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 simvastatin and cimetidine. Please also consult the relevant specialist information.
|Simvastatin||1.43 [1.43,1.92] 1||1.43|
The changes in exposure mentioned relate to changes in the plasma concentration-time curve [AUC]. Simvastatin exposure increases to 143%, when combined with cimetidine (143%). We did not detect any change in exposure to cimetidine. We cannot currently estimate the influence of simvastatin.
The pharmacokinetic parameters of the average population are used as the starting point for calculating the individual changes in exposure due to the interactions.
Simvastatin has a low oral bioavailability [ F ] of 5%, which is why the maximum plasma level [Cmax] tends to change strongly with an interaction. The terminal half-life [ t12 ] is 7.9 hours and constant plasma levels [ Css ] are reached after approximately 31.6 hours. The protein binding [ Pb ] is 96.5% strong and the volume of distribution [ Vd ] is 46 liters in the middle range, The metabolism mainly takes place via CYP3A4 and the active transport takes place partly via BCRP, MRP2 and PGP.
Cimetidine has a mean oral bioavailability [ F ] of 65%, which is why the maximum plasma levels [Cmax] tend to change with an interaction. The terminal half-life [ t12 ] is rather short at 1.6333333 hours and constant plasma levels [ Css ] are reached quickly. The protein binding [ Pb ] is very weak at 19% and the volume of distribution [ Vd ] is very large at 91 liters. The metabolism does not take place via the common cytochromes and the active transport takes place partly via BCRP and PGP.
|Serotonergic Effects a||0||Ø||Ø|
Rating: According to our knowledge, neither simvastatin nor cimetidine 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: Cimetidine 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 findings, simvastatin does not increase anticholinergic activity.
QT time prolongation
Recommendation: Please make sure that influenceable risk factors are minimized. Electrolyte disturbances such as low levels of calcium, potassium and magnesium should be compensated for. The lowest effective dose of cimetidine should be used.
Rating: Cimetidine can potentially prolong the QT time and if there are risk factors, arrhythmias of the type torsades de pointes can be favored. We do not know of any QT-prolonging potential for simvastatin.
General adverse effects
|Side effects||∑ frequency||sim||cim|
|Abdominal pain||7.3 %||7.3||n.a.|
|Cholestatic hepatitis||0.0 %||0.0||n.a.|
|Liver failure||0.0 %||0.0||n.a.|
Rupture of tendon: simvastatin
Based on your
Abstract: Recently, the use of astemizole and terfenadine, both non-sedating H1-antihistamines, caused considerable concern. Several case reports suggested an association of both drugs with an increased risk of torsades de pointes, a special form of ventricular tachycardia. The increased risk of both H1-antihistamines was associated with exposure to supratherapeutic doses; for terfenadine the risk was also associated with concomitant exposure to the cytochrome P-450 inhibitors ketoconazole, erythromycin and cimetidine. To predict the size of the population that runs the risk of developing this potentially fatal adverse reaction in the Netherlands, the prevalence of prescribing supratherapeutic doses and the concomitant exposure to terfenadine and cytochrome P-450 inhibitors was studied. Data were obtained from the PHARMO data base in 1990, a pharmacy-based record linkage system encompassing a catchment population of 300,000 individuals. The results of the study showed that the prescribing of supratherapeutic doses and the concomitant exposure to terfenadine and cytochrome P-450 inhibitors was low. Furthermore, the results of a sensitivity analysis showed that the risk of fatal torsades de pointes has to be as high as 1 in 10,000 to cause one death in the Netherlands in one year.
Abstract: Astemizole (Hismanal), an antihistamine agent, has been reported to be associated with ventricular arrhythmias. In this paper we present a case of QT prolongation and torsades de pointes (TdP) in a 77-year-old woman who had been taking astemizole (10 mg/day) for 6 months because of allergic skin disease. At the time of admission, the serum concentration of astemizole and its metabolites was markedly elevated at 15.85 ng/ml, approximately 3 times the normal level. The patient was also taking cimetidine, a known inhibitor of cytochrome P-450 enzymatic activity, and during her admission was diagnosed as having vasospastic angina. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of astemizole-induced QT prolongation and TdP in Japan.
Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To study the effects of erythromycin and verapamil on the pharmacokinetics of simvastatin, an inhibitor of 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase. METHODS: A randomized, double-blind crossover study was performed with three phases separated by a washout period of 3 weeks. Twelve young, healthy volunteers took orally either 1.5 gm/day erythromycin, 240 mg/day verapamil, or placebo for 2 days. On day 2, 40 mg simvastatin was administered orally. Serum concentrations of simvastatin, simvastatin acid, erythromycin, verapamil, and norverapamil were measured for up to 24 hours. RESULTS: Erythromycin and verapamil increased mean peak serum concentration (Cmax) of unchanged simvastatin 3.4-fold (p < 0.001) and 2.6-fold (p < 0.05) and the area under the serum simvastatin concentration-time curve from time zero to 24 hours [AUC(0-24)] 6.2-fold (p < 0.001) and 4.6-fold (p < 0.01). Erythromycin increased the mean Cmax of active simvastatin acid fivefold (p < 0.001) and the AUC(0-24) 3.9-fold (p < 0.001). Verapamil increased the Cmax of simvastatin acid 3.4-fold (p < 0.001) and the AUC(0-24) 2.8-fold (p < 0.001). There was more than tenfold interindividual variability in the extent of simvastatin interaction with both erythromycin and verapamil. CONCLUSIONS: Both erythromycin and verapamil interact considerably with simvastatin, probably by inhibiting its cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4-mediated metabolism. Concomitant administration of erythromycin, verapamil, or other potent inhibitors of CYP3A4 with simvastatin should be avoided. As an alternative, the dosage of simvastatin should be reduced considerably, that is, by about 50% to 80%, at least when a simvastatin dosage higher than 20 mg/day is used. Possible adverse effects, such as elevation of creatine kinase level and muscle tenderness, should be closely monitored when such combinations are used.
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Simvastatin is a cholesterol-lowering agent that is metabolized through CYP3A4. We studied the effect of grapefruit juice on the pharmacokinetics of orally administered simvastatin. METHODS: In a randomized, 2-phase crossover study, 10 healthy volunteers took either 200 mL double-strength grapefruit juice or water 3 times a day for 2 days. On day 3, each subject ingested 60 mg simvastatin with either 200 mL grapefruit juice or water, and an additional 200 mL was ingested 1/2 and 1 1/2 hours after simvastatin administration. Serum concentrations of simvastatin and simvastatin acid were measured by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS-MS) and those of active (naive) and total (after hydrolysis) 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors by a radioenzyme inhibition assay. RESULTS: Grapefruit juice increased the mean peak serum concentration (Cmax) of unchanged simvastatin about 9-fold (range, 5.1-fold to 31.4-fold; P < .01) and the mean area under the serum simvastatin concentration-time curve [AUC(0-infinity)] 16-fold (range, 9.0-fold to 37.7-fold; P < .05). The mean Cmax and AUC(0-infinity) of simvastatin acid were both increased about 7-fold (P < .01). Grapefruit juice increased the mean AUC(0-infinity) of active and total HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors 2.4-fold (P < .01) and 3.6-fold (P < .01), respectively. The time of the peak concentration of active and total HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors was increased by grapefruit juice (P < .05). CONCLUSION: Grapefruit juice greatly increased serum concentrations of simvastatin and simvastatin acid and, to a lesser extent, those of active and total HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors. The probable mechanism of this interaction was inhibition of CYP3A4-mediated first-pass metabolism of simvastatin by grapefruit juice in the small intestine. Concomitant use of grapefruit juice and simvastatin, at least in large amounts, should be avoided, or the dose of simvastatin should be greatly reduced.
