Comparison of predictive accuracy of teicoplanin concentration using creatinine clearance and glomerular filtration rate estimated by serum creatinine or cystatin C

Kozono, Aki; Hiraki, Yoichi; Adachi, Rui; Nagano, Masahisa; Inoue, Daisuke; Tsuji, Yasuhiro; Kamimura, Hidetoshi; Karube, Yoshiharu

doi:10.1016/j.jiac.2016.01.024

Cited by 5 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…6 Kozono et al suggested that the predictive accuracy of teicoplanin C min using Hoek's formula with cystatin C was similar to that when using the C&G equation with SCr. 23 Considering availability, this study therefore identified patients with ARC using CCr calculated with SCr within 3 days of teicoplanin administration. Patients with ARC are often at risk of suboptimal antimicrobial exposure when conventional dosage regimens are used.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Despite some studies considering that when calculating CCr according to the C&G equation would be underestimated in cases of ARC, most of the renal function of severely ill patients is still determined by SCr 6 . Kozono et al suggested that the predictive accuracy of teicoplanin C min using Hoek's formula with cystatin C was similar to that when using the C&G equation with SCr 23 . Considering availability, this study therefore identified patients with ARC using CCr calculated with SCr within 3 days of teicoplanin administration.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There were no obese patients (body mass index >30 kg/m 2 ) in the groups. The Cockcroft‐Gault (C&G) equation was therefore used to calculate patient CCr values 23 according to their SCr within 3 days of teicoplanin administration, those with CCr > 130 ml/min were regarded as the ARC group, and patients with 60 ml/min ≤ CCr ≤130 ml/min were regarded as the non‐ARC group. CCr was calculated using the following C&G equation 24 :

CCr {(normalml / normalmin)}^{male} = ([140 - age {years}] \times body weight \{normalkg\}) / (0.818 \times SCr [μmol / L])

For females, the equation for calculating CCr was modified as follows:

CCr {((), ml / \min)}^{female} = CCr {((), ml / \min)}^{male} \times 0.85

Patients were divided into teicoplanin HD and LD regimen groups.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…There were no obese patients (body mass index >30 kg/m 2 ) in the groups. The Cockcroft-Gault (C&G) equation was therefore used to calculate patient CCr values 23 according to their SCr within 3 days of teicoplanin administration, those with CCr > 130 ml/min were regarded as the ARC group, and patients with 60 ml/min ≤ CCr ≤130 ml/ min were regarded as the non-ARC group. CCr was calculated using the following C&G equation 24 :…”

Section: Grouping By Kidney Function and Teicoplanin Dose Regimenmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Plasma trough concentration distribution and safety of high‐dose teicoplanin for patients with augmented renal clearance

Wang

You

et al. 2022

Clinical Pharmacy Therapeu

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

What Is Known and Objective There are few reports on the distribution of the plasma trough concentration (Cmin) of teicoplanin in patients with augmented renal clearance (ARC) and on the safety of a high‐dose regimen (HD; 800 mg loading dose for q12h three times followed by an 800 mg qd maintenance dose). The objective of this study was to determine the Cmin values of teicoplanin in ARC patients using HD teicoplanin to provide a reference for individualized medication. Methods Data on patients treated with teicoplanin from January 2019 to January 2021 were collected retrospectively and divided into ARC (creatinine clearance rate [CCr] >130 ml/min, n = 22) and non‐ARC (60 ml/min ≤ CCr ≤130 ml/min, n = 24) groups. The Cmin values in the two patient groups were analysed during the HD and the low‐dose regimen (LD; all other regimens) on the third day of medication and during the dose maintenance period. Liver and kidney function indexes were also analysed before and after medication. Results and Discussions On the third day of the HD, Cmin did not differ significantly between the ARC and non‐ARC groups (17.3 ± 9.2 mg/L [mean ± SD] vs. 15.5 ± 7.9 mg/L, p = 0.663), while Cmin in the ARC group was significantly lower for the LD (6.8 ± 3.9 mg/L, p = 0.039). During the dose maintenance period, Cmin in the ARC group when receiving the HD (18.3 ± 5.1 mg/L) was significantly lower than that in the non‐ARC group (25.5 ± 11.9 mg/L, p = 0.016) and significantly higher than that for the LD (12.2 ± 6.3 mg/L, p = 0.022). Nephrotoxicity and hepatotoxicity incidence rates did not differ significantly between these groups. What Is New and Conclusion These results suggest that it is necessary to apply a loading dose of 800 mg (but not higher) q12h three times for patients with ARC, with 800 mg needed as a maintenance dose during severe infection, and 600 mg or 400 mg for mild infection.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

