Janna K Duong1,2,3, M Y A M Kroonen4, S S Kumar5,6, H L Heerspink4, C M Kirkpatrick7, G G Graham5,6, K M Williams5,6, R O Day5,6,8. 1. School of Medical Sciences, Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. jkduong@gmail.com. 2. Department of Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, St Vincent's Hospital, Sydney, Australia. jkduong@gmail.com. 3. Faculty of Pharmacy, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, 2006, Australia. jkduong@gmail.com. 4. Department of Pharmacy and Pharmacology, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands. 5. School of Medical Sciences, Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. 6. Department of Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, St Vincent's Hospital, Sydney, Australia. 7. Centre for Medicine Use and Safety, Monash University, Parkville, Australia. 8. St Vincent's Clinical School, Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aims of this study were to investigate the relationship between metformin exposure, renal clearance (CLR), and apparent non-renal clearance of metformin (CLNR/F) in patients with varying degrees of kidney function and to develop dosing recommendations. METHODS: Plasma and urine samples were collected from three studies consisting of patients with varying degrees of kidney function (creatinine clearance, CLCR; range, 14-112 mL/min). A population pharmacokinetic model was built (NONMEM) in which the oral availability (F) was fixed to 0.55 with an estimated inter-individual variability (IIV). Simulations were performed to estimate AUC0-τ, CLR, and CLNR/F. RESULTS: The data (66 patients, 327 observations) were best described by a two-compartment model, and CLCR was a covariate for CLR. Mean CLR was 17 L/h (CV 22%) and mean CLNR/F was 1.6 L/h (69%).The median recovery of metformin in urine was 49% (range 19-75%) over a dosage interval. When CLR increased due to improved renal function, AUC0-τ decreased proportionally, while CLNR/F did not change with kidney function. Target doses (mg/day) of metformin can be reached using CLCR/3 × 100 to obtain median AUC0-12 of 18-26 mg/L/h for metformin IR and AUC0-24 of 38-51 mg/L/h for metformin XR, with Cmax < 5 mg/L. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed dosing algorithm can be used to dose metformin in patients with various degrees of kidney function to maintain consistent drug exposure. However, there is still marked IIV and therapeutic drug monitoring of metformin plasma concentrations is recommended.
PURPOSE: The aims of this study were to investigate the relationship between metformin exposure, renal clearance (CLR), and apparent non-renal clearance of metformin (CLNR/F) in patients with varying degrees of kidney function and to develop dosing recommendations. METHODS: Plasma and urine samples were collected from three studies consisting of patients with varying degrees of kidney function (creatinine clearance, CLCR; range, 14-112 mL/min). A population pharmacokinetic model was built (NONMEM) in which the oral availability (F) was fixed to 0.55 with an estimated inter-individual variability (IIV). Simulations were performed to estimate AUC0-τ, CLR, and CLNR/F. RESULTS: The data (66 patients, 327 observations) were best described by a two-compartment model, and CLCR was a covariate for CLR. Mean CLR was 17 L/h (CV 22%) and mean CLNR/F was 1.6 L/h (69%).The median recovery of metformin in urine was 49% (range 19-75%) over a dosage interval. When CLR increased due to improved renal function, AUC0-τ decreased proportionally, while CLNR/F did not change with kidney function. Target doses (mg/day) of metformin can be reached using CLCR/3 × 100 to obtain median AUC0-12 of 18-26 mg/L/h for metformin IR and AUC0-24 of 38-51 mg/L/h for metformin XR, with Cmax < 5 mg/L. CONCLUSIONS: The proposed dosing algorithm can be used to dose metformin in patients with various degrees of kidney function to maintain consistent drug exposure. However, there is still marked IIV and therapeutic drug monitoring of metformin plasma concentrations is recommended.
Entities:
Keywords:
Kidney disease; Metformin; Pharmacokinetics; Population modelling; Renal clearance; Type 2 diabetes mellitus
Authors: Ron J Keizer; Michel van Benten; Jos H Beijnen; Jan H M Schellens; Alwin D R Huitema Journal: Comput Methods Programs Biomed Date: 2010-06-02 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Sarayut Janmahasatian; Stephen B Duffull; Susan Ash; Leigh C Ward; Nuala M Byrne; Bruce Green Journal: Clin Pharmacokinet Date: 2005 Impact factor: 6.447
Authors: Janna K Duong; Timothy J Furlong; Darren M Roberts; Garry G Graham; Jerry R Greenfield; Kenneth M Williams; Richard O Day Journal: Drug Saf Date: 2013-09 Impact factor: 5.606
Authors: Garry G Graham; Jeroen Punt; Manit Arora; Richard O Day; Matthew P Doogue; Janna K Duong; Timothy J Furlong; Jerry R Greenfield; Louise C Greenup; Carl M Kirkpatrick; John E Ray; Peter Timmins; Kenneth M Williams Journal: Clin Pharmacokinet Date: 2011-02 Impact factor: 6.447
Authors: Janna K Duong; Shaun S Kumar; Carl M Kirkpatrick; Louise C Greenup; Manit Arora; Toong C Lee; Peter Timmins; Garry G Graham; Timothy J Furlong; Jerry R Greenfield; Kenneth M Williams; Richard O Day Journal: Clin Pharmacokinet Date: 2013-05 Impact factor: 6.447
Authors: Klarissa A Sinnappah; Isabelle H S Kuan; Tilenka R J Thynne; Matthew P Doogue; Daniel F B Wright Journal: Br J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2020-02-25 Impact factor: 4.335
Authors: Thomas M Polasek; Geoffrey T Tucker; Michael J Sorich; Michael D Wiese; Titus Mohan; Amin Rostami-Hodjegan; Porntipa Korprasertthaworn; Vidya Perera; Andrew Rowland Journal: Br J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2018-01-11 Impact factor: 4.335
Authors: Tom N Lea-Henry; Jane E Carland; Sophie L Stocker; Jacob Sevastos; Darren M Roberts Journal: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol Date: 2018-06-22 Impact factor: 8.237
Authors: Isabelle H S Kuan; Luke C Wilson; Jed C Leishman; Samuel Cosgrove; Robert J Walker; Tracey L Putt; John B W Schollum; Daniel F B Wright Journal: PLoS One Date: 2021-02-18 Impact factor: 3.240