Switching monitoring of emulsified cyclosporine from trough level to 2-hour level in stable liver transplant patients

Liver Transplantation

Volumn 10, Issue 2, 2004, Pages 183-189

  Langers, Pieter ^a   Cremers, Serge C L M ^a   den Hartigh, Jan ^a   Veenendaal, Roeland A ^a   ten Hove, W Rogier ^a   Ringers, Jan ^a   Lamers, Cornelis B H W ^a   van Hoek, Bart ^a  

^a LEIDEN UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AZATHIOPRINE; CORTICOSTEROID; CREATININE; CYCLOSPORIN A; MYCOPHENOLIC ACID 2 MORPHOLINOETHYL ESTER; PREDNISONE;

ADULT; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTICLE; BLOOD PRESSURE; BLOOD SAMPLING; CALCULATION; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CORRELATION ANALYSIS; CREATININE CLEARANCE; DATA ANALYSIS; DRUG BLOOD LEVEL; DRUG DOSE REDUCTION; DRUG DOSE REGIMEN; DRUG EXPOSURE; DRUG MONITORING; FEMALE; GRAFT REJECTION; HUMAN; HYPOTENSION; KIDNEY DYSFUNCTION; LIVER DYSFUNCTION; LIVER FUNCTION TEST; LIVER TRANSPLANTATION; MALE; MICROEMULSION; PATIENT MONITORING; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SYSTOLIC BLOOD PRESSURE; URINALYSIS;

ADULT; AREA UNDER CURVE; BLOOD PRESSURE; CYCLOSPORINE; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; EMULSIONS; FEMALE; HUMANS; IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE AGENTS; KIDNEY; LIVER TRANSPLANTATION; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; POPULATION SURVEILLANCE; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 1242352379     PISSN: 15276465     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/lt.20056     Document Type: Article

References (34)

