Evidence map›Paper›PMID 9084960›Full record

ReviewClinical pharmacokinetics1997

Use of in vitro and in vivo data to estimate the likelihood of metabolic pharmacokinetic interactions.

R J Bertz, G R Granneman

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical pharmacokinetics, 1997. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 138 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
138citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

138 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. The effect of erythromycin on the pharmacokinetics of rosuvastatin.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2003
    Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Effect of ciprofloxacin on the pharmacokinetics of ropivacaine.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2003
    Trial
  13. Interaction between grapefruit juice and praziquantel in humans.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2002
    Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

78 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

R J BertzDepartment of Pharmacokinetics and Biopharmaceutics, Abbott Laboratories, Abbott Park, Illinois, USA.
G R Granneman

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article reviews the information available to assist pharmacokineticists in the prediction of metabolic drug interactions. Significant advances in this area have been made in the last decade, permitting the identification in early drug development of dominant cytochrome P450 (CYP) isoform(s) metabolising a particular drug as well as the ability of a drug to inhibit a specific CYP isoform. The major isoforms involved in human drug metabolism are CYP3A, CYP2D6, CYP2C, CYP1A2 and CYP2E1. Often patients are taking multiple concurrent medications, and thus an assessment of potential drug-drug interactions is imperative. A database containing information about the clearance routes for over 300 drugs from multiple therapeutic classes, including analgesics, anti-infectives, psychotropics, anticonvulsants, cancer chemotherapeutics, gastrointestinal agents, cardiovascular agents and others, was constructed to assist in the semiquantitative prediction of the magnitude of potential interactions with drugs under development. With knowledge of the in vitro inhibition constant of a drug (Ki) for a particular CYP isoform, it is theoretically possible to assess the likelihood of interactions for a drug cleared through CYP-mediated metabolism. For many agents, the CYP isoform involved in metabolism has not been identified and there is substantial uncertainty given the current knowledge base. The mathematical concepts for prediction based on competitive enzyme inhibition are reviewed in this article. These relationships become more complex if the inhibition is of a mixed competitive/noncompetitive nature. Sources of uncertainty and inaccuracy in predicting the magnitude of in vivo inhibition includes the nature and design of in vitro experiments to determine Ki, inhibitor concentration in the hepatic cytosol compared with that in plasma, prehepatic metabolism, presence of active metabolites and enzyme induction. The accurate prospective prediction of drug interactions requires rigorous attention to the details of the in vitro results, and detailed information about the pharmacokinetics and metabolism of the inhibitor and inhibited drug. With the discussion of principles and accompanying tabulation of literature data concerning the clearance of various drugs, a framework for reasonable semiquantitative predictions is offered in this article.

Indexed as

Drug InteractionsPharmacokineticsCytochrome P-450 Enzyme SystemHumansIsoenzymesCytochrome P-450 Enzyme SystemIsoenzymes

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.