Impact of Area Under the Concentration–Time Curve–Based Vancomycin Dosing on Efficacy and Safety in Patients With Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Amy T. Chang, Christie Davis, Megan Cheatham, Kerri Degenkolb, Christopher Geik, Michael B. Kays, Sharon M. Erdman
{"title":"Impact of Area Under the Concentration–Time Curve–Based Vancomycin Dosing on Efficacy and Safety in Patients With Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia","authors":"Amy T. Chang,&nbsp;Christie Davis,&nbsp;Megan Cheatham,&nbsp;Kerri Degenkolb,&nbsp;Christopher Geik,&nbsp;Michael B. Kays,&nbsp;Sharon M. Erdman","doi":"10.1155/jcpt/5147445","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n <p><b>Background:</b> The optimal strategy for dosing and monitoring vancomycin continues to evolve. A vancomycin 24-h steady-state area under the concentration–time curve/minimum inhibitory concentration (AUC/MIC) of ≥ 400 has been associated with positive clinical outcomes, while an AUC/MIC &gt; 600–700 has been associated with increased risk of nephrotoxicity. The 2009 vancomycin dosing guidelines recommended target trough concentrations between 10–20 mcg/mL depending on infection; however, recent pharmacokinetic data suggest that most patients can achieve target AUC/MIC with trough concentrations &lt; 15 mcg/mL. While existing literature has demonstrated reduced nephrotoxicity with AUC-guided dosing (AGD), there are limited data evaluating efficacy and other clinical outcomes. Therefore, this study compared the clinical efficacy of vancomycin using trough-guided dosing (TGD) versus AGD in patients with confirmed methicillin-resistant <i>Staphylococcus aureus</i> (MRSA) bacteremia.</p>\n <p><b>Methods:</b> This was a retrospective, observational, quasiexperimental study of adult patients who received vancomycin for treatment of MRSA bacteremia. Patients with central nervous system infections, weighing &gt; 200 kg, with acute kidney injury, or receiving hemodialysis/continuous renal replacement therapy were excluded. The primary outcome was microbiological success defined as negative blood cultures within 7 days of vancomycin initiation. Secondary outcomes included achievement of therapeutic target concentrations and incidence of nephrotoxicity.</p>\n <p><b>Results:</b> Microbiological success was achieved in 52/55 (95%) patients with TGD versus 50/51 (98%) patients with AGD (<i>p</i> = 0.619). In the TGD group, 24/55 (44%) patients achieved therapeutic target concentrations within 48 h of initiation of vancomycin compared to 24/51 (47%) patients in the AGD group (<i>p</i> = 0.723). The median hospital length of stay was longer in the TGD group compared to the AGD group (16 days, IQR 11–27 days versus 13 days, IQR 9–24 days, respectively, <i>p</i> = 0.260). Nephrotoxicity occurred in 7/55 (13%) TGD patients versus 5/51 (10%) AGD patients during vancomycin therapy (<i>p</i> = 0.763).</p>\n <p><b>Conclusions:</b> AGD was similar to TGD at achieving microbiological success in patients with MRSA bacteremia and may lead to shorter lengths of hospital stay and lower rates of nephrotoxicity.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":15381,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics","volume":"2025 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1155/jcpt/5147445","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1155/jcpt/5147445","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The optimal strategy for dosing and monitoring vancomycin continues to evolve. A vancomycin 24-h steady-state area under the concentration–time curve/minimum inhibitory concentration (AUC/MIC) of ≥ 400 has been associated with positive clinical outcomes, while an AUC/MIC > 600–700 has been associated with increased risk of nephrotoxicity. The 2009 vancomycin dosing guidelines recommended target trough concentrations between 10–20 mcg/mL depending on infection; however, recent pharmacokinetic data suggest that most patients can achieve target AUC/MIC with trough concentrations < 15 mcg/mL. While existing literature has demonstrated reduced nephrotoxicity with AUC-guided dosing (AGD), there are limited data evaluating efficacy and other clinical outcomes. Therefore, this study compared the clinical efficacy of vancomycin using trough-guided dosing (TGD) versus AGD in patients with confirmed methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia.

