No effect of short-term omeprazole intake on acenocoumarol pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics

Aims To investigate the effect of omeprazole on the pharmacokinetics of R- and S-acenocoumarol and on their combined anticoagulant activity.
Methods Eight healthy male subjects completed a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, two-way cross-over study. Subjects were given either omeprazole 40  mg or placebo once daily for 3 days. On day 2 of each study period, a single 10  mg oral dose of racemic acenocoumarol was administered and venous blood samples were collected for pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic assessments. A wash-out period of 2 weeks separated the two study periods.
Results The pharmacokinetics of R- and S-acenocoumarol (AUC 3016±221 and 233±14  ng  ml⁻¹ h, respectively) did not change after omeprazole (AUC 2929±256 and 220±18  ng  ml⁻¹ h, respectively). Anticoagulant activity (INR_max 1.7±0.1) was unaffected by co-administration of omeprazole (INR_max 1.7±0.1).
Conclusions The short-term intake of omeprazole does not affect acenocoumarol pharmacokinetics or pharmacodynamics. These data differ from the results of previous studies on the effect of omeprazole on warfarin, suggesting a different in vivo interaction profile of omeprazole on acenocoumarol than on warfarin. Drug interaction studies with oral anticoagulants should not be restricted to the use of warfarin.     

Opposite effects of lornoxicam co-administration on phenprocoumon pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics

Objective: To investigate the effect of co-administration of the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) lornoxicam on the pharmacokinetics of (R)- and (S)-phenprocoumon and their effect on factor II and VII activities. Methods: Six healthy male volunteers completed an open crossover study. Plasma concentrations of (R)- and (S)-phenprocoumon and activities of coagulation factors II and VII were measured after a single oral dose of 9 mg phenprocoumon racemate. In the second session, lornoxicam administration was started 3 days before phenprocoumon administration and continued twice daily until the last blood sample was drawn. Results: Lornoxicam co-administration resulted in a statistically significant increase of the area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) of the more potent (S)-isomer of phenprocoumon from a median value of 100 (range 68–146) mg · h · l⁻¹ to 124 (92–239) mg · h · l⁻¹. For the (R)-isomer, the AUC increase from 96 (70–142) mg h · l⁻¹ in the absence to 108 (75–155) mg · h · l⁻¹ in the presence of lornoxicam was not statistically significant. In a model-based analysis, an increase of (S)-phenprocoumon and (R)-phenprocoumon bioavailability of 14% [95% CI (9%, 19%)] and 6% (2%, 10%) and a decrease of their clearances by 15% (8%, 21%) and 6% (0%, 13%) was obtained. Lornoxicam co-administration did not influence the free fractions of (R)- or (S)-phenprocoumon. Contrary to what was expected from the changes in pharmacokinetics, a statistically significant decrease in the effect of phenprocoumon on factor II and VII activity was observed for the sessions with lornoxicam co-administration. For factor VII, lornoxicam was found to increase the concentration causing half-maximal effect (C₅₀) of phenprocoumon by 70% [95% CI (38%, 111%)]. Conclusion: Co-administration of lornoxicam at the upper limit of recommended doses mainly altered the pharmacokinetics of the more potent (S)-isomer and to a lesser degree those of (R)-phenprocoumon. Despite these changes in pharmacokinetics, a decrease of the effect on factor II and VII activity was observed. These results suggest that in the case of lornoxicam co-administration in a patient treated with phenprocoumon the prothrombin time should be monitored closely. Received: 22 June 1998 / Accepted: 1 August 1998     

The effect of nateglinide on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of acenocoumarol

Summary

Quantification of follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) for clinical use has traditionally involved the use of in vivo bioassays, particularly the Steelman–Pohley bioassay. This assay has limited precision, requires large numbers of laboratory animals and involves cumbersome procedures for data generation and interpretation. Recent advances in manufacturing procedures for recombinant human FSH (r-hFSH) have resulted in a preparation (follitropin alfa; Gonal-F) that is highly consistent in both isoform profile and glycan species distribution. As a result, follitropin alfa can be reliably quantified using an optimised

size exclusion high-performance liquid chromat-ography (SE-HPLC) method, and vials can be filled by mass. Preliminary clinical studies suggest that the fill-by-mass process results in a product that delivers a more consistent clinical response and is more effective than follitropin alfa vials filled by bioassay in women undergoing controlled ovarian stimulation. Non-bioassay methods such as SE-HPLC are likely to become increasingly important for quality testing and regulatory purposes, provided that the manufacturing process is well controlled and produces a protein of highly consistent physico-chemical properties.     

