Pharmacokinetics of milnacipran in liver impairment

Consensus statements on the clinical understanding and use of milnacipran in Hong Kong

OBJECTIVE

Our aim is to develop a local consensus to guide medical practitioners and psychiatrists on the use of milnacipran in different psychiatric conditions.

METHODS

By utilizing the modified Delphi technique, 12 statements were electronically voted on anonymously for their practicability of recommendation.

RESULTS

There was a very high degree of agreement among the consensus group on 10 finalized consensus statements, but 2 statements were voted down due to a poor degree of agreement.

CONCLUSIONS

The present consensus statements were developed as general recommendations for medical practitioners and psychiatrists to be practically referred to in clinical settings.

Serotonin and Norepinephrine Reuptake Inhibitors

This chapter covers antidepressants that fall into the class of serotonin (5-HT) and norepinephrine (NE) reuptake inhibitors. That is, they bind to the 5-HT and NE transporters with varying levels of potency and binding affinity ratios. Unlike the selective serotonin (5-HT) reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), most of these antidepressants have an ascending rather than a flat dose-response curve. The chapter provides a brief review of the chemistry, pharmacology, metabolism, safety and adverse effects, clinical use, and therapeutic indications of each antidepressant. Venlafaxine, a phenylethylamine, is a relatively weak 5-HT and weaker NE uptake inhibitor with a 30-fold difference in binding of the two transporters. Therefore, the drug has a clear dose progression, with low doses predominantly binding to the 5-HT transporter and more binding of the NE transporter as the dose ascends. Venlafaxine is metabolized to the active metabolite O-desmethylvenlafaxine (ODV; desvenlafaxine) by CYP2D6, and it therefore is subject to significant inter-individual variation in blood levels and response dependent on variations in CYP2D6 metabolism. The half-life of venlafaxine is short at about 5 h, with the ODV metabolite being 12 h. Both parent compound and metabolite have low protein binding and neither inhibit CYP enzymes. Therefore, both venlafaxine and desvenlafaxine are potential options if drug-drug interactions are a concern, although venlafaxine may be subject to drug-drug interactions with CYP2D6 inhibitors. At low doses, the adverse effect profile is similar to an SSRI with nausea, diarrhea, fatigue or somnolence, and sexual side effects, while venlafaxine at higher doses can produce mild increases in blood pressure, diaphoresis, tachycardia, tremors, and anxiety. A disadvantage of venlafaxine relative to the SSRIs is the potential for dose-dependent blood pressure elevation, most likely due to the NE reuptake inhibition caused by higher doses; however, this adverse effect is infrequently observed at doses below 225 mg per day. Venlafaxine also has a number of potential advantages over the SSRIs, including an ascending dose-antidepressant response curve, with possibly greater overall efficacy at higher doses. Venlafaxine is approved for MDD as well as generalized anxiety disorder, social anxiety disorder, and panic disorder. Desvenlafaxine is the primary metabolite of venlafaxine, and it is also a relatively low-potency 5-HT and NE uptake inhibitor. Like venlafaxine it has a favorable drug-drug interaction profile. It is subject to CYP3A4 metabolism, and it is therefore vulnerable to enzyme inhibition or induction. However, the primary metabolic pathway is direct conjugation. It is approved in the narrow dose range of 50-100 mg per day. Duloxetine is a more potent 5-HT and NE reuptake inhibitor with a more balanced profile of binding at about 10:1 for 5HT and NE transporter binding. It is also a moderate inhibitor of CYP2D6, so that modest dose reductions and careful monitoring will be needed when prescribing duloxetine in combination with drugs that are preferentially metabolized by CYP2D6. The most common side effects identified in clinical trials are nausea, dry mouth, dizziness, constipation, insomnia, asthenia, and hypertension, consistent with its mechanisms of action. Clinical trials to date have demonstrated rates of response and remission in patients with major depression that are comparable to other marketed antidepressants reviewed in this book. In addition to approval for MDD, duloxetine is approved for diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain, fibromyalgia, and musculoskeletal pain. Milnacipran is marketed as an antidepressant in some countries, but not in the USA. It is approved in the USA and some other countries as a treatment for fibromyalgia. It has few pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions with other drugs. Milnacipran has a half-life of about 10 h and therefore needs to be administered twice per day. It is metabolized by CYP3A4, but the major pathway for clearance is direct conjugation and renal elimination. As with other drugs in this class, dysuria is a common, troublesome, and dose-dependent adverse effect (occurring in up to 7% of patients). High-dose milnacipran has been reported to cause blood pressure and pulse elevations. Levomilnacipran is the levorotary enantiomer of milnacipran, and it is pharmacologically very similar to the racemic compound, although the side effects may be milder within the approved dosing range. As with other NE uptake inhibitors, it may increase blood pressure and pulse, although it appears to do so less than some other medications. All medications in the class can cause serotonin syndrome when combined with MAOIs.

