Caffeine is a widely recognized psychostimulant compound with a long history of consumption by humans. While it has received a significant amount of attention there is still much to be learned with respect to its toxicology in humans, especially in cases of overdose. A review of the history of consumption and the clinical toxicology of caffeine including clinical features, pharmacokinetics, toxicokinetics, a thorough examination of mechanism of action and management/treatment strategies are undertaken. While higher (i.e., several grams) quantities of caffeine are known to cause toxicity and potentially lethality, cases of mainly younger individuals who have experienced severe side effects and death despite consuming doses not otherwise known to cause such harm is troubling and deserves further study. An attempted case reconstruction is performed in an effort to shed light on this issue with a focus on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of caffeine.

Herbal or botanical dietary supplements are an ever increasingly popular category of products in the United States and around the world. In vitro data can provide meaningful insight into the potential target and mechanism of action for a proposed active compound but may also be misused to promote a supplement to consumers with unverified health claims. In vitro data need to be considered alongside pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic data in preclinical animal and clinical human trials. While considerable activity of compounds and extracts in vitro may lead to further testing in vivo, in many instances, concentrations tested in cell lines or isolated targets are not achievable at the target site in vivo. Thus, whether the in vitro data are relevant to humans after oral administration is questionable. This review will discuss this discrepancy using in vitro and in vivo data of resveratrol, xanthones (α-mangostin and γ-mangostin) and xanthohumol.

Sympathomimetic amine compounds are often pooled together and incorrectly assumed to be interchangeable with respect to potential adverse effects. A brief and specific review of sympathomimetic compounds and one instance (i.e., hepatotoxicity) where these compounds have been improperly grouped together is covered. A review of the proposed mechanisms through which known hepatotoxic sympathomimetic agents (e.g., 3,4-methylenedioxymethamphetamine or MDMA, methamphetamine and amphetamine) cause liver injury, along with a corresponding review of in vitro data, interventional data, animal model studies and observational data allow for a comparison/contrast of different agents and reveals a lack of potential toxicity for some agents (e.g., pseudoephedrine, phenylephrine, ephedrine, 1,3-dimethylamylamine, phentermine) in this broad category. Data show that compounds within the broad group of sympathomimetics display divergent pharmacological and toxicological profiles and can be clearly distinguished with respect to liver injury. These data serve as a reminder to clinicians and others, that even small structural differences between molecules can lead to drastically different pharmacological/toxicological profiles and that one should not assume that all sympathomimetic agents are hepatotoxic. Such assumptions could lead to diagnostic errors and incorrect or insufficient treatment.

Papukashvili et al [...]

No abstract