QT time prolongation
Adverse drug events
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 asenapine and tacrolimus. 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 asenapine, when combined with tacrolimus (100%). We do not expect any change in exposure for tacrolimus, when combined with asenapine (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.
Asenapine has a low oral bioavailability [ F ] of 2%, which is why the maximum plasma level [Cmax] tends to change strongly with an interaction. The terminal half-life [ t12 ] is 24 hours and constant plasma levels [ Css ] are reached after approximately 96 hours. The protein binding [ Pb ] is moderately strong at 95% and the volume of distribution [ Vd ] is very large at 1700 liters. The metabolism mainly takes place via CYP1A2 and the active transport takes place in particular via UGT1A4.
Tacrolimus has a low oral bioavailability [ F ] of 18%, which is why the maximum plasma level [Cmax] tends to change strongly with an interaction. The terminal half-life [ t12 ] is rather long at 40 hours and constant plasma levels [ Css ] are only reached after more than 160 hours. The therapeutic window is narrow and the safety margin is therefore small. Even small changes in exposure can increase the risk of toxicity. The protein binding [ Pb ] is very strong at 98.9% and the volume of distribution [ Vd ] is very large at 116 liters, Since the substance has a low hepatic extraction rate of 0.05, displacement from protein binding [Pb] in the context of an interaction can lead to increased exposure. The metabolism mainly takes place via CYP3A4 and the active transport takes place partly via MRP2 and PGP.
|Serotonergic Effects a||0||Ø||Ø|
Rating: According to our knowledge, neither asenapine nor tacrolimus 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: Asenapine 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, tacrolimus does not increase anticholinergic activity.
QT time prolongation
Rating: In combination, asenapine and tacrolimus can potentially trigger ventricular arrhythmias of the torsades de pointes type.
General adverse effects
|Side effects||∑ frequency||ase||tac|
|Peripheral edema||21.0 %||n.a.||21.0|
|Elevated serum creatinine||16.0 %||n.a.||16.0|
Atrial fibrillation (14.9%): tacrolimus
Cardiac arrest (14.9%): tacrolimus
Myocardial infarction (14.9%): tacrolimus
Orthostatic hypotension (1.5%): asenapine
Heart failure: tacrolimus
Acute respiratory distress syndrome (14.9%): tacrolimus
Somnolence (14.7%): asenapine
Headache (14%): tacrolimus
Insomnia (14%): tacrolimus
Paresthesia (10%): tacrolimus
Akathisia (9.5%): asenapine
Dizziness (5.5%): asenapine
Seizure: tacrolimus, asenapine
Neuroleptic malignant syndrome: asenapine
Weight gain (11.5%): asenapine
Suicidal (2.5%): asenapine
Prolonged bleeding time: tacrolimus
Diabetes mellitus: tacrolimus
Hypersensitivity reaction: tacrolimus, asenapine
Hemolytic uremic syndrome: tacrolimus
Renal failure: tacrolimus
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 purpose of this open-label, prospective study was to compare steady state concentrations and clearances of intravenously administered cyclosporine or tacrolimus with and without concomitant high-dose (400 mg/day) fluconazole in allogeneic BMT patients. Twenty-one patients were evaluable. The mean steady state cyclosporine and tacrolimus concentrations without fluconazole were 320.3 and 18.2 ng/ml and increased to 389.2 and 21.2 ng/ml, respectively, after the addition of fluconazole, corresponding to a 21% (P=0.031) and 16% (P=0.125) increase. The mean steady state clearance of cyclosporine and tacrolimus without fluconazole was 6.82 and 1.28 ml/min/kg, which decreased to 5.57 and 1.10 ml/min/kg with fluconazole, corresponding to a 21% (P=0.031) and 16% (P=0.125) decrease, respectively. The 21% difference in the cyclosporine concentration and clearance was not thought to be clinically significant. These results suggest that fluconazole's interaction with cyclosporine or tacrolimus may be a result of fluconazole's inhibition of gut metabolism, resulting in a greater extent of absorption.
