Controlled-dose versus fixed-dose mycophenolate mofetil for kidney transplant recipients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Transplantation

Volumn 96, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 361-367

  Wang, Xianding ^a   Qin, Xin ^a   Wang, Yong ^b   Huang, Zhongli ^a   Li, Xiaohong ^b   Zeng, Quantao ^b   Zeng, Hao ^a   Lu, Yiping ^a   Wang, Li ^a   Lin, Tao ^a  

^a SICHUAN UNIVERSITY   (China)

^b SICHUAN UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

Area under the curve; Kidney transplantation; Meta analysis; Mycophenolate mofetil; Therapeutic drug monitoring

Indexed keywords

CREATININE; MYCOPHENOLIC ACID 2 MORPHOLINOETHYL ESTER;

ACUTE GRAFT REJECTION; ADVERSE OUTCOME; ANEMIA; AREA UNDER THE CURVE; CLINICAL EVALUATION; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; CREATININE BLOOD LEVEL; CREATININE CLEARANCE; DIARRHEA; DRUG DOSE COMPARISON; DRUG DOSE REGIMEN; DRUG EFFICACY; DRUG SAFETY; DRUG TREATMENT FAILURE; GRAFT FAILURE; GRAFT RECIPIENT; HUMAN; KIDNEY GRAFT REJECTION; KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION; LEUKOPENIA; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALIGNANT NEOPLASTIC DISEASE; META ANALYSIS; MULTICENTER STUDY (TOPIC); OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); REVIEW; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTOR; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; THROMBOCYTOPENIA;

DRUG MONITORING; HUMANS; IMMUNOSUPPRESSIVE AGENTS; KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION; MYCOPHENOLIC ACID; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS AS TOPIC; RISK FACTORS;

EID: 84883462835     PISSN: 00411337     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/TP.0b013e31828c6dc7     Document Type: Review

References (28)

1. Guerra G, Ciancio G, Gaynor JJ, et al. Randomized trial of immunosuppressive regimens in renal transplantation. J Am Soc Nephrol 2011; 22: 1758.
2. Sunder-Plassmann G, Reinke P, Rath T, et al. Comparative pharmacokinetic study of two mycophenolate mofetil formulations in stable kidney transplant recipients. Transpl Int 2012; 25: 680.
3. Gourishankar S, Houde I, Keown PA, et al. The CLEAR study: A 5-day, 3-g loading dose of mycophenolate mofetil versus standard 2-g dosing in renal transplantation. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2010; 5: 1282.
4. Miura M, Niioka T, Kato S, et al. Monitoring of mycophenolic acid predose concentrations in the maintenance phase more than one year after renal transplantation. Ther Drug Monit 2011; 33: 295.
5. van Gelder T. Mycophenolate blood level monitoring: Recent progress. Am J Transplant 2009; 9: 1495.
6. Saint-Marcoux F, Vandierdonck S, Premaud A, et al. Large scale analysis of routine dose adjustments of mycophenolate mofetil based on global exposure in renal transplant patients. Ther Drug Monit 2011; 33: 285.
7. van Gelder T, Silva HT, de Fijter H, et al. How delayed graft function impacts exposure to mycophenolic acid in patients after renal transplantation. Ther Drug Monit 2011; 33: 155.
8. Glander P, Sommerer C, Arns W, et al. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of intensified versus standard dosing of mycophenolate sodium in renal transplant patients. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2010; 5: 503.
9. Le Meur Y, Borrows R, Pescovitz MD, et al. Therapeutic drug monitoring of mycophenolates in kidney transplantation: Report of The Transplantation Society consensus meeting. Transplant Rev (Orlando) 2011; 25: 58.
10. Staatz CE, Tett SE. Maximum a posteriori Bayesian estimation of mycophenolic acid area under the concentration-time curve: Is this clinically useful for dosage prediction yet? Clin Pharmacokinet 2011; 50: 759.
11. Musuamba FT, Rousseau A, Bosmans JL, et al. Limited sampling models and Bayesian estimation for mycophenolic acid area under the curve prediction in stable renal transplant patients co-medicated with ciclosporin or sirolimus. Clin Pharmacokinet 2009; 48: 745.
12. ZhaoW, FakhouryM, Baudouin V, et al. Limited sampling strategy for estimating individual exposure of tacrolimus in pediatric kidney transplant patients. Ther Drug Monit 2011; 33: 681.
13. Kuypers DR, Le Meur Y, Cantarovich M, et al. Consensus report on therapeutic drug monitoring of mycophenolic acid in solid organ transplantation. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2010; 5: 341.
14. van Gelder T, Silva HT, de Fijter JW, et al. Comparing mycophenolate mofetil regimens for de novo renal transplant recipients: The fixeddose concentration-controlled trial. Transplantation 2008; 86: 1043.
15. 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.
16. Gaston RS, Kaplan B, Shah T, et al. Fixed- or controlled-dose mycophenolate mofetil with standard- or reduced-dose calcineurin inhibitors: The Opticept trial. Am J Transplant 2009; 9: 1607.
17. Le Meur Y, Thierry A, Glowacki F, et al. Early steroid withdrawal and optimization of mycophenolic acid exposure in kidney transplant recipients receiving mycophenolate mofetil. Transplantation 2011; 92:1244.
18. Rousseau A, Laroche ML, Venisse N, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of individualized mycophenolate mofetil dosing in kidney transplant patients in the APOMYGRE trial. Transplantation 2010; 89: 1255.
19. Knight SR, Morris PJ. Does the evidence support the use of mycophenolate mofetil therapeutic drug monitoring in clinical practicé A systematic review. Transplantation 2008; 85: 1675.
20. 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.
21. Tett SE, Saint-Marcoux F, Staatz CE, et al. Mycophenolate, clinical pharmacokinetics, formulations, and methods for assessing drug exposure. Transplant Rev (Orlando) 2011; 25: 47.
22. van Gelder T, LeMeur Y, Shaw LM, et al. Therapeutic drug monitoring of mycophenolate mofetil in transplantation. Ther Drug Monit 2006; 28: 145.
23. Kaplan B, Gaston RS, Meier-Kriesche HU, et al. Mycophenolic acid exposure in high- and low-weight renal transplant patients after dosing with mycophenolate mofetil in the Opticept trial. Ther Drug Monit 2010; 32: 224.
24. Hocker B, van Gelder T, Martin-Govantes J, et al. Comparison of MMF efficacy and safety in paediatric vs. adult renal transplantation: Subgroup analysis of the randomised, multicentre FDCC trial. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2011; 26: 1073.
25. van Gelder T, Tedesco Silva H, de Fijter JW, et al. Renal transplant patients at high risk of acute rejection benefit from adequate exposure to mycophenolic acid. Transplantation 2010; 89: 595.
26. van Agteren M, Armstrong VW, van Schaik RH, et al. AcylMPAG plasma concentrations and mycophenolic acid-related side effects in patients undergoing renal transplantation are not related to the UGT2B7-840G9A gene polymorphism. Ther Drug Monit 2008; 30: 439.
27. Jadad AR, Moore RA, Carroll D, et al. Assessing the quality of reports of randomized clinical trials: Is blinding necessary? Control Clin Trials 1996; 17: 1.
28. Pengel L, Morris P. The transplant library of randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews. Transplantation 2011; 92: 613.