Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Author’s Reply to Kotlinska-Lemieszek: “Should Midazolam Drug–Drug Interactions Be of Concern to Palliative Care Physicians?”

  • Commentary
  • Published:
Drug Safety Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Kotlinska-Lemieszek A. Should midazolam drug–drug interactions be of concern to palliative care physicians? [letter]. Drug Saf. 2013. doi:10.1007/s40264-013-0066-2

  2. Frechen S, Zoeller A, Ruberg K, et al. Drug interactions in dying patients: a retrospective analysis of hospice inpatients in Germany. Drug Saf. 2012;35(9):745–58.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Galetin A, Gertz M, Houston JB. Potential role of intestinal first-pass metabolism in the prediction of drug–drug interactions. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol. 2008;4(7):909–22.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Guengerich FP. Cytochrome P-450 3A4: regulation and role in drug metabolism. Annu Rev Pharmacol Toxicol. 1999;39:1–17.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Dresser GK, Spence JD, Bailey DG. Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic consequences and clinical relevance of cytochrome P450 3A4 inhibition. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2000;38(1):41–57.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Plant NJ, Gibson GG. Evaluation of the toxicological relevance of CYP3A4 induction. Curr Opin Drug Discov Devel. 2003;6(1):50–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Hyland R, Osborne T, Payne A, et al. In vitro and in vivo glucuronidation of midazolam in humans. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2009;67(4):445–54.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Ito K, Ogihara K, Kanamitsu S, et al. Prediction of the in vivo interaction between midazolam and macrolides based on in vitro studies using human liver microsomes. Drug Metab Dispos. 2003;31(7):945–54.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Vossen M, Sevestre M, Niederalt C, et al. Dynamically simulating the interaction of midazolam and the CYP3A4 inhibitor itraconazole using individual coupled whole-body physiologically-based pharmacokinetic (WB-PBPK) models. Theor Biol Med Model. 2007;4:13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Zhang X, Quinney SK, Gorski JC, et al. Semiphysiologically based pharmacokinetic models for the inhibition of midazolam clearance by diltiazem and its major metabolite. Drug Metab Dispos. 2009;37(8):1587–97.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Quinney SK, Zhang X, Lucksiri A, et al. Physiologically based pharmacokinetic model of mechanism-based inhibition of CYP3A by clarithromycin. Drug Metab Dispos. 2010;38(2):241–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Rowland Yeo K, Jamei M, Yang J, et al. Physiologically based mechanistic modelling to predict complex drug-drug interactions involving simultaneous competitive and time-dependent enzyme inhibition by parent compound and its metabolite in both liver and gut—the effect of diltiazem on the time-course of exposure to triazolam. Eur J Pharm Sci. 2010;39(5):298–309.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Frechen S, Junge L, Saari TI, et al. A semiphysiological population pharmacokinetic model for dynamic inhibition of liver and gut wall CYP3A by voriconazole. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2013. doi:10.1007/s40262-013-0070-9.

  14. O’Mahony D, O’Connor MN. Pharmacotherapy at the end-of-life. Age Ageing. 2011;40(4):419–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Gaertner J, Ruberg K, Schlesiger G, et al. Drug interactions in palliative care—it’s more than cytochrome P450. Palliat Med. 2012;26(6):813–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Claessens P, Menten J, Schotsmans P, et al. Palliative sedation: a review of the research literature. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2008;36(3):310–33.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Pecking M, Montestruc F, Marquet P, et al. Absolute bioavailability of midazolam after subcutaneous administration to healthy volunteers. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2002;54(4):357–62.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Lindqvist O, Lundquist G, Dickman A, et al. Four essential drugs needed for quality care of the dying: a Delphi-study based international expert consensus opinion. J Palliat Med. 2013;16(1):38–43.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No funding has been received for writing this comment. The original study was supported by an unrestricted research grant from Mundipharma.

Conflicts of interest

Sebastian Frechen and Jan Gaertner have no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this comment.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pharmacology, Clinical Pharmacology, Cologne University Hospital, Gleueler Str. 24, 50931, Cologne, Germany

    Sebastian Frechen

  2. Department of Palliative Care, University Medical Center Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany

    Jan Gaertner

Authors
  1. Sebastian Frechen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jan Gaertner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sebastian Frechen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Frechen, S., Gaertner, J. Author’s Reply to Kotlinska-Lemieszek: “Should Midazolam Drug–Drug Interactions Be of Concern to Palliative Care Physicians?”. Drug Saf 36, 791–792 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-013-0067-1

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-013-0067-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation