Clinically significant drug interactions with antidepressants in the elderly

Pharmacological treatment of depression in old age is associated with an increased risk of adverse pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic drug interactions. Elderly patients may have multiple disease states and, therefore, may require a variety of other drugs. In addition to polypharmacy, other factors such as age-related physiological changes, diseases, genetic constitution and diet may alter drug response and, therefore, predispose elderly patients to adverse effects and drug interactions. Antidepressant drugs currently available differ in their potential for drug interactions. In general, older compounds, such as tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) and monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs), have a higher potential for interactions than newer compounds, such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and other relatively novel agents with a more specific mechanism of action. In particular, TCAs and MAOIs are associated with clinically significant pharmacodynamic interactions with many medications frequently prescribed to elderly patients. Moreover, TCAs may be susceptible to pharmacokinetic interactions when given in combination with inhibitors or inducers of the cytochrome P450 (CYP) isoenzymes involved in their metabolism. Because of a more selective mechanism of action, newer antidepressants have a low potential for pharmacodynamic drug interactions. However, the possibility of the serotonin syndrome should be taken into account when drugs affecting serotonergic transmission, such as SSRIs, venlafaxine or nefazodone, are coadministered with other serotonergic agents. Newer agents have a differential potential for pharmacokinetic interactions because of their selective effects on CYP isoenzymes. Within the group of SSRIs, fluoxetine and paroxetine are potent inhibitors of CYP2D6, while fluvoxamine predominantly affects CYP1A2 and CYP2C19 activity. Therefore, these agents should be closely monitored or avoided in elderly patients treated with substrates of these isoforms, especially those with a narrow therapeutic index. On the other hand, citalopram and sertraline have a low inhibitory activity on different drug metabolising enzymes and appear particularly suitable in an elderly population. Among other newer antidepressants, nefazodone is a potent inhibitor of CYP3A4 and its combination with substrates of this isoform should be avoided.     

Clinically important drug interactions with zopiclone,zolpidem and zaleplon

Insomnia, an inability to initiate or maintain sleep, affects approximately one-third of the American population. Conventional benzodiazepines, such as triazolam and midazolam, were the treatment of choice for short-term insomnia for many years but are associated with adverse effects such as rebound insomnia, withdrawal and dependency. The newer hypnosedatives include zolpidem, zaleplon and zopiclone. These agents may be preferred over conventional benzodiazepines to treat short-term insomnia because they may be less likely to cause significant rebound insomnia or tolerance and are as efficacious as the conventional benzodiazepines. This review aims to summarise the published clinical drug interaction studies involving zolpidem, zaleplon and zopiclone. The pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions that may be clinically important are highlighted. Clinical trials have studied potential interactions of zaleplon, zolpidem and zopiclone with the following types of drugs: cytochrome P450 (CYP) inducers (rifampicin), CYP inhibitors (azoles, ritonavir and erythromycin), histamine H(2) receptor antagonists (cimetidine and ranitidine), antidepressants, antipsychotics, antagonists of benzodiazepines and drugs causing sedation. Rifampicin significantly induced the metabolism of the newer hypnosedatives and decreased their sedative effects, indicating that a dose increase of these agents may be necessary when they are administered with rifampicin. Ketoconazole, erythromycin and cimetidine inhibited the metabolism of the newer hypnosedatives and enhanced their sedative effects, suggesting that a dose reduction may be required. Addition of ethanol to treatment with the newer hypnosedatives resulted in additive sedative effects without altering the pharmacokinetic parameters of the drugs. Compared with some of the conventional benzodiazepines, fewer clinically important interactions appear to have been reported in the literature with zaleplon, zolpidem and zopiclone. The fact that these drugs are newer to the market and have not been as extensively studied as the conventional benzodiazepines may be the reason for this. Another explanation may be a difference in CYP metabolism. While triazolam and midazolam are biotransformed almost entirely via CYP3A4, the newer hypnosedatives are biotransformed by several CYP isozymes in addition to CYP3A4, resulting in CYP3A4 inhibitors and inducers having a lesser effect on their biotransformation.     

