Skip to main content
PMC home page
British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology logoLink to British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology
. 1990 Sep;30(3):437–441. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.1990.tb03795.x

A comparison of a short half-life marker (low-dose isoniazid), a long half-life pharmacological indicator (low-dose phenobarbitone) and measurements of a controlled release 'therapeutic drug' (metoprolol, Metoros) in reflecting incomplete compliance by volunteers.

E Hardy 1, S Kumar 1, S Peaker 1, M Feely 1, T Pullar 1
PMCID: PMC1368147  PMID: 2223422

Abstract

1. Although, long half-life compounds appear to be more appropriate pharmacological indicators of compliance with treatment, short half-life markers or measurements of short half-life therapeutic drugs are frequently used. 2. We have compared the usefulness of low-dose phenobarbitone (a long half-life indicator), low dose isoniazid (a short half-life marker) and controlled release metoprolol (Metros) (a controlled release formulation of a short half-life 'therapeutic' drug) in seven volunteers with simulated partial (two thirds) compliance. 3. Detection of isoniazid metabolites in urine had an 83% sensitivity and 94% specificity for detecting ingestion within the previous 24 h and 100% sensitivity and 82% specificity for detecting ingestion within the past 6 h but gave no indication of the longer term pattern of compliance. 4. At 28 days (a time when steady-state would be obtained for all three drugs) phenobarbitone plasma levels were 70% (66-76%)--median and interquartile range--of the expected steady-state level if compliance had been complete. Corresponding figures for metoprolol were 82% (37-100%). 5. Measurement of phenobarbitone was much superior to isoniazid or metoprolol measurements in reflecting partial compliance over the previous 1 to 4 weeks.

Full text

PDF
439

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Cramer J. A., Mattson R. H., Prevey M. L., Scheyer R. D., Ouellette V. L. How often is medication taken as prescribed? A novel assessment technique. JAMA. 1989 Jun 9;261(22):3273–3277. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Ellard G. A., Greenfield A sensitive urine-test method for monitoring the ingestion of isoniazid. J Clin Pathol. 1977 Jan;30(1):84–87. doi: 10.1136/jcp.30.1.84. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Ellard G. A., Jenner P. J., Downs P. A. An evaluation of the potential use of isoniazid, acetylisoniazid and isonicotinic acid for monitoring the self-administration of drugs. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1980 Oct;10(4):369–381. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.1980.tb01773.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Eraker S. A., Kirscht J. P., Becker M. H. Understanding and improving patient compliance. Ann Intern Med. 1984 Feb;100(2):258–268. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-100-2-258. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Feely M., Cooke J., Price D., Singleton S., Mehta A., Bradford L., Calvert R. Low-dose phenobarbitone as an indicator of compliance with drug therapy. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1987 Jul;24(1):77–83. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.1987.tb03139.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Good W., Leeson L. J., Zak S. L., Wagner W. E., Meeker J. B., Arnold J. D. Oros controlled-release formulations of metoprolol: an approach to the development of a system for once daily administration. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1985;19 (Suppl 2):231S–238S. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.1985.tb02768.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Gordis L. General concepts for use of markers in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1984 Dec;5(4 Suppl):481–487. doi: 10.1016/0197-2456(84)90008-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Insull W., Jr Statement of the problem and pharmacological and clinical requirements for the ideal marker. Control Clin Trials. 1984 Dec;5(4 Suppl):459–462. doi: 10.1016/0197-2456(84)90003-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. Lasagna L. Fault and default. N Engl J Med. 1973 Aug 2;289(5):267–268. doi: 10.1056/NEJM197308022890511. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Mäenpä H., Javela K., Pikkarainen J., Mälkönen M., Heinonen O. P., Manninen V. Minimal doses of digoxin: a new marker for compliance to medication. Eur Heart J. 1987 Oct;8 (Suppl 1):31–37. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/8.suppl_i.31. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Peaker S., Mehta A. C., Kumar S., Feely M. Measurement of low (sub-therapeutic) phenobarbitone levels in plasma by high-performance liquid chromatography: application to patient compliance studies. J Chromatogr. 1989 Dec 29;497:308–312. doi: 10.1016/0378-4347(89)80034-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Pearson R. M. Who is taking their tablets? Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1982 Sep 18;285(6344):757–758. doi: 10.1136/bmj.285.6344.757. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Porter A. M. Drug defaulting in a general practice. Br Med J. 1969 Jan 25;1(5638):218–222. doi: 10.1136/bmj.1.5638.218. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Price D. E., Mehta A., Park B. K., Hay A., Feely M. P. The effect of low-dose phenobarbitone on three indices of hepatic microsomal enzyme induction. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1986 Dec;22(6):744–747. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.1986.tb02970.x. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Pullar T., Birtwell A. J., Wiles P. G., Hay A., Feely M. P. Use of a pharmacologic indicator to compare compliance with tablets prescribed to be taken once, twice, or three times daily. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1988 Nov;44(5):540–545. doi: 10.1038/clpt.1988.191. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Pullar T., Kumar S., Tindall H., Feely M. Time to stop counting the tablets? Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1989 Aug;46(2):163–168. doi: 10.1038/clpt.1989.121. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Pullar T., Peaker S., Martin M. F., Bird H. A., Feely M. P. The use of a pharmacological indicator to investigate compliance in patients with a poor response to antirheumatic therapy. Br J Rheumatol. 1988 Oct;27(5):381–384. doi: 10.1093/rheumatology/27.5.381. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Rudd P., Byyny R. L., Zachary V., LoVerde M. E., Titus C., Mitchell W. D., Marshall G. The natural history of medication compliance in a drug trial: limitations of pill counts. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1989 Aug;46(2):169–176. doi: 10.1038/clpt.1989.122. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology are provided here courtesy of British Pharmacological Society

RESOURCES