Disposition and metabolism of [14C]-levomilnacipran, a serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, in humans, monkeys, and rats

Levomilnacipran is approved in the US for the treatment of major depressive disorder in adults. We characterized the metabolic profile of levomilnacipran in humans, monkeys, and rats after oral administration of [¹⁴C]-levomilnacipran. In vitro binding of levomilnacipran to human plasma proteins was also studied. Unchanged levomilnacipran was the major circulating compound after dosing in all species. Within 12 hours of dosing in humans, levomilnacipran accounted for 52.9% of total plasma radioactivity; the circulating metabolites N-desethyl levomilnacipran N-carbamoyl glucuronide, N-desethyl levomilnacipran, and levomilnacipran N-carbamoyl glucuronide accounted for 11.3%, 7.5%, and 5.6%, respectively. Similar results were seen in monkeys. N-Desethyl levomilnacipran and p-hydroxy levomilnacipran were the main circulating metabolites in rats. Mass balance results indicated that renal excretion was the major route of elimination with 58.4%, 35.5%, and 40.2% of total radioactivity being excreted as unchanged levomilnacipran in humans, monkeys, and rats, respectively. N-Desethyl levomilnacipran was detected in human, monkey, and rat urine (18.2%, 12.4%, and 7.9% of administered dose, respectively). Human and monkey urine contained measurable quantities of levomilnacipran glucuronide (3.8% and 4.1% of administered dose, respectively) and N-desethyl levomilnacipran glucuronide (3.2% and 2.3% of administered dose, respectively); these metabolites were not detected in rat urine. The metabolites p-hydroxy levomilnacipran and p-hydroxy levomilnacipran glucuronide were detected in human urine (≤1.2% of administered dose), and p-hydroxy levomilnacipran glucuronide was found in rat urine (4% of administered dose). None of the metabolites were pharmacologically active. Levomilnacipran was widely distributed with low plasma protein binding (22%).

Excretion and metabolism of milnacipran in humans after oral administration of milnacipran hydrochloride

The pharmacokinetics, excretion, and metabolism of milnacipran were evaluated after oral administration of a 100-mg dose of [¹⁴C]milnacipran hydrochloride to healthy male subjects. The peak plasma concentration of unchanged milnacipran (∼240 ng/ml) was attained at 3.5 h and was lower than the peak plasma concentration of radioactivity (∼679 ng Eq of milnacipran/ml) observed at 4.3 h, indicating substantial metabolism of milnacipran upon oral administration. Milnacipran has two chiral centers and is a racemic mixture of cis isomers: d-milnacipran (1S, 2R) and l-milnacipran (1R, 2S). After oral administration, the radioactivity of almost the entire dose was excreted rapidly in urine (approximately 93% of the dose). Approximately 55% of the dose was excreted in urine as unchanged milnacipran, which contained a slightly higher proportion of d-milnacipran (∼31% of the dose). In addition to the excretion of milnacipran carbamoyl O-glucuronide metabolite in urine (∼19% of the dose), predominantly as the l-milnacipran carbamoyl O-glucuronide metabolite (∼17% of the dose), approximately 8% of the dose was excreted in urine as the N-desethyl milnacipran metabolite. No additional metabolites of significant quantity were excreted in urine. Similar plasma concentrations of milnacipran and the l-milnacipran carbamoyl O-glucuronide metabolite were observed after dosing, and the maximum plasma concentration of l-milnacipran carbamoyl O-glucuronide metabolite at 4 h after dosing was 234 ng Eq of milnacipran/ml. Lower plasma concentrations (<25 ng Eq of milnacipran/ml) of N-desethyl milnacipran and d-milnacipran carbamoyl O-glucuronide metabolites were observed.

