Prolongación del tiempo QT
Eventos adversos de medicamentos
Variantes ✨Para la evaluación computacionalmente intensiva de las variantes, elija la suscripción estándar paga.
Explicaciones de las sustancias para pacientes.
No existen advertencias adicionales para la combinación de tramadol y loratadina. Consulte también la información especializada pertinente.
|Tramadol||1 [0.63,3.38] 1,2||1|
Los cambios informados en la exposición corresponden a los cambios en la curva de concentración plasmática-tiempo [ AUC ]. No esperamos ningún cambio en la exposición a tramadol, cuando se combina con loratadina (100%). El AUC se encuentra entre 0 % y 100 % dependiendo del
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 tramadol tiene una biodisponibilidad oral media [ F ] del 100 %, por lo que los niveles plasmáticos máximos [Cmax] tienden a cambiar con una interacción. La vida media terminal [ t12 ] es relativamente corta a las 4.5 horas y los niveles plasmáticos constantes [ Css ] se alcanzan rápidamente. La unión a proteínas [ Pb ] es muy débil al 100 % y el volumen de distribución [ Vd ] es muy grande a 238 litros. Dado que la sustancia tiene una tasa de extracción hepática baja de 0,9, el desplazamiento de la unión a proteínas [Pb] en el contexto de una interacción puede conducir a una mayor exposición. Aproximadamente el 20 % de la dosis administrada se excreta inalterada a través de los riñones, y esta proporción rara vez se ve modificada por las interacciones. El metabolismo tiene lugar a través de CYP2B6, CYP2D6 y CYP3A4, entre otros y el transporte activo tiene lugar especialmente a través de UGT1A1.
La loratadina tiene una baja biodisponibilidad oral [ F ] del 100 %, por lo que el nivel plasmático máximo [Cmax] tiende a cambiar fuertemente con una interacción. La unión a proteínas [ Pb ] es 100 % fuerte. El metabolismo tiene lugar a través de CYP2D6 y CYP3A4, entre otros y el transporte activo tiene lugar especialmente a través de PGP.
|Efectos serotoninérgicos a||2||++||Ø|
Recomendación: Como medida de precaución, se deben tener en cuenta los síntomas de sobreestimulación serotoninérgica, especialmente después de aumentar la dosis y en dosis en el rango terapéutico superior.
Clasificación: La tramadol modula el sistema serotoninérgico en un grado moderado. El riesgo de síndrome serotoninérgico se puede clasificar como bajo con este medicamento si la dosis se encuentra en el rango habitual. Según nuestro conocimiento, la loratadina no aumenta la actividad serotoninérgica.
|Kiesel & Durán b||2||+||+|
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: La Tramadol y loratadina solo tienen un efecto leve sobre el sistema anticolinérgico. El riesgo de síndrome anticolinérgico con este medicamento es relativamente bajo si la dosis se encuentra en el rango habitual.
Prolongación del tiempo QT
La tramadol puede aumentar potencialmente el tiempo QT, pero no tenemos conocimiento de arritmias del tipo torsades de pointes. No conocemos ningún potencial de prolongación del intervalo QT de la loratadina.
Efectos adversos generales
|Efectos secundarios||∑ frecuencia||tra||lor|
|Dolor de cabeza||12.9 %||+||12.0|
|Sensación de calor o bochorno||11.8 %||11.8||n.a.|
Disnea (4.9%): tramadol
Depresion respiratoria: tramadol
Fatiga (3%): loratadina
Reacción de hipersensibilidad: tramadol
Con base en sus respuestas e información científica, evaluamos el riesgo individual de efectos secundarios adversos. Estas recomendaciones están destinadas a asesorar a los profesionales y no sustituyen la consulta con un médico. En la versión de prueba restringida (alfa), el riesgo de todas las sustancias aún no se ha evaluado de manera concluyente.
