AIMS: To examine the effect of ticlopidine administration on the activities CYP2C19 and CYP3 A in vivo using omeprazole as a model substrate. METHODS: A single dose of 40 mg omeprazole was administered orally with or without ticlopidine (300 mg daily for 6 days) to six Japanese extensive metabolisers with respect to CYP2C19. Blood samples were taken for the measurement of plasma concentrations of omeprazole, 5-hydroxyomeprazole and omeprazole sulphone. RESULTS:Ticlopidine administration increased omeprazole Cmax (1978+/-859/ 3442+/-569 (control phase/ticlopidine phase, nm )) and decreased the oral clearance of omeprazole (CL/F; 25.70+/-16. 17/10.76+/-1.16 (control phase/ticlopidine phase, l h-1 )) significantly. The 5-hydroxyomeprazole to omeprazole AUC ratio (0. 817+/-0.448/0.236+/-0.053 (control phase/ticlopidine phase)) and the 5-hydroxyomeprazole to omeprazole sulphone AUC ratio (1.114+/-0. 782/0.256+/-0.051 (control phase/ticlopidine phase)) were decreased significantly after ticlopidine administration. The decrease in omeprazole CL/F and the 5-hydroxyomeprazole to omeprazole AUC ratio correlated significantly with their respective absolute values when the drug was given alone. The decrease in CL/F following ticlopidine administration correlated with that in the 5-hydroxyomeprazole to omeprazole AUC ratio. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that ticlopidine inhibited the in vivo activity of CYP2C19, but not, or to a lesser extent CYP3 A4, and that the magnitude of inhibition by ticlopidine is related to the in vivo activity of CYP2C19 before inhibition.
RCT Entities:
AIMS: To examine the effect of ticlopidine administration on the activities CYP2C19 and CYP3 A in vivo using omeprazole as a model substrate. METHODS: A single dose of 40 mg omeprazole was administered orally with or without ticlopidine (300 mg daily for 6 days) to six Japanese extensive metabolisers with respect to CYP2C19. Blood samples were taken for the measurement of plasma concentrations of omeprazole, 5-hydroxyomeprazole and omeprazole sulphone. RESULTS:Ticlopidine administration increased omeprazole Cmax (1978+/-859/ 3442+/-569 (control phase/ticlopidine phase, nm )) and decreased the oral clearance of omeprazole (CL/F; 25.70+/-16. 17/10.76+/-1.16 (control phase/ticlopidine phase, l h-1 )) significantly. The 5-hydroxyomeprazole to omeprazole AUC ratio (0. 817+/-0.448/0.236+/-0.053 (control phase/ticlopidine phase)) and the 5-hydroxyomeprazole to omeprazole sulphone AUC ratio (1.114+/-0. 782/0.256+/-0.051 (control phase/ticlopidine phase)) were decreased significantly after ticlopidine administration. The decrease in omeprazole CL/F and the 5-hydroxyomeprazole to omeprazole AUC ratio correlated significantly with their respective absolute values when the drug was given alone. The decrease in CL/F following ticlopidine administration correlated with that in the 5-hydroxyomeprazole to omeprazole AUC ratio. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that ticlopidine inhibited the in vivo activity of CYP2C19, but not, or to a lesser extent CYP3 A4, and that the magnitude of inhibition by ticlopidine is related to the in vivo activity of CYP2C19 before inhibition.
Authors: W K Hass; J D Easton; H P Adams; W Pryse-Phillips; B A Molony; S Anderson; B Kamm Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1989-08-24 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: M E Veronese; C J Doecke; P I Mackenzie; M E McManus; J O Miners; D L Rees; R Gasser; U A Meyer; D J Birkett Journal: Biochem J Date: 1993-01-15 Impact factor: 3.857
Authors: T Andersson; J O Miners; M E Veronese; W Tassaneeyakul; W Tassaneeyakul; U A Meyer; D J Birkett Journal: Br J Clin Pharmacol Date: 1993-12 Impact factor: 4.335
Authors: Lee Jia; Patricia E Noker; Lori Coward; Gregory S Gorman; Marina Protopopova; Joseph E Tomaszewski Journal: Br J Pharmacol Date: 2006-03 Impact factor: 8.739
Authors: Sean C Gay; Arthur G Roberts; Keiko Maekawa; Jyothi C Talakad; Wen-Xu Hong; Qinghai Zhang; C David Stout; James R Halpert Journal: Biochemistry Date: 2010-09-15 Impact factor: 3.162