Genetic differences in Native Americans and tacrolimus dosing after kidney transplantation.

Tacrolimus pharmacokinetics vary due to single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in metabolizing enzymes and membrane transporters that alter drug elimination. Clinically we observed that Native Americans require lower dosages of tacrolimus to attain trough levels similar to Caucasians. We previously demonstrated that Native Americans have decreased oral clearance of tacrolimus, suggesting that Native Americans may have more variant SNPs and, therefore, altered tacrolimus pharmacokinetic parameters. We conducted 12-hour pharmacokinetic studies on 24 adult Native American kidney transplant recipients on stable doses of tacrolimus for at least 1 month posttransplantation. Twenty-four Caucasian kidney transplant recipients were compared as controls. SNPs encoding the genes for the enzymes (CYP3A4, CYP3A5) and transporters (ABCB1, BCRP, and MRP1) were typed using TaqMan. The mean daily tacrolimus dose in the Native Americans was 0.03 ± 0.02 compared with the Caucasians 0.5 ± 0.3 (mg/kg/d; P = .002), with no significant differences in trough levels, (6.7 ± 3.1 vs 7.4 ± 2.1 ng/dL; P = .4). Many Native Americans, but not Caucasians, demonstrated the 3/*3 - C3435T CC and the *3/*3 -G2677T GG genotype combination previously associated with low tacrolimus dosing. Native Americans required significantly lower tacrolimus doses than Caucasians to achieve similar tacrolimus trough levels, in part due to lower tacrolimus clearance from decreased drug metabolism and excretion.

Outcomes after simultaneous pancreas and kidney transplantation and the discriminative ability of the C-peptide measurement pretransplant among type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND: Earlier studies reporting outcomes after pancreas transplantation have included a combination of C-peptide cutoffs and clinical criteria to classify type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). However, because the kidney is the major site for C-peptide catabolism, C-peptide is unreliable to discriminate the type of diabetes in patients with kidney disease. METHODS: To improve the discriminative power and better classify the type of diabetes, we used a composite definition to identify T2DM: presence of C-peptide, negative glutamic acid decarboxylase antibody, absence of diabetic ketoacidosis, and use of oral hypoglycemics. Additionally among T2DM patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD), body mass index of <30 kg/m(2) and use of <1 u/kg of insulin per day were selection criteria for suitablity for simultaneous pancreas and kidney transplantation (SPKT). We compared graft and patient survival between T1DM and T2DM after SPKT. RESULTS: Our study cohort consisted of 80 patients, 10 of whom were assigned as T2DM based on our study criteria. Approximately 15% of patients with T1DM had detectable C-peptide. Cox regression survival analyses found no significant differences in allograft (pancreas and kidney) or patient survival between the 2 groups. The mean creatinine clearance at 1 year estimated by the modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) equation was not significantly different between the 2 groups. Among those with 1 year of follow-up, all patients with T2DM had glycosylate hemoglobin of <6.0 at 1 year versus 92% of those with T1DM. CONCLUSION: SPKT should be considered in the therapeutic armamentarium for renal replacement in selected patients with T2DM and ESRD. Use of C-peptide measurements for ESRD patients can be misleading as the sole criterion to determine the type of diabetes.