Analysis of thrombocytopenic effects and population pharmacokinetics of linezolid: a dosage strategy according to the trough concentration target and renal function in adult patients

High accumulation of linezolid and its major metabolite in the serum of patients with hepatic and renal dysfunction is significantly associated with thrombocytopenia and anemia

This study aims to examine the serum levels of linezolid and its metabolites (PNU-142300 and PNU-142586) in patients with varying hepatic and renal function. It seeks to understand how these levels relate to thrombocytopenia and anemia and to identify concentration thresholds that could cause these adverse effects, thereby aiding in personalized drug dosing. This prospective study was conducted from January to December 2023. According to the established inclusion and exclusion criteria, 77 patients with infections treated with linezolid were selected as the research subjects. Venous blood samples were collected every 48 h starting from the first use of linezolid, specifically 30 min before the next dose. Laboratory data were obtained through biochemical analysis and blood routine tests, and blood drug concentration monitoring was carried out based on the pre-established high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) method. The exposure levels of linezolid and its metabolites in the serum of patients under different liver and kidney function states were compared, and the relationships between these drug exposure levels and platelet count and hemoglobin concentration were analyzed. Additionally, the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was used to determine the blood drug concentration thresholds of linezolid and its metabolites that led to thrombocytopenia or anemia. Finally, survival analysis was used to evaluate the time differences in the occurrence of adverse reactions, such as thrombocytopenia and anemia, between the liver and kidney function impairment group and the normal group after the use of linezolid. Exposure to linezolid and its metabolites increased with the severity of hepatic and renal impairment. Patients with severe and moderate hepatic and renal impairment had a substantially higher median Cmin of linezolid and its metabolites 2 and 3 than those with mild hepatic and renal impairment. The platelet count and hemoglobin concentration were significantly associated with linezolid and its metabolite overexposure. The concentration threshold for linezolid and its metabolites 2 and 3 to cause thrombocytopenia and anemia were 7.0, 3.6, and 4.3 mg/L. Patients with hepatic and renal impairment exhibit higher levels of linezolid and its metabolites, potentially leading to adverse effects like thrombocytopenia and anemia. It is recommended to monitor drug levels and develop individualized dosage regimens.

IMPORTANCE

The accumulation of plasma linezolid and its metabolites increased with the degree of liver and kidney injury. High plasma linezolid and its metabolite accumulation is significantly associated with thrombocytopenia and anemia. Linezolid and its metabolite concentration threshold can warn the clinical prevention of hematological adverse reactions. Individual therapy guided by therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) can improve the efficacy of linezolid and reduce toxic reactions. Patients with severe hepatic and renal dysfunction should actively monitor the blood routine and linezolid concentration and adjust the dosage in time.

Management of antibiotic adverse events

PURPOSE

Antibiotic-associated adverse drug events (ADEs) are common and diverse in clinical practice, yet healthcare professionals often lack sufficient understanding of them. An ill-considered change to an alternative agent whent symptoms of suspected ADEs appear can lead to excessive overuse and misuse of antibiotics. Proper management of ADEs is part of antimicrobial stewardship.

AREAS COVERED

This review describes clinical characteristics, diagnosis and management of ADEs, featuring drug fever, rash, nephrotoxicity, liver injury, interstitial pneumonitis, rhabdomyolysis, encephalopathy, QT prolongation, thrombocytopenia and neutropenia.

SUMMARY

Healthcare professionals should be familiar with the typical symptoms, time course and likely causative agent for each adverse reaction. Early detection and proper judgement are important. In sever case, early discontinuation of the causative agent and proper treatment are required. If it is not fatal, continuing the suspected agent and careful monitoring may help identify the causative agent. Especially in penicillin allergies, it is important to remember that most patients labeled as allergic are, in fact, misclassified.

Population pharmacokinetics and thrombocytopenia risk assessment of linezolid in liver transplant recipients

BACKGROUND

Linezolid is a commonly prescribed antibiotic for multidrug-resistant enterococcal infections in liver transplant recipients (LTRs). However, changes in pharmacokinetics due to fluctuations in liver and renal functions, combined with the increased risk of thrombocytopenia, complicate its clinical use. This study aimed to characterize the exposure-thrombocytopenia risk relationship of linezolid in LTRs, and to identify safe dosing thresholds to promote rational drug use.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted on adult LTRs treated with linezolid at Zhongshan Hospital between January 2019 and May 2022. A population exposure-safety model was developed and used to establish a thrombocytopenia risk threshold and optimize initial dosing strategies through Monte Carlo simulations. An area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) calculator was developed to facilitate individualized dose adjustments.

RESULTS

Exposure-safety analysis revealed that an AUCss,24h threshold of 291.7 mg/L·h was associated with an increased risk of thrombocytopenia. Monte Carlo simulations showed that current covariate-based initial dosing recommendations were suboptimal, highlighting the necessity of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) to improve outcomes in LTRs. The online AUC calculator developed in this study offers a practical tool for clinicians to implement timely dose adjustments (https://optimaldose.shinyapps.io/LinezolidAUC/).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides the first comprehensive analysis of linezolid exposure and its relationship to thrombocytopenia risk in LTRs. The findings underscore the importance of AUC-guided dosing and TDM in optimizing treatment outcomes.

Safety Evaluation of Contezolid (MRX-I) Versus Linezolid in Sprague-Dawley Rats

BACKGROUND & OBJECTIVES

Contezolid (MRX-I) is a novel ortho-fluorophenyl dihydropyridone developed by MicuRx Pharmaceuticals, Inc. It has been approved for the treatment of drug-resistant Gram-positive bacterial infections with relatively lower toxicity than other oxazolidinones such as linezolid. However, the toxicity profile has not yet been completely revealed. The aim of this study was to disclose the toxicity of contezolid in Sprague-Dawley (SD) rats and compare its toxicity profile with linezolid in a standard 4-week toxicity study.

METHODS

In this study, SD rats were orally administered with contezolid at doses of 20, 100, or 200/300 mg/kg/day for 28 consecutive days followed by a 28-day recovery period. Linezolid at doses of 100 or 200 mg/kg/day served as a comparator. Clinical observations, body weight, food consumption, hematology, clinical chemistry, urinalysis, and histopathological examinations were conducted.

RESULTS

All females in the 200 mg/kg/day linezolid group were subjected to unscheduled death due to myelosuppression within the first 2 weeks. No abnormalities were noted in the 200 mg/kg/day contezolid group, and the dose level was escalated to 300 mg/kg/day from day 15. Myelosuppression or myelosuppression-associated effects were comparable between the 300-mg/kg/day contezolid group and the 100-mg/kg/day linezolid group. The 'no observed adverse effect level' (NOAEL) of contezolid was determined to be 100 mg/kg/day (with an average AUC0-24 h of 268.4 μg*h/mL). At the same dose levels, the toxicity of contezolid was significantly lower than that of linezolid.

CONCLUSION

These findings demonstrate that contezolid exhibits a favorable safety profile compared with linezolid in this 4-week repeated-dose toxicity study in rats.

Population pharmacokinetics and clinical assessment of linezolid in pediatric bacterial infections

The pharmacokinetic profile of linezolid still needs further definition, and insufficient or excessive exposure may lead to treatment failure or development of adverse events. Our study aimed to establish a population pharmacokinetic (PPK) model for linezolid in children with bacterial infections, develop an optimal dosage, and evaluate its efficacy and safety. A total of 157 plasma samples from 80 patients were utilized in PPK modeling. A one-compartment model with first-order elimination was most suitable for describing the PK characteristics of linezolid. Weight and creatinine clearance were the significant covariates for clearance. The outcomes of Monte Carlo revealed that in children under 12 years, the probability of target attainment (PTA) for standard dosage (10 mg/kg q8h) was over 90.0% when minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) ≤2 µg/mL, with a mere 1.4% probability of surpassing the safety threshold. Meanwhile, in children aged 12 years and above, the PTA for standard dosage (600 mg q12h) was over 83.0%, and the probability of surpassing the safety threshold was 0.0%. To take the results one step further, a total of 67 patients (using standard dosage) were enrolled in the efficacy and safety analysis. Of the patients, 95.5% were cured or improved clinical treatment outcomes, and 22.4% of the patients developed possible adverse events (AEs), and no patient experienced early discontinuation of linezolid due to AEs. The standard dosage of linezolid is effective and safe in children with bacterial infections (MIC ≤2 µg/mL). For pathogens with MIC >2 µg/mL, it is advisable to switch antibiotics or increase dosage.CLINICAL TRIALSThis study is registered with Chinese Clinical Trial Registry as ChiCTR 2200061207.

