Evelyn D. Lobo

Olanzapine is an atypical antipsychotic approved for the treatment of adults and adolescents (aged 13–17 years) with schizophrenia or bipolar I disorder (manic or mixed episodes). To characterize the pharmacokinetics of olanzapine in adolescents, to estimate the sources of variability, and to identify significant co-variates. In addition, olanzapine pharmacokinetic parameters in adolescents were compared with those in adults to guide appropriate dosing recommendations for adolescent patients. A population pharmacokinetic modeling study was performed. The majority of pharmacokinetic data for the model came from a multicenter, open-label study in which 4.5 weeks of oral olanzapine 2.5-20 mg once daily was administered to a total of 105 patients aged 13–17 years (41.1–148 kg) who had a diagnosis of schizophrenia or bipolar I disorder. Four blood samples at steady state were obtained from each patient. Olanzapine concentrations in plasma were determined using a validated high-performance liquid chromatography method with electrochemical detection. Similar data from 11 adolescents from three previous studies were also included. A pharmacokinetic model was developed and the potential effects of patient characteristics (sex, bodyweight, age, ethnic origin) were investigated using a nonlinear mixed effects modeling program. The distributions of pharmacokinetic parameters for olanzapine in adolescents were compared with those previously reported in adults (n = 912, diagnosis of schizophrenia, olanzapine 5–20 mg/day) using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov 2-sample test. A visual predictive check was performed using Monte Carlo simulations on an external validation dataset. The pharmacokinetics of oral olanzapine in adolescent patients were described by a one-compartment pharmacokinetic model. The typical model estimates were 13.6 L/h (70 kg female patient) for oral clearance (CL/F) and 899 L for oral volume of distribution (V/F). Interpatient variability (40.5% for CL/F, 65.4% for V/F) and residual error (27%) were moderate. Bodyweight and sex had a significant influence on CL/F, which was lower in patients with lower weights and approximately 30% higher in males than females. Olanzapine exposure was typically 27% higher in adolescents versus adults. Approximately 77% of adolescents and adults had comparable CL/F values and 69% had comparable V/F values. The pharmacokinetics of oral olanzapine in adolescent patients are similar to those in adults, and are linear in the dosage range of 2.5-20 mg/day. Given the small magnitude of co-variate effects and the interpatient variability, dose adjustments based on bodyweight or sex are not necessary in adolescents.

Duloxetine is indicated for patients with a variety of conditions, and some of these patients may have mild to moderate degrees of renal impairment. Renal impairment may affect the pharmacokinetics of a drug by causing changes in absorption, distribution, protein binding, renal excretion or nonrenal clearance. As duloxetine is highly bound to plasma proteins and its metabolites are renally excreted, it is prudent to evaluate the effect of renal insufficiency on exposure to duloxetine and its metabolites in the systemic circulation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of varying degrees of renal impairment on duloxetine pharmacokinetics in a single-dose phase I study and using pooled steady-state pharmacokinetic data from phase II/III trials. In the phase I study, a single oral dose of duloxetine 60 mg was given to 12 subjects with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and 12 matched healthy control subjects. In the phase II/III trials (n = 463 patients), duloxetine 20–60 mg was given as once- or twice-daily doses. Duloxetine and metabolite concentrations in plasma were determined using liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry. Noncompartmental methods (phase I: duloxetine and its metabolites) and population modelling methods (phase II/III: duloxetine) were used to analyse the pharmacokinetic data. The maximum plasma concentration (C_max) and the area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) of duloxetine were ∼2-fold higher in subjects with ESRD than in healthy subjects, which appeared to reflect an increase in oral bioavailability. The C_max and AUC of two major inactive conjugated metabolites were as much as 2- and 9-fold higher, respectively, reflecting reduced renal clearance of these metabolites. Population pharmacokinetic results indicated that mild or moderate renal impairment, assessed by creatinine clearance (CL_CR) calculated according to the Cockcroft-Gault formula, did not have a statistically significant effect on pharmacokinetic parameters of duloxetine. Values for the apparent total body clearance of duloxetine from plasma after oral administration (CL/F) in subjects with ESRD were similar to CL/F values in patients with normal renal function or with mild or moderate renal impairment. Dose adjustments for duloxetine are not necessary for patients with mild or moderate renal impairment (CL_cr ≥30 mL/min). For patients with ESRD or severe renal impairment (CL_cr <30 mL/min), exposures of duloxetine and its metabolites are expected to increase; therefore, duloxetine is not generally recommended for these patients.

