Literature DB >> 12352933

Plasma concentrations of the enantiomers of fluoxetine and norfluoxetine: sources of variability and preliminary observations on relations with clinical response.

Giovanna Jannuzzi1, Giuliana Gatti, Paolo Magni, Edoardo Spina, Roberta Pacifici, Piergiorgio Zuccaro, Riccardo Torta, Laura Guarneri, Emilio Perucca.   

Abstract

Factors affecting the plasma concentrations of the R- and S-enantiomers of fluoxetine and norfluoxetine were investigated in 131 adult patients receiving long-term fluoxetine, of 10 to 60 mg/d (mean, 24 +/- 10 mg/d). Plasma concentration values (geometric means, CI 95%) in these patients were 186 (156, 223) nmol/L for S-fluoxetine, 67 (58, 77) nmol/L for R-fluoxetine, 247 (212, 287) nmol/L for S-norfluoxetine, and 118 (102, 137) nmol/L for R-norfluoxetine. The difference between the concentrations of the respective R- and S-enantiomers was statistically significant ( P< 0.0001) for both the parent drug and the demethylated metabolite. A significant correlation was found between the concentrations of each enantiomer and the prescribed daily dosage (r = 0.44, P< 0.0001 for S-fluoxetine; r = 0.48, P < 0.0001 for R-fluoxetine; r = 0.36, < 0.0001 for S-norfluoxetine; r = 0.32, P = 0.0003 for R-norfluoxetine), but the variability in concentration at any given dosage was considerable. When an iterative model based on multiple polynomial regressions was applied to determine the potential contributions of dosage, age, gender, body weight, and concomitant medication to the variability in the plasma concentration of the enantiomers, dosage was consistently found to provide the greatest predictive value. The predictive value of the model could be consistently improved when concentrations of other enantiomers were included as covariates. Of 58 patients with depressive symptoms for whom evaluation of clinical response (CGI scale) was available, 33 (57%) responded favorably to treatment. The plasma levels of individual enantiomers and of the active moiety (ActM, sum of the concentrations of R-fluoxetine, S-fluoxetine, and S-norfluoxetine) in these patients did not differ significantly from those found in patients with unsatisfactory therapeutic response. Likewise, the concentrations of individual enantiomers and of the ActM were similar in patients with or without adverse effects. Overall, these results demonstrate that the pharmacokinetics of fluoxetine and norfluoxetine exhibit marked stereoselectivity and considerable interpatient variability, which could not be explained by differences in gender, age, or comedication. In addition, a considerable variability was found in the enantiomers' concentrations associated with a favorable therapeutic response.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12352933     DOI: 10.1097/00007691-200210000-00006

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ther Drug Monit        ISSN: 0163-4356            Impact factor:   3.681


  8 in total

1.  Bioequivalence testing of a new tablet formulation of generic fluoxetine.

Authors:  D Jovanović; V Kilibarda; S Dordević; M Jovanović; J Jovic-Stosić; D Srdić; T Knezević
Journal:  Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet       Date:  2006 Jan-Mar       Impact factor: 2.441

2.  Disposition of chiral and racemic fluoxetine and norfluoxetine across childbearing.

Authors:  Dorothy Sit; James M Perel; James F Luther; Stephen R Wisniewski; Joseph C Helsel; Katherine L Wisner
Journal:  J Clin Psychopharmacol       Date:  2010-08       Impact factor: 3.153

3.  Effects of norfluoxetine on the action potential and transmembrane ion currents in canine ventricular cardiomyocytes.

Authors:  János Magyar; Norbert Szentandrássy; Tamás Bányász; Valéria Kecskeméti; Péter P Nánási
Journal:  Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol       Date:  2004-08-26       Impact factor: 3.000

4.  Effect of CYP2D6 and CYP2C9 genotypes on fluoxetine and norfluoxetine plasma concentrations during steady-state conditions.

Authors:  Adrián LLerena; Pedro Dorado; Roland Berecz; Antonio P González; Eva M Peñas-LLedó
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2004-01-16       Impact factor: 2.953

5.  Stereoselective inhibition of CYP2C19 and CYP3A4 by fluoxetine and its metabolite: implications for risk assessment of multiple time-dependent inhibitor systems.

Authors:  Justin D Lutz; Brooke M VandenBrink; Katipudi N Babu; Wendel L Nelson; Kent L Kunze; Nina Isoherranen
Journal:  Drug Metab Dispos       Date:  2013-06-19       Impact factor: 3.922

6.  The impact of pregnancy on the pharmacokinetics of antidepressants: a systematic critical review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Georgios Schoretsanitis; Olav Spigset; Julia C Stingl; Kristina M Deligiannidis; Michael Paulzen; Andreas A Westin
Journal:  Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol       Date:  2020-04-10       Impact factor: 4.481

7.  Fluoxetine- and norfluoxetine-mediated complex drug-drug interactions: in vitro to in vivo correlation of effects on CYP2D6, CYP2C19, and CYP3A4.

Authors:  J E Sager; J D Lutz; R S Foti; C Davis; K L Kunze; N Isoherranen
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2014-02-25       Impact factor: 6.875

8.  Quantitative cross-species extrapolation between humans and fish: the case of the anti-depressant fluoxetine.

Authors:  Luigi Margiotta-Casaluci; Stewart F Owen; Rob I Cumming; Anna de Polo; Matthew J Winter; Grace H Panter; Mariann Rand-Weaver; John P Sumpter
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-10-22       Impact factor: 3.240

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.