Milnacipran: a selective serotonin and norepinephrine dual reuptake inhibitor for the management of fibromyalgia

Milnacipran, a serotonin and norepinephrfrine reuptake inhibitor with preferential inhibition of norepinephrine reuptake over serotonin, is approved in the United States for the management of fibromyalgia. Owing to its effects on norepinephrine and serotonin, as well as its lack of activity at other receptor systems, it was hypothesized that milnacipran would provide improvements in pain and other fibromyalgia symptoms without some of the unpleasant side effects associated with other medications historically used for treating fibromyalgia. The clinical safety and efficacy of milnacipran 100 and 200 mg/day in individuals with fibromyalgia has been investigated in four large, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies and three long-term extension studies. The clinical studies used composite responder analyses to identify the proportion of individual patients reporting simultaneous and clinically significant improvements in pain, global status, and physical function, in addition to assessing improvement in various symptom domains such as fatigue and dyscognition. In the clinical studies, patients receiving milnacipran reported significant improvements in pain and other symptoms for up to 15 months of treatment. Most adverse events were mild to moderate in severity and were related to the intrinsic pharmacologic properties of the drug. Long-term exposure to milnacipran did not result in any new safety concerns. As with other serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, increases in heart rate and blood pressure have been observed in some patients with milnacipran treatment.

New and emerging therapeutic agents for the treatment of fibromyalgia: an update

Fibromyalgia (FM) is a chronic widespread pain condition that is estimated to affect 5 million US adults. Several molecular pathophysiologies are thought to contribute to the symptoms of FM, complicating the development of effective clinical management techniques. It is now known that abnormalities in both nociceptive and central pain processing systems are necessary (but perhaps not sufficient) to condition the onset and maintenance of FM, producing associated neuropsychologic symptoms such as pronounced fatigue, sleep abnormalities, cognitive difficulties, stress sensitivity, anxiety, and depression. Current treatment strategies are focused primarily on correcting the pathophysiologic mechanisms underlying these nervous system abnormalities. Clinical studies demonstrate the safety and efficacy of three drugs recently approved for the treatment of FM: pregabalin (an alpha-2-delta ligand), and duloxetine and milnacipran (serotonin/norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors). This review describes these pharmaceuticals in detail and discusses their current roles in FM management.

Role and rationale for the use of milnacipran in the management of fibromyalgia

Fibromyalgia (FM) is a complex syndrome characterized by chronic widespread musculoskeletal pain which is often accompanied by multiple other symptoms, including fatigue, sleep disturbances, decreased physical functioning, and dyscognition. Due to these multiple symptoms, as well as high rates of comorbidity with other related disorders, patients with FM often report a reduced quality of life. Although the pathophysiology of FM is not completely understood, patients with FM experience pain differently from the general population, most likely due to dysfunctional pain processing in the central nervous system leading to both hyperalgesia and allodynia. In many patients with FM, this aberrant pain processing, or central sensitization, appears to involve decreased pain inhibition within the spinal tract, which is mediated by descending pathways that utilize serotonin, norepinephrine, and other neurotransmitters. The reduced serotonin and norepinephrine levels observed in patients with FM suggest that medications which increase the levels of these neurotransmitters, such as serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), may have clinically beneficial effects in FM and other chronic pain conditions. Milnacipran is an SNRI that has been approved for the management of FM. In clinical trials, treatment with milnacipran for up to 1 year has been found to improve the pain and other symptoms of FM. Because FM is characterized by multiple symptoms that all contribute to the decreased quality of life and ability to function, the milnacipran pivotal trials implemented responder analyses. These utilized a single composite endpoint to identify the proportion of patients who reported simultaneous and clinically significant improvements in pain, global disease status, and physical function. Other domains assessed during the milnacipran trials include fatigue, multidimensional functioning, mood, sleep quality, and patient-reported dyscognition. This review article provides information intended to help clinicians make informed decisions about the use of milnacipran in the clinical management of patients with FM. It draws primarily on results from 2 of the pivotal clinical trials that formed the basis of approval of milnacipran in the United States by the Food and Drug Administration.

