Cargando…
Pharmacokinetics of Enteric-Coated Mycophenolate Sodium in Lupus Nephritis (POEMSLUN)
Mycophenolate mofetil or enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium (EC-MPS) and steroids are used for induction and maintenance therapy in severe lupus nephritis. Blood concentrations of mycophenolic acid (MPA), the active metabolite of these drugs, vary among patients with lupus nephritis. The objective...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Therapeutic Drug Monitoring
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6867677/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31219949 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/FTD.0000000000000658 |
Sumario: | Mycophenolate mofetil or enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium (EC-MPS) and steroids are used for induction and maintenance therapy in severe lupus nephritis. Blood concentrations of mycophenolic acid (MPA), the active metabolite of these drugs, vary among patients with lupus nephritis. The objective of this study was to examine whether concentration-controlled (CC) dosing (through therapeutic drug monitoring) of EC-MPS results in a higher proportion of participants achieving target exposure of MPA compared with fixed-dosing (FD). An additional aim of the study was to evaluate the influence of CC dosing on clinical outcomes. METHODS: Nineteen participants were randomly assigned either to the FD or CC group. All the participants were eligible to have free and total measurements of MPA over a period of 8–12 hours on 3 different occasions. Area under the concentration–time curve between 0 and 12 hours (AUC(0-12)) was calculated using noncompartmental methods. Dose of EC-MPS was titrated according to AUC(0-12) in the CC group. RESULTS: Thirty-two AUC(0-12) measurements were obtained from 9 FD and 9 CC participants. Large inter-patient variability was observed in both groups but was more pronounced in the FD group. There were no significant differences between FD and CC participants in any pharmacokinetic parameters across the study visits, except for total C(0) (FD 2.0 ± 0.3 mg/L versus CC 1.1 ± 0.3; P = 0.01) and dose-normalized C(0) (FD 2.9 ± 0.2 mg/L/g versus CC 2.1 ± 0.7 mg/L/g; P = 0.04) at the second visit and total AUC(0-12) (FD 66.6 ± 6.0 mg·h/L versus CC 35.2 ± 11.4 mg·h/L; P = 0.03) at the third visit. At the first study visit, 33.3% of the FD and 11.1% of the CC participants achieved the target area under the concentration–time curve (P = 0.58). From the second visit, none of the FD participants, compared with all the CC participants, achieved target AUC(0-12) (P = 0.01). More CC participants achieved remission compared with FD participants (absolute difference of −22.2, 95% confidence interval [Image: see text]0.19 to 0.55; P = 0.62). The mean free MPA AUC(0-12) was significantly lower in those who had complete remission. CONCLUSIONS: CC participants reached target AUC(0-12) quicker. Larger studies are required to test clinical efficacy. |
---|