Optimization of Vancomycin Initial Dosing Regimen in Neonates Using an Externally Evaluated Population Pharmacokinetic Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Vancomycin therapeutic monitoring guidelines were revised in March 2020, and a population pharmacokinetics-guided Bayesian approach to estimate the 24-hour area under the concentration-time curve to the minimum inhibitory concentration ratio has since been recommended instead of trough concentrations. To comply with these latest guidelines, we evaluated published population pharmacokinetic models of vancomycin using an external dataset of neonatal patients and selected the most predictive model to develop a new initial dosing regimen. METHODS: The models were identified from the literature and tested using a retrospective dataset of Canadian neonates. Their predictive performance was assessed using prediction- and simulation-based diagnostics. Monte Carlo simulations were performed to develop the initial dosing regimen with the highest probability of therapeutic target attainment. RESULTS: A total of 144 vancomycin concentrations were derived from 63 neonates in the external population. Five of the 28 models retained for evaluation were found predictive with a bias of 15% and an imprecision of 30%. Overall, the Grimsley and Thomson model performed best, with a bias of -0.8% and an imprecision of 20.9%; therefore, it was applied in the simulations. A novel initial dosing regimen of 15 mg/kg, followed by 11 mg/kg every 8 hours should favor therapeutic target attainment. CONCLUSIONS: A predictive population pharmacokinetic model of vancomycin was identified after an external evaluation and used to recommend a novel initial dosing regimen. The implementation of these model-based tools may guide physicians in selecting the most appropriate initial vancomycin dose, leading to improved clinical outcomes.
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 | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".