Fluoxetine-induced elevation and prolongation of tricyclic levels in overdose

Systematic overview of drug interactions with antidepressant medications

OBJECTIVE

Antidepressants are commonly used drugs with potential for numerous drug interactions. This study aims to systematically review the literature on drug interactions with antidepressants.

METHODS

We searched MEDLINE (1966 to November 2003) and EMBASE (1980 to 2003), using the heading drug interactions combined with individual antidepressant names. We restricted searches to English-language articles and human studies. We screened drug interaction texts and review articles for relevant studies. We included articles reporting original human data on drug interactions with antidepressants commonly used in North America. Articles were independently evaluated by 2 reviewers on clinical effect, clinical significance, and quality of evidence. Discrepancies were resolved by consensus.

RESULTS

There were 904 eligible interactions, involving 9509 patients, for a total of 598 summary interactions. Of these, 439 (73%) demonstrated an interaction, 148 (25%) had no effect, and 11 (2%) had conflicting evidence. For 510 interactions (85%), the quality of evidence was poor. It was fair for 67 (11%) interactions and good for 10 (2%) interactions. There were no interactions with excellent quality of evidence. There were 145 (24%) interactions of major clinical significance. These were predominantly hypertensive emergencies and serotonin syndrome. Most interacting drugs had central nervous system (CNS) activity. As expected, monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs) appear to be the most problematic family in terms of potential for serious drug interactions.

CONCLUSIONS

Drug interactions with antidepressants are an important cause for concern, but this concern is based primarily on poor evidence. We recommend caution when combining antidepressants with other CNS drugs, particularly when coadministering MAOIs with other substances.

Clinical pharmacokinetics of drugs used to treat urge incontinence

Urge incontinence (also known as overactive bladder) is a common form of urinary incontinence, occurring alone or as a component of mixed urinary incontinence, frequently together with stress incontinence. Because of the pathophysiology of urge incontinence, anticholinergic/antispasmodic agents form the cornerstone of therapy. Unfortunately, the pharmacological activity of these agents is not limited to the urinary tract, leading to systemic adverse effects that often promote nonadherence. Although the pharmacokinetics of flavoxate, propantheline, scopolamine, imipramine/desipramine, trospium chloride and propiverine are also reviewed here, only for oxybutynin and tolterodine are there adequate efficacy/tolerability data to support their use in urge incontinence. Oxybutynin is poorly absorbed orally (2-11% for the immediate-release tablet formulation). Controlled-release oral formulations significantly prolong the time to peak plasma concentration and reduce the degree of fluctuation around the average concentration. Significant absorption occurs after intravesical (bladder) and transdermal administration, although concentrations of the active N-desethyl metabolite are lower after transdermal compared with oral administration, possibly improving tolerability. Food has been found to significantly affect the absorption of one of the controlled-release formulations of oxybutynin, enhancing the rate of drug release. Oxybutynin is extensively metabolised, principally via N-demethylation mediated by the cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A isozyme. The pharmacokinetics of tolterodine are dependent in large part on the pharmacogenomics of the CYP2D6 and 3A4 isozymes. In an unselected population, oral bioavailability of tolterodine ranges from 10% to 74% (mean 33%) whereas in CYP2D6 extensive metabolisers and poor metabolisers mean bioavailabilities are 26% and 91%, respectively. Tolterodine is metabolised via CYP2D6 to the active metabolite 5-hydroxymethyl-tolterodine and via CYP3A to N-dealkylated metabolites. Urinary excretion of parent compound plays a minor role in drug disposition. Drug effect is based upon the unbound concentration of the so-called 'active moiety' (sum of tolterodine + 5-hydroxymethyl-tolterodine). Terminal disposition half-lives of tolterodine and 5-hydroxymethyl-tolterodine (in CYP2D6 extensive metabolisers) are 2-3 and 3-4 hours, respectively. Coadministration of antacid essentially converts the extended-release formulation into an immediate-release formulation. Knowledge of the pharmacokinetics of these agents may improve the treatment of urge incontinence by allowing the identification of individuals at high risk for toxicity with 'usual' dosages. In addition, the use of alternative formulations (controlled-release oral, transdermal) may also facilitate adherence, not only by reducing the frequency of drug administration but also by enhancing tolerability by altering the proportions of parent compound and active metabolite in the blood.

