Revisiting the drug interaction between tamoxifen and SSRI antidepressants
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Few topics in therapeutics are more vexing than drug interactions. They number in the thousands, involve confusing terminology, and are rarely supported by evidence stronger than case reports and volunteer studies. It’s not surprising, therefore, that experts disagree on which interactions are serious and which ones are not. And yet their importance is undeniable because they can cause serious morbidity or even death, despite epitomizing, in theory at least, avoidable drug related harm. Over the past decade, few drug interactions have been as controversial as those involving tamoxifen and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) antidepressants, explored yet again by Donneyong and colleagues in a linked study (doi:10.1136/bmj.i5014). On its surface, the issue seems straightforward: as a prodrug, tamoxifen requires conversion to active metabolites, the most important of which is endoxifen. This process is influenced by cytochrome-P450 isoenzyme 2D6 (CYP2D6), an enzyme characterized bymarked variability from person to person. Some SSRIs but not others inhibit CYP2D6, conceivably attenuating or even abolishing the benefits of tamoxifen. The importance of this potential interaction is amplified by three factors. First, tamoxifen is a monumental treatment, conferring dramatic reductions in breast cancer recurrence and associated mortality. Second, antidepressants are often co-prescribed with tamoxifen for extended periods, in part because depression often coexists with breast cancer and in part to offset vasomotor symptoms induced by tamoxifen. Third, and in contrast with most drug interactions, the consequences are delayed by years and manifest simply as treatment failure, undermining causal attribution at the patient level. Why does the interaction between tamoxifen and SSRIs remain controversial? One reason is that tamoxifen’s pharmacokinetic fate involves processes other than CYP2D6. Another is that studies of the relation between CYP2D6 activity and outcomes in women receiving tamoxifen yield remarkably inconsistent results. Finally, with some exceptions, 11 observational studies show little evidence that use of antidepressants is associated with adverse outcomes in women receiving tamoxifen. Donneyong and colleagues used data from five US health insurance databases to study women already being treated with an SSRI at the outset of treatment with tamoxifen or who received an SSRI later during its course. Over a median follow-up of about two years, they found no difference in overall mortality among women receiving SSRIs that inhibit CYP2D6 (paroxetine and fluoxetine) relative to SSRIs that do not (citalopram, escitalopram, fluvoxamine and sertraline). These findings are unsurprising, if for no other reason than follow-up was too brief for any differential survival to show up. Studying total mortality rather than cancer specific outcomes further diminished the investigators’ ability to discern signal from noise. Consequently, this study does little to disprove a meaningful interaction between tamoxifen and CYP2D6 inhibitors. It does, however, illustrate just how challenging such studies can be. Pharmacoepidemiology is a relative newcomer to the science of drug interactions, with most studies exploring short term toxicities after the co-prescription of drugs with well established interactions. In contrast, the interaction between tamoxifen and CYP2D6 inhibiting SSRIs is characterized by an elusive outcome (treatment failure), a long latent period, and many other factors (including non-adherence, therapeutic switching, CYP2D6 polymorphisms, dose-response effects, variable mechanisms and degrees of inhibition, and a probable endoxifen threshold below which treatment failure is more likely) that collectively attenuate any signal that might exist. For these reasons, the tamoxifen-SSRI interaction is perhaps the most difficult drug interaction to explore using the techniques of pharmacoepidemiology. Where does this leave patients and clinicians? In my view it is premature to dismiss an interaction between tamoxifen and SSRIs, particularly given the stakes and the ease with which harm can bemitigated.We know tamoxifen prevents recurrence and death from breast cancer, that endoxifen is its dominant metabolite, and that CYP2D6 plays an important role in its
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
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 tête enseignante, 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 ».