To Örebro University

oru.seÖrebro University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Dried Blood Spot Self-Sampling by Guardians of Children With Epilepsy Is Feasible: Comparison With Plasma for Multiple Antiepileptic Drugs
Division of Clinical Pharmacology, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Solna, Sweden; Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Department of Pediatrics, Sachsska Children's Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Department of Clinical Science, Technology and Intervention (CLINTEC), Karolinska Institutet, Solna, Sweden; Department of Pediatrics, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
Department of Clinical Pharmacology, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden; Departments of Clinical Science and Education, Södersjukhuset and Medicine, Stockholm, Sweden.ORCID iD: 0000-0002-3845-8100
Show others and affiliations
2019 (English)In: Therapeutic Drug Monitoring, ISSN 0163-4356, E-ISSN 1536-3694, Vol. 41, no 4, p. 509-518Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

BACKGROUND: Dried blood spot (DBS) is an attractive matrix alternative to plasma for the measurement of antiepileptic drug concentrations with the possibility of self-sampling at home. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether DBS concentrations from a children population could be used as an alternative to plasma concentrations in a clinical routine laboratory.

METHODS: Children with epilepsy using carbamazepine (CBZ), lamotrigine (LTG), levetiracetam (LEV), or valproic acid (VPA) had capillary blood collected for routine plasma analysis. DBS samples were collected by guardians or nurses, and the quality of sampling was compared between the groups. DBS samples were analyzed with liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry methods and plasma samples with immunochemical methods. In the comparison between DBS and plasma concentrations, previously analyzed sample data were pooled with data in this study and resulted in 190 comparison pairs. A bioanalytical cross-validation according to European Medicines Agency was performed. Clinicians evaluated the results to understand if a DBS concentration was linked to a different clinical dose recommendation for the patient in comparison with plasma concentrations.

RESULTS: Comparison of DBS sample quality showed that 2.3% of the capillary DBS collected by guardians were rejected and 8.0% of the capillary DBS collected by nurses. For DBS, a conversion factor of 0.85 for CBZ and 1.65 for VPA was applied for the comparison with plasma. LTG and LEV results were directly comparable. In the cross-validation, 88% of CBZ, 75% of LTG, 74% of LEV, and 94% of VPA comparisons were within 20% of the difference of the mean, although LEV had a few major differences (+31% to -40%). In 4 of the 190 comparisons, the clinical evaluation indicated a risk of conflicting decisions regarding the need for dose adjustment when using DBS concentrations. However, the risk of negative patient outcomes was considered negligible.

CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates that a combination of bioanalytical cross-validation and clinical evaluation is an effective way to describe the applicability of DBS as an alternative to plasma, taking into account how therapeutic drug monitoring is used in specific patient groups. For LTG, converted CBZ and VPA, DBS is a feasible alternative for self-sampling at home. DBS for LEV can only be recommended for nonadherence queries due to the high variability of the plasma/DBS concentration ratios.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2019. Vol. 41, no 4, p. 509-518
Keywords [en]
Anticonvulsants, clinical validation, LC-MS/MS, self-sampling, TDM
National Category
Medical and Health Sciences Pharmacology and Toxicology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:oru:diva-80563DOI: 10.1097/FTD.0000000000000605ISI: 000480711500012PubMedID: 30807537Scopus ID: 2-s2.0-85066248403OAI: oai:DiVA.org:oru-80563DiVA, id: diva2:1413906
Available from: 2020-03-11 Created: 2020-03-11 Last updated: 2024-01-02Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text in DiVA

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMedScopus

Authority records

von Euler, Mia

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
von Euler, Mia
In the same journal
Therapeutic Drug Monitoring
Medical and Health SciencesPharmacology and Toxicology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 231 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf