Discovering interactions in polypharmacy: Impact of metamizole on the metabolism of quetiapine.

AIMS: Metamizole is quite an old drug with analgesic, antipyretic and spasmolytic properties. Recent findings have shown that it may induce several cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzymes, especially CYP3A4 and CYP2B6. The clinical relevance of these properties is uncertain. We aimed to unravel potential pharmacokinetic interactions between metamizole and the CYP3A4 substrate quetiapine. METHODS: Plasma concentrations of quetiapine from a large therapeutic drug monitoring database were analysed. Two groups of 33 patients, either receiving quetiapine as a monotherapy (without CYP modulating comedications) or with concomitantly applied metamizole, were compared addressing a potential impact of metamizole on the metabolism of quetiapine being reflected in differences of plasma concentrations of quetiapine and dose-adjusted plasma concentrations. RESULTS: Patients comedicated with metamizole showed >50% lower plasma concentrations of quetiapine (median 45.2 ng/mL, Q1 = 15.5; Q3 = 90.5 vs. 92.0 ng/mL, Q1 = 52.3; Q3 = 203.8, P = .003). The dose-adjusted plasma concentrations were 69% lower in the comedication group (P = .001). Subgroup analyses did not suggest a dose dependency of the metamizole effect or an influence of quetiapine formulation (immediate vs. extended release). Finally, the comedication group exhibited a significantly higher proportion of patients whose quetiapine concentrations were below the therapeutic reference range (78.8% in the metamizole group vs. 54.4% in the control group, P = .037) indicating therapeutically insufficient drug concentrations. CONCLUSION: The combination of metamizole and quetiapine leads to significantly lower drug concentrations of quetiapine, probably via an induction of CYP3A4. Clinicians must consider the risk of adverse drug reactions, especially treatment failure under quetiapine when adding metamizole.

Assessing Pharmacokinetic Correlates of Escitalopram-Related Adverse Drug Reactions.

BACKGROUND: To assess the pharmacokinetic correlates of reported adverse drug reactions (ADRs) under antidepressant treatment with escitalopram (ESC) using a large therapeutic drug monitoring database. METHODS: A large naturalistic sample of inpatients and outpatients prescribed ESC was analyzed. ADRs were classified using the Udvalg for Kliniske Undersogelser side effect rating scale. We compared ESC-treated patients with (n = 35) and without ADRs (n = 273) using ESC plasma concentrations as the primary outcome. We also compared ADR rates in the 2 groups based on 2 cut-off ESC levels reflecting the recommended upper thresholds of the therapeutic reference range of 80 ng/mL, suggested by the consensus therapeutic drug monitoring guidelines, and 40 ng/mL, based on recent meta-analysis data. The effects of age, sex, smoking, daily ESC dose, plasma concentrations, and concentrations corrected for daily dose were included in a binary logistic regression model to predict ADRs. RESULTS: No differences in clinical, demographic, or pharmacokinetic parameters were observed between patients with and without ADRs ( P > 0.05). Patients with ESC-related ADRs were more frequently diagnosed with psychotic disorders than those without (25% vs. 7.1%, P = 0.004). None of the variables was associated with ADR risk. Overall, ADR rates were not significantly different in patients above versus below thresholds of ESC concentrations (ESC concentrations >40 [n = 59] vs. ≤40 ng/mL [n = 249] and >80 [n = 8] vs. ≤80 ng/mL [n = 300]; P = 0.56 and P = 1.0, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: No distinct pharmacokinetic patterns underlying ESC-associated ADRs were observed. Further studies with more specific assessments of ADRs in larger cohorts are required to better identify potential underlying patterns.

Clozapine once- versus multiple-daily dosing: a two-center cross-sectional study, systematic review and meta-analysis.

