Clinical Importance of Plasma Drug Concentration of Oral Molecular Targeted Drugs for Renal Cell Carcinoma.

PURPOSE: Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is widely used in clinical practice to maximize drug efficacy and minimize toxicities. Currently, it is also practiced in the use of oral molecular targeted drugs. The objective of this study was to assess the clinical importance of measuring the systemic concentration of oral molecular targeted drugs used to treat renal cell carcinoma (RCC). METHODS: The systemic concentrations of the oral molecular targeted drugs sorafenib, sunitinib, axitinib, pazopanib, and everolimus used for RCC were useful for therapeutic interventions, and clinical outcomes were evaluated retrospectively. RESULTS: The interventional use of systemic drug concentration was confirmed in 26 of 87, and their categories are presented. The systemic concentration of sunitinib was useful in dose reduction and/or discontinuation (n = 10), dose escalation (n = 3), and adherence monitoring (n = 2). Nine of the 10 patients whose dose was reduced showed reduced adverse event. Two patients who were intervened in adherence monitor showed improved adherence. For axitinib, dose reduction and/or discontinuation (n = 1) and dose escalation (n = 6) were confirmed. For pazopanib, dose reduction and/or discontinuation (n = 1) and drug interaction detection (n = 1) were confirmed, both of them were confirmed to have reduced adverse events. For everolimus, dose reduction and/or discontinuation (n = 1) and drug interaction detection (n = 1) were confirmed, a patient with reduced dose recovered from adverse events. Interventions for sorafenib were not identified. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated that systemic concentrations of oral molecular targeted drugs for RCC were considered to be clinically useful for dose adjustment, monitoring of treatment adherence, and the detection of drug interactions. Moreover, this information could be successfully used to guide individualized therapy to maximize the antitumor effects of these drugs.

Simultaneous quantification of cyclosporin, tacrolimus, sirolimus and everolimus in whole blood by UHPLC-MS/MS for therapeutic drug monitoring.

The aim of this study was to develop and validate a UHPLC-MS/MS assay to quantify cyclosporin (CYC), tacrolimus (TAC), sirolimus (SIR) and everolimus (EVE) in human whole blood for therapeutic drug monitoring. Analytes were extracted from 50 µL human whole blood by protein precipitation. The separation of the drugs was performed on an Acquity UPLC BEH C18 column. Analytes were eluted with a mobile phase consisting of 2 mM ammonium acetate with 0.1% formic acid (v/v) in deionised water and 2 mM ammonium acetate with 0.1% formic acid (v/v) in methanol at a flow rate of 300 µL/min in gradient elution. The method performance was evaluated by analysing patient blood samples and/or external quality control samples [proficiency testing (PT) scheme]. The method was linear from 23.75 to 1094.0, 1.3 to 42.4, 1.3 to 47.0 and 1.2-41.6 µg/mL for CYC, TAC, SIR and EVE, respectively. The within- and between-assay reproducibility results were ˂ 11%. Results from PT and patient sample quantification were comparable to those obtained previously by an in-house validated method using protein precipitation and liquid-liquid extraction. This method showed good analytical performance for quantifying CYC, TAC, SIR and EVE in whole blood over their respective calibration ranges.

Effect of genetic polymorphisms in CYP3A4, CYP3A5, and m-TOR on everolimus blood exposure and clinical outcomes in cancer patients.

Genetic variations in CYP3A4, CYP3A5, and m-TOR could contribute to interpatient variability regarding m-TOR inhibitors pharmacokinetics or cellular effects. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the influence of selected candidate variations in these genes on everolimus pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and toxicity in cancer patients. Thirty-four patients receiving everolimus for breast (n = 22) or renal (n = 10) cancers, or neuroendocrine tumors of pancreatic origin (n = 2) were included in the study. Six variants in genes related to everolimus pharmacokinetics (CYP3A4*22 and CYP3A5*3) or pharmacodynamics (m-TOR rs2295079, rs2295080, rs2024627 and rs1057079) were genotyped. Associations with trough concentrations (C0), dose reductions, or treatment interruptions due to toxicity and progression-free survival were investigated using generalized estimating equations and Cox models. CYP3A5 nonexpressers had significantly higher C0 as compared with expressers (ßGG vs AG = + 6.32 ± 2.22 ng/mL, p = 0.004). m-TOR rs2024627 was significantly associated with an increased risk of cancer progression studied alone or as part of an haplotype (T vs C: HR = 2.60, 95% CI [1.16-5.80], p = 0.020; CTCG vs other haplotypes HR = 2.29, 95% CI [1.06-4.95], p = 0.035, respectively). This study showed that CYP3A5 expression impacts everolimus pharmacokinetics in cancer patients and identified a genetic variation in m-TOR associated with the risk of cancer progression.

