Population pharmacokinetics of posaconazole in allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplant patients.

BACKGROUND: Invasive fungal disease (IFD) in the early post-allogeneic HSCT (alloHCT) period is associated with increased likelihood of catastrophic outcomes. The utility of oral modified release (MR) posaconazole tablets is limited by reduced drug absorption from gastrointestinal toxicity induced by cytotoxic chemotherapy, necessitating a switch to the IV posaconazole formulation. OBJECTIVES: To describe the population pharmacokinetics of posaconazole for oral MR and IV formulations in alloHCT patients and determine dosing regimens likely to achieve therapeutic exposures. METHODS: We performed a prospective observational pharmacokinetic study in adult patients in the early post-alloHCT period requiring a change in posaconazole formulation (oral to IV). Samples were analysed using a validated LC-MS/MS method. Population pharmacokinetic analysis and Monte Carlo simulations (n = 1000) were performed using Pmetrics for R. RESULTS: Twenty patients aged between 21 and 70 years were included in the study. A two-compartment model, incorporating mucositis/diarrhoea to modify the bioavailability for oral administration best described the data. To achieve ≥90% PTA, simulations showed that higher than currently recommended doses of oral MR posaconazole were required for prophylaxis Cmin targets (≥0.5 and ≥0.7 mg/L), while increased doses of both formulations were required for IFD treatment PK/PD targets, with patients experiencing oral mucositis/diarrhoea unlikely to achieve these. CONCLUSIONS: Increased doses of posaconazole should be considered for both prophylaxis and treatment of IFD to increase the proportion of alloHCT patients achieving therapeutic exposures, particularly the oral formulation in patients with mucositis and/or diarrhoea. Posaconazole therapeutic drug monitoring should be considered for all formulations in this setting.

Consistency of remifentanil concentrations in propofol-Remifentanil infusions. A laboratory-based study.

BACKGROUND: There is increasing interest in two-agent single-pump intravenous infusions for anesthesia and sedation in pediatric patients. Propofol-remifentanil is one such mixture. The poor miscibility of such admixtures when remifentanil is added in very high concentrations and when the admixtures are maintained in static conditions has been demonstrated; however, these physiochemical properties have not been examined in clinically relevant concentrations or settings. AIM: To examine if propofol-remifentanil admixtures maintain consistent remifentanil delivery when mixed in clinically relevant remifentanil concentrations and subjected to the physical effects of an actively infusing, directly-engaged syringe driver system with an extension line, as occurs when propofol-remifentanil is administered to a patient. METHODS: A propofol 10 mg.ml-1 combined with remifentanil 5 mcg.ml-1 solution was run using a Paedfusor® propofol target-controlled infusion model for 10 kg and 20 kg children for 57 min at a target plasma concentration of 3 mcg.ml-1 through a 30 ml syringe, 180 cm minimum volume extension line, lever lock cannula, interlink injection site, and 22 g intravenous cannula into sample pots. Samples were taken at the completion of the loading bolus, 1 and 2 min postcompletion of loading bolus, and every 5 min thereafter. The remifentanil concentration in these samples was then assayed using chromatography. RESULTS: There was no difference in the concentration of remifentanil in the samples based on the duration of infusion to the endpoint of 1 h, or on the patient weight model used. The concentration remained 5 mcg.ml-1 +/- 0.5 mcg.ml-1 per sample. The measurement uncertainty for the assay at 0.5 mcg.ml-1 is +/- 0.2 mcg.ml-1 . CONCLUSION: The concentration of remifentanil was 5 mcg.ml-1 +/- 0.5 mcg.ml-1 and was consistent across 57 min of infusion, and two different pediatric weight profiles.

Ropivacaine (total and unbound) and AGP concentrations after transversus abdominis plane block for analgesia after abdominal surgery.

