Observational studyPharmacology research & perspectives2021
Effects of dosing frequency on the clinical efficacy of ampicillin/sulbactam in Japanese elderly patients with pneumonia: A single-center retrospective observational study.
Observational study in Pharmacology research & perspectives, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mathematical modelling of synergistic triple-antibiotic therapy against carbapenem-resistantJournal of medical microbiology · 2025Article
- Ampicillin sulbactam impacts serum potassium level comparable to piperacillin tazobactam.Scientific reports · 2025Observational
- Underdosed and Underappreciated: Why Japanese Community-Acquired Pneumonia Outcomes With Ampicillin-Sulbactam May Not Translate Globally.Open forum infectious diseases · 2025Article
- Review
- Pulmonary Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Evaluation of Ampicillin/Sulbactam Regimens for Pneumonia Caused by Various Bacteria, includingAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study sought to investigate whether dosing frequency (the number of doses per day) affects the antimicrobial efficacy and safety of ampicillin/sulbactam (ABPC/SBT) in Japanese elderly pneumonia patients treated with ABPC/SBT at 6 g/day. This was a retrospective observational study that included hospitalized elderly patients (aged ≥75 years, 10 ml/min ≤CLcr <50 ml/min) who received 3 g every 12 h (BID; n = 61) or 1.5 g every 6 h (QID; n = 45) for the treatment of pneumonia. The primary endpoint was clinical response, assessed by measuring body temperature, white blood cell count, and C-reactive protein levels. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic simulations were conducted in silico to rationalize the clinical findings. The clinical response rates (extremely effective and effective) in the BID and QID groups were 36.1% and 55.6%, respectively (p = .0459). QID tended to be more effective in patients with gram-negative rods detected (p = .0563). According to the simulated minimum plasma ABPC concentrations at steady state for BID and QID were 2.5 and 7.3 μg/ml, respectively (p < .0001). Based on the simulated time above minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC), pharmacological (not clinical) efficacy was predicted to be higher with QID. Both groups had similar safety profiles. The main adverse event in both groups was liver damage. The present retrospective survey demonstrated that ABPC/SBT treatment for elderly patients with pneumonia and renal dysfunction was more effective with QID than with BID. Therefore, the QID regimen is worthy of consideration to improve the clinical outcomes of ABPC/SBT therapy in the present patient population.
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.