Evidence regarding effectiveness and safety of clozapine once- vs. multiple-daily dosing is limited. We compared demographic and clinical parameters between patients with once- vs. multiple-daily dosing in the Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Regensburg, Germany (AGATE dataset), and the Department of Psychiatry, Lausanne University Hospital, Switzerland, using non-parametric tests. Effectiveness and safety outcomes were available in the AGATE dataset. We performed a systematic review in PubMed/Embase until February 2022, meta-analyzing studies comparing clozapine once- vs. multiple-daily-dosing. We estimated a pooled odds ratio for adverse drug-induced reactions (ADRs) and meta-analyzed differences regarding clinical symptom severity, age, percentage males, smokers, clozapine dose, and co-medications between patients receiving once- vs. multiple-daily dosing. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa-Scale. Of 1494 and 174 patients included in AGATE and Lausanne datasets, clozapine was prescribed multiple-daily in 74.8% and 67.8%, respectively. In the AGATE cohort, no differences were reported for the clinical symptoms severity or ADR rate (p > 0.05). Meta-analyzing eight cohorts with a total of 2810 clozapine-treated individuals, we found more severe clinical symptoms (p = 0.036), increased ADR risk (p = 0.01), higher clozapine doses (p < 0.001), more frequent co-medication with other antipsychotics (p < 0.001), benzodiazepines (p < 0.001), anticholinergics (p = 0.039), and laxatives (p < 0.001) in patients on multiple- vs. once-daily dosing. Of six studies, five were rated as good, and one as poor quality. Patients responding less well to clozapine may be prescribed higher doses multiple-daily, also treated with polypharmacy, potentially underlying worse safety outcomes. Patient preferences and adherence should be considered during regimen selection.

Dose-Related Reference Range as a Tool in Therapeutic Drug Monitoring.

BACKGROUND: Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) aims to individualize drug therapy. This systematic review provides a state-of-the-art overview of the benefits of adding the dose-related reference range (DRR) as a second reference range to the set of tools used by TDM for measurement and evaluation. It discusses alternative pharmacokinetic approaches for individualization of drug therapy. METHODS: Literature was searched in PubMed. Textbooks provided Bateman transformations for calculating expected drug concentrations at various times after drug application in "normal patients," that is, the population of phase II clinical trials. The review compiles conditions and prerequisites for these transformations to be valid. RESULTS: Relating a measured drug concentration to the orienting therapeutic reference range provides pharmacodynamic information for improving the benefit-to-risk ratio of desired drug effects versus adverse drug effects. The discriminating DRR considers a patient's individual pharmacokinetic situation. DRR is statistically based on the pharmacokinetic parameters total clearance, time to reach maximal concentrations, and elimination half-life. Relating the measured drug concentration to a range rather than a particular value, DRR determines if individual patients do or do not belong to the population of "normal patients." Once a patient is identified to be outside the population of "normal patients," the clinical-pharmacological TDM report elaborates the cause. It consists of the measured value, the TDM 9-field-board, the elimination pathways table, and a medication recommendation taking into account clinical information. The internet-based platform KONBEST supports editing of the clinical-pharmacological TDM report. It is personally signed and send to the therapist. CONCLUSIONS: The DRR embedded into a clinical-pharmacological TDM report allows adjusting a patient's medication to the patient's individual needs (individualization of drug therapy).

Simultaneous Quantification of 11 Antiseizure Medications and Metabolites in Serum for Therapeutic Drug Monitoring Using High-Performance Liquid Chromatography with Ultraviolet Detection: A Short Communication.

BACKGROUND: Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of antiseizure medications (ASMs) is widely used to guide therapy, avoid toxicity, and assess patient compliance. Commercial immunologic quantification methods are common practice; however, as they are only applicable to one specific drug and prone to cross-reacting metabolites, their practical applicability is limited. In this article, the authors proposed a high-performance liquid chromatography method using ultraviolet detection (HPLC-UV) for simultaneous quantification of 11 ASMs and active metabolites (carbamazepine, felbamate, lacosamide, lamotrigine, levetiracetam, phenobarbital, phenytoin, primidone, zonisamide, carbamazepine-10,11-epoxide, and licarbazepine) in serum. METHODS: Chromatographic separation was performed on a Phenomenex Luna PFP(2) (3-µm particle size; 150 × 4.6 mm i.d.) analytical column. The mobile phase comprised phosphate buffer (20 mM; pH 3), acetonitrile (ACN), and methanol using gradient elution. Analyses were conducted at 35°C and a 1.3-mL/min flow rate. The detection wavelength for all analytes was 210 nm. The samples were prepared by protein precipitation using ACN. RESULTS: The HPLC-UV method was validated according to the FDA guidelines and applied to measure patient samples in TDM. Calibration curves showed excellent linearity (r2 > 0.99) and covered the entire reference range for each analyte. Intraday and interday imprecisions and inaccuracies were <10% for all samples. Extensive stability testing showed no significant degradation (<15%), and interference measurements additionally ensured clinical applicability. Furthermore, the sensitivity was comparable with that of previously published HPLC methods using mass spectrometry. CONCLUSIONS: The authors developed an HPLC-UV method for the simultaneous quantification of 11 ASMs in the human serum and demonstrated its practical applicability in TDM. The method requires only standard laboratory equipment and simple sample preparation, making TDM available in less specialized laboratories.

