Evidence map›Paper›PMID 11108433›Full record

ReviewClinical pharmacokinetics2000

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of cephalosporins in cerebrospinal fluid.

I Lutsar, I R Friedland

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical pharmacokinetics, 2000. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 67 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Safety of ceftriaxone in paediatrics: a systematic review.Archives of disease in childhood · 2020
    Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Penicillin-SusceptibleAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Challenge of evolvingInternational journal of medical sciences · 2022
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

I LutsarPfizer Global Research & Development Ltd, Sandwich Laboratories, England. irja_lutsar@sandwich.pfizer.com
I R Friedland
Pfizer (United Kingdom) · GBUnited States Military Academy · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Largely because of their low lipophilicity, cephalosporins poorly penetrate through the blood-brain barrier, achieving relatively low cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) concentrations. However, the minimum bactericidal concentrations (MBCs) of the extended spectrum cephalosporins for common meningeal pathogens are generally low; thus, therapeutic CSF drug concentrations several-fold greater than the MBC can be achieved with currently recommended dosage regimens. However, the effectiveness of cephalosporin therapy is unreliable in patients with meningitis caused by highly penicillin-resistant pneumococci. As in other body sites, the bactericidal activity of cephalosporins in CSF predominantly depends on the time their concentrations exceed the MBC of infecting organisms (t>MBC). Experimental studies show that, for maximal efficacy, t>MBC values greater than 90% of the dosage interval are required in meningitis. Such values are usually achieved in humans with currently recommended dosage regimens because the half-lives of cephalosporins are 2- to 3-fold longer in CSF than in serum. Several advanced generation cephalosporins have shown equal efficacy in clinical trials, but only cefotaxime, ceftriaxone and ceftazidime are currently approved for the treatment of patients with bacterial meningitis.

Indexed as

AnimalsCephalosporinsHalf-LifeHumansCephalosporins

Identifiers

PMID11108433
OpenAlexW2038011835

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.