Abstract: Tacrolimus, a novel macrocyclic lactone with potent immunosuppressive properties, is currently available as an intravenous formulation and as a capsule for oral use, although other formulations are under investigation. Tacrolimus concentrations in biological fluids have been measured using a number of methods, which are reviewed and compared in the present article. The development of a simple, specific and sensitive assay method for measuring concentrations of tacrolimus is limited by the low absorptivity of the drug, low plasma and blood concentrations, and the presence of metabolites and other drugs which may interfere with the determination of tacrolimus concentrations. Currently, most of the pharmacokinetic data available for tacrolimus are based on an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay method, which does not distinguish tacrolimus from its metabolites. The rate of absorption of tacrolimus is variable with peak blood or plasma concentrations being reached in 0.5 to 6 hours; approximately 25% of the oral dose is bioavailable. Tacrolimus is extensively bound to red blood cells, with a mean blood to plasma ratio of about 15; albumin and alpha 1-acid glycoprotein appear to primarily bind tacrolimus in plasma. Tacrolimus is completely metabolised prior to elimination. The mean disposition half-life is 12 hours and the total body clearance based on blood concentration is approximately 0.06 L/h/kg. The elimination of tacrolimus is decreased in the presence of liver impairment and in the presence of several drugs. Various factors that contribute to the large inter- and interindividual variability in the pharmacokinetics of tacrolimus are reviewed here. Because of this variability, the narrow therapeutic index of tacrolimus, and the potential for several drug interactions, monitoring of tacrolimus blood concentrations is useful for optimisation of therapy and dosage regimen design.
Abstract: No Abstract available
Abstract: Tacrolimus is a marketed immunosuppressant used in liver and kidney transplantation. It is subject to extensive metabolism by CYP3A4 and is a substrate for P-glycoprotein-mediated transport. A pharmacokinetic interaction with rifampin, an antituberculosis agent and potent inducer of CYP3A4 and P-glycoprotein, and tacrolimus was evaluated in six healthy male volunteers. Tacrolimus was administered at doses of 0.1 mg/kg orally and 0.025 mg/kg/4 hours intravenously. The pharmacokinetics of tacrolimus were obtained from serial blood samples collected over 96 hours, after single oral and intravenous administration prior to and during an 18-day concomitant rifampin dosing phase. Coadministration of rifampin significantly increased tacrolimus clearance (36.0 +/- 8.1 ml/hr/kg vs. 52.8 +/- 9.6 ml/hr/kg; p = 0.03) and decreased tacrolimus bioavailability (14.4% +/- 5.7% vs. 7.0% +/- 2.7%; p = 0.03). Rifampin appears to induce both intestinal and hepatic metabolism of tacrolimus, most likely through induction of CYP3A and P-glycoprotein in the liver and small bowel.
Abstract: Tacrolimus is a macrolide lactone with potent immunosuppressive properties. It has been shown in clinical studies to prevent allograft rejection. The pharmacokinetics of tacrolimus in healthy subjects and transplant patients has been described in earlier studies using immunoassay methods; however, detailed information on the absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion of tacrolimus using a radiolabeled drug is lacking. The objective of the present study was to characterize the disposition of tacrolimus after single i.v. (0.01 mg/kg) and oral (0.05 mg/kg) administration of 14C-labeled drug in six healthy subjects. Tacrolimus was absorbed rapidly after oral dosing with a mean Cmax and Tmax of 42 ng/ml and 1 h, respectively. The oral bioavailability was about 20%. After i.v. and oral dosing, most of the administered dose was recovered in feces, suggesting that bile is the principal route of elimination. Urinary excretion accounted for less than 3% of total administered dose. In systemic circulation, unchanged parent compound accounted for nearly all the radioactivity; however, less than 0.5% of unchanged drug was detectable in feces and urine. The excretion of the metabolites was formation-rate-limited. The mean total body clearance at 37.5 ml/min was equivalent to about 3% of the liver blood flow. Renal clearance was less than 1% of the total body clearance. The mean elimination half-life was 44 h.
Abstract: An assessment of the effects of asenapine on QTc interval in patients with schizophrenia revealed a discrepancy between the results obtained by two different methods: an intersection-union test (IUT) (as recommended in the International Conference on Harmonisation E14 guidance) and an exposure-response (E-R) analysis. Simulations were performed in order to understand and reconcile this discrepancy. Although estimates of the time-matched, placebo-corrected mean change in QTc from baseline (ddQTc) at peak plasma concentrations from the E-R analysis ranged from 2 to 5 ms per dose level, the IUT applied to simulated data from the E-R model yielded maximum ddQTc estimates of 7-10 ms for the various doses of asenapine. These results indicate that the IUT can produce biased estimates that may induce a high false-positive rate in individual thorough QTc trials. In such cases, simulations from an E-R model can aid in reconciling the results from the two methods and may support the use of E-R results as a basis for labeling.