The effect of nateglinide on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of acenocoumarol

OBJECTIVE: The potential for a drug interaction was investigated between nateglinide, an oral antidiabetic agent, and acenocoumarol, an oral anticoagulant, as these drugs are primarily metabolized via CYP2C9. METHODS: A two-period, randomized, double-blind, two-way crossover study design was employed to evaluate the effect of nateglinide on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of acenocoumarol in 11 healthy male or female subjects. All subjects received either nateglinide 120 mg t.i.d. or placebo for 5 days in a crossover fashion and a single 10-mg dose of acenocoumarol on day 3. Plasma concentrations of R- and S-acenocoumarol and the anticoagulation parameters [prothrombin time (PT) and international normalized ratio of PT (PTINR)] were determined for 72 h following acenocoumarol administration. The pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters of acenocoumarol were determined by noncompartmental analysis. RESULTS: The mean (coefficient of variation (CV%)) area under the concentration-time curve (AUC(0-t)) of R-acenocoumarol in the presence and absence of nateglinide was 4217 (23%) and 3831 (24%) ng.h/ml, respectively. The corresponding values for S-acenocoumarol were 397 (20%) and 382 (23%), respectively. The mean (CV%) C(max) of R-acenocoumarol in the presence and absence of nateglinide was 304 (16%) and 316 (16%), respectively and the corresponding values for S-acenocoumarol were 142 (36%) and 141 (34%), respectively. The 90% confidence intervals indicated that exposure parameters, AUC(0-t) and C(max), of both R- and S-acenocoumarol were within the acceptable limits of 0.8-1.25. The mean (CV%) of area under the concentration-time curve of PT (AUC(PT)) following acenocoumarol administration in the presence and absence of nateglinide was 1170 (10%) and 1136 (8%), respectively. The corresponding AUC(INR) values were 104 (13%) and 99 (10%), respectively. Nateglinide co-administration has no influence on the PT or PTINR of acenocoumarol (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Co-administration of nateglinide does not influence either the pharmacokinetics or the anticoagulant activity of R- and S-acenocoumarol in healthy subjects. This suggests that no dosage adjustments will be required when nateglinide and acenocoumarol are coadministered in clinical practice.     

The effect of cimetidine on the steady-state pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of warfarin in humans

Objective: The interaction of multiple oral doses of cimetidine on the steady-state pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of warfarin was investigated in six healthy male volunteers. Methods: The subjects were given individually adjusted doses of warfarin to achieve therapeutic levels of prothrombin activity. The established daily maintenance oral dose of warfarin was kept stable throughout the trial and, on study days 8–14, each volunteer received a 800-mg daily dose of cimetidine. The degree of anticoagulant response produced by warfarin was quantified by the determination of both the prothrombin time and factor-VII clotting activity. Results: Cimetidine co-administration had no significant effect on the pharmacokinetics of the more potent S-warfarin but significantly increased by 28% (P < 0.05) mean R-warfarin trough plasma concentrations and decreased by 23% (P < 0.05) mean R-warfarin apparent clearance. Both prothrombin time and factor-VII clotting activity displayed considerable inter-subject variability and were not significantly affected by concurrent cimetidine treatment. The reduction of apparent clearance of R-warfarin by cimetidine was found to be the effect of inhibition of the formation of warfarin metabolites as determined by apparent formation clearance values (±SD) of R-6-hydroxywarfarin (31.1 ± 7.4 ml/h baseline; 18.5 ± 4.5 ml/h at end of cimetidine treatment; P < 0.01), and R-7-hydroxywarfarin (6.9 ± 1.3 ml/h baseline; 4.3 ± 1.1 ml/h at end of cimetidine treatment; P < 0.01). Conclusion: Cimetidine stereoselectively affects the steady-state pharmacokinetics of warfarin by inhibiting the disposition of the less potent R-warfarin in humans. However, this interaction is likely to be of minimal clinical significance in most patients. Received: 11 December 1998 / Accepted in revised form: 17 March 1999     

