Use of neoral C2 monitoring: A European consensus

Transplant International

Volumn 18, Issue 7, 2005, Pages 768-778

  Nashan, Bjorn ^a   Bock, Andreas ^b   Bosmans, Jean Louis ^c   Budde, Klemens ^d   De Fijter, Hans ^e   Jaques, Bryon ^f   Johnston, Atholl ^g   Lück, Rainer ^h   Midtvedt, Karsten ⁱ   Pallardó, Luis M ^j   Ready, Andrew ^k   Salamé, Ephrem ^e   Salizzoni, Mauro ^l   Suarez, Francisco ^m   Thervet, Eric ⁿ  

^a QUEEN ELIZABETH II HEALTH SCIENCES CENTRE   (Canada)

^b Division of Nephrology   (Switzerland)

^c ANTWERP UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Belgium)

^d CHARITÉ UNIVERSITÄTSMEDIZIN BERLIN   (Germany)

^e Department of Nephrology ^*  (France)

^f FREEMAN HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^g QUEEN MARY UNIVERSITY OF LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^h HANNOVER MEDICAL SCHOOL   (Germany)

ⁱ OSLO UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Norway)

^j HOSPITAL CLÍNICO UNIVERSITARIO   (Spain)

^k QUEEN ELIZABETH HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^l MOLINETTE HOSPITAL   (Italy)

^m HOSPITAL JUAN CANALEJO   (Spain)

ⁿ HÔPITAL NECKER ENFANTS MALADES   (France)

more..

Author keywords

C2 monitoring; Clinical outcome; Cyclosporine; Immunosuppression; Neoral

Indexed keywords

CYCLOSPORIN A; MYCOPHENOLIC ACID 2 MORPHOLINOETHYL ESTER; CYCLOSPORIN; IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE AGENT;

AREA UNDER THE CURVE; CLINICAL TRIAL; EUROPE; GRAFT REJECTION; HUMAN; IMMUNE RESPONSE; KIDNEY GRAFT; LIVER TRANSPLANTATION; MICROEMULSION; NEPHROTOXICITY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; REVIEW; ABSORPTION; BLOOD; CONFERENCE PAPER; CONSENSUS DEVELOPMENT; KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; TIME;

ABSORPTION; CYCLOSPORINE; EUROPE; HUMANS; IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE AGENTS; KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION; LIVER TRANSPLANTATION; POSTOPERATIVE PERIOD; TIME FACTORS;

EID: 26044448325     PISSN: 09340874     EISSN: 14322277     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1432-2277.2005.00151.x     Document Type: Review

References (43)

