Université Grenoble Alpes, Inserm, CHU Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble, France
Laboratoire de Pharmacologie, Pharmacogénétique et Toxicologie, CHU Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble, France.
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2019 Sep 23;63(10). doi: 10.1128/AAC.00484-19. Print 2019 Oct.
The delayed-release tablet formulation of posaconazole (POS-tab) results in higher plasma POS trough concentrations (C) than the oral suspension (POS-susp), which raises the question of the utility of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). We aimed to compare the variability of the POS C for the two formulations and identify determinants of the POS-tab C and its variability. Demographic, biological, and clinical data from 77 allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant patients (874 C) treated with POS-tab ( = 41), POS-susp ( = 29), or both ( = 7) from January 2015 to December 2016 were collected retrospectively. Interpatient and within-subject coefficients of variation (CVs) of the C adjusted to dose (D) were calculated for each formulation. Between-group comparisons were performed using a linear mixed effects model. The POS C was higher for the tablet than for the suspension (median [25th-75th percentile]: 1.8 [1.2-2.4] mg/liter versus 1.2 [0.7-1.6] mg/liter, < 0.0001). Interpatient CVs for the tablet and suspension were 60.8 versus 63.5% ( = 0.7), whereas within-subject CVs were 39.7 and 44.9%, respectively ( = 0.3). Univariate analysis showed that age and treatment by POS-tab were significantly and positively associated with the POS C, whereas diarrhea was associated with a diminished POS C Multivariate analysis identified treatment with POS-tab and diarrhea as independent factors of the POS C, with a trend toward a lower impact of diarrhea during treatment with POS-tab ( = 0.07). Despite increased POS exposure with the tablet formulation, the variability of the POS C was not significantly lower than that of the suspension. This suggests that TDM may still be useful to optimize tablet POS therapy.
泊沙康唑延迟释放片(POS-tab)的血药浓度(C)较口服混悬液(POS-susp)更高,这引发了治疗药物监测(TDM)是否有用的问题。我们旨在比较两种制剂的泊沙康唑 C 变异性,并确定泊沙康唑延迟释放片 C 及其变异性的决定因素。回顾性收集了 2015 年 1 月至 2016 年 12 月间接受泊沙康唑延迟释放片( = 41)、泊沙康唑口服混悬液( = 29)或两者( = 7)治疗的 77 例异基因造血干细胞移植患者的人口统计学、生物学和临床数据。计算了两种制剂调整剂量(D)后的 C 的个体间和个体内变异系数(CV)。采用线性混合效应模型进行组间比较。与泊沙康唑口服混悬液相比,泊沙康唑延迟释放片的 C 更高(中位数[25-75 百分位数]:1.8[1.2-2.4]mg/L 与 1.2[0.7-1.6]mg/L, < 0.0001)。泊沙康唑延迟释放片和泊沙康唑口服混悬液的个体间 CV 分别为 60.8%和 63.5%( = 0.7),而个体内 CV 分别为 39.7%和 44.9%( = 0.3)。单因素分析显示,年龄和泊沙康唑延迟释放片治疗与泊沙康唑 C 显著正相关,而腹泻与泊沙康唑 C 降低相关。多因素分析确定泊沙康唑延迟释放片治疗和腹泻是泊沙康唑 C 的独立影响因素,而在泊沙康唑延迟释放片治疗期间腹泻的影响呈下降趋势( = 0.07)。尽管泊沙康唑延迟释放片的暴露量增加,但 C 的变异性并未显著低于泊沙康唑口服混悬液。这表明 TDM 可能仍然有助于优化泊沙康唑的治疗。