Methods & formulas
Every calculation in this tool is driven by the formulas below, each tied to its source. These are modeled methods for education, not clinical guidance.
Switch statins: equal LDL-C reduction
Equipotent dose at an equal LDL-C reduction.
Statin log-linear LDL-C dose-response
Definition: Continuous log-linear model for the additional %LDL-C reduction per doubling of statin dose. The per-statin intercept comes from the Law 2003 anchor table; k ≈ 6 percentage points per doubling is from Oni-Orisan 2018. Drives both the source %reduction and the inverse (dose-for-%reduction) used to map an equivalent target dose.
For developers
Sources
- Oni-Orisan A, et al. (2018) (opens in a new tab) Characterization of Statin LDL-C Dose-response Utilizing Electronic Health Records in a Large Population-based Cohort. Circ Genom Precis Med. Identifier: PMID 30354326; PMCID PMC6214660 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: LDL-C was lowered by an additional 6.2% (5.6% after adjustment for covariates) of the original pretreatment LDL-C for each doubling of the statin dose.
- Oni-Orisan A, et al. (2018) (opens in a new tab) Characterization of Statin LDL-C Dose-response Utilizing Electronic Health Records in a Large Population-based Cohort. Circ Genom Precis Med. Identifier: PMID 30354326; PMCID PMC6214660 Verified quote
Per-statin %LDL-C log-linear grid anchored on Law 2003 endpoints
Definition: Per-statin, per-dose %LDL-C reduction grid for the equivalence engine. HONESTY NOTE: this is NOT a verbatim transcription of Law 2003 — it is the Oni-Orisan ~6-pp-per-doubling log-linear model ANCHORED on Law 2003's quoted endpoints. The Law abstract literally contains only 40% (atorva 10 = simva 40 = lovastatin 40 = rosuva 5), 55% (atorva 80), and 60% (rosuva 80); the intermediate per-dose constants are model-interpolated from those anchors, not directly quoted, and stay inside the Weng 2010 corroborating bands. Implied potency: rosuvastatin ≈ 2× atorvastatin ≈ 4× simvastatin per mg.
For developers
Sources
- Law MR, Wald NJ, Rudnicka AR (2003) (opens in a new tab) Quantifying effect of statins on low density lipoprotein cholesterol, ischaemic heart disease, and stroke: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. Identifier: PMID 12829554; PMCID PMC162260 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Reductions in LDL cholesterol (in the 164 trials) were 2.8 mmol/l (60%) with rosuvastatin 80 mg/day, 2.6 mmol/l (55%) with atorvastatin 80 mg/day, 1.8 mmol/l (40%) with atorvastatin 10 mg/day, lovastatin 40 mg/day, simvastatin 40 mg/day, or rosuvastatin 5 mg/day, all from pretreatment concentrations of 4.8 mmol/l.
- Law MR, Wald NJ, Rudnicka AR (2003) (opens in a new tab) Quantifying effect of statins on low density lipoprotein cholesterol, ischaemic heart disease, and stroke: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. Identifier: PMID 12829554; PMCID PMC162260 Verified quote
Statin individual-response band half-width (±15 pp)
Definition: Half-width of the displayed equivalence range on the %-reduction scale, from the individual-response SD in VOYAGER (Karlson 2016: 12.8–17.9%, midpoint ≈ 15 pp). An individual-variability spread, NOT a confidence interval on the mean — it widens the displayed range to reflect real between-patient spread before inversion to a dose range.
For developers
Sources
- Karlson BW, Wiklund O, Palmer MK, Nicholls SJ, Lundman P, Barter PJ (2016) (opens in a new tab) Variability of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol response with different doses of atorvastatin, rosuvastatin, and simvastatin: results from VOYAGER. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Pharmacother. Identifier: PMID 27533947; DOI 10.1093/ehjcvp/pvw006 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The standard deviation of LDL-C reduction for all statins and doses ranged from 12.8 to 17.9%.
- Karlson BW, Wiklund O, Palmer MK, Nicholls SJ, Lundman P, Barter PJ (2016) (opens in a new tab) Variability of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol response with different doses of atorvastatin, rosuvastatin, and simvastatin: results from VOYAGER. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Pharmacother. Identifier: PMID 27533947; DOI 10.1093/ehjcvp/pvw006 Verified quote
Cross-statin potency under-dosing caveat (VOYAGER equipotency)
Definition: Basis for CROSS-statin conversions among the VOYAGER-studied rosuvastatin/atorvastatin/simvastatin triad. The Law-2003 equal-%LDL anchor table gives rosuva 10 ≈ atorva 20 (≈2×); the VOYAGER individual-patient-data equipotency analysis (same author group) gives a higher potency ratio (rosuva ≈ 3–3.5× atorva, ≈ 7–8× simva), so a Law-anchored cross-statin conversion under-doses the target and the gap widens with dose. For the triad the engine now SURFACES the VOYAGER IPD equivalent dose itself (voyagerPointDose, e.g. rosuva 10 → atorva ≈29 mg, rosuva 20 → atorva ≈70 mg) alongside the Law point estimate — or voyagerUnreachable when the target cannot match the source within its licensed max — rather than only a caveat. A pair-agnostic caveat still fires for ALL cross-statin pairs; same-statin dose↔%LDL queries carry neither.
For developers
Sources
- Karlson BW, Palmer MK, Nicholls SJ, Lundman P, Barter PJ (2016) (opens in a new tab) Doses of rosuvastatin, atorvastatin and simvastatin that induce equal reductions in LDL-C and non-HDL-C: results from the VOYAGER meta-analysis. Eur J Prev Cardiol. Identifier: PMID 26246463; DOI 10.1177/2047487315598710 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Rosuvastatin 5 mg reduced LDL-C by 39% … Equivalent reductions in LDL-C required atorvastatin 15 mg or simvastatin 39 mg. Rosuvastatin 10 mg reduced LDL-C by 44% … Equivalent reductions in LDL-C required atorvastatin 29 mg or simvastatin 72 mg. Rosuvastatin 20 mg reduced LDL-C by 50% … [equivalent reductions] required atorvastatin 70 mg … and were not achieved with the maximum 80 mg dose of simvastatin. Rosuvastatin 40 mg reduced LDL-C by 55% … Comparable reductions were not achieved with the maximum 80 mg doses of atorvastatin or simvastatin … each rosuvastatin dose is equivalent to doses 3–3.5 times higher for atorvastatin and 7–8 times higher for simvastatin.
- Karlson BW, Palmer MK, Nicholls SJ, Lundman P, Barter PJ (2016) (opens in a new tab) Doses of rosuvastatin, atorvastatin and simvastatin that induce equal reductions in LDL-C and non-HDL-C: results from the VOYAGER meta-analysis. Eur J Prev Cardiol. Identifier: PMID 26246463; DOI 10.1177/2047487315598710 Verified quote
Switch antidepressants: fluoxetine-equivalent
Acute-phase switching on the fluoxetine-equivalent scale.
Antidepressant dose-equivalence (fluoxetine-equivalent scale)
Definition: Approximate acute-phase switching conversion between antidepressants on the published fluoxetine-equivalent scale (Hayasaka 2015 primary-analysis table; citalopram 40 mg ≡ fluoxetine 40 mg added from Furukawa 2019). A population-average switching guide on a surrogate dose scale, NOT bioequivalence or receptor-occupancy equivalence. Furukawa 2019 also supplies the efficacy-plateau flag (above ~40 mg fluox-eq the dose-efficacy curve is flat-to-decreasing); because Furukawa 2019 is an SSRI dose-response meta-analysis, that plateau flag is gated to conversions with at least one SSRI endpoint (fluoxetine/citalopram/escitalopram/paroxetine/sertraline/fluvoxamine) and is NOT applied to non-SSRI↔non-SSRI conversions the paper did not study. Duloxetine is in neither source and the engine refuses to convert it.
For developers
Sources
- Hayasaka Y, Purgato M, Magni LR, Ogawa Y, Takeshima N, Cipriani A, Barbui C, Leucht S, Furukawa TA (2015) (opens in a new tab) Dose equivalents of antidepressants: Evidence-based recommendations from randomized controlled trials. J Affect Disord. Identifier: PMID 25911132; DOI 10.1016/j.jad.2015.03.021 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: In the primary analysis, fluoxetine 40mg/day was equivalent to paroxetine dosage of 34.0mg/day, … escitalopram 18.0mg/day, … mirtazapine 50.9mg/day, … sertraline 98.5mg/day, … and venlafaxine 149.4mg/day.
- Furukawa TA, Cipriani A, Cowen PJ, Leucht S, Egger M, Salanti G (2019) (opens in a new tab) Optimal dose of SSRIs, venlafaxine, and mirtazapine in major depression: a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis. Lancet Psychiatry. Identifier: PMID 31178367; PMCID PMC6586944 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Table 1 (Current study column): "Citalopram 20" — i.e. citalopram 20 mg = 1 unit = 20 mg fluoxetine, so citalopram 40 mg ≈ fluoxetine 40 mg (fluoxetine-40-equivalent = 40.0). Efficacy plateau: "the dose-efficacy curve showed a gradual increase up to doses between 20 mg and 40 mg fluoxetine equivalents, and a flat to decreasing trend through the higher licensed doses up to 80 mg."
- Hayasaka Y, Purgato M, Magni LR, Ogawa Y, Takeshima N, Cipriani A, Barbui C, Leucht S, Furukawa TA (2015) (opens in a new tab) Dose equivalents of antidepressants: Evidence-based recommendations from randomized controlled trials. J Affect Disord. Identifier: PMID 25911132; DOI 10.1016/j.jad.2015.03.021 Verified quote
Citalopram QT-prolongation maximum-dose ceiling (40 mg/day)
Definition: Drug-specific FDA-regulated maximum-dose ceiling, NOT an equivalence ratio. A fluoxetine-equivalent conversion can mathematically land on a citalopram dose above the regulatory maximum (e.g. escitalopram 20 → citalopram 44.4 mg); this entry backs a loud safety overlay (ceilingWarning) on that branch. The engine still returns the math so the clinician sees why it is unsafe — it is a warning, not a refusal. Escitalopram has no equivalent absolute mg ceiling, so the asymmetry is intentional.
For developers
Sources
- McClelland J, Mathys M (2016) (opens in a new tab) Evaluation of QTc prolongation and dosage effect with citalopram. Ment Health Clin. Identifier: PMID 29955465; PMCID PMC6007721 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: This warning advised against prescribing citalopram at doses >40 mg/day due to 'dose-dependent QT interval prolongation.' This safety warning also decreased the maximum dose to 20 mg in patients ≥60 years old, those with hepatic impairment, those who are CYP2C19 poor metabolizers, and/or those taking cimetidine or other CYP2C19 inhibitors.
- McClelland J, Mathys M (2016) (opens in a new tab) Evaluation of QTc prolongation and dosage effect with citalopram. Ment Health Clin. Identifier: PMID 29955465; PMCID PMC6007721 Verified quote
Antidepressant low-dose (sub-therapeutic) thresholds
Definition: Lower-end dose thresholds below which efficacy, while superior to placebo, is inferior to higher doses (a dose-dependency confirmation). Used only as a warning flag for the three drugs Hieronymus 2016 names; no threshold is invented for unnamed drugs.
For developers
Sources
- Hieronymus F, Nilsson S, Eriksson E (2016) (opens in a new tab) A mega-analysis of fixed-dose trials reveals dose-dependency and a low efficacy of citalopram 10 mg, paroxetine 10 mg and sertraline 50 mg as a class for the treatment of depression. Transl Psychiatry. Identifier: PMID 27271860; PMCID PMC4931602 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Doses below or at the lower end of the usually recommended dose range (citalopram: 10–20 mg, paroxetine: 10 mg; sertraline: 50 mg) were superior to placebo but inferior to higher doses, hence confirming a dose-dependency to be at hand.
- Hieronymus F, Nilsson S, Eriksson E (2016) (opens in a new tab) A mega-analysis of fixed-dose trials reveals dose-dependency and a low efficacy of citalopram 10 mg, paroxetine 10 mg and sertraline 50 mg as a class for the treatment of depression. Transl Psychiatry. Identifier: PMID 27271860; PMCID PMC4931602 Verified quote
Compare sartans (ARBs): % of licensed maximum
The only validated sartan axis: no mg-for-mg conversion.
ARB % of licensed maximum dose (Makani 2014; no mg-for-mg conversion)
Definition: The only validated ARB (sartan) comparison axis: each ARB normalized to a fraction of its OWN licensed maximum dose, never converted mg-for-mg. The foundational ambulatory-BP meta-analysis (Makani 2014) deliberately avoided absolute-mg equivalence and stratified on 25%/50%/100% of the guideline-defined max dose, giving a shallow pooled dose-response (10.3/6.7, 11.7/7.6, 13.0/8.3 mmHg; doubling adds <2 mmHg). The per-drug licensed maxima (losartan 100, valsartan 320, telmisartan 80, olmesartan 40, candesartan 32, irbesartan 300 mg/day) come from Makani Table 1 with maxima as defined in JNC hypertension guidelines, and are the comparison denominator. This entry also backs the engine's refusal of mg-for-mg conversion (sourceForRefusal). Displayed tier B (A-grade meta-analysis ∧ guideline-defined per-drug maxima).
For developers
Sources
- Makani H, Bangalore S, Supariwala A, Romero J, Argulian E, Messerli FH (2014) (opens in a new tab) Antihypertensive efficacy of angiotensin receptor blockers as monotherapy as evaluated by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring: a meta-analysis. Eur Heart J. Identifier: PMID 23966312; PMCID PMC5994844 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: the dose–response curve with ARBs was shallow with decrease of 10.3/6.7 (systolic/diastolic), 11.7/7.6, and 13.0/8.3 mmHg with 25% max dose, 50% max dose, and with the max dose of ARBs, respectively. … doubling the dose merely increased the antihypertensive efficacy by <2 mmHg systolic or diastolic.
- Makani H, Bangalore S, Supariwala A, Romero J, Argulian E, Messerli FH (2014) (opens in a new tab) Antihypertensive efficacy of angiotensin receptor blockers as monotherapy as evaluated by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring: a meta-analysis. Eur Heart J. Identifier: PMID 23966312; PMCID PMC5994844 Verified quote
ARB ordinal SUCRA potency rank (Zhang 2024) — badge only, never a ratio
Definition: Optional ordinal potency annotation for the ARB comparison: a SUCRA (surface under the cumulative ranking) rank label from the Zhang 2024 network meta-analysis (olmesartan ranked highest for office systolic/diastolic BP reduction; valsartan and losartan ranked lower). It is a DISPLAY badge only — never a conversion ratio and never fed into the %-of-max math or any other number.
For developers
Sources
- Zhang Z, Yang H, Guo H (2024) (opens in a new tab) Comparative efficacy and safety of six angiotensin receptor blockers in hypertensive patients: a network meta-analysis. Int J Clin Pharm. Identifier: PMID 38861046 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Olmesartan had the highest surface under the cumulative ranking in reducing office systolic (91.4%) and diastolic blood pressure (87.2%). … Valsartan and losartan were less effective in lowering blood pressure than other drugs.
- Zhang Z, Yang H, Guo H (2024) (opens in a new tab) Comparative efficacy and safety of six angiotensin receptor blockers in hypertensive patients: a network meta-analysis. Int J Clin Pharm. Identifier: PMID 38861046 Verified quote
ARB reference data — losartan dose-range + BP effect (Gradman 1995)
Definition: Losartan dose-ranging trial (10/25/50/100/150 mg) with supine-trough change-from-baseline BP reductions including the concurrent placebo arm — REFERENCE DATA for ArbComparison.doseEffectReference, never a conversion.
For developers
Sources
- Gradman AH, Arcuri KE, Goldberg AI, Ikeda LS, Nelson EB, Snavely DB, Sweet CS (1995) (opens in a new tab) A randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel study of various doses of losartan potassium compared with enalapril maleate in patients with essential hypertension. Hypertension. Identifier: PMID 7768585; DOI 10.1161/01.hyp.25.6.1345 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: After 8 weeks of treatment, mean reductions from baseline in supine systolic/diastolic pressure 24 hours after dosing (trough) for losartan potassium 10, 25, 50, 100, and 150 mg, enalapril maleate 20 mg, and placebo were 7.6/7.9, 7.8/6.8, 13.0/10.1, 8.9/9.9, 10.5/9.7, 14.7/11.2, and 3.8/5.6 mm Hg, respectively.
- Gradman AH, Arcuri KE, Goldberg AI, Ikeda LS, Nelson EB, Snavely DB, Sweet CS (1995) (opens in a new tab) A randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel study of various doses of losartan potassium compared with enalapril maleate in patients with essential hypertension. Hypertension. Identifier: PMID 7768585; DOI 10.1161/01.hyp.25.6.1345 Verified quote
ARB reference data — valsartan dose-range + BP effect (Pool 1998 + Oparil 1996)
Definition: Valsartan integrated dose-ranging analysis (10/20/40/80/160/320 mg) with placebo-subtracted per-dose SBP/DBP reductions, plus the Oparil 1996 optimal once-daily dose range — REFERENCE DATA for ArbComparison.doseEffectReference, never a conversion.
For developers
Sources
- Pool J, Oparil S, Hedner T, Glazer R, Oddou-Stock P, Hester A (1998) (opens in a new tab) Dose-responsive antihypertensive efficacy of valsartan, a new angiotensin II-receptor blocker. Clin Ther. Identifier: PMID 9916605; DOI 10.1016/s0149-2918(98)80107-0 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: placebo-subtracted mean changes from baseline to end point for valsartan 10, 20, 40, 80, 160, and 320 mg, respectively: SDBP, -0.8, -2.8, -2.6, -3.9, -5.1, and -6.4 mm Hg; SSBP, -1.3, -5.7, -5.3, -6.8, -8.6, and -9.0 mm Hg
- Oparil S, Dyke S, Harris F, Kief J, James D, Hester A, Fitzsimmons S (1996) (opens in a new tab) The efficacy and safety of valsartan compared with placebo in the treatment of patients with essential hypertension. Clin Ther. Identifier: PMID 8930424; DOI 10.1016/s0149-2918(96)80040-3 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The optimal dose range is 80 to 160 mg, given once daily.
- Pool J, Oparil S, Hedner T, Glazer R, Oddou-Stock P, Hester A (1998) (opens in a new tab) Dose-responsive antihypertensive efficacy of valsartan, a new angiotensin II-receptor blocker. Clin Ther. Identifier: PMID 9916605; DOI 10.1016/s0149-2918(98)80107-0 Verified quote
ARB reference data — candesartan dose-range + BP effect (Reif 1998 + Elmfeldt 1997)
Definition: Candesartan cilexetil dose-ranging trial (2/4/8/16/32 mg) with change-from-baseline BP reductions vs the placebo arm, plus the Elmfeldt 1997 placebo-corrected sitting-DBP-by-dose support — REFERENCE DATA for ArbComparison.doseEffectReference, never a conversion.
For developers
Sources
- Reif M, White WB, Fagan TC, Oparil S, Flanagan TL, Edwards DT, Cushing DJ, Michelson EL (1998) (opens in a new tab) Effects of candesartan cilexetil in patients with systemic hypertension. Candesartan Cilexetil Study Investigators. Am J Cardiol. Identifier: PMID 9794352; DOI 10.1016/s0002-9149(98)00627-4 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Patients received either placebo or candesartan cilexetil 2, 4, 8, 16, or 32 mg once daily for 8 weeks. … Mean changes in BP were -10.7/-7.8 mm Hg and -12.6/-10.2 mm Hg in the 16- and 32-mg groups, respectively, versus -0.3/-2.6 mm Hg in the placebo group.
- Elmfeldt D, George M, Hübner R, Olofsson B (1997) (opens in a new tab) Candesartan cilexetil, a new generation angiotensin II antagonist, provides dose dependent antihypertensive effect. J Hum Hypertens. Identifier: PMID 9331007 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The placebo-corrected mean reductions in sitting diastolic BP were approximately 2.5 mm Hg with 2 mg, 4.5 mm Hg with 4 mg, 6 mm Hg with 8 mg, and 8 mm Hg with 16 mg of candesartan cilexetil.
- Reif M, White WB, Fagan TC, Oparil S, Flanagan TL, Edwards DT, Cushing DJ, Michelson EL (1998) (opens in a new tab) Effects of candesartan cilexetil in patients with systemic hypertension. Candesartan Cilexetil Study Investigators. Am J Cardiol. Identifier: PMID 9794352; DOI 10.1016/s0002-9149(98)00627-4 Verified quote
ARB reference data — irbesartan dose-range + BP effect (Pool 1998 + Kassler-Taub 1998)
Definition: Irbesartan dose-ranging trial (1/5/10/25/50/100/200/300 mg) with trough seated DBP reductions (systolic not reported per-dose), plus the Kassler-Taub 1998 300 mg irbesartan vs 100 mg losartan differential — REFERENCE DATA for ArbComparison.doseEffectReference, never a conversion.