Abstract: This histological and immunohistochemical study of 6 food handlers affected by immediate contact dermatitis due to foods shows that apparently normal skin of patients with this condition presents several histological and immunohistochemical abnormalities. Skin biopsies of normal hand skin showed focal parakeratosis and moderately dense dermal infiltrates. Immunohistochemistry showed an increased number of Langerhans cells in the epidermis and in the superficial dermis and a mononuclear dermal infiltrate consisting of peripheral T lymphocytes with a CD4/CD8 ratio of 5-6/1. Biopsies of the immediate vesicular reactions induced by foods showed spongiotic vesicles within the epidermis and a moderate to dense mononuclear dermal perivascular infiltrate. The immunohistochemical features were similar to those described in apparently normal skin. The mechanism of this immediate vesicular reaction requires further research. The rapid appearance of the lesions (after 20-30 min) probably excludes an immunological cell-mediated pathogenesis. A non-immunological mechanism due to direct liberation of mediators by foods is more readily conceivable than an immediate immunological type of contact reaction.
Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of coadministration of loratadine and erythromycin on the pharmacokinetics and electrocardiographic repolarization (QTc) pharmacodynamics of loratadine and its metabolite descarboethoxyloratadine in healthy volunteers. METHODS: Twenty-four healthy volunteers were studied in a prospective, double-blind crossover design while confined in a Clinical Research Center. The primary pharmacodynamic end point of the study was the difference between baseline and day 10 mean QTc intervals obtained from surface electrocardiograms. Plasma concentrations of loratadine, descarboethoxyloratadine, and erythromycin were measured on treatment day 10 for pharmacokinetic analysis. Subjects received in random sequence the following three treatments for 10 consecutive days during three separate study periods: 10 mg loratadine every morning plus 500 mg erythromycin stearate every 8 hours, or 10 mg loratadine every morning plus placebo every 8 hours, or placebo every morning plus 500 mg erythromycin stearate. RESULTS: Concomitant administration of loratadine and erythromycin was associated with increased plasma concentrations of loratadine (40% increase in area under the plasma concentration-time curve [AUC]) and descarboethoxyloratadine (46% increase in AUC) compared with loratadine alone. Analysis of variance showed no difference between the treatment groups in effect on QTc intervals compared with baseline, and no significant change from baseline was observed. No clinically relevant changes in the safety profile of loratadine were observed, and there were no reports of sedation nor syncope. CONCLUSION: Although concomitant administration of loratadine and erythromycin was associated with increased plasma concentrations of loratadine and descarboethoxyloratadine, no clinically relevant changes in the safety profile of loratadine were observed. In this study, 10 mg loratadine administered orally for 10 consecutive days was well tolerated when coadministered with therapeutic doses of erythromycin stearate.
Abstract: (+/-)-Tramadol is a synthetic 4-phenyl-piperidine analogue of codeine. It is a central analgesic with a low affinity for opioid receptors. Its selectivity for mu receptors has recently been demonstrated, and the M1 metabolite of tramadol, produced by liver O-demethylation, shows a higher affinity for opioid receptors than the parent drug. The rate of production of this M1 derivative (O-demethyl tramadol), is influenced by a polymorphic isoenzyme of the debrisoquine-type, cytochrome P450 2D6 (CYP2D6). Nevertheless, this affinity for mu receptors of the CNS remains low, being 6000 times lower than that of morphine. Moreover, and in contrast to other opioids, the analgesic action of tramadol is only partially inhibited by the opioid antagonist naloxone, which suggests the existence of another mechanism of action. This was demonstrated by the discovery of a monoaminergic activity that inhibits noradrenaline (norepinephrine) and serotonin (5-hydroxytryptamine; 5-HT) reuptake, making a significant contribution to the analgesic action by blocking nociceptive impulses at the spinal level. (+/-)-Tramadol is a racemic mixture of 2 enantiomers, each one displaying differing affinities for various receptors. (+/-)-Tramadol is a selective agonist of mu receptors and preferentially inhibits serotonin reuptake, whereas (-)-tramadol mainly inhibits noradrenaline reuptake. The action of these 2 enantiomers is both complementary and synergistic and results in the analgesic effect of (+/-)-tramadol. After oral administration, tramadol demonstrates 68% bioavailability, with peak serum concentrations reached within 2 hours. The elimination kinetics can be described as 2-compartmental, with a half-life of 5.1 hours for tramadol and 9 hours for the M1 derivative after a single oral dose of 100mg. This explains the approximately 2-fold accumulation of the parent drug and its M1 derivative that is observed during multiple dose treatment with tramadol. The recommended daily dose of tramadol is between 50 and 100mg every 4 to 6 hours, with a maximum dose of 400 mg/day; the duration of the analgesic effect after a single oral dose of tramadol 100mg is about 6 hours. Adverse effects, and nausea in particular, are dose-dependent and therefore considerably more likely to appear if the loading dose is high. The reduction of this dose during the first days of treatment is an important factor in improving tolerability. Other adverse effects are generally similar to those of opioids, although they are usually less severe, and can include respiratory depression, dysphoria and constipation. Tramadol can be administered concomitantly with other analgesics, particularly those with peripheral action, while drugs that depress CNS function may enhance the sedative effect of tramadol. Tramadol should not be administered to patients receiving monoamine oxidase inhibitors, and administration with tricyclic antidepressant drugs should also be avoided. Tramadol has pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties that are highly unlikely to lead to dependence. This was confirmed by various controlled studies and postmarketing surveillance studies, which reported an extremely small number of patients developing tolerance or instances of tramadol abuse. Tramadol is a central acting analgesic which has been shown to be effective and well tolerated, and likely to be of value for treating several pain conditions (step II of the World Health Organization ladder) where treatment with strong opioids is not required.
Abstract: AIMS: To evaluate whether ketoconazole or cimetidine alter the pharmacokinetics of loratadine, or its major metabolite, desloratadine (DCL), or alter the effects of loratadine or DCL on electrocardiographic repolarization in healthy adult volunteers. METHODS: Two randomized, evaluator-blind, multiple-dose, three-way crossover drug interaction studies were performed. In each study, subjects received three 10 day treatments in random sequence, separated by a 14 day washout period. The treatments were loratadine alone, cimetidine or ketoconazole alone, or loratadine plus cimetidine or ketoconazole. The primary study endpoint was the difference in mean QTc intervals from baseline to day 10. In addition, plasma concentrations of loratadine, DCL, and ketoconazole or cimetidine were obtained on day 10. RESULTS: Concomitant administration of loratadine and ketoconazole significantly increased the loratadine plasma concentrations (307%; 90% CI 205-428%) and DCL concentrations (73%; 62-85%) compared with administration of loratadine alone. Concomitant administration of loratadine and cimetidine significantly increased the loratadine plasma concentrations (103% increase; 70-142%) but not DCL concentrations (6% increase; 1-11%) compared with administration of loratadine alone. Cimetidine or ketoconazole plasma concentrations were unaffected by coadministration with loratadine. Despite increased concentrations of loratadine and DCL, there were no statistically significant differences for the primary electrocardiographic repolarization parameter (QTc) among any of the treatment groups. No other clinically relevant changes in the safety profile of loratadine were observed as assessed by electrocardiographic parameters (mean (90% CI) QTc changes: loratadine vs loratadine + ketoconazole = 3.6 ms (-2.2, 9.4); loratadine vs loratadine + cimetidine = 3.2 ms (-1.6, 7.9)), clinical laboratory tests, vital signs, and adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Loratadine 10 mg daily was devoid of any effects on electrocardiographic parameters when coadministered for 10 days with therapeutic doses of ketoconazole or cimetidine in healthy volunteers. It is concluded that, although there was a significant pharmacokinetic drug interaction between ketoconazole or cimetidine and loratadine, this effect was not accompanied by a change in the QTc interval in healthy adult volunteers.
