Drug Interaction between Ticlopidine and Cyclosporine
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTION Cyclosporine is an immunosuppressant that is widely used for patients undergoing organ transplantation. Optimal long-term use of the drug entails careful monitoring of blood or plasma concentrations.1 The concurrent administration of other drugs may lead to alterations in cyclosporine concentrations and either a potential risk of graft rejection or toxic effects from excess cyclosporine. Ticlopidine is an antiplatelet agent that may interact with cyclosporine, affecting its concentration in whole blood. A limited number of reports have suggested a potential interaction between cyclosporine and ticlopidine.2-5 Birmele and others2 documented this interaction in an 18-year-old man who was treated with cyclosporine for corticodependent nephrotic syndrome and who received ticlopidine 500 mg daily. The authors observed a dramatic decrease in the mean blood level of cyclosporine, and the dosage of cyclosporine had to be increased. When ticlopidine was discontinued, the cyclosporine blood level increased. A reintroduction test of ticlopidine yielded the same results. Verdejo and others3 also reported a probable interaction between ticlopidine 250 mg daily and cyclosporine in a patient who had received a renal transplant. The 64-year-old woman had been taking cyclosporine and had recently started ticlopidine for cranial nerve palsy secondary to ischemia. Introduction of ticlopidine led to a decrease in the trough concentration dose ratio of cyclosporine (the concentration divided by the daily dose per kilogram). The authors noted the same results — an increase followed by a decrease in the trough concentration dose ratio of cyclosporine — upon withdrawal and reintroduction of ticlopidine. Boissonnat and others4 examined the effect of ticlopidine on blood levels of cyclosporine and the tolerability of the combination in a randomized, doubleblind, placebo-controlled trial. Twenty heart transplant recipients stabilized on cyclosporine for a minimum of 6 weeks were randomly assigned to receive either ticlopidine 250 mg daily or placebo for 14 days. The dosage of ticlopidine in this trial was half of the recommended daily dosage; this dosage was chosen to minimize the risk of graft rejection resulting from an abrupt decrease in cyclosporine concentration in the blood. At this dosage, there was no significant difference between the 2 groups in the maximum blood concentration of cyclosporine after the morning dose, the minimum blood concentration of cyclosporine during the 12-h interval after the morning dose, or the area under the curve calculated with the trapezoidal method in the 0–12 h interval after the morning dose. However, one patient was withdrawn from the study 3 days after starting ticlopidine because of a significant fall (more than 50%) in the trough level of cyclosporine. His cyclosporine dose was increased, and the blood concentration returned to prestudy level. De Lorgeril and others5 evaluated the effect of ticlopidine 250 mg bid on platelet function, hematological and biochemical parameters, and whole-blood cyclosporine in 12 heart transplant patients. The patients received antithrombotic prophylaxis with ticlopidine for a period of 3 months. At follow-up, no significant modifications to the cyclosporine dosage were made, although the mean whole-blood trough level of cyclosporine was significantly decreased.5 Practitioners need to be aware of this potential interaction, as it may lead to changes in cyclosporine concentrations and changes in the patient’s clinical status. We report here a case of decreased cyclosporine concentration after initiation of ticlopidine therapy.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».