Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31973753›Full record

ArticleBMC infectious diseases2020

Pharmacodynamic comparison of different antimicrobial regimens against Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infections with elevated vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration.

Thaina Miranda da Costa, Gabriel Trova Cuba, Priscylla Guimarães Migueres Morgado, David P Nicolau, Simone Aranha Nouér, Kátia Regina Netto Dos Santos, Carlos Roberto Veiga Kiffer

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 50% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. 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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Thaina Miranda da CostaLaboratório de Infecção Hospitalar, Departamento de Microbiologia Médica, Instituto de Microbiologia Paulo de Góes, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Av. Carlos Chagas Filho, 373 - bloco I, Sala I2-010, Cidade Universitária Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. thainamc@uol.com.br.
Gabriel Trova CubaLaboratório Especial de Microbiologia Clínica, Disciplina de Infectologia, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP), Rua Leandro Dupret, São Paulo, SP, 188, Brazil. gbtrova@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8732-8946
Priscylla Guimarães Migueres MorgadoLaboratório de Infecção Hospitalar, Departamento de Microbiologia Médica, Instituto de Microbiologia Paulo de Góes, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Av. Carlos Chagas Filho, 373 - bloco I, Sala I2-010, Cidade Universitária Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
David P NicolauCenter for Anti-infective Research and Development, Hartford Hospital, 80 Seymour Street, Hartford, CT, USA.
Simone Aranha NouérHospital Universitário Clementino Fraga FilhoFaculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rua Rodolpho Paulo Rocco, 255, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.
Kátia Regina Netto Dos SantosLaboratório de Infecção Hospitalar, Departamento de Microbiologia Médica, Instituto de Microbiologia Paulo de Góes, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Av. Carlos Chagas Filho, 373 - bloco I, Sala I2-010, Cidade Universitária Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Carlos Roberto Veiga KifferLaboratório Especial de Microbiologia Clínica, Disciplina de Infectologia, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP), Rua Leandro Dupret, São Paulo, SP, 188, Brazil.
Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro · BRUniversidade Federal de São Paulo · BRHartford Hospital · US

Funding

Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq) 301846/2017Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - Brasil (CAPES) Finance Code 001Fundação Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (FAPERJ) 203.018/2016
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStaphylococcus aureus is one of the major causes of bloodstream infections (BSI) worldwide, representing a major challenge for public health due to its resistance profile. Higher vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentrations (MIC) in S. aureus are associated with treatment failure and defining optimal empiric options for BSIs in settings where these isolates are prevalent is rather challenging. In silico pharmacodynamic models based on stochastic simulations (Monte Carlo) are important tools to estimate best antimicrobial regimens in different scenarios. We aimed to compare the pharmacodynamic profiles of different antimicrobials regimens for the treatment of S. aureus BSI in an environment with high vancomycin MIC.

methodsSteady-state drug area under the curve ratio to MIC (AUC/MIC) or the percent time above MIC (fT > MIC) were modeled using a 5000-patient Monte Carlo simulation to achieve pharmacodynamic exposures against 110 consecutive S. aureus isolates associated with BSI.

resultsCumulative fractions of response (CFRs) against all S. aureus isolates were 98% for ceftaroline; 79% and 92% for daptomycin 6 mg/kg q24h and for the high dose of 10 mg/kg q24h, respectively; 77% for linezolid 600 mg q12h when MIC was read according to CLSI M100-S26 instructions, and 64% when MIC was considered at the total growth inhibition; 65% and 86% for teicoplanin, three loading doses of 400 mg q12 h followed by 400 mg q24 h and for teicoplanin 400 mg q12 h, respectively; 61% and 76% for vancomycin 1000 mg q12 h and q8 h, respectively.

conclusionsBased on this model, ceftaroline and high-dose daptomycin regimens delivered best pharmacodynamic exposures against S. aureus BSIs. Teicoplanin higher dose regimen achieved the best CFR (86%) among glycopeptides, although optimal threshold was not achieved, and vancomycin performance was critically affected by the S. aureus vancomycin MIC ≥2 mg/L. Linezolid effectiveness (CFR of 73%) is also affected by high prevalence of isolates with linezolid MIC ≥2 mg/L. These data show the need to continually evaluate the pharmacodynamic profiles of antimicrobials for empiric treatment of these infections.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsBacteremiaBrazilCeftarolineCephalosporinsDaptomycinHumansMethicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureusMicrobial Sensitivity TestsMonte Carlo MethodRetrospective StudiesStaphylococcal InfectionsStaphylococcus aureusVancomycinAnti-Bacterial AgentsCeftarolineCephalosporinsDaptomycinVancomycinBloodstream infectionsCeftarolineDaptomycinPharmacodynamic targetsStaphylococcus aureusVancomycin

Identifiers

PMID31973753
PMCPMC6979379
OpenAlexW3005161695

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.