Lack of a pharmacokinetic interaction between steady-state roflumilast and single-dose midazolam in healthy subjects

AIMS: The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of roflumilast, an investigational PDE4 inhibitor for the treatment of COPD and asthma, on the pharmacokinetics of the CYP3A probe drug midazolam and its major metabolites. METHODS: In an open, randomized (for midazolam treatment sequence) study, 18 healthy male subjects received single doses of midazolam (2 mg oral and 1 mg i.v., 1 day apart) alone, repeated doses of roflumilast (500 microg once daily for 14 days) alone, and repeated doses of roflumilast together with single doses of midazolam (2 mg oral and 1 mg i.v., 1 day apart). RESULTS: A comparison of clearance and peak and systemic exposure to midazolam following administration of roflumilast indicated no effect of roflumilast dosed to steady state on the pharmacokinetics of midazolam. Point estimates (90% CI) were 0.97 (0.84, 1.13) for the AUC of i.v. midazolam and 0.98 (0.82, 1.17) for that of oral midazolam with and without roflumilast. CONCLUSIONS: Therapeutic steady state concentrations of roflumilast and its N-oxide do not alter the disposition of the CYP3A substrate midazolam in healthy subjects. This finding suggests that roflumilast is unlikely to alter the clearance of drugs that are metabolized by CYP3A4.     

Evaluation of a pharmacokinetic interaction between remacemide hydrochloride and phenobarbitone in healthy males

AIMS: To determine whether there is a pharmacokinetic interaction between the antiepileptic drugs remacemide and phenobarbitone. METHODS: In a group of 12 healthy adult male volunteers, the single dose and steady-state kinetics of remacemide were each determined twice, once in the absence and once in the presence of phenobarbitone. The effect of 7 days remacemide intake on initial steady-state plasma phenobarbitone concentrations was also investigated. RESULTS: Apparent remacemide clearance (CL/F) and elimination half-life values were unchanged after 7 days intake of the drug in the absence of phenobarbitone (1.25 +/- 0.32 vs 1.18 +/- 0.22 l kg(-1) h(-1) and 3.29 +/- 0.68 vs 3.62 +/- 0.85 h, respectively). Concomitant administration of remacemide with phenobarbitone resulted in an increase in the estimated CL/F of remacemide (1.25 +/- 0.32 vs 2.09 +/-0.53 l kg-1 h-1), and a decreased remacemide half-life (3.29 +/- 0.68 vs 2.69 +/- 0.33 h). The elimination of the desglycinyl metabolite of remacemide also appeared to be increased after the phenobarbitone intake (half-life 14.72 +/- 2.82 vs 9.61 +/- 5.51 h, AUC 1532 +/- 258 vs 533 +/- 281 ng ml(-1) h). Mean plasma phenobarbitone concentrations rose after 7 days of continuing remacemide intake (12.67 +/- 1.31 vs 13.86 +/- 1.81 microgram ml(-1)). CONCLUSIONS: Phenobarbitone induced the metabolism of remacemide and that of its desglycinyl metabolite. Remacemide did not induce its own metabolism, but had a modest inhibitory effect on the clearance of phenobarbitone.     

Lack of interaction between metoclopramide and morphine in vitro and in mice

1.?This study examined interactions via common metabolism or via common pharmacodynamic pathways between frequently co-prescribed metoclopramide (a prokinetic) and morphine (an opioid analgesic).

2.?In human liver microsomes, morphine 3-glucuronide and morphine 6-glucuronide formation had V_max estimates of 6.2 ± 0.07 and 0.75 ± 0.01 (nmole min^?1 mg^?1 protein) and K_m estimates of 1080 ± 37 and 665 ± 55 (µM), respectively. The in vitro K_i for morphine 3-glucuronide formation in the presence of metoclopramide in human liver microsomes or recombinant uridine diphosphoglucuronosyltransferase 2B7 predicted a lack of in vivo interaction.

3.?Morphine (2 mg kg^?1 subcutaneously) delayed gastrointestinal meal transit in mice, metoclopramide (10 mg kg^?1 subcutaneously) had no effect on meal transit, and metoclopramide did not alter this effect of morphine.

4.?Morphine (2 or 5 mg kg^?1 subcutaneously) was antinociceptive in mice (hot plate test) and metoclopramide (10 mg kg^?1 subcutaneously) did not alter the antinociceptive effects of morphine.