Abstract: No Abstract available
Abstract: Tramadol, a centrally acting analgesic structurally related to codeine and morphine, consists of two enantiomers, both of which contribute to analgesic activity via different mechanisms. (+)-Tramadol and the metabolite (+)-O-desmethyl-tramadol (M1) are agonists of the mu opioid receptor. (+)-Tramadol inhibits serotonin reuptake and (-)-tramadol inhibits norepinephrine reuptake, enhancing inhibitory effects on pain transmission in the spinal cord. The complementary and synergistic actions of the two enantiomers improve the analgesic efficacy and tolerability profile of the racemate. Tramadol is available as drops, capsules and sustained-release formulations for oral use, suppositories for rectal use and solution for intramuscular, intravenous and subcutaneous injection. After oral administration, tramadol is rapidly and almost completely absorbed. Sustained-release tablets release the active ingredient over a period of 12 hours, reach peak concentrations after 4.9 hours and have a bioavailability of 87-95% compared with capsules. Tramadol is rapidly distributed in the body; plasma protein binding is about 20%. Tramadol is mainly metabolised by O- and N-demethylation and by conjugation reactions forming glucuronides and sulfates. Tramadol and its metabolites are mainly excreted via the kidneys. The mean elimination half-life is about 6 hours. The O-demethylation of tramadol to M1, the main analgesic effective metabolite, is catalysed by cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2D6, whereas N-demethylation to M2 is catalysed by CYP2B6 and CYP3A4. The wide variability in the pharmacokinetic properties of tramadol can partly be ascribed to CYP polymorphism. O- and N-demethylation of tramadol as well as renal elimination are stereoselective. Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic characterisation of tramadol is difficult because of differences between tramadol concentrations in plasma and at the site of action, and because of pharmacodynamic interactions between the two enantiomers of tramadol and its active metabolites. The analgesic potency of tramadol is about 10% of that of morphine following parenteral administration. Tramadol provides postoperative pain relief comparable with that of pethidine, and the analgesic efficacy of tramadol can further be improved by combination with a non-opioid analgesic. Tramadol may prove particularly useful in patients with a risk of poor cardiopulmonary function, after surgery of the thorax or upper abdomen and when non-opioid analgesics are contraindicated. Tramadol is an effective and well tolerated agent to reduce pain resulting from trauma, renal or biliary colic and labour, and also for the management of chronic pain of malignant or nonmalignant origin, particularly neuropathic pain. Tramadol appears to produce less constipation and dependence than equianalgesic doses of strong opioids.
Abstract: Loratadine is known to be a substrate for both CYP3A4 and CYP2D6 based on a previous in vitro study. In view of the large interindividual variability in loratadine pharmacokinetics and the greater genetically determined variability of CYP2D6 activity than of CYP3A4 in vivo, we hypothesized that CYP2D6 polymorphisms may contribute to the pharmacokinetic variability of loratadine. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of CYP2D6 genotype (specifically the CYP2D6*10 allele) on the pharmacokinetics of loratadine in Chinese subjects. Three groups of healthy male Chinese subjects were enrolled: group I, homozygous CYP2D6*1 (*1/*1, n=4); group II, heterozygous CYP2D6*10 (*1/*10 or *2/*10, n=6); and group III, homozygous CYP2D6*10 (*10/*10, n=7) carriers. Each subject received a single oral dose of 20 mg of loratadine under fasting conditions. Multiple blood samples were collected over 48 h, and the plasma concentrations of loratadine and its metabolite desloratadine were determined by high-performance liquid chromatography. In comparing homozygous CYP2D6*10 (group III) to heterozygous CYP2D6*10 (group II) to homozygous CYP2D6*1 (group I) subjects, loratadine oral clearance values were 7.17+/- 2.54 versus 11.06+/-1.70 versus 14.59+/-2.43 l/h/kg, respectively [one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), p<0.01], and the corresponding metabolic ratios [area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC)(desloratadine)/AUC(loratadine)] were 1.55+/-0.73 versus 2.47+/- 0.46 versus 3.32+/- 0.49, respectively (one-way ANOVA, p<0.05), indicating a gene-dose effect. The results demonstrated that CYP2D6 polymorphism prevalent in the Chinese population significantly affected loratadine pharmacokinetics.
