Clinical Chemistry AACC Online Job Center
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Clinical Chemistry 33: 2225-2229, 1987;
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit an electronic Letter to
the Editor about this paper
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Schran, H. F.
Right arrow Articles by Pell, M. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Schran, H. F.
Right arrow Articles by Pell, M. A.

Clinical Chemistry, Vol 33, 2225-2229, Copyright © 1987 by American Association for Clinical Chemistry

Determination of cyclosporine concentrations with monoclonal antibodies

HF Schran, TG Rosano, AE Hassell and MA Pell
Drug Safety and Metabolism Division, Sandoz Research Institute, East Hanover, NJ 07936.

We measured cyclosporine in whole blood from normal volunteers administered single oral doses of the drug and from two renal- transplant patients on immunosuppressive maintenance therapy, by liquid chromatography (I) and by radioimmunoassay with use of nonspecific polyclonal (II), specific monoclonal (III), and nonspecific monoclonal (IV) antibodies. Concentrations determined by III were equivalent to I, irrespective of cyclosporine dose, concentration, time after dose, or time after transplant. Concentrations determined by II and IV were consistently higher than those by I, owing to cross reactivity with metabolites. Ratios of values by II and IV to those by I increased from less than 1.5 to about 3-4 between 0.5 and 12 h after a single cyclosporine dose, owing to differences in rates of appearance and disappearance of cyclosporine and cross-reacting metabolites, though for the constant 12-h dose intervals in the two renal-transplant patients at steady state these ratios (most within the range 3-4) were relatively stable. Ratios of concentrations measured by IV to those by II (mean of 1.2 for single-dose data, most within the range of 1.2 to 1.5 at steady state) were unaffected by time after dose or time after transplant, suggesting that, despite certain cross-reactivity differences between the two nonspecific antibodies, results are proportional throughout therapy. We therefore propose that III and IV offer alternatives, respectively, to the currently used I and II for cyclosporine monitoring.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1987 by the American Association for Clinical Chemistry.