4.7 Article

Genetic Variation in CYP2D6 and SLC22A1 Affects Amlodipine Pharmacokinetics and Safety

期刊

PHARMACEUTICS
卷 15, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/pharmaceutics15020404

关键词

pharmacogenetics; amlodipine

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigated the associations between amlodipine pharmacokinetics and safety and pharmacogenes. Results showed a strong relationship between amlodipine and the CYP2D6 and SLC22A1 genes. Further research is needed before its application in clinical practice.
Amlodipine is an antihypertensive drug with unknown pharmacogenetic biomarkers. This research is a candidate gene study that looked for associations between amlodipine pharmacokinetics and safety and pharmacogenes. Pharmacokinetic and safety data were taken from 160 volunteers from eight bioequivalence trials. In the exploratory step, 70 volunteers were genotyped for 44 polymorphisms in different pharmacogenes. CYP2D6 poor metabolizers (PMs) showed higher half-life (t(1/2)) (univariate p-value (p(uv)) = 0.039, multivariate p-value (p(mv)) = 0.013, beta = -5.31, R-2 = 0.176) compared to ultrarapid (UMs), normal (NMs) and intermediate metabolizers (IMs). SLC22A1 rs34059508 G/A genotype was associated with higher dose/weight-corrected area under the curve (AUC(72)/DW) (p(uv) = 0.025; p(mv) = 0.026, beta = 578.90, R-2 = 0.060) compared to the G/G genotype. In the confirmatory step, the cohort was increased to 160 volunteers, who were genotyped for CYP2D6, SLC22A1 and CYP3A4. In addition to the previous associations, CYP2D6 UMs showed a lower AUC(72)/DW (p(uv) = 0.046, p(mv) = 0.049, beta = -68.80, R-2 = 0.073) compared to NMs, IMs and PMs and the SLC22A1 rs34059508 G/A genotype was associated with thoracic pain (p(uv) = 0.038) and dizziness (p(uv) = 0.038, p(mv) = 0.014, log OR = 10.975). To our knowledge, this is the first work to report a strong relationship between amlodipine and CYP2D6 and SLC22A1. Further research is needed to gather more evidence before its application in clinical practice.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据