Intervallo QT lungo
Reazione avversa da farmaco (ADR)
Varianti ✨Per l'analisi computazionale dettagliata delle varianti, si prega di selezionare l'abbonamento standard a pagamento.
Informazioni dei farmaci per i pazienti
Non abbiamo ulteriori avvertenze per la co-somministrazione di lopinavir e voriconazolo. Si prega di consultare le informazioni specialistiche pertinenti.
I cambiamenti riportati in seguito all'esposizione corrispondono ai cambiamenti nell'area sottesa alla curva concentrazione plasmatica-tempo [ AUC ]. Non è stato possibile rilevare nessun tipo di cambiamento nell'esposizione alla lopinavir. Allo stato attuale non è possibile valutare come influisce la voriconazolo. Non è stato possibile rilevare nessun tipo di cambiamento nell'esposizione alla voriconazolo. Allo stato attuale non è possibile valutare come influisce la lopinavir.
I parametri farmacocinetici della popolazione media sono utilizzati come punto di partenza per calcolare i cambiamenti del singolo individuo esposto alle interazioni farmacologiche
La biodisponibilità della lopinavir non è nota. Il legame con le proteine [ Pb ] non è noto. Il metabolismo avviene principalmente attraverso l'enzima CYP3A4 e il trasporto attivo avviene in particolare attraverso i trasportatori PGP e TRA8X8.
La voriconazolo ha un elevata biodisponibilità [ F ] orale pari al 88%, perciò nel corso di un'interazione farmacologica la concentrazione plasmatica massima [Cmax] tende a cambiare di poco. L'emivita [ t12 ] del farmaco è piuttosto breve in 6 ore e lo stato stazionario [Css] si raggiunge molto velocemente. Il legame proteico [ Pb ] è piuttosto debole al 58% e il volume di distribuzione [ Vd ] è molto grande in 90 litri, Dato che il farmaco ha un basso tasso di estrazione epatico, lo spiazzamento del legame alle proteine plasmatiche [Pb] porta ad un aumento all'esposizione farmacologica. Tra l'altro, il metabolismo avviene rispettivamente attraverso gli enzimi CYP2C19, CYP2C9 e CYP3A4..
|Effetti serotoninergici a||0||Ø||Ø|
Valutazione: Sulla base dei dati a nostra disposizione, né la lopinavir né la voriconazolo potenziano l'attività serotoninergica.
|Kiesel & Durán b||0||Ø||Ø|
Valutazione: Sulla base dei dati a nostra disposizione, né la lopinavir né la voriconazolo causano un aumento dell'attività anticolinergica.
Intervallo QT lungo
Valutazione: La co-somministrazione di lopinavir e voriconazolo potrebbe causare tachicardia ventricolare a torsione di punta.
Effetti collaterali generali
|Effetti collaterali||∑ frequenza||lop||vor|
|Visione offuscata||26.0 %||n.a.||26.0|
|Dolore addominale||12.0 %||n.a.||12.0|
|Eruzione cutanea||7.0 %||n.a.||7.0|
Epatite colestatica (4.9%): voriconazolo
Epatotossicità (1.9%): voriconazolo
Ittero (1.9%): voriconazolo
Insufficienza epatica (1.9%): voriconazolo
Vomito (4.4%): voriconazolo
Diarrea (1.9%): voriconazolo
Mal di testa (3%): voriconazolo
Edema periferico (1.9%): voriconazolo
Eritema multiforme (1.9%): voriconazolo
Melanoma maligno (1.9%): voriconazolo
Carcinoma spinocellulare (1.9%): voriconazolo
Sindrome di Stevens Johnson (1.9%): voriconazolo
Necrolisi epidermica tossica (1.9%): voriconazolo
Neurite ottica: voriconazolo
Insufficienza renale: voriconazolo
Abbiamo valutato il rischio individuale di effetti indesiderati in base alle risposte fornite ed alle informazioni scientifiche disponibili. Le informazioni contenute nel sito hanno esclusivamente scopo informativo e non sostituiscono il parere del medico. Si accomanda pertanto di chiedere sempre il parere del proprio medico curante e/o di specialisti riguardo qualsiasi indicazione riportata. Nella versione alpha test, il rischio di tutti i farmaci non è stato ancora completamente valutato.
Abstract: No Abstract available
Abstract: This review presents the published clinical pharmacokinetic data for the antifungal agent voriconazole. Aspects regarding absorption, tissue distribution, elimination and kinetic interactions are also discussed.
