Display options
Share it on

Indian J Nephrol. 2013 Nov;23(6):419-23. doi: 10.4103/0971-4065.120338.

Cyclosporine/ketoconazole reduces treatment costs for nephrotic syndrome.

Indian journal of nephrology

A Iyengar, N Kamath, K D Phadke, M Bitzan

Affiliations

  1. Division of Pediatric Nephrology, St John's Medical College Hospital, Bangalore, India.

PMID: 24339519 PMCID: PMC3841509 DOI: 10.4103/0971-4065.120338

Abstract

Cyclosporine A (CyA) is an effective agent for the treatment of glucocorticoid-dependent idiopathic nephrotic syndrome (GCDNS), but costs are prohibitive in resource-poor societies. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the efficacy and safety of reducing the dose of CyA by co-administering ketoconazole. A prospective study targeting children 2-18 years of age with GCDNS in remission with CyA monotherapy was conducted. CyA dose was reduced by 50% and ketoconazole was added at 25% of the recommended therapeutic dose, and the drug levels and therapeutic and adverse effects (AE) were monitored. Continued combined therapy after completion of the 4-week trial period was offered. Ten patients (median age 9.5 years, range 3.0-16.0 years) were enrolled in the study. At week 4, the CyA dose was 2.2 ± 0.7 mg/kg/day compared with 5.6 ± 0.9 mg/kg/day at enrolment (P < 0.0001). No AE were noted. All patients continued ketoconazole treatment for at least 3 months. CyA drug cost savings were 61%, and approximately 60% with ketoconazole cost included. The combination of an expensive immunosuppressive drug with a cheap metabolic inhibitor reduced the treatment costs by> 50% without increased adverse events or drug monitoring needs. This intervention demonstrates how access of patients with limited resources to needed drugs can be improved by interference with physiological drug elimination.

Keywords: Azoles; India; co-administration; cyclosporine; nephrotic syndrome; pediatric

References

  1. N Engl J Med. 1994 Jan 27;330(4):263-72 - PubMed
  2. Clin Pharmacokinet. 1988 Jan;14(1):13-34 - PubMed
  3. N Engl J Med. 1995 Sep 7;333(10):628-33 - PubMed
  4. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2004 May;60(3):143-8 - PubMed
  5. Clin Pharmacokinet. 1997 May;32(5):357-67 - PubMed
  6. Clin Chem. 1993 Nov;39(11 Pt 1):2235-41 - PubMed
  7. Pharmacoeconomics. 1999 Apr;15(4):317-37 - PubMed
  8. Am J Kidney Dis. 2009 May;53(5):760-9 - PubMed
  9. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1999 Jul;66(1):66-75 - PubMed
  10. Transplant Proc. 2010 Jan-Feb;42(1):270-2 - PubMed
  11. Rev Panam Salud Publica. 2011 Jan;29(1):46-51 - PubMed
  12. Lancet. 1982 Dec 11;2(8311):1342-3 - PubMed
  13. Iran J Kidney Dis. 2009 Jul;3(3):127-35 - PubMed
  14. Pediatr Nephrol. 1994 Aug;8(4):492-3 - PubMed
  15. Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2004 Sep;19(9):2266-71 - PubMed
  16. Ethn Dis. 2006 Spring;16(2 Suppl 2):S2-70-2 - PubMed
  17. Kidney Int. 1988 Mar;33(3):729-34 - PubMed
  18. Pediatr Nephrol. 2004 Sep;19(9):976-81 - PubMed
  19. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther Toxicol. 1992 Dec;30(12):555-70 - PubMed
  20. Kidney Int. 2007 Dec;72(12):1429-47 - PubMed
  21. Pediatr Nephrol. 2011 Jun;26(6):881-92 - PubMed
  22. Pharmacotherapy. 2006 Dec;26(12):1730-44 - PubMed
  23. Am J Kidney Dis. 2001 Mar;37(3):510-7 - PubMed
  24. Int J Nephrol. 2012;2012:246128 - PubMed
  25. Biochem Pharmacol. 2004 Nov 1;68(9):1889-902 - PubMed
  26. Am J Nephrol. 1995;15(6):493-9 - PubMed
  27. Clin Transpl. 1991;:159-78 - PubMed
  28. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2003 Jan;127(1):19-22 - PubMed
  29. Indian J Med Res. 2005 Jul;122(1):13-28 - PubMed

Publication Types