Abstract: The metabolism and excretion of asenapine [(3aRS,12bRS)-5-chloro-2-methyl-2,3,3a,12b-tetrahydro-1H-dibenzo[2,3:6,7]-oxepino [4,5-c]pyrrole (2Z)-2-butenedioate (1:1)] were studied after sublingual administration of [(14)C]-asenapine to healthy male volunteers. Mean total excretion on the basis of the percent recovery of the total radioactive dose was ∼90%, with ∼50% appearing in urine and ∼40% excreted in feces; asenapine itself was detected only in feces. Metabolic profiles were determined in plasma, urine, and feces using high-performance liquid chromatography with radioactivity detection. Approximately 50% of drug-related material in human plasma was identified or quantified. The remaining circulating radioactivity corresponded to at least 15 very polar, minor peaks (mostly phase II products). Overall, >70% of circulating radioactivity was associated with conjugated metabolites. Major metabolic routes were direct glucuronidation and N-demethylation. The principal circulating metabolite was asenapine N(+)-glucuronide; other circulating metabolites were N-desmethylasenapine-N-carbamoyl-glucuronide, N-desmethylasenapine, and asenapine 11-O-sulfate. In addition to the parent compound, asenapine, the principal excretory metabolite was asenapine N(+)-glucuronide. Other excretory metabolites were N-desmethylasenapine-N-carbamoylglucuronide, 11-hydroxyasenapine followed by conjugation, 10,11-dihydroxy-N-desmethylasenapine, 10,11-dihydroxyasenapine followed by conjugation (several combinations of these routes were found) and N-formylasenapine in combination with several hydroxylations, and most probably asenapine N-oxide in combination with 10,11-hydroxylations followed by conjugations. In conclusion, asenapine was extensively and rapidly metabolized, resulting in several regio-isomeric hydroxylated and conjugated metabolites.
Abstract: UNLABELLED: The hepatitis C virus protease inhibitor telaprevir is an inhibitor of the enzyme cytochrome P450 3A, responsible for the metabolism of both cyclosporine and tacrolimus. This Phase I, open-label, nonrandomized, single-sequence study assessed the effect of telaprevir coadministration on the pharmacokinetics of a single dose of either cyclosporine or tacrolimus in two separate panels of 10 healthy volunteers each. In Part A, cyclosporine was administered alone as a single 100-mg oral dose, followed by a minimum 8-day washout period, and subsequent coadministration of a single 10-mg oral dose of cyclosporine with either a single dose of telaprevir (750 mg) or with steady-state telaprevir (750 mg every 8 hours [q8h]). In Part B, tacrolimus was administered alone as a single 2-mg oral dose, followed by a minimum 14-day washout period, and subsequent coadministration of a single 0.5-mg dose of tacrolimus with steady-state telaprevir (750 mg q8h). Coadministration with steady-state telaprevir increased cyclosporine dose-normalized (DN) exposure (DN_AUC(0-∞)) by approximately 4.6-fold and increased tacrolimus DN_AUC(0-∞) by approximately 70-fold. Coadministration with telaprevir increased the terminal elimination half-life (t(½)) of cyclosporine from a mean (standard deviation [SD]) of 12 (1.67) hours to 42.1 (11.3) hours and t(½) of tacrolimus from a mean (SD) of 40.7 (5.85) hours to 196 (159) hours. CONCLUSION: In this study, telaprevir increased the blood concentrations of both cyclosporine and tacrolimus significantly, which could lead to serious or life-threatening adverse events. Telaprevir has not been studied in organ transplant patients; its use in these patients is not recommended because the required studies have not been completed to understand appropriate dose adjustments needed for safe coadministration of telaprevir with cyclosporine or tacrolimus, and regulatory approval has not been obtained.
