Pharmacoepidemiology of depression and anxiety

Hoogendijk, W.J.G. [Promotor]Penninx, B.W.J.H. [Promotor]Hugtenburg, J.G. [Copromotor

Elevated acute phase proteins affect pharmacokinetics in COVID-19 trials: Lessons from the CounterCOVID - imatinib study.

This study aimed to determine whether published pharmacokinetic (PK) models can adequately predict the PK profile of imatinib in a new indication, such as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Total (bound + unbound) and unbound imatinib plasma concentrations obtained from 134 patients with COVID-19 participating in the CounterCovid study and from an historical dataset of 20 patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) and 85 patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) were compared. Total imatinib area under the concentration time curve (AUC), maximum concentration (C <sub>max</sub> ) and trough concentration (C <sub>trough</sub> ) were 2.32-fold (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.34-3.29), 2.31-fold (95% CI 1.33-3.29), and 2.32-fold (95% CI 1.11-3.53) lower, respectively, for patients with CML/GIST compared with patients with COVID-19, whereas unbound concentrations were comparable among groups. Inclusion of alpha1-acid glycoprotein (AAG) concentrations measured in patients with COVID-19 into a previously published model developed to predict free imatinib concentrations in patients with GIST using total imatinib and plasma AAG concentration measurements (AAG-PK-Model) gave an estimated mean (SD) prediction error (PE) of -20% (31%) for total and -7.0% (56%) for unbound concentrations. Further covariate modeling with this combined dataset showed that in addition to AAG; age, bodyweight, albumin, CRP, and intensive care unit admission were predictive of total imatinib oral clearance. In conclusion, high total and unaltered unbound concentrations of imatinib in COVID-19 compared to CML/GIST were a result of variability in acute phase proteins. This is a textbook example of how failure to take into account differences in plasma protein binding and the unbound fraction when interpreting PK of highly protein bound drugs, such as imatinib, could lead to selection of a dose with suboptimal efficacy in patients with COVID-19

Policy and practice review: a first guideline on the use of pharmacogenetics in clinical psychiatric practice

Effective pharmacologic treatments for psychiatric disorders are available, but their effect is limited due to patients' genetic heterogeneity and low compliance-related to frequent adverse events. Only one third of patients respond to treatment and experience remission. Pharmacogenetics is a relatively young field which focusses on genetic analyses in the context of the metabolism and outcome of drug treatment. These genetic factors can, among other things, lead to differences in the activity of enzymes that metabolize drugs. Recently, a clinical guideline was authorized by the Dutch Clinical Psychiatric Association (NVvP) on the clinical use of pharmacogenetics in psychiatry. The main goal was to provide guidance, based on current evidence, on how to best use genotyping in clinical psychiatric practice. A systematic literature search was performed, and available publications were assessed using the GRADE methodology. General recommendations for psychiatric clinical practice were provided, and specific recommendations per medication were made available. This clinical guideline for caregivers prescribing psychotropic drugs is the product of a broad collaboration of professionals from different disciplines, making use of the information available at the Dutch Pharmacogenetics Working Group (DPWG) and the Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) so far. We summarize the relevant literature and all recommendations in this article. General recommendations are provided and also detailed recommendations per medication. In summary we advise to consider genotyping, when there are side effects or inefficacy for CYP2C19 and CYP2D6. When genotype information is available use this to select the right drug in the right dose for the right patient.Public Health and primary carePrevention, Population and Disease management (PrePoD

Imatinib in patients with severe COVID-19: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical trial

