A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF BIOEQUIVALENCE, CLINICAL EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF GENERIC VERSUS ORIGINAL CYCLOSPORINE AFTER KIDNEY TRANSPLANTATION

The aim of the study was the evaluation of pharmacokinetic parameters and clinical efficacy of generic cyclosporine (Ecoral) and Sandimmune Neoral. Materials and methods’. The pharmacokinetic parameters of different cyclosporine formulations. In 197 kidney graft recipients 319 comprehensive pharmacokinetic studies were performed. In 42 patients received in consecutive order original and generic Cyclosporine in the same dosage the complete pharmacokinetic study was perforfomed. AUC calculations based on dosing interval concentration values were fulfilled using linear trapezoidal rule. To evaluate clinical efficacy 235 short pharmacokinetic studies with concentration examination at 0, 1, 2 and 3 hours after taking Cyclosporine (Co, C1 C2 and C3) were performed in patients treated with Neoral (n = 75) or generic cyclosporine (n = 160). Clinical efficacy of generic cyclosporine was estimated by the prevalence of allograft dysfunction and biopsy proved acute rejection episodes as well as by one-years graft survival and events-free survival. The graft survival rate was calculated by Kaplan–Meyer method. Results. At 100–200 ng/ml maintenance concentration (estimated by C0 concentration) pharmacokinetic parameters did not significantly differ according to Cyclosporine formulation in both complete or short pharmacokinetic studies: AUC-4265 vs. 4204 and 3834 vs. 3670 ng/ml/h respectively; (p > 0.05), Cmax (1036 vs 931 and 813 vs 741 ng/ml respectively; (p > 0.05). Allograft dysfunction occurred in 5% of patients subjected to Neoral immunosuppression and in 8% of Equoral recipients (p > 0.05). However biopsy-proven acute rejection as a cause of graft dysfunction was seen only in patients receiving Ecoral (7% vs 0; p < 0.05). One-years graft survival rate did not differ between groups (99% and 94% in generic CyA and Neoral respectively; p > 0.05), whereas events-free graft survival was significantly lower in patients, receiving generic CyA than in Neoral group (88 vs 94% respectively; p = 0,03). Conclusion. Pharmacokinetic studies have shown the absorption profile of generic formulations Equoral do not differ significantly from that of Neoral. Prospective pilot trial demonstrated no difference between one-year graft survival or graft dysfunction rate, but lower eventsfree one-year graft survival as well as the tendency to higher acute rejection rate in patients treated with generics in comparison with those receiving Neoral should be noted. This issue is to be studied further. 

1. Kälble T, Alcaraz A, Budde K et al. Guidelines on Renal Transplantation. Updated March 2009. Accepted on uroveb. org.

2. Johnston A, Belitsky P, Frey U. Potential clinical implication of substitution of generic cyclosporine formulations for cyclosporine (Neoral) in transplant recipients. European Journal of clinical pharmacology. 60 (6): 389–395.

3. Pollard S, Nashan B, Johnston A. A Pharmacokinetic and clinical review of the potential clinical impact of using different formulations of Cyclosporin A. Clinical Therapeutics. 2003; 25 (6): 1654–1664.

4. Masri MA, Barbari A, Stephan A. Pharmacokinetics in stable renal tansplant patients: effect of formulation sandimmun versus consupren versus neural. Transplant Proc. 1996; 28: 1318–1320.

5. Noble S, Markham A. Cyclosporin: аreviеw of its pharmacokinetic properties, clinical efficacy and tolerability of microemulsion-based formulation (Neoral). Drugs, 1995; 50: 924–941.

6. Столяревич ЕС. Сандиммун Неорал и генерические препараты циклоспорина; проблема взаимозаменяемости. Нефрология и диализ. 2006; 8 (2): 141–147. Stolyarevich ES. Sandimmun Neoral i genericheskie preparaty ciklosporina; problema vzaimozamenjajemosti. Nefrologiya i dialis. 2006; 8 (2): 141–147.

7. Kahan BD, Welsh M, Rutzky L. P Challenges in Cyclosporine therapy: The role of therapeutic monitoring by area under the curve monitoring. Ther. Dtug. Monit. 1995; 17: 621–624.

8. Kahan BD, Welsh M, Urbauer D.L. Low Intraindividual Variability of Cyclosporin A Exposure Reduces Chronic Rejection Incidence and Health Care Costs Am SocNephrol. 2000; 11: 1122–1131.

9. CTS Collaborative study. www.ctstransplant.org

10. Gaspari F, Anedda MF, Signorini O et al. Prediction of cyclosporine area under the curve using a three-point sampling strategy after Neoral administration. J. Am. Soc. Nephrol. 1997; 8 (4): 647–652.