The full benefit of many effective medications will be achieved only if patients adhere to prescribed treatment regimens. Unfortunately, applying terms such as “noncompliant” and “nonadherent” to patients who do not consume every pill at the desired time can stigmatize them in their future relationships with health care providers. This article on medication adherence (or compliance) reviews strategies to assess and enhance this important aspect of patient care.

The importance of reviewing and studying sex-based differences in pharmacologic parameters is demonstrated by the increasing data on gender variation in drug efficacy and toxicity profiles. Sex-based differences in the four major factors that contribute to interindividual pharmacokinetic variability—bioavailability, distribution, metabolism, and elimination—are theorized to stem from variations between men and women in factors such as body weight, plasma volume, gastric emptying time, plasma protein levels, cytochrome P450 activity, drug transporter function, and excretion activity. Sex-determined variations in pharmacodynamics have traditionally been more difficult to study, but a number of recent studies have explored these differences. This review examines the biologic basis of differences in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics between the sexes and summarizes studies that have addressed these differences. As an example, sex-based variation in the efficacy and toxicity of antiretroviral therapy in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV)-infected patients is explored more thoroughly to illustrate some of the factors underlying sex-based differences in drug therapy.

Satisfactory adherence to aptly prescribed medications is essential for good outcomes of patient care and reliable evaluation of competing modes of drug treatment. The measure of satisfactory adherence is a dosing history that includes timely initiation of dosing plus punctual and persistent execution of the dosing regimen throughout the specified duration of treatment. Standardized terminology for initiation, execution, and persistence of drug dosing is essential for clarity of communication and scientific progress. Electronic methods for compiling drug dosing histories are now the recognized standard for quantifying adherence, the parameters of which support model-based, continuous projections of drug actions and concentrations in plasma that are confirmable by intermittent, direct measurements at single time points. The frequency of inadequate adherence is usually underestimated by pre-electronic methods and thus is clinically unrecognized as a frequent cause of failed treatment or underestimated effectiveness. Intermittent lapses in dosing are potential sources of toxicity through hazardous rebound effects or recurrent first-dose effects.

Lipid lowering therapy is used increasingly in persons with HIV infection in the absence of safety data or information on drug interactions with antiretroviral agents. The primary objectives of this study were to examine the effects of ritonavir (RTV) plus saquinavir soft-gel (SQVsgc) capsules on the pharmacokinetics of pravastatin, simvastatin, and atorvastatin, and the effect of pravastatin on the pharmacokinetics of nelfinavir (NFV) in order to determine clinically important drug–drug interactions. Randomized, open-label study in healthy, HIV seronegative adults at AIDS Clinical Trials Units across the USA. Three groups of subjects (arms 1, 2, and 3) received pravastatin, simvastatin or atorvastatin (40 mg daily each) from days 1–4 and 15–18. In these groups, RTV 400 mg and SQVsgc 400 mg twice daily were given from days 4–18. A fourth group (arm 4) received NFV 1250 mg twice daily from days 1–14 with pravastatin 40 mg daily added from days 15–18. Statin and NFV levels were measured by liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry. Fifty-six subjects completed both pharmacokinetic study days. In arms 1–3, the median estimated area under the curves (AUC)0−−24 for the statins were: pravastatin (arm 1, n = 13), 151 and 75 nguu.h/ml on days 4 and 18 (decline of 50% in presence of RTV/SQVsgc), respectively (P = 0.005); simvastatin (arm 2, n = 14), 17 and 548 nguu.h/ml on days 4 and 18 (increase of 3059% in the presence of RTV/SQVsgc), respectively (P < 0.001); and total active atorvastatin (arm 3, n = 14), 167 and 289 nguu.h/ml on days 4 and 18 (increase of 79% in the presence of RTV/SQVsgc), respectively (P < 0.001). In arm 4, the median estimated AUC0−−8 for NFV (24 319 versus 26 760 nguu.h/ml;P = 0.58) and its active M8 metabolite (15 565 versus 14 571 nguu.h/m;P = 0.63) were not statistically different from day 14 to day 18 (without or with pravastatin). Simvastatin should be avoided and atorvastatin may be used with caution in persons taking RTV and SQVsgc. Dose adjustment of pravastatin may be necessary with concomitant use of RTV and SQVsgc. Pravastatin does not alter the NFV pharmacokinetics, and thus appears to be safe for concomitant use.