Objectives: The objectives of this analysis were to characterize the pharmacokinetics of duloxetine at steady state in patients, estimate the variability, identify significant covariates that may influence duloxetine pharmacokinetics and provide appropriate dosing recommendations for patients on duloxetine treatment. Methods: The pharmacokinetic meta-analysis dataset was created from one open-label clinical study and four double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical studies. Duloxetine concentrations (N = 2002) were obtained from 594 patients diagnosed with major depressive disorder (n = 223), diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain (n = 112), stress urinary incontinence (n = 128) and fibromyalgia (n = 131). Patients were given 20–60 mg/day of oral duloxetine once or twice daily (the highest dose studied was 120 mg/day). A population pharmacokinetic model was developed using a nonlinear mixed-effects modelling method. Covariates including bodyweight, age, sex, ethnicity, smoking status, disease condition, dose, dosing regimen and creatinine clearance were tested for their influence on duloxetine pharmacokinetics. The final model was used to predict steady-state duloxetine concentration-time profiles in various patient subgroups. Results: Duloxetine pharmacokinetics in patients were described by a one-compartmental pharmacokinetic model. The interpatient variability in apparent oral clearance (CL/F) was 59% and the interpatient variability in the apparent volume of distribution after oral administration (V_d/F) was 97%. The residual error was 31%. Sex, smoking status, age and dose had a statistically significant effect on CL/F, whereas the V_d/F was influenced by ethnicity. CL/F was 40% lower in females than in males and 30% lower in nonsmokers than in smokers. CL/F decreased with increasing dose and age. The V_d/F in Hispanic patients was twice that of non-Hispanic patients. Simulations showed a considerable overlap in duloxetine exposure between the identified patient subgroups. Conclusion: Given the clinically insignificant change in the magnitude of duloxetine steady-state exposure and the considerable overlap in duloxetine exposure between the patient subgroups, specific dose recommendations based on sex, smoking status, age, dose and ethnicity are not warranted.

Objective: The purpose of this study was to characterize duloxetine pharmacokinetics in the breast milk and plasma of lactating women and to estimate the duloxetine dose that an infant might consume if breastfed. Methods: This open-label study included six healthy women aged 22–35 years who stopped nursing during and after the study. Duloxetine 40 mg was given orally every 12 hours for 3.5 days; seven plasma and milk samples over 12 hours were obtained after the seventh dose. Plasma and milk samples were analysed using validated liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry methods. Safety measures included vital signs, ECGs, laboratory tests, adverse event monitoring and depression rating scales. Results: The mean steady-state milk-to-plasma duloxetine exposure ratio was 0.25 (90% CI 0.18, 0.35). The amount of duloxetine in the breast milk was 7 μg/day (range 4–15 μg/day). The estimated infant dose was 2 μg/kg/day (range 0.6–3 μg/kg/day), which is 0.14% of the maternal dose. Dizziness, nausea and fatigue were commonly reported adverse events. No clinically important changes in safety measures occurred. Conclusion: Duloxetine is detected in breast milk, and steady-state concentrations in breast milk are about one-fourth of those in maternal plasma. As the safety of duloxetine in infants is unknown, prescribers should carefully assess, on an individual basis, the potential risks of duloxetine exposure to infants and the benefits of nursing an infant when the mother is on duloxetine therapy.

