» Articles » PMID: 9241491

Switching Between Cyclosporin Formulations. What Are the Risks?

Overview
Journal Drug Saf
Specialties Pharmacology
Toxicology
Date 1997 Jun 1
PMID 9241491
Citations 2
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The introduction of cyclosporin, refinement in surgical techniques and improvement in allograft preservation have all led to an improvement in graft and ultimately patient survival. Cyclosporin is a lipophilic cyclic polypeptide produced by Trichoderma, a fungus isolated from Norwegian soil. Cyclosporin is a potent, selective and powerful immunosuppressive agent possessing a narrow therapeutic window. Substitution among different formulations of cyclosporin for economic reasons, without close monitoring of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, can induce undesirable toxic effects. A number of recent reports, largely anecdotal, of adverse drug reactions and acute cellular rejection after conversion from the standard formulation to the microemulsion formulation of cyclosporin have created uncertainty over the therapeutic equivalency of these agents. This leading article reviews the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics and adverse drug reactions of cyclosporin as well as the potential risks associated with switching between cyclosporin formulations in stable renal transplant recipients. Caution should be employed when switching between cyclosporin formulations. Since data are limited, long-term prospective studies are necessary to delineate the role of high peak concentrations obtained from the microemulsion formulation in relation to cyclosporin-induced chronic nephropathy. The significance of the reduction in pharmacokinetic variability with use of the microemulsion formulation in terms of graft and patient survival remains unclear.

Citing Articles

Immunosuppressant-induced nephropathy: pathophysiology, incidence and management.

Olyaei A, de Mattos A, Bennett W Drug Saf. 1999; 21(6):471-88.

PMID: 10612271 DOI: 10.2165/00002018-199921060-00004.


Cyclosporin microemulsion (Neoral). A pharmacoeconomic review of its use compared with standard cyclosporin in renal and hepatic transplantation.

Coukell A, Plosker G Pharmacoeconomics. 1999; 14(6):691-708.

PMID: 10346420 DOI: 10.2165/00019053-199814060-00009.

References
1.
Bunke M, Sloan R, Brier M, Ganzel B . An improved glomerular filtration rate in cardiac transplant recipients with once-a-day cyclosporine dosing. Transplantation. 1995; 59(4):537-40. View

2.
Kahan B . Individualization of cyclosporine therapy using pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters. Transplantation. 1985; 40(5):457-76. DOI: 10.1097/00007890-198511000-00001. View

3.
Kovarik J, Mueller E, van Bree J, Tetzloff W, Kutz K . Reduced inter- and intraindividual variability in cyclosporine pharmacokinetics from a microemulsion formulation. J Pharm Sci. 1994; 83(3):444-6. DOI: 10.1002/jps.2600830336. View

4.
Kahan B, Welsh M, Schoenberg L, Rutzky L, KATZ S, Urbauer D . Variable oral absorption of cyclosporine. A biopharmaceutical risk factor for chronic renal allograft rejection. Transplantation. 1996; 62(5):599-606. DOI: 10.1097/00007890-199609150-00010. View

5.
Graham R . Cyclosporine: mechanisms of action and toxicity. Cleve Clin J Med. 1994; 61(4):308-13. DOI: 10.3949/ccjm.61.4.308. View