myparkinsons.co.uk

Parkinson's Disease

The stomach is the gateway

Absorption and Metabolism of L‐Dopa by the  Stomach

Department of Medicine, Division of Clinical Pharmacology, The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.

European Journal of Clinical Investigation (Impact Factor: 3.37). 09/1971; 1(5):313 – 320. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2362.1971.tb00637.x

ABSTRACT The absorption and gastric metabolism of L-dopa (L-dihydroxyphenylalanine) were studied in 14 Parkinsonian patients. Patients were given p. o. 25 μCi (500 mg) 14C L-dopa labelled at the β-carbon mixed with 2 g polyethylene glycol as a dilution marker. Absorption was evaluated by determining the gastric rate of absorption, gastric clearance, serum levels, and urinary excretion of 14C. L-dopa and its metabolites in the gastric juice and serum were fractionated by column chromatography. Patients with gastric juice pH of 1.2-2.1 had a gastric rate of absorption of 62.6±4.7 mg/h with a gastric clearance of 31.7.4.1 ml/h. The gastric emptying time was 228±96min. 17.2–26.4% of total radioactivity in the gastric juice were dopa metabolites. Patients with gastric pH of 6.9-7.2 had a very rapid emptying time (an average of 22 min.) with no gastric absorption. The amount of metabolites in their gastric juice was insignificant. Gastric absorption and emptying time were reduced in patients when the gastric pH was raised to 3.5-4.5 with antacids. Serum peak concentrations were higher and more rapidly achieved in patients with high gastric pH than in those with low pH.The most rapidly achieved and highest serum peak levels were observed in patients with partial gastrectomy and in those who were given the drug by duodenal infusion. It appears that direct absorption of L-dopa by the stomach may be limited by gastric metabolism of the drug, a possibility supported by the study in vitro of human stomach tissue obtained at surgery. The inverse relationship between the gastric emptying time and serum levels suggests that the intestine is the major site of L-dopa absorption. Thus factors that prolong gastric emptying time may lower serum levels of L-dopa by delaying access of the drug to the site of absorption and by increasing metabolism before absorption.

August 12, 2014 Posted by | Anatomy-gut, Medication, Research | Leave a Comment

Be Aware-Generic Brands

The effective control of Parkinson’s disease requires
that we are staBilised on usually a combination of medicines taken at set times which optimises symptom control. This usually requires a degree oftrial and error with the medications prescribed and the times of the day when
they are taken.

Once an individual patient with Parkinson’s is stabilised on a particular
medicine or a combination of medicines, it is important that they get the
same medicine dispensed on each occasion. Fear of loss of control of
symptoms is a source of great anxiety for patients with Parkinson’s. Patients
may experience symptoms of ‘freezing’ or dyskinesia, the former may occur
if blood levels of medication fall two low and the latter may occur if blood
levels are too high. Each patient therefore needs to have confidence in the
medicines dispensed, and if different generic medicines are dispensed on
different occasions they may well become anxious as to whether the medicine
will control their symptoms as well as the branded medicines they are used to.

A crucial element in the proposal for generic substitution from the Department
of Health is that the prescriber should have the means when writing the
prescription to specify that if a brand name is written that is what should be
dispensed. It is proposed that the prescriber can do this by means of ticking a
box for ‘no substitution’ somewhere on the FP 10 form.

Whilst this may seem reasonable, the question is will doctors always
remember to ‘tick the box’ for patients with Parkinson’s who are being
prescribed a combination of branded medicines like Sinemet CR + Requip?
The answer is almost certainly no. This would be particularly likely to occur
when a doctor is signing a large batch of repeat prescriptions, and may well
not take the time with each prescription to properly evaluate whether generic
substitution is right for a particular patient before signing the prescription.

