Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37876989›Full record

ArticleCritical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine2023

A protocol for an international, multicentre pharmacokinetic study for Screening Antifungal Exposure in Intensive Care Units: The SAFE-ICU study.

Jason A Roberts, Fekade Sime, Jeffrey Lipman, Maria Patricia Hernández-Mitre, João Pedro Baptista, Roger J Brüggemann, Jai Darvall, Jan J De Waele, George Dimopoulos, Jean-Yves Lefrant and 9 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Critical care and resuscitation : journal of the Australasian Academy of Critical Care Medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

19 authors at 12 institutions in 12 countries.

Jason A RobertsUniversity of Queensland Centre for Clinical Research, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Fekade SimeUniversity of Queensland Centre for Clinical Research, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Jeffrey LipmanUniversity of Queensland Centre for Clinical Research, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Maria Patricia Hernández-MitreUniversity of Queensland Centre for Clinical Research, Faculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
João Pedro BaptistaDepartment of Intensive Care, Centro Hospitalar e Universitário de Coimbra (CHUC), Coimbra, Portugal.
Roger J BrüggemannDepartment of Pharmacy and Radboudumc Institute of Health Sciences, And Radboudumc/CWZ Center of Expertise in Mycology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Jai DarvallDepartment of Critical Care, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Jan J De WaeleDepartment of Intensive Care Medicine, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
George Dimopoulos3rd Department of Critical Care, EVGENIDIO Hospital, Medical School, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Greece.
Jean-Yves LefrantDivision of Anaesthesiology Critical Care Emergency and Pain Medicine, Nîmes University Hospital, University of Montpellier, Nîmes, France.
Mohd Basri Mat NorKulliyyah of Medicine, International Islamic University Malaysia, Kuantan Campus, Malaysia.
Jordi RelloDivision of Anaesthesiology Critical Care Emergency and Pain Medicine, Nîmes University Hospital, University of Montpellier, Nîmes, France.
Leonardo SeoaneFaculty of Medicine, The University of Queensland, New Orleans, LA, USA.
Monica A SlavinNational Centre for Infections in Cancer and Department of Infectious Diseases, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Miia ValkonenIntensive Care Medicine, Department of Perioperative, Intensive Care and Pain Medicine, University of Helsinki and Helsinki University Hospital, Finland.
Mario VendittiDepartment of Public Health and Infectious Diseases, University "Sapienza" of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Wai Tat WongDepartment of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, SAR, China.
Markus ZeitlingerDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Claire RogerDivision of Anaesthesiology Critical Care Emergency and Pain Medicine, Nîmes University Hospital, University of Montpellier, Nîmes, France.
The University of Queensland · AUUniversité de Montpellier · FRThe Royal Melbourne Hospital · AUChinese University of Hong Kong · HKGhent University Hospital · BEHospitais da Universidade de Coimbra · PTInternational Islamic University Malaysia · MYMedical University of Vienna · ATNational and Kapodistrian University of Athens · GROchsner Health System · USRadboud University Nijmegen · NLUniversity of Helsinki · FI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: To describe whether contemporary dosing of antifungal drugs achieves therapeutic exposures in critically ill patients that are associated with optimal outcomes. Adequate antifungal therapy is a key determinant of survival of critically ill patients with fungal infections. Critical illness can alter an antifungal agents' pharmacokinetics, increasing the risk of inappropriate antifungal exposure that may lead to treatment failure and/or toxicity. Design setting and participants: This international, multicentre, observational pharmacokinetic study will comprise adult critically ill patients prescribed antifungal agents including fluconazole, voriconazole, posaconazole, isavuconazole, caspofungin, micafungin, anidulafungin, and amphotericin B for the treatment or prophylaxis of invasive fungal disease. A minimum of 12 patients are targeted for enrolment for each antifungal agent, across 12 countries and 30 intensive care units to perform descriptive pharmacokinetics. Pharmacokinetic sampling will occur during two dosing intervals (occasions): firstly, between days 1 and 3, and secondly, between days 4 and 7 of the antifungal course, collecting three samples per occasion. Patients' demographic and clinical data will be collected. Main outcome measures: The primary endpoint of the study is attainment of pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic target exposures that are associated with optimal efficacy. Thirty-day mortality will also be measured. Results and conclusions: This study will describe whether contemporary antifungal drug dosing achieves drug exposures associated with optimal outcomes. Data will also be used for the development of antifungal dosing algorithms for critically ill patients. Optimised drug dosing should be considered a priority for improving clinical outcomes for critically ill patients with fungal infections.

Indexed as

Antifungal agentsCritically illDosingIntensive care unitPharmacokinetics

Identifiers

PMID37876989
PMCPMC10581271
OpenAlexW4377137427

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.