Frequency of Clinical Monitoring of Serum Concentrations of Digoxin, Potassium, and Creatinine, and Recording of Electrocardiograms in Digoxin-Treated Patients: A Japanese Claims Database Analysis.

Guidelines for cardiovascular drug therapy recommend monitoring serum digoxin concentration (SDC) in patients receiving digoxin treatment, especially those with renal dysfunction and hypokalemia. However, only a few studies have reported the prevalence of SDC monitoring and laboratory testing in clinical practice. Therefore, the aim of this study was to describe the frequency of SDC monitoring and laboratory testing in digoxin users and to assess the association between SDC monitoring and patient characteristics. We used the Japanese insurance claims data covering approximately 1.7 million patients aged 20-74 years between January 1, 2005 and March 31, 2014. All patients who had at least one prescription for digoxin were included. The frequency of SDC and laboratory tests was calculated and the association between patient characteristics and SDC monitoring was assessed using logistic regression analysis. A total of 98867 prescriptions of digoxin were issued to 3458 patients between 2005 and 2014. The annual mean frequencies of monitoring SDC, serum potassium level and serum creatinine level and of recording electrocardiograms was 16.8, 34.8, 38.7, and 24.1%, respectively. Atrial fibrillation, chronic heart failure, renal diseases, and use of oral anticoagulants were associated with SDC monitoring. We found the frequency of SDC monitoring to be relatively low in Japanese clinical practice.

Clinical drug-drug interaction assessment of ivacaftor as a potential inhibitor of cytochrome P450 and P-glycoprotein.

Ivacaftor is approved in the USA for the treatment of cystic fibrosis (CF) in patients with a G551D-CFTR mutation or one of eight other CFTR mutations. A series of in vitro experiments conducted early in the development of ivacaftor indicated ivacaftor and metabolites may have the potential to inhibit cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2C8, CYP2C9, CYP3A, and CYP2D6, as well as P-glycoprotein (P-gp). Based on these results, a series of clinical drug-drug interaction (DDI) studies were conducted to evaluate the effect of ivacaftor on sensitive substrates of CYP2C8 (rosiglitazone), CYP3A (midazolam), CYP2D6 (desipramine), and P-gp (digoxin). In addition, a DDI study was conducted to evaluate the effect of ivacaftor on a combined oral contraceptive, as this is considered an important comedication in CF patients. The results indicate ivacaftor is a weak inhibitor of CYP3A and P-gp, but has no effect on CYP2C8 or CYP2D6. Ivacaftor caused non-clinically significant increases in ethinyl estradiol and norethisterone exposure. Based on these results, caution and appropriate monitoring are recommended when concomitant substrates of CYP2C9, CYP3A and/or P-gp are used during treatment with ivacaftor, particularly drugs with a narrow therapeutic index, such as warfarin.

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic drug-drug interaction assessment between pradigastat and digoxin or warfarin.

Pradigastat, a novel diacylglycerol acyltransferase-1 inhibitor, was evaluated for both pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) drug-drug interactions when co-administered with digoxin or warfarin in healthy subjects. This open-label study included two parallel subject cohorts each with three sequential treatment periods. Forty subjects were enrolled in the study with 20 subjects allocated to each cohort. PK and PD (PT/INR for warfarin only) samples were collected in each period. The statistical analysis results showed that the 90% CIs of the geometric mean ratios of digoxin, R-warfarin, and S-warfarin PK parameters (AUC and Cmax) were all within 0.80-1.25 interval. The 90% CIs of the geometric mean ratios of pradigastat PK parameters (AUC and Cmax) were within 0.80-1.25 interval when co-administered with warfarin; while co-administration with digoxin slightly reduced pradigastat exposure (∼15%). The results also showed that 90% CIs of the geometric mean ratios of warfarin PD parameters (AUC(PT), PTmax, AUC(INR), and INRmax) were within 0.80-1.25 interval. Pradigastat and digoxin or warfarin had no relevant clinical PK or PD drug-drug interactions. Administration of pradigastat and warfarin or pradigastat and digoxin as a mono or combined treatment appears to be safe and tolerated.

