Rachael Lawson1,2,3, Lachlan Paterson4,5, Christopher J Fraser6, Stefanie Hennig4,7,8,9. 1. School of Pharmacy, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia. Rachael.Lawson@health.qld.gov.au. 2. Pharmacy Department, Queensland Children's Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia. Rachael.Lawson@health.qld.gov.au. 3. Pharmacy Australia Centre of Excellence (PACE), University of Queensland, 20 Cornwall Street, Woolloongabba, QLD, 4102, Australia. Rachael.Lawson@health.qld.gov.au. 4. School of Pharmacy, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia. 5. School of Medicine, Griffith University, Southport, QLD, Australia. 6. Blood and Marrow Transplant Service, Queensland Children's Hospital, Brisbane, QLD, Australia. 7. Certara, Inc, Princeton, NJ, USA. 8. Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Institute of Pharmacy, Freie Universitaet Berlin, Berlin, Germany. 9. School of Clinical Sciences, Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, 4000, Australia.
Abstract
AIM: To assess the ability of model-based personalised dosing tools to estimate busulfan exposure (i) in comparison to clinically used intensive sampling exposure estimation procedure, (ii) using limited sampling strategies and (iii) to predict changes in busulfan clearance during busulfan treatment. METHODS: Data on intravenous busulfan dosing for patients with 4 consecutive days were entered into Bayesian forecasting software, InsightRX and NextDose. Prediction of busulfan cumulative exposure was compared to current clinical practice estimation, aiming for pre-defined individualised target of cumulative exposure. Estimation performance was tested given several limited sampling strategies. RESULTS: Thirty-two paediatric patients (0.2-16.5 years) provided a total of 103 daily exposure measurements estimated using 7 samples taken per day (full sampling), with 19 patients having sampling following all doses administered. Both software tools utilising Bayesian methods provided acceptable relative bias and precision of cumulative exposure estimations under the tested sampling scenarios. Relative bias ranged from median RE of 0.1-14.6% using InsightRX and from 3.4-7.8% using NextDose. Precision ranged from median RMSE of 0.19-0.32 mg·h·L-1 for InsightRX and 0.08-0.1 mg·h·L-1 for NextDose. A median reduction in busulfan clearance from day 1 to day 4 was observed in the clinical data (-10.9%), when using InsightRX (-18.6%) and with NextDose (-14.7%). CONCLUSION: Bayesian methods were shown to have relatively low bias and precisely estimate busulfan exposure using intensive sampling and several limited sampling strategies, which provides evidence for prospective studies to evaluate these tools in clinical practice. A trend to overestimation of exposure using Bayesian methods was observed compared to clinical practice. Reduction of busulfan clearance from day 1 to 4 of once daily dosing was confirmed and should be considered when adjusting doses.
AIM: To assess the ability of model-based personalised dosing tools to estimate busulfan exposure (i) in comparison to clinically used intensive sampling exposure estimation procedure, (ii) using limited sampling strategies and (iii) to predict changes in busulfan clearance during busulfan treatment. METHODS: Data on intravenous busulfan dosing for patients with 4 consecutive days were entered into Bayesian forecasting software, InsightRX and NextDose. Prediction of busulfan cumulative exposure was compared to current clinical practice estimation, aiming for pre-defined individualised target of cumulative exposure. Estimation performance was tested given several limited sampling strategies. RESULTS: Thirty-two paediatric patients (0.2-16.5 years) provided a total of 103 daily exposure measurements estimated using 7 samples taken per day (full sampling), with 19 patients having sampling following all doses administered. Both software tools utilising Bayesian methods provided acceptable relative bias and precision of cumulative exposure estimations under the tested sampling scenarios. Relative bias ranged from median RE of 0.1-14.6% using InsightRX and from 3.4-7.8% using NextDose. Precision ranged from median RMSE of 0.19-0.32 mg·h·L-1 for InsightRX and 0.08-0.1 mg·h·L-1 for NextDose. A median reduction in busulfan clearance from day 1 to day 4 was observed in the clinical data (-10.9%), when using InsightRX (-18.6%) and with NextDose (-14.7%). CONCLUSION: Bayesian methods were shown to have relatively low bias and precisely estimate busulfan exposure using intensive sampling and several limited sampling strategies, which provides evidence for prospective studies to evaluate these tools in clinical practice. A trend to overestimation of exposure using Bayesian methods was observed compared to clinical practice. Reduction of busulfan clearance from day 1 to 4 of once daily dosing was confirmed and should be considered when adjusting doses.
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: Imke H Bartelink; Charlotte van Kesteren; Jaap J Boelens; Toine C G Egberts; Marc B Bierings; Geoff D E Cuvelier; Robert F Wynn; Mary A Slatter; Robert Chiesa; Meindert Danhof; Catherijne A J Knibbe Journal: Ther Drug Monit Date: 2012-10 Impact factor: 3.681
Authors: N Bleyzac; G Souillet; P Magron; A Janoly; P Martin; Y Bertrand; C Galambrun; Q Dai; P Maire; R W Jelliffe; G Aulagner Journal: Bone Marrow Transplant Date: 2001-10 Impact factor: 5.483
Authors: A M Bolinger; A B Zangwill; J T Slattery; L J Risler; D H Sultan; D V Glidden; D Norstad; M J Cowan Journal: Bone Marrow Transplant Date: 2001-12 Impact factor: 5.483
Authors: Jeannine S McCune; Meagan J Bemer; Jeffrey S Barrett; K Scott Baker; Alan S Gamis; Nicholas H G Holford Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2013-11-11 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: J S McCune; T Gooley; J P Gibbs; J E Sanders; E W Petersdorf; F R Appelbaum; C Anasetti; L Risler; D Sultan; J T Slattery Journal: Bone Marrow Transplant Date: 2002-08 Impact factor: 5.483
Authors: Imke H Bartelink; Robert G M Bredius; Svetlana V Belitser; Marit M Suttorp; Marc Bierings; Catherijne A J Knibbe; Maarten Egeler; Arjan C Lankester; Atoine C G Egberts; Juliette Zwaveling; Jaap Jan Boelens Journal: Biol Blood Marrow Transplant Date: 2009-02 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Abdullah Alsultan; Ahmed A Albassam; Abdullah Alturki; Abdulrahman Alsultan; Mohammed Essa; Bader Almuzzaini; Salman Alfadhel Journal: Front Pediatr Date: 2022-04-07 Impact factor: 3.418
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