Efficacy and tolerability of lovastatin in 459 African-Americans with hypercholesterolemia.

A paucity of substantive data from clinical drug trials is available specifically evaluating the effects of therapy for hypercholesterolemia in African-Americans, even though a substantial number are candidates for medical advice and intervention for high blood cholesterol. The efficacy and safety of lovastatin in 459 African-Americans with hypercholesterolemia were studied in the Expanded Clinical Evaluation of Lovastatin study, a multicenter, double-blind, diet- and placebo-controlled trial. This trial involved 8,245 patients who were randomly assigned, regardless of race, to receive placebo or lovastatin at doses of 20 mg once daily, 40 mg once daily, 20 mg twice daily, or 40 mg twice daily for 48 weeks. Among African-Americans, lovastatin produced sustained, dose-related (p <0.001) decreases in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (20% to 38%), total cholesterol (14% to 28%), and triglycerides (8% to 15%). From 75% to 96% of African-Americans treated with lovastatin achieved the National Cholesterol Education Program goal of low-density lipoprotien cholesterol <160 mg/di, and from 33% to 71% achieved the goal <130 mg/di. The safety profile of lovastotin in African-Americans was generally favorable. A relatively high incidence of creatine kinase levels greater than the upper limit of normal was observed in African-Americans during the study, i.e., 63% in the placebo group and similar levels in lovastatin treatment groups. Lovastatin is highly effective and generally well tolerated as therapy for primary hypercholesterolemia in African-Americans.

Expanded Clinical Evaluation of Lovastatin (EXCEL) study results: two-year efficacy and safety follow-up.

The Expanded Clinical Evaluation of Lovastatin study, a randomized, double-blind, placebo- and diet-controlled multicenter trial, evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of lovastatin over 48 weeks in 8,245 patients with moderately severe hypercholesterolemia. During year 1 of follow-up of the full cohort, lovastatin at 20 or 40 mg/day, or 20 or 40 mg twice daily, produced dose-dependent decreases in low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol (24% to 40%) and triglyceride levels (10% to 19%), and increases in high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol (6.6% to 9.5%). In all, 977 patients continued their original blinded treatment for an additional year. In year 2, the LDL cholesterol response to lovastatin was maintained, the triglyceride reductions were somewhat less, and the increases in HDL cholesterol were moderately greater than in year 1. Successive transaminase elevations > 3 times the upper limit of normal were observed in only 1 patient in year 2, yielding a cumulative 2-year incidence of from 0.1% (placebo or lovastatin 20 mg/day) to 1.9% (lovastatin 80 mg/day). Myopathy occurred in only 1 patient during year 2, and over the 2-year study was observed rarely and only at lovastatin dosages of 40 and 80 mg/day. This study indicates that lovastatin maintains its efficacy over long-term follow-up, particularly in effectively lowering LDL cholesterol, is generally well tolerated, and has a favorable safety profile.

Efficacy and tolerability of lovastatin in 3390 women with moderate hypercholesterolemia.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of lovastatin in women with moderate hypercholesterolemia. DESIGN: The Expanded Clinical Evaluation of Lovastatin (EXCEL) Study, a multicenter, double-blind, diet- and placebo-controlled trial, in which participants were randomly assigned to receive placebo or lovastatin at doses of 20 or 40 mg once daily, or 20 or 40 mg twice daily for 48 weeks. SETTING: Ambulatory patients recruited by 362 participating centers throughout the United States. PATIENTS: Women (n = 3390) from the total cohort of 8245 volunteers. MEASUREMENTS: Plasma total, low-density lipoprotein (LDL), and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, and triglycerides; and laboratory and clinical evidence of adverse events monitored periodically throughout the study. RESULTS: Among women, lovastatin (20 to 80 mg/d) produced sustained (12- to 48-week), dose-related changes (P < 0.001): decreases in LDL cholesterol (24% to 40%) and triglycerides (9% to 18%), and increases in HDL cholesterol (6.7% to 8.6%). Depending on the dose, from 82% to 95% of lovastatin-treated women achieved the National Cholesterol Education Program goal of LDL cholesterol levels less than 4.14 mmol/L (160 mg/dL), and 40% to 87% achieved the goal of 3.36 mmol/L (130 mg/dL). Successive transaminase elevations greater than three times the upper limit of normal occurred in 0.1% of women and were dose dependent above the 20-mg dose. Myopathy, defined as muscle symptoms with creatine kinase elevations greater than 10 times the upper limit of normal, was rare and associated with the highest recommended daily dose of lovastatin (80 mg). Estrogen-replacement therapy appeared to have no effect on either the efficacy or safety profile of lovastatin. CONCLUSION: Lovastatin is highly effective and generally well tolerated as therapy for primary hypercholesterolemia in women.