Risk of seizures associated with psychotropic medications: emphasis on new drugs and new findings

Psychotropic medications in the classes of antidepressants, antipsychotics and mood stabilisers have been recognised in the literature and clinical settings as having high epileptogenic potential. Among these three classes, clozapine, tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) and lithium are agents that clinicians have historically recognised as precipitants of drug-induced seizures. There are few reports that review the epileptogenic risk of newer psychotropic agents; in this qualitative review, the authors provide an update on the most recently published reports on seizures associated with antidepressants, antipsychotics, mood stabilisers, anxiolytics and sedative-hypnotics. In general, the epileptogenic risks of the newer psychotropic agents appear to be quite low as long as dosing strategies are consistent with recommended guidelines. Whilst newer psychotropic medications appear to be safe in patients with epilepsy, few studies have specifically addressed this population. In addition, the potential for drug interactions between antiepileptic drugs and psychotropics may be substantial with certain agents. For example, many psychotropes are both substrates and inhibitors of cytochrome P450 (CYP450) isoenzymes, whilst many antiepileptic drugs are both substrates and inducers of CYP450 activity. Every attempt should be made to minimise potential interactions when these agents are concomitantly administered.     

Risk of seizures associated with psychotropic medications: emphasis on new drugs and new findings

Psychotropic medications in the classes of antidepressants, antipsychotics and mood stabilisers have been recognised in the literature and clinical settings as having high epileptogenic potential. Among these three classes, clozapine, tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) and lithium are agents that clinicians have historically recognised as precipitants of drug-induced seizures. There are few reports that review the epileptogenic risk of newer psychotropic agents; in this qualitative review, the authors provide an update on the most recently published reports on seizures associated with antidepressants, antipsychotics, mood stabilisers, anxiolytics and sedative-hypnotics. In general, the epileptogenic risks of the newer psychotropic agents appear to be quite low as long as dosing strategies are consistent with recommended guidelines. Whilst newer psychotropic medications appear to be safe in patients with epilepsy, few studies have specifically addressed this population. In addition, the potential for drug interactions between antiepileptic drugs and psychotropics may be substantial with certain agents. For example, many psychotropes are both substrates and inhibitors of cytochrome P450 (CYP450) isoenzymes, whilst many antiepileptic drugs are both substrates and inducers of CYP450 activity. Every attempt should be made to minimise potential interactions when these agents are concomitantly administered.     

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and cytochrome P-450 mediated drug-drug interactions: an update

The selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) have become the most prescribed antidepressants in many countries. Although the SSRIs share a common mechanism of action, they differ substantially in their chemical structure, metabolism, and pharmacokinetics. Perhaps the most important difference between the SSRIs is their potential to cause drug-drug interactions through inhibition of cytochrome-P450 (CYP) isoforms. This paper provides an update on both the in vitro and in vivo evidence with respect to CYP-mediated drug-drug interactions with this class of antidepressants. The available evidence clearly indicates that the individual SSRIs display a distinct profile of cytochrome P450 inhibition. Fluvoxamine is a potent CYP1A2 and CYP2C19 inhibitor, and a moderate CYP2C9, CYP2D6, and CYP3A4 inhibitor. Fluoxetine and paroxetine are potent CYP2D6 inhibitors, whereas fluoxetine's main metabolite, norfluoxetine, has a moderate inhibitory effect on CYP3A4. Sertraline is a moderate CYP2D6 inhibitor; citalopram appears to have little effect on the major CYP isoforms. Fluoxetine deserves special attention as inhibitory effects on CYP-activity can persist for several weeks after fluoxetine discontinuation because of the long half-life of fluoxetine and its metabolite norfluoxetine. Drug combinations with SSRIs should be assessed on an individual basis. Knowledge regarding the CYP-isoforms involved in the metabolism of the co-administered drug may help clinicians to anticipate and avoid potentially dangerous drug-drug interactions. Anticipated interactions can usually be managed by appropriate dose adjustment and titration of the object drug. In some cases, therapeutic drug monitoring can be useful. Equally well, an SSRI with limited interaction potential may be selected to treat depression in patients that receive other medications.     