Background The major complication of COVID-19 is hypoxaemic respiratory failure from capillary leak and alveolar oedema. Experimental and early clinical data suggest that the tyrosine-kinase inhibitor imatinib reverses pulmonary capillary leak.Methods This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, clinical trial was done at 13 academic and non-academic teaching hospitals in the Netherlands. Hospitalised patients (aged >= 18 years) with COVID-19, as confirmed by an RT-PCR test for SARS-CoV-2, requiring supplemental oxygen to maintain a peripheral oxygen saturation of greater than 94% were eligible. Patients were excluded if they had severe pre-existing pulmonary disease, had pre-existing heart failure, had undergone active treatment of a haematological or non-haematological malignancy in the previous 12 months, had cytopenia, or were receiving concomitant treatment with medication known to strongly interact with imatinib. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either oral imatinib, given as a loading dose of 800 mg on day 0 followed by 400 mg daily on days 1-9, or placebo. Randomisation was done with a computer-based clinical data management platform with variable block sizes (containing two, four, or six patients), stratified by study site. The primary outcome was time to discontinuation of mechanical ventilation and supplemental oxygen for more than 48 consecutive hours, while being alive during a 28-day period. Secondary outcomes included safety, mortality at 28 days, and the need for invasive mechanical ventilation. All efficacy and safety analyses were done in all randomised patients who had received at least one dose of study medication (modified intention-to-treat population). This study is registered with the EU Clinical Trials Register (EudraCT 2020-001236-10).Findings Between March 31, 2020, and Jan 4, 2021, 805 patients were screened, of whom 400 were eligible and randomly assigned to the imatinib group (n=204) or the placebo group (n=196). A total of 385 (96%) patients (median age 64 years [IQR 56-73]) received at least one dose of study medication and were included in the modified intention-to-treat population. Time to discontinuation of ventilation and supplemental oxygen for more than 48 h was not significantly different between the two groups (unadjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.95 [95% CI 0.76-1.20]). At day 28, 15 (8%) of 197 patients had died in the imatinib group compared with 27 (14%) of 188 patients in the placebo group (unadjusted HR 0.51 [0.27-0.95]). After adjusting for baseline imbalances between the two groups (sex, obesity, diabetes, and cardiovascular disease) the HR for mortality was 0.52 (95% CI 0.26-1.05). The HR for mechanical ventilation in the imatinib group compared with the placebo group was 1.07 (0.63-1.80; p=0.81). The median duration of invasive mechanical ventilation was 7 days (IQR 3-13) in the imatinib group compared with 12 days (6-20) in the placebo group (p=0.0080). 91 (46%) of 197 patients in the imatinib group and 82 (44%) of 188 patients in the placebo group had at least one grade 3 or higher adverse event. The safety evaluation revealed no imatinib-associated adverse events.Interpretation The study failed to meet its primary outcome, as imatinib did not reduce the time to discontinuation of ventilation and supplemental oxygen for more than 48 consecutive hours in patients with COVID-19 requiring supplemental oxygen. The observed effects on survival (although attenuated after adjustment for baseline imbalances) and duration of mechanical ventilation suggest that imatinib might confer clinical benefit in hospitalised patients with COVID-19, but further studies are required to validate these findings. Copyright (C) 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.Pathogenesis and treatment of chronic pulmonary disease

Cytokine profiles during clinical high-flux dialysis : no evidence for cytokine generation by circulating monocytes

Contains fulltext : 25537___.PDF (publisher's version ) (Open Access

Current and Remitted Depression and Anxiety Disorders as Risk Factors for Medication Nonadherence

Objective: To investigate the impact of current and remitted depression and anxiety disorders and sociodemographic and other related factors on medication nonadherence in a large cohort study. Method: The Medication Adherence Rating Scale was used to assess medication nonadherence of 1,890 medication users in the 4-year follow-up assessment of the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety, which was conducted between 2008 and 2011. Psychiatric diagnoses according to the DSM-IV, sociodemographic and clinical characteristics, and medication use were determined. Medication nonadherence was defined by the tendency to forget a dose, change the dose, stop for a while, skip 1 dose, or take a smaller dosage than prescribed. Results: Overall medication nonadherence was 44%. In multivariate analyses, all current and remitted depression and anxiety diagnoses were risk factors for medication nonadherence as compared to subjects never having had a depressive or anxiety diagnosis (P < .05). Age (OR = 0.85, P < .001) and antidepressant use (OR = 0.66, P = .001) were associated with less medication nonadherence. Alcohol dependence (OR = 1.67, P = .05) and the number of dietary supplements (OR = 1.18, P = .02) proved risk factors for medication nonadherence. Associations of anxiety diagnosis with medication nonadherence were mainly driven by depression diagnosis. Conclusions: All current and remitted depression and anxiety disorders were risk factors for medication nonadherence. Since these disorders are highly comorbid with other medical conditions, health care workers should address medication nonadherence in patients with depression and/or anxiety disorders, even in those who are in symptomatic remission