediated inhibition of venlafaxine metabolism by trimipramine.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to ensure patients' safety and to enhance treatment efficacy, knowledge about pharmacokinetic interactions even in complex clinical situations of polypharmacy is invaluable. This study is to uncover the potential of pharmacokinetic interactions between venlafaxine and trimipramine in a naturalistic sample. METHODS: Out of a therapeutic drug monitoring database with plasma concentrations of venlafaxine (VEN) and O-desmethylvenlafaxine (ODV), we considered two groups of patients receiving venlafaxine without known cytochrome P450 confounding medications, taking solely venlafaxine: V0 (n = 905), and a group of patients co-medicated with trimipramine, VTRIM (n = 33). For VEN, ODV and active moiety (sum of VEN + ODV) plasma concentrations and dose-adjusted concentrations as well as ODV/VEN ratios were compared between groups using the Mann-Whitney U test with a significance level of 0.05. RESULTS: Patients co-medicated with trimipramine had higher plasma concentrations of VEN (183.0 vs. 72.0, +154%, P = 0.002) and AM (324.0 vs. 267.5, +21%, P = 0.005) and higher dose adjusted plasma concentrations than patients in the control group (P = 0.001 and P = 0.003). No differences were found for ODV and C/D ODV (P < 0.05 for both comparisons). The metabolite to parent ratio, ODV/VEN, was significantly lower in the VTRIM group (1.15 vs. 2.37, P = 0.012). CONCLUSION: Findings suggest inhibitory effects of trimipramine on venlafaxine pharmacokinetics most likely via an inhibition of CYP 2D6 or by saturated enzyme capacity. The lack of in vitro data hampers the understanding of the exact mechanisms. Clinicians should be aware of drug-drug interactions when combining these agents. Therapeutic drug monitoring helps to ensure treatment efficacy and patients' safety.

Pharmacokinetics of venlafaxine in treatment responders and non-responders: a retrospective analysis of a large naturalistic database.

PURPOSE: To assess in a large naturalistic sample, whether clinical response to a treatment with venlafaxine is associated with different patterns of plasma concentrations of active moiety, AM (sum of venlafaxine (VEN) and its active metabolite O-desmethylvenlafaxine (ODVEN)). METHODS: Applying a regression model, plasma concentrations and plasma concentrations corrected-by-dosage (C/D) for AM were included as independent variable with Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement (CGI-I) scale ratings as dependent variable. Moreover, AM, VEN, and ODVEN were compared between treatment responders and non-responders, defining response as much or very much improved on the CGI-I scale based on the non-parametric Mann-Whitney U (M-W-U) test with a significance level of 0.05. RESULTS: No correlations were found between AM and C/D AM plasma concentrations and CGI-I ratings (regression coefficient 0.0, CI 0.000, 0.001, p = 0.492 for AM and 0.047, CI - 0.065, 0.159, p = 0.408 for C/D AM). Venlafaxine daily dosage did not differ between responders and non-responders (217.7 ± 76.9 vs. 222.0 ± 72.7 mg/day, p = 0.45 for M-W-U). Responders displayed lower ODVEN (p = 0.033) and AM (p = 0.031) plasma concentrations than non-responders (p = 0.033 and 0.031, respectively for M-W-U). No other differences were detected. Using a cut-off level of 400 ng/mL for AM concentrations, a higher percentage of responders was reported in the group of patients with AM < 400 ng/mL (13.04%) compared to patients with AM > 400 ng/mL (8%) (p = 0.038). CONCLUSIONS: Higher ODVEN and AM concentrations in non-responders than in responders indicate that treatment escalation above upper thresholds of therapeutic reference ranges of venlafaxine is not promising. Hence, the therapeutic reference range for venlafaxine can help in improving outcomes in a measurement-based care model that takes advantage of therapeutic drug monitoring.

Pharmacokinetic correlates of venlafaxine: associated adverse reactions.

To address the potential correlation between plasma concentrations of venlafaxine (VEN), its active metabolite O-desmethylvenlafaxine (ODVEN) and the active moiety, AM, (ODVEN + VEN) and adverse drug reactions (ADR) in a large naturalistic sample of in- and outpatients. We compared plasma concentrations of VEN, ODVEN and AM and dose-adjusted (C/D) levels as well the ODVEN/VEN ratios between patients complaining ADRs, following the Udvalg for Kliniske Undersogelser side effect rating scales (UKU) (n = 114) and patients without ADRs (control group, n = 688) out of a naturalistic database. We also investigated potential pharmacokinetic correlates of the four UKU categories by comparing patients complaining ADRs with those who did not. Based on previous literature we applied different ODVEN/VEN ratio values as cut-offs to split our sample into two groups at a time and compare frequencies of ADRs between the groups. No differences for demographic and pharmacokinetic variables including plasma and C/D concentrations as well as ODVEN/VEN ratios were observed between study groups. Neither the comparisons between females and males nor between elderly and non-elderly patients revealed significant differences (p > 0.05 in all cases). No differences were also reported exploring the patients complaining ADRs from the 4 UKU categories separately. After applying various ODVEN/VEN cut-offs, groups did not display differences in frequencies of ADRs (p > 0.05 in all cases). Our findings do not demonstrate a direct link between venlafaxine metabolism measures and ADRs. Therefore, additional dimensions are needed to be considered in future trials aiming to disentangle the involved aspects of ADRs in patients receiving venlafaxine.