Comparison of two population pharmacokinetic programs, NONMEM and P-PHARM, for tacrolimus

Objectives: To compare the population modelling programs NONMEM and P-PHARM during investigation of the pharmacokinetics of tacrolimus in paediatric liver-transplant recipients. Methods: Population pharmacokinetic analysis was performed using NONMEM and P-PHARM on retrospective data from 35 paediatric liver-transplant patients receiving tacrolimus therapy. The same data were presented to both programs. Maximum likelihood estimates were sought for apparent clearance (CL/F) and apparent volume of distribution (V/F). Covariates screened for influence on these parameters were weight, age, gender, post-operative day, days of tacrolimus therapy, transplant type, biliary reconstructive procedure, liver function tests, creatinine clearance, haematocrit, corticosteroid dose, and potential interacting drugs. Results: A satisfactory model was developed in both programs with a single categorical covariate - transplant type - providing stable parameter estimates and small, normally distributed (weighted) residuals. In NONMEM, the continuous covariates - age and liver function tests - improved modelling further. Mean parameter estimates were CL/F (whole liver) = 16.3 1/h, CL/F (cut-down liver) = 8.5 1/h and V/F = 565 1 in NONMEM, and CL/F = 8.3 1/h and V/F = 155 1 in P-PHARM. Individual Bayesian parameter estimates were CL/F (whole liver) = 17.9 +/- 8.8 1/h, CL/F (cutdown liver) = 11.6 +/- 18.8 1/h and V/F = 712 792 1 in NONMEM, and CL/F (whole liver) = 12.8 +/- 3.5 1/h, CL/F (cut-down liver) = 8.2 +/- 3.4 1/h and V/F = 221 1641 in P-PHARM. Marked interindividual kinetic variability (38-108%) and residual random error (approximately 3 ng/ml) were observed. P-PHARM was more user friendly and readily provided informative graphical presentation of results. NONMEM allowed a wider choice of errors for statistical modelling and coped better with complex covariate data sets. Conclusion: Results from parametric modelling programs can vary due to different algorithms employed to estimate parameters, alternative methods of covariate analysis and variations and limitations in the software itself.

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.