The effect of sevelamer on tacrolimus target levels

Exploring co-dispensed drug use in patients on sevelamer or polystyrene sulfonate to identify potential novel binding interactions: a cross sectional in silico study : Potential novel binding interactions with resins

Background Sevelamer and polystyrene sulfonate are used for treating hyperphosphatemia and hyperkalaemia in chronic kidney disease patients. Because of their binding properties, these resins potentially bind other drugs in the gastrointestinal tract, thereby decreasing their bioavailability and clinical effectiveness. Aim The aim of this study was to explore co-dispensed drug use in patients on sevelamer or polystyrene sulfonate to identify potential novel binding interactions. Method In this in silico study, the 100 drugs most frequently co-dispensed with sevelamer/polystyrene sulfonate in the period 2000-2018 were extracted from the University Groningen IADB.nl database. Drugs dispensed to < 5% of patients, drugs not orally administered, drugs administered once daily before bedtime and drugs for which information on binding interactions with sevelamer or polystyrene was already available were excluded. The likelihood of an interaction (yes or no) of the included drugs was assessed based on pKa- and Log P values. For sevelamer, drugs with a pKa (acid) between 1.5 and 7.4 and or a Log P value > 2.0 were identified as potential interacting drug. For polystyrene sulfonate, drugs with a pKa (base) > 1.5 were identified as potential interacting drug. Results Of the top 100 drugs most frequently co-dispensed with sevelamer/polystyrene sulfonate, 22 and 27 potentially clinically relevant new interacting drugs were identified for sevelamer and polystyrene sulfonate respectively. Conclusion Several potentially relevant novel binding interactions for sevelamer and polystyrene sulfonate were identified based on dispensing data and assessment of chemical properties for which further interaction research is warranted.

Binding interactions with sevelamer and polystyrene sulfonate in vitro

This study explored the binding of 28 drugs, which were selected based on frequency of concomitant use and chemical properties, to sevelamer and polystyrene sulfonate in vitro. The relative binding was determined by dissolving the investigated drugs alone (=control), together with 800 mg of sevelamer and 15 g of polystyrene sulfonate at different pH levels (1.5, 5.5, and 7.4), respectively. After incubation at 37℃ and shaking for 60 min, the solutions were diluted and centrifuged, and the drug concentrations were quantified with validated analytical assays. The binding assays were performed in threefold. The mean relative binding (MRB) at each pH level was calculated, with a MRB >20% for at least one pH level to be considered as relevant binding. Fourteen and 23 potentially new binding interactions were identified with sevelamer and polystyrene sulfonate, respectively. These potentially new binding interactions have to be studied in vivo to assess their clinical relevance.

Subtherapeutic serum quetiapine concentrations after absorption inhibition by binding resins: a case report

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Polystyrene sulfonate and sevelamer are binding resins that are used in the treatment of, respectively, hyperkalemia and hyperphosphatemia. It is unknown whether these resins interact with the antipsychotic quetiapine.

CASE SUMMARY

We report on a woman with unexplainable low serum quetiapine concentrations who also used the binding resins polystyrene sulfonate and sevelamer. An In vitro binding assay showed binding of quetiapine by these resins. Separation of the ingestion times of quetiapine and the binding resins resulted in increased serum levels in this patient.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

Polystyrene sulfonate and sevelamer are able to bind quetiapine. Healthcare professionals should be aware of this potential drug-drug interaction as this could lead to antipsychotic treatment failure.

Update and critical appraisal of sevelamer in the management of chronic renal failure

Sevelamer (Renagel and Renvela), is an orally administered weakly basic anion exchange resin that binds dietary phosphate in the gastrointestinal tract, and is approved for use in the US, Europe and many other countries for the treatment of hyperphosphatemia in adult patients on hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis. Clinical evidence shows that sevelamer is at least as effective as calcium-based oral phosphate binders in controlling serum phosphate, but with a lower incidence of hypercalcemia. Whilst sevelamer hydrochloride is associated with mild acidosis, sevelamer carbonate does not have this drawback. Use of sevelamer and avoidance of calcium-based binders may slow the progression of vascular calcification in hemodialysis patients, and it also reduces serum low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol levels. There was no between-group difference in all-cause mortality between sevelamer and calcium-based phosphate binder therapy in the primary efficacy analysis of the large (n >2100), 3-year DCOR trial. In the smaller (n = 109) nonblind RIND trial in patients new to hemodialysis, data suggest there may be an overall survival benefit with sevelamer versus calcium-based phosphate binder treatment but the evidence on the efficacy of sevelamer in reducing mortality and hospitalization is not strong. The balance of evidence, however, does not strongly support the use of sevelamer over the much less costly calcium-based binders except in patients at risk of hypercalcemic episodes. Further research into cardiovascular and all-cause mortality over a longer time period would be needed to settle this issue, and the relative survival benefits and cost effectiveness of all phosphate binder therapies remains to be fully determined. Despite the relative paucity of data available, sevelamer has established itself as the most widely used binder in the United States and the most widely used noncalcium-based binder worldwide. However, affordability is a major issue for most health economies and in the light of recent economic events is likely to become more prominent.

