Evaluation Of Population Pharmacokinetic Models Research Articles

External evaluation of neonatal vancomycin population pharmacokinetic models: Moving from first-order equations to Bayesian-guided therapeutic monitoring.

Guidelines for vancomycin therapeutic monitoring recommend using a Bayesian approach with a population pharmacokinetic model to estimate the 24 h area under the concentration-time curve over first-order equations. Thus, we performed an external evaluation of population pharmacokinetic models of vancomycin in neonates and compared Bayesian results with those observed in clinical practice via pharmacokinetic equations to improve therapeutic monitoring by proposing optimized initial dosing nomograms and assessing the feasibility of reduced blood sampling strategies using the most predictive models. Models were identified from the literature and evaluated via an external neonatal population. A priori predictive performance was first assessed by prediction-based diagnostics, then by simulation-based diagnostics and a posteriori analyses only if deemed satisfactory; model-informed vancomycin exposure was also compared with reference first-order pharmacokinetic equations. The best-performing models were ultimately subjected to Monte Carlo simulations to develop new initial dosing nomograms offering the highest probability of achieving therapeutic target. A total of 28 population pharmacokinetic models were evaluated in the external dataset, which includes 72 neonates and 380 vancomycin concentrations. Eleven models had an adequate predictive performance with bias ≤ ± 15% and imprecision 30%, while the Bayesian approach yielded over 75% agreement with reference exposure values in most cases. Nonetheless, Capparelli etal. and Mehrotra etal. models performed the best overall, showing the lowest imprecisions of 16.8% and 16.9%, respectively; both models recommended higher dosage regimens than the theoretical nomogram currently applied to favor therapeutic target attainment. We externally evaluated numerous neonatal population pharmacokinetic models of vancomycin and used the most predictive ones to advocate new initial dosing nomograms. Clinical implementation of the Bayesian approach could reduce the time needed to reach therapeutic target and limit the number of blood samples in newborns compared with traditional pharmacokinetic equations.

Infliximab in paediatric inflammatory bowel disease: External evaluation of population pharmacokinetic models.

Use of infliximab (IFX) has improved outcomes in children with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). However, a proportion of patients does not respond to IFX or loses response over time. Population pharmacokinetic (PopPK) modelling is a promising approach for IFX dose optimization, but with the increasing number of PopPK models in literature, model evaluation is essential. The aims of this study are: (i) to validate the predictive performance of existing IFX PopPK models using a cohort of children with IBD; and (ii) to perform a Bayesian estimation of the most suitable model to predict the next IFX concentrations. PubMed was searched for IFX PopPK models in children. Selected models were rebuilt and analysed using R. Model performance was assessed through goodness-of-fit-plots, residuals against time, prediction error and prediction-corrected visual predictive checks. The validation cohort consisted of 73 children with IBD who were treated with IFX in our centre between 2017 and 2023 (340 IFX measurements). We identified 9 PopPK models. Model bias for individual predicted values ranged from -9.29% to 8.01% compared to bias for population predicted values. The model by Vande Casteele et al. demonstrated superior performance (individual predicted bias 2.13, population predicted bias -6.11); upon Bayesian estimation, it predicted induction trough levels with median error of 12.95% but had a median error of -69% predicting maintenance concentrations. The model by Vande Casteele et al. displayed superior performance in initial evaluations but had a high error in estimating next IFX levels and can only be used in practice to predict induction levels.

Evaluation of Population Pharmacokinetic Models of Micafungin: Implications for Dosing Regimen Optimization in Critically Ill Patients.

