Search

There are limited clinical data regarding prolonged-release tacrolimus (PR-T) use in pediatric transplant recipients. This Phase 2 study assessed the efficacy and safety of PR-T in stable pediatric kidney, liver, and heart transplant recipients (aged ≥5 to ≤16 years) over 1 year following conversion from immediate-release tacrolimus (IR-T), on a 1:1 mg total-daily-dose basis. Endpoints included the incidence of acute rejection (AR), a composite endpoint of efficacy failure (death, graft loss, biopsy-confirmed AR, and unknown outcome), and safety. Tacrolimus dose and whole-blood trough levels (target 3.5–15 ng/ml) were also evaluated. Overall, 79 patients (kidney, n = 48; liver, n = 29; heart, n = 2) were assessed. Following conversion, tacrolimus dose and trough levels remained stable; however, 7.6–17.7% of patients across follow-up visits had trough levels below the target range. Two (2.5%) patients had AR, and 3 (3.8%) had efficacy failure. No graft loss or deaths were reported. No new safety signals were identified. Drug-related treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 28 patients (35.4%); most were mild, and all resolved. This study suggests that IR-T to PR-T conversion is effective and well tolerated over 1 year in pediatric transplant recipients and highlights the importance of therapeutic drug monitoring to maintain target tacrolimus trough levels.

This study was a Phase II, open-label, multicenter, single-arm, cross-over study comparing the pharmacokinetics (PK) of tacrolimus in stable pediatric kidney, liver, or heart allograft recipients converted from immediate-release tacrolimus (IR-T) to prolonged-release tacrolimus (PR-T). In Days −30 to −1 of screening period, patients received their IR-T-based regimen; during Days 1-7, patients received study IR-T (same dose as screening). On Day 7, the first 24-hours PK profile was taken; patients were then converted to PR-T (1 mg:1 mg), with a second 24-hours PK profile taken on Day 14. The primary end-point was tacrolimus area under the blood concentration–time curve over 24 hours (AUC24); secondary end-points were maximum concentration Cmaxand concentration at 24 hours C24. The predefined similarity interval for confidence intervals (CIs) of least squares mean (LSM) ratios was 80%-125%. The PK analysis set comprised 74 pediatric transplant recipients (kidney, n = 45; liver, n = 28; heart, n = 1). PR-T:IR-T LSM ratio (90% CI) was similar overall for AUC24, max, and C24, and for kidney and liver recipients for AUC24 (LSM ratio, kidney 91.8%; liver 104.1%) and C24 (kidney 90.5%; liver 89.9%). Linear relationship was similar between AUC24 and C24, and between PR-T and IR-T (rho 0.89 and 0.84, respectively), suggesting that stable pediatric transplant recipients can be converted from IR-T to PR-T at the same total daily dose, using the same therapeutic drug monitoring method.

Background: With the same dose of tacrolimus, lower systemic exposure on the first day of dosing has been reported for prolonged-release tacrolimus compared with immediate-release tacrolimus, prompting investigation of differing initial doses. Methods: This substudy of a double-blind, randomized, phase III trial in de novo liver transplant recipients compared the pharmacokinetics of once-daily prolonged-release tacrolimus (initial dose: 0.2 mg/kg/day) versus twice-daily immediate-release tacrolimus (initial dose: 0.1 mg/kg/day) during the first 2 weeks post-transplant. Results: Pharmacokinetic data were analyzed from patients receiving prolonged-release tacrolimus (n=13) and immediate-release tacrolimus (n=12). Mean systemic exposure (AUC0-24) was higher with prolonged-release versus immediate-release tacrolimus. Dose-normalized AUC0-24 (normalized to 0.1 mg/kg/day) showed generally lower exposure with prolonged-release tacrolimus versus immediate-release tacrolimus. There was good correlation between AUC0-24 and concentration at 24 hours after the morning dose (r=.96 and r=.86, respectively), and the slope of the line of best fit was similar for both formulations. Conclusions: Doubling the initial starting dose of prolonged-release tacrolimus compared with immediate-release tacrolimus overcompensated for lower exposure on Day 1. A 50% higher starting dose of prolonged-release tacrolimus than immediate-release tacrolimus may be required for similar systemic exposure. However, doses of both formulations can be optimized using the same trough-level monitoring system. (ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT00189826).

Tacrolimus, a cornerstone immunosuppressant, is widely available as a twice-daily formulation (Tacrolimus BID). A once-daily prolonged-release formulation (Tacrolimus QD) has been developed that may improve adherence and impart long-lasting graft protection. This study compared the pharmacokinetics (PK) of tacrolimus in de novo kidney transplant patients treated with Tacrolimus QD or Tacrolimus BID. A 6-week, open-label, randomized comparative study was conducted in centers in Europe and Australia. Eligible patients received Tacrolimus QD or Tacrolimus BID. PK profiles were obtained following the first tacrolimus dose (day 1), and twice under steady-state conditions. As secondary objectives, efficacy and safety parameters were also evaluated. Sixty-six patients completed all PK profiles (34 Tacrolimus QD, 32 Tacrolimus BID). Mean AUC(0-24) of tacrolimus on day 1 was approximately 30% lower for Tacrolimus QD than Tacrolimus BID (232 and 361 ng.h/mL, respectively), but was comparable by day 4. There was a good correlation and a similar relationship between AUC(0-24) and C-min for both formulations. Efficacy and safety data were also comparable over the 6-week period. Tacrolimus QD can be administered once daily in the morning on the basis of the same systemic exposure and therapeutic drug monitoring concept as Tacrolimus BID.