Expanded Clinical Evaluation of Lovastatin (EXCEL) study results. Effect of patient characteristics on lovastatin-induced changes in plasma concentrations of lipids and lipoproteins.

BACKGROUND: Lovastatin produces consistent dose-related reductions in plasma levels of low density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol along with variable decreases in triglycerides and increases in high density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol. Patient characteristics from the Expanded Clinical Evaluation of Lovastatin (EXCEL) study were examined to determine their association with the magnitude of lovastatin-induced changes in these lipids and lipoproteins. METHODS AND RESULTS: After a baseline period consisting of dietary therapy, 8,245 patients with moderate hypercholesterolemia were randomized to five groups that received 48 weeks of treatment with either placebo or daily doses of lovastatin ranging from 20 to 80 mg. By use of linear statistical models, 20 different patient characteristics were examined for modification of the dose-dependent responses observed. For LDL cholesterol, the following were associated with enhanced lowering (p less than 0.05; percent changes are placebo-corrected, adjusted mean changes from baseline for the 80-mg/day lovastatin group): full drug compliance (-41.9%) versus 80% compliance (-20.3%); an age of 65 (-43.4%) versus 45 years (-38.1%) for women; white race (-40.9%) versus black race (-38.0%); and 4.5-kg weight gain (-42.6%) versus 4.5-kg weight loss (-37.9%). Similar relations for enhanced triglyceride lowering were found with older age and weight gain. Patients with initially low HDL cholesterol (less than 0.91 mmol/l) and high triglycerides (greater than 2.26 mmol/l) had enhanced responses for these parameters: placebo-corrected percent changes at 80 mg/day were -27.4% for triglycerides and +12.3% for HDL cholesterol. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, patient characteristics had very little impact of clinical importance on the dose-dependent LDL cholesterol lowering found with lovastatin. In patients with initially high levels of triglycerides and low levels of HDL cholesterol, the elevation of HDL cholesterol produced by lovastatin appears to be enhanced.

Lovastatin and coadministered antihypertensive/cardiovascular agents.

Hypertension and hypercholesterolemia frequently coexist and may require concomitant drug treatments. The efficacy and safety profile of lovastatin given in the presence of antihypertensive medication was evaluated using patient subgroups identified in the Expanded Clinical Evaluation of Lovastatin (EXCEL) Study. The EXCEL study examined 8,245 patients with moderate hypercholesterolemia randomly assigned either to a group treated with lovastatin (20-80 mg daily) or to a group given placebo for 48 weeks. After adjustment for patient characteristics, pairwise comparisons were made between patients taking no antihypertensive agents (n = 3,772) and those taking either calcium antagonists (n = 446), selective beta 1-adrenergic receptor blockers (n = 326), nonselective beta-adrenergic receptor blockers (n = 219), potassium-sparing diuretics (n = 187), thiazide diuretics (n = 126), or angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (n = 171). The placebo-corrected dose-dependent effect of lovastatin on the percent change from baseline in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol was not attenuated in any subgroup and was slightly enhanced in the calcium antagonist subgroup (-29% to -44%, p = 0.06) when compared with patients taking no antihypertensive agents (-24% to -40%); this difference, however, was only of borderline significance. Patterns of lovastatin-induced increase in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and decrease in triglycerides were not consistently different among the subgroups. Examination of mean changes in serum transaminases, mean changes in creatine kinase, and the proportion of patients discontinuing therapy for clinical adverse experiences did not indicate the presence of an interaction.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

Expanded clinical evaluation of lovastatin (EXCEL) study results: III. Efficacy in modifying lipoproteins and implications for managing patients with moderate hypercholesterolemia.

