Evaluation of minimal erythemadose in patients who use dihydropyridinic calcium channel blockers

Year 2018, Volume: 9 Issue: 4, 277 - 280, 28.12.2018

Serkan Demirkan , Ekin Şavk , Neslihan Şendur , Göksun Karaman Meltem Uslu

https://doi.org/10.18663/tjcl.370070

Abstract

Aim:
One
of the most frequent and reliable methods for determining phototoxicity is to monitor
the minimal erythema dose(MED) related to UVA after using the drug.

In our study, it was aimed to determine whether dihydropyridine-derived
calcium channel blockers cause phototoxicity.

Material
and Methods: Eight open areas of 1 cm2 were left on
the backs of the patients. Eight different doses of UVA were applied to these 8
areas starting at 2 j / cm2 and increasing to 16 j / cm2; After 24 hours, the
first area which had significant erythema was checked. This value is defined as
minimal erythematous dose (MED). MED values of patients were measured before
treatment and on the 7th day of treatment.

Results:Thirty-nine
hypertensive patients, 20 female and 19 male, were included in the study.

Conclusion:
Dihydropyridine-derived calcium channel blockers did not cause a change in MED
for UVA and therefore did not cause phototoxicity.

Keywords

minimal erythema dose, phototoxicity, nifedipine, calcium channel blocker, amlodipine

Dihidropiriridn Türevi Kalsiyum Kanal Blokeri Kullananlarda Minimal Eritem Dozunun Değerlendirilmesi

Abstract

Amaç:
Bir
ilaca bağlı fototoksisitenin belirlenmesinde en sık ve güvenilir yöntem ilacı
kullanmaya başladıktan sonra özellikle UVA’ya ait minimal eritem dozu (MED)
değişimini gözlemektir. Çalışmamızda fotosensitiviteye yol açabileceği
belirtilen hipertansiyon ilaçlarından dihidropiridin türevi kalsiyum kanal
blokerlerinin fotosensitiviteye sebep olup olmadıklarının saptanması
amaçlanmıştır.

Gereç
ve Yöntemler: Hastaların sırtlarında 1 cm2 lik 8 adet
açık alan bırakılmıştır. Bu 8 alana 2 j/cm2 dozundan başlanarak 16 j/cm2’ye
kadar artan 8 farklı dozda UVA uygulanmış; 24 saat sonra ilk hangi alanda
sınırları belirgin eritem oluştuğuna bakılmıştır. Bu değer minimal eritem
dozu(MED) olarak belirlenmiştir. Hastaların tedavi öncesi ve tedavinin 7.
gününde MED değerleri ölçülmüştür.

Bulgular:
Çalışmaya
20’si kadın, 19’u erkek olmak üzere 39 hipertansiyon hastası dahil edilmiştir.

Tartışma:
Dihidropiridin türevi kalsiyum kanal blokerilerinin UVA için MED değerinde değişiklikliğe
neden olmadığı dolayısıyle fototoksisiteye sebep olmadığı görülmüştür.

Keywords

fototoksisite, kalsiyum kanal blokeri, nifedipin, amlodipin, minimal eritem dozu

References

• 1. Moseley H. Elementary photobiology and photophysics. J. Ferguson, J.S.Dover(Eds). Photodermatology (pp.:9-13). London: Manson Publishing, 2006.
• 2. Kochever IE, Taylor CR, Krutman J. Fundamentals of cutaneous photobiology and photoimmunulogy. In:K.Wolff, L.A.Goldsmith, S.I.Katz, B.A.Gilchrest, A.S.Paller, D.J.Leffel (eds). Fitzpatrick’s Dermatology in General Medicine (pp.:797-809). 7th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 2008.
• 3. Scheinfeld NS, Chernoff K, DerekHo MK, LiuYC.Drug-induced photoallergic and phototoxic reactions - an update. Expert Opin Drug Saf 2014:321-340.
• 4. Endres L, Breit R. UV radiation, irradiation, dosimetry. In: Krutmann J, Höningsmann H, Elmets CA, Bergstresser PR (eds). Dermatological phototherapy and photodiagnostic methods (pp.:3-53). Berlin: Springer Verlag, 2000.
• 5. Moseley H. Phototest equipment. In: J Ferguson, J.S.Dover (Eds). Photodermatology (pp.:14-20). London: Manson Publishing 2010.
• 6. Becker L, Eberlein-Konig B, Przybilla B. Phototoxicity of Non-steroidal Antiinflammatory Drugs: In Vitro Studies with Visible Light. Acta Derm Venereol 1996; 76: 337-40.
• 7. Dawe RS, Ibbotson SH. Drug-induced photosensitivity. Dermatol Clin 2014: 363-68.
• 8. Ferguson J, Leeming MRG. Lack of photosensitising potential of tenidap, a novel anti-rheumatic agent. Br J Clin Pharmac 1995; 39: 63-66.
• 9. Ferguson J, Dawe R. Phototoxicity in quinolones: comparison of ciprofloxacin and grepafloxacin. J Antimicrob Chemother 1997 ;40: 93–98.
• 10. Jeon HY, Kim JK, KimWG, Lee SJ. Effects of oral epigallocatechingallate supplementation on the minimal erythemadoseand UV-induced skin damage. Skin Pharmacol Physiol 2009; 22: 137-41.
• 11. Beattie PE, Dawe RS, Traynor NJ, Woods JA, Ferguson J, Ibbotson SH. Can St John’swort (hypericin) ingestion enhance the erythemal response during high-dose ultraviolet A1 therapy? Br J Dermatol 2005: 1187–91.
• 12. Taylor DK, Anstey AV, Coleman AJ, et al: Guidelines for dosimetry and calibration in ultraviolet radiation therapy: a report of a British Photodermatology Group workshop. Br J Dermatol 2002; 146: 755-63.
• 13. Jameron H. Dawe R.S. Photosensitizing drugs may lower the narrow-band ultraviolet B(TL-01) minimal erythema dose. Br J Dermatol 2000; 142: 370-93.
• 14. Neuman NJ, Lehmen P. Photodiagnostic Modalities. In: J.Krutmann, H.Hönigsman, C.A.Elmets, PR. Bergstresser (Eds), Dermatological Phototheraphy and Photodiagnostic Methods. (pp.:367-376.) Berlin: Springer 2009:
• 15. Kayaalp O. Kardiyovasküler sistem; kalsiyum kanal blokerleri. In: O. Kayaalp(Ed), Türkiye ilaç klavuzu 5 (pp.:99-104). İstanbul: GoldenPrint 2007.