Metabolic drug interactions with newer antipsychotics: a comparative review

Newer antipsychotics introduced in clinical practice in recent years include clozapine, risperidone, olanzapine, quetiapine, sertindole, ziprasidone, aripiprazole and amisulpride. These agents are subject to drug-drug interactions with other psychotropic agents or with medications used in the treatment of concomitant physical illnesses. Most pharmacokinetic interactions with newer antipsychotics occur at the metabolic level and usually involve changes in the activity of the major drug-metabolizing enzymes involved in their biotransformation, i.e. the cytochrome P450 (CYP) monooxygenases and/or uridine diphosphate-glucuronosyltransferases (UGT). Clozapine is metabolized primarily by CYP1A2, with additional contribution by other CYP isoforms. Risperidone is metabolized primarily by CYP2D6 and, to a lesser extent, CYP3A4. Olanzapine undergoes both direct conjugation and CYP1A2-mediated oxidation. Quetiapine is metabolized by CYP3A4, while sertindole and aripiprazole are metabolized by CYP2D6 and CYP3A4. Ziprasidone pathways include aldehyde oxidase-mediated reduction and CYP3A4-mediated oxidation. Amisulpride is primarily excreted in the urine and undergoes relatively little metabolism. While novel antipsychotics are unlikely to interfere with the elimination of other drugs, co-administration of inhibitors or inducers of the major enzymes responsible for their metabolism may modify their plasma concentrations, leading to potentially significant effects. Most documented metabolic interactions involve antidepressant and anti-epileptic drugs. Of a particular clinical significance is the interaction between fluvoxamine, a potent CYP1A2 inhibitor, and clozapine. Differences in the interaction potential among the novel antipsychotics currently available may be predicted based on their metabolic pathways. The clinical relevance of these interactions should be interpreted in relation to the relative width of their therapeutic index. Avoidance of unnecessary polypharmacy, knowledge of the interaction profiles of individual agents, and careful individualization of dosage based on close evaluation of clinical response and, possibly, plasma drug concentrations are essential to prevent and minimize potentially adverse drug interactions in patients receiving newer antipsychotics.     

Pharmacokinetics and interactions of headache medications, part I: introduction, pharmacokinetics, metabolism and acute treatments

Recent progress in the treatment of primary headaches has made available specific, effective and safe medications for these disorders, which are widely spread among the general population. One of the negative consequences of this undoubtedly positive progress is the risk of drug-drug interactions. This review is the first in a two-part series on pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions of headache medications. Part I addresses acute treatments. Part II focuses on prophylactic treatments. The overall aim of this series is to increase the awareness of physicians, either primary care providers or specialists, regarding this topic. Pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions of major severity involving acute medications are a minority among those reported in literature. The main drug combinations to avoid are: i) NSAIDs plus drugs with a narrow therapeutic range (i.e., digoxin, methotrexate, etc.); ii) sumatriptan, rizatriptan or zolmitriptan plus monoamine oxidase inhibitors; iii) substrates and inhibitors of CYP2D6 (i.e., chlorpromazine, metoclopramide, etc.) and -3A4 (i.e., ergot derivatives, eletriptan, etc.), as well as other substrates or inhibitors of the same CYP isoenzymes. The risk of having clinically significant pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions seems to be limited in patients with low frequency headaches, but could be higher in chronic headache sufferers with medication overuse.     

Antidepressant-drug interactions are potentially but rarely clinically significant.

