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


     

Clinical Chemistry 39: 1415-1419, 1993;
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 McBride, J. H.
Right arrow Articles by Ota, M. K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by McBride, J. H.
Right arrow Articles by Ota, M. K.

Clinical Chemistry, Vol 39, 1415-1419, Copyright © 1993 by American Association for Clinical Chemistry

Whole-blood cyclosporin G in renal transplant recipients determined by two immunoassays and liquid chromatography

JH McBride, SS Kim, GM Danovitch, DO Rodgerson, AF Reyes and MK Ota
Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, UCLA School of Medicine 90024-1732.

Cyclosporin G (CsG) is less nephrotoxic than cyclosporin A (CsA) and is undergoing clinical trials for use as an immunosuppressive agent after renal transplantation. Three assays for whole-blood CsA-HPLC, RIA (INCSTAR, Cyclo-Trac SP), and FPIA (Abbott TDx)--were adapted for use with CsG and were assessed for analytical suitability and to determine which assay was capable of deriving CsG values rapidly after transplantation. The assays were acceptable in terms of sensitivity, linearity, analytical recovery, and precision. When considering blood samples (n = 107) from renal transplant recipients receiving a low dose of CsG (5 mg/kg per day) and a high dose (10 mg/kg per day), we obtained the following correlation data: RIA = 0.974HPLC + 27.89 (r = 0.9798, Sy/x = 39.24); FPIA = 0.964HPLC + 33.59 (r = 0.9819, Sy/x = 36.66); and FPIA = 0.977RIA + 9.50 (r = 0.9894, Sy/x = 28.12). The FPIA of CsG is recommended as the most rapid method, although it is the most expensive. HPLC, RIA, and FPIA were capable of accurately deriving projected CsG concentrations at various stages of the clinical trial when the low- and high-dose regimes were tapered over a period of 16 weeks.




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1993 by the American Association for Clinical Chemistry.