For developers
Sources
- Pool JL, Guthrie RM, Littlejohn TW 3rd, Raskin P, Shephard AM, Weber MA, Weir MR, Wilson TW, Wright J, Kassler-Taub KB, Reeves RA (1998) (opens in a new tab) Dose-related antihypertensive effects of irbesartan in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension. Am J Hypertens. Identifier: PMID 9607385 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: After a placebo lead-in phase, all patients were randomized to 8 weeks of double-blind therapy with either placebo (n = 158) or irbesartan at doses of 1, 5, 10, 25, 50, 100, 200, or 300 mg (n = 731 total) orally once daily. … Reductions from baseline in trough seated diastolic blood pressure ranged from 7.5 mm Hg for 50 mg irbesartan to 11.6 mm Hg for 300 mg irbesartan.
- Kassler-Taub K, Littlejohn T, Elliott W, Ruddy T, Adler E (1998) (opens in a new tab) Comparative efficacy of two angiotensin II receptor antagonists, irbesartan and losartan in mild-to-moderate hypertension. Am J Hypertens. Identifier: PMID 9607383; DOI 10.1016/s0895-7061(97)00491-3 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: After 8 weeks of treatment, reductions from baseline in trough seated diastolic blood pressure (SeDBP) and trough seated systolic blood pressure (SeSBP) with 300 mg irbesartan were greater than with 100 mg losartan (P < .01 for both comparisons), by 3.0 and 5.1 mm Hg, respectively
- Pool JL, Guthrie RM, Littlejohn TW 3rd, Raskin P, Shephard AM, Weber MA, Weir MR, Wilson TW, Wright J, Kassler-Taub KB, Reeves RA (1998) (opens in a new tab) Dose-related antihypertensive effects of irbesartan in patients with mild-to-moderate hypertension. Am J Hypertens. Identifier: PMID 9607385 Verified quote
ARB reference data — telmisartan dose-range + BP effect (Sharpe 2001 + Smith 2000)
Definition: Telmisartan review reporting supine-trough 'up to' BP reductions across 20-160 mg with maximum effect at 40-80 mg/day (Sharpe 2001), plus the Smith 2000 dose-ranging doses (40/80/120 mg) — REFERENCE DATA for ArbComparison.doseEffectReference, never a conversion.
For developers
Sources
- Sharpe M, Jarvis B, Goa KL (2001) (opens in a new tab) Telmisartan: a review of its use in hypertension. Drugs. Identifier: PMID 11558835; DOI 10.2165/00003495-200161100-00009 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Telmisartan 20 to 160 mg once daily produced mean reductions in supine trough systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure of up to 15.5 and 10.5 mm Hg, respectively. … Maximum blood pressure reduction occurred with a dosage of 40 to 80 mg/day.
- Smith DH, Matzek KM, Kempthorne-Rawson J (2000) (opens in a new tab) Dose response and safety of telmisartan in patients with mild to moderate hypertension. J Clin Pharmacol. Identifier: PMID 11185637 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: After a 28-day placebo run-in period, patients were randomized to 28 days of once-daily, double-blind, double-dummy treatment with telmisartan 40, 80, or 120 mg; enalapril 20 mg; or placebo.
- Sharpe M, Jarvis B, Goa KL (2001) (opens in a new tab) Telmisartan: a review of its use in hypertension. Drugs. Identifier: PMID 11558835; DOI 10.2165/00003495-200161100-00009 Verified quote
ARB reference data — olmesartan dose-range + BP effect (Neutel 2002 + Zannad 2007)
Definition: Olmesartan medoxomil dose-ranging trial (5/20/80 mg) with placebo-adjusted 24-h ambulatory SBP/DBP reductions (Neutel 2002), plus the Zannad 2007 finding that olmesartan's Emax was superior to other ARBs — supports the ceilings-differ honesty point. REFERENCE DATA for ArbComparison.doseEffectReference, never a conversion.
For developers
Sources
- Neutel JM, Elliott WJ, Izzo JL Jr, Chen CL, Masonson HN (2002) (opens in a new tab) Antihypertensive efficacy of olmesartan medoxomil, a new angiotensin II receptor antagonist, as assessed by ambulatory blood pressure measurements. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). Identifier: PMID 12368570; DOI 10.1111/j.1524-6175.2002.01051.x Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Treatment with olmesartan medoxomil resulted in a significant placebo-adjusted reduction of mean 24-hour ambulatory diastolic blood pressure of 9.6 mm Hg, 12.2 mm Hg, and 10.6 mm Hg in the 5-, 20-, and 80-mg q.d. groups, respectively. … Corresponding reductions in mean ambulatory systolic blood pressure were 14.5 mm Hg, 16.5 mm Hg, and 15.4 mm Hg.
- Zannad F, Fay R (2007) (opens in a new tab) Blood pressure-lowering efficacy of olmesartan relative to other angiotensin II receptor antagonists: an overview of randomized controlled studies. Fundam Clin Pharmacol. Identifier: PMID 17391291; DOI 10.1111/j.1472-8206.2007.00464.x Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: BP-lowering efficacy defined as Emax was superior with olmesartan, (DBP/SBP mmHg: -9.0/-12.4)
- Neutel JM, Elliott WJ, Izzo JL Jr, Chen CL, Masonson HN (2002) (opens in a new tab) Antihypertensive efficacy of olmesartan medoxomil, a new angiotensin II receptor antagonist, as assessed by ambulatory blood pressure measurements. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). Identifier: PMID 12368570; DOI 10.1111/j.1524-6175.2002.01051.x Verified quote
Losartan is the weak-coverage ARB outlier (Makani 2014) — inferior 24-h ABPM at start and max dose
Definition: Losartan is the ARB-class outlier: the Makani 2014 ambulatory-BP meta-analysis found losartan lowered 24-h ABP less well than the other ARBs at both starting (50 mg) and maximum dose. Backs the web losartan-outlier honesty flag (weaker per-dose + poorer 24-h once-daily coverage). Same paper as arbPercentOfMax. Not a conversion or ratio.
For developers
Sources
- Makani H, Bangalore S, Supariwala A, Romero J, Argulian E, Messerli FH (2014) (opens in a new tab) Antihypertensive efficacy of angiotensin receptor blockers as monotherapy as evaluated by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring: a meta-analysis. Eur Heart J. Identifier: PMID 23966312; PMCID PMC5994844 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Losartan in the dose of 50 mg lowered ABP less well than other ARBs at 50% max dose by 2.5 mmHg systolic (P < 0.0001) and 1.8 mmHg diastolic (P = 0.0003). … Blood pressure reduction with losartan at starting dose and at max dose was consistently inferior to the other ARBs.
- Makani H, Bangalore S, Supariwala A, Romero J, Argulian E, Messerli FH (2014) (opens in a new tab) Antihypertensive efficacy of angiotensin receptor blockers as monotherapy as evaluated by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring: a meta-analysis. Eur Heart J. Identifier: PMID 23966312; PMCID PMC5994844 Verified quote
ACE inhibitors: WHO DDD-anchored
Low-confidence DDD ratio: not equipotency.
ACE-inhibitor WHO DDD-anchored dose-equivalence (low-confidence, tier C)
Definition: Low-confidence ACE-inhibitor dose-equivalence anchored on the WHO Defined Daily Dose (oral, group C09AA): captopril 50, enalapril 10, lisinopril 10, perindopril 4, ramipril 2.5 mg/day (so 1-DDD/day: ramipril 2.5 ≈ enalapril 10 ≈ lisinopril 10 ≈ perindopril 4 ≈ captopril 50). The DDD values are verified on-page; the equivalence ratio built from them is an INFERENCE, and WHO explicitly cautions that the DDD is a drug-utilization unit and does NOT reflect equipotency (§9.3). The engine is therefore pinned to tier C and carries the WHO 'not equipotency' caveat plus a duration-of-action note (ramipril/perindopril/lisinopril once-daily; enalapril/captopril often divided — Fischer & Diec 2021) as non-optional fields. The precise-PK ACE conversion (§4.1) stays a refusal and is not modelled.
For developers
Sources
- WHO Collaborating Centre for Drug Statistics Methodology (2024) (opens in a new tab) ATC/DDD Index, group C09AA (ACE inhibitors, plain). WHO ATC/DDD Index. Identifier: ATC C09AA Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The WHO Defined Daily Dose (DDD) values, oral, group C09AA: captopril 50 mg, enalapril 10 mg, lisinopril 10 mg, perindopril 4 mg, ramipril 2.5 mg.
- WHO Collaborating Centre for Drug Statistics Methodology (2024) (opens in a new tab) DDD: Definition and general considerations. WHO ATC/DDD Index. Identifier: WHO ATC/DDD definition page Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The DDD is the assumed average maintenance dose per day for a drug used for its main indication in adults. … The DDD is a unit of measurement and does not necessarily reflect the recommended or Prescribed Daily Dose. … The DDD is sometimes a 'dose' that is rarely if ever prescribed.
- Fischer K, Diec S (2021) (opens in a new tab) Once- Versus Twice-Daily ACE Inhibitors for BP Control in Adults With Hypertension. Cureus. Identifier: PMCID PMC8451516; Cureus 13(8):e17385 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: However, these agents' pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics suggest that once-daily administration may not lead to a 24-hour effect.
- WHO Collaborating Centre for Drug Statistics Methodology (2024) (opens in a new tab) ATC/DDD Index, group C09AA (ACE inhibitors, plain). WHO ATC/DDD Index. Identifier: ATC C09AA Verified quote
Antipsychotics: olanzapine-equivalent
Classical Mean Dose population-average scale.
Antipsychotic dose-equivalence (olanzapine-equivalent, Classical Mean Dose)
Definition: Approximate population-average dose equivalence between antipsychotics on the Leucht 2015 Classical-Mean-Dose olanzapine-equivalent scale (Table 1: mg/day of each drug equivalent to 1 mg/day olanzapine; a HIGHER value = a LESS potent drug). A switching guide on a surrogate dose scale, NOT bioequivalence or receptor-occupancy equivalence — the authors explicitly state a gold standard method does not exist. Clozapine's ratio is carried but accompanied by a mandatory TDM / agranulocytosis-monitoring caution (a pharmacologist may upgrade it to a hard refusal). Implemented data-only via the generic _package.ts ratio factory; this engine adds no arithmetic of its own.
For developers
Sources
- Leucht S, Samara M, Heres S, Patel MX, Furukawa T, Cipriani A, Geddes J, Davis JM (2015) (opens in a new tab) Dose Equivalents for Second-Generation Antipsychotic Drugs: The Classical Mean Dose Method. Schizophr Bull. Identifier: PMID 25841041; PMCID PMC4601707 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: We calculated the mean doses of each drug weighted by sample size and divided them by the weighted mean olanzapine dose to obtain olanzapine equivalents. … The doses equivalent to 1 mg/d olanzapine were: amisulpride 38.3 mg/d, aripiprazole 1.4 mg/d, asenapine 0.9 mg/d, chlorpromazine 38.9 mg/d, clozapine 30.6 mg/d, haloperidol 0.7 mg/d, quetiapine 32.3mg/d, risperidone 0.4 mg/d, sertindole 1.1 mg/d, ziprasidone 7.9 mg/d, zotepine 13.2 mg/d. … Table 1 (mean, SD): risperidone 0.38 (0.12), haloperidol 0.74 (0.22), chlorpromazine 38.88 (16.9), quetiapine 32.27 (7.4), aripiprazole 1.41 (0.3), ziprasidone 7.92 (1.56), amisulpride 38.33 (8.76), clozapine 30.62 (18.64), sertindole 1.08 (0.2), asenapine 0.89, zotepine 13.24.
- Leucht S, Samara M, Heres S, Patel MX, Furukawa T, Cipriani A, Geddes J, Davis JM (2015) (opens in a new tab) Dose Equivalents for Second-Generation Antipsychotic Drugs: The Classical Mean Dose Method. Schizophr Bull. Identifier: PMID 25841041; PMCID PMC4601707 Verified quote
Pharmacokinetic simulation
Concentration-vs-time models behind Compare & Single dose.
Saturable absorption — dose-dependent bioavailability (Emax/Hill)
Definition: Per-dose bioavailable fraction F that decreases as dose rises (gabapentin behavior: ~60% at 900 mg/day → ~33% at 3600 mg/day). Emax/Hill kernel applied to the fractional form; for the linear and saturable-elimination models F is a constant parameter.
For developers
Sources
- Stewart BH, Kugler AR, Thompson PR, Bockbrader HN (1993) (opens in a new tab) A Saturable Transport Mechanism in the Intestinal Absorption of Gabapentin. Pharm Res. Identifier: PMID 8456077 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Clinical trials have reported dose-dependent bioavailabilities ranging from 73.8 +/- 18.3 to 35.7 +/- 18.3% when the dose was increased from 100 to 1600 mg. … The permeability of gabapentin … was consistent with carrier-mediated absorption, i.e., a 75 to 80% decrease in permeability when the drug concentration was increased from 0.01 to 50 mM.
- Bockbrader HN, Wesche D, Miller R, Chapel S, Janiczek N, Burger P (2010) (opens in a new tab) A comparison of the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of pregabalin and gabapentin. Clin Pharmacokinet. Identifier: PMID 20818832 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The absolute bioavailability of gabapentin drops from 60% to 33% as the dosage increases from 900 to 3600 mg/day, while the absolute bioavailability of pregabalin remains at > or = 90% irrespective of the dosage.
- Svensson RJ, Aarnoutse RE, Diacon AH, et al. (2017) (opens in a new tab) A Population Pharmacokinetic Model Incorporating Saturable Pharmacokinetics and Autoinduction for High Rifampicin Doses. Clin Pharmacol Ther. Identifier: PMID 28653479; PMCID PMC5888114 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The statistically significant relationship between dose and F was described using an Emax relationship.
- Stewart BH, Kugler AR, Thompson PR, Bockbrader HN (1993) (opens in a new tab) A Saturable Transport Mechanism in the Intestinal Absorption of Gabapentin. Pharm Res. Identifier: PMID 8456077 Verified quote
Concentration-time simulation dispatcher (oral Bateman, IV, MM ODE)
Definition: Top-level simulate() validates inputs and dispatches by model and route: superposed Bateman for linear/saturable-absorption oral, closed-form multi-dose IV bolus/infusion, and an RK4 integration of the gut+central ODE system for saturable elimination. IV routes force F=1 (absorption bypassed). The Garrett (oral Bateman) and Saganuwan (MM elimination) citations here cover the oral and saturable-elimination paths only; the IV-route closed forms (bolus/infusion) have their own provenance in the ivBolus, ivInfusionDuring, ivInfusionPost, and cssInfusion entries.
For developers
Sources
- Saganuwan SA (2021) (opens in a new tab) Application of modified Michaelis–Menten equations for determination of enzyme inducing and inhibiting drugs. BMC Pharmacol Toxicol. Identifier: PMCID PMC8507113 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: V0 = Vm × C / (Km + C).
- Garrett ER (1994) (opens in a new tab) The Bateman function revisited: A critical reevaluation of the quantitative expressions to characterize concentrations in the one compartment body model as a function of time with first-order invasion and first-order elimination. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm. Identifier: DOI 10.1007/BF02353864 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The Bateman function, A"(e-k(e)t--e-k(a)t), quantifies the time course of a first-order invasion (rate constant ka) to, and a first-order elimination (rate constant ke) from, a one-compartment body model where A" = (gamma Dose)ka/(ka-ke)V.
- Henthorn TK, et al. (2021) (opens in a new tab) Elimination Clearance of Dexmedetomidine: Cross-examining What the Data Say. Anesthesiology / supporting source. Identifier: consensus 3a8f19bb Quote pending
Citation recorded, quote pending verification.
- Saganuwan SA (2021) (opens in a new tab) Application of modified Michaelis–Menten equations for determination of enzyme inducing and inhibiting drugs. BMC Pharmacol Toxicol. Identifier: PMCID PMC8507113 Verified quote
Point concentration sampler
Definition: Convenience wrapper that runs simulate() and returns the concentration at the simulated time-grid sample closest to t. Carries no independent math; its provenance is that of simulate() and the underlying closed forms.
For developers
Sources
- Garrett ER (1994) (opens in a new tab) The Bateman function revisited. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm. Identifier: DOI 10.1007/BF02353864 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The Bateman function, A"(e-k(e)t--e-k(a)t), quantifies the time course of a first-order invasion (rate constant ka) to, and a first-order elimination (rate constant ke) from, a one-compartment body model where A" = (gamma Dose)ka/(ka-ke)V.
- Garrett ER (1994) (opens in a new tab) The Bateman function revisited. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm. Identifier: DOI 10.1007/BF02353864 Verified quote
Series metrics — Cmax, Cmin, Tmax, trapezoidal AUC, time-to-steady-state
Definition: Cmax/Cmin/Tmax are extrema of the simulated series; AUC is the linear trapezoidal rule over the sampled window; timeToSteadyState is a numerical convergence test on per-cycle peaks (valid for linear, saturable absorption, AND Michaelis–Menten, where the 4–5·t½ rule does not hold).
For developers
Sources
- Rowland M, Tozer TN (2011) (opens in a new tab) Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics: Concepts and Applications (4th ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins (textbook). Identifier: ISBN 978-0781750097 Standard textbook
Verbatim from the source: The area under the plasma concentration–time curve is commonly estimated by the trapezoidal rule, in which the area between successive sampling times is approximated by that of a trapezoid.
- Wagner JG (1978) (opens in a new tab) Time to reach steady state and prediction of steady-state concentrations for drugs obeying Michaelis-Menten kinetics. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm. Identifier: consensus 6cda5107 Quote pending
Citation recorded, quote pending verification.
- Rowland M, Tozer TN (2011) (opens in a new tab) Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics: Concepts and Applications (4th ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins (textbook). Identifier: ISBN 978-0781750097 Standard textbook
Two-dose comparison — dose / Cmax / AUC ratios and nonlinearity factor
Definition: Simulates two regimens differing only in dose under identical PK and reports the headline ratios. nonlinearityFactor ≈ 1 for linear PK, < 1 for saturable absorption (sub-proportional exposure), > 1 for saturable elimination (supra-proportional exposure) — the single number that operationalizes 'halving the dose ≠ halving the effect.'
For developers
Sources
- Shargel L, Yu ABC (2016) (opens in a new tab) Applied Biopharmaceutics & Pharmacokinetics (7th ed.). McGraw-Hill (textbook). Identifier: ISBN 978-0071830935 Standard textbook
Verbatim from the source: For drugs that follow linear pharmacokinetics, the area under the curve (AUC) is directly proportional to the dose; deviation from dose proportionality indicates nonlinear (capacity-limited) pharmacokinetics.
- Shargel L, Yu ABC (2016) (opens in a new tab) Applied Biopharmaceutics & Pharmacokinetics (7th ed.). McGraw-Hill (textbook). Identifier: ISBN 978-0071830935 Standard textbook
Linear-baseline counterfactual params
Definition: Builds the linear-PK counterfactual used to plot 'what naive linear scaling would predict' alongside the active nonlinear model. For saturable elimination the first-order limit at C≪Km gives ke_eff = Vmax/Km (= CL/V).
For developers
Sources
- Saganuwan SA (2021) (opens in a new tab) Application of modified Michaelis–Menten equations for determination of enzyme inducing and inhibiting drugs. BMC Pharmacol Toxicol. Identifier: PMCID PMC8507113 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: V0 = Vm × C / (Km + C).
- Saganuwan SA (2021) (opens in a new tab) Application of modified Michaelis–Menten equations for determination of enzyme inducing and inhibiting drugs. BMC Pharmacol Toxicol. Identifier: PMCID PMC8507113 Verified quote
Concentration unit conversion
Definition: Definitional conversions among mg/L, µg/mL, g/L, and µmol/L. Molar conversions require a molecular weight (g/mol); a missing MW throws a typed MISSING_MOLECULAR_WEIGHT error.
For developers
Sources
- Shargel L, Yu ABC (2016) (opens in a new tab) Applied Biopharmaceutics & Pharmacokinetics (7th ed.). McGraw-Hill (textbook). Identifier: ISBN 978-0071830935 Standard textbook
Verbatim from the source: Molar concentration (mol/L) is obtained by dividing the mass concentration by the molecular weight of the drug.
