scholarly journals Total testing process applied to therapeutic drug monitoring: impact on patients’ outcomes and economics

1998 ◽  
Vol 44 (2) ◽  
pp. 370-374 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gerald E Schumacher ◽  
Judith T Barr

Abstract The Total Testing Process (TTP) refers to the sequence of 11 steps of laboratory testing, beginning with a clinical question prompted by the patient–clinician encounter and concluding with the impact of the test result on patient care. TTP when applied to therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) emphasizes that TDM must be considered a process involving a series of steps and interrelated activities and not viewed simply as a numerical value for a serum drug concentration. TTP is also an ideal format for organizing and identifying the system-related and patient-centered variables used in outcomes assessment of TDM, as well as providing a template for collecting the cost data needed for economic analyses. Examples are provided for improving application of TDM by practitioners, clinical laboratories, and educators.

Author(s):  
Paul Firman ◽  
Karen Whitfield ◽  
Ken‐Soon Tan ◽  
Alexandra Clavarino ◽  
Karen Hay

Diagnosis ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Adrian Klak ◽  
Steven Pauwels ◽  
Pieter Vermeersch

Abstract Background Dried blood spots (DBSs) could allow patients to prepare their own samples at home and send them to the laboratory for therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of immunosuppressants. The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of the current knowledge about the impact of DBS-related preanalytical factors on TDM of tacrolimus, sirolimus and everolimus. Content Blood spot volume, blood spot inhomogeneity, stability of analytes in DBS and hematocrit (Hct) effects are considered important DBS-related preanalytical factors. In addition, the influence of drying time has recently been identified as a noteworthy preanalytical factor. Tacrolimus is not significantly influenced by these factors. Sirolimus and everolimus are more prone to heat degradation and exhibited variations in recovery which were dependent on Hct and drying time. Summary and outlook DBS-related preanalytical factors can have a significant impact on TDM for immunosuppressants. Tacrolimus is not significantly influenced by the studied preanalytical factors and is a viable candidate for DBS sampling. For sirolimus and everolimus more validation of preanalytical factors is needed. In particular, drying conditions need to be examined further, as current protocols may mask Hct-dependent effects on recovery. Further validation is also necessary for home-based self-sampling of immunosuppressants as the sampling quality is variable.


2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S412-S412
Author(s):  
G Bodini ◽  
M G Demarzo ◽  
A Djahandideh ◽  
I Baldissarro ◽  
E Savarino ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Therapeutic Drug Monitoring (TDM) is a useful tool to help physicians managing patients with Inflammatory Bowel Disease treated with anti-tumour necrosis factor (TNF) drugs. Different techniques are available to evaluate serum drug concentration (TL), However, these techniques are time-consuming. A point-of-care (POC) method has been proposed to evaluate drug TL and overcome the limitations inherent to other methodologies. Our aim was to evaluate the capability of POC to discriminate between IBD relapse and remission and to evaluate the concordance of drug TL measured with POC and HMSA Methods We analysed with Quantum BlueÒ (Buhlmann Laboratories AG, Schonenbuch, Switzerland) (POC) 200 Adalimumab (ADA) and 200 Infliximab serum samples of 46 Crohn’s disease (CD) patients previously assessed with HMSA. Blood samples were drawn at standardised time points during anti-TNF treatment (2, 6, and every 8 weeks), before anti-TNF administration. Disease activity was assessed by the Harvey–Bradshaw Index (HBI, remission defined by HBI<5). Results We evaluated 46 CD patients responders to anti-TNF induction with ADA (n = 25, 54.3%) and IFX (n = 21, 45.6%) with a median follow-up of 83 weeks (range 16–144 weeks). At week 16, median ADA TL of patients in remission were significantly higher as compared with patients in disease relapse using both HMSA [12.7 μg/ml (range, 8.9–23.6 μg/ml) vs. 6.6 μg/ml (range, 0.7–9.6 μg/ml), p = 0.0001] and POC [17.8 μg/ml (range 7.6–35.0 μg/ml) vs. 9.8 μg/ml (range 5.8–11.4 μg/ml), p = 0.0003]. The concordance between the two different techniques has been assessed as 0.76 by Choen Kappa. Considering IFX TL, patients in remission had higher serum drug concentration using both HMSA [7.0 μg/ml (range, 0.0–21.8 μg/ml)] and POC [6.2 μg/ml (range 0.4–14.3 μg/ml)] as compared with patients who experienced disease relapse [HMSA, 0.1 μg/ml (range, 0.0–4.1 μg/ml), p = 0.019; POC, 0.45 μg/ml (range 0.4–3.3 μg/ml), p = 0.0072]. The concordance between the two different test for IFX TL was 0.81. We obtained similar results at the end of follow-up: median ADA TL was higher in remission than in disease relapse patients using both HMSA and POC [p = 0.001 and p = 0.0012] with a concordance of 0.75. Median IFX TL was higher in remission than in disease relapse patients using both HMSA and POC (p = 0.13 and p = 0.25) with a concordance of 0.70. Conclusion Both POC and HMSA are TL tests able to differentiate relapse and remission in IBD patients. The association between anti-TNF TL and disease status (remission/relapse) was better in ADA-treated patients rather than patients treated with IFX. Finally, we demonstrated a good concordance between HMSA and POC. Anti-drug antibody concentrations while available on HMSA were not available on POC


