A fatal case of desvenlafaxine and paroxetine poisoning.

Desvenlafaxine (O-desmethylvenlafaxine) and paroxetine are antidepressants that inhibit serotonin reuptake. Despite their relatively safe profiles, several serious side effects, including serotonin syndrome, bleeding, mania, and high blood pressure, are observed. We report the confirmation of the death of a 41-year-old female, with an overdose of desvenlafaxine and paroxetine suspected as the main cause of death. To quantify the level of desvenlafaxine and paroxetine in whole blood and urine, solid phase extraction combined with liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry was developed and validated. Calibration curves were linear with coefficients of determination (r2) >0.999 for desvenlafaxine and paroxetine. The limits of detection and the limits of quantification for both desvenlafaxine and paroxetine were 0.001 µg/mL and 0.02 µg/mL, respectively. Desvenlafaxine and paroxetine were detected in the postmortem samples, along with various psychiatric drugs, and the blood alcohol content level was below 0.010%. The concentrations of desvenlafaxine and paroxetine in the heart blood were 11.0 µg/mL and 2.1 µg/mL, respectively, indicating lethal concentrations. In the urine, the concentrations of desvenlafaxine and paroxetine were 87.7 µg/mL and 3.5 µg/mL, respectively. This is the first report to determine the blood concentration of desvenlafaxine in a fatal intoxication caused by an overdose of desvenlafaxine single formulation.

Pitfalls and challenges associated with phenoconversion in forensic toxcicology.

PURPOSE: In recent years, several publications have demonstrated the interest and the usefulness of pharmacogenetics in forensic toxicology. However, this approach remains namely focused on DNA-based phenotype, which may potentially lead to misinterpretation. Other determinants such as co-medication or physiological parameters may also impact the phenotype. This article aims to highlight the importance of considering such determinants in forensic toxicology, through the original case of a heroin-related fatality. METHOD: Ethanol concentration determination and toxicological screening were performed using gas chromatography with flame ionization detection, liquid chromatography with diode array detection and gas chromatography with mass spectrometry detection. CYP2C19 and CYP2D6 genotypes were determined by Taqman® real-time PCR analyses. RESULTS: Femoral blood analyses revealed the presence of ethanol, morphine, codeine, venlafaxine (VEN), O-desmethylvenlafaxine (ODV) and N-desmethylvenlafaxine (NDV), paroxetine, and risperidone. 6-acetylmorphine was also identified in urine. VEN, paroxetine and risperidone were quantified at supra-therapeutic or toxic blood concentrations. NDV was not quantified. The metabolic ratio of VEN (ODV to VEN) was exceptionally low (about 0.7). Pharmacogenetics testing showed that the patient was heterozygous for the CYP2C19*2 loss-of-function allele, which predict an intermediate metabolism for CYP2C19. None of the deficient CYP2D6 alleles investigated were identified. Those results suggest an extensive CYP2D6-metabolism phenotype. CONCLUSION: A discrepancy was seen between the results of the genomic evaluation and the observed metabolic ratio of VEN. This tends to exclude a genetic origin and lead us to formulate other hypotheses, such as phenoconversion that may have been induced by drug interaction involving patients' regular medications. Phenoconversion is as a complex phenomenon that leads to genotype-phenotype mismatch without any genetic abnormality particularly described for cytochromes P450 2D6 and 2C19. Although transient, phenoconversion can have a significant impact on the analysis and interpretation of genotype-focused clinical outcomes correlation and in forensic toxicology conclusions.

Precision dosing-based optimisation of paroxetine during pregnancy for poor and ultrarapid CYP2D6 metabolisers: a virtual clinical trial pharmacokinetics study.