Metamizole but not ibuprofen reduces the plasma concentration of sertraline: Implications for the concurrent treatment of pain and depression/anxiety disorders.

AIM: Comorbidity of pain and depression or anxiety is a challenging clinical phenomenon, often requiring the concurrent application of antidepressant and analgesic drugs. Growing evidence suggests that the analgesic metamizole exhibits cytochrome P450 inducing properties. In the present study, we assessed the impact of metamizole and ibuprofen on plasma concentrations of the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor sertraline. METHODS: Out of a therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) database, three groups of patients were compared: patients receiving sertraline and metamizole (n = 15), patients receiving sertraline and ibuprofen (n = 19), and a matched control group without one of the analgesics (n = 19). RESULTS: Metamizole was associated with 67% lower median sertraline plasma concentrations compared to the control group (14 vs 42 ng/mL, P < 0.001). In contrast, differences between the ibuprofen group and the control group did not reach statistical significance (31 vs 42 ng/mL, P = 0.128). Moreover, the metamizole group demonstrated lower dose-adjusted drug concentrations than the ibuprofen group (0.10 vs 0.26 (ng/mL)/(mg/day), P = 0.008). Finally, the metamizole group exhibited a higher proportion of patients whose sertraline concentrations were below the therapeutic reference range (40% in the metamizole group, 5% in the ibuprofen group, 0% in the control group, P = 0.005) indicating therapeutically insufficient drug concentrations. CONCLUSION: Our findings support preliminary evidence that metamizole acts as a potent inductor of cytochrome P450 isoenzymes CYP2B6 and CYP3A4. We observed a clinically meaningful pharmacokinetic interaction between metamizole and sertraline, leading to insufficiently low sertraline drug concentrations. Clinicians should therefore consider alternative drug combinations or apply TDM-guided dose adjustment of sertraline.

Clinical response in patients treated with once-monthly paliperidone palmitate: analysis of a therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) database.

To investigate pharmacokinetic correlates of clinical response in patients treated with once-monthly paliperidone palmitate (PP1M) injections at steady state. Plasma concentrations and dose-adjusted-plasma concentrations (C/D) of paliperidone from a naturalistic therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) database were compared between responders and non-responders using the Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement scale (CGI-I) ratings. Analyses were based on the non-parametric Mann-Whitney U test and the Pearson Chi-squared test (χ2) with a significance level of 0.05. Subgroup analyses were performed separately in patients with schizophrenia spectrum, schizoaffective disorders and bipolar disorders. Comparing 93 responders with 80 non-responders, we detected no significant differences in the proportion of females, age, and body mass index (p's ranging 0.18-0.83); there were more smokers in the group of non-responders (p = 0.04), which also included more patients with bipolar disorders (p = 0.014). Despite the lack of differences for prescribed PP1M doses and dose intervals (p = 0.42 and p = 0.11, respectively), non-responders had higher paliperidone plasma concentrations and C/D levels (p = 0.033 and p = 0.021, respectively). Subgroup analyses did not yield differences for paliperidone plasma and C/D levels between non-responders and responders with schizophrenia spectrum (p = 0.099 and p = 0.14, respectively) and bipolar disorders (p = 0.95 and p = 0.75, respectively); dose-adjusted plasma concentrations were higher in non-responders compared to responders with schizoaffective disorders (p = 0.039), while no differences were reported for plasma levels (p = 0. 15). Our results show that paliperidone plasma concentrations over injection doses may be associated with patterns of clinical response suggesting potential utility of TDM as part of PP1M-based maintenance treatment.

Lack of Smoking Effects on Pharmacokinetics of Oral Paliperidone-analysis of a Naturalistic Therapeutic Drug Monitoring Sample.