Exploring the impact of baseline platelet count on linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia: a retrospective single-center observation study

BACKGROUND

Patients treated with linezolid (LZD) frequently develop thrombocytopenia, and previous studies have identified the risk factors for this condition. However, the relationship between the development of LZD-induced thrombocytopenia and baseline platelet count has varied according to different reports.

AIM

To explore the relationship between platelet count and the development of LZD-induced thrombocytopenia.

METHOD

Patients who underwent LZD at Hokkaido University Hospital in Japan from September 2008 to March 2023 were included. We collected data on patient characteristics and platelet counts at baseline and during LZD therapy from the electronic medical records. Thrombocytopenia was defined as a decrease in platelet count by 30% or more from baseline, or a platelet level < 100,000/µL.

RESULTS

Two hundred and ninety-five patients who received LZD were included in this study, of whom 34.9% developed thrombocytopenia. In the early days of LZD treatment, the thrombocytopenia group showed a nearly 5% decrease in platelet count, while the non-thrombocytopenia group exhibited an increase of over 5%. Additionally, focusing on early onset thrombocytopenia (within 5 days), a baseline platelet count of < 150,000/µL was identified as a risk factor for early thrombocytopenia. Conversely, it was also observed that 24.7% of patients with a baseline platelet count ≥ 150,000/µL still developed early thrombocytopenia.

CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest that while a baseline platelet count of < 150,000/µL is a risk factor for the early onset of thrombocytopenia, vigilant monitoring of platelet counts by clinical pharmacists in the early stages of LZD treatment is essential, regardless of baseline platelet levels.

Linezolid and tedizolid adverse effects: a review on serotonin syndrome, myelosuppression, neuropathies, and lactic acidosis

Oxazolidinone antibiotics-linezolid and tedizolid-are often used to treat multidrug-resistant infections. They are highly bioavailable and ideal for transition to enteral therapy when appropriate. However, multiple associated adverse effects are potentially treatment-limiting. The objective of this review is to discuss relevant adverse effects of linezolid and tedizolid, including serotonin syndrome, myelosuppression, neuropathies, and lactic acidosis, and their commonality in real-world experience in the last decade. Mitigation strategies, including the role of therapeutic drug monitoring, are also discussed.

Personalized Dosing of Linezolid to Reduce the Risk of Thrombocytopenia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia (LIT) occurs in a dose-dependent manner. There is no consensus regarding personalized dosing of linezolid in the real world. This study investigated the usefulness of personalized dosing for the potential mitigation of LIT compared with standard dosing.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis were performed using 4 medical electronic databases. Inclusion criteria were original research articles published up to October 23, 2023, whereas nonoriginal articles were excluded. Eligible participants included adults who were administered linezolid. A random-effects model was used to synthesize the results.

RESULTS

Four studies were eligible for inclusion. There were 208 patients in the personalized dosing (intervention) group and 195 patients in the standard dosing (comparison) group. The odds ratio for the intervention was 0.648 (95% confidence interval: 0.150-2.797), although significant heterogeneity was observed (I2 = 83.3%). An ad hoc analysis was performed by excluding one study with a significant bias risk in the treatment duration. The odds ratio for the intervention in the ad hoc analysis was 0.356 (95% confidence interval: 0.179-0.708) with little heterogeneity, showing a lower incidence risk of LIT.

CONCLUSIONS

Personalized dosing in linezolid therapy may mitigate the risk of LIT.

Optimizing the dosing regimens of linezolid against gram-positive cocci in critically ill patients with different renal functions: a Monte Carlo simulation

To promote the accurate administration of linezolid, this study aimed to evaluate its dosage regimens in critically ill patients with varying renal functions. This evaluation was based on a combined analysis of pharmacokinetic (PK), pharmacodynamic (PD), and toxicodynamic (TD) indices. The percentage of therapeutic target attainment (PTTA) was used as the index for PK/PD/TD, defined as simultaneously meeting two PK/PD criteria (AUC0-24h/MIC ≥ 100 and Css between 2.6-7.8 mg/L) and adjusted for toxicity probability, with MICs ranging from 0.5 to 8 mg/L. The recommended doses of linezolid for patients: 600 mg every 12 h for normal renal function or mild renal impairment, 300 mg every 12 h for severe renal impairment, 450 mg every 12 h for moderate renal impairment, and 600 mg every 8 h for supra-normal renal function. In conclusion, specific dosing regimens should be adopted for patients with varying renal functions, combined with therapeutic drug monitoring, to ensure the safety and efficacy of linezolid.

Model-informed precision dosing: State of the art and future perspectives

Model-informed precision dosing (MIPD) stands as a significant development in personalized medicine to tailor drug dosing to individual patient characteristics. MIPD moves beyond traditional therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) by integrating mathematical predictions of dosing and considering patient-specific factors (patient characteristics, drug measurements) as well as different sources of variability. For this purpose, rigorous model qualification is required for the application of MIPD in patients. This review delves into new methods in model selection and validation, also highlighting the role of machine learning in improving MIPD, the utilization of biosensors for real-time monitoring, as well as the potential of models integrating biomarkers for efficacy or toxicity for precision dosing. The clinical evidence of TDM and MIPD is discussed for various medical fields including infection medicine, oncology, transplant medicine, and inflammatory bowel diseases, thereby underscoring the role of pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics and specific biomarkers. Further research, particularly randomized clinical trials, is warranted to corroborate the value of MIPD in enhancing patient outcomes and advancing personalized medicine.

Pharmacology of emerging drugs for the treatment of multi-drug resistant tuberculosis

Mycobacterium tuberculosis (TB) remains the leading cause of infection-related mortality worldwide. Drug resistance, need for multiple antimycobacterial agents, prolonged treatment courses, and medication-related side effects are complicating factors to TB cure. The introduction of treatment regimens containing the novel agents bedaquiline, pretomanid, and linezolid, with or without moxifloxacin (BPaL-M or BPaL, respectively) have substantially reduced TB-related morbidity and mortality and are associated with favorable rates of treatment completion and cure. This review summarizes key information on the pharmacology and treatment principles for moxifloxacin, bedaquiline, delamanid, pretomanid, linezolid, and tedizolid in the treatment of multi-drug resistant TB, with recommendations provided to address and attenuate common adverse effects during treatment.

Population Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Study of Linezolid in Hospital-Acquired Pneumonia Patients with Renal Insufficiency

Purpose

The optimal treatment strategy in patients with hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) due to Gram-positive bacteria and renal insufficiency remains challenging. The objective of this study was to compare the outcomes of linezolid versus teicoplanin in HAP patients with renal insufficiency and to explore optimal dosage strategy for linezolid.

Methods

The retrospective study enrolled adult patients treated with intravenous linezolid or teicoplanin at Suzhou Municipal Hospital between July 2018 and August 2023. For the comparative pharmacodynamic study, effectiveness, safety and target attainment of trough concentration (Cmin) for teicoplanin versus linezolid treatment in HAP patients with document Gram-positive bacteria and renal insufficiency were compared. For the population pharmacokinetics (PPK) analyses, linezolid concentrations collected exclusively from HAP patients with renal insufficiency were used and the optimal dosage strategy was investigated using Monte Carlo simulations.

Results

Linezolid-treated patients had a higher bacterial eradication rate than teicoplanin-treated patients (88.5% vs 63.4%, P < 0.001). A higher proportion of patients in the linezolid group experienced at least one adverse reaction (42.0% vs 25.0%, P = 0.025). Significantly more supratherapeutic Cmin, less therapeutic Cmin were achieved in the linezolid group (adjusted P < 0.05). A total of 207 linezolid concentrations from 166 patients with renal insufficiency were available for the PPK analysis. Age and creatinine clearance (CrCL) were identified as significant covariates that influenced clearance. Simulations show that 300 mg q12h provide the optimal exposure in patients with a CrCL of 60 or 45 mL/min, and 200 mg q12h was recommended for patients with a CrCL of 30 or 15 mL/min.