Long-Term Performance of Laboratory-Developed Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry Tests and a Food and Drug Administration-Approved Immunoassay for the Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Everolimus.

BACKGROUND: Laboratory-developed tests (LDTs) are analytical tests developed and validated "in-house" for clinical diagnosis. Regulatory agencies, such as the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA), encourage using regulatory-approved assays rather than LDTs. In the ongoing Zortracker everolimus study, samples were provided monthly to participating clinical laboratories that conduct therapeutic drug monitoring of everolimus. This allowed for the long-term (6-year) comparison of the performance of liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) assays, which are LDTs, to the FDA-approved everolimus Quantitative Microsphere System (QMS). METHODS: Each laboratory received the same 3 blinded samples. LC-MS/MS and QMS assays were compared using Passing Bablok regression analysis. Data were analyzed in 12-month periods to detect trends over time. RESULTS: The slopes of the Passing Bablok regression curves remained unchanged in 2013 and 2014 (reference LC-MS/MS; test QMS: slope = 0.934 and 1.008). However, by 2016, the slope increased significantly to between 1.111 and 1.320, then dropped to 0.980 in 2017 and 0.912 in 2018, suggestive of changes in QMS bias compared with LC-MS/MS over longer periods. Outliers did not affect these results. The interlaboratory variability of LC-MS/MS and QMS remained unchanged from 2013 to 2015, with coefficients of variation of 15.3%, 18.4%, and 17.2% for LC-MS/MS, and 13.0%, 13.1%, and 15.3% for QMS, respectively, per year. At the end of the observation period, the average coefficients of variation in LC-MS/MS laboratories dropped to 14.3%, 12.6%, and 14.2%, whereas the variability in QMS laboratories was 19.5%, 13.3%, and 19.6% in 2016, 2017, and 2018, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Initially, QMS everolimus concentrations in patient samples were comparable with those detected in LC-MS/MS laboratories. However, concentration bias of the QMS assay significantly changed within 6 years, emphasizing the need for long-term, independent performance tracking of therapeutic drug monitoring assays, including FDA-approved assays.

Salting Out-Assisted Liquid-Liquid Extraction for Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry Measurement of Tacrolimus, Sirolimus, Everolimus, and Cyclosporine a in Whole Blood.

BACKGROUND: Therapeutic drug monitoring of the immunosuppressants tacrolimus, sirolimus, everolimus, and cyclosporine A is effectively performed by analyzing whole-blood samples using liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry. Samples are usually prepared using simple protein precipitation (PPT) with methanol and zinc sulfate (ZnSO4). Significant sample dilution is necessary to obtain clean extracts but may increase the limit of quantification of the method. Salting out-assisted liquid-liquid extraction (SALLE) was explored as a novel sample preparation method for measuring these drugs in blood. METHOD: SALLE, which simply consists of LLE with a water-miscible solvent where phase separation is achieved by adding salt, was used to analyze treated blood samples. RESULTS: SALLE allowed direct injection of a 5-µL extract from the upper solvent phase into a reversed phase LC column, which would not be feasible using standard LLE. Compared with PPT, SALLE provided better extraction efficiencies and more ion enhancement, resulting in limit of quantification of 0.4, 1.4, 0.06, and 0.4 ng/mL for tacrolimus, sirolimus, everolimus, and cyclosporine A, respectively. Full-method validation was performed, including a comparison of results with those of another laboratory. A ≤10% bias was observed for tacrolimus and cyclosporine A, whereas further investigation of that for sirolimus (-12%) and everolimus (-18%) revealed that it was caused by the different calibrators used. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first report of the use of SALLE for the measurement of tacrolimus, sirolimus, everolimus, and cyclosporine A in whole blood. The advantages of SALLE over PPT and conventional LLE would make it an attractive sample preparation method for clinical laboratories.

