Extensión de tiempo QT
Efectos adversos de las drogas
|Dolor de cabeza|
|Sensación de calor o bochorno|
Variantes ✨Para la evaluación computacionalmente intensiva de las variantes, elija la suscripción estándar paga.
Áreas de aplicación
Explicaciones para pacientes
Se recomienda la monitorización de cimetidina y nifedipina.
Aumento de las concentraciones de nifedipina.Mecanismo: la cimetidina inhibe el metabolismo hepático de la nifedipina.
Efecto: el AUC de nifedipino aumenta alrededor de un 80% en combinación con cimetidina. Posibles consecuencias: dolor de cabeza, edema periférico, hipotensión, taquicardia.
Medidas: Controle la presión arterial y la frecuencia cardíaca con regularidad. Si es necesario, reduzca la dosis de nifedipina.
Los cambios en la exposición mencionados se refieren a cambios en la curva de concentración plasmática-tiempo [AUC]. La exposición a nifedipina aumenta al 223%, cuando se combina con ranitidina (112%) y cimetidina (182%). Esto puede provocar un aumento de los efectos secundarios. No detectamos ningún cambio en la exposición a ranitidina, cuando se combina con nifedipina (100%). Actualmente no podemos estimar la influencia de la cimetidina. No detectamos ningún cambio en la exposición a cimetidina. Actualmente no podemos estimar la influencia de nifedipina y ranitidina.
Los parámetros farmacocinéticos de la población media se utilizan como punto de partida para calcular los cambios individuales en la exposición debidos a las interacciones.
La nifedipina tiene una biodisponibilidad oral media [ F ] del 54%, por lo que los niveles plasmáticos máximos [Cmax] tienden a cambiar con una interacción. La vida media terminal [ t12 ] es bastante corta a las 2 horas y se alcanzan rápidamente niveles plasmáticos constantes [ Css ]. La unión a proteínas [ Pb ] es moderadamente fuerte al 95% y el volumen de distribución [ Vd ] es de 54 litros, por eso, con una tasa de extracción hepática media de 0,9, tanto el flujo sanguíneo hepático [Q] como un cambio en la unión a proteínas [Pb] son relevantes. El metabolismo tiene lugar a través de CYP1A2 y CYP3A4, entre otros. y el transporte activo tiene lugar en particular a través de BCRP.
La ranitidina tiene una biodisponibilidad oral media [ F ] del 50%, por lo que los niveles plasmáticos máximos [Cmax] tienden a cambiar con una interacción. La vida media terminal [ t12 ] es bastante corta a las 2.5 horas y se alcanzan rápidamente niveles plasmáticos constantes [ Css ]. La unión a proteínas [ Pb ] es muy débil al 15%. El metabolismo tiene lugar a través de CYP1A2, CYP2C19 y CYP2D6, entre otros. y el transporte activo tiene lugar en particular a través de PGP.
La cimetidina tiene una biodisponibilidad oral media [ F ] del 65%, por lo que los niveles plasmáticos máximos [Cmax] tienden a cambiar con una interacción. La vida media terminal [ t12 ] es bastante corta a las 1.6333333 horas y se alcanzan rápidamente niveles plasmáticos constantes [ Css ]. La unión a proteínas [ Pb ] es muy débil al 19% y el volumen de distribución [ Vd ] es muy grande a 91 litros. El metabolismo no tiene lugar a través de los citocromos comunes. y el transporte activo se realiza en parte a través de BCRP y PGP.
|Efectos serotoninérgicos a||0||Ø||Ø||Ø|
Clasificación: Según nuestro conocimiento, ni la nifedipina, ranitidina ni la cimetidina aumentan la actividad serotoninérgica.
|Kiesel & Durán b||2||Ø||+||+|
Recomendación: Como precaución, se debe prestar atención a los síntomas anticolinérgicos, especialmente después de aumentar la dosis y en dosis en el rango terapéutico superior.
Clasificación: Ranitidina y cimetidina solo tienen un efecto leve sobre el sistema anticolinérgico. El riesgo de síndrome anticolinérgico con este medicamento es bastante bajo si la dosis se encuentra en el rango habitual. Según nuestros hallazgos, la nifedipina no aumenta la actividad anticolinérgica.
Extensión de tiempo QT
Recomendación: Asegúrese de minimizar los factores de riesgo influibles. Las alteraciones electrolíticas, como los bajos niveles de calcio, potasio y magnesio, deben compensarse. Se debe usar la dosis efectiva más baja de cimetidina.
Clasificación: La cimetidina puede prolongar potencialmente el tiempo QT y, si hay factores de riesgo, se pueden favorecer las arritmias del tipo torsades de pointes. No conocemos ningún potencial de prolongación del intervalo QT para nifedipina y ranitidina.
