Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Pediatric Nephrology 7/2005

01-07-2005 | Original Article

Cyclosporin A absorption profiles in children with nephrotic syndrome

Authors: Kandai Nozu, Kazumoto Iijima, Toshiyuki Sakaeda, Katsuhiko Okumura, Koichi Nakanishi, Norishige Yoshikawa, Masataka Honda, Masahiro Ikeda, Masafumi Matsuo

Published in: Pediatric Nephrology | Issue 7/2005

Login to get access

Abstract

A single blood concentration measurement of Neoral 2 h after administration (C2) is a new concept in therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). In most adult patients, the concentration of cyclosporin A (CyA) peaks within 2 h after Neoral administration. Therefore, monitoring the area under the concentration-time curve over the first 4 h post-dose (AUC0–4) is considered to be the most reliable strategy for Neoral TDM. In addition, C2 is considered to be the most accurate predictor of AUC0–4, with which C2 correlates best. Thus, in adult patients, C2 monitoring is recommended as the best single-point TDM method for Neoral. However, in paediatric patients, the effectiveness of C2 monitoring is still unclear. We examined the trough concentration (C0), C1, C2, C3, and C4 of CyA in 60 patients (1 to 20 years old, mean age 7.42±0.67 years) who had nephrotic syndrome treated with Neoral. The peak concentration of C0-C4 was C1 or C2 in 38 patients (early peak group) and C3 or C4 in 22 patients (late peak group). C2 in the late peak group was significantly lower than that in the early peak group (422±50.1 vs. 665 ±53.8 ng/ml, P =0.0008), although the administered doses of Neoral and C0 were similar between these groups. Therefore, TDM by C2 using the same standard as in the early peak group might result in an overdose of CyA in the late peak group. As the concentration peaked at 3 h or more after Neoral administration in the late peak group, AUC0–4 does not necessarily reflect the Neoral absorption profile. As more than 33% of the paediatric patients were in the late peak group, TDM by AUC0–4 or C2 should be used carefully in paediatric patients treated with Neoral.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Mahalati K (2000) Absorption profiling: a novel method for monitoring Neoral in kidney transplantation that reduces rejection and nephrotoxicity. Transplantation 69 [Suppl]: S114 Mahalati K (2000) Absorption profiling: a novel method for monitoring Neoral in kidney transplantation that reduces rejection and nephrotoxicity. Transplantation 69 [Suppl]: S114
2.
go back to reference Mahalati K, Belitsky P, West K, Kiberd B, Fraser A, Sketris I, Macdonald AS, McAlister V, Lawen J (2001) Approaching the therapeutic window for cyclosporine in kidney transplantation: a prospective study. J Am Soc Nephrol 12: 828–833 Mahalati K, Belitsky P, West K, Kiberd B, Fraser A, Sketris I, Macdonald AS, McAlister V, Lawen J (2001) Approaching the therapeutic window for cyclosporine in kidney transplantation: a prospective study. J Am Soc Nephrol 12: 828–833
3.
go back to reference Levy GA (2000) Improved clinical outcomes for liver transplant recipients using cyclosporine blood level monitoring based on two-hour post-dose levels. Transplantation 69 [Suppl]: S387 Levy GA (2000) Improved clinical outcomes for liver transplant recipients using cyclosporine blood level monitoring based on two-hour post-dose levels. Transplantation 69 [Suppl]: S387
4.
go back to reference Belitsky P, Levy GA, Johnson A (2000) Neoral absorption profiling: an evolution in effectiveness. Transplant Proc 32 [Suppl 3A]: 45s–52s Belitsky P, Levy GA, Johnson A (2000) Neoral absorption profiling: an evolution in effectiveness. Transplant Proc 32 [Suppl 3A]: 45s–52s
5.
go back to reference Barama A, Perner F, Beauregard-Zollinger L (2000) Absorption profiling of cyclosporine therapy for de novo kidney transplantation: a prospective randomized study comparing sparse sampling to trough monitoring. Transplantation 69: s162 Barama A, Perner F, Beauregard-Zollinger L (2000) Absorption profiling of cyclosporine therapy for de novo kidney transplantation: a prospective randomized study comparing sparse sampling to trough monitoring. Transplantation 69: s162
6.
go back to reference Cole E, Midtvedt K, Johnston A, Pattison J, Catherine OG (2002) Recommendations for implementation of Neoral C2 monitoring in clinical practice. Transplantation 73 [Suppl]: S19–S22 Cole E, Midtvedt K, Johnston A, Pattison J, Catherine OG (2002) Recommendations for implementation of Neoral C2 monitoring in clinical practice. Transplantation 73 [Suppl]: S19–S22
7.
go back to reference Levy GA, Thervet E, Lake J, Uchida K, on behalf of the CONCERT group (2002) Patient management by Neoral C2 monitoring: an international consensus statement. Transplantation 73 [Suppl]: S12–S18 Levy GA, Thervet E, Lake J, Uchida K, on behalf of the CONCERT group (2002) Patient management by Neoral C2 monitoring: an international consensus statement. Transplantation 73 [Suppl]: S12–S18
8.
