| Literature DB >> 32443147 |
Nynke G L Jager1,2, Reinier M van Hest3, Jiao Xie4, Gloria Wong1, Marta Ulldemolins5, Roger J M Brüggemann2, Jeffrey Lipman1,6,7, Jason A Roberts1,6,7,8.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Initial appropriate anti-infective therapy is associated with improved outcomes in patients with severe infections. In critically ill patients, altered pharmacokinetic (PK) behaviour is common and known to influence the achievement of PK/pharmacodynamic targets.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32443147 PMCID: PMC7443729 DOI: 10.1093/jac/dkaa187
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Antimicrob Chemother ISSN: 0305-7453 Impact factor: 5.790
Patient characteristics
| Characteristic | Model-building patient cohort ( | External patient cohorts | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Brisbane ( | Nijmegen ( | ||
| Female, | 12 (34) | 7 (35) | 3 (21) |
| Age (years) | 52 (43–67) | 55 (41–62) | 61 (51–71) |
| Total body weight (kg) | 95 (73–120) | 80 (62–115) | 83 (74–96) |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 31 (25–35) | 26 (20–34) | 27 (24–29) |
| SOFA score | 8 (5–13) | 6 (3–10) | 9 (5–11) |
| eGFR (mL/min) | 96 (26–166) | 52 (11–159) | 51 (22–177) |
| RRT, | 4 (11) | 3 (15) | 3 (21) |
| Albumin (g/L) | 21 (15–34) | 21 (15–33) | 15 (10–26) |
Values are expressed as median (IQR), unless stated otherwise. RRT, renal replacement therapy.
Figure 1.Unbound versus total flucloxacillin concentrations, measured in 79 samples from 16 patients.
Figure 2.Protein binding of flucloxacillin (%), calculated as (1 − unbound fraction) × 100, versus serum albumin concentrations, based on 79 patient samples.
Figure 3.Covariate relationship between (a) serum albumin concentrations and Bmax and (b) eGFR and CL of unbound flucloxacillin for the final model, for all patients for whom both total and unbound concentrations were measured (n = 16). The dots represent the individual estimates of (a) Bmax and (b) unbound flucloxacillin CL. The line represents the model-predicted association between the parameter estimate and the covariate of interest.
Parameter estimates of the different model-building steps
| Parameters | Structural model | Final model | Bootstrap ( | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| estimate | RSE (%) | estimate | RSE (%) | estimate | 95% CI | |
|
| 0.46 | 14.5 | 0.469 | 14.1 | 0.478 | 0.316–0.622 |
| Kd (mmol/L) | 0.0397 | 15.3 | 0.0441 | 16.6 | 0.0450 | 0.0260–0.0621 |
| CL (L/h) | 54.6 | 13.6 | 55.4 | 11.4 | 55.2 | 42.8–68.1 |
|
| 51.5 | 11.5 | 52.7 | 12.0 | 53.3 | 36.9–68.6 |
|
| 55.9 | 11.9 | 56.8 | 11.8 | 57.3 | 41.6–72.0 |
| Q (L/h) | 66.4 | 25.8 | 67.2 | 26.0 | 65.6 | 32.6–102 |
| BPV | ||||||
| | 42.2 | 23.3 | 30.4 | 19.2 | 28.5 | 14.4–41.1 |
| CL (%CV) | 88.1 | 11.7 | 71.6 | 15.8 | 68.9 | 43.7–96.1 |
| Residual variability | ||||||
| proportional error, unbound flucloxacillin | 0.222 | 11.6 | 0.222 | 11.2 | 0.212 | 0.169–0.275 |
| proportional error, total flucloxacillin | 0.161 | 11.5 | 0.160 | 11.6 | 0.150 | 0.112–0.203 |
| Covariates | ||||||
| albumin | — | — | 1.51 | 28.6 | 1.52 | 0.521–2.50 |
| eGFR | — | — | 0.809 | 24.2 | 0.809 | 0.365–1.02 |
CV, coefficient of variation; RSE, relative standard error.
Predictive performance of the structural and final model in two external datasets
| Brisbane external dataset ( | Nijmegen external dataset ( | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Characteristics | structural model | final model |
| structural model | final model |
|
| Total flucloxacillin | ||||||
| error (%) | NA | NA | 18.1 (−54.8 to 66.4) | −11.0 (−57.1 to 28.3) | 0.0005 | |
| absolute error (%) | NA | NA | 55.3 (28.5–77.6) | 39.6 (19.2–59.6) | 0.004 | |
| Unbound flucloxacillin | ||||||
| error (%) | −59.4 (−83.4 to 14.3) | −5.80 (−36.9 to 29.7) | 0.01 | −49.1 (−86.1 to 9.80) | −27.8 (−64.5 to 21.2) | 0.04 |
| absolute error (%) | 70.3 (40.4–92.0) | 33.4 (10.9–58.4) | 0.0005 | 59.2 (32.3–88.9) | 51.7 (25.2–74.9) | 0.01 |
Values are expressed as median (IQR). A one-sided Wilcoxon matched-pairs test was used to test differences between the performance of the structural model and the final model. NA, not available.
Figure 4.Illustration of the effect of the covariates eGFR (mL/min) and serum albumin concentration (g/L) on the concentration–time curve of flucloxacillin as assessed by Monte Carlo simulations of the first 24 h of treatment of a virtual critically ill patient, with all median characteristics of the population, but with two different eGFR values and two different serum albumin concentrations. Both total and unbound flucloxacillin concentrations were simulated for two different IV dosing regimens: (a) total flucloxacillin concentrations after 1 g q6h; (b) unbound flucloxacillin concentrations after 1 g q6h; (c) total flucloxacillin concentrations after 2 g q4h; and (d) unbound flucloxacillin concentrations after 2 g q4h. Alb, serum albumin concentration.
Figure 5.Monte Carlo simulations (n = 1000) and PTA for achieving 100%fT>MIC at t = 24 h for various eGFRs calculated by the CKD-EPI equation, for four different IV flucloxacillin dosing regimens administered to critically ill patients: (a) 1 g q6h; (b) 1 g q4h; (c) 2 g q6h; and (d) 2 g q4h. The ECOFF of cloxacillin (as a surrogate for flucloxacillin) for S. aureus is 0.5 mg/L, according to EUCAST.