1. Kish MA. Guide to development of practice guidelines. Clin Infect Dis 2001; 32: 851.
2. Barr WH. Cyclosporine: the case for expanding bioequivalence criteria to include measures of individual bioequivalence in relevant population subsets. Transplant Proc 1999; 31 (Suppl. 3A): 25S.
3. Lemaire M, Fahr A, Maurer G. Pharmacokinetics of cyclosporine: inter- and intra-individual variations and metabolic pathways. Transplant Proc 1990; 22: 1110.
4. Kovarik JM, Mueller EA, van Bree JB, et al. Cyclosporine pharmacokinetics and variability from a microemulsion formulation: a multicenter investigation in kidney transplant patients. Transplantation 1994; 58: 658.
5. 2 monitoring strategy for optimising cyclosporin immunosuppression. BioDrugs 2001; 15: 279.
6. International Neoral Renal Transplant Study Group. Cyclosporine Microemulsion (Neoral®) absorption profiling and sparse-sample predictors. Am J Transplant 2002; 2: 148.
7. Mahalati K, Belitsky P, Sketris I, West K, Panek R. Neoral monitoring by simplified sparse sampling area under the concentration-time curve. Transplantation 1999; 68: 55.
8. International Neoral Renal Transplantation Study Group. Randomized, international study of cyclosporine microemulsion absorption profiling in renal transplantation with basiliximab immunoprophylaxis. Am J Transplant 2002; 2: 157.
9. Kelles A, Herman J, Tjandra-Maga TB, Van Damme-Lombaerts R. Sandimmune to Neoral conversion and value of abbreviated AUC monitoring in stable pediatric kidney transplant recipients. Pediatr Transplant 1999; 3: 282.
10. Cantarovich M, Barkun JS, Tchervenkov JI, Besner J-G, Aspeslet L, Metrakos P. Comparison of Neoral dose monitoring with cyclosporine trough levels versus 2-hr postdose levels in stable liver transplant patients. Transplantation 1998; 66: 1621.
11. Lück R, Böger E, Klempnauer J, Nashan B. Achieving adequate cyclosporine exposure in liver transplant recipients: a novel strategy for monitoring and dosing using intravenous therapy. Liver Transplant 2004; 10: 686.
12. 2 monitoring in pediatric liver transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 2001; 33: 3094.
13. Cantarovich M, Besner JG, Barkun JS, Elstein E, Loertscher R. Two-hour cyclosporine level determination is the appropriate tool to monitor Neoral therapy. Clin Transplant 1998; 12: 243.
14. 2 levels is predictive for AUC in lung transplant recipients. J Heart Lung Transplant 2002; 21: 87.
15. max) correlate with freedom from liver graft rejection. Transplantation 1999; 67: 1133.
16. Halloran PF, Helms LM, Kung L, Noujaim J. The temporal profile of calcineurin inhibition by cyclosporine in vivo. Transplantation 1999; 68: 1356.
17. Sindhi R, LaVia MR, Paulling E, et al. Stimulated response of peripheral lymphocytes may distinguish cyclosporine effect in renal transplant recipients receiving a cyclosporine + rapamycin regimen. Transplantation 2000; 69: 432.
18. 2 monitoring of cyclosporine microemulsion. Transplantation 2003; 76: 903.
19. 2-monitoring for cyclosporine microemulsion (CsA-ME, Neoral): results of MO2ART, a 12-month randomized international study. Am J Transplant 2004; 4 (Suppl. 8): 238.
20. Mendez R, Light J, Pearson TC, Wu YM, Curtis J, Vincenti F. Neoral therapy optimized by C2 monitoring and Simulect induction can result in a low acute rejection rate in renal transplant recipients. Am J Transplant 2004; 4 (Suppl. 8): 255.
21. Vitko S, Tedesco H, Eris J, et al. Everolimus with optimized cyclosporine dosing in renal transplant recipients: 6-month safety and efficacy results of two randomized studies. Am J Transplant 2004; 4: 626.
22. Budde K, Zeier M, Bosmans J-L, et al. Therapeutische wirksamkeit und sicherheit in de novo nierentransplantierten patienten, die mit Myfortic in kombination mit Simulect, steroiden und entweder einer standarddosis oder einer reduzierten sosis Sandimmun Optoral behandelt wurden. Transplantationsmedizin 2004; 16 (Suppl): 63.
23. 2). Transplantation 2002; 73: 953.
24. 2 monitoring are sustained at 1 year in de novo liver transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 2001; 33: 3092.
25. 0 monitoring in de novo liver transplantation. Transplantation 2004; 778: 1632.
26. 2 monitoring versus tacrolimus in live transplantation (LIS2T). Am J Transplant 2004; 4 (Suppl. 8): 268.
27. Nashan B, Armstrong VW, Budde K, et al. Cyclosporin C2-Monitoring zur Optimierung der Immunsuppression nach Nierentransplantation. Transplantationsmedizin 2003; 15 (Suppl. 15): 15.
28. Cremers SCLM, Scholten EM, Schoemaker RC, et al. A compartmental pharmacokinetic model of cyclosporin and its predictive performance after Bayesian estimation in kidney and simultaneous pancreas-kidney transplant recipients. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2003; 18: 1201.
29. Nashan B, Curtis J, Ponticelli C, et al. Everolimus and reduced-exposure cyclosporine in de novo renal transplant recipients: a 3-year phase II, randomized, multicenter, open-label study. Transplantation 2004; 78: 1332.
30. 2 target range: evidence from a prospective, multicenter trial in liver transplantation. Am J Transplant 2004; 4 (Suppl. 8): 529.
31. 2 monitoring of cyclosporine in de novo liver transplant recipients: the clinician's perspective. Liver Transplantation 2004; 10: 577.
32. Lindholm A, Welsh M, Alton C, Kahan BD. Demographic factors influencing cyclosporine pharmacokinetic parameters in patients with uremia: racial differences in bioavailability. Clin Pharmacol Ther 1992; 52: 359.
33. Kahan BD, Kramer WG, Wideman C, Flechner SM, Lorber MI, Van Buren CT. Demographic factors affecting the pharmacokinetics of cyclosporine estimated by radioimmunoassay. Transplantation 1986; 41: 459.
34. Walsky RL, Gaman EA, Obach RS. Examination of 209 drugs for inhibition of cytochrome P450 2C8. J Clin Pharmacol 2005; 45: 68.
35. Cole E, Maham N, Cardella C, et al. Clinical benefits of Neoral C2 monitoring in the long-term management of renal transplant recipients. Transplantation 2003; 75: 2086.
36. Bock A. Optimal cyclosporin C2 levels beyond year 1 of transplantation. [Abstract T688]. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2003: 18 (Suppl. 4): 501.
37. Midtvedt K, Fauchald P, Bergan S, et al. C2 monitoring in maintenance renal transplant recipients: is it worthwhile? Transplantation 2003; 76: 1236.
38. Einecke G, Mai I, Fritsche L, et al. The value of C2 monitoring in stable renal allograft recipients on maintenance immunosuppression. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2004; 19: 215.
39. Barakat O, Peaston R, Rai R, Talbot D, Manas D. Clinical benefit of monitoring cyclosporine C2 and C4 in long-term liver transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 2002; 34: 1535.
40. Sterneck M, Zadeh KM, Grotelüschen R, Bröring D, Rogiers X, Fischer L. Clinical use of C2 monitoring in long-term liver transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 2002; 34: 3304.
41. Kahan BD, Keown P, Levy GA, Johnston A. Therapeutic drug monitoring of immunosuppressant drugs in clinical practice. Clin Ther 2002; 24: 330.
42. Johnston A, Chusney G, Schütz E, Oellerich M, Lee TD, Holt DW. Monitoring cyclosporin in blood: between-assay differences at trough and 2 hours post-dose (C2). Ther Drug Monit 2003; 25: 167.
43. 2 monitoring in clinical practice. Transplantation 2002; 73 (Suppl): S19.