4.7 Article

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of cefepime in patients with various degrees of renal function

Journal

ANTIMICROBIAL AGENTS AND CHEMOTHERAPY
Volume 47, Issue 6, Pages 1853-1861

Publisher

AMER SOC MICROBIOLOGY
DOI: 10.1128/AAC.47.6.1853-1861.2003

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study evaluated the pharmacokinetics of cefepime in 36 patients with different levels of renal function. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters were calculated using samples obtained at steady state. Patients with creatinine clearance (CLCR) of >100 ml/min had more rapid clearance (CL) and a lower minimum concentration in serum (C-min). C-min in this group was found to be 3.3 +/- 3.6 mg/liter (mean and standard deviation), compared to 19.5 +/- 21.5 mg/liter in patients with a CLCR of between 60 and 100 ml/min (P = 0.025) and 14.0 +/- 11.5 mg/liter in patients with a CLCR of <60 ml/min (P = 0.009). Patient data were also analyzed by the nonparametric expectation maximization method and Bayesian forecasting. The median volume of distribution in the central compartment was 27.08 liters. CL and CLCR were highly correlated (P = 0.00033) according to the equation CL = 0.324 liters/h + (0.0551 x CLCR). The median rate constants from the central compartment to the peripheral compartment and from the peripheral compartment to the central compartment were 12.58 and 41.09 h(-1), respectively. The time-concentration profiles for 1,000 patients (CLCRS, 120, 60, and 30 ml/min) each receiving various dosing regimens were simulated by using Monte Carlo simulations. Standard dosing resulted in a C-min that was greater than or equal to the MIC in more than 80% of the simulated profiles with MICs ≤2 mg/liter. Current dosing recommendations may be suboptimal for monotherapy of infections due to less susceptible pathogens (e.g., those for which MICs are ≥4 mg/liter), particularly when CLCR exceeds 120 ml/min.

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