Efectos secundarios generales
|Efectos secundarios||∑ frecuencia||nif||ran||cim|
|Dolor de cabeza||21.0 %||21.0↑||n.a.||n.a.|
|Sensación de calor o bochorno||14.5 %||14.5↑||n.a.||n.a.|
|Edema periférico||10.0 %||10.0↑||n.a.||n.a.|
|Infarto de miocardio||0.0 %||0.1↑||n.a.||n.a.|
Taquicardia: nifedipina, ranitidina
Bloqueo auriculoventricular: ranitidina
Necrolisis epidérmica toxica: nifedipina
Eritema multiforme: ranitidina
Hepatitis colestásica: ranitidina
Sintiéndose nervioso: nifedipina
Disfunción eréctil: nifedipina
Pancreatitis: cimetidina, ranitidina
Con base en sus
Referencias de literatura
Abstract: A compilation of drug interactions between H2 antagonists and cardiovascular drugs is found in Table I. Cimetidine's potency, lipophilicity, and affinity for binding to the P-450 cytochrome system can probably be attributed to the drug interactions that have been identified with the H2 antagonists. The mechanism for most cimetidine drug interactions is inhibition of hepatic metabolism. There is conflicting evidence regarding significance of altered liver blood flow for both cimetidine and ranitidine and their influence on other agents. Cimetidine may increase propranolol's blood concentrations and potentiate beta blocking effects through inhibition of hepatic microsomal enzymes and possibly through reduction of hepatic blood flow. Ranitidine has no effect on propranolol. Cimetidine, when administered concurrently with metoprolol, could possibly cause an increase in plasma metoprolol concentrations or bioavailability through inhibition of hepatic P-450 metabolizing enzymes. No effect of cimetidine on metoprolol pharmacodynamics was evident. Ranitidine has no effect on metoprolol pharmacokinetics or pharmacodynamics. Neither H2 antagonist altered the kinetics or physiologic effects of atenolol. Atenolol is the drug of choice in patients receiving H2 antagonists, since no interaction has been observed. Metoprolol could probably be used safely in most patients, as no change in pharmacodynamics has been evident. Concurrent administration of cimetidine and nifedipine may result in alterations in heart rate and blood pressure. The mechanism is inhibition of oxidative liver metabolism. Ranitidine has no effect on nifedipine. Studies are needed to investigate the interaction between the H2 antagonists and diltiazem or verapamil. Cimetidine, given concomitantly with lidocaine, may increase lidocaine concentrations and clinical symptoms of lidocaine toxicity. The mechanism involved is probably a reduction in oxidative drug metabolism or liver blood flow. Ranitidine has no significant effects on lidocaine pharmacokinetics. Cimetidine may increase quinidine levels and symptoms of quinidine toxicity. Additionally, enhanced arrhythmic effects may be observed. The interaction probably caused by an inhibition of hepatic drug metabolism of quinidine by cimetidine would be most significant in patients with liver disease and in the elderly. Ranitidine may enhance quinidine's arrhythmic effect. Cimetidine can possibly increase procainamide and NAPA serum concentrations, especially in the elderly and in patients with renal dysfunction, predisposing them to adverse side effects. The interaction is mediated by a reduction of tubular secretion of procainamide and NAPA.
Abstract: 1. The effects of age on the pharmacology of nifedipine were investigated in 11 young and six elderly normotensive volunteers. 2. Following 2.5 mg of nifedipine i.v. the plasma clearance of nifedipine was 348 +/- 83 (s.d.) ml min-1 in the elderly compared with 519 +/- 125 ml min-1 in the young (P less than 0.05) and the AUC in the elderly was significantly greater at 125 +/- 28 ng ml-1 h compared with 83.9 +/- 19 ng ml-1 h (P less than 0.05). The Vss was similar in both age groups. 3. Following 10 mg oral sustained release nifedipine the AUC was 281 +/- 64 ng ml-1 h in the elderly compared with 136 +/- 56 ng ml-1 h in the young (P less than 0.002) and Cmax in the elderly was significantly greater at 36.8 +/- 11.8 ng ml-1 compared with 22.3 +/- 5.8 ng ml-1 (P less than 0.05). The trend towards an increased bioavailability in elderly subjects (36%) was supported by a significantly lower nitropyridine metabolite/nifedipine ratio in the elderly. 4. Absorption rate limited kinetics of the sustained release formulation were indicated by the prolonged t1/2 compared with i.v. administration. In the elderly t1/2 (oral) was significantly greater than in the young (elderly 6.7 +/- 2.2 h, young 3.8 +/- 1.4 h, P less than 0.05). 5. Haemodynamic changes in the young were confined to a tachycardia following i.v. administration. In the elderly, supine BP fell significantly following both oral and i.v. nifedipine while the heart rate remained unchanged.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
Abstract: Two studies of the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of intravenous nifedipine infusion were performed: the first, a randomised double-blind crossover study of nifedipine and its vehicle in eight subjects, the second a dose ranging study in nine subjects. Nifedipine pharmacokinetics did not vary with dose or duration of infusion up to 8 h, and are similar to those reported for other nifedipine preparations. Nifedipine increased heart rate and forearm blood flow and decreased blood pressure after bolus injection but not during prolonged infusion. The vehicle decreased blood pressure and increased forearm blood flow after bolus injection but not during prolonged infusion. It did not affect heart rate. The vehicle's haemodynamic activity has not been previously recognised and is of potential importance in the study of this and similar preparations of calcium antagonists.
