MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405775005 · doi:10.1007/s40262-024-01460-6

A Pooled Pharmacokinetic Analysis for Piperacillin/Tazobactam Across Different Patient Populations: From Premature Infants to the Elderly

2024· article· en· W4405775005 on OpenAlexaff
Daming Kong, Jason A. Roberts, Jeffrey Lipman, Fabio Silvio Taccone, Michael Cohen-Wolkowiez, Fekade B. Sime, Danny Tsai, Pieter De Cock, Sutep Jaruratanasirikul, Sofie Dhaese, Andrew Udy, Timothy Felton, Robin Michelet, Céline Thibault, Jeroen V. Koomen, Douglas J. Eleveld, Michel Struys, Jan J. De Waele, Pieter Colin, Caroline Damen, Evelyn Dhont, Charlotte Kloft, Michael Zöller, Johannes Zander

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Pharmacokinetics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntibiotics Pharmacokinetics and Efficacy
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine
FundersChina Scholarship Council
KeywordsDosingPharmacokineticsMedicinePharmacodynamicsPiperacillinPiperacillin/tazobactamPopulationTazobactamPharmacologyCovariateInternal medicineBiologyStatisticsMathematicsGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The pharmacokinetics (PK) of piperacillin/tazobactam (PIP/TAZ) is highly variable across different patient populations and there are controversies regarding non-linear elimination as well as the fraction unbound of PIP ( f UNB_PIP ). This has led to a plethora of subgroup-specific models, increasing the risk of misusing published models when optimising dosing regimens. In this study, we aimed to develop a single model to simultaneously describe the PK of PIP/TAZ in diverse patient populations and evaluate the current dosing recommendations by predicting the PK/pharmacodynamics (PD) target attainment throughout life. Population PK models were separately built for PIP and TAZ based on data from 13 studies in various patient populations. In the development of those single-drug models, postnatal age (PNA), postmenstrual age (PMA), total body weight (TBW), height, and serum creatinine (SCR) were tested as covariates. Subsequently, a combined population PK model was established and the correlations between the PK of PIP and TAZ were tested. Monte Carlo simulations were performed based on the final combined model to evaluate the current dosing recommendations. The final combined model for PIP/TAZ consisted of four compartments (two for each drug), with covariates including TBW, PMA, and SCR. For a 70-kg, 35-year-old patient with SCR of 0.83 mg L −1 , the PIP values for V 1 , CL, V 2 and Q 2 were 10.4 L, 10.6 L h −1 , 11.6 L and 15.2 L h −1 , respectively, and the TAZ values were 10.5 L, 9.58 L h −1 , 13.7 L and 16.8 L h −1 , respectively. The CL for both drugs show maturation in early life, reaching 50% at 54.2 weeks PMA. With advancing age, CL of TAZ declines to 50% at 61.6 years PMA, whereas CL of PIP declines more slowly, reaching 50% at 89.1 years PMA. The f UNB_PIP was estimated as 64.5% and non-linear elimination was not supported by our data. The simulation results indicated considerable differences in PK/PD target attainment for different patient populations under current recommended dosing regimens. We developed a combined population PK model for PIP/TAZ across a broad range of patients covering the extremes of patient characteristics. This model can be used as a robust a priori model for Bayesian forecasting to achieve individualised dosing. The simulations indicate that adjustments based on the allometric theory as well as maturation and decline of CL of PIP may help the current dosing recommendations to provide consistent target attainment across patient populations.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.005
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.078
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.365 · 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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical PharmacokineticsSame topicAntibiotics Pharmacokinetics and EfficacyFrench-language works237,207