QT time prolongation
Adverse drug events
|Loss of appetite|
Variants ✨For the computationally intensive evaluation of the variants, please choose the paid standard subscription.
Explanations of the substances for patients
We have no additional warnings for the combination of abarelix and furosemide. Please also consult the relevant specialist information.
The reported changes in exposure correspond to the changes in the plasma concentration-time curve [ AUC ]. We do not expect any change in exposure for abarelix, when combined with furosemide (100%). We do not expect any change in exposure for furosemide, when combined with abarelix (100%).
The pharmacokinetic parameters of the average population are used as the starting point for calculating the individual changes in exposure due to the interactions.
The bioavailability of abarelix is unknown. The terminal half-life [ t12 ] is rather long at 316.8 hours and constant plasma levels [ Css ] are only reached after more than 1267.2 hours. The protein binding [ Pb ] is 97.5% strong. The metabolism via cytochromes is currently still being worked on.
Furosemide has a mean oral bioavailability [ F ] of 56%, which is why the maximum plasma levels [Cmax] tend to change with an interaction. Protein binding [ Pb ] is not known. About 75.0% of an administered dose is excreted unchanged via the kidneys and this proportion is seldom changed by interactions. The metabolism does not take place via the common cytochromes and the active transport takes place partly via BCRP, MRP2, MRP4, PGP and UGT1A1.
|Serotonergic Effects a||0||Ø||Ø|
Rating: According to our knowledge, neither abarelix nor furosemide increase serotonergic activity.
|Kiesel & Durán b||1||Ø||+|
Recommendation: As a precaution, attention should be paid to anticholinergic symptoms, especially after increasing the dose and at doses in the upper therapeutic range.
Rating: Furosemide only has a mild effect on the anticholinergic system. The risk of anticholinergic syndrome with this medication is rather low if the dosage is in the usual range. According to our knowledge, abarelix does not increase anticholinergic activity.
QT time prolongation
Rating: In combination, abarelix and furosemide can potentially trigger ventricular arrhythmias of the torsades de pointes type.
General adverse effects
|Side effects||∑ frequency||aba||fur|
|Loss of appetite||1.0 %||n.a.||+|
|Orthostatic hypotension||0.0 %||n.a.||0.01|
|Erythema multiforme||0.0 %||n.a.||0.01|
|Stevens johnson syndrome||0.0 %||n.a.||0.01|
|Toxic epidermal necrolysis||0.0 %||n.a.||0.01|
Aplastic anemia: furosemide
Hypersensitivity reaction: furosemide
Based on your answers and scientific information, we assess the individual risk of undesirable side effects. These recommendations are intended to advise professionals and are not a substitute for consultation with a doctor. In the restricted test version (alpha), the risk of all substances has not yet been conclusively assessed.
Abstract: The objective of this study was to measure the anticholinergic activity (AA) of medications commonly used by older adults. A radioreceptor assay was used to investigate the AA of 107 medications. Six clinically relevant concentrations were assessed for each medication. Rodent forebrain and striatum homogenate was used with tritiated quinuclidinyl benzilate. Drug-free serum was added to medication and atropine standard-curve samples. For medications that showed detectable AA, average steady-state peak plasma and serum concentrations (C(max)) in older adults were used to estimate relationships between in vitro dose and AA. All results are reported in pmol/mL of atropine equivalents. At typical doses administered to older adults, amitriptyline, atropine, clozapine, dicyclomine, doxepin, L-hyoscyamine, thioridazine, and tolterodine demonstrated AA exceeding 15 pmol/mL. Chlorpromazine, diphenhydramine, nortriptyline, olanzapine, oxybutynin, and paroxetine had AA values of 5 to 15 pmol/mL. Citalopram, escitalopram, fluoxetine, lithium, mirtazapine, quetiapine, ranitidine, and temazepam had values less than 5 pmol/mL. Amoxicillin, celecoxib, cephalexin, diazepam, digoxin, diphenoxylate, donepezil, duloxetine, fentanyl, furosemide, hydrocodone, lansoprazole, levofloxacin, metformin, phenytoin, propoxyphene, and topiramate demonstrated AA only at the highest concentrations tested (patients with above-average C(max) values, who receive higher doses, or are frail may show AA). The remainder of the medications investigated did not demonstrate any AA at the concentrations examined. Psychotropic medications were particularly likely to demonstrate AA. Each of the drug classifications investigated (e.g., antipsychotic, cardiovascular) had at least one medication that demonstrated AA at therapeutic doses. Clinicians can use this information when choosing between equally efficacious medications, as well as in assessing overall anticholinergic burden.
Abstract: Diuretics are commonly used to control edema across various clinical fields. Diuretics inhibit sodium reabsorption in specific renal tubules, resulting in increased urinary sodium and water excretion. Loop diuretics are the most potent diuretics. In this article, we review five important aspects of loop diuretics, in particular furosemide, which must be considered when prescribing this medicine: (1) oral versus intravenous treatment, (2) dosage, (3) continuous versus bolus infusion, (4) application in chronic kidney disease patients, and (5) side effects. The bioavailability of furosemide differs between oral and intravenous therapy. Additionally, the threshold and ceiling doses of furosemide differ according to the particular clinical condition of the patient, for example in patients with severe edema or chronic kidney disease. To maximize the efficiency of furosemide, a clear understanding of how the mode of delivery will impact bioavailability and the required dosage is necessary.
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: BACKGROUND: Anticholinergic drugs put elderly patients at a higher risk for falls, cognitive decline, and delirium as well as peripheral adverse reactions like dry mouth or constipation. Prescribers are often unaware of the drug-based anticholinergic burden (ACB) of their patients. This study aimed to develop an anticholinergic burden score for drugs licensed in Germany to be used by clinicians at prescribing level. METHODS: A systematic literature search in pubmed assessed previously published ACB tools. Quantitative grading scores were extracted, reduced to drugs available in Germany, and reevaluated by expert discussion. Drugs were scored as having no, weak, moderate, or strong anticholinergic effects. Further drugs were identified in clinical routine and included as well. RESULTS: The literature search identified 692 different drugs, with 548 drugs available in Germany. After exclusion of drugs due to no systemic effect or scoring of drug combinations (n = 67) and evaluation of 26 additional identified drugs in clinical routine, 504 drugs were scored. Of those, 356 drugs were categorised as having no, 104 drugs were scored as weak, 18 as moderate and 29 as having strong anticholinergic effects. CONCLUSIONS: The newly created ACB score for drugs authorized in Germany can be used in daily clinical practice to reduce potentially inappropriate medications for elderly patients. Further clinical studies investigating its effect on reducing anticholinergic side effects are necessary for validation.