Enteric-coated Mycophenolate Sodium: an Update.
W Zhang,C Ding,S Zheng
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcp.12399
2014-01-01
Abstract:International Journal of Clinical PracticeVolume 68, Issue s181 p. 1-3 Perspective Enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium: an update W. Zhang, W. Zhang Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China Key Laboratory of Combined Multi-Organ Transplantation, Ministry of Public Health, First Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, ChinaThese authors contributed equally to this work.Search for more papers by this authorC. Ding, C. Ding Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China Key Laboratory of Combined Multi-Organ Transplantation, Ministry of Public Health, First Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, ChinaThese authors contributed equally to this work.Search for more papers by this authorS. Zheng, Corresponding Author S. Zheng Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China Key Laboratory of Combined Multi-Organ Transplantation, Ministry of Public Health, First Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China Correspondence to: Prof. Shusen Zheng, Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Key Laboratory of Combined Multi-organ Transplantation, Ministry of Health, First Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, 79 Qingchun Road, Zhejiang 310003, China Tel.: + 86-571-87236601 Fax: + 86-571-87236739 Email: [email protected].Search for more papers by this author W. Zhang, W. Zhang Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China Key Laboratory of Combined Multi-Organ Transplantation, Ministry of Public Health, First Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, ChinaThese authors contributed equally to this work.Search for more papers by this authorC. Ding, C. Ding Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China Key Laboratory of Combined Multi-Organ Transplantation, Ministry of Public Health, First Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, ChinaThese authors contributed equally to this work.Search for more papers by this authorS. Zheng, Corresponding Author S. Zheng Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, First Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China Key Laboratory of Combined Multi-Organ Transplantation, Ministry of Public Health, First Affiliated Hospital, School of Medicine, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China Correspondence to: Prof. Shusen Zheng, Division of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Key Laboratory of Combined Multi-organ Transplantation, Ministry of Health, First Affiliated Hospital, Zhejiang University School of Medicine, Hangzhou, 79 Qingchun Road, Zhejiang 310003, China Tel.: + 86-571-87236601 Fax: + 86-571-87236739 Email: [email protected].Search for more papers by this author First published: 27 March 2014 https://doi.org/10.1111/ijcp.12399 Disclosure Publication of this supplement article was supported as part of an unrestricted educational grant by Novartis. Novartis provided financial support for English-language editorial services. The authors declare that they do not have any potential conflict of interest with respect to this manuscript. Read the full textAboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL No abstract is available for this article. References 1Allison AC, Hovi T, Watts RW, Webster AD. Immunological observations on patients with Lesch-Nyhan syndrome, and on the role of de-novo purine synthesis in lymphocyte transformation. Lancet 1975; 2(7946): 1179– 83. 2Allison AC, Eugui EM. Immunosuppressive and other effects of mycophenolic acid and an ester prodrug, mycophenolate mofetil. Immunol Rev 1993; 136: 5– 28. 3Knoll GA, MacDonald I, Khan A, Van Walraven C. Mycophenolate mofetil dose reduction and the risk of acute rejection after renal transplantation. J Am Soc Nephrol 2003; 14(9): 2381– 6. 4Tierce JC, Porterfield-Baxa J, Petrilla AA, Kilburg A, Ferguson RM. Impact of mycophenolate mofetil (MMF)-related gastrointestinal complications and MMF dose alterations on transplant outcomes and healthcare costs in renal transplant recipients. Clin Transplant 2005; 19(6): 779– 84. 5Hardinger KL, Brennan DC, Lowell J, Schnitzler MA. Long-term outcome of gastrointestinal complications in renal transplant patients treated with mycophenolate mofetil. Transpl Int 2004; 17(10): 609– 16. 6Bunnapradist S, Lentine KL, Burroughs TE et al. Mycophenolate mofetil dose reductions and discontinuations after gastrointestinal complications are associated with renal transplant graft failure. Transplantation 2006; 82(1): 102– 7. 7Arns W, Breuer S, Choudhury S et al. Enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium delivers bioequivalent MPA exposure compared with mycophenolate mofetil. Clin Transplant 2005; 19(2): 199– 206. 8Tedesco-Silva H, Bastien MC, Choi L et al. Mycophenolic acid metabolite profile in renal transplant patients receiving enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium or mycophenolate mofetil. Transplant Proc 2005; 37(2): 852– 5. 9Arns W, Gies M, Choi L et al. Absorption characteristics of EC-MPS – an enteric-coated formulation of mycophenolic sodium. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther 2006; 44(8): 375– 85. 10Budde K, Bauer S, Hambach P et al. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic comparison of enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium and mycophenolate mofetil in maintenance renal transplant patients. Am J Transplant 2007; 7(4): 888– 98. 11Johnston A, He X, Holt DW. Bioequivalence of enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium and mycophenolate mofetil: a meta-analysis of three studies in stable renal transplant recipients. Transplantation 2006; 82(11): 1413– 8. 12Abd Rahman AN, Tett SE, Staatz CE. Clinical pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of mycophenolate in patients with autoimmune disease. Clin Pharmacokinet 2013; 52(5): 303– 31. 13Traitanon O, Avihingsanon Y, Kittikovit V et al. Efficacy of enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium in patients with resistant-type lupus nephritis: a prospective study. Lupus 2008; 17(8): 744– 51. 14Czock D, Rasche FM, Carius A et al. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of mycophenolic acid after enteric-coated mycophenolate versus mycophenolate mofetil in patients with progressive IgA nephritis. J Clin Pharmacol 2007; 47(7): 850– 9. 15Glander P, Sommerer C, Arns W et al. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of intensified versus standard dosing of mycophenolate sodium in renal transplant patients. Clin J Am Soc Nephrol 2010; 5(3): 503– 11. 16Sommerer C, Glander P, Arns W et al. Safety and efficacy of intensified versus standard dosing regimens of enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium in de novo renal transplant patients. Transplantation 2011; 91(7): 779– 85. 17Budde K, Tedesco-Silva H, Arns W et al. Improved rejection prophylaxis with an initially intensified dosing regimen of enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium in de novo renal transplant recipients. Transplantation 2011; 92(3): 321– 7. 18Chadban S, Eris J, Russ G et al. Enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium in combination with full dose or reduced dose cyclosporine, basiliximab and corticosteroids in Australian de novo kidney transplant patients. Nephrology (Carlton) 2013; 18(1): 63– 70. 19Thierry A, Mourad G, Buchler M et al. Steroid avoidance with early intensified dosing of enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium: a randomized multicentre trial in kidney transplant recipients. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2012; 27(9): 3651– 9. 20Salvadori M, Holzer H, de Mattos A et al. Enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium is therapeutically equivalent to mycophenolate mofetil in de novo renal transplant patients. Am J Transplant 2004; 4(2): 231– 6. 21Ciancio G, Burke GW, Gaynor JJ et al. Randomized trial of mycophenolate mofetil versus enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium in primary renal transplant recipients given tacrolimus and daclizumab/thymoglobulin: one year follow-up. Transplantation 2008; 86(1): 67– 74. 22Cooper M, Deering KL, Slakey DP et al. Comparing outcomes associated with dose manipulations of enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium versus mycophenolate mofetil in renal transplant recipients. Transplantation 2009; 88(4): 514– 20. 23Sollinger HW, Sundberg AK, Leverson G, Voss BJ, Pirsch JD. Mycophenolate mofetil versus enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium: a large, single-center comparison of dose adjustments and outcomes in kidney transplant recipients. Transplantation 2010; 89(4): 446– 51. 24Irish W, Arcona S, Gifford RJ, Baillie GM, Cooper M. Enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium versus mycophenolate mofetil maintenance immunosuppression: outcomes analysis of the United Network for Organ Sharing/Organ Procurement and Transplantation Network database. Transplantation 2010; 90(1): 23– 30. 25Chan L, Mulgaonkar S, Walker R, Arns W, Ambuhl P, Schiavelli R. Patient-reported gastrointestinal symptom burden and health-related quality of life following conversion from mycophenolate mofetil to enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium. Transplantation 2006; 81(9): 1290– 7. 26Bolin P, Tanriover B, Zibari GB et al. Improvement in 3-month patient-reported gastrointestinal symptoms after conversion from mycophenolate mofetil to enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium in renal transplant patients. Transplantation 2007; 84(11): 1443– 51. 27Shehata M, Bhandari S, Venkat-Raman G et al. Effect of conversion from mycophenolate mofetil to enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium on maximum tolerated dose and gastrointestinal symptoms following kidney transplantation. Transpl Int 2009; 22(8): 821– 30. 28Langone AJ, Chan L, Bolin P, Cooper M. Enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium versus mycophenolate mofetil in renal transplant recipients experiencing gastrointestinal intolerance: a multicenter, double-blind, randomized study. Transplantation 2011; 91(4): 470– 8. 29Ortega F, Sanchez-Fructuoso A, Cruzado JM et al. Gastrointestinal quality of life improvement of renal transplant recipients converted from mycophenolate mofetil to enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium drugs or agents: mycophenolate mofetil and enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium. Transplantation 2011; 92(4): 426– 32. Volume68, Issues181Special Issue: EC‐MPS in Chinese Organ Transplant Recipients. Guest editor: Prof. Shu‐sen Zheng. Publication of this supplement was supported by Novartis.April 2014Pages 1-3 ReferencesRelatedInformation