The influence of combination use of CYP450 inducers on the pharmacokinetics of voriconazole: a systematic review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
What is known and objectives Voriconazole is a triazole antifungal agent and is extensively metabolized via cytochrome P450 (CYP450); therefore, special precautions need to be taken when co-administered with a known CYP450 inducer, which may lead to treatment failure. The influence of some CYP450 inducers on the pharmacokinetics of voriconazole has been described in previous studies, but a systematic review was lacking. In this study, we carried out a systematic review to assess the influence of CYP450 inducers on the pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters of voriconazole. Methods Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Clinicaltrials.gov and three Chinese databases (CNKI, CBM and WanFang) were searched through January 2016. Interventional and observational studies comparing the PK parameters of voriconazole used alone or with CYP450 inducers in healthy volunteers and patients were included. The outcomes included were the area under the plasma concentration–time curve (AUC), peak plasma concentrations (Cmax) and trough plasma concentrations (Cmin). The quality of the included studies was assessed using Cochrane's risk of bias tool, Newcastle–Ottawa Scale (NOS) and a modified risk of bias tool for pharmacokinetic before-and-after studies. Results and discussion Sixteen studies were included in this review: three randomized controlled trials (RCTs), five single-arm before–after studies (SBAs), six cohort studies and two case reports. All studies except case reports had moderate to high quality. Of the 11 inducers reviewed, efavirenz, ritonavir (chronic use), phenytoin, rifampin and rifabutin significantly decreased mean AUC and Cmax of voriconazole; St John's wort significantly decreased only mean AUC; rifampin, rifabutin, phenobarbital and carbamazepine significantly decreased mean Cmin. Etravirine and Ginkgo biloba did not reveal any such influence. The influence of glucocorticoids may depend on its type and dose. What is new and conclusions To conclude, the combination use of high-dose efavirenz, high-dose ritonavir, St John's wort, rifampin, phenobarbital, or carbamazepine with voriconazole is contraindicated as instructed in the drug label. Low-dose efavirenz, low-dose ritonavir, rifabutin and phenytoin may be used together with voriconazole provided TDM and dose adjustment of voriconazole. Moreover, this study shows there is low risk of drug–drug interactions when voriconazole is co-administered with etravirine or G. biloba; however, whether the use of glucocorticoids has a clinically significant effect on voriconazole still requires more evidence. This study also highlights the lack of clinical studies and future high-quality studies assessing the influence of CYP450 inducers on voriconazole. PK parameters and dosing optimization should be designed to provide a more definitive answer regarding the necessity of TDM and the recommendations for dose adjustment of voriconazole.
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 | 0,007 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,004 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 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 ».