The influence of telmisartan on metformin pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics

Metformin is the most widely used drug among type 2 diabetes mellitus patients. However, drug interaction on metformin will influence its glucose-lowering effect or increase its side effect of lactic acidosis. In this study, a randomized, two-stage, crossover study was conducted to unveil the potential drug interaction between metformin and the anti-hypertension drug, telmisartan. Totally, 16 healthy Chinese male volunteers were enrolled. Blood samples from various time-points after drug adminstration were analyzed for metformin quantification. Oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) was conducted 2 h after metformin administration. The AUC_0-12 and Cmax of metformin in subjects co-administrated with telmisartan were significantly lower than with placebo. The geometric mean ratios (value of metformin plus telmisartan phase/value of metformin plus placebo phase) for Cmax and AUC_0-12 is 0.7972 (90%CI: 0.7202–0.8824) and 0.8336 (90%CI: 0.7696–0.9028), respectively. Moreover, telmisartan co-administration significantly increased the plasma concentrations of both glucose and insulin at 0.5 h since OGTT (7.64 ± 1.86 mmol/l·min vs 6.77 ± 0.83 mmol/l·min, P = 0.040; 72.91 ± 31.98 μIU/ml·min vs 60.20 ± 24.20 μIU/ml·min, P = 0.037), though the AUC of glucose and insulin after OGTT showed no significant difference. These findings suggested that telmisartan had a significant influence on the Pharmacokinetics of metformin in healthy groups, though the influence on glucose-lowering effect was moderate.     

Effect of nebicapone on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of warfarin in healthy subjects

Objective  Nebicapone is a new catechol-O-methyltransferase inhibitor. In vitro, nebicapone has showed an inhibitory effect upon CYP2C9, which is responsible for the metabolism of S-warfarin. The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of nebicapone on warfarin pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics in healthy subjects. Methods  Single-centre, open-label, randomised, two-period crossover study in 16 healthy volunteers. In one period, subjects received nebicapone 200 mg thrice daily for 9 days and a racemic warfarin 25-mg single dose concomitantly with the nebicapone morning dose on day 4 (test). In the other period, subjects received a racemic warfarin 25-mg single dose alone (reference). The treatment periods were separated by a washout of 14 days. Results  For R-warfarin, mean ± SD C_max was 1,619 ± 284 ng/mL for test and 1,649 ± 357 ng/mL for reference, while AUC_0-t was 92,796 ± 18,976 ng·h/mL (test) and 73,597 ± 11,363 ng·h/mL (reference). The R-warfarin test-to-reference geometric mean ratio (GMR) and 90% confidence interval (90%CI) were 0.973 (0.878–1.077) for C_max and 1.247 (1.170–1.327) for AUC_0-t . For S-warfarin, mean ± SD C_max was 1,644 ± 331 ng/mL for test and 1,739 ± 392 ng/mL for reference, while AUC_0-t was 66,627 ± 41,199 ng·h/mL (test) and 70,178 ± 42,560 ng·h/mL (reference). The S-warfarin test-to-reference GMR and 90%CI were 0.932 (0.845–1.028) for C_max and 0.914 (0.875–0.954) for AUC_0-t . No differences were found for the pharmacodynamic parameter (INR). Conclusion  Nebicapone showed no significant effect on S-warfarin pharmacokinetics or on the coagulation endpoint (INR). A mild inhibition of the R-warfarin metabolism was found but is unlikely to be of clinical relevance.     