Tacrolimus, a cornerstone immunosuppressant, is widely available as a twice-daily formulation (Tacrolimus BID). A once-daily prolonged-release formulation (Tacrolimus QD) has been developed that may improve adherence and impart long-lasting graft protection. This study compared the pharmacokinetics (PK) of tacrolimus in de novo kidney transplant patients treated with Tacrolimus QD or Tacrolimus BID. A 6-week, open-label, randomized comparative study was conducted in centers in Europe and Australia. Eligible patients received Tacrolimus QD or Tacrolimus BID. PK profiles were obtained following the first tacrolimus dose (day 1), and twice under steady-state conditions. As secondary objectives, efficacy and safety parameters were also evaluated. Sixty-six patients completed all PK profiles (34 Tacrolimus QD, 32 Tacrolimus BID). Mean AUC(0-24) of tacrolimus on day 1 was approximately 30% lower for Tacrolimus QD than Tacrolimus BID (232 and 361 ng.h/mL, respectively), but was comparable by day 4. There was a good correlation and a similar relationship between AUC(0-24) and C(min) for both formulations. Efficacy and safety data were also comparable over the 6-week period. Tacrolimus QD can be administered once daily in the morning on the basis of the same systemic exposure and therapeutic drug monitoring concept as Tacrolimus BID., Journal Article, Randomized Controlled Trial, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't, FLWIN, info:eu-repo/semantics/published

Tacrolimus, a cornerstone immunosuppressant, is widely available as a twice-daily formulation (Tacrolimus BID). A once-daily prolonged-release formulation (Tacrolimus QD) has been developed that may improve adherence and impart long-lasting graft protection. This study compared the pharmacokinetics (PK) of tacrolimus in de novo kidney transplant patients treated with Tacrolimus QD or Tacrolimus BID. A 6-week, open-label, randomized comparative study was conducted in centers in Europe and Australia. Eligible patients received Tacrolimus QD or Tacrolimus BID. PK profiles were obtained following the first tacrolimus dose (day 1), and twice under steady-state conditions. As secondary objectives, efficacy and safety parameters were also evaluated. Sixty-six patients completed all PK profiles (34 Tacrolimus QD, 32 Tacrolimus BID). Mean AUC(0-24) of tacrolimus on day 1 was approximately 30% lower for Tacrolimus QD than Tacrolimus BID (232 and 361 ng.h/mL, respectively), but was comparable by day 4. There was a good correlation and a similar relationship between AUC(0-24) and C(min) for both formulations. Efficacy and safety data were also comparable over the 6-week period. Tacrolimus QD can be administered once daily in the morning on the basis of the same systemic exposure and therapeutic drug monitoring concept as Tacrolimus BID., Journal Article, Randomized Controlled Trial, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't, FLWIN, info:eu-repo/semantics/published

Tacrolimus, a cornerstone immunosuppressant, is widely available as a twice-daily formulation (Tacrolimus BID). A once-daily prolonged-release formulation (Tacrolimus QD) has been developed that may improve adherence and impart long-lasting graft protection. This study compared the pharmacokinetics (PK) of tacrolimus in de novo kidney transplant patients treated with Tacrolimus QD or Tacrolimus BID. A 6-week, open-label, randomized comparative study was conducted in centers in Europe and Australia. Eligible patients received Tacrolimus QD or Tacrolimus BID. PK profiles were obtained following the first tacrolimus dose (day 1), and twice under steady-state conditions. As secondary objectives, efficacy and safety parameters were also evaluated. Sixty-six patients completed all PK profiles (34 Tacrolimus QD, 32 Tacrolimus BID). Mean AUC(0-24) of tacrolimus on day 1 was approximately 30% lower for Tacrolimus QD than Tacrolimus BID (232 and 361 ng.h/mL, respectively), but was comparable by day 4. There was a good correlation and a similar relationship between AUC(0-24) and C(min) for both formulations. Efficacy and safety data were also comparable over the 6-week period. Tacrolimus QD can be administered once daily in the morning on the basis of the same systemic exposure and therapeutic drug monitoring concept as Tacrolimus BID.

The pharmacokinetics of intravenous and oral tacrolimus was assessed in paediatric liver transplant patients at two centers in Europe. Sixteen patients, age 0.7 to 13 years, participated in the study; 12 patients were evaluable for intravenous pharmacokinetics, and 16 for oral. Intravenous tacrolimus was given as a continuous 24 h infusion (mean 0.037+/-0.013 mg/kg/day), and oral tacrolimus was given in 2 doses per day (mean 0.152+/-0.015 mg/kg). Whole blood samples for the intravenous pharmacokinetic profile were taken before initiation of the first infusion, 4, 8, 12 and 24 h post-infusion, and every 24 h thereafter until intravenous administration was discontinued. During the 12 h wash-out period between intravenous and oral administration, samples were taken every 3 h. Samples for the oral pharmacokinetic profile were taken immediately before the first oral dose and 0.5, 0.75, 1, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12 h post-administration. Non-compartmental procedures were used to characterise the pharmacokinetic parameters. Mean estimates for clearance and terminal half-life were 2.3+/-1.2 ml/min/kg and 11.5+/-3.8 h, respectively, following intravenous tacrolimus. The mean bioavailability of oral tacrolimus was 25+/-20%. A strong correlation was observed between AUC and trough whole blood levels of tacrolimus (r=0.90). The clearance was approximately 2-fold higher than that previously observed in adults; this could explain the higher dosage requirements in children.