Insights into the population pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of quetiapine: a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Quetiapine exhibits notable pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) variability, the origins of which are poorly understood. This systematic review summarizes published population PK/PD studies and identifies significant covariates accounting for this variability to inform precision dosing. METHODS: We systematically searched the PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase databases and compared study characteristics, model parameters, and covariate effects. Visual predictive distributions were used to compare different models. Forest plots and Monte Carlo simulations were used to assess the influence of covariates. RESULTS: Six population PK and three population PK/PD studies were included. The median apparent clearance in adults was 87.7 L/h. Strong and moderate cytochrome P450 3A4 inducers increased the apparent clearance approximately fourfold, while strong cytochrome P450 3A4 inhibitors reduced it by 93%. The half-maximum effect concentrations were 82.8 ng/mL for the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale and 583 ng/mL for dopamine D2 receptor occupancy. Both treatment duration and quetiapine exposure were associated with weight gain. CONCLUSIONS: Concurrent administration of potent or moderate CYP3A4 inducers and inhibitors need to be avoided in quetiapine-treated patients. When co-medication is required, it is recommended to adjust the dosage based on therapeutic drug monitoring. Additional research is warranted to delineate the dose-exposure-response relationships of quetiapine and active metabolite norquetiapine in pediatrics, geriatrics, hepatically-impaired patients, and women using contraceptives or are pregnant or menopausal. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD42023446654.

Quantitative risk-benefit profiles of oral contraceptives, insulin sensitizers and antiandrogens for women with polycystic ovary syndrome: A model-based meta-analysis.

Oral contraceptives (OCs), insulin sensitizers, and antiandrogens (AAs), alone or in combination, are commonly used for treating non-fertility indications in polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). However, unclear risk-benefit profiles jeopardize their appropriate clinical applications. This study aimed to quantitatively evaluate the effects of the aforementioned medications and to compare their risk-benefit profiles. Randomized controlled trials published until 14th March 2022 were searched in PubMed and Embase. A model-based meta-analysis was developed to examine the time-effect profiles of each medication. The maximal percentage change of the effect (Emax) and time to achieve half of Emax (T50) were estimated. Primary outcomes included menstruation, hirsutism score, free androgen index (FAI), body mass index (BMI), insulin sensitivity, and lipid profiles. Overall, 200 studies (9,685 patients and 385 arms) were identified for modeling. OCs performed exceptionally well in improving menstruation (Emax: 149%; T50: 7.44 weeks), hirsutism score (Emax: 66.2%; T50: 26.2 weeks), and FAI (Emax: 75.7%; T50: 0.51 weeks). However, OCs elevated the triglyceride (TG) level (Emax: 12.6%; T50:1.19 weeks). After 12-week OC treatment, the TG level of approximately 30% of patients, whose baselines were normal, exceeded the reference limit. This suggested that OC-induced dyslipidemia should be routinely monitored. The maximal BMI-lowering effect of metformin was similar to that of placebo (Emax: 3.80%); however, metformin had a shorter T50 (6.67 weeks versus 12.9 weeks). Further, active lifestyle intervention plus placebo significantly decreased BMI (Emax: 8.78%). Adding metformin to active lifestyle intervention accelerated the BMI-lowering effect within 24 weeks, whereas with the extension of this addition beyond 24 weeks, BMI did not reduce further, which indicated that benefits were limited from this prolonged addition. AAs were less potent in reducing hirsutism score (Emax: 40.2% versus 66.2%) and FAI (Emax: 34.5% versus 75.7%) compared to OCs. OC plus metformin combined OC-derived androgen-suppressing effects and metformin-derived insulin-sensitizing effects, and partially relieved the OC-induced TG increase (Emax: 9.76%). Baseline dependency was found in most clinical responses, implying that pharmacotherapies tailored based on baselines achieved more clinical improvements. This study presents new quantitative evidence on pharmacotherapies for PCOS. Currently, long-term risk-benefit profiles and emerging therapies are inadequately reported and require more further research.

A real-world cost-effectiveness study of vancomycin versus linezolid for the treatment of late-onset neonatal sepsis in the NICU in China.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Currently, the detection rates of methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) and methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative staphylococci (MRCoNS) in the blood cultures of neonates with sepsis exceed the national average drug resistance level, and vancomycin and linezolid are the primary antibacterial drugs used for these resistant bacteria according to the results of etiological examinations. However, a comprehensive evaluation of their costs and benefits in late-onset neonatal sepsis in a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) has not been conducted. This study aimed to compare the cost and effectiveness of vancomycin and linezolid in treating neonatal sepsis in the NICU. METHODS: A cost-effectiveness analysis of real-world data was carried out by retrospective study in our hospital, and the cost and effectiveness of vancomycin and linezolid were compared by establishing a decision tree model. The drug doses in the model were 0.6 g for linezolid and 0.5 g for vancomycin. The cost break down included cost of medical ward, NICU stay, intravenous infusion of vancomycin or linezolid, all monitoring tests, culture tests and drugs. The unit costs were sourced from hospital information systems. The effectiveness rates were obtained by cumulative probability analysis. One-way sensitivity analysis was used to analyze uncertain influencing factors. RESULTS: The effectiveness rates of vancomycin and linezolid in treating neonatal sepsis in the NICU were 89.74% and 90.14%, respectively, with no significant difference. The average cost in the vancomycin group was ¥12261.43, and the average cost in the linezolid group was ¥17227.96. The incremental cost effectiveness was ¥12416.33 cost per additional neonate with treatment success in the linezolid group compared to vancomycin group at discharge. Factors that had the greatest influence on the sensitivity of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio were the price of linezolid and the effectiveness rates. CONCLUSIONS: The cost for treatment success of one neonate in linezolid group was ¥5449.17 more than that in vancomycin group, indicating that vancomycin was more cost-effective. Therefore, these results can provide a reference for a cost effectiveness treatment scheme for neonatal sepsis in the NICU.

Significant predictors for olanzapine pharmacokinetics: a systematic review of population pharmacokinetic studies.

INTRODUCTION: Olanzapine is widely used for treating schizophrenia and bipolar I disorder. Due to its high pharmacokinetic variability, several population pharmacokinetic studies have been performed to identify factors contributing to the variability and thus facilitate individualized dosing. This review aims to provide a comprehensive overview of published population pharmacokinetic studies and explore potential covariates. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, and EMBASE databases from their inception to 31 December 2022. Information on the study design, characteristics, and final parameter estimates was summarized and compared. Monte Carlo simulations provided visual predictive distributions to compare eligible studies. Forest plots were constructed to explore the effects of covariates on olanzapine pharmacokinetics. RESULTS: A total of 10 population pharmacokinetic and three population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic studies involving infants, children, adolescents, and adults were finally included. The median apparent clearance was 0.253 L/h/kg in adults, 27-43% lower than that of infants and children. Men and smokers increased the apparent clearance of olanzapine by 32% and 34%, respectively. The concentration required to achieve half of the maximum effect for the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total score was 24.80 ng/mL, comparable with 22.32 ng/mL for dopamine D2 receptor occupancy. CONCLUSIONS: A higher dosage may be required for men or heavy smokers than for women or nonsmokers to reach the same exposure. Moreover, further population studies are essential to be conducted to clarify the dose-exposure-response relationship of olanzapine. PROSPERO REGISTRATION: CRD42022368637.