Examples of using Prograf in English and their translations into Croatian
{-}
-
Colloquial
-
Ecclesiastic
-
Computer
Advagraf and Prograf are not interchangeable.
Month graft survival was 96.7% for Advagraf,92.9% for Prograf and 95.7% for ciclosporin.
Dr. Parker, get a prograf and a CMP and keep Dr. Pierce updated.
Patients were either switched to treatment with Envarsus once daily or continued Prograf treatment twice daily.
Prograf and Advagraf both contain the active substance, tacrolimus.
Conversion between Modigraf and Prograf tacrolimus formulations.
Treatment failure occurred in 18.3% patients treated with Envarsus(49 out of 268), and19.6% given Prograf 54 out of 275.
Example: Total daily dose Prograf capsules given as 1 mg in the morning and 0.5 mg in the evening.
Treatment emergent fatal adverse events occurred in 1.2% of Envarsus patients and 0.6% of Prograf patients.
Envarsus has been shown to be at least as effective as Prograf in two main studies in patients with kidney transplants.
The relationship between tacrolimus trough levels(C24) and systemic exposure(AUC 0-24) is similar between the two formulations Advagraf and Prograf.
The second study compared Envarsus with Prograf as part of standard treatment in 543 patients with a newly transplanted kidney.
The dose recommendations for lung, pancreas andintestinal transplantation are based on limited prospective clinical trial data with the Prograf formulation.
These studies compared Envarsus with Prograf, a widely used and well-established tacrolimus medicine that releases tacrolimus more quickly.
The relationship between tacrolimus trough levels(C12) and systemic exposure(AUC0-12)is similar between the 2 formulations Modigraf granules and Prograf capsules.
The efficacy and safety of Advagraf and Prograf, both in combination with mycophenolate mofetil(MMF) and corticosteroids, was compared in 667 de novo kidney transplant recipients.
In healthy subjects the systemic exposure to tacrolimus(AUC)for Modigraf was approximately 18% higher than that for Prograf capsules when administered as single doses.
Similarly, for conversion of patients from Prograf capsules to Modigraf granules, the total daily Modigraf dose should preferably be equal to the total daily Prograf dose.
Results of a single dose bioequivalence study with adult healthy volunteers showed that Modigraf granules were approximately 20% more bioavailable than the Prograf capsules.
The efficacy and safety of Envarsus and Prograf, both in combination with mycophenolate mofetil(MMF) or mycophenolate sodium(MPS) and corticosteroids, was compared in 324 stable kidney transplant recipients.
The event rate for centrally-read, biopsy-confirmed acute rejection(BPAR)during the 360-day study was 13.1% in the Envarsus group(N=268) and 13.5% in the Prograf group N=275.
The efficacy and safety of Prograf, ciclosporin and Advagraf, all in combination with basiliximab antibody induction, MMF and corticosteroids, was compared in 638 de novo kidney transplant recipients.
The Agency's Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use(CHMP) decided that the approved doses of Envarsus have been shown to have a comparable quality, safety andeffectiveness to Advagraf and Prograf.
In stable patients converted from Prograf capsules(twice daily) to Advagraf(once daily) on a 1:1(mg: mg) total daily dose basis, the systemic exposure to tacrolimus(AUC0-24)for Advagraf was approximately 10% lower than that for Prograf.
There appears to be no significant difference in the pattern of adverse events suspected to be causally related to study drug between once daily Envarsus andtacrolimus immediate-release capsules Prograf.
The event rate for locally read biopsy-confirmed acute rejection(BPAR) during the 360 day study was 1.2% in the Envarsus group(N=162) post conversion from Prograf at a dose ratio of 1:0.7(mg: mg) and1.2% in the group maintained on Prograf N=162.
The efficacy and safety of Envarsus and Prograf, both in combination with Mycophenolate Mofetil(MMF) corticosteroids, and IL-2 receptor antagonist as per the standard of care was compared in a randomised, double-blind, double-dummy study, in 543 de novo kidney transplant recipients.
The efficacy failure rate as measured by the composite endpoint of death, graft loss, locally read BPAR andloss to follow-up was 2.5% in both the Envarsus and Prograf groups.
The 12-month patient survival rates were 98.6% for Advagraf,95.7% for Prograf and 97.6% for ciclosporin; in the Advagraf arm 3 patients died(all male), in the Prograf arm 10 patients died(3 female, 7 male) and in the ciclosporin arm 6 patients died 3 female, 3 male.
Higher Cavg(~50%), reduced peak trough fluctuation(Cmax/Cmin) and a longer Tmax were seen for Envarsus when compared with both,tacrolimus immediate-release formulation(Prograf) and a tacrolimus once daily formulation Advagraf.