CCr {(normalml / normalmin)}^{male} = ([140 - age {years}] \times body weight \{normalkg\}) / (0.818 \times SCr [μmol / L])

For females, the equation for calculating CCr was modified as follows:

CCr {((), ml / \min)}^{female} = CCr {((), ml / \min)}^{male} \times 0.85

Patients were divided into teicoplanin HD and LD regimen groups.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Grouping By Kidney Function and Teicoplanin Dose Regimenmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Plasma trough concentration distribution and safety of high‐dose teicoplanin for patients with augmented renal clearance

Wang

You

et al. 2022

Clinical Pharmacy Therapeu

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Oda et al [19] reported the possibility of improving the accuracy of predicting TEIC blood concentration by modifying the distribution volume of the population PK parameters in the Nakayama et al [18] population PKs. Kozono et al [20] reported on the predictive accuracy of using the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) calculated using cystatin C to predict the blood concentration of TEIC. In addition, the population PK parameters for TEIC specific to patients with FN have been reported outside of Japan [21].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Accuracy of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Teicoplanin at the Onset of Febrile Neutropenia

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Objectives: Teicoplanin (TEIC) is an effective drug for patients with febrile neutropenia (FN); however, it has been reported that these patients may have increased TEIC clearance compared with patients who do not have FN. The purpose of this study was to study therapeutic drug monitoring in patients with FN when the TEIC dosing design was based on the population mean method. Materials and Methods: Thirty-nine FN patients with hematological malignancy were included in the study. To calculate the predicted blood concentration of TEIC, we used the two population pharmacokinetic (population PK) parameters (parameters 1 and 2) reported by Nakayama et al. and parameter 3, which is a modification of the population PK of Nakayama et al. We calculated the mean prediction error (ME), an indicator of prediction bias, and the mean absolute prediction error (MAE), an indicator of accuracy. Furthermore, the percentage of predicted TEIC blood concentration within 25% and 50% of the measured TEIC blood concentration was calculated. Results: The ME values were −0.54, −0.25, and −0.30 and the MAE values were 2.29, 2.19, and 2.22 for parameters 1, 2, and 3, respectively. For all of the three parameters, the ME values were calculated as minus values, and the predicted concentrations tended to be biased toward smaller values relative to the measured concentrations. Patients with serum creatinine (Scr) < 0.6 mg/dL and neutrophil counts < 100/μL had greater ME and MAE values and a smaller percentage of predicted TEIC blood concentration within 25% of measured TEIC blood concentrations compared with other patients. Conclusions: In patients with FN, the accuracy of predicting TEIC blood concentrations was good, with no significant differences between each parameter. However, patients with a Scr < 0.6 mg/dL and a neutrophil count < 100/μL showed slightly inferior prediction accuracy.

show abstract

Population pharmacokinetics of teicoplanin in hospitalized elderly patients using cystatin C as an indicator of renal function

Kasai

Tsuji

Hiraki

et al. 2018

Journal of Infection and Chemotherapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Comparison of predictive accuracy of teicoplanin concentration using creatinine clearance and glomerular filtration rate estimated by serum creatinine or cystatin C

Cited by 5 publications

References 21 publications

Plasma trough concentration distribution and safety of high‐dose teicoplanin for patients with augmented renal clearance

Plasma trough concentration distribution and safety of high‐dose teicoplanin for patients with augmented renal clearance

Accuracy of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Teicoplanin at the Onset of Febrile Neutropenia

Population pharmacokinetics of teicoplanin in hospitalized elderly patients using cystatin C as an indicator of renal function

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About