INTRODUCTION: Major smoking effects have been reported for a series of psychotropic agents, mainly including substrates of CYP450 1A2, although smoking may also affect alternative metabolic pathways. To our knowledge, smoking effects on paliperidone pharmacokinetics have not been assessed yet. METHODS: We compared plasma concentrations of paliperidone as well as dose-corrected-plasma concentrations (C/D) from a naturalistic database between smokers and nonsmokers using nonparametrical tests, such as the Mann-Whitney U-test (MWU). Additionally, we compared light and heavy smokers with nonsmokers separately. RESULTS: Comparing 55 smokers with 37 nonsmokers treated with oral paliperidone, no differences in the percentage of females, age, body weight, body mass index, and daily paliperidone dose were reported (p=0.709 for χ2, p=0.26, p=0.38, p=0.67, and p=0.8 for MWU). No differences were detected in plasma concentrations or C/D values (p=0.50 and p=0.96 for MWU). Likewise, differences in daily dose, plasma concentrations, or C/D values were not significant between light smokers (n=17) and nonsmokers (p=0.61, p=0.81, and p=0.33 for MWU) or heavy smokers (n=22) and nonsmokers (p=0.874, p=0.38, and p=0.59; MWU in all cases). DISCUSSION: Paliperidone is not affected by smoking, and paliperidone dose-adjustments in smokers may not be necessary. This may be seen as an essential difference to risperidone, whose cytochrome-mediated metabolism might be affected by smoking.

[Antihypertensive drugs in psychiatry : Prescription behavior and potential drug-drug interactions]. / Antihypertensiva in der Psychiatrie : Verordnungsverhalten und Interaktionspotenzial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with mental illnesses are at increased risk of cardiovascular disease-related mortality. Antihypertensive drugs are used particularly for the prophylaxis and treatment of cardiovascular diseases. In combination with psychiatric medication there is a potential for interaction, which can impair the achievement of therapeutic goals. OBJECTIVE: The prescription behavior for antihypertensive drugs in psychiatric clinics and practices in German-speaking countries as well as the interaction potential with psychotropic drugs were investigated. METHODS: The AGATE "index day" database, which anonymously stores patient data on age, sex, psychiatric main diagnosis as well as the prescribed commercial preparations collected in AGATE institutions (hospitals and community practitioners), was analyzed. The possible interactions were analyzed with PSIAC. RESULTS: Between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2016, 27% of all 21,980 patients recorded had a prescription for at least 1 antihypertensive drug, rising to 72% among patients over 80 years old. Of the patients treated with antihypertensive drugs, 48% received antihypertensive monotherapy. The importance of antihypertensive drug combination treatment increased with age. A median of 7 active substances were prescribed to the patients which mathematically results in 21 interactions. The simultaneous administration of psychotropic and antihypertensive drugs can result in an increased risk of hypotension, insufficient blood pressure reduction or QTc prolongation. CONCLUSION: Antihypertensive drugs are important in the treatment of psychiatric patients. An interaction test should be performed if pharmacotherapy is to be supplemented or changed. Where appropriate, measures to improve drug treatment safety should be considered.

The Effects of Co-prescription of Pantoprazole on the Clozapine Metabolism.

BACKGROUND: Polypharmacy including somatic medications such as proton pump inhibitors is a common phenomenon in psychiatric care. The aim of this study was to evaluate the pantoprazole effects on clozapine metabolism. METHODS: A large therapeutic drug-monitoring database containing plasma concentrations of CLZ was analyzed. The results were stratified into four groups: a non-smoking (n=250) and a smoking group (n=326), and two groups co-medicated with pantoprazole: non-smokers (n=26) and smokers (n=29). The analysis was based on the non-parametrical Mann-Whitney U test (M-W-U) with a significance level of 0.05. RESULTS: Differences reached statistical significance for pharmacokinetic parameters between CLZ monotherapy and co-medication with pantoprazole neither in smokers nor in non-smokers (p>0.05 for M-W-U in pairwise comparisons). In patients with clozapine monotherapy, smokers had a higher daily dosage of CLZ compared to non-smokers (mean dosage 363±181 vs. 291±145 mg/day, p<0.001 for M-W-U). CONCLUSIONS: Adding pantoprazole to an ongoing treatment with clozapine does not alter the metabolism of clozapine to a significant extent.