Generic substitution can lead to more than one switch
in generic medicines.
Generic medicines always have a different
size, shape, colour and packaging from each
other, and to branded medicine
Therefore, a patient could receive a different
medication, with a different appearance with every prescription

. In a European study, one in three
patients who had experienced a generic
substitution had to become accustomed to a
different colour or shape medication

Bioavailability and formulation issues
Generic medicines have the same active
ingredient as the branded medicine.
However, they are not always identical to
the branded medicine
. The amount of drug
that finally reaches the site of action is
known as the ‘bioavailability’. The
bioavailability is very important, because
this will determine how effective the
medicine will be. Too little drug reaching
the target could lead to less effective
treatment, but too much could increase side
effects. The bioavailability can vary between
branded and generic medicines, and
between different generic medicines, with
the same amount of active ingredient. This
is because the formulation and excipients
(other ingredients included in the medicine)
affect the absorption and metabolism of the
drug.
Branded medicines undergo a rigorous
process of clinical trials assessing safety and
effectiveness before they are approved for
human use. However, generic medicines can
be approved on the basis of
pharmacokinetic studies carried out on a
minimal number of healthy volunteers,
where they are shown to be ‘bioequivalent’
to the branded medicine. This means that
the rate and extent of their bioavailability
lies within ‘acceptable predefined limits’
compared with the original branded
medicine. For a generic medicine to be
considered bioequivalent, the European
Medicines Agency (EMEA) requires the
measures of bioavailability (area under the
curve and Cmax) to be within 0.8 and 1.25 of
the original medicine’s values.26, 27

Thus, the relative bioavailability of the generic
medicine can lie anywhere between 80%
and 125% of the original medicine’s values.
Bearing in mind that patients can be
switched between different branded products

Patients with certain conditions requiring
carefully balanced combinations of
medications would also be
disproportionately affected by medicine
substitutions. For example, people with
Parkinson’s disease often take a
combination of medications, which must be
taken at the correct time for them to avoid
worsening of their symptoms. Patients
with Parkinson’s disease could be
understandably concerned about apparent
changes in their medication. In addition,
changes in formulation type could affect
symptom control

 

July 16, 2014 Posted by | Generics | Leave a Comment

Explaining your medication needs

1. I have Parkinson’s disease which affects——————.details————-

2. Currrent medication for this is ————details———–.

3. My daytime medication effectively controls symptoms for periods of between 30 and 90 minutes on each occasion, effective about an hour after taking medication. I can be approximate but not precise as to the effectiveness or duration of action of each dose of medication as it does vary.

4. I have some limited benefit from the medication both when it is taking effect and when it is wearing off. The average time for which the medication is effective, is approximately 1 hour with half an hour on either side for ‘’wearing off and coming on’’.

5. When my medication wears off entirely my functionality, both physical and mental are seriously impaired

6. I cannot be sure that the effect of each dose of medication will be sufficient to enable me to perform or complete a particular task. The extent and time taken to sustain a task or to take it to completion are variables beyond my every day control .

7. The timing of medication is critical to me.

8. The timing of medication is a consideration essential to accommodating my personal self care needs in relation to hygiene, meal preparation and social events.

9. Side effects of my medications can cause me to experience involuntary episodes of drowsiness and to make me feel excessively sleepy. This drowsiness is the direct side effect of the medication taken to counter the effects of my Parkinson’s disease.This is a direct result of treatment prescribed and the absence of alternative therapies.

10. I am dependant on medication.

June 30, 2014 Posted by | Medication, Self Management | Leave a Comment

Levadopa its Strength and Weakness

By;Eduardo Tolosa

Oral levodopa was developed in laboratories in the US owned by the
Atomic Energy Commission: Brookhaven National Laboratory, Long
Island, New York.

A neurologist from Crete – George Cotzias –
published a crucial paper in 1967 in the New England Journal of
Medicine about how he administered melanocyte-stimulating
hormone (MSH) to patients with Parkinson’s disease (PD).

1967

He thought the problem was that patients needed melanin as the substantia nigra was depigmented. However, when he gave MSH the patients actually got worse and their skin darkened.

Cotzias’ focus then moved to levodopa, a precursor to melanin. In
the same paper he described how he administered D,L-dopa to
16 patients .

It was the first time this compound had been given orally in such massive amounts. Eight patients improved dramatically with the large doses of D,L-dopa, but many experienced profound nausea.
Improvements were seen and lasted for several months.

Nevertheless,in this study, dyskinesias were already being described – the first time they had been described in the literature.

Furthermore, D,L-dopa was toxic to bone marrow, and the dosing led to granulocytopoenia. Cotzias was forced to cease administration.

Despite these problems, Cotzias had achieved notable successes, including
laying the foundations of levodopa dosing:

  1. many doses
  2. slow titration
  3. increasing dosage as much as necessary
  4. daily doses distributed throughout the day.