Abstract: BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The effects of hepatic or renal impairment on the pharmacokinetics of atypical antipsychotics are not well understood. Drug exposure may increase in patients with hepatic disease, owing to a reduction of certain metabolic enzymes. The objective of the present study was to study the effects of hepatic or renal impairment on the pharmacokinetics of asenapine and its N-desmethyl and N⁺-glucuronide metabolites. METHODS: Two clinical studies were performed to assess exposure to asenapine, desmethylasenapine and asenapine N⁺-glucuronide in subjects with hepatic or renal impairment. Pharmacokinetic parameters were determined from plasma concentration-time data, using standard noncompartmental methods. The pharmacokinetic variables that were studied included the maximum plasma concentration (C(max)) and the time to reach the maximum plasma concentration (t(max)). Eligible subjects, from inpatient and outpatient clinics, were aged ≥18 years with a body mass index of ≥18 kg/m² and ≤32 kg/m². Sublingual asenapine (Saphris®) was administered as a single 5 mg dose. RESULTS: Thirty subjects participated in the hepatic impairment study (normal hepatic function, n = 8; mild hepatic impairment [Child-Pugh class A], n = 8; moderate hepatic impairment [Child-Pugh class B], n = 8; severe hepatic impairment [Child-Pugh class C], n = 6). Thirty-three subjects were enrolled in the renal impairment study (normal renal function, n = 9; mild renal impairment, n = 8; moderate renal impairment, n = 8; severe renal impairment, n = 8). Asenapine and N-desmethylasenapine exposures were unaltered in subjects with mild or moderate hepatic impairment, compared with healthy controls. Severe hepatic impairment was associated with increased area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity (AUC(∞)) values for total asenapine, N-desmethylasenapine and asenapine N⁺-glucuronide (5-, 3-, and 2-fold, respectively), with slight increases in the C(max) of asenapine but 3- and 2-fold decreases in the C(max) values for N-desmethylasenapine and asenapine N⁺-glucuronide, respectively, compared with healthy controls. The mean AUC(∞) of unbound asenapine was more than 7-fold higher in subjects with severe hepatic impairment than in healthy controls. Mild renal impairment was associated with slight elevations in the AUC(∞) of asenapine compared with healthy controls; alterations observed with moderate and severe renal impairment were marginal. N-desmethylasenapine exposure was only slightly altered by renal impairment. No correlations were observed between exposure and creatinine clearance. CONCLUSION: Severe hepatic impairment (Child-Pugh class C) was associated with pronounced increases in asenapine exposure, but significant increases were not seen with mild (Child-Pugh class A) or moderate (Child-Pugh class B) hepatic impairment, or with any degree of renal impairment. Asenapine is not recommended in patients with severe hepatic impairment; no dose adjustment is needed in patients with mild or moderate hepatic impairment, or in patients with renal impairment.
Abstract: UNLABELLED: The hepatitis C virus protease inhibitor boceprevir is a strong inhibitor of cytochrome P450 3A4 and 3A5 (CYP3A4/5). Cyclosporine and tacrolimus are calcineurin inhibitor immunosuppressants used to prevent organ rejection after liver transplantation; both are substrates of CYP3A4. This two-part pharmacokinetic interaction study evaluated boceprevir with cyclosporine (part 1) and tacrolimus (part 2). In part 1, 10 subjects received single-dose cyclosporine (100 mg) on day 1, single-dose boceprevir (800 mg) on day 3, and concomitant cyclosporine/boceprevir on day 4. After washout, subjects received boceprevir (800 mg three times a day) for 7 days plus single-dose cyclosporine (100 mg) on day 6. In part 2A, 12 subjects received single-dose tacrolimus (0.5 mg). After washout, they received boceprevir (800 mg three times a day) for 11 days plus single-dose tacrolimus (0.5 mg) on day 6. In part 2B, 10 subjects received single-dose boceprevir (800 mg) and 24 hours later received boceprevir (800 mg) plus tacrolimus (0.5 mg). Coadministration of boceprevir with cyclosporine/tacrolimus was well tolerated. Concomitant boceprevir increased the area under the concentration-time curve from time 0 to infinity after single dosing (AUC(inf) ) and maximum observed plasma (or blood) concentration (C(max) ) of cyclosporine with geometric mean ratios (GMRs) (90% confidence interval [CI]) of 2.7 (2.4-3.1) and 2.0 (1.7-2.4), respectively. Concomitant boceprevir increased the AUC(inf) and C(max) of tacrolimus with GMRs (90% CI) of 17 (14-21) and 9.9 (8.0-12), respectively. Neither cyclosporine nor tacrolimus coadministration had a meaningful effect on boceprevir pharmacokinetics. CONCLUSION: Dose adjustments of cyclosporine should be anticipated when administered with boceprevir, guided by close monitoring of cyclosporine blood concentrations and frequent assessments of renal function and cyclosporine-related side effects. Administration of boceprevir plus tacrolimus requires significant dose reduction and prolongation of the dosing interval for tacrolimus, with close monitoring of tacrolimus blood concentrations and frequent assessments of renal function and tacrolimus-related side effects.