Micafungin (MFG) is a widely used echinocandin antifungal agent for treating invasive candidiasis, particularly in critically ill patients. However, its pharmacokinetics can be highly variable in this population. This systematic review aims to summarize population pharmacokinetic models and provide recommendations for its use in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. Monte Carlo simulations were implemented to compare pharmacokinetic parameters and probability of target attainment (PTA) against various Candida species. A total of 16 studies were included, of which 6 studies were conducted in adult ICU patients. The key covariates were body size, liver function, and sepsis-related organ failure assessment score (SOFA) score. The median MFG clearance in adult ICU patients was 30-51% higher than in adult non-ICU patients. For infections with C. albican with MIC below 0.016 mg/L, micafungin dosages of 100 and 150 mg/d were recommended for adult non-ICU and ICU patients, respectively. For C. tropicalis and C. glabrata, 200 and 250 mg/d were recommended, respectively. However, for C. krusei and C. parapsilosis, none of the tested dosage regimens achieved assumed PTA criteria within MIC ranges of 0.125-0.25 mg/L and 0.125-2 mg/L, respectively. Therefore, MFG dosage regimens in ICU and non-ICU patients should be tailored based on the Candida spp. and their respective MIC values.

External Evaluation of Population Pharmacokinetic Models of Piperacillin in Preterm and Term Patients from Neonatal Intensive Care.

Piperacillin/tazobactam is extensively used off-label to treat late-onset neonatal sepsis, but safety and pharmacokinetic data in this population are limited. Additionally, the organic immaturity of the newborns contributes to a high piperacillin pharmacokinetic variability. This affects the clinical efficacy of the antibiotic treatment and increases the probability of developing drug resistance. This study aimed to evaluate the predictive performance of reported piperacillin population pharmacokinetic models for their application in a model-informed precision dosing strategy in preterm and term Mexican neonatal intensive care patients. Published population pharmacokinetic models for piperacillin which included neonates in their study population were identified. From the reference models, structured models, population pharmacokinetic parameters, and interindividual and residual variability data were extracted to be replicated in pharmacokinetic software (NONMEM® version 7.4). For the clinical study, a sampling schedule was designed, and 2-3 blood samples of 250 µL were taken from neonates who met the inclusion criteria. Piperacillin plasma concentrations were determined by liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry. The clinical treatment data were collected, and piperacillin plasma concentrations were estimated using reference pharmacokinetic models for an a priori or Bayesian approach. Statistical methods were used in terms of bias and precision to evaluate the differences between observed and estimated neonatal piperacillin plasma concentrations with the different approaches and to identify the pharmacokinetic model that best fits the neonatal data. A total of 70 plasma samples were collected from 25 neonatal patients, of which 15 were preterm neonates. The overall median value (range) postnatal age, gestational age, body weight, and serum creatinine at the sampling collecting day were 12 (3-26) days, 34.2 (26-41.1) weeks, 1.78 (0.08-3.90) Kg, 0.47 (0.20-0.90) mg/dL, respectively. Three population pharmacokinetic models for piperacillin in infants up to 2months were identified, and their predictive performance in neonatal data was evaluated. No pharmacokinetic model was suitable for our population using an a priori approach. The model published by Cohen-Wolkowiez et al. in 2014 with a Bayesian approach showed the best performance of the pharmacokinetic models evaluated in our neonatal data. The procedure requires two blood samples (predose and postdose), and, when applied, it predicted 66.6% of the observations with a relative median absolute predicted error of less than 30%. The population pharmacokinetic model developed by Cohen-Wolkowiez et al. in 2014 demonstrated superior performance in predicting the plasma concentration of piperacillin in preterm and term Mexican neonatal intensive care patients. The Bayesian approach, including two different piperacillin plasma concentrations, was clinically acceptable regarding bias and precision. Its application for model-informed precision dosing can be an option to optimize the piperacillin dosage in our population.

A systematic evaluation of population pharmacokinetic models for polymyxin B in patients with liver and/or kidney dysfunction.