Using ISO/TS 20914:2019 to calculate the measurement uncertainty of immunosuppressive drugs in a clinical laboratory.

According to the standard ISO 15189 clinical routine laboratories shall estimate measurement uncertainty (MU) of patient results of their provided measurands. Up to now there was no accepted description on how to perform. Recently, the ISO technical standard ISO/TS 20914 was published giving a practical guide for uncertainty estimation. The immunosuppressive drugs Everolimus, Ciclosporin, Sirolimus and Tacrolimus have narrow therapeutic windows. Hence, their MU should be considered for deducing clinical decisions. Here, a pathway is presented in detail on how to estimate MU measuring immunosuppressants using a widespread CE certified assay via LC-MS/MS technology. Namely, the expanded measurement uncertainties are from 13% to 27% depending on analyte and concentration. The calculation based on n > 2000 measurements each of four control levels within one year. Lower uncertainties were observed if the material was native pooled blood (13% to 17%, n > 300 measurements, one year).

Clinical application of a dried blood spot assay for sirolimus and everolimus in transplant patients.

Background Monitoring of immunosuppressive drugs such as everolimus and sirolimus is important in allograft rejection prevention in transplant patients. Dried blood spots (DBS) sampling gives patients the opportunity to sample a drop of blood from a fingerprick at home, which can be sent to the laboratory by mail. Methods A total of 39 sirolimus and 44 everolimus paired fingerprick DBS and whole blood (WB) samples were obtained from 60 adult transplant patients for method comparison using Passing-Bablok regression. Bias was assessed using Bland-Altman. Two validation limits were pre-defined: limits of analytical acceptance were set at >67% of all paired samples within 20% of the mean of both samples and limits of clinical relevance were set in a multidisciplinary team at >80% of all paired samples within 15% of the mean of both samples. Results For both sirolimus and everolimus, Passing-Bablok regression showed no differences between WB and DBS with slopes of 0.86 (95% CI slope, 0.72-1.02) and 0.96 (95% CI 0.84-1.06), respectively. Only everolimus showed a significant constant bias of 4%. For both sirolimus and everolimus, limits of analytical acceptance were met (76.9% and 81.8%, respectively), but limits or clinical relevance were not met (77.3% and 61.5%, respectively). Conclusions Because pre-defined limits of clinical relevance were not met, this DBS sampling method for sirolimus and everolimus cannot replace WB sampling in our center at this time. However, if the clinical setting is compatible with less strict limits for clinical relevance, this DBS method is suitable for clinical application.

Posaconazole Tablets in Real-Life Lung Transplantation: Impact on Exposure, Drug-Drug Interactions, and Drug Management in Lung Transplant Patients, Including Those with Cystic Fibrosis.

Appropriate exposure to posaconazole (PSZ) has been limited until the recent approval of the delayed-release oral tablet formulation. Our goal was to determine the exposure obtained by using the standard dose of 300 mg once a day in lung transplant (LT) patients, including patients with cystic fibrosis (CF). PSZ trough concentrations (C0) were determined using a liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry assay. Indicative thresholds of interest were <0.7 mg/liter for prophylaxis and 1 to 3 mg/liter for cure. The tacrolimus (TRL) and everolimus (ERL) C0 measured during PSZ exposure were also collected. The interaction with proton-pump inhibitors (PPI) was evaluated. We recorded the results for 21 CF patients with LT (CFLT patients), 11 non-CF patients with LT (NCFLT patients), and 27 nontransplant (NT) patients in pneumology departments. The weights of the NCFLT, CFLT, and NT patients were 59.2 ± 8.4, 48.8 ± 8.4, and 63.7 ± 16.6 kg, respectively (P = 0.001* [asterisk means that statistical test is significant]), and the PSZ C0 exposures for these patients were 1.9 ± 1.5, 1.1 ± 0.8, and 2.4 ± 1.8 mg/liter, respectively (P < 0.00001*). More than 60% of the concentrations were in the therapeutic range. In CFLT patients, the administration of one 300-mg PSZ tablet quickly achieved an exposure similar to that achieved with the PSZ oral suspension formulation (OSF) administered 3 or 4 times a day for several months. The TRL C0/dose ratio (C0/D) was 7.4 ± 4.4 mg/liter with PSZ tablets, whereas it was 4.6 ± 0.8 mg/liter with the PSZ oral solution (P = 0.034*). The ERL C0/D was similar with both formulations. PPI had no impact on the PSZ concentration (1.49 ± 1.07 mg/liter without PPI versus 1.33 ± 1.17 mg/liter with PPI; P = 0.4134*). Despite the high levels of exposure, PSZ remained well tolerated (one case of diarrhea and one case of fatigue were reported). PSZ tablet administration allows satisfactory exposure, even in CFLT patients, with a dosage lower than that of the PSZ OSF. This once-a-day formulation was not impacted by PPI, which are extensively used in CF patients.

