From Therapeutic Drug Monitoring to Model-Informed Precision Dosing for Antibiotic

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) and model-informed precision dosing (MIPD) have evolved as important tools to inform rational dosing of antibiotics in individual patients with infections. In particular, critically ill patients display altered, highly variable pharmacokinetics and often suffer from infections caused by less susceptible bacteria. Consequently, TDM has been used to individualize dosing in this patient group for many years. More recently, there has been increasing research on the use of MIPD software to streamline the TDM process, which can increase the flexibility and precision of dose individualization but also requires adequate model validation and re-evaluation of existing workflows. In parallel, new minimally invasive and noninvasive technologies such as microneedle-based sensors are being developed, which-together with MIPD software-have the potential to revolutionize how patients are dosed with antibiotics. Nonetheless, carefully designed clinical trials to evaluate the benefit of TDM and MIPD approaches are still sparse, but are critically needed to justify the implementation of TDM and MIPD in clinical practice. The present review summarizes the clinical pharmacology of antibiotics, conventional TDM and MIPD approaches, and evidence of the value of TDM/MIPD for aminoglycosides, beta-lactams, glycopeptides, and linezolid, for which precision dosing approaches have been recommended

Role of renal function in risk assessment of target non-attainment after standard dosing of meropenem in critically ill patients: a prospective observational study

Background: Severe bacterial infections remain a major challenge in intensive care units because of their high prevalence and mortality. Adequate antibiotic exposure has been associated with clinical success in critically ill patients. The objective of this study was to investigate the target attainment of standard meropenem dosing in a heterogeneous critically ill population, to quantify the impact of the full renal function spectrum on meropenem exposure and target attainment, and ultimately to translate the findings into a tool for practical application. Methods: A prospective observational single-centre study was performed with critically ill patients with severe infections receiving standard dosing of meropenem. Serial blood samples were drawn over 4 study days to determine meropenem serum concentrations. Renal function was assessed by creatinine clearance according to the Cockcroft and Gault equation (CLCRCG). Variability in meropenem serum concentrations was quantified at the middle and end of each monitored dosing interval. The attainment of two pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic targets 100%T >MIC,50%T >4×MIC) was evaluated for minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) values of 2 mg/L and 8 mg/L and standard meropenem dosing (1000 mg, 30-minute infusion, every 8 h). Furthermore, we assessed the impact of CLCRCG on meropenem concentrations and target attainment and developed a tool for risk assessment of target non-attainment. Results: Large inter- and intra-patient variability in meropenem concentrations was observed in the critically ill population (n = 48). Attainment of the target 100%T >MIC was merely 48.4% and 20.6%, given MIC values of 2 mg/L and 8 mg/L, respectively, and similar for the target 50%T >4×MIC. A hyperbolic relationship between CLCRCG (25–255 ml/minute) and meropenem serum concentrations at the end of the dosing interval (C8h) was derived. For infections with pathogens of MIC 2 mg/L, mild renal impairment up to augmented renal function was identified as a risk factor for target non-attainment (for MIC 8 mg/L, additionally, moderate renal impairment). Conclusions: The investigated standard meropenem dosing regimen appeared to result in insufficient meropenem exposure in a considerable fraction of critically ill patients. An easy- and free-to-use tool (the MeroRisk Calculator) for assessing the risk of target non-attainment for a given renal function and MIC value was developed. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT01793012 . Registered on 24 January 2013

Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic models for time courses of antibiotic effects

Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PKPD) models have emerged as valuable tools for the characterization and translation of antibiotic effects, and consequently for drug development and therapy. In contrast to traditional PKPD concepts for antibiotics such as minimum inhibitory concentration and PKPD indices, PKPD models enable description of the continuous, often species- or population-dependent time course of antimicrobial effects, commonly considering mechanistic pathogen- and drug-related knowledge. This review presents a comprehensive overview of previously published PKPD models describing repeated measurements of antibiotic effects. A literature review was conducted to identify PKPD models based on: (i) antibiotic compounds; (ii) Gram-positive or Gram-negative pathogens; and (iii) in-vitro or in-vivo longitudinal colony-forming unit data. In total, 132 publications were identified that were released between 1963 and 2021, including models based on exposure to single antibiotics (n=92) and drug combinations (n=40), as well as different experimental settings (e.g. static/traditional dynamic/hollowfibre/animal time-kill models, n=90/27/32/11). An interactive, fully searchable table summarizes the details of each model, namely variants and mechanistic elements of PKPD submodels capturing observed bacterial growth, regrowth, drug effects and interactions. Furthermore, the review highlights the main purposes of PKPD model development, including the translation of preclinical PKPD to clinical settings, and the assessment of varied dosing regimens and patient characteristics for their impact on clinical antibiotic effects. In summary, this comprehensive overview of PKPD models will assist in identifying PKPD modelling strategies to describe growth, killing, regrowth and interaction patterns for pathogen-antibiotic combinations over time, and ultimately facilitate model-informed antibiotic translation, dosing and drug development. (c) 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