1. Dunn CJ, Wagstaff AJ, Perry CM, Plosker GL, Goa KL. Cyclosporine: an updated review of the pharmacokinetic properties, clinical efficacy and tolerability of a microemulsion-based formulation (Neoral®) in organ transplantation. Drugs 2001;61(13):1957-2016.
2. Levy GA. C2 monitoring strategy for optimising cyclosporine immunosuppression from the Neoral formulation. BioDrugs 2001;15(5):279-290.
3. Nashan B, Cole E, Levy G, Thervet E. Clinical validation studies of Neoral C2 monitoring: a review. Transplantation 2002; 73(suppl):3-9.
4. Cantarovich M, Elstein E, de Varennes B, Barkun JS. Clinical benefit of Neoral® dose monitoring with cyclosporinee 2-hour post-dose levels compared with trough levels in stable heart transplant patients. Transplantation 1999;68:1839-1842.
5. Glanville AR, Hopkins PM, Aboyoun CL, Chhajed PN, Plit ML, Malouf MA. Clinical utility of cyclosporine C2 monitoring after lung transplantation. J Heart Lung Transplant 2002;21: 143.
6. Cole E, Midtvedt K, Johnston A, Pattison J, O'Grady C. Recommendations for the implementation of Neoral C(2) monitoring in clinical practice. Transplantation 2002 May 15;73(suppl 9):19-22.
7. Levy G, Thervet E., Lake J, Uchida K, for the CONCERT Group. Patient management by Neoral® C2 monitoring: an international consensus statement. Transplantation 2002; 73(suppl 9):12-18.
8. Cantarovich M, Barkun JS, Tchervenkov JI, Besner JG, Aspeslet L, Metrakos P. Comparison of neoral dose monitoring with cyclosporinee trough levels versus 2-hr postdose levels in stable liver transplant patients. Transplantation December 1998;66(12):1621-1627.
9. Grant D, Kneteman N, Tchervenkov J, et al. Peak cyclosporinee levels (Cmax) correlate with freedom from liver graft rejection: results of a prospective, randomized comparison of neoral and sandimmune for liver transplantation (NOF-8). Transplantation April 1999;67(8):1133-1137.
10. 2 monitoring are sustained at 1 year in de novo liver transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 2001;33:3092-3093.
11. Levy GA. Neoral C2 in liver transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 2001;33:3089-3091.
12. Levy G, O'Grady C, Lilly LB, Grant D, Girgrah N, Greig PD. C2 monitoring in liver transplantation with Neoral immunosuppression: effect of achieving C2 target early on efficacy and safety. Am J Transplant 2001;1(suppl 1):310.
13. Dunn S, Falkenstein K, Cooney G. Neoral C2 monitoring in pediatric liver transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 2001;33: 3094-3095.
14. Barakat O, Peaston R, Rai R, Talbot D, Manas D. Clinical benefit of monitoring cyclosporinee C2 and C4 in long-term liver transplant patients. Transplant Proc 2002;34(5):1535-1537.
15. Levy G, Burra P, Cavallari A, et al. Improved clinical outcomes for liver transplant recipients using cyclosporinee monitoring based on 2-hr post-dose levels (C2). Transplantation 2002;73: 953-959
16. Kahan BD, Dunn J, Fitts C, et al. Reduced inter- and intrasubject variability in cyclosporinee pharmacokinetics in renal transplant recipients treated with a microemulsion formulation in conjunction with fasting, low-fat meals, or high-fat meals. Transplantation 1995;59:505-511.
17. Rowland M, Tozer TN. Clinical pharmacokinetics: Concepts and applications. Philadelphia:Lea and Febiger; 1989:459-463.
18. Kahan BD, Keown P, Levy GA, Johnston A. Therapeutic drug monitoring of immunosuppressant drugs in clinical practice. Clin Ther 2002;24(3):1-21.
19. Saint-Marcoux F, Rousseau A, Le Meur Y, et al. Influence of sampling-time error on cyclosporinee measurements nominally at 2 hours after administration. Clin Chem 2003;49:813-815.
20. Stoves J, Newstead CG. Variability of cyclosporinee exposure and its relevance to chronic allograft nephropathy: a case-control study. Transplantation 2002;74:1794-1797.
21. Wiesner RH, Ludwig J, Krom RA, Hay JE, van Hoek B. Hepatic allograft rejection: new developments in terminology, diagnosis, prevention, and treatment. Mayo Clin Proc January 1993;68(1): 69-79.
22. van Hoek B, Wiesner RH, Krom RA, Ludwig J, Moore SB. Severe ductopenic rejection following liver transplantation: incidence, time of onset, risk factors, treatment, and outcome. Semin Liver Dis February 1992;12(1):41-50.
23. Wiesner RH, Ludwig J, van Hoek B, Krom RA. Current concepts in cell-mediated hepatic allograft rejection leading to ductopenia and liver failure. Hepatology 1991;14(pt 4.1):721-729.
24. Wiesner RH, Demetris AJ, Belle SH, et al. Acute hepatic allograft rejection: incidence, risk factors, and impact on outcome. Hepatology 1998;28:638-645.
25. International Neoral Renal Transplantation Study Group. Randomized, international study of cyclosporinee microemulsion absorption profiling in renal transplantation. Am J Transplant 2002;2(2):157-166.
26. Kazancioglu R, Goral S, Shockley SL, et al. A systematic examination of cyclosporine area under the curve in renal transplant recipients. Transplantation 2002;73:301-302.
27. Canadian Neoral Renal Transplantation Study Group. Absorption profiling of cyclosporinee microemulsion (Neoral) during the first 2 weeks after renal transplantation. Transplantation 2001;72:1024-1032.
28. Johnston A, David OJ, Cooney GF. Pharmacokinetic validation of Neoral absorption profiling. Transplant Proc 2000;32(suppl 3.1):53-56.
29. Sindhi R, LaVia MF, Paulling E, et al. Stimulated response of peripheral lymphocytes may distinguish cyclosporinee effect in renal transplant recipients receiving a cyclosporinee + rapamycin regimen. Transplantation 2000;15:69:432-436.
30. Camps-Valls G, Porta-Oltra B, Soria-Olivas E, et al. Prediction of cyclosporinee dosage in patients after kidney transplantation using neural networks. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 2003;50:442-448.
31. Leger F, Debord J, Le Meur Y, et al. Maximum a posteriori Bayesian estimation of oral cyclosporinee pharmacokinetics in stable renal transplant patients. Clin Pharmacokinet 2002;41: 71-80.
32. Monchaud C, Léger F, Rousseau A, David O, Cooney G, Marquet P. Bayesian forecasting of oral cyclosporinee in cardiac transplant recipients. Ther Drug Monit 2001;23:468.
33. Debord J, Risco E, Harel M, et al. Application of a gamma model of absorption to oral cyclosporine. Clin Pharmacokinet 2001;40: 375-382.
34. Rousseau A, Monchaud C, Debord J, et al. Bayesian forecasting of oral cyclosporinee pharmacokinetics in stable lung transplant recipients with and without cystic fibrosis. Ther Drug Monit 2003;25:28-35.