1
|
The Association of Tacrolimus Formulation Switching with Trough Concentration Variability: A Retrospective Cohort Study of Tacrolimus Use Post-Kidney Transplantation Based on National Drug Code (NDC) Numbers. Adv Ther 2019; 36:1358-1369. [PMID: 31004326 PMCID: PMC6824386 DOI: 10.1007/s12325-019-00950-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/30/2018] [Indexed: 10/27/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION It was hypothesized that patients experiencing at least one tacrolimus formulation switch may require more frequent therapeutic drug monitoring, subsequent dose adjustments, and a potential for untoward clinical outcomes than patients who remain on a single formulation. METHODS Eligible patients were adult kidney transplant recipients with stable renal function at month 3 post-transplant and no evidence of acute rejection, receiving an oral, tacrolimus-based regimen. Patients were categorized into two groups (fixed or variable formulation) using the US National Drug Code (NDC) on the basis of tacrolimus formulation usage over the 12-month period. RESULTS A total of 305 patients were enrolled from four US transplant centers; 44 (14.4%) received multiple formulations and 261 (85.6%) received a single formulation. Mean number of tacrolimus dose adjustments and mean cumulative milligram dose change were not statistically different between the two groups. Mean trough-to-dose ratio, frequency of trough level measurements, and mean number of excursions above 120% or below 80% of the patient's mean trough concentration were significantly higher in the variable compared to the fixed formulation group. CONCLUSION A variable tacrolimus formulation regimen was associated with a higher frequency of trough level measurements and a greater number of excursions in trough levels compared with continuing on a fixed formulation regimen of tacrolimus in this retrospective chart review study. FUNDING Astellas Pharma Global Development, Inc. Plain language summary available for this article.
Collapse
|
2
|
Trofe-Clark J, Brennan DC, West-Thielke P, Milone MC, Lim MA, Neubauer R, Nigro V, Bloom RD. Results of ASERTAA, a Randomized Prospective Crossover Pharmacogenetic Study of Immediate-Release Versus Extended-Release Tacrolimus in African American Kidney Transplant Recipients. Am J Kidney Dis 2017; 71:315-326. [PMID: 29162334 DOI: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2017.07.018] [Citation(s) in RCA: 51] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/23/2017] [Accepted: 07/20/2017] [Indexed: 12/23/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Differences in tacrolimus dosing across ancestries is partly attributable to polymorphisms in CYP3A5 genes that encode tacrolimus-metabolizing cytochrome P450 3A5 enzymes. The CYP3A5*1 allele, preponderant in African Americans, is associated with rapid metabolism, subtherapeutic concentrations, and higher dose requirements for tacrolimus, all contributing to worse outcomes. Little is known about the relationship between CYP3A5 genotype and the tacrolimus pharmacokinetic area under the curve (AUC) profile in African Americans or whether pharmacogenetic differences exist between conventional twice-daily, rapidly absorbed, immediate-release tacrolimus (IR-Tac) and once-daily extended-release tacrolimus (LifeCycle Pharma Tac [LCPT]) with a delayed absorption profile. STUDY DESIGN Randomized prospective crossover study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS 50 African American maintenance kidney recipients on stable IR-Tac dosing. INTERVENTION Recipients were randomly assigned to continue IR-Tac on days 1 to 7 and then switch to LCPT on day 8 or receive LCPT on days 1 to 7 and then switch to IR-Tac on day 8. The LCPT dose was 85% of the IR-Tac total daily dose. OUTCOMES Tacrolimus 24-hour AUC (AUC0-24), peak and trough concentrations (Cmax and Cmin), time to peak concentration, and bioavailability of LCPT versus IR-Tac, according to CYP3A5 genotype. MEASUREMENTS CYP3A5 genotype, 24-hour tacrolimus pharmacokinetic profiles. RESULTS ∼80% of participants carried the CYP3A5*1 allele (CYP3A5 expressers). There were no significant differences in AUC0-24 or Cmin between CYP3A5 expressers and nonexpressers during administration of either IR-Tac or LCPT. With IR-Tac, tacrolimus