Journal
JOURNAL OF ANTIMICROBIAL CHEMOTHERAPY
Volume 75, Issue 6, Pages 1374-1389Publisher
OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/jac/dkaa005
Keywords
-
Funding
- Innovative Medicines Initiative Joint Undertaking from the European Union's 7th Framework Programme (FP7/2007+/-2013) [115523]
- European Federation of Pharmaceutical Industries and Associations (EFPIA) companies'
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Background: Pharmacokinetic (PK)-pharmacodynamic (PD) indices relate measures of drug exposure to antibacterial effect. Clinical PK-PD studies aim to correlate PK-PD indices with outcomes in patients. Optimization of dosing based on pre-clinical studies means that PK-PD relationships are difficult to establish; therefore studies need to be designed and reported carefully to validate pre-clinical findings. Objectives: To describe the methodological features of clinical antibacterial and antifungal PK-PD studies that reported the relationship between PK-PD indices and clinical or microbiological responses. Methods: Studies published between 1980 and 2015 were identified through systematic searches. Methodological features of eligible studies were extracted. Results: We identified 85 publications containing 97 PK-PD analyses. Most studies were small, with fewer than 100 patients. Around a quarter were performed on patients with infections due to a single specific pathogen. In approximately one-third of studies, patients received concurrent antibiotics/antifungals and in some other studies patients received other treatments that may confound the PK-PD-outcome relationship. Most studies measured antimicrobial concentrations in blood/serum and only four measured free concentrations. Most performed some form of regression, time-to-event analysis or used the Hill/Emax equation to examine the association between PK-PD index and outcome. Target values of PK-PD indices that predict outcomes were investigated in 52% of studies. Target identification was most commonly done using recursive partitioning or logistic regression. Conclusions: Given the variability in conduct and reporting, we suggest that an agreed set of standards for the conduct and reporting of studies should be developed.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available