Abstract: No Abstract available
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: OBJECTIVES: To examine the longitudinal relationship between cumulative exposure to anticholinergic medications and memory and executive function in older men. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: A Department of Veterans Affairs primary care clinic. PARTICIPANTS: Five hundred forty-four community-dwelling men aged 65 and older with diagnosed hypertension. MEASUREMENTS: The outcomes were measured using the Hopkins Verbal Recall Test (HVRT) for short-term memory and the instrumental activity of daily living (IADL) scale for executive function at baseline and during follow-up. Anticholinergic medication use was ascertained using participants' primary care visit records and quantified as total anticholinergic burden using a clinician-rated anticholinergic score. RESULTS: Cumulative exposure to anticholinergic medications over the preceding 12 months was associated with poorer performance on the HVRT and IADLs. On average, a 1-unit increase in the total anticholinergic burden per 3 months was associated with a 0.32-point (95% confidence interval (CI)= 0.05-0.58) and 0.10-point (95% CI=0.04-0.17) decrease in the HVRT and IADLs, respectively, independent of other potential risk factors for cognitive impairment, including age, education, cognitive and physical function, comorbidities, and severity of hypertension. The association was attenuated but remained statistically significant with memory (0.29, 95% CI=0.01-0.56) and executive function (0.08, 95% CI=0.02-0.15) after further adjustment for concomitant non-anticholinergic medications. CONCLUSION: Cumulative anticholinergic exposure across multiple medications over 1 year may negatively affect verbal memory and executive function in older men. Prescription of drugs with anticholinergic effects in older persons deserves continued attention to avoid deleterious adverse effects.
Abstract: WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN: During recent years some opioids have been associated with prolonged QT and torsade de pointes (TdP). In vitro testing has shown that most opioids can block the cardiac potassium channels. This indicates that QT prolongation and TdP could be a more general problem associated with the use of these drugs. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: This study is the first to show that oxycodone dose is associated with QT prolongation and in vitro blockade of hERG channels expressed in HEK293. Neither morphine nor tramadol doses are associated with the QT interval length. AIMS: During recent years some opioids have been associated with prolonged QT interval and torsade de pointes (TdP). In vitro patch clamp testing has shown that most opioids can block human ether-a-go-go related gene (hERG) channels that are known to underlie cardiac repolarizing I(Kr) current. This indicates that QT prolongation and TdP could be a more general problem associated with the use of these drugs. The aims of this study were to evaluate the association between different opioids and the QTc among patients and measure hERG activity under influence by opioids in vitro. METHODS: One hundred chronic nonmalignant pain patients treated with methadone, oxycodone, morphine or tramadol were recruited in a cross-sectional study. The QTc was estimated from a 12-lead ECG. To examine hERG activity in the presence of oxycodone, electrophysiological testing was conducted using Xenopus laevis oocytes and HEK293 cells expressing hERG channels. RESULTS: There were no differences in gender distribution or age between the treatment groups. The known association between methadone dose and QTc was confirmed (R(2) = 0.09; P = 0.02). Higher oxycodone dose was also associated with longer QTc (R(2) = 0.21; P = 0.02). A 100 mg higher oxycodone dose was associated with a 10 ms(1/2) (95% CI 2-19) longer QTc. Neither morphine nor tramadol dose was associated with the QTc. Electrophysiological testing revealed low-affinity inhibition of the potassium current through hERG channels expressed in HEK293 cells (IC(50) = 171 microM oxycodone). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients treated with methadone or oxycodone, higher doses were associated with longer QTc. Oxycodone is capable of inhibiting hERG channels in vitro.
Abstract: The present study demonstrated that in addition to CYP3A4 and CYP2D6, the metabolism of loratadine is also catalyzed by CYP1A1, CYP2C19, and to a lesser extent by CYP1A2, CYP2B6, CYP2C8, CYP2C9 and CYP3A5. The biotransformation of loratadine was associated with the formation of desloratadine (DL) and further hydroxylation of both DL and the parent drug (loratadine). Based on the inhibition and correlation studies contribution of CYP2C19 in the formation of the major circulating metabolite DL seems to be minor. Reported clinical results suggest that the steady state mean (%CV) plasma Cmax and AUC(24hr) of loratadine were 4.73 ng/ml (119%) and 24.1 ng.hr/ml (157%), respectively, after dosing with 10 mg loratadine tablets for 10 days. High inter-subject variability in loratadine steady-state data is probably due to the phenotypical characteristics of CYP2D6, CYP2C19, and CYP3A4. The relative abundance of CYP3A4 in the human liver exceeds that of CYP2C19 and CYP2D6 and therefore the contribution of CYP3A4 in the metabolism of loratadine should be major (approximately 70%).
