Juárez-de la Cruz FJ, Barrios-Reyes CY

Language: Spanish
References: 10
Page: 56-60
PDF size: 216.75 Kb.

ABSTRACT

The pharmacokinetics of immunosuppressants are altered in blacks and hispanics compared with whites. Everolimus clearance was 20% higher in blacks. Study design: Open-label, 6-month study in 20 hispanic de novo renal allograft recipients in Mexico. They received everolimus 1.5 mg bid, neoral and steroids. Everolimus and cyclosporine trough concentrations (Cmin) were obtained in weeks one and two and months one to six. Pharmacokinetic profiles were obtained at month one. These data were compared with those from white patients (n = 41) in a study conducted in North and South America using the same dose of everolimus. Results: Hispanic patients weighed less than white patients (65.8 13.9 vs 78.3 ± 19.2 kg, p = 0.01) resulting in a higher weight-adjusted everolimus dose in hispanics (0.024 ± 0.005 vs 0.020 ± 0.005 mg/kg, p = 0.01). Everolimus Cmins in hispanics were lower at week 1 (3.7 ± 2.1 ng/ml) and week 2 (5.1 ± 2.1 ng/mL) compared with month 1 (7.5 ± 2.8 ng/mL); thereafter values remained stable to month six. Everolimus Cmins in white patients were stable throughout the six-month period: 6.8 ± 5.4 ng/mL (week one), 6.7 ± 4.8 ng/mL (week two), 8.2 ± 4.5 ng/mL (month one and thereafter). None of the everolimus parameters were different between ethnic groups. The correlation between everolimus Cmin and AUC was comparable: slope 14.9, r = 0.93, p ‹in hispanics and 11.3, r = 0.81, p ‹ 0.001 in whites. There were no differences in cyclosporine in both groups. Conclusions: With the exception of lower everolimus Cmins in the first two weeks, the disposition of everolimus in mexican patients was comparable to that of white patients from North and South America.

REFERENCES

1. Dantal J, Lehne G, Winkler M et al. Fármaco cinética de estado estable y tolerancia de RAD y sus influencias sobre la ciclosporina en pacientes estables de trasplante renal. Trasplante. 1999; 67: S160.

2. Kirchner GI, Meier-Wiedenbach I, Manns MP. Clinical pharmacokinetics of everolimus. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2004; 43 (2): 83-95.

3. Kovarik JM, Kahan BD, Kaplan B et al. Longitudinal assessment of everolimus in de novo renal transplant recipients over the first post-transplant year: pharmacokinetics, exposure-response relationships, and influence on cyclosporin. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2001; 69: 48-56.

4. McMahon LM, Luo S, Hayes M et al. High-throughput analysis of everolimus (RAD001) and cyclosporine (CsA) in whole blood by liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry using a semi-automated 96-well solid-phase extraction system. Rapid Commun Mass Spectrom. 2000; 14: 1965-1971.

5. Crowe A, Bruelinsauer A, Duerr L et al. Absorption and intestinal metabolism of SDZ-RAD and rapamycin in rats. Drug Metab Dispos. 1999; 27: 627-632.

6. Kovarik JM, Hartmann S, Figueiredo J et al. Effect of rifampin on apparent clearance of everolimus. Ann Pharmacother. 2002; 36: 981-985.

7. Neumayer HH, Paradis K, Korn A et al. Entry-into-human study with the novel immunosuppressant SDZ-RAD in stable renal transplant recipients. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1999; 48: 694-703.

8. Yacyshyn Br, Bowen-Yacyshyn MB, Pilarski LM. Inhibition by rapamycin of P-glycoprotein 170-mediated export from normal lymphocytes. Scand J Immunol. 1996; 43: 449-455.

9. Jacobsen W, Serkova N, Hausen B et al. Comparison of the in vitro metabolism of the macrolide immunosuppressants sirolimus and RAD. Transplant Proc. 2001; 33: 514-515.

10. Kahan BD, Koch SM. Current immunosuppressive regimens: considerations for critical care. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2001; 7: 242-250.