Antifungal Dosing in Critically Ill Patients on Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is an established advanced life support system, providing temporary cardiac and/or respiratory support in critically ill patients. Fungal infections are associated with increased mortality in patients on ECMO. Antifungal drug dosing for critically ill patients is highly challenging because of altered pharmacokinetics (PK). PK changes during critical illness; in particular, the drug volume of distribution ( V d ) and clearance can be exacerbated by ECMO. This article discusses the available literature to inform adequate dosing of antifungals in this patient population. The number of antifungal PK studies in critically ill patients on ECMO is growing; currently available literature consists of case reports and studies with small sample sizes providing inconsistent findings, with scant or no data for some antifungals. Current data are insufficient to provide definitive empirical drug dosing guidance and use of dosing strategies derived from critically patients not on ECMO is reasonable. However, due to high PK variability, therapeutic drug monitoring should be considered where available in critically ill patients receiving ECMO to prevent subtherapeutic or toxic antifungal exposures.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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".