4.6 Article

Antifungal Drug Plasma Exposures: A Possible Contribution of Vitamin D-Related Gene Variants

期刊

PHARMACEUTICALS
卷 15, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ph15050630

关键词

genetics; azoles; pharmacokinetics; VDR; CYP27B1; CYP24A1; GC

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study investigates the influence of vitamin D pathway-related gene polymorphisms on antifungal drug concentrations, efficacy, and toxicity. The results suggest that certain gene polymorphisms are associated with drug concentrations and response.
Vitamin D (VD) seems to influence drug clearance and outcome. Antifungal drugs (AFU) are the most used azoles in clinical practice. In the literature, no data are available concerning VD's impact on AFU therapy. The aim of this study was to analyze if VD pathway-related polymorphisms may influence voriconazole (VRC), itraconazole (ITC), and posaconazole (PSC) drug concentrations in order to identify patients with the highest probability of response and toxicity. Allelic discrimination was performed through real-time PCR, whereas drug concentrations were through liquid chromatography. A total of 636 samples of AFU-treated patients were included in the analysis. Concerning VRC, concentrations higher than the 1000 ng/mL efficacy cut-off value were predicted by Caucasian ethnicity, CYP24A1 3999, and CYP27B1 + 2838 polymorphisms, whereas levels higher than the 5000 ng/mL toxicity value by Caucasian, female sex, e.v. administration, and GC 1296. Considering PSC, concentrations higher than the 700 ng/mL efficacy cut-off value were predicted by VDR Cdx2, CYP27B1 - 1260, and GC 1296. Finally, for ITC, VDR BsmI was the only predictor of drug exposure higher than the 500 ng/mL efficacy cut-off value, whereas female sex, CYP27B1 - 1260, and VDR TaqI remained in the final regression model related to concentrations higher than the 1000 ng/mL toxicity-associated cut-off value. This is the first study reporting the influence of VD pathway-related gene SNPs on AFU exposures, efficacy, and toxicity.

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