Pharmacokinetic Drug-drug Interaction of Antibiotics Used in Sepsis Care in China

Background: Many antibiotics have a high potential for having an interaction with drugs, as perpetrator and/or victim, in critically ill patients, and particularly in sepsis patients. Methods: The aim of this review is to summarize the pharmacokinetic drug-drug interaction (DDI) of 45 antibiotics commonly used in sepsis care in China. Literature mining was conducted to obtain human pharmacokinetics/dispositions of the antibiotics, their interactions with drug metabolizing enzymes or transporters, and their associated clinical drug interactions. Potential DDI is indicated by a DDI index > 0.1 for inhibition or a treated-cell/untreated-cell ratio of enzyme activity being > 2 for induction. Results: The literature-mined information on human pharmacokinetics of the identified antibiotics and their potential drug interactions is summarized. Conclusion: Antibiotic-perpetrated drug interactions, involving P450 enzyme inhibition, have been reported for four lipophilic antibacterials (ciprofloxacin, erythromycin, trimethoprim, and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole) and three lipophilic antifungals (fluconazole, itraconazole, and voriconazole). In addition, seven hydrophilic antibacterials (ceftriaxone, cefamandole, piperacillin, penicillin G, amikacin, metronidazole, and linezolid) inhibit drug transporters in vitro. Despite no reported clinical PK drug interactions with the transporters, caution is advised in the use of these antibacterials. Eight hydrophilic antibacterials (all β-lactams; meropenem, cefotaxime, cefazolin, piperacillin, ticarcillin, penicillin G, ampicillin, and flucloxacillin), are potential victims of drug interactions due to transporter inhibition. Rifampin is reported to perpetrate drug interactions by inducing CYP3A or inhibiting OATP1B; it is also reported to be a victim of drug interactions, due to the dual inhibition of CYP3A4 and OATP1B by indinavir. In addition, three antifungals (caspofungin, itraconazole, and voriconazole) are reported to be victims of drug interactions because of P450 enzyme induction. Reports for other antibiotics acting as victims in drug interactions are scarce.

Download Full-text

2020 FDA Drug-drug Interaction Guidance: A Comparison Analysis and Action Plan by Pharmaceutical Industrial Scientists

Current Drug Metabolism ◽

10.2174/1389200221666200620210522 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 21 (6) ◽

pp. 403-426 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Sirimas Sudsakorn ◽

Praveen Bahadduri ◽

Jennifer Fretland ◽

Chuang Lu

Keyword(s):

Cytochrome P450 ◽

Drug Interaction ◽

Drug Interactions ◽

Action Plan ◽

European Medicines Agency ◽

Cytochrome P450 Enzyme ◽

Interaction Studies ◽

P450 Enzyme ◽

Us Fda

Background: In January 2020, the US FDA published two final guidelines, one entitled “In vitro Drug Interaction Studies - Cytochrome P450 Enzyme- and Transporter-Mediated Drug Interactions Guidance for Industry” and the other entitled “Clinical Drug Interaction Studies - Cytochrome P450 Enzyme- and Transporter-Mediated Drug Interactions Guidance for Industry”. These were updated from the 2017 draft in vitro and clinical DDI guidance. Methods: This study is aimed to provide an analysis of the updates along with a comparison of the DDI guidelines published by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and Japanese Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency (PMDA) along with the current literature. Results: The updates were provided in the final FDA DDI guidelines and explained the rationale of those changes based on the understanding from research and literature. Furthermore, a comparison among the FDA, EMA, and PMDA DDI guidelines are presented in Tables 1, 2 and 3. Conclusion: The new 2020 clinical DDI guidance from the FDA now has even higher harmonization with the guidance (or guidelines) from the EMA and PMDA. A comparison of DDI guidance from the FDA 2017, 2020, EMA, and PMDA on CYP and transporter based DDI, mathematical models, PBPK, and clinical evaluation of DDI is presented in this review.

Download Full-text

Pharmacokinetic Drug-Drug Interaction and Responsible Mechanism between Memantine and Cimetidine

Pharmaceutics ◽

10.3390/pharmaceutics10030119 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 10 (3) ◽

pp. 119

Author(s):

Young Choi ◽

Im-Sook Song ◽

Min-Koo Choi

Keyword(s):

Drug Interaction ◽

Drug Interactions ◽

Intestinal Permeability ◽

Internal Standard ◽

Rat Plasma ◽

Precipitation Method ◽

Plasma Exposure ◽

Standard Curve ◽

Drug Drug Interaction ◽

Pharmacokinetic Drug

A sensitive and simple chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) method was developed to evaluate memantine in rat plasma. Memantine and propranolol (internal standard) in rat plasma was extracted using a methanol precipitation method. The standard curve value was 0.2–1000 ng/mL and selectivity, linearity, inter-day and intra-day accuracy and precision were within acceptance criteria. Using this validated method, drug-drug interactions between memantine and cimetidine was measured following co-administration of memantine and cimetidine intravenously and orally. Plasma exposure of memantine was increased by 1.6- and 3.0-fold by co-medication with cimetidine intravenously and orally, respectively. It suggested that the drug interaction occurred during the gut absorption process, which was consistent with the results showing that the intestinal permeability of memantine in the presence of cimetidine was 3.2-fold greater than that of memantine alone. Inhibition of cimetidine on hepatic elimination of memantine rather than renal excretion was also attributed to the drug-drug interaction between memantine and cimetidine, which explained the decreased clearance of memantine by co-medication with cimetidine. In conclusion, the newly developed simple and sensitive LC-MS/MS analytical method was applied to investigate the pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions of memantine. Plasma exposure of memantine by co-administration with cimetidine was increased because of its enhanced intestinal permeability and the decreased metabolic activity of memantine.

Download Full-text