Three-years experience with Neoral C₂ monitoring adjusted to a target range of 500–600 ng/ml in long-term renal transplant recipients receiving dual immunosuppressive therapy

References

• Kahan BD, Keown P, Levy GA, Johnston A. Therapeutic drug monitoring of immunosuppressant drugs in clinical practice. Clin Ther 2002; 24: 330–50
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lindholm A. Cyclosporine A: clinical experience and therapeutic drug monitoring. Ther Drug Monit 1995; 17: 631–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mahalati K, Belitsky P, Sketris I, West K, Panek R. Neoral monitoring by simplified sparse sampling area under the concentration-time curve: its relationship to acute rejection and cyclosporine nephrotoxicity early after kidney transplantation. Transplantation 1999; 15: 55–62
   Google Scholar
• International Neoral Renal Transplantation Study Group. Cyclosporine microemulsion (Neoral) absorption profiling and sparse-sample predictors during the first 3 months after renal transplantation. Am J Transplant 2002;2:148–56.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levy G. C2 monitoring strategy for optimising cyclosporine immunosuppression. BioDrugs 2001; 15: 279–90
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thervet E, Pfeffer P, Scolari MP, Toselli L, Pallardó LM, Chadban S, et al. Clinical outcomes during the first three months posttransplant in renal allograft recipients managed by C2 monitoring of cyclosporine microemulsion. Transplantation 2003; 76: 903–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vincenti F, Mendez R, Curtis J, Light J, Pearson TC, Wu YM, et al. A multicenter, prospective study of C2-monitored cyclosporine microemulsion in a U.S. population of de novo renal transplant recipients. Transplantation 2005; 80: 910–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stefoni S, Midtved K, Cole E, Thervet E, Cockfield S, Buchler M, et al. on behalf of the MO2ART Study Group. Efficacy and safety outcomes among de novo renal transplant recipients managed by C2 monitoring of cyclosporine a microemulsion: results of a 12-month, randomized, multicenter study. Transplantation 2005; 79: 577–83
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Di Paolo S, Teutonico A, Schena A, Infante B, Stallone G, Granaliano G, et al. Conversion to C2 monitoring of cyclosporine A exposure in maintenance kidney transplant recipients: results at 3 years. Am J Kidney Dis 2004; 44: 886–92
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paydas S, Balal M, Sertdemir Y, Seyrek N, Karayaylali I. Long-term comparative results of C0 and C2 monitoring of CyA in renal transplanted patients. Ren Fail 2005; 27: 409–13
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levy G, Thervet E, Lake J, Uchida K. Patient management by Neoral C2 monitoring: an international consensus statement. Transplantation 2002; 9: S12–8
   Google Scholar
• Nashan B, Bock A, Bosmans J-L, Budde K, de Fijter H, Jaques B, et al. Use of Neoral C2 monitoring: a European consensus. Transplant Int 2005; 18: 768–78
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Racusen LC, Solez K, Colvin RB, Bonsib SM, Castro MC, Cavallo T, et al. The Banff 97 working classification of renal allograft pathology. Kidney Int 1999; 55: 713–23
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Einecke G, Mai I, Fritsche L, Slowinski T, Waiser J, Neumayer H-H, et al. The value of C2 monitoring in stable renal allograft recipients on maintenance immunosuppression. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2004; 19: 215–22
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cole E, Maham N, Cardella C, Cattran D, Fenton S, Hamel J, et al. Clinical benefits of neoral C2 monitoring in the long-term management of renal transplant recipients. Transplantation 2003; 75: 2086–90
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cantarovich M, Barkun JS, Tchervenko JI, Besner JC, Aspeslet L, Metrakos P. Comparison of neoral dose monitoring with cyclosporine trough levels versus 2-hr postdose levels in stable liver transplant patients. Transplantation 1998; 66: 1621–7
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cantarovich M, Elstein E, deVarennes B, Barkun JS. Clinical benefit of neoral dose monitoring with cyclosporine 2-hr post-dose levels compared with trough levels in stable heart transplant patients. Transplantation 1999; 68: 1839–42
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Citterio F, Scata MC, Romagnoli J, Nanni G, Castagneto M. Results of a three-year prospective study of C2 monitoring in long-term renal transplant recipients receiving cyclosporine microemulsion. Transplantation 2005; 79: 802–6
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Citterio F, Scata MC, Pozzetto U, Nanni G, Castagneto M. Long-term predictive value of cyclosporine microemulsion C2 level for chronic renal allograft dysfunction. Transplant Proc 2003; 35: 2894–8
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Danish National Registry Report on Dialysis and Transplantation in Denmark 2005. Available from: www.nephrology.dk/publikationer/landsregister.
   Google Scholar
• Marcen R, Villafruela JJ, Pascual J, Teruel JL, Ocana J, Tenorio MT, et al. Clinical outcomes and C2 cyclosporine monitoring in maintenance renal transplant recipients: 1 year follow-up study. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2005; 20: 803–10
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waiser J, Slowinski T, Brinker-Paschke A, Budde K, Schreiber M, Böhler T, et al. Impact of the variability of cyclosporine A trough levels on the long-term allograft function. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2002; 17: 1310–17
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar