Generic maintenance immunosuppression in solid organ transplant recipients

Pharmacotherapy

Volumn 31, Issue 11, 2011, Pages 1111-1129

  Ensor, Christopher R ^a,b   Trofe Clark, Jennifer ^c,d   Gabardi, Steven ^e,f   McDevitt Potter, Lisa M ^g,h   Shullo, Michael A ^i,j  

^a JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MARYLAND SCHOOL OF PHARMACY   (United States)

^c HOSPITAL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^d UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

^e BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

^f HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^g TUFTS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^h TUFTS UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

ⁱ UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^j UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

Formulary considerations; Generic drugs; Maintenance immunosuppression; Solid organ transplantation

Indexed keywords

AZATHIOPRINE; CYCLOSPORIN; CYCLOSPORIN A; DRUG; EVEROLIMUS; EXCIPIENT; GENERIC DRUG; IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE AGENT; INNOVATOR DRUG; MYCOPHENOLIC ACID; MYCOPHENOLIC ACID 2 MORPHOLINOETHYL ESTER; POLYSORBATE 80; PREDNISONE; RANITIDINE; RAPAMYCIN; SORBITOL; SUCROSE; TACROLIMUS; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

AREA UNDER THE CURVE; AWARENESS; B LYMPHOCYTE; BIOEQUIVALENCE; DRUG BLOOD LEVEL; DRUG COST; DRUG MARKETING; DRUG MEGADOSE; DRUG MONITORING; DRUG POTENCY; DRUG SPECIFICITY; DRUG USE; FOOD AND DRUG ADMINISTRATION; GRAFT RECIPIENT; HUMAN; IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE TREATMENT; LOADING DRUG DOSE; LOW DRUG DOSE; MAINTENANCE THERAPY; MAXIMUM PLASMA CONCENTRATION; ORGAN TRANSPLANTATION; PATIENT ATTITUDE; PHYSICIAN ATTITUDE; REVIEW; SURVIVAL; T LYMPHOCYTE;

EID: 80054930281     PISSN: 02770008     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1592/phco.31.11.1111     Document Type: Review

References (86)

