Literature DB >> 11825097

Population pharmacokinetic model to predict steady-state exposure to once-daily cyclosporin microemulsion in renal transplant recipients.

Franziska Schädeli1, Hans-Peter Marti, Felix J Frey, Dominik E Uehlinger.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The microemulsion formulation of cyclosporin (CsA-ME) has a less variable absorption profile than the standard formulation (CsA-S), but only limited information is available about once-daily administration of CsA-ME.
OBJECTIVE: To develop a population pharmacokinetic model for once-daily CsA-ME that enables the prediction of individual steady-state area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) on the basis of blood concentration measurements and patient covariates. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The steady-state pharmacokinetics of once-daily cyclosporin were studied in 60 stable renal transplant recipients before and after conversion from CsA-S to CsA-ME. For each formulation, 7 blood samples were collected from 50 patients (group A) at sparse timepoints over 2 weeks, and 10 blood samples were collected from 10 patients (group B) at fixed timepoints over 24 hours. A 2-compartment population model assuming time-lagged first-order oral absorption was fitted to the data from group A, using nonlinear mixed effects modelling (NONMEM). The data from group B were used to evaluate the predictive performance of the model.
RESULTS: Mean [+/- SD; coefficient of variation (%CV)] CsA-S doses of 245mg (+/- 92) resulted in cyclosporin blood concentrations of 214 microg/L (+/- 70) after 12 hours and 108 microg/L (+/- 23) after 24 hours; the mean estimated AUC to 24 hours was 7658 microg x h/L (30%). With mean CsA-ME doses of 206mg (+/- 59), cyclosporin blood concentrations were 212 microg/L (+/- 33) and 132 microg/L (25%) after 12 and 24 hours, respectively, and the mean estimated AUC(24) was 9357 microg x h/L (23%). A strong correlation between 12-hour concentrations and AUC(24) was observed for CsA-ME (r = 0.95, p < 0.001), but not for CsA-S (r = 0.59, nonsignificant); the correlation between 24-hour trough concentrations and AUC(24) was weaker for both formulations (r = 0.64, p < 0.05 and r = 0.37, nonsignificant, respectively). On the basis of the population model derived from group A, the single best timepoint to predict AUC(24) from blood cyclosporin concentration was at 8 hours [AUC(24) (microg x h/L) = 19.6 x cyclosporin concentration at 8 hours (microg/L) + 3035], resulting in a prediction error of 8.3 +/- 6.6% when applied to the measured AUC(24) of group B. Adverse events were observed after conversion in 18 patients; these events generally resolved spontaneously or after dosage reduction, but twice-daily administration was required in some patients.
CONCLUSIONS: Switching from once-daily CsA-S to CsA-ME results in more consistent and predictable cyclosporin pharmacokinetics. Adjustment of dosage or regimen may be required in some patients.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11825097     DOI: 10.2165/00003088-200241010-00005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet        ISSN: 0312-5963            Impact factor:   6.447


  33 in total

1.  Estimated area-under-the-curve monitoring of Neoral in a stable pediatric renal transplant population: one-year experience.

Authors:  J Lemire; E V Capparelli; D MacDonald; N Benador; V M Reznik; S A Mendoza; W R Griswold
Journal:  Transplant Proc       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 1.066

2.  Comparison of the absorption pharmacokinetics of Sandimmune and Neoral following porcine small bowel transplantation.

Authors:  K Akhtar; D Deardon; J J Cranley; J Walter; N R Parrott
Journal:  Transplant Proc       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 1.066

3.  The pharmacokinetics of a microemulsion formulation of cyclosporine in primary renal allograft recipients. The Neoral Study Group.

Authors:  G Barone; C T Chang; M G Choc; J B Klein; C L Marsh; J A Meligeni; D I Min; M D Pescovitz; R Pollak; T L Pruett; J B Stinson; J S Thompson; E Vasquez; T Waid; D G Wombolt; R L Wong
Journal:  Transplantation       Date:  1996-03-27       Impact factor: 4.939

4.  Influence of a fat-rich meal on the pharmacokinetics of a new oral formulation of cyclosporine in a crossover comparison with the market formulation.

Authors:  E A Mueller; J M Kovarik; J B van Bree; J Grevel; P W Lücker; K Kutz
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 4.200

5.  Application of Akaike's information criterion (AIC) in the evaluation of linear pharmacokinetic equations.

Authors:  K Yamaoka; T Nakagawa; T Uno
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Biopharm       Date:  1978-04

6.  A limited sampling strategy for the estimation of eight-hour neoral areas under the curve in renal transplantation.

Authors:  H U Meier-Kriesche; B Kaplan; P Brannan; B D Kahan; R J Portman
Journal:  Ther Drug Monit       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 3.681

7.  Cyclosporine A monitoring in patients with renal, cardiac, and liver transplants: a comparison between fluorescence polarization immunoassay and two different RIA methods.

Authors:  S Bergan; H E Rugstad; O Stokke; O Bentdal; T Frøysaker; A Bergan
Journal:  Scand J Clin Lab Invest       Date:  1993-08       Impact factor: 1.713

8.  Variable oral absorption of cyclosporine. A biopharmaceutical risk factor for chronic renal allograft rejection.

Authors:  B D Kahan; M Welsh; L Schoenberg; L P Rutzky; S M Katz; D L Urbauer; C T Van Buren
Journal:  Transplantation       Date:  1996-09-15       Impact factor: 4.939

9.  Trough levels and concentration time curves of cyclosporine in patients undergoing renal transplantation.

Authors:  F J Frey; F F Horber; B M Frey
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  1988-01       Impact factor: 6.875

10.  Two-hour cyclosporine level determination is the appropriate tool to monitor Neoral therapy.

Authors:  M Cantarovich; J G Besner; J S Barkun; E Elstein; R Loertscher
Journal:  Clin Transplant       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 2.863

View more
  5 in total

1.  Bayesian estimation of cyclosporin exposure for routine therapeutic drug monitoring in kidney transplant patients.

Authors:  Hélène Bourgoin; Gilles Paintaud; Matthias Büchler; Yvon Lebranchu; Elisabeth Autret-Leca; France Mentré; Chantal Le Guellec
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2005-01       Impact factor: 4.335

2.  Optimal designs for composed models in pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic experiments.

Authors:  Holger Dette; Andrey Pepelyshev; Weng Kee Wong
Journal:  J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn       Date:  2012-05-22       Impact factor: 2.745

3.  Population pharmacokinetic study of cyclosporine in Chinese renal transplant recipients.

Authors:  Bing Chen; WeiXia Zhang; ZhiDong Gu; Juan Li; YuXin Zhang; WeiMin Cai
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2010-12-16       Impact factor: 2.953

4.  Patient characteristics influencing ciclosporin pharmacokinetics and accurate Bayesian estimation of ciclosporin exposure in heart, lung and kidney transplant patients.

Authors:  Franck Saint-Marcoux; Pierre Marquet; Evelyne Jacqz-Aigrain; Nicole Bernard; Philippe Thiry; Yann Le Meur; Annick Rousseau
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 6.447

Review 5.  Population pharmacokinetics of cyclosporine in transplant recipients.

Authors:  Kelong Han; Venkateswaran C Pillai; Raman Venkataramanan
Journal:  AAPS J       Date:  2013-06-18       Impact factor: 4.009

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.