Verlängerung der QT-Zeit
Varianten ✨Für die rechenintensive Bewertung der Varianten bitte das kostenpflichtige Standard Abonnement wählen.
Eklärungen für Patienten zu den Wirkstoffen
Monitorisierung von Valproinsäure und Lorazepam empfohlen.
Erhöhte Lorazepamexposition und verstärkte Sedation möglichMechanismus: Der Metabolismus von Lorazepam erfolgt primär über Glucuronidierung. Valproinsäure kann durch Hemmung der Glucuronidierung von Lorazepam dessen Verstoffwechselung hemmen. Es kann zu einer erhöhten Lorazepamexposition kommen.
Effekt: Wird Lorazepam zusammen mit Valproat gegeben, kann eine Zunahme der Plasmakonzentration und Abnahme der Clearance von Lorazepam erfolgen. In einer klinischen Studie kam es unter der Kombination bei 6 von 8 gesunden Probanden zu einer Verminderung der totalen Clearance von Lorazepam um 40%. Die Glucuronidierungsrate sank auf 55%. Des Weiteren zeigten sich die Lorazepamkonzentrationen innerhalb 12h nach der gleichzeitigen Gabe verdoppelt.
Massnahmen: Wird Lorazepam in Kombination mit Valproinsäure gegeben, ist -auch wenn die therapeutische Breite von Lorazepam gross ist- ein in etwa um 50% reduzierter Dosisbedarf von Lorazepam zu erwarten. Auf Anzeichen von verstärkten Symptomen, insbesondere einer verlängerten/ tieferen Sedation, sollte geachtet werden.
Die genannten Expositionsveränderungen beziehen sich jeweils auf Veränderungen der Plasmakonzentrations-Zeit-Kurve [ AUC ]. Eine Veränderung der Exposition von Lorazepam haben wir nicht erkannt. Den Einfluss von undefined können wir aktuell nicht abschätzen. Eine Veränderung der Exposition von Valproinsäure haben wir nicht erkannt.
Für die Berechnung der individuellen Expositionsveränderungen durch die Wechselwirkungen werden als Ausgangsbasis die pharmakokinetischen Parameter der durchschnittlichen Population verwendet.
Lorazepam hat eine hohe orale Bioverfügbarkeit [ F ] von 85%, weshalb die maximalen Plasmaspiegel [ Cmax ] sich bei einer Interaktion tendentiell wenig verändern. Die terminale Halbwertszeit [ t12 ] beträgt 14.3 Stunden und konstante Plasmaspiegel [ Css ] werden ungefähr nach 57.2 Stunden erreicht. Die Proteinbindung [ Pb ] ist mit 91.9% mässig stark und das Verteilungsvolumen [ Vd ] ist mit 111 Liter sehr gross. Die Metabolisierung erfolgt nicht über die gängigen Cytochrome und der aktive Transport erfolgt insbesondere über UGT2B7.
Für Valproinsäure ist die Bioverfügbarkeit nicht bekannt. Die terminale Halbwertszeit [ t12 ] beträgt 12.5 Stunden und konstante Plasmaspiegel [ Css ] werden ungefähr nach 50 Stunden erreicht. Die Proteinbindung [ Pb ] ist mit 85% mässig stark. Die Metabolisierung findet vor allem über CYP2C9 statt und der aktive Transport erfolgt zum Teil über UGT1A1, UGT1A4, UGT1A9 und UGT2B7.
|Serotonerge Effekte a||0||Ø||Ø|
Bewertung: Gemäss unseren Erkenntnissen erhöhen weder Lorazepam noch Valproinsäure die serotonerge Aktivität.
|Kiesel & Durán b||0||Ø||Ø|
Bewertung: Die anticholinergen Effekt von Lorazepam und Valproinsäure sind nicht relevant.
Verlängerung der QT-Zeit
Für Lorazepam und Valproinsäure ist uns kein QT-Zeit verlängerndes Potential bekannt.
