Diacerein is a drug for the treatment of patients with osteoarthritis. This drug is administered orally as 50 mg twice daily. Diacerein is entirely converted into rhein before reaching the systemic circulation. Rhein itself is either eliminated by the renal route (20%) or conjugated in the liver to rhein glucuronide (60%) and rhein sulfate (20%); these metabolites are mainly eliminated by the kidney. The pharmacokinetics characteristics of diacerein are about the same in young healthy volunteers and elderly people with normal renal function, both after a single dose (50 mg) or repeated doses (25 to 75 mg twice daily). Rhein kinetics after single oral doses of diacerein are linear in the range 50 to 200 mg. However, rhein kinetics are time-dependent, since the nonrenal clearance decreases with repeated doses. This results in a moderate increase in maximum plasma concentration, area under the plasma concentration-time curve and elimination half-life. Nevertheless, the steady-state is reached by the third administration and the mean elimination half-life is then around 7 to 8 hours. Taking diacerein with a standard meal delays systemic absorption, but is associated with a 25% increase in the amount absorbed. Mild-to-severe (Child Pugh's grade B to C) liver cirrhosis does not change the kinetics of diacerein, whereas mild-to-severe renal insufficiency (creatinine clearance < 2.4 L/h) is followed by accumulation of rhein which justifies a 50% reduction of the standard daily dosage. Rhein is highly bound to plasma proteins (about 99%), but this binding is not saturable so that no drug interactions are likely to occur, in contrast to those widely reported with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Except for moderate and transient digestive disturbances (soft stools, diarrhoea), diacerein is well tolerated and seems neither responsible for gastrointestinal bleeding nor for renal, liver or haematological toxicity.

The teicoplanin pharmacokinetics (PK) of 30 febrile and severely neutropenic patients (polymorphonuclear count, <500/mm 3 ) with hematologic malignancies were compared with those determined for five healthy volunteers (HV). Neutropenic patients were given piperacillin combined with amikacin, and teicoplanin was added to the regimen the day fever developed in patients suspected of having a staphylococcal infection or 48 h later. Teicoplanin was given intravenously at a dosage of 6 mg/kg of body weight at 0, 12, and 24 h and once a day thereafter. Five to eleven blood samples per patient were collected. Teicoplanin concentrations were measured by liquid chromatography. A bicompartmental model was fitted to the data by a nonlinear mixedeffect-model approach. Multiple-linear regression analysis was applied in an attempt to correlate PK parameters to nine covariates. The mean trough concentrations of teicoplanin 48 h after the onset of treatment and 24 h after the last injection (last trough) ؎ standard deviations were 8.8 ؎ 4.1 and 17.5 ؎ 13.5 mg/liter, respectively. A significant increase was noted in the mean rate of elimination clearance of teicoplanin in neutropenic patients compared with that of HV (0.86 versus 0.73 liter/h, P ‫؍‬ 0.002), as was the case with rates of distribution clearance (5.89 versus 4.94 liter/h, P ‫؍‬ 0.002); the mean half-life of distribution was significantly shorter in patients than in HV (0.43 versus 0.61 h, P ‫؍‬ 0.002). In contrast, the volumes of the central compartment (ca. 5.8 liters for both groups), the volumes of distribution at steady state (HV, 37.6 liters; patients, 55.9 liters), and the elimination half-lives (HV, 39.6 h; patients, 52.7 h) were not significantly different between HV and neutropenic patients. Interindividual variabilities of rates of clearance (coefficient of variation [CV], 43%) and elimination half-lives (CV, 56%) were mainly explained by the variabilities among rates of creatinine clearance. Interindividual variabilities of the volumes of the central compartment (CV, 33%) and the volumes of distribution at steady state (CV ‫؍‬ 51%) were correlated to interindividual variabilities among numbers of leukocytes and the ages of patients, respectively. On the basis of the population PK model of teicoplanin, simulations were made to optimize the dosing schedule. A supplemental 6 mg/kg dose of teicoplanin at 36 h resulted in a trough concentration at 48 h of 16.0 ؎ 4.5 mg/liter, with only 7% of patients having a trough concentration of less than 10 mg/liter, compared with 46% of patients on the usual schedule. * Corresponding author. Phone: 33 1 48 95 56 61. Fax: 33 1 48 95 56 59. 1242 on July 4, 2020 by guest http://aac.asm.org/ Downloaded from

Measurements of aminoglycoside concentration in serum are used to individualise dosage regimens (dose per administration and/or administration interval) with the goal of attaining the desired therapeutic range as quickly as possible. Therapeutic range is defined in terms of peak concentration (to monitor effectiveness) and trough concentration (to avoid toxicity). This article focuses on methods to individualise aminoglycoside dosage regimens in the context of extended dosage intervals. Simple pharmacokinetic methods involve linear dosage adjustment based on peak or trough concentrations or area under the concentration-time curve, or nomograms. The once daily aminoglycoside nomogram determines the dosage interval for aminoglycosides given as a fixed dose per administration, based on a single concentration measurement drawn 6 to 14 hours after the start of the first infusion. This is a preferred method because of its simplicity, strong pharmacodynamic rationale and prospective validation in a large population. However, it does not work when the fixed dose assumed is not relevant, for example for patients with burns, cystic fibrosis, ascites or pregnancy. Furthermore, it has not been validated in children. In these cases, a more sophisticated method is required. Complex pharmacokinetic methods require dedicated software. Non-Bayesian least-squares methods allow the optimisation of both the dose and the dosage interval, but require aminoglycoside concentrations from two or more samples taken in the post-distributive phase during a single dosage interval. With Bayesian least-squares methods, only one concentration measurement is required, although any number of samples can be taken into account. In the Bayesian maximum a posteriori (MAP) method, the parameter estimates are taken as the values corresponding to the maximum of the posterior density. In 'full' Bayesian approaches (also called stochastic control), all the information about the parameters revealed by the posterior distribution is taken into account, and the optimal regimen is found by minimising the expected value of the weighted sum of squared deviations between predicted and target concentrations. If the population model is reasonably well known, Bayesian methods (MAP or stochastic control) should be used because of their good predictive performance. Although only one concentration measurement is required, better precision is afforded by a two-sample strategy, preferably drawn 1 and 6 hours after the start of the first infusion. If the population model is not known, then the non-Bayesian least-squares method is the method of choice, because of its robustness and lack of requirement for prior information about the distribution of parameters in the population.

No abstract