Jason A Roberts1,2,3, Abdulaziz S Alobaid1,4, Steven C Wallis1, Anders Perner5,6, Jeffrey Lipman1,2,7, Fredrik Sjövall6,8,9. 1. University of Queensland Centre for Clinical Research, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. 2. Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. 3. Centre for Translational Anti-infective Pharmacodynamics, School of Pharmacy, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. 4. Department of Pharmacy, King Saud Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. 5. University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark. 6. Department of Intensive Care, Copenhagen University Hospital Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark. 7. Faculty of Health, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. 8. Department of Intensive Care and Perioperative Medicine, Skane University Hospital, Malmö, Sweden. 9. Mitochondrial Medicine, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients with septic shock may undergo extensive physiological alterations that can alter antibiotic pharmacokinetics. OBJECTIVES: To describe the population pharmacokinetics of ciprofloxacin in septic shock and to define recommendations for effective ciprofloxacin dosing in these patients. METHODS: Adult patients with septic shock treated with ciprofloxacin were eligible for inclusion. Concentrations were measured by HPLC-MS/MS. Population pharmacokinetic modelling was performed with Monte Carlo simulations then used to define dosing regimens that optimize the PTA of an AUC/MIC ratio >125 for different MICs and fractional target attainment (FTA) of empirical and targeted therapy against Pseudomonas aeruginosa. RESULTS: We included 48 patients with median Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II of 49 and 90 day mortality of 33%. Ciprofloxacin pharmacokinetics was best described by a two-compartment linear model including CLCR and body weight as covariates on CL and central volume respectively. With a dose of 400 mg q8h and CLCR of 80 mL/min, >95% PTA was achieved for bacteria with MICs ≤0.25 mg/L. For empirical treatment of P. aeruginosa, 600 mg q8h only reached a maximum of 68% FTA. For directed therapy against P. aeruginosa, a dose of 600 mg q8h was needed to achieve sufficient AUC/MIC ratios. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with septic shock, standard ciprofloxacin dosing achieved concentrations to successfully treat bacteria with MICs ≤0.25 mg/L and then only in patients with normal or reduced CLCR. To cover pathogens with higher MICs or in patients with augmented renal CL, doses may have to be increased.
BACKGROUND:Patients with septic shock may undergo extensive physiological alterations that can alter antibiotic pharmacokinetics. OBJECTIVES: To describe the population pharmacokinetics of ciprofloxacin in septic shock and to define recommendations for effective ciprofloxacin dosing in these patients. METHODS: Adult patients with septic shock treated with ciprofloxacin were eligible for inclusion. Concentrations were measured by HPLC-MS/MS. Population pharmacokinetic modelling was performed with Monte Carlo simulations then used to define dosing regimens that optimize the PTA of an AUC/MIC ratio >125 for different MICs and fractional target attainment (FTA) of empirical and targeted therapy against Pseudomonas aeruginosa. RESULTS: We included 48 patients with median Simplified Acute Physiology Score (SAPS) II of 49 and 90 day mortality of 33%. Ciprofloxacin pharmacokinetics was best described by a two-compartment linear model including CLCR and body weight as covariates on CL and central volume respectively. With a dose of 400 mg q8h and CLCR of 80 mL/min, >95% PTA was achieved for bacteria with MICs ≤0.25 mg/L. For empirical treatment of P. aeruginosa, 600 mg q8h only reached a maximum of 68% FTA. For directed therapy against P. aeruginosa, a dose of 600 mg q8h was needed to achieve sufficient AUC/MIC ratios. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with septic shock, standard ciprofloxacin dosing achieved concentrations to successfully treat bacteria with MICs ≤0.25 mg/L and then only in patients with normal or reduced CLCR. To cover pathogens with higher MICs or in patients with augmented renal CL, doses may have to be increased.
Authors: Natalija Karabasevic; Jason A Roberts; Luke Stronach; Saiyuri Naicker; Steven C Wallis; Fredrik Sjövall; Fekade Sime Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2022-04-07 Impact factor: 5.938
Authors: Luca F Roggeveen; Lucas M Fleuren; Tingjie Guo; Patrick Thoral; Harm Jan de Grooth; Eleonora L Swart; Thomas L T Klausch; Peter H J van der Voort; Armand R J Girbes; Rob J Bosman; Paul W G Elbers Journal: Trials Date: 2019-12-18 Impact factor: 2.279
Authors: Alan Abdulla; Omar Rogouti; Nicole G M Hunfeld; Henrik Endeman; Annemieke Dijkstra; Teun van Gelder; Anouk E Muller; Brenda C M de Winter; Birgit C P Koch Journal: Eur J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2020-04-19 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Koen P van Rhee; Cornelis Smit; Roeland E Wasmann; Paul D van der Linden; Rene Wiezer; Eric P A Van Dongen; Elke H J Krekels; Roger J M Brüggemann; Catherijne A J Knibbe Journal: Clin Pharmacokinet Date: 2022-06-01 Impact factor: 5.577
Authors: Martin Šíma; Daniel Bobek; Petra Cihlářová; Pavel Ryšánek; Jaroslava Roušarová; Jan Beroušek; Martin Kuchař; Tomáš Vymazal; Ondřej Slanař Journal: Pharmaceutics Date: 2022-08-04 Impact factor: 6.525
Authors: D Hirt; M Oualha; B Pasquiers; S Blanot; R Rubinstazjn; C Glorion; S El Messaoudi; D Drummond; V Lopez; J Toubiana; A Béranger; Sana Boujaafar; Yi Zheng; Carmen Capito; S Winter; P L Léger; R Berthaud; Inès Gana; F Foissac; J M Tréluyer; N Bouazza; S Benaboud Journal: Eur J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2021-06-23 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Emilie M Gieling; Eveline Wallenburg; Tim Frenzel; Dylan W de Lange; Jeroen A Schouten; Jaap Ten Oever; Eva Kolwijck; David M Burger; Peter Pickkers; Rob Ter Heine; Roger J M Brüggemann Journal: Clin Pharmacol Ther Date: 2020-05-15 Impact factor: 6.875