This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
ISSN 1999-4923 www.mdpi.com/journal/pharmaceutics Review
Pharmacokinetic Drug Interactions of Antimicrobial Drugs: A Systematic Review on Oxazolidinones, Rifamycines, Macrolides, Fluoroquinolones, and Beta-Lactams
Mathieu S. Bolhuis *, Prashant N. Panday, Arianna D. Pranger, Jos G. W. Kosterink and Jan-Willem C. Alffenaar Department of Hospital and Clinical Pharmacy, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, PO Box 30.001, 9700 RB Groningen, The Netherlands; E-Mails: email@example.com (P.N.P.); firstname.lastname@example.org (A.D.P.); email@example.com (J.G.W.K.); firstname.lastname@example.org (J.-W.C.A.) * Author to whom correspondence should be addressed; E-Mail: email@example.com; Tel.: +31-50-361-4071; Fax: +31-50-361-4078 Received: 15 October 2011; in revised form: 26 October 2011 / Accepted: 9 November 2011 / Published: 18 November 2011
Abstract: Like any other drug, antimicrobial drugs are prone to pharmacokinetic drug interactions. These drug interactions are a major concern in clinical practice as they may have an effect on efficacy and toxicity. This article provides an overview of all published pharmacokinetic studies on drug interactions of the commonly prescribed antimicrobial drugs oxazolidinones, rifamycines, macrolides, fluoroquinolones, and beta-lactams, focusing on systematic research. We describe drug-food and drug-drug interaction studies in humans, affecting antimicrobial drugs as well as concomitantly administered drugs. Since knowledge about mechanisms is of paramount importance for adequate management of drug interactions, the most plausible underlying mechanism of the drug interaction is provided when available. This overview can be used in daily practice to support the management of pharmacokinetic drug interactions of antimicrobial drugs. Keywords: pharmacokinetics; drug interaction; antimicrobial drugs; oxazolidinones; rifamycines; macrolides; fluoroquinolones; beta-lactams; cytochrome P450; induction; inhibition
Pharmaceutics 2011, 3 1. Introduction
Antimicrobial drugs manifest a wide variety of drug interactions, which can differ greatly in their extent of severity and clinical relevance. Not only co-medication, but also food and herbal medicine can interact with antimicrobial drugs and vice versa. The nature of these interactions can be of pharmacodynamic (PD) and/or pharmacokinetic (PK) origin. A PD interaction consists of an alteration of a pharmacological response, through either agonism or antagonism, without affecting the kinetics of the drug. In cases of PD interactions, physicians are advised to re-evaluate the benefit-risk ratio of the co-prescribed drug for each individual patient . PK interactions result in an altered disposition of a drug within a patient and can take place at the level of each of four processes influencing drug exposure, i.e., absorption, distribution, metabolism, and excretion, commonly described by the acronym ADME. Historically, the relevance of drug distribution, particularly of protein binding, has been over-emphasized in the assessment of drug interactions, and nowadays the main cause of drug-drug interactions has been recognized to be modulation of the activity, i.e., inhibition or induction, of cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzymes and transporters. Clinicians, prescribing the drug and pharmacists—often involved in medication review, therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM), or consultation on drug choice or dose—should be aware of clinically relevant interactions between antimicrobial drugs and co-medication, herbal medicine, and/or food in order to avoid toxicity, side effects, or inadequate treatment. PK interactions are in most cases manageable by adjusting the dose and by monitoring of drug levels (TDM) or vital signs. This review article will address PK interactions of antimicrobial drugs. The scope is to present an overview of PK studies on drug-drug and drug-food interactions of commonly prescribed antimicrobial drugs in daily clinical practice, i.e., oxazolidinones, rifamycines, macrolides, fluoroquinolones, and β-lactam antimicrobial drugs. 2. Experimental Section The Pubmed database was searched for PK interaction studies on drug-drug and drug-food interactions of antimicrobial drugs (Figure 1). The search was limited through the following selections: “Humans”, “Clinical Trial”, “Randomized Controlled Trial”, “Comparative Study”, and “Controlled Clinical Trial”. Only articles written in English were included. Per group of antimicrobial drugs, a separate search was conducted consisting of the name of the group, the name of the individual drugs, and the term “drug interaction”. When the Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) term “drug interaction” was used, indented terms such as “Herb-Drug Interaction” and “Food-Drug Interaction” were also searched. The search terms “NOT in vitro” and “NOT review” were added since this review focuses on original articles of studies with human subjects. Summaries of product characteristics or package leaflets were not consulted since these sources will only present a snapshot of the available information and will therefore not give a good overall impression of their use in clinical practice.
Pharmaceutics 2011, 3 Figure 1. Scope of the review and summary of the experimental section. The gray area symbolizes the focus of this review, i.e., pharmacokinetic (PK) drug interactions of antimicrobial drugs. Arrows symbolize a PK interaction. Upwards pointing arrows (↑): interaction affecting antimicrobial drug (§3.x.1 “Antimicrobial drugs as victims”). Downwards pointing arrows (↓): interaction affecting co-prescribed drug (§3.x.2 “Antimicrobial drugs as perpetrators”).
When a search resulted in only a few results, the query was expanded with the criterion “Case Report” and explicitely marked as such in this review since its contents have to be interpreted carefully because of the limited level of evidence. All searches were conducted in March and April 2011. The relevant results were described per group of antimicrobial drugs. For each group, the drug interactions are divided into interactions affecting the antimicrobial drugs and interactions effecting the co-medication. The drug that is affected is identified by the term ‘victim’ and the drug that causes the effect by ‘perpetrator’. A table summarizing the most important drug interactions is provided for each group of antimicrobial drugs. 3. Results and Discussion 3.1. Oxazolidinones Currently, LZD is the only oxazolidinone authorized by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The number of properly designed drug-interaction studies with oxazolidinones is limited and the underlying mechanisms of some drug interactions are not yet fully elucidated. Furthermore, there is a lack of reviewed publications on drug interactions of newer compounds such as PNU-100480, posizolid (AZD2563), radezolid (RX-1741), torezolid and others, several of which are still being studied in phase I, II or III clinical research. A summary of LZD PK interactions is provided in Table 1.
Pharmaceutics 2011, 3 Table 1. Summary of interactions of the oxazolidinone LZD with enzyme systems and/or food.
Absorption Fat meal LZD
Metabolism: Antacids = CYP -
Excretion: P-gp S
Reactive Oxygen Species =
Arrows pointing downward (↓) indicate inhibition and upward (↑) induction. The number of arrows indicates the extent of the inhibition or induction: 1 arrow <50%, 2 arrows 50–150%, 3 arrows >150% increase/decrease of AUC. “S” indicates the drug being a substrate, and “=” interaction is not relevant.
Mostly based on case reports: in need of further research.
Note: Systematic research on newer compounds such as PNU-100480, posilozid (AZD2563), radezolid (RX-1741), torezolid, and others is not available. Since there were no interactions affecting displacement/distribution this process was not included in the table.
3.1.1. Oxazolidinones as Victims Antimicrobial drugs: In an open-label comparative study of 8 healthy volunteers receiving 600 mg of both LZD and rifampicin (RIF) intravenously, a reduction of LZD plasma concentration was observed . An in vitro study demonstrated that LZD is not detectably metabolized by human CYP and did not inhibit the activities of human CYP isoforms 1A2, 2C9, 2C19, 2D6, 2E1, or 3A4 . Based on these observations along with the fact that RIF is a well-known P-gp inducer, the authors suggest LZD to be a P-gp substrate . This hypothesis was further supported by a case report of a patient with MDR-TB. This patient received LZD and clarithromycin (CLR), a potent inhibitor of P-gp and a well-known CYP3A4 inhibitor. It was shown that co-administration of CLR with LZD resulted in a markedly increased LZD AUC . The combination of aztreonam and LZD in an open-label cross-over study that included 13 healthy volunteers resulted in a statistically significant, although probably not clinically relevant increase of LZD AUC of approximately 18% . The authors suggest that the mechanism for this interaction is partly explained by a common elimination pathway, i.e., renal excretion. However, the definite mechanism remains unknown. Food and antacids: In a two-phase single-dose open-label cross-over study of 12 healthy volunteers, a fatty meal caused a small but statistically significant reduction of mean LZD plasma concentration . The Cmax decreased by 23% and tmax increased from 1.5 hours to 2.2 hours, probably due to prolonged gastric residence time. An open-label cross-over study in 28 healthy volunteers tested the hypothesis that a disturbed balanced of reactive oxygen species might lower the in vivo clearance of LZD by supplementing dietary antioxidants, i.e., vitamin C and E, but concluded there was no significant effect on LZD Cmax and AUC . This is in line with current literature indicating that supplemented antioxidant vitamins have subtle effects on in vivo reactive oxygen species balance . A randomized open-label cross-over study of 17 healthy volunteers showed that the antacid Maalox has no effect on the PK of LZD . 3.1.2. Oxazolidinones as Perpetrators Serotonin reuptake inhibitors: A single randomized controlled trial (RCT)  and several case reports [10–23] describe LZD’s potential for drug interactions due to its reversible monoamine oxidase-A inhibitor activity. In case reports, serotonic toxicity was observed after co-administration of
Pharmaceutics 2011, 3
LZD with drugs that influence serotonin levels like selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs), tricyclic antidepressants, monoamine oxidase inhibitors, and other serotonergic agents such as citalopram, diphenhydramine, duloxetine, fluoxetine, paroxetine, sertraline, trazodone, and venlafaxine. However, one case report presented a depressed patient receiving co-administered mirtazepine and LZD being treated successfully without toxic signs . The RCT focused on the PK interaction of LZD with the over the counter (OTC) sympathomimetic drugs pseudoephedrine and phenylpropanolamine. A slight increase in blood pressure and a minimal effect on the PK of both co-administered drugs was found in 42 healthy individuals . The serotonin reuptake inhibitor dextromethorphan was co-administered with LZD with no clinical effect: only a slight decrease of dextrorphan, the primary metabolite of dextromorphan, was observed . 3.2. Rifamycines The antimicrobial group of rifamycines exhibits their bactericide effect through inhibition of bacterial DNA-dependant RNA polymerases. The most pronounced members of the group, rifampi(ci)n (RIF), rifabutin (RFB) and rifapentine (RFP), are often administered for the treatment of Mycobacterium tuberculosis, leprosy (Hansen’s disease), and M. avium complex. A summary of the interactions is presented in Table 2. Table 2. Summary of interactions of rifamycines with enzyme systems and/or food.
Rifamycines *1 RIF Absorption: Fat meal Antacids OATP Metabolism: CYP1A2 CYP2B6 CYP2C8 CYP2C9 CYP2J2 CYP3A4 UGT1A1 Excretion: P-gp
RFB S, ↑-↑↑↑ 0-↑ -
↓ 0 ↓↓-↑ ↑-↑↑ ↑ ↑-↑↑ ↑-↑↑ ↑ S, ↑-↑↑↑ ↑-↑↑ ↑-↑↑
Arrows pointing downward (↓) indicate inhibition and upward (↑) induction. The number of arrows indicates the extent of the inhibition or induction: 1 arrow < 50%, 2 arrows 50–150%, 3 arrows >150% increase/decrease of AUC. “S” indicates the drug being a substrate, “0” indicates the absence of an interaction.
Inhibition after single dose, upregulation after multiple doses.
Since there were no interactions affecting displacement/distribution this process was not included in the table.
2. Food and antacids: A randomized cross-over study in 14 healthy subjects found that the antacid aluminum-magnesium did not alter PK parameters of RIF. The effect of food intake on rifalazil PK parameters was studied in 12 healthy volunteers receiving a normal breakfast or a high-fat breakfast. a potent inhibitor of CYP3A4. Another study showed that when 300 mg RFB was added to indinavir 2400 mg/day. Co-trimoxazole increased the median AUC of RIF by 60% and Cmax by 31% .3% . the combination produced similar indinavir PK parameters but an increase of RFB AUC by 70% . When the RFB dose was decreased from 300 mg/day to 150 mg/day and the indinavir dose was increased from 2400 mg/day to 3000 mg/day. Indinavir. Nelfinavir increased the AUC of RFB by approximately 22% in a prospective cohort of seven tuberculosis patients .1. possibly caused by enhanced decomposition of RIF to the insoluble metabolite 3-formyl RIF SV in the gastrointestinal tract due to the presence of isoniazide in the acidic stomach . 3 3. The authors explain this decrease by autoinduction of metabolism of RFP through high doses of RFP administered intermittently for more than two weeks. RFB AUC increased by 44% and Cmax by 45% after co-administration with saquinavir and was well tolerated in a randomized open-label study of HIV-infected patients . with a fat content of respectively 30% or 60% of the total calories. Antimicrobial drugs: CLR was found to increase RIF AUC by 60%  and RFB AUC by 76–99% in two studies [39. The authors suggest amprenavir both to be a CYP3A4 inhibitor and substrate and RFB as a CYP3A4 substrate being a less potent inducer of CYP3A4 than RIF. fluconazole did increase RFB AUC by 82% and its metabolite LM565 by 216%. In a randomized single-dose cross-over study of 16 tuberculosis patients. Rifamycines as Victims 870 Antiretroviral drugs: Amprenavir co-administered with RFB or RIF in a randomized prospective cohort study that included 24 healthy subjects resulted in a 293% increase of RFB AUC. also possibly through CYP3A4 inhibition . co-administration of RIF and isoniazide with or without pyrazinamide resulted in a significantly reduced AUC and Cmax of RIF . Antifungal drugs: Fluconazole had little  to no  effect on RIF PK parameters. but had no effect on RIF kinetics . One study focused on the effect of pefloxacin on RIF PK and found that the AUC of RIF in serum was increased by 200% . The bioavailability of RIF was reduced by approximately 32% when co-administered with isoniazide in a fixed dose combination capsule formulation of 450 mg RIF and 300 mg isoniazide. Atazanavir co-administration with RIF resulted in an increased RIF exposure by 160–250% . nearly doubling the tmax . increased the RIF mean AUC by 73% in HIV-infected patients . AUC exposure to RFB significantly increased by 273% . Co-administration of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate and RIF resulted in no significant changes in PK parameters .Pharmaceutics 2011. . resulting in a decrease of RFP AUC by 20. possibly through inhibition of CYP3A .40]. resulting in a progressively increased exposure by 30% to 60% . However. but a high-fat meal did reduce the Cmax by 36% and the AUC by a mere 6%. Co-administration of didanosine with RFB resulted in unchanged RFB exposure . Posaconazole caused the AUC of RFB to increase by 72% and the Cmax by 31%. The RFP exposure was reduced by co-administration with moxifloxacin (MXF).
A recent study in 12 healthy Asian volunteers found that a single dose of RIF increased pravastatin AUC0-∞ by 182%. The authors suggest that OATP1B1 transporter expression might vary. e. RIF had no effect on PK parameters of diabecon (D-400). OATP and CYP3A4. In a randomized open-label cross-over study. pretreatment with 600 mg RIF reduced the 8 mg single-dose rosiglitazone AUC by 65% and Cmax by 33%. This difference might be explained by up-regulation of mRNA of drug transporters. In a randomized cross-over study in nine healthy volunteers. Rifamycines as Perpetrators 871 Antidiabetic drugs: The effect of RIF on antidiabetics such as gliclazide. In a randomized open-label 2-way cross-over study of 10 healthy subjects. to a lesser extent CYP2C9 . probably through induction of CYP2C8 and. without a significant effect on Cmax. Immunosuppressants: Several interaction studies co-administering rifamycins with immunosuppressants have been conducted. probably through induction of liver enzymes. and glyburide has been investigated in several studies.g. HMG-coA reductase inhibitors (statins): RIF reduced exposure to atorvastatin by 80%. 3 3. The authors hypothesized that the decreased exposure was caused by induction of CYP2C9. probably via induction of CYP2C8 enzyme system .2. A study with a similar design in 10 healthy subjects found the glimepiride exposure to decrease by 34% . In a small study of four patients. RIF altered the disposition and antihistamine effect of ebastine. which resulted in the glyburide AUC to decrease by 125% and Cmax by 81% . RIF had no effect on the mean AUC of rosuvastatin (95. resulting in variable intracellular RIF concentration and interpatient variability in AUC. Antihistamines: RIF reduced the fexofenadine bioavailability through induction of intestinal P-gp. possibly combined with P-gp or CYP2J2 induction. a non-sedative antihistamine. A cross-over study in 12 healthy volunteers receiving RIF and everolimus found a .Pharmaceutics 2011. co-administering glyburide and a single intravenous dose of RIF demonstrated that RIF inhibited organic anion-transporter polypeptide (OATP) family members. although in some patients a marked decrease was noted . reducing the AUC of the active metabolite carebastine to 15% and reducing oral bioavailability . reducing the AUC by 24% without affecting the Cmax . In three cross-over studies of healthy volunteers RIF reduced repaglinide AUC by 31–81%. glimepiride. RIF had a similar effect on nateglinide. possibly through inhibited hepatic uptake by OATPs and inhibited biliary excretion mediated by MRP2 .2. resulting in an increased oral clearance. RIF decreased the gliclazide AUC by 70% with clinically significant changed blood glucose levels .8%). This resulted in changed blood glucose profiles [51–53].. In the same study multiple oral doses of RIF resulted in a decreased glyburide exposure. and a decrease of AUC . However. possibly by CYP3A4 mediated first pass effect in the liver and intestinal wall . calculated from dose/AUC. an effect probably caused by induction of CYP3A4 and possibly by CYP2C8. a multiple-dose study in 10 healthy Caucasian volunteers found that the pravastatin AUC was reduced by 31% . after multiple doses of RIF or possibly by different polymorphism of Asians compared to Caucasian volunteers. RIF significantly decreased cyclosporine A serum trough concentrations through induction of CYP450 enzyme mediated metabolism . The authors suggest that this might be caused by CYP3A4 induction. RIF reduced the pioglitazone AUC significantly by 54%. RIF greatly decreased the AUC of simvastatin by 87%. a complex herbal supplement supposedly offering glycemic control . probably by CYP3A4 induction .
but resulted in a decrease of Cmax by 36%. Efavirenz and RIF co-administration was studied in a non-blinded randomized PK study. Other studies found either an increase in AUC of 5%  or a non-significant difference in the Cmin . resulting in increased MPA glucuronidation which possibly also was due to RIF-associated increased expression of MRP2. vomiting and elevated transaminaseelevations levels) . whereas in the same study the combination of RIF and amprenavir resulted in a decrease of amprenavir AUC by 82% . Combining RIF with enfuvirtide had no effect on enfuvirtide PK . probably through induction of CYP3A4 . Co-administration of nevirapine with RIF resulted in a decreased AUC by 36% and Cmin by 32% in one study . resulting in a decreased bioavailability by 35%. A decreased MPA AUC by 17.e. but the C12h still dropped by 53% compared to raltegravir alone. . was terminated after patients encountered adverse events (i. leading to nearly negligible delavirdine concentrations . Delavirdine was studied with both RFB and RIF in 12 HIV-positive patients. Co-administration of RIF with indinavir-ritonavir resulted in an AUC decrease of indinavir by 87% and ritonavir by 94%. Doubling the maraviroc dose to 200 mg resulted in maraviroc exposure approaching pre-induction values. When raltegravir 400 mg was co-administered with RIF. 3 872 reduced everolimus Cmax by 58%. e. This is clinically relevant as Cmin is the relevant PK parameter predicting anti-retroviral activity . AUC by 63%. The second study. Indinavir is indicated as a substrate of CYP3A4. One study found a minor increase of atazanavir AUC of 10% but a decrease of the Cmin by 59%. along with an increased clearance . RIF co-administration resulted in a 2700% increase of oral clearance. resulting in a decrease in mean efavirenz Cmax by 24% and AUC by 25% .. When 700/100 mg fosamprenavir/ritonavir bid was combined with RFB. Co-administration of RIF with mycophenolic acid (MPA) was investigated in a prospective cohort PK interaction study following 8 stable renal allograft recipients . combining atazanavir/ritonavir with RIF. elevated AST/ALT.5% was observed. Anti-retroviral drugs: Amprenavir co-administered with RFB in a randomized prospective cohort study that included 24 healthy subjects resulted in no change in amprenavir PK. RIF appeared to induce both intestinal and hepatic metabolism of tacrolimus by means of induction of CYP3A and P-gp in the liver and small bowel. The possible explanation lies in the fact that nevirapine is a CYP3A4 and 2B6 substrate or possibly even a P-gp substrate. RFB increased the oral clearance by 500% . This suggested an induction of uridine diphosphate glucuronosyltransferase (UGT). and ritonavir a potent CYP inhibitor. with an increased exposure to the glucuronidated metabolites.. and a reduced t1/2 from 32 to 24 hours . the Cmin was decreased by 61% and the AUC by 40%. and a reduced Cmin by 39% in another . After doubling the raltegravir dose the effect of RIF on raltegravir dose was abolished. Atazanavir combined with RIF was examined in two studies. RIF had no effect on PK of temsirolimus in healthy volunteers.g. inhibiting the enterohepatic recirculation. When maraviroc 100 mg was combined with RIF. and did reduce the sirolimus AUC by 65% and Cmax by 56% .Pharmaceutics 2011. besides a decrease in rifamipicin exposure . RFB increased darunavir/ritonavir exposure by approximately 60% . A study combining 600 mg RIF once a day and adjusted dose lopinavir/ritonavir tablets of 600/150 mg or 800/200 mg was terminated due to adverse events. Co-administration of didanosine with RFB resulted in a 20% AUC increase of didanosine . a dose reduction of RFB by 75% is advised based on a PK interaction study in healthy volunteers . the AUC of maraviroc was decreased by 50% and the Cmax by 70%. The authors hypothesized that RIF competitively inhibits MRP2-mediated transport of MPA. nausea and vomiting .
