Search

Busulfan is an alkylating agent used as part of conditioning chemotherapy regimens prior to allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (allo-HCT). Pharmacokinetic (PK)-guided test-dose strategies have been shown to improve the number of patients achieving busulfan exposure goals and improve clinical outcomes. However, current practices require extensive PK sampling. In this study, PK data were retrospectively collected from busulfan drug monitoring records from adult allo-HCT recipients who received once-daily intravenous busulfan at the University of North Carolina Medical Center (UNCMC). A population pharmacokinetic (popPK) model was developed to identify sources of interindividual variability and evaluate alternative PK sampling strategies. A 2-compartment model, with covariate effects of actual body weight and sex, best described the data. The typical value of clearance for an 83 kg male was estimated to be 11.21 L/h. Fifty-nine percent of allo-HCT recipients were estimated to have met the UNCMC institutional myeloablative conditioning (MAC) exposure goal based on model post hoc estimates of clearance using all PK samples obtained following MAC dosing. Fifty-seven percent of patients were estimated to have met this goal based on post hoc estimates using a single PK sample. Our results indicate once-daily, intravenous busulfan PK in adult allo-HCT recipients receiving MAC dosing can be reasonably described by a popPK model, and the use of a sparse PK sampling strategy may be feasible for determining target exposure attainment following MAC dosing. Use of a popPK model and sparse PK sampling strategy to carry out busulfan test-dose procedures could reduce health care costs and inconvenience to patients., (© 2023, The American College of Clinical Pharmacology.)

Addition of plerixafor (P) to granulocyte colony stimulating factor (G-CSF) during peripheral blood mobilization of hematopoietic stem cells (HSC) increases the number of patients meeting collection goals prior to autologous stem cell transplant (aSCT). However, use of P is not universal among transplant centers due to cost. This study aims to compare clinical and financial impacts of using an algorithm-based P mobilization strategy versus use in all patients. This was a single center, retrospective analysis of adult patients with myeloma or amyloidosis receiving aSCT who received apheresis of their HSC between 3/1/2017 and 3/1/2019. Patients prior to 3/1/2018 were classified as receiving P "per algorithm" and those after this date were classified as "up-front" P. For the per-algorithm group, P was given for a pre-apheresis CD34+ cell count of <20 cells/μL on mobilization day 5 and patients returned on day 6 for apheresis. Of the 129 patients included, 55 received P per-algorithm and 74 received up-front P. There was a reduction in median number of apheresis days (1.5 vs 1 day, p < 0.001) and an increase in median number of CD34+ cells collected (6.6 vs 8.5 × 10 6 cells/kg, p < 0.001) with up-front P. Up-front P increased drug cost but reduced apheresis costs, which resulted in a net savings of $121 per patient in total mobilization costs. These findings suggest that use of up-front P for mobilization significantly reduces apheresis days and increases HSC collection yield without increasing overall cost per patient., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Tacrolimus is a calcineurin inhibitor used to prevent acute graft versus host disease in adult patients receiving allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT). Previous population pharmacokinetic (PK) models have been developed in solid organ transplant, yet none exists for patients receiving HCT. The primary objectives of this study were to (1) use a previously published population PK model in adult patients who underwent kidney transplant and apply it to allogeneic HCT; (2) evaluate model-predicted tacrolimus steady-state trough concentrations and simulations in patients receiving HCT; and (3) evaluate covariates that affect tacrolimus PK in allogeneic HCT. A total of 252 adult patients receiving allogeneic HCT were included in the study. They received oral tacrolimus twice daily (0.03 mg/kg) starting 3 days prior to transplant. Data for these analyses included baseline clinical and demographic data, genotype data for single nucleotide polymorphisms in CYP3A4/5 and ABCB1, and the first tacrolimus steady-state trough concentration. A dosing simulation strategy based on observed trough concentrations (rather than model-based predictions) resulted in 12% more patients successfully achieving tacrolimus trough concentrations within the institutional target range (5-10 ng/ml). Stepwise covariate analyses identified HLA match and conditioning regimen (myeloablative vs. reduced intensity) as significant covariates. Ultimately, a previously published tacrolimus population PK model in kidney transplant provided a platform to help establish a model-based dose adjustment strategy in patients receiving allogenic HCT, and identified HCT-specific covariates to be considered for future prospective studies. Study Highlights WHAT IS THE CURRENT KNOWLEDGE ON THE TOPIC? Tacrolimus is a cornerstone immunosuppressant used in patients who undergo organ transplantations. However, because of its narrow therapeutic index and wide interpatient pharmacokinetic (PK) variability, optimizing its dose is crucial to maximize efficacy and minimize tacrolimus-induced toxicities. Prior to this study, no tacrolimus population PK models have been developed for adult patients receiving allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT). Therefore, research effort was warranted to develop a population PK model that begins to propose more precision tacrolimus dosing and begins to address both a clinical and scientific gap in this patient population. WHAT QUESTION DID THIS STUDY ADDRESS? The study addressed whether there is value in utilizing the observed tacrolimus steady-state trough concentrations from patients receiving allogeneic HCT within the context of a pre-existing population PK model developed for kidney transplant. The study also addressed whether there are clinically relevant covariates specific to adult patients receiving allogeneic HCT. WHAT DOES THIS STUDY ADD TO OUR KNOWLEDGE? Inclusion of a single steady-state tacrolimus trough concentration is beneficial to model predictions. The dosing simulation strategy based on observed tacrolimus concentration, rather than the model-predicted concentration, resulted in more patients achieving the target range at first steady-state collection. Future studies should evaluate HLA matching and myeloablative conditioning versus reduced intensity conditioning regimens as covariates. These data and model-informed dose adjustments should be included in future prospective studies. This research could also serve as a template as to how to assess the utility of prior information for other disease settings. HOW MIGHT THIS CHANGE CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY OR TRANSLATIONAL SCIENCE? The M2 model fitting method and D2 dosing simulation method can be applied to other clinical pharmacology studies where only a single steady-state trough concentration is available per patient in the presence of a previously published population PK model., (© 2021 The Authors. Clinical and Translational Science published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of the American Society for Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics.)

