PURPOSE: To elucidate the stereoselective pharmacokinetics of omeprazole enantiomers and their metabolites after racemic IV dosing because there is little information about the stereoselective metabolism of omeprazole in in vivo study. METHODS: Seventeen subjects were classified into three CYP2C19 groups based on their genotypes: homozygous extensive metabolizers (hmEMs; n = 5), heterozygous EMs (htEMs; n = 7) and poor metabolizers (PMs; n = 5). RESULTS: After single IV administration of racemic omeprazole (20 mg), the mean area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC(0-∞)) of R(+)-omeprazole in PMs was significantly higher than that in hmEMs and htEMs, while that of S(-)-omeprazole was no significance among three genotypes because of a wide inter-individual variability. In addition, although the AUC(0-∞) of R(+)-5-hydroxyomeprazole were determined among three genotypes, the that of S(-)-5-hydroxyomeprazole was undetectable in the hmEMs and barely detectable in the htEMs. Conversly, the AUC(0-∞) of S(-)-5-hydroxyomeprazole was greater than that of R(+)-5-hydroxyomeprazole in the PMs. CONCLUSIONS: These data therefore suggest that, for EMs, the CYP2C19-mediated formation from R(+)-enantiomer is a 5-hydroxy-metabolite, while that from S(-)-enantiomer may be a minor metabolite. Thus, the in vivo disposition of S(-)- and R(+)-omeprazole after racemic dosing may be different among the CYP2C19 genotypes.
PURPOSE: To elucidate the stereoselective pharmacokinetics of omeprazole enantiomers and their metabolites after racemic IV dosing because there is little information about the stereoselective metabolism of omeprazole in in vivo study. METHODS: Seventeen subjects were classified into three CYP2C19 groups based on their genotypes: homozygous extensive metabolizers (hmEMs; n = 5), heterozygous EMs (htEMs; n = 7) and poor metabolizers (PMs; n = 5). RESULTS: After single IV administration of racemic omeprazole (20 mg), the mean area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC(0-∞)) of R(+)-omeprazole in PMs was significantly higher than that in hmEMs and htEMs, while that of S(-)-omeprazole was no significance among three genotypes because of a wide inter-individual variability. In addition, although the AUC(0-∞) of R(+)-5-hydroxyomeprazole were determined among three genotypes, the that of S(-)-5-hydroxyomeprazole was undetectable in the hmEMs and barely detectable in the htEMs. Conversly, the AUC(0-∞) of S(-)-5-hydroxyomeprazole was greater than that of R(+)-5-hydroxyomeprazole in the PMs. CONCLUSIONS: These data therefore suggest that, for EMs, the CYP2C19-mediated formation from R(+)-enantiomer is a 5-hydroxy-metabolite, while that from S(-)-enantiomer may be a minor metabolite. Thus, the in vivo disposition of S(-)- and R(+)-omeprazole after racemic dosing may be different among the CYP2C19 genotypes.
Authors: I Ieiri; T Kubota; A Urae; M Kimura; Y Wada; K Mamiya; S Yoshioka; S Irie; T Amamoto; K Nakamura; S Nakano; S Higuchi Journal: Clin Pharmacol Ther Date: 1996-06 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: T Furuta; K Ohashi; K Kobayashi; I Iida; H Yoshida; N Shirai; M Takashima; K Kosuge; H Hanai; K Chiba; T Ishizaki; E Kaneko Journal: Clin Pharmacol Ther Date: 1999-09 Impact factor: 6.875