Two different studies found that RIF reduced the AUC of zolpidem by 73% and Cmax by 58%  and of zopiclone by respectively 82% and 71% . a reduction of trimethoprim of 47% and of sulfamethoxazole of 23% . probably through CYP3A4 induction. A study combining doxycyclin with RIF found significantly lower doxycyclin levels. coadministration of RIF with quinine resulted in an increase of unbound clearance. Antimycotics: RIF was observed to both inhibit and induce caspofungin disposition. but increased dapsone clearance by 67% . The authors suggest the underlying mechanism is an enzyme-inducing effect of RIF on the glucuronidation of zidovudine [91–93].107]. resulting in a reduced C24h by 14 to 31% after multiple RIF doses. predominantly metabolized by CYP3A4. and CYP3A4 . Finally. possibly through induction of the UGT enzyme system . . Benzodiazepines: Rifaximin had no effect on PK parameters of midazolam.. the posaconazole AUC decreased by 49% and the Cmax by 43% in 24 healthy volunteers receiving RFB co-medication.Pharmaceutics 2011. but increased the AUC of its metabolite 14-OH-CLR in a study including 34 patients . by 690% . RIF increased apparent oral clearance of zidovudine [91. Hormones: Both rifalazil  and rifaximin  exhibited no effect on PK parameters of ethinyl estradiol after co-administration in healthy volunteers. decreasing AUC by 47% in HIV-infected patients . RIF reduced the AUC of saquinavir when co-administered with soft-capsule saquinavir by 70% in healthy volunteers and by 46% in patients . RFB had a similar effect.96]. besides reducing RFP exposure . A blinded randomized placebo-controlled. decreasing the AUC by approximately 96% and clinically significantly reducing the PD effects [95. i. RFB was found to have no effect on safety and PK parameters when combined with zidovudine. RIF reduced the exposure to co-trimoxazole. Clun. the MXF AUC was reduced by 27–31% [106. and a significantly reduced t1/2 and AUC . RIF reduced the fluconazole AUC by 22% . higher clearance. An open-label single-dose study found RIF reduced the itraconazole AUC by 88% in healthy subjects and by 64% in HIV-infected patients . 3 873 possibly by potent induction of UGT 1 family. probably mostly through CYP3A4 and to a lesser extent through CYP1A2 induction . RIF has no effect on the AUC of dapsone. with a reduced AUC by 95% and Cmax by 88% in a randomized double-blinded cross-over study resulting in an ineffective triazolam treatment . was affected by RIF.90].e.92]. Tizanidine and RIF coadministration in a blinded randomized cross-over trial of 10 healthy volunteers resulted in a decrease of tizanidine AUC by 54% and Cmax by 51%. RIF caused a reduction of pefloxacin AUC by 27% when administered concomitantly . In a three-way randomized cross-over design study. RIF did have a significant effect on midazolam. Co-administering RFP with MXF resulted in a decrease in AUC of MXF by 17%. and thus no effect on UGT1A1 [89. Co-administration of tipranavir/ritonavir with a single dose of RFB resulted in a 16% increase in tipranavir C12h in healthy subjects . polypeptide 1 (UGT1A1). In a different study. Also triazolam. and was found to exhibit a transient net inhibition before full induction of metabolism. resulting in a decrease of AUC by 47% . When RIF was combined with MXF. leading to an elevated AUC of caspofungin by 61% on the first days of co-administration . which is primarily metabolized by CYP3A4 . RIF reduced the median AUC by 75% through induced metabolic clearance . RFB was observed to decrease CLR AUC by 44%. Antimicrobial drugs: No significant PK interaction was found between azithromycin (AZM) and RFB .
and increased imatinib metabolite exposure . Single oral dose RIF reduced the mean oral bioavailability of nifedipine to 36%. In a two-phase open-label cross-over study. RIF was found to significantly decrease prothrombin time and warfarin AUC . 3 874 cross-over study of 19 healthy volunteers found the AUC of toremifene and of tamoxifen to be decreased by approximately 87% and the Cmax by 55% after co-administration with RIF . by 44% . without a significant effect on the main active metabolite piperazine but with a 35% increase of piperazine Cmax . and attributed to a CYP3A4 interaction . RIF decreased the morphine AUC by 28% and the Cmax by 41% as well as those of the morphine metabolites. Prednisolon AUC was lower after co-treatment with RIF . Opioids: In a double-blinded randomized double-cross-over study of 10 healthy volunteers. and Cmax by 54%. Anti-epileptics: RIF significantly decreased lamotrigine exposure in a blinded study in 10 healthy volunteers. evidenced by a decrease of AUC0-∞ to 81% and an increase of renal clearance to 109% . probably through increased P-gp mediated excretion . whereas cessation of RIF in patients receiving haloperidol and RIF resulted in higher haloperidol AUCs up to 329% at day 28 . RIF mediated CYP3A induction. For teratrolol. Antihelmintic agents: Praziquantel was undetectable after a single dose of RIF in 7 of 10 subjects and in 5 of 10 after multi-dose administration. together with a significant reduction of effect of buspirone seen during 6 psychomotor tests. Oncolytics: In a randomized cross-over study RIF reduced gefitinib AUC by 83% and Cmax by 65% through induction of CYP3A4 . Psychopharmaca: The AUC of bupropion dropped by 43% when co-administered with RIF. Mirodenafil. A similar effect on buspirone PK was observed in a different study. and increased the total clearance. In a blinded 4-period . possibly through CYP3A4 induction .Pharmaceutics 2011. RIF decreased risperidone AUC by 72% and Cmax by 50%. A placebo-controlled cross-over study in 9 healthy subjects found that RIF had a minor effect on the PK of atenolol. Anti-hypertensive agents: In a randomized cross-over study of 12 healthy volunteers. attenuating the PD effect of oxycodon . used to treat erectile dysfunctions. reduced imatinib mesylate AUC0–24h by 68%. with the Cmax decreasing by 99% and 98% respectively and the AUC by 94% and 89% . a 35% decrease of teratrolol AUC was caused by RIF . Anticoagulants: RIF enhanced clopidogrel-mediated platelet aggregation inhibition by 70%. Various: RIF increased atrasentan Cmax by 150% and reduced t1/2 by 77%. Haloperidol and RIF co-administration led to a decrease in haloperidol AUC to 30% of baseline by day 28. decreased the t1/2. It showed an RIF induced reduction of AUC of 97%. possibly by induction of CYP3A4-mediated activation of clopidogrel . but had no effect on tmax and apparent Vd . A randomized placebo-controlled cross-over study of 6 healthy volunteers found the buspirone AUC to decrease by 91% and Cmax by 85%. resulting in a loss of analgesic effect . RIF decreased talinolol AUC by 21% after intravenous and by 35% after oral administration. RIF reduced the Cmax by 39% and the AUC by 56% . an oral iron chelator. RIF greatly reduced oral and intravenous oxycodon AUC by respectively 53% and 86% and reduced oral bioavailability from 69% to 21% through induction of CYP3A4. has been studied in an open-label 1-sequence 3-period cross-over study of 19 healthy volunteers. AUC0-∞ by 74%. through induction of CYP2B6 . probably due to an induction of the UGT enzyme system . through CYP3A4 induction . In the other subjects the effect was less distinct. but had no effect on AUC  and decreased the AUC of deferasirox.
The articles on which the summary has been based are further specified in the text below. the PK parameters remained unchanged . by an unknown mechanism ..3. resulting in a 35% increase of pentoxifylline AUC . i. A two-way open-label cross-over study of 12 healthy volunteers receiving AZM co-administered with nelfinavir.1. in a few studies a drug-drug interaction of AZM with antihistamines has been demonstrated. 8 healthy volunteers were administered RIF and pentoxifylline.. Macrolides as Victims Anti-retroviral drugs: AZM has been suggested to be a substrate for P-gp.3. ↓-↓↓↓ - - - - Arrows pointing downward (↓) indicate inhibition and upward (↑) induction. respectively. an inhibitor of P-gp. Despite an alteration of the Cmax of 3-hydroxydesloratadine (i. 3 875 placebo-controlled cross-over study. but absorption of tablets was unaffected by food. 2 arrows 50–150%. The effect of RIF on hydrodolasteron. metabolite of rupatadine). “S” indicates the drug being a substrate. Antihistamines: A randomized open-label cross-over study of 24 healthy individuals found an interaction between AZM and the antiallergic agent rupatadine. caused the AZM Cmax and AUC to increase by more than 100% . The number of arrows indicates the extent of the inhibition or induction: 1 arrow < 50%. “0” indicates the absence of an interaction *2 *3 Absorption of capsules has been reduced. the active metabolite of dolasteron. However. by preventing peptyltransfyrase-controlled attachement of a peptyl to tRNA to a following amino acid. Macrolides Macrolides are thought to exert their action by inhibition of bacterial protein synthesis. the Cmax and AUC increased by 69% and 67%.e.Pharmaceutics 2011. Macrolides *1 Azithromycin Absorption: Food Antacids Grapefruit juice P-gp Metabolism: CYP2C19 CYP3A4 Excretion: P-gp *1 Clarithromycin ↑ ↓ 0 *3 Erythromycin 0 ↓-↓↓↓ Telithromycin 0 ↓↓ Roxithromycin ↓ 0. PK was small. ↓↓↓*2 0 ↓-↓↓ ↓↓ ↓↓↓ S. a reduction of AUC of 28% and a 17% reduction of Cmax . except for an increase in tmax. 3. No effect on clarithromycin PK. Since there were no interactions affecting displacement/distribution this process was not included in the table. Table 3. Interactions of macrolides with enzyme systems and the effect of food on the PK of macrolides are briefly summarized in Table 3.e. 3 arrows >150% increase/decrease of AUC. The concentration and t1/2 of theophylline decreased significantly after co-administration with RIF and the clearance increased by 53% within a week . 3. Summary of interactions of macrolides with enzyme systems and/or food. In a blinded randomized placebo-controlled study of 90 healthy patients receiving AZM and fexofenadine.
except for an increased tmax . For erythromycin (ERY) acistrate and enterocoated ERY bases the authors of a randomized cross-over study concluded that food intake had no effect on the PK of ERY acistrate and a slight effect on steady-state PK of the enterocoated ERY bases that might have some clinical relevance . An open-label cross-over study of 12 healthy volunteers showed that grapefruit juice. but neither AUC nor total clearance changed in this cross-over study (n = 12) . Proton pump inhibitors: An open-label cross-over study of 23 Helicobacter pylori-positive patients and negative controls found exposure to CLR to decrease when co-administered with lanzoprazole. 3. studied in a doubleblinded 3-way cross-over study in 8 healthy subjects. based on .Pharmaceutics 2011. ceftriaxon . Prolonged gastric acid exposure caused an increased des-cladinose AZM (DCA) AUC of 243% in fasted state versus 270% in fed state. dideoxyinosine . as well as on sachets and pediatric suspension. RFB (also no PK interaction with CLR) .39 to 2. Macrolides as Perpetrators Anesthetics: A blinded randomized cross-over study of 10 healthy volunteers found an increase of the AUC of s-ketamine by 260% and the Cmax by 360% after pre-treatment with oral CLR. but other behavioural effects and cold pain scores remained unaffected. Various: No effect on PK parameters was observed when intravenous AZM and ceftriaxon were co-administered .34 hours (+68%) and the half life of both parent drug and metabolite increased. The effect of food on AZM capsules and tablets has been studied in a four-way randomized cross-over study of 8 healthy volunteers . possibly by displacement of piroxicam of local acceptor sites at the level of periodontal tissues . probably by inhibition of its CYP3A metabolism . a well-known inhibitor of intestinal CYP3A4. terfenadine . Co-administration of cimetidine with CLR resulted in a decrease of the Cmax of CLR and its metabolite 14-OH-CLR by 46% and 43% respectively. The observations made in this study suggest that AZM capsules. One study concluded that ERY either increases lidocaine metabolism to monoethylglycinexylidide (MEGX) or reduces further metabolism of MEGX.2. showed no changes in parent drug PK but a slight decrease in metabolite PK . was previously shown in an open-label cross-over study of 12 healthy volunteers . resulting in a Cmax that decreased by respectively 40% and 15% and an AUC0–10h by respectively 30% and 10% . had no effect on CLR PK parameters. Anti-inflammatory drugs: An open-label study of 66 patients in which patients were randomly assigned to one of three groups. chloroquine . In addition. exhibit slow and/or delayed disintegration in the fed stomach. Administrating ERY with the local anesthetic lidocaine (lignocaine) has also been studied [160–162]. Food: The lack of effect of nutritional state on AZM tablets. a single dose cross-over design study showed that food intake directly before intake of a CLR tablet increased the extent of absorption by 25% and increased the AUC of the metabolite of CLR by approximately 9% .3. concluded that co-administration of piroxicam and AZM interfered negatively with periodontal disposition. in contrast to tablets. the tmax of 14-OH-CLR was prolonged from 1. Ropivacaine co-administration. The s-ketamine drug effect increased. and zidovudine (only an increase in tmax of 44%) . 3 876 . An absence of clinically relevant and/or statistically significant changes in PK was observed when AZM was co-administered with atovaquone . A single-phase open-label cross-over study in 18 healthy volunteers showed no effect of food intake on telitromycin PK . For CLR.
Cmax and Cmin of amprenavir by respectively 18%. both substrates of CYP3A4 isoenzymes. During co-administration the CLR AUC increased by 57% and the Cmax by 26%. pantoprazole . suggesting both drugs can be co-administered safely . Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs): Co-administration of CLR with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs). for simvastatin. Other drugs from the same group.Pharmaceutics 2011. several studies focused on finding drug interactions between these two groups.. A subsequent study concluded that ERY increased the lidocaine AUC by 40–70% and the MEGX AUC by 40% . has been studied in 12 subjects in an open-label randomized multiple-dose three-period crossover study. In a open-label multi-dose cross-over study in 33 HIV patients. co-administration of ERY and saquinavir (soft gelatin capsules) resulted in a 99% increase of saquinavir AUC0–8h . Co-administering a darunavir/ritonavir combination with CLR in a randomized open-label cross-over study in 18 healthy volunteers resulted in a small increase of darunavir AUC by 13% and Cmax by 17% . A two-way open-label cross-over study of 12 healthy volunteers receiving AZM co-administered with nelfinavir caused the nelfinavir PK to decrease significantly. CLR increased the AUC. and rabeprazole —a combination commonly prescribed as part of Helicobacter pylori treatment—has been investigated in several studies. indinavir Cmax increase of 58% and AUC of 47% in a smaller group of 12 patients at steady state . such as pravastatin (a non-CYP substrate). In a RCT conducted on HIV patients AZM exhibited no effect on zidovudine PK.172–175]. 15% and 39%. except for a decrease in tmax of 44%. CLR significantly increased the AUC and Cmax of lansoprazole. The authors suggest the mechanism of the interaction was CYP3A4 inhibiton . especially at higher doses of CLR was required . omeprazole [176–179]. though not to be of clinical imporantance . respectively. Another double- . This study suggests that CLR is not just an inhibitor of CYP3A4 but also act as a substrate. HMG-coA reductase inhibitors (statins): CLR inhibits CYP3A4 mediated metabolism of several HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors such as atorvastatin.e. and. were studied in combination with ERY. showed an increase of almost 200%. A study with a similar design found a clinically non-significant effect of CLR on indinavir. both used to treat hypercholesterolemia. Since antiretroviral drugs and macrolides are likely to be co-administered in patients with HIV and Mycobacterium infections. i. albeit not of clinical importance . such as esomeprazole . A double-blinded RCT in 18 healthy volunteers of different genotype groups of CYP2C19 found an increase of approximately 110% of the AUC and Cmax of (S)-lansoprazole in extensive metabolizers (EMs) . whereas the rosuvastatin AUC decreased by 20% and Cmax by 30%.168]. The increase was more pronounced in homozygous extensive metabolizers (homEMs) than in heterozygous extensive metabolizers (hetEMs). In poor metabolizers (PMs). ERY increased the simvastatin AUC by 620% and Cmax by 340%. This increase was moderately tolerated but careful monitoring for signs of toxicity. 3 877 a 45–60% increase of MEGX AUC . resulting in an increased AUC24h of 82–400% [167. lansoprazole [151. a 1000% increase of the AUC . The effect of co-administering CLR and amprenavir. An open-label randomized cross-over study in 22 patients focused on co-administration of CLR with ritonavir and found a small statistically significant increase of ritonavir exposure of approximately 10% . Antiretroviral drugs: A comparative study showed that after combining the protease inhibitors tipranavir/ritonavir (TPV/r) with CLR the exposure of both TPV and CLR increased with 19% and 66%. Simvastatin  and rosuvastatin .
a proton pump inhibitor with minor CYP2C19 and 3A4 involvement. and co-administration with felodipine resulted in an increase of felodipine AUC and Cmax . resulting in an increase of AUC of approximately 210% . The authors suggest the increased oral bioavailability and reduced renal clearance to be caused by P-gp inhibition . as was suggested by several other case reports . . the relative values between hetEMs. A double-blinded cross-over study in 8 healthy volunteers not only studied co-administration of CLR with omeprazole. Co-administration of ERY with talinolol resulted in a significant increase in talinolol AUC and Cmax . Cardiovascular agents: In a prospective observational study combining CLR with digoxin. An open-label Latin-square design study of nine healthy volunteers found that co-administration of intravenous digoxin with either CLR or ERY did not lead to increased AUCs.4-fold increase of renal clearance) . but the AUC of rabeprazole thioether was found to exhibit an approximate 200% increase . but also with pantoprazole. A double-blinded cross-over study of 12 healthy volunteers showed that oral administration of CLR 250 mg twice a day resulted in a 70% increase of digoxin AUC. ERY was found to exhibit no effect on co-administered intravenous digoxine (except for a 1.Pharmaceutics 2011. When co-administered with CLR the AUC of rabeprazole did not change significantly. for both CLR and ERY . A study of 8 Japanese heart failure inpatients resulted in a dose-dependent increase of digoxin concentration by 70% at the common CLR dose of 400 mg per day .. and found that the PK of CLR and pantoprazole remained unchanged. 3 878 blinded RCT in 18 healthy Japanese volunteers found similar results . i. Also. whereas intravenous administration of digoxin combined with CLR caused a mere 20% increase of digoxin AUC. Another double-blinded randomized cross-over study focused on CLR and omeprazole in 21 humans and found CLR to inhibit omeprazole metabolism. the digoxin clearance and elimination rate was 56–60% lower and the elimination half-life increased by 82% after co-administration. 16% in gastric fundus and approximately 900% in gastric mucus. but did lead to prolonged Clrenal by approximately 37% and urinary excretion of digoxin by 30%. resulting in an increase of glibenclamide Cmax to 125% and AUC to 135%. The study did find increased CLR and 14-OH-CLR levels in gastric tissue. CLR increased omeprazole AUC by 90% but did not result in a significantly altered gastric pH . homEMs. and PMs were comparable. Rabeprazole.e. Antidiabetic drugs: In a randomized open-label cross-over study 12 healthy volunteers received glibenclamide and CLR. Although the increase was slightly more pronounced in this study. a twofold increase of omeprazole AUC and a decrease of omeprazole clearance and volume of distribution by respectively 75% and 56% was observed . a 200% increase was found in a randomized cross-over study co-administering esomeprazole and CLR to a group of 26 EMs and PMs . In a randomized double-blinded cross-over study of 20 healthy volunteers. No changes in AMX PK were found. leading to a decreased QTc interval by 15.5 ms . Administration of roxithromycin with co-medication lansoprazole  or omeprazole  resulted in unchanged PK parameters. and CLR compared to mono-therapy of each of the drugs found an increase of AUC of lansoprazole and 14-OH-CLR of 25% when co-administered as part of triple therapy . amoxicillin (AMX). However. has been studied in a double-blinded RCT of 19 healthy subjects. Omeprazole has also been widely studied in combination with CLR [176–178]. An 4-way cross-over RCT study in 12 H. pylori-negative volunteers looking into triple therapy consisting of lansoprazole. When sotalol was co-administered with telithromycin the sotalol Cmax decreased by 34% and AUC by 27%.
Small increases of less than 15% were found in desloratadine PK when co-administered with AZM. A double-blind 2-phase cross-over study of 10 healthy volunteers contradicts these findings. showed an increase in AUC of 60% after co-administration with ERY and an increase in tmax to 3h (instead of 40 minutes) . A lack of clinically relevant interaction was found between the antihistamine drug desloratadine and ERY. as no changes in PD or PK of midazolam were found except for a decrease in Cmax by 44% and a delay in tmax from 1. was associated with an increased risk of QTc prolongation . co-administration of oral ERY with antihistamines. fexofenadine. In a retrospective cohort study. alprazolam 61% . For most benzodiazepines slight increases in AUC were measured.25 hours . and increases in metabolite desloratadine AUC and Cmax. temazepam PK remained unchanged . compared to an increase in fexofenadine Cmax of 69% and AUC of 67% .208].198]. nitrazepam 25% . Administration of roxithromycin with midazolam resulted in a slight increase of midazolam AUC by 47% and t1/2 from 1. A total of 64 healthy volunteers were included in a double-blinded randomized trial comparing the effect of co-administration of midazolam with AZM or ERY. Benzodiazepines: Since some macrolides inhibit oxidative hepatic metabolism of various drugs. several studies have been conducted with the combination of AZM and midazolam [197–200]. The authors concluded that ERY.2 hours. Midazolam exhibited the largest changes in AUC. However. Another antihistaminic agent. As a result of simultaneous administration of tolbutamide and CLR. The effect of AZM on older antihistamines has been researched in a randomized placebo-controlled study involving 18 volunteers. enhanced the objective and subjective effects of midazolam via interference of AZM with the hepatic CYP3A metabolism of midazolam . triazolam by an uncalculated amount (Cmax increased significantly) . and zopiclone 40% .7 to 2. flunitrazepam 25% . accompanied by minor psychomotoric changes . increases were observed of loratadine Cmax by 36%. i.0 to 1. the authors reported a hypoglycemic effect. but no changes in QTc (<3%) .. and not AZM. 3 879 possibly through inhibition of P-gp mediated transport . nine healthy subjects received single doses of tolbutamide with or without CLR. diazepam 15% . Co-administering ERY with glyburide resulted in an increase of glyburide Cmax by 18% and a tmax decrease from 4. especially terfenadine. Co-administration of ERY with benzodiazepines has been investigated in several studies. . without clinically relevant changes in safety profile . Two other open-label cross-over studies found no effect of AZM on midazolam PK or PD [197. Intestinal and hepatic CYP3A inhibition by CLR resulted in a significant increase of midazolam AUC of 320% after intravenous administration and 800% after oral administration in an open-label comparative study of 16 healthy volunteers .9 to 3. with an increase of desloratadine AUC of 10% and Cmax of 20% . ranging from 230–400% [207. Antihistamines: A randomized open-label cross-over study focused on co-administration of loratadine with CLR in 24 healthy volunteers and found no PK changes for CLR. In a 2x2 double-blinded randomized study.0 hours but with minimal effect on serum glucose concentration . When loratadine was co-administered with ERY. loratadine AUC of 76%. resulting in a 20% increase of the tolbutamide absorption rate and a 26% increase of the mean bioavailability of tolbutamide .e.Pharmaceutics 2011. an increase in loratadine AUC of 40% was found. However. The authors suggest the midazolam PK changes to be caused by inhibition of CYP3A by roximycin.
