4.3 Article

The influence of CYP3A, PPARA, and POR genetic variants on the pharmacokinetics of tacrolimus and cyclosporine in renal transplant recipients

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PHARMACOLOGY
卷 70, 期 6, 页码 685-693

出版社

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00228-014-1656-3

关键词

Calcineurin inhibitors; Pharmacokinetics; CYP3A; POR; PPARA; Kidney recipients

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Tacrolimus (Tac) and cyclosporine (CsA) are mainly metabolized by CYP3A4 and CYP3A5. Several studies have demonstrated an association between the CYP3A5 genotype and Tac dose requirements. Recently, CYP3A4, PPARA, and POR gene variants have been shown to influence CYP3A metabolism. The present study investigated potential associations between CYP3A5*3, CYP3A4*22, PPARA c.209-1003G > A and c.208 + 3819A > G, and POR*28 alleles and dose-adjusted concentrations (C/D) of Tac and CsA in 177 renal transplant patients early post-transplant. All patients (n = 177) were genotyped for CYP3A4*22, CYP3A5*3, POR*28, PPARA c.209-1003G > A, and PPARA c.208 + 3819A > G using real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and melting curve analysis with allele-specific hybridization probes or PCR restriction fragment length polymorphisms (RFLP) methods. Drug concentrations and administered doses were retrospectively collected from patient charts at Oslo University Hospital, Rikshospitalet, Norway. One steady-state concentration was collected for each patient. We confirmed a significant impact of the CYP3A5*3 allele on Tac exposure. Patients with POR*28 and PPARA variant alleles demonstrated 15 % lower (P = 0.04) and 19 % higher (P = 0.01) Tac C-0/D respectively. CsA C-2/D was 53 % higher among CYP3A4*22 carriers (P = 0.03). The results support the use of pre-transplant CYP3A5 genotyping to improve initial dosing of Tac, and suggest that Tac dosing may be further individualized by additional POR and PPARA genotyping. Furthermore, initial CsA dosing may be improved by pre-transplant CYP3A4*22 determination.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据