This small pilot study shows that BD stents are a safe, effective and reliable alternative to classical metallic stents in patients with anastomotic stenosis after lung transplantation, and may avoid the need for permanent stenting.
These results confirm the reported high immunogenicity of NY-ESO-1 and suggest that a smoking-induced chronic inflammatory state might potentiate the development of NY-ESO-1-specific immune responses. Moreover, smoking might contribute to the expression of other cancer/testis antigens such as MAGE-A4 at early stages of NSCLC development.
Background and purpose
Lymphatic transport of drugs after oral administration is an important mechanism for absorption of highly lipophilic compounds. Direct measurement in lymph duct cannulated animals is the gold standard method, but non‐invasive cycloheximide chylomicron flow blocking method has gained popularity recently. However, concerns about its reliability have been raised. The aim of this work was to investigate the validity of cycloheximide chylomicron flow blocking method for the evaluation of lymphatic transport using model compounds with high to very high lipophilicity, that is, abiraterone and cinacalcet.
Experimental approach
Series of pharmacokinetic studies were conducted with abiraterone acetate and cinacalcet hydrochloride after enteral/intravenous administration to intact, lymph duct cannulated and/or cycloheximide pre‐treated rats.
Key results
Mean total absolute oral bioavailability of abiraterone and cinacalcet was 7.0% and 28.7%, respectively. There was a large and significant overestimation of the lymphatic transport extent by the cycloheximide method. Mean relative lymphatic bioavailability of abiraterone and cinacalcet in cycloheximide method was 28‐fold and 3‐fold higher than in cannulation method, respectively.
Conclusion and implications
Cycloheximide chylomicron flow blocking method did not provide reliable results on lymphatic absorption and substantially overestimated lymphatic transport for both molecules, that is, abiraterone and cinacalcet. This non‐invasive method should not be used for the assessment of lymphatic transport and previously obtained data should be critically revised.
The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the pharmacokinetics of ganciclovir in lung transplant recipients, to explore its covariates, and to propose an individualized dosing regimen. Ganciclovir was administered according to the protocol in a standardized intravenous dose of 5 mg/kg twice daily. Serum ganciclovir concentrations were monitored as a trough and at 3 and 5 h after dosing. Individual ganciclovir pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated in a two-compartmental pharmacokinetic model, while regression models were used to explore the covariates. Optimal loading and maintenance doses were calculated for each patient. In lung transplant recipients (n = 40), the median (IQR) ganciclovir total volume of distribution and clearance values were 0.65 (0.52–0.73) L/kg and 0.088 (0.059–0.118) L/h/kg, respectively. We observed medium-to-high inter-individual but negligible intra-individual variability in ganciclovir pharmacokinetics. The volume of distribution of ganciclovir was best predicted by height, while clearance was predicted by glomerular filtration rate. Bodyweight-normalized clearance was significantly higher in patients with cystic fibrosis, while distribution half-life was reduced in this subgroup. On the basis of the observed relationships, practical nomograms for individualized ganciclovir dosing were proposed. The dosing of ganciclovir in patients with cystic fibrosis requires special caution, as their daily maintenance dose should be increased by approximately 50%.
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.