The CYP3A4 genotype was *1*1 in 44 of 45 subjects (97.8%) and *1/*1B in only one subject (2.2%). The CYP3A5 genotype was *1*1 in four subjects (8.9%), *1*3 in 20 subjects (44.4%), and *3*3 in 21 subjects (46.7%). Thus, 24 of

Opaganib ic50 45 subjects (53.3%) were Exp with *1, and 21 of 45 (46.7%) were Non-Exp without *1. No obvious differences were seen in the baseline characteristics of patients in the Exp group and the Non-Exp group before starting Tac (Table 1). The genotype of ABCB1 2677G/A/T was G/T in 16 patients (35.6%), G/A in 11 patients (24.4%), G/G in 9 patients (20.0%), T/A in 4 patients (8.9%), and T/T in 5 patients (11.1%). The genotype of ABCB1 3435C/T was C/T in 24 patients (53.3%), C/C in 17 patients (37.8%), and T/T in 4 patients (8.9%). All patients who needed fasting to control their severe symptoms were continued on fasting status until at least day 12 of Tac therapy. Therefore, their fasting status did not affect the analysis of Tac pharmacokinetics on days 2–5 and 7–10. On days 2–5, there was no difference in the Tac dose between the

CYP3A5 Non-Exp group and the Exp group, but the Non-Exp group had a significantly higher trough level (10.16 ± 5.84 vs 4.47 ± 2.50 ng/mL, P < 0.0001) and dose-adjusted trough level (139.36 ± 77.43 vs 61.37 ± 41.55 ng/mL per mg/kg/day, P < 0.0001). On days 2–5, the Non-Exp learn more group had a significantly higher percentage of patients achieving the optimal trough level than the Exp group (40.0% vs 4.3%, P = 0.01). On days 7–10, the Tac dose was significantly higher in the

Exp group because of dose adjustment (0.156 ± 0.036 vs 0.112 ± 0.044 mg/kg, P = 0.001), but the Non-Exp group had significantly higher trough levels (16.81 ± 5.70 vs 9.76 ± 2.90 ng/mL, P < 0.0001) and dose-adjusted trough levels (185.19 ± 109.55 vs 66.52 ± 28.00 ng/mL per mg/kg/day, P < 0.0001) than the Exp group. On days 7–10, the Non-Exp group had a significantly higher percentage of patients achieving the optimal trough level than the Exp group (84.2% vs 45.5%, P = 0.04) (Table 2). For ABCB1, the trough level and dose-adjusted trough level were compared on days 2–5 and 7–10 between the TT type and all other types in find more C3435T and between the TT type and all other types in G2677A/T, but no significant differences were seen (data not shown). 1. Percentage of patients achieving the optimal trough level on days 2–5 and associated factors Nine patients (20.9%) achieved the optimal trough levels on the initial measurement. Univariate analysis was done with a total of 28 items, including CYP3A4, ABCB1, CYP3A5 genotype, patient background, pretreatment, activity index, endoscopic severity, and laboratory data (erythrocyte sedimentation rate, white blood cell count, hemoglobin, platelet count, C-reactive protein, albumin) to determine whether an appropriate trough level was achieved (Table 3).