Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32939689›Full record

ArticleClinical pharmacokinetics2021

Evaluation of Voriconazole CYP2C19 Phenotype-Guided Dose Adjustments by Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling.

Pablo Zubiaur, Lisa A Kneller, Dolores Ochoa, Gina Mejía, Miriam Saiz-Rodríguez, Alberto M Borobia, Dora Koller, Irene García García, Marcos Navares-Gómez, Georg Hempel and 1 more

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical pharmacokinetics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 30% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pre-emptiveFrontiers in pharmacology · 2026
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Impact of polymorphisms inFrontiers in pharmacology · 2023
    Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. 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

11 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Pablo ZubiaurClinical Pharmacology Department, La Princesa University Hospital, Instituto Teófilo Hernando, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Princesa (IP), Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (UAM), C/Diego de León, 62, 28006, Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-6150-4320
Lisa A KnellerInstitute of Pharmaceutical and Medical Chemistry, Clinical Pharmacy, University of Münster, Münster, Germany.
Dolores OchoaClinical Pharmacology Department, La Princesa University Hospital, Instituto Teófilo Hernando, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Princesa (IP), Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (UAM), C/Diego de León, 62, 28006, Madrid, Spain.
Gina MejíaClinical Pharmacology Department, La Princesa University Hospital, Instituto Teófilo Hernando, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Princesa (IP), Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (UAM), C/Diego de León, 62, 28006, Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-8689-7941
Miriam Saiz-RodríguezClinical Pharmacology Department, La Princesa University Hospital, Instituto Teófilo Hernando, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Princesa (IP), Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (UAM), C/Diego de León, 62, 28006, Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-1660-3135
Alberto M BorobiaSchool of Medicine, Clinical Pharmacology Department, La Paz University Hospital, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-8584-3263
Dora KollerClinical Pharmacology Department, La Princesa University Hospital, Instituto Teófilo Hernando, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Princesa (IP), Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (UAM), C/Diego de León, 62, 28006, Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-0415-0466
Irene García GarcíaSchool of Medicine, Clinical Pharmacology Department, La Paz University Hospital, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain.
Marcos Navares-GómezClinical Pharmacology Department, La Princesa University Hospital, Instituto Teófilo Hernando, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Princesa (IP), Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (UAM), C/Diego de León, 62, 28006, Madrid, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-2501-6845
Georg HempelInstitute of Pharmaceutical and Medical Chemistry, Clinical Pharmacy, University of Münster, Münster, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5790-6423
Francisco Abad-SantosClinical Pharmacology Department, La Princesa University Hospital, Instituto Teófilo Hernando, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Princesa (IP), Universidad Autónoma de Madrid (UAM), C/Diego de León, 62, 28006, Madrid, Spain. francisco.abad@salud.madrid.org.ORCID 0000-0002-6519-8885
Spanish Clinical Research Network · ESHospital Universitario de La Princesa · ESUniversidad Autónoma de Madrid · ESUniversity of Münster · DEHospital Universitario de Burgos · ESHospital Universitario La Paz · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectivesControversy exists regarding dose adjustment in patients treated with voriconazole due to the severity of the infections for which it is prescribed. The Dutch Pharmacogenetics Working Group (DPWG) recommends a 50% dose increase or decrease for cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2C19 ultrarapid (UM) or poor (PM) metabolizers, respectively. In contrast, for the previous phenotypes, the Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) voriconazole guideline only recommends a change of treatment. Based on observed data from single-dose bioequivalence studies and steady-state observed concentrations, we aimed to investigate voriconazole dose adjustments by means of physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling.

methodsPBPK modeling was used to optimize voriconazole single-dose models for each CYP2C19 phenotype, which were extrapolated to steady state and evaluated for concordance with the therapeutic range of voriconazole. Based on optimized models, dose adjustments were evaluated for better adjustment to the therapeutic range.

resultsOur models suggest that the standard dose may only be appropriate for normal metabolizers (NM), although they would benefit from a 50-100% loading dose increase. Intermediate metabolizers (IMs) and PMs required a daily dose reduction of 50 and 75%, respectively. Rapid metabolizers (RMs) and UMs required a daily dose increase of 100% and 300%, respectively.

conclusionThe prescription of voriconazole in clinical practice should be personalized according to the CYP2C19 phenotype, followed by therapeutic drug monitoring of plasma concentrations to guide dose adjustment.

Indexed as

Cytochrome P-450 CYP2C19VoriconazoleDrug MonitoringGenotypeHumansPhenotypeCYP2C19 protein, humanCytochrome P-450 CYP2C19Voriconazole

Identifiers

PMID32939689
OpenAlexW3087535503

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.