Evidence map›Paper›PMID 9160170›Full record

ReviewClinical pharmacokinetics1997

The use of other drugs to allow a lower dosage of cyclosporin to be used. Therapeutic and pharmacoeconomic considerations.

T E Jones

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical pharmacokinetics, 1997. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 63 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Observational
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Clinically relevant drug-drug interactions in oncology.British journal of clinical pharmacology · 1998
    Review
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

1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.

T E JonesPharmacy Department, Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Woodville South, Australia.
Queen Elizabeth Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Since its discovery in 1970, and introduction into clinical practice in 1978, cyclosporin has become the most important immunosuppressive drug used to prevent organ transplant rejection. This has been achieved by virtue of the improved graft survival rates and adverse effect profiles in patients when compared with that of the older agents. Cyclosporin is substantially more expensive (both to provide and to monitor) however, and the magnitude of these costs may preclude its use, particularly where the transplant recipient is required to pay. Cyclosporin has a complex pharmacokinetic profile with poor absorption, extensive metabolism to more than 30 metabolites and considerable inter- and intrapatient variability. Many transplant centres routinely use drugs ("cyclosporin-sparing agents') to allow a reduction in the dosage of cyclosporin while maintaining therapeutic blood cyclosporin concentrations. The use of a second drug to affect the pharmacokinetic profile of a primary drug is not new, but the use of cyclosporin-sparing agents is a departure from previous practices in that this coprescription is primarily for economic reasons. The decision to use these agents (and the choice of agent) is based upon economic and other factors including the extent of the cyclosporin-sparing effect, the potential for additional therapeutic benefit and/or adverse effects. The coprescription of cyclosporin-sparing agents is ethically more acceptable where the transplant recipient is the economic beneficiary but where the savings accrue to a third party it is more difficult. Benefits to the community at large must be balanced against the risk of adverse effects to the patient. The use of cyclosporin-sparing agents may reduce compliance and hence, jeopardise transplant and/or recipient outcomes. The transplant recipient must be informed about the reasons for their use and advised to consult an experienced physician or pharmacist before altering the established drug regimen.

Indexed as

Aryl Hydrocarbon HydroxylasesOrgan TransplantationAustraliaCyclosporineCytochrome P-450 CYP3ACytochrome P-450 Enzyme InhibitorsDiltiazemDrug SynergismEnzyme InhibitorsGraft RejectionHumansImmunosuppressive AgentsKetoconazoleNew ZealandOxidoreductases, N-DemethylatingAryl Hydrocarbon HydroxylasesCyclosporineCytochrome P-450 CYP3ACytochrome P-450 Enzyme InhibitorsDiltiazemEnzyme InhibitorsImmunosuppressive AgentsKetoconazoleOxidoreductases, N-Demethylating

Identifiers

PMID9160170
OpenAlexW1973562193

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.