Co-administration of roxithromycin with theophylline resulted in unchanged PK parameters . Finally. The Cmax and AUC of everolimus. or tiagabin . several studies found that ERY exhibited no effect on the co-administered agents oxcarbazepine . when combining AZM with albendazole and ivermectin .Pharmaceutics 2011. No escalated side effects or parasite clearance time was observed when spiramycin was combined with quinine . Glucocorticoids: A comparative study in 6 patients showed CLR to have no effect on prednisolon PK. The authors suggest the underlying mechanism to be enhanced activation of clopidogrel by ERY via CYP3A4. Anti-epileptics: When phenytoin was administered to patients also receiving josamycin. Psychopharmaca: A double-dummy double-blinded cross-over study in 8 healthy subjects found the AUC of buspirone to increase by 600% and the Cmax to increase by 500% . A study of 24 patients concluded there is no PK interaction between AZM and chloroquine . ERY was found to exhibit no effect on the co-administered agent clozapine . no PK changes were observed compared to monotherapy . and concluded the drug-drug interaction not to be clinically significant . Various: A comparative interaction study in 12 patients showed that CLR had no effect on dapsone PK . An open-label placebo-controlled study of eight stable renal transplant patients found a 7% increase in AUC and 19% increase in Cmax of cyclosporine A. This was thought to be caused by irreversible inhibition of liver function-dependent CYP3A4-mediated metabolism and a displacement of quinine from plasma proteins. Patients receiving ERY may therefore have an additional risk for the development of theophylline toxicity [217–220]. Co-administration of roxithromycin with warfarin resulted in unchanged PK parameters . a limited increase of total quinine levels was observed with disproportionately increased free quinine levels . were increased by respectively 200% and 440% when co-administered with ERY . and a study without a clear study design of 12 HIV-positive patients found no differences in . but resulted in a 65% reduction of methylprednisolon clearance and significantly increased methylprednisolon concentrations . Antithrombotics: A study without detailed described methodology found that ERY attenuates platelet aggregation inhibition caused by clopidogrel. Bronchodilators: Combining CLR with theophylline in a Latin-square design study of 8 patients did not result in any significant PK changes . a CYP3A4 substrate immunosuppressant. leading to an increase of 73% in platelet aggregation . after co-administration of AZM. No effect on PK parameters was observed when spiramycin was combined with cyclosporine A . Antihelmintic drugs: A cross-over study of 18 volunteers found an increase of ivermectin AUC of 31% and Cmax of 27% possibly by competition of AZM and ivermectin with P-gp. a CYP3A4 substrate. phenytoine . Several less recent studies focused on the effect of ERY on theophylline PK and found an increased t1/2. 3 880 Immunosuppressants: A less recent study found that ERY increased the bioavailability of cyclosporin A from 36% to 60% by enhanced absorption . Opioids: Telithromycin combined with oxycodon in a blinded cross-over study resulted in an increased oxycodon AUC by 80% and a decreased AUC of the metabolite noroxycodon by 46% . Anti-protozoic drugs: In a double-blinded cross-over study in 30 healthy volunteers co-administering ERY and quinine.
e. When ERY was co-administered with roflumilast... and ofloxacin [OFX]) with enzyme systems and the effect of food on the PK of fluoroquinolones are briefly summarized in Table 4. MXF. Several studies found that ERY exhibited no effect on the co-administered agent. through jejunostomy or through gastrostomy tubes. This resulted in an increase of both the AUC and Cmax of cabergoline by 260% in healthy volunteers and by 170% in Parkinson patients . 3 arrows >150% increase/decrease of AUC.4.e. AZM or CLR did not exhibit an effect on the PK parameters of atorvastatin either . “0” indicates the absence of an interaction. i. i. Since there were no interactions affecting displacement/distribution this process was not included in the table. the AUC of the latter increased by 70% in an open-label single-dose comparative study of 16 healthy subjects . Table 4. gatifloxacin [GAT].. also known as topo-isomerase I.Pharmaceutics 2011. Fluoroquinolones Fluoroquinolones exhibit their bactericidal effect through complex formation with bacterial DNA-gyrase. 3. desmopressin (except for shortening tmax) . acetaminophen .e. The articles on which the summary is based are further specified in the text. ciprofloxacin [CIP]. Summary of interactions of fluoroquinolones with enzyme systems and/or food. oral. The number of arrows indicates the extent of the *2 inhibition or induction: 1 arrow <50%. Fluoroquinolones *1 Ciprofloxacin Absorption: Meal Enteral feeding Orange juice (calcium-fortified) Dairy products Di-/trivalent metallic agents Metabolism: Phase II enzymes CYP1A2 CYP3A4 Excretion: Competitive tubular filtration P-gp *1 Levofloxacin ↓ ↓ (↓) ↓ 0-↓ 0 # - Gatifloxacin ↓ 0 (↓) 0 # - Moxifloxacin ↓ 0-↓ 0-↓ S 0 0 - Ofloxacin 0 ↓ ↓-↓↓ 0 - Clinafloxacin ↓↓ - Lomefloxacin 0 - Grepafloxacin ↓↓ - 0-↓ ↓-↓↓*2 ↓ (↓) ↓ ↓-↓↓ ↓-↓↓↓ 0 # 0 Arrows pointing downward (↓) indicate inhibition and upward (↑) induction. levofloxacin [LVX]. and with topo-isomerase IV. administration. 2 arrows 50–150%. “S” indicates the drug being a substrate. an “#” indicates the presence of an interaction. 3 881 PK of 2’-3’-dideoxynosine either . Cabergoline PK was studied in 10 healthy volunteers and 7 Parkinson patients after co-administration of CLR. or intranasal levocabastine . Interactions of the currently available fluoroquinolones (i. Depending on method of .
resulting in a reduced Cmax by 12% without effect on the AUC . Ferrous sulphate in a dose of 100 mg reduced the Cmax of MXF by 59% and the AUC by 39% .g. the Cmax is reduced by 57% and the AUC by 67% . through gastrostomy tubes (by 37% and 53% respectively).e. 3 3. Fluoroquinolones as Victims 882 Food: Several randomized cross-over studies have focused on bioavailability of fluoroquinolones when co-administered with food. A comparable four-way cross-over study that included 6 healthy volunteers showed that intake with food had no effect on OFX PK parameters . The relative bioavailability of GAT crushed tablet suspension was 99–109% when co-administered with enteral feeding in 16 patients . Also. The OFX Cmax and AUC were reduced by co-administration with enteral feeding by respectively 36% and 10% .and trivalent metallic agents. Crushed MXF could be administered with food via a nasogastric tube. In the same study. in a randomized cross-over study of 68 healthy volunteers . although the AUC remained unchanged.4. fluoroquinolone exposure decreases and separated administration may be warranted as Ca2+ reduced CIP Cmax and AUC by 48% . reducing the Cmax by 11% and increasing the AUC by 13% compared to a fasted state. i.and trivalent metallic agents and fluoroquinolones. e. When Ca2+ was co-administered with CIP or gemifloxacin. Calcium-fortified orange juice slightly reduced the GAT Cmax by 15% (non-significant) and the AUC by 12% . Dairy products. milk and yogurt. Enteral feeding reduced the Cmax and AUC of CIP. or through jejunostomy (by 59% and 67% respectively) [239. When 600 mg iron (as gluconate) is co-administered with CIP in eight healthy volunteers.. the AUC was reduced by approximately 15% . and reduced the gemifloxacin AUC by 21% and the Cmax by 17% . as yogurt reduced the Cmax and AUC by 15% and 6% respectively . and of 36% and 25% for OFX .and trivalent metallic agents: Several studies focused on interactions between di.1. Di. Both Cmax and AUC of CIP were reduced by approximately 20% when co-administered with orange juice and by approximately 40% in case of concomitant treatment with calcium-fortified orange juice . Remarkably. Co-administration of a CIP suspension with a standard lunch had little effect on CIP PK parameters. depending on the method of administration. and a light morning meal appeared to have no effect on GAT Cmax and reduced the AUC negligibly by 12% . 300 mg iron (as sulphate) reduced these PK parameters by respectively 33% and 46%.240]. Co-administration of MXF together with dairy products is also possible. A high-fat breakfast combined with LVX in 24 healthy volunteers reduced the LVX Cmax by 14% and the AUC by 10% . lomefloxacin appeared to have an interaction with iron and resulted in reducing the Cmax of lomefloxacin by 26% . However. orally (by 43% and 27% respectively). in a randomized open-label 3-way cross-over study where LVX was co-administered with juice and cereal with and without milk.Pharmaceutics 2011. The proposed mechanism is that of a chelation complex formation with di. A different study co-administering 100 mg ferrous sulphate with CIP or OFX found a decrease of Cmax and AUC of respectively 54% and 57% for CIP. reduced the CIP exposure by 30% and 36% respectively when co-administered . the Cmax of LVX  and the third-generation fluoroquinolone MXF  .. Calcium-fortified orange juice reduced the LVX Cmax by 18% without an effect on the AUC .
77%. GAT . and 30% respectively . but did not affect LVX  PK parameters in a clinical relevant matter. and reduced AUC by 59%. LVX. 2 h and 4 h by 80%. Sucralfate. with CIP should be avoided as it reduced the CIP Cmax by 40% and the AUC by 52% in 15 healthy volunteers . or MXF.107].275]. Ca2+. are observed. resulting in a decrease in Cmax and AUC by 55% . containing Bi3+ and Al3+. No clinical relevant changes in drug exposure—possibly through a less stable chelating complex— was found after administration of Al3+ with OFX in 10 healthy volunteers either . or 2h after MXF. including multivitamins. and the CIP AUC by 85%. an antacid containing Mg2+ and Al3+. Co-administration of MXF with Maalox® resulted in a reduced Cmax when the antacid is administered simultaneously. 1%. 23%. . and MXF  in several studies. OFX. Probably a less stable chelating complex is formed in the latter case . and 13% respectively. OFX . As an alternative for Maalox®. Gastric acid-reducing agents: Maalox®. Cu2+ and Mn2+. However. 4h prior. Pepto Bismol®. which reduces both the CIP AUC and Cmax by 55% . and a combination with MXF  results in an increased Cmax by 3% and an AUC by 8%. 3 883 decreased by approximately 18% by means of concomitant treatment with calcium. and 26% at the aforementioned time points . Antiretroviral drugs: The antiretroviral drug didanosine is unstable in an acidic environment and is kept stable by incorporating a buffer containing dihydroxylaluminium sodium carbonate and magnesium hydroxide in the formulation. Four grams of sucralfate [268.and trivalent cation-containing compounds (DTCCs). ranitidine is recommended. Maalox® reduces CIP Cmax after 5–10 min. CIP treatment with concomitant omeprazole seems to be possible since a PK interaction is of non-significance for immediate release tablets  and extendedrelease tablets . and 7%. GAT concomitantly administered with Maalox® reduced the Cmax by 68% and AUC by 64%. and of MXF  by respectively 71% and 60%. was combined with CIP . Zn2+. resulting in a clinically relevant reduction of absorption for all fluoroquinolones except for OFX. did not reduce the drug exposure of CIP significantly. a PK interaction between RIF and MXF was observed in two prospective cohort studies [106. Sucralfate (1 g) also reduced the Cmax and AUC of OFX [238. resulting in a decrease of Cmax by 14% and AUC by 12% . This is also the case for concomitant treatment of CIP with lanthanum carbonate.1 to 8. These excipients interact with CIP and consequently result in a reduced Cmax of CIP by 16–93% and AUC by 26–98% [273. A new enteric bead formulation of didanosine allows concomitant administration with CIP. but when Maalox® was administered 2h prior to GAT. a phosphate-binding polymer. should not be concomitantly administered with CIP. Anti-TB drugs: RFP modestly reduced MXF exposure by 17% and reduced the elimination half-life from 11. A case control study suggested that di. containing Al3+.274]. by respectively 61%. Mg2+. Also interactions with OTC preparations such as Centrum Forte®. might inhibit fluoroquinolone absorption . possibly by inducing phase-II enzymes . possibly through induction of P-gp  combined with phase-II sulphatation and glucuronidation .Pharmaceutics 2011. Finally.271] by respectively 70% and 61%. concomitant treatment with sevelamer hydrochloride. containing Fe2+. resulting in a reduced Cmax and AUC of approximately 9% [274.9 hours.269] reduced the AUC of CIP by 88–96% and 1 gram  by 30% when administered simultaneously. the Cmax was reduced by 45% and the AUC by 42% . RIF decreased MXF exposure by approximately 30%. Co-administration of ranitidine with CIP  results in relatively unchanged Cmax and AUC by 15%. 74%.
however. As a result. Of the newer fluoroquinolones.4. albeit to different extents. However. Competition for glomular filtration is a proposed mechanism. 3 884 Anti-protozoic drugs: Co-administration of chloroquine with CIP increased the cumulative urinary concentration and excretion rate of CIP  and reduced the Cmax by 22%  in five healthy male volunteers. Of the newer fluoroquinolones. Co-administration of GAT  and MXF  with theophylline did not result in clinically relevant changes in PK parameters either. Analgesic: When CIP is co-administered with oral phenazopyridine.280]. in a dose of 1000 mg. based on its broad antibacterial activity [279. Another study observed an increase in AUC and terminal phase half-life of caffeine by 145% and 115% respectively when co-administered with 1500 mg CIP . CIP was observed to induce clozapine and its metabolite N-desmethylclozapine serum concentration through CYP1A2 inhibition by approximately 30% in a randomized double-blinded cross-over study of 7 patients . drug levels more than 100 times higher are observed for CIP and gemifloxacin. For the newer fluoroquinolones sparfloxacin  and gemifloxacin  no clinically relevant interaction was observed with concomitant digoxin administration either.5h. CIP. Fluoroquinolones as Perpetrators Psychopharmaca: Several fluoroquinolones appear to inhibit CYP1A2. such as caffeine by 3-N-demethylation. patients receiving this agent are at risk for a drug-drug interation of theophylline with several fluoroquinolones. and reduced theophylline clearance by 50% in 12 healthy volunteers . Drugs undergoing biotransformation through CYP1A2. Clinafloxacin reduced theophylline clearance dose-dependently by 50% (200 mg clinafloxacin) and 70% (400 mg . Grepafloxacin (600 mg) significantly increased theophylline AUC and Cmax. resulting in QT prolongation [292. Although the affinity for the renal transporter is greater for CIP and gemifloxacin than for probenecid.Pharmaceutics 2011. are at risk of interacting with fluoroquinolones . Caffeine drug exposure has been increased by CIP. the authors advised patients receiving clinafloxacin to restrict their caffeine intake . a clinically relevant interaction between digoxin and LVX was not observed .284] and gemifloxacin  resulted in an increased drug exposure. The same study found that OFX had negligible influence on caffeine PK parameters. Antigout drugs: Probenecid may possibly compete with fluoroquinolones for tubular secretion. The authors recommended that patients receiving CIP restrict their intake of caffeine. probably through CYP1A2 inhibition. Co-administration with CIP [283.293].294–298]. Bronchodilators: Theophylline is also a CYP1A2 substrate. Several case reports suggest CIP exhibits a drug interaction with olanzapine. Therefore.2. Lomefloxacin. co-administration of clinafloxacin appeared to reduce caffeine clearance by 84%. Cardiaca: LVX has been suggested to inhibit metabolism of digoxin by intestinal bacteria to inactive metabolites which are subsequently excreted in urine and faeces. but the Cmax remained unchanged . clinafloxacin or grepafloxacin changed theophylline PK parameters. appeared not to have a significant effect on the caffeine disposition of 16 young healthy volunteers . with an increase in Cmax varying between 7–17% and an AUC increase ranging from 17 to 58%. depending on the CIP dose (200–1000 mg) in a prospective cohort study (n = 12) . 3. reduced theofylline clearance by 19–32% [216. whereas 600mg OFX co-administrated with caffeine led to unchanged theophylline disposition . the CIP AUC increased by 30% and the tmax increased from 1h to 1.
Antimicrobial drugs: CIP did not have a clinically relevant interaction with RIF. resulting in (refractory) diabetes. or LVX . Because of escalated hypotensive and sedative effects of tizanide. but the potential role of CYP3A4 is still uncertain and requires further research [313–315]. leaving the other PK parameters unchanged . with a suggested mechanism being CIP inhibiting the CYP1A2 and 3A4-mediated metabolism of methadone [316–318].312] or patients . CIP increased lidocaine AUC by 26% and Cmax by 12% in a randomized double-blinded cross-over study of 9 patients . when CIP . the effect on the intestinal flora.5. resulting in significantly decreased renal clearance. an oral direct thrombin inhibitor that is a substrate for P-gp and is not metabolized by the CYP450 enzyme system. with co-administration resulting in a decrease of RIF Cmax by 12% without significant changes in AUC . Anti-diabetic drugs: Cases are reported of co-administration of fluoroquinolones. only a few prospective drug interaction trials have been performed. β-Lactams Although β-lactams are a relatively old group of antimicrobial drugs. The PK parameters of tacrolimus also remained unaffected after co-administration with MXF in a prospective cohort study that included 11 patients . MXF ..g. sparfloxacin. CIP and LVX. no significant changes in cyclosporine exposure are observed in healthy volunteers [310. by 874% and 583% respectively . 3. and trovafloxacin appeared to have minimal effect on PK parameters of theophylline [298. Muscle relaxants: CIP was found to greatly increase the AUC and Cmax of tizanide. Immunosuppressants: Despite CYP3A4 involvement in the metabolism of cyclosporine. gemifloxacin. leaving the clinafloxacin PK parameters unchanged . When CIP was co-administered with procainamide. Opioids: Several cases were reported of CIP co-administration with methadone resulting in QT prolongation. a centrally acting muscle relaxant that is metabolized mainly by CYP1A2. resulting in an increased anesthetic exposure. with different anti-diabetic agents. Anticoagulants: Co-administration of CIP with ximelagatran. physicians should avoid concomitant administration. CIP was found to reduce the clearance by 31%. and displacement of drugs from serum proteins. Anesthetics: CIP appeared to exhibit an interaction with anesthetics ropivacaine and lidocaine as well by means of CYP1A2 inhibition. without a significant effect on ropivacaine AUC and Cmax . Inhibition of CYP3A4 by FQs is therefore unlikely. e. 3 885 clinafloxacin) .Pharmaceutics 2011. However. Most of our knowledge on drug interactions is therefore based on case reports. In a similar study. . LVX  and OFX increased the drug exposure of procainamide. These reports focus mainly on the CYP3A4 isoenzyme induction by flucloxacillin and nafcillin.303–305]. Anti-epileptic drugs: Clinafloxacin lowered phenytoin clearance by 15% when co-administered. only the renal clearance of procainamide and its metabolite N-acetylprocainamide decreased significantly. probably through competition for tubular secretion through the organic cation transporter. the effect on (tubular) renal clearance of (co-)medication. are co-administered with cyclosporine. resulted in unchanged ximelagatran PK parameters . induction of chemical degradation. possibly through CYP2C19 inhibition. lomefloxacin.
Meropenem # Other *3 Absorption: Displacement/distribution: Precipitation with Ca2+ Competitive binding on protein sites Metabolism: CYP3A4 Chemical degradation of aminoglycosids ↑↑-↑↑↑ # Excretion: Competitive tubular excretion *1 Arrows pointing downward (↓) indicate inhibition and upward (↑) induction.5. Another study showed that probenecid prolonged the cefuroxim serum half-life by 63% in 10 healthy volunteers. β-lactams *1. cephalexin. “#” indicates the presence of an interaction. 3. and cephradine.g. the drug with the highest affinity for the renal transporter is responsible for reducing renal tubular excretion of the competing drug.Pharmaceutics 2011. The number of arrows indicates the extent Mostly based on case reports: in need of further research. Electrolytes: In 2007. 3 886 A summary of the interactions is presented in Table 5.1. The data suggest that β-lactams have an effect on renal clearance of co-medication and vice versa. This study showed that probenecid 500 mg given orally 4 times a day enabled a cefazolin dose reduction to 2000 mg once a day. a FDA Medwatch alert described a decreased ceftriaxone recovery at higher calcium concentrations in two in vitro experiments carried out in blood subtracted from adult patients and umbilical cords. *2 *3 3. still resulting in therapeutic serum concentrations of cefazolin at steady state .. β-Lactams as Victims Antimicrobial drugs: Probenecid has been reported to prolong the half-life and increase serum levels of cephalosporins cephradine and cefaclor . A possible underlying mechanism is the competitive character of this interaction. non-randomized study examined the effect of probenecid on blocking tubular excretion of cefazolin. This might be due to formation of a ceftriaxone-calcium complex. instead of 3 times a day. cefazolin. AMX # ↑ # # ↓ Piperacillin Ceftriaxon Imipenem. cefuroxime.2 Nafcillin/ flucloxacillin Cephalexin. β-Lactams as Perpetrators Oral anti-coagulants: Several case reports showed a decrease of the international normalized ratio (INR) when nafcillin or flucloxacillin is added to warfarin therapy [324–328]. A recent prospective. e. 3 arrows >150%. Cefaclor.5. This is suggested to be . The beneficial effect is that the time that the concentration of cefuroxim is above the MIC90 of the causative pathogen was extended . Summary of drug interactions of β-lactams. of the interaction: 1 arrow <50%. oxacillin. 2 arrows 50–150%. Table 5. The motivation for these in vitro studies and the following FDA Medwatch alert was a French case report presenting a case of an anaphylactic shock and calcium-ceftriaxone precipitation in a premature newborn.2. probably by blocking tubular excretion.
