Avvisi di avvertenza
Estensione di tempo QT
Effetti avversi del farmaco
|Mal di testa|
Varianti ✨Per la valutazione computazionalmente intensiva delle varianti, scegli l'abbonamento standard a pagamento.
Aree di applicazione
Spiegazioni per i pazienti
Avvisi di avvertenza
Non abbiamo ulteriori avvertenze per la combinazione di cimetidina e nebivololo. Si prega di consultare anche le informazioni specialistiche pertinenti.
|Nebivololo||1.46 [0.44,8.8] 1||1.46|
I cambiamenti nell'esposizione menzionati si riferiscono ai cambiamenti nella curva concentrazione plasmatica-tempo [AUC]. Non abbiamo rilevato alcun cambiamento nell'esposizione alla cimetidina. Al momento non possiamo stimare l'influenza della nebivololo. L'esposizione alla nebivololo aumenta al 146%, se combinato con cimetidina (146%). L'AUC è compresa tra 44% e 880% a seconda del
I parametri farmacocinetici della popolazione media sono utilizzati come punto di partenza per il calcolo delle singole variazioni di esposizione dovute alle interazioni.
La cimetidina ha una biodisponibilità orale media [ F ] del 65%, motivo per cui i livelli plasmatici massimi [Cmax] tendono a cambiare con un'interazione. L'emivita terminale [ t12 ] è piuttosto breve a 1.6333333 ore e i livelli plasmatici costanti [ Css ] vengono raggiunti rapidamente. Il legame proteico [ Pb ] è molto debole al 19% e il volume di distribuzione [ Vd ] è molto grande a 91 litri. Il metabolismo non avviene tramite i comuni citocromi e il trasporto attivo avviene in parte tramite BCRP e PGP.
La nebivololo ha una bassa biodisponibilità orale [ F ] del 12%, motivo per cui il livello plasmatico massimo [Cmax] tende a cambiare fortemente con un'interazione. L'emivita terminale [ t12 ] è di 16.3 ore e i livelli plasmatici costanti [ Css ] vengono raggiunti dopo circa 65.2 ore. Il legame proteico [ Pb ] è forte al 98% e il volume di distribuzione [ Vd ] è molto grande a 1939 litri, tuttavia, poiché la sostanza ha un'elevata velocità di estrazione epatica pari a 0,9, sono rilevanti solo i cambiamenti nel flusso sanguigno epatico [Q]. Il metabolismo avviene principalmente tramite CYP2D6.
|Effetti serotoninergici a||0||Ø||Ø|
Valutazione: Secondo le nostre conoscenze, né la cimetidina né la nebivololo aumentano l'attività serotoninergica.
|Kiesel & Durán b||1||+||Ø|
Raccomandazione: A scopo precauzionale, occorre prestare attenzione ai sintomi anticolinergici, soprattutto dopo aver aumentato la dose ea dosi nel range terapeutico superiore.
Valutazione: La cimetidina ha solo un lieve effetto sul sistema anticolinergico. Il rischio di sindrome anticolinergica con questo farmaco è piuttosto basso se il dosaggio è nel range usuale. Secondo i nostri risultati, la nebivololo non aumenta l'attività anticolinergica.
Estensione di tempo QT
Raccomandazione: Assicurati che i fattori di rischio influenzabili siano ridotti al minimo. Disturbi elettrolitici come bassi livelli di calcio, potassio e magnesio devono essere compensati. Deve essere utilizzata la dose minima efficace di cimetidina.
Valutazione: La cimetidina può potenzialmente prolungare il tempo dell'intervallo QT e in presenza di fattori di rischio, possono essere preferite le aritmie di tipo torsioni di punta. Non conosciamo alcun potenziale di prolungamento dell'intervallo QT per la nebivololo.
Effetti collaterali generali
|Effetti collaterali||∑ frequenza||cim||neb|
|Mal di testa||7.5 %||n.a.||7.5|
Blocco atrioventricolare: nebivololo
Sulla base delle vostre
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: Nebivolol is a new selective beta 1-adrenergic blocking agent, that possesses a peculiar pharmacodynamic profile and an original chemical structure, by which it differs from traditional beta 1-blockers. Nebivolol is a racemic mixture of two enantiomers in equal ratios. It is endowed with a highly selective beta 1-blocking activity, and does not show an intrinsic sympathomimetic activity. Nebivolol is endowed with peripheral vasodilating properties mediated by the modulation of the endogenous production of nitric oxide. It does not significantly decrease airway conductance compared with atenolol and propranolol. Nebivolol does not compromise the left ventricular function, but it may increase stroke volume, and does not reduce heart inotropism during exertion. Nebivolol is quite safe and is well tolerated, also when compared to traditional beta-blockers. The most common adverse effects are dizziness, headache and fatigue. Owing to its combined dual mechanism of action, nebivolol leads to a unique haemodynamic and therapeutic profile by which it may be advantageous in essential hypertension, ischaemic heart disease and congestive heart failure.