Dopamine D2 Receptor Occupancy Estimated From Plasma Concentrations of Four Different Antipsychotics and the Subjective Experience of Physical and Mental Well-Being in Schizophrenia: Results From the Randomized NeSSy Trial.

BACKGROUND: Impaired subjective well-being in schizophrenia patients treated with antipsychotics has often been linked inter alia to the antidopaminergic effects of medication. Thus, it is important to capture the association between striatal dopamine D2 receptor occupancy (D2-RO) and global subjective well-being. We examined this association using data from our multicenter, randomized, double-blind Neuroleptic Strategy Study (NeSSy). METHODS: An innovative double randomization process was used for allocation of patients to the specific treatment groups. Plasma drug concentrations were measured after 6 and 24 weeks of treatment to obtain the estimated D2-RO (eD2-RO) relative to literature values. We made an exploratory analysis of associations between eD2-RO and subjective well-being scores. One hundred two blood samples from 69 patients were available for the analysis. Because of the lack of a satisfactory occupancy model for quetiapine, only haloperidol, flupentixol, and olanzapine treatment groups were pooled, whereas aripiprazole data were analyzed separately, because of its partial agonistic properties. RESULTS: In the pooled antagonist group, eD2-RO correlated negatively with the summarized well-being score. In a more detailed analysis, this association could be confirmed for all first-generation antipsychotic-treated patients, but not for the separate second-generation antipsychotic groups. In the aripiprazole group, higher eD2-RO was associated with impaired physical well-being, but had no association with mental well-being. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that high plasma levels and consequently high occupancy at D2 receptors are disadvantageous for subjective well-being, as distinct from the objective extrapyramidal side effects. To minimize patients' malaise, which disfavors adherence, implementation of therapeutic drug monitoring in the clinical routine may be useful.

Pharmacokinetics of venlafaxine in treatment responders and non-responders: a retrospective analysis of a large naturalistic database.

PURPOSE: To assess in a large naturalistic sample, whether clinical response to a treatment with venlafaxine is associated with different patterns of plasma concentrations of active moiety, AM (sum of venlafaxine (VEN) and its active metabolite O-desmethylvenlafaxine (ODVEN)). METHODS: Applying a regression model, plasma concentrations and plasma concentrations corrected-by-dosage (C/D) for AM were included as independent variable with Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement (CGI-I) scale ratings as dependent variable. Moreover, AM, VEN, and ODVEN were compared between treatment responders and non-responders, defining response as much or very much improved on the CGI-I scale based on the non-parametric Mann-Whitney U (M-W-U) test with a significance level of 0.05. RESULTS: No correlations were found between AM and C/D AM plasma concentrations and CGI-I ratings (regression coefficient 0.0, CI 0.000, 0.001, p = 0.492 for AM and 0.047, CI - 0.065, 0.159, p = 0.408 for C/D AM). Venlafaxine daily dosage did not differ between responders and non-responders (217.7 ± 76.9 vs. 222.0 ± 72.7 mg/day, p = 0.45 for M-W-U). Responders displayed lower ODVEN (p = 0.033) and AM (p = 0.031) plasma concentrations than non-responders (p = 0.033 and 0.031, respectively for M-W-U). No other differences were detected. Using a cut-off level of 400 ng/mL for AM concentrations, a higher percentage of responders was reported in the group of patients with AM < 400 ng/mL (13.04%) compared to patients with AM > 400 ng/mL (8%) (p = 0.038). CONCLUSIONS: Higher ODVEN and AM concentrations in non-responders than in responders indicate that treatment escalation above upper thresholds of therapeutic reference ranges of venlafaxine is not promising. Hence, the therapeutic reference range for venlafaxine can help in improving outcomes in a measurement-based care model that takes advantage of therapeutic drug monitoring.

Pharmacokinetic correlates of venlafaxine: associated adverse reactions.

