Ergotism related to interaction between nelfinavir and ergotamine

In silico drug repositioning against human NRP1 to block SARS-CoV-2 host entry

Despite COVID-19 turned into a pandemic, no approved drug for the treatment or globally available vaccine is out yet. In such a global emergency, drug repurposing approach that bypasses a costly and long-time demanding drug discovery process is an effective way in search of finding drugs for the COVID-19 treatment. Recent studies showed that SARS-CoV-2 uses neuropilin-1 (NRP1) for host entry. Here we took advantage of structural information of the NRP1 in complex with C-terminal of spike (S) protein of SARS-CoV-2 to identify drugs that may inhibit NRP1 and S protein interaction. U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved drugs were screened using docking simulations. Among top drugs, well-tolerated drugs were selected for further analysis. Molecular dynamics (MD) simulations of drugs-NRP1 complexes were run for 100 ns to assess the persistency of binding. MM/GBSA calculations from MD simulations showed that eltrombopag, glimepiride, sitagliptin, dutasteride, and ergotamine stably and strongly bind to NRP1. In silico Alanine scanning analysis revealed that Tyr²⁹⁷, Trp³⁰¹, and Tyr³⁵³ amino acids of NRP1 are critical for drug binding. Validating the effect of drugs analyzed in this paper by experimental studies and clinical trials will expedite the drug discovery process for COVID-19.

In silico identification of widely used and well-tolerated drugs as potential SARS-CoV-2 3C-like protease and viral RNA-dependent RNA polymerase inhibitors for direct use in clinical trials

Despite strict measures taken by many countries, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) continues to be an issue of global concern. Currently, there are no clinically proven pharmacotherapies for coronavirus disease 2019, despite promising initial results obtained from drugs such as azithromycin and hydroxychloroquine. Therefore, the repurposing of clinically approved drugs for use against SARS-CoV-2 has become a viable strategy. Here, we searched for drugs that target SARS-CoV-2 3C-like protease (3CLpro) and viral RNA-dependent RNA polymerase (RdRp) by in silico screening of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved drug library. Well-tolerated and widely used drugs were selected for molecular dynamics (MD) simulations to evaluate drug-protein interactions and their persistence under physiological conditions. Tetracycline, dihydroergotamine, ergotamine, dutasteride, nelfinavir, and paliperidone formed stable interactions with 3CLpro based on MD simulation results. Similar analysis with RdRp showed that eltrombopag, tipranavir, ergotamine, and conivaptan bound to the enzyme with high binding free energies. Docking results suggest that ergotamine, dihydroergotamine, bromocriptine, dutasteride, conivaptan, paliperidone, and tipranavir can bind to both enzymes with high affinity. As these drugs are well tolerated, cost-effective, and widely used, our study suggests that they could potentially to be used in clinical trials for the treatment of SARS-CoV-2-infected patients.Communicated by Ramaswamy H. Sarma.

History of the Use of Ergotamine and Dihydroergotamine in Migraine From 1906 and Onward

Dale showed in 1906 in a seminal work that ergot inhibits the pressor effect of adrenaline. Stoll at Sandoz isolated ergotamine from ergot in 1918. Based on the belief that migraine was due to increased sympathetic activity, ergotamine was first used in the acute treatment of migraine by Maier in Switzerland in 1925. In 1938 Graham and Wolff demonstrated the parallel decrease of temporal pulsations and headache after ergotamine i.v. This inspired the vascular theory of Wolff: an initial cerebral vasoconstriction followed by an extracranial vasodilation. Dihydroergotamine (DHE) was introduced as an adrenolytic agent in 1943. It is still in use parenterally and by the nasal route. Before the triptan era ergotamine and DHE had widespread use as the only specific antimigraine drugs. From 1950 the world literature on ergotamine was dominated by two adverse events: ergotamine overuse headache and the relatively rare overt ergotism. Recently, oral ergotamine, which has an oral bioavailability of < 1%, has been inferior to oral triptans in randomized clinical trials. A European Consensus in 2000 concluded that ergotamine is not a drug of first choice. In an American review of 2003 it was suggested that ergotamine may be considered in the treatment of selected patients with moderate to severe migraine.

Pharmacokinetics and interactions of headache medications, part I: introduction, pharmacokinetics, metabolism and acute treatments

Recent progress in the treatment of primary headaches has made available specific, effective and safe medications for these disorders, which are widely spread among the general population. One of the negative consequences of this undoubtedly positive progress is the risk of drug-drug interactions. This review is the first in a two-part series on pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions of headache medications. Part I addresses acute treatments. Part II focuses on prophylactic treatments. The overall aim of this series is to increase the awareness of physicians, either primary care providers or specialists, regarding this topic. Pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions of major severity involving acute medications are a minority among those reported in literature. The main drug combinations to avoid are: i) NSAIDs plus drugs with a narrow therapeutic range (i.e., digoxin, methotrexate, etc.); ii) sumatriptan, rizatriptan or zolmitriptan plus monoamine oxidase inhibitors; iii) substrates and inhibitors of CYP2D6 (i.e., chlorpromazine, metoclopramide, etc.) and -3A4 (i.e., ergot derivatives, eletriptan, etc.), as well as other substrates or inhibitors of the same CYP isoenzymes. The risk of having clinically significant pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions seems to be limited in patients with low frequency headaches, but could be higher in chronic headache sufferers with medication overuse.