Abstract: The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of the CYP3A5*3 allele on the pharmacokinetics of tacrolimus and amlodipine, and drug-drug interactions between them in healthy subjects. Pharmacokinetic drug interactions between tacrolimus and amlodipine were evaluated in a randomized, 3-period, 6-sequence crossover study in healthy Chinese volunteers according to CYP3A5 genotype. A single-dose and multiple-dose study were designed. A 96-h pharmacokinetic study followed either tacrolimus or amlodipine dose, and the washout periods between the study phases were 14 days. In the single-dose study, apparent oral clearance (CL/F) of tacrolimus (5 mg) in CYP3A5 expressers was 3.8-fold (p = 0.008) higher than that in CYP3A5 non-expressers. Amlodipine decreased mean tacrolimus CL/F in CYP3A5 expressers by 2.2-fold (p = 0.005), while it had no effect on that in CYP3A5 non-expressers. The CL/F of amlodipine in CYP3A5 non-expressers was 2.0-fold (p = 0.001) higher than that in CYP3A5 expressers. Tacrolimus increased mean amlodipine CL/F in CYP3A5 expressers by 1.4-fold (p = 0.016) while it had no effect on that in CYP3A5 non-expressers. Tacrolimus slightly reduced the AUC₀-∞ of amlodipine in both CYP3A5 expressers and non-expressers. Dose adjustment of tacrolimus should be considered according to CYP3A5*3 genetic polymorphism when tacrolimus is coadministered with amlodipine.
Abstract: BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Tacrolimus is an immunosuppressive drug used for the prevention of the allograft rejection in kidney transplant recipients. It exhibits a narrow therapeutic index and large pharmacokinetic variability. Tacrolimus is mainly metabolized by cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 and 3A5 and effluxed via ATP-binding cassette (ABC) transporters such as P-glycoprotein (P-gp), encoded by ABCB1 gene. The influence of CYP3A5*3 on the pharmacokinetics of tacrolimus has been well characterized. On the other hand, the contribution of polymorphisms in other genes is controversial. In addition, the involvement of other efflux transporters than P-gp in tacrolimus disposition is uncertain. The present study was designed to investigate the effects of genetic polymorphisms of CYP3As and efflux transporters on the pharmacokinetics of tacrolimus. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A total of 500 blood concentrations of tacrolimus from 102 adult stable kidney transplant recipients were included in the analyses. Genetic polymorphisms in CYP3A4 and CYP3A5 genes were determined. In addition, the genes of efflux transporters including P-gp (ABCB1), multidrug resistance-associated protein (MRP2/ABCC2) and breast cancer resistance protein (BCRP/ABCG2) were genotyped. For ABCC2 gene, haplotypes were determined as follows: H1 (wild type), H2 (1249G>A), H9 (3972C>T) and H12 (-24C>T and 3972C>T). Population pharmacokinetic analysis was performed using nonlinear mixed effects modeling. RESULTS: Analyses revealed that the CYP3A5 expressers (CYP3A5*1 carriers) and MRP2 high-activity group (ABCC2 H2/H2 and H1/H2) showed a decreased dose-normalized trough concentration of tacrolimus by 2.3-fold (p < 0.001) and 1.5-fold (p = 0.007), respectively. The pharmacokinetics of tacrolimus were best described using a two-compartment model with first order absorption and an absorption lag time. In the population pharmacokinetic analysis, CYP3A5 expressers and MRP2 high-activity groups were identified as the significant covariates for tacrolimus apparent clearance expressed as 20.7 × (age/50)(-0.78) × 2.03 (CYP3A5 expressers) × 1.40 (MRP2 high-activity group). No other CYP3A4, ABCB1 or ABCG2 polymorphisms were associated with the apparent clearance of tacrolimus. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first report showing that MRP2/ABCC2 has a crucial impact on the pharmacokinetics of tacrolimus in a haplotype-specific manner. Determination of the ABCC2 as well as CYP3A5 genotype may be useful for more accurate tacrolimus dosage adjustment.