Concomitant administration of mezlocillin with cefotaxime in eight healthy volunteers and five patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) suggested that the lower cefotaxime doses may prove to be adequate in patients with normal renal function with co-administered mezlocillin . Although the mechanism of this nonrenal PK interaction is still unclear. after 60 hours of oxacillin treatment. oxacillin. has also been reported to increase MTX toxicity by reducing renal MTX clearance . Calcium antagonist: A blinded randomized cross-over study of 9 healthy volunteers suggested an effect of nafcillin on CYP3A4. the fraction of unbound phenytoin in a hypoalbuminemic .330]. concentration. in the absence of any infectious or inflammatory syndrome . Piperacillin showed a similar interaction with drugs that are cleared renally.2 (95% confidence interval). the AUC of nifedipine is significantly reduced by 63% and the total plasma clearance increased by 245% . Methotrexate (MTX): Case reports described AMX to decrease renal tubular excretion. resulting in increased MTX concentrations . for the renal transporter responsible for renal tubular excretion resulting in competitive inhibition. Antimicrobial drugs: Piperacillin has been shown to reduce half life and increase clearance of aminoglycosides in several studies by means of chemical degradation. such as MTX . and combined agents. such as flucloxacillin or MTX. AMX. or extra monitoring of the INR is recommended. Finally. has been reported to increase the INR when combined with anticoagulant agents such as warfarin and acenocoumarol. Amoxicillin plus clavulanic acid (AMC) should be avoided in patients receiving coumarins. a systematic prospective evaluation of the interaction between AMC and warfarin in 12 patients found that the INR was not modified in patients stable on warfarin therapy. possibly by reducing vitamin K-producing gut flora resulting in vitamin K deficiency [329. a substrate of CYP3A4. Although the mechanism is not fully elucidated. Another report warned not to combine verapamil with highly protein-bound drugs such as ceftriaxone. and secondly suppression of hydrolysis of the glucuronidated valproic acid in the liver .Pharmaceutics 2011. contact time. since these may displace verapamil from its protein-binding sites leading to verapamil toxicity . resulting in an increased metabolism of warfarin. Anti-epileptics: Seven case reports described a decreased effect of valproic acid when combined with meropenem. 3 887 caused by an induction of hepatic CYP3A4 isoenzyme. increasing the glucuronidation in the liver. the authors suspected the character of the interaction to be of metabolic origin . A nucleophilic attack of the β-lactam ring of piperacillin on an amino group of the aminoglycoside seemed to be responsible for the drug-drug interaction [338–340]. The pencillin. However. When nafcillin is combined with nifedipine. with or without clavulanic acid. A randomized open-label cross-over study of 10 healthy volunteers describes piperacillin to reduce renal and non-renal clearance of flucloxacillin by respectively 55% and 34% . A proposed underlying mechanism was the higher affinity of piperacillin compared to other drugs. An open-label case-control study including 302 cases concluded that penicillins were associated with a risk of overanticoagulation with an adjusted odds ratio of 24. a reaction believed to be dependent on many factors like temperature. two mechanisms were postulated: firstly the increased amount of cofactor uridine diphosphate glucuronic acid (UDPGA). resulting in sub-therapeutic valproic acid levels and associated seizures [342–348].
this makes PK interactions difficult to interpret.Pharmaceutics 2011. imipenem has been reported to cause an episode of severe transient hypotension when combined with haloperidol. oxazolidinones. Various: Imipenem was also described to have an interaction with theophyllin. It has been demonstrated that PK characteristics of drugs can differ between healthy volunteers and patients . 4. . The interactions presented in this article vary in extent of severity and clinical relevance. a case report suggested that co-administration of AMC with venlafaxine may result in serotonic toxicity . As a result of an underlying disease. Especially in non-linear PK. drug interactions not only occur when two or more interacting drugs are administered. The authors concluded that cephalexin inhibits renal tubular secretion. However. inhibition of enzyme systems can occur within 2–3 days . Most electronic health record systems include a program that can routinely check for drug-drug interactions and could assist in preventing drug interaction-related adverse events. This is particularly true for PK interaction studies with biotransformation as possible underlying mechanism since induction of enzyme systems might require days to 2–3 weeks to develop fully . physiological changes can influence drug PK. It need hardly be mentioned that multiple-dose studies will reflect best clinical practice. One should bear in mind that findings in PK interaction studies performed in healthy volunteers might not be observed in clinical practice in specific patient populations. can be used by physicians and pharmacists in daily practice to assist in preventing and managing PK drug interactions of antimicrobial drugs. and β-lactam antimicrobial drugs. increasing the metformin Cmax by 34% and the AUC by 24%. Combining cephalosporins and alcohol was discouraged too. a double-blinded randomized singledose cross-over study of 12 healthy volunteers showed that co-administration of cephalexin altered the systemic disposition of metformin . rifamycines. fluoroquinolones. since peripheral flush with shock was noticed . Finally. possibly resulting in a higher volume of distribution that might affect PK . presenting an overview of PK studies on drug-drug and drug-food interactions of macrolides. PK interaction studies in both patients and healthy volunteers are included in this article. Psychopharmaca: In three patients with preexisting or impending hypotension. these programs rarely check for interactions that can occur when one of the interacting drugs is halted. Conclusions This article. Physicians and pharmacists should also be aware of the fact that some of the included studies used doses that are higher or lower than those used in daily clinical practice. Multidisciplinary vigilance of physicians. 3 888 patient rose insignificantly due to increased phenytoin displacement by oxacillin from the plasma protein-binding site . The interaction may also persist at a similar length of time when the inducing agent is stopped. Finally. but can also surface when one of the interacting drugs is halted. PK interaction studies administering both single doses and multiple doses to study subjects were used in this overview. Furthermore. resulting in druginduced seizures in a series of 3 cases . Unlike induction. Finally. Potential clinical problems can range from therapeutic failure due to low drug exposure to adverse events due to toxic drug concentrations. although the mechanism remains to be elucidated. Competition of both drugs for the protein-binding site is one of the possible mechanisms responsible for an increase in the amount of protein-unbound haloperidol . In many critically ill patients extracellular fluids have increased.
S. 1999. 346–347.E. 2008. Oxidation of the novel oxazolidinone antibiotic linezolid in human liver microsomes.Pharmaceutics 2011.K. 563–572.. T. 2. Jungbluth. Drewe. Agents Chemother. Y. Serotonin syndrome precipitated by linezolid in a medically ill patient on duloxetine. Lack of pharmacokinetic interaction between linezolid and antacid in healthy volunteers. J.C. Clin.M. Drug Metab.A. Packer.. Uges. J. 14. P.. 2006. 2003.. G. Drug Dispos. and other health care professionals remains necessary for adequate management of drug-interactions of antimicrobial drugs. .. 8. Dis.A. Hauer. Fungal Infect. van der Werf. Zakowski. Forrest. 1014–1017... R.. Linezolid: pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic evaluation of coadministration with pseudoephedrine HCl. 9. A. Bolhuis.W... R. 68–72. Steinberg..G. A pharmacokinetic evaluation of concomitant administration of linezolid and aztreonam. S.J. Serotonin toxicity as a consequence of linezolid use in revision hip arthroplasty. M. T. Pharmacol. J. 59–62. Morin. 5418–5419. Pharmacol. 91–97. Am.H. 2. Pharmacol. J. Linezolid absolute bioavailability and the effect of food on oral bioavailability.. Randhawa. Slatter.. N. Hopkins. Zysset-Aschmann. Kummerer. Welshman..A. 64 (1). Jungbluth.M. T. Clarithromycin significantly increases linezolid serum concentrations. P. E. P. Hopkins. R.W. D.. 2000.K.. 1161–1167. Carpenter. Sisson. S. Maier. Sisson. M. 2007. Pharm. E. Clin. 77 (5)... Hong.G.L. 26 (6). Clin. 50 (1). 31 (11). Dispos. Alffenaar. 2001. Tan.J. 11. Kerrihard. Alffenaar.S.K.. Orthopedics 2008.. 681–683. 46 (2). Biopharm. Wienkers... Hopkins.E. I. 264–265. G.B. van Altena... G. Warkentin. N. Linezolid and rifampin: Drug interaction contrary to expectations? Clin. 20–27. Psychiatry 2007. 7. K.. J. H. Agents Chemother.L. Mason. L. Burger. Berman. I. 2001. Am. 1140..J.... J. Antal. M.. References 1. Forscher. Clin. T. 54 (12). Psychopharmacol. Strouse. L. M.L. Stalker. 39 (12). Ther. 10. Billaud. 4.F. Gordi.. K. and dextromethorpan HBr. J. Antimicrob. Wynalda.. 28 (9).. 6. Blijlevens. 41 (5).L. 1277–1282. 2005. Batts.R. E.. D. E.I. 164 (2). Antal. F.K.J. Trittler. Health Syst. Mild serotonin syndrome associated with concurrent linezolid and fluoxetine. P. D.M. J. Serotonin syndrome after concomitant treatment with linezolid and meperidine. Kosterink. Antimicrob. Egle.C. J. The pharmacokinetics of linezolid are not affected by concomitant intake of the antioxidant vitamins C and E. Pharmacokinetic drug interactions of azoles. 2006..S. D.. 2008. phenylpropanolamine HCl.. N. Clin..W. Krahenbuhl. N. Hewko. Serotonin syndrome precipitated by the monoamine oxidase inhibitor linezolid. S. 22 (3). C.. Welshman.A. Kosterink. Das. Rep. R. N. Lemmen..G. Curr.J. Vollenweider.. S.. J.M. T. Hopkins. Infect.. Verweij. D.K. 5. Pharmacol.H.. J.J. Hendershot. 3. T.R.N. 3 889 pharmacists. L.R. C. 43 (10). D.. T.. 451–453. Francom.. 12.S. Grunder.W. Bruggemann. J. 2010. 13.A.
J. C. J. Kristoff. W. Tahir. C. Goetz. Goggin. Linezolid. Sandman.E. Higgs. C.A. Am. 2001. 159–169.A. C. O'Brien.. Sadler.R.A. Khan. H.. 46 (3)..J. 2004. Clin.. 62–65. Dis.. Aga. 305–313. 27 (6). Antimicrob. J. 2002. H. R. G. J.. O.. H. Z.. J. 790. T. Jefferson. Athan. Am. Moyle. 3 15.. P. Effect of indinavir on the pharmacokinetics of rifampicin in HIV-infected patients. 432–434.E. J. Zhao. Ruan. R. Y. Wigen. 17..A. Currier. Kearney. 19. Br.S. Brophy. N.A. Infect. Serotonin syndrome as a consequence of drug-resistant infections: an interaction between linezolid and citalopram.P. Acad. Greenberg. R.. Intensive Care Med. C. J..I. 890 16... C. McCrea. 793–800.. Flexner. P.. 2004. Psychosomatics 2001.H.. Kraft. S. Serotonin syndrome associated with linezolid treatment after discontinuation of fluoxetine. Vernon.P.S. Pharmacokinetic Interaction between amprenavir and rifabutin or rifampin in healthy males.. Pharm. Ravi... 111–113.. 25. 5 (2). Patron. V. Droste. Y. Linezolid-associated serotonin syndrome after concomitant treatment with citalopram and mirtazepine in a critically ill bone marrow transplant recipient. Serotonin syndrome and linezolid. Chemother. Hsyu.E.. Rosenberg. 2004. J.A. Vanhorssen.J. . A. Assoc... Woolf. Antimicrob. E. J.E. Lowry. Lavery.. N. Schaefer.E. M.J. 351–353.A.. 2004. W. N. Morales. 274–275. 43 (7). Hamzeh.. 28. S.. Sriwiriyajan. Interaction between saquinavir soft-gel and rifabutin in patients infected with HIV. 409–412. 2005. Linezolid: MAOI activity and potential drug interactions... Jones. P..L.E.N. Pharmacother. Meyer. Weiner.. 289–290. 24.B.L. 20... Serio. Vermette. W. 22. Dir. D.T... Waldman.. Parada. 30. J.A. 18. G. 2002. 21. Clin. Barklage. Lou. H... III. Pharmacol. H. Benson. Child Adolesc. a monoamine oxidase inhibiting antibiotic. Buffels. Clin. Symonds.. 31. Ann. Lee. Serotonin syndrome and linezolid. Burger. Becker. P.. Chittick. Carides. 2001. D. R. Pharmacol. S. Polk.. M. A.. 609–611..Pharmaceutics 2011.W. S. D. Pharmacol. Psychosomatics 2002. R. J. C.R. Psychiatry 2004.E. McDaniel. Hekster. Pharmacol. Med.M. Psychiatry 2003. Linezolid and serotonin syndrome. Pushkin.K.W. N. Buss. M. Serotonin syndrome due to co-administration of linezolid and venlafaxine.. 502–508. Steady-state pharmacokinetic interaction of modified-dose indinavir and rifabutin. J..E. 2003.. 23.. D. L. Snell. and antidepressants. McCrea. P. 27. Clin. Acute delirium associated with combined diphenhydramine and linezolid use. D.. 178–182. 26. 29... Agents Chemother... 64 (5).M.. Kusma... J. 49 (2).. Jaruratanasirikul.. Jones. B. 73 (3). 680–684. Winchell.H. M. W. Gerber. M. Psychosomatics 2005. 43 (3).M.A. Deutsch. Indinavir and rifabutin drug interactions in healthy volunteers. 44 (3). J. Antimicrob.B.F. Pharmacokinetic study of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate combined with rifampin in healthy volunteers. 248–249.J. G. 38 (1). Deutsch. Clinical evaluation of the nelfinavir-rifabutin interaction in patients with tuberculosis and human immunodeficiency virus infection. S.. D. P.P. Agents Chemother. B. F. Burman... 54 (1). 45 (2). Pharmacotherapy 2007. Benator. 20 (6). Hammerness.M. 34 (12).. Blythe.A. B. Clin. R. J. Stein. Verweij-van Wissen. Thomas.J. Wu.J. Peloquin. P. 53 (3). J. Israel. Silva-Trigo. A. DeBellis... V. Hawkins.. Volturo. M.. Y. S. Liquori. D... A. E. D. Ther. 54 (2). 1651–1652. 2005. C. G. W. Engle. 42 (5).. Abrams.
J..E. 11 (4).T. Gerena. 2007.W.S. Jordan. S. 42 (3). 1998... Nienhuis. S. Lack of effect of fluconazole on the pharmacokinetics of rifampicin in AIDS patients. Sahai. Antimicrob. D.N. Ezejiofor. D. Opin. 37. Pharmacother.A. 38 (5).. 2000. D. Antimicrob. D. S. 3878–3883. Parsons... Low antituberculosis drug concentrations in patients with AIDS.. W. W. 38. L. 44 (8). Miranda-Massari. A. Grosset. 50 (10). Almeida.. Trapnell. 44. 1991. 419–421. Mant. Burman. Am.C. M. 34. 283–287. Increased plasma rifabutin levels with concomitant fluconazole therapy in HIV-infected patients. 39. Masur. D. B. M. Child. J. Piscitelli. Drusano. G. 545–552. Agents Chemother.P. Agents Chemother. Impaired bioavailability of rifampicin in presence of isoniazid from fixed dose combination (FDC) formulation.F.A. J.. van der Werf.. 2006. 23 (3). F. Shah. V. de Velde. S. Been-Tiktak.S.S. Kulshrestha. C.. Behera... Chemother.. 40. M. 877–880.. 1566–1570.K. Intern.. 1997. H.... J. 35. P. Bertz.. 2170–2172. Bethel. Narang. R. Peloquin.. Alffenaar.... Tuber. Effect of pyrazinamide on rifampicin kinetics in patients with tuberculosis. Tolerance and pharmacokinetic interactions of rifabutin and clarithromycin in human immunodeficiency virusinfected volunteers. 228 (1–2).. P... C. W.. Lung Dis. D.C. Raasch. Narang. 87–90. Agents Chemother. Evaluation of the pharmacokinetics of posaconazole and rifabutin following co-administration to healthy men.B. Peloquin. O. Antimicrob. Bhatia.. Nitta. Burger.T. 3 32. 1996. 45. 10 (6).. Jindal. S. 2008. Nuermberger. R. Med. Agarwala. 52 (11).C. ..M. Y. 41. 124 (6). Uges. P. Bianchine. Dorman. Zuur. 42.E. Agents Chemother. S. J. Drug interaction between rifampicin and cotrimoxazole in patients with tuberculosis. Effects of fluconazole and clarithromycin on rifabutin and 25-O-desacetylrifabutin pharmacokinetics.E. S. Agents Chemother. O. Jaruratanasirikul. Berning. Pharmacokinetics of rifampin and clarithromycin in patients treated for Mycobacterium ulcerans infection. A.T. J. S. Hum. Ther. Hafner. Shishoo..K. 36.. M. R. Ann. 74 (2).. I. 2001. Wang. S. Power. T. 53–67. 573–576... Kleepkaew.J.K.. T..U. Li.. Res. C. Polis. 919–925. Mehta.E. R... Agbasi. M.. R. Brudney.K. Landry.R. 4037–4042. Med. Repeated administration of high-dose intermittent rifapentine reduces rifapentine and moxifloxacin plasma concentrations.. Orisakwe.. N.. Flexner. Malhi. P. D. H. A. Akunyili.E. Agents Chemother.. 891 33.Pharmaceutics 2011. 2010. Mole. G. A. Cohn. J. Toxicol. Pharm. Kantesaria. Curr. J.. Follansbee.. J.S.... Rathod. 3336–3342. Rifabutin absorption in the gut unaltered by concomitant administration of didanosine in AIDS patients. G. Antimicrob. Exp..R..J. Chaisson. R. Lavelle. Kelly. C. M.. Krishna.. Dooley.. Standiford.K.J.L.R.. Hackman. 1993.A. A. Narang.. K. Vora. K. Effect of rifampin on steady-state pharmacokinetics of atazanavir with ritonavir in healthy volunteers.. Int. McGuinness. R. 1996. C. G. Some plasma and saliva pharmacokinetics parameters of rifampicin in the presence of pefloxacin. Antimicrob. 30 (9). J....A. Uppal. Ann.. B. A. 631–639. Antimicrob. Banach. 2004. Cameron.. E. P.A. R. Jain. M. Li.. 1996. Adjei. J. Antimicrob. 41 (7). Savale.. A. 43.. Mushatt. 54 (9). Wessels.A. S. Kumar..M. R.
Pharmacokinetics of rifampin under fasting conditions.A. R. C. Kivel. S.. K. Deng. Pharmacol. 12–18. 1256–1263. randomized. T. Zhang. B. Thomsen. Yin.. M. Ther. M. Effect of rifampicin on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of glimepiride. Li.H. Bruce. 591–595. J.H.. J. Tang... 68 (5). Effects of a concomitant single oral dose of rifampicin on the pharmacokinetics of pravastatin in a two-phase.P. Neuvonen. H. Cao.P. Br. 57 (2). T. single-blind. Br. Backman. Effect of food on the pharmacokinetics of rifalazil. X.J. 59. G. 892 48. K.. K. A. Elucidating rifampin's inducing and inhibiting effects on glyburide pharmacokinetics and blood glucose in healthy volunteers: unmasking the differential effects of enzyme induction and transporter inhibition for a drug and its primary metabolite.. Pharmacokinetics of rosuvastatin when coadministered with rifampicin in healthy males: a . Pharmacol. Backman. Sundaram. Chen.. C. Y. Neuvonen. Pharmacokinetic interaction of Diabecon (D-400) with rifampicin and nifedipine. 2003. Thomsen.. Pharmacol. R. 51.. Rifampin decreases the plasma concentrations and effects of repaglinide. Backman.G. 181–187.K... B. Eur. 49.. Niemi. D. . Neuvonen. Clin.A. K. Liu. Pharmacol. Hansen.J. M. Rifampin markedly decreases and gemfibrozil increases the plasma concentrations of atorvastatin and its metabolites... 52.. 2004.Z. 53. S. Kyrklund. 74 (4)... C. Huang. 115 (1). 1999.. P. Peloquin. M. 79–82. Clin. J. H. Frassetto. 154–167.D. Clin..S. P. 2000. 31 (6).T. Scharling.. with food.T. Nix... Benet. 114–121.T. S.. 24 (1). placebo-controlled. Park. Clin. Ther. 78 (2). J. J. P. Shin.. M... W. Drug Metab Pharmacokinet.. pharmacodynamics. D. 43 (6). Y. Shon. V.. Pharmacol. C.E.. a novel antibacterial. 47 (7). Hatorp.. in healthy male volunteers. 2009. Haehner-Daniels. L. 109–114. J. Park. 2004. 2003. Eur. 2010. 2005. Bidstrup.. H.J. Neuvonen.H. J. P. M. Pharmacol. Clin. 2001. M. Clin. Clin.. Pharmacol. Effect of rifampin on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of gliclazide. Li. Cabana. Namdar. Zheng. 495–500.D. Damkier. 195–204.. Clin. Neuvonen. 50. J.A.. Rifampicin seems to act as both an inducer and an inhibitor of the metabolism of repaglinide. Brosen. Luo. B... M.. Chen. Ther. 3 46. Ther.T. Influence of drugs interacting with CYP3A4 on the pharmacokinetics. Zhou.. 54..W.. P. 649–660. J. 2000. Hall.. S. Backman.X. Xie. Z. Itraconazole and rifampin alter significantly the disposition and antihistamine effect of ebastine and its metabolites in healthy participants.. S.J.J. 55. and with antacids.. X. Clin. 78–85. L. J.. Dai. N. 50 (2). Zhou.Y. S. Singleton.Y.. D.. Clin. J. I. 60. 841–849. Shin. N. J. Clin. Chest 1999. Ther. 85 (1). The effect of rifampin administration on the disposition of fexofenadine. Cha.S. H. 58.. K. 56. Clin. 2009. Kivisto.V.W. Venkataranganna. Pharmacol.. Park. Yeo.A. Hamman.T.W. J. 2007. 334–340.X. Pharmacol. Mitra.A.. He.Pharmaceutics 2011. Pharmacol. Y. Niemi. 47. Effect of rifampicin on pravastatin pharmacokinetics in healthy subjects.D.. Lee. J. Luurila.. crossover study in healthy Chinese male subjects.T. Chen. Neuvonen.. Ther.Y. Kim. Neuvonen. Gopumadhavan.B... Michaelis..J. 50 (6). 60 (2). 57. and safety of the prandial glucose regulator repaglinide. Kivisto. M.. F. Y. Cao. K. 69 (3). M. Pharmacol. L.T.. Deng. Stilling. M. P.T.S. J..G. J.