Milnacipran for the management of fibromyalgia syndrome

Fibromyalgia syndrome (FMS) is a widespread pain condition associated with fatigue, cognitive dysfunction, sleep disturbance, depression, anxiety, and stiffness. Milnacipran is one of three medications currently approved by the Food and Drug Administration in the United States for the management of adult FMS patients. This review is the second in a three-part series reviewing each of the approved FMS drugs and serves as a primer on the use of milnacipran in FMS treatment including information on pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, safety and tolerability. Milnacipran is a mixed serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor thought to improve FMS symptoms by increasing neurotransmitter levels in descending central nervous system inhibitory pathways. Milnacipran has proven efficacy in managing global FMS symptoms and pain as well as improving symptoms of fatigue and cognitive dysfunction without affecting sleep. Due to its antidepressant activity, milnacipran can also be beneficial to FMS patients with coexisting depression. However, side effects can limit milnacipran tolerability in FMS patients due to its association with headache, nausea, tachycardia, hyper- and hypotension, and increased risk for bleeding and suicidality in at-risk patients. Tolerability can be maximized by starting at low dose and slowly up-titrating if needed. As with all medications used in FMS management, milnacipran works best when used as part of an individualized treatment regimen that includes resistance and aerobic exercise, patient education and behavioral therapies.

Milnacipran: beyond a role of antidepressant

Milnacipran is a serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) with negligible effects on any presynaptic or postsynaptic receptors. Milnacipran has unique pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics that distinguish it from the other marketed serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, venlafaxine, desvenlafaxine, and duloxetine such as equipotent serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibition and a linear dose-concentration trend at therapeutic doses. The half-life of milnacipran is approximately 8 hours. In addition, milnacipran does not inhibit the cytochrome P 450 system, indicating minimal propensity for drug-drug interactions. The antidepressant efficacy of milnacipran has been clearly established in a number of randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials, and it has been widely used for treating major depressive disorder. Moreover, evidence suggests that milnacipran is effective and tolerable in the treatment of fibromyalgia and may have usefulness for fatigue and anxiety symptoms. The current paper reviews researches conducted to date that is relevant to the efficacy, tolerability, and mechanism of action of milnacipran in the treatment of depression, fibromyalgia, and other psychiatric syndromes. Future directions of research are also identified.

Effects of milnacipran on cardiac repolarization in healthy participants

Milnacipran is approved for management of fibromyalgia in the United States. In this double-blind, placebo- and active drug-controlled study (N = 100), effects of supratherapeutic doses of milnacipran on cardiac repolarization were evaluated in healthy volunteers. The primary outcome was the largest mean difference between milnacipran and placebo in time-matched baseline-adjusted QT interval corrected for heart rate using an individual correction formula (QTcNi). In addition, data were analyzed using the Fridericia formula (QTcF) and a post hoc piecewise QTcNi analysis based on a dichotomous cut of RR interval data at 800 ms. Moxifloxacin (400 mg single dose) was used to establish assay sensitivity. Using the QTcNi method, the largest difference in baseline-adjusted QTcNi between milnacipran 300 mg bid and placebo was -4.7 ms (90% confidence interval [CI]: -9.4 to -0.1), indicating no QT prolongation. Analysis using the Fridericia formula (QTcF) showed a maximum adjusted mean change of +7.7 ms, but QTcF versus RR interval plots indicated overcorrection with this method. The piecewise QTcNi correction method demonstrated a more accurate correction for drug-induced heart rate increase; mean baseline-adjusted between-group difference was +0.9 ms (90% CI: -6.6 to 8.3). The results suggest that milnacipran would not significantly affect cardiac repolarization at clinically relevant therapeutic and supratherapeutic concentrations.

Serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) in anxiety disorders: a comprehensive review of their clinical efficacy

Anxiety disorders are common psychiatric conditions that typically require long-term treatment. This review summarizes current knowledge of the pharmacological treatment of anxiety disorders with serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) with specific emphasis on the findings of recent randomized clinical trials and relevant neurobiological investigations. It is now well established that gabaergic, noradrenergic and serotonergic systems play a critical role in the pathophysiology of anxiety disorders, abnormalities in these systems being related to structural and functional alterations in specific brain areas such as the amygdala, prefrontal cortex, locus coeruleus and hippocampus, as repeatedly shown by neuroimaging studies. SNRIs selectively inhibit norepinephrine and serotonin reuptake and have shown to be efficacious and generally well tolerated treatments in patients with anxiety disorders, with some potential clinical advantages over selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), which are considered by many to represent first-line pharmacological treatments in patients with anxiety disorders. Anxiety disorders are characterized by a typically chronic course, high rates of comorbidity and frequent partial response to standard treatments, and the increasing use of SNRIs reflects currently unmet clinical need, in terms of overall response, remission rates and treatment tolerability.

