Pharmacokinetics for once-daily versus twice-daily tacrolimus formulations in de novo liver transplantation: A randomized, open-label trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tacrolimus, a cornerstone immunosuppressant, is available as a twice-daily formulation (tacrolimus bid). A once-daily prolonged-release formulation (tacrolimus qd) has been developed. This 6-week, randomized, phase 2, multicenter, open-label, prospective trial in primary liver transplant recipients investigated and compared the pharmacokinetics (PK) of tacrolimus for qd and bid formulations. All patients received tacrolimus-based immunosuppression (tacrolimus qd, n = 67; bid, n = 62). PK data were available for 77 patients (tacrolimus qd, n = 45; bid, n = 32). Tacrolimus area under the curve (AUC) from 0 to 24 hours (AUC(0-24) ) at equivalent doses was approximately 50% lower for tacrolimus qd than for bid on day 1 (146 versus 264 ng · h/mL, respectively), but by day 14 was comparable between treatments (324 and 287 ng · h/mL, respectively) with higher tacrolimus qd doses. There was a strong correlation between AUC(0-24) and concentration at 24 hours for tacrolimus qd and bid (r = 0.92 and r = 0.76, respectively). Furthermore, the relationship between these 2 parameters (ie, the slope of the line) was also similar for the 2 formulations. Efficacy endpoints were comparable for both formulations at 6 weeks with no marked differences in incidence, nature, or severity of adverse events between treatments (although the study was not powered to draw efficacy conclusions). These results suggest that targeting the same trough levels will achieve similar total AUC over 24 hours for both tacrolimus qd and tacrolimus bid in de novo liver transplant recipients.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".