Effects of a Novel UGT2B Haplotype and UGT1A4*3 Allele Variants on Glucuronidation of Clozapine In vivo.

BACKGROUND: Glucuronidation is an important metabolic pathway of clozapine (CLZ), but the impact of various uridine 5'diphospho-glucuronosyltransferases (UGT) polymorphisms on the exposure and metabolism of CLZ in vivo is unclear. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to investigate the impact of UGT2B haplotype and UGT1A4*3 allele variants on the formation of CLZ glucuronide metabolites (5N- and N+-glucuronide) and CLZ exposure in patients' serum after adjusting for sex, age, and smoking habits. METHODS: The study was based on serum samples from CLZ-treated patients (n=79) subjected to routine therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) at Diakonhjemmet Hospital, Oslo, Norway. From the same patients, the following UGT variants were genotyped using Real-Time PCR: UGT2B:GA haplotype (defined as UGT2B:GA; rs1513559A>G and rs416593T>A) and UGT1A4*3 (rs2011425T>G). Serum concentrations of CLZ 5N- and N+-glucuronide were measured by UPLC high-resolution mass spectrometry. RESULTS: None of the genotypes had significant impact on CLZ exposure (p>0.05). However, compared to UGT2B:AT/AT and UGT1A4*1/*1, the 5N-glucuronide exposure was reduced in UGT2B:GA/GA carriers (-75 %, p=0.03) while the exposure was non-significantly increased in UGT1A4*3 carriers (+100 %, p=0.14), respectively. The N+-glucuronide exposure was unchanged in UGT1A4*3 vs. noncarriers (p=0.28), but significantly reduced in heterozygous (-50 %, p=0.016) and homozygous carriers (-70 %, p=0.021) of UGT2B:GA compared to UGT2B:AT/AT carriers, respectively. CONCLUSION: The UGT2B:GA and UGT1A4*3 variants had no impact on CLZ exposure but were associated with differences and preferences in CLZ glucuronidation. The latter might be of potential relevance for CLZ tolerability since levels of the N+-glucuronide metabolite may reflect the generation and trapping of reactive metabolites involved in CLZ-induced toxicity.

Effect of Valproic Acid on the Metabolic Spectrum of Clozapine in Patients With Schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Valproic acid (VPA) is frequently used with clozapine (CLZ) as mood stabilizer and/or seizure prophylaxis. Valproic acid is known to reduce N-desmethylclozapine (N-DMC) but not CLZ levels. This leads to the hypothesis that VPA induces the CLZ metabolism via non-N-desmethylation pathways. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the effect of concurrent VPA use on the serum concentrations of a spectrum of CLZ metabolites in patients, adjusting for smoking. METHODS: In total, 288 patients with an overall number of 737 serum concentration measurements of CLZ and metabolites concurrently using VPA (cases, n = 22) or no interacting drugs (controls, n = 266) were included from a routine therapeutic drug monitoring service. Linear mixed model analyses were performed to compare the dose-adjusted concentrations (C/D) of CLZ, N-DMC, CLZ 5N/N+-glucuronides, and metabolite-to-parent ratios in cases versus controls. RESULTS: After adjusting for covariates, the N-DMC (-40%, P < 0.001) and N+-glucuronide C/Ds (-78%, P < 0.001) were reduced in cases versus controls, while the CLZ C/D was unchanged (P > 0.7). In contrast, the 5N-glucuronide C/D (+250%, P < 0.001) and 5N-glucuronide-to-CLZ ratios (+120%, P = 0.01) were increased in cases versus controls. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show that complex changes in CLZ metabolism underly the pharmacokinetic interaction with VPA. The lower levels of N-DMC seem to be caused by VPA-mediated induction of CLZ 5N-glucuronide formation, subsequently leading to reduced substrate availability for N-desmethylation. Whether the changes in CLZ metabolism caused by VPA affects the clinical outcome warrants further investigation.

Impact of antipsychotic polypharmacy on nonadherence of oral antipsychotic drugs - A study based on blood sample analyses from 24,239 patients.

