Tobramycin administered by the TOBI® Podhaler® for persons with cystic fibrosis: a review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Donald R VanDevanter1, David E Geller21Department of Pediatrics, Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine, Cleveland, OH, 2Nemours Children’s Clinic, Orlando, FL, USAAbstract: From its introduction, the antibiotic tobramycin has been an important tool in the management of persons with cystic fibrosis (CF) and chronic Pseudomonas aeruginosa lung infections. Initially an intravenous rescue treatment for pulmonary exacerbations, tobramycin delivered by inhalation has become a mainstay of chronic suppressive CF infection management. Platforms for tobramycin aerosol delivery have steadily improved, with increased lung deposition complimented by decreased device complexities, loaded tobramycin doses, delivery times, and treatment burdens. Most recently, a unique tobramycin inhalation powder (TIP) formulation with a portable delivery system, the TOBI® Podhaler® (Novartis AG, Basel, Switzerland) has been developed and approved in Europe, Canada, and Chile. Four capsules, each containing 28 mg of TIP are successively pierced and inhaled via the T-326 Dry Powder Inhaler Device (Novartis AG, Basel, Switzerland). No external power source is required to deliver an efficacious tobramycin dose in minutes. By comparison, tobramycin inhalation solution (TIS) (TOBI®; Novartis), is delivered by LC® Plus (PARI Respiratory Equipment Inc, Midlothian, VA) jet nebulizer powered by an air compressor over 15–20 minutes. Comparative pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy studies of TIS and TIP in CF subjects with P. aeruginosa ≥ 6 years old demonstrate that: tobramycin lung deposition with 112 mg TIP is comparable to that attained with 300 mg TIS, TIP is more effective than placebo and not inferior to TIS with respect to pulmonary function benefit, and TIP has significantly faster treatment times and achieves higher patient satisfaction than TIS. TIP is associated with an increased frequency of mild to moderate local adverse events (cough, dysphonia, and dysgeusia) compared with TIS, however, these become less frequent as subjects gain TIP experience. These results suggest that the TOBI Podhaler may better meet the needs of many CF patients and families by reducing treatment time and complexity and improving patient satisfaction compared with TIS.Keywords: dry powder inhaler, tobramycin, cystic fibrosis
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".