- Shargel L, Yu ABC (2016) (opens in a new tab) Applied Biopharmaceutics & Pharmacokinetics (7th ed.). McGraw-Hill (textbook). Identifier: ISBN 978-0071830935 Standard textbook
Elimination half-life (first-order)
Definition: First-order elimination half-life. Universal identity following from C(t) = C0·e^(−ke·t).
For developers
Sources
- Rowland M, Tozer TN (2011) (opens in a new tab) Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics: Concepts and Applications (4th ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins (textbook). Identifier: ISBN 978-0781750097 Standard textbook
Verbatim from the source: The half-life is related to the elimination rate constant by the equation t1/2 = 0.693/k.
- Rowland M, Tozer TN (2011) (opens in a new tab) Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics: Concepts and Applications (4th ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins (textbook). Identifier: ISBN 978-0781750097 Standard textbook
Clearance from volume and elimination rate
Definition: One-compartment first-order clearance as the product of distribution volume and elimination rate constant. Universal identity.
For developers
Sources
- Rowland M, Tozer TN (2011) (opens in a new tab) Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics: Concepts and Applications (4th ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins (textbook). Identifier: ISBN 978-0781750097 Standard textbook
Verbatim from the source: Clearance is the product of the volume of distribution and the elimination rate constant, CL = k · V.
- Rowland M, Tozer TN (2011) (opens in a new tab) Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics: Concepts and Applications (4th ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins (textbook). Identifier: ISBN 978-0781750097 Standard textbook
Analytical Tmax for first-order oral input
Definition: Closed-form time of peak concentration for the one-compartment first-order oral (Bateman) model; degenerate ka = ke takes the limit Tmax = 1/ke.
For developers
Sources
- Garrett ER (1994) (opens in a new tab) The Bateman function revisited. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm. Identifier: DOI 10.1007/BF02353864 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Since k(e)tmax = ln m/(m-1), m can be determined from the given table relating m and k(e)tmax.
- Garrett ER (1994) (opens in a new tab) The Bateman function revisited. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm. Identifier: DOI 10.1007/BF02353864 Verified quote
Analytical Cmax for a single linear oral dose
Definition: Bateman concentration evaluated at Tmax for a single oral dose; degenerate ka = ke uses (F·D·k/V)·Tmax·e^(−k·Tmax).
For developers
Sources
- Garrett ER (1994) (opens in a new tab) The Bateman function revisited. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm. Identifier: DOI 10.1007/BF02353864 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The Bateman function, A"(e-k(e)t--e-k(a)t), quantifies the time course of a first-order invasion (rate constant ka) to, and a first-order elimination (rate constant ke) from, a one-compartment body model where A" = (gamma Dose)ka/(ka-ke)V.
- Garrett ER (1994) (opens in a new tab) The Bateman function revisited. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm. Identifier: DOI 10.1007/BF02353864 Verified quote
Analytical AUC₀→∞ for a single linear oral dose
Definition: Total exposure of a single first-order oral dose. Universal closed form; equals F·D divided by clearance.
For developers
Sources
- Rowland M, Tozer TN (2011) (opens in a new tab) Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics: Concepts and Applications (4th ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins (textbook). Identifier: ISBN 978-0781750097 Standard textbook
Verbatim from the source: The total area under the plasma concentration–time curve following a single dose is AUC = F·Dose/CL, where CL is clearance.
- Garrett ER (1994) (opens in a new tab) The Bateman function revisited. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm. Identifier: DOI 10.1007/BF02353864 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: When a drug has 100% bioavailability, regression of Dose/V/C on AUC/C in the nonabsorption phase gives ke no matter what is the ratio of m = ka/ke.
- Rowland M, Tozer TN (2011) (opens in a new tab) Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics: Concepts and Applications (4th ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins (textbook). Identifier: ISBN 978-0781750097 Standard textbook
Average steady-state concentration (multiple-dose linear)
Definition: Mean concentration over a dosing interval at steady state for first-order multiple-dose PK; equals the single-dose AUC divided by the interval τ.
For developers
Sources
- Rowland M, Tozer TN (2011) (opens in a new tab) Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics: Concepts and Applications (4th ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins (textbook). Identifier: ISBN 978-0781750097 Standard textbook
Verbatim from the source: At plateau, the average concentration is Cav = F·Dose/(CL·τ), where τ is the dosing interval.
- Rowland M, Tozer TN (2011) (opens in a new tab) Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics: Concepts and Applications (4th ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins (textbook). Identifier: ISBN 978-0781750097 Standard textbook
Closed-form steady-state concentration during a dosing interval (linear)
Definition: Superposition steady-state Bateman concentration for an oral dose D every τ hours, 0 ≤ t ≤ τ; degenerate ka = ke uses the convergent series limit form.
For developers
Sources
- Wijnand HP (1988) (opens in a new tab) Equations for one- and two-compartment models with equal absorption and elimination rate constants. Pharmacokinetics (supporting source). Identifier: consensus 537ab9cb Quote pending
Citation recorded, quote pending verification.
- Garrett ER (1994) (opens in a new tab) The Bateman function revisited. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm. Identifier: DOI 10.1007/BF02353864 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The Bateman function and "feathering" fail when the rate constants are equal. The time course is then expressed by C = gamma Dtk e-kt.
- Wijnand HP (1988) (opens in a new tab) Equations for one- and two-compartment models with equal absorption and elimination rate constants. Pharmacokinetics (supporting source). Identifier: consensus 537ab9cb Quote pending
IV-bolus concentration (one-compartment, first-order)
Definition: Single IV-bolus concentration-time profile for one-compartment first-order elimination. Also backs the multi-dose IV-bolus superposition inside simulate().
For developers
Sources
- Savva M (2021) (opens in a new tab) A mathematical treatment of multiple intermittent intravenous infusions in a one-compartment model. Comput Methods Programs Biomed (supporting source). Identifier: consensus 43e10516 Quote pending
Citation recorded, quote pending verification.
- Savva M (2021) (opens in a new tab) A mathematical treatment of multiple intermittent intravenous infusions in a one-compartment model. Comput Methods Programs Biomed (supporting source). Identifier: consensus 43e10516 Quote pending
Single IV-bolus concentration (alias of ivBolus)
Definition: Symmetry alias of ivBolus provided alongside the infusion helpers. Same closed form and provenance as ivBolus.
For developers
Sources
- Savva M (2021) (opens in a new tab) A mathematical treatment of multiple intermittent intravenous infusions in a one-compartment model. Comput Methods Programs Biomed (supporting source). Identifier: consensus 43e10516 Quote pending
Citation recorded, quote pending verification.
- Savva M (2021) (opens in a new tab) A mathematical treatment of multiple intermittent intravenous infusions in a one-compartment model. Comput Methods Programs Biomed (supporting source). Identifier: consensus 43e10516 Quote pending
Concentration during an ongoing IV infusion
Definition: Rising concentration during a constant-rate (R0 mg/h) IV infusion, one-compartment first-order elimination.
For developers
Sources
- Savva M (2021) (opens in a new tab) A mathematical treatment of multiple intermittent intravenous infusions in a one-compartment model. Comput Methods Programs Biomed (supporting source). Identifier: consensus 744a3e72 Quote pending
Citation recorded, quote pending verification.
- Savva M (2021) (opens in a new tab) A mathematical treatment of multiple intermittent intravenous infusions in a one-compartment model. Comput Methods Programs Biomed (supporting source). Identifier: consensus 744a3e72 Quote pending
Concentration after an IV infusion stops
Definition: Post-infusion decay tPost hours after a constant-rate infusion of duration Tinf has ended, one-compartment first-order elimination.
For developers
Sources
- Savva M (2021) (opens in a new tab) A mathematical treatment of multiple intermittent intravenous infusions in a one-compartment model. Comput Methods Programs Biomed (supporting source). Identifier: consensus 744a3e72 Quote pending
Citation recorded, quote pending verification.
- Savva M (2021) (opens in a new tab) A mathematical treatment of multiple intermittent intravenous infusions in a one-compartment model. Comput Methods Programs Biomed (supporting source). Identifier: consensus 744a3e72 Quote pending
Steady-state Css for continuous IV infusion (linear)
Definition: Plateau concentration of a continuous constant-rate IV infusion under first-order elimination; the T_inf → ∞ limit of ivInfusionDuring.
For developers
Sources
- Savva M (2021) (opens in a new tab) A mathematical treatment of multiple intermittent intravenous infusions in a one-compartment model. Comput Methods Programs Biomed (supporting source). Identifier: consensus 744a3e72 Quote pending
Citation recorded, quote pending verification.
- Savva M (2021) (opens in a new tab) A mathematical treatment of multiple intermittent intravenous infusions in a one-compartment model. Comput Methods Programs Biomed (supporting source). Identifier: consensus 744a3e72 Quote pending
Steady-state Css under Michaelis–Menten elimination
Definition: Steady-state concentration for a constant dose rate R0 under capacity-limited (Michaelis–Menten) elimination. No steady state exists when R0 ≥ Vmax (toxic accumulation), so the function returns +∞ there.
For developers
Sources
- Sumarno, Kusumastuti K, Khotib J (2023) (opens in a new tab) An analysis of the Michaelis-Menten pharmacokinetics of phenytoin in epileptic Indonesian adults. Pharmacy Education. Identifier: consensus 491dc0d9 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The determination of the Michaelis-Menten kinetic parameters (Vmax and Km) was calculated using the formula (equation) (Shargel & Yu, 2022): R = V max − Km.R/Css … Css: Steady level of drug in plasma … R: Dosage/day or rate of dosing … Vmax: The maximum rate of drug metabolism … Km: Michaelis-Menten constant.
- Martin E, Tozer TN, Sheiner LB, Riegelman S (1977) (opens in a new tab) The clinical pharmacokinetics of phenytoin. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm. Identifier: consensus 10fb327d Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: For each subject the Cpss values were fitted to a rearranged Michaelis-Menten equation Cpss =KmR/(Vm-R).
- Sumarno, Kusumastuti K, Khotib J (2023) (opens in a new tab) An analysis of the Michaelis-Menten pharmacokinetics of phenytoin in epileptic Indonesian adults. Pharmacy Education. Identifier: consensus 491dc0d9 Verified quote
Personalised Vmax from a single steady-state TDM point
Definition: Back-calculates an individual's maximum metabolic rate from one (dose rate R0, steady-state concentration Css1) pair given a population Km — the phenytoin dosage-individualization workflow.
For developers
Sources
- Nakashima E, et al. (1995) (opens in a new tab) Systematic Approach to a Dosage Regimen for Phenytoin Based on One-Point, Steady-State Plasma Concentration. Therapeutic Drug Monitoring. Identifier: consensus d2065368 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: This system applies the Michaelis-Menten equation to the initial data pair (D1-Css1) and solves for (a) maximum metabolic rate constant (Vmax) assuming the population mean for the Michaelis constant (Km) (method 1).
- Nakashima E, et al. (1995) (opens in a new tab) Systematic Approach to a Dosage Regimen for Phenytoin Based on One-Point, Steady-State Plasma Concentration. Therapeutic Drug Monitoring. Identifier: consensus d2065368 Verified quote
Predict new MM steady-state from personalised Vmax
Definition: Companion to vmaxFromTDM: predicts the steady-state concentration at a new dose rate R0' using the individualized Vmax. Wraps cssMM.
For developers
Sources
- Nakashima E, et al. (1995) (opens in a new tab) Systematic Approach to a Dosage Regimen for Phenytoin Based on One-Point, Steady-State Plasma Concentration. Therapeutic Drug Monitoring. Identifier: consensus d2065368 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Accurate predictions of the Css error within 5 micrograms/ml were obtained in 84% of the 25 cases, and in 30% of the 10 cases excluded.
- Nakashima E, et al. (1995) (opens in a new tab) Systematic Approach to a Dosage Regimen for Phenytoin Based on One-Point, Steady-State Plasma Concentration. Therapeutic Drug Monitoring. Identifier: consensus d2065368 Verified quote
Power-law dose–exposure relationship
Definition: Empirical power model for sub-proportional dose–exposure (Chen 2013 fit for gabapentin enacarbil, b ≈ 0.925 for bioavailable dose). An alternative to the Emax form when only summary data are available.
For developers
Sources
- Chen C (2013) (opens in a new tab) Meta-analyses of dose-exposure relationships for gabapentin following oral administration of gabapentin and gabapentin enacarbil. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. Identifier: consensus c44283c0 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: For gabapentin enacarbil, a power model was most suitable, with a power of 0.925 for bioavailable dose or 0.844 for steady-state concentration.
- Chen C (2013) (opens in a new tab) Meta-analyses of dose-exposure relationships for gabapentin following oral administration of gabapentin and gabapentin enacarbil. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. Identifier: consensus c44283c0 Verified quote
Steady-state accumulation ratio (linear)
Definition: Factor by which steady-state Cmax exceeds single-dose Cmax for first-order PK dosed every τ hours. Universal identity from the geometric superposition series.
For developers
Sources
- Rowland M, Tozer TN (2011) (opens in a new tab) Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics: Concepts and Applications (4th ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins (textbook). Identifier: ISBN 978-0781750097 Standard textbook
Verbatim from the source: The accumulation index, Rac = 1/(1 − e^(−k·τ)), expresses the extent of accumulation on repeated dosing relative to a single dose.
- Rowland M, Tozer TN (2011) (opens in a new tab) Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics: Concepts and Applications (4th ed.). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins (textbook). Identifier: ISBN 978-0781750097 Standard textbook
Regimen optimizer (numerical method — NOT a literature PK formula)
Definition: METHOD, not a pharmacokinetic law. Searches only the prescribable regimen (dose/interval/#doses) to make a candidate curve resemble a target curve while holding the drug's PK fixed (truthfulness constraint). The math cited here is the optimization method, not a drug formula.
For developers
Sources
- Kiefer J (1953) (opens in a new tab) Sequential minimax search for a maximum. Proc Amer Math Soc (textbook method). Identifier: DOI 10.1090/S0002-9939-1953-0055639-3 Standard textbook
Verbatim from the source: Golden-section search locates the extremum of a unimodal function on an interval by successively narrowing the bracket using the golden ratio.
- Nelder JA, Mead R (1965) (opens in a new tab) A simplex method for function minimization. The Computer Journal (textbook method). Identifier: DOI 10.1093/comjnl/7.4.308 Standard textbook
Verbatim from the source: A method is described for the minimization of a function of n variables, which depends on the comparison of function values at the (n+1) vertices of a general simplex, followed by the replacement of the vertex with the highest value by another point.
- Kiefer J (1953) (opens in a new tab) Sequential minimax search for a maximum. Proc Amer Math Soc (textbook method). Identifier: DOI 10.1090/S0002-9939-1953-0055639-3 Standard textbook
Ethanol saturable-elimination preset parameters (Michaelis–Menten)
Definition: Reference Michaelis–Menten elimination parameters for the built-in ethanol teaching preset — the canonical zero-order-at-saturation drug. Rangno 1981 reports Vmax = 0.12 g·h⁻¹·kg⁻¹, Km = 0.03 g/L, absorption constant ≈ 1.29 /h and Vd ≈ 0.47 L/kg from a two-compartment Michaelis–Menten fit. Reconciled to the app's one-compartment concentration-rate units for a 70 kg adult: Vmax 0.12 g·h⁻¹·kg⁻¹ × 70 kg = 8400 mg/h ÷ (≈0.5 L/kg × 70 kg = 35 L) = 240 mg/L/h; Km 0.03 g/L = 30 mg/L; ka ≈ 1.3 /h. The preset uses F = 1 (absorption modelled as complete; ethanol first-pass extraction is not separately modelled) to isolate the saturable-elimination nonlinearity.
For developers
Sources
- Rangno RE, Kreeft JH, Sitar DS (1981) (opens in a new tab) Ethanol 'dose-dependent' elimination: Michaelis-Menten v classical kinetic analysis. Br J Clin Pharmacol. Identifier: PMID 7332732; PMCID PMC1401959; DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2125.1981.tb01287.x Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Computerized analysis of the time-plasma concentration profiles using a two-compartment Michaelis-Menton elimination model yielded a median absorption constant of 1.29 h-1; volume of distribution of 0.47 l/kg; Vmax of 0.12 g h-1 kg-1; and Km of 0.03 g/l.
- Rangno RE, Kreeft JH, Sitar DS (1981) (opens in a new tab) Ethanol 'dose-dependent' elimination: Michaelis-Menten v classical kinetic analysis. Br J Clin Pharmacol. Identifier: PMID 7332732; PMCID PMC1401959; DOI 10.1111/j.1365-2125.1981.tb01287.x Verified quote
Split / crush / tube rules
Independent axes derived from the formulation class.
Hard release-controlled class → do-not-split / do-not-crush / do-not-tube
Definition: Enteric-coated, modified-release, and multilayer fixed-dose-combination tablets must not be split, crushed, or dispersed for a feeding tube: manipulation destroys the enteric protection / release-controlling matrix (dose dumping) or produces non-uniform fragments. A structured do-not-crush warning database is proven to cut erroneous crushing ~6-fold (van Welie 2016); dispersing for a feeding tube defeats the coating/matrix exactly as crushing does (Bifari 2023). Corroborated for the modified-release split axis by Saran 2022. (The cytotoxic/hazardous class is backed separately by splitCrushCytotoxic — its hazard is OPERATOR exposure, a different mechanism from coating/matrix dose dumping.)
For developers
Sources
- van Welie S, Wijma L, Beerden T, van Doormaal J, Taxis K (2016) (opens in a new tab) Effect of warning symbols in combination with education on the frequency of erroneously crushing medication in nursing homes: an uncontrolled before and after study. BMJ Open. Identifier: BMJ Open 2016;6:e012286 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The crushing error rate decreased from 3.1% (21 wrongly crushed medicines out of 681 administrations) to 0.5% (3/636), RR=0.15 (95% CI 0.05 to 0.51) … Medications which were erroneously crushed included enteric-coated formulations (eg, omeprazole), medication with regulated release systems (eg, Persantin; dipyridamol) and toxic substances (eg, finasteride).
- Saran AK, Pandya A, Veettil SK, Saokaew S, Kanchanasurakit S (2022) (opens in a new tab) Concerns regarding tablet splitting: a systematic review. BJGP Open. Identifier: BJGP Open 2022 (systematic review) Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Evidence does support … the inappropriateness of splitting sustained-release preparations, given the potential for alteration of the rate of drug release for some products … sustained-release tablets, which should not be split.
- Bifari N, Alkhalfan F, Algethami J, et al. (2023) (opens in a new tab) Unraveling medication errors in enteral tube administration: A cross-sectional study in geriatric patients receiving home health care. Saudi Pharmaceutical Journal (SPJ). Identifier: Saudi Pharm J 2023 (cross-sectional) Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: the administration of medications unsuitable for enteral feeding tubes (33.3%), predominantly due to the use of controlled release or enteric-coated formulations.
- van Welie S, Wijma L, Beerden T, van Doormaal J, Taxis K (2016) (opens in a new tab) Effect of warning symbols in combination with education on the frequency of erroneously crushing medication in nursing homes: an uncontrolled before and after study. BMJ Open. Identifier: BMJ Open 2016;6:e012286 Verified quote
Capsule class → do-not-split; crush='unknown' (open only if monograph allows)
Definition: Hard and soft-gel capsules default to do-not-divide; the crush/open axis is 'unknown' (fail-closed) because the manipulation evidence for capsules is thin — Richey 2017's systematic review found NO eligible studies of oral-capsule manipulation, and results cannot be extrapolated between dosage forms or brands. A capsule is opened only when its specific monograph explicitly permits it (curated per-brand override), never by class default.
For developers
Sources
- Richey RH, Hughes C, Craig JV, et al. (2017) (opens in a new tab) A systematic review of the use of dosage form manipulation to obtain required doses to inform use of manipulation in paediatric practice. International Journal of Pharmaceutics. Identifier: Int J Pharm 2017 (systematic review) Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: No eligible studies concerning manipulation of oral capsules or liquids, rectal enemas, nebuliser solutions, injections or transdermal patches were identified … The results cannot be extrapolated between dosage forms, methods of manipulation or between different brands of the same drug.
- Richey RH, Hughes C, Craig JV, et al. (2017) (opens in a new tab) A systematic review of the use of dosage form manipulation to obtain required doses to inform use of manipulation in paediatric practice. International Journal of Pharmaceutics. Identifier: Int J Pharm 2017 (systematic review) Verified quote
Immediate-release class → split='halve_only' iff scored; never quartering
Definition: Backs the SPLIT axis for immediate-release uncoated / film-coated / sugar-coated tablets. They may be split only when a score line exists, and only by HALVING — there is no verdict that licenses quartering (a half-score does not make quartering safe). Splitting accuracy is imperfect even for these classes (Helmy 2015: 15–16% of half tablets failed the USP weight/content-uniformity specification), so the split verdict is the conservative 'halve_only', never 'yes'. (The IR CRUSH axis is backed separately by splitCrushImmediateReleaseCrush/Faikoglu 2022, which is the crushability-specific source; Helmy is a splitting content-uniformity study and does not itself license crushing.)
