Evidence map›Paper›PMID 16029068›Full record

Trial reportClinical pharmacokinetics2005

A double absorption-phase model adequately describes mycophenolic acid plasma profiles in de novo renal transplant recipients given oral mycophenolate mofetil.

Aurélie Prémaud, Jean Debord, Annick Rousseau, Yannick Le Meur, Olivier Toupance, Yvon Lebranchu, Guillaume Hoizey, Chantal Le Guellec, Pierre Marquet

Abstract readClinical Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Clinical pharmacokinetics, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Aurélie PrémaudDepartment of Pharmacology-Toxicology, University Hospital, 2 Avenue Martin-Luther-King, 87042 Limoges, France.
Jean Debord
Annick Rousseau
Yannick Le Meur
Olivier Toupance
Yvon Lebranchu
Guillaume Hoizey
Chantal Le Guellec
Pierre Marquet

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMycophenolic acid (MPA) shows complex plasma concentration-time profiles, particularly in the immediate (first month) post-transplantation phase for which no relevant pharmacokinetic model has been proposed thus far.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to develop a model to accurately describe the time profile of plasma MPA concentrations after oral administration of mycophenolate mofetil in adult kidney transplant patients, in any post-transplantation period.

methodFull interdose pharmacokinetic profiles were collected in 45 adult renal transplant patients who were orally administered mycophenolate mofetil and ciclosporin; 25 patients were de novo transplant patients for whom individual pharmacokinetics were assessed at three post-transplantation periods (days 3, 7 and 30) and 20 patients were stable transplant patients (>3 months post-transplantation). MPA was determined in plasma by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry. Models combining a single- or double-input (described as single or double gamma distributions) with one- or two-compartments were developed using in-house software and fitted to the individual profiles by nonlinear regression.

resultsVisual inspection of the pharmacokinetic profiles showed highly variable absorption profiles and secondary peaks of various intensity. The pharmacokinetic models including a double gamma distribution best fitted these various profiles in the immediate post-transplantation period (mean bias and precision of -0.92% and 20.19%; -1.5% and 18.02%, on day 7 and day 30, respectively), while in the stable post-grafting phase (beyond 3 months), the single- and double-absorption models performed similarly (mean bias and precision of -3.37% and 17.64%; -3.12% and 18.44%, on day 7 and day 30, respectively).

conclusionThe proposed pharmacokinetic models adequately describe the concentration-time profiles of MPA in renal transplant patients and could be helpful in the development of tools for MPA monitoring.

Indexed as

Kidney TransplantationModels, BiologicalAbsorptionAdministration, OralAdultAgedArea Under CurveChromatography, LiquidFemaleGas Chromatography-Mass SpectrometryHumansImmunosuppressive AgentsMaleMiddle AgedMycophenolic AcidProdrugsImmunosuppressive AgentsMycophenolic AcidProdrugs

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.