Literature DB >> 18568053

Cyclosporin therapeutic drug monitoring--an established service revisited.

Raymond G Morris1.   

Abstract

Despite the routine application of therapeutic drug monitoring of cyclosporin (CsA) for two decades, there remain significant analytical issues. In addition, new developments have arisen in the delivery of this laboratory service as well as alternative clinical strategies for delivering optimal benefit to organ transplant recipients. Sample collection strategies are evolving away from the traditional pre-dose/trough (C0) sample in favour of estimates of the absorption phase in the first 4-6 hours after the oral dose of CsA. This is based on the recognition of the relatively poor relationship between C0 and CsA exposure indices, such as area under the blood CsA concentration versus time curve (AUC), especially in the first few hours after the dose. By collecting serial blood samples over this limited period (4 hr after the dose) and estimating the AUC(0-4), one can gain insight into how well CsA has been absorbed for each transplant recipient, and individualise CsA dosage. However, a recent survey of Australasian CsA laboratories revealed that such AUC(0-4) sampling strategies in the early post-dose period were poorly accepted in clinics across Australasia. The alternative that has proven to be more clinically acceptable is the use of a single sample 2-hours after the dose (C2). The C2 concentration has been demonstrated (particularly in kidney and liver transplant recipients) as correlating well with AUC(0-4), allowing it to be used as a surrogate index of CsA absorption and exposure. The laboratory survey also showed several areas of concern in the analytical sphere. The major one is that the majority of laboratories employ the two immunoassays that deliver the least specific result on C0 samples within the range of monoclonal methods, leading to high variability and clinically significant errors with patient samples. Laboratories have also adopted a range of dilution protocols for the significantly higher C2 concentrations, and this has proved a source of significant error. In addition, around 30% of laboratories were not involved in a proficiency-testing program. Thus there is clear opportunity to do much better analytically. Hence, there remain significant challenges ahead to deliver better quality CsA assay services and dosage individualisation to further improve outcomes for the organ transplant recipients that we care for.

Entities:  

Year:  2003        PMID: 18568053      PMCID: PMC1855625     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Biochem Rev        ISSN: 0159-8090


  84 in total

1.  New approaches to cyclosporine monitoring raise further concerns about analytical techniques.

Authors:  D W Holt; A Johnston; B D Kahan; R G Morris; M Oellerich; L M Shaw
Journal:  Clin Chem       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 8.327

Review 2.  Therapeutic drug monitoring of immunosuppressant drugs in clinical practice.

Authors:  Barry D Kahan; Paul Keown; Gary A Levy; Atholl Johnston
Journal:  Clin Ther       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 3.393

Review 3.  Canadian Consensus Meeting on cyclosporine monitoring: report of the consensus panel.

Authors:  L M Shaw; R W Yatscoff; L D Bowers; D J Freeman; J R Jeffery; P A Keown; I J McGilveray; T G Rosano; P Y Wong
Journal:  Clin Chem       Date:  1990-10       Impact factor: 8.327

4.  Evaluation of the new AxSYM cyclosporine assay: comparison with TDx monoclonal whole blood and Emit cyclosporine assays.

Authors:  P E Wallemacq; K Alexandre
Journal:  Clin Chem       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 8.327

5.  Area under the curve monitoring of cyclosporine therapy: the early posttransplant period.

Authors:  J Grevel; B D Kahan
Journal:  Ther Drug Monit       Date:  1991-03       Impact factor: 3.681

6.  Update on pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic studies with FTY720 and sirolimus.

Authors:  Barry D Kahan
Journal:  Ther Drug Monit       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 3.681

7.  Influence of different parameters for the monitoring of cyclosporine.

Authors:  H Humbert; L Vernillet; M D Cabiac; J Barradas; E Billaud
Journal:  Transplant Proc       Date:  1990-06       Impact factor: 1.066

8.  The temporal profile of calcineurin inhibition by cyclosporine in vivo.

Authors:  P F Halloran; L M Helms; L Kung; J Noujaim
Journal:  Transplantation       Date:  1999-11-15       Impact factor: 4.939

9.  Abbreviated pharmacokinetic profiles in area-under-the-curve monitoring of cyclosporine therapy in de novo renal transplant patients treated with Sandimmune or Neoral. Neoral study group.

Authors:  C L Marsh
Journal:  Ther Drug Monit       Date:  1999-02       Impact factor: 3.681

10.  Randomized, international study of cyclosporine microemulsion absorption profiling in renal transplantation with basiliximab immunoprophylaxis.

Authors: 
Journal:  Am J Transplant       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 8.086

View more
  4 in total

1.  Effect of bifendate on the pharmacokinetics of cyclosporine in relation to the CYP3A4*18B genotype in healthy subjects.

Authors:  Yong Zeng; Yi-jing He; Fu-yuan He; Lan Fan; Hong-hao Zhou
Journal:  Acta Pharmacol Sin       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 6.150

2.  Optimal sampling time-point for cyclosporin A concentration monitoring in heart transplant recipients.

Authors:  Yixin Jia; Xu Meng; Yan Li; Chunlei Xu; Wen Zeng; Yuqing Jiao; Wei Han
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2018-09-10       Impact factor: 2.447

3.  Utility of C-2 (Cyclosporine) monitoring in postrenal transplant patients: A study in the Indian population.

Authors:  V Thakur; R Kumar; P N Gupta
Journal:  Indian J Nephrol       Date:  2008-07

4.  A 16 Month Survey of Cyclosporine Utilization Evaluation in Allogeneic Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplant Recipients.

Authors:  Maria Tavakoli Ardakani; Ali Tafazoli; Mahshid Mehdizadeh; Abbas Hajifathali; Simin Dadashzadeh
Journal:  Iran J Pharm Res       Date:  2016       Impact factor: 1.696

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.