Palmer J L, Scott R J, Gibson A, Dickins M, Pleasance S
Clinical Pharmacology, Glaxo Wellcome R & D, Greenford, Middlesex, UK.
Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2001 Nov;52(5):555-61. doi: 10.1046/j.0306-5251.2001.01479.x.
The use of multiple probe substrates to evaluate the activity of drug metabolizing enzymes requires that there are no inter-substrate interactions. As part of a series of studies to develop a clinically useful collection of probe substrates that could be given alone or in any combination, we observed an interaction between midazolam (MDZ) and another component of the six-drug cocktail. Published data indicated that the interacting component was likely to be chlorzoxazone. This was investigated as part of a second study. The data relating to the interaction from both studies are reported here.
Both studies were performed in 16 healthy subjects. All treatments were given orally after an overnight fast. In study 1, which was performed to a four-period, open, crossover design, subjects received on separate occasions MDZ 5 mg, diclofenac 25 mg, a four drug cocktail (caffeine 100 mg, mephenytoin 100 mg, debrisoquine 10 mg and chlorzoxazone 250 mg) and a six drug cocktail (caffeine 100 mg, mephenytoin 100 mg, debrisoquine 10 mg, chlorzoxazone 250 mg, diclofenac 25 mg and MDZ 5 mg). In study 2, which was performed to a two-period, open, crossover design, subjects received a five drug cocktail (as the six drug cocktail in the first study, but without chlorzoxazone and with diclofenac dose increased to 50 mg) and a six drug cocktail (as five drug cocktail, with chlorzoxazone 250 mg). In both studies, blood samples were taken for measurement of plasma MDZ and 1-hydroxy MDZ (1-OH MDZ) concentrations. In study 1, blood samples were taken up to 12 h post-dose while in study 2 a single sample was taken 2 h after dosing. In study 1, the potential interaction between MDZ and the other components of the six drug cocktail was assessed by comparing AUClast ratios (1-OH MDZ/MDZ) between the two treatments. Additionally, a single sampling timepoint of 2 h post-dose for determination of concentration, rather than AUC, ratios was established. The 2 h plasma concentration ratios from studies 1 and 2 were combined and a pooled analysis performed to compare ratios within each study (to determine the change in ratio when MDZ was dosed with and without chlorzoxazone) and between studies (to determine the consistency of the ratios when MDZ was given either as part of the two six drug cocktails or when given alone and as part of the five drug cocktail).
In study 1, both the AUClast ratio and the 2 h post-dose plasma concentration ratio were reduced when MDZ was given as part of the six drug cocktail in comparison with those for MDZ alone. This was the result of an increase in MDZ, rather than decrease in 1-OH MDZ, concentrations and was considered to result from a reduction in first pass metabolism of MDZ. The geometric mean AUClast values (with 95% CI) for MDZ were 95.6 (79.0, 115.7) and 160.4 (133.6, 192.6) microg l(-1) h when given alone and as part of the six drug cocktail, respectively. The corresponding values for 1-OH MDZ were 789.6 (697.6, 893.6) and 791.4 (701.7, 892.6) microg l(-1) h. The ratio of adjusted geometric mean AUClast ratios for the two treatments was 1.82 (90% CI 1.48, 2.23, P < 0.001). The pooled plasma 1-OH MDZ/MDZ ratio data from both studies showed that the differences in MDZ metabolism observed in study 1 were replicated in study 2. The adjusted geometric mean 1-OH MDZ/MDZ ratios when MDZ was given alone and as part of the six drug cocktail were 7.79 and 4.59, respectively, for study 1 (ratio 1.70, 95% CI 1.36, 2.11, P < 0.001) and 7.64 and 4.60 for study 2 (ratio 1.66, 95% CI 1.34, 2.06, P < 0.001). These data indicate that when given orally chlorzoxazone interacts with MDZ, increasing plasma MDZ concentrations. In contrast, there was no difference between the plasma 1-OH MDZ/MDZ ratios when MDZ was given alone and as part of the five drug cocktail indicating that there were no interactions between MDZ and any of the other components of that cocktail.
Chlorzoxazone appears to significantly influence the pharmacokinetics of oral MDZ, probably through inhibition of first pass metabolism by CYP3A in the GI tract. Data from these studies and literature evidence showing a further interaction between chlorzoxazone and CYP1A2 substrates and questions concerning the specificity of chlorzoxazone as a probe substrate for CYP2E1, indicate that the use of chlorzoxazone in multisubstrate probe cocktails should be avoided.
