Dataset Information

Setting the Beta-Lactam Therapeutic Range for Critically Ill Patients: Is There a Floor or Even a Ceiling?

ABSTRACT: Beta-lactam antibiotics exhibit high interindividual variability in drug concentrations in patients with critical illness which led to an interest in the use of therapeutic drug monitoring to improve effectiveness and safety. To implement therapeutic drug monitoring, it is necessary to define the beta-lactam therapeutic range-in essence, what drug concentration would prompt a clinician to make dose adjustments up or down. This objective of this narrative review was to summarize evidence for the "floor" (for effectiveness) and "ceiling" (for toxicity) for the beta-lactam therapeutic range to be used with individualized therapeutic drug monitoring.

Data sources

Research articles were sourced from PubMed using search term combinations of "pharmacokinetics," "pharmacodynamics," "toxicity," "neurotoxicity," "therapeutic drug monitoring," "beta-lactam," "cefepime," "meropenem," "piperacillin/tazobactam," "ICU," and "critical illness."

Study selection

Articles were selected if they included preclinical, translational, or clinical data on pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic thresholds for effectiveness and safety for beta-lactams in critical illness.

Data synthesis

Experimental data indicate a beta-lactam concentration above the minimum inhibitory concentration of the organism for greater than or equal to 40-60% of the dosing interval is needed, but clinical data indicate that higher concentrations may be preferrable. In the first 48 hours of critical illness, a free beta-lactam concentration at or above the susceptibility breakpoint of the most likely pathogen for 100% of the dosing interval would be reasonable (typically based on Pseudomonas aeruginosa). After 48 hours, the lowest acceptable concentration could be tailored to 1-2× the observed minimum inhibitory concentration of the organism for 100% of the dosing interval (often a more susceptible organism). Neurotoxicity is the primary dose-dependent adverse effect of beta-lactams, but the evidence remains insufficient to link a specific drug concentration to greater risk.

Conclusions

As studies advance the understanding of beta-lactam exposure and response in critically ill patients, it is essential to clearly define the acceptable therapeutic range to guide regimen selection and adjustment.

SUBMITTER: Barreto EF

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8202642 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jun

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Setting the Beta-Lactam Therapeutic Range for Critically Ill Patients: Is There a Floor or Even a Ceiling?

Barreto Erin F EF Webb Andrew J AJ Pais Gwendolyn M GM Rule Andrew D AD Jannetto Paul J PJ Scheetz Marc H MH

Critical care explorations 20210611 6

Beta-lactam antibiotics exhibit high interindividual variability in drug concentrations in patients with critical illness which led to an interest in the use of therapeutic drug monitoring to improve effectiveness and safety. To implement therapeutic drug monitoring, it is necessary to define the beta-lactam therapeutic range-in essence, what drug concentration would prompt a clinician to make dose adjustments up or down. This objective of this narrative review was to summarize evidence for the ...[more]

PMID: 34136822

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundBeta-lactams (i.e., penicillins, cephalosporins, carbapenems, monobactams) are the most widely used class of antibiotics in critically ill patients. There is substantial interpatient variability in beta-lactam pharmacokinetics which renders their effectiveness and safety largely unpredictable. One strategy to ensure achievement of therapeutic concentrations is drug level testing ("therapeutic drug monitoring"; TDM). While studies have suggested promise with beta-lactam TDM, it is not yet widely available or implemented. This protocol presents a mixed-methods study designed to examine healthcare practitioners' perspectives on the use and implementation of beta-lactam TDM in the critically ill.MethodsAn explanatory sequential mixed-methods design will be used [QUANT → qual]. First, quantitative data will be collected through a web-based questionnaire directed at clinicians at three academic medical centers at different phases of beta-lactam TDM implementation (not yet implemented, partially implemented, fully implemented). The sampling frame will include providers from a variety of disciplines that interact with drug level testing and interpretation in the critical care environment including pharmacists, intensivists, infectious diseases experts, medical/surgical trainees, and advanced practice providers. Second, approximately 30 individuals will be purposively sampled from survey respondents to conduct in-depth qualitative interviews to explain and expand upon the results from the quantitative strand. Normalization Process Theory and the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Science will be used to guide data analysis.DiscussionThese data will be used to answer two specific questions: "What are ICU practitioners' perspectives on implementing beta-lactam TDM?" and "What factors contribute to the success of beta-lactam TDM program implementation?" Results of this study will be used to design future implementation strategies for beta-lactam TDM programs in the critically ill.Trial registrationNCT04755777 .

Project description:Study objectiveMinimizing the duration of broad-spectrum antimicrobial exposure in the critically ill is a commonly used strategy aimed at preventing resistance. Our objective was to correlate the duration of exposure to antipseudomonal β-lactam antibiotics with the development of new resistance in critically ill patients.DesignSingle-center, retrospective cohort study.SettingA large, academic, tertiary care hospital.PatientsA total of 7118 adults with a discharge diagnosis of severe sepsis or septic shock who received at least one dose of cefepime, meropenem, or piperacillin-tazobactam during their hospitalization between 2010 and 2015.Measurements and main resultsCohort entry was defined as the first day of any antipseudomonal β-lactam initiation, and exposure was defined as the cumulative days of any antipseudomonal β-lactam exposure during the 60-day follow-up period. The primary outcome was development of new resistance to any antipseudomonal β-lactam > 3 days after cohort entry. New resistance was defined as detection of resistance to any antipseudomonal β-lactam not identified within 180 days before cohort entry. Patients without an outcome (i.e., did not develop new resistance) or who died by day 60 were censored. Cox proportional hazards models were performed to assess the risk of development of new resistance to any antipseudomonal β-lactam with each additional day of exposure. Analyses of each individual antipseudomonal β-lactam were evaluated as secondary outcomes. Each additional day of exposure to any antipseudomonal β-lactam resulted in an adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of 1.04 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.04-1.05) for new resistance development. The risk of developing new resistance to cefepime, meropenem, and piperacillin-tazobactam for each additional day of exposure resulted in an aHR of 1.08 (95% CI 1.07-1.09), 1.02 (95% CI 1.01-1.03), and 1.08 (95% CI 1.06-1.09), respectively.ConclusionAmong critically ill patients who receive antipseudomonal β-lactam antibiotics, each additional day of exposure to cefepime, meropenem, and piperacillin-tazobactam is associated with an increased risk of new resistance development.