509–521. M.J. K.J. Freimuth. Kim. Ther. 1998.P.. Acosta. J. L. V. Neuvonen.. 30 (7). J. Acquir. M. Y.W.H. Chambers.H. Effect of rifampin on the pharmacokinetics of rosiglitazone in healthy subjects. R. 36 (6). Y.T. Laitila. Antimicrob. B. D. Clin.. Syndr. Pharmacol.A. 63. S. J.. E..T. Verbeke. 2003. Neuvonen.. A. 3 893 61. Backman.M.. M. Sekar.. 56 (4). Figueiredo. Fisher..M. D. J. Kuypers.Y. J. J. 544–553. single-blind.A. S. Gerber. T. Yoon. Freimuth. Berckmans.. W. Effects of rifampin on tacrolimus pharmacokinetics in healthy volunteers. Kang. Suckow. 65. Y. L. M.. D. C.. J.. 70–78. M. J.T. Rifampin greatly reduces plasma simvastatin and simvastatin acid concentrations. I. I. J. J. J. Clin.. Backman.G. 53–63. P. T. Antiviral Res... Kendall.. 2006. 427–432. Vangeneugden. K..J. 70. Effects of rifampin on cyclosporine disposition in kidney recipients with tuberculosis. S. Ann. B. S. 1430–1439. Gagnon. Effect of rifampicin on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of nateglinide in healthy subjects... Pharmacol.T.W. 66. Pharmacokinetic study of the interaction between rifabutin and delavirdine mesylate in HIV-1 infected patients.. Borin.. C. Pharmacokinetic profile of temsirolimus with concomitant administration of cytochrome p450-inducing medications. Port. 91–96.H. 2000. J.J... Clin.. S. M. 2004. Clin..J. Leister. Child. crossover study. De Pauw. J. 35 (1). M. L.. Transplant. Clin. M. Cincotta. M. Kim.. Hosey. B.. 69. 50 (3).. Alston-Smith. Pharmacokinetics of darunavir/ritonavir and rifabutin coadministered in HIV-negative healthy volunteers. 72. Clin. Moore. Ther.. C. Y.T. 71. Clin. Hebert.J.. Clin. T... Laitila..W.. Niemi. 62. Backman. 61 (1). C. J. 592–597. Ther. Zolopa. 2007.. J.H.. L. 47 (11). Spinosa-Guzman. Ther. M.. Oellerich. 1997.. C. Ther.L.F. Chambers. 61 (5). Boni.. 67. M. Br. Carel. Kyrklund. Pharmacother.. 290–293. Clin. Vanrenterghem. Pharmacol. Agents Chemother. Rifampin induces alterations in mycophenolic acid glucuronidation and elimination: implications for drug exposure in renal allograft recipients. M. Pharmacokinetic study of the interaction between rifampin and delavirdine mesylate. V.R. Bertz.W. 80 (5).. C. Neuvonen. 2008.W. 981–985. Hoetelmans. W... 54 (10).T. 1283–1289.J. Pharmacol.. 4440–4445. Streit. A. 2006. P.. 2009.. 75 (3). Cha. Laughlin. 39 (1). K... J. randomized. S. M... Shin. Rordorf. 68. M. 68 (6). Bekersky.. Hartmann. 1997.R. ..... Hug. 157–162. 64.G. Piergies. Burns. J. Lavreys. Pharmacol. Marsh. Kovarik. 30 (7).G. Naesens. Borin. Defic.R. J. Dressler.Pharmaceutics 2011. Jaakkola. Kivisto. 73. Effect of rifampin on apparent clearance of everolimus.... Pharmacol. R. A. Pharmacol. Van de Casteele.. Immune.. Hepatotoxicity and gastrointestinal intolerance when healthy volunteers taking rifampin add twice-daily atazanavir and ritonavir. Kim. P. Proc. Neuvonen. R. J. Carel. 1999.. 2010.L. M. 2002. Neuvonen. F.L. 3570–3572.. Park. Neuvonen. Pharmacol. Armstrong. J. Br. B. Haas. Kim. Koletar.. placebo-controlled. Shin.. Aksentijevich. Rouilly.A.. Effect of rifampicin on the pharmacokinetics of pioglitazone.
681–690.. Cohen. van Cutsem.W. Chen. G. W.. Antimicrob. Ruxrungtham. De Iaco..J. 2008.. 50 (5). Petry. J.. Ren. 82. 2002. Simonsson.K.. Hanley. Buss. R. Carvalho. Boyd. 1995. Effects of CYP3A4 inducers with and without CYP3A4 inhibitors on the pharmacokinetics of maraviroc in healthy volunteers. 2004.C. J.J. Y. Clin.S... Yuen. B.. Kinchelow.. R.. P.. U. Brosen.. Smith. Leon-Jimenez. S. 53 (7). HIV.. Ridgway. A.A. Effect of rifampicin-based antitubercular therapy on nevirapine plasma concentrations in South African adults with HIV-associated tuberculosis. K.H. 2007.Pharmaceutics 2011. M. A.. 349–353.. 38 (3). Iwamoto. 85. 65 (1). Matteelli. L'homme. K.. D.J. McIlleron. Mangin. P.J. Wenning.. 5 (3)..... S.A. Chodakewitz. AIDS 2008.S. J. Aarnoutse. 65 (Suppl 1). R. . S. M.. Y. L. Rongen. Min. Curr. Defic.... Wagner. Defic. 76. J. I. Pharmacokinet. 81. Smith. Marbury. Chemother. G...A.F.. Regazzi... P. 52 (2). Kamal. Cusato. J.E.L. Ruiz-Valderas.S. J.A.. Cameron. Nuttall. G. M. Multiple-dose pharmacokinetics of efavirenz with and without the use of rifampicin in HIV-positive patients. 83..S. Klitgaard. Immune. J.. Meyers. High incidence of adverse events in healthy volunteers receiving rifampicin and adjusted doses of lopinavir/ritonavir tablets..M. A.. Br. Hawley-Foss. 22 (8). 2009. 2009. M... E. A phase I evaluation of concomitant rifabutin and didanosine in symptomatic HIV-infected patients. Agents Chemother... X. 439–443. G. van Crevel.. M. Abel... 3 74. Muirhead.A..M. H. Brainard. J. 2008.. Dis. Gottesdiener. Maartens. Viciana. Smith. K. Agents Chemother. Koopmans..P. R. Goemaere. a potent inducer of drug-metabolizing enzymes. Tomasoni. A. L. Carosi... Andersen.A. Lopez-Cortes. McIlleron. 931–935.J. Justesen. T. Lou. 894 75.. Clin..J.. Retrovirol. A. Effect of rifampicin on efavirenz pharmacokinetics in HIV-infected children with tuberculosis. Whitlock. P. C.. Clin. G. Burger. S. Borland.. M. Jenkins.. Villani.. 79.and tuberculosis-infected South African patients. Lopez-Pua.. Clin. S. N. Sahai.C. G. on the pharmacokinetics of raltegravir.. 38–46... N.M. Infect. Gomez-Mateos. Boulle. K. Immune. M. Gerstoft. Alarcon-Gonzalez. Pharmacokinetic interactions between efavirenz and rifampicin in HIV-infected patients with tuberculosis. Pachon.. Nieforth. A. H. S. Capone. 43 (12). Res.. 84. B.K. J.D. Acquir. Kolis. T. J. Acquir. Li. Zhang. Pedersen. Y. Clin. Antimicrob... 274–279. J. Maartens.. H. J. T. Pharmacol. R. Sarasanacenta. 2003. 426–429. Pharmacol. 9 (3). 2008. Jin. M. K. Dorr. van Uden. 2009.B.. Shelton.A.M. P. G.. 61 (2). L. J.. Patel. Jansson. Hum... P. Ghosh.. 77.. D. Pharmacol.. Syndr.J. Boeree. Ford.S.C.. Y. G... J. Berg. Antimicrob. 80. J. E. 2852–2856. N. D. A. Effect of rifampin. Population pharmacokinetics of nevirapine in combination with rifampicin-based short course chemotherapy in HIV. Stone. Elsherbiny. Syndr. K.M. H. P.C. 41 (9). 71–80. L.E. T. McIlleron.F.. Narang. B. M. C. Eur... 1382–1391.M. U. D.. 534–538. Manfrin. Cohen.. E. 78.. P... Eley. Lack of enzyme-inducing effect of rifampicin on the pharmacokinetics of enfuvirtide. Pharmacokinetic interaction between rifampin and the combination of indinavir and low-dose ritonavir in HIV-infected patients..A. Nijland. J. Pharmacokinetic interaction between fosamprenavir-ritonavir and rifabutin in healthy subjects. Caligaris. K. 389–393.M.
37 (7).. 93. Goggin. Neuvonen. C.H. Bi. Cameron.T. J. 471–474. Burger. Neuvonen.P.. 96. Hickey.T. ten Napel. Nightingale. K.H. Sahai. Kivisto.. I. Freeman. Br.J. Greenberg. Shukla.W. Beijnen.T. 1008–1011. S. erythromycin and rifampicin: comparison of the effect in healthy volunteers and in HIV-infected patients. 629–634. Meenhorst. Kraft. 62 (6). Dis. Burger. Migoya. AIDS 1994. S. D. The effect of multiple-dose. W. Antimicrob. J. Kivisto... Agents Chemother. J. Deutsch. Backman. Sahai.K. 115–121.. Eur. 53–58.. Cameron.. Kivisto. 8–14. T.S. D. The area under the plasma concentration-time curve for oral midazolam is 400-fold larger during treatment with itraconazole than with rifampicin. 1683–1689. K.K. 99.. J. Clin. J. 8 (12). W. Seguin. E.A. Dilzer. 88.. Effect of rifabutin on the pharmacokinetics of zidovudine in patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus. D. K. 1996. D. Waldman. J.T. J. K. Villikka... 97. fluconazole. H. Clin. Villikka. H. 2006. Cameron. C. K. Clin.. L. Kantola.C.. Jorga. 7–13. Neuvonen.. Backman. Olkkola. Olkkola. Rifampin drastically reduces plasma concentrations and effects of oral midazolam. A...J.J. H. Agents Chemother. 100. S. Lasseter..S. Pharmacotherapy 2007. J. Forbes. Ther. Bult. Agents Chemother. 48 (2).T. Beijnen. Pharmacokinetic variability of zidovudine in HIV-infected individuals: subgroup analysis and drug interactions. Backman. 43 (5).. Luurila. 87..J. Clin. 1993.J. Li..T. G. S. la Porte. 27 (10). Seguin. Agents Chemother.. Trapnell. K. 4306–4314. M.. Pharmacol. Eur. 1999. J. J. 54 (1). Bettenhausen. H... K. Lamberg. Backman. Neuvonen. 2004. Gallicano... J. Pharmacol.T.M. P. 48 (11). Antimicrob. Kivisto. Pakuts.C...L. Rifampin reduces plasma concentrations and effects of zolpidem.. 1397–1402. P. E. Swick. Triazolam is ineffective in patients taking rifampin. Kwok. Rifampicin is only a weak inducer of CYP1A2mediated presystemic and systemic metabolism: studies with tizanidine and caffeine.T. M. C.P.W.D. T. Antimicrob. K. P. I.. Ludin.. Lewis. 1361–1369.T. A. 1995.T.J. Sabo.Pharmaceutics 2011. 53 (1). 57 (2). T. Koks. Elgadi.. M. 90..B. J. 895 Grub. 2009. B. 1997. K.. Pharmacol. Ghosh.. K.W.. Pakuts.H. 168–179. C.L. 62 (6).M. K. Potential for interactions between caspofungin and nelfinavir or rifampin.A. Clin. J. P. Stone.J. 89.. P.C. Granfors. 91. Clin. Olkkola. Clin. Connolly.C...K.. 95. Neuvonen. Induction of zidovudine glucuronidation and amination pathways by rifampicin in HIV-infected patients. J.. Ther. . Koks. Pharmacol.K. 2001.T.W.H. Pharmacol. Pentikis.. Lack of effect of concomitant zidovudine on rifabutin kinetics in patients with AIDS-related complex.. V. Br. Neuvonen. Antimicrob. Interaction studies of tipranavir-ritonavir with clarithromycin.. 92.. P.. D. J. C. R.. Bryson. and rifabutin in healthy volunteers. 162–173. K. 3 86. 94. J. S.C. D. Pharmacol. 98.A.. Foster. 1996. The interaction of saquinavir (soft gelatin capsule) with ketoconazole.. 1997.H. D. 59 (1).. oral rifaximin on the pharmacokinetics of intravenous and oral midazolam in healthy volunteers. Narang. R. 451–461. P.. R. Villikka. Meenhorst. Desai. Concentrations and effects of zopiclone are greatly reduced by rifampicin. Eur.. 1426–1431.. A. Clin.T... A. 61 (1).. K.M. L. Clin. Gallicano..... Mulder.C. Colborn. 1998. D. C. 1997. Infect. Ther..J. K. Pharmacokinetic interaction between rifampin and zidovudine.. P.. Pharmacol. P. Winchell. 40 (6). P... K.. Neef. Pharmacol. 21 (4)..
Pharmacol. Antimicrob. P. 106. Unadkat. J. R. E.T. G. 45 (8). Pharmacokinet. M. J. 1991. P.. Winter. 109.K. A. 87–91. 222–228.. Influence of rifampin on the pharmacokinetics of pefloxacin. S.. S. 1001–1007. Looareesuwan. Frydman. Kang. M. Clin.. C. Burman. N. N. H. 47 (5). Drusano... Sriwiriyajan. Luo.. S. 2007. Montay... Absence of effect of oral rifaximin on the pharmacokinetics of ethinyl estradiol/norgestimate in healthy females.L.A. Mushatt. 2007. Pou.. Vernon.M. 2004. Antimicrob. 2001. S.... D. Chen. Weiner. Prakongpan. 76 (6).R. L. N.L.. R. Effect of rifampicin on the pharmacokinetics of fluconazole in patients with AIDS. D. Pieniaszek. Kivel... Aarnoutse. 45 (7). S. 54 (2). J. Follansbee. Rifampicin reduces plasma concentrations of moxifloxacin in patients with tuberculosis. A. Connolly. Bettenhausen. Effect of rifampicin on the pharmacokinetics of itraconazole in normal volunteers and AIDS patients. Valverde. Humbert. T. I.. E.. A. Agents Chemother. Clin.J... Ann..A.. Brumpt. Y.. L.. 2861–2866.. Antimicrob. Clin. Ocana. 2001. B. R.E. Viriyayudhakorn. Michaelis. Peloquin. . Ruslami.. C. D.. I. 3 896 101. Hafner..M. V. Thitiarchakul.. 579–587. Agents Chemother. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. 2007.. Forbes. 682–687. Suroto. Hooton. Engle. Dis.. Standiford.Pharmaceutics 2011. Ruiz.. 111. Agundez. Clin. S.. 40 (1). Wanwimolruk. Lack of effect of rifalazil on ethinyl estradiol pharmacokinetics in healthy postmenopausal women. Pukrittayakamee. S. W. D. 43 (11). Adverse effect of rifampin on quinine efficacy in uncomplicated falciparum malaria. 105. Rifampin reduces concentrations of trimethoprim and sulfamethoxazole in serum in human immunodeficiency virus-infected patients. R. Marked enhancement by rifampicin and lack of effect of isoniazid on the elimination of quinine in man. The effect of clarithromycin.C. 113. Pentikis...M. 108. J. R.P. F. Borsa-Lebas. H. Pharmacol. 2003. Sedeno. 104. Greenspan. I. Gilman. 112. Raasch. Clemens.. 1509–1513. D. Mole.. Ther. J. J. Pharmacol. 51 (8). J. Int.. Jacobson..C. Trapnell... van Crevel. Panomvana Na Ayudhya.... 102.D. Polk.. Clin.E. Pharmacol.. Trapnell. Pahissa. 1995.B. Colmenero. A. Cohn. Clin. 418–422.. J. R.. Coville. Pharmacother. Alisjahbana.. S... S. Bethel. Thanompuangseree.. 41 (2). Fernandez-Gallardo. R. W. N. Goldberg. 2007.. Ther. Tansuphaswadikul. 3238–3241. B. H. H. Campos. Agents Chemother. and rifabutin on dapsone hydroxylamine formation in individuals with human immunodeficiency virus infection (AACTG 283). S.X. J. G. 725–732. Moore. fluconazole. Agents Chemother.. S. L. 2004. J.. Wanwimolruk. A. 1572–1577. 1998...B.. White. S. Eur. Br.J.. Effects of rifampin and multidrug resistance gene polymorphism on concentrations of moxifloxacin.F.C. A. M.. 50 (6). Cabana... C. Benitez. 1994. Ribera. 155–158. S. H. 45 (5). Lopez. Le Liboux. W. Nijland.D. Infect. Tolerance and pharmacokinetic interactions of rifabutin and azithromycin. R. Slattery. F. Agarwal. 110. Possible implications of doxycycline-rifampin interaction for treatment of brucellosis. 107.. D. Pharmacol. Jaruratanasirikul. 45 (11). Fernandez-Sola. 38 (12). Burger. C.M. 2798–2802..... Ther. 103.. Kumar. A. M. Antimicrob. Clin. G.
Weinbrenner. I. Kauffmann. N.. 2000. H. G. J.J. 1999. Villikka. Clin. 4 (2). a cytochrome P450 3A inducer. Halabi.S. P.. The effect of single does of rifampicin on the pharmacokinetics of oral nifedipine. W.. Lamberg. Ridtitid. P.J.. D. von Richter. Pharmacol. Kivisto. 555–558. 107 (1). Abdu-Aguye. R. J... J. 2010.M. 1974. P..G. Y. Cytochrome P450 2B6 activity as measured by bupropion hydroxylation: effect of induction by rifampin and ethnicity. Lilja.K. Neuvonen. W.R. Franke. Ann.. Nyman. Ther.. 122.. 126. 117. Terhaag.. J. Blievernicht. 115.J.S.. H. Bates. Tapaninen. 487–491. O'Reilly. 119. Siegmund. 120. 118. M. Pharmacol.C.C. 32–37. W.. Kim.. Watkins.. Shim.. Med.B. Studies in man. Liauw. 299–304. 45 (4).J. Effect of rifampicin on the pharmacokinetics of atenolol.S.. 32 (2). Induction of P-glycoprotein by rifampin increases intestinal secretion of talinolol in human beings: a new type of drug/drug interaction. 80 (1). Milferstadt. 337–340. Ebert. Warzok. 125. Clin.. L. 15 (9–10)..J. P. 75–84. 94–97. T. S. J. O. 121. Clin. Neuvonen. Clin. 497–502. K... Shin. P. R. 1998. K. 16 (3). 1571–1575. Anal.K. McLachlan. Tamoxifen and toremifene concentrations in plasma are greatly decreased by rifampin..I.. 1990. Ndanusa. Ther. M... Kirch.Q. Pharmacol. Pharm. Kirch. Interactions of buspirone with itraconazole and rifampicin: effects on the pharmacokinetics of the active 1-(2-pyrimidinyl)-piperazine metabolite of buspirone. 127. L.. C. Pharm. Nontaput. 2000.J. Ther. K.. L. W. T. Pharmacol... Lamberg... J. Fritz. Wongnawa.S. 1997. M. Neuvonen. Y.. A. I. Jang.T. 381–385. 161–167. Pharmacol. Carville. 345–355. M.... Concentrations and effects of buspirone are considerably reduced by rifampicin. Toxicol. Westphal. Pharmacol. 648–654. Park. Rifampin. Kivisto. Shin. Tait. W. Guyer. Horowitz. Mustapha. Clin.R. J.. A. Woo. Kroemer...U. Hopp.. Effects of rifampicin and cimetidine on pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of lamotrigine in healthy subjects. L.... 247–252. Schrenk. Toxicol. Br.J. J.T.K. B. Interaction of sodium warfarin and rifampin. Pharmacol..M. I. Psychopharmacol. Waskell. A. T... C. Day. 123.Pharmaceutics 2011. Thong. decreases plasma concentrations of antipsychotic risperidone in healthy volunteers.A. P. K. Oertel. Rifampicin reduces the plasma concentrations and the renin-inhibiting effect of aliskiren. J. A. K. U.. Cha. .. 84 (2).. 2006..M.. J. W. 3 897 114. Drugs Ther. Efthymiopoulos. 56 (4). E.. Atorvastatin reduces the ability of clopidogrel to inhibit platelet aggregation: a new drug-drug interaction. S. Rocher. Clin. Ther. 64 (6). K. Mahatthanatrakul. Interaction of tertatolol with rifampicin and ranitidine pharmacokinetics and antihypertensive activity. W. Y. Eur..I..R. 66 (5). A. Sunbhanich..... Basic Clin..K. J. P.G. Neer. Kivisto. Circulation 2003. 68 (4). Kim. Neuvonen. Effect of rifampin on the plasma concentration and the clinical effect of haloperidol concomitantly administered to schizophrenic patients. K. Cardiovasc. 1998. 116. 124. Hachenberg. Lau. Kim. Pharmacol. B. Williams. Oertel. 1996.. R.G. I.T.E. Knoke.J.. T. Intern.. A. Niemi.O.... 81 (3). Jung.H. R. Clin. T. Zschiesche.A. M. K. 2007. Anttila.. Biomed. M. Yoon.S.J. Clin. 98 (6).J. Juntti-Patinen.H. Neuvonen. R. Zanger. G. Gross. D.. 2006. J. Loboz. K. A. Eur. U.