Abstract: No Abstract available
Abstract: PURPOSE: We assessed possible drug interactions of tramadol given concomitantly with the potent CYP2B6 inhibitor ticlopidine, alone or together with the potent CYP3A4 and P-glycoprotein inhibitor itraconazole. METHODS: In a randomized, placebo-controlled cross-over study, 12 healthy subjects ingested 50 mg of tramadol after 4 days of pretreatment with either placebo, ticlopidine (250 mg twice daily) or ticlopidine plus itraconazole (200 mg once daily). Plasma and urine concentrations of tramadol and its active metabolite O-desmethyltramadol (M1) were monitored over 48 h and 24 h, respectively. RESULTS: Ticlopidine increased the mean area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC0-∞) of tramadol by 2.0-fold (90 % confidence interval (CI) 1.6-2.4; p < 0.001) and Cmax by 1.4-fold (p < 0.001), and reduced its oral and renal clearance (p < 0.01). Ticlopidine reduced the AUC0-3 of M1 (p < 0.001) and the ratio of the AUC0-∞ of M1 to that of tramadol, but did not influence the AUC0-∞ of M1. Tramadol or M1 pharmacokinetics did not differ between the ticlopidine alone and ticlopidine plus itraconazole phases. CONCLUSIONS: Ticlopidine increased exposure to tramadol, reduced its renal clearance and inhibited the formation of M1, most likely via inhibition of CYP2B6 and/or CYP2D6. The addition of itraconazole to ticlopidine did not modify the outcome of the drug interaction. Concomitant clinical use of ticlopidine and tramadol may enhance the risk of serotonergic effects, especially when higher doses of tramadol are used.
Abstract: PURPOSE: Tramadol is mainly metabolized by the cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2D6, CYP2B6 and CYP3A4 enzymes. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of enzyme induction with rifampicin on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of oral and intravenous tramadol. METHODS: This was a randomized placebo-controlled crossover study design with 12 healthy subjects. After pretreatment for 5 days with rifampicin (600 mg once daily) or placebo, subjects were given tramadol either 50 mg intravenously or 100 mg orally. Plasma concentrations of tramadol and its active main metabolite O-desmethyltramadol (M1) were determined over 48 h. Analgesic and behavioral effects and whole blood 5-hydroxytryptamine (5-HT) and 5-hydroxyindoleacetic acid (5-HIAA) concentrations were measured. RESULTS: Rifampicin reduced the mean area under the time-concentration curve (AUC0-∞) of intravenously administered tramadol by 43 % and that of M1 by 58 % (P < 0.001); it reduced the AUC0-∞ of oral tramadol by 59 % and that of M1 by 54 % (P < 0.001). Rifampicin increased the clearance of intravenous tramadol by 67 % (P < 0.001). Bioavailability of oral tramadol was reduced by rifampicin from 66 to 49 % (P = 0.002). The pharmacological effects of tramadol or whole blood serotonin concentrations were not influenced by pretreatment with rifampicin. CONCLUSIONS: Rifampicin markedly decreased the exposure to tramadol and M1 after both oral and intravenous administration. Therefore, rifampicin and other potent enzyme inducers may have a clinically important interaction with tramadol regardless of the route of its administration.
Abstract: BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Tramadol hydrochloride is used worldwide as an analgesic drug with a unique dual function. The metabolic enzymes cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4, CYP2B6, and CYP2D6 and the various transporters [adenosine triphosphate-binding cassette B1/multidrug resistance 1/P-glycoprotein, organic cation transporter 1, serotonin transporter (SERT), norepinephrine transporter (NET)] and receptor genes (opioid receptor μ 1 gene) give possible genetic differences that might affect the pharmacokinetics and/or pharmacodynamics of tramadol. Therefore, the aim of this review is to present a systematic walkthrough of all possible genetic factors involved in the pharmacology of tramadol. METHOD: A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed and EMBASE involving all metabolic enzymes, drug transporters and receptors, as well as SERT and NET that are involved in the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of tramadol. An additional search on population pharmacokinetics with genetic factors as covariates was performed separately. RESULTS: A total of 56 studies (45 cohort and case-control studies, three case reports, six in vitro studies, and two animal studies) were included. CONCLUSION: In this systematic review, the current knowledge on all possible genetic factors that might influence the metabolism or clinical efficacy of tramadol has been collected and summarized. Only the effect of CYP2D6 polymorphisms on the metabolism of tramadol and the consequent effect on pain relief has been thoroughly studied and sufficiently established as clinically relevant.