In the multicenter, double-blind EXCEL (Expanded Clinical Evaluation of Lovastatin) study the efficacy of lovastatin in modifying plasma lipids and lipoproteins in 8,245 participants with moderate primary hypercholesterolemia was evaluated. Patients were randomly assigned to 48 weeks of treatment with diet and placebo or diet and lovastatin 20 or 40 mg once a day, or 20 or 40 mg twice a day. At all of these dosages, lovastatin produced substantial dose-dependent reductions in low-density-lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol levels, averaging 24% (20 mg/day) to 40% (80 mg/day). The magnitude of the effect of this lipoprotein was further reflected by the percentage of patients who achieved National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) goals. In the absence of coronary artery disease (CAD) or two other CAD risk factors, the LDL-cholesterol goal of 4.14 mmol/L (160 mg/dL) was attained by 22% of patients in the placebo group and between 81% (20 mg/day) and 96% (80 mg/day) of those treated with lovastatin. For those with CAD or at least two other CAD risk factors, the LDL-cholesterol goal of 3.36 mmol/L (130 mg/dL) was attained by 4% of placebo patients and between 38% (20 mg/day) and 83% (80 mg/day) of those treated with lovastatin. Lovastatin also increased high-density-lipoprotein cholesterol (7-10%) and decreased triglycerides (10-19%) in a dose-dependent manner. Thus, when used as an adjunct to a prudent diet, lovastatin produces favorable changes in the entire lipoprotein profile and is a highly effective agent for managing patients with primary hypercholesterolemia.

Expanded clinical evaluation of lovastatin (EXCEL) study results: IV. Additional perspectives on the tolerability of lovastatin.

This randomized, double-blind, multicenter, diet-and-placebo-controlled study was designed to clarify the dose-response relationship of lovastatin therapy to lipid-modifying efficacy and drug-related adverse events. Exclusion criteria were minimized so that study patients were representative of the majority of patients with moderate hypercholesterolemia seen in medical practice. After 6 weeks on the American Heart Association Step 1 Diet, a total of 8,245 patients were randomly assigned to 48 weeks of treatment with diet and placebo or lovastatin at dosages of 20 or 40 mg once a day or 20 or 40 mg twice a day. All adverse events were monitored, with particular attention to evaluation of liver and muscle. Liver transaminase elevations suggestive of possible hepatotoxicity, defined as successive elevations in either aspartate transaminase or alanine aminotransferase greater than 3 times the upper limit of normal, occurred in equal numbers of placebo and lovastatin 20 mg/day treated patients (0.1%). The frequencies were higher in lovastatin 40 mg/day and 80 mg/day patient groups (0.9 and 1.5%, respectively). No patient was diagnosed as having clinically symptomatic hepatic dysfunction. Creatinine kinase (CK) elevations above the upper limit of normal occurred frequently in placebo- (29%), as well as lovastatin-treated patients (29-35%), and muscle symptoms were reported with similar frequency in all groups (7-9%). The combination of muscle symptoms with marked CK elevations (greater than 10 times the upper limit of normal) was seen in only five patients: one in a 40 mg/day dose group and four in the 80 mg/day dose group. No patient developed rhabdomyolysis. The incidence of clinical and laboratory adverse events requiring discontinuation was 6% for the placebo group and from 7% (20 mg/day) to 9% (80 mg/day) for lovastatin treatment groups. No new types of adverse experiences related to lovastatin treatment were reported. Lovastatin, as an adjunct to diet for the reduction of elevated LDL cholesterol, was generally very well tolerated.

Expanded clinical evaluation of lovastatin (EXCEL) study results. II. Assessment of the human lens after 48 weeks of treatment with lovastatin.

The crystalline lenses of hypercholesterolemic patients were assessed before and after 48 weeks of treatment with lovastatin or placebo to determine the effect of lovastatin on the human lens. Patients were given a biomicroscopic (slit-lamp) examination of the lens, and a previously validated, standardized classification system was used to describe the findings. A total of 8,245 patients were randomly assigned in equal numbers to treatment with placebo or lovastatin 20 or 40 mg once or twice daily in this double-blind, parallel-group study. Statistical analyses of the distribution of cortical, nuclear and subcapsular opacities at 48 weeks, adjusted for age and presence of an opacity at baseline, showed no significant differences (p less than 0.01) between the placebo and lovastatin-treated groups. Visual acuity assessments at week 48 were also not found to have significantly different distributions among treatment groups. Moreover, no significant differences were found among the groups in the frequencies of greater than or equal to 2-line worsening in visual acuity with concurrent progression in lenticular opacity, cataract extraction, or any spontaneously reported adverse ophthalmologic experience. No evidence was found for an effect of lovastatin on the human lens after 48 weeks of treatment.

Expanded Clinical Evaluation of Lovastatin (EXCEL) study results. I. Efficacy in modifying plasma lipoproteins and adverse event profile in 8245 patients with moderate hypercholesterolemia.

