ArticleJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences
Experience of a Single-Center Voriconazole TDM Bioassay for Hospitalized Patients with Invasive Fungal Infections.
Article in Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Information on the plasma ranges of prescribed voriconazole prophylactic and therapeutic drug levels among the patients with invasive fungal infections (IFIs) is sparsely documented from central India. Methods: This prospective observational database study was conducted over a period of 18 months at the ICMR Mycology Advanced Resource Center of a tertiary care hospital in central India. It included 25 voriconazole samples from 18 patients undergoing routine therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). Clinico-mycological characteristics, target concentration ranges for prophylactic and therapeutic prescriptions, and clinical outcomes were evaluated among enrolled patients. Results: Out of the 25 samples, 8 (32%) were random and 17 (68%) were trough samples. 33.3% (6/18) had repeat samples sent for analysis. Out of the 18 patients enrolled, 10 (55%) received prophylactic, while 8 (44%) were received therapeutic doses of voriconazole. Overall mean concentration of voriconazole in trough samples was 3.93 μg/ml, and in random samples was 2.38 μg/ml. Both these values were within the normal range. Commonest drug-drug interaction (DDI), between proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use and voriconazole was evident in supratherapeutic voriconazole concentrations. With small sample size, exploratory nature of this study and without a multivariable analysis; the association of PPIs alone for supratherapeutic voriconazole concentrations cannot be established. Conclusion: The research highlighted notable pharmacokinetic variances between children and adults who received voriconazole, particularly concerning the rate of absorption, bioavailability, and metabolism. This study emphasizes the need for antifungal TDM in developing nations with resource limited settings in better understanding of IFI management.
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.