Dataset Information

A systematic review of population pharmacokinetic analyses of digoxin in the paediatric population.

ABSTRACT: This is a PROSPERO registered systematic review (CRD42018105207), conducted to summarize the available knowledge regarding the population pharmacokinetics of digoxin in paediatrics and to identify the sources of variability in its disposition. PubMed, ISI Web of Science, SCOPUS and Science Direct databases were searched from inception to January 2019. All paediatric population pharmacokinetic studies of digoxin that utilized the nonlinear mixed-effect modelling approach were incorporated in this review, and data were synthesized descriptively. After application of the inclusion-exclusion criteria 8 studies were included. Most studies described digoxin pharmacokinetics as a 1-compartment model with only 1 study describing its pharmacokinetics as 2-compartments. Age was an important predictor of clearance in studies involving neonates or infants, other predictors of clearance were weight, height, serum creatinine, coadministration of spironolactone and presence of congestive heart failure. Congestive heart failure was also associated with an increased volume of distribution in 1 study. The estimated value of apparent clearance in a typical individual standardized by mean weight ranged between 0.24 and 0.56 L/h/kg, the interindividual variability in clearance ranged between 7.0 and 35.1%. Half of the studies evaluated the performance of their developed models via external evaluation. In conclusion, substantial predictors of digoxin pharmacokinetics in the paediatric population in addition to model characteristics and evaluation techniques are presented. For clinicians, clearance could be predicted using age especially in neonates or infants, weight, height, serum creatinine, coadministration of medications and disease status. For future researchers, designing pharmacokinetic studies that allow 2-compartment modelling and linking pharmacokinetics with pharmacodynamics is recommended.

SUBMITTER: Abdel Jalil MH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7667574 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:The purpose of this work was to develop a consolidated set of guiding principles for reporting of population pharmacokinetic (PK) analyses based on input from a survey of practitioners as well as discussions between industry, consulting and regulatory scientists. The survey found that identification of population covariate effects on drug exposure and support for dose selection (where population PK frequently serves as preparatory analysis to exposure-response modeling) are the main areas of influence for population PK analysis. The proposed guidelines consider two main purposes of population PK reports (1) to present key analysis findings and their impact on drug development decisions, and (2) as documentation of the analysis methods for the dual purpose of enabling review of the analysis and facilitating future use of the models. This work also identified two main audiences for the reports: (1) a technically competent group responsible for in-depth review of the data, methodology, and results, and (2) a scientifically literate, but not technically adept group, whose main interest is in the implications of the analysis for the broader drug development program. We recommend a generalized question-based approach with six questions that need to be addressed throughout the report. We recommend eight sections (Synopsis, Introduction, Data, Methods, Results, Discussion, Conclusions, Appendix) with suggestions for the target audience and level of detail for each section. A section providing general expectations regarding population PK reporting from a regulatory perspective is also included. We consider this an important step towards industrialization of the field of pharmacometrics such that non-technical audience also understands the role of pharmacometrics analyses in decision making. Population PK reports were chosen as representative reports to derive these recommendations; however, the guiding principles presented here are applicable for all pharmacometric reports including PKPD and simulation reports.

Project description:ObjectiveOur objective was to evaluate quality of conduct and reporting of published systematic reviews and meta-analyses in paediatric surgery. We also aimed to identify characteristics predictive of review quality.BackgroundSystematic reviews summarise evidence by combining sources, but are potentially prone to bias. To counter this, the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) was published to aid in reporting. Similarly, the Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) measurement tool was designed to appraise methodology. The paediatric surgical literature has seen an increasing number of reviews over the past decade, but quality has not been evaluated.MethodsAdhering to PRISMA guidelines, we performed a systematic review with a priori design to identify systematic reviews and meta-analyses of interventions in paediatric surgery. From 01/2010 to 06/2016, we searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, Centre for Reviews and Dissemination, Web of Science, Google Scholar, reference lists and journals. Two reviewers independently selected studies and extracted data. We assessed conduct and reporting using AMSTAR and PRISMA. Scores were calculated as the sum of reported items. We also extracted author, journal and article characteristics, and used them in exploratory analysis to determine which variables predict quality.Results112 articles fulfilled eligibility criteria (53 systematic reviews; 59 meta-analyses). Overall, 68% AMSTAR and 56.8% PRISMA items were reported adequately. Poorest scores were identified with regards a priori design, inclusion of structured summaries, including the grey literature, citing excluded articles and evaluating bias. 13 reviews were pre-registered and 6 in PRISMA-endorsing journals. The following predicted quality in univariate analysis:, word count, Cochrane review, journal h-index, impact factor, journal endorses PRISMA, PRISMA adherence suggested in author guidance, article mentions PRISMA, review includes comparison of interventions and review registration. The latter three variables were significant in multivariate regression.ConclusionsThere are gaps in the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews in paediatric surgery. More endorsement by journals of the PRISMA guideline may improve review quality, and the dissemination of reliable evidence to paediatric clinicians.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Different definitions exist for hypotension in children. In this study, we aim to identify evidence-based reference values for low blood pressure and to compare these with existing definitions for systolic hypotension. METHODS:We searched online databases until February 2019 (including MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science) using a comprehensive search strategy to identify studies that defined age-related centiles (first to fifth centile) for non-invasive systolic blood pressure in healthy children <?18?years. Existing cut-offs for hypotension were identified in international guidelines and textbooks. The age-related centiles and clinical cut-offs were compared and visualized using step charts. RESULTS:Fourteen studies with population-based centiles were selected, of which 2 addressed children <?1?year. Values for the fifth centile differed 8 to 17?mmHg for age. We identified 13 clinical cut-offs of which only 5 reported accurate references. Age-related cut-offs for hypotension showed large variability (ranging from 15 to 30?mmHg). The clinical cut-offs varied in agreement with the low centiles. The definition from Paediatric Advanced Life Support agreed well for children <?12?years but was below the fifth centiles for children >?12?years. For children >?12?years, the definition of Parshuram's early warning score agreed well, but the Advanced Paediatric Life Support definition was above the fifth centiles. CONCLUSIONS:The different clinical guidelines for low blood pressure show large variability and low to moderate agreement with population-based lower centiles. For children <?12?years, the Paediatric Advanced Life Support definition fits best but it underestimates hypotension in older children. For children >?12?years, the Advanced Paediatric Life Support overestimates hypotension but Parshuram's cut-off for hypotension in the early warning score agrees well. Future studies should focus on developing reference values for hypotension for acutely ill children.

Dataset Information

A systematic review of population pharmacokinetic analyses of digoxin in the paediatric population.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure