Consistency of drug-drug and gene-drug interaction information in US FDA-approved drug labels.

AIM: To characterize concordance between clinically relevant drug-drug interactions (DDIs) related to CYP2C19, CYP2D6 and CYP2C9 and their analogous gene-drug interactions (GDIs) in US FDA-approved drug labeling. METHODS: We selected prototypical CYP2C19, CYP2D6 and CYP2C9 inhibitors and abstracted all respective interacting drugs via a tertiary resource used in the clinical setting. We then selected only CYP2C19, CYP2D6 and CYP2C9 metabolism-related DDIs requiring enhanced clinical monitoring, dose adjustment or use of alternative drugs. Labeling and management strategies on DDIs and GDIs were compared. RESULTS: Among the drug labels with DDI information, 73% of them describe the analogous GDI. Of the 65 drug labels, 43 and 17% had specific management recommendations for DDIs and GDIs, respectively. In general, GDI management recommendations were concordant with DDI management recommendations in terms of specific dose adjustments or use of alternative drugs. CONCLUSION: The FDA has recognized genetic differences in drug metabolism where clinically relevant DDIs trigger dose adjustment or use of alternative drugs.

CYP2D6 genotype information to guide pimozide treatment in adult and pediatric patients: basis for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's new dosing recommendations.

OBJECTIVE: The occurrence of pimozide-induced arrhythmias is concentration dependent. Hence, it is important for prescribers to consider causes of increased pimozide exposure. This article summarizes the U.S. Food and Drug Administration's (FDA's) review of drug interaction and pharmacogenomic studies and discusses pharmacokinetic simulations we performed to develop new cytochrome P450 2D6 (CYP2D6) genotype-guided dosing recommendations for pimozide. METHOD: Pharmacokinetic parameters by CYP2D6 genotype were derived from a published single-dose pharmacogenomic study of pimozide. We simulated what pimozide exposures would result from a multiple-dose scenario in different CYP2D6 genotype groups: extensive, intermediate, and poor metabolizers. The maximum dose for poor metabolizers was defined as the dose that would not exceed pimozide concentrations following 10 mg daily in extensive metabolizers and intermediate metabolizers (the current maximum dose in an unselected population). RESULTS: Dose-ranging analyses revealed that 4 mg daily in CYP2D6 poor metabolizers was the maximum dose that would not result in plasma concentrations in excess of those observed in extensive metabolizer and intermediate metabolizer patients receiving 10 mg daily. CYP2D6 genotyping is now consequently recommended in the pimozide product label before exceeding 4 mg of pimozide daily in adults or 0.05 mg/kg/d in children. Previously, dose adjustment was recommended every 3 days to achieve the desired clinical response for all patients. The label was modified to subsequently reflect that pimozide doses should not be increased earlier than 14 days in patients who are known CYP2D6 poor metabolizers. CONCLUSIONS: Given the risk of increased pimozide concentrations and longer time to steady state in CYP2D6 poor metabolizers, the FDA has revised the pimozide label to provide clinicians with clearer dosing, titration, and genotype testing recommendations. The new information is intended to enhance therapeutic individualization of pimozide in pediatric and adult patients.

A randomized, controlled trial of the renal effects of ultrafiltration as compared to furosemide in patients with acute decompensated heart failure.

OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to evaluate the consequences of ultrafiltration (UF) and standard intravenous diuretic (furosemide) therapy on glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and renal plasma flow in patients with acute decompensated heart failure. BACKGROUND: It has been hypothesized that treatment with diuretics may worsen renal function as the result of systemic neurohormonal activation and direct renal vascular effects. UF also removes fluid, but its actions on intrarenal hemodynamics, and therefore renal function, are unknown. METHODS: Patients hospitalized for acute decompensated heart failure with an ejection fraction less than 40% and two or more signs of hypervolemia were randomized to receive UF or intravenous diuretics. Urine output, GFR (as measured by iothalamate), and renal plasma flow (as measured by para-aminohippurate) were assessed before fluid removal and after 48 hours. RESULTS: Nineteen patients (59 +/- 16 years, 68% were male) were randomized to receive UF (n = 9) or intravenous diuretics (n = 10). The change in GFR (-3.4 +/- 7.7 mL/min vs. -3.6 +/- 11.5 mL/min; P = .966), renal plasma flow (26.6 +/- 62.7 mL/min vs. 16.1 +/- 42.0 mL/min; P = .669), and filtration fraction (-6.9 +/- 13.6 mL/min vs. -3.9 +/- 13.6 mL/min; P = .644) after treatment were not significantly different between the UF and furosemide treatment groups, respectively. There was no significant difference in net 48-hour fluid removal between the groups (-3211 +/- 2345 mL for UF and -2725 +/- 2330 mL for furosemide, P = .682). UF removed 3666 +/- 2402 mL. Urine output during 48 hours was significantly greater in the furosemide group (5786 +/- 2587 mL) compared with the UF group (2286 +/- 915 mL, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: During a 48-hour period, UF did not cause any significant differences in renal hemodynamics compared with the standard treatment of intravenous diuretics.