Multicenter Evaluation of a New Electrochemiluminescence Immunoassay for Everolimus Concentrations in Whole Blood.

BACKGROUND: The precise monitoring of everolimus, an immunosuppressant drug, is vital for transplant recipients due to its narrow therapeutic range. This study evaluated the analytical performance of a new electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (ECLIA) for everolimus concentrations in whole blood. METHODS: Accuracy, imprecision, and sensitivity studies for the Roche Elecsys everolimus ECLIA were performed at 5 European laboratories. The ECLIA was compared with liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) methods, as well as the Quantitative Microsphere System everolimus assay. RESULTS: Everolimus ECLIA accuracies were within the range 100% ± 9%. Coefficients of variation (CVs) across the target range were ≤4.8% for repeatability and ≤8.4% for intermediate imprecision, whereas multisite reproducibility at lower (2.71 mcg/L) and higher everolimus concentrations (3.0-30.0 mcg/L) resulted in CVs of ≤13.7% and ≤12.4%, respectively. The CV at the assay's lower limit of quantification without considering bias was excellent, estimated as ≤9.3% at 0.5 mcg/L. The weighted Deming regression analysis, used for comparison of the results obtained by everolimus ECLIA and by LC-MS/MS methods, yielded a slope of 1.21 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.15-1.26], intercept of 0.478 mcg/L (95% CI: 0.241-0.716), and a Pearson correlation coefficient (r) of 0.91. A single-site comparison between the ECLIA and the Quantitative Microsphere System assay revealed a slope of 1.05 (95% CI: 0.917-1.17), intercept of 1.03 mcg/L (95% CI: 0.351-1.70), and r of 0.91. CONCLUSIONS: Based on these results, the Roche Elecsys everolimus ECLIA can be considered suitable for routine therapeutic drug monitoring. A positive bias was observed with respect to LC-MS/MS methods, suggesting that it may be necessary to rebaseline individual patients when switching from LC-MS/MS to the ECLIA; however, this must also be considered for any change of method for everolimus measurement.

Adequacy of Initial Everolimus Dose, With and Without Calcineurin Inhibitors, in Kidney Transplant Recipients.