Nonadherence to oral antipsychotic drugs is a major issue in clinical psychiatry giving rise to treatment failure. Further, polypharmacy is common in the treatment of psychotic disorders due to insufficient treatment effect during monotherapy. As a potential circuit problem, we hypothesized that antipsychotic polypharmacy is associated with increased risk of nonadherence. To investigate this, in terms of 'complete' nonadherence, the rates of undetectable serum drug concentrations during prescribing of doses used in psychotic disorders were compared during antipsychotic 'monotherapy' vs 'polypharmacy' treatment using therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) data of 24,239 patients. A complete nonadherence patient was objectively defined as the detection of at least one event of undetectable serum concentration of a prescribed antipsychotic drug. The rate of complete nonadherence patients was compared between antipsychotic monotherapy and polypharmacy by multivariate logistic regression analyses. The overall rate of complete nonadherence in the population was 6.8% (n = 1,644; 95%CI: 6.5-7.1). Compared to monotherapy patients, the rate of nonadherence increased significantly with the number of co-prescribed antipsychotic drugs. After adjusting for sex (p = 0.091) and age (p < 0.001) as covariates, the rates of nonadherence vs monotherapy were 1.69-fold (95% CI: 1.48-1.92; p < 0.001) for two, 2.60-fold (95% CI: 1.88-3.59; p < 0.001) for three, and 3.54-fold (95% CI: 1.46-8.58; p = 0.005) for four or more co-prescribed antipsychotics, respectively. The present naturalistic study shows that antipsychotic polypharmacy significantly increases the rate of complete nonadherence, which is positively correlated with increasing number of concurrently used antipsychotic drugs. Thus, the intended clinical benefit of combining oral antipsychotic drugs may probably be reduced by increased nonadherence.

The Effect of Valproic Acid on Olanzapine Serum Concentration: A Study Including 2791 Patients Treated With Olanzapine Tablets or Long-Acting Injections.

BACKGROUND: The combination of olanzapine and valproic acid (VPA) is regularly prescribed in the treatment of bipolar or schizoaffective disorders. The VPA has been shown to reduce olanzapine concentration, but the mechanism behind this interaction remains unknown. We aimed to investigate the effect of VPA on olanzapine concentration during oral versus long-acting injectable (LAI) formulation in a real-life setting. METHODS: From a therapeutic drug monitoring service, prescribed doses and serum concentrations from 2791 olanzapine-treated patients (9433 measurements) were included. RESULTS: The number of patients on olanzapine-LAI treatment was 328, whereas 2463 were using oral olanzapine. The frequency of patients comedicated with VPA was 9.4% for olanzapine tablets and 5.8% for olanzapine-LAI. The VPA had no effect on olanzapine dose-adjusted concentrations in LAI users (1.6 vs 1.7 [ng/mL]/[mg/d]; P = 0.38), whereas in the oral group the dose-adjusted olanzapine concentration was lower in VPA users (2.2 vs 2.7 [ng/mL]/[mg/d]; P < 0.001). For smokers in the oral olanzapine group using VPA, 8.7% of the measurements were in the subtherapeutic range (<10 ng/mL) compared with 6.0% in nonusers (P = 0.003). IMPLICATIONS: These findings show that the VPA-olanzapine interaction involves a presystemic mechanism and is therefore restricted to oral olanzapine treatment. For oral treatment of olanzapine, comedication with VPA implies a risk of insufficient effect, which may be of clinical relevance in smokers in particular. Thus, it is important to be aware of the interaction potential with VPA during oral olanzapine use, whereas for LAI-treated patients fewer precautions are required from a pharmacokinetic point of view.

Age Impacts Olanzapine Exposure Differently During Use of Oral Versus Long-Acting Injectable Formulations: An Observational Study Including 8,288 Patients.