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: 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: Drug interactions are a significant clinical concern, particularly in patients with conditions such as heart disease and hypertension, in whom coadministration of multiple drugs is common. Nebivolol is a selective β(1)-blocker with vasodilatory properties approved for the treatment of hypertension. Drug-drug interactions were investigated when nebivolol was coadministered to subjects classified as poor CYP2D6 metabolizers and extensive CYP2D6 metabolizers who were receiving other drugs commonly administered to patients with hypertension or compounds metabolized by cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2D6. There were no drug-drug interactions when nebivolol was coadministered with hydrochlorothiazide, furosemide, ramipril, losartan, digoxin, or warfarin. Coadministration with fluoxetine (also metabolized by CYP2D6) in extensive CYP2D6 metabolizers impeded the apparent clearance of nebivolol. The authors conclude that nebivolol is safe and well tolerated regardless of genotype and type of medication coadministered.
Abstract: WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: Nebivolol is a highly selective beta-blocker with additional vasodilator properties, widely used in the clinical practice for the treatment of hypertension and heart failure. Paroxetine is a second-generation antidepressant and a potent inhibitor of CYP2D6, the same isoenzyme involved in the metabolism of nebivolol. The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of multiple-dose paroxetine intake on the pharmacokinetics of nebivolol in healthy volunteers and its potential consequences upon nebivolol pharmacodynamics. METHODS: The study included 23 healthy subjects and was designed as an open-label, single-centre, non-randomized, two-period clinical trial. During period 1 (reference), each volunteer received a single dose of 5 mg nebivolol, whereas during period 2 (test), each volunteer received a single dose of 5 mg nebivolol and 20 mg paroxetine, after a pretreatment regimen with paroxetine (20-40 mg/day for 6 days). The pharmacokinetic parameters of nebivolol and its active metabolite were analysed by non-compartmental modelling. The pharmacodynamic parameters (blood pressure and heart rate) were assessed at rest, after each nebivolol intake. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Pretreatment with paroxetine increased the mean peak plasma concentrations (Cmax ) for unchanged nebivolol (1·78 ± 1·17 vs. 4·24 ± 1·67 ng/mL) and for its active metabolite (0·58 ± 0·21 vs. 0·79 ± 0·24 ng/mL) compared to nebivolol alone. The time (tmax ) to reach Cmax was 1·37 ± 0·88 (h) and 3·11 ± 1·76 (h) for the parent compound and its active metabolite after nebivolol administered alone and 3·96 ± 1·76 (h), respectively, 7·33 ± 7·84 (h) after pretreatment with paroxetine. Also, the total areas under the curve (AUC0-∞ ) were significantly increased from 17·26 ± 43·06 to 106·20 ± 65·56 h ng/mL for nebivolol unchanged and 13·03 ± 11·29 to 74·56 ± 88·77 h ng/mL for its hydroxylated metabolite, before and after paroxetine intake. All the pharmacokinetic parameters presented statistically significant differences when paroxetine was administered with nebivolol. Nonetheless, statistical analysis did not show a significant difference between the vital signs measured during the two periods. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: After pretreatment with paroxetine, the exposure to nebivolol was increased by 6·1-fold for the parent drug and 5·7-fold for the hydroxylated active metabolite. Paroxetine influenced nebivolol pharmacokinetics in healthy volunteers, but it did not have a significant effect on nebivolol pharmacodynamic parameters measured at rest, although the clinical relevance of this drug interaction needs further investigation.
Abstract: Combining different classes of antihypertensives is more effective for reducing blood pressure (BP) than increasing the dose of monotherapies. The aims of this phase I study were to investigate pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions between nebivolol, a vasodilatory β1-selective blocker, and valsartan, an angiotensin II receptor blocker, and to assess safety and tolerability of the combination. This was a single-center, randomized, open-label, multiple-dose, 3-way crossover trial in 30 healthy adults aged 18-45 years. Participants were randomized into 1 of 6 treatment sequences (1:1:1:1:1:1) consisting of three 7-day treatment periods followed by a 7-day washout. Once-daily oral treatments comprised nebivolol (20 mg), valsartan (320 mg), and nebivolol-valsartan combination (20/320 mg). Outcomes included AUC0-τ,ss, Cmax,ss, Tmax,ss, changes in BP, pulse rate, plasma angiotensin II, plasma renin activity, 24-hour urinary aldosterone, and adverse events. Steady-state pharmacokinetic interactions were observed but deemed not clinically significant. Systolic and diastolic BP reduction was significantly greater with nebivolol-valsartan combination than with either monotherapy. The mean pulse rate associated with nebivolol and nebivolol-valsartan treatments was consistently lower than that associated with valsartan monotherapy. A sharp increase in mean day 7 plasma renin activity and plasma angiotensin II that occurred in valsartan-treated participants was significantly attenuated with concomitant nebivolol administration. Mean 24-hour urine aldosterone at day 7 was substantially decreased after combined treatment, as compared with either monotherapy. All treatments were safe and well tolerated. In conclusion, nebivolol and valsartan coadministration led to greater reductions in BP compared with either monotherapy; nebivolol and valsartan lower BP through complementary mechanisms.
Abstract: Transporters in proximal renal tubules contribute to the disposition of numerous drugs. Furthermore, the molecular mechanisms of tubular secretion have been progressively elucidated during the past decades. Organic anions tend to be secreted by the transport proteins OAT1, OAT3 and OATP4C1 on the basolateral side of tubular cells, and multidrug resistance protein (MRP) 2, MRP4, OATP1A2 and breast cancer resistance protein (BCRP) on the apical side. Organic cations are secreted by organic cation transporter (OCT) 2 on the basolateral side, and multidrug and toxic compound extrusion (MATE) proteins MATE1, MATE2/2-K, P-glycoprotein, organic cation and carnitine transporter (OCTN) 1 and OCTN2 on the apical side. Significant drug-drug interactions (DDIs) may affect any of these transporters, altering the clearance and, consequently, the efficacy and/or toxicity of substrate drugs. Interactions at the level of basolateral transporters typically decrease the clearance of the victim drug, causing higher systemic exposure. Interactions at the apical level can also lower drug clearance, but may be associated with higher renal toxicity, due to intracellular accumulation. Whereas the importance of glomerular filtration in drug disposition is largely appreciated among clinicians, DDIs involving renal transporters are less well recognized. This review summarizes current knowledge on the roles, quantitative importance and clinical relevance of these transporters in drug therapy. It proposes an approach based on substrate-inhibitor associations for predicting potential tubular-based DDIs and preventing their adverse consequences. We provide a comprehensive list of known drug interactions with renally-expressed transporters. While many of these interactions have limited clinical consequences, some involving high-risk drugs (e.g. methotrexate) definitely deserve the attention of prescribers.
Abstract: PURPOSE: To investigate whether fluvoxamine coadministration can influence the pharmacokinetic properties of nebivolol and its active hydroxylated metabolite (4-OH-nebivolol) and to assess the consequences of this potential pharmacokinetic interaction upon nebivolol pharmacodynamics. METHODS: This open-label, non-randomized, sequential clinical trial consisted of two periods: Period 1 (Reference), during which each volunteer received a single dose of 5 mg nebivolol and Period 2 (Test), when a combination of 5 mg nebivolol and 100 mg fluvoxamine was given to all subjects, after a 6-days pretreatment regimen with fluvoxamine (50-100 mg/day). Non-compartmental analysis was used to determine the pharmacokinetic parameters of nebivolol and its active metabolite. The pharmacodynamic parameters (blood pressure and heart rate) were assessed at rest after each nebivolol intake, during both study periods. RESULTS: Fluvoxamine pretreatment increased Cmax and AUC0-∞ of nebivolol (Cmax: 1.67 ± 0.690 vs 2.20 ± 0.970 ng/mL; AUC0-∞: 12.1 ± 11.0 vs 19.3 ± 19.5 ng*h/mL ) and of its active metabolite (Cmax: 0.680 ± 0.220 vs 0.960 ± 0.290 ng/mL; AUC0-∞: 17.6 ±20.1 vs 25.5 ± 29.9 ng*h/mL). Apart from Cmax,AUC0-t and AUC0-∞, the other pharmacokinetic parameters (tmax, kel and t½) were not significantly different between study periods. As for the pharmacodynamic analysis, decreases in blood pressure and heart rate after nebivolol administration were similar with and without fluvoxamine concomitant intake. CONCLUSIONS: Due to enzymatic inhibition, fluvoxamine increases the exposure to nebivolol and its active hydroxylated metabolite in healthy volunteers. This did not influence the blood pressure and heart-rate lowering effects of the beta-blocker administered as single-dose. However, more detail studies involving actual patients are required to further investigate the clinical relevance of this drug interaction. This article is open to POST-PUBLICATION REVIEW. Registered readers (see "For Readers") may comment by clicking on ABSTRACT on the issue's contents page.