Mycophenolate Mofetil Dose Adjustment in Pediatric Kidney Transplant Recipients
- PMID: 36823705
- DOI: 10.1097/FTD.0000000000001087
Mycophenolate Mofetil Dose Adjustment in Pediatric Kidney Transplant Recipients
Abstract
Background: The Immunosuppressant Bayesian Dose Adjustment web site aids clinicians and pharmacologists involved in the care of transplant recipients; it proposes dose adjustments based on the estimated area under the concentration-time curve (AUCs). Three concentrations (T 20 min , T 1 h , and T 3 h ) are sufficient to estimate mycophenolic acid (MPA) AUC 0-12 h in pediatric kidney transplant recipients. This study investigates mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) doses and MPA AUC values in pediatric kidney transplant recipients, and target exposure attainment when the proposed doses were followed, through a large-scale analysis of the data set collated since the inception of the Immunosuppressant Bayesian Dose Adjustment web site.
Methods: In this study, 4051 MMF dose adjustment requests, corresponding to 1051 patients aged 0-18 years, were retrospectively analyzed. AUC calculations were performed in the back office of the Immunosuppressant Bayesian Dose Adjustment using published Bayesian and population pharmacokinetic models.
Results: The first AUC request was posted >12 months posttransplantation for 41% of patients. Overall, only 50% had the first MPA AUC 0-12 h within the recommended 30-60 mg.h/L range. When the proposed dose was not followed, the proportion of patients with an AUC in the therapeutic range for MMF with cyclosporine or tacrolimus at the subsequent request was lower (40% and 45%, respectively) than when it was followed (58% and 60%, respectively): P = 0.08 and 0.006, respectively. Furthermore, 3 months posttransplantation, the dispersion of AUC values was often lower at the second visit when the proposed doses were followed, namely, P = 0.03, 0.003, and 0.07 in the 4 months-1 year, and beyond 1 year with <6-month or >6-month periods between both visits, respectively.
Conclusions: Owing to extreme interindividual variability in MPA exposure, MMF dose adjustment is necessary; it is efficient at reducing such variability when based on MPA AUC.
Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflicts of Interest and Source of funding: None declared.
References
-
- Woillard JB, Saint-Marcoux F, Monchaud C, et al . Mycophenolic mofetil optimized pharmacokinetic modelling, and exposure-effect associations in adult heart transplant recipients. Pharmacol Res. 2015;99:308–315.
-
- Bergan S, Brunet M, Hesselink DA, et al. Personalized therapy for mycophenolate: consensus report by the international association of therapeutic drug monitoring and clinical toxicology. Ther Drug Monit. 2021;43:150–200.
-
- Tett SE, Saint-Marcoux F, Staatz CE, et al. Mycophenolate, clinical pharmacokinetics, formulations, and methods for assessing drug exposure. Transplant Rev. 2011;25:47–57.
-
- van Gelder T, Hilbrands LB, Vanrenterghem Y, et al. A randomized double-blind, multicenter plasma concentration controlled study of the safety and efficacy of oral mycophenolate mofetil for the prevention of acute rejection after kidney transplantation. Transplantation. 1999;68:261–266.
-
- Knight SR, Morris PJ. Does the evidence support the use of mycophenolate mofetil therapeutic drug monitoring in clinical practice? A systematic review. Transplantation. 2008;85:1675–1685.
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