BACKGROUND: This study investigates the adequacy of initial everolimus (EVR) dose, with and without calcineurin inhibitors (CNI), in kidney transplant recipients. METHODS: This retrospective cohort analysis involved data from 305 kidney transplant recipients participating in 3 randomized trials receiving reduced dose cyclosporin A (CsA) combined with EVR 0.75 mg BID (CSA/EVR0.75, N = 32) or 1.5 mg BID (CSA/EVR1.5, N = 31), reduced dose tacrolimus (TAC) combined with EVR 1.5 mg BID (TAC0.05/EVR1.5, N = 83), standard dose TAC combined with EVR 1.5 mg BID (TAC0.1/EVR1.5, N = 93), and EVR 1.5 mg BID (EVR1.5, N = 66) with TAC introduction after day 5. The adequacy of the initial EVR dose, based on EVR whole blood trough between 3 and 8 ng/mL, was compared using first EVR blood concentrations obtained at day 3 after transplantation. RESULTS: Recipient age, proportion of patients with diabetes mellitus, and proportion of grafts from living donors were different among the groups. Dose-corrected EVR concentrations were higher in patients receiving CsA than in those receiving TAC or no calcineurin inhibitors (6.7 ± 5.9 versus 5.4 ± 2.2 versus 2.4 ± 0.8 versus 2.5 ± 0.9 versus 2.2 ± 0.7, P = 0.000). No differences were observed comparing dose adjusted EVR concentrations combined with TAC or alone (P = 0.073). The proportion of patients with EVR concentration below <3 ng/mL was lower when EVR was combined with CsA (25 versus 3 versus 43 versus 33 versus 50%, P = 0.000). Later introduction of TAC did not influence EVR concentrations. There were no differences in mean CsA concentrations comparing patients receiving EVR 0.75 or 1.5 mg BID (240 ± 143 versus 213 ± 105 ng/mL). On the other hand, mean TAC concentrations were higher according to the initial TAC dose regimen (6.4 ± 3.9 versus 9.8 ± 5.9 ng/mL). CONCLUSIONS: In de novo kidney transplant recipients, the choice of the initial dose of EVR should consider the type of calcineurin inhibitor to reach target EVR concentration within the first week in a higher proportion of patients, maximizing the efficacy/toxicity profile.

Clinical validation study of dried blood spot for determining everolimus concentration in patients with cancer.

PURPOSE: Everolimus treatment is seriously hampered by its toxicity profile. As a relationship between everolimus exposure and effectiveness and toxicity has been established, early and ongoing concentration measurement can be key to individualize the dose and optimize treatment outcomes. Dried blood spot (DBS) facilitates sampling at a patients' home and thereby eases dose individualization. The aim of this study is to determine the agreement and predictive performance of DBS compared to whole blood (WB) to measure everolimus concentrations in cancer patients. METHODS: Paired DBS and WB samples were collected in 22 cancer patients treated with everolimus and analyzed using UPLC-MS/MS. Bland-Altman and Passing-Bablok analysis were used to determine method agreement. Limits of clinical relevance were set at a difference of ± 25%, as this would lead to a different dosing advice. Using DBS concentration and Passing-Bablok regression analysis, WB concentrations were predicted. RESULTS: Samples of 20 patients were suitable for analysis. Bland-Altman analysis showed a mean ratio of everolimus WB to DBS concentrations of 0.90, with 95% of data points within limits of clinical relevance. Passing-Bablok regression of DBS compared to WB revealed no constant bias (intercept 0.02; 95% CI 0.93-1.35) and a small proportional bias (slope 0.89; 95% CI 0.76-0.99). Predicted concentrations showed low bias and imprecision and 90% of samples had an absolute percentage prediction error of < 20%. CONCLUSIONS: DBS is a valid method to determine everolimus concentrations in cancer patients. This can especially be of value for early recognition of over- or underexposure to enable dose adaptations.

Comparison of the everolimus concentrations measured in whole blood with everolimus QMS or sirolimus CMIA.

Few years ago, it was proposed that everolimus blood levels could be determined with the commercially available sirolimus chemiluminescence magnetic microparticle immunoassay (CMIA). More recently, a highly specific microsphere system (QMS) has been approved by FDA for therapeutic drug monitoring in humans. Aim of the present study was to compare the results of everolimus assay performed with everolimus QMS and with sirolimus CMIA. The two methods were compared with Passing-Bablok regression and Bland-Altman plot analysis. The Passing-Bablok regression analysis showed that although the results obtained with the two techniques were significantly correlated, CMIA-measured differed from QMS-measured everolimus concentrations by both a systematic and a proportional error. Specifically, at blood levels lower than 5 ng/mL CMIA were lower than QMS-measured everolimus concentrations. On the opposite, at everolimus blood concentrations higher than 10 ng/mL CMIA-estimated values became progressively higher than QMS-measured everolimus concentrations. The analysis of the Bland Altman plot showed a less than optimal agreement of the two tests (5.59% of the data point outside the ±1.96 SD interval). Moreover, the relationship between the difference between EveroQMS and EveroCMIA and their average was clearly concentration dependent with positive and negative values at concentration values lower and higher than 5 ng/mL respectively. In conclusion, our finding showed that the values of everolimus concentrations measured with sirolimus CMIA differ from those detected with the FDA-approved everolimus QMS further suggesting that sirolimus CMIA should not be used anymore for everolimus therapeutic drug monitoring.

