A post-authorization survey to evaluate plasma concentrations of teicoplanin in adult hospitalized patients treated for sepsis in Gauteng, South Africa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study measured and analyzed plasma concentrations of teicoplanin in patients >18 years in the first 4 days of administration. This was an open-label, multicentre, observational study in patients receiving teicoplanin for suspected or diagnosed Gram-positive infection. Data collection included demographics, method of administration, loading and maintenance doses, creatinine and adverse events. Trough and peak concentrations were determined 15 minutes prior to drug administration and 60 minutes after. Serum was separated and stored at -20°C until analysis. Levels were determined with an Abbott TDx /FLx analyzer and Seradyn Teicoplanin Innofluor assay kits. Seradyn internal teicoplanin controls were run within and between each batch. Mean trough and peak plasma levels were calculated for 4 days of therapy. Seventy-four patients with complete records were analyzed and whilst all patients received an 800 mg loading dose on day 1, 40 received 400 mg twice daily thereafter (BD group) and 34 once daily (OD group), for nosocomial pneumonia ( n = 14), skin and soft tissue infection (burn and nonburn including diabetic foot) ( n = 13), bacteraemia ( n = 10), intra-abdominal infection ( n = 8), bone and joint infection ( n = 6) and as pre-emptive therapy for severe trauma ( n = 13). In the OD group, mean trough levels remained at 9.64 μg/ml from days 2 to 4 and peak levels remained at a mean of 24.84 μg/ml. In the BD group, mean trough levels increased by 5.65 μg/ml/24 hours to 21.8 μg/ml by day 4; the mean peak level increased by 5.06 μg/ml/24 hours to 43.89 μg/ml by day 4. Higher trough levels of glycopeptides (15–20 μg/ml) are targeted to improve efficacy and reduce resistance development. In the OD group the conventional target of 10 μg/ml was achieved, whilst in the BD arm 20 μg/ml was exceeded for 60% of the time by day 2 and 100% by day 4. BD dosing is recommended for most patients with severe infections, particularly those that are critically ill. No premature discontinuations or adverse events were reported during the study.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".