In 2007, a consortium of European experts on tacrolimus (TAC) met to discuss the most recent advances in the drug/dose optimization of TAC taking into account specific clinical situations and the analytical methods currently available and drew some recommendations and guidelines to help clinicians with the practical use of the drug. Pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic, and more recently pharmacogenetic approaches aid physicians to individualize long-term therapies as TAC demonstrates a high degree of both between- and within-individual variability, which may result in an increased risk of therapeutic failure if all patients are administered a uniform dose. TAC has undoubtedly benefited from therapeutic drug monitoring, but interpretation of the blood concentration is confounded by the relative differences between the assays. Single time points, limited sampling strategies, and area under concentration-time curve have all been considered to determine the most appropriate sampling procedure that correlates with efficacy. Therapeutic trough TAC concentration ranges have changed since the initial introduction of the drug, while still maintaining adequate immunosuppression and avoiding drug-related adverse effects. Pharmacodynamic markers have also been considered advantageous to the clinician, which may better reflect efficacy and safety, taking into account the between-individual variability rather than whole blood concentrations. The choice of method, differences between methods, and potential pitfalls of the method should all be considered when determining TAC concentrations. The recommendations of this consensus meeting regarding the analytical methods include the following: encourage the development and promote the use of analytical methods displaying a lower limit of quantification (1 ng/mL), perform careful validation when implementing a new analytical assay, participate in external proficiency testing programs, promote the use of certified material as calibrators in high-performance liquid chromatography with mass spectrometric detection methods, and take account of the assay and intermethod bias when comparing clinical trial outcomes. It is also important to consider that TAC concentrations may also be influenced by other factors such as specific pharmacokinetic characteristics associated with the population, drug interactions, pharmacogenetics, adverse events that may alter TAC concentrations, and any change in the oral formulation that may result in pharmacokinetic changes. This meeting emphasized the importance of obtaining multicenter prospective trials to assess the efficacy of alternative strategies to TAC trough concentrations whether it is other single time points or area under the concentration-time curve Bayesian estimation using limited sampling strategies and to select, standardize, and validate routine biomarkers of TAC pharmacodynamics.

Monitoring immunosuppressive drugs (ISDs) in blood or plasma is still a key therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) application in clinical settings. Narrow target ranges and severe side effects at drug underexposure or overexposure make accurate and precise measurements a must. This overview prepared by the Immunosuppressive Drugs Scientific Committee of the International Association of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring and Clinical Toxicology is intended to serve as a summary and guidance document describing the current state-of-the-art in the TDM of ISDs.

In 2014, the Immunosuppressive Drugs Scientific Committee of the International Association of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring and Clinical Toxicology called a meeting of international experts to provide recommendations to guide therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of everolimus (EVR) and its optimal use in clinical practice. EVR is a potent inhibitor of the mammalian target of rapamycin, approved for the prevention of organ transplant rejection and for the treatment of various types of cancer and tuberous sclerosis complex. EVR fulfills the prerequisites for TDM, having a narrow therapeutic range, high interindividual pharmacokinetic variability, and established drug exposure–response relationships. EVR trough concentrations (C₀) demonstrate a good relationship with overall exposure, providing a simple and reliable index for TDM. Whole-blood samples should be used for measurement of EVR C₀, and sampling times should be standardized to occur within 1 hour before the next dose, which should be taken at the same time everyday and preferably without food. In transplantation settings, EVR should be generally targeted to a C₀ of 3–8 ng/mL when used in combination with other immunosuppressive drugs (calcineurin inhibitors and glucocorticoids); in calcineurin inhibitor-free regimens, the EVR target C₀ range should be 6–10 ng/mL. Further studies are required to determine the clinical utility of TDM in nontransplantation settings. The choice of analytical method and differences between methods should be carefully considered when determining EVR concentrations, and when comparing and interpreting clinical trial outcomes. At present, a fully validated liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry assay is the preferred method for determination of EVR C₀, with a lower limit of quantification close to 1 ng/mL. Use of certified commercially available whole-blood calibrators to avoid calibration bias and participation in external proficiency-testing programs to allow continuous cross-validation and proof of analytical quality are highly recommended. Development of alternative assays to facilitate on-site measurement of EVR C₀ is encouraged.

With current treatment regimens, a relatively high proportion of transplant recipients experience underimmunosuppression or overimmunosuppression. Recently, several promising biomarkers have been identified for determining patient alloreactivity, which help in assessing the risk of rejection and personal response to the drug; others correlate with graft dysfunction and clinical outcome, offering a realistic opportunity for personalized immunosuppression. This consensus document aims to help tailor immunosuppression to the needs of the individual patient. It examines current knowledge on biomarkers associated with patient risk stratification and immunosuppression requirements that have been generally accepted as promising. It is based on a comprehensive review of the literature and the expert opinion of the Biomarker Working Group of the International Association of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring and Clinical Toxicology. The quality of evidence was systematically weighted, and the strength of recommendations was rated according to the GRADE system. Three types of biomarkers are discussed: (1) those associated with the risk of rejection (alloreactivity/tolerance), (2) those reflecting individual response to immunosuppressants, and (3) those associated with graft dysfunction. Analytical aspects of biomarker measurement and novel pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic models accessible to the transplant community are also addressed. Conventional pharmacokinetic biomarkers may be used in combination with those discussed in this article to achieve better outcomes and improve long-term graft survival. Our group of experts has made recommendations for the most appropriate analysis of a proposed panel of preliminary biomarkers, most of which are currently under clinical evaluation in ongoing multicentre clinical trials. A section of Next Steps was also included, in which the Expert Committee is committed to sharing this knowledge with the Transplant Community in the form of triennial updates.