Effect of ranitidine on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of prasugrel and clopidogrel

ABSTRACT

Objective: Clopidogrel is an oral thienopyridine antiplatelet agent indicated for the treatment of atherothrombotic events in patients with acute coronary syndrome (ACS). Prasugrel, a novel oral thienopyridine, is under investigation for the reduction of atherothrombotic events in patients with ACS undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention. Prasugrel's solubility decreases with increasing pH, suggesting that concomitantly-administered medications that increase gastric pH may lower the rate and/or extent of prasugrel absorption. This study evaluated the influence of ranitidine coadministration on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the respective active metabolite of prasugrel and clopidogrel.

Research design and methods: In this open-label, two-period, two-treatment, crossover study, 47 healthy male subjects were randomized to one of two study arms, receiving either prasugrel (60-mg loading dose [LD], 10-mg maintenance dose [MD] for 7?days; n?=?23) or clopidogrel (600-mg LD, 75-mg MD for 7?days; n?=?24). In one treatment period, subjects received prasugrel or clopidogrel alone, and in the alternate period received the same thienopyridine with ranitidine (150?mg twice daily, starting 1?day before the LD). Pharmacokinetic parameter estimates (AUC_{0?t last}, C_max, and t_max) and inhibition of platelet aggregation (IPA) by light transmission aggregometry were assessed at multiple time points after the LD and final MD.

Results: Ranitidine had no clinically significant effect on the area under the plasma-concentration-time curve (AUC) and did not affect the time to C_max (t_max) for active metabolites of either prasugrel or clopidogrel. It reduced the geometric mean maximum concentrations of active metabolite (C_max) after a prasugrel and clopidogrel LD by 14% and 10%, respectively, but these differences were not statistically significant. When coadministered with a 60-mg prasugrel LD, ranitidine did not affect the time to, or magnitude of, peak IPA, but did result in a modest reduction at 0.5?h from 67.4 to 55.1% (p?<?0.001). Ranitidine did not affect prasugrel IPA during MD. For clopidogrel, IPA was not affected by ranitidine. Prasugrel and clopidogrel were both well-tolerated, with/without ranitidine.

Conclusions: Results from this study suggest that there is no significant drug–drug interaction between oral ranitidine therapy and concomitantly-administered prasugrel or clopidogrel.     

The effect of fluvastatin on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of ezetimibe

ABSTRACT

Objective: The objective of this study was to evaluate the pharmacodynamic effects and safety of the co-administration of ezetimibe and fluvastatin in healthy hypercholesterolemic subjects at clinically-relevant doses and to evaluate the potential for a pharmacokinetic drug interaction between ezetimibe and fluvastatin.

Methods: In a single-center, evaluator-blind, placebo-controlled, multiple-dose, parallel-group study 32 healthy subjects with hypercholesterolemia were randomized to 4 treatments administered once daily for 14 days: ezetimibe 10?mg plus ezetimibe placebo, fluvastatin 20?mg plus ezetimibe placebo, fluvastatin 20?mg plus ezetimibe 10?mg, and ezetimibe placebo. Blood samples were collected to measure serum lipids and to determine steady-state pharmacokinetics.

Results: Ezetimibe 10?mg significantly (?p ≤ 0.01) decreased total-cholesterol and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL‐C) concentrations compared to placebo at Day 14. Fluvastatin 20?mg also caused a significant (?p = 0.01) reduction in total-cholesterol and a decrease in LDL‐C at Day 14 compared to placebo, however, the decrease in LDL‐C did not reach statistical significance (?p = 0.08). The coadministration of ezetimibe 10?mg and fluvastatin 20?mg caused significantly (?p ≤ 0.01) greater mean percent reductions in LDL‐C and total-cholesterol than fluvastatin 20?mg alone or placebo at Day 14. Fluvastatin had no clinically significant effect on the pharmacokinetics of ezetimibe. On average, ezetimibe appeared to decrease the rate and extent of fluvastatin bioavailability.