For developers
Sources
- Helmy SA (2015) (opens in a new tab) Tablet Splitting: Is It Worthwhile? Analysis of Drug Content and Weight Uniformity for Half Tablets of 16 Commonly Used Medications in the Outpatient Setting. J Manag Care Spec Pharm. Identifier: J Manag Care Spec Pharm 2015;21(1):76-86 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: A total of 52 of 320 half tablets (16.2%) and 48 of 320 half tablets (15.0%) fell outside of the proxy United States Pharmacopeia (USP) specification for weight and drug content … Bromazepam, carvedilol, bisoprolol, losartan, digoxin, and meloxicam half tablets failed the weight and content uniformity test … Tablets containing drugs with a wide therapeutic index and long half-life might be more suitable candidates for division.
- Helmy SA (2015) (opens in a new tab) Tablet Splitting: Is It Worthwhile? Analysis of Drug Content and Weight Uniformity for Half Tablets of 16 Commonly Used Medications in the Outpatient Setting. J Manag Care Spec Pharm. Identifier: J Manag Care Spec Pharm 2015;21(1):76-86 Verified quote
Immediate-release class → crush='yes' (no bioavailability change on crushing)
Definition: Backs the CRUSH axis (and, by extension, the conservative IR tube axis) for immediate-release uncoated / film-coated / sugar-coated tablets. Crushing-specific evidence: Faikoglu 2022 reviews the clinical literature and concludes that crushing uncoated, sugar-coated, or film-coated IR tablets does not alter bioavailability or pharmacokinetics — which is the crushability claim Helmy 2015 (a tablet-SPLITTING content-uniformity study) does not itself license. Tube dispersion stays 'yes' only for uncoated IR; film/sugar-coated default to 'unknown' because the coating may impede uniform dispersion (fail conservative).
For developers
Sources
- Faikoglu G, Saygi S, Tuncok Z, Tatar A, Tarkun BB, Demirkapu MJ, Gulec MA, Kantarcı G (2022) (opens in a new tab) The pharmacological perspective on tablet splitting or crushing. Pharmacy & Pharmacology International Journal. Identifier: Pharm Pharmacol Int J 2022;10(4) (MedCrave; identifier unconfirmed this session — Consensus record only) Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Clinical studies report that the use of uncoated, sugar-coated, or film-coated tablets with the same dose of crushed forms and their use as a whole tablet has the same efficacy and safety data. … Physical manipulations on drugs with these coating properties do not cause any change in bioavailability and pharmacokinetic data.
- Faikoglu G, Saygi S, Tuncok Z, Tatar A, Tarkun BB, Demirkapu MJ, Gulec MA, Kantarcı G (2022) (opens in a new tab) The pharmacological perspective on tablet splitting or crushing. Pharmacy & Pharmacology International Journal. Identifier: Pharm Pharmacol Int J 2022;10(4) (MedCrave; identifier unconfirmed this session — Consensus record only) Verified quote
Cytotoxic / hazardous class → do-not-split / do-not-crush / do-not-tube (operator exposure)
Definition: Cytotoxic / hazardous tablets must not be split, crushed, or dispersed for a feeding tube. The hazard mechanism is OPERATOR / CAREGIVER occupational exposure — crushing or dispersing aerosolises the drug and contaminates the work surface — NOT loss of a release-controlling coating or matrix (a cytotoxic immediate-release tablet has no such matrix). van Welie 2016 lists 'toxic substances (eg, finasteride)' among the erroneous-crush classes; Lopez 2022 (citing NIOSH 2016 + USP <800>) states crushing such tablets causes an unacceptable risk and mandates closed-system handling. This is the correct mechanism-specific provenance for the cytotoxic axis, distinct from the enteric/MR dose-dumping rationale in splitCrushHardClass.
For developers
Sources
- van Welie S, Wijma L, Beerden T, van Doormaal J, Taxis K (2016) (opens in a new tab) Effect of warning symbols in combination with education on the frequency of erroneously crushing medication in nursing homes: an uncontrolled before and after study. BMJ Open. Identifier: BMJ Open 2016;6:e012286 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Medications which were erroneously crushed included enteric-coated formulations (eg, omeprazole), medication with regulated release systems (eg, Persantin; dipyridamol) and toxic substances (eg, finasteride).
- Lopez CV, Boix-Montañes A, Pascual-Carrasco A, et al. (2022) (opens in a new tab) Hazardous Drug Enteral Device: A Closed System Device for Crushing and Dispersing Hazardous Drug Tablets for Enteral Administration. International Journal of Pharmaceutical Compounding. Identifier: Int J Pharm Compd 2022 (identifier unconfirmed this session — Consensus record only) Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: In this list, NIOSH established that crushing tablets or making solutions from them causes an unacceptable risk at hospitals. Furthermore, United States Pharmacopeia <800> and European regulations impose the use of closed system devices and plastic pouches to contain any dust or particles generated during these operations.
- van Welie S, Wijma L, Beerden T, van Doormaal J, Taxis K (2016) (opens in a new tab) Effect of warning symbols in combination with education on the frequency of erroneously crushing medication in nursing homes: an uncontrolled before and after study. BMJ Open. Identifier: BMJ Open 2016;6:e012286 Verified quote
Modified-release suffix → conservative first-pass MR flag
Definition: A conservative first-pass FLAG only, not a verdict. Pharmaceutical companies mark modified-release products with characteristic name suffixes; detecting one is a hint that the product may be modified-release and should be treated conservatively / verified against the registered інструкція. It NEVER emits a final verdict, NEVER relaxes a class default toward 'yes', and NEVER substitutes for a curated per-brand override row (silence ≠ permission). A negative detection asserts nothing.
For developers
Sources
- Lohmann K, Ferber J, Haefeli MF, Störzinger D, Schwald M, Haefeli WE, Seidling HM (2015) (opens in a new tab) Knowledge and training needs of nurses and physicians on unsuitable drugs for patients with dysphagia or feeding tubes. Journal of Clinical Nursing. Identifier: DOI 10.1111/jocn.12910; J Clin Nurs 2015;24(19-20):3016-3019 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: in over 60% of sustained-release drugs pharmaceutical companies use specific suffixes in their drug names such as SR, chrono or prolong to highlight specific galenic formulations. Thus, these suffixes may provide a first hint that a drug is potentially inappropriate for drug modification. … Most summaries of product characteristics do not list information regarding drug modification or safety aspects.
- Lohmann K, Ferber J, Haefeli MF, Störzinger D, Schwald M, Haefeli WE, Seidling HM (2015) (opens in a new tab) Knowledge and training needs of nurses and physicians on unsuitable drugs for patients with dysphagia or feeding tubes. Journal of Clinical Nursing. Identifier: DOI 10.1111/jocn.12910; J Clin Nurs 2015;24(19-20):3016-3019 Verified quote
Dose-dumping illustration — verapamil crushed-vs-intact 24 h AUC anchor
Definition: Empirical magnitude anchor for the E13 dose-dumping illustration. Kumagai 2024 measured that crushing a verapamil tablet raised the initial-24 h AUC to ≈1.7× the intact tablet's. The illustration calibrates two COMPOSED concentration-time profiles (a slow-absorption modified-release 'intact' profile and a fast-absorption 'crushed' profile, both from the shipped simulate()/metrics() engine) so their crushed:intact AUC(0–24) ratio reproduces this measured ≈1.7×. It introduces NO new pharmacokinetic formula — it is a calibrated reuse of the existing engine — and the 1.7× is the verapamil EXEMPLAR of why crushing a modified-release product dumps the dose, never a patient-specific prediction for an arbitrary product.
For developers
Sources
- Kumagai S, et al. (2024) (opens in a new tab) Comparative analysis of verapamil pharmacokinetics: simple suspension and crushing. J Clin Med. Identifier: Consensus record 035221cda10f5a5f9ce549d3e142d945 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: the area under the curve for verapamil during the initial 24 h period was 1.7 and 1.3 times greater in the crushed and simple suspension groups, respectively, than in the tablet group.
- Kumagai S, et al. (2024) (opens in a new tab) Comparative analysis of verapamil pharmacokinetics: simple suspension and crushing. J Clin Med. Identifier: Consensus record 035221cda10f5a5f9ce549d3e142d945 Verified quote
Other methods
Additional formulas in the registry.
Per-statin studied ceiling (conversion clamp) & new-start maximum (warning threshold)
Definition: equivalentDose clamps a conversion TARGET dose to the highest VALIDATED/studied once-daily strength — the SAME bound the source guard uses — so a dose that is valid to enter as a source is also valid to display as a target. This preserves same-drug identity (simvastatin 60 mg → simvastatin returns ~60 mg, not 40). These are dose bounds (numeric medical claims) from the FDA prescribing information (DailyMed), each with a verbatim quote. For every statin EXCEPT simvastatin the studied ceiling equals the licensed maximum. Simvastatin diverges: its 80 mg dose is FDA-restricted to patients already taking it chronically without muscle toxicity, so 80 mg is the studied ceiling (and the displayable target ceiling) while 40 mg is the maximum recommended NEW-START dose. The safety layer (getStatinDoseRisk) therefore flags a simvastatin target dose above 40 mg/day as 'above the maximum recommended dose'; the 80 mg dose adds the SEARCH myopathy caveat. When the required %reduction needs more than the studied ceiling, equivalentDose clamps the point dose and sets limitingStatin; a SOURCE dose above the studied ceiling is refused (ABOVE_VALIDATED_CEILING).
For developers
Sources
- Pfizer (FDA prescribing information) (2024) (opens in a new tab) LIPITOR (atorvastatin calcium) tablets — Dosage and Administration. DailyMed / FDA label. Identifier: DailyMed setid a60cc18b-0631-4cf0-b021-9f52224ece65 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The dosage range is 10 mg to 80 mg once daily.
- AstraZeneca (FDA prescribing information) (2023) (opens in a new tab) CRESTOR (rosuvastatin) tablets — Dosage and Administration. DailyMed / FDA label. Identifier: DailyMed setid 325a5d0e-9a72-4015-9fcd-1655fb504cee Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The dosage range for CRESTOR is 5 to 40 mg orally once daily.
- Merck (FDA prescribing information) (2023) (opens in a new tab) ZOCOR (simvastatin) tablets — Dosage and Administration. DailyMed / FDA label. Identifier: DailyMed setid 8f55d5de-5a4f-4a39-8c84-c53976dd6af9 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The maximum recommended dosage is ZOCOR 40 mg once daily. An 80 mg daily dosage of ZOCOR is restricted to patients who have been taking simvastatin 80 mg daily chronically (e.g., for 12 months or more) without evidence of muscle toxicity.
- Bristol-Myers Squibb (FDA prescribing information) (2023) (opens in a new tab) PRAVASTATIN SODIUM tablets — Dosage and Administration. DailyMed / FDA label. Identifier: DailyMed setid f87016fb-4c01-4279-8cf7-59819971ca15 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The recommended starting dosage is pravastatin sodium tablets 40 mg to 80 mg once daily.
- Merck / generic (FDA prescribing information) (2023) (opens in a new tab) LOVASTATIN tablets — Dosage and Administration. DailyMed / FDA label. Identifier: DailyMed setid 0a680e13-0356-4e08-a7fe-78b96ba51b9d Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The recommended dosing range is 10 to 80 mg/day in single or two divided doses; the maximum recommended dose is 80 mg/day.
- Novartis / Sandoz (FDA prescribing information) (2023) (opens in a new tab) LESCOL XL (fluvastatin sodium) extended-release tablets — Dosage and Administration. DailyMed / FDA label. Identifier: DailyMed setid 726ea2db-f1b0-4b73-a515-02157db88a42 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The recommended dosage for LESCOL XL is 80 mg once daily.
- Kowa (FDA prescribing information) (2024) (opens in a new tab) LIVALO (pitavastatin) tablets — Dosage and Administration. DailyMed / FDA label. Identifier: DailyMed setid 44dcbf97-99ec-427c-ba50-207e0069d6d2 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The maximum recommended dosage is LIVALO 4 mg once daily.
- Pfizer (FDA prescribing information) (2024) (opens in a new tab) LIPITOR (atorvastatin calcium) tablets — Dosage and Administration. DailyMed / FDA label. Identifier: DailyMed setid a60cc18b-0631-4cf0-b021-9f52224ece65 Verified quote
Per-statin licensed once-daily minimum (conversion clamp floor)
Definition: The licensed once-daily minimum used as the clamp FLOOR in equivalentDose. These are dose floors (numeric medical claims) sourced from the FDA prescribing information (DailyMed), each with a verbatim quote. They REPLACE the previous floor (the lowest anchor-table row): for several statins the lowest anchor row sits above the lowest licensed dose (pravastatin/lovastatin anchor floor 40, simvastatin 20, fluvastatin 40), so clamping at the table floor pushed a low equivalent dose UP — breaking same-drug identity (converting a statin to itself must return ~the same dose, e.g. pravastatin 10 mg → pravastatin must stay ~10, not 40) and emitting a dose above a patient's actual low-dose label. The log-linear model extrapolates below the lowest anchor exactly as it extrapolates above the top anchor, so only the clamp floor moves.
For developers
Sources
- AstraZeneca (FDA prescribing information) (2023) (opens in a new tab) CRESTOR (rosuvastatin) tablets — Dosage and Administration. DailyMed / FDA label. Identifier: DailyMed setid 325a5d0e-9a72-4015-9fcd-1655fb504cee Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The dosage range for CRESTOR is 5 to 40 mg orally once daily.
- Pfizer (FDA prescribing information) (2024) (opens in a new tab) LIPITOR (atorvastatin calcium) tablets — Dosage and Administration. DailyMed / FDA label. Identifier: DailyMed setid a60cc18b-0631-4cf0-b021-9f52224ece65 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The dosage range is 10 mg to 80 mg once daily.
- Merck (FDA prescribing information) (2023) (opens in a new tab) ZOCOR (simvastatin) tablets — Dosage and Administration. DailyMed / FDA label. Identifier: DailyMed setid 8f55d5de-5a4f-4a39-8c84-c53976dd6af9 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: For patients with severe renal impairment [creatinine clearance (CLcr) 15 – 29 mL/min], the recommended starting dosage of simvastatin is 5 mg once daily.
- Bristol-Myers Squibb (FDA prescribing information) (2023) (opens in a new tab) PRAVASTATIN SODIUM tablets — Dosage and Administration. DailyMed / FDA label. Identifier: DailyMed setid e9c188f7-cd6f-afac-b493-36552d86589e Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: In patients with severe renal impairment, the recommended starting dosage is pravastatin sodium 10 mg once daily.
- Merck / generic (FDA prescribing information) (2023) (opens in a new tab) LOVASTATIN tablets — Dosage and Administration. DailyMed / FDA label. Identifier: DailyMed setid 0a680e13-0356-4e08-a7fe-78b96ba51b9d Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The recommended dosing range is 10 to 80 mg/day in single or two divided doses; the maximum recommended dose is 80 mg/day.
- Novartis / Sandoz (FDA prescribing information) (2023) (opens in a new tab) LESCOL (fluvastatin sodium) capsules — Description and Dosage. DailyMed / FDA label. Identifier: DailyMed setid e38126a5-9d6a-422f-812c-a01610108162 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Lescol is supplied as capsules containing fluvastatin sodium, equivalent to 20 mg or 40 mg of fluvastatin, for oral administration.
- Kowa (FDA prescribing information) (2024) (opens in a new tab) LIVALO (pitavastatin) tablets — Dosage and Administration. DailyMed / FDA label. Identifier: DailyMed setid 44dcbf97-99ec-427c-ba50-207e0069d6d2 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: For patients with renal impairment, the recommended starting dosage for patients with moderate and severe renal impairment and patients with end-stage renal disease receiving hemodialysis is LIVALO 1 mg once daily.
- AstraZeneca (FDA prescribing information) (2023) (opens in a new tab) CRESTOR (rosuvastatin) tablets — Dosage and Administration. DailyMed / FDA label. Identifier: DailyMed setid 325a5d0e-9a72-4015-9fcd-1655fb504cee Verified quote
Pitavastatin %LDL-C anchor (2 mg = atorvastatin 10 mg bridge)
Definition: Pitavastatin anchor for the statin LDL-equivalence engine. The single empirical bridge is pitavastatin 2 mg = 37%: Vo 2024 states the 2 mg dose matched atorvastatin's 10 mg dose, and atorvastatin 10 mg = 37% in the Law-2003 anchor table, so pitavastatin 2 mg is anchored to an already-verbatim value. The 1 mg = 31% and 4 mg = 43% rows are the engine's own K=6-per-doubling model extrapolated to pitavastatin's licensed dose bounds (1–4 mg) to give the clamp limits; they are model-derived, NOT independent empirical claims, and sit inside Vo's verbatim observed 28–47% envelope (31 > 28; 43 < 47). Vo does not report 31% or 43% for specific doses. Two pitavastatin-only caveats ride along: (1) Vo's data are from Asian populations (the review is titled '…in Dyslipidemia in Asia'), so response may differ elsewhere; (2) VOYAGER did not study pitavastatin, so the VOYAGER potency-ratio cross-check does not cover any pitavastatin conversion and the estimate is lower-confidence. No pitavastatin potency ratio is fabricated; tier stays B.
For developers
Sources
- Vo NX, Pham HL, Bui TT, Bui TT (2024) (opens in a new tab) Systematic Review on Efficacy, Effectiveness, and Safety of Pitavastatin in Dyslipidemia in Asia. Healthcare. Identifier: DOI 10.3390/healthcare13010059; PMCID PMC11720254 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Pitavastatin doses (1–4 mg) reduced LDL-C by 28–47%, comparable to atorvastatin, rosuvastatin, and simvastatin. The 2 mg dose matched atorvastatin's 10 mg dose in efficacy for both short-term (35–42%) and long-term (28–36%) use.
- Vo NX, Pham HL, Bui TT, Bui TT (2024) (opens in a new tab) Systematic Review on Efficacy, Effectiveness, and Safety of Pitavastatin in Dyslipidemia in Asia. Healthcare. Identifier: DOI 10.3390/healthcare13010059; PMCID PMC11720254 Verified quote
Dihydropyridine % of highest licensed dose (Law 2003; no mg-for-mg conversion)
Definition: The only honest within-class dihydropyridine comparison axis: each DHP normalized to a fraction of its OWN highest licensed antihypertensive dose, never converted mg-for-mg. Law 2003 defined equivalent doses as the drug's 'usual maintenance dose' (the 'standard dose') and found a FLAT dose-response — 'All five categories of drug produced similar reductions in blood pressure', with the average reduction 9.1/5.5 mmHg at standard dose and only 20% lower (7.1/4.4) at half standard dose. For the calcium-channel-blocker class specifically, Table 2 gives placebo-corrected reductions (systolic/diastolic mmHg) of 5.9/3.9 at half standard dose, 8.8/5.9 at standard dose, and 11.7/7.9 at twice standard dose — so doubling the dose adds little. Because no source measured DHP BP at fractions of the licensed MAX, this axis attaches NO per-dose mmHg to the %-of-max headline; the per-drug highest-licensed-dose denominators come from each drug's label (the dhpRef<Drug> entries: amlodipine 10, levamlodipine 5, felodipine 10, nifedipine prolonged-release 90, lacidipine 6, nitrendipine 40, lercanidipine 20 mg/day). This entry also backs the engine's refusal of mg-for-mg conversion (sourceForRefusal). Displayed tier B (A-grade meta-analysis ∧ label/guideline-defined per-drug doses).
For developers
Sources
- Law MR, Wald NJ, Morris JK, Jordan RE (2003) (opens in a new tab) Value of low dose combination treatment with blood pressure lowering drugs: analysis of 354 randomised trials. BMJ. Identifier: PMID 12829555; PMCID PMC162261; DOI 10.1136/bmj.326.7404.1427 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: In combining trial data we specified equivalent daily doses of different drugs as the 'usual maintenance dose' in reference pharmacopoeias. We call this the standard dose. … All five categories of drug produced similar reductions in blood pressure. … The average reduction was 9.1 mm Hg systolic and 5.5 mm Hg diastolic at standard dose and 7.1 mm Hg systolic and 4.4 mm Hg diastolic (20% lower) at half standard dose.