Polymyxin B (PMB) is considered a last-line treatment for multidrug-resistant (MDR) gram-negative bacterial infections. Model-informed precision dosing with population pharmacokinetics (PopPK) models could help to individualize PMB dosing regimens and improve therapy. However, the external prediction ability of the established PopPK models has not been fully elaborated. This study aimed to systemically evaluate eleven PMB PopPK models from ten published literature based on a new independent population, which was divided into four different populations, patients with liver dysfunction, kidney dysfunction, liver and kidney dysfunction, and normal liver and kidney function. The whole data set consisted of 146 patients with 391 PMB concentrations. The prediction- and simulation-based diagnostics and Bayesian forecasting were conducted to evaluate model predictability. In the overall evaluation process, none of the models exhibited satisfactory predictive ability in both prediction- and simulation-based diagnostic simultaneously. However, the evaluation of the models in the subgroup of patients with normal liver and kidney function revealed improved predictive performance compared to those with liver and/or kidney dysfunction. Bayesian forecasting demonstrated enhanced predictability with the incorporation of two to three prior observations. The external evaluation highlighted a lack of consistency between the prediction results of published models and the external validation dataset. Nonetheless, Bayesian forecasting holds promise in improving the predictive performance of the models, and feedback from therapeutic drug monitoring is crucial in optimizing individual dosing regimens.

External Evaluation of Population Pharmacokinetic Models for High-Dose Methotrexate in Adult Patients with Hematological Tumors.

Currently, numerous population pharmacokinetic (popPK) models for methotrexate (MTX) have been published for estimating PK parameters and variability. However, it is unclear whether the accuracy of these models is sufficient for clinical application. The aim of this study is to evaluate published models and assess their predictive performance according to the standards of scientific research. A total of 237 samples from 74 adult patients who underwent high-dose MTX (HDMTX) treatment at Shanghai Changzheng Hospital were collected. The software package NONMEM was used to perform an external evaluation for each model, including prediction-based diagnosis, simulation-based diagnosis, and Bayesian forecasting. The simulation-based diagnosis includes normalized prediction distribution error (NPDE) and visual predictive check (VPC). Following screening, 7 candidate models suitable for external validation were identified for comparison. However, none of these models exhibited excellent predictive performance. Bayesian simulation results indicated that the prediction precision and accuracy of all models significantly improved when incorporating prior concentration information. The published popPK models for MTX exhibit significant differences in their predictive performance, and none of the models were able to accurately predict MTX concentrations in our data set. Therefore, before adopting any model in clinical practice, extensive evaluation should be conducted.

External Evaluation of Population Pharmacokinetic Models for Precision Dosing: Current State and Knowledge Gaps.

Predicting drug exposures using population pharmacokinetic models through Bayesian forecasting software can improve individual pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic target attainment. However, selecting the most adapted model to be used is challenging due to the lack of guidance on how to design and interpret external evaluation studies. The confusion around the choice of statistical metrics and acceptability criteria emphasises the need for further research to fill this methodological gap as there is an urgent need for the development of standards and guidelines for external evaluation studies. Herein we discuss the scientific challenges faced by pharmacometric researchers and opportunities for future research with a focus on antibiotics.

Towards Precision Dosing of Clozapine in Schizophrenia: External Evaluation of Population Pharmacokinetic Models and Bayesian Forecasting.

Therapeutic drug monitoring and treatment optimization of clozapine are recommended, owing to its narrow therapeutic range and pharmacokinetic (PK) variability. This study aims to assess the clinical applicability of published population PK models by testing their predictive performance in an external data set and to determine the effectiveness of Bayesian forecasting (BF) for clozapine treatment optimization. Available models of clozapine were identified, and their predictive performance was determined using an external data set (53 patients, 151 samples). The median prediction error (PE) and median absolute PE were used to assess bias and inaccuracy. The potential factors influencing model predictability were also investigated. The final concentration was reestimated for all patients using covariates or previously observed concentrations. The 7 included models presented limited predictive performance. Only 1 model met the acceptability criteria (median PE ≤ ±20% and median absolute PE ≤30%). There was no difference between the data used for building the models (therapeutic drug monitoring or PK study) or the number of compartments in the models. A tendency for higher inaccuracy at low concentrations during treatment initiation was observed. Heterogeneities were observed in the predictive performances between the subpopulations, especially in terms of smoking status and sex. For the models included, BF significantly improved their predictive performance. Our study showed that upon external evaluation, clozapine models provide limited predictive performance, especially in subpopulations such as nonsmokers. From the perspective of model-informed prediction dosing, model predictability should be improved using updating or metamodeling methods. Moreover, BF substantially improved model predictability and could be used for clozapine treatment optimization.