OBJECTIVE: Paroxetine has been demonstrated to undergo gestation-related reductions in plasma concentrations, to an extent which is dictated by the polymorphic state of CYP 2D6. However, knowledge of appropriate dose titrations is lacking. METHODS: A pharmacokinetic modelling approach was applied to examine gestational changes in trough plasma concentrations for CYP 2D6 phenotypes, followed by necessary dose adjustment strategies to maintain paroxetine levels within a therapeutic range of 20-60 ng/ml. KEY FINDINGS: A decrease in trough plasma concentrations was simulated throughout gestation for all phenotypes. A significant number of ultrarapid (UM) phenotype subjects possessed trough levels below 20 ng/ml (73-76%) compared to extensive metabolisers (EM) (51-53%). CONCLUSIONS: For all phenotypes studied, there was a requirement for daily doses in excess of the standard 20 mg dose throughout gestation. For EM, a dose of 30 mg daily in trimester 1 followed by 40 mg daily in trimesters 2 and 3 is suggested to be optimal. For poor metabolisers (PM), a 20 mg daily dose in trimester 1 followed by 30 mg daily in trimesters 2 and 3 is suggested to be optimal. For UM, a 40 mg daily dose throughout gestation is suggested to be optimal.

Modification of the association between paroxetine serum concentration and SERT-occupancy by ABCB1 (P-glycoprotein) polymorphisms in major depressive disorder.

BACKGROUND: Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) exert substantial variability in effectiveness in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD), with up to 50-60% not achieving adequate response. Elucidating pharmacokinetic factors that explain this variability is important to increase treatment effectiveness. OBJECTIVES: To examine potential modification of the relationship between paroxetine serum concentration (PSC) and serotonin transporter (SERT)-occupancy by single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of the ABCB1 gene, coding for the P-glycoprotein (P-gp) pump, in MDD patients. To investigate the relationship between ABCB1 SNPs and clinical response. METHODS: Patients had MDD and received paroxetine 20 mg/day. We measured PSC after 6 weeks. We quantified SERT-occupancy with SPECT imaging (n = 38) and measured 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS17)-scores at baseline and after 6 weeks (n = 81). We genotyped ABCB1 at rs1045642 [3435C>T], rs1128503 [1236C>T], rs2032582 [2677G>T/A] and rs2235040 [2505G>A]. For our primary aim, we modeled mean SERT-occupancy in an Emax nonlinear regression model with PSC and assessed whether the model improved by genetic subgrouping. For our secondary aim, we used multivariate linear regression analysis. RESULTS: The rs1128503 and rs2032582 SNPs modified the relationship between PSC and SERT-occupancy in both our intention-to-treat and sensitivity analyses at the carriership level. However, we could not detect significant differences in clinical response between any of the genetic subgroups. CONCLUSION: Pharmacokinetic influences of the ABCB1 rs1128503 and rs2032582 represent a potentially relevant pharmacogenetic mechanism to consider when evaluating paroxetine efficacy. Future studies are needed to support the role of ABCB1 genotyping for individualizing SSRI pharmacotherapy.

Magnetic solid-phase extraction coupled with UHPLC-MS/MS for four antidepressants and one metabolite in clinical plasma and urine samples.

Aim: Routine therapeutic drug monitoring is highly recommended since common antidepressant combinations increase the risk of drug-drug interactions or overlapping toxicity. Materials & methods: A magnetic solid-phase extraction by using C18-functionalized magnetic silica nanoparticles (C18-Fe3O4@SiO2 NPs) as sorbent was proposed for rapid extraction of venlafaxine, paroxetine, fluoxetine, norfluoxetine and sertraline from clinical plasma and urine samples followed by ultra-HPLC-MS/MS assay. Results: The synthesized C18-Fe3O4@SiO2 NPs showed high magnetization and efficient extraction for the analytes. After cleanup by magnetic solid-phase extraction, no matrix effects were found in plasma and urine matrices. The analytes showed LODs among 0.15-0.75 ng ml-1, appropriate linearity (R ≥ 0.9990) from 2.5 to 1000 ng ml-1, acceptable accuracies 89.1-110.9% with precisions ≤11.0%. The protocol was successfully applied for the analysis of patients' plasma and urine samples. Conclusion: It shows high potential in routine therapeutic drug monitoring of clinical biological samples.