5.?Together, the data suggest a lack of interaction between morphine and metoclopramide.     

Lack of a pharmacokinetic interaction between moexipril and hydrochlorothiazide

Objective: To investigate the potential for pharmacokinetic interactions between moexipril, a new converting enzyme inhibitor, and hydrochlorothiazide after single dose administration. Methods: 12 healthy male volunteers were studied by an open, randomised, three-way cross-over design, in which single doses of moexipril, hydrochlorothiazide and the two drugs together were administered. Blood and urine were collected up to 48 hours for measurement of the concentrations of moexipril and its metabolite moexiprilat. In addition, the urine samples were analysed for hydrochlorothiazide. Results: For the area under the plasma concentration-time curve calculated from time 0 to a concentration greater than zero, AUC(0–t), the study showed a mean value of moexipril 437 ng ⋅ ml⁻¹⋅ h⁻¹ following administration of moexipril alone and 416 ng ⋅ ml⁻¹⋅ h⁻¹ following moexipril concomitantly with hydrochloro- thiazide. The corresponding values for the metabolite moexiprilat were 203 and 215 ng ⋅ ml⁻¹⋅ h⁻¹, respectively. The c_max of moexipril and the metabolite (data of the metabolite in parenthesis) were 245.4 (70.8) ng ⋅ ml⁻¹ after administration of moexipril alone and 241.0 (69.2) ng ⋅ ml⁻¹ after coadministration of hydrochlorothiazide. The mean total renal excretion (TUE) of hydrochlorothiazide was 15.2 mg when administered alone and 15.1 mg when given together with moexipril. The corresponding mean TUE-values for moexiprilat were 334 (1200) and 453 (1460) μg. Conclusion: The coadministration of moexipril with hydrochlorothiazide had no demonstrable effect on the measured pharmacokinetic parameters of moexipril, its active metabolite moexiprilat or hydrochlorothiazide. Received: 10 July 1995/Accepted in revised form: 3 March 1996     

Evaluation of the potential for steady-state pharmacokinetic interaction between vildagliptin and simvastatin in healthy subjects*

ABSTRACT

Background: Vildagliptin is an orally active, potent and selective inhibitor of dipeptidyl peptidase IV (DPP-4), the enzyme responsible for the degradation of incretin hormones. By enhancing prandial levels of incretin hormones, vildagliptin improves glycemic control in type 2 diabetes. Co-administration of vildagliptin and simvastatin, an HMG-CoA-reductase inhibitor may be required to treat patients with diabetes and dyslipidemia. Therefore, this study was conducted to determine the potential for pharmacokinetic drug–drug interaction between vildagliptin and simvastatin at steady-state.

Methods: An open label, single center, multiple dose, three period, crossover study was conducted in 24?healthy subjects. All subjects received once daily doses of either vildagliptin 100?mg or simvastatin 80?mg or the combination for 7 days with an inter-period washout of 7 days. Plasma levels of vildagliptin, simvastatin, and its active metabolite, simvastatin β-hydroxy acid (major active metabolite of simvastatin) were determined using validated LC/MS/MS methods. Pharmacokinetic and statistical analyses were performed using WinNonlin and SAS, respectively.

Results: The 90% confidence intervals of C_max and AUC_τ of vildagliptin, simvastatin, and simvastatin β-hydroxy acid were between 80 and 125% (bioequivalence range) when vildagliptin and simvastatin were administered alone and in combination. These data indicate that the rate and extent of absorption of vildagliptin and simvastatin were not affected when co-administered, nor was the metabolic conversion of simvastatin to its active metabolite. All treatments were safe and well tolerated in this study.

Conclusions: The pharmacokinetics of vildagliptin, simvastatin, and its active metabolite were not altered when vildagliptin and simvastatin were co-administered.     