Chong. one-sequence. Achari. Infect. W. D.. Weir. J. J. Clin. Nafziger. A. J..E. 2004. D. J. P. Magnusson.. R.G. S. 2007. 53 (2). J. T. S. V... L. 2000. P. Pharmacol.Pharmaceutics 2011. M. McKillop.Y. L.G. a once-daily oral iron chelator. Lee. Clin. Punyo. J. three-period.. 3 898 128. S. S. Krebs-Brown. K. Foulds. Kaplowitz. Roth. Anesthesiology 2009.. Ther. Seiberling. N. M. Neuvonen. Shin. 2010..S.J.. Kim. G. D. Clin. Kim. K. Clin..J... Pharmacol.N. 1993.L. Jang. Carr. Wild.. S.S. Pharmacol. A placebocontrolled study of retinal blood flow changes by pentoxifylline and metabolites in humans. 133. 1522–1527. S. Pharmacol. A study of the pharmacokinetics of azithromycin and nelfinavir when coadministered in healthy volunteers. Ridtitid. Dis... R. Eur. Bruzzese. A. 31 (12). D.C.. Keung. Time course of the changes in prednisolone pharmacokinetics after co-administration or discontinuation of rifampin. Hubert.W.. Gillum..J.H.. A.. Shin.H. 2005. 129.. 139. Effect of clarithromycin on the pharmacokinetics of 2'. B. 287–289..P. 140.G. Ahn.. 126–132. I. J. Bolton. Heijl. G. Bjorkman. Laight. Locke. Dual effects of rifampin on the pharmacokinetics of atrasentan.H.. M. K. Sunbhanich.. 505–513.E.B. R. M.S.H. 130. J. Y.. J.C. H. 205–213. H. Pharmacol.. and repaglinide in healthy volunteers. M. 45 (3). Katz. Clin. 61 (2). 137.. Pharmacol. Amsden. K.W. Jang. 716–718.J. Yu. J.. 110 (6). 43 (2). Smith..3'-dideoxyinosine in patients who are seropositive for human immunodeficiency virus. 1996. Lung Dis. Arumugham. 138–147.A.. 136. 135.. Cho. Nieminen. Ther. Pharmacokinetic drug interactions of gefitinib with rifampicin. J... H. Dimmitt.. U. Wongnawa. K. Int. STI571) in healthy subjects. Swaisland.. Cancer Chemother. 1067–1081. Jankowski. M. Effect of rifampicin on the pharmacokinetics of imatinib mesylate (Gleevec.M. L. 2002. Ranson.E... rifampin. A. Saari. Leadbetter. J..J. T. Kim. three-treatment crossover study. Polk. D.. Cancer Chemother. M.T.. K. R.S. Capdeville. 2009. A. S. B. 138. Tuberc. Br.. Hoglund. 7 (6). Pharmacokinetics of dolasetron with coadministration of cimetidine or rifampin in healthy subjects. Sleep. Laine. P. 47 (4).S. 44 (10)..H. M.J. itraconazole and metoprolol..... A.. T. Mahatthanatrakul.. Shin. C.. M. Shin. Cramer. 50 (2). 2003. Pertovaara.. R. 1371–1378. J. Cabelus.. A.. Clin. 587–591. W.J... Investigation of the pharmacokinetic interactions of deferasirox.C. 102–106. Xiong. 72 (5). C. Lee. Neuvonen. Pharmacol. Pharmacokinet.A. The effects of ketoconazole and rifampicin on the pharmacokinetics of mirodenafil in healthy Korean male volunteers: an open-label.I.. 423–429.G. Skerjanec. Wang. Olkkola.. . Wang. Rifampin markedly decreases plasma concentrations of praziquantel in healthy volunteers.T. J. Doan. I.. 3009–3020. Bergstrand. Clin.. Yoon.. Yi.R. Rojkjaer. Peng. W. Pharmacol. Maren..G. A.C. Clin. 132. The clearance of theophylline is increased during the initial period of tuberculosis treatment.. Israel. T... Rifampin greatly reduces the plasma concentrations of intravenous and oral oxycodone. 40 (12 Pt 2). Kim. Lee. 1999. 22 (4). 134. 131. 2006. with midazolam. Hagelberg.. B. I. Keller. J. T.. Clin.
open-label. The absence of an effect of food on the bioavailability of azithromycin administered as tablets. 1999. Luke. Donado. 2006.L. G. Foulds. Chu. Teng... Campa. Mannisto. Clin.. 42 (4). R.R. A. Agents Chemother. Antimicrob. Pharmacol. B. R. J. Biol. 2001.T. F.. 1578–1580. Gabriele.L.. K. 2008. L. Med. B. R. F. Dis. M. Del Tacca. Amsden. two-way. Bernasconi. Cheng. Cheng. S... 37 (Suppl C). C. Pharmacokinetics of azithromycin administered alone and with atovaquone in human immunodeficiency virus-infected children. Solans. Clin. Oral cimetidine prolongs clarithromycin absorption. 74 (3). 145.A.. 1988. Carbo. Ther.. S.R. J. Locke. A. Agents Chemother. 142. M. J. 154. G. Deguer. Lack of a pharmacokinetic interaction between azithromycin and chloroquine.. Marchioretto. Calafatti. J.. Wesche. M. 144. 27 (7)... 1998. I. P. Pharmacokinetics of intravenous azithromycin and ceftriaxone when administered alone and concurrently to healthy volunteers. Gupta. M.K. 37–44.S. Tuominen. 72 (9). Braz.J. W. 150. Nafziger.. placebo-controlled. S. Res. B. Ribeiro. J. Chiu.. E.Y.. C..A. Banfield. 42 (7). M. C. 30 (9).W. Pharm...M. M. 1151–1156. J... K. 1639–1650. Effect of grapefruit juice on clarithromycin pharmacokinetics. Affrime. Marino. Peloquin. J.W. Barbanoj. Cavanaugh. M. C. M. Clin. 1996. Jr.L. Mechanistic study of the azithromycin dosage-formdependent food effect. Lenfant. Agents Chemother.. 823–826. Phase I study. 143. 152. G..W.. H. Moraes. 149. 2002.. 3 899 141. Antimicrob.L. 45–55. W. 1075–1079.D.A. telithromycin.. 2002. Vuorela. 147.T.H. Am. 2007. R.. Res.. M... Pedrazzoli. 2001.. Cook. C. 40 (3).. 151. J. V.Pharmaceutics 2011. 1516–1519. Drug-food interaction potential of clarithromycin. 148. Willavize. T. Chemother. Blandizzi... Menhinick.L.. Hyg.. Ngo... Bhargava. Infect. J.. Antimicrob.. Pharmacokinetic and safety profile of desloratadine and fexofenadine when coadministered with azithromycin: a randomized. Xu. 1361–1366. Nafziger.. ..C.A.. M. Interaction between piroxicam and azithromycin during distribution to human periodontal tissues. Curatolo. Johnson. V.. Yogev... Burchett.A. 927–929. Wilson. D.. G. Peloquin. Antimicrob. Amsden.A. E. Antonijoan. Izquierdo. Friedman. 1998. Park. Malizia.C. Pena. 2010. parallel-group study. Labadie. Effect of Helicobacter pylori infection and acid blockade by lansoprazole on clarithromycin bioavailability. Ecclissato. L.. L. sachet or suspension.. Pharmacokinetic and safety profile of rupatadine when coadministered with azithromycin at steady-state levels: a randomized.W.. M. J. Clement. Graziani.. R..N. Batoni. C. A. J. Y. Unadkat. Randinitis. 1992. D.. W. crossover. 43 (6). A. M. Ghelardi..M. Bramson.. 34 (11). Kantesaria.. a new macrolide antimicrobial. S. G. 21 (Suppl D). A. 146.M. G. Curatolo. C. Scand. R. P. Med.N.. 23 (3). Pohto..A. Merlos..A.. G. Chemother. Periodontol. Hughes. P. 32–36. Foulds. Amsden. Ther. Absorption of erythromycin acistrate and erythromycin base in the fasting and non-fasting state. W. S. C.. Chemother. Batra.. Lack of effect of food on the bioavailability of a new ketolide antibacterial... 383–389. The ACTG 254 Team. Pascual. E. R. 407–412. Baschiera. E.. Nadal... 153. Antimicrob.J. J. Dankner. 32 (1). S. Sadler. Sultan. Montay. 50 (6). T. Perret. A.. D. Senesi. Antimicrob... J. G. 451–466. Trop.. Ortiz. Solkinen. J.
T. 94 (9). 100 (5).. O. 2001. 2001. Toxicol. Brophy..T. 2004. Eller. 168. Pharmacokinetic interaction between ritonavir and clarithromycin.J.M. 157. S. 830–835... H. G. 64 (4). Clarithromycin. Pharmacol. 2000. Okerholm. P. Pharmacol. Clin. T. R. Guenther. 1998.J. Neuvonen.E. Peltoniemi. Hilligoss. Boruchoff. S. Foulds. 351–359. J. K. 187–191. D. 156. G.. 88 (4).. P. G.. Hamunen. 44 (4). Antimicrob.. 84 (3).. Kurkinen.A. Polk. S. 58 (3).M. Neuvonen. Flaherty.J.. Analg. . M.. Sadler. J. Pharmacol. Pharmacokinetic interaction between amprenavir and clarithromycin in healthy male volunteers.. K.M. Effect of clarithromycin and itraconazole on the pharmacokinetics of ropivacaine. J.T.. Am. Clin. 159. 54 (7). Pharmacol. A. G. G. 310–315. G. Neuvonen. Granneman.. De Paepe..A.. 162..E. T.M. 165.R. Ther.. Hoetelmans.. M. Saari.. 2002. 38 (9).M. 14 (6). Pharmacol. M.T.. Eur. Olkkola. D. K. Cardiol. G... K. Colangelo.T.T.. B.R. Ahonen. M.. P. Wei. Ther. Seibold. The effect of erythromycin and fluvoxamine on the pharmacokinetics of intravenous lidocaine.C.T.. Ouellet. 177–182.. Comparative pharmacokinetic interaction profiles of pravastatin. Cavanaugh. K. 64 (2). J. Clin.. Pastor.. simvastatin. D. Luke. 167. P. a potent inhibitor of CYP3A.J. E. J. Kivisto.. M. Y. Darunavir/ritonavir pharmacokinetics following coadministration with clarithromycin in healthy volunteers.. Hsu. M.J. Eur. Anesth. Clin. S. Clin. Ther. J.W... P. greatly increases exposure to oral S-ketamine. 1995. Neuvonen.J. 164. Pharmacol. Isohanni. K. Amsden. M. De Pauw.J. Laine. J... 444–449.H.M.. 2000.. 1998. 1999. Vincent. Apseloff. K. Olkkola.. Sekar..H. Clin.. Pharmacol. Willavize. Jokinen. Kusma.F. Hagelberg. J.W.. LaBoy-Goral. 158. Lou. Pain 2010. L. V. 1998... R. P. 41 (2). Agents Chemother. Effect of erythromycin and itraconazole on the pharmacokinetics of intravenous lignocaine. Effect of erythromycin and itraconazole on the pharmacokinetics of oral lignocaine.T.. 2008. 163. A study of the interaction potential of azithromycin and clarithromycin with atorvastatin in healthy volunteers.S. 161. R. Pharmacol. Comparison of azithromycin and clarithromycin in their interactions with rifabutin in healthy volunteers. 48 (1). Clin. 160. Ther. Winchell. K.A.. Neuvonen. S.E..G. Leonard.J. Olkkola. 169.J. G.. 625–629..H. Clin. V. W. M. McCrea. K.. 2005. Erythromycin and verapamil considerably increase serum simvastatin and simvastatin acid concentrations.. Grasing. Carlson. Vangeneugden. T. Pharmacol. Olkkola. A.J.J.. J. Kantola. Toxicol. 3 900 155. 67 (4). 143–146. G. Isohanni.. 978–984.. 42 (4). 1140–1146. Sturgill. Isohanni. Neuvonen. Olkkola. Lack of an effect of azithromycin on the disposition of zidovudine and dideoxyinosine in HIV-infected patients. 355–362.Pharmaceutics 2011. Azithromycin and terfenadine: lack of drug interaction. and atorvastatin when coadministered with cytochrome P450 inhibitors. J.. Harris. Palkama. J.. N. J. E.. Pharmacol. J. 166. 60–65. 561–565. Lefebvre. D. P. Clin. K. C. Symonds. J. Jacobson. P. 1998. Pharmacol.E. Chittick. 1352–1356. Israel. D. The steady-state disposition of indinavir is not altered by the concomitant administration of clarithromycin.I.. Deutsch. Gillotin. Kuye. Amsden.. 210–216. Spinosa-Guzman.
17 (6).. 33–43.Pharmaceutics 2011. Clin. F. Sugawara. de Nucci.. J.W. Cooper. Saito.. M... J.. Antimicrob. Sugawara. Ther. A. N. K. M. P.L. Liljeblad.A. .. Ther. 407–412. Effects of clarithromycin and verapamil on rabeprazole pharmacokinetics between CYP2C19 genotypes. A. Pedrazzoli. Res.. 1995. 59 (3). Pharmacol..A. Lode. Nachi... K. Clin. D.E. Studies on drug interactions between esomeprazole. Yasui-Furukori. A. Uno. Zimmermann. Tateishi. Hanai... 36 (12). 180. Ther. Gastroenterol.. Kaiser. Ortiz. Ohnishi. Dias. K.. Chirality 2005. Pharmacol. Edmonds. Tacca. 2000. Hassan-Alin.. Zapater. S. M. Ther. Deguer.. Pharmacokinetic interactions between omeprazole/pantoprazole and clarithromycin in health volunteers..A. 597–603. Tateishi. Munakata.. K. T. 14 (4). DeBartolo. Dane. 66 (3). Mendes.W. J. T.... 50 (5). E. C. S.. 72 (1). 2078–2083. Pharmacol. Jr. Takashima. J.. Effects of clarithromycin on lansoprazole pharmacokinetics between CYP2C19 genotypes. Yoshida. Pharmacokinetics of lansoprazole. Furuta. B. J. 62 (8). F. Chemother.. T. H. Int. Shirai.E. 2006. T. A. 179. 59 (1). M. 2001. Scholmerich. 2002. J. Tada. Di Paolo. 2004. Chemother. L. Sirtori. M. Horga. Pharmacol. Holstege. 171. Piovesana. I. M. Transfer of clarithromycin to gastric juice is enhanced by omeprazole in Helicobacter pylori-infected individuals. F. Perez-Mateo. Pharmacokinetic interaction between proton pump inhibitors and roxithromycin in volunteers. A.. Locke. Pharmacol. Rohss. J. Effect of clarithromycin on the enantioselective disposition of lansoprazole in relation to CYP2C19 genotypes. T. G.D. 2006.L. D. J. 175. 699–706. 177.. 493–499.. Clin. Pereira. Suzuki.J. Lock.. T.. 338–344. D. Pazzucconi. 2005. Aliment. N.D. Schneck..F.. T. Effect of omeprazole on concentrations of clarithromycin in plasma and gastric tissue at steady state.G. C. 601–606. 3 901 170. 176. 174.... M. Clin... Dose-dependent inhibition of CYP3A activity by clarithromycin during Helicobacter pylori eradication therapy assessed by changes in plasma lansoprazole levels and partial cortisol clearance to 6beta-hydroxycortisol. Yasui-Furukori. 302–309. Miura. Kotwas.. Chiba. K... 51–56. Bento. Sugawara. Ittner. Kaneko. Agents Chemother. Eur... A. Warwick. H. F. Yasui-Furukori. Effects of clarithromycin on the metabolism of omeprazole in relation to CYP2C19 genotype status in humans.. K.. Tello. 182. Ishizaki. Pharmacol. Kosuge. J. 119–127. 39 (9). S. Schneck.. N. Clin. Reus.. Br. T. Shimizu. J.. Ferraz.P. Uno.. 178. H. Pharmacol.F. M. A.D.. K.... Persson. K. 1999. P. H. Echizen. A. P. 2002.A. M. Torrus. M. Scand. N. Calabresi. Antimicrob. J. Ohashi.. amoxicillin and clarithromycin after simultaneous and single administration.. R. Grobecker.. 172. J. Eur. K. H. D.. Borner. 2002. Martin. Takahata. Niazi...P.... 173. Raza. The effect of erythromycin on the pharmacokinetics of rosuvastatin... T. J... K. Kobayashi. M. 181. Andersson. M. 44 (3). Iida. G.... 265–274. T.. K. Calafatti.. Mainz.J. Pharmacol. A.. Koeppe.S. amoxicillin and clarithromycin in healthy subjects.. T. Clin. Ushiama. H. A. Lerner. M. Tateishi. S.. Kees. A prospective study of the clarithromycin-digoxin interaction in elderly patients. 1248–1253. L.. 50 (4)..L.. Antimicrob. H. 2003. 49 (5). Uno. Gustavson.. H. F. Ferrara.
Fleishaker. Lennernas. Nakano. K. E. 161–167.W. J. Kirch.. C. Ther. 193..J. Steady-state pharmacokinetics and electrocardiographic pharmacodynamics of clarithromycin and loratadine after individual or concomitant administration. 1991. L. J. Nyberg. M. T. Schwarz. 178–181. Palmer.. 63 (6). Shi. Ludwig.. M. Effect of clarithromycin on steady-state digoxin concentrations.. J. Reidenberg. Clin.E... 60 (1). Ther... Choo. Erythromycin-felodipine interaction: magnitude. K. 16 (3). J. Pharmacol. 71–79. J. Clin. Br.. 186. S. Effects of clarithromycin and grapefruit juice on the pharmacokinetics of glibenclamide. G. J.. Morimoto. Affrime. L.... U. Miyatake.. Br. Terfenadineassociated ventricular arrhythmias and QTc interval prolongation. Otani. Pharmacol.. 29–35. Affrime. Fredrikson. G. Banfield.. Padhi. Dixit. 60 (2).. L. Krappweis. Vacheron. Br. Shneyer.. 196. Effect of erythromycin on the absorption of fexofenadine in the jejunum. Brannan. Ther. Hunt. Hedeland. 5 (3). 1995. Clin. Funck-Brentano. Lin. Bondesson.. Bend.P. Walter-Sack. J. K.. R. J.. 120–127. Y. P. 2003.. 25–33. Yoneda.D. Katayama. A. 44 (2). Pharmacol. . R.. Antimicrob. 1996.C.. 185. J. Hanrahan. Tsutsumi. Pharmacol. J. Evaluation of a potential interaction between erythromycin and glyburide in diabetic volunteers.. Matsuki.S. Effect of clarithromycin on the pharmacokinetics of tolbutamide. W. 38 (4). Tanaka.. K. Loratadine administered concomitantly with erythromycin: pharmacokinetic and electrocardiographic evaluations. 2002. C. H. C. 42 (5). F.C. K. 2000..J. J.. S. R. Pharmacol.L. 2006. M. L.. Assessment of the effect of a single oral dose of telithromycin on sotalol-induced qt interval prolongation in healthy women.. Clin. ileum and colon determined using local intubation in healthy volunteers. H. Carr. Neuvonen. 2000. Kuranari.A. I. Kishan. Lilja.A. D. J. 188.. P. Bailey. Clin.C. Rao.M. M.. R..A. 58 (3). Phillips. 184.. M. G. Statkevich.. Burhenne. Int. J. and comparison with grapefruit juice. Agents Chemother.T. J. A. D. Rengelshausen. 732–740... Carlson.. J.. T. Pharmacol. J. D. Lack of clinically relevant interaction between desloratadine and erythromycin. H.. 2007. Cayen.. T. 42 (10).. 37 (2). 259–262. P.B.. Clin. V..I. 207–215... P. 194. Riedel. 2005. 2002. 191. 3 902 183. 195. 187. Mikus.. C. M. Gramatte. Y. Pharmacol. O. 41 (Suppl 1).. Ther. S.. Epidemiol. Gustavson.. Radwanski.. Platt. Tran. Niemi. 31 (3). Kotegawa. Pharmacokinet. Clin. Drug Metabol. W. Contribution of increased oral bioavailability and reduced nonglomerular renal clearance of digoxin to the digoxin-clarithromycin interaction. T. Faich. J.D.. J. M.P. Strabach.N... Petri. J. Pharmacother.... 1995.E. 1998. Harris. L. Ann. K. Pharmacol... Reyderman. Clin.. Borga..R. A retrospective cohort comparison with other antihistamines among members of a health maintenance organization. 269–278..I. Int. Arnold. H. Kodama. Jayasagar. W. Goggelmann. Drug Interact. 56 (1). Spence.. Ueno.D. Weiss. Ann. M. The effect of erythromycin and clarithromycin on the pharmacokinetics of intravenous digoxin in healthy volunteers. Greineder. Craft. Clin. 192. J. 1176–1180. Locke. Oertel. mechanism.. 2003. 190. C. P-glycoprotein inhibitor erythromycin increases oral bioavailability of talinolol in humans. Haefeli. 201–209. N. 32–38.Pharmaceutics 2011.G. U. Demolis. Y. 189. Edmonds. Pharmacol. S. 1159–1164. J.M. Clin.. Matsumoto.
