Evidence map›Paper›PMID 20065059›Full record

Trial reportAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2010

Population pharmacokinetic comparison and pharmacodynamic breakpoints of ceftazidime in cystic fibrosis patients and healthy volunteers.

J B Bulitta, C B Landersdorfer, S J Hüttner, G L Drusano, M Kinzig, U Holzgrabe, U Stephan, F Sörgel

Abstract readClinical TrialComparative Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

8 authors.

J B BulittaIBMP Institute for Biomedical and Pharmaceutical Research, Nürnberg-Heroldsberg, Germany.
C B Landersdorfer
S J Hüttner
G L Drusano
M Kinzig
U Holzgrabe
U Stephan
F Sörgel

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Despite the promising activity of ceftazidime against Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Burkholderia cepacia, there has not yet been a study that directly compared the pharmacokinetics (PK) of ceftazidime in cystic fibrosis (CF) patients and healthy volunteers by population PK methodology. We assessed the population PK and PK/pharmacodynamic (PD) breakpoints of ceftazidime in CF patients and healthy volunteers. Eight CF patients (total body weight [WT] [average +/- standard deviation] = 42.9 +/- 18.4 kg) and seven healthy volunteers (WT = 66.2 +/- 4.9 kg) received 2 g ceftazidime as a 5-min intravenous infusion. High-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) was used for drug analysis, and NONMEM (results reported), S-ADAPT, and NPAG were used for parametric and nonparametric population PK modeling. We considered linear and allometric body size models to scale clearance and volume of distribution. Monte Carlo simulations were based on a target time of non-protein-bound plasma concentration of ceftazidime above MIC of > or =65%, which represents near-maximal killing. Unscaled total clearance was 19% lower in CF patients, and volume of distribution was 36% lower. Total clearance was 7.82 liters/h for CF patients and 6.68 liters/h for healthy volunteers with 53 kg fat-free mass. Allometric scaling by fat-free mass reduced the between-subject variability by 32% for clearance and by 18 to 26% for volume of both peripheral compartments compared to linear scaling by WT. A 30-min ceftazidime infusion of 2 g/70 kg WT every 8 h (q8h) achieved robust (> or =90%) probabilities of target attainment (PTAs) for MICs of < or =1 mg/liter in CF patients and < or =3 mg/liter in healthy volunteers. Alternative modes of administration achieved robust PTAs up to markedly higher MICs of < or =8 to 12 mg/liter in CF patients for 5-h infusions of 2 g/70 kg WT q8h and < or =12 mg/liter for continuous infusion of 6 g/70 kg WT daily.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAnti-Bacterial AgentsCeftazidimeChildChromatography, High Pressure LiquidCystic FibrosisFemaleHumansInfusions, IntravenousMaleMicrobial Sensitivity TestsMiddle AgedMonte Carlo MethodPopulationPseudomonas aeruginosaAnti-Bacterial AgentsCeftazidime

Identifiers

PMID20065059
PMCPMC2826012

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.