Pharmacokinetic interaction between retigabine and lamotrigine in healthy subjects

PURPOSE: The antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) retigabine (RGB) and lamotrigine (LTG) undergo predominantly N-glucuronidation and renal excretion. This study was performed to evaluate potential pharmacokinetic interactions between both AEDs. METHODS: Twenty-nine healthy male subjects participated in the study. Group A ( n=14) received single oral 200-mg RGB doses on day 1 and day 7, and 25 mg o.i.d. LTG on days 3-8. Group B ( n=15) received single oral 200-mg LTG doses on day 1 and day 17, and was up-titrated to 300 mg RGB b.i.d. on days 6-20. Blood samples were collected to compare the pharmacokinetics of both AEDs and the N-acetyl metabolite of RGB (AWD21-360) after single and concomitant treatments. RESULTS: RGB was rapidly absorbed and eliminated with a mean half-life (t(1/2)) of 6.3+/-1.1 h and an apparent clearance (CL/F) of 0.69+/-1.4 l/h/kg. Under co-administration of LTG, mean RGB t(1/2) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) were increased by 7.5% ( P=0.045) and 15% ( P=0.006), respectively, while CL/F was decreased by 13% ( P=0.06). Consistent results were obtained for AWD21-360. LTG was moderately rapidly absorbed, eliminated with a mean t(1/2) of 37+/-10.4 h and a CL/F of 0.028+/-0.007 l/h/kg. Under co-administration of RGB, mean LTG t(1/2) and AUC decreased by 15% and 18%, respectively, while CL/F increased by 22% (all parameters, P=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: RGB and LTG exhibit a modest pharmacokinetic interaction on each other. The slight decline in RGB clearance due to LTG is believed to result from competition for renal elimination rather than competition for glucuronidation. The induction of LTG clearance due to retigabine was unexpected since RGB did not show enzyme induction in various other drug-drug interaction studies. Further studies in patients are needed to assess the clinical relevance of these findings for concomitant treatment with both drugs in the upper recommended dose range.     

Pharmacokinetic interaction between verapamil and everolimus in healthy subjects

AIMS: We sought to define the influence of verapamil, an inhibitor of CYP3A and P-glycoprotein, on the pharmacokinetics of everolimus, a substrate of this enzyme and transporter. METHODS: This was a two-period, single-sequence, crossover study in 16 healthy subjects. In period 1 subjects received a single 2 mg oral dose of everolimus. In period 2 they received verapamil 80 mg three times daily for a total of 6 days and a single 2 mg dose of everolimus co-administered on the second day of verapamil therapy. RESULTS: During verapamil co-administration, everolimus C(max) increased 2.3-fold (90% CI, 1.9, 2.7) from 21 +/- 8 to 47 +/- 18 ng ml(-1) and AUC increased 3.5-fold (90% CI, 3.1, 3.9) from 115 +/- 45 to 392 +/- 142 ng ml(-1) h. Everolimus half-life was only prolonged to a minor extent (32 +/- 6 vs. 37 +/- 6 h). Verapamil predose concentrations doubled from 32 +/- 16 to 74 +/- 42 ng ml(-1) after single dose administration of everolimus. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple dosing with verapamil increased blood concentrations of everolimus after a single dose by an average 3.5-fold. During verapamil treatment, dose reduction for everolimus should be made guided by blood monitoring and for verapamil by blood pressure monitoring.     

Lack of a pharmacokinetic interaction between phenobarbitone and gabapentin.

Twelve subjects received a single oral dose (300 mg) of gabapentin and serial blood and urine samples were collected for drug measurements. Oral phenobarbitone (30-90 mg/day) was then administered to steady-state, and the gabapentin single dose study was repeated on day 42. Gabapentin was administered from days 49 to 52 to achieved steady-state, and further blood and urine samples were collected for drug measurements. Trough plasma phenobarbitone concentrations were monitored at frequent intervals. No statistically significant differences were observed in gabapentin Cmax, tmax, AUC, t1/2 or urinary drug recovery following single doses of gabapentin alone or combined with phenobarbitone. Phenobarbitone did not alter the disposition of gabapentin at steady state. Mean trough steady-state phenobarbitone concentrations were not significantly affected by concomitant gabapentin administration.     

Lack of a pharmacokinetic interaction between oral famciclovir and allopurinol in healthy volunteers

Famciclovir has been shown to have potent and selective activity against herpesviruses. The possibility of a pharmacokinetic interaction between the anti-viral agent, famciclovir and allopurinol has been investigated in twelve healthy male volunteers following a single oral dose of famciclovir (500 mg) in the presence and absence of steady-state levels of allopurinol (300 mg). Similarly, the pharmacokinetic profiles of allopurinol and oxypurinol prior to and following a single dose of famciclovir were compared.Mean values of C_max, AUC and terminal-phase half-life for penciclovir following administration of famciclovir alone at 3.3 g·ml^-1, 8.8 ·h·ml^-1 and 2.1 h, respectively were unchanged by co-administration of allopurinol. Similarly, mean urinary recovery and renal clearance values of penciclovir following famciclovir alone were 56.8% and 271·h^-1, and when given with allopurinol 59.7% and 27.51·h^-1, respectively. No evidence of accumulation of the inactive precursor to penciclovir, BRL 42359, was noted as a result of co-administration of the two drugs.Mean steady-state C_max, AUC and terminal-phase half-life values for allopurinol after co-administration of allopurinol with famciclovir also appeared unchanged from values obtained after dosing of allopurinol alone, at 2.12 g·ml^-1, 5.73 g·h·ml^-1 and 1.38h, respectively. Mean C_max and AUC values of the active metabolite of allopurinol, oxypurinol were 11.2 g·ml^-1 and 96.0 g·h·ml^-1, respectively, and these were also unaltered by co-administration of famciclovir with allopurinol, with values of 10.6 g/ml and 89.8 g·h/ml, respectively.In summary, no evidence of a pharmacokinetic interaction between allopurinol and famciclovir was observed when the two drugs were given concomitantly to healthy volunteers.     

Pharmacokinetic interaction study between benazepril and amlodipine in healthy subjects

Pharmacokinetic interaction between benazepril (ACE inhibitor) and amlodipine (calcium channel blocker) was studied in 12 healthy subjects. Single doses of benazepril hydrochloride (10-mg tablet) and amlodipine besylate (tablet equivalent to 5 mg amlodipine) were administered alone or in combination according to a three-way, Latin-Square, randomized crossover design. Serial blood samples were collected following each administration for the determination of benazepril and its active metabolite benazeprilat and amlodipine. The mean values of AUC (0–4 h), C_max andT _max for benazepril given as combination versus given alone were 161 vs 140 ng·h·ml⁻¹, 168 vs 149 ng·ml⁻¹, and 0.5 vs 0.6 h. The mean values of AUC (0–24 h), C_max andT _max for benazeprilat after benazepril given as combination versus given alone were 1470 vs 1410 ng·h·ml⁻¹, 292 vs 257 ng·ml⁻¹, and 1.7 vs 1.5 h. The mean values of AUC (0–144 h), C_max andT _max for amlodipine given as combination versus given alone were 118 vs 114 ng·h·ml⁻¹, 2.5 vs 2.3 ng·ml⁻¹, and 8.3 vs 9.0 h. The differences in these pharmacokinetic parameters between the combination and monotherapy treatments were not statistically significant based on ANOVA. The results of this study indicate that no pharmacokinetic interaction existed between the two drugs.     

Lack of pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic interaction between pantoprazole and phenprocoumon in man

Objective: Pantoprazole is a selective proton pump inhibitor characterized by a low potential to interact with the cytochrome P450 enzymes in man. Due to the clinical importance of an interaction with anticoagulants, this study was carried out to investigate the possible influence of pantoprazole on the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of phenprocoumon. Methods: Sixteen healthy male subjects were given individually adjusted doses of phenprocoumon to reduce prothrombin time ratio (Quick method) to about 30–40% of normal within the first 5–9 days and to maintain this level. The individual maintenance doses remained unaltered from day 9 on and were administered until day 15. Additionally, on study days 11–15, pantoprazole 40 mg was given per once daily. As a pharmacodynamic parameter, the prothrombin time ratio was determined on days 9 and 10 (reference value) and on days 14 and 15 (test value), and the ratio test/reference was evaluated according to equivalence criteria. Results: The equivalence ratio (test/reference) for prothrombin time ratio was 1.02 (90% confidence interval 0.95–1.09), thus fulfilling predetermined bioequivalence criteria (0.70–1.43). The pharmacokinetic characteristics AUC_0–24h and C_max of S(−)-and R(+)-phenprocoumon were also investigated using equivalence criteria. Equivalence ratios and confidence limits of AUC_0–24h and of C_max of S(−)-phenprocoumon (0.93, 0.87–1.00 for AUC_0–24h; 0.95, 0.88–1.03 for C_max) and of R(+)-phenprocoumon (0.89, 0.82–0.96; 0.9, 0.83–0.98) were within the accepted range of 0.8–1.25. Conclusion: Pantoprazole does not interact with the anticoagulant phenprocoumon on a pharmacodynamic or pharmacokinetic level. Concomitant treatment was well tolerated. Received: 26 January 1996/Accepted in revised form:22 May 1996     

