Literature DB >> 18691105

Therapeutic drug monitoring of busulfan in transplantation.

J A Russell1, S B Kangarloo.   

Abstract

Busulfan is the only agent used in myeloablative regimens for hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for which therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) has been widely used. Studies of oral busulfan (Bu) indicate wide intrapatient and interpatient variations in pharmacokinetic (PK) behavior, particularly in children. Dose adjustments of oral Bu based on TDM to bring exposures within established therapeutic ranges have been shown to reduce toxicity and improve outcomes. Intravenous (IV) Bu is becoming more widely used and has much more predictable PK. Outcomes with IV Bu appear to be superior to those achieved using oral Bu without TDM. However there is still at least a threefold variation in exposures achieved by the same dose of IV Bu in different individuals and a small proportion of patients will experience toxic exposures with current dosing regimens. Therapeutic monitoring with appropriate dose adjustment is therefore recommended for all patients treated with regimens containing high doses of Bu. Giving IV Bu at a fixed rate to adults will narrow the range of exposures but more work is needed to establish the best dosing regimen to bring as many exposures as possible within the target range. Studies of test dosing of IV Bu show that this strategy is more accurate when test and treatment doses are infused at the same rate. Finally, targeting exposures to the upper end of the therapeutic range may provide a safe approach to exploiting dose-intensity for the treatment of some malignancies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18691105     DOI: 10.2174/138161208785061382

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Pharm Des        ISSN: 1381-6128            Impact factor:   3.116


  19 in total

1.  Trough level monitoring of intravenous busulfan to estimate the area under the plasma drug concentration-time curve in pediatric hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients.

Authors:  Erika Watanabe; Takuro Nishikawa; Kazuro Ikawa; Hiroki Yamaguchi; Takanari Abematsu; Shunsuke Nakagawa; Koichiro Kurauchi; Yuichi Kodama; Takayuki Tanabe; Yuichi Shinkoda; Kazuaki Matsumoto; Yasuhiro Okamoto; Yasuo Takeda; Yoshifumi Kawano
Journal:  Int J Hematol       Date:  2015-08-05       Impact factor: 2.490

2.  Therapeutic salivary monitoring of IV busulfan in patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: a pilot study.

Authors:  L M Bezinelli; F P Eduardo; D L C de Carvalho; C E Dos Santos Ferreira; E V de Almeida; L R Sanches; I Esteves; P V Campregher; N Hamerschlak; L Corrêa
Journal:  Bone Marrow Transplant       Date:  2017-07-24       Impact factor: 5.483

3.  Therapeutic drug monitoring for either oral or intravenous busulfan when combined with pre- and post-transplantation cyclophosphamide.

Authors:  Lindsey R Lombardi; Christopher G Kanakry; Marianna Zahurak; Nadira Durakovic; Javier Bolaños-Meade; Yvette L Kasamon; Douglas E Gladstone; William Matsui; Ivan Borrello; Carol Ann Huff; Lode J Swinnen; Robert A Brodsky; Richard F Ambinder; Ephraim J Fuchs; Gary L Rosner; Richard J Jones; Leo Luznik
Journal:  Leuk Lymphoma       Date:  2015-10-12

Review 4.  Not too little, not too much-just right! (Better ways to give high dose melphalan).

Authors:  P J Shaw; C E Nath; H M Lazarus
Journal:  Bone Marrow Transplant       Date:  2014-08-18       Impact factor: 5.483

5.  Phase I study of dose-escalated busulfan with fludarabine and alemtuzumab as conditioning for allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant: reduced clearance at high doses and occurrence of late sinusoidal obstruction syndrome/veno-occlusive disease.

Authors:  Peter H O'Donnell; Andrew S Artz; Samir D Undevia; Rish K Pai; Paula Del Cerro; Sarah Horowitz; Lucy A Godley; John Hart; Federico Innocenti; Richard A Larson; Olatoyosi M Odenike; Wendy Stock; Koen Van Besien
Journal:  Leuk Lymphoma       Date:  2010-10-04

6.  Mini test dose of intravenous busulfan (busulfex(®)) in allogeneic non-myeloablative stem cell transplantation, followed by liquid chromatography tandem-mass spectrometry.

Authors:  Ivan Spasojevic; Ligia R S da Costa; Mitchell E Horwitz; Gwynn D Long; Keith M Sullivan; John P Chute; Cristina Gasparetto; Ashley Morris; Nelson J Chao; David A Rizzieri
Journal:  Cancer Invest       Date:  2012-09-28       Impact factor: 2.176

7.  Risk Score for the Development of Veno-Occlusive Disease after Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplant.

Authors:  Christopher Strouse; Ying Zhang; Mei-Jie Zhang; Alyssa DiGilio; Marcelo Pasquini; Mary M Horowitz; Stephanie Lee; Vincent Ho; Muthalagu Ramanathan; Wichai Chinratanalab; Alison Loren; Linda J Burns; Andrew Artz; Kathleen F Villa; Wael Saber
Journal:  Biol Blood Marrow Transplant       Date:  2018-06-19       Impact factor: 5.742

8.  Enzyme replacement is associated with better cognitive outcomes after transplant in Hurler syndrome.

Authors:  Julie B Eisengart; Kyle D Rudser; Jakub Tolar; Paul J Orchard; Teresa Kivisto; Richard S Ziegler; Chester B Whitley; Elsa G Shapiro
Journal:  J Pediatr       Date:  2012-09-10       Impact factor: 4.406

9.  Sequential regimen of clofarabine, cytosine arabinoside and reduced-intensity conditioned transplantation for primary refractory acute myeloid leukemia.

Authors:  Mohamad Mohty; Florent Malard; Didier Blaise; Noel Milpied; Gérard Socié; Anne Huynh; Oumédaly Reman; Ibrahim Yakoub-Agha; Sabine Furst; Thierry Guillaume; Resa Tabrizi; Stéphane Vigouroux; Pierre Peterlin; Jean El-Cheikh; Philippe Moreau; Myriam Labopin; Patrice Chevallier
Journal:  Haematologica       Date:  2016-08-25       Impact factor: 9.941

10.  Variation in prescribing patterns and therapeutic drug monitoring of intravenous busulfan in pediatric hematopoietic cell transplant recipients.

Authors:  Jeannine S McCune; K Scott Baker; David K Blough; Alan Gamis; Meagan J Bemer; Megan C Kelton-Rehkopf; Laura Winter; Jeffrey S Barrett
Journal:  J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2013-01-24       Impact factor: 3.126

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.