In the Expanded Clinical Evaluation of Lovastatin (EXCEL) Study, a multicenter, double-blind, diet- and placebo-controlled trial, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of lovastatin in 8245 patients with moderate hypercholesterolemia. Patients were randomly assigned to receive placebo or lovastatin at a dosage of 20 mg once daily, 40 mg once daily, 20 mg twice daily, or 40 mg twice daily for 48 weeks. Lovastatin produced sustained, dose-related (P less than .001) changes as follows (for dosages of 20 to 80 mg/d): decreased low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol level (24% to 40%), increased high-density lipoprotein-cholesterol level (6.6% to 9.5%), decreased total cholesterol level (17% to 29%), and decreased triglyceride level (10% to 19%). The National Cholesterol Education Program's low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol level goal of less than 4.14 mmol/L (160 mg/dL) was achieved by 80% to 96% of patients, while the less than 3.36 mmol/L (130 mg/dL) goal was achieved by 38% to 83% of patients. The difference between lovastatin and placebo in the incidence of clinical adverse experiences requiring discontinuation was small, ranging from 1.2% at 20 mg twice daily to 1.9% at 80 mg/d. Successive transaminase level elevations greater than three times the upper limit of normal were observed in 0.1% of patients receiving placebo and 20 mg/d of lovastatin, increasing to 0.9% in those receiving 40 mg/d and 1.5% in those receiving 80 mg/d of lovastatin (P less than .001 for trend). Myopathy, defined as muscle symptoms with a creatine kinase elevation greater than 10 times the upper limit of normal, was found in only one patient (0.1%) receiving 40 mg once daily and four patients (0.2%) receiving 80 mg/d of lovastatin. Thus, lovastatin, when added after an adequate trial of a prudent diet, is a highly effective and generally well-tolerated treatment for patients with moderate hypercholesterolemia.

Expanded clinical evaluation of lovastatin (EXCEL) study: design and patient characteristics of a double-blind, placebo-controlled study in patients with moderate hypercholesterolemia.

The randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial described in this report was undertaken to clarify the dose-response relation of lovastatin therapy to lipid-modifying efficacy (lipid/lipoprotein modification) and drug-related adverse events in a population with moderately elevated fasting plasma total cholesterol (240 to 300 mg/dl) and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (greater than or equal to 160 mg/dl). Men or women (postmenopausal or surgically sterile), aged 18 to 70 years, were entered into the trial with minimal exclusion criteria. After 4 to 6 weeks of an American Heart Association phase I diet or a more stringent diet, 8,245 patients from 362 sites were randomized to 1 of 5 parallel diet and drug treatment groups: placebo (n = 1,663) or lovastatin, 20 mg (n = 1,642) and 40 mg (n = 1,645) with the evening meal, and 20 mg (n = 1,646) or 40 mg twice daily (n = 1,649). The regimen of diet and lovastatin (or placebo) was followed for 48 weeks. The 5 treatment groups were similar at baseline. The total cohort had the following characteristics: 59% were men (mean age 56 years); 92% were white; 59% had completed at least 1 year of education beyond high school; 57% had a history of cardiovascular and associated disease; 40% had a history of hypertension; and 29% had coronary artery disease. Health habits were similar among groups, with 18% of patients reporting cigarette smoking, 14% reporting that they consume greater than 1 alcoholic beverage daily and 67% reporting no strenous exercise. Mean lipid/lipoprotein levels were also similar among groups, with the following average levels: total cholesterol (258 mg/dl), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (180 mg/dl), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (45 mg/dl) and triglycerides (median = 155 mg/dl). The large size of this trial, its placebo-controlled, double-blind design and the similarity of treatment groups at baseline should allow clear documentation of the long-term effects of lovastatin treatment and generalization of the results to a substantial portion of patients who may be candidates for lipid-modifying therapy.

Clinical experience with lovastatin.

