Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33946905›Full record

ReviewAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland)2021

Aminoglycosides in the Intensive Care Unit: What Is New in Population PK Modeling?

Alexandre Duong, Chantale Simard, Yi Le Wang, David Williamson, Amélie Marsot

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

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

5 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

Alexandre DuongFaculté de Pharmacie, Université de Montréal, Montréal, QC H3T 1J4, Canada.
Chantale SimardFaculté de Pharmacie, Université Laval, Québec, QC G1V 0A6, Canada.
Yi Le WangFaculté de Pharmacie, Université de Montréal, Montréal, QC H3T 1J4, Canada.
David WilliamsonFaculté de Pharmacie, Université de Montréal, Montréal, QC H3T 1J4, Canada.
Amélie MarsotFaculté de Pharmacie, Université de Montréal, Montréal, QC H3T 1J4, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-9303-8862
Université de Montréal · CACentre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine · CAHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de Montréal · CAInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec · CA

Funding

Fonds de Recherche du Québec - Santé 283368Réseau Québécois de Recherche sur les Médicaments 2019-Axe biopharmacie et pharmacométrie
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAlthough aminoglycosides are often used as treatment for Gram-negative infections, optimal dosing regimens remain unclear, especially in ICU patients. This is due to a large between- and within-subject variability in the aminoglycoside pharmacokinetics in this population.

objectiveThis review provides comprehensive data on the pharmacokinetics of aminoglycosides in patients hospitalized in the ICU by summarizing all published PopPK models in ICU patients for amikacin, gentamicin, and tobramycin. The objective was to determine the presence of a consensus on the structural model used, significant covariates included, and therapeutic targets considered during dosing regimen simulations.

methodA literature search was conducted in the Medline/PubMed database, using the terms: 'amikacin', 'gentamicin', 'tobramycin', 'pharmacokinetic(s)', 'nonlinear mixed effect', 'population', 'intensive care', and 'critically ill'.

resultsNineteen articles were retained where amikacin, gentamicin, and tobramycin pharmacokinetics were described in six, 11, and five models, respectively. A two-compartment model was used to describe amikacin and tobramycin pharmacokinetics, whereas a one-compartment model majorly described gentamicin pharmacokinetics. The most recurrent significant covariates were renal clearance and bodyweight. Across all aminoglycosides, mean interindividual variability in clearance and volume of distribution were 41.6% and 22.0%, respectively. A common consensus for an optimal dosing regimen for each aminoglycoside was not reached.

conclusionsThis review showed models developed for amikacin, from 2015 until now, and for gentamicin and tobramycin from the past decades. Despite the growing challenges of external evaluation, the latter should be more considered during model development. Further research including new covariates, additional simulated dosing regimens, and external validation should be considered to better understand aminoglycoside pharmacokinetics in ICU patients.

Indexed as

aminoglycosidescritically illintensive care unitpopulation pharmacokinetic modeling

Identifiers

PMID33946905
PMCPMC8145041
OpenAlexW3154042781

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.