Opposite effects of milnacipran, a serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, on the levels of nitric oxide and brain-derived neurotrophic factor in mouse brain cortex

There is a growing body of evidence demonstrating that changes in the brain levels of nitric oxide (NO) and brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) are implicated in the pathogenesis of major depression. We report here the effects of subchronic treatment of mice with milnacipran, a serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, on the levels of NO and BDNF in mice. In vivo administration of milnacipran (10 mg/kg) for 14 days caused a significant decrease in nitrate and nitrite concentrations in the cerebral cortex and hippocampus, but not in the midbrain. Milnacipran (10 mg/kg, 14 days) also decreased the activity of NO synthase in the cerebral cortex. On the other hand, milnacipran (10 mg/kg, 14 days) increased the levels of BDNF protein and mRNA in the cerebral cortex. These findings suggest that milnacipran has opposite effects on the levels of NO and BDNF in the brain cortex, namely, downregulation of NO and upregulation of BDNF.

Milnacipran

Each month, subscribers to The Formulary Monograph Service receive 5 to 6 well-documented monographs on drugs that are newly released or are in late phase 3 trials. The monographs are targeted to Pharmacy & Therapeutics Committees. Subscribers also receive monthly 1-page summary monographs on agents that are useful for agendas and pharmacy/nursing inservices. A comprehensive target drug utilization evaluation (DUE) is also provided each month. With a subscription, the monographs are sent in print and are also available online. Monographs can be customized to meet the needs of a facility. Subscribers to The Formulary Monograph Service also receive access to a pharmacy bulletin board, The Formulary Information Exchange (The F.I.X.). All topics pertinent to clinical and hospital pharmacy are discussed on The F.I.X.

Through the cooperation of The Formulary, Hospital Pharmacy publishes selected reviews in this column. For more information about The Formulary Monograph Service or The F.I.X., call The Formulary at 800–322–4349. The July 2009 monograph topics are golimumab injection, tapentadol immediate-release tablets, iloperidone, benzyl alcohol 5% lotion, and artemether/lumefantrine. The DUE is on golimumab injection.

Stimulation of catecholamine synthesis via activation of p44/42 MAPK in cultured bovine adrenal medullary cells by milnacipran

Milnacipran is a serotonin noradrenaline reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) and is used clinically as an antidepressant. We report here the effect of milnacipran on catecholamine synthesis in cultured bovine adrenal medullary cells. Incubation of adrenal medullary cells with milnacipran (300 ng/ml, 1,065 nM) for 20 min resulted in a significant increase in 14C-catecholamine synthesis from [14C]tyrosine, but not from [14C]DOPA, whereas the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), paroxetine (300 ng/ml, 800 nM) and fluvoxamine (300 ng/ml, 691 nM), had little effect. Milnacipran, but not paroxetine or fluvoxamine, increased the activity of tyrosine hydroxylase, the rate-limiting step of catecholamine biosynthesis, in a concentration-dependent manner (100-300 ng/ml, 355-1,065 nM). U0126 (1 microM), an inhibitor of p44/42 mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) kinase, abolished the stimulatory effects of milnacipran on tyrosine hydroxylase activity. Furthermore, incubation of cells with milnacipran (30-100 ng/ml) for 5 min activated p44/42 MAPK, whereas paroxetine and fluvoxamine did not. The present findings suggest that milnacipran activates tyrosine hydroxylase and then stimulates catecholamine synthesis through a p44/42 MAPK-dependent pathway in cultured bovine adrenal medullary cells.

Lack of pharmacokinetic interaction when switching from fluoxetine to milnacipran

