SynthesisFrontiers in pharmacology2025
Population pharmacokinetics of imipenem in different populations for individualized dosing: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Frontiers in pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Brensocatib: First Approval.Drugs · 2026Review
- Toward Model-Informed Precision Dosing of Imipenem: Multicenter External Validation of Population Pharmacokinetic Models in Adult Critically Ill Patients.Drug design, development and therapy · 2026Article
- Selecting the Most Robust Imipenem Pharmacokinetic Model Requires Paired Forecasts and Explicit Metric Weighting [Response to Letter].Drug design, development and therapy · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Imipenem is a broad-spectrum carbapenem antibiotic for severe infections with significant pharmacokinetic (PK) variability. This review systematically synthesized published population pharmacokinetic (popPK) studies to identify key covariates and guide individualized dosing for patients with various conditions. Methods: A systematic PubMed and Web of Science search identified imipenem popPK models. Studies employing nonlinear mixed-effects modeling in patients with various conditions were included, and data were extracted independently by two reviewers via a standardized form. The study characteristics and PK parameter estimates were compared. Results: This systematic review of 18 popPK studies revealed that imipenem PKs were predominantly characterized by two-compartment models. The clearance of imipenem varied from 4.79 to 16.2 L/h in adults. Creatinine clearance (CLcr) was the most consistent and significant covariate for imipenem clearance, whereas body weight (BW) was frequently identified for volume of distribution. Other clinically relevant covariates, including the glomerular filtration rate (GFR), age, and serum ALB level, were also incorporated into the final models for specific patient subpopulations. All models applied internal validations, such as bootstrap and visual predicative check, but only three studies performed external validation. Conclusion: This review systematically integrates existing popPK models of imipenem, highlighting renal function and BW as key covariates. This study provides valuable insights for individualized dosing while identifying critical research gaps, particularly the need for external validation and focused studies in special populations.
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.