Abstract: Voriconazole is the first available second-generation triazole with potent activity against a broad spectrum of clinically significant fungal pathogens, including Aspergillus,Candida, Cryptococcus neoformans, and some less common moulds. Voriconazole is rapidly absorbed within 2 hours after oral administration and the oral bioavailability is over 90%, thus allowing switching between oral and intravenous formulations when clinically appropriate. Voriconazole shows nonlinear pharmacokinetics due to its capacity-limited elimination, and its pharmacokinetics are therefore dependent upon the administered dose. With increasing dose, voriconazole shows a superproportional increase in area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC). In doses used in children (age < 12 years) voriconazole pharmacokinetics appear to be linear. Steady-state plasma concentrations are reached approximately 5 days after both intravenous and oral administration; however, steady state is reached within 24 hours with voriconazole administered as an intravenous loading dose. The volume of distribution of voriconazole is 2-4.6 L/kg, suggesting extensive distribution into extracellular and intracellular compartments. Voriconazole was measured in tissue samples of brain, liver, kidney, heart, lung as well as cerebrospinal fluid. The plasma protein binding is about 60% and independent of dose or plasma concentrations. Clearance is hepatic via N-oxidation by the hepatic cytochrome P450 (CYP) isoenzymes, CYP2C19, CYP2C9 and CYP3A4. The elimination half-life of voriconazole is approximately 6 hours, and approximately 80% of the total dose is recovered in the urine, almost completely as metabolites. As with other azole drugs, the potential for drug interactions is considerable. Voriconazole shows time-dependent fungistatic activity against Candida species and time-dependent slow fungicidal activity against Aspergillus species. A short post-antifungal effect of voriconazole is evident only for Aspergillus species. The predictive pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic parameter for voriconazole treatment efficacy in Candida infections is the free drug AUC from 0 to 24 hour : minimum inhibitory concentration ratio.
Abstract: We describe 2 patients who developed prolonged QTc interval on electrocardiogram while being treated with voriconazole. The first patient had undergone induction chemotherapy for acute myelogenous leukemia, and her course had been complicated by invasive aspergillosis and an acute cardiomyopathy. She developed torsades de pointes 3 weeks after starting voriconazole therapy. She was re-challenged with voriconazole without recurrent QTc prolongation or cardiac dysfunction. The second patient had a significantly prolonged QTc interval while on voriconazole therapy. We recommend careful monitoring for QTc prolongation and arrhythmia in patients who are receiving voriconazole, particularly those who have significant electrolyte disturbances, are on concomitant QT prolonging medications, have heart failure such as from a dilated cardiomyopathy, or have recently received anthracycline-based chemotherapy. The potential for synergistic cardiotoxicity must be carefully considered.
Abstract: On the basis of a single clinical trial in first-line treatment, the atazanavir and ritonavir combination appears to be no more effective than the fixed-dose combination of lopinavir and ritonavir. The adverse effect profiles were slightly different, but atazanavir carries a troubling risk of torsades de pointes.
Abstract: The objective of this study was to evaluate the pharmacokinetics of voriconazole and the potential correlations between pharmacokinetic parameters and patient variables in liver transplant patients on a fixed-dose prophylactic regimen. Multiple blood samples were collected within one dosing interval from 15 patients who were initiated on a prophylactic regimen of voriconazole at 200 mg enterally (tablets) twice daily starting immediately posttransplant. Voriconazole plasma concentrations were measured using high-pressure liquid chromatography (HPLC). Noncompartmental pharmacokinetic analysis was performed to estimate pharmacokinetic parameters. The mean apparent systemic clearance over bioavailability (CL/F), apparent steady-state volume of distribution over bioavailability (Vss/F), and half-life (t1/2) were 5.8+/-5.5 liters/h, 94.5+/-54.9 liters, and 15.7+/-7.0 h, respectively. There was a good correlation between the area under the concentration-time curve from 0 h to infinity (AUC0-infinity) and trough voriconazole plasma concentrations. t1/2, maximum drug concentration in plasma (Cmax), trough level, AUC0-infinity, area under the first moment of the concentration-time curve from 0 h to infinity (AUMC0-infinity), and mean residence time from 0 h to infinity (MRT0-infinity) were significantly correlated with postoperative time. t1/2, lambda, AUC0-infinity, and CL/F were significantly correlated with indices of liver function (aspartate transaminase [AST], total bilirubin, and international normalized ratio [INR]). The Cmax, last concentration in plasma at 12 h (Clast), AUMC0-infinity, and MRT0-infinity were significantly lower in the presence of deficient CYP2C19*2 alleles. Donor characteristics had no significant correlation with any of the pharmacokinetic parameters estimated. A fixed dosing regimen of voriconazole results in a highly variable exposure of voriconazole in liver transplant patients. Given that trough voriconazole concentration is a good measure of drug exposure (AUC), the voriconazole dose can be individualized based on trough concentration measurements in liver transplant patients.