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and venlafaxine in pregnancy: Changes in drug disposition.

BACKGROUND: Pregnancy may cause changes in drug disposition. The clinical consequences may be profound and even counterintuitive; in some cases pregnant women may need more than twice their usual drug dose in order to maintain therapeutic drug levels. For antidepressants, evidence on drug disposition in pregnancy is scarce. The aim of this study was to determine the effects of pregnancy on serum levels of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and venlafaxine in a large and naturalistic patient material, in order to provide tentative dose recommendations for pregnant women. METHODS: Using patient data from two routine therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) services in Norway with linkage to the national birth registry, dose-adjusted serum drug concentrations of SSRIs and venlafaxine during pregnancy were compared to the women's own baseline (non-pregnant) values, using a linear mixed model. FINDINGS: Overall, the TDM databases contained 196,726 serum concentration measurements from 54,393 women. After data linkage and drug selection (SSRIs or venlafaxine only), we identified 367 analyses obtained from a total of 290 pregnancies in 281 women, and 420 baseline observations from the same women. Serum concentrations in the third trimester were significantly lower than baseline for paroxetine (-51%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -66%, -30%; p<0.001), fluvoxamine (-56%; CI, -75%, -23%; p = 0.004) and citalopram (-24%; CI, -38%, -7%; p = 0,007), and higher than baseline for sertraline (+68%; CI, +37%, +106%; p<0.001). For escitalopram, fluoxetine and venlafaxine concentrations did not change significantly. CONCLUSIONS: For paroxetine and fluvoxamine the pronounced decline in maternal drug serum concentrations in pregnancy may necessitate a dose increase of about 100% during the third trimester in order to maintain stable concentrations. For fluoxetine, venlafaxine, citalopram, escitalopram and sertraline, the present study indicates that dose adjustments are generally not necessary during pregnancy.

Structure-Based Design of Highly Selective and Potent G Protein-Coupled Receptor Kinase 2 Inhibitors Based on Paroxetine.

In heart failure, the ß-adrenergic receptors (ßARs) become desensitized and uncoupled from heterotrimeric G proteins. This process is initiated by G protein-coupled receptor kinases (GRKs), some of which are upregulated in the failing heart, making them desirable therapeutic targets. The selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor, paroxetine, was previously identified as a GRK2 inhibitor. Utilizing a structure-based drug design approach, we modified paroxetine to generate a small compound library. Included in this series is a highly potent and selective GRK2 inhibitor, 14as, with an IC50 of 30 nM against GRK2 and greater than 230-fold selectivity over other GRKs and kinases. Furthermore, 14as showed a 100-fold improvement in cardiomyocyte contractility assays over paroxetine and a plasma concentration higher than its IC50 for over 7 h. Three of these inhibitors, including 14as, were additionally crystallized in complex with GRK2 to give insights into the structural determinants of potency and selectivity of these inhibitors.