Pharmacokinetics of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors

The five selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, paroxetine, sertraline, and citalopram, have similar antidepressant efficacy and a similar side effect profile. They differ, however, in their pharmacokinetic properties. Under steady-state concentrations, their half-lives range between 1 and 4 days for fluoxetine (7 and 15 days for norfluoxetine) and between 21 (paroxetine) and 36 (citalopram) hr for the other SSRIs. Sertraline and citalopram show linear and fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, and paroxetine nonlinear pharmacokinetics. SSRIs underlie an extensive metabolism with high interindividual variability, whereby cytochrome P450 (CYP) isoenzymes play a major role. Therefore, resulting blood concentrations are highly variable between individuals. Except for N-demethylated fluoxetine, metabolites of SSRIs do not contribute to clinical actions. Therapeutically effective blood concentrations are unclear so far, although there is evidence for minimal effective and upper-threshold concentrations that should not be exceeded. Paroxetine and, to a lesser degree, fluoxetine and norfluoxetine are potent inhibitors of CYP2D6 and fluvoxamine of CYP1A2 and CYP2C19. This can give rise to drug-drug interactions that may have no effect, lead to intoxication, or improve the therapeutic response. These different pharmacokinetic properties of the five SSRIs, especially their drug-drug interaction potential, should be considered when selecting a distinct SSRI for treatment of depression or other disorders with a suggested dysfunction of the serotonergic system in the brain.

Fluoxetine. A review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties, and therapeutic use in older patients with depressive illness

The selective serotonin (5-hydroxytryptamine; 5-HT) reuptake inhibitor fluoxetine is an effective antidepressant in elderly patients. Its efficacy is similar to that of other frequently used antidepressants, such as the tricyclic antidepressants. However, compared with the tricyclic antidepressants, fluoxetine has a more favourable tolerability profile and is less toxic in overdose. It is associated with fewer anticholinergic, cardiovascular and CNS adverse events, but greater numbers of gastrointestinal adverse events than have been reported for the tricyclic antidepressants. This is important in elderly patients who are more at risk of developing central anticholinergic and cardiovascular effects than are younger patients. Therefore, while its position relative to other selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors requires investigation, fluoxetine represents a major advance over tricyclic antidepressant agents in the treatment of elderly patients with depression, predominantly because of its favourable tolerability profile.

Steady-state kinetics of fluoxetine and amitriptyline in patients treated with a combination of these drugs as compared with those treated with amitriptyline alone

The steady-state kinetics of amitriptyline (AMI), fluoxetine (FLU), and their active metabolites nortriptyline (NTRIP) and norfluoxetine (NFLU) were studied in 15 patients treated once daily for long durations with 50 mg of AMI and 20 mg of FLU. These compounds were analyzed simultaneously in plasma by liquid chromatography. The means and (SEM) of the steady-state concentrations (Css) of AMI, NTRIP, FLU, and NFLU were 80.6 (14.2), 52.6 (10.3), 85.3 (16.1), and 90 (13.6) ng/mL, respectively, and the apparent oral clearances (CLor) of AMI and FLU were 42.4 (8.6) and 14.9 (2.5) L/hr, respectively. The metabolite/drug steady-state concentration ratio (Css(m)/Css) for NTRIP/AMI was 0.75 (0.14) and for NFLU/FLU was 1.27 (0.17). There was a significant correlation (P < 0.05) between Css of FLU and that of AMI or NTRIP. The Css and Css(m)/Css values obtained for AMI were higher (P < 0.056 and P < 0.0034, respectively) than those we observed in 10 patients treated solely with the same dose of AMI. The twofold increase in Css of AMI and ninefold increase in Css of NTRIP seem to be the result of inhibition of the metabolism of these compounds by FLU, particularly the ring hydroxylation. Norfluoxetine may have a small inhibitory influence on the metabolism of NTRIP but lacks this effect on the metabolism of AMI.

Prescribing attitudes of different physician groups regarding fluoxetine

OBJECTIVE

To determine the attitudes and prescribing patterns of family medicine and psychiatric physicians regarding fluoxetine.

DESIGN

A three-part questionnaire was distributed to the Departments of Family Medicine and Psychiatry. The survey included topics associated with fluoxetine use that have received broad professional attention, such as drug-induced suicidal and aggressive behavior.

SETTING

The Family Practice Medical Group and the Department of Psychiatry at the University of Florida.

PARTICIPANTS

Mailing lists from both above departments were used to distribute surveys to residents, fellows, and attending/faculty members of each department. Eighty-seven surveys were mailed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Survey questions were divided into three sections to help determine current attitudes of prescribing fluoxetine: eight short cases, 16 statements, and demographic data.

RESULTS

The return rate was 69 percent following a mailing and a hand-delivered copy. Responses were dichotomized to agree or disagree and were analyzed by Fisher's exact test. Psychiatrists were much more likely than family practitioners to prescribe fluoxetine for obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), and more likely to prescribe for a patient with a history of substance abuse or seizure disorder. Psychiatrists were more aware of safety issues; however, drug-interaction knowledge was weak in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Family practitioners, being the most predominant of medical specialists, appeared equally comfortable with prescribing fluoxetine in most circumstances compared with psychiatrists. However, there is a need for pharmacists to provide up-to-date drug information on fluoxetine to all healthcare professionals.