Langman, Loralie J.

Abstract: When mycophenolic acid (MPA) was originally marketed for immunosuppressive therapy, fixed doses were recommended by the manufacturer. Awareness of the potential for a more personalized dosing has led to development of methods to estimate MPA area under the curve based on the measurement of drug concentrations in only a few samples. This approach is feasible in the clinical routine and has proven successful in terms of correlation with outcome. However, the search for superior correlates has continued, and numerous studies in search of biomarkers that could better predict the perfect dosage for the individual patient have been published. As it was considered timely for an updated and comprehensive presentation of consensus on the status for personalized treatment with MPA, this report was prepared following an initiative from members of the International Association of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring and Clinical Toxicology (IATDMCT). Topics included are the criteria for analytics, methods to estimate exposure including pharmacometrics, the potential influence of pharmacogenetics, development of biomarkers, and the practical aspects of implementation of target concentration intervention. For selected topics with sufficient evidence, such as the application of limited sampling strategies for MPA area under the curve, graded recommendations on target ranges are presented. To provide a comprehensive review, this report also includes updates on the status of potential biomarkers including those which may be promising but with a low level of evidence. In view of the fact that there are very few new immunosuppressive drugs under development for the transplant field, it is likely that MPA will continue to be prescribed on a large scale in the upcoming years. Discontinuation of therapy due to adverse effects is relatively common, increasing the risk for late rejections, which may contribute to graft loss. Therefore, the continued search for innovative methods to better personalize MPA dosage is warranted.

Background:The combination of trimethoprim (TMP) and sulfamethoxazole (SMX) is used to treat a number of bacterial infections. TMP/SMX concentrations in serum are conventionally monitored using high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) or liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry. These methods require laborious manual extraction techniques and relatively long sample analysis times, necessitating the development of a simple, high-throughput method. A simple, high-throughput method to measure TMP/SMX using ultra-fast solid-phase extraction (SPE)–tandem mass spectrometry has been developed.Methods:Calibration standards, quality control materials, and patient samples were precipitated with acetonitrile containing isotopically labeled internal standards. Samples were vortexed, centrifuged for 5 minutes at 2053g, and the resulting supernatant was diluted in aqueous mobile phase and injected onto the C18 SPE cartridge. MS/MS analysis was performed by electrospray ionization in positive ion mode at a rate of <20 seconds per sample. A 5-point linear 1/x calibration curve was used to calculate sample concentrations.Results:The intra-assay precision coefficients of variation were <6% and <7% for SMX and TMP, respectively, and <10% for both interassay precision coefficients of variation. Comparison studies using 50 patient and spiked serum samples showed r2values of 0.9890 and 0.9853 andy-intercept values of −1.918 and −1.357, respectively compared with the HPLC reference method. All data points were <±15% of the mean. Linearity [r2= 0.9952 (SMX) and 0.9954 (TMP)] was established from 12 to 400 mcg/mL with a detection limit of 0.47 mcg/mL, and 1.2–40 mcg/mL with a detection limit of 0.06 mcg/mL, for SMX and TMP, respectively. For either drug, no significant carryover was observed after samples at the upper limit of quantification. No interference was observed from any of the 77 drugs and respective metabolites tested.Conclusions:A high-throughput SPE–tandem mass spectrometry method for TMP/SMX quantification was developed. The <20 seconds analysis time is a significant improvement compared with traditional HPLC and liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry methods, without sacrificing analytical performance.

Background: COVID-19 is a novel infectious disease caused by the severe acute respiratory distress (SARS)-coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2). Several therapeutic options are currently emerging but none with universal consensus or proven efficacy. Solid organ transplant recipients are perceived to be at increased risk of severe COVID-19 because of their immunosuppressed conditions due to chronic use of immunosuppressive drugs (ISDs). It is therefore likely that solid organ transplant recipients will be treated with these experimental antivirals. Methods: This article is not intended to provide a systematic literature review on investigational treatments tested against COVID-19; rather, the authors aim to provide recommendations for therapeutic drug monitoring of ISDs in transplant recipients infected with SARS-CoV-2 based on a review of existing data in the literature. Results: Management of drug–drug interactions between investigational anti-SARS-CoV-2 drugs and immunosuppressants is a complex task for the clinician. Adequate immunosuppression is necessary to prevent graft rejection while, if critically ill, the patient may benefit from pharmacotherapeutic interventions directed at limiting SARS-CoV-2 viral replication. Maintaining ISD concentrations within the desired therapeutic range requires a highly individualized approach that is complicated by the pandemic context and lack of hindsight. Conclusions: With this article, the authors inform the clinician about the potential interactions of experimental COVID-19 treatments with ISDs used in transplantation. Recommendations regarding therapeutic drug monitoring and dose adjustments in the context of COVID-19 are provided.