|Verlust von Appetit||8.0 %||n.a.||8.0|
Gesteigerter Appetit (6%): Valproinsäure
Nystagmus (5.5%): Lorazepam, Valproinsäure
Atemnot (5%): Valproinsäure
Asthenie (4.2%): Lorazepam
Schläfrigkeit (2%): Lorazepam, Valproinsäure
Herzklopfen (3%): Valproinsäure
Tachykardie (3%): Valproinsäure
Erythema multiforme: Valproinsäure
Myelodysplastisches Syndrom: Valproinsäure
Verlängerte Blutungszeit: Valproinsäure
Erhöhte Transaminasen: Valproinsäure
Proximale Tubulopathie: Valproinsäure
DRESS- Syndrom: Valproinsäure
Lupus erythematodes: Valproinsäure
Basierend auf Ihren
Abstract: No Abstract available
Abstract: Healthy volunteers received single doses of three benzodiazepines (diazepam, 10 mg i.v.; alprazolam, 1.0 mg orally; lorazepam, 2 mg i.v.) on two occasions in random sequence. One trial was a control; for the other, subjects ingested propoxyphene, 65 mg every 6 h, for the duration of the benzodiazepine study. The kinetics of each benzodiazepine were determined from multiple plasma concentrations measured following each dose. For diazepam, propoxyphene produced a small and statistically insignificant prolongation of elimination half-life (43 vs 38 h) and reduction of total clearance (0.41 vs 0.47 ml min-1 kg-1). Propoxyphene significantly prolonged alprazolam half-life (18 vs 12 h, P less than 0.005) and reduced total clearance (0.8 vs 1.3 ml min-1 kg-1, P less than 0.005). Propoxyphene had no apparent influence on lorazepam half-life (13.4 vs 13.5 h) or clearance (1.5 vs 1.4 ml min-1 kg-1). Thus propoxyphene significantly impairs the clearance of alprazolam, biotransformed mainly by the oxidative reaction of aliphatic hydroxylation. Propoxyphene has far less effect on the oxidation of diazepam by N-demethylation, and has no apparent influence on lorazepam conjugation.
Abstract: Eleven subjects received acetaminophen (650 mg i.v.) on two occasions in random sequence, with and without concurrent administration of probenecid (500 mg) every 6 hr. Nine subjects similarly received lorazepam (2 mg. i.v.) with and without concurrent probenecid. Acetaminophen half-life was prolonged during probenecid treatment (mean +/- S.E., 4.30 +/- 0.23 vs. 2.51 +/- 0.16 hr; P less than .001) due to markedly decreased clearance (178 +/- 13 vs. 329 +/- 24 ml/min; P less than .001) with no change in volume of distribution (65 +/- 4 vs. 69 +/- 3 l; NS). Urinary excretion of acetaminophen glucuronide during 24 hr was decreased (84 +/- 9 vs. 260 +/- 21 mg of acetaminophen as glucuronide; P less than .001) and acetaminophen sulfate excretion was increased (323 +/- 25 vs. 217 +/- 17 mg of acetaminophen as sulfate; P less than .005) during concurrent probenecid treatment. However, the sum of the two conjugated metabolites was not significantly different (407 +/- 28 vs. 476 +/- 20 mg of acetaminophen as glucuronide plus sulfate excreted per 24 hr; NS). Lorazepam half-life was also prolonged during probenecid treatment (33.0 +/- 3.9 vs. 14.3 +/- 1.08 hr; P less than .001) due to decreased clearance (44.7 +/- 5.4 vs. 80.3 +/- 13.2 ml/min; P less than .001) with no change in volume of distribution (111 +/- 5 vs. 111 +/- 7 l; NS). Formation of the ether glucuronides of acetaminophen and lorazepam is impaired markedly by therapeutic doses of probenecid. Sulfate conjugation is not affected.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
Abstract: No Abstract available
Abstract: Valproate (VPA) has been shown to interact with all the major antiepileptic drugs (AEDs) through two mechanisms of action: displacement from albumin binding sites and inhibition of drug metabolism. More recently, evidence showed that VPA inhibits the elimination of drugs metabolized by glucuronide conjugation. Lorazepam (LZP), which is primarily eliminated by conjugation with glucuronic acid, is administered concurrently with VPA both in treatment of epilepsy and in patients treated with VPA for psychiatric disorders. Therefore, a significant drug interaction is likely. We investigated such interaction both in in vitro isolated perfused rat liver (IPRL) and in normal subjects. LZP [2 mg, intravenous (i.v.) bolus] was administered to 8 normal volunteers before and after chronic dosing with VPA. In 6 of 8 subjects, VPA significantly decreased LZP plasma clearance by an average of 40% (p < 0.05) and increased LZP concentrations by decreasing formation clearance of the LZP glucuronide. In the IPRL studies, VPA also significantly decreased formation of LZP glucuronide (from 0.72 +/- 0.14 to 0.22 +/- 0.15 ml/h/kg, p < 0.05), indicating that IPRL is a useful tool for evaluation of the effect of VPA on drugs eliminated by glucuronide conjugation.
