Multicenter Evaluation of a New Electrochemiluminescence Immunoassay for Everolimus Concentrations in Whole Blood

Everolimus Personalized Therapy: Second Consensus Report by the International Association of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring and Clinical Toxicology

ABSTRACT

The Immunosuppressive Drugs Scientific Committee of the International Association of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring and Clinical Toxicology established the second consensus report to guide Therapeutic Drug Monitoring (TDM) of everolimus (EVR) and its optimal use in clinical practice 7 years after the first version was published in 2016. This version provides information focused on new developments that have arisen in the last 7 years. For the general aspects of the pharmacology and TDM of EVR that have retained their relevance, readers can refer to the 2016 document. This edition includes new evidence from the literature, focusing on the topics updated during the last 7 years, including indirect pharmacological effects of EVR on the mammalian target of rapamycin complex 2 with the major mechanism of direct inhibition of the mammalian target of rapamycin complex 1. In addition, various concepts and technical options to monitor EVR concentrations, improve analytical performance, and increase the number of options available for immunochemical analytical methods have been included. Only limited new pharmacogenetic information regarding EVR has emerged; however, pharmacometrics and model-informed precision dosing have been constructed using physiological parameters as covariates, including pharmacogenetic information. In clinical settings, EVR is combined with a decreased dose of calcineurin inhibitors, such as tacrolimus and cyclosporine, instead of mycophenolic acid. The literature and recommendations for specific organ transplantations, such as that of the kidneys, liver, heart, and lungs, as well as for oncology and pediatrics have been updated. EVR TDM for pancreatic and islet transplantation has been added to this edition. The pharmacodynamic monitoring of EVR in organ transplantation has also been updated. These updates and additions, along with the previous version of this consensus document, will be helpful to clinicians and researchers treating patients receiving EVR.

Lack of Interchangeability Between 3 Different Methods for Quantification of Everolimus in Blood: ACMIA, LTIA, and UHPLC-MS/MS

BACKGROUND

Affinity chrome-mediated immunoassays (ACMIA) do not require pretreatment and have a wide calibration range and good analytical performance. To date, no studies have compared ACMIA and latex agglutination turbidimetry immunoassays (LTIA). The objective of this study was to evaluate the interchangeability of ACMIA, LTIA, and the previously developed ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry (UHPLC-MS/MS).

METHODS

A total of 111 whole blood samples were collected from 25 patients undergoing routine everolimus therapeutic drug monitoring. The interchangeability between the 3 methods was assessed using robust Passing-Bablok regression analysis and Bland-Altman plots.

RESULTS

All samples were quantifiable by UHPLC-MS/MS, whereas 56 and 1 samples were below the lower limits of quantification by LTIA and ACMIA, respectively. In the robust Passing-Bablok regression plots, the slopes of the regression equations between ACMIA and UHPLC-MS/MS, LTIA and UHPLC-MS/MS, and ACMIA and LTIA were 1.23 (95% [confidence interval] CI, 1.13-1.33), 0.67 (95% CI, 0.57-0.77), and 1.71 (95% CI, 1.43-2.33), respectively, with significant proportional biases indicating no interchangeability among all 3 methods. Bland-Altman plots also revealed statistically significant proportional biases between ACMIA and UHPLC-MS/MS (P = 0.012), LTIA and UHPLC-MS/MS (P < 0.001), and ACMIA and LTIA (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Statistically significant proportional biases were observed among the 3 methods. Blood everolimus concentration measurements should be interpreted with caution when switching the quantification methods for therapeutic drug monitoring.

Analytical Performance of the New Siemens Affinity Chrome-Mediated Immunoassay Everolimus Assay and Its Interchangeability With the Thermo Quantitative Microsphere System for Routine Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Patients After Solid Organ Transplantation

BACKGROUND

A new homogeneous affinity chrome-mediated immunoassay (ACMIA) "EVRO" from Siemens Healthcare was evaluated for therapeutic drug monitoring of everolimus (EVL) with automated sample pretreatment and compared with quantitative microsphere system (QMS) "EVER" from Thermo Fisher Scientific.

METHODS

Imprecision, inaccuracy, and limit of quantitation (LoQ) of ACMIA/EVRO were verified using both hemolysate quality control (QC) samples and pooled whole blood specimens. The interchangeability of methods and the agreement of results were analyzed using 72 specimens (from 38, 30, and 4 kidney, liver, and lung transplant recipients, respectively).