The salient pharmacologic features of the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) discovered in the late 1980s included an in vitro ability to inhibit various cytochrome P450 enzymes (CYPs). Differences in potency among the SSRIs for CYP inhibition formed the basis of a marketing focus based largely on predictions of in vivo pharmacokinetic drug interactions from in vitro data, conclusions derived from case reports, and the extrapolation of the results of pharmacokinetic studies conducted in healthy volunteers to patients. Subsequently introduced antidepressants have undergone a similar post hoc scrutiny for potential drug-drug interactions. Concern for the untoward consequences of drug interactions led the FDA to publish guidance for the pharmaceutical industry in 1997 recommending that in vitro metabolic studies be conducted early in the drug development process to evaluate inhibitory properties toward the major CYPs. However, the prevalence of clinically significant enzyme inhibition interactions occurring during antidepressant treatment remains poorly defined despite millions of exposures. Although lack of evidence does not equate to evidence of absence, sparse epidemiological and post-marketing surveillance data do not substantiate a conclusion that widespread morbidity results from antidepressant-induced drug interactions. This commentary discusses points of uncertainty and controversy in the field of drug interactions, notes areas where inadequate data exist, and suggests explanations for a low prevalence of serious interactions. The conclusion is drawn that drug interactions from CYP inhibition caused by the newer antidepressants are potentially, but rarely, clinically significant.     

Pharmacokinetics and interactions of headache medications, part II: prophylactic treatments

The present part II review highlights pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions (excluding those of minor severity) of medications used in prophylactic treatment of the main primary headaches (migraine, tension-type and cluster headache). The principles of pharmacokinetics and metabolism, and the interactions of medications for acute treatment are examined in part I. The overall goal of this series of two reviews is to increase the awareness of physicians, primary care providers and specialists regarding pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions (DDIs) of headache medications. The aim of prophylactic treatment is to reduce the frequency of headache attacks using beta-blockers, calcium-channel blockers, antidepressants, antiepileptics, lithium, serotonin antagonists, corticosteroids and muscle relaxants, which must be taken daily for long periods. During treatment the patient often continues to take symptomatic drugs for the attack, and may need other medications for associated or new-onset illnesses. DDIs can, therefore, occur. As a whole, DDIs of clinical relevance concerning prophylactic drugs are a limited number. Their effects can be prevented by starting the treatment with low dosages, which should be gradually increased depending on response and side effects, while frequently monitoring the patient and plasma levels of other possible coadministered drugs with a narrow therapeutic range. Most headache medications are substrates of CYP2D6 (e.g., beta-blockers, antidepressants) or CYP3A4 (e.g., calcium-channel blockers, selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors, corticosteroids). The inducers and, especially, the inhibitors of these isoenzymes should be carefully coadministered.     

Metabolic drug interactions between antidepressants and anticancer drugs: focus on selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and hypericum extract

Different antidepressant drugs are currently used for the treatment of depression in cancer patients, such as second-generation antidepressants and, recently, the extracts of Hypericum perforatum. These agents are susceptible to metabolically-based drug interactions with anticancer drugs. The aim of the present article is to provide an updated review of clinically relevant metabolic drug interactions between selected anticancer drugs and antidepressants, focusing on selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and Hypericum extract. SSRIs can cause pharmacokinetic interactions through their in vitro ability to inhibit one or more cytochrome P450 isoenzymes (CYPs). SSRIs differ in their potential for metabolic drug interactions with anticancer drugs. Fluoxetine and paroxetine are potent inhibitors of CYP2D6 and administration of these SSRIs reduces the clinical benefit of an anticancer drug, such as tamoxifen, by decreasing the formation of active metabolites of this drug. Women with breast cancer who receive paroxetine in combination with tamoxifen are at increased risk for death. Other SSRIs, including citalopram, escitalopram, are weak or negligible inhibitors of CYP2D6 and are less likely to interact with anticancer drugs, while sertraline causes significant inhibition of this isoform only at high doses. Hypericum extract, by inducing both the CYP3A4 and the P-glycoprotein (P-gp), can reduce the plasma concentrations of different antineoplastic agents such as imatinib, irinotecan and docetaxel, thus reducing the clinical efficacy of these drugs. Although these interactions are often predictable, the use of fluoxetine, paroxetine and Hypericum extract should be avoided in cancer patients.     

