4.7 Article

Pharmacokinetics of inhaled colistin in patients with cystic fibrosis

Journal

JOURNAL OF ANTIMICROBIAL CHEMOTHERAPY
Volume 57, Issue 2, Pages 306-311

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/jac/dki461

Keywords

Pseudomonas; antimicrobial therapy; airways

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objectives: Inhaled colistin is commonly used in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF), but only limited data are available to define its pharmacokinetic profile. Patients and methods: We performed a multicentre study in 30 CF patients to assess sputum, serum and urine concentrations after a single dose of 2 million units of colistin administered by inhalation. In a subgroup of patients we also compared the efficacy of two different nebulizers for administration of inhaled colistin. Results: Serum concentrations of colistin reached their maximum 1.5 h after inhalation and decreased thereafter. Serum concentrations were well below those previously reported for systemic application in all patients. A mean 4.3 +/- 1.3% of the inhaled dose was detected in urine. Elimination characteristics did not differ significantly from those previously reported for systemic application. A positive correlation was found between forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) in per cent predicted and both AUC and maximal colistin concentrations in serum (C-max). Maximum sputum concentrations were at least 10 times higher than the MIC breakpoint for Pseudomonas aeruginosa proposed by the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. Although sputum drug concentrations decreased after a peak at 1 h, the mean colistin concentrations were still above 4 mg/L after 12 h. No differences were seen in polymyxin E sputum concentrations, for CF patients between the two nebulizer systems. Conclusions: The low systemic and high local concentrations of colistin support the use of inhaled colistin in CF patients infected with P. aeruginosa.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available