使用多种探针底物评估药物代谢酶的活性需要不存在底物间相互作用。作为开发一系列临床可用探针底物(可单独或任意组合给药)研究的一部分,我们观察到咪达唑仑(MDZ)与六药鸡尾酒中的另一种成分之间存在相互作用。已发表的数据表明,相互作用的成分可能是氯唑沙宗。这作为第二项研究的一部分进行了调查。此处报告了两项研究中与该相互作用相关的数据。
两项研究均在16名健康受试者中进行。所有治疗均在禁食过夜后口服给药。在研究1中,采用四周期、开放、交叉设计,受试者在不同时间分别接受5毫克MDZ、25毫克双氯芬酸、四药鸡尾酒(100毫克咖啡因、100毫克美芬妥英、10毫克异喹胍和250毫克氯唑沙宗)以及六药鸡尾酒(100毫克咖啡因、100毫克美芬妥英、10毫克异喹胍、250毫克氯唑沙宗、25毫克双氯芬酸和5毫克MDZ)。在研究2中,采用两周期、开放、交叉设计,受试者接受五药鸡尾酒(如研究1中的六药鸡尾酒,但不含氯唑沙宗且双氯芬酸剂量增加至50毫克)和六药鸡尾酒(如五药鸡尾酒,含250毫克氯唑沙宗)。在两项研究中,均采集血样以测量血浆MDZ和1 - 羟基MDZ(1 - OH MDZ)浓度。在研究1中,给药后长达12小时采集血样,而在研究2中,给药后2小时采集单个样本。在研究1中,通过比较两种治疗之间的AUClast比值(1 - OH MDZ/MDZ)评估MDZ与六药鸡尾酒中其他成分之间的潜在相互作用。此外,确定了给药后2小时的单个采样时间点用于测定浓度比值而非AUC。将研究1和2的2小时血浆浓度比值合并并进行汇总分析,以比较各研究内的比值(确定MDZ与氯唑沙宗合用时和不合用时比值的变化)以及研究之间的比值(确定MDZ作为两种六药鸡尾酒的一部分给药时或单独给药以及作为五药鸡尾酒的一部分给药时比值的一致性)。
在研究1中,与单独给予MDZ相比,当MDZ作为六药鸡尾酒的一部分给药时,AUClast比值和给药后2小时血浆浓度比值均降低。这是MDZ浓度升高而非1 - OH MDZ浓度降低的结果,被认为是由于MDZ首过代谢减少所致。MDZ单独给药和作为六药鸡尾酒一部分给药时的几何平均AUClast值(95%置信区间)分别为95.6(79.0, 115.7)和160.4(133.6, 192.6)μg l⁻¹ h。1 - OH MDZ的相应值分别为789.6(697.6, 893.6)和791.4(701.7, 892.6)μg l⁻¹ h。两种治疗的调整几何平均AUClast比值之比为1.82(90%置信区间1.48, 2.23,P < 0.001)。两项研究的汇总血浆1 - OH MDZ/MDZ比值数据表明,研究1中观察到的MDZ代谢差异在研究2中得到了重复。在研究1中,MDZ单独给药和作为六药鸡尾酒一部分给药时调整后的几何平均1 - OH MDZ/MDZ比值分别为7.79和4.59(比值1.70, 95%置信区间1.36, 2.11,P < 0.001),在研究2中分别为7.64和4.60(比值1.66, 95%置信区间1.34, 2.06,P < 0.001)。这些数据表明,口服氯唑沙宗时与MDZ相互作用,增加血浆MDZ浓度。相比之下,MDZ单独给药和作为五药鸡尾酒一部分给药时血浆1 - OH MDZ/MDZ比值无差异,表明MDZ与该鸡尾酒中的任何其他成分之间不存在相互作用。
氯唑沙宗似乎显著影响口服MDZ的药代动力学,可能是通过抑制胃肠道中CYP3A的首过代谢。这些研究的数据以及文献证据表明氯唑沙宗与CYP1A2底物之间存在进一步相互作用,以及关于氯唑沙宗作为CYP2E1探针底物特异性的问题,表明应避免在多底物探针鸡尾酒中使用氯唑沙宗。