Kerri A Mcgrady1, Makenzie Benton2, Serina Tart3, Riley Bowers4. 1. PharmD. College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Campbell University. Buies Creek, NC (United States). kamcgrady1006@email.campbell.edu. 2. BS. College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Campbell University. Buies Creek, NC (United States). mlbenton0527@email.campbell.edu. 3. PharmD. Cape Fear Valley Health. Fayetteville, NC (United States). start@capefearvalley.com. 4. PharmD. College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Campbell University. Buies Creek, NC (United States). bowers@campbell.edu.
Keywords:
Acute Kidney Injury; Area Under Curve; Drug Monitoring; Inpatients; Microbial Sensitivity Tests; Retrospective Studies; Software; United States; Vancomycin
Vancomycin is a glycopeptide antibiotic that has been in clinical use since
1958.1 Despite its frequent use, gaps
still exist in our knowledge of optimizing therapy and avoiding adverse events in
patient care. The area-under the curve to minimum-inhibitory concentration (AUC/MIC)
dosing method has been identified as the most appropriate monitoring target for
vancomycin.1 Previously, the AUC/MIC ratio
has been cumbersome to calculate, and monitoring with targeted trough levels of
15-20 mg/dL as a surrogate marker for AUC was recommended.1 However, additional research has shown that trough-based
monitoring is not a sufficient surrogate marker for AUC/MIC targets.2-4 Target
AUC/MIC levels can be achieved without a trough concentration of 15-20 mg/dL.2 Therefore, current expert consensus recommends
an AUC/MICBroth-Micro-Dilution target of 400 to 600 to achieve clinical efficacy
while improving patient safety.1Vancomycin-associated acute kidney injury (AKI) occurs in 5-43% of treated
patients.5 AKI has been shown to
significantly decrease long-term survival rates, increase morbidity and prolong
hospitalizations in critically ill patients.6
Literature suggests risk of AKI increases with increasing vancomycin exposures and
trough concentrations (>15-20 mg/dL), and there is additional evidence that
AKI risk increases when daily AUC exceeds 700-1300 mg*hr/L.5,7-8A 2017 retrospective study by Zasowski analyzed 323 patients receiving vancomycin for
bacteremia or pneumonia for at least 72 hours.9 After excluding patients’ confounding risks for decline in
renal function, such as Elixhauser comorbidity index and receipt of IV contrast dye,
rates of nephrotoxicity were significantly higher in patients who received a
concomitant nephrotoxin, and patients with AUC≥677 mg*hr/L.9Two approaches exist for monitoring AUC/MIC, the use of Bayesian software programs to
estimate the 24-hour area under the curve (AUC24) with minimal
pharmacokinetic sampling, or the use of two concentrations (peak and trough) and
simple PK equations to estimate AUC24 values.1 The Bayesian approach provides some advantages. It provides
accurate estimates of AUC24 values with trough-only sampling, however,
given limited data it is recommended to be used with two vancomycin
concentrations.1,10 A major disadvantage to this approach is the costly nature
of the software programs. The advantage of using two concentrations is it is simpler
and relies on fewer assumptions than the Bayesian approach. The main limitation of
this approach is it is not adaptive like the Bayesian approach, and works best when
levels are obtained at/near steady state.4,11The purpose of this study was to compare mean initial 24-hour vancomycin exposure
using traditional trough-based dosing versus dosing recommended by an electronic
AUC/MIC dosing program.
METHODS
The single-center, retrospective cohort study was conducted at Cape Fear Valley
Medical Center in Fayetteville, North Carolina, a 670-bed community hospital.
Vancomycin dosing and monitoring is accomplished via pharmacy to dose consult
service. Initial dosing regimens and therapeutic adjustments are determined per a
hospital-wide nomogram (Figure 1) or utilizing
first-order kinetic equations with goal trough concentrations of 10-20 mg/dL. Trough
concentration goals are specific to infection location with lower trough targets of
10-15 mg/dL utilized for less severe infections such as skin and soft tissue
infections and urinary tract infections. Trough concentrations of 15-20 mg/dL are
used for all other infections. Therapeutic monitoring is based on trough-only serum
levels. The institutional review board granted exempt status for this study.
