Langman, Loralie

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.

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.

Background: Reliability of continuous glucose monitors (CGM) is a prerequisite for therapeutic dosing of insulin without the need for confirmatory blood glucose meter measurements. Interference of CGMs with commonly prescribed substances has not been extensively evaluated. Methods: We sought to undertake a novel pilot study to determine the susceptibility of FDA-approved CGM systems (Medtronic Guardian Sof-Sensor, Dexcom G4 Platinum) to erroneous readings in the presence of common medications. CGMs were placed on the abdomen of healthy subjects 48 hours prior to study. Subjects were admitted to the Clinical Research Trials Unit (CRTU) on the evening before study and fed a standard supper. The following morning, an oral medication was administered in the fasted state and blood was sampled for 9 hours. CGM values were compared to ambient glucose (measured with YSI) to observe variations in CGM readings. Microdialysis catheters were also placed in the abdomen to sample interstitial fluid (ISF) for drug concentrations. Results: Nineteen healthy drug-naïve subjects without diabetes participated in the study. A drug/substance was tested up to a maximum of nine times on separate occasions. Comparison of CGM glucose patterns to actual plasma glucose concentrations show several drugs, including lisinopril, albuterol, and acetaminophen, appear to interfere with commonly used CGM devices. Wine also interfered with CGM readings. Conclusions: We conclude there is some evidence of CGM interference with lisinopril, albuterol, acetaminophen, atenolol, and red wine. Future studies are required to address interference with newer sensors being approved or in the process of approval.