ArticleThe Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy2016
Information provision for antibacterial dosing in the obese patient: a sizeable absence?
Article in The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Macrolide Treatment Failure due to Drug-Drug Interactions: Real-World Evidence to Evaluate a Pharmacological Hypothesis.Pharmaceutics · 2022Article
- Optimising antimicrobial use in humans - review of current evidence and an interdisciplinary consensus on key priorities for research.The Lancet regional health. Europe · 2021Review
- [Anti-infective treatment in obesity-"just double it?"]Der Anaesthesist · 2020Review
- Diagnostic and medical needs for therapeutic drug monitoring of antibiotics.European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2020Review
- Evaluation of treatment options for methicillin-resistantInfection and drug resistance · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundObesity is on course to overtake being underweight as a global disease burden. Obesity alters antibacterial pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD). Historically, drug PK/PD parameters have not been studied in obese populations. This means dose recommendations risk being sub-therapeutic in a population at increased risk of infection. Suboptimal antibacterial prescribing is widely associated with treatment failure, worse clinical outcomes, unnecessary escalation to broad-spectrum therapy and the emergence of antimicrobial resistance (AMR).
objectivesTo analyse current information provided by pharmaceutical companies, for the most commonly prescribed antibacterial agents in the UK, for evidence of dosing guidance for obese adults.
methodsWe analysed the manufacturers' Summary of Product Characteristics (SPC) for 42 of the most clinically important and frequently prescribed antibacterial agents dispensed across both primary and secondary care. The manufacturer's SPC was reviewed, and cross-referenced with the online British National Formulary, to assess dosing guidance for obese adults.
resultsNo advice was provided to guide dosing for obese adults in 35 (83%) of 42 of the most clinically important and frequently prescribed antibacterial agents in the UK. Seven (17%) antibacterial agents (tigecycline, vancomycin, daptomycin, amikacin, gentamicin, tobramycin and teicoplanin) provided variable levels of advice.
conclusionsThere is a paucity of advice and evidence in the UK to guide dosing common antibacterial agents in the obese. The literature on antibacterial PK/PD studies in obese populations remains scarce. In the face of the increasing risks of AMR combined with the global rise of obesity there is an urgent need to address this significant research gap.
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.