Figure 1
Institution nomogram for initial vancomycin dosing
Of the 619 patients evaluated, 264 (42.6%) met inclusion criteria. Patients
were excluded for the following: surgical prophylaxis (n=45), treatment for less
than 24 hours (n=273), unstable renal function (n=5), hemodialysis (n=21), treatment
for meningitis (n=8), and pregnancy (n=1). Two patients were also excluded due to
having documented allergies to vancomycin, vancomycin was ordered for these patients
but never documented as given in the EMR. The study population was predominately
male with an average age of 55.7 years. Remaining subject demographics are
summarized in Table 1. For secondary
outcomes, the AUC/MIC group included 127 patients; the trough-based group included
137 patients (Table 2). Most patients were
treated for skin and soft tissue infections (Table
1).
Table 1
Baseline Characteristics
Parameter
All patients
Male, n(%)
142 (53.8%)
Mean Weight, kg (SD)
88.1 (26.7)
Mean BMI[a], kg/m2 (SD)
29.9 (8.9)
Mean Age, years (SD)
55.7 (18.9)
Mean Scr, mg/dL (SD)
1.1 (0.4)
Indications, n(%)
Skin and Soft Tissue
97 (36.7%)
Sepsis
69 (26.1%)
Other[b]
63 (23.9%)
Pneumonia
52 (19.7%)
Bacteremia
23 (8.7%)
Body Mass Index
Includes urinary tract infection, osteomyelitis, and intra-abdominal
infections
Table 2
Secondary endpoints
Endpoint
AUC/MIC recommended dosing (n=127)
Trough-based dosing (n=137)
Difference [95% CI]
p-value
Estimated AUC/MIC, mg*hr/L
510.9 SD:54.6
639.4 SD:136.7
128.5 [102.9:154.1]
p<0.001
Estimated Trough, mg/dL
13.5 SD:2.3
18.3 SD:5.0
4.8 [3.9:5.8]
p<0.001
AKI, n (%)
10 (7.9)
11 (8.0)
p=0.9629
Body Mass IndexIncludes urinary tract infection, osteomyelitis, and intra-abdominal
infectionsFor the primary endpoint, mean total first day vancomycin dose was significantly
higher (2649.6 mg; SD 66.6 mg) than the AUC/MIC recommended dosing (2380.7 mg; SD
831.8 mg) [95%CI 114.7:423.1] p=0.0007.Once patients were divided into groups based on their dosing consistency with the
AUC/MIC calculator recommendations, predicted mean AUC/MIC and trough concentrations
were calculated and found to be significantly lower in the AUC/MIC group (510.9 [SD
54.6], 13.5 mg/dL [SD 2.3]) than in the trough-based group (639.4 [SD 136.7], 18.3
mg/dL [SD 5.0]) [95%CI 102.9:154.1, 95%CI 3.9:5.8] both p
values<0.001 (Table 2).Rates of acute kidney injury were similar between groups. Ten patients in the AUC/MIC
group experienced an AKI compared to 11 in the trough-based group (Table 2). Of the 21 total patients who
experienced an AKI, 17 (81%) were receiving at least one concomitant
nephrotoxin. Overall, the incidence of AKI was 8%. Nephrotoxins included
piperacillin/tazobactam (n=13), ACEi/ARB (n=6), IV contrast dye (n=5), and loop
diuretics (n=4). Rates of other adverse events were low; two patients had allergic
reactions to vancomycin and one patient developed Red Man syndrome. No other drug
related adverse effects were reported.
DISCUSSION
The results of our study found that traditional trough-based dosing led to an
increased total first day vancomycin dose compared to AUC/MIC recommended dosing.