New information on the tolerability of lovastatin has emerged from an ongoing study of long-term therapy; preliminary results from a large, 48-week clinical trial; and spontaneous reports of adverse events observed during prescription use of the drug in the United States. As of June 1989, 744 patients had received lovastatin for an average duration of 3.6 years in the long-term study. Drug-attributable adverse events necessitated withdrawal of 17 patients (2.3%) from the study. These adverse effects were asymptomatic elevations of transaminases (10), skin rash (3), gastrointestinal symptoms (2), myopathy (1) and insomnia (1). No effect of lovastatin on the human lens was observed. In the 48-week study, 8,245 patients were randomized into 5 equal groups to receive placebo or lovastatin 20 or 40 mg once or twice daily on a double-blind basis. Only 3 cases of myopathy were observed, all in patients taking lovastatin 40 mg twice daily. The incidence of withdrawal from the study because of raised transaminases was approximately 0.1% in the placebo group vs 0.1, 0.7, 0.6 and 1.5% in patients taking lovastatin in doses of 20 mg once daily, 40 mg once daily, 20 mg twice daily and 40 mg twice daily, respectively. Lovastatin has been available in the United States since September 1987. By June 1989, the drug had been prescribed for approximately 1 million patients. Drug-attributable adverse events not observed in clinical trials (such as hypersensitivity reactions and symptomatic hepatitis) have been reported, but the incidence of each appears to be extremely low.

Field test reliability of a new lens opacity rating system utilizing slit-lamp examination.

A field test of a lens opacity rating system was run. Findings were graded in 7 categories: Cortex: (1) Waterclefts, Vacuoles, & Flakes (WVF, 4 grades), (2) Wedges & Spokes graded by number of Quadrants affected (WS-Q), and (3) Inward extent of Wedges & Spokes (WS-I, 3 grades); Nucleus: (4) Opacification (NUC-O) and (5) Coloration (NUC-C), each using 4 grades; and Subcapsular areas: (6) Anterior (SUB-A) and (7) Posterior (SUB-P) opacification, each using 5 grades. An instruction booklet with corresponding guidelines, sketches, and photographs was developed. Reproducibility of grading was tested in 3 clinics using 16 ophthalmologist-examiners. At each clinic, examiners were randomly paired. They independently performed slit-lamp exams of assigned patients (9 on average) on the same day (inter-examiner) and 1-2 weeks later (intra-examiner). To test intra-examiner reliability, examiners were divided into two groups (one from each pair), with gradings analyzed by group. For each group, 53 to 58 patients had evaluable examinations. Intra-examiner concordance for each lens category (defined as at most one grade difference in one lens) was as follows (for examiner groups 1 and 2, resp.): WVF: 98% & 97%; WS-Q: 96% & 100%; WS-I: 100% & 100%; NUC-O: 98% & 100%; NUC-C: 100% & 98%; SUB-A: 90% & 100%; and, SUB-P: 92% & 100%. Inter-examiner concordances were slightly lower than those found for intra-examiner. Grading lens findings in the manner described above appears to have potential utility in large scale studies.

A comparison of the influence of famotidine and cimetidine on phenytoin elimination and hepatic blood flow.

The H2-receptor antagonist cimetidine has been reported to decrease the hepatic clearance of numerous drugs by inhibiting cytochrome P-450 metabolism, decreasing liver blood flow or both. In this open-label, randomized crossover study we determined whether therapeutic doses of famotidine, a newer H2-receptor antagonist, has similar effects. Ten healthy subjects received single doses of both phenytoin 100 mg orally and indocyanine green intravenously without other treatment, and then again during treatment with famotidine or cimetidine. After a drug-free period, this sequence was repeated with the alternate H2-receptor antagonist. Cimetidine decreased the plasma clearance of phenytoin by 16% +/- 14% (mean +/- s.d.), but was not found to have a significant influence on phenytoin volume of distribution or terminal elimination rate constant nor on blood clearance of indocyanine green. Famotidine was not found to alter either phenytoin or indocyanine green kinetics.

Effects of age and chronic renal failure on the urinary excretion kinetics of famotidine in man.

The plasma and urine concentrations of famotidine, a new, potent H2-receptor antagonist, have been measured in 16 healthy young adults, 8 healthy elderly people and 18 patients with varying degrees of renal dysfunction after intravenous administration. Both the plasma elimination and renal excretion of famotidine were decreased in the elderly volunteers and renal patients. The renal clearance of famotidine averaged 4.43 ml/min/kg (310 ml/min) in normal young volunteers, which exceeded the mean creatinine clearance 1.55 ml/min/kg (109 ml/min), suggesting net secretion is a significant mechanism for elimination of famotidine. The ratio of famotidine renal clearance to creatinine clearance decreased as creatinine clearance decreased; these results suggest that the deterioration in the secretion process was much faster than that in glomerular filtration and are incompatible with the "intact nephron hypothesis". Nevertheless, both total body clearance and renal clearance were significantly correlated with creatinine clearance. The apparent half-life was also significantly correlated with creatinine clearance. Since famotidine is essentially free of dose-related adverse effects, dose adjustment in patients with mild renal insufficiency and in elderly people is not required; however, either a prolonged dosing interval or a decrease in daily dose during long-term therapy may be adapted for the patients with severe renal insufficiency to avoid accumulation and the potential undesirable effects.

