Arzneimittelforschung 2012; 62(06): 274-279
DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1306317
Original Article
© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Intersex Effect of Lamotrigine on the Pharmacokinetic Parameters of CDRI-97/78, a Novel Trioxane Antimalarial Compound, in Rats

H. N. Kushwaha
1   Pharmacokinetics and Metabolism Division, CSIR-Central Drug Research Institute, Lucknow, India
,
N. Gautam
1   Pharmacokinetics and Metabolism Division, CSIR-Central Drug Research Institute, Lucknow, India
,
A. Misra
1   Pharmacokinetics and Metabolism Division, CSIR-Central Drug Research Institute, Lucknow, India
,
B. Singh
1   Pharmacokinetics and Metabolism Division, CSIR-Central Drug Research Institute, Lucknow, India
,
S. Kumar
1   Pharmacokinetics and Metabolism Division, CSIR-Central Drug Research Institute, Lucknow, India
,
H. H. Siddiqui
2   Faculty of Pharmacy, Integral University, Lucknow, India
,
S. K. Singh
1   Pharmacokinetics and Metabolism Division, CSIR-Central Drug Research Institute, Lucknow, India
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

received 24 November 2011

accepted 08 February 2012

Publication Date:
16 April 2012 (online)

Abstract

Reports regarding drug toxicity and adverse events resulting from coadministration of multiple drugs are increasing at an alarming rate. CDRI-97/78 is an 1,2,4-trioxane antimalarial agent under development which gets metabolized to the in vivo active metabolite 97/63. In order to assess its drug interaction potential, CDRI-97/78 was administered alone and in combination with lamotrigine to male and female rats via the oral route. Quantification of the active metabolite 97/63 in rat plasma was achieved with an LC-MS/MS assay. After oral administration of 97/78, the Tmax and Cmax values of 97/63 in male rats were 1.75±0.77 h and 862±306 ng/mL while female rats showed values for Cmax of 622.75±95.09 ng/mL and for Tmax of 7.5±0.5 h. Coadministration of 97/78 and lamotrigine resulted in decreased Tmax and Cmax values in both male and female rats (Tmax and Cmax of 0.77±0.16 h and 58.58±6.43 ng/mL in male rats; 1.13±0.22 h and 62.95±12.00 ng/mL in female rats, respectively). A statistically significant difference (P<0.05) was observed for the pharmacokinetic parameters of 97/63 after oral administration of 97/78 alone and upon its coadministration with lamotrigine except for the Cmax and Tmax values in male and for the T1/2 value in female rats. Statistically, no significant difference for the pharmacokinetic parameters of 97/63 between male and female rats after oral administration of 97/78 alone or in combination with lamotrigine was determined except for Tmax. The study indicates that coadministration of 97/78, an antimalarial agent, and the antiepileptic lamotrigine may require dose adjustments. Additional clinical drug interaction trials may be required to confirm these findings.