Immunotherapy in elderly transplant recipients: a guide to clinically significant drug interactions

Currently, >50% of candidates for solid organ transplantation in Europe and the US are aged >50 years while approximately 15% of potential recipients are aged >or=65 years. Elderly transplant candidates are characterized by specific co-morbidity profiles that compromise graft and patient outcome after transplantation. The presence of coronary artery or peripheral vascular disease, cerebrovascular disease, history of malignancy, chronic obstructive lung disease or diabetes mellitus further increases the early post-transplant mortality risk in elderly recipients, with infections and cardiovascular complications as the leading causes of death. Not only are elderly patients more prone to developing drug-related adverse effects, but they are also more susceptible to pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic drug interactions because of polypharmacy. The majority of currently used immunosuppressant drugs in organ transplantation are metabolized by cytochrome P450 (CYP) or uridine diphosphate-glucuronosyltransferases and are substrates of the multidrug resistance (MDR)-1 transporter P-glycoprotein, the MDR-associated protein 2 or the canalicular multispecific organic anion transporter, which predisposes these immunosuppressant compounds to specific interactions with commonly prescribed drugs. In addition, important drug interactions between immunosuppressant drugs have been identified and require attention when choosing an appropriate immunosuppressant drug regimen for the frail elderly organ recipient. An age-related 34% decrease in total body clearance of the calcineurin inhibitor ciclosporin was observed in elderly renal recipients (aged >65 years) compared with younger patients, while older recipients also had 44% higher intracellular lymphocyte ciclosporin concentrations. Similarly, using a Bayesian approach, an inverse relationship was noted between sirolimus clearance and age in stable kidney recipients. Ciclosporin and tacrolimus have distinct pharmacokinetics, but both are metabolized by intestinal and hepatic CYP3A4/3A5 and transported across the cell membrane by P-glycoprotein. The most common drug interactions with ciclosporin are therefore also observed with tacrolimus, but the two drugs do not interact identically when administered with CYP3A inhibitors or inducers. The strongest effects on calcineurin-inhibitor disposition are observed with azole antifungals, macrolide antibacterials, rifampicin, calcium channel antagonists, grapefruit juice, St John's wort and protease inhibitors. Drug interactions with mycophenolic acids occur mainly through inhibition of their enterohepatic recirculation, either by interference with the intestinal flora (antibacterials) or by limiting drug absorption (resins and binders). Rifampicin causes a reduction in mycophenolic acid exposure probably through induction of uridine diphosphate-glucuronosyltransferases. Proliferation signal inhibitors (PSIs) such as sirolimus and everolimus are substrates of CYP3A4 and P-glycoprotein and have a macrolide structure very similar to tacrolimus, which explains why common drug interactions with PSIs are comparable to those with calcineurin inhibitors. Ciclosporin, in contrast to tacrolimus, inhibits the enterohepatic recirculation of mycophenolic acids, resulting in significantly lower concentrations and hence risk of underexposure. Therefore, when switching from tacrolimus to ciclosporin and vice versa or when reducing or withdrawing ciclosporin, this interaction needs to be taken into account. The combination of ciclosporin with PSIs requires dose reductions of both drugs because of a synergistic interaction that causes nephrotoxicity when left uncorrected. Conversely, when switching between calcineurin inhibitors, intensified monitoring of PSI concentrations is mandatory. Increasing age is associated with structural and functional changes in body compartments and tissues that alter absorptive capacity, volume of distribution, hepatic metabolic function and renal function and ultimately drug disposition. While these age-related changes are well-known, few specific effects of the latter on immunosuppressant drug metabolism have been reported. Therefore, more clinical data from elderly organ recipients are urgently required.