27 research outputs found

    Quantitative analyses and modelling to support achievement of the 2020 goals for nine neglected tropical diseases

    Get PDF
    Quantitative analysis and mathematical models are useful tools in informing strategies to control or eliminate disease. Currently, there is an urgent need to develop these tools to inform policy to achieve the 2020 goals for neglected tropical diseases (NTDs). In this paper we give an overview of a collection of novel model-based analyses which aim to address key questions on the dynamics of transmission and control of nine NTDs: Chagas disease, visceral leishmaniasis, human African trypanosomiasis, leprosy, soil-transmitted helminths, schistosomiasis, lymphatic filariasis, onchocerciasis and trachoma. Several common themes resonate throughout these analyses, including: the importance of epidemiological setting on the success of interventions; targeting groups who are at highest risk of infection or re-infection; and reaching populations who are not accessing interventions and may act as a reservoir for infection,. The results also highlight the challenge of maintaining elimination 'as a public health problem' when true elimination is not reached. The models elucidate the factors that may be contributing most to persistence of disease and discuss the requirements for eventually achieving true elimination, if that is possible. Overall this collection presents new analyses to inform current control initiatives. These papers form a base from which further development of the models and more rigorous validation against a variety of datasets can help to give more detailed advice. At the moment, the models' predictions are being considered as the world prepares for a final push towards control or elimination of neglected tropical diseases by 2020

    Cost Evaluation of Dried Blood Spot Home Sampling as Compared to Conventional Sampling for Therapeutic Drug Monitoring in Children.

    Get PDF
    Dried blood spot (DBS) sampling for the purpose of therapeutic drug monitoring can be an attractive alternative for conventional blood sampling, especially in children. This study aimed to compare all costs involved in conventional sampling versus DBS home sampling in two pediatric populations: renal transplant patients and hemato-oncology patients. Total costs were computed from a societal perspective by adding up healthcare cost, patient related costs and costs related to loss of productivity of the caregiver. Switching to DBS home sampling was associated with a cost reduction of 43% for hemato-oncology patients (€277 to €158) and 61% for nephrology patients (€259 to €102) from a societal perspective (total costs) per blood draw. From a healthcare perspective, costs reduced with 7% for hemato-oncology patients and with 21% for nephrology patients. Total savings depend on the number of hospital visits that can be avoided by using home sampling instead of conventional sampling

    Manual punch versus automated flow-through sample desorption for dried blood spot LC-MS/MS analysis of voriconazole

    No full text
    Dried blood spot (DBS) sampling is a patient-friendly alternative for plasma sampling for the purpose of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). To speed up the analysis time, an automated flow-through desorption method of DBS samples may be beneficial. This article describes the cross-validation of a manual punch DBS method with an automated desorption (DBS autosampler, DBSA) method for the DBS analysis of the antifungal drug voriconazole, followed by cross-validation of both DBS methods with a plasma-based method, and an assessment of agreement between DBS/DBSA and regular plasma concentration measurements (gold standard) in samples from patients on voriconazole treatment. DBS and DBSA LC-MS/MS assays for voriconazole were validated according to the latest guidelines on bioanalytical method validation (FDA, EMA). Additional DBS-specific validation parameters included hematocrit effect and the influence of spot volume. Passing-Bablok regression and Bland-Altman plots were used to cross-validate the punch DBS, DBSA and plasma methods. The assessment of agreement between DBS/DBSA and plasma concentration measurements involved the performance of DBS/DBSA measurements to predict voriconazole plasma concentrations in patient samples. Both DBS methods complied with all validation parameters. Sample pre-processing time was reduced from 1.5 h to 3 min when using the DBSA. Cross-validation of both DBS methods showed a proportional bias and a correction factor was needed to interchange voriconazole concentrations of both DBS methods. Similarly, the punch DBS method required a factor to correct for proportional bias compared to the plasma method, but the DBSA and plasma assays showed no bias. Limits of agreement of the DBS/DBSA and plasma assays in Bland-Altman analysis were relatively wide, i.e. 0.75-1.28 for the DBS punch method versus plasma method and 0.57-1.38 for the DBSA versus plasma assay. Interpretation of DBS, DBSA and plasma samples in terms of concentrations in or outside of the voriconazole therapeutic range agreed in 82-86% of the cases. The variability in paired DBS/DBSA and plasma concentration measurements is considered high for TDM purposes and this limitation should be balanced against the advantages of DBS sampling of voriconazole and the speed of flow through desorption

    Population Pharmacokinetic Model and Pharmacokinetic Target Attainment of Micafungin in Intensive Care Unit Patients

    No full text
    OBJECTIVE: To study the pharmacokinetics of micafungin in intensive care patients and assess pharmacokinetic (PK) target attainment for various dosing strategies. METHODS: Micafungin PK data from 20 intensive care unit patients were available. A population-PK model was developed. Various dosing regimens were simulated: licensed regimens (I) 100 mg daily; (II) 100 mg daily with 200 mg from day 5; and adapted regimens 200 mg on day 1 followed by (III) 100 mg daily; (IV) 150 mg daily; and (V) 200 mg daily. Target attainment based on a clinical PK target for Candida as well as non-Candida parapsilosis infections was assessed for relevant minimum inhibitory concentrations [MICs] (Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute). Parameter uncertainty was taken into account in simulations. RESULTS: A two-compartment model best fitted the data. Clearance was 1.10 (root square error 8%) L/h and V 1 and V 2 were 17.6 (root square error 14%) and 3.63 (root square error 8%) L, respectively. Median area under the concentration-time curve over 24 h (interquartile range) on day 14 for regimens I-V were 91 (67-122), 183 (135-244), 91 (67-122), 137 (101-183) and 183 (135-244) mg h/L, respectively, for a typical patient of 70 kg. For the MIC/area under the concentration-time curve >3000 target (all Candida spp.), PK target attainment was >91% on day 14 (MIC 0.016 mg/L epidemiological cut-off) for all of the dosing regimens but decreased to (I) 44%, (II) 91%, (III) 44%, (IV) 78% and (V) 91% for MIC 0.032 mg/L. For the MIC/area under the concentration-time curve >5000 target (non-C. parapsilosis spp.), PK target attainment varied between 62 and 96% on day 14 for MIC 0.016. CONCLUSIONS: The licensed micafungin maintenance dose results in adequate exposure based on our simulations with a clinical PK target for Candida infections but only 62% of patients reach the target for non-C. parapsilosis. In the case of pathogens with an attenuated micafungin MIC, patients may benefit from dose escalation to 200 mg daily. This encourages future study
    corecore