ReviewClinical pharmacokinetics1992
Considerations in dosage selection for third generation cephalosporins.
Review in Clinical pharmacokinetics, 1992. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Commonly used antibacterial and antifungal agents for hospitalised paediatric patients: implications for therapy with an emphasis on clinical pharmacokinetics.Paediatric drugs · 2001Review
- Review
- Pharmacokinetics of drugs used in critically ill adults.Clinical pharmacokinetics · 1998Review
- Review
- Ceftriaxone. A pharmacoeconomic evaluation of its use in the treatment of serious infections.PharmacoEconomics · 1994Article
- Clinical pharmacokinetics of cefotetan.Clinical pharmacokinetics · 1994Review
- Cefetamet pivoxil. A review of its antibacterial activity, pharmacokinetic properties and therapeutic use.Drugs · 1993Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Pharmacokinetic parameters of third generation cephalosporins vary widely, requiring different dosage regimens and adjustment methods for each agent. Although their antibacterial spectrum favours their usage in infections caused by aerobic Gram-negative organisms, due to their limited post-antibiotic effect against these organisms, dosage regimens should ensure that free drug concentrations at the site of infection remain above the minimum inhibitory concentration for as much of the dosage interval as possible in patients with normal host defence mechanisms and for the entire dosage interval in immunocompromised patients. Altered protein binding encountered in various disease states can affect both microbiological and pharmacokinetic properties especially for drugs with high protein binding. Since the concentrations at the site of action are often different from those in serum, a higher or lower range of dosages needs to be selected depending on the target site. Decreased renal function affects the elimination of most third generation cephalosporins, whereas the presence of hepatic disease does not generally necessitate dosage adjustment. Because of the complex age-related physiological changes in paediatric and elderly patients, dosage should be adjusted on the basis of the reported pharmacokinetic data in these populations. The usual recommended dose may or may not be optimal in a given condition depending on the complex interactions between pharmacokinetic, microbiological and other host factors.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.