PURPOSE: Olanzapine is a commonly prescribed antipsychotic available as oral and long-acting injectable (LAI) formulations. Data are lacking on the use and safety of olanzapine-LAI in older patients. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of increasing age on olanzapine exposure during oral versus LAI administration in a real-life setting. METHODS: This observational study was based on routine therapeutic drug monitoring data collected during 2005-2017. As a measure of exposure, absolute concentrations and concentration/dose ratios of olanzapine were defined as outcome variables. Linear mixed-model analyzes were used to allow for inclusion of multiple samples per patient and adjustment for covariate effects. RESULTS: Olanzapine concentrations and doses from 8,288 patients (21,378 measurements) were included. The number of patients on oral treatment was 7,893 (42%, 50 years or older), while 395 were using olanzapine-LAI (27%, 50 years or older). In contrast to oral use, where the dose-adjusted concentration of olanzapine increased significantly for patients 50 years or older (P < 0.001), increasing age had no effect on olanzapine concentration following LAI administration (P = 0.550). The effects of smoking habits and gender were equal in oral and olanzapine-LAI users. CONCLUSION: While the dose-adjusted systemic exposure of olanzapine increases by age after oral administration, these novel findings from a large patient population show that systemic exposure of olanzapine-LAI is unaffected by age, probably due to the lacking influence of age-related changes in gastrointestinal absorption and/or presystemic metabolism. From a pharmacokinetic point of view, it is therefore no reason to restrict the use of olanzapine-LAI in older patients requiring long-term treatment.

Correlates of major medication side effects interfering with daily performance: results from a cross-sectional cohort study of older psychiatric patients.

BACKGROUND: Polypharmacy is common among older persons who are also vulnerable to side effects. We aimed to characterize patients who on admission to a geriatric psychiatric hospital had major medication side effects interfering with daily performance. METHODS: Cross-sectional cohort study of patients consecutively admitted to a geriatric psychiatric hospital from 2006, 06 December to 2008, 24 October. The UKU side effect rating scale was performed, and patients were divided into those with no/minor side effects versus those with major side effects. Blood levels of 56 psychotropic drugs and 27 safety laboratory tests were measured upon admission. RESULTS: Of 206 patients included in the analysis, 70 (34%) had major side effects related to drug treatment. The most frequent side effects were asthenia (31%), reduced salivation (31%), concentration difficulties (28%), memory impairment (24%), and orthostatic dizziness (18%). The significant characteristics predicting major side effects were female gender (OR = 2.4, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.1-5.5), main diagnosis of affective disorder (OR = 4.3, 95% CI = 1.5-12.3), unreported use of psychotropic medications (OR = 2.0, 95% CI = 1.0-4.1), a higher number of reported psychotropic medications (OR = 1.7, 95% CI = 1.2-2.3), a higher number of reported medications for somatic disorders (OR = 1.2, 95% CI = 1.1-1.5), and a higher score on the Charlson comorbidity index (OR = 1.2, 95% CI = 1.0-1.4) (r 2 = 0.238, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians should be especially aware of side effects related to drug treatment in geriatric psychiatric female patients with a high use of psychotropic and other medications and somatic comorbidity. Unreported use of psychotropic medications was also related to the risk for side effects, and clinicians should make an effort to ascertain all medications taken by geriatric psychiatric patients.

Psychotropic medication in geriatric psychiatric patients: use and unreported use in relation to serum concentrations.

PURPOSE: The aim of this observational study was to describe the type, number, and serum concentration levels of psychotropic drugs in elderly patients, on admission to a geriatric psychiatric inpatient unit. We further wanted to investigate the use and unreported use of psychotropic drugs by analyzing for a broad spectrum of drugs in the serum samples. METHODS: A total of 236 patients were included. Drug use, patient characteristics, and diagnoses were recorded, and serum analysis was performed for a total of 56 psychotropic drugs in 233 of the patients. RESULTS: Nine out of ten patients (88%) used one or more psychotropic drugs on admission to hospital; the mean use was 2.8 (95% confidence interval (CI) 2.6-2.9) drugs. In 25 patients (11%), drugs reported used were not detected in serum. Unreported use of drugs (serum analysis revealing one or more drugs not reported) was found in 100 patients (43%). This was more common in younger patients. Psychotropic polypharmacy (use of three or more psychotropic drugs) was found in 109 patients (47%). Patients with a main diagnosis of affective disorder used the most psychotropic drugs. CONCLUSIONS: Psychotropic drugs are commonly used among geriatric psychiatric patients on admission to hospital. Psychotropic polypharmacy is a major concern among these patients. There was considerable unreported use of drugs within this population, and a low threshold for a broader serum analysis for psychotropic drugs appears indicated.