Enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium versus mycophenolate mofetil in renal transplant recipients experiencing gastrointestinal intolerance: A multicenter, double-blind, randomized study

Transplantation

Volumn 91, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 470-478

  Langone, Anthony J ^a   Chan, Laurence ^b   Bolin, Paul ^c   Cooper, Matthew ^d  

^a VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO   (United States)

^c EAST CAROLINA UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Gastrointestinal; HRQoL; Mycophenolate mofetil; Mycophenolate sodium; Quality of life

Indexed keywords

CALCINEURIN INHIBITOR; CORTICOSTEROID; CYCLOSPORIN A; MYCOPHENOLIC ACID; MYCOPHENOLIC ACID 2 MORPHOLINOETHYL ESTER; PLACEBO; STEROID; TACROLIMUS;

ABDOMINAL DISTENSION; ADULT; AGED; ANEMIA; ARTICLE; CONSTIPATION; CORTICOSTEROID THERAPY; DIABETES MELLITUS; DIARRHEA; DISEASE SEVERITY; DOUBLE BLIND PROCEDURE; DRUG DOSE COMPARISON; DRUG DOSE INCREASE; DRUG DOSE REDUCTION; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG SAFETY; DRUG TOLERABILITY; DRUG WITHDRAWAL; DYSPEPSIA; ENTERIC COATED TABLET; ENTEROPATHY; ERUCTATION; FEMALE; FLATULENCE; GASTROESOPHAGEAL REFLUX; GASTROINTESTINAL SYMPTOM; GASTROINTESTINAL SYMPTOM RATING SCALE; GLOMERULONEPHRITIS; GLOMERULOPATHY; GRAFT RECIPIENT; HUMAN; IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE TREATMENT; INDIGESTION; INTERSTITIAL NEPHRITIS; KIDNEY DISEASE; KIDNEY DYSPLASIA; KIDNEY FAILURE; KIDNEY GRAFT REJECTION; KIDNEY HYPERPLASIA; KIDNEY POLYCYSTIC DISEASE; KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION; LEUKOPENIA; LOWER ABDOMINAL PAIN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MULTICENTER STUDY; NAUSEA; NEPHROSCLEROSIS; NEUTROPENIA; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; PYELONEPHRITIS; QUALITY OF LIFE; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; RATING SCALE; THROMBOCYTOPENIA; TREATMENT DURATION; TREATMENT OUTCOME; UPPER ABDOMINAL PAIN; VASCULITIS; VOMITING;

ADRENAL CORTEX HORMONES; ADULT; CALCINEURIN; DIABETES MELLITUS; DOUBLE-BLIND METHOD; DYSPEPSIA; ENZYME INHIBITORS; FEMALE; GASTROINTESTINAL DISEASES; HUMANS; IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE AGENTS; KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION; LONGITUDINAL STUDIES; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MYCOPHENOLIC ACID; TABLETS, ENTERIC-COATED;

