An updated vancomycin dosing protocol for initiating therapy in patients undergoing intermittent high-flux hemodialysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To design an updated vancomycin dosing protocol for initiating therapy in patients undergoing chronic intermittent high-flux hemodialysis (iHFHD) that is congruent with the revised 2020 consensus guidelines for therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). METHODS: Monte Carlo simulation methods were used to study vancomycin dosing for patients on iHFHD. Vancomycin regimens were constructed as intravenous infusions (for intradialytic administration) of a loading dose and maintenance doses 3 times weekly during subsequent dialysis sessions. Vancomycin plasma concentrations were simulated, and the probability of target attainment (PTA) for a 24-hour area under the time-concentration curve (AUC24) of 400 to 700 mg · h/L was determined. Standardized weight-based (ie, dose-banding) regimens were investigated, and an optimized protocol was selected based on TDM target attainment and practical considerations for use in the dialysis setting. RESULTS: The proposed vancomycin dosing protocol (for intradialytic administration) specifies 3 regimens: (1) a 1,500-mg loading dose and 750-mg maintenance doses for patients weighing 50 kg to 69 kg; (2) a 2,000-mg loading dose and 1,000-mg maintenance doses for patients weighing 70 kg to 89 kg; and (3) a 2,500-mg loading dose and 1,250-mg maintenance doses for patients weighing 90 kg to 110 kg. In a simulated hemodialysis population (n = 5,000), the proposed protocol delivered median (interquartile range [IQR]) loading and maintenance doses of 25.0 (23.4-26.6) mg/kg and 12.5 (11.8-13.3) mg/kg, respectively. The PTA for an AUC24 of 400 to 700 mg · h/L was 74.7% on day 1 and 70.8% on day 8, with less than 10% of values exceeding the target range. CONCLUSION: Our proposed dosing protocol for patients undergoing iHFHD offers an updated and practical approach for initiating vancomycin therapy that can be optimized with early TDM.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".