| Literature DB >> 31470904 |
Tivadar Kiss1,2, Zoltán Timár3, Andrea Szabó2,4, Anita Lukács2,4, Viktória Velky3, Gábor Oszlánczi2,4, Edina Horváth4, István Takács1, István Zupkó2,5, Dezső Csupor6,7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The investigation of food-drug and plant-drug interactions has become increasingly important. In case of antibiotics, it is essential to achieve and maintain a plasma concentration sufficient for the antimicrobial action. Although, on theoretical basis, the interaction of polyphenols and antibiotics may be hypothesized, experimental data are lacking to assess its clinical relevance. The aim of our study was to assess the interaction between one of the most widely used antibiotics, amoxicillin, and green tea, the most frequently consumed drink with high polyphenol content.Entities:
Keywords: Amoxicillin; green tea; Camellia sinensis; Interaction; LC-MS/MS; Pharmacokinetics
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31470904 PMCID: PMC6717353 DOI: 10.1186/s40360-019-0332-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Pharmacol Toxicol ISSN: 2050-6511 Impact factor: 2.483
Sampling protocol. Times of blood sampling after treatment (30–240 min), showing which animals were used for blood sampling at each time point
| Code number of the animals | ||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Amoxicillin (AM) | Amoxicillin + green tea (AMG) | |||||||||||
| 1st treatment day | 2nd treatment day | 3rd treatment day | 4th treatment day | |||||||||
| 30′ | 4 | 5 | 6 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
| 60′ | 1 | 2 | 3 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 19 | 20 | 21 |
| 90′ | 4 | 5 | 6 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
| 120′ | 1 | 2 | 3 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 19 | 20 | 21 |
| 180′ | 4 | 5 | 6 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
| 240′ | 1 | 2 | 3 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 19 | 20 | 21 |
Suspension (green tea +/− amoxicillin) volumes administered before sampling, and sampling volumes after treatment (30–240 min) (AM: amoxicillin, AMG: amoxicillin + green tea)
| Group code | Animal code | Animal weight (g) | Administered suspension volume (ml) | Volumes of blood samples taken | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 30’ | 60’ | 90’ | 120’ | 180’ | 240’ | 300′ | 360′ | ||||
| AM | 1 | 285 | 0.29 | – | 0.50 | – | 0.45 | – | 0.55 | – | 0.50 |
| 2 | 292 | 0.29 | – | 0.50 | – | 0.40 | – | 0.60 | – | 0.60 | |
| 3 | 287 | 0.29 | – | 0.60 | – | 0.50 | – | 0.75 | – | 0.55 | |
| 4 | 285 | 0.29 | 0.48 | – | 0.45 | – | 0.50 | – | 0.80 | – | |
| 5 | 273 | 0.27 | 0.52 | – | 0.20 | – | 0.30 | – | 0.90 | – | |
| 6 | 281 | 0.28 | 0.45 | – | 0.40 | – | 0.55 | – | 0.60 | – | |
| 7 | 267 | 0.27 | – | 0.30 | – | 0.60 | – | 0.60 | – | 0.80 | |
| 8 | 285 | 0.29 | – | 0.65 | – | 0.70 | – | 0.70 | – | 0.90 | |
| 9 | 287 | 0.29 | – | 0.70 | – | 0.50 | – | 0.70 | – | 1.00 | |
| 10 | 285 | 0.29 | 0.70 | – | 0.60 | – | 0.50 | – | 0.25 | – | |
| 11 | 288 | 0.29 | 0.70 | – | 0.30 | – | 0.30 | – | 0.20 | – | |
| 12 | 290 | 0.29 | 0.65 | – | 0.60 | – | 0.55 | – | 0.30 | – | |
| AMG | 13 | 296 | 0.30 | – | 0.70 | – | 0.70 | – | 0.70 | – | 0.70 |
| 14 | 302 | 0.30 | – | 0.60 | – | 0.60 | – | 0.70 | – | 0.50 | |
| 15 | 294 | 0.29 | – | 0.45 | – | 0.70 | – | 0.60 | – | 0.60 | |
| 16 | 298 | 0.30 | 0.70 | – | 0.55 | – | 0.70 | – | 0.60 | – | |
| 17 | 301 | 0.30 | 0.70 | – | 0.30 | – | 0.50 | – | 0.70 | – | |
| 18 | 287 | 0.29 | 0.60 | – | 0.60 | – | 0.55 | – | 0.50 | – | |
| 19 | 311 | 0.31 | – | 0.35 | – | 0.50 | – | 0.45 | – | 0.50 | |
| 20 | 306 | 0.31 | – | 0.65 | – | 0.65 | – | 0.70 | – | 0.90 | |
| 21 | 312 | 0.31 | – | 0.75 | – | 0.60 | – | 0.50 | 0.60 | ||
| 22 | 307 | 0.31 | 0.50 | – | 0.50 | – | 0.7 | – | 0.70 | – | |
| 23 | 292 | 0.29 | 0.50 | – | 0.80 | – | 1.00 | – | 1.50 | – | |
| 24 | 301 | 0.30 | 0.45 | – | 0.30 | – | 0.60 | – | 0.70 | – | |
Fig. 1Change in the plasma concentration of amoxicillin in the AM and AMG groups. Data are shown as mean ± SEM (*p < 0.05)
Fig. 2AUC values in the AM and AMG groups. Data are shown as mean ± SEM