ArticleEuropean journal of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics2021
Model-Informed Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Meropenem in Critically Ill Patients: Improvement of the Predictive Ability of Literature Models with the PRIOR Approach.
Article in European journal of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Meropenem Model-Informed Precision Dosing in the Treatment of Critically Ill Patients: Can We Use It?Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Population pharmacokinetics of cisplatin in small cell lung cancer patients guided with informative priors.Cancer chemotherapy and pharmacology · 2022Observational
- Evaluating and Improving Neonatal Gentamicin Pharmacokinetic Models Using Aggregated Routine Clinical Care Data.Pharmaceutics · 2022Article
- Population Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Meropenem in Critically Ill Patients: How to Achieve Best Dosage Regimen According to the Clinical Situation.European journal of drug metabolism and pharmacokinetics · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectiveTo improve the predictive ability of literature models for model-informed therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of meropenem in intensive care units, we propose to tweak the literature models with the "prior approach" using a subset of the data. This study compares the predictive ability of both literature and tweaked models on TDM concentrations of meropenem in critically ill patients.
methodsBlood samples were collected from patients of an intensive care unit treated with intravenous meropenem. Data were split six times into an "estimation" and a "prediction" datasets. Population pharmacokinetic (popPK) models of meropenem were selected from literature. These models were run on the "estimation" dataset with the $PRIOR subroutine in NONMEM to obtain tweaked models. The literature and tweaked models were used a priori (with covariate only) and with Bayesian fitting to predict each individual concentration from the previous concentration(s). Their respective predictive abilities were compared using median relative prediction error (MDPE%) and median absolute relative prediction error (MDAPE%).
resultsThe total dataset was composed of 115 concentrations from 58 patients. For each of the six splits, the "estimation" and the "prediction" datasets were respectively composed of 44 and 14 patients or 45 and 13 patients. Six popPK models were selected in the literature. MDPE% and MDAPE% were globally lower for the tweaked than for the literature models, especially for a priori predictions.
conclusionThe "prior approach" could be a valuable tool to improve the predictive ability of literature models, especially for a priori predictions, which are important to optimize dosing in emergency situations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33830470What 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.