MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3204395071 · doi:10.4212/cjhp.v74i4.3193

Tacrolimus Dose-Conversion Ratios Based on Switching of Formulations for Patients with Solid Organ Transplants

2021· article· en· W3204395071 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Wen-Yuan Johnson Kuan, Nathalie Châteauvert, Vincent Leclerc, Benoît Drolet

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de QuébecCentre Intégré de Santé et de Services Sociaux des Laurentides
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTacrolimusCapsuleMedicineSuspension (topology)UrologyTransplantationSurgeryMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Tacrolimus may be administered during hospitalization as an IV formulation or oral suspension. However, literature suggesting appropriate ratios for conversion from these formulations to capsules is limited. Objective: To evaluate conversion ratios after a switch in formulation of tacrolimus for solid-organ transplant recipients. Methods: This single-centre observational longitudinal study involved hospitalized patients who underwent a switch in formulation of tacrolimus according to 1 of 3 possible scenarios: IV to oral suspension, IV to capsule, or oral suspension to capsule. Data were collected from the earliest accessible electronic file (January 2009) to January 1, 2019. Conversion ratios were calculated for each of the 3 groups using data for blood concentrations and doses before and after the switch. The calculated ratios were then compared with recommended conversion ratios: 1:5 (i.e., 1 mg of IV tacrolimus is converted to 5 mg of oral tacrolimus, expressed as “5”) for either of the switches involving an IV formulation and 1:1 (i.e., same amount, expressed as “1”) for the switch from oral formulation to capsules. Results: For the group who underwent switching from the IV formulation to oral suspension, the mean calculated conversion ratio was 3.04, which was significantly different from the recommended ratio of 5. For the group who underwent switching from the IV formulation to capsules, the calculated conversion ratio was 5.18, which was not significantly different from the recommended ratio of 5. For the group who underwent switching from oral suspension to capsules, the calculated conversion ratio was 1.17, which was not significantly different from the recommended ratio of 1. Conclusion: In this small retrospective study of tacrolimus therapy, the calculated conversion ratio was significantly different from the recommended ratio for patients who were switched from IV administration to oral suspension, but not for those switched from IV administration or oral suspension to capsules. Therapeutic drug monitoring therefore appears indispensable, regardless of conversion ratios. RÉSUMÉ Contexte : Le tacrolimus peut être administré par IV ou sous forme de suspension orale pendant une hospitalisation. Cependant, il existe peu de documents qui proposent des ratios appropriés pour convertir ces formulations en capsules. Objectif : Évaluer les ratios de conversion après un changement de formulation du tacrolimus pour les bénéficiaires de greffes d’organes solides. Méthodes : Cette étude observationnelle longitudinale unicentrique impliquait des patients hospitalisés, pour qui la formulation de tacrolimus changeait en fonction de chacun des trois scénarios possibles : passage de l’administration par IV à la suspension orale, passage de l’administration par IV aux capsules ou passage de l’administration par suspension aux capsules. Le recueil des données a été effectué à partir du plus ancien dossier électronique accessible (janvier 2009) jusqu’au 1er janvier 2019. Les ratios de conversion ont été calculés pour chacun des trois groupes à l’aide de données pour les concentrations de sang et des doses avant et après le changement. Les ratios calculés ont ensuite été comparés avec les ratios de conversion recommandés : 1:5 (c.-à-d., 1 mg de tacrolimus administré par IV est converti en 5 mg de tacrolimus par voie orale, conversion exprimée par le nombre « 5 ») pour chacun des changements impliquant une formulation IV et 1:1 (c.-à-d. même quantité, conversion exprimée par le nombre « 1 ») pour le passage de la formulation orale aux capsules. Résultats : Dans le groupe dont l’administration par IV est passée à une suspension orale, le ratio de conversion moyen calculé était de 3,04, ce qui était significativement différent par rapport au ratio recommandé de 5. Pour le groupe dont l’administration par IV est passée à des capsules, le ratio de conversion moyen calculé était de 5,18, ce qui n’était pas significativement différent par rapport au ratio recommandé de 5. Pour le groupe dont l’administration est passée de la suspension orale aux capsules, le ratio de conversion moyen calculé était de 1,17, ce qui n’était pas significativement différent par rapport au ratio recommandé de 1. Conclusion : Dans cette petite étude rétrospective de la thérapie à l’aide du tacrolimus, le ratio de conversion calculé était significativement différent du ratio recommandé pour les patients qui passaient d’une administration IV à une suspension orale, mais pas pour ceux qui passaient d’une administration par IV ou d’une suspension orale à des capsules. La surveillance thérapeutique des médicaments semble donc indispensable, quels que soient les ratios de conversion.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations3
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital PharmacySame topicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207