Background and Objective The impact of liver cirrhosis on the activity of UDP-glucuronosyltransferases (UGTs) is currently not well characterized. We investigated the glucuronidation capacity and glucuronide accumulation in patients with liver cirrhosis. Methods We administered the Basel phenotyping cocktail (caffeine, efavirenz, flurbiprofen, omeprazole, metoprolol, midazolam) to patients with liver cirrhosis ( n = 16 Child A, n = 15 Child B, n = 5 Child C) and n = 12 control subjects and obtained pharmacokinetic profiles of substrates and primary metabolites and their glucuronides. Results Caffeine and its metabolite paraxanthine were only slightly glucuronidated. The metabolic ratio (AUC glucuronide /AUC parent , MR) was not affected for caffeine but decreased by 60% for paraxanthine glucuronide formation in Child C patients. Efavirenz was not glucuronidated whereas 8-hydroxyefavirenz was efficiently glucuronidated. The MR of 8-hydroxyefavirenz-glucuronide formation increased three-fold in Child C patients and was negatively correlated with the glomerular filtration rate. Flurbiprofen and omeprazole were not glucuronidated. 4-Hydroxyflurbiprofen and 5-hydroxyomeprazole were both glucuronidated but the corresponding MRs for glucuronide formation were not affected by liver cirrhosis. Metoprolol, but not α-hydroxymetoprolol, was glucuronidated, and the MR for metoprolol-glucuronide formation dropped by 60% in Child C patients. Both midazolam and its metabolite 1′-hydroxymidazolam underwent glucuronidation, and the corresponding MRs for glucuronide formation dropped by approximately 80% in Child C patients. No relevant glucuronide accumulation occurred in patients with liver cirrhosis. Conclusions Detailed analysis revealed that liver cirrhosis may affect the activity of UGTs of the UGT1A and UGT2B subfamilies according to liver function. Clinically significant glucuronide accumulation did not occur in the population investigated. Clinical Trial Registration NCT03337945. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40262-023-01261-3.
Failure to perform adequate dose adjustment in patients with liver cirrhosis may be associated with increased toxicity. We compared the prediction of area under the curve (AUC) and clearance for the six compounds of the Basel phenotyping cocktail (caffeine, efavirenz, flurbiprofen, omeprazole, metoprolol, and midazolam) using a well‐known physiology‐based pharmacokinetic approach (physiologically‐based pharmacokinetic [PBPK] approach, Simcyp) and a novel top‐down method based on the systemic clearance in healthy volunteers adjusted for markers of liver and renal dysfunction (“top‐down approach”). With few exceptions, plasma concentration‐time curves were accurately predicted by the PBPK approach. In comparison to the measured AUC and clearance of these drugs in patients with liver cirrhosis and healthy controls, except for efavirenz, the estimates of both approaches were within two standard deviations of the mean for total and free drug concentrations. For both approaches, a correction factor for dose adjustment in patients with liver cirrhosis could be calculated for the drugs administered. AUCs calculated using the adjusted doses were comparable to the AUCs measured in control subjects, with slightly more accurate predictions generated by the PBPK approach. For drugs with a free fraction < 50%, predictions using free drug concentrations were more accurate than with total drug concentrations. In conclusion, both methods provided good qualitative predictions of the changes by liver cirrhosis in the pharmacokinetics of the six compounds investigated. The top‐down approach is easier to implement but the PBPK approach predicted changes in drug exposure more accurately than the top‐down approach and provided reliable estimates for plasma concentrations.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.