ArticleTherapeutics and clinical risk management2011
Quantifying the impact of nonadherence patterns on exposure to oral immunosuppressants.
Article in Therapeutics and clinical risk management, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Recurrent thymoma-associated PRCA with persistent agranulocytosis: a case report and therapeutic considerations.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Leveraging mathematical modeling to analyze nonadherence for hydroxyurea therapy in sickle cell disease.CPT: pharmacometrics & systems pharmacology · 2023Article
- Effect of Missed Doses on the Therapeutic Effect of Methotrexate for Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Pharmacokinetic Modeling Study.Open access rheumatology : research and reviews · 2021Article
- Patterns of non-adherence to oral antiretroviral medication: frequencies of consecutively missed doses.Patient preference and adherence · 2019Article
- Posttransplant Medical Adherence: What Have We Learned and Can We Do Better?Current transplantation reports · 2018Article
- Acceptable medication non-adherence: A crowdsourcing study among French physicians for commonly prescribed medications.PloS one · 2018Article
- The Adherence Rate Threshold is Drug Specific.Drugs in R&D · 2017Article
- Relationship Between Adherence Rate Threshold and Drug 'Forgiveness'.Clinical pharmacokinetics · 2017Article
- The effect of medication nonadherence on progression-free survival among patients with renal cell carcinoma.Cancer management and research · 2017Article
- Patient survey to identify reasons for non-adherence and elicitation of quality of life concepts associated with immunosuppressant therapy in kidney transplant recipients.Patient preference and adherence · 2016Article
- Defining medication adherence in individual patients.Patient preference and adherence · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesNonadherence to oral immunosuppressive drugs in renal transplant patients remains a major challenge. The objective of this study was to develop an adherence-exposure model that 1) quantifies the impact of nonadherence patterns on cyclosporine levels and 2) identifies nonadherence patterns that are associated with unfavorable transplantation outcomes. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, AND MEASUREMENTS: This model quantified variability in drug exposure, expressed as the coefficient of variation (CV%), for time-averaged and trough cyclosporine levels (C(avg) and C(min), respectively), and percentage of days spent below the therapeutic C(min) target. Simulated patterns of nonadherence closely matched those observed in clinical practice for four nonadherence clusters and an "Others" category.
resultsPatients in simulated nonadherence clusters 1-3 spent a mean (standard deviation) 5.8% (4.9), 9.0% (5.0), and 6.5% (3.4) of days below the C(min) target, compared with 76.8% (6.5) for cluster 4 and 38.3% (6.4) for the "Others" category. Mean (standard deviation) CV% values for C(min) were 24.1 (7.9), 35.4 (11.7), and 34.1 (10.6) for clusters 1-3, compared with 136.4 (23.6) for cluster 4 and 64.8 (10.3) for the "Others" category. Findings for C(avg) were similar.
conclusionBased on nonadherence patterns and known relationships between CV% for C(min) and C(avg), and transplantation outcomes, patients in cluster 4 and the "Others" category are expected to be at high risk of allograft rejection. The proposed drug adherence-exposure model is useful to identify high-risk patients who can be targeted for interventions aimed at enhancing drug adherence to optimize clinical long-term outcomes.
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.