Plerixafor is a hematopoietic stem cell mobilizing agent used in combination with granulocyte-colony stimulating factor to improve collection for autologous stem cell transplantation. Despite a recommendation for administration 11 h prior to apheresis per package labeling, logistical challenges lead many institutions to administer plerixafor at an extended interval. The purpose of this study was to determine if plerixafor effectively and efficiently mobilizes CD34+ cells when given at an extended interval prior to apheresis. This was a retrospective evaluation of adult patients who received plerixafor based on an algorithm reserving daily plerixafor only for patients with a pre-apheresis CD34+ count of < 20 cells/µL (pre-apheresis plerixafor) or with a low CD34+ yield after the first apheresis session (rescue plerixafor). The primary outcome was achievement of a disease-specific collection goal of ≥ 6 ×10 6 CD34+ cells/kg for multiple myeloma and ≥ 4 ×10 6 CD34+ cells/kg for lymphoma. The mean interval between plerixafor administration and apheresis was 17 h in this study. Despite this extended interval, 64% of patients met their disease-specific collection goal. A minimum collection goal of ≥ 2 ×10 6 CD34+ cells/kg was achieved by 95% of patients. Mobilization remained efficient with a median of two days to complete collection. Based on this data, plerixafor effectively and efficiently mobilizes CD34+ cells when given at an extended interval prior to apheresis.

A paucity of data currently exists regarding drug-drug interaction (DDI) with tacrolimus and isavuconazole coadministration. Current literature provides conflicting recommendations on whether an empiric tacrolimus dose reduction is necessary when coadministered with isavuconazole. A 47-year-old African American female with acute lymphoblastic leukemia underwent an allogenic stem cell transplant (alloSCT) and was subsequently placed on routine posttransplant therapy including tacrolimus for immunosuppression and posaconazole for antifungal prophylaxis. Tacrolimus was empirically dose reduced due to the expected DDI with posaconazole based on current recommendations. Due to a persistently prolonged QTc interval and need for mold coverage, antifungal prophylaxis was ultimately changed to isavuconazole at standard recommended dosing. Tacrolimus was empirically dose reduced by 40% based on limited available literature at the time; however, tacrolimus trough concentrations subsequently declined, requiring an increase in tacrolimus dose to maintain therapeutic trough concentrations. Adequate isavuconazole absorption was documented through pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic data by measuring an isavuconazole trough concentration and directly observing isavuconazole's shortening effect on the QTc interval, respectively. Our experience in an alloSCT patient suggests that an empiric tacrolimus dose reduction is not required when isavuconazole is initiated, but close tacrolimus therapeutic drug monitoring should rather be performed to guide tacrolimus dosing.