- Law MR, Wald NJ, Morris JK, Jordan RE (2003) (opens in a new tab) Value of low dose combination treatment with blood pressure lowering drugs: analysis of 354 randomised trials. BMJ. Identifier: PMID 12829555; PMCID PMC162261; DOI 10.1136/bmj.326.7404.1427 Verified quote
Dihydropyridines: BP-equipotent ≠ interchangeable (Furberg 1995 + Toal 2012)
Definition: Backs the mandatory honesty caveat that a matched blood-pressure effect does NOT make two dihydropyridines clinically interchangeable. Furberg 1995 (meta-analysis) found short-acting nifedipine at moderate-to-high doses increased total mortality in coronary disease and warned the effect may extend to other dihydropyridines. Toal 2012 (review) documents that even within the DHP subgroup formulations, pharmacokinetics and durations of action differ markedly (amlodipine inherently long half-life vs nifedipine inherently short, made once-daily only by the GITS delivery system), and that potent arterial vasodilators evoke a baroreceptor-mediated reflex sympathetic increase in heart rate. Reference data only — never a conversion, ratio, or per-dose number.
For developers
Sources
- Furberg CD, Psaty BM, Meyer JV (1995) (opens in a new tab) Nifedipine. Dose-related increase in mortality in patients with coronary heart disease. Circulation. Identifier: PMID 7648682; DOI 10.1161/01.cir.92.5.1326 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: In patients with coronary disease, the use of short-acting nifedipine in moderate to high doses causes an increase in total mortality. … Other calcium antagonists may have similar adverse effects, in particular those of the dihydropyridine type.
- Toal CB, Meredith PA, Elliott HL (2012) (opens in a new tab) Long-acting dihydropyridine calcium-channel blockers and sympathetic nervous system activity in hypertension: A literature review comparing amlodipine and nifedipine GITS. Blood Press. Identifier: PMID 22762301; PMCID PMC3469239; DOI 10.3109/08037051.2012.690615 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Even within the dihydropyridine subgroup, there are significant differences in formulations, pharmacokinetics, durations of action and their effects on blood pressure, heart rate, end organs and the sympathetic nervous system. … Amlodipine has an inherently long pharmacokinetic half-life, whereas, in contrast, nifedipine has an inherently short half-life but in the GITS formulation the sophisticated delivery system allows for once-daily dosing. … However, it has long been known that potent arterial vasodilators evoke a baroreceptor-mediated reflex increase in heart rate that is mediated via the sympathetic nervous system.
- Furberg CD, Psaty BM, Meyer JV (1995) (opens in a new tab) Nifedipine. Dose-related increase in mortality in patients with coronary heart disease. Circulation. Identifier: PMID 7648682; DOI 10.1161/01.cir.92.5.1326 Verified quote
Dihydropyridine stepwise switching guide — published direct-switch starting doses (no general mg-for-mg conversion)
Definition: Surfaces the specific starting-dose findings from the two DIRECT published DHP switch studies as approximate (≈) starting points that ALWAYS require titration against measured blood pressure. This is NOT a general mg-for-mg converter and NOT an equipotency claim — the class still refuses general conversion (dhpConvert). Yamreudeewong 1999 (n=27) found amlodipine 5 or 10 mg once daily can be used when converting from nifedipine ER, with dose titration required in 16 of 27; the study did NOT report the pre-switch nifedipine doses, so NO source-dose-specific mapping (e.g. 30→5, 60→10) is claimed — only a fixed 5-or-10 mg starting choice. Parra 2000 (retrospective, n=100) advised that when converting from amlodipine the felodipine dose should usually be EQUAL to the amlodipine dose, and that other calcium-channel antagonists or below-equal felodipine doses need titration. Both studies are DIRECTIONAL (the reverse direction is not licensed). A THIRD, lower-confidence pairing — amlodipine → nifedipine GITS (5→30, 10→60 mg/day) — is surfaced under the issue-#43 scoped waiver of §9.8: it rests on TRIAL-DOSING-ARM provenance (Testa 1998 PMID 9869019, Elliott 2002 PMID 11821720, Huang 2019 PMID 30973207 — head-to-head RCTs where those dose arms gave ~equal ambulatory BP), NOT a direct conversion study, and is tagged evidenceBasis 'rct-dosing-arm' so the UI shows it at lower confidence than the two direct-conversion pairs; it is the number the walled-off §9.10 aid used, now inside the cited guide. Any other source→target pair, an out-of-range/non-arm dose, or an unknown drug ships NO number and falls back to the %-of-max positional comparison. The general mg-for-mg refusal (dhpConvert) is byte-unchanged. Displayed tier C for a studied starting dose (small conversion / trial-arm studies), B for the no-number algorithm content (Law 2003 + labels).
For developers
Sources
- Yamreudeewong W, Halverson VJ, Lower DL, Kilpatrick DM, Enlow AM, Montopoli G (1999) (opens in a new tab) Evaluation of amlodipine dosing for conversion of nifedipine extended-release to amlodipine in the treatment of hypertension. Ann Pharmacother. Identifier: PMID 9972377; DOI 10.1345/aph.18177 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: This study indicates the amlodipine dosage of 5 or 10 mg once daily can be used when nifedipine ER is converted to amlodipine in the treatment of hypertension. … Dosing titration of amlodipine was required in 16 of 27 patients after the switch.
- Parra D, Beckey NP, Korman L (2000) (opens in a new tab) Retrospective evaluation of the conversion of amlodipine to alternative calcium channel blockers. Pharmacotherapy. Identifier: PMID 10999500; DOI 10.1592/phco.20.13.1072.35022 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: When converting patients from amlodipine, dosages usually should be equal to those of felodipine; if converting to other calcium channel antagonists, the need for adjustments should be anticipated. … Conversion to calcium channel antagonists other than felodipine or less than equal dosages of felodipine may require dosage titration.
- Testa MA, Turner RR, Simonson DC, Krafcik MB, Calvo C, Luque-Otero M (1998) (opens in a new tab) Quality of life and calcium channel blockade with nifedipine GITS versus amlodipine in hypertensive patients in Spain. J Hypertens. Identifier: PMID 9869019; DOI 10.1097/00004872-199816120-00018 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: This was a double-blind, double-dummy, randomized clinical trial comparing nifedipine GITS (30 mg) and amlodipine (5 mg) for 24 weeks following a placebo run-in. … There were no significant differences between active treatment groups in the blood pressure changes (systolic blood pressure: nifedipine GITS -15.5 mmHg; amlodipine -15.7 mmHg).
- Elliott HL, Elawad M, Wilkinson R, Singh SP (2002) (opens in a new tab) Persistence of antihypertensive efficacy after missed doses: comparison of amlodipine and nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system. J Hypertens. Identifier: PMID 11821720; DOI 10.1097/00004872-200202000-00025 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: In a randomized crossover design, 42 patients were randomized to receive amlodipine (5-10 mg) or the GITS formulation of nifedipine (nifedipine GITS) (30-60 mg) once daily for 12 weeks, then vice versa. … When compliance was not perfect, i.e. when one or two doses were missed, DBP was maintained at a significantly lower level with amlodipine compared with nifedipine GITS.
- Huang QF, Sheng CS, Li Y, Dou Y, Zheng MS, Zhu ZM, Wang JG (ARMORS Investigators) (2019) (opens in a new tab) A randomized controlled trial on the blood pressure-lowering effect of amlodipine and nifedipine-GITS in sustained hypertension. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). Identifier: PMID 30973207; DOI 10.1111/jch.13543 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Eligible patients were randomly assigned to amlodipine 5-10 mg/day or nifedipine-GITS 30-60 mg/day. … After 8-week treatment, BP was similarly reduced in the amlodipine (n = 257) and nifedipine-GITS groups (n = 248) for both clinic and ambulatory (24-hour systolic/diastolic BP 10.3/6.5 vs 10.9/6.3 mm Hg, P ≥ 0.24) measurements.
- Yamreudeewong W, Halverson VJ, Lower DL, Kilpatrick DM, Enlow AM, Montopoli G (1999) (opens in a new tab) Evaluation of amlodipine dosing for conversion of nifedipine extended-release to amlodipine in the treatment of hypertension. Ann Pharmacother. Identifier: PMID 9972377; DOI 10.1345/aph.18177 Verified quote
DHP reference dose — amlodipine 5 mg maintenance / 10 mg max (Norvasc FDA label)
Definition: Amlodipine besylate (Norvasc) US prescribing information: usual initial antihypertensive dose 5 mg once daily, maximum 10 mg once daily — the highest-licensed-dose denominator for the DHP %-of-max comparison.
For developers
Sources
- Pfizer (Norvasc prescribing information) (2019) (opens in a new tab) NORVASC (amlodipine besylate) tablets — Highlights of Prescribing Information. DailyMed (US FDA label). Identifier: DailyMed setid abd6a2ca-40c2-485c-bc53-db1c652505ed §2.1 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The usual initial antihypertensive oral dose of NORVASC is 5 mg once daily, and the maximum dose is 10 mg once daily.
- Pfizer (Norvasc prescribing information) (2019) (opens in a new tab) NORVASC (amlodipine besylate) tablets — Highlights of Prescribing Information. DailyMed (US FDA label). Identifier: DailyMed setid abd6a2ca-40c2-485c-bc53-db1c652505ed §2.1 Verified quote
DHP reference dose — levamlodipine 2.5 mg maintenance / 5 mg max (CONJUPRI FDA label)
Definition: Levamlodipine (CONJUPRI; the S(–)-enantiomer of amlodipine) US FDA prescribing information: usual initial antihypertensive dose 2.5 mg once daily, maximum 5 mg once daily — the highest-licensed-dose denominator. Treated as its own drug; the eutomer-vs-racemate 1:2 relationship to amlodipine is NOT asserted by this posology and is not modelled.
For developers
Sources
- CSPC Ouyi Pharmaceutical (CONJUPRI prescribing information) (2024) (opens in a new tab) CONJUPRI (levamlodipine) tablets — Prescribing Information. DailyMed (US FDA label). Identifier: DailyMed setid c3cca66e-348a-43e8-8f96-e995104dae3d §2.1 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The usual initial antihypertensive oral dose of levamlodipine is 2.5 mg once daily, and the maximum dose is 5 mg once daily.
- CSPC Ouyi Pharmaceutical (CONJUPRI prescribing information) (2024) (opens in a new tab) CONJUPRI (levamlodipine) tablets — Prescribing Information. DailyMed (US FDA label). Identifier: DailyMed setid c3cca66e-348a-43e8-8f96-e995104dae3d §2.1 Verified quote
DHP reference dose — felodipine ER 5 mg maintenance / 10 mg max (Plendil FDA label)
Definition: Felodipine extended-release (Plendil) US prescribing information: recommended starting dose 5 mg once a day, recommended dosage range 2.5-10 mg once daily, with doses above 10 mg/day adding little BP effect but markedly more peripheral edema — so 10 mg/day is the highest-licensed-dose denominator.
For developers
Sources
- Felodipine extended-release tablets prescribing information (2009) (opens in a new tab) FELODIPINE extended-release tablets — Dosage and Administration. DailyMed (US FDA label). Identifier: DailyMed setid b951455c-c235-4e23-9e21-08672d108726 (Plendil) Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The recommended starting dose is 5 mg once a day. … The recommended dosage range is 2.5 - 10 mg once daily. … In clinical trials, doses above 10 mg daily showed an increased blood pressure response but a large increase in the rate of peripheral edema and other vasodilatory adverse events.
- Felodipine extended-release tablets prescribing information (2009) (opens in a new tab) FELODIPINE extended-release tablets — Dosage and Administration. DailyMed (US FDA label). Identifier: DailyMed setid b951455c-c235-4e23-9e21-08672d108726 (Plendil) Verified quote
DHP reference dose — nifedipine prolonged-release 20 mg initial / 90 mg max (Adalat LA SmPC)
Definition: Nifedipine prolonged-release / GITS once-daily antihypertensive form (Adalat LA) UK SmPC: recommended initial dose 20 mg once daily (mild-moderate; 30 mg in severe hypertension), maximum 90 mg once daily — the highest-licensed-dose denominator. This is the once-daily prolonged-release antihypertensive formulation ONLY — NOT immediate-release capsules and NOT tocolysis.
For developers
Sources
- Bayer (Adalat LA prolonged-release tablets SmPC) (2026) (opens in a new tab) Adalat LA 30 mg prolonged-release tablets — Summary of Product Characteristics. electronic Medicines Compendium (UK). Identifier: eMC product 6180 §4.2 (rev. 12 May 2026) Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: In mild to moderate hypertension, the recommended initial dose is one 20 mg tablet once-daily. In severe hypertension, the recommended initial dose is one 30 mg tablet once-daily. … If necessary, the dosage can be increased according to individual requirements up to a maximum of 90 mg once-daily.
- Bayer (Adalat LA prolonged-release tablets SmPC) (2026) (opens in a new tab) Adalat LA 30 mg prolonged-release tablets — Summary of Product Characteristics. electronic Medicines Compendium (UK). Identifier: eMC product 6180 §4.2 (rev. 12 May 2026) Verified quote
DHP reference dose — lacidipine 2 mg initial / 6 mg effective ceiling (Motens SmPC)
Definition: Lacidipine (Motens) UK SmPC: recommended initial dose 2 mg once daily, may be increased to 4 mg then 6 mg; daily doses above 6 mg have not been shown to be significantly more effective — so 6 mg/day is the highest effective (denominator) dose.
For developers
Sources
- Lacidipine (Motens) SmPC (2024) (opens in a new tab) Motens Tablets 2mg (lacidipine) — Summary of Product Characteristics. electronic Medicines Compendium (UK). Identifier: eMC product 894 §4.2 (rev. 25 Sep 2024) Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The recommended initial dose is 2 mg once daily. The dose may be increased to 4 mg (and then, if necessary, to 6 mg) after adequate time has been allowed for the full pharmacological effect to occur. … Daily doses above 6 mg have not been shown to be significantly more effective.
- Lacidipine (Motens) SmPC (2024) (opens in a new tab) Motens Tablets 2mg (lacidipine) — Summary of Product Characteristics. electronic Medicines Compendium (UK). Identifier: eMC product 894 §4.2 (rev. 25 Sep 2024) Verified quote
DHP reference dose — nitrendipine 20 mg/day usual / 40 mg/day max (German Fachinformation)
Definition: Nitrendipine (Nitrendipin-ratiopharm) German Fachinformation: standard adult dose 20 mg/day (as 20 mg once daily or 10 mg twice daily), maximum daily dose 40 mg/day — the highest-licensed-dose denominator. Doses are PER-DAY totals (not per-dose), unlike the once-daily DHPs. Quote in the source language (German) with the dose numbers verbatim.
For developers
Sources
- ratiopharm (Nitrendipin-ratiopharm Tabletten Fachinformation) (2020) (opens in a new tab) Nitrendipin-ratiopharm Tabletten — Fachinformation (German SmPC). Fachinformation (Germany). Identifier: Nitrendipin-ratiopharm Fachinformation §4.2 (Stand Oktober 2020); corroborated by Nitrendipin AbZ (fachinfo.de 004396) Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Richtdosis für Erwachsene: 2-mal täglich (morgens und abends) 1 Tablette Nitrendipin-ratiopharm® 10 mg Tabletten oder 1-mal täglich (morgens) 1 Tablette Nitrendipin-ratiopharm® 20 mg Tabletten (entspr. 20 mg Nitrendipin). … Die maximale Tagesdosis beträgt 40 mg Nitrendipin.
- ratiopharm (Nitrendipin-ratiopharm Tabletten Fachinformation) (2020) (opens in a new tab) Nitrendipin-ratiopharm Tabletten — Fachinformation (German SmPC). Fachinformation (Germany). Identifier: Nitrendipin-ratiopharm Fachinformation §4.2 (Stand Oktober 2020); corroborated by Nitrendipin AbZ (fachinfo.de 004396) Verified quote
DHP reference dose — lercanidipine 10 mg maintenance / 20 mg max (Zanidip SmPC)
Definition: Lercanidipine (Zanidip) UK SmPC: recommended dose 10 mg once daily, may be increased to 20 mg; the dose-response curve plateaus at 20-30 mg so higher doses are unlikely to improve efficacy — so 20 mg/day is the highest-licensed-dose denominator.
For developers
Sources
- Recordati (Zanidip tablets SmPC) (2021) (opens in a new tab) Zanidip 10 mg tablets (lercanidipine) — Summary of Product Characteristics. electronic Medicines Compendium (UK). Identifier: eMC product 191 §4.2 (rev. 24 Jun 2021) Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The recommended dosage is 10 mg orally once a day at least 15 minutes before meals; the dose may be increased to 20 mg depending on the individual patient's response. … Since the dose-response curve is steep with a plateau at doses between 20-30 mg, it is unlikely that efficacy will be improved by higher doses; whereas side effects may increase.
- Recordati (Zanidip tablets SmPC) (2021) (opens in a new tab) Zanidip 10 mg tablets (lercanidipine) — Summary of Product Characteristics. electronic Medicines Compendium (UK). Identifier: eMC product 191 §4.2 (rev. 24 Jun 2021) Verified quote
DHP effective-band floor — amlodipine 2.5 mg min-effective (Norvasc FDA label §2.1)
Definition: Amlodipine besylate (Norvasc) US label §2.1 gives 2.5 mg once daily as the reduced start for small/fragile/elderly/hepatic patients — the min-effective floor of the amlodipine effective band. Law 2003 corroborates a demonstrated antihypertensive effect at the half-standard dose (placebo-corrected 5.9/3.9 mmHg). This SAME quote also backs the amlodipine hepatic + elderly adjustedStartMg 2.5 checkpoint. The ceiling side (10 mg) is licensing-tolerability, NOT an efficacy plateau — effect is still rising at 10 mg (Law twice-standard 11.7/7.9 > standard 8.8/5.9), so no 'no added effect above X' claim is made.
For developers
Sources
- Pfizer (Norvasc prescribing information) (2019) (opens in a new tab) NORVASC (amlodipine besylate) tablets — Dosage and Administration. DailyMed (US FDA label). Identifier: DailyMed setid abd6a2ca-40c2-485c-bc53-db1c652505ed §2.1 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Small, fragile, or elderly patients, or patients with hepatic insufficiency may be started on 2.5 mg once daily.
- Pfizer (Norvasc prescribing information) (2019) (opens in a new tab) NORVASC (amlodipine besylate) tablets — Dosage and Administration. DailyMed (US FDA label). Identifier: DailyMed setid abd6a2ca-40c2-485c-bc53-db1c652505ed §2.1 Verified quote
DHP effective-band floor — levamlodipine 1.25 mg min (CONJUPRI FDA label §2.1)
Definition: Levamlodipine (CONJUPRI) US label §2.1 gives 1.25 mg once daily as the reduced/add-on start — the min-effective floor of the levamlodipine band. This is a SPECIAL-POPULATION / add-on dose: monotherapy efficacy at 1.25 mg is NOT independently proven, and the racemic-amlodipine (Law 2003) numbers must NOT be transferred (different enantiomer). Backs the levamlodipine hepatic + elderly adjustedStartMg 1.25 checkpoint.
For developers
Sources
- CSPC Ouyi Pharmaceutical (CONJUPRI prescribing information) (2024) (opens in a new tab) CONJUPRI (levamlodipine) tablets — Dosage and Administration. DailyMed (US FDA label). Identifier: DailyMed setid c3cca66e-348a-43e8-8f96-e995104dae3d §2.1 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Small, fragile, or elderly patients, or patients with hepatic insufficiency may be started on 1.25 mg once daily and this dose may be used when adding levamlodipine to other antihypertensive therapy.
- CSPC Ouyi Pharmaceutical (CONJUPRI prescribing information) (2024) (opens in a new tab) CONJUPRI (levamlodipine) tablets — Dosage and Administration. DailyMed (US FDA label). Identifier: DailyMed setid c3cca66e-348a-43e8-8f96-e995104dae3d §2.1 Verified quote
DHP effective-band floor — nifedipine GITS 20 mg min-effective (Toal 2001)
Definition: Toal 2001 (nifedipine GITS switch-down RCT) shows 20 mg once daily retains antihypertensive efficacy in mild-moderate hypertension controlled on 30 mg — the RCT-backed min-effective floor of the nifedipine GITS band (corroborated by Adalat LA §4.2 initial 20 mg). The effective CEILING is UNDETERMINED: DISTINCT (Kjeldsen 2016) showed dose-response still rising 20→30→60 mg and 60→90 is untested, so no plateau below the licensed max (90) is sourceable — the band renders the licensed max with a 'no sourced effective ceiling' note (fail-closed), never a ceiling number.