AUC/MIC recommended dosing also resulted in lower predicted AUC/MIC and trough
concentrations. Our results support the guideline recommendations set forth in the
2020 IDSA guidelines of a target range of 400-600.1 These results were also described by Covvey et al.,
in their analysis of total daily dose of vancomycin in patients with MRSA bacteremia
and a body mass index (BMI) greater than 30.13 Notably, the predicted trough concentration in the AUC/MIC group was
13.5 mg/dL which was almost 5 mg/dL lower than the mean trough-based concentration
of 18.3 mg/dL; this depicts the ability to achieve AUC/MIC targets without trough
concentrations of 15-20 mg/dL.2 It should be
noted that total weight-based first day vancomycin dose was not calculated in this
analysis, which may confound results as patients with lower weights may have reduced
lower doses.Lodise and colleagues explained the existence of an exposure-response relationship
between initial vancomycin trough value and the occurrence of nephrotoxicity, as
nephrotoxicity significantly increased with increasing initial trough
concentration.8 Based on this
relationship, lowering initial vancomycin exposure via utilizing AUC/MIC dosing
recommendations may lower risks for nephrotoxicity that accompany elevated initial
trough concentrations. A prospective study by Neely and colleagues utilized Bayesian
estimations to calculate AUC/MIC and discovered AUC-guided dosing was associated
with decreased nephrotoxicity.14
Additionally, Finch et al., found that AUC-guided dosing is
independently associated with less nephrotoxicity and trough-concentrations, which
they hypothesized is likely due to decreased vancomycin exposure.15 The results of our current study agree with
their findings.There are multiple potential obstacles to overcome when considering transitioning to
an AUC/MIC-based dosing strategy, including increased workload on clinical
pharmacists, the need for extensive education for multiple members of the healthcare
team, and determining inclusion criteria for the new dosing strategy. Heil
et al. provides advice for overcoming these obstacles including
ideas for continued education for pharmacists, physicians, nurses, and
phlebotomists.11 Additionally, new and
innovative programs to calculate AUC/MIC exist which alleviate the excess workload
that long-hand calculations place on clinical pharmacists. These programs include
electronic calculators, such as what was utilized in this study, spreadsheets,
calculators built into electronic medical records, and commercially available dosing
calculators.11,12Rates of acute kidney injury were similar between the two groups, although this study
was not adequately powered to find differences in safety endpoints. The incidence of
kidney injury was 8% which is consistent with rates reported in a recent
meta-analysis.5 Additionally, most
patients in this study were receiving concomitant nephrotoxins in addition to
vancomycin. The effects of these nephrotoxins could not be adequately described in
this evaluation, which is a limitation.Furthermore, most patients in this study were treated for skin and soft tissue
infections; the trough-based target for these infections is 10-15 mg/dL which may
have induced bias by lowering the true vancomycin exposure in the trough-based
group. Skin and soft tissue infections are also not considered invasive infections
and it is currently unknown whether AUC/MIC based dosing is the best form of
monitoring.1
CONCLUSIONS
AUC/MIC recommended dosing resulted in lower total first day vancomycin dose and
lower predicted AUC/MIC and trough concentrations. The results of our study support
the newly released IDSA guideline recommendations of an AUC/MIC target of
400-600.
Authors: Evan J Zasowski; Kyle P Murray; Trang D Trinh; Natalie A Finch; Jason M Pogue; Ryan P Mynatt; Michael J Rybak Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2017-12-21 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Emily L Heil; Kimberly C Claeys; Ryan P Mynatt; Teri L Hopkins; Karrine Brade; Ian Watt; Michael J Rybak; Jason M Pogue Journal: Am J Health Syst Pharm Date: 2018-10-17 Impact factor: 2.637
Authors: Michael N Neely; Lauren Kato; Gilmer Youn; Lironn Kraler; David Bayard; Michael van Guilder; Alan Schumitzky; Walter Yamada; Brenda Jones; Emi Minejima Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2018-01-25 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Adam Linder; Chris Fjell; Adeera Levin; Keith R Walley; James A Russell; John H Boyd Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2014-05-01 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Natalie A Finch; Evan J Zasowski; Kyle P Murray; Ryan P Mynatt; Jing J Zhao; Raymond Yost; Jason M Pogue; Michael J Rybak Journal: Antimicrob Agents Chemother Date: 2017-11-22 Impact factor: 5.191
Authors: Nimish Patel; Manjunath P Pai; Keith A Rodvold; Ben Lomaestro; George L Drusano; Thomas P Lodise Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2011-04-15 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Thomas P Lodise; Nimish Patel; Ben M Lomaestro; Keith A Rodvold; George L Drusano Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2009-08-15 Impact factor: 9.079