EID: 79951679491     PISSN: 00411337     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/TP.0b013e318205568c     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Allison AC, Eugui EM. Immunosuppressive and other effects of myco-phenolic acid and an ester prodrug, mycophenolate mofetil. Immunol Rev 2006; 136: 5.
2. A blinded, randomized clinical trial of mycophenolate mofetil for the prevention of acute rejection in cadaveric renal transplantation. The Tricontinental Mycophenolate Mofetil Renal Transplantation Study Group. Transplantation 1996; 61: 1029.
3. Sollinger HW. Mycophenolate mofetil for the prevention of acute rejection in primary cadaveric renal allograft recipients. U.S. Renal Transplant Mycophenolate Mofetil Study Group. Transplantation 1995; 60: 225.
4. Ojo AO, Meier-Kriesche HU, Hanson JA, et al. Mycophenolate mofetil reduces late renal allograft loss independent of acute rejection. Transplantation 2000; 69: 2405.
5. Meier-Kriesche HU, Steffen BJ, Hochberg AM, et al. Long-term use of mycophenolate mofetil is associated with a reduction in the incidence and risk of late rejection. Am J Transplant 2003; 3: 68.
6. Knoll GA, MacDonald I, Khan A, et al. Mycophenolate mofetil dose reduction and the risk of acute rejection after renal transplantation. J Am Soc Nephrol 2003; 14: 2381.
7. Tierce JC, Porterfield-Baxa J, Petrilla AA, et al. Impact of mycopheno-late mofetil (MMF)-related gastrointestinal complications and MMF dose alterations on transplant outcomes and healthcare costs in renal transplant recipients. Clin Transplant 2005; 19: 779.
8. Pelletier RP, Akin B, Henry ML, et al. The impact of mycophenolate mofetil dosing patternsonclinical outcome after renal transplantation. Clin Transplant 2003; 17: 200.
9. Hardinger KL, Brennan DC, Lowell J, et al. Long-term outcome of gastrointestinal complications in renal transplant patients treated with mycophenolate mofetil. Transpl Int 2004; 17: 609.
10. Bunnapradist S, Lentine KL, Burroughs TE, et al. Mycophenolate mofetil dose reductions and discontinuations after gastrointestinal complications are associated with renal transplant graft failure. Transplantation 2006; 15: 102.
11. Johnston A, He X, Holt D. Bioequivalence of enteric-coated mycophe-nolate sodium and mycophenolate mofetil: A meta-analysis of three studies in stable renal transplant recipients. Transplantation 2006; 82: 1413.
12. Salvadori M, Holzer H, de Mattos A, et al. Enteric-coated mycopheno-late sodium is therapeutically equivalent to mycophenolate mofetil in de novo renal transplant patients. Am J Transplant 2004; 4: 231.
13. Budde K, Curtis J, Knoll G, et al. Enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium can be safely administered in maintenance renal transplant patients: Results of a 1-year study. Am J Transplant 2004; 4: 237.
14. Salvadori M, Holzer H, Civati G, et al. Long-term administration of enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium (EC-MPS; myfortic) is safe in kidney transplant patients. Clin Nephrol 2006; 66: 112.
15. Hardinger KL, Hebbar S, Bloomer T, et al. Adverse drug reaction driven immunosuppressive drug manipulations: A single-center comparison of enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium vs. mycophenolate mofetil. Clin Transplant 2008; 22: 555.
16. Chan L, Mulaongkar S, Walker R, et al. Patient-reported gastrointestinal symptom burden and health related quality of life following conversion from mycophenolate mofetil to enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium. Transplantation 2006; 81: 1290.
17. Bolin P, Tanriover B, Zibari GB, et al. Improvement in 3-month patient-reported gastrointestinal symptoms after conversion from my-cophenolate mofetil to enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium in renal transplant patients. Transplantation 2007; 84: 1443.
18. Kleinman L, Faull R, Walker R, et al. Gastrointestinal-specific patient-reported outcome instruments differentiate between renal transplant patients with or without GI complications. Transplant Proc 2005; 37: 846.
19. Dimenas E, Glise H, Hallerback B, et al. Quality of life in patients with upper gastrointestinal symptoms. An improved evaluation of treatment regimens? Scand J Gastroenterol 1993; 28: 681.
20. Revicki DA, Wood M, Wiklund I, et al. Reliability and validity of the Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale in patients with gastroesopha-geal reflux disease. Qual Life Res 1998; 7: 75.
21. Eypasch E, Williams JI, Wood-Dauphinee S, et al. Gastrointestinal Quality of Life Index: Development, validation and application of a new instrument. Br J Surg 1995; 82: 216.
22. Jaeschke R, Singer J, Guyatt GH. Measurement of health status; ascertaining the minimal clinically important difference. Control Clin Trials 1989; 10: 407.
23. Guyatt GH, Juniper EF, Walter SD, et al. Interpreting treatment effects in randomised trials. BMJ 1998; 316: 690.
24. Juniper EF, Guyatt GH, Willian A, et al. Determining a minimal important change in a disease-specific quality of life questionnaire. J Clin Epidemiol 1994; 47: 81.
25. Talley NJ, Fullerton S, Junghard O, et al. Quality of life in patients with endoscopy-negative heartburn: Reliability and sensitivity of disease-specific instruments. Am J Gastroenterol 2001; 96: 1998.
26. Guyatt GH, Osoba D, Wu AW, et al; Clinical Significance Consensus Meeting Group. Methods to explain the clinical significance of health status measures. Mayo Clinic Proc 2002; 77: 371.
27. 2007 Annual Report of the U.S. Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network and the Scientific Registry of Transplant Recipients: Transplant Data 1997-2006. Rockville, MD, Health Resources and Services Administration, Healthcare Systems Bureau, Division of Transplantation.
28. Pietruck F, Budde K, Salvadori M, et al. Efficacy and safety of enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium in renal transplant patients with diabetes mellitus: Post hoc analyses from three clinical trials. Clin Transplant 2007; 21: 117.
29. Meier-Kriesche HU, Chu AH, David KM,et al. Switching immunosup-pression medications after renal transplantation-A common practice. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2006; 21: 2256.