Objective: To determine whether duloxetine is a substrate, inhibitor or inducer of cytochrome P450 (CYP) 1A2 enzyme, using in vitro and in vivo studies in humans. Methods: Human liver microsomes or cells with expressed CYP enzymes and specific CYP inhibitors were used to identify which CYP enzymes catalyse the initial oxidation steps in the metabolism of duloxetine. The potential of duloxetine to inhibit CYP1A2 activity was determined using incubations with human liver microsomes and phenacetin, the CYP1A2 substrate. The potential for duloxetine to induce CYP1A2 activity was determined using human primary hepatocytes treated with duloxetine for 72 hours. Studies in humans were conducted using fluvoxamine, a potent CYP1A2 inhibitor, and theophylline, a CYP1A2 substrate, as probes. The subjects were healthy men and women aged 18–65 years. Single-dose duloxetine was administered either intravenously as a 10-mg infusion over 30 minutes or orally as a 60-mg dose in the presence or absence of steady-state fluvoxamine (100 mg orally once daily). Single-dose theophylline was given as 30-minute intravenous infusions of aminophylline 250 mg in the presence or absence of steady-state duloxetine (60 mg orally twice daily). Plasma concentrations of duloxetine, its metabolites and theophylline were determined using liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry. Pharmacokinetic parameters were estimated using noncompartmental methods and evaluated using mixed-effects ANOVA. Safety measurements included vital signs, clinical laboratory tests, a physical examination, ECG readings and adverse event reports. Results: The in vitro results indicated that duloxetine is metabolized by CYP1A2; however, duloxetine was predicted not to be an inhibitor or inducer of CYP1A2 in humans. Following oral administration in the presence of fluvoxamine, the duloxetine area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity (AUC_∞) and the maximum plasma drug concentration (C_max) significantly increased by 460% (90% CI 359, 584) and 141% (90% CI 93, 200), respectively. In the presence of fluvoxamine, the oral bioavailability of duloxetine increased from 42.8% to 81.9%. In the presence of duloxetine, the theophylline AUC_∞ and C_max increased by only 13% (90% CI 7, 18) and 7% (90% CI 2,14), respectively. Coadministration of duloxetine with fluvoxamine or theophylline did not result in any clinically important safety concerns, and these combinations were generally well tolerated. Conclusion: Duloxetine is metabolized primarily by CYP1A2; therefore, coadministration of duloxetine with potent CYP1A2 inhibitors should be avoided. Duloxetine does not seem to be a clinically significant inhibitor or inducer of CYP1A2; therefore, dose adjustment of CYP1A2 substrates may not be necessary when they are coadministered with duloxetine.

The objectives of the study were to characterise the pharmacokinetics and assess the tolerability of duloxetine in healthy Chinese subjects after single and multiple oral 60mg dosing. This was a single-centre, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, single-period study in healthy native Chinese subjects. A total of 32 subjects, 19 men (14 on duloxetine, 5 on placebo) and 13 women (10 on duloxetine, 3 on placebo) between the ages of 20 and 39 years, participated in the study. Duloxetine 60mg (enteric-coated pellets in a capsule) was given orally once on day 1 and once daily on days 4 to 9. Sequential blood samples were collected over 72 hours after the dose on days 1 and 9, and a predose sample was obtained on days 7 and 8. Duloxetine concentrations in plasma were determined by a validated liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method. The tolerability evaluation included a physical examination, vital signs, adverse event monitoring and clinical laboratory evaluations. Duloxetine disposition on oral administration is characterised by a one-compartment pharmacokinetic model. Duloxetine is well absorbed, with a median time of maximum plasma concentration at 6 and 4 hours following single and multiple dosing, respectively. At steady state, the mean apparent oral clearance (CLss/F), mean apparent volume of distribution (V_ss/F) and mean terminal elimination half-life (t½) were 86.8 L/h, 1570L and 11 hours, respectively. CL/F and V_ss/F on single dosing were not statistically significantly different (p > 0.05) compared with multiple dosing. The linearity index, calculated as the ratio of the area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) during the dosing interval τ at steady state (AUC_τ,ss) to the AUC from time zero to infinity after single dosing (AUC_{∞single dose}) was 1.15 (coefficient of variation 35.7%). The accumulation in duloxetine exposure was estimated to be 50% on multiple dosing compared with single dosing, consistent with the t½ and dosing interval (24 hours). The pharmacokinetic parameters of duloxetine in Chinese subjects were not statistically significantly different from those reported previously in Caucasian and Japanese subjects. There were no clinically significant adverse events, abnormal safety laboratory data or vital sign changes reported. Duloxetine pharmacokinetics in healthy Chinese subjects given a 60mg once-daily dosing regimen were well characterised and consistent with known duloxetine pharmacokinetics in healthy Caucasian and Japanese subjects. Both single dosing and multiple once-daily dosing of duloxetine 60mg were well tolerated by healthy Chinese subjects in this study.