Comparative oxidative metabolic profiles of clomipramine in cats, rats and dogs: preliminary results from an in vitro study

Comparative pharmacokinetic profile of cimicoxib in dogs and cats after IV administration

Cimicoxib is a selective COX-2 inhibitor (coxib) registered for the treatment of pain and inflammation in dogs. Pharmacokinetics of some coxibs have been described in dogs and cats. In cats, total body clearance values are lower and terminal half-lives of the coxibs are longer than those in dogs. The aim of this work was to evaluate if this is also the case for cimicoxib. For this purpose, blood pharmacokinetics and urinary excretion after IV administration were compared between these species. The in vitro metabolism of cimicoxib was also evaluated using canine and feline microsomes. In canine and feline microsomes, the formation rate of demethyl-cimicoxib, a phase 1 metabolite, was decreased in presence of quinidine, a specific human cytochrome P450 (CYP)2D6 inhibitor. IC₅₀ values were 1.6 μM and 0.056 μM with canine and feline microsomes, respectively. As quinidine was about 30 times more potent in feline microsomes, the affinity of cimicoxib to the enzyme was considered to be about 30 times lower than that in canine microsomes. Total body clearance (Cl_B) of cimicoxib, was 0.50 L/h kg in dogs and 0.14 L/h kg in cats (P < 0.01) and terminal half-life, T_½λz, was 1.92 and 5.25 h, respectively (P < 0.01). Dose eliminated in urine was 12.2% in dogs and 3.12% in cats (P < 0.01). Conjugated demethyl-cimicoxib represented 93.7% of this amount in dogs and 67.5% in cats. Thus cimicoxib, like other veterinary coxibs, was eliminated more slowly in cats. Both CYP2D15 (the canine ortholog of CYP2D6) and UDP-glucuronyltransferase enzyme systems have reduced ability to produce metabolites of cimicoxib in cats.

Metabolism and pharmacokinetics of pharmaceuticals in cats (Felix sylvestris catus) and implications for the risk assessment of feed additives and contaminants

In animal health risk assessment, hazard characterisation of feed additives has been often using the default uncertainty factor (UF) of 100 to translate a no-observed-adverse-effect level in test species (rat, mouse, dog, rabbit) to a 'safe' level of chronic exposure in farm and companion animal species. Historically, both 10-fold factors have been further divided to include chemical-specific data in both dimensions when available. For cats (Felis Sylvestris catus), an extra default UF of 5 is applied due to the species' deficiency in particularly glucuronidation and glycine conjugation. This paper aims to assess the scientific basis and validity of the UF for inter-species differences in kinetics (4.0) and the extra UF applied for cats through a comparison of kinetic parameters between rats and cats for 30 substrates of phase I and phase II metabolism. When the parent compound undergoes glucuronidation the default factor of 4.0 is exceeded, with exceptions for zidovudine and S-carprofen. Compounds that were mainly renally excreted did not exceed the 4.0-fold default. Mixed results were obtained for chemicals which are metabolised by CYP3A in rats. When chemicals were administered intravenously the 4.0-fold default was not exceeded with the exception of clomipramine, lidocaine and alfentanil. The differences seen after oral administration might be due to differences in first-pass metabolism and bioavailability. Further work is needed to further characterise phase I, phase II enzymes and transporters in cats to support the development of databases and in silico models to support hazard characterisation of chemicals particularly for feed additives.

Minimising Stress for Patients in the Veterinary Hospital: Why It Is Important and What Can Be Done about It

Minimising stress for patients should always be a priority in the veterinary hospital. However, this is often overlooked. While a "no stress" environment is not possible, understanding how to create a "low stress" (sometimes called "fear-free") environment and how to handle animals in a less stressful manner benefits patients, staff and the hospital alike. Many veterinary practitioners believe creating a low stress environment is too hard and too time consuming, but this need not be the case. With some simple approaches, minimising patient, and hence staff, stress is achievable in all veterinary practices. This article provides a background on why minimising stress is important and outlines some practical steps that can be taken by staff to minimise stress for presenting and hospitalised patients. Useful resources on recognising signs of stress in dogs and cats, handling, restraint, behaviour modification, medications, and hospital design are provided.