Single- and multiple-dose pharmacokinetics and tolerability of a paroxetine controlled-release tablet in healthy Chinese subjects
.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the pharmacokinetics of paroxetine controlled-release (CR) tablets after single and multiple oral administrations and to evaluate its safety profile in healthy Chinese subjects. METHODS: This was a phase 1, open-label, single- and multiple-dose combined study. All 12 healthy subjects received a single oral dose of 25-mg paroxetine CR, followed by a washout period of 5 days. Then, the subjects received multiple oral doses of 25-mg paroxetine CR for 14 consecutive days. Serial venous blood samples were collected 96 hours after single dosing and 24 hours after the last dose in multiple-dosing. Blood samples were analyzed using LC-MS/MS. Pharmacokinetic parameters of paroxetine were calculated via noncompartmental analysis using the WinNonlin software (Pharsight Corp., Mountain View, CA, USA). RESULTS: For both single- and multiple-dose regimens, a lag time of ~ 4 hours was observed before the absorption of paroxetine CR tablet with a tmax of ~ 7 - 9 hours. From single- to multiple-dose regimens, the mean Cmax increased from 7.08 to 36.95 ng/mL, the mean AUC0-24h increased from 100.91 to 706.75 h×ng/mL, and the mean t1/2 increased from 12.3 to 83.6 hours (all p < 0.05). The point estimate and 90% confidence intervals of the Ctrough ratio indicated that the concentration of paroxetine reached steady state after 14 days of repeated dosing. The point estimate of the accumulation factor indicated that the extent of drug exposure at steady state was ~ 9 times that of single dosing. All reported adverse events were considered to be mild. CONCLUSIONS: Paroxetine CR tablet is absorbed with a delay of ~ 4 hours after oral administration, and the accumulation factor is ~ 9 at steady state. Paroxetine CR tablet is well tolerated by healthy Chinese subjects.
.

Contrasting regional Fos expression in adolescent and young adult rats following acute administration of the antidepressant paroxetine.

Adolescents and adults may respond differently to antidepressants, with poorer efficacy and greater probability of adverse effects in adolescents. The mechanisms underlying this differential response are largely unknown, but likely relate to an interaction between the neural effects of antidepressants and brain development. We used Fos immunohistochemistry to examine regional differences in adolescent (postnatal day (PND) 28) and young adult (PND 56) male, Wistar rats given a single injection of the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor paroxetine (10mg/kg). Paroxetine induced widespread Fos expression in both adolescent and young adult rats. Commonly affected areas include the bed nucleus of the stria terminalis (dorsolateral), medial preoptic area, paraventricular hypothalamic and thalamic nuclei and central nucleus of the amygdala. Fos expression was generally lower in adolescents with significantly greater Fos expression observed in young adults in the prelimbic cortex, supraoptic nucleus, basolateral amygdala, lateral parabrachial and Kölliker-Fuse nuclei. However, a small subset of regions showed greater adolescent Fos expression including the nucleus accumbens shell, lateral habenula and dorsal raphe. Paroxetine increased plasma corticosterone concentrations in young adults, but not adolescents. Plasma paroxetine levels were not significantly different between the age groups. These results indicate a different c-Fos signature of acute paroxetine in adolescent rats, with greater activation in key mesolimbic and serotonergic regions, but a more subdued cortical, brainstem and hypothalamic response. This suggests that the atypical response of adolescents to paroxetine may be related to a blunted neuroendocrine response, combined with insufficient top-down regulation of limbic regions involved in reward and impulsivity.

High-throughput liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry method for simultaneous determination of fampridine, paroxetine, and quinidine in rat plasma: Application to in vivo perfusion study.

A selective and high-throughput liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry method has been developed and validated for the simultaneous quantification of paroxetine, fampridine, and quinidine in rat plasma using imipramine as an internal standard. Following protein precipitation extraction, the analytes and internal standard were run on XBridge C18 column (150 mm × 4.6 mm, 5 µm) using a gradient mobile phase consisting of 5mM ammonium formate in water (pH 9.0) and acetonitrile in a flow gradience program. The precursor and product ions of the drugs were monitored on a triple quadrupole instrument operated in the positive ionization mode. The method was validated over a concentration range of 0.1-100 ng/mL for all the three analytes, with relative recoveries ranging from 69% to 82%. The intra- and interbatch precision (percent coefficient of variation) across four validation runs were less than 13.4%. The accuracy determined at four quality control (QC) levels (lower limit of quantitation, low QC, medium QC, and high QC) was within ±6.5% of coefficient of variation values. The method proved highly reproducible and sensitive, and was successfully applied in a pharmacokinetic study after single-dose oral administration to rats and also in perfusion study sample analysis.