Lack of interaction between HEPP,a new antiepileptic agent,and carbamazepine in rabbits

The effect of the combination of a new anticonvulsant drug HEPP and carbamazepine (CBZ) on the pharmacokinetics of HEPP and CBZ was investigated using rabbits as an animal model. The study was performed in 18 male New Zealand white rabbits which were randomly divided into three groups, according to a balanced incomplete block design of three treatments and two periods. Plasma concentrations for HEPP and CBZ were assayed using HPLC methods. The results showed that the pharmacokinetic parameters C(max), AUC and t(1/2) were not statistically different when HEPP was administered alone and with CBZ, (AUC(0-alpha) 82.86+/-19.40 vs 83.24+/-12.56 microg h ml(-1); t( 1 2 beta) 3.40+/-0.29 vs 3.36+/-0.45 h; C(max) 18.93+/-2.99 vs 19.79+/-2.68 microg ml(-1) and T(max) 1.27+/-0.16 vs 1.22+/-0.11 h for HEPP alone and HEPP plus CBZ respectively. Evaluation of the pharmacokinetic parameters of CBZ showed, AUC(0-inf) 61.5+/-21.7 vs 67.4+/-23.8 microg h ml(-1); t(12) 4.60+/-1.54 vs 4.41+/-1.35 h; C(max) 8.45+/-3.83 vs 8.70+/-2.59 microg ml(-1) when the drug was administered alone and CBZ plus HEPP, respectively. Our data indicate that there is no effect on the pharmacokinetics of either HEPP or CBZ, when they are administered simultaneously.     

左乙拉西坦引起苯巴比妥血药浓度降低案例分析

目的:探讨左乙拉西坦与苯巴比妥的药物相互作用及作用机制。方法:临床药师通过神经内科ICU的一例伴难以控制、反复发作癫的急性重症脑炎病例用药发现问题,查阅病历资料及相关文献进行分析。结果:左乙拉西坦可引起苯巴比妥血药浓度降低,可能与两者竞争结合P糖蛋白有关。结论:临床药师应该加强对左乙拉西坦的药物相互作用的观察和研究,以促进抗癫药物的合理应用。     

Lack of a pharmacokinetic interaction between steady-state tipranavir/ritonavir and single-dose valacyclovir in healthy volunteers

Objective  

This study assessed the single-dose pharmacokinetics of the herpes antiviral acyclovir (administered as the pro-drug valacyclovir) alone and in combination with twice-daily 200 mg ritonavir-boosted tipranavir (500 mg) at steady state.     

Lack of a pharmacokinetic interaction between atovaquone and proguanil

Objective: To assess the magnitude of the putative effect of atovaquone on the pharmacokinetics of proguanil and to determine whether the pharmacokinetics of atovaquone are affected by concomitant administration of proguanil, with both drugs administered for 3 days to healthy adult volunteers. Methods: This was an open-label, randomized, three-way cross-over study, in which 18 healthy volunteers received 400 mg proguanil, 1000 mg atovaquone and 1000 mg atovaquone + 400 mg proguanil. Each treatment was given once daily for 3 days with a 3-week wash-out period between each occasion. For the assay of proguanil, cycloguanil and atovaquone, blood was sampled before dosing and at regular intervals over 8 days when proguanil was given, and over 17 days when atovaquone was given. Results: The geometric mean of the area under the atovaquone plasma concentration-time curve calculated from 0 to 24 h after the last dose (AUC_0→24h) was 180 μg · ml⁻¹ · h following administration of atovaquone alone and 193 μg · ml⁻¹ · h following atovaquone with proguanil. The geometric mean AUC_0→24h for proguanil was 6296 ng · ml⁻¹ · h after proguanil alone and 5819 ng · ml⁻¹ · h following proguanil with atovaquone. The corresponding values for the metabolite cycloguanil were 1297 ng · ml⁻¹ · h and 1187 ng · ml⁻¹ · h, respectively. The geometric mean elimination half-life (t_1/2) of atovaquone was 57.1 h when given alone and 59.0 h when administered together with proguanil. The corresponding geometric mean values of t_1/2 for proguanil were 13.7 h and 14.5 h. Exploratory statistical analysis showed no important gender effects on the pharmacokinetics of atovaquone, proguanil, or cycloguanil. Conclusion: The pharmacokinetics of atovaquone and proguanil and its metabolite, cycloguanil, were not different when atovaquone and proguanil were given alone or in combination. Received: 14 October 1998 / Accepted in revised form: 8 February 1999     

