Jinjie Yuan1,2, Ning Sun1, Xinying Feng3, Huan He1, Dong Mei1, Guanghua Zhu4, Libo Zhao1. 1. Clinical Research Center, Beijing Children's Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, People's Republic of China. 2. School of Basic Medicine and Clinical Pharmacy, China Pharmaceutical University, Nanjing, People's Republic of China. 3. Phase I Clinical Trials Centre, Luoyang Central Hospital Affiliated to Zhengzhou University, Luoyang, People's Republic of China. 4. Hematology Oncology Center, Beijing Children's Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, People's Republic of China.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to develop a novel busulfan dosing regimen, based on a population pharmacokinetic (PPK) model in Chinese children, and to achieve better area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) targeting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We collected busulfan concentration-time samples from 69 children who received intravenous busulfan prior to allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT). A population pharmacokinetic model for busulfan was developed by nonlinear mixed effect modelling and was validated by an external dataset (n=14). A novel busulfan dosing regimen was developed through simulated patients, and has been verified on real patients. Limited sampling strategy (LSS) was established by Bayesian forecasting. Mean absolute prediction error (MAPE) and relative root mean Squared error (rRMSE) were calculated to evaluate predictive accuracy. RESULTS: A one-compartment model with first-order elimination best described the data. GSTA1 genotypes, body surface area (BSA) and aspartate aminotransferase (AST) were found to be significant covariates of Bu clearance, and BSA had significant impact of the volume of distribution. Moreover, two equations were obtained for recommended dose regimens: dose (mg)=34.14×BSA (m2)+3.75 (for GSTA1 *A/*A), Dose (mg)=30.99×BSA (m2)+3.21 (for GSTA1 *A/*B). We also presented a piecewise dosage based on BSA categories for each GSTA1 mutation. A two-point LSS, two hours and four hours after dosing, behaved well with acceptable prediction precision (rRMSE=1.026%, MAPE=6.55%). CONCLUSION: We recommend a GSTA1-BSA and BSA-based dosing (Q6 h) based on a PPK model for personalizing busulfan therapy in pediatric population. Additionally, an optimal LSS (C2h and C4h) provides convenience for therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) in the future.
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to develop a novel busulfan dosing regimen, based on a population pharmacokinetic (PPK) model in Chinese children, and to achieve better area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) targeting. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We collected busulfan concentration-time samples from 69 children who received intravenous busulfan prior to allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT). A population pharmacokinetic model for busulfan was developed by nonlinear mixed effect modelling and was validated by an external dataset (n=14). A novel busulfan dosing regimen was developed through simulated patients, and has been verified on real patients. Limited sampling strategy (LSS) was established by Bayesian forecasting. Mean absolute prediction error (MAPE) and relative root mean Squared error (rRMSE) were calculated to evaluate predictive accuracy. RESULTS: A one-compartment model with first-order elimination best described the data. GSTA1 genotypes, body surface area (BSA) and aspartate aminotransferase (AST) were found to be significant covariates of Bu clearance, and BSA had significant impact of the volume of distribution. Moreover, two equations were obtained for recommended dose regimens: dose (mg)=34.14×BSA (m2)+3.75 (for GSTA1 *A/*A), Dose (mg)=30.99×BSA (m2)+3.21 (for GSTA1 *A/*B). We also presented a piecewise dosage based on BSA categories for each GSTA1 mutation. A two-point LSS, two hours and four hours after dosing, behaved well with acceptable prediction precision (rRMSE=1.026%, MAPE=6.55%). CONCLUSION: We recommend a GSTA1-BSA and BSA-based dosing (Q6 h) based on a PPK model for personalizing busulfan therapy in pediatric population. Additionally, an optimal LSS (C2h and C4h) provides convenience for therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) in the future.
Authors: Brian P Booth; Atiqur Rahman; Ramzi Dagher; Donna Griebel; Shari Lennon; David Fuller; Chandra Sahajwalla; Mehul Mehta; Jogarao V S Gobburu Journal: J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2007-01 Impact factor: 3.126
Authors: Rosa F Yeh; Matthew A Pawlikowski; David K Blough; George B McDonald; Paul V O'Donnell; Andrew Rezvani; H Joachim Deeg; Jeannine S McCune Journal: Biol Blood Marrow Transplant Date: 2011-07-04 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Imke H Bartelink; Arief Lalmohamed; Elisabeth M L van Reij; Christopher C Dvorak; Rada M Savic; Juliette Zwaveling; Robbert G M Bredius; Antoine C G Egberts; Marc Bierings; Morris Kletzel; Peter J Shaw; Christa E Nath; George Hempel; Marc Ansari; Maja Krajinovic; Yves Théorêt; Michel Duval; Ron J Keizer; Henrique Bittencourt; Moustapha Hassan; Tayfun Güngör; Robert F Wynn; Paul Veys; Geoff D E Cuvelier; Sarah Marktel; Robert Chiesa; Morton J Cowan; Mary A Slatter; Melisa K Stricherz; Cathryn Jennissen; Janel R Long-Boyle; Jaap Jan Boelens Journal: Lancet Haematol Date: 2016-10-13 Impact factor: 18.959
Authors: R J Jones; K S Lee; W E Beschorner; V G Vogel; L B Grochow; H G Braine; G B Vogelsang; L L Sensenbrenner; G W Santos; R Saral Journal: Transplantation Date: 1987-12 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: M H ten Brink; J Zwaveling; J J Swen; R G M Bredius; A C Lankester; H J Guchelaar Journal: Drug Discov Today Date: 2014-04-16 Impact factor: 7.851
Authors: Khalil Ben Hassine; Madeleine Powys; Peter Svec; Miroslava Pozdechova; Birgitta Versluys; Marc Ansari; Peter J Shaw Journal: Front Pediatr Date: 2021-12-10 Impact factor: 3.418