Exposure-outcome analysis in depressed patients treated with paroxetine using population pharmacokinetics.

PURPOSE: This study investigated population pharmacokinetics of paroxetine, and then performed an integrated analysis of exposure and clinical outcome using population pharmacokinetic parameter estimates in depressed patients treated with paroxetine. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 271 therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) data were retrospectively collected from 127 psychiatric outpatients. A population nonlinear mixed-effects modeling approach was used to describe serum concentrations of paroxetine. For 83 patients with major depressive disorder, the treatment response rate and the incidence of adverse drug reaction (ADR) were characterized by logistic regression using daily dose or area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) estimated from the final model as a potential exposure predictor. RESULTS: One compartment model was developed. The apparent clearance of paroxetine was affected by age as well as daily dose administered at steady-state. Overall treatment response rate was 72%, and the incidence of ADR was 30%. The logistic regression showed that exposure predictors were not associated with treatment response or ADR in the range of dose commonly used in routine practice. However, the incidence of ADR increased with the increase of daily dose or AUC for the patients with multiple concentrations. CONCLUSION: In depressed patients treated with paroxetine, TDM may be of limited value for individualization of treatment.

Differentiated effects of the multimodal antidepressant vortioxetine on sleep architecture: Part 1, a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic comparison with paroxetine in healthy men.

We compared the effect of vortioxetine, paroxetine and placebo after three days of dosing on sleep architecture. This was a randomised, double-blind, four-way crossover, placebo-controlled, multiple-dose study in 24 healthy young men. Subjects received 20mg vortioxetine, 40 mg vortioxetine, 20mg paroxetine or placebo for three consecutive days in four different periods with at least three weeks between them. Polysomnography and blood sampling for pharmacokinetic analysis were performed on the pre-dose night and nights 1 and 3 of dosing in each period. Plasma concentrations of vortioxetine and paroxetine during the polysomnography measurement were used to estimate SERT occupancies using published relationships in healthy subjects.All three active treatments significantly increased REM onset latency and decreased time spent in REM sleep. In the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamics analysis significant relationships were found between REM onset latency and time spent in REM sleep and vortioxetine/paroxetine exposure. The relation between REM suppression parameters and SERT occupancy was significantly different between vortioxetine and paroxetine, despite the same SERT occupancy. This indicates that vortioxetine has a different clinical pharmacological profile from paroxetine, which may explain the differences in adverse effect profile of the two drugs, for instance the lower incidence of nausea, weight gain and sexual dysfunction with vortioxetine.

Cytochrome P450 2D6 genotype affects the pharmacokinetics of controlled-release paroxetine in healthy Chinese subjects: comparison of traditional phenotype and activity score systems.

PURPOSE: This study evaluated the effects of cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2D6 polymorphisms on the pharmacokinetics of controlled-release paroxetine in healthy Chinese subjects and used paroxetine as a tool drug to compare the performance of traditional phenotype and activity score systems. METHODS: Pharmacokinetic data were evaluated in 24 subjects who received a single oral dose of 25 mg controlled-release paroxetine. Plasma paroxetine concentrations were measured by LC-MS/MS. CYP2D6 genotypes were tested by PCR and direct DNA sequencing. Subjects were classified by two systems of phenotype prediction. In the traditional phenotype system, subjects were classified as extensive metabolizers or intermediate metabolizers; in the activity score system, subjects were divided into four activity groups. Analysis of variance testing was applied to estimate the effects of CYP2D6 polymorphisms on the pharmacokinetics of paroxetine. RESULTS: With the traditional phenotype system, significant differences were observed in the following pharmacokinetic parameters of paroxetine: t 1/2, C max, AUC0-t, AUC0-inf, Vz/F, and CL/F (all P < 0.05). The AUC or exposure of paroxetine was about 3.5-fold higher in the intermediate metabolizer group than in the extensive metabolizer group. With the activity score system, significant differences were observed in the t 1/2, C max, AUC0-t, AUC0-inf, Vz/F, and CL/F among the four different activity score groups (all P < 0.05). We found that the AUC of paroxetine decreased by around one half as the activity score increased by 0.5. CONCLUSION: The pharmacokinetics of controlled-release paroxetine after a single administration was affected by CYP2D6 polymorphisms. Both the traditional phenotype and the activity score systems performed well and distinguished subjects with different drug exposures. The activity score system provided a more detailed classification for the subjects.

