MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041629314 · doi:10.1002/lt.21657

Pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and safety of mycophenolate mofetil in combination with standard-dose or reduced-dose tacrolimus in liver transplant recipients

2009· article· en· W2041629314 on OpenAlexaff
Björn Nashan, Faouzi Saliba, François Durand, Rafael Bárcena, J.I. Herrero, Gilles Mentha, P. Neuhaus, Matthew Bowles, David Patch, A Bernardos, Jürgen Klempnauer, René Bouw, Jane Ives, Richard D. Mamelok, Diane L. McKay, Paul Marotta

Bibliographic record

VenueLiver Transplantation · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and Treatments
Canadian institutionsLondon Health Sciences CentreWestern University
FundersF. Hoffmann-La Roche
KeywordsTacrolimusPharmacokineticsMedicineMycophenolateMycophenolic acidPharmacologyLiver transplantationUrologyTrough levelArea under the curveGastroenterologyTransplantationInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The pharmacokinetics of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) in liver transplant recipients may change because of pharmacokinetic interactions with coadministered immunosuppressants or because changes in the enterohepatic anatomy may affect biotransformation of MMF to mycophenolic acid (MPA) and enterohepatic recirculation of MPA through the hydrolysis of mycophenolate acid glucuronide to MPA in the gut. In the latter case, the choice of formulation (oral versus intravenous) could have important clinical implications. We randomized liver transplant patients (n = 60) to standard (10-15 ng/mL) or reduced (5-8 ng/mL) trough levels of tacrolimus plus intravenous MMF followed by oral MMF (1 g twice daily) with corticosteroids. Pharmacokinetic sampling was performed after the last intravenous MMF dose, after the first oral MMF dose, and at selected times over 52 weeks. The efficacy and safety of the 2 regimens were also assessed. Twenty-eight and 27 patients in the tacrolimus standard-dose and reduced-dose groups, respectively, were evaluated. No significant differences between the tacrolimus standard-dose and reduced-dose groups were seen in dose-normalized MPA values of the time to the maximum plasma concentration (1.25 versus 1.28 hours), the maximum plasma concentration (15.5 +/- 7.93 versus 13.6 +/- 7.03 microg/mL), or the area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 12 hours (AUC(0-12); 53.0 +/- 20.6 versus 43.8 +/- 15.5 microg h/mL) at week 26 or at any other time point. No relationship was observed between the tacrolimus trough or AUC(0-12) and MPA AUC(0-12). Exposure to MPA after oral and intravenous administration was similar. Safety and efficacy were similar in the two treatment groups. In conclusion, exposure to MPA is not a function of exposure to tacrolimus. The similar safety and efficacy seen with MMF plus standard or reduced doses of tacrolimus suggest that MMF could be combined with reduced doses of tacrolimus.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.594
Threshold uncertainty score0.808

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.268 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations40
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLiver TransplantationSame topicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207