Comparison of electrochemiluminescence immunoassay and latex agglutination turbidimetric immunoassay for evaluation of everolimus blood concentrations in renal transplant patients.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: For analysis of blood concentrations of everolimus, many hospital laboratories use either latex agglutination turbidimetric immunoassay (LTIA) or electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (ECLIA). However, no studies have compared both immunoassay methods under the same conditions. Accordingly, in this study, we compared everolimus blood concentrations obtained by LTIA and ECLIA in renal transplant patients. METHODS: Blood samples (n = 230) from 60 renal transplant patients (19 female and 41 male) were evaluated using both immunoassays. Subsequently, we switched the assay for detection of everolimus blood concentrations from LTIA to ECLIA as a clinical application. Three quality control (QC) samples for LTIA were analysed using ECLIA, and 3 QC samples for ECLIA were analysed using LTIA. RESULTS: The Deming regression of ECLIA versus LTIA generated the following parameters: slope, 1.0067 and intercept, 1.7489 ng/mL, in the analysis of 230 samples. Bland-Altman analysis showed an average positive bias of 1.73 ng/mL between ECLIA and LTIA. When the clinical apparatus was switched from LTIA to ECLIA, the average everolimus blood concentration assayed by LTIA before switching was 3.57 ng/mL, whereas that by ECLIA after switching in the same patients taking the same daily dose (mean: 1.43 mg/day) was 5.85 ng/mL. The QCs assayed using LTIA were lower by an average of 67.3% (range: 55.8%-79.5%) for ECLIA, and in the same 230 samples from patients, the everolimus blood concentrations assayed by LTIA were lower by an average of 67.4% (range: 37.1%-114.5%) of ECLIA. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: Analysis of everolimus concentrations by immunoassays with high precision and accuracy is required to ensure long-term survival of transplant recipients. Although the concentrations of QCs and calibrators of everolimus in LTIA were previously corrected to 70% concentration because of cross-reactivity with everolimus metabolites, these adjustments may need to be reviewed.

Prediction of Tacrolimus Exposure by CYP3A5 Genotype and Exposure of Co-Administered Everolimus in Japanese Renal Transplant Recipients.

While tacrolimus and everolimus have common metabolic pathways through CYP3A4/5, tacrolimus is metabolized solely by CYP3A4 in recipients with the CYP3A5*3/*3. The purpose of this study was to evaluate how the area under the blood concentration-time curves (AUC) of tacrolimus could be predicted based on CYP3A5 genotype and the AUC of everolimus in renal transplant patients taking both drugs. The dose-adjusted AUC (AUC/D) of tacrolimus and everolimus were calculated at one month and one year after transplantation. Significant correlations between the AUC/D of tacrolimus and everolimus were found for patients with the CYP3A5*1 allele or CYP3A5*3/*3 at both one month and one year. At both stages, the determination coefficients were higher and the slopes of regression equations were larger for patients with CYP3A5*3/*3 compared to the CYP3A5*1 allele. A good correlation between single doses of tacrolimus and everolimus was found for CYP3A5*3/*3 patients at 1 year after transplantation (r = 0.794, p < 0.001). The variability of the AUC0-24/D of tacrolimus for each CYP3A5 genotype could be predicted based on the AUC0-12/D of everolimus. Clinicians may be able to comprehensively carry out the dose adjustments of tacrolimus and everolimus based on relationship with AUCs of both drugs in each CYP3A5 genotype.

Towards therapeutic drug monitoring of everolimus in cancer? Results of an exploratory study of exposure-effect relationship.