Abstract: The pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic interaction between valproate and lorazepam was evaluated in this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study. Sixteen healthy male volunteers enrolled in the study to receive either divalproex sodium (500 mg every 12 hours) or matching placebo for 12 days in the first period, and then to receive the other regimen for an identical second 12-day period. In both periods, lorazepam (1 mg every 12 hours) was administered on days 6 through 9 and on the morning of day 10. Concomitant administration of divalproex sodium with lorazepam resulted in an 8%, 20%, and 31% increase in steady-state maximum plasma concentration, area under the concentration-time curve, and trough plasma concentrations of lorazepam, respectively. The apparent clearance of lorazepam through the formation of lorazepam glucuronide was reduced by 31% during coadministration of divalproex sodium. Pharmacokinetic properties of valproate did not change significantly in the ten available participants during coadministration of lorazepam. Sedation scales revealed no statistically significant differences in sedation between the two regimens. It is concluded that valproate increases plasma concentrations and reduces clearance of lorazepam, most likely by impairing hepatic glucuronidation, and that coadministration of lorazepam does not affect the steady-state pharmacokinetic properties of valproate.
Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the kinetics and dynamics of lorazepam during administration as a bolus plus an infusion, using electroencephalography as a pharmacodynamic end point. METHODS: Nine volunteers received a 2-mg bolus loading dose of lorazepam, coincident with the start of a 2 microg/kg/hr zero-order infusion. The infusion was stopped after 4 hrs. Plasma lorazepam concentrations and electroencephalographic activity in the 13- to 30-Hz range were monitored for 24 hrs. RESULTS: The bolus-plus-infusion scheme rapidly produced plasma lorazepam concentrations that were close to those predicted to be achieved at true steady state. Mean kinetic values for lorazepam were as follows: volume of distribution, 126 L; elimination half-life, 13.8 hrs; and clearance, 109 mL/min. Electroencephalographic effects were maximal 0.5 hr after the loading dose, were maintained essentially constant during infusion, and then declined in parallel with plasma concentrations after the infusion was terminated. There was no evidence of tolerance. Plots of pharmacodynamic electroencephalographic effect vs. plasma lorazepam concentration demonstrated counterclockwise hysteresis, consistent with an effect-site equilibration delay. This was incorporated into a kinetic-dynamic model in which hypothetical effect-site concentration was related to pharmacodynamic electroencephalographic effect via the sigmoid Emax model. The analysis yielded the following mean estimates: maximum electroencephalographic effect, 12.7% over baseline; 50% effective concentration, 13.1 ng/mL; and effect-site equilibration half-life, 8.8 mins. CONCLUSION: Despite the delay in effect onset, continuous infusion of lorazepam, preceded by a bolus loading dose, produces a relatively constant sedative effect on the central nervous system, which can be utilized in the context of critical care medicine.
Abstract: Both valproate (VPA) and lorazepam (LZP) are primarily cleared from the body by glucuronidation. Concomitant administration of VPA has been reported to reduce the elimination of LZP. However, it remains unknown whether this drug interaction is clinically significant. We report a patient with epilepsy who showed that VPA-LZP interaction could result in severe encephalopathy such as coma.
Abstract: The present study investigates the kinetic disposition with focus on the racemization, glucuronidation capacity and the transplacental transfer of lorazepam in term parturients during labor. The study was conducted on 10 healthy parturients aged 18-37 years with a gestational age of 36-40.1 weeks, treated with a single oral dose of 2 mg racemic lorazepam 2-9 h before delivery. Maternal venous blood and urine samples were obtained over a 0-48 h interval and the umbilical cord sample was obtained immediately after clamping. Lorazepam enantiomers were determined in plasma and urine samples by LC-MS/MS using a Chiralcel OD-R column. In vitro racemization of lorazepam required the calculation of the pharmacokinetic parameters as isomeric mixtures. The data were fitted to two-compartment model and the pharmacokinetic parameters are reported as means (95% CI): t(1/2a) 3.2h (2.6-3.7 h), K(a) 0.23 h(-1) (0.19-0.28 h(-1)), t(1/2) 10.4h (9.4-11.3h), beta 0.068 h(-1) (0.061-0.075h(-1)), AUC(0-infinity) 175.3(ngh)/ml (145.7-204.8(ngh)/ml), Cl/F 2.6 ml/(minkg) (2.3-2.9 ml/(minkg)), Vd/F178.8l (146.5-211.1l), Fel 0.3% (0.1-0.5%), and Cl(R) 0.010 ml/(minkg) (0.005-0.015 ml/(minkg)). Placental transfer of lorazepam evaluated as the ratio of vein umbilical/maternal vein plasma concentrations, obtained as an isomeric mixture, was 0.73 (0.52-0.94). Pregnancy changes the pharmacokinetics of lorazepam, with an increase in the apparent distribution volume, an increase in apparent oral clearance, and a reduction of elimination half-life. The increase in oral clearance may indicate an increase in glucuronidation capacity, with a possible reduction in the plasma concentrations of drugs depending on glucuronidation capacity as the major metabolic pathway.
