BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) is an immunosuppressive drug used in renal transplant patients. Upon oral administration it is hydrolyzed to the active agent mycophenolic acid (MPA). In renal transplant recipients, MMF therapy is optimal when the area under the curve of MPA is 30 to 60 mg·h/L. When MMF doses are adjusted, a linear relationship between dose and MPA exposure is assumed. In this study, the linearity of MMF pharmacokinetics was investigated. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: MPA concentration-time profiles from renal transplant recipients cotreated with cyclosporine (n = 140) or tacrolimus (n = 101) were analyzed retrospectively using nonlinear mixed-effects modeling. The correlation between the MMF dose and the pharmacokinetics parameters was evaluated. RESULTS: In the developed population pharmacokinetics model MPA clearance and the central volume of distribution were correlated with cyclosporine coadministration and time posttransplantation. The pharmacokinetics of MPA were not linear. Bioavailability decreased with increasing MMF doses. Compared with an MMF dose of 1000 mg (=100%), relative bioavailability was 123%, 111%, 94%, and 90% in patients receiving MMF doses of 250, 500, 1500, and 2000 mg in combination with cyclosporine (P < 0.001); respective values in tacrolimus-cotreated patients were 176%, 133%, 85%, and 76% (P < 0.001). Because of the decreasing relative bioavailability, MPA exposure will increase less than proportionally with increasing MMF doses. CONCLUSIONS: MMF exhibits nonlinear pharmacokinetics. This should be taken into account when performing therapeutic drug monitoring.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) is an immunosuppressive drug used in renal transplant patients. Upon oral administration it is hydrolyzed to the active agent mycophenolic acid (MPA). In renal transplant recipients, MMF therapy is optimal when the area under the curve of MPA is 30 to 60 mg·h/L. When MMF doses are adjusted, a linear relationship between dose and MPA exposure is assumed. In this study, the linearity of MMF pharmacokinetics was investigated. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: MPA concentration-time profiles from renal transplant recipients cotreated with cyclosporine (n = 140) or tacrolimus (n = 101) were analyzed retrospectively using nonlinear mixed-effects modeling. The correlation between the MMF dose and the pharmacokinetics parameters was evaluated. RESULTS: In the developed population pharmacokinetics model MPA clearance and the central volume of distribution were correlated with cyclosporine coadministration and time posttransplantation. The pharmacokinetics of MPA were not linear. Bioavailability decreased with increasing MMF doses. Compared with an MMF dose of 1000 mg (=100%), relative bioavailability was 123%, 111%, 94%, and 90% in patients receiving MMF doses of 250, 500, 1500, and 2000 mg in combination with cyclosporine (P < 0.001); respective values in tacrolimus-cotreated patients were 176%, 133%, 85%, and 76% (P < 0.001). Because of the decreasing relative bioavailability, MPA exposure will increase less than proportionally with increasing MMF doses. CONCLUSIONS:MMF exhibits nonlinear pharmacokinetics. This should be taken into account when performing therapeutic drug monitoring.
Authors: Ferdi Sombogaard; Ron H N van Schaik; Ron A Mathot; Klemens Budde; Marloes van der Werf; Arnold G Vulto; Willem Weimar; Petra Glander; Laurent Essioux; Teun van Gelder Journal: Pharmacogenet Genomics Date: 2009-08 Impact factor: 2.089
Authors: Ferdi Sombogaard; Annemiek M A Peeters; Carla C Baan; Ron A A Mathot; Monique E Quaedackers; Arnold G Vulto; Willem Weimar; Teun van Gelder Journal: Ther Drug Monit Date: 2009-10 Impact factor: 3.681
Authors: Teun van Gelder; Helio Tedesco Silva; Johan W de Fijter; Klemens Budde; Dirk Kuypers; Gunnar Tyden; Aleksander Lohmus; Claudia Sommerer; Anders Hartmann; Yann Le Meur; Michael Oellerich; David W Holt; Burkhard Tönshoff; Paul Keown; Scott Campbell; Richard D Mamelok Journal: Transplantation Date: 2008-10-27 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Y Le Meur; M Büchler; A Thierry; S Caillard; F Villemain; S Lavaud; I Etienne; P-F Westeel; B Hurault de Ligny; L Rostaing; E Thervet; J C Szelag; J-P Rérolle; A Rousseau; G Touchard; P Marquet Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2007-10-01 Impact factor: 8.086
Authors: Brenda C M de Winter; Irmgard Neumann; Reinier M van Hest; Teun van Gelder; Ron A A Mathot Journal: Ther Drug Monit Date: 2009-06 Impact factor: 3.681
Authors: Brenda C M de Winter; Ron A A Mathôt; Reinier M van Hest; Teun van Gelder Journal: Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol Date: 2007-04 Impact factor: 4.481
Authors: Brenda C M de Winter; Teun van Gelder; Petra Glander; Dario Cattaneo; Helio Tedesco-Silva; Irmgard Neumann; Luuk Hilbrands; Reinier M van Hest; Mark D Pescovitz; Klemens Budde; Ron A A Mathot Journal: Clin Pharmacokinet Date: 2008 Impact factor: 6.447
Authors: Malek Okour; Pamala A Jacobson; Mariam A Ahmed; Ajay K Israni; Richard C Brundage Journal: J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2018-01-12 Impact factor: 3.126
Authors: Min Dong; Tsuyoshi Fukuda; Shareen Cox; Marij T de Vries; David K Hooper; Jens Goebel; Alexander A Vinks Journal: Br J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2014-11 Impact factor: 4.335
Authors: Tsuyoshi Fukuda; Jens Goebel; Shareen Cox; Denise Maseck; Kejian Zhang; Joseph R Sherbotie; Eileen N Ellis; Laura P James; Robert M Ward; Alexander A Vinks Journal: Ther Drug Monit Date: 2012-12 Impact factor: 3.681