 
  • References

  • 1 Sperber K, Chiang G, Chen H et al. Comparison of hydroxychloroquine with zidovudine in asymptomatic patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus type 1. Clin Ther 1997; 19: 913-923
  • 2 Yuen AWC, Land G, Weatherley B. Sodium valproate inhibits lamotrigine metabolism. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1992; 33: 511-513
  • 3 Besag FM, Berry DJ, Pool F. Carbamazepine toxicity with lamotrigine: pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic interaction?. Epilepsia 1998; 39: 183-187
  • 4 Majkowski J. Antiepileptic and nonantiepileptic drug interactions. Epileptologia 1998; 6: 55-73
  • 5 Sander JW, Perucca E. Epilepsy and comorbidity: infections and antimicrobials usage in relation to epilepsy management. Acta. Neurol Scand 2003; 108 (180) 16-22
  • 6 Gupta S, Thapar MM, Wernsdorfer WH. In vitro interactions of artemisinin with atovaquone, quinine, and mefloquine against Plasmodium falciparum. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother 2002; 46: 1510-1515
  • 7 Patsalos PN, Duncan JS. Antiepileptic drugs; a review of clinically significant drug interactions. Drug Saf 1993; 9: 156-184
  • 8 Patsalos PN. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamic interaction; principles and interpretative pitfalls. Epileptologia 1998; 6: 9-19
  • 9 Patsalos PN. Therapeutic drug monitoring in epilepsy: the established and the new antienilentic drugs. Epilepsy Monit 2002; 6: 1-8
  • 10 Brahmankar DM, Jaiswal SB. Biopharmaceutics and pharmacokinetics- A treatise. New Delhi: Vallabh Prakashan; 1997
  • 11 Bonate PL, Reith K, Weir S. Drug interactions at the renal level. Implications for drug development. Clin Pharmacokinet 1998; 34: 375-404
  • 12 Hansten PD. Understanding drug interactions. Sci. Med 1998; Jan/Feb: 16-25
  • 13 Tanaka E. Clinically important pharmacokinctic drug-drug interactions: role of cytochrome P450 enzymes. J Clin Pharmacol Ther 1998; 23: 403-416
  • 14 Lundahi J, Regardh CG, Edgar B et al. Effect of grapefruit juice ingestion – pharmacokineties and haemodynamics of intravenously and orally adminisitered felodipine in healthy men. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1997; 52: 139-145
  • 15 Lund W. The Pharmaceutical Codex. 12th edition London: The Pharmaceutical Press; 1994: 342
  • 16 Welling PG, Tse FLS. Pharmacokinetics, regulatory-industrial-academic perspectives. 2nd edition. New York: Marcel Dekker Inc; 1995: 335-410
  • 17 Singh RP, Sabarinath S, Gautam N et al. Liquid chromatographic tandem mass spectrometric assay for quantification of 97/78 and its metabolite 97/63: A promising trioxane antimalarial in monkey plasma. J Chromatogr B 2009; 877: 2074-2080
  • 18 Singh RP, Sabarinath S, Gautam N et al. Pharmacokinetic study of the novel, synthetic trioxane antimalarialcompound 97-78 in rats using an LC-MS/MS method for quantification. Arzneimittelforschung 2011; 61: 120-125
  • 19 Shah VP, Midha KK, Findlay JWA et al. Bioanalytical method validation-a revisit with a decade of progress. Pharm Res 2000; 17: 1551-1557
  • 20 Freireich EJ, Gehan EA, Rall DP et al. Quantitative comparison of toxicity of anticancer agents in mouse, rat, hamster, dog, monkey and man. Cancer Chemother Rep 1966; 50: 219-244
  • 21 Tripathi KD. Essentials of Medical Pharmacology. 5th edition New Delhi: Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers(P) Ltd; 2010
  • 22 Bjornsson TD, Callaghan JT, Einolf HJ et al. The conduct of in vitro and in vivo drug-drug interaction studies: a Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA) perspective. Drug Metab Dispos 2003; 31: 815-832
  • 23 Huang SM, Lesko LJ. Drug-drug, drug-dietary supplement, and drug-citrus fruit and other food interactions: what have we learned?. J Clin Pharmacol 2004; 44: 559-569
  • 24 Yuan R, Madani S, Wei XX et al. Evaluation of cytochrome P450 probe substrates commonly used by the pharmaceutical industry to study in vitro drug interactions. Drug Metab Dispos 2002; 30: 1311-1319
  • 25 Davit B, Reynolds K, Yuan R et al. FDA evaluations using in vitro metabolism to predict and interpret in vivo metabolic drug-drug interactions: impact on labeling. J Clin Pharmacol 1999; 39: 899-910
  • 26 Mizuno N, Niwa T, Yotsumoto Y et al. Impact of drug transporter studies on drug discovery and development. Pharmacol Rev 2003; 55: 425-461
  • 27 Lin JH. Drug-drug interaction mediated by inhibition and induction of P-glycoprotein. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2003; 55: 53-81
  • 28 Tsuji A. Transporter-mediated drug interactions. Drug Metab Pharmacokinet 2002; 17: 253-274