Literature DB >> 15205865

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

Atholl Johnston1, Philip Belitsky, Ulrich Frei, John Horvath, Peter Hoyer, J Harold Helderman, Michael Oellerich, Stephen Pollard, Hany Riad, Paolo Rigotti, Paul Keown, Björn Nashan.   

Abstract

Cyclosporine (CsA) is a critical-dose drug for which a minor change in absorption can have important clinical implications. Generic formulations of CsA are becoming more widely available, but standard criteria for bioequivalence require only that a single study in healthy volunteers demonstrate that mean pharmacokinetic parameters fall within 80-125% of the mean values for Neoral, the reference formulation of CsA. However, CsA absorption is known to differ between healthy volunteers and transplant patients and between different types of transplant patients, such that standard bioequivalence testing may be inadequate to ensure interchangeability of CsA formulations in all patients. The limited available clinical evidence has shown that stable renal transplant patients receiving Neoral have a significant reduction in mean CsA trough level after transfer to the Cicloral formulation. Mean pharmacokinetic values have been reported as equivalent following transfer to Gengraft in one study, but mean CsA trough fell and mean serum creatinine rose significantly in a separate trial. The only clinical outcomes data available are from a retrospective study of de novo renal transplant patients, which reported a significantly higher incidence of biopsy-proven acute rejection in patents receiving Gengraf versus Neoral (39% versus 25%, P<0.05). Until robust clinical data demonstrate that different formulations of CsA are interchangeable, it is advisable to prescribe CsA by brand, and any transfer to a different CsA formulation should be undertaken with close supervision and only at the direction of the transplant physician.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15205865     DOI: 10.1007/s00228-004-0774-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol        ISSN: 0031-6970            Impact factor:   2.953


  28 in total

1.  "Inactive" excipients such as Cremophor can affect in vivo drug disposition.

Authors:  Cristoph Wandel; Richard B Kim; C Michael Stein
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 6.875

2.  The clay feet of bioequivalence testing.

Authors:  G Levy
Journal:  J Pharm Pharmacol       Date:  1995-12       Impact factor: 3.765

3.  Comparative bioavailability of Neoral and Sandimmune in cardiac transplant recipients over 1 year.

Authors:  G F Cooney; V Jeevanandam; S Choudhury; G Feutren; E A Mueller; H J Eisen
Journal:  Transplant Proc       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 1.066

Review 4.  Cyclosporin pharmacokinetics in paediatric transplant recipients.

Authors:  G F Cooney; K Habucky; K Hoppu
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  1997-06       Impact factor: 6.447

5.  Improved dose linearity of cyclosporine pharmacokinetics from a microemulsion formulation.

Authors:  E A Mueller; J M Kovarik; J B van Bree; W Tetzloff; J Grevel; K Kutz
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  1994-02       Impact factor: 4.200

6.  The adverse impact of high cyclosporine. Clearance rates on the incidences of acute rejection and graft loss.

Authors:  A Lindholm; M Welsh; L Rutzky; B D Kahan
Journal:  Transplantation       Date:  1993-05       Impact factor: 4.939

Review 7.  Sandimmun neoral pharmacokinetics: impact of the new oral formulation.

Authors:  D W Holt; E A Mueller; J M Kovarik; J B van Bree; F Richard; K Kutz
Journal:  Transplant Proc       Date:  1995-02       Impact factor: 1.066

8.  The evaluation of the safety and tolerability of two formulations of cyclosporine: neoral and sandimmune. A meta-analysis.

Authors:  M B Shah; J E Martin; T J Schroeder; M R First
Journal:  Transplantation       Date:  1999-06-15       Impact factor: 4.939

9.  Reduced inter- and intrasubject variability in cyclosporine pharmacokinetics in renal transplant recipients treated with a microemulsion formulation in conjunction with fasting, low-fat meals, or high-fat meals.

Authors:  B D Kahan; J Dunn; C Fitts; D Van Buren; D Wombolt; R Pollak; R Carson; J W Alexander; M Choc; R Wong
Journal:  Transplantation       Date:  1995-02-27       Impact factor: 4.939

10.  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

View more
  5 in total

1.  Therapeutic monitoring of pediatric renal transplant patients with conversion to generic cyclosporin.

Authors:  Natalia Riva; Paulo Caceres Guido; Juan Ibañez; Nieves Licciardone; Marcela Rousseau; Gabriel Mato; Marta Monteverde; Paula Schaiquevich
Journal:  Int J Clin Pharm       Date:  2014-05-27

2.  Neoimmun versus Neoral: a bioequivalence study in healthy volunteers and influence of a fat-rich meal on the bioavailability of Neoimmun.

Authors:  F Kees; M Bucher; F Schweda; H Gschaidmeier; L Faerber; R Seifert
Journal:  Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol       Date:  2007-06-15       Impact factor: 3.195

3.  Cyclosporine: A Commentary on Brand versus Generic Formulation Exchange.

Authors:  A K Singh; S S Narsipur
Journal:  J Transplant       Date:  2011-11-17

Review 4.  Equivalence and interchangeability of narrow therapeutic index drugs in organ transplantation.

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

5.  Views and perceptions about locally manufactured medicines in Ethiopia: a qualitative study of physicians, patients and regulatory authorities.

Authors:  Chalachew Alemayehu; Geoff Mitchell; Jane Nikles; Abraham Aseffa; Alexandra Clavarino
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2018-08-08       Impact factor: 2.655

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.