INTRODUCTION: Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of everolimus is not performed in oncology and no trough level (C0) target has been yet defined. The aim of this study was to determine everolimus C0 target for toxicity and efficacy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Clinical, biological and radiologic data from 54 patients were collected. Toxicity event was defined by termination, temporary interruption and/or dose reduction of everolimus while efficacy was defined as progression-free survival. C0 values were dichotomized by ROC curve analysis and the association between exposure and outcome was determined using Cox models for repeated events (toxicity) or Cox model censured at the first event (progression free survival). RESULTS: Among the 42 patients (77.8%) with breast cancer, 10 (18.5%) kidney cancer and 2 (3.7%) neuroendocrine cancer, adverse events were reported in 75.9% of the patients (everolimus termination in 25.9% patients). C0 everolimus higher than 26.3ng/mL (Sen=0.38,Spe=0.88) were associated with a 4-fold increased risk of toxicity (HR=4.12, IC95%=[1.48-11.5], p=0.0067) whereas C0 lower than 11.9ng/mL were associated with a 3-fold increased risk of progression (HR=3.2, IC95%=[1.33-7.81],p=0.001). DISCUSSION: Further studies are required to evaluate the everolimus C0 threshold proposed for toxicity (26.3ng/mL) and for progression (11.9ng/mL) especially with a large number of patients and more homogeneous types of cancer. However, these results are in favour of TDM for everolimus in oncology.

Effect of confounding factors on a phospho-flow assay of ribosomal S6 protein for therapeutic drug monitoring of the mTOR-inhibitor everolimus in heart transplanted patients.

CONTEXT: Several assays of monitoring immune cell function have been developed to enhance therapeutic drug monitoring. OBJECTIVE: An in vitro-validated whole-blood assay of phosphorylated ribosomal protein S6 (pS6RP) was evaluated for confounders to monitor the mTOR-inhibitor everolimus (ERL). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Whole blood samples from 87 heart transplant recipients were analyzed for pS6RP-expression in CD3-positive T-cells by phospho-flow analysis. RESULTS: ERL blood concentration, laboratory parameters, co-medications, demographic and clinical data were reviewed. CONCLUSION: Evaluating the pS6RP-assay revealed that pS6RP is influenced by cyclosporine A (CsA) blood concentration, duration of ERL treatment, co-medication with thiazide diuretics and different metabolic parameters.

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Everolimus: Comparability of Concentrations Determined by 2 Immunoassays and a Liquid Chromatography Tandem Mass Spectrometry Method.

BACKGROUND: Therapeutic drug monitoring is recommended to guide therapy with the immunosuppressant everolimus (EVL) in solid organ transplantation to prevent rejections and to limit toxicity. For therapeutic drug monitoring, predose EVL concentrations are measured in whole blood mainly by liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). In addition, 2 immunoassays [Quantitative Microsphere System (QMS) EVL and Elecsys EVL] are commercially available. The aim of this study was to evaluate the comparability of EVL results determined with the 2 immunoassays and a validated LC-MS/MS test using samples from kidney, liver, and heart transplant (KT, LT, and HT, respectively) recipients. METHODS: Analysis of predose samples from KT (n = 56), LT (n = 60), and HT (n = 59) recipients, obtained at variable time points after transplantation, was performed by LC-MS/MS and with the 2 immunoassays. The QMS EVL assay was applied on Dimension Xpand Plus and the Elecsys EVL assay on cobas e 411 analyzer. Results were compared by the Spearman's rank correlation coefficient, unbiased Passing and Bablok linear regression test, and Bland-Altman plot. RESULTS: Results generated with both immunoassays correlated well with those of LC-MS/MS. An overestimation of EVL concentrations by the Elecsys EVL compared with LC-MS/MS was observed (mean bias: 34.2%). Using the QMS EVL, a small but significant negative deviation (mean bias: -8.0%) was found. Looking at KT, HT, and LT samples separately, the bias to LC-MS/MS seen with the Elecsys EVL was similar. With the QMS EVL, the best agreement was observed with the KT samples followed by LT and HT. CONCLUSIONS: Results generated by the 3 methods are not consistent regarding their diagnostic value. Both laboratories and manufacturers should take care to inform their costumers about the between-method differences to avoid misinterpretation of the results in clinical practice.