For developers
Sources
- Toal CB (2001) (opens in a new tab) Nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system (GITS) for the treatment of hypertension: a switch study from 30 mg to 20 mg. Clinical Therapeutics. Identifier: PMID 11219482 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Patients whose mild to moderate essential hypertension is controlled with nifedipine GITS 30 mg once daily may be able to switch to 20 mg once daily with continued antihypertensive efficacy.
- Toal CB (2001) (opens in a new tab) Nifedipine gastrointestinal therapeutic system (GITS) for the treatment of hypertension: a switch study from 30 mg to 20 mg. Clinical Therapeutics. Identifier: PMID 11219482 Verified quote
DHP effective-band floor — nitrendipine 10 mg od min-effective (Lederle 1991 trial, NOT label)
Definition: Lederle 1991 (monotherapy trial, n=141) found nitrendipine 10 mg once daily effective in mild hypertension (DBP -11.8 vs -5 placebo) — the min-effective floor of the nitrendipine band. CRITICAL honesty marker: the German label does NOT license 10 mg once-daily as a general dose (label 10 mg = twice-daily = 20/day, or a hepatic-reduced start), so the 10-mg-od floor is attributed to the TRIAL, not the label (minEffectiveKind literature-not-label). The effective CEILING is UNDETERMINED (no 'no further benefit above X' sentence exists) → band renders the licensed max (40) with a 'no sourced effective ceiling' note, never a ceiling number.
For developers
Sources
- Lederle RM (1991) (opens in a new tab) Efficacy and tolerability of nitrendipine 10 mg once daily in the monotherapy of mild essential hypertension. Journal of Cardiovascular Pharmacology. Identifier: PMID 1723455 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: nitrendipine is suitable for monotherapy of mild arterial hypertension in the dosage of 10 mg once daily used in this study.
- Lederle RM (1991) (opens in a new tab) Efficacy and tolerability of nitrendipine 10 mg once daily in the monotherapy of mild essential hypertension. Journal of Cardiovascular Pharmacology. Identifier: PMID 1723455 Verified quote
CCB HFrEF — amlodipine documented-safe/neutral (PRAISE, Packer 1996)
Definition: PRAISE (Packer 1996, NEJM) established that amlodipine did not increase cardiovascular morbidity or mortality in severe heart failure — a SAFETY/NEUTRALITY finding, never a benefit claim (PRAISE-2 refuted the subgroup benefit). Backs the amlodipine HFrEF checkpoint as documentedSafe (neutral).
For developers
Sources
- Packer M, O'Connor CM, Ghali JK, et al. (PRAISE Study Group) (1996) (opens in a new tab) Effect of amlodipine on morbidity and mortality in severe chronic heart failure. New England Journal of Medicine. Identifier: PMID 8813041; DOI 10.1056/NEJM199610103351501 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Amlodipine did not increase cardiovascular morbidity or mortality in patients with severe heart failure.
- Packer M, O'Connor CM, Ghali JK, et al. (PRAISE Study Group) (1996) (opens in a new tab) Effect of amlodipine on morbidity and mortality in severe chronic heart failure. New England Journal of Medicine. Identifier: PMID 8813041; DOI 10.1056/NEJM199610103351501 Verified quote
CCB HFrEF — felodipine documented-safe/neutral (V-HeFT III, Cohn 1997)
Definition: V-HeFT III (Cohn 1997, Circulation) found felodipine safe but not clearly efficacious in heart failure — a SAFETY/NEUTRALITY finding, never a benefit claim. Backs the felodipine HFrEF checkpoint as documentedSafe (neutral).
For developers
Sources
- Cohn JN, Ziesche S, Smith R, et al. (V-HeFT III) (1997) (opens in a new tab) Effect of the calcium antagonist felodipine as supplementary vasodilator therapy in patients with chronic heart failure treated with enalapril: V-HeFT III. Circulation. Identifier: PMID 9264493; DOI 10.1161/01.cir.96.3.856 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The drug appears to be safe but not clearly efficacious in patients with heart failure.
- Cohn JN, Ziesche S, Smith R, et al. (V-HeFT III) (1997) (opens in a new tab) Effect of the calcium antagonist felodipine as supplementary vasodilator therapy in patients with chronic heart failure treated with enalapril: V-HeFT III. Circulation. Identifier: PMID 9264493; DOI 10.1161/01.cir.96.3.856 Verified quote
CCB HFrEF — verapamil/diltiazem contraindicated (verapamil + diltiazem SmPC §4.3)
Definition: The non-dihydropyridine CCBs verapamil and diltiazem are contraindicated in heart failure per their SmPC §4.3 (verapamil: uncompensated heart failure; diltiazem: left ventricular failure with pulmonary stasis). Paired with MDPIT (ccbHfDiltiazemMdpit) for the mechanism. Backs the verapamil/diltiazem HFrEF checkpoint as contraindicated. Verapamil's label word is 'uncompensated' — do not over-read it beyond the label + MDPIT.
For developers
Sources
- Verapamil hydrochloride SmPC (2024) (opens in a new tab) Verapamil — Summary of Product Characteristics §4.3 Contraindications. electronic Medicines Compendium (UK). Identifier: eMC product 13118 §4.3 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Uncompensated heart failure
- Diltiazem hydrochloride SmPC (2024) (opens in a new tab) Diltiazem — Summary of Product Characteristics §4.3 Contraindications. electronic Medicines Compendium (UK). Identifier: eMC product 1465 §4.3 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Left ventricular failure with pulmonary stasis
- Verapamil hydrochloride SmPC (2024) (opens in a new tab) Verapamil — Summary of Product Characteristics §4.3 Contraindications. electronic Medicines Compendium (UK). Identifier: eMC product 13118 §4.3 Verified quote
CCB HFrEF — diltiazem late CHF in low-EF (MDPIT, Goldstein 1991)
Definition: MDPIT (Goldstein 1991, Circulation) showed diltiazem increased late congestive heart failure in post-MI patients with a baseline ejection fraction below 0.40 — the mechanism corroborating the non-DHP HF contraindication (ccbHfNonDhp).
For developers
Sources
- Goldstein RE, Boccuzzi SJ, Cruess D, Nattel S (MDPIT) (1991) (opens in a new tab) Diltiazem increases late-onset congestive heart failure in postinfarction patients with early reduction in ejection fraction. Circulation. Identifier: PMID 1984898; DOI 10.1161/01.cir.83.1.52 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Among those with a baseline EF of less than 0.40, late CHF appeared in 12% (39/326) receiving placebo and 21% (61/297) receiving diltiazem (p = 0.004).
- Goldstein RE, Boccuzzi SJ, Cruess D, Nattel S (MDPIT) (1991) (opens in a new tab) Diltiazem increases late-onset congestive heart failure in postinfarction patients with early reduction in ejection fraction. Circulation. Identifier: PMID 1984898; DOI 10.1161/01.cir.83.1.52 Verified quote
CCB AV-block/SSS/bradycardia — verapamil/diltiazem contraindicated (SmPC §4.3)
Definition: Verapamil and diltiazem are cardiac-selective and contraindicated in high-grade AV block, sick sinus syndrome, and severe bradycardia per SmPC §4.3 (pacemaker-exception wording preserved). Backs the verapamil/diltiazem AV-block/bradycardia checkpoint as contraindicated.
For developers
Sources
- Verapamil hydrochloride SmPC (2024) (opens in a new tab) Verapamil — Summary of Product Characteristics §4.3 Contraindications. electronic Medicines Compendium (UK). Identifier: eMC product 13118 §4.3 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Second or third degree atrioventricular block (except in patients with a functioning artificial pacemaker)… Sick sinus syndrome… Bradycardia of less than 50 beats/minute
- Diltiazem hydrochloride SmPC (2024) (opens in a new tab) Diltiazem — Summary of Product Characteristics §4.3 Contraindications. electronic Medicines Compendium (UK). Identifier: eMC product 1465 §4.3 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Sick sinus syndrome, 2nd or 3rd degree AV block in patients without a functioning pacemaker… Severe bradycardia (less than 50 beats per minute).
- Verapamil hydrochloride SmPC (2024) (opens in a new tab) Verapamil — Summary of Product Characteristics §4.3 Contraindications. electronic Medicines Compendium (UK). Identifier: eMC product 13118 §4.3 Verified quote
CCB AV-block — dihydropyridines vascular-selective, exempt (Lee 2023)
Definition: Lee 2023 review: dihydropyridine CCBs are vascular-selective potent vasodilators, whereas non-DHP CCBs are cardiac-selective and act on the SA and AV nodes — so DHPs carry no documented AV-block/bradycardia hazard. Backs the DHP-class AV-block checkpoint as noDocumentedHazard (sourced, NOT a silent safe).
For developers
Sources
- Lee SE (2023) (opens in a new tab) Calcium channel blockers for hypertension: old but still useful. Cardiovascular Prevention and Pharmacotherapy. Identifier: DOI 10.36011/cpp.2023.5.e2 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: DHP-CCBs are vascular-selective and function as potent vasodilators, whereas non-DHP-CCBs are cardiac-selective… acting on… the sinoatrial (SA) node and atrioventricular (AV) node.
- Lee SE (2023) (opens in a new tab) Calcium channel blockers for hypertension: old but still useful. Cardiovascular Prevention and Pharmacotherapy. Identifier: DOI 10.36011/cpp.2023.5.e2 Verified quote
CCB hepatic — felodipine lower to min effective; severe = contraindicated (felodipine SmPC §4.2/§4.3)
Definition: Felodipine SmPC (emc 11604) §4.2/§4.3: in mild-moderate hepatic impairment the starting dose is lowered to the minimum therapeutic effective dose, and felodipine is contraindicated in severe hepatic impairment. No fixed mg is given, so the checkpoint carries NO adjustedStartMg (cautionDoseDown, qualitative).
For developers
Sources
- Felodipine (Pinefeld XL) SmPC (2024) (opens in a new tab) Felodipine prolonged-release tablets — SmPC §4.2 Posology / §4.3 Contraindications. electronic Medicines Compendium (UK). Identifier: eMC product 11604 §4.2/§4.3 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: In mild to moderate hepatic impairment, the recommended starting dose should be lowered to the minimum therapeutic effective dose. … Felodipine is contraindicated in patients with severe hepatic impairment.
- Felodipine (Pinefeld XL) SmPC (2024) (opens in a new tab) Felodipine prolonged-release tablets — SmPC §4.2 Posology / §4.3 Contraindications. electronic Medicines Compendium (UK). Identifier: eMC product 11604 §4.2/§4.3 Verified quote
CCB hepatic/age — nifedipine GITS contraindicated in hepatic; no elderly adjustment (Adalat LA §4.2/§4.3)
Definition: Adalat LA (nifedipine GITS) SmPC §4.3 contraindicates the formulation in hepatic impairment (owing to its duration of action), and §4.2 states no dose adaptation is needed in patients over 65. Backs nifedipine hepatic = contraindicated (formulation) and nifedipine elderly = noAdjustmentNeeded (a SOURCED negative — contradicts the naïve 'elderly → lower'). No adjustedStartMg.
For developers
Sources
- Bayer (Adalat LA prolonged-release tablets SmPC) (2026) (opens in a new tab) Adalat LA prolonged-release tablets — SmPC §4.2 Posology / §4.3 Contraindications. electronic Medicines Compendium (UK). Identifier: eMC product 6180 §4.2/§4.3 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Owing to the duration of action of the formulation, Adalat LA should not be administered to patients with hepatic impairment. … no dose adaptation in elderly people above 65 years is necessary.
- Bayer (Adalat LA prolonged-release tablets SmPC) (2026) (opens in a new tab) Adalat LA prolonged-release tablets — SmPC §4.2 Posology / §4.3 Contraindications. electronic Medicines Compendium (UK). Identifier: eMC product 6180 §4.2/§4.3 Verified quote
CCB hepatic — lacidipine hypotensive effect enhanced; severe → reduce (Motens SmPC §4.2)
Definition: Motens (lacidipine) SmPC (emc 894) §4.2: hepatic impairment increases bioavailability and enhances the hypotensive effect; in severe cases a dose reduction may be necessary. Backs lacidipine hepatic = cautionMonitor (qualitative). No fixed mg → no adjustedStartMg. Lacidipine ELDERLY was not retrievable (QUOTE_PENDING) → the elderly cell fails closed to 'not assessed'.
For developers
Sources
- Lacidipine (Motens) SmPC (2024) (opens in a new tab) Motens Tablets (lacidipine) — SmPC §4.2 Posology (hepatic impairment). electronic Medicines Compendium (UK). Identifier: eMC product 894 §4.2 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: the bioavailability of MOTENS may be increased and the hypotensive effect enhanced… in severe cases, a dose reduction may be necessary.
- Lacidipine (Motens) SmPC (2024) (opens in a new tab) Motens Tablets (lacidipine) — SmPC §4.2 Posology (hepatic impairment). electronic Medicines Compendium (UK). Identifier: eMC product 894 §4.2 Verified quote
CCB hepatic — nitrendipine enhanced/prolonged effect (Gelbe Liste, tertiary; numeric QUOTE_PENDING)
Definition: Nitrendipine tertiary source (Gelbe Liste) notes hepatic impairment can enhance or prolong the drug's effects. Backs nitrendipine hepatic = cautionMonitor (qualitative, tier C). The NUMERIC dose adjustment is QUOTE_PENDING (primary Fachinformation 404'd this session) → suppressed, no adjustedStartMg. Nitrendipine ELDERLY was not retrievable (QUOTE_PENDING) → the elderly cell fails closed to 'not assessed'.
For developers
Sources
- Gelbe Liste (nitrendipine drug information, tertiary) (2024) (opens in a new tab) Nitrendipin — Fachinformation summary (hepatic impairment). Gelbe Liste (Germany, tertiary). Identifier: Gelbe Liste Nitrendipin (tertiary; primary Fachinformation unavailable) Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Patienten mit Leberfunktionsstörungen können verstärkte oder verlängerte Wirkungen… aufweisen.
- Gelbe Liste (nitrendipine drug information, tertiary) (2024) (opens in a new tab) Nitrendipin — Fachinformation summary (hepatic impairment). Gelbe Liste (Germany, tertiary). Identifier: Gelbe Liste Nitrendipin (tertiary; primary Fachinformation unavailable) Verified quote
CCB CYP3A4 — felodipine: grapefruit ↑8×, strong inhibitor ↑, strong inducer ↓ (avoid) (Bailey 1991 + SmPC §4.5)
Definition: Felodipine is a high-first-pass CYP3A4 substrate: grapefruit juice raised bioavailability ~2.8× (Bailey 1991); strong inhibitors (itraconazole) raised Cmax 8-fold/AUC 6-fold and 'should be avoided'; strong inducers (carbamazepine/phenytoin/phenobarbital) cut Cmax 82%/AUC 96% (efficacy lost). Backs felodipine CYP3A4 checkpoint = contraindicated/avoid.
For developers
Sources
- Bailey DG, Spence JD, Munoz C, Arnold JMO (1991) (opens in a new tab) Interaction of citrus juices with felodipine and nifedipine. Lancet. Identifier: PMID 1671113; DOI 10.1016/0140-6736(91)90872-M Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The mean felodipine bioavailability with grapefruit juice was 284 (range 164-469)% of that with water.
- Felodipine (Pinefeld XL) SmPC (2024) (opens in a new tab) Felodipine prolonged-release tablets — SmPC §4.5 Interactions. electronic Medicines Compendium (UK). Identifier: eMC product 11604 §4.5 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Cmax and AUC increased 8-fold and 6-fold… The combination with strong CYP3A4 inhibitors should be avoided. … with carbamazepine, phenytoin or phenobarbital, the Cmax and AUC of felodipine were decreased by 82% and 96% respectively.
- Bailey DG, Spence JD, Munoz C, Arnold JMO (1991) (opens in a new tab) Interaction of citrus juices with felodipine and nifedipine. Lancet. Identifier: PMID 1671113; DOI 10.1016/0140-6736(91)90872-M Verified quote
CCB CYP3A4 — lercanidipine: strong inhibitor or grapefruit contraindicated (Zanidip SmPC §4.3)
Definition: Zanidip (lercanidipine) SmPC §4.3 contraindicates co-administration with strong CYP3A4 inhibitors and with grapefruit/grapefruit juice. Backs lercanidipine CYP3A4 checkpoint = contraindicated.
For developers
Sources
- Recordati (Zanidip tablets SmPC) (2021) (opens in a new tab) Zanidip tablets (lercanidipine) — SmPC §4.3 Contraindications. electronic Medicines Compendium (UK). Identifier: eMC product 191 §4.3 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Co-administration with: strong inhibitors of CYP3A4… grapefruit or grapefruit juice
- Recordati (Zanidip tablets SmPC) (2021) (opens in a new tab) Zanidip tablets (lercanidipine) — SmPC §4.3 Contraindications. electronic Medicines Compendium (UK). Identifier: eMC product 191 §4.3 Verified quote
CCB CYP3A4 — nifedipine: rifampicin contraindicated; inhibitor/grapefruit monitor (Nifedipress SmPC §4.3/§4.5)
Definition: Nifedipine SmPC (Nifedipress MR, emc 658) §4.3/§4.5: the combination with rifampicin (a strong inducer) is contraindicated; with CYP3A4 inhibitors or grapefruit, blood pressure should be monitored and a dose reduction considered. Backs nifedipine CYP3A4 checkpoint = contraindicated (rifampicin) with a monitor caution for inhibitors.
For developers
Sources
- Nifedipine (Nifedipress MR) SmPC (2024) (opens in a new tab) Nifedipine modified-release tablets — SmPC §4.3/§4.4/§4.5. electronic Medicines Compendium (UK). Identifier: eMC product 658 §4.3/§4.5 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The use of nifedipine in combination with rifampicin is therefore contraindicated. … blood pressure should be monitored and, if necessary, a reduction of the nifedipine dose should be considered.
- Nifedipine (Nifedipress MR) SmPC (2024) (opens in a new tab) Nifedipine modified-release tablets — SmPC §4.3/§4.4/§4.5. electronic Medicines Compendium (UK). Identifier: eMC product 658 §4.3/§4.5 Verified quote
CCB CYP3A4 — amlodipine: strong/moderate inhibitor ↑ exposure, caution esp. elderly (Amlodipine SmPC §4.5)
Definition: Amlodipine SmPC (emc 14677) §4.5: strong/moderate CYP3A4 inhibitors may give rise to a significant increase in amlodipine exposure, more pronounced in the elderly. Backs amlodipine CYP3A4 checkpoint = cautionMonitor. The grapefruit-specifically-LOWER-magnitude claim is an INFERENCE (not a quoted head-to-head) and is DELIBERATELY not asserted here (suppressed).
For developers
Sources
- Amlodipine SmPC (2024) (opens in a new tab) Amlodipine tablets — SmPC §4.5 Interactions (CYP3A4 inhibitors). electronic Medicines Compendium (UK). Identifier: eMC product 14677 §4.5 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: may give rise to significant increase in Amlodipine exposure… more pronounced in the elderly.
- Amlodipine SmPC (2024) (opens in a new tab) Amlodipine tablets — SmPC §4.5 Interactions (CYP3A4 inhibitors). electronic Medicines Compendium (UK). Identifier: eMC product 14677 §4.5 Verified quote
CCB edema — amlodipine dose-dependent (Norvasc label incidence 1.8→3.0→10.8%)
Definition: Norvasc label reports edema as the most common adverse reaction, occurring in a dose-related manner (2.5 mg 1.8%, 5 mg 3.0%, 10 mg 10.8%, placebo 0.6%). Backs amlodipine peripheral-edema checkpoint = dose-dependent (cautionMonitor).
For developers
Sources
- Pfizer (Norvasc prescribing information) (2019) (opens in a new tab) NORVASC (amlodipine besylate) tablets — Adverse Reactions (edema, dose-related). DailyMed (US FDA label). Identifier: DailyMed setid abd6a2ca-40c2-485c-bc53-db1c652505ed §6 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Most common adverse reaction… is edema which occurred in a dose related manner.
- Pfizer (Norvasc prescribing information) (2019) (opens in a new tab) NORVASC (amlodipine besylate) tablets — Adverse Reactions (edema, dose-related). DailyMed (US FDA label). Identifier: DailyMed setid abd6a2ca-40c2-485c-bc53-db1c652505ed §6 Verified quote
CCB edema — felodipine dose-dependent >10 mg (Plendil label)
Definition: Plendil (felodipine) label: doses above 10 mg add BP response but a large increase in peripheral edema; edema is age- and dose-related, with discontinuation in about 3%. Backs felodipine peripheral-edema checkpoint = dose-dependent (>10 mg). NB: the copy must be 'added lowering is outweighed by a large rise in edema', not 'no added effect above 10 mg'.
