Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32415710›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2020

Prospective validation of a model-informed precision dosing tool for vancomycin in intensive care patients.

Rob Ter Heine, Ron J Keizer, Krista van Steeg, Elise J Smolders, Matthijs van Luin, Hieronymus J Derijks, Cornelis P C de Jager, Tim Frenzel, Roger Brüggemann

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMulticenter StudyValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

27 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 38 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Guideline
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

9 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Rob Ter HeineRadboud Institute for Health Sciences, Department of Pharmacy, Radboud university medical center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-2185-8201
Ron J KeizerInsight Rx, San Francisco, California, USA.
Krista van SteegDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, Ziekenhuisgroep Twente, Almelo, The Netherlands.
Elise J SmoldersDepartment of Pharmacy, Isala Hospital, Zwolle, The Netherlands & Department of Pharmacy, Radboud University Medical Center, Radboud Institute of Health Sciences, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Matthijs van LuinDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, Rijnstate Hospital, Arnhem, The Netherlands.
Hieronymus J DerijksDepartment of Pharmacy, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, The Netherlands/Department of Pharmacy, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Cornelis P C de JagerDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Jeroen Bosch Hospital, 's-Hertogenbosch, the Netherlands.
Tim FrenzelDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Roger BrüggemannRadboud Institute for Health Sciences, Department of Pharmacy, Radboud university medical center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-7618-725X
Radboud University Nijmegen · NLIDinsight · USJeroen Bosch Ziekenhuis · NLRijnstate Hospital · NLZiekenhuis Groep Twente · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsVancomycin is an important antibiotic for critically ill patients with Gram-positive bacterial infections. Critically ill patients typically have severely altered pathophysiology, which leads to inefficacy or toxicity. Model-informed precision dosing may aid in optimizing the dose, but prospectively validated tools are not available for this drug in these patients. We aimed to prospectively validate a population pharmacokinetic model for purpose model-informed precision dosing of vancomycin in critically ill patients.

methodsWe first performed a systematic evaluation of various models on retrospectively collected pharmacokinetic data in critically ill patients and then selected the best performing model. This model was implemented in the Insight Rx clinical decision support tool and prospectively validated in a multicentre study in critically ill patients. The predictive performance was obtained as mean prediction error and relative root mean squared error.

resultsWe identified 5 suitable population pharmacokinetic models. The most suitable model was carried forward to a prospective validation. We found in a prospective multicentre study that the selected model could accurately and precisely predict the vancomycin pharmacokinetics based on a previous measurement, with a mean prediction error and relative root mean squared error of respectively 8.84% (95% confidence interval 5.72-11.96%) and 19.8% (95% confidence interval 17.47-22.13%).

conclusionUsing a systematic approach, with a retrospective evaluation and prospective verification we showed the suitability of a model to predict vancomycin pharmacokinetics for purposes of model-informed precision dosing in clinical practice. The presented methodology may serve a generic approach for evaluation of pharmacometric models for the use of model-informed precision dosing in the clinic.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsCritical CareVancomycinAdultAgedAged, 80 and overCritical IllnessFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesRetrospective StudiesYoung AdultAnti-Bacterial AgentsVancomycincritically illmodel-informed precision dosingvalidationvancomycin

Identifiers

PMID32415710
PMCPMC7688533
OpenAlexW3024869617

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.