Methods: This was a retrospective, observational, quasiexperimental study of adult patients who received vancomycin for treatment of MRSA bacteremia. Patients with central nervous system infections, weighing > 200 kg, with acute kidney injury, or receiving hemodialysis/continuous renal replacement therapy were excluded. The primary outcome was microbiological success defined as negative blood cultures within 7 days of vancomycin initiation. Secondary outcomes included achievement of therapeutic target concentrations and incidence of nephrotoxicity.

Results: Microbiological success was achieved in 52/55 (95%) patients with TGD versus 50/51 (98%) patients with AGD (p = 0.619). In the TGD group, 24/55 (44%) patients achieved therapeutic target concentrations within 48 h of initiation of vancomycin compared to 24/51 (47%) patients in the AGD group (p = 0.723). The median hospital length of stay was longer in the TGD group compared to the AGD group (16 days, IQR 11–27 days versus 13 days, IQR 9–24 days, respectively, p = 0.260). Nephrotoxicity occurred in 7/55 (13%) TGD patients versus 5/51 (10%) AGD patients during vancomycin therapy (p = 0.763).

Conclusions: AGD was similar to TGD at achieving microbiological success in patients with MRSA bacteremia and may lead to shorter lengths of hospital stay and lower rates of nephrotoxicity.

基于浓度-时间曲线的万古霉素给药面积对耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌菌血症患者疗效和安全性的影响
背景:万古霉素给药和监测的最佳策略在不断发展。万古霉素在浓度-时间曲线下的24小时稳态面积/最低抑制浓度(AUC/MIC)≥400与阳性临床结果相关,而AUC/MIC >;600-700与肾毒性风险增加有关。2009年万古霉素剂量指南推荐的目标谷浓度为10-20微克/毫升,具体取决于感染情况;然而,最近的药代动力学数据表明,大多数患者可以达到最低浓度的目标AUC/MIC;15微克/毫升。虽然现有文献已经证明auc引导给药(AGD)可以降低肾毒性,但评估疗效和其他临床结果的数据有限。因此,本研究比较了万古霉素通过引导给药(TGD)和AGD治疗确诊耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌(MRSA)菌血症患者的临床疗效。方法:对接受万古霉素治疗MRSA菌血症的成年患者进行回顾性、观察性、准实验性研究。中枢神经系统感染患者,体重>;排除体重200公斤、急性肾损伤、接受血液透析/持续肾替代治疗者。主要终点是微生物学成功,定义为万古霉素起始7天内血培养阴性。次要结局包括达到治疗目标浓度和肾毒性发生率。结果:52/55 (95%)TGD患者获得微生物学成功,50/51 (98%)AGD患者获得微生物学成功(p = 0.619)。在TGD组中,24/55(44%)患者在开始使用万古霉素48小时内达到治疗目标浓度,而AGD组中24/51(47%)患者达到治疗目标浓度(p = 0.723)。TGD组的中位住院时间较AGD组更长(16天,IQR 11-27天,13天,IQR 9-24天,p = 0.260)。万古霉素治疗期间,7/55 (13%)TGD患者发生肾毒性,5/51 (10%)AGD患者发生肾毒性(p = 0.763)。结论:AGD与TGD在MRSA菌血症患者获得微生物学成功方面相似,可能导致住院时间缩短和肾毒性发生率降低。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
5.00%
发文量
226
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Clinical Pharmacy and Therapeutics provides a forum for clinicians, pharmacists and pharmacologists to explore and report on issues of common interest. Reports and commentaries on current issues in medical and pharmaceutical practice are encouraged. Papers on evidence-based clinical practice and multidisciplinary collaborative work are particularly welcome. Regular sections in the journal include: editorials, commentaries, reviews (including systematic overviews and meta-analyses), original research and reports, and book reviews. Its scope embraces all aspects of clinical drug development and therapeutics, including: Rational therapeutics Evidence-based practice Safety, cost-effectiveness and clinical efficacy of drugs Drug interactions Clinical impact of drug formulations Pharmacogenetics Personalised, stratified and translational medicine Clinical pharmacokinetics.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信