Abstract: A novel human organic transporter, OATP2, has been identified that transports taurocholic acid, the adrenal androgen dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate, and thyroid hormone, as well as the hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA reductase inhibitor, pravastatin. OATP2 is expressed exclusively in liver in contrast to all other known transporter subtypes that are found in both hepatic and nonhepatic tissues. OATP2 is considerably diverged from other family members, sharing only 42% sequence identity with the four other subtypes. Furthermore, unlike other subtypes, OATP2 did not transport digoxin or aldosterone. The rat isoform oatp1 was also shown to transport pravastatin, whereas other members of the OATP family, i.e. rat oatp2, human OATP, and the prostaglandin transporter, did not. Cis-inhibition studies indicate that both OATP2 and roatp1 also transport other statins including lovastatin, simvastatin, and atorvastatin. In summary, OATP2 is a novel organic anion transport protein that has overlapping but not identical substrate specificities with each of the other subtypes and, with its liver-specific expression, represents a functionally distinct OATP isoform. Furthermore, the identification of oatp1 and OATP2 as pravastatin transporters suggests that they are responsible for the hepatic uptake of this liver-specific hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA reductase inhibitor in rat and man.
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Simvastatin is an inhibitor of 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase that is used as a cholesterol-lowering agent and is metabolized by cytochrome P450 3A (CYP3A) enzymes. Diltiazem is a substrate and an inhibitor of CYP3A enzymes and is commonly coadministered with cholesterol-lowering agents such as simvastatin. The objective of this study was to quantify the effect of diltiazem on the pharmacokinetics of simvastatin. METHOD: A fixed-order study was conducted in 10 healthy volunteers with a 2-week washout period between the phases. In one arm of the study, a single 20-mg dose of simvastatin was administered orally; the second arm entailed administration of a single 20-mg dose of simvastatin orally after 2 weeks of treatment with 120 mg diltiazem twice a day. RESULTS: Diltiazem significantly increased the mean peak serum concentration of simvastatin by 3.6-fold (P < .05) and simvastatin acid by 3.7-fold (P < .05). Diltiazem also significantly increased the area under the serum concentration-time curve of simvastatin 5-fold (P < .05) and the elimination half-life 2.3-fold (P < .05). There was no change in the time to peak concentration for simvastatin and simvastatin acid. CONCLUSION: Diltiazem coadministration resulted in a significant interaction with simvastatin, probably by inhibiting CYP3A-mediated metabolism. Concomitant use of diltiazem or other potent inhibitors of CYP3A with simvastatin should be avoided, or close clinical monitoring should be used.
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Concomitant treatment with simvastatin and gemfibrozil, two lipid-lowering drugs, has been associated with occurrence of myopathy in case reports. The aim of this study was to determine whether gemfibrozil affects the pharmacokinetics of simvastatin and whether it affects CYP3A4 activity in vitro. METHODS: A double-blind, randomized crossover study with two phases (placebo and gemfibrozil) was carried out. Ten healthy volunteers were given gemfibrozil (600 mg twice daily) or placebo orally for 3 days. On day 3 they ingested a single 40-mg dose of simvastatin. Plasma concentrations of simvastatin and simvastatin acid were measured up to 12 hours. In addition, the effect of gemfibrozil (0 to 1,200 micromol/L) on midazolam 1'-hydroxylation, a CYP3A4 model reaction, was investigated in human liver microsomes in vitro. RESULTS: Gemfibrozil increased the mean total area under the plasma concentration-time curve of simvastatin [AUC(0-infinity)] by 35% (P < .01) and the AUC(0-infinity) of simvastatin acid by 185% (P < .001). The elimination half-life of simvastatin was increased by 74% (P < .05), and that of simvastatin acid was increased by 51% (P < .01) by gemfibrozil. The peak concentration of simvastatin acid was increased by 112%, from 3.20 +/- 2.73 ng/mL to 6.78 +/- 4.67 ng/mL (mean +/- SD; P < .01). In vitro, gemfibrozil showed no inhibition of midazolam 1'-hydroxylation. CONCLUSIONS: Gemfibrozil increases plasma concentrations of simvastatin and, in particular, its active form, simvastatin acid, suggesting that the increased risk of myopathy in combination treatment is, at least partially, of a pharmacokinetic origin. Because gemfibrozil does not inhibit CYP3A4 in vitro, the mechanism of the pharmacokinetic interaction is probably inhibition of non-CYP3A4-mediated metabolism of simvastatin acid.