Abstract Background Immunosuppressant therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) usually requires outpatient travel to hospitals or phlebotomy sites for venous blood collection; however Mitra® Microsampling Device (MSD) sampling could allow self-collection and shipping of samples to a laboratory for analysis. This study examined the feasibility of using volumetric microsampling by MSD for TDM of tacrolimus (TaC) and cyclosporin A (CsA) in transplant patients, along with their feedback on the process. Methods MSD was used to collect TaC and CsA from venous (VB) or capillary (CB) blood. The MSDs were rehydrated, extracted, and analyzed using on-line solid phase extraction coupled to tandem mass spectrometry (SPE-MS/MS). We report an abbreviated method validation of the MSD including: accuracy, precision, linearity, carry-over, and stability using residual venous whole blood (VB) samples. Subsequent clinical validation compared serially collected MSD + CB against VB (200 µL) from transplant patients. Results Accuracy comparing VB vs. MSD+VB showed high clinical concordance (TaC = 89% and CsA = 98%). Inter- and intra-precision was ≤11.5 %CV for TaC and CsA. Samples were stable for up to 7 days at room temperature with an average difference of &lt;10%. Clinical validation with MSD+CB correlated well with VB for CsA (slope = 0.95, r2 = 0.88, n = 47) and TaC (slope = 0.98, r2 = 0.82, n = 49). CB vs. VB gave concordance of 94% for CsA and 79% for TaC. A satisfaction survey showed 82% of patients preferred having the capillary collection option. Conclusion Transplant patients favored having the ability to collect capillary samples at home for TaC/CsA monitoring. Our results demonstrate good concordance between MSD+CB and VB for TaC and CsA TDM, but additional studies are warranted.

Abstract: Ten years ago, a consensus report on the optimization of tacrolimus was published in this journal. In 2017, the Immunosuppressive Drugs Scientific Committee of the International Association of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring and Clinical Toxicity (IATDMCT) decided to issue an updated consensus report considering the most relevant advances in tacrolimus pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacogenetics (PG), pharmacodynamics, and immunologic biomarkers, with the aim to provide analytical and drug-exposure recommendations to assist TDM professionals and clinicians to individualize tacrolimus TDM and treatment. The consensus is based on in-depth literature searches regarding each topic that is addressed in this document. Thirty-seven international experts in the field of TDM of tacrolimus as well as its PG and biomarkers contributed to the drafting of sections most relevant for their expertise. Whenever applicable, the quality of evidence and the strength of recommendations were graded according to a published grading guide. After iterated editing, the final version of the complete document was approved by all authors. For each category of solid organ and stem cell transplantation, the current state of PK monitoring is discussed and the specific targets of tacrolimus trough concentrations (predose sample C 0 ) are presented for subgroups of patients along with the grading of these recommendations. In addition, tacrolimus area under the concentration–time curve determination is proposed as the best TDM option early after transplantation, at the time of immunosuppression minimization, for special populations, and specific clinical situations. For indications other than transplantation, the potentially effective tacrolimus concentrations in systemic treatment are discussed without formal grading. The importance of consistency, calibration, proficiency testing, and the requirement for standardization and need for traceability and reference materials is highlighted. The status for alternative approaches for tacrolimus TDM is presented including dried blood spots, volumetric absorptive microsampling, and the development of intracellular measurements of tacrolimus. The association between CYP3A5 genotype and tacrolimus dose requirement is consistent (Grading A I). So far, pharmacodynamic and immunologic biomarkers have not entered routine monitoring, but determination of residual nuclear factor of activated T cells–regulated gene expression supports the identification of renal transplant recipients at risk of rejection, infections, and malignancy (B II). In addition, monitoring intracellular T-cell IFN-g production can help to identify kidney and liver transplant recipients at high risk of acute rejection (B II) and select good candidates for immunosuppression minimization (B II). Although cell-free DNA seems a promising biomarker of acute donor injury and to assess the minimally effective C 0 of tacrolimus, multicenter prospective interventional studies are required to better evaluate its clinical utility in solid organ transplantation. Population PK models including CYP3A5 and CYP3A4 genotypes will be considered to guide initial tacrolimus dosing. Future studies should investigate the clinical benefit of time-to-event models to better evaluate biomarkers as predictive of personal response, the risk of rejection, and graft outcome. The Expert Committee concludes that considerable advances in the different fields of tacrolimus monitoring have been achieved during this last decade. Continued efforts should focus on the opportunities to implement in clinical routine the combination of new standardized PK approaches with PG, and valid biomarkers to further personalize tacrolimus therapy and to improve long-term outcomes for treated patients.