C2 is superior to C0 as predictor of renal toxicity and rejection risk profile in stable heart transplant recipients

Transplant International

Volumn 18, Issue 1, 2005, Pages 116-124

  Caforio, Alida L P ^a   Tona, Francesco ^a   Piaserico, Stefano ^a   Gambino, Antonio ^a   Feltrin, Giuseppe ^a   Fortina, Anna Belloni ^a   Angelini, Annalisa ^a   Alaibac, Mauro ^a   Bontorin, Martina ^a   Calzolari, Diego ^a   Peserico, Andrea ^a   Thiene, Gaetano ^a   Iliceto, Sabino ^a   Gerosa, Gino ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF PADOVA   (Italy)

Author keywords

C2 monitoring; Heart transplantation; Immunosuppression; Rejection

Indexed keywords

CREATININE; CYCLOSPORIN A; UREA; CYCLOSPORIN; IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE AGENT;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CREATININE BLOOD LEVEL; DOSE RESPONSE; FEMALE; GRAFT REJECTION; HEART GRAFT; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; NEPHROTOXICITY; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK FACTOR; SCORING SYSTEM; UREA BLOOD LEVEL; BLOOD; DRUG EFFECT; FOLLOW UP; HEART TRANSPLANTATION; IMMUNOLOGY; KIDNEY; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY; PREDICTION AND FORECASTING; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; TIME;