Conclusion

Linezolid-treated patients with HAP and renal insufficiency had higher bacterial eradication rates, supratherapeutic exposure and adverse reactions than teicoplanin-treated patients. Linezolid dose reduction in patients with renal insufficiency improved the probability of achieving optimal exposure.

Therapeutic drug monitoring of linezolid and exploring optimal regimens and a toxicity-related nomogram in elderly patients: a multicentre, prospective, non-interventional study

BACKGROUND

The concentrations of linezolid, its optimal regimen and the associated side effects in elderly patients remain unclear.

METHODS

In this multicentre, prospective study, elderly patients receiving linezolid at four tertiary hospitals in Beijing between May 2021 and December 2022 were included. Linezolid concentrations and haematological toxicity were monitored dynamically. Risk factors for linezolid overexposure and moderate-to-severe linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia (M/S LIT) were analysed, and a predictive model of M/S LIT was developed.

RESULTS

A total of 860 linezolid concentrations were measured in 313 patients. The median trough concentrations of linezolid were 24.4 (15.3, 35.8) mg/L at 36-72 h and 26.1 (17.0, 38.1) mg/L at 5-10 days (P = 0.132). Severe linezolid exposure was independently associated with age, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and the worst SOFA score (SOFA1), and we further recommended dose regimens for elderly patients based on these findings. The incidences of linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia(LIT) and M/S LIT were 73.5% and 47.6%, respectively. M/S LIT was independently correlated with treatment duration, average trough concentration (TDMa), baseline platelet count, eGFR and baseline SOFA score (SOFA0). The developed nomogram predicted M/S LIT with an area under the curve of 0.767 (95% CI 0.715-0.820), a sensitivity of 71.1% and a specificity of 73.2%.

CONCLUSIONS

Linezolid trough concentrations increased dramatically in the elderly, by about 10 mg/L in patients aged 65-80 years, followed by a further increase of 10 mg/L for every 10 years of age. Therapeutic drug monitoring is recommended in elderly patients receiving linezolid. The developed nomogram may predict M/S LIT and guide dosage adjustments of linezolid. Clinical trial registration number: ChiCTR2100045707.

Estimation of linezolid exposure in patients with hepatic impairment using machine learning based on a population pharmacokinetic model

PURPOSE

To investigate the pharmacokinetic changes of linezolid in patients with hepatic impairment and to explore a method to predict linezolid exposure.

METHODS

Patients with hepatic impairment who received linezolid were recruited. A population pharmacokinetic model (PPK) was then built using NONMEM software. And based on the final model, virtual patients with rich concentration values was constructed through Monte Carlo simulations (MCS), which were used to build machine learning (ML) models to predict linezolid exposure levels. Finally, we investigated the risk factors for thrombocytopenia in patients included.

RESULTS

A PPK model with population typical values of 3.83 L/h and 34.1 L for clearance and volume of distribution was established, and the severe hepatic impairment was identified as a significant covariate of clearance. Then, we built a series of ML models to predict the area under 0 -24 h concentration-time curve (AUC0-24) of linezolid based on virtual patients from MCS. The results showed that the Xgboost models showed the best predictive performance and were superior to the methods for estimating linezolid AUC0-24 based on though concentration or daily dose. Finally, we found that baseline platelet count, linezolid AUC0-24, and combination with fluoroquinolones were independent risk factors for thrombocytopenia, and based on this, we proposed a method for calculating the toxicity threshold of linezolid.

CONCLUSION

In this study, we successfully constructed a PPK model for patients with hepatic impairment and used ML algorithm to estimate linezolid AUC0-24 based on limited data. Finally, we provided a method to determine the toxicity threshold of linezolid.

Necessity for higher teicoplanin doses in older adults: a multicenter prospective observational study in China

BACKGROUND

Many older adult patients receive low-dose teicoplanin with varied regimens, leading to a lack of clarity on its optimal regimens and toxicity profiles in China. This study aimed to clarify these aspects by analyzing teicoplanin treatment concentrations and toxicities.

METHODS

We included older adult patients administered teicoplanin at four tertiary hospitals in Beijing from June 2021 to July 2023, targeting a trough concentration (Cmin) ≥ 10 mg/L. Teicoplanin concentrations and toxicities were monitored dynamically.

RESULTS

From 204 patients, we obtained 632 teicoplanin concentrations. Most patients (83.3%) received low-dose regimens. Suboptimal concentrations were found in 66.4% of patients within 7 days of treatment and 17.0% after 15 days. Cmin gradually increased with treatment duration and was influenced initially by creatinine and by both body weight and creatinine from days 8 to 14. The target concentration was achieved in 53.1%, 33.9%, 15.6%, and 5.5% of patients at 3, ≤ 7, 8-14, and ≥ 15 days after withdrawal, respectively. Slow elimination was associated with average Cmin and eGFR. Nephrotoxicity, hepatotoxicity, and thrombocytopenia occurred in 12.5%, 4.1%, and 31.5% of patients, respectively, without significant differences between concentrations.

CONCLUSIONS

Most older adult patients were underdosed, indicating a need for dose adjustment. Given the varied risk factors for suboptimal concentrations in different treatment stages, a one-size-fits-all regimen was ineffective. We recommend an initial dose of 400 mg at 12-h intervals for the first three days, with subsequent doses from days 4 to 14 adjusted based on creatinine and body weight; after day 14, a maintenance dose of 200 mg daily is advised.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ChiCTR2100046811; 28/05/2021.

Updates in pulmonary drug-resistant tuberculosis pharmacotherapy: A focus on BPaL and BPaLM

Drug-resistant tuberculosis (TB) is a major public health concern and contributes to high morbidity and mortality. New evidence supports the use of shorter duration, all-oral regimens, which represent an encouraging treatment strategy for drug-resistant TB. As a result, the landscape of drug-resistant TB pharmacotherapy has drastically evolved regarding treatment principles and preferred agents. This narrative review focuses on the key updates of drug-resistant TB treatment, including the use of short-duration all-oral regimens, while calling attention to current gaps in knowledge that may be addressed in future observational studies.

Linezolid-Induced Thrombocytopenia in Patients with Renal Impairment: A Case Series, Review and Dose Advice

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Oral linezolid is often used as alternative therapy for intravenous vancomycin. According to the current guidelines, no dose adjustment has to be made in case of renal impairment. Nevertheless, in our hospital we have seen several patients with renal impairment who developed linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia when linezolid was taken in the standard dose. In this case series and review we want to emphasize the necessity of reviewing the Dutch and international guidelines.

METHODS

We describe five cases with renal impairment that developed linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia in our hospital. A PubMed literature review was conducted to identify other cases and find the optimal dosing regimen for these patients.

RESULTS

Our cases join a long list of cases and available literature about linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia in patients with renal impairment. Less linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia was found, both in our cases and in the literature, after dose reduction of 50%. High linezolid trough concentrations were associated with a higher risk of linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia. Besides renal impairment, other risk factors for developing linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia were also identified, such as low body weight, high daily dose/kg, higher age, longer duration of therapy, low baseline count, malignity, low-dose aspirin and interacting co-medication.

CONCLUSION

Re-evaluation of the current dose advice is necessary. We advocate for a standard dose reduction to 50% after 2 days of standard dosing for all patients with an estimated glomerular filtration of <60 mL/min/1.73 m2. Besides this, therapeutic drug monitoring and thrombocytes monitoring may be executed weekly when patients have renal impairment or other risk factors for developing linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia.

Linezolid brain penetration in neurointensive care patients

BACKGROUND

Linezolid exposure in critically ill patients is associated with high inter-individual variability, potentially resulting in subtherapeutic antibiotic exposure. Linezolid exhibits good penetration into the CSF, but its penetration into cerebral interstitial fluid (ISF) is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To determine linezolid penetration into CSF and cerebral ISF of neurointensive care patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Five neurocritical care patients received 600 mg of linezolid IV twice daily for treatment of extracerebral infections. At steady state, blood and CSF samples were collected from arterial and ventricular catheters, and microdialysate was obtained from a cerebral intraparenchymal probe.

