Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41405421›Full record

SynthesisThe Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy2026

Systematic review of antimicrobial pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic indices in murine thigh and hollow fibre dose fractionation studies analysed with a standard method.

Najla Alabdulkarim, John Readman, Andrew Mead, Robert Oakley, Suzanne Wenker, Japhette Kembou, Stefano Azzariti, Mona Bajaj-Elliott, Mario Cortina-Borja, Joseph F Standing

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

10 authors.

Najla AlabdulkarimGreat Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-5887-8583
John ReadmanGreat Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, UK.
Andrew MeadDepartment of Comparative Biomedical Science, The Royal Veterinary College, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3550-3030
Robert OakleyPK/PD of Anti-Infectives Study Group of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, Basel, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0001-6329-8658
Suzanne WenkerGreat Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, UK.
Japhette KembouGreat Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-9612-7799
Stefano AzzaritiDepartment of Comparative Biomedical Science, The Royal Veterinary College, London, UK.
Mona Bajaj-ElliottGreat Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, UK.
Mario Cortina-BorjaPopulation, Policy and Practice Research and Teaching Department, UCL Great Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, London, UK.
Joseph F StandingGreat Ormond Street Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-4561-7173

Funding

Princess Nourah Bint Abdulrahman UniversityUK Medical Research Council MR/008665/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPre-clinical models are commonly used to determine human antibiotic dosage regimens using pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PKPD) indices. The murine thigh infection model (MTIM) is most commonly used for PKPD index determination, while the hollow fibre infection model (HFIM) may be a viable alternative. However, there is no standardized method for determining the PKPD index and R2 may not be the ideal metric to determine goodness of fit for nonlinear models. This study aimed to reanalyse PKPD indices published in MTIM and HFIM, using a standardized modelling approach.

methodsSystematic literature review was conducted to identify MTIM and HFIM dose fractionation studies. Searches covered databases including PubMed, MEDLINE, BIOSIS, SCOPUS and EMBASE. Data were extracted and modelled using eight variations of Emax model, with model selection based on the lowest Akaike information criterion (AIC) and parameter plausibility in terms of precision and interpretability.

resultsA total of 53 studies were included: 50 MTIM (of 1138) and 3 HFIM (of 316). Among the 53 studies, reporting issues included an infrequent use of AIC for model selection as applied in only one paper, and a lack of methodological transparency in 29 papers. Remodelling revealed some disagreement in optimal PKPD indices in six studies.

conclusionsThis study suggests a standard method for PKPD index model selection and provides a database on PKPD index analysis. Building the Emax model from one to four estimated parameters and assessing them with AIC is recommended to avoid over fitting. Too few HFIM dose fractionation studies were found to allow comparison of PKPD index with MTIM.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsThighAnimalsDisease Models, AnimalMiceAnti-Bacterial Agents

Identifiers

PMID41405421
PMCPMC12802965

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.