The lack of a therapeutic effect or unsupportable side-effects can lead to substitution of one antidepressant by another. The present study investigated potential modifications to the pharmacokinetic profile of milnacipran at steady-state when it is substituted for fluoxetine without any washout period. The open-label, multiple dose, three-period study was carried out in 12 evaluable healthy volunteers. A reference period (period 1) comprising a 3.5-day treatment with milnacipran at 50 mg b.i.d. was followed, after a 5-10-day washout, by 3 weeks of administration of 20 mg fluoxetine once daily (period 2), immediately followed by a further 3.5 days of administration of milnacipran at 50 mg b.i.d. (period 3). Blood samples collected at each period were analysed for milnacipran, N-dealkyl milnacipran, fluoxetine and norfluoxetine. Potential drug-drug interactions were evaluated by comparing milnacipran pharmacokinetic parameters between periods 1 and 3. A steady-state of fluoxetine and its metabolite was effectively reached by the end of the 3-week period. A steady-state of milnacipran was reached on day 2 of both periods 1 and 3. Trough concentrations of milnacipran were 66 and 65 ng/ml before and after the fluoxetine administration period, respectively. Cmax values were 226 and 248 ng/ml. When comparing the kinetic parameters of milnacipran before and after fluoxetine treatment, all the 90% confidence intervals were in the 20% range. No significant difference in the adverse events of milnacipran was observed before or after fluoxetine administration.

Effect of prolonged exposure to milnacipran on norepinephrine transporter in cultured bovine adrenal medullary cells

The antidepressants milnacipran and paroxetine are used clinically worldwide. In the present study, we report here the effects of treatment with milnacipran and paroxetine on the functional activity, binding sites, and mRNA of the norepinephrine (NE) transporter (NET) in cultured bovine adrenal medullary cells. In acute treatment with antidepressants for 20 min, both milnacipran and paroxetine competitively inhibited NET function in cultured adrenal medullary cells. Prolonged treatment of adrenal medullary cells with milnacipran produced time (48-96h)- and concentration (35-355 nM)-dependent increases in [3H]NE uptake and [3H]DMI binding without any increase in NET mRNA. At a high concentration (800 nM, 72 h), paroxetine suppressed [3H]NE uptake. To examine whether milnacipran-induced [3H]NE uptake is mediated by newly synthesized mRNAs or proteins, we used actinomycin D, an inhibitor of DNA-dependent RNA polymerase, and cycloheximide, an inhibitor of ribosomal protein synthesis. Cycloheximide (1 micorM, 72 h) abolished the effect of milnacipran on [3H]NE uptake, while the stimulatory effect of milnacipran was observed in actinomycin D-treated cells. The present findings suggest that prolonged exposure to milnacipran up-regulates the NET function, probably through a post-transcriptional process of NET or other proteins.

Lack of Interaction of Milnacipran with the Cytochrome P450 Isoenzymes Frequently Involved in the Metabolism of Antidepressants

OBJECTIVE

To compare the pharmacokinetics of milnacipran in extensive metabolisers (EMs) and poor metabolisers (PMs) of sparteine and mephenytoin, and to assess the influence of multiple administrations of milnacipran on the activity of cytochrome P450 (CYP) isoenzymes through its own metabolism and through various probes, namely CYP2D6 (sparteine/dextromethorphan), CYP2C19 (mephenytoin), CYP1A2 (caffeine) and CYP3A4 (endogenous 6-beta-hydroxy-cortisol excretion).

METHODS

Twenty-five healthy subjects, 12 EMs for both sparteine/dextromethorphan and mephenytoin, nine EMs for mephenytoin and PMs for sparteine/dextromethorphan (PM(2D6)) and four PMs for mephenytoin and EMs for sparteine/dextromethorphan (PM(2C19)) were administered milnacipran as a single 50 mg capsule on day 1 followed by a 50 mg capsule twice daily for 7 days. The pharmacokinetics of milnacipran and its oxidative metabolites were assessed after the first dose (day 1) and after multiple administration (day 8), and were compared for differences between CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 PMs and EMs. Metabolic tests were performed before (day -2), during (days 1 and 8) and after (day 20) milnacipran administration.

RESULTS

Milnacipran steady state was rapidly achieved. Metabolism was limited: approximately 50% unchanged drug, 30% as glucuronide and 20% as oxidative metabolite (mainly F2800 the N-dealkyl metabolite). Milnacipran administration to PM2D6 and PM2C19 subjects did not increase parent drug exposure or decrease metabolite exposure. Milnacipran oxidative metabolism is not mediated through CYP2D6 or CYP2C19 polymorphic pathways nor does it significantly interact with CYP1A2, CYP2C19, CYP2D6 or CYP3A4 activities.

CONCLUSION

Limited reciprocal pharmacokinetic interaction between milnacipran and CYP isoenzymes would confer flexibility in the therapeutic use of the drug when combined with antidepressants. Drug-drug interaction risk would be low, even if the combined treatments were likely to inhibit CYP2D6 and CYP2C19 isoenzyme activities.