For developers
Sources
- Felodipine extended-release tablets prescribing information (Plendil) (2009) (opens in a new tab) FELODIPINE extended-release tablets — Adverse Reactions (peripheral edema). DailyMed (US FDA label). Identifier: DailyMed setid b951455c-c235-4e23-9e21-08672d108726 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: doses above 10 mg daily showed an increased blood pressure response but a large increase in the rate of peripheral edema… age and dose related… discontinuation… in about 3%.
- Felodipine extended-release tablets prescribing information (Plendil) (2009) (opens in a new tab) FELODIPINE extended-release tablets — Adverse Reactions (peripheral edema). DailyMed (US FDA label). Identifier: DailyMed setid b951455c-c235-4e23-9e21-08672d108726 Verified quote
CCB edema — lacidipine/lercanidipine comparatively lower (Liang 2022 NMA)
Definition: Liang 2022 network meta-analysis (JCH): lacidipine and lercanidipine rank among the lowest CCBs for peripheral edema (nifedipine 7.17× more likely than lacidipine; lacidipine SUCRA 12.8%, lercanidipine 26.2%). Backs lacidipine + lercanidipine peripheral-edema checkpoint = comparativelyLower.
For developers
Sources
- Liang X, et al. (2022) (opens in a new tab) Comparison of peripheral edema among calcium channel blockers: a network meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical Hypertension. Identifier: PMCID PMC9106091 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Nifedipine is 7.17 times more likely to cause peripheral edema compared to lacidipine
- Liang X, et al. (2022) (opens in a new tab) Comparison of peripheral edema among calcium channel blockers: a network meta-analysis. Journal of Clinical Hypertension. Identifier: PMCID PMC9106091 Verified quote
CCB edema — common class effect (Makani 2011)
Definition: Makani 2011 (Am J Med): peripheral edema is a common adverse effect of the CCB class — used as sourced class context for DHPs without a drug-specific edema verdict (levamlodipine, nifedipine, nitrendipine). This entry uses ONLY the 'common class effect' clause; the paper's RAS-blocker-reduction finding is carried separately in `ccbEdemaRasReduction` (issue #43). IDENTIFIER FIX (#43): the shipped identifier was PMID 21596367 / DOI 10.1016/j.amjmed.2011.02.031, which is a DIFFERENT paper (Bavry 2011, NSAIDs); the correct record for this title + quote is PMID 21295192 / DOI 10.1016/j.amjmed.2010.08.007.
For developers
Sources
- Makani H, Bangalore S, Romero J, Wever-Pinzon O, Messerli FH (2011) (opens in a new tab) Effect of renin-angiotensin system blockade on calcium channel blocker-associated peripheral edema. American Journal of Medicine. Identifier: PMID 21295192; DOI 10.1016/j.amjmed.2010.08.007 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Peripheral edema is a common adverse effect of calcium channel blockers.
- Makani H, Bangalore S, Romero J, Wever-Pinzon O, Messerli FH (2011) (opens in a new tab) Effect of renin-angiotensin system blockade on calcium channel blocker-associated peripheral edema. American Journal of Medicine. Identifier: PMID 21295192; DOI 10.1016/j.amjmed.2010.08.007 Verified quote
CCB edema — adding a RAS blocker reduces it ~38% (Makani 2011 meta-analysis)
Definition: Makani 2011 (Am J Med) — meta-analysis of 25 RCTs (n=17,206): adding an ACE inhibitor or ARB to a calcium channel blocker cut peripheral-edema incidence by 38% (RR 0.62; 95% CI 0.53–0.74) and edema-related withdrawal by 62% (RR 0.38) vs CCB monotherapy. Backs the DHP switching guide's edema-driven mitigation note (issue #43): when edema drives the switch, combining the DHP with a RAS blocker is a sourced alternative to changing the DHP. Displayed as a qualitative note; the % lives here + the citation.
For developers
Sources
- Makani H, Bangalore S, Romero J, Wever-Pinzon O, Messerli FH (2011) (opens in a new tab) Effect of renin-angiotensin system blockade on calcium channel blocker-associated peripheral edema. American Journal of Medicine. Identifier: PMID 21295192; DOI 10.1016/j.amjmed.2010.08.007 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The incidence of peripheral edema with calcium channel blocker/renin-angiotensin system blocker combination was 38% lower than that with calcium channel blocker monotherapy (P<.00001) (relative risk [RR] 0.62; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.53-0.74).
- Makani H, Bangalore S, Romero J, Wever-Pinzon O, Messerli FH (2011) (opens in a new tab) Effect of renin-angiotensin system blockade on calcium channel blocker-associated peripheral edema. American Journal of Medicine. Identifier: PMID 21295192; DOI 10.1016/j.amjmed.2010.08.007 Verified quote
CCB aortic stenosis — nifedipine contraindicated (EU SmPC, Coracten XL §4.3)
Definition: Coracten XL (nifedipine) EU SmPC §4.3 contraindicates use in clinically significant aortic stenosis (US labels differ — the EU SmPC is cited). Backs nifedipine aortic-stenosis checkpoint = contraindicated.
For developers
Sources
- Nifedipine (Coracten XL) SmPC (2024) (opens in a new tab) Coracten XL capsules (nifedipine) — SmPC §4.3 Contraindications. electronic Medicines Compendium (UK). Identifier: eMC product 5573 §4.3 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: They should not be used in clinically significant aortic stenosis…
- Nifedipine (Coracten XL) SmPC (2024) (opens in a new tab) Coracten XL capsules (nifedipine) — SmPC §4.3 Contraindications. electronic Medicines Compendium (UK). Identifier: eMC product 5573 §4.3 Verified quote
CCB aortic stenosis — amlodipine caution in severe AS (Norvasc §5.1)
Definition: Norvasc §5.1 warns that symptomatic hypotension is possible, particularly in patients with severe aortic stenosis. Backs amlodipine aortic-stenosis checkpoint = cautionMonitor (severe AS). The DHP-class aortic-stenosis mechanism caution (Basile 2021 / ESC-EACTS 2021) was QUOTE_PENDING this session → not asserted for the other DHPs (fail-closed 'not assessed').
For developers
Sources
- Pfizer (Norvasc prescribing information) (2019) (opens in a new tab) NORVASC (amlodipine besylate) tablets — Warnings (§5.1 severe aortic stenosis). DailyMed (US FDA label). Identifier: DailyMed setid abd6a2ca-40c2-485c-bc53-db1c652505ed §5.1 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Symptomatic hypotension is possible, particularly in patients with severe aortic stenosis.
- Pfizer (Norvasc prescribing information) (2019) (opens in a new tab) NORVASC (amlodipine besylate) tablets — Warnings (§5.1 severe aortic stenosis). DailyMed (US FDA label). Identifier: DailyMed setid abd6a2ca-40c2-485c-bc53-db1c652505ed §5.1 Verified quote
Glucocorticoid anti-inflammatory dose-equivalence (prednisone-equivalent)
Definition: Approximate ANTI-INFLAMMATORY (glucocorticoid) dose-equivalence between corticosteroids on the Parente 2017 Table-4 prednisone-equivalent scale: equipotent mg are cortisone 25, hydrocortisone 20, deflazacort 7.5, prednisolone 5, prednisone 5, methylprednisolone 4, triamcinolone 4, betamethasone 0.75, dexamethasone 0.75. `targetDose = dose × (equiv_target / equiv_source)`; the prednisone-equivalent anchor = `dose × 5 / equiv_source`. Tier B — a published conversion table (Parente 2017) validated as 'reasonable' by an independent PK/PD study (Mager 2003). This is glucocorticoid (anti-inflammatory) potency ONLY: mineralocorticoid (salt-retaining) potency and duration of action differ between agents and are NOT interchangeable; it is NOT a valid HPA-axis taper step; and at high/pulse doses the non-genomic hierarchy diverges from this classical (genomic) table — all four carried as non-optional caveats (Torpy 2023; Buttgereit 1999). Deflazacort 7.5 mg is the verbatim Table-4 value; the paper's own minimum-effective-dose analysis implies a tighter ~1.3:1 vs prednisone (≈6.5 mg), surfaced as an internal-range note. Mineralocorticoids such as fludrocortisone are excluded by design and the engine refuses them. Implemented data-only via the generic _package.ts ratio factory; this engine adds no arithmetic of its own.
For developers
Sources
- Parente L (2017) (opens in a new tab) Deflazacort: therapeutic index, relative potency and equivalent doses versus other corticosteroids. BMC Pharmacology and Toxicology. Identifier: DOI 10.1186/s40360-016-0111-8; PMCID PMC5216559 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The anti-inflammatory potency of cortisol (hydrocortisone) is conventionally equal to 1; hence, based on the relative potencies of various corticosteroids, it is possible to identify the equivalent doses of every single steroid. … Conversion of corticosteroid doses. Elaboration of data from [1] and [3]
- Mager DE, Lin SX, Blum RA, Lates CD, Jusko WJ (2003) (opens in a new tab) Dose Equivalency Evaluation of Major Corticosteroids. J Clin Pharmacol. Identifier: J Clin Pharmacol 2003;43(11):1216-1227; DOI 10.1177/0091270003258651; PMID 14551176 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: this study… shows that currently used dosing tables reflect reasonable dose equivalency relationships for four corticosteroids.
- Torpy DJ, Lim WT (2023) (opens in a new tab) Glucocorticoid-induced adrenal suppression: physiological basis and strategies for glucocorticoid weaning. Med J Aust. Identifier: Med J Aust 2023;219(10):444-447; DOI 10.5694/mja2.52140; PMID 37884339 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: prednisolone, which has four times the anti-inflammatory potency as hydrocortisone but less salt-retaining properties, a longer plasma disappearance half-life.
- Buttgereit F, Brand MD, Burmester GR (1999) (opens in a new tab) Equivalent doses and relative drug potencies for non-genomic glucocorticoid effects: a novel glucocorticoid hierarchy. Biochem Pharmacol. Identifier: Biochem Pharmacol 1999;58(2):363-368; DOI 10.1016/s0006-2952(99)00090-8; PMID 10423179 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: This hierarchy [non-genomic] is completely different from that for the classical effects… of crucial relevance for… glucocorticoid high-dose therapy.
- Parente L (2017) (opens in a new tab) Deflazacort: therapeutic index, relative potency and equivalent doses versus other corticosteroids. BMC Pharmacology and Toxicology. Identifier: DOI 10.1186/s40360-016-0111-8; PMCID PMC5216559 Verified quote
Benzodiazepine diazepam-milligram-equivalent (DME) dose-equivalence
Definition: Diazepam-milligram-equivalent (DME) dose-equivalence between benzodiazepines on the Borrelli 2022 'Diazepam Milligram Equivalency Algorithm': equivalent mg (≡ 5 mg diazepam) are diazepam 5.00, alprazolam 0.50, chlordiazepoxide 12.50, clobazam 10.00, clonazepam 0.50, clorazepate 7.50, estazolam 0.67, flurazepam 15.00, lorazepam 1.00, oxazepam 15.00, temazepam 10.00, triazolam 0.25. `targetDose = dose × (equiv_target / equiv_source)`; the diazepam-equivalent anchor = `dose × 5 / equiv_source` (e.g. alprazolam 1 mg → 10 mg diazepam-equivalent). Tier B — a peer-reviewed, systematically-derived equivalency algorithm standardized from product-label recommended total daily doses (Borrelli 2022). This is a TAPER-PLANNING DME scale ONLY: it converts to a single long-acting agent (diazepam) as the starting point of a gradual, supervised taper, NOT an acute one-time swap; benzodiazepines must not be discontinued abruptly in physically-dependent patients (withdrawal/seizure risk); diazepam's long action and active metabolites accumulate (individualize and adjust to response); and the DME values are population/label-derived approximations — all four carried as non-optional caveats (ASAM 2025; Borrelli 2022). Z-drugs (zolpidem, zopiclone, eszopiclone, zaleplon) and designer/novel benzodiazepines (e.g. etizolam, bromazolam) are excluded by design and the engine refuses them. Implemented data-only via the generic _package.ts ratio factory; this engine adds no arithmetic of its own.
For developers
Sources
- Borrelli EP, Bratberg J, Hallowell BD, Greaney ML, Kogut SJ (2022) (opens in a new tab) Application of a diazepam milligram equivalency algorithm to assess benzodiazepine dose intensity in Rhode Island in 2018. J Manag Care Spec Pharm. Identifier: J Manag Care Spec Pharm 2022;28(1):58-68; DOI 10.18553/jmcp.2022.28.1.58; PMCID PMC10373022 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Diazepam Milligram Equivalency Algorithm … The recommended total daily dose described in product labels was used to adjust for differences in dosing intervals and to standardize total daily dose exposure across medication types.
- Brunner E, et al. (2025) (opens in a new tab) Joint Clinical Practice Guideline on Benzodiazepine Tapering: Considerations When Risks Outweigh Benefits. J Gen Intern Med. Identifier: DOI 10.1007/s11606-025-09499-2; PMCID PMC12463801 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: clinicians should not discontinue BZDs abruptly in patients who are likely to be physically dependent and at risk of withdrawal symptoms. … Clinicians should tailor tapering strategies to each individual patient and adjust tapering based on patient response.
- Borrelli EP, Bratberg J, Hallowell BD, Greaney ML, Kogut SJ (2022) (opens in a new tab) Application of a diazepam milligram equivalency algorithm to assess benzodiazepine dose intensity in Rhode Island in 2018. J Manag Care Spec Pharm. Identifier: J Manag Care Spec Pharm 2022;28(1):58-68; DOI 10.18553/jmcp.2022.28.1.58; PMCID PMC10373022 Verified quote
Proton-pump inhibitor (PPI) omeprazole-equivalent dose-equivalence
Definition: Omeprazole-equivalent dose-equivalence between proton-pump inhibitors on the Graham & Tansel 2018 / Kirchheiner 2009 relative-potency table: per-mg relative potencies for acid suppression (omeprazole = 1.00) are pantoprazole 0.23, lansoprazole 0.90, omeprazole 1.00, esomeprazole 1.60, rabeprazole 1.82. `targetDose = dose × (RP_source / RP_target)`; the omeprazole-equivalent (OE) anchor = `dose × RP_source` (e.g. omeprazole 20 mg → 20 OE, lansoprazole 15 mg → 13.5 OE, esomeprazole 20 mg → 32 OE — Graham Table 1). Tier B — a peer-reviewed relative-potency table built on a pharmacodynamic SURROGATE (effect on intragastric pH / acid suppression), NOT a clinical-outcome endpoint and NOT bioequivalence; equal acid-suppression mg does not prove equal clinical benefit, and the potencies are population averages, not an individualised dose — both carried as non-optional caveats (Graham & Tansel 2018; Kirchheiner 2009). Dexlansoprazole is excluded by design (no verified relative-potency value) and the engine refuses it. The factory consumes the reciprocal (1/RP) of the verbatim potencies as its dose-equivalent table — a pure mechanical inversion that adds no number. Implemented data-only via the generic _package.ts ratio factory; this engine adds no arithmetic of its own.
For developers
Sources
- Graham DY, Tansel A (2018) (opens in a new tab) Interchangeable Use of Proton Pump Inhibitors Based on Relative Potency. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. Identifier: Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2018;16(6):800-808.e7; DOI 10.1016/j.cgh.2017.09.033; PMID 28964908; PMCID PMC6913203 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Kirchheiner et al reported the relative potencies were 0.23, 0.90, 1.00, 1.60, and 1.82 for pantoprazole, lansoprazole, omeprazole, esomeprazole, and rabeprazole, respectively
- Kirchheiner J, Glatt S, Fuhr U, Klotz U, Meineke I, Seufferlein T, Brockmöller J (2009) (opens in a new tab) Relative potency of proton-pump inhibitors—comparison of effects on intragastric pH. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. Identifier: Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2009;65(1):19-31; DOI 10.1007/s00228-008-0576-5; PMID 18925391 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Based on the mean 24-h gastric pH, the relative potencies of the five PPIs compared to omeprazole were 0.23, 0.90, 1.00, 1.60, and 1.82 for pantoprazole, lansoprazole, omeprazole, esomeprazole, and rabeprazole, respectively.
- Graham DY, Tansel A (2018) (opens in a new tab) Interchangeable Use of Proton Pump Inhibitors Based on Relative Potency. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. Identifier: Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol 2018;16(6):800-808.e7; DOI 10.1016/j.cgh.2017.09.033; PMID 28964908; PMCID PMC6913203 Verified quote
Loop-diuretic relative-IV-potency dose-equivalence (furosemide-equivalent)
Definition: Relative-IV-potency dose-equivalence between loop diuretics on the Pham & Grodin 2017 Table-1 furosemide-equivalent scale: relative intravenous natriuretic potency (mg) is furosemide 40, torasemide 20, bumetanide 1 (furosemide 40 mg ≈ torasemide 20 mg ≈ bumetanide 1 mg). `targetDose = dose × (equiv_target / equiv_source)`; the furosemide-equivalent anchor = `dose × 40 / equiv_source`. Tier B — a peer-reviewed relative-potency table. The ratio is INTRAVENOUS natriuretic potency, not a proven oral bioequivalence; furosemide oral bioavailability is wide and variable (10–100 %) whereas torasemide/bumetanide are 80–100 %; the oral:IV factor differs (furosemide ≈ 1:2, torasemide/bumetanide ≈ 1:1); and equal natriuretic potency is not equal clinical outcome — all four carried as non-optional caveats (Pham & Grodin 2017). The oral factors are NOT folded into a second, invented oral ratio (no unsourced coefficient). Ethacrynic acid is excluded by design (no verified value) and the engine refuses it. Implemented data-only via the generic _package.ts ratio factory; this engine adds no arithmetic of its own.
For developers
Sources
- Pham D, Grodin JL (2017) (opens in a new tab) Dilemmas in the Dosing of Heart Failure Drugs: Titrating Diuretics in Chronic Heart Failure. Cardiac Failure Review. Identifier: Card Fail Rev 2017;3(2):108-112; DOI 10.15420/cfr.2017:10:1; PMID 29387462; PMCID PMC5789220 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Relative intravenous potency (mg): Furosemide 40, Torsemide 20, Bumetanide 1 … Oral : intravenous dosing: Furosemide 1 : 2, Torsemide 1 : 1, Bumetanide 1 : 1 … Torsemide and bumetanide have an oral bioavailability of 80–100 %, while furosemide has a wide variant bioavailability of 10–100 %.
- Pham D, Grodin JL (2017) (opens in a new tab) Dilemmas in the Dosing of Heart Failure Drugs: Titrating Diuretics in Chronic Heart Failure. Cardiac Failure Review. Identifier: Card Fail Rev 2017;3(2):108-112; DOI 10.15420/cfr.2017:10:1; PMID 29387462; PMCID PMC5789220 Verified quote
Statin dose → ACC/AHA intensity tier (low/moderate/high)
Definition: Maps every licensed statin dose to a low/moderate/high intensity tier — the backbone axis that makes a 'risk by dose' chart meaningful. The %-bands (high ≥50%, moderate 30–49%, low <30% LDL-C reduction) and the per-statin dose lists come from the 2018 ACC/AHA Blood Cholesterol Guideline (Table 3). NOT an equation: a curated dose→tier lookup.
For developers
Sources
- Grundy SM, Stone NJ, Bailey AL, et al. (2019) (opens in a new tab) 2018 AHA/ACC/AACVPR/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/ADA/AGS/APhA/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline on the Management of Blood Cholesterol. Circulation. Identifier: DOI 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000625 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: High intensity, which typically lowers LDL-C by 50% or more; Moderate intensity, which lowers LDL-C by 30% to 49%; Low intensity, which lowers LDL-C by 30% or less.
- Grundy SM, Stone NJ, Bailey AL, et al. (2019) (opens in a new tab) 2018 AHA/ACC/AACVPR/AAPA/ABC/ACPM/ADA/AGS/APhA/ASPC/NLA/PCNA Guideline on the Management of Blood Cholesterol. Circulation. Identifier: DOI 10.1161/CIR.0000000000000625 Verified quote
Statin muscle symptoms by intensity tier (moderate baseline, high elevated)
Definition: Intensity-dependence of statin muscle symptoms from a network meta-analysis of 153 000 patients: moderate-intensity therapy is not significantly different from placebo (→ baseline), while high-intensity is a small but significant increase over moderate (→ elevated). Backs the muscle cell level at moderate vs high intensity. Honesty flag: the paper's CK outcome is CK >10×ULN (RR 4.69 high-vs-moderate); this feature surfaces neither that relative risk nor the threshold to the user — the muscle cell uses only the RR-1.04 'any muscle problem' direction and the moderate-vs-placebo null.