To address the potential correlation between plasma concentrations of venlafaxine (VEN), its active metabolite O-desmethylvenlafaxine (ODVEN) and the active moiety, AM, (ODVEN + VEN) and adverse drug reactions (ADR) in a large naturalistic sample of in- and outpatients. We compared plasma concentrations of VEN, ODVEN and AM and dose-adjusted (C/D) levels as well the ODVEN/VEN ratios between patients complaining ADRs, following the Udvalg for Kliniske Undersogelser side effect rating scales (UKU) (n = 114) and patients without ADRs (control group, n = 688) out of a naturalistic database. We also investigated potential pharmacokinetic correlates of the four UKU categories by comparing patients complaining ADRs with those who did not. Based on previous literature we applied different ODVEN/VEN ratio values as cut-offs to split our sample into two groups at a time and compare frequencies of ADRs between the groups. No differences for demographic and pharmacokinetic variables including plasma and C/D concentrations as well as ODVEN/VEN ratios were observed between study groups. Neither the comparisons between females and males nor between elderly and non-elderly patients revealed significant differences (p > 0.05 in all cases). No differences were also reported exploring the patients complaining ADRs from the 4 UKU categories separately. After applying various ODVEN/VEN cut-offs, groups did not display differences in frequencies of ADRs (p > 0.05 in all cases). Our findings do not demonstrate a direct link between venlafaxine metabolism measures and ADRs. Therefore, additional dimensions are needed to be considered in future trials aiming to disentangle the involved aspects of ADRs in patients receiving venlafaxine.

[Therapeutic drug monitoring in neuropsychopharmacology : Summary of the consensus guidelines 2017 of the TDM task force of the AGNP]. / Therapeutisches Drug-Monitoring in der Neuropsychopharmakologie : Zusammenfassung der Konsensusleitlinien 2017 der TDM-Arbeitsgruppe der AGNP.

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is the quantification and interpretation of drug concentrations in blood serum or plasma to optimize pharmacological therapy. TDM is an instrument with which the high interindividual variability of pharmacokinetics of patients can be identified and therefore enables a personalized pharmacotherapy. In September 2017 the TDM task force of the Working Group for Neuropsychopharmacology and Pharmacopsychiatry (AGNP) published an update of the consensus guidelines on TDM published in 2011. This article summarizes the essential statements for the clinical practice in psychiatry and neurology.

How to Treat Hypertension in Venlafaxine-Medicated Patients-Pharmacokinetic Considerations in Prescribing Amlodipine and Ramipril.

BACKGROUND: Amlodipine (AMLO) and ramipril (RAMI) belong to the most prescribed drugs in patients with hypertension, a condition also encountered in depression. Venlafaxine may worsen hypertension because of noradrenergic properties. Although of special clinical relevance, data on pharmacokinetic interactions between AMLO, RAMI, and venlafaxine (VEN) are lacking. METHODS: Two TDM databases consisting of plasma concentrations of VEN and its active metabolite O-desmethylvenlafaxine (ODVEN) were analyzed. We considered a group of patients comedicated with AMLO, VAMLO (n = 22); a group comedicated with RAMI, VRAMI (n = 20); and a 4:1 control group age matched to the VAMLO group receiving VEN without confounding medications, V0 (n = 88). Plasma concentrations of VEN, ODVEN, and active moiety, AM (VEN + ODVEN); metabolic ratio (ODVEN/VEN); and dose-adjusted plasma concentrations (C/D) were compared using nonparametric tests. RESULTS: Groups did not differ in daily VEN dose, age, or sex. The metabolic ratio (ODVEN/VEN) was lower in the AMLO group (P = 0.029), whereas the RAMI group showed lower values for ODVEN (P = 0.029). All other parameters showed no significant differences. CONCLUSIONS: Significantly lower values for the metabolic ratio in the AMLO group are unlikely to be explained by cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 and weak CYP2D6 inhibition by AMLO. Other factors such as differences in CYP2D6 polymorphisms and metabolizer status may better explain the findings. Ramipril showed modest effects with changes in ODVEN concentrations that did not remain significant after dose-adjusted comparisons.

Cytochrome P450-mediated interaction between perazine and risperidone: implications for antipsychotic polypharmacy.