RESULTS

The median fAUC0-24 was 57.6 (24.9-365) mg·h/L in plasma, 64.1 (43.5-306.1) mg·h/L in CSF, and 27.0 (10.7-217.6) mg·h/L in cerebral ISF. The median penetration ratio (fAUCbrain_or_CSF/fAUCplasma) was 0.5 (0.25-0.81) for cerebral ISF and 0.92 (0.79-1) for CSF. Cerebral ISF concentrations correlated well with plasma (R = 0.93, P < 0.001) and CSF levels (R = 0.93, P < 0.001).The median fAUC0-24/MIC ratio was ≥100 in plasma and CSF for MICs of ≤0.5 mg/L, and in cerebral ISF for MICs of ≤0.25 mg/L. The median fT>MIC was ≥80% of the dosing interval in CSF for MICs of ≤0.5 mg/L, and in plasma and cerebral ISF for MICs of ≤0.25 mg/L.

CONCLUSIONS

Linezolid demonstrates a high degree of cerebral penetration, and brain concentrations correlate well with plasma and CSF levels. However, substantial variability in plasma levels, and thus cerebral concentrations, may result in subtherapeutic tissue concentrations in critically ill patients with standard dosing, necessitating therapeutic drug monitoring.

Adverse drug events associated with linezolid administration: a real-world pharmacovigilance study from 2004 to 2023 using the FAERS database

Introduction: Linezolid is an oxazolidinone antibiotic that is active against drug-resistant Gram-positive bacteria and multidrug-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis. Real-world studies on the safety of linezolid in large populations are lacking. This study aimed to determine the adverse events associated with linezolid in real-world settings by analyzing data from the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS). Methods: We retrospectively extracted reports on adverse drug events (ADEs) from the FAERS database from the first quarter of 2004 to that of 2023. By using disproportionality analysis including reporting odds ratio (ROR), proportional reporting ratio (PRR), Bayesian Confidence Propagation Neural Network (BCPNN), along with the multi-item gamma Poisson shrinker (MGPS), we evaluated whether there was a significant association between linezolid and ADE. The time to onset of ADE was further analyzed in the general population and within each age, weight, reporting population, and weight subgroups. Results: A total of 11,176 reports of linezolid as the "primary suspected" drug and 263 significant adverse events of linezolid were identified, including some common adverse events such as thrombocytopenia (n = 1,139, ROR 21.98), anaemia (n = 704, ROR 7.39), and unexpected signals that were not listed on the drug label such as rhabdomyolysis (n = 90, ROR 4.33), and electrocardiogram QT prolonged (n = 73, ROR 4.07). Linezolid-induced adverse reactions involved 27 System Organ Class (SOC). Gender differences existed in ADE signals related to linezolid. The median onset time of all ADEs was 6 days, and most ADEs (n = 3,778) occurred within the first month of linezolid use but some may continue to occur even after a year of treatment (n = 46). Conclusion: This study reports the time to onset of adverse effects in detail at the levels of SOC and specific preferred term (PT). The results of our study provide valuable insights for optimizing the use of linezolid and reducing potential side effects, expected to facilitate the safe use of linezolid in clinical settings.

Population Pharmacokinetic Model of Linezolid and Probability of Target Attainment in Patients with COVID-19-Associated Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome on Veno-Venous Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation-A Step toward Correct Dosing

During veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (vv ECMO) therapy, antimicrobial drugs are frequently used, and appropriate dosing is challenging due to there being limited data to support the dosage. Linezolid is effective against multidrug-resistant Gram-positive pathogens frequently isolated in ECMO patients. In total, 53 steady-state linezolid levels were obtained following 600 mg intravenous (IV) injections every 8 h, and these were used to develop a population pharmacokinetic (PopPK) model in patients with COVID-19-associated acute respiratory distress syndrome (CARDS) on vv ECMO. The data were analyzed using a nonlinear mixed-effects modelling approach. Monte Carlo simulation generated 5000 patients' individual PK parameters and corresponding concentration-time profiles using the PopPK model, following the administration of 600 mg/8 h (a higher-than-standard dosing) and 600 mg/12 h (standard). The probabilities of pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) target attainment (PTA) and the cumulative fraction of responses (CFR) for three pathogens were calculated and compared between the two dosing scenarios. Linezolid 600 mg/8 h was predicted to achieve greater than or equal to 85%Tf>MIC in at least 90% of the patients with CARDS on vv ECMO compared to only approximately two thirds of the patients after dosing every 12 h at a minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) of 2 mg/L. In addition, for the same MIC, fAUC24/MIC ≥ 80 was achieved in almost three times the number of patients following an 8-h versus a 12-h interval. PopPK simulation predicted that a significantly higher proportion of the patients with CARDS on vv ECMO would achieve the PK/PD targets following the 8-h dosing interval compared to standard linezolid dosing. Nevertheless, the safety concern, in particular, for thrombocytopenia, with higher-than-standard linezolid dosage is reasonable, and consequently, monitoring is essential.

Towards a better detection of patients at-risk of linezolid toxicity in clinical practice: a prospective study in three Belgian hospital centers

Introduction: Linezolid is a last-resort antibiotic for infections caused by multidrug-resistant microorganisms. It is widely used for off-label indications and for longer than recommended treatment durations, exposing patients at higher risk of adverse drug reactions (ADRs), notably thrombocytopenia. This study aimed to investigate ADR incidence and risk factors, identify thrombocytopenia-related trough levels based on treatment duration, and evaluate the performance of predictive scores for ADR development. Methods: Adult in- and outpatients undergoing linezolid therapy were enrolled in three hospitals and ADRs and linezolid trough levels prospectively monitored over time. A population pharmacokinetic (pop-PK model) was used to estimate trough levels for blood samples collected at varying times. Results: A multivariate analysis based on 63 treatments identified treatment duration ≥10 days and trough levels >8 mg/L as independent risk factors of developing thrombocytopenia, with high trough values correlated with impaired renal function. Five patients treated for >28 days did not develop thrombocytopenia but maintained trough values in the target range (<8 mg/L). The Buzelé predictive score, which combines an age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity index with treatment duration, demonstrated 77% specificity and 67% sensitivity to predict the risk of ADR. Conclusion: Our work supports the necessity of establishing guidelines for dose adjustment in patients with renal insufficiency and the systematic use of TDM in patients at-risk in order to keep trough values ≤8 mg/L. The Buzelé predictive score (if ≥7) may help to detect these at-risk patients, and pop-PK models can estimate trough levels based on plasma samples collected at varying times, reducing the logistical burden of TDM in clinical practice.

External evaluation of the predictive performance of published population pharmacokinetic models of linezolid in adult patients

OBJECTIVES

Several linezolid population pharmacokinetic (popPK) models have been established to facilitate optimal therapy; however, their extrapolated predictive performance to other clinical sites is unknown. This study aimed to externally evaluate the predictive performance of published pharmacokinetic models of linezolid in adult patients.

METHODS

For the evaluation dataset, 150 samples were collected from 70 adult patients (72.9% of which were critically ill) treated with linezolid at our center. Twenty-five published popPK models were identified from PubMed and Embase. Model predictability was evaluated using prediction-based, simulation-based, and Bayesian forecasting-based approaches to assess model predictability.

RESULTS

Prediction-based diagnostics found that the prediction error within ±30% (F30) was less than 40% in all models, indicating unsatisfactory predictability. The simulation-based prediction- and variability-corrected visual predictive check and normalized prediction distribution error test indicated large discrepancies between the observations and simulations in most of the models. Bayesian forecasting with one or two prior observations significantly improved the models' predictive performance.

CONCLUSION

The published linezolid popPK models showed insufficient predictive ability. Therefore, their sole use is not recommended, and incorporating therapeutic drug monitoring of linezolid in clinical applications is necessary.

Rifampicin reduces plasma concentration of linezolid in patients with infective endocarditis

BACKGROUND

Linezolid in combination with rifampicin has been used in treatment of infective endocarditis especially for patients infected with staphylococci.