Pharmacometrics-Based Considerations for the Design of a Pharmacogenomic Clinical Trial Assessing Irinotecan Safety

Purpose Pharmacometric models provide useful tools to aid the rational design of clinical trials. This study evaluates study design-, drug-, and patient-related features as well as analysis methods for their influence on the power to demonstrate a benefit of pharmacogenomics (PGx)-based dosing regarding myelotoxicity. Methods Two pharmacokinetic and one myelosuppression model were assembled to predict concentrations of irinotecan and its metabolite SN-38 given different UGT1A1 genotypes (poor metabolizers: CLSN-38: -36%) and neutropenia following conventional versus PGx-based dosing (350 versus 245 mg/m(2) (-30%)). Study power was assessed given diverse scenarios (n = 50-400 patients/arm, parallel/crossover, varying magnitude of CLSN-38, exposure-response relationship, inter-individual variability) and using model-based data analysis versus conventional statistical testing. Results The magnitude of CLSN-38 reduction in poor metabolizers and the myelosuppressive potency of SN-38 markedly influenced the power to show a difference in grade 4 neutropenia (<0.5 center dot 10(9) cells/L) after PGx-based versus standard dosing. To achieve >80% power with traditional statistical analysis (chi(2)/McNemar's test, alpha = 0.05), 220/100 patients per treatment arm/sequence (parallel/crossover study) were required. The model-based analysis resulted in considerably smaller total sample sizes (n = 100/15 given parallel/crossover design) to obtain the same statistical power. Conclusions The presented findings may help to avoid unfeasible trials and to rationalize the design of pharmacogenetic studies

Model-Informed Translation of In Vitro Effects of Short-, Prolonged- and Continuous-Infusion Meropenem against Pseudomonas aeruginosa to Clinical Settings

Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PKPD) models have met increasing interest as tools to identify potential efficacious antibiotic dosing regimens in vitro and in vivo. We sought to investigate the impact of diversely shaped clinical pharmacokinetic profiles of meropenem on the growth/killing patterns of Pseudomonas aeruginosa (ARU552, MIC = 16 mg/L) over time using a semi-mechanistic PKPD model and a PK/PD index-based approach. Bacterial growth/killing were driven by the PK profiles of six patient populations (infected adults, burns, critically ill, neurosurgery, obese patients) given varied pathogen features (e.g., EC50, growth rate, inoculum), patient characteristics (e.g., creatinine clearance), and ten dosing regimens (including two dose levels and 0.5-h, 3-h and continuous-infusion regimens). Conclusions regarding the most favourable dosing regimen depended on the assessment of (i) the total bacterial load or fT(>MIC) (time that unbound concentrations exceed the minimum inhibitory concentration); (ii) the median or P-0.95 profile of the population; and (iii) 8 h or 24 h time points. Continuous infusion plus loading dose as well as 3-h infusions (3-h infusions: e.g., for scenarios associated with low meropenem concentrations, P-0.95 profiles, and MIC >= 16 mg/L) appeared superior to standard 0.5-h infusions at 24 h. The developed platform can serve to identify promising strategies of efficacious dosing for clinical trials

Development of a dosing nomogram for continuous-infusion meropenem in critically ill patients based on a validated population pharmacokinetic model

Optimal antibiotic exposure is a vital but challenging prerequisite for achieving clinical success in ICU patients.To develop and externally validate a population pharmacokinetic model for continuous-infusion meropenem in critically ill patients and to establish a nomogram based on a routinely available marker of renal function.A population pharmacokinetic model was developed in NONMEM® 7.3 based on steady-state meropenem concentrations (CSS) collected during therapeutic drug monitoring. Different serum creatinine-based markers of renal function were compared for their influence on meropenem clearance (the Cockcroft-Gault creatinine clearance CLCRCG, the CLCR bedside estimate according to Jelliffe, the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration equation and the four-variable Modification of Diet in Renal Disease equation). After validation of the pharmacokinetic model with independent data, a dosing nomogram was developed, relating renal function to the daily doses required to achieve selected target concentrations (4/8/16 mg/L) in 90% of the patients. Probability of target attainment was determined for efficacy (CSS ≥8 mg/L) and potentially increased likelihood of adverse drug reactions (CSS >32 mg/L).In total, 433 plasma concentrations (3.20-48.0 mg/L) from 195 patients (median/P0.05 - P0.95 at baseline: weight 77.0/55.0-114 kg, CLCRCG 63.0/19.6-168 mL/min) were used for model building. We found that CLCRCG best described meropenem clearance (CL = 7.71 L/h, CLCRCG = 80 mL/min). The developed model was successfully validated with external data (n = 171, 73 patients). According to the nomogram, daily doses of 910/1480/2050/2800/3940 mg were required to reach a target CSS = 8 mg/L in 90% of patients with CLCRCG = 20/50/80/120/180 mL/min, respectively. A low probability of adverse drug reactions