Abstract: Cases of catatonia in patients with renal failure have been rarely reported. In this report, we describe two renal-insufficient patients with catatonia who had a good response to intramuscular lorazepam whereby the catatonic symptoms were relieved. Case 1 involved a patient with end-stage renal disease and severe pneumonia related respiratory failure. He responded well to intramuscular lorazepam (total dose, 4 mg) whereby the catatonia was elieved. Case 2 involved a patient with alcoholic liver cirrhosis and rhabdomyolysis-related acute renal failure. He showed great improvement with intramuscular lorazepam (2 mg) whereby the catatonia was subsequently relieved. This report demonstrates that intramuscular lorazepam is safe, effective and rapid in relieving catatonia associated with renal function impairment. Neither of the patients had a recurrence of catatonia during a period of 6- months follow-up. In conclusion, intramuscular lorazepam may play an important role in the treatment of catatonia associated with renal insufficiency.
Abstract: Proximal renal tubular acidosis (RTA) (Type II RTA) is characterized by a defect in the ability to reabsorb HCO(3) in the proximal tubule. This is usually manifested as bicarbonate wastage in the urine reflecting that the defect in proximal tubular transport is severe enough that the capacity for bicarbonate reabsorption in the thick ascending limb of Henle's loop and more distal nephron segments is overwhelmed. More subtle defects in proximal bicarbonate transport likely go clinically unrecognized owing to compensatory reabsorption of bicarbonate distally. Inherited proximal RTA is more commonly autosomal recessive and has been associated with mutations in the basolateral sodium-bicarbonate cotransporter (NBCe1). Mutations in this transporter lead to reduced activity and/or trafficking, thus disrupting the normal bicarbonate reabsorption process of the proximal tubules. As an isolated defect for bicarbonate transport, proximal RTA is rare and is more often associated with the Fanconi syndrome characterized by urinary wastage of solutes like phosphate, uric acid, glucose, amino acids, low-molecular-weight proteins as well as bicarbonate. A vast array of rare tubular disorders may cause proximal RTA but most commonly it is induced by drugs. With the exception of carbonic anhydrase inhibitors which cause isolated proximal RTA, drug-induced proximal RTA is associated with Fanconi syndrome. Drugs that have been recently recognized to cause severe proximal RTA with Fanconi syndrome include ifosfamide, valproic acid and various antiretrovirals such as Tenofovir particularly when given to human immunodeficiency virus patients receiving concomitantly protease inhibitors such as ritonavir or reverse transcriptase inhibitors such as didanosine.
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Anticholinergic drugs are often involved in explicit criteria for inappropriate prescribing in older adults. Several scales were developed for screening of anticholinergic drugs and estimation of the anticholinergic burden. However, variation exists in scale development, in the selection of anticholinergic drugs, and the evaluation of their anticholinergic load. This study aims to systematically review existing anticholinergic risk scales, and to develop a uniform list of anticholinergic drugs differentiating for anticholinergic potency. METHODS: We performed a systematic search in MEDLINE. Studies were included if provided (1) a finite list of anticholinergic drugs; (2) a grading score of anticholinergic potency and, (3) a validation in a clinical or experimental setting. We listed anticholinergic drugs for which there was agreement in the different scales. In case of discrepancies between scores we used a reputed reference source (Martindale: The Complete Drug Reference®) to take a final decision about the anticholinergic activity of the drug. RESULTS: We included seven risk scales, and evaluated 225 different drugs. Hundred drugs were listed as having clinically relevant anticholinergic properties (47 high potency and 53 low potency), to be included in screening software for anticholinergic burden. CONCLUSION: Considerable variation exists among anticholinergic risk scales, in terms of selection of specific drugs, as well as of grading of anticholinergic potency. Our selection of 100 drugs with clinically relevant anticholinergic properties needs to be supplemented with validated information on dosing and route of administration for a full estimation of the anticholinergic burden in poly-medicated older adults.