Assessment of the appropriateness of serum digoxin concentration measurement in a medical group setting.

BACKGROUND: Recent quality initiatives require that the routine annual therapeutic drug-monitoring (TDM) parameters for the high-risk medication digoxin include a measure of renal function and a serum potassium level but not a serum digoxin concentration (SDC) measurement. Several studies have shown that the majority of the SDCs obtained in hospital settings provide little clinically actionable information. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the appropriateness and utility of SDCs ordered in a medical group practice setting by categorizing the reason the SDC was ordered and identifying action taken in response to the result. METHODS: The descriptive study was conducted as a retrospective, electronic medical record (EMR) review of 90 primary care patients with continuous prescriptions for digoxin current on their medication profile with no gaps in therapy for at least 2 years prior to an SDC result entered into the EMR between January 1, 2009, and September 30, 2009. The reason the SDC was ordered was abstracted independently by 2 reviewers, who then assigned it to 1 of 8 predefined indication categories based on previously published criteria and practice guidelines. A third reviewer resolved inter-reviewer discrepancy (n = 1). RESULTS: A total of 90 patients with at least 1 SDC met inclusion criteria. Routine monitoring was the most frequent SDC order indication category with 35 patients (38.9%), 17 (48.6%) of whom did not have the recommended monitoring measures of potassium or renal function drawn concurrently. Patients were included in other categories as follows: confirmation of signs/symptoms of toxicity 30 (33.3%); assessment of factors altering pharmacokinetics 5 (5.6%); assessment of dosage change 5 (5.6%); assessment of drug interaction 3 (3.3%); assessment of clinical response 3 (3.3%); assessment of adherence 1 (1.1%); and other 2 (2.2%). Across all categories, a total of 19 (21.1%) of SDC results were outside the therapeutic range of 0.5 nanograms (ng) per mL and 2.0 ng per mL, 18 of which were below 0.5 ng per mL, with none of the subtherapeutic levels leading to a change in digoxin therapy. Only 1 patient (1.1%) had therapy changed in response to an elevated abnormal SDC result of 2.1 ng per mL and was in the routine monitoring category. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of SDC results obtained in our medical group setting did not lead to clinical action, such as dose adjustment or drug discontinuation. SDCs were commonly measured as part of routine monitoring, which is considered an inappropriate indication, and often without being accompanied by better markers for digoxin toxicity such as serum potassium levels and measures of renal function as recommended by drug-monitoring quality initiatives. Provider education is needed regarding the most indicative digoxin TDM parameters to obtain in order to satisfy quality initiatives.

Clinical repercussions of analytical interferences due to aldosterone antagonists in digoxin immunoassays: an assessment.

Analytical interferences in digoxin immunoassays constitute a well-known problem, with repercussions for therapeutic drug monitoring. Clinically effective doses of spironolactone and potassium canrenoate cross-react in several digoxin immunoassays, producing falsely elevated or lowered concentrations. This study evaluates the interferences caused by these drugs in the microparticle enzyme immunoassay (MEIA III) in comparison with another 3 immunoassays used for digoxin therapeutic drug monitoring: MEIA II, fluorescence polarization immunoassay, and enzyme multiplied immunoassay. The potential clinical implications of assay discrepancies in patient care are also assessed. To evaluate assay performance, in vitro specimens and real patient samples were measured using the 4 assays. Five serum pools were spiked with digoxin to achieve concentrations of 1 and 2.25 ng/mL digoxin and measured with the immunoassays before and after supplementation. Real samples from patients receiving digoxin (n = 39), digoxin and spironolactone (n = 35), or digoxin and potassium canrenoate (n = 4) were also quantified. The influence of ultrafiltration was evaluated in 3 pools from 29 additional patients. The implications of assay discrepancies for dose recommendations were also evaluated. In general, the results obtained for the in vitro and in vivo approaches coincided, confirming statistically significant differences in the assays regardless of the type of sample. MEIA III showed positive interference against the well-known negative interference attributed to MEIA II. According to Bland-Altman analysis, it is not possible to assume the interchangeability of the immunoassays evaluated. Thus, individual patients must be monitored with the same technique even in the absence of potential interferences. Discordant digoxin dose recommendations were estimated in 31% of patients not treated with interfering drugs and in 43% of cotreated patients. From a clinical perspective, analytical interferences in digoxin immunoassays are a real and frequent problem, which seems even more important in view of the lower therapeutic range now recommended.