BACKGROUND: Although clinically widespread, scientific evidence for antipsychotic polypharmacy is still limited. Combining different drugs increases the potential for drug-drug interactions, enhancing the risk of adverse drug reactions. We aimed to unravel the potential pharmacokinetic interactions between risperidone (RIS) and perazine. METHODS: Using a therapeutic drug monitoring database containing plasma concentrations of RIS and its active metabolite [9-hydroxyrisperidone (9-OH-RIS)], we considered two groups: a group of patients under antipsychotic monotherapy with RIS (n = 40) and a group of patients that was comedicated with perazine (n = 16). Groups were matched for demographic characteristics and daily dosage of RIS. Plasma concentrations, concentrations corrected for the dose (C/D) of RIS, 9-OH-RIS and the active moiety (RIS + 9-OH-RIS), as well as the metabolic ratios of concentrations of 9-OH-RIS/RIS, were compared using nonparametric tests. RESULTS: All parameters other than plasma concentrations and the C/D ratio of 9-OH-RIS differed between groups. Median values for plasma concentrations of the active moiety and C/D of the active moiety were higher in the perazine group (P < 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively). Differences were driven by variations in the plasma concentrations and C/D of RIS, which were higher in the perazine group (P < 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively). Metabolic ratios were lower in the perazine group (P = 0.003). DISCUSSION: The coadministration of perazine in RIS-medicated patients leads to significantly higher plasma concentrations and C/D values of RIS and its active moiety, and a lower metabolic ratio, reflecting the cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2D6 phenotype. We suggest that the mechanism underlying the effect of perazine on RIS metabolism is based on an inhibition of CYP2D6 and CYP3A4 activity.

Development of an UHPLC-UV-Method for Quantification of Direct Oral Anticoagulants: Apixaban, Rivaroxaban, Dabigatran, and its Prodrug Dabigatran Etexilate in Human Serum.

BACKGROUND: Direct oral anticoagulants currently have no indication for monitoring even though there are data that imply that individual dosing can improve and add safety to the therapy. METHODS: An ultra-high performance liquid chromatography method with ultra violet detection has been developed and validated for apixaban, dabigatran, dabigatran etexilate, and rivaroxaban. Protein precipitation with methanol (1:3 vol/vol) was used as sample preparation. Analyses were performed on an Agilent 1290 ultra-high performance liquid chromatography system with an Agilent Poroshell 120 EC-C18-RP column using eluents [A] H2O and [B] methanol with 0.1% formic acid added to each. A gradient run was performed with a flow of 0.7 mL/min at 35°C. Apixaban was detected at 280 nm, dabigatran at 294 nm, dabigatran etexilate at 340 nm, and rivaroxaban at 249 nm. RESULTS: Retention times were 1.83 minutes for dabigatran, 4.10 minutes for rivaroxaban, 4.30 minutes for apixaban, and 6.10 minutes for dabigatran etexilate within a total run time of 7 minutes. Linearity was given over a range from 20 to 300 ng/mL with r >0.999. The limit of detection ranged from 4 to 5 ng/mL and the limit of quantification from 15 to 19 ng/mL, respectively. Usability in daily routine was demonstrated in 27 samples from patients receiving rivaroxaban and 11 samples from patients receiving apixaban. In the absence of validated therapeutic ranges, we estimated "assumed therapeutically effective concentrations" from dose-related ranges for the respective licensed dosages. CONCLUSIONS: The method offers a fast, reliable, and low-cost way to quantify direct oral anticoagulants in daily routine even in smaller laboratories without access to liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry.

Clinical response in a risperidone-medicated naturalistic sample: patients' characteristics and dose-dependent pharmacokinetic patterns.

The purpose of this study was to disentangle an association between plasma concentrations of risperidone (RIS), its active metabolite 9-hydroxyrisperidone (9-OH-RIS) and the active moiety, AM (RIS + 9-OH-RIS), and clinical response in a naturalistic sample. Plasma concentrations of RIS, 9-OH-RIS and AM in patients out of a therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) database were compared between responders (n = 64) and non-responders (n = 526) using the Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) Scale. Daily dosage of risperidone did not differ between responders and non-responders. Differences for active moiety plasma levels between the two groups did not reach statistical significance. However, responders showed lower plasma concentrations of the parent compound RIS as well as lower metabolic ratios RIS/9-OH-RIS than non-responders (p = 0.017 and p = 0.034). These differences did not remain after controlling for age and baseline symptoms. Furthermore, the cohort was split into two subgroups based on the daily dosage: patients under high (≥6 mg/day) (R H, n = 187) and patients under lower dosages (<6 mg) (R L, n = 403) of risperidone. Differences between responders and non-responders after controlling for demographic and clinical characteristics remained only for plasma concentrations of active moiety in the lower-dose medicated groups; non-responders showed higher active moiety plasma concentrations than responders. Understanding the mechanisms involved and factors associated with the clinical response in patients medicated with antipsychotics is of great interest. Our data imply that clinical response to an antipsychotic treatment cannot be attributed to a single pharmacokinetic pattern. It seems to be rather a complex patchwork of influencing factors such as demographic and clinical characteristics as well as the metabolizer status as surrogate of CYP activity. It seems that the ratio between RIS and 9-OH-RIS may play a crucial role in mediating the clinical effect.