OBJECTIVES

Because rifampicin has been reported to reduce the plasma concentration of linezolid, the present study aimed to characterize the population pharmacokinetics of linezolid for the purpose of quantifying an effect of rifampicin cotreatment. In addition, the possibility of compensation by dosage adjustments was evaluated.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Pharmacokinetic measurements were performed in 62 patients treated with linezolid for left-sided infective endocarditis in the Partial Oral Endocarditis Treatment (POET) trial. Fifteen patients were cotreated with rifampicin. A total of 437 linezolid plasma concentrations were obtained. The pharmacokinetic data were adequately described by a one-compartment model with first-order absorption and first-order elimination.

RESULTS

We demonstrated a substantial increase of linezolid clearance by 150% (95% CI: 78%-251%), when combined with rifampicin. The final model was evaluated by goodness-of-fit plots showing an acceptable fit, and a visual predictive check validated the model. Model-based dosing simulations showed that rifampicin cotreatment decreased the PTA of linezolid from 94.3% to 34.9% and from 52.7% to 3.5% for MICs of 2 mg/L and 4 mg/L, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

A substantial interaction between linezolid and rifampicin was detected in patients with infective endocarditis, and the interaction was stronger than previously reported. Model-based simulations showed that increasing the linezolid dose might compensate without increasing the risk of adverse effects to the same degree.

Linezolid dose adjustment according to therapeutic drug monitoring helps reach the goal concentration in severe patients, and the oldest seniors benefit more

BACKGROUND

The elderly with severe infection increased dramatically in intensive care unit (ICU). Proper antimicrobial therapy help improve the prognosis. Linezolid, as an antimicrobial drug, is commonly utilized to treat patients infected with methicillin-resistant S. aureus and vancomycin-resistant enterococci. Clinical evidence suggests elderly patients prone to linezolid overexposure. Here, we describe the results of three years' linezolid adjustment experiences according to therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM), especially in the oldest old.

METHODS

Linezolid therapeutic drug monitoring data were collected between January 2020 and November 2022 from patients who were admitted to ICU and treated with linezolid. All the patients started with a dosage of 600 mg, twice daily. The first TMD was carried out ten minutes before the seventh administration. The dosage adjustment was determined by the doctor according to the first TMD and patients' condition, and the repeated TDM was conducted as required. The dosage adjustment in different age group was recorded. Laboratory data were compared between the old and the oldest old. The high mortality risk of the oldest old was also explored.

RESULTS

Data of 556 linezolid TDM from 330 patients were collected. Among which, 31.6%, 54.8%, and 75% of patients had supra-therapeutic linezolid trough concentrations at the first TDM assessment in different age group, leading to the dosage adjustment rate of 31.0%, 40.3%, 68.8% respectively. The linezolid dosage adjustments according to TDM help to reach therapeutic concentration. The oldest old was in high risk of linezolid overexposure with lowercreatinine clearance. The norepinephrine maximum dosage but not linezolid Cmin was associated with 28-day mortality in the oldest old.

CONCLUSIONS

Elderly patients with linezolid conventional 600 mg twice-daily dose might be at a high risk of overexposure, especially in the oldest old. The linezolid dosage adjustments according to TDM help reach the therapeutic concentration. The high mortality of the oldest old was not related with initial linezolid overexposure.

Derivation and Clinical Utility of Safety Targets for Linezolid-Related Adverse Events in Drug-Resistant Tuberculosis Treatment

Long-term usage of linezolid can result in adverse events such as peripheral neuropathy, anemia and thrombocytopenia. Therapeutic drug monitoring data from 75 drug-resistant tuberculosis patients treated with linezolid were analyzed using a time-to-event (TTE) approach for peripheral neuropathy and anemia and indirect response modelling for thrombocytopenia. Different time-varying linezolid pharmacokinetic exposure indices (AUC0-24h,ss, Cav, Cmax and Cmin) and patient characteristics were investigated as risk factors. A treatment duration shorter than 3 months was considered dropout and was modelled using a TTE approach. An exposure-response relationship between linezolid Cmin and both peripheral neuropathy and anemia was found. The exposure index which best described the development of thrombocytopenia was AUC0-24h. The final TTE dropout model indicated an association between linezolid Cmin and dropout. New safety targets for each adverse event were proposed which can be used for individualized linezolid dosing. According to the model predictions at 6 months of treatment, a Cmin of 0.11 mg/L and 1.4 mg/L should not be exceeded to keep the cumulative probability to develop anemia and peripheral neuropathy below 20%. The AUC0-24h should be below 111 h·mg/L or 270 h·mg/L to prevent thrombocytopenia and severe thrombocytopenia, respectively. A clinical utility assessment showed that the currently recommended dose of 600 mg once daily is safer compared to a 300 mg BID dosing strategy considering all four safety endpoints.

Prolonged use of linezolid in bone and joint infections: a retrospective analysis of adverse effects

OBJECTIVES

Antibiotic treatment for bone and joint infections generally lasts for 6 weeks or longer. Linezolid may be a good option for treating bone and joint infections, but there is an increased risk of potential serious adverse drug events (ADEs) when used for more than 28 days. The aim of this study was to obtain detailed information on the type and time to occurrence of the patient-reported ADEs, the dynamics of haematopoiesis over time, and the reasons for early discontinuation of linezolid when used for an intended maximum duration of 12 weeks.

METHODS

This single-centre retrospective study was conducted at the Sint Maartenskliniek in The Netherlands. Patients were included if they were planned to use linezolid for more than 28 days. The main reason for discontinuation of linezolid, the ADE according to the Naranjo score, and the time to occurrence of ADEs were analysed.

RESULTS

Among 78 patients, drug toxicity led to early discontinuation of linezolid in 11 (14%) patients before and nine (12%) after 28 days of therapy. The median treatment duration was 42 days. Gastrointestinal intolerance (42%) and malaise (32%) were the most common ADEs. In 75% of the cases the ADE occurred within 28 days of therapy. Sixty-seven patients were able to continue linezolid beyond 28 days, 87% of whom completed therapy as scheduled. Severe cytopenia, according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse events (CTCA), was observed in four patients and was reversible after discontinuation of linezolid. One patient suffered optic neuropathy related to linezolid use.

CONCLUSIONS

Linezolid could be considered an alternative option to the current standard of IV glycopeptides for the treatment of bone and joint infection for up to 12 weeks. If patients pass the first 28 days of therapy, the likelihood of successful completion of therapy is high with a low risk of serious ADEs.

Effect of Platelet Parameters on Linezolid-Related Thrombocytopenia in Hospitalized Patients

Background

Linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia incidence varies considerably. Linezolid-related thrombocytopenia in patients has received few studies which have investigated risk factors including platelet parameters except for platelet counts. The study aims to analyze the effect of platelet parameters, including mean platelet volume and platelet large cell ratio, on linezolid-related thrombocytopenia in patients.

Methods

The effect of platelet parameters on linezolid-related thrombocytopenia was identified by univariate and multivariate logistic regressions. A Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was carried out to compare the survival of patients who developed linezolid-related thrombocytopenia with patients who did not.

Results

Thrombocytopenia occurred at a rate of 41.5% (66/159) after linezolid therapy in hospitalized patients. Platelet parameters, including the difference in mean platelet volume (MPV/fL=0.08 (-1.2-0.9)vs-0.5 (-1.5-0.3), (OR, 0.459; P = 0.001), the difference in platelet large cell ratio (PLCR/fL=0.9 (-5.1-6.2)vs-3.8 (-8.6-2.4), (OR, 1.156; P = 0.001), baseline platelet counts (OR, 0.995; P = 0.006) and duration of linezolid therapy≥10d (OR, 1.346; P = 0.007), were significantly associated with linezolid-related thrombocytopenia in hospitalized patients. In addition, other risk factors which also are associated with linezolid-related thrombocytopenia include baseline red blood cells, co-medication with parecoxib and co-medication with caspofungin. Accumulated in-hospital mortality of patients with thrombocytopenia was significantly higher than that of patients without thrombocytopenia during linezolid treatment (19.7% vs 8.6%, P = 0.003).

Conclusion

The difference in mean platelet volume, the difference in large platelet ratio, baseline platelet counts and duration of linezolid therapy≥10d significantly affected the development of linezolid-related thrombocytopenia in hospitalized patients.