Tacrolimus exhibits high inter-patient pharmacokinetics (PK) variability, as well as a narrow therapeutic index, and therefore requires therapeutic drug monitoring. Germline mutations in cytochrome P450 isoforms 4 and 5 genes ( CYP3A4/5 ) and the ATP-binding cassette B1 gene ( ABCB1 ) may contribute to interindividual tacrolimus PK variability, which may impact clinical outcomes among allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) patients. In this study, 252 adult patients who received tacrolimus for acute graft versus host disease (aGVHD) prophylaxis after allogeneic HSCT were genotyped to evaluate if germline genetic variants associated with tacrolimus PK and pharmacodynamic (PD) variability. Significant associations were detected between germline variants in CYP3A4/5 and ABCB1 and PK endpoints (e.g., median steady-state tacrolimus concentrations and time to goal tacrolimus concentration). However, significant associations were not observed between CYP3A4/5 or ABCB1 germline variants and PD endpoints (e.g., aGVHD and treatment-emergent nephrotoxicity). Decreased age and CYP3A5*1/*1 genotype were independently associated with subtherapeutic tacrolimus trough concentrations while CYP3A5*1*3 or CYP3A5*3/*3 genotypes, myeloablative allogeneic HSCT conditioning regimen (MAC) and increased weight were independently associated with supratherapeutic tacrolimus trough concentrations. Future lines of prospective research inquiry are warranted to use both germline genetic and clinical data to develop precision dosing tools that will optimize both tacrolimus dosing and clinical outcomes among adult HSCT patients.

Targeted busulfan dosing helps limit chemotherapy-related toxicity and optimize disease outcomes in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT). The objective of this study was to evaluate busulfan exposure from a pharmacokinetic (PK)-guided dosing strategy using a test dose. This retrospective evaluation included adult patients who underwent HCT at our institution with busulfan-based myeloablative (>9 mg/kg) conditioning between January 2014 and October 2015. A weight-based test dose of 0.8 mg/kg was used with PK assessments to predict area under the curve (AUC pred ) achieved with weight-based dosing, with a target AUC of 4800 µM*minute (AUC target ). PK from the test dose was then used to calculate a PK-guided first myeloablative busulfan dose. PK assessments were also done after the first dose to assess if the goal area under the curve (AUC) had been achieved (AUC first ). A PK-guided first dose resulted in achievement of target AUC with target ranges of ±10% in 50% of patients, ±15% in 75%, and ±20% in 94%. This was an improved rate of target achievement compared with the 33%, 44%, and 63% of patients who achieved the desired AUC for these respective target ranges when using weight-based dosing (P = .12, .004, and <.001, respectively). The PK-guided strategy also decreased the variability of AUC from 3.6-fold in AUC pred from the weight-based test doses (2700.8 to 9631 µM*minute; SD, 1211.6 µM*minute) to 1.8-fold in AUC first from the PK-guided first doses (3672.1 to 6609.8 µM*minute; SD, 574.7 µM*minute). This reflects a 2-fold improvement in AUC variability with a PK-guided dosing strategy. This is also improved from the 3-fold variability in AUC reported in other studies. Weight and body surface area were significantly associated with the likelihood of AUC first being within the ±10% target range (P = .04 for both associations). There was no significant association between AUC first and death, relapse, or a composite of the two. These results demonstrate a significant improvement in target AUC attainment and less interpatient variability with PK-guided dosing using a test dose strategy compared with weight-based dosing., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.)