Literature DB >> 24012820

Increased teicoplanin doses are associated with improved serum levels but not drug toxicity.

Philippa C Matthews1, Amy L Chue, David Wyllie, Adam Barnett, Tomide Isinkaye, Lorrayne Jefferies, Andrew Lovering, Matthew Scarborough.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: Teicoplanin is widely used for the treatment of severe gram-positive infection, aiming to achieve trough serum levels of 20-60 mg/L for patients with severe infection. A standard 400 mg daily dose is frequently associated with sub-therapeutic levels, and we have therefore changed our routine approach to 600 mg daily (following loading doses in each case). We set out to investigate the impact of this dose increase on drug levels and potential side-effects.
METHODS: We undertook a retrospective study of 549 consecutive adult Out-Patient Antimicrobial Treatment (OPAT) episodes treated with intravenous teicoplanin.
RESULTS: Therapeutic teicoplanin levels were more frequently achieved in patients treated with 600 mg compared to 400 mg daily (68% vs. 37% respectively, p < 0.0001), without an increased frequency of potentially toxic levels, defined as >60 mg/L (6% vs. 8% respectively, p = 0.4). There was no difference in the incidence of neutropaenia, eosinophilia, thrombocytopaenia, acute renal injury or treatment cessation in patients treated with the higher teicoplanin dose.
CONCLUSIONS: In the majority of stable adult patients with normal renal function, we advocate a loading regimen (600 mg b.d. for two doses) followed by a 600 mg daily teicoplanin dose in order to achieve therapeutic trough levels.
Copyright © 2013 The British Infection Association. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Adverse effects; Glycopeptides; OPAT; Osteomyelitis therapy; Therapeutic drug monitoring

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24012820     DOI: 10.1016/j.jinf.2013.08.018

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Infect        ISSN: 0163-4453            Impact factor:   6.072


  10 in total

1.  Enhanced loading regimen of teicoplanin is necessary to achieve therapeutic pharmacokinetics levels for the improvement of clinical outcomes in patients with renal dysfunction.

Authors:  T Ueda; Y Takesue; K Nakajima; K Ichiki; A Doita; Y Wada; T Tsuchida; Y Takahashi; M Ishihara; H Ikeuchi; M Uchino; T Kimura
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2016-06-09       Impact factor: 3.267

2.  Evaluating the optimal dose of teicoplanin with therapeutic drug monitoring: not too high for adverse event, not too low for treatment efficacy.

Authors:  Si-Ho Kim; Cheol-In Kang; Kyungmin Huh; Sun Young Cho; Doo Ryeon Chung; Soo-Youn Lee; Yae-Jean Kim; Kyong Ran Peck
Journal:  Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis       Date:  2019-08-01       Impact factor: 3.267

3.  Effects of teicoplanin on cell number of cultured cell lines.

Authors:  Tahere Kashkolinejad-Koohi; Iraj Saadat; Mostafa Saadat
Journal:  Interdiscip Toxicol       Date:  2015-03

4.  Teicoplanin-based antimicrobial therapy in Staphylococcus aureus bone and joint infection: tolerance, efficacy and experience with subcutaneous administration.

Authors:  Olivier Peeters; Tristan Ferry; Florence Ader; André Boibieux; Evelyne Braun; Anissa Bouaziz; Judith Karsenty; Emmanuel Forestier; Frédéric Laurent; Sébastien Lustig; Christian Chidiac; Florent Valour
Journal:  BMC Infect Dis       Date:  2016-11-03       Impact factor: 3.090

5.  Impact of teicoplanin maintenance dose and MIC values on the clinical outcomes of patients treated for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia.

Authors:  Ching-Yen Tsai; Chen-Hsiang Lee; Chun-Chih Chien; I-Ling Chen
Journal:  Infect Drug Resist       Date:  2018-08-15       Impact factor: 4.003

6.  Clinical outcomes of teicoplanin use in the OPAT setting.

Authors:  Hannah Dabrowski; Helena Wickham; Surjo De; Jonathan Underwood; Stephen Morris-Jones; Sarah Logan; Michael Marks; Gabriele Pollara
Journal:  Int J Antimicrob Agents       Date:  2020-01-08       Impact factor: 5.283

7.  Quantification of Teicoplanin Using the HPLC-UV Method for Clinical Applications in Critically Ill Patients in Korea.

Authors:  Jaeok Lee; Eun-Kyoung Chung; Sung-Wook Kang; Hwa-Jeong Lee; Sandy-Jeong Rhie
Journal:  Pharmaceutics       Date:  2021-04-17       Impact factor: 6.321

8.  Comparison of mortality and clinical failure rates between vancomycin and teicoplanin in patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus pneumonia.

Authors:  Jang Ho Lee; Myeong Geun Choi; Hyung Jun Park; Ho Cheol Kim; Chang-Min Choi
Journal:  BMC Infect Dis       Date:  2022-07-07       Impact factor: 3.667

Review 9.  Updated good practice recommendations for outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) in adults and children in the UK.

Authors:  Ann L N Chapman; Sanjay Patel; Carolyne Horner; Helen Green; Achyut Guleri; Sara Hedderwick; Susan Snape; Julie Statham; Elizabeth Wilson; Mark Gilchrist; R Andrew Seaton
Journal:  JAC Antimicrob Resist       Date:  2019-08-26

10.  Tools for the Individualized Therapy of Teicoplanin for Neonates and Children.

Authors:  V Ramos-Martín; M N Neely; K Padmore; M Peak; M W Beresford; M A Turner; S Paulus; J López-Herce; W W Hope
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2017-09-22       Impact factor: 5.191

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.