47 (7). 206. Ohkubo. 1994. Olkkola. Clin. Phillips. K. Leitold.. J. S. Wildfeuer. Clin. Luurila.K. Kaneko. Laufen. A potentially hazardous interaction between erythromycin and midazolam. A pharmacokinetic interaction between roxithromycin and midazolam. Osanai. Clin. J. A. Clin. A.. Pharmacol. Idanpaan-Heikkila. R. Otani. 98–109. Pharmacol..N. 208. 213–217.. J. N.W. 475–481. Yeates. 202. 2005. B. Clin.. Quinney. Ohashi..T. S. R. 205. Pharmacol. H. 1996. Yeates. Luurila. Ther.T. Tsutsumi. Pharmacol.. Imai. 65 (1). Schmouder. The effect of erythromycin on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of zopiclone. J. 255–258. M. T.J. K. Johnson.. R. J. Ther. Olkkola. Drug Monit. 1995.. Beyer. Backman.. Luurila. Clin. H. Hall. 47 (1). 297–299. T. Himberg. Rhoades. 35–38. R. Ther. J. Azithromycin does not increase plasma concentrations of oral midazolam. L. J. Ishizaki. H.T. J. K. J. Lack of interaction of erythromycin with temazepam. Int. 199.J. Neuvonen. 53 (3). Br.D. A kinetic and dynamic study of oral alprazolam with and without erythromycin in humans: in vivo evidence for the involvement of CYP3A4 in alprazolam metabolism. Psychopharmacol.. 210. H.. K. J.J. Neuvonen. 33 (6).. D. 200. 212. 203.. J. Neuvonen. Neuvonen. 78 (2). J. Pharmacol. H. P. 2007. Eur.D.. Eur. 1994. 16 (6). Smith.. Nakano. R. Mattila.. Kotegawa. J.. K.A. M. Sugawara.B. J..J... J. P. S.T. Olkkola. Ther.J. 2008. 6 (5). Effect of the treatment period with erythromycin on cytochrome P450 3A activity in humans. 1986. Q. K. Jiang. Interaction between midazolam and clarithromycin: comparison with azithromycin. Laufen.. H. 49–52.A.... A.. Olkkola. Effect of multiple-dose erythromycin on everolimus pharmacokinetics. P.. M.. 514–519. 207. A pharmacokinetic drug interaction between erythromycin and triazolam. Scharpf.. 201. 61 (1). Toxicol. T. 204. Aranko. Himberg..B.. Interaction between erythromycin and the benzodiazepines diazepam and flunitrazepam. Int. H. Clin. Saarnivaara. Clin. Rowland.T.. 1996.. 1994... Br.. Clin.. K.. Interaction between erythromycin and nitrazepam in healthy volunteers. Hiller. Pharmacol. Azithromycin does not alter the effects of oral midazolam on human performance. 1996.T. Aranko. Zimmermann. Okudaira. K.C. K. J. 363–367.T. 1993. J.T. Olkkola. M. T. Backman.. 27 (4). Z. 209. P. Pharmacol. Luurila. 211. J. Haehner. Cyclosporin-erythromycin interaction in renal transplant patients.J.. Arzneimittelforschung 1996.Pharmaceutics 2011.J..P. 356–359.. K. T. Bizot.. 1989. Pharmacol. .. K. Neuvonen. Pharmacol. Shenouda.. J. 871–876. Olkkola.. 400–405. 548–551. 551–555. K. Lin. 46 (2). H. 3 903 197. F. K. 76 (4). Clin. 34 (9). Br. 198. Bakran.. 1994. Influence of the antibiotics erythromycin and azithromycin on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of midazolam. Pharmacol. M. Olkkola.. 59 (5). Vanakoski. P..J. Kovarik. Eur. 46 (6).J. Pharmacol... 117–122.. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 1995. Chiba. Yasui..M. Clin.K. M. S. 38 (4). K. Luurila. T. Gorski. P. Zimmermann. Aranko. Antal. 298–305. Backman. Ther. J. Gupta.. T.J. Interaction between midazolam and clarithromycin in the elderly.L.T.T. E. Neuvonen. S..J. K. Clin.. Pharmacol..
Roe. 286–290. 218. 63 (4). Plasma buspirone concentrations are greatly increased by erythromycin and itraconazole. F. 422–426. Soejima.S. Vernillet. 217. 62 (3). 225. Pharmacol.. 221–226.. Y.N.. O. 224.P. 427–431. Spigset. L. Nosten. 120–123. J. S.. K. Pharmacol.. R.. T. 3 (5). Wing.J. Toxicol. Antimicrob.S. Lack of effect of spiramycin on cyclosporin pharmacokinetics. 86 (2). Pharmacol. S. 2003. 215–220. O. Polk. Pharmacol... R. 1988. Res. Effect of erythromycin on theophylline kinetics. 222. 103 (6).C. Chandra. C. 47 (6). 228.K.. De Martin.. C... S. Andersson. Pegoraro.E. Pharmacol.G. L.. 348–354. Leung. Karibo.M. 330–333. Maelankirri. The effects of erythromycin on theophylline elimination in normal males. Hung. N.Pharmaceutics 2011. O.H. Soc..G. Weinberger. Macrolide antibiotics and serum theophylline levels in relation to the severity of respiratory impairment: a comparison between the effects of erythromycin and josamycin.D. P. L. Lamberg. Ther. L.. Milne. Menge. Acta Neurol. D.. P. 2009. B.. Depression of theophylline elimination by erythromycin. 1993. Roxithromycin does not raise serum theophylline levels. 87 (3).. Neuvonen. J. K. Ellenburg.. J. Immunol. K. V. Kivisto. 68 (6). Hendeles. D. Jensen. 1992. White. 227.. Jolkkonen.J.. Eur. Lunell. Roberts. 26 (3). Gradoli. L.S. Olmer. Bartolucci. Pharmacol.J. E. J. 305–306.. Hashiguchi. R.. J. E. Granberg. 1981. Persbo-Lundqvist. T. Absence of interaction between oxcarbazepine and erythromycin. 1031–1035. Quintieri. J. Influence of a 3-day regimen of azithromycin on the disposition kinetics of cyclosporine A in stable renal transplant patients.. Agents Chemother.. Trop. J. Thakker. T.J. Allergy Clin. Keranen... Nation.. 549–554. Effect of combination therapy with ciprofloxacin and clarithromycin on theophylline pharmacokinetics in healthy volunteers. P. Spiramycin does not potentiate quinine treatment of falciparum malaria in pregnancy.. Nilsson. Palatini. 27 (6). Trans. 102 (2). Scott. Saint-Salvi. R.T.. Clin. L. Kantola. D.. F.. 1989. 40 (7). Bachmann.. Barradas. A. Hyg. .. Absence of interaction between erythromycin and a single dose of clozapine. 22 (2–3). Clin. Jauregui. R. Irreversible CYP3A inhibition accompanied by plasma protein-binding displacement: a comparative analysis in subjects with normal and impaired liver function. 789–794. J. P.J. 216. S. Clin.. Clin.W. Renton. 1996.. Spahn.. Climo.. G. Chemioterapia 1984. ter Kuile. 55 (3). Paulsen.Y.L. Y. J... Gillum. D. Sansom. Durand. E... Mjorndal.. Manuel. Gray. G. Ther. K. M. Inhibition of methylprednisolone elimination in the presence of clarithromycin therapy. 30 (3). Allergy Clin.E.. Bertault-Peres. 1999. C.S.. K. R. Martin. Med. 214.W. 653–654. K. Pharmacol. Riegelman. Clin.. Penna. Scand.R. L. 221..B. 1999.... Br. Lack of effect of erythromycin on the pharmacokinetics of single oral doses of phenytoin.. Br. J. M. 1997. Berland. 220. T. Szefler.W. Fost. Brown.A.. Israel. May. Clin. G. 219.A.. L. J. Coulthard. D. 1988. 1981. Orlando. 215. A. Thwai.L. D. P.D. Pharmacol. Chest 1992.. Ther.. M.. K. 1982. Dahlqvist. 125–130.. Vincenzi.C. Clin. J. R. Iapadre... 319–326. No effect of roxithromycin on pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic properties of warfarin and its enantiomers. Prince. R. 3 904 213. Hagg. 226. 1715–1716. R. K. R. 85 (3). P. C. Immunol. R. 223.T. Jarboe. M.. Pharmacol. Valori.. Niki..
I. Wright. Linakis.. 238. 38 (9).. Effect of repeated dose of erythromycin on the pharmacokinetics of roflumilast and roflumilast N-oxide.. W. Pharmacol. Evaluation of promotility agents to limit the gut bioavailability of extended-release acetaminophen. P... L. D.. Hermann. Moritoyo. Sci.. D. Chemother. 101–108. 231. Effect of telithromycin on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of oral oxycodone.L. N.B. Wilton. Abel. R.R. Hejmanowsk. Lahu.H. 1153–1157.. Brierton.C. Healy. G... H... 305–309. 47 (1). Zhou... Clin.O. J. Clin. M.. Lundahl. Thomsen. M. H.. K. Amsden. 239. P. Wiesinger. S. Martikainen. Bowman.A. Pesco-Koplowitz.. A. P. . J. Grover. Zech. 39 (1). A.. Liu.. M. Michalak. Nakatsuka.S. Laine. S.. Clendening. Amato. Shah. J. K. Nagai. A. 498–502..K. L. R. Vaughan. C. Hagelberg. Pharmacol. Mueller. Olkkola. B.. Agents Chemother.... R. Lack of effect of erythromycin and ketoconazole on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of steady-state intranasal levocabastine. Neuvonen. Fukuchi. 55 (4). 76 (6). M. Gregory. R. M. Glue. A. T.. Iga. H.A. 234. 47 (4). Clin. Saari. M. 49–54. Matsuse. B. P. L. P. 2007. Interference of dairy products with the absorption of ciprofloxacin. 241. Amsden. Agents Chemother. Effect of clarithromycin on the pharmacokinetics of cabergoline in healthy controls and in patients with Parkinson's disease.W. Toxicol. Smith. 461–466.. Brodbeck. Int. 100 (1).A.T.E. P. Lehto. 50 (1). Kawakami. Hoglund. C. Clin.. T. Antimicrob.P. Huennemeyer.Pharmaceutics 2011. J. 1999. Gronlund.W.. 1999. Herzog.. Eur. Ther.. Pharmacokinetics of azithromycin and the combination of ivermectin and albendazole when administered alone and concurrently in healthy volunteers. Am. J. T. J. 1994... 236–245. Clin. Clin. Kruse.. Bengtsson.. Travers. 2004. T. 43 (Suppl A). Orimo. L. 59–64. 38 (11). Effect of enteral feeding with ensure on oral bioavailabilities of ofloxacin and ciprofloxacin. Hall. 1994. C. Sawada. Antimicrob. 1996.. Victory. Trop. 2101–2105. 235. Agerso. T.. 42 (4).. The effect of food on the interaction of ofloxacin with sucralfate in healthy volunteers. Antimicrob. Groes. Ciprofloxacin absorption is impaired in patients given enteral feedings orally and via gastrostomy and jejunostomy tubes. 2006. C. H. 67–69.. Neuvonen. J.G. Pharmacol. Y. 230.. Med.G.T.. Clin. A. N. Changes in gastrointestinal motility influence the absorption of desmopressin. D. Yabe. 233.G.. 1051–1056. M.. Seino. 40 (1). Ther. Clin... 232. Eur. Y. J. 237. Nomura. J. Hyg. Hassell... 2002. Lee. H.Y. A. N. 3 905 229.S.. Mechlinski. 73–77. T. T. Toxicol. P.H. N. Moritoyo. Oral bioequivalence of three ciprofloxacin formulations following single-dose administration: 500 mg tablet compared with 500 mg/10 mL or 500 mg/5 mL suspension and the effect of food on the absorption of ciprofloxacin oral suspension. Pharmacol.. Nomoto. Hunt. J.M. J. 42 (1).. J. Pharmacol. G. 50 (5 Pt 1). K. Kotaki. Lack of bioequivalence of ciprofloxacin when administered with calcium-fortified orange juice: a new twist on an old interaction. J. Elmlinger.. 76–85. 236. J. Callreus. 1998. 240. K. G... 1991. R. 2010. Pharmacol. Nishikawa. Neuhofel.C. T. Knirsch. Wang... T.J.... J. McCracken.. T.. 242.. 6–10. J.J.. 2009. Kivisto. J. H. Pharmacol. Lack of pharmacokinetic interaction between tiagabine and erythromycin. 1999. Heller. Pharmacol.. Clin. Pharmacol.
Kivisto. 2003. 247. Hasinoff. H. Schuhly. J.. 37 (1). 44 (9). Moe. in healthy volunteers. 2003. J.. Altered steady state pharmacokinetics of levofloxacin in adult cystic fibrosis patients receiving calcium carbonate. 246.B.. 2001.W.W.W. Lehto. Thuss. Effect of calcium carbonate on bioavailability of orally administered gemifloxacin. S. ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin. Clin. H. Kubitza. Kara. J. 969–976.. Wallace.. A. Pharmacol. U.. B. R. Lehto. M. Ishida. 251. J. Kays. Amsden.M. 40 (Suppl 1). Moller. B. 56 (5).P. Pharmacokinet. T. Stass.M.W. Effects of dairy products on the oral bioavailability of moxifloxacin..T.F. Dix. Clin.. McKinnon. Hafkin. Am. Pharmacol. G. O. 1347–1352.R.A. Br.M. 40 (Suppl 1). G..R. Y. J. K. Kidney Dis.E.. J. Pharmacokinet. 249. Clin. Crit Care Med. 39 (12). Br. P. Effects of sevelamer hydrochloride and calcium acetate on the oral bioavailability of ciprofloxacin.. Kanji.M. Pharmacol.T.D. Clin. 5 (3). Ther. B.. Pletz.W. Overholser. 245. Lee. A. Clin.. 33–38. G. P.W. Barletta. Lack of bioequivalence of levofloxacin when coadministered with a mineral-fortified breakfast of juice and cereal. 1994.. 2003. 1994. 2001.. Mueller. Welte. 2003. Burkhardt. N. Ooie.. Antimicrob. D. J.. H. S. 2635–2640. Whitaker. 248. Kosuge.. Lack of bioequivalence of gatifloxacin when coadministered with calcium-fortified orange juice in healthy volunteers. Wallace. S. B. Pharmacol.. P. U. Victory. 3 906 243. G. Agents Chemother. K. 41 (10). 47 (7). T. 254. Kusajima. K.. J. .. Cyst.. Lee. 31 (5). 477–482. J. Clin. Petzold. Uchida.. 253. 257. Uematsu.. 539–544. Effects of sucralfate on the oral bioavailability of moxifloxacin. 43 (5). Fibros. 2196–2200. Nakashima.. in humans.. Amsden.. J. Kruse. Clin. Johnson. 1991. 43 (9).S.J. P.. Hoh. J. Antimicrob. The effect of ferrous sulphate on the absorption of norfloxacin. L. 1997. Clinical and chemical interactions between iron preparations and ciprofloxacin. H. A.. Burkhardt. Campbell. Different effects of products containing metal ions on the absorption of lomefloxacin. Pharmacokinet. D. a new 6-fluoro-8-methoxy quinolone.. Borner. 92–96.W. 255. a novel 8-methoxyfluoroquinolone. Allen. 1253–1259. A. Clin. R. Delesen. Pharmacol. 256. J.A. McKay. K. T.G. 1995... Antimicrob. 250.W. 252. in healthy volunteers. M. O. Agents Chemother. Single. Clin. M. Allen. J. 2005.. Pai.. Stass. 2158–2160.Pharmaceutics 2011. J. Amsden.B.. Lode. 244. H.. I. Stass. 31 (3). Agents Chemother. 49–55. a novel 8-methoxyfluoroquinolone. 990–995... 42 (6). 2003. 2006.. Masuda. Effects of food and sucralfate on a single oral dose of 500 milligrams of levofloxacin in healthy subjects. Kivisto. Neuvonen..M. Bioavailability of gatifloxacin by gastric tube administration with and without concomitant enteral feeding in critically ill patients. Lack of bioequivalence when levofloxacin and calcium-fortified orange juice are coadministered to healthy volunteers.W. H.. M. Victory.and multiple-dose pharmacokinetics of AM-1155.W. 153–157. M. Amsden.. P..J.. H. 43 (1). 82–85. Sowinski. 2003. 257–261. Devlin. Effects of enteral feeding on the oral bioavailability of moxifloxacin in healthy volunteers.. P. K. Pharmacol.
Fishman. Interaction study of lomefloxacin and ciprofloxacin with omeprazole and comparative pharmacokinetics. H. M... D. D. Lener. H. Evaluation of the influence of antacids and H2 antagonists on the absorption of moxifloxacin after oral administration of a 400 mg dose to healthy volunteers.A. G. .. Antimicrob.. J. 1990. F. 25 (6). 269. Van Slooten. Am. M. 265. P. M.L.. H. H. Antimicrob. Stass. K.. Nix.C. Frost.O. 1994. Effects of lanthanum carbonate on the absorption and oral bioavailability of ciprofloxacin.D.. K. Lettieri. Antimicrob. Lode. 261. 39 (5). 43 (5). C. N.H.. J. 700–705.. Davies. 40 (Suppl 1). Effect of bismuth subsalicylate on ciprofloxacin bioavailability. 2006. P. Arruda. Watson.F.H. Ther.T... Kivisto. Maesen. J.. How. 259. C. J.. S. M. Antimicrob. Goldstein. 377–380. Geraedts. Rau. 34 (5). Oral absorption of ofloxacin administered together with aluminum. J. Pharmacokinet. 270. Moller. D.. Agents Chemother.D. 2 (6). 63 (7).. 848–850. 2187–2190... 262. Antimicrob. Agents Chemother. Stass. Ziege.. Agents Chemother. Sumajow. Goldstein.E. Pharm. W. 1999. C. Pharmacol.A. Ofloxacin and antacids. Bottcher. Effect of omeprazole on bioavailability of an oral extended-release formulation of ciprofloxacin.H. 248–251. Clin..E.. Lober.. Krol. Koeppe.A. 3 907 258. Rost. M.. Garrelts. 327–330.. N. 578–582. Quain.. Garber. 1235–1240. A. Martinez Cabarga.C.. R.G. B.P. A.. Pharmacotherapy 1989.. J. 271. Koeppe. Watson.W..H. C. Am. 27–32. 38 (9). 1994. G. 40 (Suppl 1). E. L. Sucralfate significantly reduces ciprofloxacin concentrations in serum. P.. 2001. Schreiber. Effect of calcium supplements on the oral bioavailability of moxifloxacin in healthy male volunteers.J. Schentag.. 39–48. H. Lehto. Agents Chemother. 1995. E..A.E. Nix. Sanchez Navarro. Goldstein. Gallicano.. Schaberg. Lode. Peterie. 267... L. J. 931–933. Soc. K.R. Love.E. Spivey. Rescott. 264.. J. Oliveras.R. K. Godley... A. H. W... 1987. H.P. 19 (6).. P. Gerlach. P. 653–656. Ochmann. Hughes.... A.. Pharmacokinet. Agents Chemother. J.D. 2510–2512. Weiner. J. Clin...G. Yakshe. Int. L.. J. Clin. Washington.D. 38 (2). Antimicrob. Barton. Handy. 2007. G.. H. 1045–1049.W. Sahai. Nephrol. 46 (6). Lautenbach. J. Rambout. 263. Clin. Agents Chemother. Agents 2005. Coadministration of oral levofloxacin with agents that impair its absorption: potential impact on emergence of resistance. J... Mignot.. 272. Delesen. Pharmacokinetics of gatifloxacin and interaction with an antacid containing aluminum and magnesium.. Hou. H.I. R. The effect of sucralfate pretreatment on the pharmacokinetics of ciprofloxacin.J. W. J. 26 (4). Antimicrob. J. 266. Chemother. Berner. S. DICP 1991.Pharmaceutics 2011. 9 (6). B. Wandel. Nix.M. 2001. Antimicrob. Combined use of ciprofloxacin and sucralfate.H. Lau. Stuht. 268. Dominguez-Gil Hurle. D. Effect of sucralfate on absorption of norfloxacin and ofloxacin. R. 38 (10). Fischer.H. E. Wilton.. T. A. Effects of aluminum and magnesium antacids and ranitidine on the absorption of ciprofloxacin. 260.L. Health Syst. 1067–1071. 1994. T.. 1989.. Frost..