Abstract: BACKGROUND: Drug-induced torsades de pointes (TdP) is a complex regulatory and clinical problem due to the rarity of this sometimes fatal adverse event. In this context, the US FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (AERS) is an important source of information, which can be applied to the analysis of TdP liability of marketed drugs. OBJECTIVE: To critically evaluate the risk of antimicrobial-induced TdP by detecting alert signals in the AERS, on the basis of both quantitative and qualitative analyses. METHODS: Reports of TdP from January 2004 through December 2008 were retrieved from the public version of the AERS. The absolute number of cases and reporting odds ratio as a measure of disproportionality were evaluated for each antimicrobial drug (quantitative approach). A list of drugs with suspected TdP liability (provided by the Arizona Centre of Education and Research on Therapeutics [CERT]) was used as a reference to define signals. In a further analysis, to refine signal detection, we identified TdP cases without co-medications listed by Arizona CERT (qualitative approach). RESULTS: Over the 5-year period, 374 reports of TdP were retrieved: 28 antibacterials, 8 antifungals, 1 antileprosy and 26 antivirals were involved. Antimicrobials more frequently reported were levofloxacin (55) and moxifloxacin (37) among the antibacterials, fluconazole (47) and voriconazole (17) among the antifungals, and lamivudine (8) and nelfinavir (6) among the antivirals. A significant disproportionality was observed for 17 compounds, including several macrolides, fluoroquinolones, linezolid, triazole antifungals, caspofungin, indinavir and nelfinavir. With the qualitative approach, we identified the following additional drugs or fixed dose combinations, characterized by at least two TdP cases without co-medications listed by Arizona CERT: ceftriaxone, piperacillin/tazobactam, cotrimoxazole, metronidazole, ribavirin, lamivudine and lopinavir/ritonavir. DISCUSSION: Disproportionality for macrolides, fluoroquinolones and most of the azole antifungals should be viewed as 'expected' according to Arizona CERT list. By contrast, signals were generated by linezolid, caspofungin, posaconazole, indinavir and nelfinavir. Drugs detected only by the qualitative approach should be further investigated by increasing the sensitivity of the method, e.g. by searching also for the TdP surrogate marker, prolongation of the QT interval. CONCLUSIONS: The freely available version of the FDA AERS database represents an important source to detect signals of TdP. In particular, our analysis generated five signals among antimicrobials for which further investigations and active surveillance are warranted. These signals should be considered in evaluating the benefit-risk profile of these drugs.
Abstract: No Abstract available
Abstract: The accurate estimation of "in vivo" inhibition constants () of inhibitors and fraction metabolized () of substrates is highly important for drug-drug interaction (DDI) prediction based on physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) models. We hypothesized that analysis of the pharmacokinetic alterations of substrate metabolites in addition to the parent drug would enable accurate estimation of in vivoandTwenty-four pharmacokinetic DDIs caused by P450 inhibition were analyzed with PBPK models using an emerging parameter estimation method, the cluster Newton method, which enables efficient estimation of a large number of parameters to describe the pharmacokinetics of parent and metabolized drugs. For each DDI, two analyses were conducted (with or without substrate metabolite data), and the parameter estimates were compared with each other. In 17 out of 24 cases, inclusion of substrate metabolite information in PBPK analysis improved the reliability of bothandImportantly, the estimatedfor the same inhibitor from different DDI studies was generally consistent, suggesting that the estimatedfrom one study can be reliably used for the prediction of untested DDI cases with different victim drugs. Furthermore, a large discrepancy was observed between the reported in vitroand the in vitro estimates for some inhibitors, and the current in vivoestimates might be used as reference values when optimizing in vitro-in vivo extrapolation strategies. These results demonstrated that better use of substrate metabolite information in PBPK analysis of clinical DDI data can improve reliability of top-down parameter estimation and prediction of untested DDIs.