Drug interactions between antiretroviral drugs and comedicated agents

HIV-infected individuals usually receive a wide variety of drugs in addition to their antiretroviral drug regimen. Since both non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors and protease inhibitors are extensively metabolised by the cytochrome P450 system, there is a considerable potential for pharmacokinetic drug interactions when they are administered concomitantly with other drugs metabolised via the same pathway. In addition, protease inhibitors are substrates as well as inhibitors of the drug transporter P-glycoprotein, which also can result in pharmacokinetic drug interactions. The nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors are predominantly excreted by the renal system and may also give rise to interactions. This review will discuss the pharmacokinetics of the different classes of antiretroviral drugs and the mechanisms by which drug interactions can occur. Furthermore, a literature overview of drug interactions is given, including the following items when available: coadministered agent and dosage, type of study that is performed to study the drug interaction, the subjects involved and, if specified, the type of subjects (healthy volunteers, HIV-infected individuals, sex), antiretroviral drug(s) and dosage, interaction mechanism, the effect and if possible the magnitude of interaction, comments, advice on what to do when the interaction occurs or how to avoid it, and references. This discussion of the different mechanisms of drug interactions, and the accompanying overview of data, will assist in providing optimal care to HIV-infected patients.

Ergotism associated with HIV antiviral protease inhibitor therapy

Ergotism is a rare condition of acute vasospasm found classically in young and middle-aged women taking ergot alkaloid agents to treat migraine headache. We report the case of a young man with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) positivity and describe the drug interaction between protease inhibitors and ergot alkaloid agents, which most likely predisposed to development of ergot toxicity. The HIV-positive population receiving antiviral therapy may be an under-recognized group at risk for ergotism through decreased hepatic metabolism of ergot preparations.

Nelfinavir, a protease inhibitor, increases sirolimus levels in a liver transplantation patient: a case report

With the increasing success of liver transplantation and the proven effectiveness of highly active retroviral therapy in HIV-positive patients, liver transplantation has been performed successfully in selected HIV-positive recipients with CD4 and an HIV viral load response to highly active antiretroviral therapy. In these patients, an interaction between a protease inhibitor (nelfinavir) and tacrolimus has been shown. The effect of nelfinavir on the pharmacokinetics of sirolimus, a newer immunosuppressive drug, is currently not known. The goal of the present case report is to document the interaction between sirolimus and nelfinavir in a liver transplantation patient. A 40-year-old woman who was HIV positive underwent a cadaveric liver transplantation for acute fulminant liver failure secondary to nevirapine (a nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor). Postoperatively, she was treated with tacrolimus and steroids. She experienced steroid-resistant rejection and was started on sirolimus on the 17th postoperative day. Kinetic parameters were determined after a 2-mg oral dose of sirolimus and 250 mg of nelfinavir by collecting multiple peripheral venous blood samples before and after sirolimus administration. The kinetic parameters were compared with parameters from three liver transplantation patients on sirolimus who were not on nelfinavir. After normalizing the kinetic parameters to sirolimus dose of 1 mg/d, 0-hour and 24-hour trough sirolimus concentrations were nine-fold and five-fold higher for the patient who was on nelfinavir, compared with those who were not on nelfinavir. The maximum concentration was 3.2 times higher, the area under the concentration curve was 1.6 times higher, and the terminal disposition half-life was prolonged by 60%. The time to reach the peak concentration was 1 hour in all patients. Increase in trough concentration, peak concentration area under the curve concentration, and prolongation of half-life of sirolimus has been shown in a patient who was on a low dose (one fifth the recommended dose) of nelfinavir.

The interaction between antiretroviral agents and tacrolimus in liver and kidney transplant patients

Solid organ transplantations have been performed successfully in selected HIV-positive patients with highly active antiretrovirus therapy (HAART). However, some of the medications in the HAART regimen require metabolism via the cytochrome P4503A, the same enzyme complex responsible for clearance of the calcineurin inhibitors cyclosporine and tacrolimus. Several case reports have described significant interactions between the agents used in HAART and immunosuppressive drugs. The goal of this report is to examine the extent of potential drug interactions between antiretroviral agents and tacrolimus after liver and kidney transplantation. Seven liver transplant (LTx) patients (M = 6, F = 1) and four kidney transplant (KTx) patients (M = 4) infected with HIV underwent surgery between September 1997 and January 2001. Initial immunosuppression consisted of tacrolimus and steroids for LTx patients or tacrolimus, steroids, and mycophenolate mofetil for KTx recipients. Their current baseline immunosuppression and HAART regimen were examined retrospectively. Of the seven liver recipients, one (case 4) died 2 weeks after LTx and never received HAART therapy posttransplantation. The remaining six patients were placed on a regimen consisting of two nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTI) and one protease inhibitor (PI) (nelfinavir in 5, indinavir in 1) based on known viral sensitivities or history of a previous clinical response. Kidney recipients received NRTI and nonnucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTI). The mean dose of tacrolimus in liver recipients was 0.6 mg/d, with mean trough concentration of 9.7 mg/mL. Compared with historic controls (liver transplant patients not on HAART), the average tacrolimus dose was 16-fold lower in patients on HAART. In contrast to liver recipients, HIV-positive kidney recipients not on PI therapy required a mean tacrolimus dose of 9.5 mg/d to maintain a mean trough concentration of 9.6 ng/mL. Of the two protease inhibitors used, nelfinavir seems to have a more profound effect than indinavir. When patients on nelfinavir alone (n = 5) were compared with a control group not on antiretroviral therapy, the need for a tacrolimus dose was 38 times lower (mean dose, 0.26 mg/d). Profound drug interactions between PI and tacrolimus have been observed requiring up to 50-fold reductions in dosage. This effect seems to be most pronounced with the use of nelfinavir as opposed to indinavir, although further experience is required to confirm this observation. In contrast, HAART using NRTI and NNRTI without the use of PI, as shown in kidney recipients, produces less significant effects on tacrolimus metabolism. Great caution and frequent drug level monitoring are necessary when HAART is introduced or withdrawn in HIV-positive recipients of organ transplants.