Alterations in vesicular dopamine uptake contribute to tolerance to the neurotoxic effects of methamphetamine

ABSTRACT Previous studies demonstrated that tolerance to the long-term neurotoxic effects of methamphetamine on dopamine neurons could be induced by pretreating with multiple injections of escalating doses of methamphetamine. The mechanism(s) underlying this tolerance phenomenon is unknown. Some recent studies suggested that aberrant vesicular monoamine transporter-2 (VMAT-2) and dopamine transporter function contribute to neurotoxic effects of methamphetamine. Hence, the purpose of this study was to explore the role of the VMAT-2 and dopamine transporter in the induction of tolerance to the longterm persistent dopaminergic deficits caused by methamphetamine. A second purpose was to investigate the potential role of hyperthermia and alterations in brain methamphetamine distribution in this tolerance. Results revealed that the methamphetamine pretreatment regimen attenuated both the acute methamphetamine-induced decrease in VMAT-2 function 2 h after the methamphetamine challenge administration and its resulting persistent dopamine deficits without attenuating the acute methamphetamine-induced decreases in dopamine transporter uptake. Furthermore, pretreatment with methamphetamine prior to a high-dose methamphetamine challenge administration also attenuated the acute methamphetamineinduced redistribution of VMAT-2 immunoreactivity within the nerve terminal. This protection was not due to alterations in concentration of methamphetamine in the brain because both the methamphetamine-and saline-pretreated rats had similar amounts of methamphetamine and amphetamine at 30 min to 2 h after the last methamphetamine challenge injection. In summary, these data are the first to demonstrate an association between the prevention of acute alterations in vesicular dopamine uptake and the development of tolerance to the neurotoxic effects of methamphetamine

Molecular, Viral and Clinical Features of Alcohol- and Non-Alcohol-Induced Liver Injury

Hepatic cells are sensitive to internal and external signals. Ethanol is one of the oldest and most widely used drugs in the world. The focus on the mechanistic engine of the alcohol-induced injury has been in the liver, which is responsible for the pathways of alcohol metabolism. Ethanol undergoes a phase I type of reaction, mainly catalyzed by the cytoplasmic enzyme, alcohol dehydrogenase (ADH), and by the microsomal ethanol-oxidizing system (MEOS). Reactive oxygen species (ROS) generated by cytochrome (CYP) 2E1 activity and MEOS contribute to ethanol-induced toxicity. We aimed to: (1) Describe the cellular, pathophysiological and clinical effects of alcohol misuse on the liver; (2) Select the biomarkers and analytical methods utilized by the clinical laboratory to assess alcohol exposure; (3) Provide therapeutic ideas to prevent/reduce alcohol-induced liver injury; (4) Provide up-to-date knowledge regarding the Corona virus and its affect on the liver; (5) Link rare diseases with alcohol consumption. The current review contributes to risk identification of patients with alcoholic, as well as non-alcoholic, liver disease and metabolic syndrome. Additional prevalence of ethnic, genetic, and viral vulnerabilities are presented

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring and Dosage Adjustments of Immunosuppressive Drugs When Combined with Nirmatrelvir/Ritonavir in Patients with COVID-19

Abstract:Nirmatrelvir/ritonavir (Paxlovid) consists of a peptidomimetic inhibitor (nirmatrelvir) of the SARS-CoV-2 main protease and a pharmacokinetic enhancer (ritonavir). It is approved for the treatment of mild-to-moderate COVID-19. This combination of nirmatrelvir and ritonavir can mediate significant and complex drug-drug interactions (DDIs), primarily due to the ritonavir component. Indeed, ritonavir inhibits the metabolism of nirmatrelvir through cytochrome P450 3A (CYP3A) leading to higher plasma concentrations and a longer half-life of nirmatrelvir. Coadministration of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir with immunosuppressive drugs (ISDs) is particularly challenging given the major involvement of CYP3A in the metabolism of most of these drugs and their narrow therapeutic ranges. Exposure of ISDs will be drastically increased through the potent ritonavir-mediated inhibition of CYP3A, resulting in an increased risk of adverse drug reactions. Although a decrease in the dosage of ISDs can prevent toxicity, an inappropriate dosage regimen may also result in insufficient exposure and a risk of rejection. Here, we provide some general recommendations for therapeutic drug monitoring of ISDs and dosing recommendations when coadministered with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir. Particularly, tacrolimus should be discontinued, or patients should be given a microdose on day 1, whereas cyclosporine dosage should be reduced to 20% of the initial dosage during the antiviral treatment. Dosages of mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors (m-TORis) should also be adjusted while dosages of mycophenolic acid and corticosteroids are expected to be less impacted