Conclusion: Coadministration of ezetimibe and fluvastatin was safe and well tolerated and caused significant incremental reductions in LDL‐C and total cholesterol compared to fluvastatin administered alone. The pharmacokinetics of ezetimibe were not affected by coadministration with fluvastatin. The apparent decrease in fluvastatin exposure on administration with ezetimibe was likely to be due to the parallel study design and two pharmacokinetic outliers and is considered of no clinical significance.     

Stereoselective interaction between piroxicam and acenocoumarol

1 An open-label study was performed to assess the effect of piroxicam on the pharmacokinetics of acenocoumarol enantiomers.
2 Eight healthy male volunteers received an oral dose of 4  mg rac -acenocoumarol on days 1 and 8, plus 40  mg piroxicam orally 2  h before the anticoagulant on day 8. R- and S-acenocoumarol, piroxicam and their metabolites were measured in plasma over a 24  h interval.
3 The pharmacokinetics of R-acenocoumarol were markedly modified by piroxicam: C _max+28.0% (s.d.23.8), P <0.05; AUC(0,  24  h)+47.2% (21.5), P <0.005; and t _1/2+38.0% (34.5), P <0.01. A concomitant decrease of CL/ F was observed: −30.8% (10.0), P <0.0001. A similar, but statistically non-significant trend, was observed on the S-enantiomer: C _max: +9.5% (s.d.36.6), AUC(0,  24  h): +15.4% (23.4), t _1/2: +19.9% (42.0), and CL/ F: −9.8% (20.5). V/F remained unchanged for both enantiomers.
4 Piroxicam plasma AUC(0,  24  h) correlated closely with R- and Sacenocoumarol AUCs on day 1 ( r =0.901, P <0.005 and r =0.797, P <0.05, respectively), as well as with the difference of AUC between days 1 and 8 for R-acenocoumarol ( r =0.903, P <0.001) and S-acenocoumarol ( r =0.711, P <0.05).
5 Piroxicam markedly reduced acenocoumarol enantiomer clearance, with a greater effect on the more active R-isomer. This interaction, which occurs in addition to the well documented pharmacodynamic one (effect on platelets), is expected to result in increased anticoagulant effect.     

A placebo-controlled pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic interaction study between tamsulosin and acenocoumarol

AIM: To evaluate pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions between tamsulosin and acenocoumarol. METHODS: Twelve healthy volunteers received tamsulosin 0.4 mg or placebo once daily for 9 days in a double-blind, cross-over study. On day 5 of each study period, a single 10-mg oral dose of racemic acenocoumarol was administered. RESULTS: The ratios (point estimates (90% confidence intervals)) of values in the presence and absence of tamsulosin were: AUCPT 1.01 (0.98, 1.03); maximum prothrombin time (Ptmax) 0.99 (0.94, 1.05); AUC (R)-acenocoumarol 1.02 (0.90, 1.16), and AUC (S)-acenocoumarol 1.03 (0.89, 1.20). Both combinations, tamsulosin and placebo with acenocoumarol, were well-tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Multiple doses of tamsulosin had no effect on the pharmacokinetics or pharmacodynamics of a single high dose of acenocoumarol.     

Relationship between time of intake of grapefruit juice and its effect on pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of felodipine in healthy subjects

In this randomised, cross-over study, in nine healthy males given felodipine ER 10 mg PO 200 ml grapefruit juice was found to increase the plasma levels of felodipine even when the juice was taken 24 hours before the drug. Grapefruit juice drunk simultaneously with and 1, 4, 10 or 24 hours before the drug administration resulted in a 32-99% increase in mean C_max values of felodipine, relative to concomitant water and felodipine intake. The effect on AUC was also significant when juice was taken up to 10 h before the drug. The effect of the interaction decreased with increasing time between juice and drug intake. All treatments produced a significant decrease in diastolic blood pressure and an increase in heart rate in comparison with morning basal values. The change in haemodynamic variables was approximately the same after all treatment combinations. Headache was reported more frequently after treatments including grapefruit juice.     