2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. S636-S636
Author(s):  
Anooj Shah ◽  
Carly D’Agostino ◽  
Kathleen Cunningham ◽  
Clare Kane ◽  
Michael G Ison ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The utility and clinical impact of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of prophylactic azole antifungals in lung transplant recipients is not well described. The objective of this study was to investigate the impact of TDM of azole prophylaxis in lung transplant recipients on the development of positive fungal events. Methods A retrospective analysis was performed on 47 lung transplant recipients between 2013 and 2018 at Northwestern Memorial Hospital. A positive fungal event was defined as fungal species on BAL culture and/or positive BAL Aspergillus galactomannan (GM) with an index value ≥1.0. Study groups were defined based on attainment of therapeutic trough levels after initiation of oral therapy (therapeutic if posaconazole level ≥0.7 μg/mL or voriconazole ≥1–5.5 μg/mL, subtherapeutic if ≥2 consecutive levels of posaconazole <0.7 μg/mL or voriconazole <1 μg/mL after initial dose increase). Results There were no differences in baseline characteristics (Figure 1). There were a total of 11 fungal events with 3 (12.0%) occurring in the therapeutic cohort and 8 (36.4%) in those subtherapeutic (P = 0.08). In the 5 patients with a positive GM, the mean index was 2.02 ± 0.95. 7/30 (23.3%) of patients on posaconazole had a fungal event, with 2/7 (28.6%) requiring treatment at the time of event. For patients on voriconazole, 4/17 (23.5%) had a fungal event, with 1/4 (25.0%) requiring treatment. Mean time to fungal event was 164.5 ± 8.9 days vs. 135.9 ± 13.7 days in the therapeutic and subtherapeutic group, respectively (P = 0.05). All patients on posaconazole suspension who experienced a fungal event were subtherapeutic (3/3, 100%) compared with the majority of patients on posaconazole delayed release (DR) tablets who achieved therapeutic levels (17/22, 77.3%). Mean posaconazole trough level observed in the patients receiving DR tablet was 2.15 ± 0.95 μg/mL. Conclusion There was an association between two consecutive subtherapeutic azole prophylaxis levels and positive fungal events indicating a role for TDM in lung transplant recipients. Time to fungal event post-transplant was shorter in subtherapeutic patients. As anticipated, the use of posaconazole suspension resulted in subtherapeutic levels. This study presents an opportunity for further research of the impact of TDM on clinical outcomes to optimize patient care. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.


Pharmaceutics ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 47
Author(s):  
Kenneth H. Wills ◽  
Stephen J. Behan ◽  
Michael J. Nance ◽  
Jessica L. Dawson ◽  
Thomas M. Polasek ◽  
...  

Background: Clozapine is a key antipsychotic drug for treatment-resistant schizophrenia but exhibits highly variable pharmacokinetics and a propensity for serious adverse effects. Currently, these challenges are addressed using therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). This study primarily sought to (i) verify the importance of covariates identified in a prior clozapine population pharmacokinetic (popPK) model in the absence of environmental covariates using physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modelling, and then to (ii) evaluate the performance of the popPK model as an adjunct or alternative to TDM-guided dosing in an active TDM population. Methods: A popPK model incorporating age, metabolic activity, sex, smoking status and weight was applied to predict clozapine trough concentrations (Cmin) in a PBPK-simulated population and an active TDM population comprising 142 patients dosed to steady state at Flinders Medical Centre in Adelaide, South Australia. Post hoc analyses were performed to deconvolute the impact of physiological and environmental covariates in the TDM population. Results: Analysis of PBPK simulations confirmed age, cytochrome P450 1A2 activity, sex and weight as physiological covariates associated with variability in clozapine Cmin (R2 = 0.7698; p = 0.0002). Prediction of clozapine Cmin using a popPK model based on these covariates accounted for <5% of inter-individual variability in the TDM population. Post hoc analyses confirmed that environmental covariates accounted for a greater proportion of the variability in clozapine Cmin in the TDM population. Conclusions: Variability in clozapine exposure was primarily driven by environmental covariates in an active TDM population. Pharmacokinetic modelling can be used as an adjunct to TDM to deconvolute sources of variability in clozapine exposure.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document