RESULTS

Within-run imprecision ranged within %CV = 2.81-2.53 with pooled whole blood specimens and within %CV = 2.88-2.53 with QCs; total imprecision with QCs was within %CV = 2.14-1.51. Inaccuracy with value assigned QC was %△ = 5.36 at the 5.6 ng/mL level and %△ = 5.56 at the 11.7 ng/mL level. LoQ was 0.93 ng/mL (%CV = 10). Passing-Bablok regression showed a constant bias of 0.679 ng/mL (95% CI: 0.216-1.026) and a proportional bias of 1.326 (95% CI: 1.240-1.425). Bland-Altman analysis showed 5/72 (6.9%) paired differences exceeding the limits of agreement and 1/72 (1.4%) paired differences exceeding 1.96 SD to a combined bias of 39.9% after detrending.

CONCLUSIONS

ACMIA/EVRO shows satisfactory analytical performances that comply with recommendations, but it does not fulfill requirements for interchangeability with QMS/EVER. Particularly, this new assay using sirolimus-specific antibody shows a sizable proportional bias versus the more specific comparator, which may be because of EVL metabolites. This is supported by the lack of agreement for individual differences in most samples collected at the peak concentration (C2). Therefore, further evidence is needed to support the transition of EVL level monitoring from QMS/EVER to ACMIA/EVRO without making extensive changes to both reference interval and patient's baseline.

Clinical validation of a liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method for the quantification of calcineurin and mTOR inhibitors in dried matrix on paper discs

Introduction

Advances in liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) have enabled the quantification of immunosuppressants using microsampling techniques. In this context, dried matrix on paper discs (DMPD) could be a useful alternative to conventional venipuncture. Although analytical validation is necessary to establish the suitability of method performance, it is not sufficient to proceed with its implementation into routine clinical practice. Also necessary is that equivalence between sampling methods be demonstrated in a clinical validation study.

Objetives

To clinically validate a LC-MS/MS method for the quantification of tacrolimus, sirolimus, everolimus and cyclosporin A using DMPD.

Methods

According to the recommendations of international guidelines, at least 40 whole blood (WB) and DMPD paired samples for each analyte were collected by skilled technicians and analyzed using LC-MS/MS. Results were evaluated in terms of statistical agreement and bias values at medical decision points.

Results

For all analytes, Passing-Bablok regression analysis revealed that confidence intervals (CIs) for slopes and intercepts included 1 and 0, respectively. It also showed that biases at medical decision points were not clinically relevant. No statistically significant differences between DMPD and WB were found using difference plots and agreement analysis. In this regard, CIs for bias estimators included 0, and more than 95% of the results fell within the limits of agreement.

Conclusion

The feasibility of the clinical application of simultaneous quantification of tacrolimus, sirolimus, everolimus and cyclosporin A in DMPD was demonstrated. Results showed that this microsampling technique is interchangeable with conventional WB sampling when specimens are collected by trained personnel.

Comparison of electrochemiluminescence immunoassay and latex agglutination turbidimetric immunoassay for evaluation of everolimus blood concentrations in renal transplant patients

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

For analysis of blood concentrations of everolimus, many hospital laboratories use either latex agglutination turbidimetric immunoassay (LTIA) or electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (ECLIA). However, no studies have compared both immunoassay methods under the same conditions. Accordingly, in this study, we compared everolimus blood concentrations obtained by LTIA and ECLIA in renal transplant patients.

METHODS

Blood samples (n = 230) from 60 renal transplant patients (19 female and 41 male) were evaluated using both immunoassays. Subsequently, we switched the assay for detection of everolimus blood concentrations from LTIA to ECLIA as a clinical application. Three quality control (QC) samples for LTIA were analysed using ECLIA, and 3 QC samples for ECLIA were analysed using LTIA.

RESULTS

The Deming regression of ECLIA versus LTIA generated the following parameters: slope, 1.0067 and intercept, 1.7489 ng/mL, in the analysis of 230 samples. Bland-Altman analysis showed an average positive bias of 1.73 ng/mL between ECLIA and LTIA. When the clinical apparatus was switched from LTIA to ECLIA, the average everolimus blood concentration assayed by LTIA before switching was 3.57 ng/mL, whereas that by ECLIA after switching in the same patients taking the same daily dose (mean: 1.43 mg/day) was 5.85 ng/mL. The QCs assayed using LTIA were lower by an average of 67.3% (range: 55.8%-79.5%) for ECLIA, and in the same 230 samples from patients, the everolimus blood concentrations assayed by LTIA were lower by an average of 67.4% (range: 37.1%-114.5%) of ECLIA.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

Analysis of everolimus concentrations by immunoassays with high precision and accuracy is required to ensure long-term survival of transplant recipients. Although the concentrations of QCs and calibrators of everolimus in LTIA were previously corrected to 70% concentration because of cross-reactivity with everolimus metabolites, these adjustments may need to be reviewed.