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 C0) 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 C0 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.
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
On the basis of chronic feeding bioassays with neonate larvae of Spodoptera littoralis reared on an artificial diet, the methanolic leaf and root extracts from Stemona collinsae displayed very high insect toxicity compared to those of two Aglaia species, a commercial Pyrethrum extract, and azadirachtin, whereas S. tuberosa extracts demonstrated low activity in roots and no activity in leaves. Beyond that, in leaf disk choice tests against fifth instar larvae, S. collinsae showed strong antifeedant activity, whereas S. tuberosa was characterized by remarkable repellency. The anti-insect properties of both species were based on pyrrolo[1,2-a]azepine alkaloids, from which didehydrostemofoline (asparagamine A) was the major compound of the roots of S. collinsae, exhibiting the highest toxicity in feeding assays. Saturation and hydroxylation of the side chain in the co-occurring stemofoline and 2'-hydroxystemofoline, respectively, led to an increasing loss of activity. Contact toxicity tests with stemofoline and didehydrostemofoline exhibited even higher activities than those of Pyrethrum extract. Tuberostemonine was the dominating alkaloid in the roots of S. tuberosa, showing outstanding repellency but no toxic effects.
BACKGROUND Novel mass spectrometric techniques such as atmospheric pressure ionization and tandem mass spectrometry have substantially extended the spectrum of clinical chemistry methods during the past decade. In particular, liquid chromatography tandem–mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) has become a standard tool in research laboratories as well as in many clinical laboratories. Although LC-MS/MS has features that suggest it has a very high analytical accuracy, potential sources of inaccuracy have recently been identified. CONTENT The sources of inaccuracy in LC-MS/MS methods used in the routine quantification of small molecules are described and discussed. Inaccuracy of LC-MS/MS methods can be related to the process of ionization through the insource transformation of conjugate metabolites or target analytes and may also be attributable to ionization matrix effects that have a differential impact on target analytes and internal-standard compounds. Inaccuracy can also be associated with the process of ion selection, which mainly occurs when compounds from the sample matrix share mass transitions with a target analyte. In individual assays, most potential sources of inaccuracy can be controlled by sufficient LC separation–based sample workup before MS analysis. SUMMARY LC-MS/MS methods should undergo rigorous and systematic validation before introduction into patient care.
Fifteen new stilbenoids including 11 phenylbenzofurans, the stemofurans A-K (1-11), and four dihydrostilbenes, the stilbostemins A (15), C (17), E (19), and F (20), were isolated and identified from a methanolic extract of Stemona collinsae roots together with five known derivatives, the stilbenes pinosylvin (13) and 4'-methylpinosylvin (14), the dihydrostilbenes, stilbostemins B (16) and D (18), and the dihydrophenanthrene racemosol (12) as well as (+)-sesamin, coniferyl alcohol, and stigmasterol. Bioautographic tests with Cladosporium herbarum displayed antifungal activity for stilbenoids of all four structural types. Ten derivatives were tested against five microfungi using the microdilution technique linked with digital image analysis of germ tubes.
In 2014, the Immunosuppressive Drugs Scientific Committee of the International Association of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring and Clinical Toxicology called a meeting of international experts to provide recommendations to guide therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of everolimus (EVR) and its optimal use in clinical practice. EVR is a potent inhibitor of the mammalian target of rapamycin, approved for the prevention of organ transplant rejection and for the treatment of various types of cancer and tuberous sclerosis complex. EVR fulfills the prerequisites for TDM, having a narrow therapeutic range, high interindividual pharmacokinetic variability, and established drug exposure-response relationships. EVR trough concentrations (C0) demonstrate a good relationship with overall exposure, providing a simple and reliable index for TDM. Whole-blood samples should be used for measurement of EVR C0, and sampling times should be standardized to occur within 1 hour before the next dose, which should be taken at the same time everyday and preferably without food. In transplantation settings, EVR should be generally targeted to a C0 of 3-8 ng/mL when used in combination with other immunosuppressive drugs (calcineurin inhibitors and glucocorticoids); in calcineurin inhibitor-free regimens, the EVR target C0 range should be 6-10 ng/mL. Further studies are required to determine the clinical utility of TDM in nontransplantation settings. The choice of analytical method and differences between methods should be carefully considered when determining EVR concentrations, and when comparing and interpreting clinical trial outcomes. At present, a fully validated liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry assay is the preferred method for determination of EVR C0, with a lower limit of quantification close to 1 ng/mL. Use of certified commercially available whole-blood calibrators to avoid calibration bias and participation in external proficiency-testing programs to allow continuous cross-validation and proof of analytical quality are highly recommended. Development of alternative assays to facilitate on-site measurement of EVR C0 is encouraged.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.