R A Danguilan1, A B Lamban1, C A C Luna2, M Bacinillo1, M I C Momongan1. 1. Department of Nephrology, National Kidney and Transplant Institute, Quezon City, Philippines. 2. Department of Nephrology, National Kidney and Transplant Institute, Quezon City, Philippines. Electronic address: cher_alaine@yahoo.com.
Abstract
AIM: The aim of this study was to establish the efficacy and safety of generic mycophenolate mofetil (Mycept) and determine the bioequivalence with Cellcept. This will provide patients an alternative cost-effective option that may improve compliance and long-term outcome. METHODS: This was a comparative study between 2 nonconcurrent matched groups on Mycept and Cellcept. A total of 56 patients were included based on criteria (20 incidental patients on Mycept, matched to 20 historical patients on Cellcept, and 16 additional incidental patients on Cellcept). Patient and graft survival and safety parameters were reviewed at 6 months. Bioequivalence of Mycept with Cellcept was done by measuring area under the curve (AUC) of mycophenolic acid (MPA), maximum concentration, and time to maximum concentration for 16 patients in each group. RESULTS: Twenty incidental Mycept patients completed 6 months of follow-up. No significant difference was observed in survival (P = 1.0), graft function (P = .2320), and rejection episodes (P = .6250) between groups. The most common side effect of Mycept was hematologic and infectious. The MPA AUC of Mycept (37.38 ng/mL) was within the recommended MPA of 30-60 ng/mL. The maximum concentration (6.06 ng/mL) and time to maximum concentration (1.19 hours) of the 10 Mycept patients were not significantly different from the 10 Cellcept patients. CONCLUSION: There was no proven statistically significant difference between Mycept and Cellcept in efficacy and graft survival at 6 months after kidney transplantation. Hematologic side effects were noted more frequently among patients on Mycept and monitoring regularly is recommended.
AIM: The aim of this study was to establish the efficacy and safety of generic mycophenolate mofetil (Mycept) and determine the bioequivalence with Cellcept. This will provide patients an alternative cost-effective option that may improve compliance and long-term outcome. METHODS: This was a comparative study between 2 nonconcurrent matched groups on Mycept and Cellcept. A total of 56 patients were included based on criteria (20 incidental patients on Mycept, matched to 20 historical patients on Cellcept, and 16 additional incidental patients on Cellcept). Patient and graft survival and safety parameters were reviewed at 6 months. Bioequivalence of Mycept with Cellcept was done by measuring area under the curve (AUC) of mycophenolic acid (MPA), maximum concentration, and time to maximum concentration for 16 patients in each group. RESULTS: Twenty incidental Myceptpatients completed 6 months of follow-up. No significant difference was observed in survival (P = 1.0), graft function (P = .2320), and rejection episodes (P = .6250) between groups. The most common side effect of Mycept was hematologic and infectious. The MPA AUC of Mycept (37.38 ng/mL) was within the recommended MPA of 30-60 ng/mL. The maximum concentration (6.06 ng/mL) and time to maximum concentration (1.19 hours) of the 10 Myceptpatients were not significantly different from the 10 Cellceptpatients. CONCLUSION: There was no proven statistically significant difference between Mycept and Cellcept in efficacy and graft survival at 6 months after kidney transplantation. Hematologic side effects were noted more frequently among patients on Mycept and monitoring regularly is recommended.
Authors: Bruno Reigner; Susan Grange; Darren Bentley; Ludger Banken; Markus Abt; Richard Hughes; Emmanuel Scheubel; Theodor W Guentert Journal: Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Date: 2019-10 Impact factor: 1.366
Authors: Amber O Molnar; Dean Fergusson; Anne K Tsampalieros; Alexandria Bennett; Nicholas Fergusson; Timothy Ramsay; Greg A Knoll Journal: BMJ Date: 2015-06-22