For developers
Sources
- Davis JW, Weller SC (2021) (opens in a new tab) Intensity of statin therapy and muscle symptoms: a network meta-analysis of 153 000 patients. BMJ Open. Identifier: PMID 34130955; PMCID PMC8211057; DOI 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043714 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: risk was significantly greater for high compared with moderate intensity statin therapy for any muscle problem (RR=1.04, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.07; I2=0%), myalgia (RR=1.04, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.08; I2=0%, number needed to harm (NNH)=173), attrition due to muscle problems (RR=1.37, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.73, I2=0%, NNH=218) and elevated CK (RR=4.69, 95% CI 2.50 to 8.80; I2=7%, NNH=527). There were no significant differences in risk between moderate intensity therapy and placebo for all outcomes.
- Davis JW, Weller SC (2021) (opens in a new tab) Intensity of statin therapy and muscle symptoms: a network meta-analysis of 153 000 patients. BMJ Open. Identifier: PMID 34130955; PMCID PMC8211057; DOI 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-043714 Verified quote
Simvastatin 80 mg myopathy per-mg anchor (marked)
Definition: The definitive dose-specific statin myopathy datapoint: a 12 064-patient double-blind RCT (80 mg vs 20 mg simvastatin) showing confirmed myopathy in 53 (1%) on 80 mg vs 2 (0·03%) on 20 mg, with 7 rhabdomyolysis cases on 80 mg vs none on 20 mg. Backs the simvastatin-80 muscle cell `marked` level and its anchor (≈0.9% vs 0.03%). Simvastatin 80 mg is FDA-restricted (do not newly start) — the cell carries restricted: true.
For developers
Sources
- SEARCH Collaborative Group (2010) (opens in a new tab) Intensive lowering of LDL cholesterol with 80 mg versus 20 mg simvastatin daily in 12 064 survivors of myocardial infarction: a double-blind randomised trial. Lancet. Identifier: PMID 21067805; PMCID PMC2988223; DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60310-8 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Myopathy was confirmed in 53 (1%) participants allocated 80 mg simvastatin compared with two (0·03%) allocated 20 mg simvastatin. Rhabdomyolysis was diagnosed in seven participants allocated 80 mg simvastatin versus none allocated 20 mg simvastatin.
- SEARCH Collaborative Group (2010) (opens in a new tab) Intensive lowering of LDL cholesterol with 80 mg versus 20 mg simvastatin daily in 12 064 survivors of myocardial infarction: a double-blind randomised trial. Lancet. Identifier: PMID 21067805; PMCID PMC2988223; DOI 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60310-8 Verified quote
Statin class-level safety baselines (muscle/liver/diabetes context)
Definition: AHA Scientific Statement class-level absolute-risk baselines used as the persistent context around the chart (not as a per-cell number): serious muscle injury <0.1%, serious hepatotoxicity ≈0.001%, and newly diagnosed diabetes ≈0.2% per treatment-year. Co-cited on every cell to keep absolute risks in view so a risk chart is never read as an anti-statin message. Preserves the source's 'creatinine kinase' spelling verbatim.
For developers
Sources
- Newman CB, Preiss D, Tobert JA, et al; American Heart Association (2019) (opens in a new tab) Statin Safety and Associated Adverse Events: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. Identifier: PMID 30580575; DOI 10.1161/ATV.0000000000000073 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The risk of statin-induced serious muscle injury, including rhabdomyolysis, is <0.1%, and the risk of serious hepatotoxicity is ≈0.001%. … in randomized clinical trials, the difference in the incidence of muscle symptoms without significantly raised creatinine kinase in statin-treated compared with placebo-treated participants is <1%. … The risk of statin-induced newly diagnosed diabetes mellitus is ≈0.2% per year of treatment, depending on the underlying risk of diabetes mellitus in the population studied.
- Newman CB, Preiss D, Tobert JA, et al; American Heart Association (2019) (opens in a new tab) Statin Safety and Associated Adverse Events: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association. Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. Identifier: PMID 30580575; DOI 10.1161/ATV.0000000000000073 Verified quote
Statin liver dose-response established ONLY for atorvastatin
Definition: Systematic review + dose-response meta-analysis (62 RCTs, n=120 456): an Emax dose-response for liver dysfunction was identified ONLY for atorvastatin; for every other statin the dose-response was inconclusive. Backs the atorvastatin liver gradient (baseline → elevated) AND the `indeterminate` liver cell for every non-atorvastatin statin (noteCode liver_dose_response_not_established) — the cell must say 'dose-response not established', never show a gradient.
For developers
Sources
- Cai T, Abel L, Langford O, et al. (2021) (opens in a new tab) Associations between statins and adverse events in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: systematic review with pairwise, network, and dose-response meta-analyses. BMJ. Identifier: PMID 34261627; PMCID PMC8279037; DOI 10.1136/bmj.n1537 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: An Emax dose-response relationship was identified for the effect of atorvastatin on liver dysfunction, but the dose-response relationships for the other statins and adverse effects were inconclusive.
- Cai T, Abel L, Langford O, et al. (2021) (opens in a new tab) Associations between statins and adverse events in primary prevention of cardiovascular disease: systematic review with pairwise, network, and dose-response meta-analyses. BMJ. Identifier: PMID 34261627; PMCID PMC8279037; DOI 10.1136/bmj.n1537 Verified quote
High-dose atorvastatin hepatotoxicity per-mg anchor (elevated)
Definition: Observational UK GPRD cohort quantifying the atorvastatin liver dose-response: hepatotoxicity in 0.44% of high-dose (40–80 mg) atorvastatin vs 0.07% low-dose (10–20 mg), AHR 7.3 vs low-dose simvastatin. Backs the atorvastatin 40/80 mg liver `elevated` level and its anchor (≈0.44% vs 0.07%). Tier C: observational, authors note 'the numbers of events in the analyses were small'.
For developers
Sources
- Clarke AT, Johnson PCD, Hall GC, Ford I, Mills PR (2016) (opens in a new tab) High Dose Atorvastatin Associated with Increased Risk of Significant Hepatotoxicity in Comparison to Simvastatin in UK GPRD Cohort. PLoS One. Identifier: PMID 26983033; PMCID PMC4794178; DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0151587 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Hepatotoxicity occurred in 0.44% of 4075 patients on high dose atorvastatin [HDA], 0.07% of 72,336 on low dose atorvastatin [LDA], 0.09% of 44,675 on high dose simvastatin [HDS] and 0.05% of 119,732 on low dose simvastatin [LDS]. High dose was classified as 40–80mg daily and low dose 10–20mg daily. AHRs compared to LDS were 7.3 [4.2–12.7] for HDA, 1.4 [0.9–2.0] for LDA and 1.5 [1.0–2.2] for HDS.
- Clarke AT, Johnson PCD, Hall GC, Ford I, Mills PR (2016) (opens in a new tab) High Dose Atorvastatin Associated with Increased Risk of Significant Hepatotoxicity in Comparison to Simvastatin in UK GPRD Cohort. PLoS One. Identifier: PMID 26983033; PMCID PMC4794178; DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0151587 Verified quote
New-onset diabetes by statin intensity (low/moderate baseline, high elevated)
Definition: Individual-participant-data meta-analysis (≈124 000 patients) of new-onset diabetes by statin intensity: low/moderate-intensity is a modest 10% increase (RR 1·10, → baseline) while high-intensity is a 36% increase (RR 1·36, → elevated). Backs the diabetes cell level at low/moderate vs high intensity. The high-intensity absolute rate is partly inflated by more frequent HbA1c measurement in those trials — surfaced as a caveat, the 4.8%/yr is not over-read.
For developers
Sources
- Cholesterol Treatment Trialists' (CTT) Collaboration; Reith C, et al. (2024) (opens in a new tab) Effects of statin therapy on diagnoses of new-onset diabetes and worsening glycaemia in large-scale randomised blinded statin trials: an individual participant data meta-analysis. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. Identifier: PMID 38554713; PMCID PMC7615958; DOI 10.1016/S2213-8587(24)00040-8 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: allocation to low-intensity or moderate-intensity statin therapy resulted in a 10% proportional increase in new-onset diabetes (2420 of 39 179 participants assigned to receive a statin [1·3% per year] vs 2214 of 39 266 participants assigned to receive placebo [1·2% per year]; rate ratio [RR] 1·10, 95% CI 1·04–1·16). … allocation to high-intensity statin therapy resulted in a 36% proportional increase (1221 of 9935 participants assigned to receive a statin [4·8% per year] vs 905 of 9859 participants assigned to receive placebo [3·5% per year]; 1·36, 1·25–1·48).
- Cholesterol Treatment Trialists' (CTT) Collaboration; Reith C, et al. (2024) (opens in a new tab) Effects of statin therapy on diagnoses of new-onset diabetes and worsening glycaemia in large-scale randomised blinded statin trials: an individual participant data meta-analysis. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. Identifier: PMID 38554713; PMCID PMC7615958; DOI 10.1016/S2213-8587(24)00040-8 Verified quote
Intensive-vs-moderate-dose diabetes corroboration
Definition: Meta-analysis of 5 RCTs (n=32 752 without baseline diabetes) corroborating the intensity→diabetes direction: intensive vs moderate dose OR 1.12, ≈2 additional cases per 1000 patient-years, NNH 498/yr. Co-cites the high-intensity diabetes `elevated` cell, supplying the plain-language anchor that going from moderate to intensive adds ≈2 extra cases per 1000 patient-years.
For developers
Sources
- Preiss D, Seshasai SRK, Welsh P, et al. (2011) (opens in a new tab) Risk of incident diabetes with intensive-dose compared with moderate-dose statin therapy: a meta-analysis. JAMA. Identifier: PMID 21693744; DOI 10.1001/jama.2011.860 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Odds ratios were 1.12 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.22; I(2) = 0%) for new-onset diabetes … representing 2.0 additional cases in the intensive-dose group per 1000 patient-years … the number needed to harm per year for intensive-dose statin therapy was 498 for new-onset diabetes.
- Preiss D, Seshasai SRK, Welsh P, et al. (2011) (opens in a new tab) Risk of incident diabetes with intensive-dose compared with moderate-dose statin therapy: a meta-analysis. JAMA. Identifier: PMID 21693744; DOI 10.1001/jama.2011.860 Verified quote
Statin transient transaminase-elevation context (0.5–2%)
Definition: EAS Consensus Panel surrounding-context line for the liver effect: transient liver-enzyme increases occur in 0.5–2% of statin patients but are not clinically relevant; idiosyncratic statin liver injury is very rare. Co-cited on the liver cells as context only, never as a per-cell incidence.
For developers
Sources
- Mach F, Ray KK, Wiklund O, et al; European Atherosclerosis Society Consensus Panel (2018) (opens in a new tab) Adverse effects of statin therapy: perception vs. the evidence — focus on glucose homeostasis, cognitive, renal and hepatic function, haemorrhagic stroke and cataract. Eur Heart J. Identifier: PMID 29718253; DOI 10.1093/eurheartj/ehy182 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Transient increases in liver enzymes occur in 0.5-2% of patients taking statins but are not clinically relevant; idiosyncratic liver injury due to statins is very rare and causality difficult to prove.
- Mach F, Ray KK, Wiklund O, et al; European Atherosclerosis Society Consensus Panel (2018) (opens in a new tab) Adverse effects of statin therapy: perception vs. the evidence — focus on glucose homeostasis, cognitive, renal and hepatic function, haemorrhagic stroke and cataract. Eur Heart J. Identifier: PMID 29718253; DOI 10.1093/eurheartj/ehy182 Verified quote
per-statin FDA simvastatin interaction dose-cap (CYP3A4 inhibitors / CCBs)
Definition: FDA simvastatin label dosage modification for drug interactions: certain CYP3A4 inhibitors and calcium-channel blockers raise simvastatin exposure and myopathy risk, so the label caps the simvastatin dose when they are co-administered. getStatinDoseRisk surfaces this as the advisory `interactionCaps` flag for simvastatin doses ≥20 mg (where the relevant interacting caps bite); it does NOT recommend a dose — it states that a per-interaction dose cap exists and what to verify.
For developers
Sources
- Organon LLC (FDA prescribing information) (2023) (opens in a new tab) ZOCOR (simvastatin) tablets — Dosage Modifications Due to Drug Interactions. FDA label. Identifier: ZOCOR PI rev. 8/2023 §2.5 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: Patients taking Verapamil, Diltiazem, or Dronedarone Do not exceed ZOCOR 10 mg once daily. Patients taking Amiodarone, Amlodipine, or Ranolazine Do not exceed ZOCOR 20 mg once daily.
- Organon LLC (FDA prescribing information) (2023) (opens in a new tab) ZOCOR (simvastatin) tablets — Dosage Modifications Due to Drug Interactions. FDA label. Identifier: ZOCOR PI rev. 8/2023 §2.5 Verified quote
rosuvastatin 40 mg conditional dose — Asian-ancestry contraindication (~2-fold exposure)
Definition: Rosuvastatin SmPC: the 40 mg dose is the conditional high-intensity dose, contraindicated in patients with pre-disposing factors for myopathy/rhabdomyolysis — including Asian ancestry, where pharmacokinetic studies show an ~2-fold elevation in median AUC and Cmax versus Caucasians. getStatinDoseRisk surfaces this as the advisory `conditionalAsian` flag for rosuvastatin doses ≥40 mg; it states the conditional contraindication and what to verify, not a dose to take.
For developers
Sources
- AstraZeneca (Summary of Product Characteristics) (2026) (opens in a new tab) Crestor 40 mg film-coated tablets — SmPC (Contraindications; Pharmacokinetics). electronic Medicines Compendium (emc) / MHRA. Identifier: Crestor 40 mg SmPC rev. 30 Mar 2026 §4.3+§5.2 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: The 40 mg dose is contraindicated in patients with pre-disposing factors for myopathy/rhabdomyolysis. Such factors include: ... Asian patients. Pharmacokinetic studies show an approximate 2-fold elevation in median AUC and Cmax in Asian subjects (Japanese, Chinese, Filipino, Vietnamese and Koreans) compared with Caucasians.
- AstraZeneca (Summary of Product Characteristics) (2026) (opens in a new tab) Crestor 40 mg film-coated tablets — SmPC (Contraindications; Pharmacokinetics). electronic Medicines Compendium (emc) / MHRA. Identifier: Crestor 40 mg SmPC rev. 30 Mar 2026 §4.3+§5.2 Verified quote
Cockcroft–Gault creatinine clearance (CrCl) estimate
Definition: Cockcroft–Gault (1976) predicts creatinine clearance from a single steady-state serum creatinine, age, sex, and body weight. It is the PRIMARY metric the renal POC uses for per-drug label thresholds. Raw form only — no SCr capping/rounding (rounding SCr→1.0 in the elderly is NOT in Cockcroft & Gault 1976; excluded). The female correction is a 0.85 MULTIPLIER (the paper's '15% less in females'); a source rendering that places 0.85 in the denominator is a transcription artefact — 15% less means × 0.85. Weight is caller-supplied (actual or Devine IBW); never auto-picked. Assumes STABLE renal function (a single SCr cannot detect AKI / non-steady-state).
For developers
Sources
- Cockcroft DW, Gault MH (1976) (opens in a new tab) Prediction of creatinine clearance from serum creatinine. Nephron. Identifier: PMID 1244564 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: A formula has been developed to predict creatinine clearance (Ccr) from serum creatinine (Scr) in adult males: (see article)(15% less in females). … The above formula gave a correlation coefficient between predicted and mean measured Ccr's of 0.83.
- Gupta AK, et al. (StatPearls) (2023) (opens in a new tab) Renal Failure Drug Dose Adjustments (StatPearls, NCBI Bookshelf). StatPearls Publishing. Identifier: NCBI Bookshelf NBK560512 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: GFR = [(140−age) × weight]/[(72 × SCr) × 0.85 (if female)]
- NIDDK (National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases) (2023) (opens in a new tab) eGFR Equations for Adults — serum creatinine unit conversion. NIH / NIDDK. Identifier: NIDDK GFR equations reference (creatinine 113.12 g/mol; PubChem CID 588) Standard textbook
Verbatim from the source: serum creatinine µmol/L to mg/dL, divide by 88.4
- Cockcroft DW, Gault MH (1976) (opens in a new tab) Prediction of creatinine clearance from serum creatinine. Nephron. Identifier: PMID 1244564 Verified quote
CKD-EPI 2021 race-free creatinine eGFR estimate
Definition: CKD-EPI 2021 (Inker et al.) is the race-free creatinine eGFR equation. It is the SECONDARY, BSA-normalized (mL/min/1.73 m²) staging readout in the renal POC — NOT interchangeable with Cockcroft–Gault CrCl for per-drug label thresholds. Only a drug whose own label states an eGFR threshold (functionBasis 'ckd-epi-egfr', e.g. metformin) is keyed off it. The NEJM abstract does not print the equation; the equation string and its κ/α coefficients are transcribed verbatim from the NIDDK reference below (corroborated by the National Kidney Foundation). Same ÷88.4 SCr identity as Cockcroft–Gault applies.
For developers
Sources
- Inker LA, Eneanya ND, Coresh J, et al. (2021) (opens in a new tab) New Creatinine- and Cystatin C–Based Equations to Estimate GFR without Race. New England Journal of Medicine. Identifier: N Engl J Med 2021;385:1737-1749; DOI 10.1056/NEJMoa2102953; PMID 34554658 Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: We developed new eGFR equations without race using data from two development data sets: 10 studies (8254 participants, 31.5% Black) for serum creatinine and 13 studies (5352 participants, 39.7% Black) for both serum creatinine and cystatin C.
- NIDDK (National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases) (2023) (opens in a new tab) eGFR Equations for Adults — 2021 CKD-EPI Creatinine equation. NIH / NIDDK. Identifier: NIDDK GFR equations reference (corroborated by NKF ckd-epi-creatinine-equation-2021) Verified quote
Verbatim from the source: eGFR = 142 × min(SCr/κ,1)α × max(SCr/κ,1)−1.200 × 0.9938Age × 1.012 [if female]
- Inker LA, Eneanya ND, Coresh J, et al. (2021) (opens in a new tab) New Creatinine- and Cystatin C–Based Equations to Estimate GFR without Race. New England Journal of Medicine. Identifier: N Engl J Med 2021;385:1737-1749; DOI 10.1056/NEJMoa2102953; PMID 34554658 Verified quote
Devine (1974) ideal body weight (IBW)
Definition: Devine's 1974 ideal-body-weight equations, the de-facto pharmacy reference for weight-based dosing. HONESTY: these are NOT a peer-reviewed derivation — they were a clinical-pharmacy approximation proposed for gentamicin dosing, with no population/body-composition derivation (documented by Pai & Paloucek 2000, Ann Pharmacother 34:1066-1069) — hence quoteStatus 'textbook' and a 2/5 evidence rating. Used in the renal POC to compute Cockcroft–Gault on IBW in addition to actual weight; the tool NEVER auto-picks a weight (adjusted BW deferred). Below the 5-foot (60-inch) base the equation is clamped to the base weight, never taken negative.
For developers
Sources
- Devine BJ (1974) (opens in a new tab) Gentamicin therapy. Drug Intelligence & Clinical Pharmacy. Identifier: Drug Intell Clin Pharm 1974;8:650-655 (reference confirmed live via Evidencio Supporting Publications) Standard textbook
Verbatim from the source: Ideal body weight (male) = 50 kg + 2.3 kg for each inch over 5 feet; ideal body weight (female) = 45.5 kg + 2.3 kg for each inch over 5 feet.
- Devine BJ (1974) (opens in a new tab) Gentamicin therapy. Drug Intelligence & Clinical Pharmacy. Identifier: Drug Intell Clin Pharm 1974;8:650-655 (reference confirmed live via Evidencio Supporting Publications) Standard textbook
Common questions
- Where do the formulas and numbers in this tool come from?
- Every calculation in this tool is driven by the formulas below, each tied to its source. These are modeled methods for education, not clinical guidance.
- Is this clinical advice? Can I change a dose based on it?
- Educational PK model: not clinical guidance. Confirm any dose change with a prescriber or pharmacist.
- How does the tool estimate an equivalent dose when switching drugs?
- Estimate an equivalent dose when switching between drugs in the same class. Results are modeled estimates from the parameters you entered.
- Can a tablet be split, crushed, or dispersed?
- Look up whether a tablet may be split, crushed, or dispersed for a feeding tube. Answers are modeled from the product's formulation and curated label sources. Always confirm against the registered product information (інструкція) and a pharmacist.
Data current as of July 2026.