Single-dose pharmacokinetics and bioavailability of famotidine in man. Results of multicenter collaborative studies.

Pharmacokinetics and bioavailability of famotidine, a new H2-receptor antagonist, were investigated in healthy subjects in five clinical studies. Linear pharmacokinetics were observed following either intravenous or oral administration. Plasma clearance averaged 463 ml min-1. Renal clearance averaged 310 ml min-1, which exceeded the glomerular filtration rate. Renal excretion was the major route of elimination. Urinary recovery of unchanged drug following intravenous administration was about 67 per cent. Famotidine plasma half-life was approximately 2.6 h. Oral absorption was incomplete. The bioavailability averaged 43 per cent of the dose.

Comparative effect of famotidine and cimetidine on the pharmacokinetics of theophylline in normal volunteers.

The comparative effect of famotidine or cimetidine on theophylline disposition was determined in healthy volunteers. Cimetidine, but not famotidine, caused a reduction in the rate of elimination of theophylline. The mean total body clearance of theophylline was reduced from 57.6 ml min-1 before cimetidine to 39.5 ml min-1 during cimetidine; and the half-life was prolonged from 8.7 h before cimetidine to 12 h during cimetidine. The volume of distribution and renal excretion of theophylline were not affected by either famotidine or cimetidine.

Effects of antacids and food on absorption of famotidine.

The effect of a high potency antacid and food on the bioavailability of famotidine was studied in 17 healthy volunteers in an open randomized three-way cross-over trial. After an overnight fast, famotidine was administered to each subject as follows: 40 mg famotidine orally alone; 40 mg orally with antacid; and 40 mg orally with a standard breakfast. Coadministration of the antacid caused a small but significant reduction in the maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) of famotidine from 81.1 +/- 54.2 to 60.8 +/- 21.6 ng ml-1 (P less than 0.05) and a small decrease in the area under plasma concentration-time curve [AUC] from 443.3 +/- 249.2 to 355.0 +/- 125.1 ng ml-1 h (P greater than 0.05). However, there was only a minimal effect of food on these parameters; the Cmax and [AUC] were 81.6 +/- 29.6 ng ml-1 and 434.8 +/- 145.9 ng ml-1 h, respectively.

Disposition of famotidine in renal insufficiency.

The disposition of famotidine was evaluated in 18 patients; Group 1, mild renal insufficiency, [creatinine clearance (CLCR): 30-60 mL/min]; Group 2, moderate to severe renal insufficiency (CLCR: 10-30 mL/min); Group 3, end-stage renal disease requiring maintenance hemodialysis (anuric). Blood and urine samples were obtained over a 72-hour period. Plasma concentration-time data demonstrated biexponential decay. The terminal elimination half-life was prolonged in Group 3 (18.6 +/- 5.7 hr) compared with Groups 1 (9.3 +/- 2.3 hr) and 2 (9.7 +/- 1.7 hr), P less than .05. Steady-state volume of distribution ranged from 0.80 to 1.26 L/kg but did not differ among the groups. Total body clearance (CLp) and renal clearance were significantly lower in Groups 2 and 3 patients compared with Group 1 patients. Nonrenal clearance was not related to CLCR. The CLp correlated well with CLCR (CLp = 1.59 CLCR + 33.8, r = 0.830, P less than .05). These data indicate that dosage adjustment may be necessary in patients who have renal insufficiency.

The effect of famotidine on renal function in patients with renal insufficiency.

The effect of famotidine, a new histamine H2-receptor antagonist, on renal tubular creatinine secretion was evaluated in twelve patients with reduced renal function (creatinine clearance 10-60 ml min-1). Creatinine and inulin clearances were determined at baseline and for 4 h after a 10 mg intravenous dose of famotidine. Famotidine renal clearance exceeded inulin clearance by an average of 152%, indicating that renal tubular secretion of famotidine occurred. No significant changes in the clearances of creatinine or inulin, or the fractional clearance of creatinine were observed after famotidine administration. These data suggest that famotidine, unlike cimetidine, does not inhibit renal tubular secretion of creatinine. Thus, famotidine does not affect creatinine-dependent measurements of renal function and is unlikely to alter the renal elimination of basic drugs.