Methods: This was a single-centre, retrospective cohort study evaluating posaconazole suspension pre-emptive therapy in LTx recipients between January 2009 and December 2015.
Results: Forty-two LTx recipients were prescribed posaconazole suspension pre-emptively. Aspergillus fumigatus was the most commonly isolated fungal organism. Of the patients receiving posaconazole suspension as the initial antifungal post-LTx, 93% had eradication of colonization at 6 months after commencing therapy. In contrast, only 61% had eradication of fungal colonization when posaconazole suspension was administered following initial therapy with voriconazole. Posaconazole suspension appeared to be well tolerated, although one case was curtailed following concern about abnormal liver function and another due to nausea/vomiting. TDM was performed in 37 patients. The initial median (IQR) trough plasma concentration ( C min ) following 400 mg twice-daily posaconazole suspension was 0.78 (0.46-1.19) mg/L. Doses beyond 800 mg daily did not appear to result in a higher median C min.
Conclusions: Early initiation of posaconazole suspension pre-emptive therapy in LTx recipients appears to be well tolerated and may potentially afford favourable clinical outcomes.
Methods: A single-centre, retrospective study evaluating posaconazole Cmin in LTx recipients receiving posaconazole suspension or MR tablets between January 2014 and December 2016.
Results: Forty-seven LTx patients received posaconazole suspension, and 78 received the MR tablet formulation; a total of 421 and 617 Cmin measurements were made, respectively. Posaconazole was concurrently administered with proton pump inhibitor in ≥ 90% of patients. The median (IQR) of initial posaconazole Cmin following 300 mg daily of posaconazole tablet was significantly higher than that of 800 mg daily of posaconazole suspension [1.65 (0.97-2.13) mg/L versus 0.81 (0.48-1.15) mg/L, P
METHODS: The pharmacology module consisted of a pharmacokinetic distribution of oseltamivir carboxylate daily area under the concentration-time curve at steady state (simulated for 75 mg and 150 mg twice daily regimens for 5 days) and a pharmacodynamic distribution of viral shedding duration obtained from phase II influenza inoculation data. The epidemiological module comprised a susceptible, exposed, infected, recovered (SEIR) model to which drug effect on the basic reproductive number (R0 ), a measure of transmissibility, was linked by reduction of viral shedding duration. The number of infected patients per population of 100 000 susceptible individuals was simulated for a series of pandemic scenarios, varying oseltamivir dose, R0 (1.9 vs. 2.7), and drug uptake (25%, 50%, and 80%). The number of infected patients for each scenario was entered into the health economics module, a decision analytic model populated with branch probabilities, disease utility, costs of hospitalized patients developing complications, and case-fatality rates. Change in quality-adjusted life years was determined relative to base case.
RESULTS: Oseltamivir 75 mg relative to no treatment reduced the median number of infected patients, increased change in quality-adjusted life years by deaths averted, and was cost-saving under all scenarios; 150 mg relative to 75 mg was not cost effective in low transmissibility scenarios but was cost saving in high transmissibility scenarios.
CONCLUSION: This methodological study demonstrates proof of concept that the disciplines of pharmacology, disease epidemiology and health economics can be linked in a single quantitative framework.