The effects of acute ethanol intake on isoniazid pharmacokinetics

Aim To assess effects of acute ethanol intake on the pharmacokinetics of isoniazid in healthy male volunteers.Methods Sixteen healthy male, drug-free subjects were studied. Each received in the fasting state, on two occasions separated by at least 1 week, isoniazid (200 mg orally). On one occasion (assigned randomly), subjects received ethanol 0.73 g/kg, 1 h before isoniazid, followed by 0.11 g/kg ethanol orally every hour thereafter for 7 h. Plasma isoniazid and acetylisoniazid concentrations were measured by means of high-performance liquid chromatography. Blood ethanol concentrations were measured hourly by breath analysis. Plasma concentrations of isoniazid and acetylisoniazid were analysed using TOPFIT software.Results Peak concentrations of isoniazid were reached within 90 min, in both the ethanol-treated and control groups. The ethanol dosage regimen used resulted in peak blood ethanol concentrations between 78 mg/l and 103 mg/l. There was no significant difference in area under the curve, half-life of elimination or the ratio of acetylisoniazid to isoniazid (AcINH/INH) in the sample withdrawn 3 h after isoniazid dose. Acetylator phenotype for patients was the same in both phases, whether assessed by half-life of isoniazid or the AcINH/INH ratio at 3 h.Conclusions Acute ethanol intake at this dose is unlikely to affect results of acetylation studies in which isoniazid is used as a substrate, whether the half-life of isoniazid or the AcINH /INH ratio at 3 h is used to phenotype patients.     

Lack of effect of bezafibrate and fenofibrate on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of repaglinide

AIMS: Gemfibrozil markedly increases the plasma concentrations and blood glucose-lowering effects of repaglinide, but the effects of other fibrates on repaglinide pharmacokinetics are not known. Our aim was to investigate the effects of bezafibrate and fenofibrate on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of repaglinide. METHODS: In a randomized, three-phase cross-over study, 12 healthy subjects received 400 mg bezafibrate, 200 mg fenofibrate or placebo once daily for 5 days. On day 5, a single 0.25 mg dose of repaglinide was ingested 1 h after the last pretreatment dose. The concentrations of plasma repaglinide, bezafibrate and fenofibrate and blood glucose were measured up to 7 h postdose. RESULTS: During the bezafibrate and fenofibrate phases, the total area under the concentration-time curve [AUC(0, infinity )] of repaglinide was 99% (95% confidence interval of the ratio to the control phase 73, 143%) and 99% (85, 127%) of the corresponding value during the placebo (control) phase, respectively. Bezafibrate and fenofibrate had no significant effect on the peak concentration (Cmax) of repaglinide. The mean half-life of repaglinide was 1.3 h in all phases. The blood glucose-lowering effect of repaglinide was not affected by bezafibrate or fenofibrate. The AUC(0,8 h) values for bezafibrate and fenofibrate varied 3.0-fold and 4.4-fold between individual subjects, respectively. Neither bezafibrate nor fenofibrate affected the pharmacokinetic variables of repaglinide. CONCLUSIONS: Bezafibrate and fenofibrate do not affect the pharmacokinetics or pharmacodynamics of repaglinide.     

Effect of aprepitant on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of warfarin

Objective To examine the effect of aprepitant on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of warfarin. Aprepitant is a neurokinin-1 (NK₁)-receptor antagonist developed as an antiemetic for chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting.Methods This was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, two-period, parallel-group study. During period 1, warfarin was individually titrated to a stable prothrombin time (expressed as international normalized ratio, INR) from 1.3 to 1.8. Subsequently, the daily warfarin dose remained fixed for 10–12 days. During period 2, the warfarin dose was continued for 8 days, and on days 1–3 administered concomitantly with aprepitant (125 mg on day 1, and 80 mg on days 2 and 3) or placebo. At baseline (day –1 of period 2) and on day 3, warfarin pharmacokinetics was investigated. INR was monitored daily. During period 2, warfarin trough concentrations were determined daily.Results The study was completed by 22 healthy volunteers (20 men, 2 women). On day 3, steady-state pharmacokinetics of warfarin enantiomers after aprepitant did not change, as assessed by warfarin AUC_0-24h and C_max. However, compared with placebo, trough S(–) warfarin concentrations decreased on days 5–8 (maximum decrease 34% on day 8, P<0.01). The INR decreased after aprepitant with a mean maximum decrease on day 8 of 11% versus placebo (P=0.011).Conclusion These data are consistent with a significant induction of CYP2C9 metabolism of S(–) warfarin by aprepitant. Subsequently, in patients on chronic warfarin therapy, the clotting status should be monitored closely during the 2-week period, particularly at 7–10 days, following initiation of the 3-day regimen of aprepitant with each chemotherapy cycle.     

