Lynda A Frassetto1, Clara C Tan-Tam, Burc Barin, Matt Browne, Alan R Wolfe, Peter G Stock, Michelle Roland, Leslie Z Benet. 1. 1 Department of Medicine and Clinical Research Center, University of California, San Francisco, CA. 2 Department of Surgery, University of California, San Francisco, CA. 3 EMMES, Bethesda, MD. 4 Department of Bioengineering and Therapeutic Sciences, University of California, San Francisco, CA. 5 Address correspondence to: Leslie Z. Benet, Ph.D., UCSF Box 0912, San Francisco, CA 94143-0912.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Interactions between antiretrovirals (ARVs) and transplant immunosuppressant agents (IS) among HIV-infected transplant recipients may lead to lack of efficacy or toxicity. In transplant recipients not infected with HIV, tacrolimus (TAC) trough levels (C0) or cyclosporine (CsA) drawn at C0 or 2 hours after dosing (C2) correlate with drug exposure (area under the curve [AUC]/dose) and outcomes. Because of ARV-IS interactions in HIV-infected individuals, and the high rate of rejection in these subjects, this study investigated the correlations between IS concentrations and exposure to determine the best method to monitor immunosuppressant levels. METHODS: This study prospectively studied 50 HIV-infected transplant recipients undergoing kidney or liver transplantation evaluating the pharmacokinetics of the IS in 150 studies over time after transplantation (weeks 2 to 4, 12, 28, 52, and 104). IS levels were measured with liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry and AUC calculated using WinNonlin 9.0. Correlation analyses were run on SAS 9.2. RESULTS: CsA concentration at C4 correlated better with AUC than C0 or C2, and over time TAC concentration correlated better at C0 or C2. CONCLUSIONS: It is suggested that C0 is acceptable for TAC monitoring, but poor predictability will occur at C0 with CsA. The low correlation of C0 with CsA AUC could be responsible for the higher rejection rates on CsA that has been reported in these subjects.
BACKGROUND: Interactions between antiretrovirals (ARVs) and transplant immunosuppressant agents (IS) among HIV-infected transplant recipients may lead to lack of efficacy or toxicity. In transplant recipients not infected with HIV, tacrolimus (TAC) trough levels (C0) or cyclosporine (CsA) drawn at C0 or 2 hours after dosing (C2) correlate with drug exposure (area under the curve [AUC]/dose) and outcomes. Because of ARV-IS interactions in HIV-infected individuals, and the high rate of rejection in these subjects, this study investigated the correlations between IS concentrations and exposure to determine the best method to monitor immunosuppressant levels. METHODS: This study prospectively studied 50 HIV-infected transplant recipients undergoing kidney or liver transplantation evaluating the pharmacokinetics of the IS in 150 studies over time after transplantation (weeks 2 to 4, 12, 28, 52, and 104). IS levels were measured with liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry and AUC calculated using WinNonlin 9.0. Correlation analyses were run on SAS 9.2. RESULTS:CsA concentration at C4 correlated better with AUC than C0 or C2, and over time TAC concentration correlated better at C0 or C2. CONCLUSIONS: It is suggested that C0 is acceptable for TAC monitoring, but poor predictability will occur at C0 with CsA. The low correlation of C0 with CsA AUC could be responsible for the higher rejection rates on CsA that has been reported in these subjects.
Authors: U Christians; W Jacobsen; N Serkova; L Z Benet; C Vidal; K F Sewing; M P Manns; G I Kirchner Journal: J Chromatogr B Biomed Sci Appl Date: 2000-10-01
Authors: Markus Bickel; Evrim Anadol; Martin Vogel; Wolf Peter Hofmann; Nils von Hentig; Johannes Kuetscher; Michael Kurowski; Christian Moench; Tessa Lennemann; Thomas Lutz; Wolf Otto Bechstein; Hans Reinhard Brodt; Jürgen Rockstroh Journal: J Antimicrob Chemother Date: 2010-03-04 Impact factor: 5.790
Authors: J E Kaplan; D Hanson; M S Dworkin; T Frederick; J Bertolli; M L Lindegren; S Holmberg; J L Jones Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2000-04 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Mysore S Anil Kumar; Debra R Sierka; Anna M Damask; Billie Fyfe; Robert F McAlack; Michael Heifets; Michael J Moritz; Daniel Alvarez; Aparna Kumar Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2005-04 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: F J Palella; K M Delaney; A C Moorman; M O Loveless; J Fuhrer; G A Satten; D J Aschman; S D Holmberg Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1998-03-26 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Peter G Stock; Burc Barin; Barbara Murphy; Douglas Hanto; Jorge M Diego; Jimmy Light; Charles Davis; Emily Blumberg; David Simon; Aruna Subramanian; J Michael Millis; G Marshall Lyon; Kenneth Brayman; Doug Slakey; Ron Shapiro; Joseph Melancon; Jeffrey M Jacobson; Valentina Stosor; Jean L Olson; Donald M Stablein; Michelle E Roland Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-11-18 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: L C Floren; I Bekersky; L Z Benet; Q Mekki; D Dressler; J W Lee; J P Roberts; M F Hebert Journal: Clin Pharmacol Ther Date: 1997-07 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: Ryan M Kern; Harish Seethamraju; Paul D Blanc; Niraj Sinha; Matthias Loebe; Jeff Golden; Jasleen Kukreja; Scott Scheinin; Steven Hays; Mary Ellen Kleinhenz; Lorri Leard; Charles Hoopes; Jonathan P Singer Journal: Ann Am Thorac Soc Date: 2014-07
Authors: Michelle E Roland; Burc Barin; Shirish Huprikar; Barbara Murphy; Douglas W Hanto; Emily Blumberg; Kim Olthoff; David Simon; William D Hardy; George Beatty; Peter G Stock Journal: AIDS Date: 2016-01-28 Impact factor: 4.177
Authors: Clara Tan-Tam; Pamela Liao; Julio S Montaner; Mark W Hull; Charles H Scudamore; Siegfried R Erb; Eric M Yoshida Journal: Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol Date: 2014-05 Impact factor: 2.471