ArticleTherapeutic drug monitoring2019
Interlaboratory Analysis of Isavuconazole Plasma Concentration Assays Among European Laboratories.
Article in Therapeutic drug monitoring, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Population Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamic Target Attainment of Isavuconazole againstPharmaceutics · 2021Article
- Isavuconazole Treatment in a Mixed Patient Cohort with Invasive Fungal Infections: Outcome, Tolerability and Clinical Implications of Isavuconazole Plasma Concentrations.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
- A Case Series and Literature Review of Isavuconazole Use in Pediatric Patients with Hemato-oncologic Diseases and Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation.Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 6 institutions in 6 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundUnder certain circumstances, clinicians treating patients with isavuconazole for invasive aspergillosis or mucormycosis may use therapeutic drug monitoring. However, the accuracy and reproducibility of the various assays used by different laboratories for the quantification of isavuconazole plasma concentrations have yet to be determined.
methodsHuman plasma samples spiked with known concentrations of isavuconazole were provided to 27 European laboratories that took part in a "round-robin" test (an interlaboratory test performed independently at least 2 times; 2 rounds performed in the current study). Assay methods included liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS), LC with ultraviolet detection (LC-UV), LC with fluorescence detection (LC-FL), and bioassay. The accuracy and reproducibility compared with the known concentrations for each sample in each round were compared overall, between assays, and between laboratories.
resultsTwenty-seven laboratories participated in the study (LC-MS/MS, n = 15; LC-UV; n = 9; LC-FL, n = 1; bioassay, n = 2). In round 1, for nominal concentrations of 1000, 1700, 2500, and 4000 ng/mL, the mean (SD) determined concentrations were 1007 (183), 1710 (323), 2528 (540), and 3898 (842) ng/mL, respectively. In round 2, for nominal concentrations of 1200, 1800, 2400, and 4000 ng/mL, the mean (SD) determined concentrations were 1411 (303), 2111 (409), 2789 (511), and 4723 (798) ng/mL, respectively. Over both rounds, determined concentrations were consistently within 15% of the nominal concentrations for 10 laboratories (LC-MS/MS, n = 4; LC-UV, n = 5; bioassay, n = 1) and consistently exceeded the upper 15% margin for 7 laboratories (LC-MS/MS and LC-UV, n = 3 each; LC-FL, n = 1).
conclusionsAlignment of methodologies among laboratories may be warranted to improve the accuracy and reproducibility of therapeutic drug measurements.
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.