Abstract: UNLABELLED: In recent years, several cases of torsade de pointes have been associated with many opioids. However, to present no cases have been reported with tramadol. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of tramadol on QT-interval in the clinical setting. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Medical history and comorbidities predisposing to QT interval prolongation were registered for patients requiring medical assistance that involved tramadol administration. Ionograms and ECGs were performed at baseline and intratreatment; QT interval was analyzed after correction with Bazzet, Fridericia, Framinghan and Hogdes formula. RESULTS: 115 patients were studied (50.4% males) All patients had received tramadol 150-400 mg/day during 3.0-5.0 days at the moment of intratreatment control. Plasma concentrations of tramadol were 201-1613 ng/mL. Intratreatment electrocardiographic control, as mean ± SD (range), showed QTcB 372±32 (305 to 433), QTcFri 356±37 (281 to 429), QTcFra 363±33 (299 to 429), QTcH 362±30 (304 to 427), ΔQTcB 26±40 (-73 to 110), ΔQTcFri 24±48 (-97 to 121), ΔQTcFra 22±42 (-81 to 109) and .QTcH 22±38 (-68 to 110) ms. QTc interval presents high correlation with plasma tramadol concentrations (for .QTc, R>0.77). Renal failure was associated with a relative risk for ΔQTc > 30 ms of 1.90 (IC95% 1.31-2.74) and for ΔQTc > 60 ms of 4.74 (IC95% 2.57-8.74). No patient had evidence of arrhythmia during the present study. CONCLUSION: Tramadol produces QTc interval prolongation in good correlation with plasma drug concentrations; renal failure is a risk factor for higher concentration and QT prolongation by tramadol.
Abstract: We evaluated the effects of therapeutic and supratherapeutic doses of tramadol hydrochloride on the corrected QT (QTc) interval in healthy adults (aged 18-55 years) in a randomized, phase I, double-blind, placebo- and positive-controlled, multiple-dose, 4-way crossover study. Participants were randomized to receive 1 of 4 treatments (A-D), 1 each in 4 treatment periods (1-4), separated by a washout period (7-15 days). Treatment A comprised tramadol 400 mg (therapeutic dose) on days 1 through 3, tramadol 100 mg and moxifloxacin-matched placebo on day 4, and placebo on all 4 days. Treatment B comprised tramadol 600 mg (supratherapeutic dose) on days 1 through 3, and tramadol 150 mg and moxifloxacin-matched placebo on day 4. Treatment C comprised placebo on days 1 through 4 and moxifloxacin-matched placebo on day 4. Treatment D comprised placebo on days 1 through 4 and moxifloxacin 400 mg on day 4. Of 68 participants enrolled, 57 (83.8%) completed the study. Both therapeutic and supratherapeutic doses of tramadol were shown to be noninferior to placebo regarding their effect on QTc prolongation. Sixty-one of 68 (89.7%) participants reported at least 1 treatment-emergent adverse event (mild); nausea was the most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse event. Summarizing, tramadol at doses up to 600 mg/day did not cause clinically relevant QTc interval prolongation in healthy adults.
