Comparison of an ELISA and an LC/MS/MS method for measuring tacrolimus concentrations and making dosage decisions in transplant recipients

This study compared an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) to a liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC/MS/MS) technique for measurement of tacrolimus concentrations in adult kidney and liver transplant recipients, and investigated how assay choice influenced pharmacokinetic parameter estimates and drug dosage decisions. Tacrolimus concentrations measured by both ELISA and LC/MS/MS from 29 kidney (n = 98 samples) and 27 liver (n = 97 samples) transplant recipients were used to evaluate the performance of these methods in the clinical setting. Tacrolimus concentrations measured by the two techniques were compared via regression analysis. Population pharmacokinetic models were developed independently using ELISA and LC/MS/MS data from 76 kidney recipients. Derived kinetic parameters were used to formulate typical dosing regimens for concentration targeting. Dosage recommendations for the two assays were compared. The relation between LC/MS/MS and ELISA measurements was best described by the regression equation ELISA = 1.02 . (LC/MS/MS) + 0.14 in kidney recipients, and ELISA = 1.12 . (LC/MS/MS) - 0.87 in liver recipients. ELISA displayed less accuracy than LC/MS/MS at lower tacrolimus concentrations. Population pharmacokinetic models based on ELISA and LC/MS/MS data were similar with residual random errors of 4.1 ng/mL and 3.7 ng/mL, respectively. Assay choice gave rise to dosage prediction differences ranging from 0% to 30%. ELISA measurements of tacrolimus are not automatically interchangeable with LC/MS/MS values. Assay differences were greatest in adult liver recipients, probably reflecting periods of liver dysfunction and impaired biliary secretion of metabolites. While the majority of data collected in this study suggested assay differences in adult kidney recipients were minimal, findings of ELISA dosage underpredictions of up to 25% in the long term must be investigated further.

Impact numbers in health policy decisions

Objective: To outline the major methodological issues appropriate to the use of the population impact number (PIN) and the disease impact number (DIN) in health policy decision making. Design: Review of literature and calculation of PIN and DIN statistics in different settings. Setting: Previously proposed extensions to the number needed to treat (NNT): the DIN and the PIN, which give a population perspective to this measure. Main results: The PIN and DIN allow us to compare the population impact of different interventions either within the same disease or in different diseases or conditions. The primary studies used for relative risk estimates should have outcomes, time periods and comparison groups that are congruent and relevant to the local setting. These need to be combined with local data on disease rates and population size. Depending on the particular problem, the target may be disease incidence or prevalence and the effects of interest may be either the incremental impact or the total impact of each intervention. For practical application, it will be important to use sensitivity analyses to determine plausible intervals for the impact numbers. Conclusions: Attention to various methodological issues will permit the DIN and PIN to be used to assist health policy makers assign a population perspective to measures of risk.

Opportunity cost of ad hoc marine reserve design decisions: an example from South Australia

Like many states and territories, South Australia has a legacy of marine reserves considered to be inadequate to meet current conservation objectives. In this paper we configured exploratory marine reserve systems, using the software MARXAN, to examine how efficiently South Australia's existing marine reserves contribute to quantitative biodiversity conservation targets. Our aim was to compare marine reserve systems that retain South Australia's existing marine reserves with reserve systems that are free to either ignore or incorporate them. We devised a new interpretation of irreplaceability to identify planning units selected more than could be expected from chance alone. This is measured by comparing the observed selection frequency for an individual planning unit with a predicted selection frequency distribution. Knowing which sites make a valuable contribution to efficient marine reserve system design allows us to determine how well South Australia's existing reserves contribute to reservation goals when representation targets are set at 5, 10, 15, 20, 30 and 50% of conservation features. Existing marine reserves that tail to contribute to efficient marine reserve systems constitute 'opportunity costs'. We found that despite spanning less than 4% of South Australian state waters, locking in the existing ad hoc marine reserves presented considerable opportunity costs. Even with representation targets set at 50%, more than halt of South Australia's existing marine reserves were selected randomly or less in efficient marine reserve systems. Hence, ad hoc marine reserve systems are likely to be inefficient and may compromise effective conservation of marine biodiversity.