External Evaluation of Population Pharmacokinetic Models of Busulfan in Chinese Adult Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation Recipients.

Objective: Busulfan (BU) is a bi-functional DNA-alkylating agent used in patients undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT). Over the last decades, several population pharmacokinetic (pop PK) models of BU have been established, but external evaluation has not been performed for almost all models. The purpose of the study was to evaluate the predictive performance of published pop PK models of intravenous BU in adults using an independent dataset from Chinese HSCT patients, and to identify the best model to guide personalized dosing. Methods: The external evaluation methods included prediction-based diagnostics, simulation-based diagnostics, and Bayesian forecasting. In prediction-based diagnostics, the relative prediction error (PE%) was calculated by comparing the population predicted concentration (PRED) with the observations. Simulation-based diagnostics included the prediction- and variability-corrected visual predictive check (pvcVPC) and the normalized prediction distribution error (NPDE). Bayesian forecasting was executed by giving prior one to four observations. The factors influencing the model predictability, including the impact of structural models, were assessed. Results: A total of 440 concentrations (110 patients) were obtained for analysis. Based on prediction-based diagnostics and Bayesian forecasting, preferable predictive performance was observed in the model developed by Huang et al. The median PE% was -1.44% which was closest to 0, and the maximum F20 of 57.27% and F30 of 72.73% were achieved. Bayesian forecasting demonstrated that prior concentrations remarkably improved the prediction precision and accuracy of all models, even with only one prior concentration. Conclusion: This is the first study to comprehensively evaluate published pop PK models of BU. The model built by Huang et al. had satisfactory predictive performance, which can be used to guide individualized dosage adjustment of BU in Chinese patients.

External evaluation of population pharmacokinetic models for voriconazole in Chinese adult patients with hematological malignancy.

Patients with hematological malignancies are prone to invasive fungal disease due to long-term chemotherapy or radiotherapy. Voriconazole is a second-generation triazole broad-spectrum antibiotic used to prevent or treat invasive fungal infections. Many population pharmacokinetic (pop PK) models have been published for voriconazole, and various diagnostic methods are available to validate the performance of these pop PK models. However, most of the published models have not been strictly evaluated externally. The purpose of this study is to evaluate these models externally and assess their predictive capabilities. The external dataset consists of adults receiving voriconazole treatment at Fujian Medical University Union Hospital. We re-established the published models based on their final estimated values in the literature and used our external dataset for initial screening. Each model was evaluated based on the following outcomes: prediction-based diagnostics, prediction- and variability-corrected visual predictive check (pvcVPC), normalized prediction distribution errors (NPDE), and Bayesian simulation results with one to two prior observations. A total of 237 samples from 166 patients were collected as an external dataset. After screening, six candidate models suitable for the external dataset were finally obtained for comparison. Among the models, none demonstrated excellent predictive performance. Bayesian simulation shows that all models' prediction precision and accuracy were significantly improved when one or two prior concentrations were given. The published pop PK models of voriconazole have significant differences in prediction performance, and none of the models could perfectly predict the concentrations of voriconazole for our data. Therefore, extensive evaluation should precede the adoption of any model in clinical practice.

External Evaluation of Population Pharmacokinetic Models to Inform Precision Dosing of Meropenem in Critically Ill Patients.