[The digitalis: should we forget it?]. / La digitale: un farmaco da dimenticare?

For more than 200 years digitalis has been considered of paramount importance in the treatment of heart failure and atrial fibrillation. The IN-CHF Italian registry shows that prescriptions were reduced from 63.3% in the period 1995-1999 to 40% in the period 2000-2005, a very different trend compared to prescriptions of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor antagonists, and beta-blockers. The commercial value of digitalis is much lower than other drugs and it does not seem to be of interest for the pharmaceutical companies. Unfortunately, this is a logical trend in the business world. For many years the major indications of digitalis have been heart failure and atrial fibrillation. The most important study on efficacy of digitalis in the treatment of heart failure was the DIG trial (1997), which showed no difference in mortality when compared to placebo but significant beneficial effects in reducing hospital admission rates. Many post-hoc researches evaluated blood levels of digitalis and proved beneficial effects also on mortality when digoxinemia values were 0.5-0.9 ng/ml. In conclusion, digitalis should still be considered effective for the treatment of heart failure; therefore prescription modality as well as the range of normal values of digoxinemia should be updated.

Assessment of digoxin antibody use in patients with elevated serum digoxin following chronic or acute exposure.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the use of antidotal therapy in patients with an elevated digitalis concentration following chronic or acute exposure. DESIGN AND SETTING: Retrospective review of patient records over 2 years in 20 city hospitals in France. PATIENTS: Overall 838 patients with an elevated serum digitalis concentration (digoxin > 1.95ng /ml or digitoxin > 23ng /ml) were included in the study. Of these, 67 (8%) had received antidotal therapy with Fab fragments. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: The relationships between previously reported prognostic criteria and use of antidotal therapy were investigated. We identified five independent factors that were associated with the use of antidotal therapy: acute overdose (OR 15.74), Fab fragment availability in the hospital (11.06), serum potassium (1.81), and heart rate (0.96). Mortality was significantly lower in Fab-treated (6%, 4/67) than untreated patients (15%, 117/770). CONCLUSIONS: Antidotal therapy is underused in patients with an elevated digitalis concentration especially in patients with chronic digitalis exposure. These patients in our series presented a higher mortality rate than patients with acute poisoning. Although they were older and tended to have a history of cardiac disease, they did not differ from patients with acute poisoning with regard to the main severity criteria and prognostic factors. The use of identical criteria for antidotal treatment after acute and chronic poisoning should help optimize outcomes. Fab fragment availability is insufficient in France but ranks only second after type of poisoning (acute or chronic) in the multivariate association with Fab treatment.

Digoxin prescribing for heart failure in elderly residents of long-term care facilities.