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors in Elderly Patients.

BACKGROUND: Elderly patients are at increased risk for elevated serum concentrations from treatment with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). The aim of this study was to examine the use of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of SSRIs in elderly compared with younger patients. METHODS: All serum concentration measurements of SSRIs (escitalopram, citalopram, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, paroxetine, and sertraline) performed at our laboratory in 2011 were included. The use of TDM (relative frequency) in older versus younger patients was examined by comparing the use of TDM in patients aged 60 years or older with that in patients younger than 60 years and by evaluating the use of TDM relative to age (age groups in decennials). The number of patients with an SSRI dispensed by prescription in the same region and period (the Norwegian Prescription Database) was used as reference. Additionally, the number of samples above the upper limit of the recommended reference range in patients aged 60 years or older and patients younger than 60 years was evaluated. RESULTS: TDM of an SSRI had been performed in 6333 patients. For all SSRIs, the use of TDM was significantly lower (8.2% versus 10.6% for citalopram, 10.0% versus 13.8% for escitalopram, 8.6% versus 17.0% for fluoxetine, 5.6% versus 10.3% for paroxetine, and 8.1% versus 15.0% for sertraline) in patients aged 60 years or older compared with those younger than 60 years (P < 0.001). There was a gradual decline in the use of TDM with increasing age, with a 3-fold difference between the youngest (10-19) and oldest (90+) patients (P < 0.0001). The percentage of samples above the upper limit of the recommended reference range was 2-fold higher in patients aged 60 years or older (6.7%) compared with patients younger than 60 (3.4%) years (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical follow-up of patients with TDM of SSRIs is less frequent in older patients compared with younger patients. This is in contrast to the general guidelines for TDM where patients of advanced age are considered of particular importance to monitor closely.

Nonresponders to daily paroxetine and another SSRI in men with lifelong premature ejaculation: a pharmacokinetic dose-escalation study for a rare phenomenon.

PURPOSE: Nonresponse to any selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) treatment is rare. In this study, we aimed to investigate ejaculation delay nonresponse to paroxetine treatment in men with lifelong premature ejaculation (PE) who were also known to be nonresponders to other SSRIs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Five males with lifelong PE who were known nonresponders to paroxetine and other serotonergic antidepressants and eight males with lifelong PE who were specifically recruited were included. Blood sampling occurred 1 month and 1 day before the start of treatment and at the end of three consecutive series of 4 weeks of daily treatment with 10-, 20-, and 30-mg paroxetine, respectively. Blood samples for measurement of leptin and paroxetine were taken at 8:30 AM, 9:30 AM, 10:30 AM, and 11:30 AM, respectively. At 9:00 AM, one tablet of 10-, 20-, or 30-mg paroxetine was taken during the first, second, and third month, respectively. Intravaginal ejaculatory latency time (IELT) was measured with a stopwatch. The main outcome measures were the fold increase in the geometric mean IELT, serum leptin and paroxetine concentrations, body mass index (BMI), 5-HT1A receptor C-1019G polymorphism, and CYP2D6 mutations. RESULTS: Between the 7 paroxetine responders and 6 nonresponders, the fold increase in the geometric mean IELT was significantly different after daily 10-mg (p=0.003), 20-mg (p=0.002), and 30-mg paroxetine (p=0.026) and ranged from 2.0 to 8.8 and from 1.1 to 1.7, respectively. BMI at baseline and at the end of the study was not significantly different between responders and nonresponders. Serum leptin levels at baseline were similar in responders and nonresponders and did not change during treatment. The serum paroxetine concentration increased with increasing dosage and was not significantly different between responders and nonresponders. There was no association between the fold increase in the geometric mean IELT and serum paroxetine levels during the three treatment periods nor between leptin levels during the treatment periods and serum paroxetine levels. For the 5-HT1A receptor C-1019G variation, all responders had the CC genotype and all nonresponders had the GC genotype, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Complete absence of paroxetine-induced ejaculation delay is presumably related to pharmacodynamic factors and perhaps to 5-HT1A receptor gene polymorphism.

