Trial reportClinical pharmacokinetics2002
Population pharmacokinetic model to predict steady-state exposure to once-daily cyclosporin microemulsion in renal transplant recipients.
Trial report in Clinical pharmacokinetics, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Impact of Spironolactone Co-administration on Cyclosporin Initial Dosage Optimization for Pediatric Refractory Nephrotic Syndrome.Current pharmaceutical design · 2024Article
- Population pharmacokinetics of cyclosporine in transplant recipients.The AAPS journal · 2013Review
- Optimal designs for composed models in pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic experiments.Journal of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics · 2012Article
- Population pharmacokinetic study of cyclosporine in Chinese renal transplant recipients.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2011Article
- Patient characteristics influencing ciclosporin pharmacokinetics and accurate Bayesian estimation of ciclosporin exposure in heart, lung and kidney transplant patients.Clinical pharmacokinetics · 2006Article
- Bayesian estimation of cyclosporin exposure for routine therapeutic drug monitoring in kidney transplant patients.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 2005Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe microemulsion formulation of cyclosporin (CsA-ME) has a less variable absorption profile than the standard formulation (CsA-S), but only limited information is available about once-daily administration of CsA-ME.
objectiveTo develop a population pharmacokinetic model for once-daily CsA-ME that enables the prediction of individual steady-state area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) on the basis of blood concentration measurements and patient covariates. PATIENTS AND
methodsThe steady-state pharmacokinetics of once-daily cyclosporin were studied in 60 stable renal transplant recipients before and after conversion from CsA-S to CsA-ME. For each formulation, 7 blood samples were collected from 50 patients (group A) at sparse timepoints over 2 weeks, and 10 blood samples were collected from 10 patients (group B) at fixed timepoints over 24 hours. A 2-compartment population model assuming time-lagged first-order oral absorption was fitted to the data from group A, using nonlinear mixed effects modelling (NONMEM). The data from group B were used to evaluate the predictive performance of the model.
resultsMean [+/- SD; coefficient of variation (%CV)] CsA-S doses of 245mg (+/- 92) resulted in cyclosporin blood concentrations of 214 microg/L (+/- 70) after 12 hours and 108 microg/L (+/- 23) after 24 hours; the mean estimated AUC to 24 hours was 7658 microg x h/L (30%). With mean CsA-ME doses of 206mg (+/- 59), cyclosporin blood concentrations were 212 microg/L (+/- 33) and 132 microg/L (25%) after 12 and 24 hours, respectively, and the mean estimated AUC(24) was 9357 microg x h/L (23%). A strong correlation between 12-hour concentrations and AUC(24) was observed for CsA-ME (r = 0.95, p < 0.001), but not for CsA-S (r = 0.59, nonsignificant); the correlation between 24-hour trough concentrations and AUC(24) was weaker for both formulations (r = 0.64, p < 0.05 and r = 0.37, nonsignificant, respectively). On the basis of the population model derived from group A, the single best timepoint to predict AUC(24) from blood cyclosporin concentration was at 8 hours [AUC(24) (microg x h/L) = 19.6 x cyclosporin concentration at 8 hours (microg/L) + 3035], resulting in a prediction error of 8.3 +/- 6.6% when applied to the measured AUC(24) of group B. Adverse events were observed after conversion in 18 patients; these events generally resolved spontaneously or after dosage reduction, but twice-daily administration was required in some patients.
conclusionsSwitching from once-daily CsA-S to CsA-ME results in more consistent and predictable cyclosporin pharmacokinetics. Adjustment of dosage or regimen may be required in some patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.