MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2344957306 · doi:10.1093/ofid/ofv133.509

A Pharmacokinetic Validation Study of Once Daily Dosing of Intravenous Gentamicin and Tobramycin in Pediatric Patients

2015· article· en· W2344957306 on OpenAlexaff
Erin Chung, Rachel Xia-Ying Liu, Marina Strzelecki, B. Michael, Laura Wang, Vicky Papaioannou, Elizabeth Harvey, Susan Richardson, Ari Bitnun, Winnie Seto

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Forum Infectious Diseases · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntibiotics Pharmacokinetics and Efficacy
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineTobramycinDosingGentamicinPharmacyPharmacokineticsSick childUniversity hospitalPediatricsEmergency medicineIntensive care medicineFamily medicineInternal medicineAntibiotics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background. Aminoglycosides are commonly used for treating serious infections caused by Gram-negative organisms. Despite evidence to support once daily dosing in the adult population, there is limited experience in children. We aimed to evaluate the ability of a daily dose of 9 mg/kg of intravenous gentamicin and tobramycin to achieve target maximum concentration (Cmax) range of 16-25 mg/L in pediatric patients in our institution. Methods. This retrospective observational cohort study assessed children receiving gentamicin or tobramycin. Pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated using serum levels drawn 3 hours and 6 hours after a dose of aminoglycoside. Descriptive statistics and Monte Carlo simulations were used in our analysis. Results. One hundred and forty seven children with 153 aminoglycoside courses aged 2 months to 18 years were included. Majority of patients were admitted to surgical units (63.4%). Seventy one percent of aminoglycoside courses were indicated for empiric use, 24% for microbiologically documented infections, and 5% for prophylaxis. Mean population pharmacokinetic parameters were: volume of distribution of 0.51 ± 0.28 L/kg, clearance of 2.83 ± 1.33 mL/min/kg and half-life of 2.13 ± 0.65 h. With first dose of therapy, 44.3% of all courses reached target therapeutic Cmax range. The mean Cmax of gentamicin and tobramycin was 18.65 ± 7.78 mg/L. Monte Carlo simulations demonstrated a minimal increase in proportion of simulated patients achieving target Cmax range with a dose increase from 9 mg/kg to 10 mg/kg (33.5% versus 33.7%, respectively). Ninety-three percent of patients defervesced by end of treatment course. The median change from baseline for: white blood cell count was −16.46% (interquartile range (IQR): −37.32 to 9.41), serum creatinine was 5.84% (IQR: −10.96 to 19.18), blood urea nitrogen was 2.27% (IQR: −28.57 to 73.03), and urine output was −13.37% (IQR: −42.02 to 24.51). One patient had audiometry testing, which was normal. Conclusion. An initial gentamicin or tobramycin daily dose of 9 mg/kg is appropriate to achieve target Cmax range and appears to be efficacious and safe for pediatric patients. Monitoring serum aminoglycoside concentrations remains an important strategy to optimize dose for efficacy and safety. Disclosures. All authors: No reported disclosures.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.295 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen Forum Infectious DiseasesSame topicAntibiotics Pharmacokinetics and EfficacyFrench-language works237,207