The role of the hepatic metabolisation for the interaction between valproic acid and carbapenem antibiotics

J. Rösche
{"title":"The role of the hepatic metabolisation for the interaction between valproic acid and carbapenem antibiotics","authors":"J. Rösche","doi":"10.1515/JOEPI-2016-0008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Dear Sir, I read with great interest the paper by Keränen and Kuusisto (2016) reporting a rapid and substantial decrease in the plasma concentration of valproic acid (VPA) within 24 hours after beginning concomitant treatment with imipenem. When imipenem treatment was stopped four days later, the VPA plasma concentration increased within a few hours. The authors conclude that this time course suggests that mechanisms other than a change in the enzymatic elimination of VPA are the cause for the pharmacokinetic interaction. This conclusion is not in line with data presented in an extensive review on the VPA-meropenem interaction by Rösche et al. (2014). At that time 21 reports with one or two patients, with a total of 28 treatment episodes in 25 patients, and nine case series with at least three cases each corresponding to 158 treatment episodes in 155 patients were available. In a patient with decompensated liver cirrhosis (Child-Pugh score 13) there was no interaction with VPA and meropenem (Spriet and Willems, 2011). Therefore liver function may be crucial for the VPA carbapenem interaction, which is commonly regarded as a class effect (Mancl and Gidal, 2009). The decrease of the VPA plasma concentration within 48 hours after meropenem application was 56% (SD 27%) in five patients with intravenous VPA administration and 84% (SD 15%) in 10 patients with enteral VPA administration (p = 0.03) (Rösche et al., 2014). Further treatment resulted in a maximal decrease of 79% (SD 14%) for VPA administered intravenously and 89% (SD 10%) for VPA administered enterally. The small delay of the decrease of the VPA plasma concentration may be an effect of the avoidance of the first pass effect of hepatic metabolism of VPA when administered intravenously. Given that the enhancement of VPA glucuronidation was considered to be the mechanism for the decline of plasma VPA levels, the range of the recovery time after stopping the carbapenem from a few hours (Keränen and Kuusisto 2016 for imipenem) to even 48 days (Gonzáles and Villena 2012 for meropenem) is difficult to explain. After all the small delay of the decrease of the VPA plasma concentration after application of a carbapenem when VPA is administered intravenously may be of limited clinical relevance, since a decrease of 50% in the first 48 hours also will lead in most patients to a subtherapeutic plasma concentration. After 48 hours of combination with meropenem a therapeutic plasma concentration is difficult to achieve. In the only treatment episode of a combination of VPA and meropenem with a VPA plasma concentration in the therapeutic range published before 2014 a daily dose of 12 g VPA was used (Spriet et al., 2007). There are no safety data for such a high dose of VPA. The combination of VPA with a carbapenem should be avoided.","PeriodicalId":15683,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Epileptology","volume":"321 1","pages":"85 - 86"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Epileptology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/JOEPI-2016-0008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Dear Sir, I read with great interest the paper by Keränen and Kuusisto (2016) reporting a rapid and substantial decrease in the plasma concentration of valproic acid (VPA) within 24 hours after beginning concomitant treatment with imipenem. When imipenem treatment was stopped four days later, the VPA plasma concentration increased within a few hours. The authors conclude that this time course suggests that mechanisms other than a change in the enzymatic elimination of VPA are the cause for the pharmacokinetic interaction. This conclusion is not in line with data presented in an extensive review on the VPA-meropenem interaction by Rösche et al. (2014). At that time 21 reports with one or two patients, with a total of 28 treatment episodes in 25 patients, and nine case series with at least three cases each corresponding to 158 treatment episodes in 155 patients were available. In a patient with decompensated liver cirrhosis (Child-Pugh score 13) there was no interaction with VPA and meropenem (Spriet and Willems, 2011). Therefore liver function may be crucial for the VPA carbapenem interaction, which is commonly regarded as a class effect (Mancl and Gidal, 2009). The decrease of the VPA plasma concentration within 48 hours after meropenem application was 56% (SD 27%) in five patients with intravenous VPA administration and 84% (SD 15%) in 10 patients with enteral VPA administration (p = 0.03) (Rösche et al., 2014). Further treatment resulted in a maximal decrease of 79% (SD 14%) for VPA administered intravenously and 89% (SD 10%) for VPA administered enterally. The small delay of the decrease of the VPA plasma concentration may be an effect of the avoidance of the first pass effect of hepatic metabolism of VPA when administered intravenously. Given that the enhancement of VPA glucuronidation was considered to be the mechanism for the decline of plasma VPA levels, the range of the recovery time after stopping the carbapenem from a few hours (Keränen and Kuusisto 2016 for imipenem) to even 48 days (Gonzáles and Villena 2012 for meropenem) is difficult to explain. After all the small delay of the decrease of the VPA plasma concentration after application of a carbapenem when VPA is administered intravenously may be of limited clinical relevance, since a decrease of 50% in the first 48 hours also will lead in most patients to a subtherapeutic plasma concentration. After 48 hours of combination with meropenem a therapeutic plasma concentration is difficult to achieve. In the only treatment episode of a combination of VPA and meropenem with a VPA plasma concentration in the therapeutic range published before 2014 a daily dose of 12 g VPA was used (Spriet et al., 2007). There are no safety data for such a high dose of VPA. The combination of VPA with a carbapenem should be avoided.
肝代谢在丙戊酸和碳青霉烯类抗生素相互作用中的作用
尊敬的先生,我非常感兴趣地阅读了Keränen和Kuusisto(2016)的论文,该论文报道了在开始亚胺培南联合治疗后24小时内丙戊酸(VPA)的血浆浓度迅速大幅下降。停用亚胺培南4天后,VPA血药浓度在数小时内升高。作者得出结论,这一时间过程表明,除了酶消除VPA的变化之外,其他机制是导致药代动力学相互作用的原因。这一结论与Rösche等人(2014年)对vpa -美罗培南相互作用的广泛综述中提供的数据不符。当时有21例1例或2例患者报告,25例患者共28次治疗,9个病例系列,每个病例至少有3例,对应155例患者的158次治疗。在失代偿性肝硬化患者(Child-Pugh评分13)中,VPA和美罗培南没有相互作用(spret和Willems, 2011)。因此,肝功能可能对VPA碳青霉烯相互作用至关重要,这种相互作用通常被认为是一种类效应(Mancl和Gidal, 2009)。5例静脉给药组和10例肠内给药组在48小时内VPA血浆浓度分别下降56% (SD 27%)和84% (SD 15%) (p = 0.03) (Rösche et al., 2014)。进一步治疗导致静脉给药VPA最大减少79% (SD 14%),肠内给药VPA最大减少89% (SD 10%)。静脉给药时,VPA血浆浓度降低的小延迟可能是由于避免了VPA肝脏代谢的首过效应。考虑到VPA葡糖苷化的增强被认为是血浆VPA水平下降的机制,停药后的恢复时间范围从几个小时(Keränen和Kuusisto 2016对于亚胺培南)到甚至48天(Gonzáles和Villena 2012对于美罗培南)很难解释。毕竟,静脉给药时,在应用碳青霉烯类药物后,VPA血浆浓度降低的小延迟可能具有有限的临床相关性,因为在最初48小时内降低50%也会导致大多数患者的血浆浓度降至亚治疗水平。联合美罗培南48小时后,治疗性血药浓度难以达到。在2014年之前发表的VPA血浆浓度在治疗范围内的唯一一次VPA和美罗培南联合治疗中,每日剂量为12g VPA (sprieet et al., 2007)。没有关于如此高剂量VPA的安全性数据。应避免VPA与碳青霉烯类药物联合使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信