Circadian pharmacokinetics and limited sampling strategy of everolimus in heart transplant patients
.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate circadian changes in everolimus (EVL) pharmacokinetics and to identify the time point of blood sampling with the strongest correlation with the area under the blood concentration-time curve (AUC) of EVL in heart transplant patients. METHODS: Heart transplant patients receiving the same dose of EVL twice a day were reviewed. In 28 patients enrolled, whole blood samples were collected before (C0), and 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, and 12 hours after each administration of EVL. Blood concentrations of EVL were compared between active (9:00 AM to 9:00 PM) and resting periods (9:00 PM to 9:00 AM). RESULTS: AUC0-4h, peak concentration (Cmax), Cmax/minimum concentration, and peak-trough fluctuation in the resting period were significantly lower than those in the active period (p = 0.008, 0.017, 0.022, and 0.011, respectively). Half-life and mean residence time were significantly longer in the resting period than in the active period (p = 0.002 and 0.002, respectively). AUC0-12h in the active period was similar (p = 0.154) and correlated with that in the resting period (r2 = 0.93). Two-point blood samplings, C0 and C2, correlated more strongly with AUC0-12h for EVL, compared with C0 alone (0.92 vs. 0.79, respectively, for r2 in the active period). CONCLUSIONS: EVL pharmacokinetics showed circadian changes, suggesting delayed absorption and decreased metabolic activity at rest. However, the circadian changes did not affect AUC0-12h. A 2-time-point model that included C0 and C2 was more accurate for predicting the AUC0-12h of EVL than C0 alone in heart transplant patients.
.

First Report of a Successful Pregnancy in an Everolimus-Treated Heart-Transplanted Patient: Neonatal Disappearance of Immunosuppressive Drugs.

The use of everolimus (EVL) as primary immunosuppression is steadily increasing in heart transplantation (HTx) patients. Limited data currently exist in kidney transplantation, but there is no report of EVL use during pregnancy after HTx and its pharmacokinetics in the newborn. We report a case of an unplanned pregnancy discovered at 21 weeks of gestation in a female HTx patient aged 40 years treated with EVL and cyclosporine (CyA). Because pregnancy was advanced, immunosuppression therapy was left unchanged. At 36 weeks, a healthy infant was delivered. At birth, CyA blood levels were lower in the neonate, but EVL concentrations in maternal and neonatal umbilical blood were similar. Amniotic fluid concentrations were undetectable for both drugs. In the newborn, EVL was measurable at 5 days after birth, whereas CyA disappeared within 2 days. Cord blood displayed a normal count of B and T cells and CD4, CD8 and natural killer cell populations. At birth, both mother and newborn displayed the same blood levels of EVL; therefore, a filter effect of the placenta may be hypothesized for CyA but not for EVL. No immediate complications were observed with this pregnancy.

Population Pharmacokinetics of Everolimus in Relation to Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Everolimus has been used for the treatment of unresectable or metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Here, we measured blood concentrations of everolimus to obtain the population pharmacokinetic parameters and to examine the relationship between blood concentration and clinical outcomes. METHODS: Twenty-two Japanese patients were enrolled. Blood samples were collected before and 2, 4, 8, and 24 hours after drug administration on days 1 and 8 of everolimus therapy (5 or 10 mg) from inpatients; occasional samples were collected from outpatients. Blood concentrations of everolimus were measured by high-performance liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry. Population pharmacokinetic analysis was conducted using the NONMEM software. RESULTS: Everolimus pharmacokinetics was best described by a 2-compartment model with population mean estimates of apparent oral clearance of 10.0 L/h and an interindividual variability of 42.4%. There was no relationship between overall best responses and the predicted trough concentrations at day 8. The predicted trough concentration in patients who terminated everolimus treatment owing to adverse drug reactions (ADRs) was significantly higher than in patients who stopped the treatment owing to disease progression or other reasons (27.6 ± 3.1 versus 15.7 ± 2.3 ng/mL; mean ± SEM). Patients who terminated the treatment owing to ADRs had significantly shorter time-to-treatment failure than other patients (112 versus 187 days, median). CONCLUSIONS: This study reports the first population pharmacokinetic parameters of everolimus in patients with RCC. Individual dose adjustment based on everolimus blood concentrations helps to avoid early drug cessation due to ADRs.