Therapeutic reference range for plasma concentrations of paroxetine in patients with major depressive disorders.

BACKGROUND: We investigated the relationship between plasma concentrations of paroxetine and the therapeutic effect of the drug, and we evaluated the therapeutic reference range for plasma concentration of paroxetine in patients with major depressive disorders (MDD). METHODS: In this study, 120 patients with MDD were treated with 10-40 mg/d of paroxetine for 6 weeks, and 89 patients completed the protocol. The Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) was used to evaluate the patients at 0, 1, 2, 4, and 6 weeks. At the 6-week treatment time point, the patients were divided into 7 groups according to their paroxetine plasma concentrations in increments of 20 ng/mL. We used an analysis of variance and a χ test to define the therapeutic reference range for plasma paroxetine concentrations. RESULTS: We used 50% as the cutoff values for the percentage of MADRS improvement to determine the responder rates, and we defined remitters as patients with MADRS scores <10 at the 6-week treatment time point. We analyzed the responder and remitter rates of the patients according to their plasma paroxetine concentrations: 20 ng/mL, 40 ng/mL, and 60 ng/mL using the χ test. According to the results of the χ test in the responder rates, the 20-60 ng/mL plasma paroxetine group showed the highest effect size. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggested that a range of 20-60 ng/mL is the therapeutic reference range for concentrations of paroxetine in plasma in patients with MDD.

The influence of 5-HTTLPR genotype on the association between the plasma concentration and therapeutic effect of paroxetine in patients with major depressive disorder.

INTRODUCTION: The efficacy of treatment with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) can differ depending on the patient's serotonin transporter-linked polymorphic region (5-HTTLPR) genotype, and the effects of varying plasma concentrations of drugs can also vary. We investigated the association between the paroxetine plasma concentration and clinical response in patients with different 5-HTTLPR genotypes. METHODS: Fifty-one patients were enrolled in this study. The Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) was used to evaluate patients at 0, 1, 2, 4, and 6 weeks. The patients' paroxetine plasma concentrations at week 6 were measured using high-performance liquid chromatography. Additionally, their 5-HTTLPR polymorphisms (alleles S and L) were analyzed using a polymerase chain reaction with specific primers. We divided the participants into two groups based on their L haplotype: the SS group and the SL and LL group. We performed single and multiple regression analyses to investigate the associations between MADRS improvement and paroxetine plasma concentrations or other covariates for each group. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the two groups with regard to demographic or clinical data. In the SS group, the paroxetine plasma concentration was significantly negatively correlated with improvement in MADRS at week 6. In the SL and LL group, the paroxetine plasma concentration was significantly positively correlated with improvement in MADRS at week 6 according to the results of the single regression analysis; however, it was not significantly correlated with improvement in MADRS at week 6 according to the results of the multiple regression analysis. CONCLUSION: Among patients with MDD who do not respond to paroxetine, a lower plasma concentration or a lower oral dose of paroxetine might be more effective in those with the SS genotype, and a higher plasma concentration might be more effective in those with the SL or LL genotype.

Effects of escitalopram on plasma concentrations of aripiprazole and its active metabolite, dehydroaripiprazole, in Japanese patients.