CYP-mediated clozapine interactions: how predictable are they?

Despite the introduction of newer drugs, the atypical antipsychotic clozapine remains the most effective drug in psychotic patients who are resistant to treatment with conventional agents. Optimal therapeutic responses to clozapine have been reported with serum concentrations between 350 microg/L and 1000 microg/L. Clozapine is frequently combined with other drugs to enhance efficacy and reduce adverse reactions but pharmacokinetic interactions can have a significant impact on drug response. The majority of the interactions with clozapine are reported to be mediated by cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzymes. CYP1A2 has a major role in the oxidative metabolism of clozapine, with a minor contribution from CYP3A4, and possibly CYP2D6, CYP2C9 and CYP2C19. Interactions mediated by potent CYP1A2 inhibitors (such as fluvoxamine) or inducers (like cigarette smoke) appear to be consistent, predictable and usually clinically significant. There are many case reports of interactions between clozapine and weak CYP1A2 inhibitors or inducers which are also potent inhibitors or inducers of CYP3A4 or CYP2D6. Researchers often explain these observations on the basis of the CYP1A2 involvement. In addition, there are case reports of clinically significant interactions between clozapine and drugs that are not substrates, inhibitors or inducers of CYP1A2. These interactions are difficult to predict and may not be consistent, as reflected by the conflicting literature reports. Further research to elucidate individual differences in clozapine metabolism, with the potential to detect the dominant roles of CYPs other than CYP1A2, may assist us in predicting these interactions.     

Charleston Antidepressant Drug Interactions Surveillance Program (CADISP)

A prospective antidepressant drug interaction surveillance program was established and collected data for over 4 years in Charleston, SC (Charleston Antidepressant Drug Interactions Surveillance Program, CADISP). One hundred and seventy patients were enrolled. The plasma concentrations and/or clinical effects of drug combinations were monitored in psychiatric patients who received therapy with a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) or one of the other newer antidepressants (nefazodone, venlafaxine) when combined with other drugs metabolized by the cytochrome P-450 (CYP) enzyme system. Patient data were evaluated to estimate the occurrence and significance of antidepressant-induced metabolic drug interactions. Plasma drug concentrations in the presence and absence of treatment with an antidepressant served as the primary assessment variable. Contrary to the hypothesis that pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions occur but go undetected, little evidence was found for occultly occurring drug interactions with newer antidepressants. The presence of commonly predicted drug interactions was documented. These data do not eliminate the need for caution when prescribing antidepressants with the potential for causing metabolic interactions, but do help allay the fear that such interactions are highly prevalent and routinely hazardous.     

