ArticleCPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology2025
Isavuconazole and Calcium Channel Blocker for Invasive Fungal Disease Accompanied With Hypertension: Evidence From the FAERS and PBPK/PD Model.
Article in CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patients with invasive fungal disease (IFD) frequently present with hypertension, necessitating polypharmacy and increasing the risk of drug-drug interactions (DDIs). This study evaluated the safety of combining isavuconazole (ISA), a triazole antifungal drug (TAD), and calcium channel blockers (CCBs) in hypertensive patients with IFD using the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) and physiologically based pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic models. FAERS data on hypertension and hypotension involving TADs from 2015 (first quarter) to 2023 (fourth quarter) were used. Disproportionality analysis was performed using the reporting odds ratio (ROR) and information component (IC) methods. DDI models were developed and validated using the Simcyp simulator and in vitro experiments. Dose regimen evaluation and optimization were conducted using the established DDI model. ISA was not associated with hypertension or hypotension. Nifedipine and amlodipine were frequently associated with hypotension induced by CYP3A4 inhibition. The simulated regimens showed that ISA doubled plasma exposure to nifedipine immediate-release (IR) and controlled-release (CR) formulations, increased the maximum concentration by 1.51-fold for nifedipine IR and 2.15-fold for nifedipine CR, and caused a 3.5- to 4.09-fold increase in maximum systolic blood pressure reduction for nifedipine IR. The effects of amlodipine were negligible. Dose optimization, such as halving the nifedipine dose, effectively managed the overexposure. ISA appears safe for use in hypertensive patients with IFD when combined with CCBs, with minimal risk of significant DDIs. Personalized dosing adjustments can mitigate DDI risk. These findings support the clinical use of ISA to enhance dosing precision and patient safety.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.