MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3202491097 · doi:10.4212/cjhp.v74i4.3195

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Vancomycin in Adult Patients with Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia or Pneumonia

2021· article· en· W3202491097 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Ryan Marko, Julia Marie Hajjar, Vanessa Nzeribe, Michelle Pittman, Vincent Deslandes, Nadia Sant, Juthaporn Cowan, Kwadwo Kyermentang, Tim Ramsay, Sheryl Zelenitsky, Salmaan Kanji

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntimicrobial Resistance in Staphylococcus
Canadian institutionsSt. Boniface HospitalOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBacteremiaVancomycinMedicinePneumoniaStaphylococcus aureusMethicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureusIntensive care medicineDrugAntibioticsMicrobiologyInternal medicinePharmacologyBacteriaBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Vancomycin remains widely used for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections; however, treatment failure rates up to 50% have been reported. At the authors’ institution, monitoring of trough concentration is the standard of care for therapeutic drug monitoring of vancomycin. New guidelines support use of the ratio of 24-hour area under the concentration–time curve to minimum inhibitory concentration (AUC24/MIC) as the pharmacodynamic index most likely to predict outcomes in patients with MRSA-associated infections.Objectives: To determine the discordance rate between trough levels and AUC24/MIC values and how treatment failure and nephrotoxicity outcomes compare between those achieving and not achieving their pharmacodynamic targets. Methods: This retrospective cohort study involved patients with MRSA bacteremia or pneumonia admitted to the study hospital between March 1, 2014, and December 31, 2018, and treated with vancomycin. Data for trough concentrations were collected, and minimum concentrations (Cmin) were extrapolated. The AUC24/MIC values were determined using validated population pharmacokinetic models. The Cmin and AUC24/MIC values were characterized as below, within, or above pharmacodynamic targets (15–20 mg/L and 400–600, respectively). Discordance was defined as any instance where a patient’s paired Cmin and AUC24/MIC values fell in different ranges (i.e., below, within, or above) relative to the target ranges. Predictors of treatment failure and nephrotoxicity were determined using logistic regression. Results: A total of 128 patients were included in the analyses. Of these, 73 (57%) received an initial vancomycin dose less than 15 mg/kg. The discordance rate between Cmin and AUC24/MIC values was 21% (27/128). Rates of treatment failure and nephrotoxicity were 34% (43/128) and 18% (23/128), respectively. No clinical variables were found to predict discordance. Logistic regression identified initiation of vancomycin after a positive culture result (odds ratio [OR] 4.41, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.36–14.3) and achievement of target AUC24/MIC after 4 days (OR 3.48, 95% CI 1.39–8.70) as modifiable predictors of treatment failure. Conclusions: The relationship between vancomycin monitoring and outcome is likely confounded by inadequate empiric or initial dosing. Before any modification of practice with respect to vancomycin monitoring, empiric vancomycin dosing should be optimized. RÉSUMÉ Contexte : La vancomycine reste largement utilisée contre les infections dues au Staphylococcus aureus méthicillinorésistant (SAMR); cependant, on rapporte des taux d’échec de traitement allant jusqu’à 50 %. Dans l’institution où travaillent les auteurs, la surveillance de la concentration minimale constitue la norme de soins du suivi thérapeutique pharmacologique de la vancomycine. De nouvelles lignes directrices soutiennent l’utilisation du ratio de 24 h de l’aire sous la courbe de concentration-temps à concentration minimale inhibitrice (AUC24/MIC) en tant qu’indice pharmacodynamique, vraisemblablement pour prédire certains résultats concernant les patients présentant des infections associées au SAMR. Objectifs : Déterminer le taux de discordance entre la concentration minimale et les valeurs de l’AUC24/MIC et la manière dont les échecs de traitement et les résultats de néphrotoxicité se comparent entre les personnes atteignant leurs cibles pharmacodynamiques et celles qui ne l’atteignent pas. Méthodes : Cette étude de cohorte rétrospective impliquait des patients atteints d’une bactériémie au SAMR ou d’une pneumonie au SAMR, admis à l’hôpital où se déroulait l’étude entre le 1er mars 2014 et le 31 décembre 2018 et traités à l’aide de vancomycine. Les données relatives aux concentrations minimales ont été recueillies, et les concentrations minimales (Cmin) extrapolées. Les valeurs de l’AUC24/MIC ont été déterminées à l’aide de modèles de population pharmacocinétiques validés. La caractérisation des valeurs de la Cmin et des valeurs de l’AUC24/MIC se décrit comme suit : « en dessous », « à l’intérieur » ou « au-dessus » des cibles pharmacodynamiques (respectivement 15-20 mg/L et 400-600). La discordance était définie comme une situation où les valeurs associées de la Cmin et de l’AUC24/MIC tombaient dans des plages différentes (c.-à-d., en dessous, à l’intérieur ou au-dessus) par rapport aux plages cibles. Une régression logistique a permis de déterminer les prédicteurs d’échecs de traitement et de néphrotoxicité. Résultats : Au total, 128 patients ont été inclus dans les analyses. De ceux-ci, 73 (57 %) ont reçu une dose initiale de vancomycine de moins de 15 mg/kg. Le taux de discordance entre les valeurs de la Cmin et de l’AUC24/MIC était de 21 % (27/128). Les taux d’échec de traitement et de néphrotoxicité se montaient respectivement à 34 % (43/128) et 18 % (23/128). Aucune variable clinique n’a pu prédire la discordance. La régression logistique a permis de déterminer le début de l’administration de la vancomycine après un résultat de culture positif (rapport de cotes [RC] 4,41, 95 % intervalle de confiance [IC] 1,36–14,3) et l’atteinte de la cible de l’AUC24/MIC après quatre jours (RC 3,48, 95 % IC 1,39-8,70) en tant que prédicteurs modifiables de l’échec du traitement. Conclusions : Il existe probablement une confusion relative à la relation entre la surveillance de la vancomycine et le résultat à cause d’un dosage empirique ou initial inadéquat. Avant de modifier la pratique relative à la surveillance de la vancomycine, le pharmacien doit optimiser son dosage empirique.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.262 · 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

Citations6
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of Hospital PharmacySame topicAntimicrobial Resistance in StaphylococcusFrench-language works237,207