1. Axelrod DA, McCullough KP, Brewer ED, Becker BN, Segev DL, Rao PS. Kidney and pancreas transplantation in the U.S., 1999-2008: the changing face of living donation. Am J Transplant 2010;10(4 pt 2):987-1002.
2. Thuluvath PJ, Guidinger MK, Fung JJ, Johnson LB, Rayhill SC, Pelletier SJ. Liver transplantation in the U.S., 1999-2008. Am J Transplant 2010;10(4 pt 2):1003-19.
3. Mazariegos GV, Steffick DE, Horslen S, et al. Intestine transplantation in the U.S., 1999-2008. Am J Transplant 2010;10(4 pt 2):1020-34.
4. Johnson MR, Meyer KH, Haft J, Kinder D, Webber SA, Dyke DB. Heart transplantation in the U.S., 1999-2008. Am J Transplant 2010;10(4 pt 2):1035-46.
5. Yusen RD, Shearon TH, Qian Y, et al. Lung transplantation in the U.S., 1999-2008. Am J Transplant 2010;10(4 pt 2):1047-68.
6. Patel J, Kobashigawa JA. Minimization of immunosuppression. Transpl Immunol 2008;20:48-54.
7. Kuypers DR. Immunosuppressive drug monitoring: what to use in clinical practice today to improve renal graft outcome. Transpl Int 2005;18:140-50. (Pubitemid 41743303)
8. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Approved drug products. Available from http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/drugsatfda. Accessed June 1, 2010.
9. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Approved drug products with therapeutic equivalence evaluations, 30th ed. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Office of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Office of Generic Drugs, April 2010. Available from http://www.accessdata.fda. gov/scripts/cder/ob/default.cfm. Accessed May 8, 2011.
10. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The 2009 annual report of the U.S. organ procurement and transplantation network and the scientific registry of transplant recipients: transplant data 1999-2008. Rockville, MD: Health Resources and Services Administration, Healthcare Systems Bureau, Division of Transplantation.
11. Generic Pharmaceutical Association. 2010 annual report. Available from http://www.gphaonline.org. Accessed November 30. 2010.
12. Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984. Public Law 98-417, 98 Stat. 1585-1605, September 1984.
13. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Approved products with therapeutic equivalence evaluations, 29th ed. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, Office of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Office of Generic Drugs, 2009. Available from http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/ DevelopmentApprovalProcess/ucm079068.htm. Accessed November 2, 2010.
14. Davit BM, Nwakama PW, Buehler GJ, et al. Comparing generic and innovator drugs: a review of 12 years of bioequivalence data from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Ann Pharmacother 2009;43:1583-97.
15. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Code of federal regulation. Title 21. Food and drugs. Chapter 1. Food and Drug Administration, Department of Health and Human Services. Subchapter D. Drugs for human use. Part 314, Section 314.94. Content and format of an abbreviated application. Revised April 1, 2009. Available from http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/ CFRSearch.cfm?fr=314.94. Accessed November 2, 2010.
16. Chen ML, Straughn AB, Sadrieh N, et al. A modern view of excipient effects on bioequivalence: case study of sorbitol. Pharm Res 2007;24:73-80. (Pubitemid 44902572)
17. Dannenfelser RM, Handan H, Joshi Y, Bateman S, Serajuddin ATM. Development of clinical dosage forms for a poorly water soluble drug. I. Application of a polyethylene glycolpolysorbate 80 solid dispersion carrier system. J Pharm Sci 2004;93:1165-75. (Pubitemid 38529690)
18. Carrier RL, Miller LA, Ahmed I. The utility of cyclodextrins for enhancing oral bioavailability. J Control Release 2007;123:78-99. (Pubitemid 47566400)
19. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Center for Drug Evaluation and Research guidance for industry: statistical approaches for establishing bioequivalence, January 2001. Available from http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/ GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/ucm070244.pdf. Accessed November 2, 2010.
20. Hadar SH, Davit B, Chen ML, et al. Bioequivalence approaches for highly variable drugs and drug products. Pharm Res 2008;25:237-41.
21. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Guidance documents. Available from http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/ default.htm. Accessed November 2, 2010.