Cmax was 33% higher in CYP3A5 expressers compared with nonexpressers (P=0.04): With LCPT, this difference was 11% (P=0.4). LIMITATIONS This was primarily a pharmacogenetic study rather than an efficacy study; the follow-up period was too short to capture clinical outcomes. CONCLUSIONS Achieving therapeutic tacrolimus trough concentrations with IR-Tac in most African Americans results in significantly higher peak concentrations, potentially magnifying the risk for toxicity and adverse outcomes. This pharmacogenetic effect is attenuated by delayed tacrolimus absorption with LCPT. TRIAL REGISTRATION Registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, with study number NCT01962922.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer Trofe-Clark
- Department of Pharmacy Services, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA; Renal Division, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| | | | | | - Michael C Milone
- Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Penn Institute for Immunology, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Mary Ann Lim
- Renal Division, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| | - Robin Neubauer
- Renal Division, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA
| | | | - Roy D Bloom
- Renal Division, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Andrews LM, De Winter BC, Van Gelder T, Hesselink DA. Consideration of the ethnic prevalence of genotypes in the clinical use of tacrolimus. Pharmacogenomics 2016; 17:1737-1740. [PMID: 27790923 DOI: 10.2217/pgs-2016-0136] [Citation(s) in RCA: 22] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Louise M Andrews
- Department of Hospital Pharmacy, Erasmus Medical Center, Room Na-206, P.O. Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Brenda Cm De Winter
- Department of Hospital Pharmacy, Erasmus Medical Center, Room Na-206, P.O. Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Teun Van Gelder
- Department of Hospital Pharmacy, Erasmus Medical Center, Room Na-206, P.O. Box 2040, 3000 CA, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.,Department of Internal Medicine, Nephrology & Transplantation, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Dennis A Hesselink
- Department of Internal Medicine, Nephrology & Transplantation, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Horwedel TA, Brennan DC. Extended-release tacrolimus tablets for preventing organ transplant rejection. Expert Opin Orphan Drugs 2016. [DOI: 10.1080/21678707.2016.1218330] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/21/2022]
|
5
|
|
6
|
Hauch A, John M, Smith A, Dortonne I, Patel U, Kandil E, Killackey M, Paramesh A, Lee B, Zhang R, Buell JF. Generics: Are all immunosuppression agents created equally? Surgery 2015. [PMID: 26206317 DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2015.05.024] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/23/2022]
|
7
|
Molnar AO, Fergusson D, Tsampalieros AK, Bennett A, Fergusson N, Ramsay T, Knoll GA. Generic immunosuppression in solid organ transplantation: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ 2015; 350:h3163. [PMID: 26101226 PMCID: PMC4476317 DOI: 10.1136/bmj.h3163] [Citation(s) in RCA: 55] [Impact Index Per Article: 6.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To compare the clinical efficacy and bioequivalence of generic immunosuppressive drugs in patients with solid organ transplants. DESIGN Systematic review and meta-analysis of all studies comparing generic with innovator immunosuppressive drugs. DATA SOURCES Medline and Embase from 1980 to September 2014. REVIEW METHODS A literature search was performed for all studies comparing a generic to an innovator immunosuppressive drug in solid organ transplantation. Two reviewers independently extracted data and assessed quality of studies. Meta-analyses of prespecified outcomes were performed when deemed appropriate. Outcomes included patient survival, allograft survival, acute rejection, adverse events and bioequivalence. RESULTS 1679 citations were screened, of which 50 studies met eligibility criteria (17 randomized trials, 15 non-randomized interventional studies, and 18 observational studies). Generics were compared with Neoral (cyclosporine) (32 studies), Prograf (tacrolimus) (12 studies), and Cellcept (mycophenolate mofetil) (six studies). Pooled analysis of randomized controlled trials in patients with kidney transplants that reported bioequivalence criteria showed that Neoral (two studies) and Prograf (three studies) were not bioequivalent with generic preparations according to criteria of the European Medicines Agency. The single Cellcept trial also did not meet bioequivalence. Acute rejection was rare but did not differ between groups. For Neoral, the pooled Peto odds ratio was 1.23 (95% confidence interval 0.64 to 2.36) for kidney randomized controlled trials and 0.66 (0.40 to 1.08) for observational studies. For kidney observational studies, the pooled Peto odds ratios were 0.98 (0.37 to 2.60) for Prograf and 0.49 (0.09 to 2.56) for Cellcept. Meta-analyses for non-renal solid organ transplants were not performed because of a lack of data.There were insufficient data reported on patient or graft survival. Pooling of results was limited by inconsistent study methods and reporting of outcomes. Many studies did not report standard criteria used to determine bioequivalence. While rates of acute rejection seemed similar and were relatively rare, few studies were designed to properly compare clinical outcomes. Most studies had short follow-up times and included stable patients without a history of rejection. CONCLUSIONS High quality data showing bioequivalence and clinical efficacy of generic immunosuppressive drugs in patients with transplants are lacking. Given the serious consequences of rejection and allograft failure, well designed studies on bioequivalence and safety of generic immunosuppression in transplant recipients are needed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amber O Molnar
- Division of Nephrology, Kidney Research Centre, Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, 501 Smyth Road, Ottawa, Canada, K1H 8L6 Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, 501 Smyth Road, Ottawa, Canada, K1H 8L6
| | - Dean Fergusson
- Division of Nephrology, Kidney Research Centre, Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, 501 Smyth Road, Ottawa, Canada, K1H 8L6 Division of Nephrology, Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario, 401 Smyth Road, Ottawa, Canada, K1H 8L1
| | - Anne K Tsampalieros
- Division of Nephrology, Kidney Research Centre, Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, 501 Smyth Road, Ottawa, Canada, K1H 8L6 Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, 501 Smyth Road, Ottawa, Canada, K1H 8L6
| | - Alexandria Bennett
- Division of Nephrology, Kidney Research Centre, Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, 501 Smyth Road, Ottawa, Canada, K1H 8L6 Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, 501 Smyth Road, Ottawa, Canada, K1H 8L6
| | - Nicholas Fergusson
- Division of Nephrology, Kidney Research Centre, Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, 501 Smyth Road, Ottawa, Canada, K1H 8L6 Clinical Epidemiology Program, Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, 501 Smyth Road, Ottawa, Canada, K1H 8L6
| | - Timothy Ramsay
- Division of Nephrology, Kidney Research Centre, Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, 501 Smyth Road, Ottawa, Canada, K1H 8L6
| | - Greg A Knoll
- Division of Nephrology, Kidney Research Centre, Department of Medicine, University of Ottawa, 501 Smyth Road, Ottawa, Canada, K1H 8L6
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
|
9
|
Dannhorn E, Cheung M, Rodrigues S, Cooper H, Thorburn D, Patch D, Burroughs A, O'Beirne J. De novouse of generic tacrolimus in liver transplantation - a single center experience with one-yr follow-up. Clin Transplant 2014; 28:1349-57. [DOI: 10.1111/ctr.12455] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 08/18/2014] [Indexed: 12/17/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- E. Dannhorn
- The Royal Free Sheila Sherlock Liver Centre and University Department of Surgery; Royal Free Hospital; London UK
| | - M. Cheung
- The Royal Free Sheila Sherlock Liver Centre and University Department of Surgery; Royal Free Hospital; London UK
| | - S. Rodrigues
- The Royal Free Sheila Sherlock Liver Centre and University Department of Surgery; Royal Free Hospital; London UK
| | - H. Cooper
- Department of Pharmacy; Royal Free Hospital; London UK
| | - D. Thorburn
- The Royal Free Sheila Sherlock Liver Centre and University Department of Surgery; Royal Free Hospital; London UK
| | - D. Patch
- The Royal Free Sheila Sherlock Liver Centre and University Department of Surgery; Royal Free Hospital; London UK
| | - A.K. Burroughs
- The Royal Free Sheila Sherlock Liver Centre and University Department of Surgery; Royal Free Hospital; London UK
| | - J. O'Beirne
- The Royal Free Sheila Sherlock Liver Centre and University Department of Surgery; Royal Free Hospital; London UK
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Sommers CD, Pang ES, Ghasriani H, Berendt RT, Vilker VL, Keire DA, Boyne MT. Analyses of marketplace tacrolimus drug product quality: Bioactivity, NMR and LC–MS. J Pharm Biomed Anal 2013; 85:108-17. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jpba.2013.07.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/23/2013] [Revised: 06/25/2013] [Accepted: 07/01/2013] [Indexed: 02/01/2023]
|
11
|
Bloom RD, Trofe-Clark J, Wiland A, Alloway RR. A randomized, crossover pharmacokinetic study comparing generic tacrolimus vs. the reference formulation in subpopulations of kidney transplant patients. Clin Transplant 2013; 27:E685-93. [DOI: 10.1111/ctr.12256] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/03/2013] [Indexed: 01/07/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- R. D. Bloom
- Renal Division; Perelman School of Medicine; University of Pennsylvania; Philadelphia PA
| | - J. Trofe-Clark
- Renal Division; Perelman School of Medicine; University of Pennsylvania; Philadelphia PA
- Department of Pharmacy; Hospital University of Pennsylvania; Philadelphia PA USA
| | - A. Wiland
- Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation; East Hanover NJ USA
| | - R. R. Alloway
- Section of Transplantation; University of Cincinnati; Cincinnati OH USA
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Alloway RR, Sadaka B, Trofe-Clark J, Wiland A, Bloom RD. A randomized pharmacokinetic study of generic tacrolimus versus reference tacrolimus in kidney transplant recipients. Am J Transplant 2012; 12:2825-31. [PMID: 22759200 PMCID: PMC3472020 DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-6143.2012.04174.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 49] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/25/2023]
Abstract
Pharmacokinetic analyses comparing generic tacrolimus preparations versus the reference drug in kidney transplant patients are lacking. A prospective, multicenter, open-label, randomized, two-period (14 days per period), two-sequence, crossover and steady-state pharmacokinetic study was undertaken to compare twice-daily generic tacrolimus (Sandoz) versus reference tacrolimus (Prograf®) in stable renal transplant patients. AUC(0-12h) and peak concentration (C(max) ) were calculated from 12 h pharmacokinetic profiles at the end of each period (days 14 and 28). Of 71 patients enrolled, 68 provided evaluable pharmacokinetic data. The ratios of geometric means were 1.02 (90% CI 97-108%, p = 0.486) for AUC(0-12h) and 1.09 (90% CI 101-118%, p = 0.057) for C(max) . Mean (SD) C(0) was 7.3(1.8) ng/mL for generic tacrolimus versus 7.0(2.1) ng/mL for reference tacrolimus based on data from days 14 and 28. Correlations between 12 h trough levels and AUC were r = 0.917 for generic tacrolimus and r = 0.887 for reference drug at day 28. These data indicate that generic tacrolimus (Sandoz) has a similar pharmacokinetic profile to the reference drug and is bioequivalent in kidney transplant recipients according to US Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency guidelines.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- R R Alloway
- Division of Nephrology, Section of Transplantation, University of CincinnatiCincinnati, OH,*Corresponding author: Rita R. Alloway,
| | - B Sadaka
- Division of Nephrology, Section of Transplantation, University of CincinnatiCincinnati, OH
| | - J Trofe-Clark
- Renal Division, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, and Department of Pharmacy, Hospital University of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphia, PA
| | - A Wiland
- Novartis Pharmaceuticals CorporationEast Hanover, NJ
| | - R D Bloom
- Renal Division, Perelman School of Medicine, University of PennsylvaniaPhiladelphia, PA
| |
Collapse
|