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: In pediatric PBPK models, age-related changes in the body are known to occur. Given the sparsity of and the variability associated with relevant physiological parameters, different PBPK software providers may vary in their system's data. In this work, three commercially available PBPK software packages (PK-Sim®, Simcyp®, and Gastroplus®) were investigated regarding their differences in system-related information, possibly affecting clearance prediction. Three retrograde PBPK clearance models were set up to enable prediction of pediatric tramadol clearance. These models were qualified in terms of total, CYP2D6, and renal clearance in adults. Tramadol pediatric clearance predictions from PBPK were compared with a pooled popPK model covering clearance ranging from neonates to adults. Fold prediction errors were used to evaluate the results. Marked differences in liver clearance prediction between PBPK models were observed. In general, the prediction bias of total clearance was greatest at the youngest population and decreased with age. Regarding CYP2D6 and renal clearance, important differences exist between PBPK software tools. Interestingly, the PBPK model with the shortest CYP2D6 maturation half-life (PK-Sim) agreed best with the in vivo CYP2D6 maturation model. Marked differences in physiological data explain the observed differences in hepatic clearance prediction in early life between the various PBPK software providers tested. Consensus on the most suited pediatric data to use should harmonize and optimize pediatric clearance predictions. Moreover, the combination of bottom-up and top-down approaches, using a convenient probe substrate, has the potential to update system-related parameters in order to better represent pediatric physiology.
Abstract: OBJECTIVE: To determine the risk of prolonged opioid use in patients receiving tramadol compared with other short acting opioids. DESIGN: Observational study of administrative claims data. SETTING: United States commercial and Medicare Advantage insurance claims (OptumLabs Data Warehouse) January 1, 2009 through June 30, 2018. PARTICIPANTS: Opioid-naive patients undergoing elective surgery. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Risk of persistent opioid use after discharge for patients treated with tramadol alone compared with other short acting opioids, using three commonly used definitions of prolonged opioid use from the literature: additional opioid use (defined as at least one opioid fill 90-180 days after surgery); persistent opioid use (any span of opioid use starting in the 180 days after surgery and lasting ≥90 days); and CONSORT definition (an opioid use episode starting in the 180 days after surgery that spans ≥90 days and includes either ≥10 opioid fills or ≥120 days' supply of opioids). RESULTS: Of 444 764 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 357 884 filled a discharge prescription for one or more opioids associated with one of 20 included operations. The most commonly prescribed post-surgery opioid was hydrocodone (53.0% of those filling a single opioid), followed by short acting oxycodone (37.5%) and tramadol (4.0%). The unadjusted risk of prolonged opioid use after surgery was 7.1% (n=31 431) with additional opioid use, 1.0% (n=4457) with persistent opioid use, and 0.5% (n=2027) meeting the CONSORT definition. Receipt of tramadol alone was associated with a 6% increase in the risk of additional opioid use relative to people receiving other short acting opioids (incidence rate ratio 95% confidence interval 1.00 to 1.13; risk difference 0.5 percentage points; P=0.049), 47% increase in the adjusted risk of persistent opioid use (1.25 to 1.69; 0.5 percentage points; P<0.001), and 41% increase in the adjusted risk of a CONSORT chronic opioid use episode (1.08 to 1.75; 0.2 percentage points; P=0.013). CONCLUSIONS: People receiving tramadol alone after surgery had similar to somewhat higher risks of prolonged opioid use compared with those receiving other short acting opioids. Federal governing bodies should consider reclassifying tramadol, and providers should use as much caution when prescribing tramadol in the setting of acute pain as for other short acting opioids.
Abstract: Genetic variants in the hepatic uptake transporter OCT1, observed in 9% of Europeans and white Americans, are known to affect pharmacokinetics and efficacy of tramadol, morphine, and codeine. Here, we report further opioids to be substrates and inhibitors of OCT1. Methylnaltrexone, hydromorphone, oxymorphone, and meptazinol were identified as OCT1 substrates. Methylnaltrexone is the strongest OCT1 substrate currently reported. It showed 86-fold higher accumulation in OCT1-overexpressing cells compared to control cells. We observed substantial differences in the inhibitory potency among structurally highly similar morphinan opioids (ICranged from 6.4 μM for dextrorphan to 2 mM for oxycodone). The ether linkage of C4-C5 in the morphinan ring leads to a strong reduction of inhibitory potency. In conclusion, although polyspecific, OCT1 possesses a strong selectivity for its ligands. In contrast to methylnaltrexone and hydromorphone, oxycodone and hydrocodone do not interact with OCT1 and may be safer for use in individuals with genetic OCT1 deficiency.