Therapeutic drug monitoring and dosage adjustments of immunosuppressive drugs when combined with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir in patients with COVID-19

International audienceNirmatrelvir/ritonavir (Paxlovid®) consists of a peptidomimetic inhibitor (Nirmatrelvir) of the SARS-CoV-2 main protease and a pharmacokinetic enhancer (Ritonavir). It is approved for the treatment of mild-to-moderate COVID-19. This combination of nirmatrelvir and ritonavir can mediate significant and complex drug-drug interactions (DDIs), primarily due to the ritonavir component. Indeed, ritonavir inhibits the metabolism of nirmatrelvir through cytochrome P450 3A (CYP3A) leading to higher plasma concentrations and a longer half-life of nirmatrelvir. Co-administration of nirmatrelvir/ritonavir with immunosuppressant drugs (ISDs) is particularly challenging given the major involvement of CYP3A in the metabolism of most of these drugs and their narrow therapeutic ranges. Exposure of ISDs will be drastically increased through the potent ritonavir-mediated inhibition of CYP3A, resulting in an increased risk of adverse drug reactions. While a decrease in the dosage of ISDs can prevent toxicity, an inappropriate dosage regimen may also result in insufficient exposure and a risk of rejection. Here we provide some general recommendations for therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of ISDs and dosing recommendations when co-administered with nirmatrelvir/ritonavir. Particularly, tacrolimus should be discontinued, or patients should be given a microdose on day-1, while cyclosporine dosage should be reduced to 20% of the initial dosage during the antiviral treatment. Dosages of mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors (m-TORis) should also be adjusted while dosages of mycophenolic acid and corticosteroids are expected to be less impacted

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Tacrolimus-Personalized Therapy: Second Consensus Report.

Ten years ago, a consensus report on the optimization of tacrolimus was published in this journal. In 2017, the Immunosuppressive Drugs Scientific Committee of the International Association of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring and Clinical Toxicity (IATDMCT) decided to issue an updated consensus report considering the most relevant advances in tacrolimus pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacogenetics (PG), pharmacodynamics, and immunologic biomarkers, with the aim to provide analytical and drug-exposure recommendations to assist TDM professionals and clinicians to individualize tacrolimus TDM and treatment. The consensus is based on in-depth literature searches regarding each topic that is addressed in this document. Thirty-seven international experts in the field of TDM of tacrolimus as well as its PG and biomarkers contributed to the drafting of sections most relevant for their expertise. Whenever applicable, the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations were graded according to a published grading guide. After iterated editing, the final version of the complete document was approved by all authors. For each category of solid organ and stem cell transplantation, the current state of PK monitoring is discussed and the specific targets of tacrolimus trough concentrations (predose sample C0) are presented for subgroups of patients along with the grading of these recommendations. In addition, tacrolimus area under the concentration-time curve determination is proposed as the best TDM option early after transplantation, at the time of immunosuppression minimization, for special populations, and specific clinical situations. For indications other than transplantation, the potentially effective tacrolimus concentrations in systemic treatment are discussed without formal grading. The importance of consistency, calibration, proficiency testing, and the requirement for standardization and need for traceability and reference materials is highlighted. The status for alternative approaches for tacrolimus TDM is presented including dried blood spots, volumetric absorptive microsampling, and the development of intracellular measurements of tacrolimus. The association between CYP3A5 genotype and tacrolimus dose requirement is consistent (Grading A I). So far, pharmacodynamic and immunologic biomarkers have not entered routine monitoring, but determination of residual nuclear factor of activated T cells-regulated gene expression supports the identification of renal transplant recipients at risk of rejection, infections, and malignancy (B II). In addition, monitoring intracellular T-cell IFN-g production can help to identify kidney and liver transplant recipients at high risk of acute rejection (B II) and select good candidates for immunosuppression minimization (B II). Although cell-free DNA seems a promising biomarker of acute donor injury and to assess the minimally effective C0 of tacrolimus, multicenter prospective interventional studies are required to better evaluate its clinical utility in solid organ transplantation. Population PK models including CYP3A5 and CYP3A4 genotypes will be considered to guide initial tacrolimus dosing. Future studies should investigate the clinical benefit of time-to-event models to better evaluate biomarkers as predictive of personal response, the risk of rejection, and graft outcome. The Expert Committee concludes that considerable advances in the different fields of tacrolimus monitoring have been achieved during this last decade. Continued efforts should focus on the opportunities to implement in clinical routine the combination of new standardized PK approaches with PG, and valid biomarkers to further personalize tacrolimus therapy and to improve long-term outcomes for treated patients