Abstract: Predicting the pharmacokinetics of highly protein-bound drugs is difficult. Also, since historical plasma protein binding data were often collected using unbuffered plasma, the resulting inaccurate binding data could contribute to incorrect predictions. This study uses a generic physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model to predict human plasma concentration-time profiles for 22 highly protein-bound drugs. Tissue distribution was estimated from in vitro drug lipophilicity data, plasma protein binding and the blood: plasma ratio. Clearance was predicted with a well-stirred liver model. Underestimated hepatic clearance for acidic and neutral compounds was corrected by an empirical scaling factor. Predicted values (pharmacokinetic parameters, plasma concentration-time profile) were compared with observed data to evaluate the model accuracy. Of the 22 drugs, less than a 2-fold error was obtained for the terminal elimination half-life (t1/2 , 100% of drugs), peak plasma concentration (Cmax , 100%), area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC0-t , 95.4%), clearance (CLh , 95.4%), mean residence time (MRT, 95.4%) and steady state volume (Vss , 90.9%). The impact of fup errors on CLh and Vss prediction was evaluated. Errors in fup resulted in proportional errors in clearance prediction for low-clearance compounds, and in Vss prediction for high-volume neutral drugs. For high-volume basic drugs, errors in fup did not propagate to errors in Vss prediction. This is due to the cancellation of errors in the calculations for tissue partitioning of basic drugs. Overall, plasma profiles were well simulated with the present PBPK model. Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Abstract: Transporters in proximal renal tubules contribute to the disposition of numerous drugs. Furthermore, the molecular mechanisms of tubular secretion have been progressively elucidated during the past decades. Organic anions tend to be secreted by the transport proteins OAT1, OAT3 and OATP4C1 on the basolateral side of tubular cells, and multidrug resistance protein (MRP) 2, MRP4, OATP1A2 and breast cancer resistance protein (BCRP) on the apical side. Organic cations are secreted by organic cation transporter (OCT) 2 on the basolateral side, and multidrug and toxic compound extrusion (MATE) proteins MATE1, MATE2/2-K, P-glycoprotein, organic cation and carnitine transporter (OCTN) 1 and OCTN2 on the apical side. Significant drug-drug interactions (DDIs) may affect any of these transporters, altering the clearance and, consequently, the efficacy and/or toxicity of substrate drugs. Interactions at the level of basolateral transporters typically decrease the clearance of the victim drug, causing higher systemic exposure. Interactions at the apical level can also lower drug clearance, but may be associated with higher renal toxicity, due to intracellular accumulation. Whereas the importance of glomerular filtration in drug disposition is largely appreciated among clinicians, DDIs involving renal transporters are less well recognized. This review summarizes current knowledge on the roles, quantitative importance and clinical relevance of these transporters in drug therapy. It proposes an approach based on substrate-inhibitor associations for predicting potential tubular-based DDIs and preventing their adverse consequences. We provide a comprehensive list of known drug interactions with renally-expressed transporters. While many of these interactions have limited clinical consequences, some involving high-risk drugs (e.g. methotrexate) definitely deserve the attention of prescribers.
Abstract: Valproic acid (VPA) is an older first-line antiepileptic drug with a complex pharmacokinetic (PK) profile, currently under investigation for several novel neurologic and non-neurologic indications. Our study objective was to design and validate a mechanistic model of VPA disposition in adults and children; and evaluate its predictive performance of drug-drug interactions (DDIs). This study expands upon existing physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) models for VPA by incorporating UGT enzyme kinetics and an advanced dissolution, absorption, and metabolism (ADAM) model for extended-release (ER) formulation. PBPK models for VPA IR and ER formulations were constructed using Simcyp Simulator (Version 15). First-order absorption was used for the immediate-release (IR) formulation and the ADAM model, including a controlled-release profile, for ER. Data from twenty-one published clinical studies were used to assess model performance. The model accurately predicted the concentration-time profiles of IR formulation for single-dose and steady-state doses ranging from 200mg to 1000mg. Similarly profiles were also simulated for ER formulation after a single-dose and steady-state doses of 500mg and 1000mg, respectively. In addition, simulated PK profiles agreed well with the observed data from studies in which VPA ER formulation was given to pediatric patients and VPA IR formulation to adult patients with cirrhosis. The model was further validated with individual adult data from a Phase I clinical trial consisting of eight cohorts after IV infusion of VPA with doses ranging from 15 to 150mg/kg. Co-administrations of VPA as an enzyme-inhibitor with victim drug phenytoin or lorazepam, as well as a substrate with enzyme inducer carbamazepine or phenobarbital, were simulated with the model to evaluate drug-drug interaction. The simulated serum concentration-time profiles were within the 5th and 95th percentiles, and the majority of the predicted area-under-the-curve (AUC) and peak plasma concentration (C) values were within 25% of the reported average values. The comprehensive VPA PBPK model defined by this study may be used to support dosage regimen optimization to improve the safety and efficacy profile of this agent under different scenarios.