Abstract: The plasma pharmacokinetics of nifedipine and the formation of its metabolites have been studied in volunteers under conditions which would affect the activity of the cytochrome P-450 system. The pharmacokinetics of a 10-mg capsule of nifedipine were not significantly different between smokers and non-smokers of similar age. After pretreatment with cimetidine, which inhibits the activity of cytochrome P-450, the peak plasma concentration and area under the plasma-time concentration curve for nifedipine were increased by a mean 84%. In contrast, pre-treatment with ranitidine which has little effect on cytochrome P-450, did not significantly alter nifedipine pharmacokinetics. Smoking does not contribute significantly to the variability in nifedipine pharmacokinetics. However, the interaction between nifedipine and cimetidine, but not ranitidine, may be of clinical importance.
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: Nifedipine, the prototype for the dihydropyridine class of calcium antagonists, has been available for 20 years and its efficacy as a vasodilator and an antihypertensive agent is well recognised. The development of the so-called nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system (GITS), which allows once-daily administration, has modified and improved the overall therapeutic profile of nifedipine to such a significant extent that it might almost be considered a new drug entity. The nifedipine GITS is associated with distinct improvements in terms of patient compliance and convenience, and a reduced incidence of adverse effects. With regard to the care of the elderly, this 'new' drug offers the prospect of a well tolerated and effective treatment without major cost implications.
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: BACKGROUND: No standard methods exist for determining the onset of action of gastric antisecretory agents in human subjects. METHODS: Intragastric pH was measured when placebo, ranitidine 150 mg, ranitidine 75 mg or famotidine 10 mg were administered 30 min after the end of a meal. RESULTS: When the onset of action was defined as the earliest time that mean gastric pH with active treatment was statistically significantly higher (P < 0.05) than the corresponding placebo value, the onsets of action of ranitidine 75 mg and 150 mg were 55 min, and of famotidine 10 mg, 90 min. When onset was defined in terms of a particular decrease in gastric acid concentration for the group as a whole or for individual subjects, there was an important variation in the relative times of onset of ranitidine 75 mg and famotidine 10 mg. CONCLUSIONS: When administered after a meal, the onset of action of ranitidine and famotidine on gastric pH can be determined for individual subjects as well as for the group as a whole. When onset was determined for the group using statistical significance, which does not depend on arbitrary cut-off points, ranitidine 75 mg had an earlier onset of action than did famotidine 10 mg.
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: The human ATP-binding cassette transporter, ABCG2, confers resistance to multiple chemotherapeutic agents and also affects the bioavailability of different drugs. [(125)I]Iodoarylazidoprazosin (IAAP) and [(3)H]azidopine were used for photoaffinity labeling of ABCG2 in this study. We show here for the first time that both of these photoaffinity analogues are transport substrates for ABCG2 and that [(3)H]azidopine can also be used to photolabel both wild-type R482-ABCG2 and mutant T482-ABCG2. We further used these assays to screen for potential substrates or modulators of ABCG2 and observed that 1,4-dihydropyridines such as nicardipine and nifedipine, which are clinically used as antihypertensive agents, inhibited the photolabeling of ABCG2 with [(125)I]IAAP and [(3)H]azidopine as well as the transport of these photoaffinity analogues by ABCG2. Furthermore, [(3)H]nitrendipine and bodipy-Fl-dihydropyridine accumulation assays showed that these compounds are transported by ABCG2. These dihydropyridines also inhibited the efflux of the known ABCG2 substrates, mitoxantrone and pheophorbide-a, from ABCG2-overexpressing cells, and nicardipine was more potent in inhibiting this transport. Both nicardipine and nifedipine stimulated the ATPase activity of ABCG2, and the nifedipine-stimulated activity was inhibited by fumitremorgin C, suggesting that these agents might interact at the same site on the transporter. In addition, nontoxic concentrations of dihydropyridines increased the sensitivity of ABCG2-expressing cells to mitoxantrone by 3-5-fold. In aggregate, results from the photoaffinity labeling and efflux assays using [(125)I]IAAP and [(3)H]azidopine demonstrate that 1,4-dihydropyridines are substrates of ABCG2 and that these photolabels can be used to screen new substrates and/or inhibitors of this transporter.
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: 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.