Lack of pharmacokinetic interaction between lamotrigine and olanzapine in healthy volunteers

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To investigate the potential drug-drug interaction between lamotrigine, an antiepileptic agent used to treat bipolar disorders, and olanzapine, an atypical antipsychotic drug also used to treat bipolar disorders, both of which are metabolized by the uridine diphosphate glucuronosyltransferase system. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: University center for clinical research. SUBJECTS: Fourteen nonsmoking, healthy volunteers. INTERVENTION: Subjects received lamotrigine 25 mg/day for 5 days, then 50 mg/day for 10 days to achieve steady-state concentrations. On day 15, blood samples were obtained before and 0.5, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, and 24 hours after the dose. Lamotrigine 50 mg/day was then given for an additional 3 days. On the next day, lamotrigine 50 mg and olanzapine 5 mg were coadministered. Blood samples were obtained at the same times as before and at 48, 72, and 96 hours after dosing. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Blood samples were assayed for lamotrigine and olanzapine concentrations by means of high-performance liquid chromatography. Olanzapine did not significantly affect lamotrigine disposition, as we observed no differences in the area under the concentration-time curve from 0-24 hours or in lamotrigine plasma concentrations at baseline or at 24 hours. For lamotrigine, the mean time to reach maximum concentration was significantly prolonged during olanzapine coadministration (mean +/- SD 1.9 +/- 1.3 vs 4.0 +/- 3.0 hrs, p = 0.025), possibly because of the anticholinergic properties associated with olanzapine. Mild sedation was the only adverse effect that occurred during lamotrigine and olanzapine coadministration. CONCLUSION: Lamotrigine and olanzapine can safely be combined in healthy volunteers at the low doses studied, without a clinically significant interaction. When prescribing high doses of olanzapine and lamotrigine for bipolar disorder, patients must be carefully monitored.     

In vitro drug interaction between diflunisal and indomethacin via glucuronidation in humans

It was reported that the plasma concentration of indomethacin was increased with concomitant oral dosages of diflunisal in humans. Both indomethacin and diflunisal are glucuronidated in humans. The effects of diflunisal on the indomethacin glucuronidation were thus investigated in vitro using human liver microsomes (HLM) and human intestine microsomes (HIM) in order to assess the drug-drug interaction. The glucuronidation of indomethacin in HLM showed atypical kinetics with Km and Ksi values of 210 and 89.5 microM, respectively, while HIM exhibited Michaelis-Menten kinetics with a Km value of 17.4 microM. Diflunisal inhibited the indomethacin glucuronidation in HLM with IC50 values ranging from 100 to 231 microM. In HIM, inhibition of the indomethacin glucuronidation by diflunisal was more potent with IC50 values of 15.2-48.7 microM. When the clinical dose of diflunisal (250 mg b.i.d.) is taken into consideration, it is expected that the diflunisal concentration in the intestine would be higher than the IC50 values for indomethacin glucuronidation in the intestine. These findings suggest that the clinical drug-drug interaction between diflunisal and indomethacin may be at least partly attributable to the inhibition of indomethacin glucuronidation by diflunisal in the intestine.     

A pharmacokinetic interaction between roxithromycin and midazolam

The interaction between roxithromycin and midazolam was investigated in a double-blind, randomised crossover study of two phases. Ten healthy volunteers were given roxithromycin (300 mg) or placebo once daily for 6 days. On the sixth day they ingested 15 mg midazolam. Plasma samples were collected and psychomotor performance measured for 17 h.Roxithromycin administration significantly increased the area under the plasma midazolam concentration-time curve from 8.3 to 12.2 g·ml^–1·min and the elimination half-lives from 1.7 to 2.2 h. In psychomotor performance only minor differences were seen between the treatments in one of the measured psychomotor parameters.Thus, in contrast to the strong interaction between erythromycin and midazolam, the interaction between roxithromycin and midazolam appears less likely to be clinically significant.Presented in part at the 18th International Congress of Chemotherapy, Stockholm, Sweden, June 27–July 2, 1993