Literature DB >> 12860490

A pharmacokinetic and clinical review of the potential clinical impact of using different formulations of cyclosporin A. Berlin, Germany, November 19, 2001.

Stephen Pollard1, Björn Nashan, Atholl Johnston, Peter Hoyer, Philip Belitsky, Paul Keown, Hal Helderman.   

Abstract

A meeting of 14 transplant and pharmacokinetic specialists from Europe and North America was convened in November 2001 to evaluate scientific and clinical data regarding the use of different formulations of cyclosporin A (CsA). The following consensus was achieved. (1) CsA is a critical-dose drug with a narrow therapeutic window. Clinical outcomes after transplantation are affected by the pharmacokinetic properties of CsA, particularly by its bioavailability, and by intrapatient variability in CsA exposure. (2) Standard bioequivalence criteria do not address differences in CsA pharmacokinetics between transplant recipients and healthy volunteers, or between subpopulations of transplant recipients. (3) In some circumstances, currently available formulations of CsA that meet standard bioequivalence criteria are likely to be nonequivalent with respect to pharmacokinetic characteristics. (4) The choice of CsA formulation can affect the short- and long-term clinical outcome. Currently, there is a lack of clinical comparisons between generic CsA formulations and the Neoral formulation (Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, New Jersey). Initial retrospective data from the Collaborative Transplant Study suggest that use of generic CsA formulations may result in reduced graft survival at 1 year. (5) Management of transplant recipients by monitoring Neoral concentrations 2 hours after dosing (C(2)) reduces the incidence and severity of acute rejection compared with monitoring of trough concentrations with no increase in toxicity. C(2) monitoring has been developed based on the pharmacokinetics of Neoral only and has not been evaluated or validated for generic formulations of CsA. (6) The major costs of care after transplantation relate to the management of poor clinical outcomes and toxicity. CsA formulations with different pharmacokinetic properties may be associated with varying clinical outcomes, which would be expected to affect total health care costs. (7) The transplant physician is responsible for selecting immunosuppressive agents and formulations for his or her patients. Any switch between CsA formulations in a particular patient should take place only in a controlled setting with adequate pharmacokinetic monitoring.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12860490     DOI: 10.1016/s0149-2918(03)80161-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Ther        ISSN: 0149-2918            Impact factor:   3.393


  12 in total

1.  Adsorption and Leachable Contamination of Flucloxacillin, Cyclosporin and Amiodarone Following Delivery Through an Intravenous Administration Set.

Authors:  Zachary Woodward; Peter Brooks; Bernadette Morris-Smith; Marianne Wallis; Steven M Ogbourne
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2018-04-19       Impact factor: 4.200

2.  PEGylated single-walled carbon nanotubes as nanocarriers for cyclosporin A delivery.

Authors:  Naghmeh Hadidi; Farzad Kobarfard; Nastaran Nafissi-Varcheh; Reza Aboofazeli
Journal:  AAPS PharmSciTech       Date:  2013-03-12       Impact factor: 3.246

Review 3.  Potential clinical implications of substitution of generic cyclosporine formulations for cyclosporine microemulsion (Neoral) in transplant recipients.

Authors:  Atholl Johnston; Philip Belitsky; Ulrich Frei; John Horvath; Peter Hoyer; J Harold Helderman; Michael Oellerich; Stephen Pollard; Hany Riad; Paolo Rigotti; Paul Keown; Björn Nashan
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2004-06-17       Impact factor: 2.953

4.  Differentiation of innovator versus generic cyclosporine via a drug interaction on sirolimus.

Authors:  John M Kovarik; Adele Noe; Yibin Wang; Irene Mueller; Gilberto DeNucci; Robert L Schmouder
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2006-03-18       Impact factor: 2.953

5.  Clinical studies with oral lipid based formulations of poorly soluble compounds.

Authors:  Dimitrios G Fatouros; Ditte M Karpf; Flemming S Nielsen; Anette Mullertz
Journal:  Ther Clin Risk Manag       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 2.423

Review 6.  A Systematic Literature Review Approach to Estimate the Therapeutic Index of Selected Immunosuppressant Drugs After Renal Transplantation.

Authors:  Jessica E Ericson; Kanecia O Zimmerman; Daniel Gonzalez; Chiara Melloni; Jeffrey T Guptill; Kevin D Hill; Huali Wu; Michael Cohen-Wolkowiez
Journal:  Ther Drug Monit       Date:  2017-02       Impact factor: 3.118

7.  Bioequivalence: tried and tested.

Authors:  R Schall; L Endrenyi
Journal:  Cardiovasc J Afr       Date:  2010 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 1.167

8.  Clinical evaluation of efficacy and safety of cyclosporine (Imusporin) in renal transplant patients with stable graft function maintained on neoral or bioral.

Authors:  Mrigank S Jha; Aneesh Srivastava; Deepak Dubey; Amit Gupta; R K Sharma; Anant Kumar
Journal:  Indian J Urol       Date:  2007-04

Review 9.  Equivalence and interchangeability of narrow therapeutic index drugs in organ transplantation.

Authors:  Atholl Johnston
Journal:  Eur J Hosp Pharm       Date:  2013-08-29

10.  Conversion to generic cyclosporine A in stable chronic patients after heart transplantation.

Authors:  Maximilian Kraeuter; Matthias Helmschrott; Christian Erbel; Christian A Gleissner; Lutz Frankenstein; Bastian Schmack; Arjang Ruhparwar; Philipp Ehlermann; Hugo A Katus; Andreas O Doesch
Journal:  Drug Des Devel Ther       Date:  2013-11-28       Impact factor: 4.162

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.