22. Schuirmann DJ. A comparison of the two one-sided tests procedure and the power approach for assessing the bioequivalence of average bioavailability. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm 1987;15:657-80.
23. Malinowski HJ, Johnson SB. Bioavailability and bioequivalency testing. In: Troy DB, ed. Remington: the science and practice of pharmacy, 21st ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams &Wilkins, 2006:1037- 46.
24. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Code of federal regulation, 21 CFR 320. Procedures for determining the bioavailability or bioequivalence of drug products. Available from http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/ cfcfr/CFRsearch.cfm?CFRPart=320. Accessed November 2, 2010.
25. Hornecker JR. Generic drugs: history, approval process and current challenges. US Pharm 2009;34s:26-30.
26. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Guidance on tacrolimus. September 2009. Available from http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/ GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/UCM181006.pdf. Accessed November 2, 2010.
27. Benet LZ, Goyan JE. Bioequivalence and narrow therapeutic index drugs. Pharmacotherapy 1995;15:433-40.
28. Health Canada. Bioequivalence requirements: critical dose drugs. Available from http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/dhp-mps/prodpharma/applic-demande/guide- ld/bio/critical-dose-critique-eng.php. Accessed November 2, 2010.
29. European Medicines Agency. Guideline on the investigation of bioequivalence. CPMP/EWP/QWP/1401/98 Rev. 1/Corr, January 20, 2010. Available from http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en-GB/document-library/Scientific-guideline/ 2010/01/WC500070039.pdf. Accessed May 27, 2010.
30. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Summary minutes of the advisory committee for pharmaceutical science and clinical pharmacology, April 13, 2010. Available from http://www.fda.gov/downloads/AdvisoryCommittees/ CommitteesMeetingMaterials/Drugs/ AdvisoryCommitteeforPharmaceuticalScienceandClinicalPharmacology/UCM210930.pdf. Accessed April 20, 2010.
31. Sabatini S, Ferguson RM, Helderman JG, et al. Drug substitution in transplantation: a National Kidney Foundation white paper. Am J Kidney Dis 1999;33:389-97. (Pubitemid 29072246)
32. Alloway R, Isaacs R, Lake K, et al. Report of the AST conference on immunosuppressive drugs and the use of generic immunosuppressants. Am J Transplant 2003;3:1211-15. (Pubitemid 37214617)
33. Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Transplant Work Group. KDIGO clinical practice guideline for the care of kidney transplant recipients. Chapter 4: strategies to reduce drug costs. Am J Transplant 2009;9:S16-18.
34. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Code of federal regulation. Title 21. Food and drugs. Chapter 1. Food and Drug Administration, Department of Health and Human Services. Subchapter D. Drugs for human use. Part 320, Section 320.1. Bioavailability and bioequivalence requirements. Definitions. Available from http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?fr=320.1. Accessed August 16, 2011.
35. Uber PA, Ross HJ, Zuckermann AO, et al. Generic drug immunosuppression in thoracic transplantation: an ISHLT educational advisory. J Heart Lung Transplant 2009;28:655-60.
36. Kovarik JM, Mueller EA, van Bree JB, Tetzloff W, Kutz K. Reduced inter- and intraindividual variability in cyclosporine pharmacokinetics from a microemulsion formulation. J Pharm Sci 1994;83:444-6. (Pubitemid 24224228)
37. Jorga A, Holt DW, Yaqoob M, Whittaker C, Johnston A. A survey to determine the blood concentration of cyclosporine 2 hours postdose in stable renal transplant patients. Transplant Proc 2004;36:3239-41. (Pubitemid 41126783)
38. Roza A, Tomlanovich S, Merion R, et al. Conversion of stable renal allograft recipients to a bioequivalent cyclosporine formulation. Transplantation 2002;74:1013-17. (Pubitemid 35191253)
39. Carnahan W, Cooper TY. Neoral-to-Gengraf conversion in renal transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 2003;35:1308-13. (Pubitemid 36765517)
40. Altman DG, Bland JM. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. BMJ 1995;311:485.
41. de Jonge H, Naesens M, Kuypers RJ. New insights into the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the calcineurin inhibitors and mycophenolic acid: possible consequences for therapeutic drug monitoring in solid organ transplantation. Ther Drug Monit 2009;31:416-35.
42. Sukhpreet P. Therapeutic drug monitoring of immunosuppressants: an overview. Indian J Pharmacol 2007;39:66-70.
43. Schiff J, Cole E, Cantarovich M. Therapeutic monitoring of calcineurin inhibitors for the nephrologist. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2007;2:374-84.
