4.6 Article

Effect of CYP3A4*22 and CYP3A4*1B but not CYP3A5*3 polymorphisms on tacrolimus pharmacokinetic model in Tunisian kidney transplant

期刊

TOXICOLOGY AND APPLIED PHARMACOLOGY
卷 396, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.taap.2020.115000

关键词

Pharmacokinetic Model; CYP3A4; CYP3A5; Tacrolimus; Tunisian Population

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The pharmacokinetics of Tacrolimus is characterized by a high interindividual variability that is mainly explained by pharmacogenetics biomarkers. The aims were to develop a population pharmacokinetic model (Pk pop) taking into account post-transplant phases (PTP), CYP3A4*1B, CYP3A4*22 and CYP3A5*3 polymorphisms on Tac pharmacokinetics in adult kidney transplant patients. The Pk pop study was performed using a nonparametric approach (Pmetrics*). The influence of covariates (age, weight, sex, hematocrit and CYP3A4*1B, CYP3A4*22 and CYP3A5*3 polymorphisms) was tested on the model's Pk parameters. The performance of the final model was assessed using an external dataset. A one-compartment model (Vd: volume of distribution, CL: Tac Clearance) was found to correctly describe the evolution of the C0/D regardless of the PTP. The influence of the covariates has shown that only the CYP3A4*1B and CYP3A4*22 polymorphisms were significantly associated only with CL, regardless of PTP (p = .04 and 0.02, respectively). Only the CYP3A4*22 polymorphism influenced CL during early PTP (P1: the first three months, p = .02). During the late PTP (P2: > 3 months), only CYP3A4 polymorphisms were found to affect CL (p = .03 for both). The external validation of the final model, including both CYP3A4 polymorphisms, showed an acceptable predictive performance during P1 and P2. We developed and validated a tac Pk pop model including both CYP3A4*22 and CYP3A4*1B polymorphisms, taking into account PTP. This model was very useful in the Tac dose proposal in this population on any PT day but could not be used in other organ transplants due to pharmacokinetic differences.

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

4.6
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