Nomogram prediction model called "ADPLCP" for predicting linezolid-associated thrombocytopenia in elderly individuals

Background

Linezolid-associated thrombocytopenia (LAT) leads to drug withdrawal associated with a poor prognosis. Some risk factors for LAT have been identified; however, the sample size of previous studies was small, data from elderly individuals are limited, and a simple risk score scale was not established to predict LAT at an early stage, making it difficult to identify and intervene in LAT at an early stage.

Methods

In this single-center retrospective case-control study, we enrolled elderly patients treated with linezolid in the intensive care unit from January 2015 to December 2020. All the data of enrolled patients, including demographic information and laboratory findings at baseline, were collected. We analyzed the incidence and risk factors for LAT and established a nomogram risk prediction model for LAT in the elderly population.

Results

A total of 428 elderly patients were enrolled, and the incidence of LAT was 35.5% (152/428). Age ≥80 years old (OR=1.980; 95% CI: 1.179-3.325; P=0.010), duration of linezolid ≥ 10 days (OR=1.100; 95% CI: 1.050-1.152; P <0.0001), platelet count at baseline (100-149×109/L vs. ≥200×109/L, OR=8.205, 95% CI: 4.419-15.232, P <0.0001; 150-199 ×109/L vs. ≥200×109/L, OR=3.067, 95% CI: 1.676-5.612, P <0.001), leukocyte count at baseline ≥16×109/L (OR=2.580; 95% CI: 1.523-4.373; P <0.0001), creatinine clearance <50 mL/min (OR=2.323; 95% CI: 1.388-3.890; P=0.001), and total protein <60 g/L (OR=1.741; 95% CI: 1.039-2.919; P=0.035) were associated with LAT. The nomogram prediction model called "ADPLCP" (age, duration, platelet, leukocyte, creatinine clearance, protein) was established based on logistic regression. The area under the curve (AUC) of ADPLCP was 0.802 (95% CI: 0.748-0.856; P <0.0001), with 78.9% sensitivity and 69.2% specificity (cut-off was 108). Risk stratification for LAT was performed based on "ADPLCP." Total points of <100 were defined as low risk, and the possibility of LAT was <32.0%. Total points of 100-150 were defined as medium risk, and the possibility of LAT was 32.0-67.5%. A total point >150 was defined as high risk, and the probability of LAT was >67.5%.

Conclusions

We created the ADPLCP risk score scale to predict the occurrence of LAT in elderly individuals. ADPLCP is simple and feasible and is helpful for the early determination of LAT to guide drug withdrawal or early intervention.

Bayesian prediction-based individualized dosing of anti-methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus treatment: Recent advancements and prospects in therapeutic drug monitoring

As one of the efficient techniques for TDM, the population pharmacokinetic (popPK) model approach for dose individualization has been developed due to the rapidly growing innovative progress in computer technology and has recently been considered as a part of model-informed precision dosing (MIPD). Initial dose individualization and measurement followed by maximum a posteriori (MAP)-Bayesian prediction using a popPK model are the most classical and widely used approach among a class of MIPD strategies. MAP-Bayesian prediction offers the possibility of dose optimization based on measurement even before reaching a pharmacokinetically steady state, such as in an emergency, especially for infectious diseases requiring urgent antimicrobial treatment. As the pharmacokinetic processes in critically ill patients are affected and highly variable due to pathophysiological disturbances, the advantages offered by the popPK model approach make it highly recommended and required for effective and appropriate antimicrobial treatment. In this review, we focus on novel insights and beneficial aspects of the popPK model approach, especially in the treatment of infectious diseases with anti-methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus agents represented by vancomycin, and discuss the recent advancements and prospects in TDM practice.

Infant Exposure to Antituberculosis Drugs via Breast Milk and Assessment of Potential Adverse Effects in Breastfed Infants: Critical Review of Data

Infants of mothers treated for tuberculosis might be exposed to drugs via breast milk. The existing information on the exposure of breastfed infants lacks a critical review of the published data. We aimed to evaluate the quality of the existing data on antituberculosis (anti-TB) drug concentrations in the plasma and milk as a methodologically sound basis for the potential risk of breastfeeding under therapy. We performed a systematic search in PubMed for bedaquiline, clofazimine, cycloserine/terizidone, levofloxacin, linezolid, pretomanid/pa824, pyrazinamide, streptomycin, ethambutol, rifampicin and isoniazid, supplemented with update references found in LactMed^®. We calculated the external infant exposure (EID) for each drug and compared it with the recommended WHO dose for infants (relative external infant dose) and assessed their potential to elicit adverse effects in the breastfed infant. Breast milk concentration data were mainly not satisfactory to properly estimate the EID. Most of the studies suffer from limitations in the sample collection, quantity, timing and study design. Infant plasma concentrations are extremely scarce and very little data exist documenting the clinical outcome in exposed infants. Concerns for potential adverse effects in breastfed infants could be ruled out for bedaquiline, cycloserine/terizidone, linezolid and pyrazinamide. Adequate studies should be performed covering the scenario in treated mothers, breast milk and infants.

Risk factors for mortality after linezolid treatment of vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus bloodstream infection

OBJECTIVES

We analyzed the risk factors affecting linezolid treatment outcome in vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE) bloodstream infection (BSI).

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter observational study of patients who received linezolid 600 mg every 12 hours for VRE BSI. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. The estimated area under the concentration-time curve and trough concentration were calculated. Multivariable logistic regression was used for the outcome analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 170 patients were included: 114 (67.1%) survived and 56 (32.9%) did not. A total of 26 (18.2%) isolates showed a linezolid minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of ≤1 mg/l, 113 (79.0%) of 2 mg/l, and 4 (2.8%) of 4 mg/l. The univariable analysis showed that the linezolid MIC and concentration-time curve/MIC were not associated with mortality (P = 0.95 and P = 0.42, respectively). After adjusting for underlying comorbidity and disease severity, the linezolid dose per body weight (LDBW), body height, and interaction between them were independent risks for mortality. Marginal analysis showed that increasing the LDBW was protective in patients with a body height <160 cm. A trough concentration of >12.2 mg/l was a risk factor for thrombocytopenia.

CONCLUSION

The LDBW and body height were interactively associated with clinical outcomes of linezolid treatment for VRE BSI.

Use of Japanese big data from electronic medical records to investigate risk factors and identify their high-risk combinations for linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia

PURPOSE

Thrombocytopenia is a major event associated with linezolid (LZD) therapy. Factors affecting LZD-induced thrombocytopenia (LIT) have been reported in previous studies. However, several issues pertaining to LIT have not yet been clarified. In the present study, we used Japanese big data to investigate associated factors and their high-risk combinations that influence LIT.

METHODS

Patients administered LZD between May 2006 and October 2020 were included in this study. LIT was defined as either a 30% or more reduction from the baseline platelets or platelet values of < 100,000/µL. We evaluated factors affecting LIT and combinations of factors that alter LIT risk according to a decision tree (DT) analysis, a typical machine learning method.

RESULTS

We successfully enrolled 1399 patients and LIT occurred in 44.7% of the patients (n = 626). We classified the laboratory data on renal function, LZD duration, age, and body weight (BW) into smaller categories. The results of multivariate analysis showed that prolonged LZD therapy, BW < 45 kg, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 30 mL/min/1.73 m², and dialysis were risk factors for LIT. The DT analysis revealed that the highest risk was a combination of LZD duration ≥ 14 days and eGFR < 30 mL/min/1.73 m².

CONCLUSIONS

The present study extracted four risk factors and identified high-risk combinations for LIT. Patients with these risk factors should be closely monitored.

Hematological toxicities associated with linezolid therapy in adults: key findings and clinical considerations

INTRODUCTION

Linezolid can cause serious adverse effects including thrombocytopenia and anemia. Here, we focus specifically on linezolid-related hematological toxicity in adult patients requiring prolonged drug treatment.

AREAS COVERED

We review the available evidence on the likelihood of hematological toxicity in adult patients treated with linezolid, with a focus on the main risk factors and strategies to prevent this adverse event. A MEDLINE PubMed search for articles published from January 2000 to May 2022 was completed matching the terms linezolid, hematology, hematological toxicity, anemia, and thrombocytopenia. Moreover, additional studies were identified from the reference lists of retrieved articles.