BACKGROUND: The goal of this study was to assess the safety of single bolus dose of ropivacaine (ROP) followed by continuous infusion through transversus abdominis plane block catheter. The aim was to determine ROP absorbed from the infusion site, changes in protein binding after surgery, and clinical determinants of adverse effects. METHODS: Twelve patients undergoing laparotomy, received bilateral transversus abdominis plane block under ultrasound guidance using a 20-mL bolus of 0.5% ROP followed by 10 mL/h of 0.2% ROP infusion for 48 hours. Serial blood samples were drawn presurgery and to 48 hours postbolus. Plasma concentrations of total and unbound ROP were measured by high performance liquid chromatography with ultraviolet detection. Alpha-1 acid glycoprotein concentrations were measured by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Patients were monitored for any signs or symptoms of central nervous system and chorionic villus sampling toxicity. RESULTS: After the bolus dose, the mean (±SD) peak plasma total (bound plus unbound) ROP concentration (Cmax) was 2.1 (±0.8) mg/L and unbound ROP concentration was 0.04 (±0.02) mg/L. During the infusion phase, total ROP concentration continued to rise to a mean (±) Cmax of 3.3 (±1.6) mg/L, and the peak unbound concentration was 0.06 (±0.0) mg/L. No patients showed symptoms of ROP toxicity or unacceptable QTc intervals. CONCLUSIONS: Although the total ROP concentrations approached or exceeded reported neurotoxicity thresholds, no patients had unbound ROP concentrations approaching the unbound toxicity threshold, nor showed any signs or symptoms of toxicity. This result was consistent with changes in protein binding to alpha-1 acid glycoprotein after surgery.

A randomized double-blind clinical trial of a continuous 96-hour levobupivacaine infiltration after open or laparoscopic colorectal surgery for postoperative pain management--including clinically important changes in protein binding.

BACKGROUND: Continuous local anesthetic infiltration has been used for pain management after open colorectal surgery. However, its application to patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery has not been examined. The aim of this prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial was to study the use of a commercial infiltration device in patients undergoing open or laparoscopic colorectal surgery, along with plasma concentrations of levobupivacaine, its acute-phase binding protein (alpha-1 acid glycoprotein, AAG), and the stress marker, cortisol. METHODS: Eligible patients were randomized (2:1) to receive a continuous infiltration of either levobupivacaine or placebo using a commercial device (ON-Q PainBuster) inserted in the preperitoneal layer at the end of surgery. Blood was sampled for determination of levobupivacaine and AAG and cortisol concentrations. Other outcomes measured were pain scores, morbidity and mortality, time to bowel movement, mobilization, and length of hospitalization. RESULTS: In patients having open surgery, the levobupivacaine treatment showed a trend toward reduced total opioid consumption. No patients reported adverse effects attributable to levobupivacaine, despite 11 patients having concentrations at some time(s) during the 96-hour infiltration of up to 5.5 mg/L exceeding a putative toxicity threshold of 2.7 mg/L. AAG concentrations measured postsurgery increased by a mean of 55% (P < 0.001) at 48 hours. Cortisol concentrations also increased significantly by a mean of 191% at 1 hour. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous local anesthetic infiltration may be more beneficial in open surgery. The threshold for adverse effects from highly bound local anesthetic drugs established in healthy volunteers is of limited usefulness in clinical scenarios in which AAG concentration increases in response to surgical stress. Hence, there is scope to adopt higher doses to enhance therapeutic benefit.

Seradyn quantitative microsphere system lamotrigine immunoassay on a Hitachi 911 analyzer compared with HPLC-UV.

Lamotrigine (LTG) is used currently as monotherapy or, more frequently, as add-on therapy with other antiepileptic drugs. It demonstrates efficacy against partial seizures, primary and secondary tonic clonic seizures, absence seizures, and drop attacks. LTG pharmacokinetics is complicated by coadministration with other antiepileptic drugs such as valproic acid, phenytoin, or carbamazepine. The wide interpatient variability in LTG dosage required to attain therapeutic plasma LTG concentrations for seizure control suggests that LTG is a good candidate for therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). In this study, we compared the quantitative microsphere system (QMS) LTG immunoassay with the LTG high-performance liquid chromatography-ultra violet (HPLC-UV) assay routinely employed for TDM in our laboratory. Samples tested by these methods were patient samples presented for TDM and from a quality assurance program. Quality control material demonstrated within- and between-run (n = 6) coefficient of variation and biases of less than 10%. Patient samples demonstrated a Deming regression of QMS = 1.09 HPLC-UV - 0.17 and quality assurance program samples had a Deming regression of QMS = 1.03 HPLC-UV - 0.11. Patient samples demonstrated a mean bias of 6.1% and quality assurance program samples had a mean bias of 0.2%. The QMS LTG assay had a clinically small but significant overestimation of plasma LTG concentrations. It may be useful as a convenient alternative method that would provide TDM guidance if a chromatographic assay was not available.

Cloned enzyme donor immunoassay tacrolimus assay compared with high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry and microparticle enzyme immunoassay in liver and renal transplant recipients.