Routine clinical meropenem therapeutic drug monitoring data can be applied to model-informed precision dosing. The current study aimed to evaluate the adequacy and predictive capabilities of the published models with routine meropenem data and identify the dosing adaptations using a priori and Bayesian estimation. For this, 14 meropenem models for the external evaluation carried out on an independent cohort of 134 patients with 205 meropenem concentrations were encoded in NONMEM 7.3. The performance was determined using: 1) prediction-based and simulation-based diagnostics; and 2) predicted meropenem concentrations by a priori prediction using patient covariates only; and Bayesian forecasting using previous observations. The clinical implications were assessed according to the required dose adaptations using the meropenem concentrations. All assessments were stratified based on the patients with or without continuous renal replacement therapy. Although none of the models passed all tests, the model by Muro et al. showed the least bias. Bayesian forecasting could improve the predictability over an a priori approach, with a relative bias of −11.63–68.89% and −302.96%–130.37%, and a relative root mean squared error of 34.99–110.11% and 14.78–241.81%, respectively. A dosing change was required in 40.00–68.97% of the meropenem observation results after Bayesian forecasting. In summary, the published models couldn’t adequately describe the meropenem pharmacokinetics of our center. Although the selection of an initial meropenem dose with a priori prediction is challenging, the further model-based analysis combining therapeutic drug monitoring could be utilized in the clinical practice of meropenem therapy.

External evaluation of population pharmacokinetic models of imatinib in adults diagnosed with chronic myeloid leukaemia.

Imatinib is considered the standard first-line treatment in newly diagnosed patients with chronic-phase myeloid leukaemia (CML). Several imatinib population pharmacokinetic (popPK) models have been developed. However, their predictive performance has not been well established when extrapolated to different populations. Therefore, this study aimed to perform an external evaluation of available imatinib popPK models developed mainly in adult patients, and to evaluate the improvement in individual model-based predictions through Bayesian forecasting computed by each model at different treatment occasions. A literature review was conducted through PubMed and Scopus to identify popPK models. Therapeutic drug monitoring data collected in adult CML patients treated with imatinib was used for external evaluation, including prediction- and simulated-based diagnostics together with Bayesian forecasting analysis. Fourteen imatinib popPK studies were included for model-performance evaluation. A total of 99 imatinib samples were collected from 48 adult CML patients undergoing imatinib treatment with a minimum of one plasma concentration measured at steady-state between January 2016 and December 2020. The model proposed by Petain et al showed the best performance concerning prediction-based diagnostics in the studied population. Bayesian forecasting demonstrated a significant improvement in predictive performance at the second visit. Inter-occasion variability contributed to reducing bias and improving individual model-based predictions. Imatinib popPK studies developed in Caucasian subjects including α1-acid glycoprotein showed the best model performance in terms of overall bias and precision. Moreover, two imatinib samples from different visits appear sufficient to reach an adequate model-based individual prediction performance trough Bayesian forecasting.

External Evaluation of Population Pharmacokinetic Models and Bayes-Based Dosing of Infliximab.

Despite the well-demonstrated efficacy of infliximab in inflammatory diseases, treatment failure remains frequent. Dose adjustment using Bayesian methods has shown in silico its interest in achieving target plasma concentrations. However, most of the published models have not been fully validated in accordance with the recommendations. This study aimed to submit these models to an external evaluation and verify their predictive capabilities. Eight models were selected for external evaluation, carried out on an independent database (409 concentrations from 157 patients). Each model was evaluated based on the following parameters: goodness-of-fit (comparison of predictions to observations), residual error model (population weighted residuals (PWRES), individual weighted residuals (IWRES), and normalized prediction distribution errors (NPDE)), and predictive performances (prediction-corrected visual predictive checks (pcVPC) and Bayesian simulations). The performances observed during this external evaluation varied greatly from one model to another. The eight evaluated models showed a significant bias in population predictions (from −7.19 to 7.38 mg/L). Individual predictions showed acceptable bias and precision for six of the eight models (mean error of −0.74 to −0.29 mg/L and mean percent error of −16.6 to −0.4%). Analysis of NPDE and pcVPC confirmed these results and revealed a problem with the inclusion of several covariates (weight, concomitant immunomodulatory treatment, presence of anti-drug antibodies). This external evaluation showed satisfactory results for some models, notably models A and B, and highlighted several prospects for improving the pharmacokinetic models of infliximab for clinical-biological application.

