4.1 Article

A Limited Sampling Schedule to Estimate Mycophenolic Acid Area Under the Concentration-Time Curve in Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation Recipients

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY
卷 52, 期 11, 页码 1654-1664

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/0091270011429567

关键词

Mycophenolic acid; population pharmacokinetics; limited sampling schedule; hematopoietic cell transplantation

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health: National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute [HL91744, HL36444]
  2. National Cancer Institute [CA15704, 18029, 78902]
  3. National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering [EB001975]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) is a key component of post-grafting immunosuppression in hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) recipients. The plasma area under the curve (AUC) of its active metabolite, mycophenolic acid (MPA), is associated with MMF efficacy and toxicity. This study developed a population pharmacokinetic model of MPA in HCT recipients and created limited sampling schedules (LSSs) to enable individualized pharmacotherapy. A retrospective evaluation of MPA concentration-time data following a 2-hour MMF intravenous (IV) infusion was conducted in 77 HCT recipients. The final model consisted of 1 and 2 compartments for MMF and MPA pharmacokinetics, respectively. The mean estimated values (coefficient of variation, %) for total systemic clearance, distributional clearance, and central and peripheral compartment volumes of MPA were 36.9 L/h (34.5%), 15.3 L/h (80.4%), 11.9 L (71.7%), and 182 L (127%), respectively. No covariates significantly explained variability among individuals. Optimal LSSs were derived using a simulation approach based on the scaled mean squared error. A 5-sample schedule of 2, 2.5, 3, 5, and 6 hours from the start of the infusion precisely estimated MPA AUC(0-12) h for Q12-hour IV MMF. A comparable schedule (2, 2.5, 3, 4, and 6 hours) similarly estimated MPA AUC(0-8 h) for Q8-hour dosing.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据