A pharmacogenetic pilot study reveals MTHFR, DRD3, and MDR1 polymorphisms as biomarker candidates for slow atorvastatin metabolizers.

BACKGROUND: The genetic variation underlying atorvastatin (ATV) pharmacokinetics was evaluated in a Mexican population. Aims of this study were: 1) to reveal the frequency of 87 polymorphisms in 36 genes related to drug metabolism in healthy Mexican volunteers, 2) to evaluate the impact of these polymorphisms on ATV pharmacokinetics, 3) to classify the ATV metabolic phenotypes of healthy volunteers, and 4) to investigate a possible association between genotypes and metabolizer phenotypes. METHODS: A pharmacokinetic study of ATV (single 80-mg dose) was conducted in 60 healthy male volunteers. ATV plasma concentrations were measured by high-performance liquid chromatography mass spectrometry. Pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated by the non-compartmental method. The polymorphisms were determined with the PHARMAchip® microarray and the TaqMan® probes genotyping assay. RESULTS: Three metabolic phenotypes were found in our population: slow, normal, and rapid. Six gene polymorphisms were found to have a significant effect on ATV pharmacokinetics: MTHFR (rs1801133), DRD3 (rs6280), GSTM3 (rs1799735), TNFα (rs1800629), MDR1 (rs1045642), and SLCO1B1 (rs4149056). The combination of MTHFR, DRD3 and MDR1 polymorphisms associated with a slow ATV metabolizer phenotype. CONCLUSION: Further studies using a genetic preselection method and a larger population are needed to confirm these polymorphisms as predictive biomarkers for ATV slow metabolizers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry: ACTRN12614000851662, date registered: August 8, 2014.

Bioequivalence of single 100-mg doses of two oral formulations of topiramate: an open-label, randomized-sequence, two-period crossover study in healthy adult male Mexican volunteers.

BACKGROUND: The proprietary form of topiramate is indicated in Mexico as an antiepileptic agent and in the prophylaxis of migraine headaches. However, before generic topiramate is placed on the market, pharmacokinetic studies investigating the bioequivalence of generic and branded formulations are needed. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the bioequivalence and tolerability of a generic (test) and a branded (reference) formulation of topiramate 100 mg in healthy Mexican volunteers. METHODS: This open-label, randomized-sequence, 2-period crossover study was conducted at Ipharma SA de CV, Monterrey, Mexico. Eligible subjects were healthy male Mexican volunteers aged 18 to 45 years. Participants were randomly assigned to receive 100 mg of the test or reference formulation, followed by a 3-week washout period and administration of the alternate formulation. Doses were administered after a 12-hour overnight fast. For analysis of pharmacokinetic properties, including C(max), AUC(0-t), and AUC(0-infinity), blood samples were obtained over a 144-hour period after dosing. The formulations were to be considered bioequivalent if calculations of a 90% CI for the ratio of the means of the measures for the test and reference formulations fell within bioequivalence limits, 80% to 125%, for logarithmic (log) transformation of C(max) and AUC, and if two 1-sided t tests showed P < 0.05. Tolerability was assessed using vital sign measurement (blood pressure, body temperature, heart rate, and respiratory rate), laboratory analysis (hematology, blood biochemistry, hepatic function, and urinalysis), and subject interview. RESULTS: Twenty-eight men (mean age, 22.21 years [range, 18-28 years]; mean weight, 75.04 kg [range, 62-96 kg]; mean height, 177 cm [range, 163-192 cm]) were enrolled in this study, and 28 (14 each randomized to receive the test or reference formulation first) completed it. No period or sequence effects were observed. The 90% CIs for the log-transformed C(max), AUC(0-t) and AUC(0-infinity) were 94.70 to 112.05, 98.88 to 105.16, and 98.80 to 105.28, respectively (all, P < 0.05). No adverse events were reported by the volunteers or found on clinical laboratory testing during the study. CONCLUSIONS: This study did not find any statistically significant differences in C(max) or AUC values between the test and reference formulations of oral topiramate 100 mg in this population of healthy adult male Mexican volunteers. On that basis, and according to both the rate and extent of absorption, the test and reference formulations met the regulatory criteria for bioequivalence. Both formulations were well tolerated.