FTY720 and cyclosporine: evaluation for a pharmacokinetic interaction.

BACKGROUND: FTY720 is a sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor agonist intended for use in immunoprophylaxis regimens to prevent acute rejection after organ transplantation. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the potential for a pharmacokinetic drug interaction between the immunomodulator FTY720 and cyclosporine to support the use of this drug combination in organ transplantation. METHODS: In this open-label, randomized crossover study, 12 subjects with psoriasis received a single dose of FTY720 1 mg alone and on day 5 of an 8-day course of cyclosporine 200 mg twice daily. The single-dose pharmacokinetics of FTY720 and the steady-state pharmacokinetics of cyclosporine were characterized when given alone and during coadministration. Routine safety data were collected, with special attention to total blood lymphocyte counts and heart rate. RESULTS: Cyclosporine coadministration compared with FTY720 given alone did not significantly alter FTY720 maximum concentration (C(max)) (0.57 +/- 0.17 vs 0.58 +/- 0.19. ng/mL, respectively) or AUC(0-t) (41 +/- 13 vs 41 +/- 13 ng. h/mL, respectively). Likewise for cyclosporine, FTY720 coadministration did not alter the steady-state Cmax compared with cyclosporine given alone (1452 +/- 308 vs 1376 +/- 149 ng/mL, respectively) or AUC(tau) (6385 +/- 1578 vs 6031 +/- 1051 ng. h/mL, respectively). Mean lymphocyte counts decreased from baseline by an average of 35% over the first 2 days after FTY720 administration and thereafter increased to prestudy values by day 5 similarly in the absence and presence of cyclosporine. The morning mean supine heart rate decreased approximately 10% and returned to prestudy rates by day 5 after administration of FTY720 alone and with cyclosporine. Heart rate changes were asymptomatic in all study participants. One subject experienced asymptomatic second-degree type 1 atrioventricular (Wenckebach) block. CONCLUSIONS: The pharmacokinetics of single-dose FTY720 and steady-state cyclosporine were not altered during coadministration.

Influence of delayed initiation of cyclosporine on everolimus pharmacokinetics in de novo renal transplant patients.

We quantified the influence of delayed initiation of cyclosporine on everolimus pharmacokinetics in order to provide dosing guidance for kidney transplant patients. In a randomized multicenter study, 56 de novo kidney transplant patients received everolimus, basiliximab, corticosteroids and either immediate (n = 40) or delayed (n = 16) initiation of cyclosporine based on renal function. Everolimus and cyclosporine predose blood levels (Cmin) were obtained over the first 3 months post-transplant. Everolimus Cmin averaged 9-11 ng/mL in the immediate cyclosporine group over the first 3 months. In the delayed cyclosporine group, average everolimus Cmins were significantly lower by 2.9-fold in the absence vs. presence of cyclosporine: 2.9 +/- 2.8 vs. 8.3 +/- 3.7 ng/mL (p < 0.001). Likewise, the within-patient ratio of everolimus Cmins in the presence/absence of cyclosporine averaged 2.9 (range, 0.7-5.6). Both everolimus and cyclosporine blood concentrations need to be monitored in kidney transplant patients with delayed graft function during the period when cyclosporine is withheld and shortly after its initiation. Dosing of everolimus needs to be adjusted to take into account an average threefold increase in everolimus exposure when cyclosporine is added to the regimen.

Everolimus in de novo cardiac transplantation: pharmacokinetics, therapeutic range, and influence on cyclosporine exposure.