BACKGROUND: Digoxin is often used in long-term care (LTC) residents with heart failure despite a high risk of toxicity associated with increased age, comorbidities and polypharmacy. This toxicity may occur at serum digoxin concentrations that are as low as 1.54 nmol/L. OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence of digoxin use, estimate the proportion at risk of toxicity and identify correlates of digoxin use in LTC residents with heart failure. METHODS: Cross-sectional survey in eight LTC facilities that lodge a total of 1223 residents. RESULTS: The prevalence of heart failure was 20%. Digoxin was prescribed for 32% of residents with heart failure and was associated with arrhythmia (primarily atrial fibrillation), anticoagulant and diuretic use, and higher serum thyroid-stimulating hormone. Digoxin doses higher than those that achieve the recommended therapeutic peak body stores of 6 microg/kg and 10 microg/kg were prescribed to 80% and 33% of residents with heart failure, respectively. Serum digoxin concentrations were greater than 1.5 nmol/L in 30% of patients. Comorbidities and concurrently prescribed medications that increase the risk of digoxin toxicity were prescribed to 26% of the patients. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately one-third of LTC residents with heart failure received digoxin. Atrial fibrillation was the most important determinant of use. At least 26% of these residents were exposed to an increased risk of digoxin toxicity. Studies are required to determine safe and effective digoxin dosing regimens for frail elderly heart failure patients. Clinicians should exercise caution when using digoxin in LTC residents.

Impaired protein binding of Chinese medicine DanShen in uremic sera and sera with hyperbilirubinemia: rapid assessment of total and free DanShen concentrations using the fluorescence polarization immunoassay for digoxin.

DanShen is a Chinese medicine that is used to treat cardiovascular disorders. DanShen is moderately to strongly protein bound, mainly to albumin. Because impaired protein binding of albumin-bound drugs in uremia has been reported, we studied protein binding of DanShen by measuring the digoxin-like immunoreactive component of this Chinese medicine. We observed a significantly higher percentage of free fraction of DanShen in uremic sera in vitro. Impaired protein binding of DanShen was also observed in sera from patients with liver disease, who had elevated concentrations of bilirubin. Treating uremic sera with activated charcoal significantly improved the protein binding of DanShen, indicating that uremic compounds are responsible for the impaired protein binding of DanShen. On the other hand, when various amounts of bilirubin were added to aliquots of the normal pool supplemented with DanShen, we observed only a modest displacement of DanShen from the protein-binding sites by bilirubin, indicating that hypoalbuminemia may play a major role in impaired protein binding of DanShen in sera with elevated bilirubin concentrations. We conclude that protein binding of DanShen is lower in uremic sera and in sera with elevated bilirubin concentrations.

Comparison by external quality assessment of performance of analytical systems for measurement of therapeutic drugs in serum.

The precision and accuracy of analytical methods currently in use for therapeutic drug monitoring were evaluated from proficiency test data provided by laboratories participating in the international Healthcontrol external quality assessment scheme for a range of eight antiepileptic drugs, theophylline, caffeine, and digoxin. Different analytical systems were assessed after grouping according to the reagent source and the analyzer used. The majority of analytical methods produced comparable levels of performance with coefficient of variation of < 10% and accuracy within +/-7% of the spike value. Emit reagents were implemented successfully on diverse analyzers but data from the Cobas Mira were generally in the technique group with significantly lower precision. Bias problems were evident for a number of FPIA assays for specific drugs. For example, caffeine interference was present in theophylline measurements by Sigma FPIA reagents whereas use of nonhuman matrix caused a negative bias in Abbott FPIA measurements of carbamazepine. Measurements in the group with highest positive bias were produced by Roche FPIA reagents for phenytoin, phenobarbitone, and carbamazepine. Chromatographic and turbidimetric techniques performed satisfactorily. The variable performance of the different reagent/analyzer combinations demonstrates the value of the narrower technique classification in the assessment of assay performance.

High-performance liquid chromatography-ionspray mass spectrometry for the specific determination of digoxin and some related cardiac glycosides in human plasma.