The immunosuppressant drug tacrolimus has a narrow therapeutic index and is subject to a large variation in individual bioavailability and clearance. With its narrow therapeutic index, therapeutic drug monitoring is standard clinical practice in the management of transplant recipients. In this study, we report the evaluation of the cloned enzyme donor immunoassay (CEDIA) for the determination of whole-blood tacrolimus concentrations compared with high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (HPLC-MS/MS) and microparticle enzyme immunoassay (MEIA) using samples obtained from liver (n = 100) and renal (n = 88) transplant recipients. Linear regression analysis showed a relationship of CEDIA = 1.24 HPLC-MS/MS -0.18 (r = 0.81). The mean bias (+/-SEM) for all patients when compared with HPLC-MS/MS was 22.2% (+/-2.1%). The precision of the CEDIA method for all samples showed a root mean square error of 3.1 microg/L. Liver transplant recipient samples showed a mean (+/-SEM) bias compared with HPLC-MS/MS of 12.5% (+/-1.6%). The precision of the CEDIA method for these samples showed a root mean square error of 1.5 microg/L. The data suggest that in the renal transplant group, the CEDIA and MEIA methods have a bias of 33.3% and 20.1%, respectively, compared with HPLC-MS/MS. The CEDIA tacrolimus immunoassay has been shown to be a rapid method for the determination of whole-blood tacrolimus concentrations and may be considered when HPLC-MS/MS is not available. When used in the clinical setting with other parameters, it would be a useful adjunct in the management of liver transplant recipients, but a significant bias in renal transplant patients needs to be further investigated.

CEDIA sirolimus assay compared with HPLC-MS/MS and HPLC-UV in transplant recipient specimens.

The role of the therapeutic drug monitoring laboratory in support of immunosuppressant drug therapy is well established, and the introduction of sirolimus (SRL) is a new direction in this field. The lack of an immunoassay for several years has restricted the availability of SRL assay services. The recent availability of a CEDIA SRL assay has the potential to improve this situation. The present communication has compared the CEDIA SRL method with 2 established chromatographic methods, HPLC-UV and HPLC-MS/MS. The CEDIA method, run on a Hitachi 917 analyzer, showed acceptable validation criteria with within-assay precision of 9.1% and 3.3%, and bias of 17.1% and 5.8%, at SRL concentrations of 5.0 microg/L and 20 microg/L, respectively. The corresponding between-run precision values were 11.5% and 3.3% and bias of 7.1% and 2.9% at 5.0 microg/L and 20 microg/L, respectively. The lower limit of quantification was found to be 3.0 microg/L. A series of 96 EDTA whole-blood samples predominantly from renal transplant recipients were assayed by the 3 methods for comparison. It was found that the CEDIA method showed a Deming regression line of CEDIA=1.20xHPLC-MS/MS-0.07 (r=0.934, SEE=.47), with a mean bias of 20.4%. Serial blood samples from 8 patients included in this evaluation showed that the CEDIA method reflected the clinical fluctuations in the chromatographic methods, albeit with the variable bias noted. The CEDIA method on the H917 analyzer is therefore a useful adjunct to SRL dosage individualization in renal transplant recipients.

Evaluation of the immunotech cyclosporine direct radioimmunoassay for the determination of whole-blood cyclosporine in renal transplant patients.

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of cyclosporine (CsA) has been an accepted as an essential tool in the management of solid organ transplant recipients. The authors evaluated a new CsA method, Immunotech cyclosporine direct radioimmunoassay (Beckman Coulter, Prague, Czech Republic), for the measurement of whole-blood CsA concentrations. The performance was compared with CEDIA Plus method as well as group mean data for HPLC and other immunoassays available from the International CsA Proficiency Testing Program (www.bioanalytics.co.uk). Regression analysis of patient samples gave a relationship of RIA = 1.0822 CEDIA(+) + 69.84 (r(2) = 0.933). External CsA-spiked proficiency-testing (PT) samples gave a regression equation of RIA = 0.9672 CEDIA(+) + 4.99 (r(2) = 0.996). The correlation with the CEDIA Plus method using patient specimens (hence, including CsA metabolites) suggested that the test RIA method possibly had slightly inferior specificity for parent CsA. The results suggest that the Immunotech cyclosporine direct RIA kit is suitable for the measurement of whole-blood CsA concentrations and maintained clinically acceptable analytic precision and accuracy, displaying CVs of less than 15% and biases of less than 10%. The PT program CsA-metabolite-free samples showed that calibration between methods was comparable with the possible exception of mFPIA/TDx.