We evaluated exposure, safety, and efficacy data from an international Phase 3 trial of everolimus in de novo heart transplantation to characterize the longitudinal pharmacokinetics of everolimus and cyclosporine and to identify a therapeutic concentration range for everolimus. We randomized 634 patients to receive either 0.75 mg everolimus twice daily, 1.5 mg everolimus twice daily, or azathioprine in addition to corticosteroids and cyclosporine. At 8 visits during the first 6 months after transplantation, we obtained 2,328 everolimus trough levels (Cmin) and 129 area-under-the-curve (AUC) profiles over the dosing interval in patients treated with everolimus; we collected 3,258 cyclosporine trough concentrations and 174 profiles in all 3 treatment arms. We used median-effect analysis to characterize exposure-response associations between everolimus average Cmin vs freedom from biopsy-confirmed acute rejection; maximum cholesterol, low density lipoprotein, triglyceride, and creatinine levels; and minimum leukocyte and platelet counts. Everolimus Cmins averaged 5.2 +/- 3.8 ng/ml and 9.4 +/- 6.3 ng/ml at the lower and upper dose levels. A 17% underproportionality was noted in Cmins; however, peak exposure and AUC were consistent with dose proportionality. Everolimus exposure was stable during the 6-month period. Interindividual variability was 37% for AUC and 40% for Cmin. The latter parameter was not influenced to a clinically relevant extent by sex, age, or weight. The Cmin was well correlated with AUC (r2 = 0.81). Everolimus Cmin was significantly related to freedom from rejection (p = 0.02) with 3 ng/ml being an informative lower threshold for efficacy. Thrombocytopenia, defined as <75 x 10(9)/liter, was related significantly to Cmin (p = 0.03); however, the incidence in this study was too low to establish an upper end for the therapeutic range. Lower doses of cyclosporine (by 15% to 19%) were used in patients treated with everolimus to achieve cyclosporine Cmins and AUCs similar to those in patients treated with azathioprine. Everolimus exposure was dose proportional and stable during the first 6 months after transplantation. Interindividual pharmacokinetic variability was high but not influenced by common demographic covariates. We observed a significantly increased risk of acute rejection at everolimus trough levels <3 ng/ml, which constitutes the lower therapeutic concentration limit when everolimus is used with conventionally dosed cyclosporine. Everolimus-related adverse events were manageable up to the highest troughs (22 ng/ml) observed in this population. We could not derive a precise upper therapeutic concentration limit from these data.

Effect of rifampin on apparent clearance of everolimus.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the influence of the CYP3A4 enzyme inducer rifampin on the pharmacokinetics of the immunosuppressant everolimus to provide guidance for their coadministration. METHODS: In this open-label, single-sequence, crossover study, 12 healthy subjects received a single oral 4-mg dose of everolimus alone and again after an 8-day pretreatment with rifampin 600 mg/d. Urinary excretion of 6beta-hydroxycortisol was measured at various time points during rifampin treatment as a marker of CYP3A4 induction. RESULTS: Urine excretion of 6beta-hydroxycortisol was significantly elevated during treatment with rifampin compared with prestudy, indicating enzyme induction. When everolimus was coadministered during rifampin treatment, the apparent clearance of everolimus was significantly increased, on average by 172%. This was manifested as a decrease in maximum concentration in all subjects, on average by 58% (range 14-73%). The AUC remained unaffected in 1 subject (although 6beta-hydroxycortisol indicated enzyme induction) and decreased in the other 11 subjects. The average decrease in AUC in the full study population was 63% (range 0-82%). Everolimus half-life was reduced significantly, from an average of 32 hours to 24 hours. CONCLUSIONS: In everolimus-treated patients for whom rifampin is indicated, alternative agents with less enzyme induction potential than rifampin could be considered. Alternatively, the dose of everolimus could be individually titrated based on everolimus therapeutic drug monitoring during rifampin therapy.

Differential influence of two cyclosporine formulations on everolimus pharmacokinetics: a clinically relevant pharmacokinetic interaction.

Everolimus is an immunosuppressant intended for use with cyclosporine in acute-rejection prophylaxis following organ transplantation. The possibility of a drug interaction of cyclosporine on everolimus was assessed. In this randomized, two-period, crossover study, 24 healthy subjects received a single oral dose of 2 mg everolimus alone and with one of two cyclosporine formulations: either 175 mg Neoral or 300 mg Sandimmune. The single doses of Neoral and Sandimmune were chosen to yield similar average areas under the concentration-time curve (AUC). Treatments were separated by a 14-day washout period. Cyclosporine AUCs were similar for both formulations (p = 0.53), whereas the peak concentration (Cmax) was significantly higher for Neoral (p = 0.02). Simultaneous administration of Neoral with everolimus increased everolimus Cmax and AUC by 82% and 168%, respectively (p = 0.0001). Coadministration of Sandimmune with everolimus did not affect everolimus Cmax (p = 0.59) but increased everolimus AUC by 74% on average (p = 0.0001). Everolimus elimination half-lives were unchanged in the presence of both cyclosporine formulations. The everolimus AUC increase with Neoral coadministration was significantly greater than the AUC increase with Sandimmune (p = 0.008). However, there was no apparent association between cyclosporine Cmax and the change in everolimus AUC with cyclosporine coadministration. If Neoral or Sandimmune is removed from an everolimus-cyclosporine immunosuppressive regimen, a two- to three-fold decrease in everolimus exposure is expected. Therapeutic monitoring of everolimus concentrations would be helpful after the removal of cyclosporine to individually titrate everolimus exposure.