RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Per-oral tacrolimus administration is not always practicable. Sublingual administration is a potential alternative, but its feasibility and effectiveness compared with oral route has not been established. AIM: To compare tacrolimus drug exposure after sublingual and oral administration in liver transplant recipients. METHODS: Experimental, open-label, non-randomised, cross-over study. Tacrolimus exposure was evaluated in 32 liver transplant recipients receiving oral administration. 12 h tacrolimus area-under-the-curve (AUC0-12 h ) was calculated using tacrolimus blood concentrations at 0-0.5-1-2-4-6-8-12 hrs post-dose. Recipients were switched to sublingual administration, and dose was adjusted to reach similar trough levels, new AUC0-12 h was calculated. Correlation between AUC0-12 h and trough levels was determined for both oral and sublingual phases. RESULTS: Similar trough levels were accomplished with oral and sublingual administration (6.68 ± 2 ng/mL vs. 6.62 ± 1.9 ng/mL (P = 0.8)). Although concentration 2 h post dose was higher in oral phase (15.36 ± 7.14 vs. 13.18 ± 5.64, P = 0.015), AUC0-12 h was similar in both phases (116.6 ± 34.6 vs. 111.5 ± 36.93 ng/mL* h, P = 0.19). Daily dose of tacrolimus required in sublingual phase was 37% lower than that used in oral phase (P < 0.0001), suggesting significantly increased bioavailability of tacrolimus when employing sublingual route. Good correlation between AUC0-12 h and trough levels was observed in sublingual phase (r2 = 0.74). Twenty-two recipients were maintained on sublingual administration after the end of study (mean follow-up: 18.7 ± 5.8 months). No difference in liver function tests or rejection rates was found during follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: Sublingual administration of tacrolimus is feasible and provides similar drug exposure compared with oral administration. In our study, at long-term follow-up, sublingual administration was not associated with liver transplant rejection.