A. Hemeryck et al., Metoprolol-paroxetine interaction in human liver microsomes: Stereoselective aspects and prediction of the in vivo interaction, DRUG META D, 29(5), 2001, pp. 656-663
This study in human liver microsomes was undertaken to establish whether pa
roxetine stereoselectively inhibits the oxidative metabolism of metoprolol
in vitro, and whether the in vivo observed magnitude of the paroxetine-meto
prolol interaction was predictable from these in vitro data. Two distinct a
pproaches were used: inhibitory effect of paroxetine on 1) the formation of
alpha -hydroxymetoprolol and O-desmethylmetoprolol from the individual met
oprolol enantiomers and 2) on the depletion of the enantiomers from the inc
ubation mixture. Nonspecific binding of both metoprolol and paroxetine to h
uman liver microsomes was also investigated. Whereas metoprolol displayed n
egligible binding, paroxetine was extensively bound to microsomal proteins.
This was taken into account in order to obtain unbiased K-i values and unb
ound concentrations of paroxetine. In the substrate depletion experiments,
the intrinsic clearance (CLint)of (R)-metoprolol was larger than that of (S
)-metoprolol. Paroxetine caused a concentration-dependent decrease in CLint
of both enantiomers and abolished the stereoselectivity. In the metabolite
formation experiments paroxetine did not stereoselectively affect alpha -h
ydroxylation, but preferentially inhibited the O-demethylation of the (R)-e
nantiomer versus the (S)-enantiomer. The use of unbound paroxetine concentr
ations in the two in vitro methods yielded comparable predicted increases i
n area under the curve (1.7-1.9 and 2.2-2.5 for (S)- and (R)-metoprolol, re
spectively) but underestimated the in vivo observed changes of about 7- and
10-fold, respectively. In conclusion, this study showed that paroxetine ab
olishes the stereoselective metabolism of metoprolol due to a stereoselecti
ve inhibition of the O-demethylation toward (R)-metoprolol. Furthermore, th
e extent of the in vivo metoprolol-paroxetine interaction was substantially
underestimated by either one of the two in vitro approaches used when a co
mpetitive mechanism was assumed.