Effect of vancomycin serum trough levels on outcomes in patients with nosocomial pneumonia due to Staphylococcus aureus: a retrospective, post hoc, subgroup analysis of the Phase 3 ATTAIN studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Existing data are not consistently supportive of improved clinical outcome when vancomycin dosing regimens aimed at achieving target trough levels are used. A retrospective, post hoc, subgroup analysis of prospectively collected data from the Phase 3 ATTAIN trials of telavancin versus vancomycin for treatment of nosocomial pneumonia was conducted to further investigate the relationship between vancomycin serum trough levels and patient outcome. METHODS: Study patients were enrolled in 274 study sites across 38 countries. A total of 98 patients had Staphylococcus aureus nosocomial pneumonia and vancomycin serum trough levels available. These patients were grouped according to their median vancomycin trough level; < 10 μg/mL, 10 μg/mL to < 15 μg/mL, and ≥ 15 μg/mL. RESULTS: Clinical cure rates in the < 10 μg/mL, 10 μg/mL to < 15 μg/mL, and ≥ 15 μg/mL vancomycin trough level groups were 70% (21/30), 55% (18/33), and 49% (17/35), respectively (p = 0.09), and the frequencies of patient death were 10% (3/30), 15% (5/33), and 20% (7/35), respectively (p = 0.31). Renal adverse events were more frequent in the ≥ 15 μg/mL (17% [6/35]) than the < 10 μg/mL (0%) and 10 μg/mL to < 15 μg/mL (3% [1/33]) trough level groups (p < 0.01). When patients with acute renal failure or vancomycin exposure within 7 days prior to study medication were excluded, clinical cure rates in the < 10 μg/mL, 10 μg/mL to < 15 μg/mL, and ≥ 15 μg/mL vancomycin trough level groups (71% [12/17], 60% [9/15], and 27% [3/11], respectively; p = 0.04) and the number of deaths (12% [2/17], 20% [3/15], and 45% [5/11], respectively; p = 0.07) demonstrated a trend towards worse outcomes in the higher vancomycin trough level groups. CONCLUSIONS: The findings of our study suggest that higher vancomycin trough levels do not result in improved clinical response but likely increase the incidence of nephrotoxicity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00107952 and NCT00124020.
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 | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".