An original method based upon high-performance liquid chromatography coupled to ionspray mass spectrometry (HPLC-ISP-MS) has been developed for the identification and quantification in plasma of several cardiac glycosides, namely digoxin, digitoxin, lanatoside C and acetyldigitoxin. After single-step liquid-liquid extraction by chloroform-2-propanol (95:5, v/v) at pH 9.5 using oleandrin as an internal standard, solutes are separated on a 4 microm NovaPak C18 (Waters) column (150x2.0 mm, I.D.), using a gradient of acetonitrile-2 mM NH4COOH, pH 3 buffer (flow-rate 200 microl/min, post-column split 1:3). Detection is done by a Perkin-Elmer Sciex API-100 mass analyzer equipped with an ISP interface. In most instances the major ion observed is not [M+H]+ as expected, but [M+NH4]+. The mean retention times (min) are: lanatoside C, 5.74; digoxin, 6.00; digitoxin, 8.08, oleandrin, 8.30, acetyldigitoxin, 8.66 and 9.01 (isomers alpha and beta, respectively). The lower limits of detection in single ion monitoring mode range from 0.15 ng/ml (alpha- and beta-acetyldigitoxin) to 0.60 ng/ml (lanatoside C), making the method less sensitive than radioimmunoassay, whereas it is much more specific.

Analytic performance of digoxin laboratory monitoring.

Since therapeutic drug monitoring is rapidly becoming a widely-used tool in clinical medicine we prospectively assessed 547 control samples over a period of 18 months using fluorescence polarization immunoassay, calibrators and control samples to determine the analytical performance of Abbott TDx in measuring serum digoxin levels. Recovery of the controls (within-run and between-run coefficient of variation) evaluated at the low, target therapeutic and intoxication ranges was 14%, 8% and 7% and precision was -3.57, -7.02, -3.38, respectively. Our clinical utility analysis showed that the prescribed dose provided serum digoxin levels within, above and below the targeted therapeutic range for 50.2%, 38.4% and 11.4% of the patients, respectively. The discrepancy between the calibrators and the controls, the tendency towards lower prescription dosage and patient noncompliance with the prescribed dose all account for these findings. The direct costs for digoxin serum concentration monitoring amount to 10 US $. A closer collaboration between the laboratory and the prescribing physician will undoubtedly form the basis of a more effective cost-efficacy strategy of digoxin serum monitoring as an indispensable tool and cornerstone of clinical decision-making.

Using patient outcomes to screen for clinical laboratory errors.

How to measure the quality of laboratory testing has long been a challenging problem for laboratory managers and accrediting agencies. Traditionally, laboratory quality has been assessed by direct inspection, proficiency testing, and the credentials of staff. None of these methods is entirely satisfactory at answering a fundamental question: does the laboratory give technically accurate and clinically meaningful information for each patient that it tests? This paper discusses how information on patient outcomes can be used to screen for laboratories that may be making frequent random or systematic errors. This approach is called downstream event monitoring (DEM). The basic idea is to look at what happens to a laboratory's patients in a critical window of time after they have been tested. The approach carries out a basic adage of quality management: follow up with your customers to see if your product has met their needs. The main idea of DEM is that if a laboratory has not conveyed accurate information, the clinician may take actions that fail to help, or maybe even harm, the patient. If a laboratory's patients have an unusually high rate of adverse events that happen within a window of time when the laboratory test would have played a critical role, the laboratory should be further examined to see if it is the cause of the problem. Right now, DEM is a technique under development. It needs a clinical logic to relate a patient's outcomes back to a laboratory test, and it needs good data to compare laboratories. This paper discusses how the prothrombin time test and the serum digoxin test have been examined for Medicare patients to see if certain laboratory characteristics are associated with unusually high occurrences of adverse events after testing. The need for future validation studies is also discussed.

Assessment of the immunoreactivity of digoxin metabolites and the cross-reactivity with digoxin-like immunoreactive factors in the Roche-TDM ONLINE digoxin assay.

Immunoassays for digoxin measurement have long had the problem of low specificity. Antisera used in these assays may not only measure digoxin and the active metabolites but also cross-react with the noncardioactive metabolites and digoxin-like immunoreactive factors (DLIFs). In this study, we describe the analytical performance of the newly introduced Roche-TDM ONLINE digoxin assay on the COBAS FARA II centrifugal analyzer. The assay possessed linearity up to 5.0 ng/ml, sensitivity of 0.19 ng/ml, average recovery of 100.4%, and day-to-day variability of < 6%. The assay demonstrated no cross-reactivity with DLIFs or spironolactone and its metabolites and negligible reactivity with the digoxin noncardioactive metabolites. In addition, the immunoreactivity of the digoxin active metabolites reflected their cardioactivity. We conclude that the Roche-TDM ONLINE digoxin assay is highly specific and precise and suitable for the therapeutic monitoring of this drug.