44. 2- level monitoring: a systematic review. Transplantation 2007;83:1525-35.
45. Bekersky I, Dressler D, Colburn W, Mekki Q. Bioequivalence of 1 and 5 mg tacrolimus capsules using a replicate study design. J Clin Pharmacol 1999;39:1032-7. (Pubitemid 30641862)
46. Shaw LM, Figurski M, Milone MC, Trofe J, Bloom RD. Therapeutic drug monitoring of mycophenolic acid. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2007;2:1062-72.
47. van Gelder T, Hilbrands LB, Vanrenterghem Y, et al. A randomized double-blind, multicenter plasma concentration controlled study of the safety and efficacy of oral mycophenolate mofetil for the prevention of acute rejection after kidney transplantation. Transplantation 1999;68:261-6. (Pubitemid 29360288)
48. MacDonald A, Scarola J, Burke JT, Zimmerman JJ. Clinical pharmacokinetics and therapeutic drug monitoring of sirolimus. Clin Ther 2000;22(suppl B):B101-21. (Pubitemid 30306050)
49. Kahan BD, Napoli KL, Kelly PA, et al. Therapeutic drug monitoring of sirolimus: correlations with efficacy and toxicity. Clin Transplant. 2000;14:97-109. (Pubitemid 30171208)
50. Kovarik JM, Kahan BD, Kaplan B, et al. Longitudinal assessment of everolimus in de novo renal transplant recipients over the first post-transplant year: pharmacokinetics, exposure-response relationships, and influence on cyclosporine. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2001;69:48-56. (Pubitemid 32108671)
51. Hummel M, Yonan N, Ross H, et al. Pharmacokinetics and variability of mycophenolic acid from enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium compared with mycophenolate mofetil in de novo heart transplant recipients. Clin Transplant 2007;21:18-23. (Pubitemid 46189583)
52. Webster AC, Lee VW, Chapman JR, Craig JC. Target of rapamycin inhibitors (sirolimus and everolimus) for primary immunosuppression of kidney transplant recipients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials. Transplantation 2006;81:1234-48.
53. Lorber MI, Ponticelli C, Whelchel J, et al. Therapeutic drug monitoring for everolimus in kidney transplantation using 12-month exposure, efficacy, and safety data. Clin Transplant 2005;19:145-52. (Pubitemid 40424882)
54. Starling RC, Hare JM, Hauptman P, et al. Therapeutic drug monitoring for everolimus in heart transplant recipients based on exposure-effect modeling. Am J Transplant 2004;4:2126-31. (Pubitemid 39611643)
55. Le Meur Y, Buchler M, Thierry A, et al. Individualized mycophenolate mofetil dosing based on drug exposure significantly improves patient outcomes after renal transplantation. Am J Transplant 2007;7:2496-503. (Pubitemid 47566324)
56. Barraclough KA, Isbel NM, Staatz CE. Evaluation of the mycophenolic acid exposure estimation methods used in the APOMYGERE, FDCC, and Opticept trials. Transplantation 2010;90:44-51.
57. Merion RM, White DJG, Thiru S, Evans DB, Calne RY. Cyclosporine: 5 years' experience in cadaveric renal transplantation. N Engl J Med 1984;310:148-54. (Pubitemid 14224108)
58. Burekart GJ, Canafax DM, Yee GC. Cyclosporine monitoring. Drug Intell Clin Pharm 1986;20:649-52. (Pubitemid 16051399)
59. Delgato DH, Rao V, Hamel J, et al. Monitoring of cyclosporine 2-hour post dose levels in heart transplantation: improvement in clinical outcomes. J Heart Lung Transplant 2005;24:1343-6. (Pubitemid 41247820)
60. Trull A, Steel L, Sharples L, et al. Randomized, trough blood cyclosporine concentration-controlled trial to compare the pharmacodynamics of Sandimmune and Neoral in de-novo lung transplant recipients. Ther Drug Monit 1999;21:17-26. (Pubitemid 29077450)
61. Kershner RP, Fitzsimmons WP. Relationship between FK506 whole blood concentrations and efficacy and toxicity after liver and kidney transplantation. Transplantation 1996;62:920-6. (Pubitemid 26360352)
62. Regazzi MB, Renaldi M, Molinaro M, et al. Clinical pharmacokinetics of tacrolimus in heart transplant recipients. Ther Drug Monit 1999;21:2-7. (Pubitemid 29077448)
63. Borobia AM, Romero I, Jimenez C, et al. Trough tacrolimus concentrations in the first week after kidney transplantation are related to acute rejection. Ther Drug Monit 2009;31:436-42.
64. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. FDA talk paper T00-32: nationwide recall of SangCya oral solution, July 10, 2000. Available from http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/ANSWERS/ANS01025.html. Accessed March 17, 2009.
65. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Requirements for submission of bioequivalence data, final rule. Fed Regist 2009;74:2849-62.
66. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Inflation calculator. Available from data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl. Accessed May 27, 2010.
67. Qazi YA, Forrest A, Tornatore K, Venuto RC. The clinical impact of 1:1 conversion from Neoral to a generic cyclosporine (Gengraf) in renal transplant recipients with stable graft function. Clin Transplant 2006;20:313-17. (Pubitemid 43880565)
68. Taber DJ, Baillie GM, Ashcraft EE, et al. Does bioequivalence between modified cyclosporine formulations translate into equal outcomes? Transplantation 2005;80:1633-5. (Pubitemid 43005876)
69. McDevitt LM, Sadaka B, Tichy E, Rogers, C, Gabardi S. A multicenter experience with generic tacrolimus conversion [published online ahead of print July 22, 2011]. Transplantation. Available from http://journals.lww.com/ transplantjournal/Abstract/publishahead/A-Multicenter-Experience-With-Generic- Tacrolimus.99320.aspx.
70. Venkataramanan R, Fontes P, De Vera M, Humar A, Starzl TE. Generic substitution of tacrolimus appears to be safe in the short term in clinically stable solid organ transplant patients, but monitoring of tacrolimus blood concentration in individual patient is essential [abstract]. Am J Transplant 2010;10(S4): abstract 1741.
71. Mojdeh A, Tichy EM, Yazdi M, et al. Clinical impact of an inpatient tacrolimus therapeutic substitution program [abstract]. Am J Transplant 2011;11(suppl 2):abstract 982.
72. Dick TB, Raines AA, Van der Werf W, Alonso D, Fujita S, Stinson J. Comparison of dose requirements of Sandoz generic tacrolimus with brand Prograf in kidney transplant recipients [abstract]. Am J Transplant 2011;11(suppl 2):abstract 1102.
73. Marfo K, Akalin E, Daniel G, et al. Clinical outcomes of inadvertent conversion from brand to generic tacrolimus in renal transplant recipients [abstract]. Am J Transplant 2011;11(suppl 2):abstract 1635.
74. Siddiqi N, Lu A, Jones T, Akalin E, Marfo K. Clinical and economic outcomes: de novo use of FDA-approved bioequivalent formulations of generic tacrolimus versus brand tacrolimus (Prograf) [abstract]. Am J Transplant 2011;11(suppl 2):abstract 706.
75. Abdulnour HA, Araya CE, Dharnidharka VR. Comparison of generic tacrolimus and Prograf drug levels in a pediatric kidney transplant program: brief communication. Pediatr Transplantation 2010;4:1007-11.
76. Bergan S, Rugstad HE, Bentdal O, et al. Monitored high-dose azathioprine treatment reduces acute rejection episodes after renal transplantation. Transplantation 1998;66:334-9. (Pubitemid 28390215)
77. Haroldson JA, Somerville KT, Carlson S, Hanson J, Emery RW, Lake KD. A retrospective assessment of safety, efficacy, and pharmacoeconomics of generic azathioprine in heart-transplant recipients. J Heart Lung Transplant 2001;20:372-4. (Pubitemid 32194638)
78. Doyle I, Zikri AM, Bennett WM, Figurski MJ, Shaw LM. Area under the curve (AUC) bioequivalence (BE) of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF): CellCept vs generic [abstract SA-P3054]. Presented at the American Society of Nephrology renal week 2010, Denver, CO, November 16-21, 2010.
79. Transplant Living. Financing a transplant. Available from http://www.transplantliving.org/beforethetransplant/finance/costs.aspx. Accessed April 20, 2011.
80. O'Neil JE. How increased competition from generic drugs has affected prices and returns in the pharmaceutical industry. Congressional Budget Office. July 1998. Available from http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/DOCKETS/dailys/04/June04/ 061404/03p-0029-bkg0001-Ref-15-vol3.pdf. Accessed November 2, 2010.
81. The National Association of Chain Drug Stores. Industry facts-at-a-glance: pharmaceutical pricing. Available from http://www.nacds.org/ wmspage.cfm?parm1=6536. Accessed November 30, 2010.
82. PDR Staff, eds. Red book: pharmacy's fundamental reference, 2010. Montvale, NJ: Thompson Reuters; 2010.
83. National Association of Boards of Pharmacy. Survey of pharmacy law. Available from http://www.nabp.net/publications/survey-of-pharmacy-law/. Accessed May 13, 2011.
84. North Carolina Board of Pharmacy. North Carolina Pharmacy Practice Act, article 4A, §90-85.28(b1). Available from http://www.ncbop.org/LawsRules/ Statutes.pdf. Accessed November 2, 2010.
85. Parker K, Wiland A. Transplant coordinators perceived impact of availability of multiple generic immunosuppression therapies on patients, workload and post-transplant maintenance therapy [abstract]. Am J Transplant 2011;11(suppl 2):abstract 705.
86. Hulbert AL, Lambourne CA, Pilch NA, et al. Generic immunosuppressants: patient perceptions mirror the ambiguity of provider perceptions [abstract]. Am J Transplant 2011;11(suppl 2):abstract 1637.