Abstract: No Abstract available
Abstract: BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection is a major cause of liver transplantation. Drug-drug interactions (DDIs) with cyclosporine and tacrolimus hindered the use of first-generation protease inhibitors in transplant recipients. The current study investigated DDIs between daclatasvir-a pan-genotypic HCV NS5A inhibitor with clinical efficacy in multiple regimens (including all-oral)-and cyclosporine or tacrolimus in healthy subjects. METHODS: Healthy fasted subjects (aged 18-49 years; body mass index 18-32 kg/m(2)) received single oral doses of cyclosporine 400 mg on days 1 and 9, and daclatasvir 60 mg once daily on days 4-11 (group 1, n = 14), or a single oral dose of tacrolimus 5 mg on days 1 and 13, and daclatasvir 60 mg once daily on days 8-19 (group 2, n = 14). Blood samples for pharmacokinetic analysis [by liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS)] were collected on days 1 and 9 for cyclosporine (72 h), on days 1 and 13 for tacrolimus (168 h) and on days 8 and 9 (group 1) or on days 12 and 13 (group 2) for daclatasvir (24 h). Plasma concentrations were determined by validated LC-MS/MS methods. RESULTS: Daclatasvir did not affect the pharmacokinetic parameters of cyclosporine or tacrolimus, and tacrolimus did not affect the pharmacokinetic parameters of daclatasvir. Co-administration of cyclosporine resulted in a 40 % increase in the area under the concentration-time curve of daclatasvir but did not affect its maximum observed concentration. CONCLUSION: On the basis of these observations in healthy subjects, no clinically relevant DDIs between daclatasvir and cyclosporine or tacrolimus are anticipated in liver transplant recipients infected with HCV; dose adjustments during co-administration are unlikely to be required.
Abstract: This report summarizes phase 1 studies that evaluated pharmacokinetic interactions between the novel triazole antifungal agent isavuconazole and the immunosuppressants cyclosporine, mycophenolic acid, prednisolone, sirolimus, and tacrolimus in healthy adults. Healthy subjects received single oral doses of cyclosporine (300 mg; n = 24), mycophenolate mofetil (1000 mg; n = 24), prednisone (20 mg; n = 21), sirolimus (2 mg; n = 22), and tacrolimus (5 mg; n = 24) in the presence and absence of clinical doses of oral isavuconazole (200 mg 3 times daily for 2 days; 200 mg once daily thereafter). Coadministration with isavuconazole increased the area under the concentration-time curves (AUC) of tacrolimus, sirolimus, and cyclosporine by 125%, 84%, and 29%, respectively, and the AUCs of mycophenolic acid and prednisolone by 35% and 8%, respectively. Maximum concentrations (C) of tacrolimus, sirolimus, and cyclosporine were 42%, 65%, and 6% higher, respectively; Cof mycophenolic acid and prednisolone were 11% and 4% lower, respectively. Isavuconazole pharmacokinetics were mostly unaffected by the immunosuppressants. Two subjects experienced elevated creatinine levels in the cyclosporine study; most adverse events were not considered to be of clinical concern. These results indicate that isavuconazole is an inhibitor of cyclosporine, mycophenolic acid, sirolimus, and tacrolimus metabolism.
Abstract: Asenapine is one of the newer atypical antipsychotics on the market. It is a sublingually administered drug that is indicated for the treatment of both schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, and is considered to be safe and well tolerated. Herein, we report a 71-year-old female with a history of bipolar disorder who had ventricular trigemini and experienced a large increase in her QTc interval after starting treatment with asenapine. These changes ceased following withdrawal of asenapine. In this case report, we discuss the importance of cardiac monitoring when switching antipsychotics, even to those that are considered to have low cardiac risk.
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.
Abstract: A highly selective and sensitive liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) assay has been described for the determination of asenapine (ASE) in presence of its inactive metabolites-desmethyl asenapine (DMA) and asenapine--glucuronide (ASG). ASE, and ASE 13C-d3, used as internal standard (IS), were extracted from 300 µL human plasma by a simple and precise liquid-liquid extraction procedure using methyl-butyl ether. Baseline separation of ASE from its inactive metabolites was achieved on Chromolith Performance RP(100 mm × 4.6 mm) column using acetonitrile-5.0 mM ammonium acetate-10% formic acid (90:10:0.1, v/v/v) within 4.5 min. Quantitation of ASE was done on a triple quadrupole mass spectrometer equipped with electrospray ionization in the positive mode. The protonated precursor to product ion transitions monitored for ASE and ASE 13C-d3 were286.1 → 166.0 and290.0 → 166.1, respectively. The limit of detection (LOD) and limit of quantitation (LOQ) of the method were 0.0025 ng/mL and 0.050 ng/mL respectively in a linear concentration range of 0.050-20.0 ng/mL for ASE. The intra-batch and inter-batch precision (% CV) and mean relative recovery across quality control levels were ≤ 5.8% and 87.3%, respectively. Matrix effect, evaluated as IS-normalized matrix factor, ranged from 1.03 to 1.05. The stability of ASE under different storage conditions was ascertained in presence of the metabolites. The developed method is much simpler, matrix free, rapid and economical compared to the existing methods. The method was successfully used for a bioequivalence study of asenapine in healthy Indian subjects for the first time.