Search

In the PREPA observational study, we investigated the factors influencing pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic variability in the responses to fluindione, an oral anticoagulant drug, in a general population of octogenarian inpatients. Measurements of fluindione concentrations and international normalized ratio (INR) were obtained for 131 inpatients in whom fluindione treatment was initiated. Treatment was adjusted according to routine clinical practice. The data were analyzed using nonlinear mixed-effects modeling, and the parameters were estimated using MONOLIX 3.2. The pharmacokinetics (PK) of fluindione was monocompartmental, whereas the evolution of INR was modeled in accordance with a turnover model (inhibition of vitamin K recycling). Interindividual variability (IIV) was very large. Clearance decreased with age and with prior administration of cordarone. Patients who had undergone surgery before the study had lower IC50 values, leading to an increased sensitivity to fluindione. Pharmacokinetic exposure is substantially increased in elderly patients, warranting a lower dose of fluindione. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Purpose: Treatment of organophosphate poisoning with pralidoxime needs to be improved. Here we have studied the pharmacokinetics of pralidoxime after its intramuscular injection alone or in combination with avizafone and atropine using an auto-injector device.Experimental Approach: The study was conducted in an open, randomized, single-dose, two-way, cross-over design. At each period, each subject received either intramuscular injections of pralidoxime (700 mg), or two injections of the combination: pralidoxime (350 mg), atropine (2 mg), avizafone (20 mg). Pralidoxime concentrations were quantified using a validated LC/MS-MS method. Two approaches were used to analyse these data: (i) a non-compartmental approach; and (ii) a compartmental modelling approach.Key Results: The injection of pralidoxime combination with atropine and avizafone provided a higher pralidoxime maximal concentration than that obtained after the injection of pralidoxime alone (out of bioequivalence range), while pralidoxime AUC values were equivalent. Pralidoxime concentrations reached their maximal value earlier after the injection of the combination. According to Akaike and to goodness of fit criteria, the best model describing the pharmacokinetics of pralidoxime was a two-compartment with a zero-order absorption model. When avizafone and atropine were injected with pralidoxime, the best model describing pralidoxime pharmacokinetics becomes a two-compartment with a first-order absorption model.Conclusions and Implications: The two approaches, non-compartmental and compartmental, showed that the administration of avizafone and atropine with pralidoxime results in a faster absorption into the general circulation and higher maximal concentrations, compared with the administration of pralidoxime alone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims To describe the pharmacokinetics of nelfinavir and its main metabolite M8 in HIV-infected patients with a sustained virological response, to characterize the effect of covariates and to estimate inter- and intra-individual variability in the pharmacokinetics. Methods Three hundred and twenty concentrations of both nelfinavir and M8 were measured in 46 patients enrolled in the COPHAR 1-ANRS 102 study. Blood samples were taken at a first visit (one sample before drug administration and four samples at fixed times after) and at a second visit 1 to 3 months later (one before and one 3 h after drug administration). The data from both visits on nelfinavir and M8 were modelled jointly in all patients using a population approach. Results A one-compartment model with first-order absorption and elimination best described nelfinavir data, with an additional compartment incorporating a first order rate-constant describing the metabolism of the drug to M8. For nelfinavir, the apparent volume of distribution ( V/ F ) (95% confidence interval for the mean), was 309 l (185, 516), the absorption rate constant ( ka) was 0.4 h−1 (0.2, 0.8), and the apparent clearance (CL/ F ) was 37.3 l h−1 (32, 44). For M8, Vm /(Fkm) and CLm/( Fkm) were 866 l h−1 (351, 2161) and 1670 l (965, 2894), respectively. The interindividual variabilities were 34.9%, 34.3% and 62.2% for V/ F, CL/ F and CLm/( Fkm), respectively. The interoccasion variability was 27.8% for CL/ F. The mean half-lives were 05.38 h and 00.44 h for nelfinavir and M8, respectively. Significant but opposite effects of comedication with zidovudine were found on nelfinavir CL/ F and M8 CLm/( Fkm), but they were not considered to be clinically relevant. Conclusions A joint model was found to describe adequately nelfinavir and M8 concentrations and was used to estimate pharmacokinetic parameters for M8. The model can be used to build reference pharmacokinetic profiles for therapeutic drug monitoring of the drug. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion of desloratadine, fexofenadine, levocetirizine, and mizolastine in humans have been compared. The time required to reach peak plasma levels ( tmax) is shortest for levocetirizine (0.9 h) and longest for desloratadine (≥3 h). Steady-state plasma levels are attained after about 6 days for desloratadine, 3 days for fexofenadine, 2–3 days for mizolastine and by the second day for levocetirizine. The apparent volume of distribution is limited for levocetirizine (0.4 L/kg) and mizolastine (1–1.2 L/kg), larger for fexofenadine (5.4–5.8 L/kg) and particularly large for desloratadine (≈ 49 l/kg). Fexofenadine and levocetirizine appear to be very poorly metabolized (≈ 5 and 14% of the total oral dose, respectively). Desloratadine and mizolastine are extensively metabolized. After administration of 14C-levocetirizine to healthy volunteers, 85 and 13% of the radioactivity are recovered in urine and faeces, respectively. In contrast, faeces are the preferential route of excretion for 14C-fexofenadine (80% vs. 11% of the radioactive dose in urine). The corresponding values are 41% (urine) and 47% (faeces) for 14C-desloratadine, 84–95% (faeces) and 8–15% (urine) for 14C-mizolastine. The absolute bioavailability is 50–65% for mizolastine; it is high for levocetirizine as the percentage of the drug eliminated unchanged in the 48 h urine is 77% of the oral dose; the estimation for fexofenadine is at least 33%; no estimation was found for desloratadine. Fexofenadine is a P-glycoprotein (P-gp) substrate and P-gp is certainly involved both in the poor brain penetration by the compound and, at least partially, in a number of observed drug interactions. An interaction of desloratadine with P-gp has been suggested in mice, whereas the information on mizolastine is very poor. The fact that levocetirizine is a substrate of P-gp, although weak in an in vitro model, could contribute to prevent drug penetration into the brain, whereas it is unlikely to be of any clinical relevance for P-gp-mediated drug interactions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Mizolastine is a new histamine H1 receptor antagonist. Mizolastine 10 mg/day is effective in allergic rhinitis and chronic idiopathic urticaria. In young healthy volunteers, absorption of mizolastine is rapid with time (tmax) to peak concentration (Cmax) of about 1 hour. The absolute bioavailability of mizolastine 10mg tablets is about 65%. Distribution is rapid with a mean distribution half-life of 1.5 to 1.9 hours. Mizolastine is >98% bound to serum albumin and the apparent volume of distribution is between I and 1.4 L/kg. Mizolastine is extensively metabolised by hepatic glucuronidation and sulphation, with no major active metabolite, and excreted in faeces. The terminal elimination half-life (t1/2beta) is 7.3 to 17.1 hours. The apparent oral clearance after a repeated oral dose of 10mg is 6.02 L/h, with steady state reached from day 3 and no accumulation between days 1 and 7. Cmax and area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) are linearly related to dose. Mizolastine appears in vivo to be a relatively weak inhibitor of cytochrome P450 2E1, 2C9, 2D6 and 3A4. In vivo, no interactions were observed between mizolastine and lorazepam or ethanol. A significant increase in Cmax and trough plasma concentration (Cmin) of digoxin occurred after coadministration with mizolastine, without change in AUC, tmax or clinical parameters. Significant increases in theophylline Cmin and AUC were observed after coadministration with mizolastine. Mizolastine Cmax and AUC were increased when coadministered with erythromycin, with no change in t1/2beta. Concomitant administration of mizolastine and ketoconazole increased mizolastine AUC values with no change in t1/2beta. In a population analysis of the pharmacokinetics of mizolastine in patients with allergies, parameter values were close to those in healthy volunteers, except for duration of absorption, which was almost doubled in the patients. Bodyweight and creatinine clearance were found to have little influence on oral clearance, and no influence of liver transaminases was found on clearance and distribution. Pharmacokinetic parameters of mizolastine in elderly individuals were similar to those observed in healthy young volunteers. In patients with chronic renal insufficiency, t1/2beta was prolonged by 47% compared with young healthy volunteers. In patients with cirrhosis, tmax was longer, Cmax was lower, distribution half-life was prolonged and AUC was 50% higher than in healthy volunteers. In pharmacodynamic-pharmacokinetic trials, the percentage of wheal and flare inhibition was found to correlate with mizolastine Cmin values. No direct relationship was found between drug concentrations in skin blister fluid and antihistamine activity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims Itraconazole is a potent inhibitor of CYP3A4 activity and is often used in combination with corticosteroids. Since the latter are partly metabolized by CYP3A4, we studied the interaction between itraconazole, prednisone and methylprednisolone in healthy male subjects. Methods The effects of 4 days administration of oral itraconazole (400 mg on the first day then 200 mg day-1 for 3 days) on the pharmacokinetics of prednisolone after a single oral dose of prednisone (60 mg) and the pharmacokinetics of methylprednisolone after single oral dose of methylprednisolone (48 mg) were studied in 14 healthy male subjects in a two-period cross-over trial. Plasma cortisol concentrations were determined as a pharmacodynamic index. Results Itraconazole increased the mean area under the methylprednisolone concentration-time curve from 2773 ng ml-1 h to 7011 ng ml-1 h (P < 0.001) and the elimination half-life from 3.2 h to 5.5 h (P < 0.001). The pharmacokinetics of prednisolone were unchanged. Cortisol concentrations at 24 h were lower after administration of methylprednisolone with itraconazole than after methylprednisolone alone (24 ng ml-1 vs 109 ng ml-1, P < 0.001). Conclusions Itraconazole increased methylprednisolone concentrations markedly with enhanced suppression of endogenous cortisol secretion, but had no effect on prednisolone pharmacokinetics. The pharmacokinetic interaction between methylprednisolone and itraconazole is probably related to inhibition of hepatic CYP3A4 activity by itraconazole. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]