1993. I. Pharmacokinetic interaction of sparfloxacin and digoxin. O. 21 (2). 292–297. Khaliq. Beer. 286.L. N.U. Clin. Landersdorfer.. J. Am. Knupp...H. encapsulated enteric-coated beads and buffered tablet. Kirkpatrick.A.. Vousden... 53 (9). Drug Dispos. Kitteringham. Hawley-Foss. Okwoli. Talbot. K. G.T.H. B. 651–656. O. 2006.. 26 (6). W. W. Competitive inhibition of renal tubular secretion of gemifloxacin by probenecid. T. Antimicrob. C. Ehren. A. 432–435. Marcelin-Jimenez. 2006. Ther. Pharmacol. Chien.E. A..E. Jaehde.... 7–12. 282. 35 (6).. A. C. Competitive inhibition of renal tubular secretion of ciprofloxacin and metabolite by probenecid.C. N.R. Heaf. Cations in the didanosine tablet reduce ciprofloxacin bioavailability.. Effect of chloroquine on the urinary excretion of ciprofloxacin. N. Ilo. Lindenbaum. A multiple-dose pharmacokinetic interaction study between didanosine (Videx) and ciprofloxacin (Cipro) in male subjects seropositive for HIV but asymptomatic. 3902–3907. Ilo. 791–797. Chow. K.. Clin. Ciprofloxacin bioavailability is enhanced by oral co-administration with phenazopyridine: a pharmacokinetic study in a Mexican population. Chemotherapy 1999..B.. Sorgel. C. Dorr. Clin. 285. Williams. Absence of a pharmacokinetic interaction between digoxin and levofloxacin.D. Bioequivalence of two formulations of didanosine. 58 (5). J. Kirkpatrick. A. Shah..B.C. Lewis. F. D. Pharmacol. 283.. Inactivation of digoxin by the gut flora: reversal by antibiotic therapy. Staib.. Ther. C.B. G. . A. Hunt. 69 (2).C. Tse-Eng.. F. S.M. 368–379.. J.. D.. 4-quinolones inhibit biotransformation of caffeine. J.. Conway. Barbhaiya. Kinzig. 532–541. R. Clin.. Naber.P. 2002. 65–77. Effect of probenecid on the distribution and elimination of ciprofloxacin in humans. Am.. Elo-Ilo. J. Med.C.. A. 3 908 273. Ther. 1997. in healthy volunteers and HIV-infected subjects. G. Naber. Maduagwuna.. 485–490.. Sorgel. Drusano. K. R. 27 (1)... Natarajan. 287. Gallicano.... G.A. 277. U. Orisakwe.E. T. Pharmacol.L. Ther. Kaul.. Rund. Angeles. F. Eur. Martinez-Rossier. Brown. Bulitta. 573–576. S. J. C. 279.. Sorgel. Preston. S. 53 (3). J. 1988. Parker.A. Clin..... Jr. Clin. U.. Agbakoba. 1999.. Saha. Knupp.. Rodamer. J. Engl. Effect of chloroquine on the bioavailability of ciprofloxacin in humans. M. 2008. 789–794. 42 (7). 1994. 167–178. Br.. Schunack. 323–328. Kinzig.G.G. S. S. F..M. Fernandez. L. S. 45 (6).. C. Agbasi. Ther. Oliveras. A. J.. Johnson. U. 419–422.M.. 305 (14). Ilondu. S. Bulitta. Sigl.R. J.. Reiter. M. J.A. M.H. 18 (1).. 2009. Clin. L.R. V. M. Sahai. 2002..A. C. 1995. Pharmacol. Papenburg.G.A.P. 284.. M. Ezejiofor. 13 (5). M.B. Harder. 2010. R. Pharmacol... Pharmacol. C. 275. J. 281. 280. P. G. Pharm. Biopharm.A.. Behr. 276.. Butler.. N. Garber. 278. 15 (5).B.Pharmaceutics 2011. Lack of pharmacokinetic interaction between gemifloxacin and digoxin in healthy elderly volunteers. P. Brown. C... Drug Investig.. Damle. 1981. Ther. Agbasi. U. Choonara. Landersdorfer. Holzgrabe. Inhibition of caffeine metabolism by ciprofloxacin in children with cystic fibrosis as measured by the caffeine breath test. A.D... P. J.U. Agents Chemother.. C.E. Orisakwe. J. S. Wong. Jaehde.. J. N. A. Clin. Allen.. N. Br. Clin. Stille. N. N. Rogge. Reiter.. D.. D.. 274. 38 (6).. Holzgrabe..
Effects of temafloxacin and ciprofloxacin on the pharmacokinetics of caffeine. Dusci. D.. S. T.. Kounas. Lack of pharmacokinetic interaction between moxifloxacin. B. K. J.Pharmaceutics 2011.J.W. D. Bramer. F. P. 294. Pharmacol.. Clin. 40 (Suppl 1). C. Vestal. 2001. R. R. D. C. Frampton. C. Ciprofloxacin increases serum clozapine and N-desmethylclozapine: a study in patients with schizophrenia. 291. Antimicrob. Vestal. N. ofloxacin and norfloxacin on theophylline disposition in humans. Exp. Eur. J. T. Vassos. Batty.L. B. M. Stass. L. Nickel. a new quinolone antibacterial.J. J. Clin.. Ilett.. Br. M. I.E. Granneman. Pharmacokinet...J. 39 (3). 301. Stotka.. 3 909 288. Aging and drug interactions. F.. J. Sorgel. K. 585–589.R. 295.. K. Individual and combined effects of cimetidine and ciprofloxacin on theophylline metabolism in male nonsmokers. Stephan. R..T.W.M. S. Begg... Davis. 1999.. J.. Suspected ciprofloxacin inhibition of olanzapine resulting in increased plasma concentration. J... Pharmacother. B. Clin.. Druginduced QT interval prolongation after ciprofloxacin administration in a patient receiving olanzapine. 1988. Int. 273–274. M. Influence of gatifloxacin. J.. Cusack.. Br. Efthymiopoulos.. Schoenle. Clin. Hashiguchi.E. 29 (4). Bron. 1991. Parker. Rausch.J. Effect of the addition of ciprofloxacin on theophylline pharmacokinetics in subjects inhibited by cimetidine... P. Drug interactions with clinafloxacin. Comparative effects of ciprofloxacin and lomefloxacin on the oxidative metabolism of theophylline. Patterson..J. 302. B. R. M. A. Blum. 1992. N.. A. H. 298. 290. C. Agents Chemother.. 305–311. Clin. J. 627–637.P. Pharmacol. Kawakatsu. Antimicrob. Ther. Mahr.. DeVane. 35 (4).J.R. on pharmacokinetics of theophylline. S. Theophylline and warfarin interaction studies with grepafloxacin. and theophylline. C. A. 26 (1).R.S. Chemother... 491–493. Alvey. The effect of ciprofloxacin on theophylline pharmacokinetics in healthy subjects. Cardiol. Effects of enoxacin.... Br. 161–165. Pharmacokinet. R. Hounslow. Sano. 2001. Clin. 1999. Sedman..P.. Miyashita. U. 1997. Quenzer. 22 (Suppl 1). Pharmacol.. Matsushima. Pharmacol.. U. 289–291. P. C... 2000. J. Davis. Pharmacokinet. 45 (9). Loi. G. 1997.. M. Agents Chemother. 11–13. 1995. Powell. G.. 1993. E.J. Ohkita. G. Muth.M. Nakajima. Yamashina... Polk. H. 36 (3). Clin. J. Niki.F. Individual and combined effects of cimetidine and cimetidine and ciprofloxacin on theophylline metabolism in healthy male and female nonsmokers. 2543–2552. 5 (3). M. Goto. B. Randinitis. 156–162. P. III.. 33 (Suppl 1).C. 35 (2).M..P. Parker.. Pharmacol..M. J.M. K. K. 1992. 1990. Abel. N. Saunders.J....W. Eur. . R. Letsas. 293. Markowitz. R. Infect. J. 660–664. Pharmacol. 299. C. Y.. Koup. 63–70. Atkinson.. a novel 8-methoxyfluoroquinolone. 289. Kinzig. Ann. 56 (8).L. 19 (3). Fuhr. Raaska. 300. Kardaras.A. A. Neuvonen. 109 (2).B.J. 296. Cusack. 297. Clin.M. 280 (2).R.. H..L. Langton. Loi.. Healy. Clin. 292.R.A. Takeyama. K.. Efremidis.. E. J. K. J. H. 90–97. Yamamoto. Kelly.. Psychopharmacol. 39–46. Kubitza. Lack of interaction between lomefloxacin and caffeine in normal volunteers. Sideris. 2006. Korantzopoulos. Robson. Maroli. 195–200.
D. J. Clin.A. Nayak. 795–799. V. P. Spillane. 598–606. 478–484. Ann. L. Anaesthesiol. Agbasi.. Eur. V. Neuvonen. Hypoglycemia associated with the use of levofloxacin....219) on the pharmacokinetics of theophylline in healthy men. O. Basile. G.M.J. 312. K. Clin. Lancet 2000..I.. 2069–2070. Doose. T. M.. Effect of a new quinolone. 638–639. C. Allen. P. Dickens. Olkkola.E. J. C.. Garber. K. Toxicol. S.M. Garrison. E... Pharmacol. 2062–2064. Bauer.. Segerdahl. P. S. 305. Ther. 28 (2). 2004. ciprofloxacin. 310. L.T..K. 76 (6). Emerg. 45 (6). Serotonin syndrome in a chronic-pain patient receiving concurrent methadone. Fuder. . 317. R. Bird. Goforth. Roberge. Patel. 311. Tan...U... 2010. R. Neuvonen. Lee. 58 (10).. 42 (3). J. K. J. 2005. O.Pharmaceutics 2011. S. 2000. P. ciprofloxacin. L. Kadilli.J. J. 2003. Ahonen.. Br. 304. J.K.. Hooton.K. Takagi. 2004. 308. S.... 319. Raisys. G. 313. Kuzuya. Phase I pilot study of the effects of trovafloxacin (CP-99. M. Lill. and venlafaxine.. 309. D. Wermeling. Federico. 1014–1019. Kalso. Pharmacol. Neuvonen. Pound. Med. J. Granfors. 38 (1).. Antimicrob.P. Tarantino. on the pharmacokinetics of theophylline in asthmatic patients.. K. 653–657.. Jokinen. Black. 307. 306. Frank. Neuvonen. E.W. Carrano. Trull. D. Ther. Herrlin... D. K. Chemotherapy 1999. 314. Backman.H. Am. Health Syst. R. 103 (12). K. N. 1649–1651.. Lin. Starer. M.. M.. Gustafsson.. L.. M. Davy. Nair. Addiction 2008. M. Orisakwe. Sabbatini. Clin. J. 576–580. Lack of effect of gemifloxacin on the steady-state pharmacokinetics of theophylline in healthy volunteers. 2009. 1997. I.R. Psychosomatics 2009. M..R.M. 3 910 303.. 295–297. Pharmacol... Afonne. 315. Capone. Effect of ciprofloxacin on the pharmacokinetics of ropivacaine.. 356 (9247). 50 (6). 36 (2). 316.T. Ahonen. Miller. Polichetti.. Effect of ciprofloxin on the pharmacokinetics of intravenous lidocaine. J.. 66 (11).. Nappi.S. Hays. G. R. Clin.J. Clin. G. H.. Levofloxacin and ciprofloxacin decrease procainamide and N-acetylprocainamide renal clearances. Ciprofloxacin-induced torsades de pointes in a methadonedependent patient.T.. Olkkola. A. Obi. T. 1991. 318. 90–93. Agents Chemother. Chien.W. Pharmacol. S.. 160–163. Clin.K.. Pharm. Isohanni. D. Toxicol.A. K. Orish. Kaplan. J. Agents Chemother. J. 50 (5).L. Clin. S. Hasegawa. J. Walker. H. Rost. Refractory hypoglycemia from ciprofloxacin and glyburide interaction. P.J.J. Ciprofloxacin greatly increases concentrations and hypotensive effect of tizanidine by inhibiting its cytochrome P450 1A2mediated presystemic metabolism. Absence of pharmacokinetic interference of moxifloxacin on cyclosporine and tacrolimus in kidney transplant recipients. 8 (3). R. 49 (4).. 151–153.. 37 (3). Fore. M.J.T.L. Nadai.. Yamaki. J.J. T. M. Rifampicin pharmacokinetics with and without ciprofloxacin... R. M.. 1989. Eur. 2005. 35 (6).. 185–187. Shawket. 1998. Williams. Am. J. Levofloxacin does not alter cyclosporine disposition. Antimicrob... 248–252.N. J.C.J. 22 (10).R. sparfloxacin. 2001.. 1137–1141.A. and adverse drug reactions. K.. Glyburide-ciprofloxacin interaction with resistant hypoglycemia. Vincent. A.. Franz. S. Co-administration of ciprofloxacin and cyclosporin: lack of evidence for a pharmacokinetic interaction. J. Methadone. Pharmacol. R. Ofoefule. Pharmacol.
. Kishore... Eriksson. M. Lang.W. Evidence of an interaction between nifedipine and nafcillin in humans.M. 1993. L. J. 491–495. Fam.. M. 330.. K. 2003. 2007. 1994...C. 118 (2). Eur. Clin. Torres. C. M.C. Pharmacother. S. Ann. Pharmacother. 1979. Dorani. 329. P. 37 (5). N. Warfarin and amoxicillin/clavulanate drug interaction. Pharmacol. F. Intern. 334. Kelly. Wernly.C. T. 327. A. 323... J. Br.L.. Ann. Verstuyft.. Chemother. 2006. D. Davis. 15 (5). U. L. 90 (4). Granero.. Mohamed.. A. Mouly.P.. Jr. Mustafa. Antimicrob.. Lee. A. 2011. R. R. 903–906. Eur. 24 (4). Heilker.. Alsar. Pehourcq.P. Br. 326. Verduga. Dillon. Soto.. P.M. Drouet. T. J. 66 (6). Sarich. W. Self. Med. J.. Kelly. F. Gilpin. 1991.J.D. A. Hannon.A... 322.C. 27 (7–8). Warfarin-flucloxacillin interaction presenting as cardioembolic ischemic stroke... Hernandez. Jonas. Zhang.L. Raina. S.. Jr. Ariano.C.O. R. 1993. T. Pharmacokinetic interaction between high-dose methotrexate and oxacillin. M.V. L. A. Misra. J.. N. Pritchard. Garton. 1993. G.. Simoneau. Moore... Ronchera. 232–236. Ann. J. Molimard. Schutzer.. 336. Ann.. Rennie. Wise. C.. .R. 228–230.. Chemother. Pharmacol. C. Clin. Continuation of warfarinnafcillin interaction during dicloxacillin therapy.. Clin. Probenecid: an unexplained effect on cephalosporin pharmacology. Bergmann. Ther..L.M. Jamal. Drug Monit.K. Clin. Jimenez. 367–370. Welling. Pharmacokinetic interaction between high-dose methotrexate and amoxycillin. Jr. Comparison of dose doubling with probenecid for sustaining serum cefuroxime levels. Sacristan.F. 621–624.. Arch. Bal dit Sollier. Taylor.. 328.G. L.. M.... J. R. 40 (6). Ther.J. 39 (2). 1374–1375.. 154 (7). Garg. Lagrange. 331. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the oral direct thrombin inhibitor ximelagatran co-administered with different classes of antibiotics in healthy volunteers. U. J. Berman. E. 71 (2)...... 2010. M. Pract.. T..C. Q. 2003.. RizzoPadoin.. Drug Monit. 8 (5). H. J.H. Spina. Antimicrob. Pharmacol. 182–185. 3 911 320. 335.. Br. Fowler. K.. Alvarez. Pharmacol. C.A. 324. Mustafa. N. S. Clin. 375–379. Acute verapamil toxicity in a patient with chronic toxicity: possible interaction with ceftriaxone and clindamycin. J. 63 (6). A. 588–590. K. Possible nafcillin-warfarin interaction. 43 (7). R. S. Fletcher. 1994. Pediatr. J... Wall.W. J. M. L.Pharmaceutics 2011. 333. Amoxicillin/clavulanic acid-warfarin drug interaction: a randomized controlled trial. 332.M.. Kendall.. Pla.. S. N. Fernandez-Viadero. J. Wlodarczyk. Bow. 1997. Acta Haematol. Pharmacol. Logren. F. Selen. 37 (3).. 2002. 643–644.. 321. Jr..J. Titier. Pharmacother. Effect of chronic probenecid therapy on cefazolin serum concentrations. J. Peris. 325.M. Merwick... C. R. Warfarin-nafcillin interaction. 570–572. V. U. 55 (6). J. Becquemont. E.E. A. J. K. J. K. A. 877–880. Zarychanski.. E.. 300–303.. Davydov.J. Yermolnik.. Marrelli. H. Mohammed. J. O'Rourke.G. 2009. Z.T. 58 (1). Decreased INR response secondary to warfarin-flucloxacillin interaction. Shafran. 822–824.. L. Cuni. 571–581. J. 2003. Pharmacother. 195–197. Probable acenocoumarol-amoxycillin interaction. Pharmacokinetic interaction between methotrexate and piperacillin/tazobactam resulting in prolonged toxic concentrations of methotrexate. G. Dean.. Ohlsson. Goldstein.
D.. Phenytoin-oxacillin interactions in normal and uremic sera. H. 393–396. Spapen. P. 348. J. Med.. Fudio. B. Inhibition of flucloxacillin tubular renal secretion by piperacillin. Konishi. Chemother. H. Effect of concomitant administration of piperacillin on the dispositions of netilmicin and tobramycin in patients with end-stage renal disease..R. Serotonin syndrome after single doses of co-amoxiclav during treatment with venlafaxine. L. E. Matzke. 42 (4). R.. Navarro-Ruiz. Sperelakis. 2007. 2003. J. 1991. Pharmacol. Antimicrob.. 45 (5). Am.. J. Casteels. Wilmer. 20 (5). Huyghens. M. J. Antimicrob. J. Palacios-Ortega.I.J..B. Yamashina. and piperacillin. 351.A.Y. G. Clin. Coves-Orts. 31 (4). 653–657. Portier.. I.P.. Child Neurol.. Interaction between cephalosporins and alcohol. Barriere. F. Rodondi. Kinzig. Ann..E.A. Atkin-Thor. A. 17 (2).. F. R. 39 (3). Willems. Goto.B. Gajwani. Pinana. C. Mason. 338. S. 19 (5). R. J. A. 375–378. Camu. K. E. J.. 1990. P. A.. Gentamicin inactivation by piperacillin or carbenicillin in patients with end-stage renal disease. 2005. Dean. 2 (8188). H. Antimicrob. Ther.W... 54–58. 2005. Epileptic seizures caused by low valproic acid levels from an interaction with meropenem. Vanbinst.. Pharmacol.Pharmaceutics 2011.M. Pediatr. 342. Clin. Lowering of plasma valproic acid concentrations during concomitant therapy with meropenem and amikacin. 347. Pharmacokinetic interaction between valproic acid and meropenem.. U. M. Acute seizures due to a probable interaction between valproic acid and meropenem. M. 233–234. H. 23 (5). 1293–1294.. A. Holzgrabe.. W.. 232–234. 268–273. R. Hypotension associated with intravenous haloperidol and imipenem..J. A. J.. 263. 66 (5).F. Kirkpatrick.. Agents Chemother. Hirata. Psychopharmacol. Dasgupta.J..G. J.L. M. 1982... M. Nacarkucuk. Y. Allen.D. Halstenson. Tanter. 1998. 2008. 344. A. 128–133. 31 (3). Riva. 480–481. Pharmacother. H.. De Turck. Semel. C. A. Abraham. 1999.. 533–537.. Russo.E. M. 465–468. 563–564. R. 1989. Meropenemvalproic acid interaction in patients with cefepime-associated status epilepticus. J. Okan... 352. L. Yamamoto. Br. . L. Chalopin. 2004. 340.C.L. 527–534. C. M. E. Pharm. P. P.J.. Connor.. Intensive Care Med. Health Syst. Flaherty. 96 (5). Schoenfeld. Soyer. Soc.. De Troy. F.M. Nakamoto. 346. Clause. Spriet. V. Ortega. 64 (1). Agents Chemother... E. Meersseman. 456–457. Cornelis. 21 (2). P. 341. I. Seizure worsening caused by decreased serum valproate during meropenem therapy. N. Freysz.. H. Matsen. Borras-Blasco. Parmeggiani. Clin. Agents Chemother. D. 339. J. Pharmacotherapy 1997. Hantson..M. ticarcillin.. B. Thompson. Maes. P. Saxon. Influence of coadministration on the pharmacokinetics of mezlocillin and cefotaxime in healthy volunteers and in patients with renal failure.. Lancet 1980. J. Seizures in patients simultaneously receiving theophylline and imipenem or ciprofloxacin or metronidazole. 353. Antimicrob. Clin.. Med. 31 (9).. A. Gambertoglio.. 2006. Franco-Bronson. 345. 349. 3 912 337. K.. Diltoer. South. Murcia-Lopez. Y. J. Santucci. Neurol.. Bulitta... Decleire. 648–659. A. Sorgel. S. 34 (1).. 350.. J. J.. 2005.. M. 84 (4). M. 1983. Pharm. Landersdorfer.. Carcas. F.. Ther.. Meropenem decreases serum level of valproic acid. Saglam. C. 343. Tobramycin inactivation by carbenicillin. Heim-Duthoy.
Agents Chemother.Pharmaceutics 2011. © 2011 by the authors. Switzerland. 1999. M. In Stockley's Drug Interactions. Altered pharmacokinetics of ceftazidime in critically ill patients. Effect of cephalexin on the pharmacokinetics of metformin in healthy human volunteers. 43 (7). Cordingly. HIV. Differences in the pharmacokinetics of protease inhibitors between healthy volunteers and HIV-infected persons. C. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license (http://creativecommons. 296–305..M. Madhusudan Rao. K. 1–14. Madhusudan Rao. Gomez. 357. C. . General Considerations and an outline survey of some basic interaction mechanisms. I. 2002. Y. 6th ed.0/). Palazzo. 355. D... 3 913 354.. Antimicrob. Stockley. Khoo. Back. licensee MDPI. Chandrasekhar. J. Dickinson.. Jayasagar.. 19 (1).G.. Krishna Kumar. Ed. M. AIDS 2008. 356... G. S. 3 (3). UK. L..J. Pharmaceutical Press: London. Drug Interact. 41–48.. Opin. 2011. Basel. Curr. 1798–1802.org/licenses/by/3. Drug Metabol. pp.
Copyright of Pharmaceutics is the property of MDPI Publishing and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. . users may print. or email articles for individual use. download. However.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.