Assessment of the pharmacokinetic interaction between zileuton and digoxin in humans.

The effects of coadministration of zileuton on the pharmacokinetic profile of digoxin were investigated in a double-blind placebo-controlled crossover study in 12 healthy male volunteers. During each study phase, the subjects received zileuton 600mg every 6 hours (regimen A) or placebo (regimen B) for 13 days. In addition, all subjects received concomitant digoxin 0.25 mg/day on study days 1 to 11 during both study phases. The study results provide no evidence of any significant overall effect of zileuton on digoxin plasma concentration-time profiles. Although the mean time to reach the maximum plasma concentration for digoxin was significantly shorter after concomitant administration of digoxin and zileuton than after concomitant administration of digoxin and placebo (0.95 vs 1.43 hours), there were no significant differences between the 2 regimens in the values for maximum plasma concentration, area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 hours, elimination half-life, oral clearance, and apparent volume of distribution associated with the terminal phase. Therefore, it is concluded that digoxin and zileuton may be coadministered without risk of clinically relevant effects on the pharmacokinetic profile of digoxin.

Positive interference of merthiolate in the TDx digoxin assay in control samples used in the Belgian External Quality Assessment (EQA) Scheme.

We investigated the possible origin of the spuriously high results observed with the Abbott TDx Immunoassay in the 1991 Belgian external quality assessment scheme for digoxin. The present work ascribes this discrepancy to a matrix effect induced by the addition of merthiolate as preservative to the control samples. It consequently stresses the importance of avoiding the use of this compound for preparing such samples.

[Digoxin level as a limited drug toxicity indicator in the assessment of post-digitalis arrhythmia]. / Poziom digoksyny jako ograniczony wskaznik toksycznosci leku w ocenie ponaparstnicowych zaburzen rytmu serca.

A clinical-laboratory analysis was carried out in 18 patients on long-term treatment with digoxin in whom toxic arrhythmia occurred, taking into account serum digoxin level measurement. In 11 patients the toxic arrhythmia correlated with high digoxin concentration in blood, in six cases it was observed with the concentration of the drug within the therapeutic level range, and in one patient it was seen below this range. Blood digoxin level in patients with hypokalemia was significantly lower in comparison to those with normal serum potassium level. Severe clinical condition of patients, especially elderly persons with hypokalemia, respiratory acidosis and renal failure contributes to the development of toxic arrhythmia; for this reason it is useful to apply in these patients the therapy monitored by blood level of the drug. Electrocardiographic features of digitalis action and non-cardiac adverse effects were seldom observed in patients with toxic arrhythmia.

Microsampling homogeneous immunoassay with Cedia digoxin reagents on the Technicon CHEM 1 chemistry analyzer.

We report the determination of digoxin concentration in serum with Microgenics Cedia digoxin reagents on the Technicon CHEM 1. The Technicon CHEM 1 clinical chemistry analyzer has a throughput of 720 tests per hour and uses only 7 microliters each of two reagents. A 100 test kit can perform 2,640 tests. The within-run coefficient of variation (CV) range is 2.3-0.9% and the total CV is 6.3-2.9% at concentrations tested ranging from 1.10 to 2.94 ng/ml. The results of the Technicon CHEM 1 (y) assay correlated well with those by the Technicon RA 1000 system (x) with 31 clinical serum samples (y = -0.03 + 1.11x, r = 0.96). We concluded that the Cedia digoxin assay on the Technicon CHEM 1 provides a very cost-effective, precise, rapid, and accurate means to determine digoxin concentration in serum.