ArticleInternational journal of clinical pharmacy2017
Evaluation of nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitor dosing during continuous veno-venous hemofiltration.
Article in International journal of clinical pharmacy, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Managing Modern Antiretroviral Therapy in the Intensive Care Unit: Overcoming Challenges for Critically Ill People With Human Immunodeficiency Virus.Open forum infectious diseases · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Unpredictable drug concentrations may lead to suboptimal exposure to nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NRTIs) due to inadequate doses administered during continuous veno-venous hemofiltration (CVVH), which in turn may lead to decreased antiretroviral efficacy and possibly further HIV disease progression. Objective To compare administered doses of NRTIs to calculated doses of NRTIs to evaluate if patients were expected to have a favorable pharmacokinetic exposure profile while receiving CVVH. Methods The NRTI dose was compared to a table of recommendations based on a mathematical formula that estimates the amount of drug expected to be removed during CVVH. Results Twelve patients were on 27 NRTIs. Eleven (41%) NRTI doses were expected to provide a favorable pharmacokinetic profile based on pharmacokinetic mathematical calculations. Conclusion The majority of NRTIs were potentially not optimally dosed based on proposed pharmacokinetic calculations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
27888453What 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.