CYCLOSPORINE; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HEART TRANSPLANTATION; HUMANS; IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE AGENTS; KIDNEY; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; PREDICTIVE VALUE OF TESTS; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 21644432632     PISSN: 09340874     EISSN: 14322277     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1432-2277.2004.00001.x     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Kahan BD. Overview: individualization of cyclosporine therapy using pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters. Transplantation 1985; 40: 457.
2. Lindholm A, Kahan BD. Influence of cyclosporine pharmacokinetics, trough concentrations, and AUC monitoring on outcomes after kidney transplantation. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1993; 54: 205.
3. Kahan BD, Welsh M, Schoenberg L, et al. Variable oral absorption of cyclosporine. A biopharmaceutical risk factor for chronic allograft rejection. Transplantation 1996; 62: 599.
4. Kahan BD, Dunn J, Fitts C, et al. Reduced inter- and intrasubject variability in cyclosporine pharmacokinetics in renal transplant recipents treated with a microemulsion formulation in conjunction with fasting, low-fat meals, or high fat meals. Transplantation 1995; 59: 505.
5. Mahalati K, Belitsky P, Sketris I, et al. Neoral monitoring by simplified sparse sampling area under the concentration-time curve: its relationship to acute rejection and cyclosporine nephrotoxicity early after kidney transplantation. Transplantation 1999; 68: 55.
6. Canadian Neoral Renal Transplantation Study Group. Absorption profiling of cyclosporine microemulsion (Neoral) during the first 2 weeks after renal transplantation. Transplantation 2001; 72: 1024.
7. Nashan B, Cole E, Levy G, Thervet E. Clinical validation studies of Neoral C2 monitoring: a review. Transplantation 2002; 73: S3.
8. Mahalati K, Belitski P, West K, et al. Approaching the therapeutic window for cyclosporine in kidney transplantation: a prospective study. J Am Soc Nephrol 2001; 12: 823.
9. Cantarovich M, Besner JG, Barkun JS, et al. Two-hour cyclosporine level determination is the appropriate tool to monitor Neoral therapy. Clin Transplant 1998; 12: 243.
10. Kelles A, Herman J, Tjandra-Maga TB, et al. Sandimmune to Neoral conversion and value of abbreviated AUC monitoring in stable pediatric kidney transplant recipients. Pediatr Transplant 1999; 3: 282.
11. Dunn S, Falkenstein K, Cooney G. Neoral C2 monitoring in pediatric liver transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 2001; 33: 3094.
12. Grant D, Kneteman N, Tchervenkov J, et al. Peak CsA 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 1999; 67: 1133.
13. Keshavamurthy M, Al Ahmadi I, Mohammed Raza S. Single-center study utilizing C2 level as monitoring tool in de novo renal transplant recipients treated with Neoral. Transplant Proc 2001; 33: 3112.
14. Maham N, Cardella C, Cole E. Optimization of cyclosporine exposure utilizing C2 level monitoring in de novo renal transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 2001; 33: 3098.
15. Levy GA, Burra P, Cavallari A, et al. Improved clinical outcomes for liver transplant recipients using cyclosporine monitoring based on two-hour post dose levels (C2). Transplantation 2002; 73: 953.
16. Vathsala A, Lu YM. Abbreviated cyclosporine pharmacokinetic profiling in clinical renal transplantation: from principles to practice. Transplant Proc 2001; 33: 3137.
17. Lake JR. on behalf of the Neo-INT-06 Study Group Benefits of cyclosporine microemulsion (Neoral) C2 monitoring are sustained at 1 year in de novo liver transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 2001; 33: 3092.
18. Levy GA. Neoral C2 in liver transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 2001; 33: 3089.
19. Citterio F, Scata MC, Borzi MT, et al. C2 single-point sampling to evaluate cyclosporine exposure in long-term renal transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 2001; 33: 3133.
20. Kahan BD, Welsh M, Urbauer DL, et al. Low intraindividual variability of cyclosporin A exposure reduces chronic rejection incidence and health care costs. J Am Soc Nephrol 2000; 59: 505.
21. Levy G. C2 monitoring strategy for optimising cyclosporin immunosuppression. BioDrugs 2001; 15: 279.
22. Levy G, Thervet E, Lake J, Kazuharu U on behalf of the CONCERT group. Patient management by Neoral C2 monitoring: an international consensus statement. Transplantation 2002; 73: S12.
23. Cantarovich M, Elstein E, De Varennes B, Barkun JS. Clinical benefit of Neoral dose monitoring with cyclosporine 2-hr post-dose levels compared with trough levels in stable heart transplant patients. Transplantation 1999; 68: 1839.
24. Cantarovich M, Quantz M, Elstein E, Ergina P, Magnan C, De Varennes B. Neoral dose monitoring with cyclosporine 2-hr post-dose levels in heart transplant patients receiving anti-thymocyte globulin induction. Transplant Proc 2000; 32: 446.
25. Valantine H. Neoral use in the cardiac transplant recipient. Transplant Proc 2000; 32: 27S.
26. Cooney GF, Johnston A. Neoral C-2 monitoring in cardiac transplant patients. Transplant Proc 2001; 33: 1572.
27. Akhlaghi F, Keogh AM, McLachlan AJ, Kaan A. Pharmacokinetics of cyclosporine in heart transplant recipients receiving metabolic inhibitors. J Heart Lung Transplant 2001; 20: 431.
28. Ray JE, Keogh AM, McLachlan AJ, Akhlaghi F. Cyclosporine C2 and C0 concentration monitoring in stable, long-term heart transplant recipients receiving metabolic inhibitors. J Heart Lung Transplant 2003; 22: 715.
29. Steimer W. Performance and specificity of monoclonal immunoassays for cyclosporine monitoring: how specific is specific? Clin Chem 1999; 45: 371.
30. Billingham ME, Cary NRB, Hammond EH, et al. A working formulation for the standardisation of nomenclature in the diagnosis of heart and lung rejection: Heart rejection study group. J Heart Transplant 1990; 8: 587.
31. Caforio ALP, Belloni-Fortina A, Piaserico S, et al. Skin cancer in heart transplant recipients: risk factor analysis and relevance of immunosuppressive therapy. Circulation 2000; 102(Suppl. III): 222.
32. Rizeq MN, Masek MA, Billingham ME. Acute rejection: significance of elapsed time after transplantation. J Heart Lung Transplant 1994; 13: 862.
33. Greenberg A, Egel JW, Thompson ME, et al. Early and late form of cyclosporine nephrotoxicity: studies in cardiac transplant patients. Am J Kidney Dis 1987; 9: 12.
34. Cantarovich M, Fitchett D, Latter D. Cyclosporine trough levels, acute rejection and renal dysfunction after heart transplantation. Transplantation 1995; 59: 444.
35. Cole E, Keown P, Landsberg D, et al. Safety and tolerability of cyclosporine and cyclosporine microemulsion durino 18 months of follow-up in stable renal transplant recipients: report of the Canadian Neoral Study Group. Transplantation 1998; 65: 505.
36. Livi U, Caforio ALP, Grassi G, et al. Mid-term results of heart transplantation in diabetic patients. J Cardiovasc Surg 1994; 35(Suppl. 1): 115.