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

被引:40
作者
Staatz, CE [1 ]
Taylor, PJ
Tett, SE
机构
[1] Univ Queensland, Sch Pharm, Brisbane, Qld 4072, Australia
[2] Princess Alexandra Hosp, Dept Clin Pharmacol, Woolloongabba, Qld, Australia
[3] Univ Queensland, Princess Alexandra Hosp, Dept Med, St Lucia, Qld, Australia
关键词
tacrolimus; therapeutic drug monitoring; enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay; liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry; dosing;
D O I
10.1097/00007691-200210000-00005
中图分类号
R446 [实验室诊断]; R-33 [实验医学、医学实验];
学科分类号
1001 ;
摘要
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.
引用
收藏
页码:607 / 615
页数:9
相关论文
共 36 条
[1]   An HPLC/MS/MS assay for tacrolimus in patient blood samples - Correlation with results of an ELISA assay [J].
Alak, AM ;
Moy, S ;
Cook, M ;
Lizak, P ;
Niggebiugge, A ;
Menard, S ;
Chilton, A .
JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICAL AND BIOMEDICAL ANALYSIS, 1997, 16 (01) :7-13
[2]   Measurement of tacrolimus (FK506) and its metabolites: A review of assay development and application in therapeutic drug monitoring and pharmacokinetic studies [J].
Alak, AM .
THERAPEUTIC DRUG MONITORING, 1997, 19 (03) :338-351
[3]  
Armstrong VW, 1998, CLIN CHEM, V44, P2516
[4]   STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT [J].
BLAND, JM ;
ALTMAN, DG .
LANCET, 1986, 1 (8476) :307-310
[5]  
BOECKMANN AJ, 1992, NONMEM USERS GUIDE
[6]  
Braun F, 1996, TRANSPLANT P, V28, P3175
[7]   Automated, fast and sensitive quantification of drugs in blood by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry with on-line extraction: immunosuppressants [J].
Christians, U ;
Jacobsen, W ;
Serkova, N ;
Benet, LZ ;
Vidal, C ;
Sewing, KF ;
Manns, MP ;
Kirchner, GI .
JOURNAL OF CHROMATOGRAPHY B-ANALYTICAL TECHNOLOGIES IN THE BIOMEDICAL AND LIFE SCIENCES, 2000, 748 (01) :41-53
[8]  
Cogill JL, 1998, CLIN CHEM, V44, P1942
[9]  
DAMBROSIO R, 1994, CLIN CHEM, V40, P159
[10]   SIMPLIFIED HIGH-PERFORMANCE LIQUID-CHROMATOGRAPHY MASS-SPECTROMETRY ASSAY FOR MEASUREMENT OF TACROLIMUS AND ITS METABOLITES AND CROSS-VALIDATION WITH MICROPARTICLE ENZYME-IMMUNOASSAY [J].
GONSCHIOR, AK ;
CHRISTIANS, U ;
WINKLER, M ;
SCHIEBEL, HM ;
LINCK, A ;
SEWING, KF .
THERAPEUTIC DRUG MONITORING, 1995, 17 (05) :504-510