Project description:BackgroundHealthcare-associated infections involving Gram-negative bacteria (GNB) with difficult-to-treat resistance (DTR) phenotype are associated with impaired patient-centered outcomes and poses daily therapeutic challenges in most of intensive care units worldwide. Over the recent years, four innovative β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitor (BL/BLI) combinations (ceftolozane-tazobactam, ceftazidime-avibactam, imipenem-relebactam and meropenem-vaborbactam) and a new siderophore cephalosporin (cefiderocol) have been approved for the treatment of certain DTR-GNB infections. The literature addressing their microbiological spectrum, pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy and safety was exhaustively audited by our group to support the recent guidelines of the French Intensive Care Society on their utilization in critically ill patients. This narrative review summarizes the available evidence and unanswered questions on these issues.MethodsA systematic search for English-language publications in PUBMED and the Cochrane Library database from inception to November 15, 2022.ResultsThese drugs have demonstrated relevant clinical success rates and a reduced renal risk in most of severe infections for whom polymyxin- and/or aminoglycoside-based regimen were historically used as last-resort strategies-namely, ceftazidime-avibactam for infections due to Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC)- or OXA-48-like-producing Enterobacterales, meropenem-vaborbactam for KPC-producing Enterobacterales, ceftazidime-avibactam/aztreonam combination or cefiderocol for metallo-β-lactamase (MBL)-producing Enterobacterales, and ceftolozane-tazobactam, ceftazidime-avibactam and imipenem-relebactam for non-MBL-producing DTR Pseudomonas aeruginosa. However, limited clinical evidence exists in critically ill patients. Extended-infusion scheme (except for imipenem-relebactam) may be indicated for DTR-GNB with high minimal inhibitory concentrations and/or in case of augmented renal clearance. The potential benefit of combining these agents with other antimicrobials remains under-investigated, notably for the most severe presentations. Other important knowledge gaps include pharmacokinetic information in particular situations (e.g., pneumonia, other deep-seated infections, and renal replacement therapy), the hazard of treatment-emergent resistance and possible preventive measures, the safety of high-dose regimen, the potential usefulness of rapid molecular diagnostic tools to rationalize their empirical utilization, and optimal treatment durations. Comparative clinical, ecological, and medico-economic data are needed for infections in whom two or more of these agents exhibit in vitro activity against the causative pathogen.ConclusionsNew BL/BLI combinations and cefiderocol represent long-awaited options for improving the management of DTR-GNB infections. Several research axes must be explored to better define the positioning and appropriate administration scheme of these drugs in critically ill patients.

Project description:BackgroundPiperacillin levels after standard dosing have been shown frequently to be subtherapeutic, especially when renal clearance was augmented. Here, we aimed to determine if piperacillin was in its therapeutic range in a typically heterogeneous intensive care unit patient group, and also to describe target attainment dependent on daily dosage, creatinine clearance, and renal replacement therapy (RRT).MethodsSixty patients with severe infections were included in this monocentric prospective observational study. Patients received 4.5 g of piperacillin-tazobactam two to three times daily by intermittent infusion depending on renal function according to clinical guidelines. Over 4 days, multiple serum samples (median per patient, 29; in total, 1627) were obtained to determine total piperacillin concentrations using ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography/tandem mass spectrometry.ResultsA high heterogeneity of patient characteristics was observed (e.g., on day 1: creatinine clearance 2-233 mL/min and ten patients on RRT). Piperacillin trough levels showed inter-individual variation from 123 to >1785-fold on different study days. Each day, approximately 50% and 60% of the patients had piperacillin levels below the target ranges 1 and 2, respectively [defined for the calculated unbound piperacillin fraction according to the literature as 100% time above MIC (100%fT > MIC) (target range 1) and ≥ 50%fT > 4 × MIC (target range 2); MIC = 16 mg/L]. Whereas only the minority of patients who received piperacillin-tazobactam three times daily (TID) reached target 1 (38% on day 1), most patients who received piperacillin-tazobactam only twice daily (BID) because of severely impaired renal function reached this target (100% on day 1). Patients with RRT had significant higher percentages of fT > MIC. Zero percent, 55% and 100% of patients without RRT who received antibiotics TID reached target 1 when creatinine clearance was > 65 mL/min, 30-65 mL/min and < 30 mL/min, respectively. In patients with causative strains only sensitive to piperacillin-tazobactam of all antibiotics given to the patient, piperacillin levels negatively correlated with CRP concentrations of day 4 (p < 0.05).ConclusionsA dosage of 4.5 g piperacillin-tazobactam TID seems to be frequently insufficient in critically ill patients, and also in patients where renal function is mildly to moderately impaired. For these patients, prescription of 4.5 g piperacillin-tazobactam four times daily could be considered.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT01793012. Registered 24 January 2013.

Dataset Information

Setting the Beta-Lactam Therapeutic Range for Critically Ill Patients: Is There a Floor or Even a Ceiling?

Data sources

Study selection

Data synthesis

Conclusions

Publications

Setting the Beta-Lactam Therapeutic Range for Critically Ill Patients: Is There a Floor or Even a Ceiling?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets