Kim Jong Man, Oh Jong Wook, Kim Sangjin, Rhu Jinsoo, Lee Ji Soo, Kim Kyeong Sik, Choi Gyu-Seong, Joh Jae-Won
Department of Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Drug Des Devel Ther. 2019 Jul 2;13:2187-2193. doi: 10.2147/DDDT.S204056. eCollection 2019.
Tablet and capsule forms have advantages and disadvantages in the market. Generally, the tablet form (500 mg) of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) is more convenient for drug ingestion and more cost-effective than the capsule form (250 mg). We examined the efficacy and safety of MMF in its different forms combined with tacrolimus in liver transplant recipients.
A randomized controlled trial was performed to compare the efficacy and safety between the tablet form of MMF (tablet group) and the capsule form of MMF (capsule group) in liver transplant patients. One hundred sixteen patients were enrolled in the present study from 2014 to 2017. Fifty-six patients in the full-analysis set (FAS) population were in the capsule group and 60 were in the tablet group. The primary endpoint was incidence of biopsy-proven acute rejection (BPAR) by 24 weeks after liver transplantation (LT). Secondary endpoints were patient survival, serum creatinine level, and adverse events (AEs).
In the per-protocol population, 45 patients were in the tablet group and 49 were in the capsule group. There were no statistically significant differences in MMF dose, mycophenolic acid trough level, and tacrolimus trough level between the two groups. The incidence of BPAR at 24 weeks after randomization was 6.7% in the tablet group and 6.1% in the capsule group (=0.627). All patients with BPAR responded well to steroid pulse therapy and increased tacrolimus. Serum creatine level and eGFR were not different between the two groups. The incidence of serious AEs was 7.2% in the tablet group and 7.6% in the capsule group, and none were related to formulation. There was no significant difference in incidence of discontinuations or serious AEs between the two groups.
The present study suggests that the new tablet formulation can be a useful treatment option to maintain a consistent systemic exposure level of MMF, which may help reduce graft failure in liver transplant patients.
片剂和胶囊剂在市场上各有优缺点。一般来说,霉酚酸酯(MMF)的片剂形式(500毫克)比胶囊剂形式(250毫克)更便于药物摄入且更具成本效益。我们研究了MMF不同剂型与他克莫司联合应用于肝移植受者的疗效和安全性。
进行了一项随机对照试验,比较MMF片剂形式(片剂组)和MMF胶囊剂形式(胶囊组)在肝移植患者中的疗效和安全性。2014年至2017年共有116例患者纳入本研究。全分析集(FAS)人群中,56例患者在胶囊组,60例患者在片剂组。主要终点是肝移植(LT)后24周经活检证实的急性排斥反应(BPAR)发生率。次要终点是患者生存率、血清肌酐水平和不良事件(AE)。
在符合方案人群中,片剂组有45例患者,胶囊组有49例患者。两组之间的MMF剂量、霉酚酸谷浓度和他克莫司谷浓度无统计学显著差异。随机分组后24周时,片剂组BPAR发生率为6.7%,胶囊组为6.1%(P = 0.627)。所有发生BPAR的患者对类固醇冲击治疗和增加他克莫司均反应良好。两组之间血清肌酐水平和估算肾小球滤过率(eGFR)无差异。片剂组严重AE发生率为7.2%,胶囊组为7.6%,且均与剂型无关。两组之间停药或严重AE发生率无显著差异。
本研究表明,新的片剂剂型可能是维持MMF全身暴露水平一致的有用治疗选择,这可能有助于减少肝移植患者的移植物失败。