The clinical impact of 1:1 conversion from Neoral to a generic cyclosporine (Gengraf) in renal transplant recipients with stable graft function

Clinical Transplantation

Volumn 20, Issue 3, 2006, Pages 313-317

  Qazi, Yasir A ^a,b   Forrest, Alan ^a,b   Tornatore, Kathleen ^a,b   Venuto, Rocco C ^a,b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY AT BUFFALO   (United States)

^b STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

^c ERIE COUNTY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

Author keywords

Bioequivalence; Cyclosporine; Kidney transplant

Indexed keywords

CREATININE; CYCLOSPORIN A;

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; CONTROLLED STUDY; CREATININE BLOOD LEVEL; DRUG DOSE REGIMEN; DRUG MONITORING; DRUG USE; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; KIDNEY GRAFT; KIDNEY GRAFT REJECTION; KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RECIPIENT; STATISTICAL ANALYSIS;

ADULT; AGED; CHEMISTRY, PHARMACEUTICAL; CREATININE; CYCLOSPORINE; DRUGS, GENERIC; EMULSIONS; FEMALE; GRAFT REJECTION; HUMANS; IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE AGENTS; KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; THERAPEUTIC EQUIVALENCY; TISSUE DONORS;

EID: 33745077432     PISSN: 09020063     EISSN: 13990012     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-0012.2005.00483.x     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Ponticelli C, Tarantino A, Vegeto A. Renal transplantation, past, present and future. J Nephrol 1999: 12(Suppl. 2): S105.
2. 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.
3. Frei UA, Neumayer HH, Buchholz B, Niese D, Mueller EA. Randomized, double blind, one-year study of the safety and tolerability of cyclosporine microemulsion compared with conventional cyclosporine in renal transplant patients. International Sandimmun Neoral Study Group. Transplantation 1998: 65: 1455.
4. K ahan BD, D unn J, F itts C et al. Reduced inter- and intra-subject variability in cyclosporine 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.
5. Medina-Pestana JO, Felipe CR, Park SI et al. Long-term kidney transplant outcomes in patients receiving oil-based or microemulsion formulations of cyclosporine. Transplant Proc 2004: 36: 74S.
6. A nonymous. A randomized clinical trial of cyclosporine in cadaveric renal transplantation. N Engl J Med 1983: 309: 809.
7. R oza A, T omlanovich S, M erion R et al. Conversion of stable renal allograft recipients to a bioequivalent cyclosporine formulation. Transplantation 2002: 74: 1013.
8. Ohlman S, Lindholm A, Hagglund H, Sawe J, Kahan BD. On the intraindividual variability and chronobiology of cyclosporine pharmacokinetics in renal transplantation. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 1993: 44: 265.
9. Choi JS, Park HJ. Circadian changes in pharmacokinetics of cyclosporin in healthy volunteers. Res Commun Mol Pathol Pharmacol 1999: 103: 109.
10. Carnahan W, Cooper TY. Neoral-to-Gengraf conversion in renal transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 2003: 35: 1308.
11. Alloway RR, Isaacs R, Lake K et al. Report of the American Society of Transplantation conference on immunosuppressive drugs and the use of generic immunosuppressants. Am J Transplant 2003: 3: 1211.
12. Pollard S, Nashan B, Johnston A et al. Transplantation, consent: A pharmacokinetic and clinical review of the potential clinical impact of using different formulations of cyclosporin A. Berlin, Germany, November 19, 2001. Clin Ther 2003: 25: 1654.
13. R oss H, W est L, K eown P, L evy G. The potential impact of switching between various formulations of cyclosporine. Canadian Society of Transplantation Consensus papers http://transplant.medical.org/ Critical_Dose_Drugs_Transplant.pdf
14. T aber T, B aillie G, A shcraft E et al. Bioequivalence between cyclosporine microemulsion formulations may not translate into equivalent clinical outcomes. Am J Transplant 2003: S5: 462. (Abstract 1211). Presented at the American Transplant Congress, May 2003.
15. Colloborative Transplant Study Newsletter 1: March 2001. Available at http://www.ctstransplant.org/public/literature/newsletters/2001/gif/ 2001-1.html