Duloxetine: clinical pharmacokinetics and drug interactions

Duloxetine, a potent reuptake inhibitor of serotonin (5-HT) and norepinephrine, is effective for the treatment of major depressive disorder, diabetic neuropathic pain, stress urinary incontinence, generalized anxiety disorder and fibromyalgia. Duloxetine achieves a maximum plasma concentration (C(max)) of approximately 47?ng/mL (40?mg twice-daily dosing) to 110?ng/mL (80?mg twice-daily dosing) approximately 6 hours after dosing. The elimination half-life of duloxetine is approximately 10-12 hours and the volume of distribution is approximately 1640?L. The goal of this paper is to provide a review of the literature on intrinsic and extrinsic factors that may impact the pharmacokinetics of duloxetine with a focus on concomitant medications and their clinical implications. Patient demographic characteristics found to influence the pharmacokinetics of duloxetine include sex, smoking status, age, ethnicity, cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2D6 genotype, hepatic function and renal function. Of these, only impaired hepatic function or severely impaired renal function warrant specific warnings or dose recommendations. Pharmacokinetic results from drug interaction studies show that activated charcoal decreases duloxetine exposure, and that CYP1A2 inhibition increases duloxetine exposure to a clinically significant degree. Specifically, following oral administration in the presence of fluvoxamine, the area under the plasma concentration-time curve and C(max) of duloxetine significantly increased by 460% (90% CI 359, 584) and 141% (90% CI 93, 200), respectively. In addition, smoking is associated with a 30% decrease in duloxetine concentration. The exposure of duloxetine with CYP2D6 inhibitors or in CYP2D6 poor metabolizers is increased to a lesser extent than that observed with CYP1A2 inhibition and does not require a dose adjustment. In addition, duloxetine increases the exposure of drugs that are metabolized by CYP2D6, but not CYP1A2. Pharmacodynamic study results indicate that duloxetine may enhance the effects of benzodiazepines, but not alcohol or warfarin. An increase in gastric pH produced by histamine H(2)-receptor antagonists or antacids did not impact the absorption of duloxetine. While duloxetine is generally well tolerated, it is important to be knowledgeable about the potential for pharmacokinetic interactions between duloxetine and drugs that inhibit CYP1A2 or drugs that are metabolized by CYP2D6 enzymes.     

Effects of the antifungal agents on oxidative drug metabolism: clinical relevance

This article reviews the metabolic pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions with the systemic antifungal agents: the azoles ketoconazole, miconazole, itraconazole and fluconazole, the allylamine terbinafine and the sulfonamide sulfamethoxazole. The majority of these interactions are metabolic and are caused by inhibition of cytochrome P450 (CYP)-mediated hepatic and/or small intestinal metabolism of coadministered drugs. Human liver microsomal studies in vitro, clinical case reports and controlled pharmacokinetic interaction studies in patients or healthy volunteers are reviewed. A brief overview of the CYP system and the contrasting effects of the antifungal agents on the different human drug-metabolising CYP isoforms is followed by discussion of the role of P-glycoprotein in presystemic extraction and the modulation of its function by the antifungal agents. Methods used for in vitro drug interaction studies and in vitro-in vivo scaling are then discussed, with specific emphasis on the azole antifungals. Ketoconazole and itraconazole are potent inhibitors of the major drug-metabolising CYP isoform in humans, CYP3A4. Coadministration of these drugs with CYP3A substrates such as cyclosporin, tacrolimus, alprazolam, triazolam, midazolam, nifedipine, felodipine, simvastatin, lovastatin, vincristine, terfenadine or astemizole can result in clinically significant drug interactions, some of which can be life-threatening. The interactions of ketoconazole with cyclosporin and tacrolimus have been applied for therapeutic purposes to allow a lower dosage and cost of the immunosuppressant and a reduced risk of fungal infections. The potency of fluconazole as a CYP3A4 inhibitor is much lower. Thus, clinical interactions of CYP3A substrates with this azole derivative are of lesser magnitude, and are generally observed only with fluconazole dosages of > or =200 mg/day. Fluconazole, miconazole and sulfamethoxazole are potent inhibitors of CYP2C9. Coadministration of phenytoin, warfarin, sulfamethoxazole and losartan with fluconazole results in clinically significant drug interactions. Fluconazole is a potent inhibitor of CYP2C19 in vitro, although the clinical significance of this has not been investigated. No clinically significant drug interactions have been predicted or documented between the azoles and drugs that are primarily metabolised by CYP1A2, 2D6 or 2E1. Terbinafine is a potent inhibitor of CYP2D6 and may cause clinically significant interactions with coadministered substrates of this isoform, such as nortriptyline, desipramine, perphenazine, metoprolol, encainide and propafenone. On the basis of the existing in vitro and in vivo data, drug interactions of terbinafine with substrates of other CYP isoforms are unlikely.     

