title: Maximum a posteriori Bayesian estimation of mycophenolic Acid area under the concentration-time curve: is this clinically useful for dosage prediction yet?
abstract: This review seeks to summarize the available data about Bayesian estimation of area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) and dosage prediction for mycophenolic acid (MPA) and evaluate whether sufficient evidence is available for routine use of Bayesian dosage prediction in clinical practice. A literature search identified 14 studies that assessed the predictive performance of maximum a posteriori Bayesian estimation of MPA AUC and one report that retrospectively evaluated how closely dosage recommendations based on Bayesian forecasting achieved targeted MPA exposure. Studies to date have mostly been undertaken in renal transplant recipients, with limited investigation in patients treated with MPA for autoimmune disease or haematopoietic stem cell transplantation. All of these studies have involved use of the mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) formulation of MPA, rather than the enteric-coated mycophenolate sodium (EC-MPS) formulation. Bias associated with estimation of MPA AUC using Bayesian forecasting was generally less than 10%. However some difficulties with imprecision was evident, with values ranging from 4% to 34% (based on estimation involving two or more concentration measurements). Evaluation of whether MPA dosing decisions based on Bayesian forecasting (by the free website service https://pharmaco.chu-limoges.fr) achieved target drug exposure has only been undertaken once. When MMF dosage recommendations were applied by clinicians, a higher proportion (72-80%) of subsequent estimated MPA AUC values were within the 30-60 mg · h/L target range, compared with when dosage recommendations were not followed (only 39-57% within target range). Such findings provide evidence that Bayesian dosage prediction is clinically useful for achieving target MPA AUC. This study, however, was retrospective and focussed only on adult renal transplant recipients. Furthermore, in this study, Bayesian-generated AUC estimations and dosage predictions were not compared with a later full measured AUC but rather with a further AUC estimate based on a second Bayesian analysis. This study also provided some evidence that a useful monitoring schedule for MPA AUC following adult renal transplant would be every 2 weeks during the first month post-transplant, every 1-3 months between months 1 and 12, and each year thereafter. It will be interesting to see further validations in different patient groups using the free website service. In summary, the predictive performance of Bayesian estimation of MPA, comparing estimated with measured AUC values, has been reported in several studies. However, the next step of predicting dosages based on these Bayesian-estimated AUCs, and prospectively determining how closely these predicted dosages give drug exposure matching targeted AUCs, remains largely unaddressed. Further prospective studies are required, particularly in non-renal transplant patients and with the EC-MPS formulation. Other important questions remain to be answered, such as: do Bayesian forecasting methods devised to date use the best population pharmacokinetic models or most accurate algorithms; are the methods simple to use for routine clinical practice; do the algorithms actually improve dosage estimations beyond empirical recommendations in all groups that receive MPA therapy; and, importantly, do the dosage predictions, when followed, improve patient health outcomes?
authors.affiliation: School of Pharmacy, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
authors.forename: Christine E
authors.initials: CE
authors.lastname: Staatz
authors.forename: Susan E
authors.initials: SE
authors.lastname: Tett
mesh_terms: D000903:Antibiotics, Antineoplastic / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000097:blood / Q000493:pharmacokinetics*; D019540:Area Under Curve; D001499:Bayes Theorem; D004305:Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; D006801:Humans; D009173:Mycophenolic Acid / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000097:blood / Q000493:pharmacokinetics*
chemical_list: D000903:Antibiotics, Antineoplastic; D009173:Mycophenolic Acid
references.citation: Pharmacogenomics. 2010 Mar;11(3):369-90
references.pmid: 20235793
references.citation: J Pharmacokinet Biopharm. 1994 Oct;22(5):431-45
references.pmid: 7791040
references.citation: Clin Ther. 2006 Jun;28(6):893-905
references.pmid: 16860172
references.citation: Arthritis Rheum. 2010 Jul;62(7):2047-54
references.pmid: 20506558
references.citation: Am J Transplant. 2009 Jul;9(7):1607-19
references.pmid: 19459794
references.citation: Semin Arthritis Rheum. 2011 Feb;40(4):307-13
references.pmid: 20655577
references.citation: Ther Drug Monit. 2011 Apr;33(2):165-70
references.pmid: 21383656
