Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21911570›Full record

Trial reportAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2011

Comparison of pharmacokinetics and safety of voriconazole intravenous-to-oral switch in immunocompromised adolescents and healthy adults.

Timothy A Driscoll, Haydar Frangoul, Eneida R Nemecek, Donald K Murphey, Lolie C Yu, Jeffrey Blumer, Robert A Krance, Alice Baruch, Ping Liu

Open access · bronzeAbstract readClinical TrialComparative Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.8field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 73 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Clinical Practice Guideline for the Management of Candidiasis: 2016 Update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America.Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America · 2016
    Guideline
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Combined Effect ofFrontiers in pediatrics · 2022
    Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Invasive Aspergillosis in Children: Update on Current Guidelines.Mediterranean journal of hematology and infectious diseases · 2018
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

9 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.

Timothy A DriscollDepartment of Pediatrics and Duke Clinical Research Institute, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina, USA.
Haydar Frangoul
Eneida R Nemecek
Donald K Murphey
Lolie C Yu
Jeffrey Blumer
Robert A Krance
Alice Baruch
Ping Liu
Pfizer (United States) · USChildren's Hospital of New Orleans · USClinical Research Institute · USCook Children's Medical Center · USDoernbecher Children's Hospital · USTexas Children's Hospital · USUniversity Hospitals Case Medical Center · USVanderbilt University Medical Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The current voriconazole dosing recommendation in adolescents is based on limited efficacy and pharmacokinetic data. To confirm the appropriateness of dosing adolescents like adults, a pharmacokinetic study was conducted in 26 immunocompromised adolescents aged 12 to <17 years following intravenous (IV) voriconazole to oral switch regimens: 6 mg/kg IV every 12 h (q12h) on day 1 followed by 4 mg/kg IV q12h, then switched to 300 mg orally q12h. Area under the curve over a 12-hour dosing interval (AUC(0-12)) was calculated using a noncompartmental method and compared to the value for adults receiving the same dosing regimens. On average, the AUC(0-12) in adolescents after the first loading dose on day 1 and at steady state during IV treatment were 9.14 and 22.4 μg·h/ml, respectively (approximately 34% and 36% lower, respectively, than values for adults). At steady state during oral treatment, adolescents also had lower average exposure than adults (16.7 versus 34.0 μg·h/ml). Larger intersubject variability was observed in adolescents than in adults. There was a slight trend for some young adolescents with low body weight to have lower voriconazole exposure. It is likely that these young adolescents may metabolize voriconazole more similarly to children than to adults. Overall, with the same dosing regimens, voriconazole exposures in the majority of adolescents were comparable to those in adults. The young adolescents with low body weight during the transitioning period from childhood to adolescence (e.g., 12 to 14 years old) may need to receive higher doses to match the adult exposures. Safety of voriconazole in adolescents was consistent with the known safety profile of voriconazole.

Indexed as

Administration, OralAdolescentAdultAntifungal AgentsAryl Hydrocarbon HydroxylasesChildCytochrome P-450 CYP2C19Dose-Response Relationship, DrugDrug Administration ScheduleFemaleGenotypeHumansImmunocompromised HostInjections, IntravenousLiver Function TestsMaleAntifungal AgentsAryl Hydrocarbon HydroxylasesCYP2C19 protein, humanCytochrome P-450 CYP2C19PyrimidinesTriazolesVoriconazole

Identifiers

PMID21911570
PMCPMC3232803
OpenAlexW2149870684

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.