Development and validation of an HPLC-UV method for the simultaneous determination of the antipsychotics clozapine, olanzapine and quetiapine, several beta-blockers and their metabolites.

A simple, accurate and selective column-switching high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) method was developed and validated for simultaneous quantification of six beta-blockers (metoprolol, timolol, bisoprolol, propranolol, carvedilol and nebivolol), three of their metabolites (α-hydroxy metoprolol, N-desisopropyl propranolol and 4'-hydroxy carvedilol 4-HCAR), three antipsychotics (olanzapine, clozapine and quetiapine) and three of their metabolites (N-desmethyl olanzapine, N-desmethyl clozapine and N-desalkyl quetiapine) in human serum. After pretreatment on a Merck LiChrospher RP-4 ADS column (25 µm), drugs were separated on a Phenomenex Gemini Phenyl Hexyl 110 A column (250 × 4.6 mm, 5 µm) using a gradient mixture of acetonitrile and potassium dihydrogen phosphate buffer pH 3.1 (containing 10% methanol) as a mobile phase at a flow rate of 1 mL/min. The total analysis time was 40 min. For detection of the analytes, four different UV wavelengths were used: 215, 226, 242 and 299 nm. The method was validated according to the guidelines of the Society of Toxicology and Forensic Chemistry in terms of selectivity, linearity, accuracy, precision and stability and successfully applied for the analysis of the 15 described analytes in human serum.

Pharmacokinetic Drug-Drug Interactions of Mood Stabilizers and Risperidone in Patients Under Combined Treatment.

BACKGROUND: The combination of anticonvulsant mood stabilizers with antipsychotic drugs may lead to clinically relevant drug-drug interactions. The objective of the study was to identify pharmacokinetic interactions of different mood stabilizers on the metabolism of risperidone (RIS) under natural conditions. METHODS: A large therapeutic drug monitoring database containing plasma concentrations of RIS and its metabolite 9-hydroxy-RIS (9-OH-RIS) of 1,584 adult patients was analyzed. Four groups (n = 1,072) were compared: a control group without a potentially cytochrome interacting comedication (R0, n = 852), a group comedicated with valproate (VPA) (RVPA, n = 153), a group comedicated with lamotrigine (LMT) (RLMT, n = 46), and a group under concomitant medication with carbamazepine (CBZ) (RCBZ, n = 21). Dose-adjusted plasma concentrations (C/D ratio) for RIS, 9-OH-RIS and active moiety (AM) (RIS + 9-OH-RIS), as well as metabolic ratios (RIS/9-OH-RIS) were computed. RESULTS: Groups did not differ with regard to the daily dosage (P = 0.46). Differences were detected for the distributions of the C/D ratios for RIS, 9-OH-RIS and AM (P = 0.003, P < 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively). Differences remained significant after conducting a Bonferroni correction (P = 0.0125). Pairwise comparisons of the concomitant medication groups with the control group revealed significant differences; RIS C/D ratios were significantly higher in the VPA and the LMT group than in the control group (P = 0.013; P = 0.021). However, these differences did not remain significant after Bonferroni correction. In contrast, CBZ-treated patients showed lower dose-adjusted plasma concentrations of 9-OH-RIS (P < 0.001) as well as the AM (P < 0.001) than the control group; this difference survived the Bonferroni correction. CONCLUSIONS: The data give evidence for pharmacokinetic interactions between RIS and different anticonvulsant mood stabilizers. Carbamazepine decreased serum concentrations of 9-OH-RIS and the AM when compared with the control group. In case of VPA and LMT, findings were less significant; hints for a weak RIS metabolism inhibition by LMT of unclear clinical significance were found.