references.citation: Arthritis Res Ther. 2010;12(6):R217
references.pmid: 21176194
references.citation: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2010 Feb;5(2):341-58
references.pmid: 20056756
references.citation: Ther Drug Monit. 2005 Apr;27(2):163-7
references.pmid: 15795646
references.citation: Clin Pharmacokinet. 2007;46(1):13-58
references.pmid: 17201457
references.citation: Ther Drug Monit. 2009 Jun;31(3):382-90
references.pmid: 19363460
references.citation: Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2005 Sep;60(3):249-56
references.pmid: 16120063
references.citation: Ther Drug Monit. 2010 Oct;32(5):594-605
references.pmid: 20736896
references.citation: Ther Drug Monit. 2007 Oct;29(5):600-6
references.pmid: 17898650
references.citation: Clin Pharmacokinet. 2004;43(4):253-66
references.pmid: 15005639
references.citation: Clin Pharmacokinet. 1992 Jun;22(6):447-67
references.pmid: 1587057
references.citation: Lupus. 2009 Apr;18(5):441-7
references.pmid: 19318398
references.citation: Clin Pharmacokinet. 2009;48(11):745-58
references.pmid: 19817503
references.citation: Ther Drug Monit. 2005 Jun;27(3):354-61
references.pmid: 15905807
references.citation: Transplant Rev (Orlando). 2011 Apr;25(2):47-57
references.pmid: 21190834
references.citation: Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2011 Aug;90(2):204-6
references.pmid: 21772295
references.citation: J Am Soc Nephrol. 2006 Mar;17(3):871-80
references.pmid: 16452491
references.citation: Ther Drug Monit. 2011 Apr;33(2):133-46
references.pmid: 21383653
references.citation: Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol. 2009 Sep;5(9):1079-97
references.pmid: 19689217
references.citation: Transplantation. 2010 Jul 15;90(1):44-51
references.pmid: 20463644
references.citation: Ther Drug Monit. 2006 Jun;28(3):419-30
references.pmid: 16778729
references.citation: Clin Pharmacokinet. 2009;48(10):667-75
references.pmid: 19743888
references.citation: Transplantation. 2010 Dec 27;90(12):1536-41
references.pmid: 21076373
references.citation: Liver Transpl. 2008 Aug;14(8):1165-73
references.pmid: 18668650
references.citation: Ther Drug Monit. 2010 Oct;32(5):606-14
references.pmid: 20720518
references.citation: Ther Drug Monit. 2011 Jun;33(3):285-94
references.pmid: 21516060
references.citation: Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2007 Jun;63(6):741-52
references.pmid: 17214827
references.citation: Ther Drug Monit. 2009 Apr;31(2):224-32
references.pmid: 19214145
references.citation: J Am Soc Nephrol. 2003 Sep;14(9):2381-6
references.pmid: 12937317
references.citation: Transplant Rev (Orlando). 2009 Jul;23(3):171-7
references.pmid: 19345081
references.citation: Am J Transplant. 2004 Jul;4(7):1079-83
references.pmid: 15196064
references.citation: Clin Transplant. 2003 Jun;17(3):200-5
references.pmid: 12780668
references.citation: Ther Drug Monit. 2008 Aug;30(4):445-55
references.pmid: 18641543
references.citation: Am J Transplant. 2007 Nov;7(11):2496-503
references.pmid: 17908276
references.citation: Transpl Int. 2005 Feb;18(2):140-50
references.pmid: 15691265
references.citation: Pharmacol Res. 2011 May;63(5):423-31
references.pmid: 21272643
references.citation: Pharmacol Res. 2010 Feb;61(2):167-74
references.pmid: 19800973
references.citation: J Clin Pharmacol. 2003 Aug;43(8):866-80
references.pmid: 12953344
references.citation: Transplantation. 2008 Jun 27;85(12):1675-85
references.pmid: 18580456
references.citation: Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol. 2011 Jun;7(6):731-43
references.pmid: 21434840
references.citation: Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2010 Apr;69(4):358-66
references.pmid: 20406220
references.citation: Clin Pharmacokinet. 2011 Jan;50(1):1-24
references.pmid: 21142265
references.citation: Clin Pharmacokinet. 2008;47(4):277-84
references.pmid: 18336056
references.citation: Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2011 Aug;90(2):203-4
references.pmid: 21772294
references.citation: Comput Biomed Res. 1972 Oct;5(5):411-59
references.pmid: 4634367
references.citation: Ther Drug Monit. 2010 Dec;32(6):723-33
references.pmid: 21068647
references.citation: Curr Drug Metab. 2009 Feb;10(2):179-87
references.pmid: 19275552
references.citation: Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2011 Mar;6(3):656-63
references.pmid: 21088289
references.citation: Clin Pharmacokinet. 2012 Jan 1;51(1):29-39
references.pmid: 22054177
references.citation: Ther Drug Monit. 2005 Jun;27(3):378-88
references.pmid: 15905811
references.citation: Ther Drug Monit. 2006 Feb;28(1):31-4
references.pmid: 16418690
references.citation: Transplantation. 2006 Oct 27;82(8):1004-12
references.pmid: 17060847
references.citation: Pharmacol Res. 2011 Mar;63(3):216-24
references.pmid: 21056671
references.citation: Transplantation. 2008 Oct 27;86(8):1043-51
references.pmid: 18946341
references.citation: Am J Transplant. 2009 Jul;9(7):1495-9
references.pmid: 19519824