Drug interactions with cholinesterase inhibitors

Cholinesterase inhibitors are used for the symptomatic treatment of patients with Alzheimer's disease. This population often has numerous comorbidities and receives treatment with multiple medications. The astute clinician should remain mindful of possible drug interactions, both pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic, that may occur with concomitant treatment. Although pharmacokinetic interactions have been reported, pharmacodynamic interactions play a far greater role in the significance of drug interactions, with anticholinergic medications being most concerning. Commonly prescribed medications, such as antihistamines and tricyclic antidepressants, often have anticholinergic properties that alone or in combination with one another can antagonise the effects of cholinesterase inhibitors. Other medication classes such as antipsychotics and cholinergic agents may also result in pharmacodynamic interactions. However, for the most part, cholinesterase inhibitors can be used safely in combination with other medications.     

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic drug interactions in the treatment of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder.

The psychostimulants methylphenidate, amphetamine and pemoline are among the most common medications used today in child and adolescent psychiatry for the treatment of patients with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder. Frequently, these medications are used in combination with other medications on a short or long term basis. The present review examines psychostimulant pharmacology, summarises reported drug-drug interactions and explores underlying pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic considerations for interactions. A computerised search was undertaken using Medline (1966 to 2000) and Current Contents to provide the literature base for reports of drug-drug interactions involving psychostimulants. These leads were further cross-referenced for completeness of the survey. Methylphenidate appears to be more often implicated in pharmacokinetic interactions suggestive of possible metabolic inhibition, although the mechanisms still remain unclear. Amphetamine was more often involved in apparent pharmacodynamic interactions and could potentially be influenced by medications affecting cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2D6. No published reports of drug interactions involving pemoline were found. The alpha2-adrenergic agonists clonidine and guanfacine have been implicated in several interactions. Perhaps best documented is their antagonism by tricyclic antidepressants and phenothiazines. In additional, concurrent beta-blocker use, or abrupt discontinuation, can lead to hypertensive response. Although there are few published well-controlled interaction studies with psychostimulants and alpha2-adrenergic agonists, it appears that these agents may be safely coadministered. The interactions of monoamine oxidase inhibitors with psychostimulants represent one of the few strict contraindications.     

Practical perspectives on the use of tipranavir in combination with other medications: lessons learned from pharmacokinetic studies

Drug-drug interactions are a major practical concern for physicians treating human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) because of the many medications that HIV-positive patients must take. Pharmacokinetic drug interactions can occur at different levels (absorption, distribution, metabolism, excretion) and are difficult to predict. Of all the processes that give rise to drug interactions, metabolism by cytochrome P450 (CYP3A) is the most frequent. Moreover, medications prescribed to HIV-positive patients may also be CYP3A inhibitors and inducers: Tipranavir, in the absence of ritonavir, is a CYP3A inducer, and ritonavir is a CYP3A inhibitor. Fortunately, the drug interactions between tipranavir coadministered with ritonavir and other antiretroviral medications or with other medications commonly used in HIV therapy are well characterized. This review summarizes the pharmacokinetic interactions between tipranavir/ritonavir and 11 other antiretroviral medications and between tipranavir/ritonavir and drugs used to treat opportunistic infections such as fungal infections, antiretroviral-treatment-related conditions such as hyperlipidemia, and side effects such as diarrhea.     

氟西汀的药代动力学及其与CYP450酶的作用

氟西汀是近年来开发的一种新型 5 羟色胺重摄取抑制剂 ,它通过选择性抑制突触间 5 羟色胺 (5 HT)的重摄取和代谢 ,增加突触间 5 HT的传递而发挥作用。氟西汀由细胞色素P45 0 (CYP45 0 )酶进行氧化代谢 ,现已证明CYP2C9,CYP2C19和CYP2D6是介导氟西汀N 去甲基代谢的主要CYP45 0同工酶。由于氟西汀及代谢产物去甲氟西汀分别为CYP2D6、CYP3A4、CYP2C19和CYP2C9的抑制剂 ,因此它可与经这些CYP同工酶催化代谢的药物产生明显的相互作用 ;从而导致不同个体间的药代动力学差异和疗效差异。