Association between medication adherence and intrapatient variability in tacrolimus concentration among stable kidney transplant recipients
Abstract This study analyzed the association between medication adherence and the intrapatient variability (IPV) of tacrolimus concentrations among kidney transplant recipients through a post hoc analysis of the dataset from a recently conducted randomized controlled trial. Among 138 patients enroll...
Guardado en:
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | article |
Lenguaje: | EN |
Publicado: |
Nature Portfolio
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://doaj.org/article/6fcd0eb2110b417c9369a67f1db76f8b |
Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
Sumario: | Abstract This study analyzed the association between medication adherence and the intrapatient variability (IPV) of tacrolimus concentrations among kidney transplant recipients through a post hoc analysis of the dataset from a recently conducted randomized controlled trial. Among 138 patients enrolled in the original trial, 92 patients with ≥ 5 months of medication event monitoring system (MEMS) use and ≥ 4 tacrolimus trough values were included in this post hoc analysis. The variability of tacrolimus trough levels was calculated using coefficient variation (CV) and mean absolute deviation. Adherence was assessed using MEMS and self-report via the Basal Assessment of Adherence to Immunosuppressive Medication Scale. There were no statistically significant differences in the CV [median 16.5% [interquartile range 11.6–25.5%] and 16.0% [11.5–23.5%], respectively, P = .602] between the nonadherent (n = 59) and adherent groups (n = 33). There was also no significant correlation between the CV and adherence detected by MEMS (taking adherence, ρ = − 0.067, P = .527; dosing adherence, ρ = − 0.098, P = .352; timing adherence, ρ = − 0.113, P = .284). Similarly, adherence measured by self-report did not significantly affect the IPV (P = .452). In this post hoc analysis, nonadherent behavior, measured through electronic monitoring or self-report, did not affect the IPV. |
---|