British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2007
Pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy of mycophenolate mofetil in combination with sirolimus or ciclosporin in renal transplant patients.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Pescovitz Mark D, Vincenti Flavio, Hart Marquis, Melton Larry, Whelchel John, Mulgaonkar Shamkant, McKay Diane, Leung Mimi, Calleja Elizabeth, Bouw M René
Аннотация
AIMS: To compare the pharmacokinetics of mycophenolic acid (MPA) and its metabolite (MPAG) when mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) is administered in combination with sirolimus or ciclosporin (CsA) in renal allograft recipients. Safety and efficacy (biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR)) were also assessed.
METHODS: Patients (n = 45) were randomized 2 : 1 to receive treatment with sirolimus (n = 30; dosed to maintain trough concentrations of 10-25 ng ml(-1) until week 8, and then 8-15 ng ml(-1) thereafter) or CsA (n = 15; administered as per centre practice) both in combination with daclizumab, oral MMF and corticosteroids. Pharmacokinetic assessments were performed at day 7, week 4, and months 3 and 6 post-transplant. The primary endpoint was the AUC(0,12 h) for MPA and MPAG. The pharmacokinetics of sirolimus were also assessed.
RESULTS: MPA exposure was 39-50% lower (month 6 mean AUC(0,12 h) (95%CI): 40.4 (33.8, 47.0) vs. 68.5 (54.9, 82.0) microg ml(-1) h) and MPAG exposure was 25-52% higher (722 (607, 838) vs. 485 (402, 569) microg ml(-1) h at month 6) in the presence of CsA compared with sirolimus across visits. BPAR was 40.0% with sirolimus and 13.3% with CsA. The incidence of hypertension, tremors and hirsutism was higher with CsA than with sirolimus, while the incidence of diarrhoea, hyperlipidaemia and impaired wound closure was higher with sirolimus. No deaths, malignancies or graft losses were reported.
CONCLUSIONS: Co-administration of sirolimus with MMF led to greater MPA exposure, but lower MPAG exposure, than co-administration with CsA. As rejection rates were higher in the absence of CsA, further study of calcineurin inhibitor-free regimens is required before general recommendations can be made.
METHODS: Patients (n = 45) were randomized 2 : 1 to receive treatment with sirolimus (n = 30; dosed to maintain trough concentrations of 10-25 ng ml(-1) until week 8, and then 8-15 ng ml(-1) thereafter) or CsA (n = 15; administered as per centre practice) both in combination with daclizumab, oral MMF and corticosteroids. Pharmacokinetic assessments were performed at day 7, week 4, and months 3 and 6 post-transplant. The primary endpoint was the AUC(0,12 h) for MPA and MPAG. The pharmacokinetics of sirolimus were also assessed.
RESULTS: MPA exposure was 39-50% lower (month 6 mean AUC(0,12 h) (95%CI): 40.4 (33.8, 47.0) vs. 68.5 (54.9, 82.0) microg ml(-1) h) and MPAG exposure was 25-52% higher (722 (607, 838) vs. 485 (402, 569) microg ml(-1) h at month 6) in the presence of CsA compared with sirolimus across visits. BPAR was 40.0% with sirolimus and 13.3% with CsA. The incidence of hypertension, tremors and hirsutism was higher with CsA than with sirolimus, while the incidence of diarrhoea, hyperlipidaemia and impaired wound closure was higher with sirolimus. No deaths, malignancies or graft losses were reported.
CONCLUSIONS: Co-administration of sirolimus with MMF led to greater MPA exposure, but lower MPAG exposure, than co-administration with CsA. As rejection rates were higher in the absence of CsA, further study of calcineurin inhibitor-free regimens is required before general recommendations can be made.