INTRODUCTION: The effects of escitalopram (10 mg/d) coadministration on plasma concentrations of aripiprazole and its active metabolite, dehydroaripiprazole, were studied in 13 Japanese psychiatric patients and compared with those of paroxetine (10 mg/d) coadministration. METHODS: The patients had received 6-24 mg/d of aripiprazole for at least 2 weeks. Patients were randomly allocated to one of 2 treatment sequences: paroxetine-escitalopram (n=6) or escitalopram-paroxetine (n=7). Each sequence consisted of two 2-week phases. Plasma concentrations of aripiprazole and dehydroaripiprazole were measured using liquid chromatography with mass spectrometric detection. RESULTS: Plasma concentrations of aripiprazole and the sum of aripiprazole and dehydroaripiprazole during paroxetine coadministration were 1.7-fold (95% confidence intervals [CI], 1.3-2.1, p<0.001) and 1.5-fold (95% CI 1.2-1.9, p<0.01) higher than those values before the coadministration. These values were not influenced by escitalopram coadministration (1.3-fold, 95% CI 1.1-1.5 and 1.3-fold, 95% CI 1.0-1.5). Plasma dehydroaripiprazole concentrations remained constant during the study. CONCLUSION: The present study suggests that low doses of escitalopram can be safely coadministered with aripiprazole, at least from a pharmacokinetic point of view.

Association of 2 neurotrophic factor polymorphisms with efficacy of paroxetine in patients with major depressive disorder in a Chinese population.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the influence of the single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) rs 6265 in the brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) gene and 21 SNPs of the glial cell line-derived neurotrophic factor (GDNF) gene on the efficacy of paroxetine in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS: Genotyping for BDNF and GDNF polymorphisms was performed in 298 patients with MDD who started 20 mg paroxetine per day and had their plasma concentrations measured after 6 weeks. The SNPs were selected from the HapMap Chinese ethnic group and literature reports. Changes in the severity of MDD were assessed with the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) at baseline and at a 6-week follow-up. Paroxetine plasma concentration was measured using high-performance liquid chromatography with fluorescence detection. The Sequenom MassArray system was used for genotyping. RESULTS: At the 6-week follow-up, 219 of the 298 patients (73.5%) were responders and 79 patients (26.5%) were nonresponders to paroxetine treatment. The lower threshold concentration of paroxetine for response was 50 ng/mL, and a linear relationship was found between paroxetine plasma concentration and clinical response. The allele types for the SNPs rs 6265 (P < 0.001), rs 2973049 (P = 0.005), and rs 2216711 (P = 0.006) demonstrated significant associations with paroxetine treatment remission at week 6. CONCLUSIONS: Genetic variants in the BDNF and GDNF regions may be indicators of treatment response to paroxetine in patients with MDD.

Determination of paroxetine in blood and urine using micellar liquid chromatography with electrochemical detection.

Paroxetine is a potent selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor used for the treatment of depression and related mood disorders. A micellar liquid chromatographic method was developed for the determination of paroxetine in serum and urine. Detection of paroxetine was carried out using a C18 column and a mobile phase of 0.15 M sodium dodecyl sulfate, 6% 1-pentanol at pH 3 (buffer salt 0.01 M NaH2PO4) running under isocratic mode at 1.0 mL/min and electrochemical detection at 0.8 V. The analyte was eluted without interferences in <15 min. The proposed methodology was validated under the guidelines of the International Conference on Harmonization of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use in matrix in terms of specificity, linearity (r(2) > 0.9999; 0.5-5 µg/mL range), accuracy (88-97.5%, recovery), repeatability (RSD < 0.54%), intermediate precision (RSD < 0.54%), limit of detection and quantification (0.001 and 0.005 µg/mL, respectively) and robustness (RSD < 3.63%). Developed method was successfully applied to real blood and urine samples as well as in spiked serum and urine samples. The developed method was specific, rapid, precise, reliable, accurate, inexpensive and then suitable for routine analysis of paroxetine in monitorized samples.