External evaluation of population pharmacokinetic models for continuous administration of meropenem in critically ill adult patients

Beta-lactams (BL), the most commonly prescribed class of antibiotics, are recommended as the first-line therapy for multiple indications in infectious disease guidelines. Meropenem (MERO) is frequently used in intensive care units (ICU) to treat bacterial infections with or without sepsis. The pharmacokinetics of MERO display a large variability in patients admitted to ICUs due to altered pathophysiology. The aim of this study was to perform an external evaluation of published population pharmacokinetic models of MERO in order to test their predictive performance in a cohort of ICU adult patients. A literature search in PubMed/Medline database was made following the PRISMA statement. External evaluation was performed using NONMEM software, and the bias and inaccuracy values were calculated. An external validation dataset from the Timone Hospital in Marseille, France, included 84 concentration samples from 27 patients. Four models of MERO were identified according to the inclusion criteria of the study. None of the models presented acceptable values of bias and inaccuracy. While performing external evaluations on some populations may confirm a model's suitability to diverse groups of patients, there is still some variability that cannot be explained nor solved by the procedure. This brings to light the difficulty to develop only one model for ICU patients and the need to develop one specific model to each population of critically ill patients.

External Evaluation of Population Pharmacokinetic Models of Vancomycin in Large Cohorts of Intensive Care Unit Patients.

Dosing of vancomycin is often guided by therapeutic drug monitoring and population pharmacokinetic models in the intensive care unit (ICU). The validity of these models is crucial, as ICU patients have marked pharmacokinetic variability. Therefore, we set out to evaluate the predictive performance of published population pharmacokinetic models of vancomycin in ICU patients. The PubMed database was used to search for population pharmacokinetic models of vancomycin in adult ICU patients. The identified models were evaluated in two independent data sets which were collected from two large hospitals in the Netherlands (Amsterdam UMC, Location VUmc, and OLVG Oost). We also tested a one-compartment model with fixed values for clearance and volume of distribution, in which a clinical standard dosage regimen (SDR) was mimicked to assess its predictive performance. Prediction error was calculated to assess the predictive performance of the models. Six models plus the SDR model were evaluated. The model of Roberts et al. (J. A. Roberts, F. S. Taccone, A. A. Udy, J.-L. Vincent, F. Jacobs, and J. Lipman, Antimicrob Agents Chemother 55:2704-2709, 2011, https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.01708-10) performed satisfactorily, with mean and median values of prediction error of 5.1% and -7.5%, respectively, for Amsterdam UMC, Location VUmc, patients, and -12.6% and -17.2% respectively, for OLVG Oost patients. The other models, including the SDR model, yielded high mean values (-49.7% to 87.7%) and median values (-56.1% to 66.1%) for both populations. In conclusion, only the model of Roberts et al. was able to validly predict the concentrations of vancomycin for our data, whereas other models and standard dosing were largely inadequate. Extensive evaluation should precede the adoption of any model in clinical practice for ICU patients.

External evaluation of population pharmacokinetic models for ciclosporin in adult renal transplant recipients.

Several population pharmacokinetic (popPK) models for ciclosporin (CsA) in adult renal transplant recipients have been constructed to optimize the therapeutic regimen of CsA. However, little is known about their predictabilities when extrapolated to different clinical centres. Therefore, this study aimed to externally evaluate the predictive ability of CsA popPK models and determine the potential influencing factors. A literature search was conducted and the predictive performance was determined for each selected model using an independent data set of 62 patients (471 predose and 500 2-h postdose concentrations) from our hospital. Prediction-based diagnostics and simulation-based normalized prediction distribution error were used to evaluate model predictability. The influence of prior information was assessed using Bayesian forecasting. Additionally, potential factors influencing model predictability were investigated. Seventeen models extracted from 17 published popPK studies were assessed. Prediction-based diagnostics showed that ethnicity potentially influenced model transferability. Simulation-based normalized prediction distribution error analyses indicated misspecification in most of the models, especially regarding variance. Bayesian forecasting demonstrated that the predictive performance of the models substantially improved with 2-3 prior observations. The predictability of nonlinear Michaelis-Menten models was superior to that of linear compartmental models when evaluating the impact of structural models, indicating the underlying nonlinear kinetics of CsA. Structural model, ethnicity, covariates and prior observations potentially affected model predictability. Structural model is the predominant factor influencing model predictability. Incorporation of nonlinear kinetics in CsA popPK modelling should be considered. Moreover, Bayesian forecasting substantially improved model predictability.

