4.2 Article

Limited sampling strategy for predicting busulfan exposure in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation recipients

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACY
Volume 39, Issue 4, Pages 662-668

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11096-017-0481-z

Keywords

Busulfan; Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation; Pharmacokinetics; Sampling strategy

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation [81503137]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Optimization of the area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) of busulfan, an essential component of conditioning regimens, improves the outcomes in patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Traditional sampling methods for calculating AUC require multiple sampling. Objective To establish a limited sampling strategy for predicting the AUC(0-12) of intravenous busulfan for Chinese adult patients prior to HSCT. Methods The pharmacokinetics of twice-daily intravenous busulfan was studied in forty-five Chinese adult patients. Limited sampling models were established by the multiple linear regression analysis. The prediction error (PE) and the absolute prediction error (APE) were calculated to evaluate predictive accuracy. The agreement between the predicted and actual AUC(0-12) was investigated by the Bland-Altman analysis. The accuracy and robustness of the models was validated by the bootstrap analysis. Results The AUC(0-12) values of the 1st and 7th doses of busulfan were 1491 +/- 403.7 and 1908 +/- 518.5 mu mol L-1 min, respectively. The 2-sample model suggested that the predicted AUC(0-12) of twice-daily intravenous busulfan could be calculated using the following equation: AUC(0-12) = 40.017 + 0.955 x C-3 + 1.088 x C-6 with r(2) = 0.919. The mean PE and APE of the model were 0.52 +/- 7.67 and 6.32 +/- 4.27%, respectively. Conclusion The 2-sample model is an effective and reliable approach to predict the AUC(0-12) of twice-daily intravenous busulfan in Chinese adult patients.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available