Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23896473›Full record

ArticleAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2013

Dried blood spot analysis suitable for therapeutic drug monitoring of voriconazole, fluconazole, and posaconazole.

Kim C M van der Elst, Lambert F R Span, Kai van Hateren, Karin M Vermeulen, Tjip S van der Werf, Ben Greijdanus, Jos G W Kosterink, Donald R A Uges, Jan-Willem C Alffenaar

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

18 citing papers in PubMed, 61 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Studies in mycology · 2021
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Combining lipidomics and machine learning to measure clinical lipids in dried blood spots.Metabolomics : Official journal of the Metabolomic Society · 2020
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Posaconazole: an Update.Current fungal infection reports · 2016
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kim C M van der ElstUniversity of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Department of Hospital and Clinical Pharmacy, Groningen, the Netherlands.
Lambert F R Span
Kai van Hateren
Karin M Vermeulen
Tjip S van der Werf
Ben Greijdanus
Jos G W Kosterink
Donald R A Uges
Jan-Willem C Alffenaar
University of Groningen · NLUniversity Medical Center Groningen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Invasive aspergillosis and candidemia are important causes of morbidity and mortality in immunocompromised and critically ill patients. The triazoles voriconazole, fluconazole, and posaconazole are widely used for the treatment and prophylaxis of these fungal infections. Due to the variability of the pharmacokinetics of the triazoles among and within individual patients, therapeutic drug monitoring is important for optimizing the efficacy and safety of antifungal treatment. A dried blood spot (DBS) analysis was developed and was clinically validated for voriconazole, fluconazole, and posaconazole in 28 patients. Furthermore, a questionnaire was administered to evaluate the patients' opinions of the sampling method. The DBS analytical method showed linearity over the concentration range measured for all triazoles. Results for accuracy and precision were within accepted ranges; samples were stable at room temperature for at least 12 days; and different hematocrit values and blood spot volumes had no significant influence. The ratio of the drug concentration in DBS samples to that in plasma was 1.0 for voriconazole and fluconazole and 0.9 for posaconazole. Sixty percent of the patients preferred DBS analysis as a sampling method; 15% preferred venous blood sampling; and 25% had no preferred method. There was significantly less perception of pain with the DBS sampling method (P = 0.021). In conclusion, DBS analysis is a reliable alternative to venous blood sampling and can be used for therapeutic drug monitoring of voriconazole, fluconazole, and posaconazole. Patients were satisfied with DBS sampling and had less pain than with venous sampling. Most patients preferred DBS sampling to venous blood sampling.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAntifungal AgentsAspergillosisDried Blood Spot TestingDrug MonitoringFluconazoleHumansMiddle AgedMucormycosisMycosesTriazolesYoung AdultAntifungal AgentsFluconazoleposaconazoleTriazoles

Identifiers

PMID23896473
PMCPMC3811398
OpenAlexW2116604032

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.