go back to reference Harmon WE, Sullivan EK (1993) Cyclosporine dosing and its relationship to outcome in pediatric renal transplantation. Kidney Int 44 [Suppl 43]: s50–s55 Harmon WE, Sullivan EK (1993) Cyclosporine dosing and its relationship to outcome in pediatric renal transplantation. Kidney Int 44 [Suppl 43]: s50–s55
9.
go back to reference Cooney GF, Dunn SP, Kaiser B, Kulinsky AV, Mochon M, Heifets M (1994) Oral cyclosporine pharmacokinetics in pediatric renal and liver transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 26: 2779–2880 Cooney GF, Dunn SP, Kaiser B, Kulinsky AV, Mochon M, Heifets M (1994) Oral cyclosporine pharmacokinetics in pediatric renal and liver transplant recipients. Transplant Proc 26: 2779–2880
10.
go back to reference Whitington PF, Emond JC, Whitington SH, Broelsch CE, Baker AL (1990) Small-bowel length and the dose of cyclosporine in children after liver transplantation. N Engl J Med 322: 733–738 Whitington PF, Emond JC, Whitington SH, Broelsch CE, Baker AL (1990) Small-bowel length and the dose of cyclosporine in children after liver transplantation. N Engl J Med 322: 733–738
11.
go back to reference Dunn S (2000) Neoral use in the pediatric transplant recipient. Transplant Proc 32 [Suppl 3A]: 20S–26S Dunn S (2000) Neoral use in the pediatric transplant recipient. Transplant Proc 32 [Suppl 3A]: 20S–26S
12.
go back to reference Weber LT, Armstrong VW, Shipkova M, Feneberg R, Wiesel M, Mehls O, Zimmerhackl LB, Oellerich M, Tonshoff B, Members of the German Study Group on Pediatric Renal Transplantion (2004) Cyclosporin A absorption profiles in pediatric renal transplant recipients predict the risk of acute rejection. Ther Drug Monit 26: 415–424 Weber LT, Armstrong VW, Shipkova M, Feneberg R, Wiesel M, Mehls O, Zimmerhackl LB, Oellerich M, Tonshoff B, Members of the German Study Group on Pediatric Renal Transplantion (2004) Cyclosporin A absorption profiles in pediatric renal transplant recipients predict the risk of acute rejection. Ther Drug Monit 26: 415–424
13.
go back to reference Abbott Co. Ltd (2003) TDX Cyclosporine Monoclonal Whole Blood Abbott Co. Ltd (2003) TDX Cyclosporine Monoclonal Whole Blood
14.
go back to reference Linholm A (1991) Factors Influencing the pharmacokinetics of cyclosporine in man, review. Ther Drug Monit 13: 465–477 Linholm A (1991) Factors Influencing the pharmacokinetics of cyclosporine in man, review. Ther Drug Monit 13: 465–477
15.
go back to reference Shaefer MS, Rossi SJ, McGuire TR, Schaaf LJ, Collier DS, Stratta RJ (1995) Evaluation of the pharmacokinetic interaction between cimetidine or famotidine and cyclosporine in healthy men (abstract). Ann Pharmacother 29: 1088–1091 Shaefer MS, Rossi SJ, McGuire TR, Schaaf LJ, Collier DS, Stratta RJ (1995) Evaluation of the pharmacokinetic interaction between cimetidine or famotidine and cyclosporine in healthy men (abstract). Ann Pharmacother 29: 1088–1091
16.
go back to reference Evans WE, McLeod HL (2003) Pharmacogenomics—drug disposition, drug targets, and side effects. N Engl J Med 348: 538–549 Evans WE, McLeod HL (2003) Pharmacogenomics—drug disposition, drug targets, and side effects. N Engl J Med 348: 538–549
17.
go back to reference Einecke G, Mai I, Fritsche L, Slowinski T, Waiser J, Neumayer HH, Budde K (2004) The value of C2 monitoring in stable renal allograft recipients on maintenance immunosuppression. Nephrol Dial Transplant 19: 215–222 Einecke G, Mai I, Fritsche L, Slowinski T, Waiser J, Neumayer HH, Budde K (2004) The value of C2 monitoring in stable renal allograft recipients on maintenance immunosuppression. Nephrol Dial Transplant 19: 215–222
18.
go back to reference Mueller EA, Kovarik JM, van Bree JB, Tetzloff W, Grevel J, Kutz K (1994) Improved dose linearity of cyclosporine pharmacokinetics from a micro emulsion formulation. Pharm Res 11: 301–304 Mueller EA, Kovarik JM, van Bree JB, Tetzloff W, Grevel J, Kutz K (1994) Improved dose linearity of cyclosporine pharmacokinetics from a micro emulsion formulation. Pharm Res 11: 301–304
19.
go back to reference Takahashi K, Shiraga H, Akioka Y (2001) Diet affects the pharmacokinetics of microemulsion formula of cyclosporine A in children with nephrotic syndrome (abstract). J Am Soc Nephrol 12: 251A Takahashi K, Shiraga H, Akioka Y (2001) Diet affects the pharmacokinetics of microemulsion formula of cyclosporine A in children with nephrotic syndrome (abstract). J Am Soc Nephrol 12: 251A
Metadata
Title
Cyclosporin A absorption profiles in children with nephrotic syndrome
Authors
Kandai Nozu
Kazumoto Iijima
Toshiyuki Sakaeda
Katsuhiko Okumura
Koichi Nakanishi
Norishige Yoshikawa
Masataka Honda
Masahiro Ikeda
Masafumi Matsuo
Publication date
01-07-2005
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Pediatric Nephrology / Issue 7/2005
Print ISSN: 0931-041X
Electronic ISSN: 1432-198X
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00467-005-1844-6

Other articles of this Issue 7/2005

Pediatric Nephrology 7/2005 Go to the issue

Announcements

July 2005

Editorial Commentary

“Why do they do that?”