1969
In 1969, Cotzias, still in the employ of the Atomic Energy Commission,
switched from D,L-dopa to levodopa. Again, all patients who received
the compound improved dramatically and had sustained improvements
in all symptoms for up to two years.

Even tremor improved – many
neurologists are reluctant to say that levodopa is as effective for tremor
as for bradykinesia, but Cotzias’ study shows that it is; it just takes a
little longer.
As early as this 1969 paper, Cotzias mentioned the emergence of
certain clinically significant symptoms in six patients: the ‘off’
phenomenon.

He noted that 14 patients also had involuntary
movements.

Furthermore, he described the antagonistic effect on
levodopa by pyridoxine (vitamin B6) and a high-protein diet.

Therefore,at this time Cotzias was already describing both the main benefits and the main weaknesses of levodopa as we know them today

.
In addition to levodopa, Cotzias laid the foundations for subsequent
work on oral dopamine agonists. He was the first to attribute the
effect of apomorphine to its dopamine-like structure.

2009
Levodopa and Parkinson’s Disease – 30 Years Later
There is no question that levodopa is the most effective symptomatic
treatment of PD. However, it has only recently been compared with
other treatments, particularly orally active dopamine agonist
monotherapy.

All trials to date have shown that levodopa has a more
potent antiparkinsonian effect, especially in the first years, than
dopamine agonists such as bromocriptine, ropinirole, pergolide,
cabergoline and pramipexole.3–7

 

To compare the benefits of initiating therapy with levodopa or the
dopamine agonist bromocriptine, the Parkinson’s Disease Research
Group of the United Kingdom (PDRGUK) conducted a long-term
(10-year) open-label, randomised study in 782 previously untreated
PD patients.3 The study found that although bromocriptine-treated
patients had a lower incidence of dyskinesia and dystonia than the
levodopa-treated patients, they also had significantly worse disability
scores throughout the first five years of therapy.

June 30, 2014 Posted by | Levadopa | Leave a Comment

Taking Medication

 

Management of illness through oral medication is the usual route of drug delivery. The limiting efficiency is the individual.

Significant to all is gastric emptying time, delayed or rapid, the result is fluctuations in response with each dose of medication taken.

 

 

 GASTROINTESTINAL TRACT

The stomach is divided into 3 regions:

 

  • fundus, reservoir for undigested material
  • body
  • antrum is for mixing motions and is a pump for gastric emptying.

 

 

 

 EXIT OF MEDICATION

  • To get out of the stomach a pill has to pass through the pyloric valve into the small intestine and its size needs to be 1 to 2 mm.

 

 

STOMACH  PH

  • Empty stomach 1.5 to 2.0
  • Fed stomach is 2.0 to 6.0.

 

A large volume of water with medication raises the PH of stomach contents to 6.0 to 9.0.

 

Some drugs  have a better chance of dissolving in fed state than in a fasting state.

 

STOMACH  EMPTYING

 

The rate of your stomach emptying depends on the density volume and calories consumed.

Nutritive density of meals helps determine gastric emptying time.

It doesn’t matter for this part of the process whether the meal has high protein, fat, or carbohydrate it. It is the calorific load that is significant.

FACTS

  • Increase in acidity and caloric value slows down gastric emptying time.

 

  • Biological factors such as age, body mass index (BMI), posture and disease status influence gastric emptying.

 

  • In elderly persons, gastric emptying is slowed down.
  • Generally females have slower gastric emptying rates than males.

 

  • Stress increases gastric emptying rates

 

  • Depression slows it down.

 

  •  Fluids taken at body temperature leave the stomach faster than colder or warmer fluids.

 

  • Studies have revealed that gastric emptying of some pills in the fed state can also be influenced by size. Small-size tablets leave the stomach earlier in the digestive process than larger ones.

 

CONCLUSION

Drug absorption in the gastrointestinal tract is a highly

variable procedure.

Delivery systems are emerging as an effective means

of enhancing the bioavailability by improving the controlled release of many drugs.

The increasing sophistication of new delivery technology will

ensure the development of an increased number of drugs that have at present absorption window, low bioavailability.

 

January 10, 2014 Posted by | Medication | | Leave a Comment