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Rifampin (rifampicin) is a potent inducer of several cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzymes, including CYP3A4. The cholesterol-lowering drug simvastatin has an extensive first-pass metabolism, and it is partially metabolized by CYP3A4. This study was conducted to investigate the effect of rifampin on the pharmacokinetics of simvastatin. METHODS: In a randomized cross-over study with two phases and a washout of 4 weeks, 10 healthy volunteers received a 5-day pretreatment with rifampin (600 mg daily) or placebo. On day 6, a single 40-mg dose of simvastatin was administered orally. Plasma concentrations of simvastatin and its active metabolite simvastatin acid were measured up to 12 hours with a sensitive liquid chromatography-ion spray tandem mass spectrometry method. RESULTS: Rifampin decreased the total area under the plasma concentration-time curve of simvastatin and simvastatin acid by 87% (P < .001) and 93% (P < .001), respectively. Also the peak concentrations of both simvastatin and simvastatin acid were reduced greatly (by 90%) by rifampin (P < .001). On the other hand, rifampin had no significant effect on the elimination half-life of simvastatin or simvastatin acid. CONCLUSIONS: Rifampin greatly decreases the plasma concentrations of simvastatin and simvastatin acid. Because the elimination half-life of simvastatin was not affected by rifampin, induction of the CYP3A4-mediated first-pass metabolism of simvastatin in the intestine and the liver probably explains this interaction. Concomitant use of potent inducers of CYP3A4 can lead to a considerably reduced cholesterol-lowering efficacy of simvastatin.
Abstract: OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the effect of carbamazepine on the pharmacokinetics of orally administered simvastatin in healthy volunteers. METHODS: In a randomised, two-phase crossover study and a wash out of 2 weeks, 12 healthy volunteers took carbamazepine for 14 days (600 mg daily except 200 mg daily for the first 2 days) or no drug. On day 15, each subject ingested 80 mg simvastatin. Serum concentrations of simvastatin and its active metabolite simvastatin acid were measured up to 24 h. RESULTS: Carbamazepine decreased the mean total area under the serum concentration-time curve of simvastatin and simvastatin acid by 75% ( P<0.001) and 82% ( P<0.001), respectively. The mean peak concentrations of both simvastatin and simvastatin acid were reduced by 68% ( P<0.01), and half-life of simvastatin acid was shortened from 5.9+/-0.3 h to 3.7+/-0.5 h ( P<0.01) by carbamazepine. CONCLUSION: Carbamazepine greatly reduces the serum concentrations of simvastatin and simvastatin acid, probably by inducing their metabolism. Concomitant administration of carbamazepine and simvastatin should be avoided or the dose of simvastatin should be considerably increased.
Abstract: The aim of this pharmacokinetic evaluation was to show the effect of the extra methyl group in simvastatin on esterase hydrolysis between lovastatin and simvastatin in male and female volunteers. This study was based on the plasma concentration-time curves and the pharmacokinetics of lovastatin and simvastatin with its respective active metabolite statin-beta-hydroxy acid obtained from two different bioequivalence studies, each with 18 females and 18 males. Results were: The group of female volunteers showed a higher yield of the active metabolite beta-hydroxy acid than the group of males (p < 0.002) for both lovastatin and simvastatin. This difference was not related to the body weight of both groups. In the male/female groups, subject-dependent yield of active metabolite beta-hydroxy acid was demonstrated, which was independent of the formulation. The variation in plasma/liver hydrolysis resulted in a fan-shaped distribution of data points when the AUCt lovastatin was plotted vs. that of the beta-hydroxy acid metabolite. In the fan of data points, subgroups could be distinguished, each showing a different regression line and with a different Y-intercept (AUCtbeta-hydroxy acid). Lovastatin hydrolysis was higher than simvastatin hydrolysis. It was possible to discriminate between hydrolysis of both lovastatin and simvastatin by plasma/liver or tissue esterase activity. The three subgroups of subjects (males/females) showing different but high yield of statin beta-hydroxy acid can be explained by variable hydrolysis of plasma and hepatic microsomal and cytosolic carboxyesterase activity. This study showed clearly that despite the subject-dependent hydrolysis of lovastatin/simvastatin to the active metabolite, males tend to hydrolyse less than females. The extra methyl group in simvastatin results in less hydrolysis due to steric hindrance.