No effect of itraconazole on the single oral dose pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of estazolam

To examine the involvement of cytochrome P450 3A4 in the metabolism of estazolam, the effect of itraconazole, a potent inhibitor of this enzyme, on the single oral dose pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of estazolam was studied in a double-blind randomized crossover manner. Ten healthy male volunteers received itraconazole 100 mg/day or placebo orally for 7 days, and on the 4th day they received a single oral 4-mg dose of estazolam. Blood samplings and evaluation of psychomotor function by the Digit Symbol Substitution Test, Visual Analog Scale, and Stanford Sleepiness Scale were conducted up to 72 hours after estazolam dosing. There was no significant difference between the placebo and itraconazole phases for the peak plasma concentration, apparent oral clearance, and elimination half-life. Similarly, none of the psychomotor function parameters was significantly different between the two phases. The current study showed no significant effect of itraconazole on the single oral dose pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of estazolam, suggesting that cytochrome P450 3A4 is not involved in the metabolism of estazolam to a major extent.     

Evaluation of the effect of naproxen on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of apixaban

Aim

To assess pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions between naproxen (a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug) and apixaban (an oral, selective, direct factor-Xa inhibitor).

Method

In this randomized, three period, two sequence study, 21 healthy subjects received a single oral dose of apixaban 10 mg, naproxen 500 mg or co-administration of both. Blood samples were collected for determination of apixaban and naproxen pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics (anti-Xa activity, international normalized ratio [INR] and arachidonic acid–induced platelet aggregation [AAI-PA]). Adverse events, bleeding time and routine safety assessments were also evaluated.

Results

Apixaban had no effect on naproxen pharmacokinetics. However, following co-administration, apixaban AUC(0,∞), AUC(0,t) and C_max were 54% (geometric mean ratio 1.537; 90% confidence interval (CI) 1.394, 1.694), 55% (1.549; 90% CI 1.400, 1.713) and 61% (1.611; 90% CI 1.417, 1.831) higher, respectively. Mean (standard deviation [SD]) anti-Xa activity at 3 h post-dose was approximately 60% higher following co-administration compared with apixaban alone, 4.4 [1.0] vs. 2.7 [0.7] IU ml⁻¹, consistent with the apixaban concentration increase following co-administration. INR was within the normal reference range after all treatments. AAI-PA was reduced by approximately 80% with naproxen. Co-administration had no impact beyond that of naproxen. Mean [SD] bleeding time was higher following co-administration (9.1 [4.1] min) compared with either agent alone (5.8 [2.3] and 6.9 [2.6] min for apixaban and naproxen, respectively).

Conclusion

Co-administration of naproxen with apixaban results in higher apixaban exposure and appears to occur through increased apixaban bioavailability. The effects on anti-Xa activity, INR and inhibition of AAI-PA observed in this study were consistent with the individual pharmacologic effects of apixaban and naproxen.     

Effect of aliskiren,an oral direct renin inhibitor,on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of a single dose of acenocoumarol in healthy volunteers

ABSTRACT

Objective: Aliskiren is a direct renin inhibitor approved for the treatment of hypertension. This study investigated the effects of aliskiren on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of a single dose of acenocoumarol in healthy volunteers.

Methods: This two-sequence, two-period, randomized, double-blind crossover study recruited 18 healthy subjects (ages 18–45) to receive either aliskiren 300?mg or placebo once daily on days 1–10 of each treatment period and a single dose of acenocoumarol 10?mg on day 8. Treatment periods were separated by a 10-day washout. Blood samples were taken frequently for determination of steady-state plasma concentrations of aliskiren (LC-MS/MS) and of R (+)- and S (?)-acenocoumarol (HPLC-UV), prothrombin time (PT) and international normalized ratio (INR).

Results: Co-administration with aliskiren had no effect on exposure to R (+)-acenocoumarol. Geometric mean ratios (GMR; aliskiren:placebo co-administration) for R (+)-acenocoumarol AUC_0?t and C_max were 1.08 and 1.04, respectively, with 90% CI within the range 0.80–1.25. Co-administration of aliskiren resulted in a 19% increase in S (?)-acenocoumarol AUC_0?t (GMR 1.19; 90% CI 0.92, 1.54) and a 9% increase in C_max (GMR 1.09; 90% CI 0.88, 1.34). The anticoagulant effect of acenocoumarol was not affected by co-administration of aliskiren. Geometric mean ratios were 1.01 for all pharmacodynamic parameters (AUC_PT, PT_max, AUC_INR and INR_max), with 90% CI within the range 0.97–1.05.

Conclusion: Aliskiren has no clinically relevant effect on the pharmacokinetics or pharmacodynamic effects of a single dose of acenocoumarol in healthy volunteers, hence no dosage adjustment of acenocoumarol is likely to be required during co-administration with aliskiren.     

Effect of ginkgo and ginger on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of warfarin in healthy subjects

AIM: The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of two common herbal medicines, ginkgo and ginger, on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of warfarin and the independent effect of these herbs on clotting status. METHODS: This was an open label, three-way crossover randomized study in 12 healthy male subjects, who received a single 25 mg dose of warfarin alone or after 7 days pretreatment with recommended doses of ginkgo or ginger from herbal medicine products of known quality. Dosing with ginkgo or ginger was continued for 7 days after administration of the warfarin dose. Platelet aggregation, international normalized ratio (INR) of prothrombin time, warfarin enantiomer protein binding, warfarin enantiomer concentrations in plasma and S-7-hydroxywarfarin concentration in urine were measured. Statistical comparisons were made using anova and the 90% confidence intervals (CIs) of the ratio of log transformed parameters are reported. RESULTS: INR and platelet aggregation were not affected by administration of ginkgo or ginger alone. The mean (95% CI) apparent clearances of S-warfarin after warfarin alone, with ginkgo or ginger were 189 (167-210) ml h(-1), 200 (173-227) ml h(-1) and 201 (171-231) ml h(-1), respectively. The respective apparent clearances of R-warfarin were 127 (106-149) ml h(-1), 126 (111-141) ml h(-1) and 131 (106-156) ml h(-1). The mean ratio (90% CI) of apparent clearance for S-warfarin was 1.05 (0.98-1.21) and for R-warfarin was 1.00 (0.93-1.08) when coadministered with ginkgo. The mean ratio (90% CI) of AUC(0-168) of INR was 0.93 (0.81-1.05) when coadministered with ginkgo. The mean ratio (90% CI) of apparent clearance for S-warfarin was 1.05 (0.97-1.13) and for R-warfarin was 1.02 (0.95-1.10) when coadministered with ginger. The mean ratio (90% CI) of AUC(0-168) of INR was 1.01 (0.93-1.15) when coadministered with ginger. The mean ratio (90% CI) for S-7-hydroxywarfarin urinary excretion rate was 1.07 (0.85-1.32) for ginkgo treatment, and 1.00 (0.81-1.23) for ginger coadministration suggesting these herbs did not affect CYP2C9 activity. Ginkgo and ginger did not affect the apparent volumes of distribution or protein binding of either S-warfarin or R-warfarin. CONCLUSIONS: Ginkgo and ginger at recommended doses do not significantly affect clotting status, the pharmacokinetics or pharmacodynamics of warfarin in healthy subjects.