Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26666946›Full record

Observational studyAntimicrobial agents and chemotherapy2015

Does Critical Illness Change Levofloxacin Pharmacokinetics?

Jason A Roberts, Menino Osbert Cotta, Piergiorgio Cojutti, Manuela Lugano, Giorgio Della Rocca, Federico Pea

Open access · bronzeAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Reply to LiaoAmerican journal of respiratory and critical care medicine · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Optimizing Antibiotic Therapy forAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Jason A RobertsBurns, Trauma, and Critical Care Research Centre, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia School of Pharmacy, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia Pharmacy Department, Royal Brisbane and Womens' Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia j.roberts2@uq.edu.au.
Menino Osbert CottaBurns, Trauma, and Critical Care Research Centre, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia School of Pharmacy, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia Pharmacy Department, Royal Brisbane and Womens' Hospital, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.
Piergiorgio CojuttiInstitute of Clinical Pharmacology, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Santa Maria della Misericordia, Udine, Italy Department of Experimental and Clinical Medical Sciences, University of Udine, Udine, Italy.
Manuela LuganoDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, University of Udine, Udine, Italy.
Giorgio Della RoccaDepartment of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine, University of Udine, Udine, Italy.
Federico PeaInstitute of Clinical Pharmacology, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Santa Maria della Misericordia, Udine, Italy Department of Experimental and Clinical Medical Sciences, University of Udine, Udine, Italy.
University of Udine · ITRoyal Brisbane and Women's Hospital · AUUniversity of Queensland · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Levofloxacin is commonly used in critically ill patients for which existing data suggest nonstandard dosing regimens should be used. The objective of this study was to compare the population pharmacokinetics of levofloxacin in critically ill and in non-critically ill patients. Adult patients with a clinical indication for levofloxacin were eligible for participation in this prospective pharmacokinetic study. Patients were given 500 mg or 750 mg daily by intravenous administration with up to 11 blood samples taken on day 1 or 2 of therapy. Plasma samples were analyzed and population pharmacokinetic analysis was undertaken using Pmetrics. Thirty-five patients (18 critically ill) were included. The mean (standard deviation [SD]) age, weight, and Cockcroft-Gault creatinine clearance for the critically ill and for the non-critically ill patients were 60.3 (16.4) and 72.0 (11.6) years, 78.5 (14.8) and 70.9 (15.8) kg, and 71.9 (65.8) and 68.2 (30.1) ml/min, respectively. A two-compartment linear model best described the data. Increasing creatinine clearance was the only covariate associated with increasing drug clearance. The presence of critical illness did not significantly affect any pharmacokinetic parameter. The mean (SD) parameter estimates were as follows: clearance, 8.66 (3.85) liters/h; volume of the central compartment (Vc), 41.5 (24.5) liters; intercompartmental clearance constants from central to peripheral, 2.58 (3.51) liters/h; and peripheral to central compartments, 0.90 (0.58) liters/h. Monte Carlo dosing simulations demonstrated that achievement of therapeutic exposures was dependent on renal function, pathogen, and MIC. Critical illness appears to have no independent effect on levofloxacin pharmacokinetics that cannot be explained by altered renal function.

Indexed as

Critical IllnessAgedAged, 80 and overAnti-Bacterial AgentsFemaleHumansInfusions, IntravenousLevofloxacinMaleMetabolic Clearance RateMicrobial Sensitivity TestsMiddle AgedModels, TheoreticalMonte Carlo MethodPneumonia, BacterialPseudomonas aeruginosaAnti-Bacterial AgentsLevofloxacin

Identifiers

PMID26666946
PMCPMC4775952
OpenAlexW2196730119

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.