Abstract: Renal drug interactions can result from competitive inhibition between drugs that undergo extensive renal tubular secretion by transporters such as P-glycoprotein (P-gp). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of itraconazole, a known P-gp inhibitor, on the renal tubular secretion of cimetidine in healthy volunteers who received intravenous cimetidine alone and following 3 days of oral itraconazole (400 mg/day) administration. Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) was measured continuously during each study visit using iothalamate clearance. Iothalamate, cimetidine, and itraconazole concentrations in plasma and urine were determined using high-performance liquid chromatography/ultraviolet (HPLC/UV) methods. Renal tubular secretion (CL(sec)) of cimetidine was calculated as the difference between renal clearance (CL(r)) and GFR (CL(ioth)) on days 1 and 5. Cimetidine pharmacokinetic estimates were obtained for total clearance (CL(T)), volume of distribution (Vd), elimination rate constant (K(el)), area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC(0-240 min)), and average plasma concentration (Cp(ave)) before and after itraconazole administration. Plasma itraconazole concentrations following oral dosing ranged from 0.41 to 0.92 microg/mL. The cimetidine AUC(0-240 min) increased by 25% (p < 0.01) following itraconazole administration. The GFR and Vd remained unchanged, but significant reductions in CL(T) (655 vs. 486 mL/min, p < 0.001) and CL(sec) (410 vs. 311 mL/min, p = 0.001) were observed. The increased systemic exposure of cimetidine during coadministration with itraconazole was likely due to inhibition of P-gp-mediated renal tubular secretion. Further evaluation of renal P-gp-modulating drugs such as itraconazole that may alter the renal excretion of coadministered drugs is warranted.
Abstract: PURPOSE: In this study, P-glycoprotein (P-gp) mediated efflux of simvastatin (SV), simvastatin acid (SVA), and atorvastatin (AVA) and inhibition of P-gp by SV, SVA, and AVA were evaluated to assess the role of P-gp in drug interactions. METHODS: P-gp mediated efflux of SV, SVA, and AVA was determined by directional transport across monolayers of LLC-PK1 cells and LLC-PK1 cells transfected with human MDR1. Inhibition of P-gp was evaluated by studying the vinblastine efflux in Caco-2 cells and in P-gp overexpressing KBV1 cells at concentrations of SV, SVA, and AVA up to 50 microM. RESULTS: Directional transport studies showed insignificant P-gp mediated efflux of SV, and moderate P-gp transport [2.4-3.8 and 3.0-6.4 higher Basolateral (B) to Apical (A) than A to B transport] for SVA and AVA, respectively. Inhibition studies did not show the same trend as the transport studies with SV and AVA inhibiting P-gp (IC50 -25-50 microM) but SVA not showing any inhibition of P-gp. CONCLUSIONS: The moderate level of P-gp mediated transport and low affinity of SV, SVA, and AVA for P-gp inhibition compared to systemic drug levels suggest that drug interactions due to competition for P-gp transport is unlikely to be a significant factor in adverse drug interactions. Moreover, the inconsistencies between P-gp inhibition studies and P-gp transport of SV, SVA, and AVA indicate that the inhibition studies are not a valid means to identify statins as Pgp substrates.
