Fasting Status and Circadian Variation Must be Considered When Performing AUC‐based Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Tacrolimus in Renal Transplant Recipients. Issue 6 (11th July 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Gustavsen, Marte Theie; Midtvedt, Karsten; Robertsen, Ida; Woillard, Jean‐Baptiste; Debord, Jean; Klaasen, Rolf Anton; Vethe, Nils Tore; Bergan, Stein; Åsberg, Anders
• Is Part Of: Clinical and translational science. Volume 13:Issue 6(2020)
• Page Start: 1327
• Page End: 1335
• Publication Date: 2020-07-11
• Subjects: Medicine, Experimental -- Periodicals; Medical innovations -- Periodicals; 616.027
• DOI: 10.1111/cts.12833
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1752-8054

Abstract

Abstract : Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is mandatory for the immunosuppressive drug tacrolimus (Tac). For clinical applicability, TDM is performed using morning trough concentrations. With recent developments making tacrolimus concentration determination possible in capillary microsamples and Bayesian estimator predicted area under the concentration curve (AUC), AUC‐guided TDM may now be clinically applicable. Tac circadian variation has, however, been reported, with lower systemic exposure following the evening dose. The aim of the present study was to investigate tacrolimus pharmacokinetic (PK) after morning and evening administrations of twice‐daily tacrolimus in a real‐life setting without restrictions regarding food and concomitant drug timing. Two 12 hour tacrolimus investigations were performed; after the morning dose and the following evening dose, respectively, in 31 renal transplant recipients early after transplantation both in a fasting‐state and under real‐life nonfasting conditions (14 patients repeated the investigation). We observed circadian variation under fasting‐conditions: 45% higher peak‐concentration and 20% higher AUC following the morning dose. In the real‐life nonfasting setting, the PK‐profiles were flat but comparable after the morning and evening doses, showing slower absorption rate and lower AUC compared with the fasting‐state. Limited sampling strategies using concentrations at 0, 1, and 3 hours predicted AUC after fasting morning administration, and samples obtained at 1, 3, and 6 hours predicted AUC for the other conditions (evening and real‐life nonfasting). In conclusion, circadian variation of tacrolimus is present when performed in patients who are in the fasting‐state, whereas flatter PK‐profiles and no circadian variation was present in a real‐life, nonfasting setting.