External evaluation of population pharmacokinetic models of vancomycin in neonates: the transferability of published models to different clinical settings

Vancomycin is one of the most evaluated antibiotics in neonates using modeling and simulation approaches. However no clear consensus on optimal dosing has been achieved. The objective of the present study was to perform an external evaluation of published models, in order to test their predictive performances in an independent dataset and to identify the possible study-related factors influencing the transferability of pharmacokinetic models to different clinical settings. Published neonatal vancomycin pharmacokinetic models were screened from the literature. The predictive performance of 6 models was evaluated using an independent dataset (112 concentrations from 78 neonates). The evaluation procedures used simulation-based diagnostics (visual predictive check [VPC] and normalized prediction distribution errors [NPDE]). Differences in predictive performances of models for vancomycin pharmacokinetics in neonates were found. The mean of NPDE for 6 evaluated models were 1.35, -0.22, -0.36, 0.24, 0.66, 0.48, respectively. These differences were explained, at least partly, by taking into account the method used to measure serum creatinine concentrations. The adult conversion factor of 1.3 (enzymatic to Jaffé) was tested with an improvement in the VPC and NPDE, but it still need to be evaluated and validated in neonates. Differences were also identified between analytical methods for vancomycin. The importance of analytical techniques for serum creatinine concentrations and vancomycin as a predictor of vancomycin concentrations in neonates has been confirmed. Dosage individualisation of vancomycin in neonates should consider not only patients' characteristics and clinical conditions, but also the methods used to measure serum creatinine and vancomycin.

Evaluation of population pharmacokinetic models for amikacin dosage individualization in critically ill patients

Abstract Objectives The aim of this study was to evaluate the reliability for dosage individualization and Bayesian adaptive control of several literature-retrieved amikacin population pharmacokinetic models in patients who were critically ill. Methods Four population pharmacokinetic models, three of them customized for critically-ill patients, were applied using pharmacokinetic software to fifty-one adult patients on conventional amikacin therapy admitted to the intensive care unit. An estimation of patient-specific pharmacokinetic parameters for each model was obtained by retrospective analysis of the amikacin serum concentrations measured (n = 162) and different clinical covariates. The model performance for a priori estimation of the area under the serum concentration-time curve (AUC) and maximum serum drug concentration (Cmax) targets was obtained. Key findings Our results provided valuable confirmation of the clinical importance of the choice of population pharmacokinetic models when selecting amikacin dosages for patients who are critically ill. Significant differences in model performance were especially evident when only information concerning clinical covariates was used for dosage individualization and over the two most critical determinants of clinical efficacy of amikacin i.e. the AUC and Cmax values. Conclusions Only a single amikacin serum level seemed necessary to diminish the influence of population model on dosage individualization.

Evaluation of population pharmacokinetic models for amikacin dosage individualization in critically ill patients

The aim of this study was to evaluate the reliability for dosage individualization and Bayesian adaptive control of several literature-retrieved amikacin population pharmacokinetic models in patients who were critically ill. Four population pharmacokinetic models, three of them customized for critically-ill patients, were applied using pharmacokinetic software to fifty-one adult patients on conventional amikacin therapy admitted to the intensive care unit. An estimation of patient-specific pharmacokinetic parameters for each model was obtained by retrospective analysis of the amikacin serum concentrations measured (n = 162) and different clinical covariates. The model performance for a priori estimation of the area under the serum concentration-time curve (AUC) and maximum serum drug concentration (C(max)) targets was obtained. Our results provided valuable confirmation of the clinical importance of the choice of population pharmacokinetic models when selecting amikacin dosages for patients who are critically ill. Significant differences in model performance were especially evident when only information concerning clinical covariates was used for dosage individualization and over the two most critical determinants of clinical efficacy of amikacin i.e. the AUC and C(max) values. Only a single amikacin serum level seemed necessary to diminish the influence of population model on dosage individualization.