Abstract: Statins are the treatment of choice for the management of hypercholesterolaemia because of their proven efficacy and safety profile. They also have an increasing role in managing cardiovascular risk in patients with relatively normal levels of plasma cholesterol. Although all statins share a common mechanism of action, they differ in terms of their chemical structures, pharmacokinetic profiles, and lipid-modifying efficacy. The chemical structures of statins govern their water solubility, which in turn influences their absorption, distribution, metabolism and excretion. Lovastatin, pravastatin and simvastatin are derived from fungal metabolites and have elimination half-lives of 1-3 h. Atorvastatin, cerivastatin (withdrawn from clinical use in 2001), fluvastatin, pitavastatin and rosuvastatin are fully synthetic compounds, with elimination half-lives ranging from 1 h for fluvastatin to 19 h for rosuvastatin. Atorvastatin, simvastatin, lovastatin, fluvastatin, cerivastatin and pitavastatin are relatively lipophilic compounds. Lipophilic statins are more susceptible to metabolism by the cytochrome P(450) system, except for pitavastatin, which undergoes limited metabolism via this pathway. Pravastatin and rosuvastatin are relatively hydrophilic and not significantly metabolized by cytochrome P(450) enzymes. All statins are selective for effect in the liver, largely because of efficient first-pass uptake; passive diffusion through hepatocyte cell membranes is primarily responsible for hepatic uptake of lipophilic statins, while hydrophilic agents are taken up by active carrier-mediated processes. Pravastatin and rosuvastatin show greater hepatoselectivity than lipophilic agents, as well as a reduced potential for uptake by peripheral cells. The bioavailability of the statins differs greatly, from 5% for lovastatin and simvastatin to 60% or greater for cerivastatin and pitavastatin. Clinical studies have demonstrated rosuvastatin to be the most effective for reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, followed by atorvastatin, simvastatin and pravastatin. As a class, statins are generally well tolerated and serious adverse events, including muscle toxicity leading to rhabdomyolysis, are rare. Consideration of the differences between the statins helps to provide a rational basis for their use in clinical practice.
Abstract: Anticholinergic Drug Scale (ADS) scores were previously associated with serum anticholinergic activity (SAA) in a pilot study. To replicate these results, the association between ADS scores and SAA was determined using simple linear regression in subjects from a study of delirium in 201 long-term care facility residents who were not included in the pilot study. Simple and multiple linear regression models were then used to determine whether the ADS could be modified to more effectively predict SAA in all 297 subjects. In the replication analysis, ADS scores were significantly associated with SAA (R2 = .0947, P < .0001). In the modification analysis, each model significantly predicted SAA, including ADS scores (R2 = .0741, P < .0001). The modifications examined did not appear useful in optimizing the ADS. This study replicated findings on the association of the ADS with SAA. Future work will determine whether the ADS is clinically useful for preventing anticholinergic adverse effects.
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Adverse effects of anticholinergic medications may contribute to events such as falls, delirium, and cognitive impairment in older patients. To further assess this risk, we developed the Anticholinergic Risk Scale (ARS), a ranked categorical list of commonly prescribed medications with anticholinergic potential. The objective of this study was to determine if the ARS score could be used to predict the risk of anticholinergic adverse effects in a geriatric evaluation and management (GEM) cohort and in a primary care cohort. METHODS: Medical records of 132 GEM patients were reviewed retrospectively for medications included on the ARS and their resultant possible anticholinergic adverse effects. Prospectively, we enrolled 117 patients, 65 years or older, in primary care clinics; performed medication reconciliation; and asked about anticholinergic adverse effects. The relationship between the ARS score and the risk of anticholinergic adverse effects was assessed using Poisson regression analysis. RESULTS: Higher ARS scores were associated with increased risk of anticholinergic adverse effects in the GEM cohort (crude relative risk [RR], 1.5; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-1.8) and in the primary care cohort (crude RR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.5-2.4). After adjustment for age and the number of medications, higher ARS scores increased the risk of anticholinergic adverse effects in the GEM cohort (adjusted RR, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.1-1.6; c statistic, 0.74) and in the primary care cohort (adjusted RR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.5-2.5; c statistic, 0.77). CONCLUSION: Higher ARS scores are associated with statistically significantly increased risk of anticholinergic adverse effects in older patients.
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: 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.