EXPERT OPINION

Thrombocytopenia is the major concern with administration of linezolid for Gram-positive infections, whereas anemia is more common in patients with tuberculosis. The important clinical risk factors for the development of linezolid-related thrombocytopenia are aging, renal dysfunction, low baseline platelet count, duration of treatment, and linezolid plasma trough concentrations >8 mg/L. Patients receiving linezolid for extended periods of time or patient populations with increased risk of altered drug pharmacokinetics would benefit from therapeutic drug monitoring or from the availability of toxico-dynamic predictive models to optimize linezolid dosing.

A Retrospective Study to Compare the Incidence of Hyponatremia after Administration between Linezolid and Tedizolid

Linezolid (LZD) and Tedizolid (TZD) are oxazolidinone antibiotic for meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). Severe hyponatremia after LZD administration have been reported. Severe hyponatremia cause seizures, unconsciousness, and even death. Therefore, we conducted a study to assess the change of serum sodium level after LZD and TZD therapy. We enrolled 67 patients treated with LZD and 28 treated with TZD. We monitored the serum sodium level from the administration to 14 days after administration of oxazolidinone drug. Hyponatremia was defined a sodiuln level ≤134 mmol/L after the initiation of oxazolidinone drug. The frequency of hyponatremia in the LZD group was significantly higher than that in the TZD group (39.7% vs. 11.1%, p < 0.05). The rate of patients administered by injection was significantly higher than in the LZD group than in the TZD group (52.9% vs. 14.8%, p < 0.01). Multiple logistic regression analyses identified the albumin level before the oxazolidinone drug therapy as the independent variables associated with the development of hyponatremia. We revealed that TZD is safer than LZD in terms of hyponatremia. Therefore, cases that LZD is administered by injection should be used more carefully with hyponatremia in patients with low albumin level.

A standard dose of linezolid puts patients with hepatic impairment at risk of overexposure

PURPOSE

The purpose of this retrospective observational study conducted in patients with hepatic impairment was to assess the variability of linezolid trough concentrations, to determine the risk factors for linezolid overexposure, and to investigate the effect of linezolid overexposure on linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia.

METHODS

All enrolled patients received a standard dose (600 mg every 12 h) of linezolid and underwent therapeutic drug monitoring. The Child-Pugh-Turcotte score was used to divide patients into three groups: mild, moderate, and severe hepatic impairment. The risk factors for linezolid overexposure (C_min > 8 mg/L) and linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia were examined using logistic regression. And the Kaplan-Meier curve was used to describe the association between linezolid overexposure and linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia.

RESULTS

Seventy-seven patients were included, 37 (48.1%) of whom experienced linezolid overexposure. Patients with severe hepatic impairment had a substantially higher median C_min of linezolid than those with mild (20.7 mg/L vs 5.51 mg/L, P < 0.001) or moderate (20.7 mg/L vs 6.70 mg/L, P = 0.001) hepatic impairment. Severe hepatic impairment was significantly associated with linezolid overexposure (OR 7.037, 95%CI 1.426-34.727, P = 0.017). After linezolid treatment, linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia occurred in 32 (41.6%) patients, and C_min > 8 mg/L was a significant predictor of linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia (OR 3.024, 95%CI 1.083-8.541, P = 0.035).

CONCLUSION

Patients with hepatic impairment who received standard doses of linezolid are at greater risk of linezolid overexposure, which may lead to a higher incidence of linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia.

Safety Profile of Linezolid in Older Adults With Renal Impairment: A Population-Based Retrospective Cohort Study

Background

The objective of this study was to characterize the safety profile of linezolid in patients with renal impairment compared with patients without renal impairment.

Methods

A population-based retrospective cohort study using linked administrative databases included patients aged 66 years or older in Ontario, Canadawho were prescribed linezolid from 2014 to 2021. Renal impairment was defined using baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate <30 mL/min/1.73 m² or receipt of dialysis. The primary outcomes were change in platelet count and severe thrombocytopenia (platelet count <50 × 10⁹/L) within 90 days. Secondary outcomes included bleeding, neutropenia, peripheral neuropathy, optic neuropathy, acidosis, serotonin syndrome, and mortality. Inverse probability of treatment weighting on propensity score was used to balance comparison groups on baseline health.

Results

Of 625 patients, 98 (15.7%) patients had renal impairment. The mean (SD) platelet change was -88.3 (108.4) 10⁹/L in the renal impairment group and -76.5 (109.8) 10⁹/L in the no renal impairment group, with an adjusted mean difference of -29.4 (95% CI, -53.4 to -5.3; P = .0165). Severe thrombocytopenia occurred in 9.2% for the renal impairment group and 5.9% for the no renal impairment group, with an adjusted risk difference of 2.7% (95% CI, -3.1% to 8.6%; P = .3655). There were no significant differences in secondary outcomes between the 2 groups.

Conclusions

Patients with renal impairment on linezolid therapy had a larger decrease in platelet count, but their risks for severe thrombocytopenia and bleeding were not significantly different than patients without renal impairment. Linezolid is likely safe in renal impairment without dose adjustment or drug level monitoring.

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic simulation for the quantitative risk assessment of linezolid-associated thrombocytopenia

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Linezolid (LZD) may cause thrombocytopenia, which can result in discontinuation of treatment. In this study, the blood LZD trough concentration was estimated based on population pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters derived from two previously published models in the Japanese population to determine the rate of achieving the target trough value when the risk of thrombocytopenia is low and to clarify its relationship with the onset of thrombocytopenia.

METHODS

This study included adult patients hospitalized at Shimane University Hospital, who received LZD treatment for at least 4 days from January 2010 to December 2017. Patients whose platelet count fell below 70% before LZD administration were categorized as the thrombocytopenic group. Patient PK parameters were calculated based on the population PK models described by Matsumoto et al. and Sasaki et al., and these parameters were designated A and B, respectively. Based on these parameters, the rate of achieving an LZD trough concentration of less than 8 μg/ml, which is the safety target achievement rate, was calculated using a random simulation for each patient. We further analysed the association between the incidence of thrombocytopenia and patient factors, including safety target achievement rate, through univariate, multivariate, and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Patients (n = 77) aged 72 ± 11 years and weighing 56.7 ± 10.9 kg, with a creatinine clearance (CL_cr ) of 60.5 ± 47.2 ml/min and a cirrhosis prevalence of 9.1%, were analysed. All patients received LZD at a dose of 600 mg twice daily for a total of 10.9 ± 8.9 days. Univariate analyses revealed significant differences (p < 0.05) in the duration of LZD therapy, serum creatinine, creatinine clearance, LZD clearance, and the safety target achievement rate for parameters A and B between the thrombocytopenic and non-thrombocytopenic groups. A multivariate analysis of these factors stratified with the cutoff values obtained by ROC analysis revealed that the duration of LZD therapy and the safety target achievement rates for parameters A and B were significant factors (odds ratios for duration of LZD therapy: 7.436 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.918-28.831] and 4.712 [95% CI: 1.567-14.163]; odds ratio for safety target achievement rate: 0.060 [95% CI: 0.016-0.232] and 0.167 [95% CI: 0.056-0.498] for parameters A and B, respectively). When the safety target achievement rates for patients treated with LZD were compared between the thrombocytopenic and non-thrombocytopenic groups, the safety target achievement rate was higher in the non-thrombocytopenic group in both the patients treated with LZD for less than 10 days and those for 10 days or more. Therefore, the safety target achievement rate estimated by the PK/PD simulation may represent to be an important index for risk assessment of LZD-induced thrombocytopenia.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

The risk of LZD-induced thrombocytopenia, which increased with the duration of LZD therapy, may be predicted using the safety target achievement rate obtained by the blood concentration simulation.

Evaluating linezolid dose regimens against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus based on renal function in populations with different body weight

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Linezolid is an alternative first-line agent for MRSA pneumonia. This study assessed whether dose adjustments of linezolid against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections were needed based on renal function in populations with different body weight.

METHODS

Monte Carlo simulations were conducted to evaluate renal function in relation to the probability of target attainment (PTA) in three population groups with different body weight. Area under the concentration time curve (AUC)/ minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) ratio and percentage of time above the MIC (%T > MIC) were regarded as pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic targets. The PTA and cumulative fractions of response (CFR) were calculated to assess the efficacy. Regarding safety, trough plasma concentration (C_min ) > 8 mg/L was used as target for toxicity.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Using AUC/MIC >100 as the target pharmacodynamic (PD) index, the CFR of linezolid at the standard dose (600 mg every 12 h [q12h]) were 57.01%, 93.22%, and 99.93% in patients with normal renal function, patients with renal dysfunction and low body weight patients with renal dysfunction, respectively. Using 100%T > MIC as the target PD index, all the CFR of three population groups were more than 90% at the standard dose. The percentages of C_min  > 8 mg/L at the standard dose of linezolid were 24.16%, 53.24%, and 90.10% in three population groups on day 7.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

The risk of thrombocytopenia of linezolid was extremely higher in low body weight patients with renal impairment when receiving standard linezolid dose compared with patients with normal renal function. 450 mg q12h and 300 mg q12h might be effective and safe against MRSA infection in patients with renal dysfunction and low body weight patients with renal dysfunction, respectively.

Lung penetration and pneumococcal target binding of antibiotics in lower respiratory tract infection

OBJECTIVES

To achieve the therapeutic effects, antibiotics must penetrate rapidly into infection sites and bind to targets. This study reviewed updated knowledge on the ability of antibiotics to penetrate into the lung, their physicochemical properties influencing the pulmonary penetration and their ability to bind to targets on pneumococci.

METHODS

A search strategy was developed using PubMED, Web of Science, and ChEMBL. Data on serum protein binding, drug concentration, target binding ability, drug transporters, lung penetration, physicochemical properties of antibiotics in low respiratory tract infection (LRTI) were collected.

RESULTS

It was seen that infection site-to-serum concentration ratios of most antibiotics are >1 at different time points except for ceftriaxone, clindamycin and vancomycin. Most agents have proper physicochemical properties that facilitate antibiotic penetration. In antimicrobial-resistant Streptococcus pneumoniae, the binding affinity of antibiotics to targets mostly decreases compared to that in susceptible strains. The data on binding affinity of linezolid, clindamycin and vancomycin were insufficient. The higher drug concentration at the infection sites compared to that in the blood can be associated with inflammation conditions. Little evidence showed the effect of drug transporters on the clinical efficacy of antibiotics against LRTI.

CONCLUSIONS

Data on antibiotic penetration into the lung in LRTI patients and binding affinity of antibiotics for pneumococcal targets are still limited. Further studies are required to clarify the associations of the lung penetration and target binding ability of antibitotics with therapeutic efficacy to help propose the right antibiotics for LRTI.

Safety of linezolid in patients with decreased renal function and trough monitoring: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Linezolid causes hematological toxicity, mostly thrombocytopenia, which leads to treatment discontinuation and failure. Recent studies revealed that during linezolid therapy, the incidence of treatment-related hematological toxicity is significantly higher in patients with decreased renal function (DRF) than in those with normal renal function. Linezolid monitoring is necessary due to the high frequency of hematological toxicity in patients with DRF and the relationship between blood concentration and safety. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the safety correlation between DRF and trough monitoring.

METHODS

Articles published before June 24, 2022, on MEDLINE, Web of Sciences, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov were systematically analyzed. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using the Mantel-Haenszel method and the variable effects model.

RESULTS

The incidence of hematological toxicity was significantly higher in patients with DRF than in those without DRF (OR = 2.37; p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis, performed according to hematotoxicity classification, including thrombocytopenia, anemia, and pancytopenia, revealed a significantly higher incidence of thrombocytopenia (OR = 2.45; p < 0.001) and anemia (OR = 2.31; p = 0.006) in patients with DRF than in those without; pancytopenia (OR = 1.41; p = 0.80) incidences were not significantly higher. Based on a systematic review, linezolid trough concentrations > 6-7 μg/mL may be associated with an increased incidence of thrombocytopenia. However, no confidential threshold values for the development of thrombocytopenia were found in the area under the concentration curve values for children or adults.

CONCLUSION

We observed a high frequency of hematological toxicity during linezolid therapy in patients with DRF. To ensure safety, linezolid trough concentrations should be ≤6-7 μg/mL.

Successful treatment of disseminated nocardiosis diagnosed by metagenomic next-generation sequencing: A case report and review of literature

BACKGROUND

Nocardia paucivorans is an infrequently found bacterium with the potential to cause severe infection, with a predilection for the central nervous system, both in immunocompromised and immunocompetent individuals. Rapid etiological diagnosis of nocardiosis can facilitate timely and rational antimicrobial treatment. Metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) can improve the rate and reduce the turnaround time for the detection of Nocardia.

CASE SUMMARY

A 49-year-old man was admitted to hospital with cough and hemoptysis. Imaging revealed pulmonary consolidation as well as multiple brain lesions. Nocardia asiatica and Nocardia beijingensis were rapidly detected by mNGS of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) while bacterial culture of BALF and pathological biopsy of lung tissue were negative. In early stages, he was treated with trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMZ) and linezolid by individual dose adjustment based on serum concentrations and the adverse effects of thrombocytopenia and leukopenia. The treatment was then replaced by TMP-SMZ and ceftriaxone or minocycline. He was treated with 8 mo of parenteral and/or oral antibiotics, and obvious clinical improvement was achieved with resolution of pulmonary and brain lesions on repeat imaging.

CONCLUSION

mNGS provided fast and precise pathogen detection of Nocardia. In disseminated nocardiosis, linezolid is an important alternative that can give a better outcome with the monitoring of linezolid serum concentrations and platelet count.

Relationship Between Linezolid Exposure and the Typical Clinical Laboratory Safety and Bacterial Clearance in Chinese Pediatric Patients

Objectives: There have been limited studies concerning the safety and efficacy of linezolid (LZD) in children. This study aimed to evaluate the association between LZD exposure and clinical safety and efficacy in Chinese pediatric patients.

Methods: This retrospective cross-sectional study included patients ≤18 years of age who received ≥3 days of LZD treatment between 31 January 2015, and 31 December 2020. Demographic characteristics, medication information, laboratory test information, and bacterial culture results were collected from the Hospital Information System (HIS). Exposure was defined as AUC₂₄ and calculated by the non-linear mixed-effects modeling program (NONMEM), version 7.2, based on two validated population pharmacokinetic models. Binary logistic regression analyses were performed to analyze the associations between AUC₂₄ and laboratory adverse events, and receiver operating characteristic curves were used to calculate the cut-off values. Efficacy was evaluated by bacterial clearance.

Results: A total of 413 paediatric patients were included, with an LZD median (interquartile range) dose, duration, clearance and AUC₂₄ of 30.0 (28.1-31.6) mg/kg/day, 8 (4‒15) days,1.31 (1.29-1.32) L/h and 81.1 (60.6-108.7) mg/L·h, respectively. Adverse events associated with TBil, AST, ALT, PLT, hemoglobin, WBC, and neutrophil count increased during and after LZD treatment when compared with before medication (p < 0.05), and the most common adverse events were thrombocytopaenia (71/399, 17.8%) and low hemoglobin (61/401, 15.2%) during the LZD treatment. Patients with AUC₂₄ higher than 120.69 mg/L h might be associated with low hemoglobin 1–7 days after the end of the LZD treatment, and those with an AUC₂₄ higher than 92.88 mg/L∙h might be associated with thrombocytopaenia 8–15 days after the end of the LZD treatment. A total of 136 patients underwent bacterial culture both before and after LZD treatment, and the infection was cleared in 92.6% (126/136) of the patients, of whom 69.8% (88/126) had AUC₂₄/MIC values greater than 80.

Conclusion: Hematological indicators should be carefully monitored during LZD treatment, especially thrombocytopaenia and low hemoglobin, and a continuous period of monitoring after LZD withdrawal is also necessary. Since the AUC₂₄ cut-off values for laboratory adverse events were relatively low, a trade-off is necessary between the level of drug exposure required for treatment and safety, and the exposure target (AUC₂₄/MIC) in pediatric patients should be further studied, especially for patients with complications and concomitant medications.

Target Therapeutic Ranges of Anti-MRSA Drugs, Linezolid, Tedizolid and Daptomycin, and the Necessity of TDM

The target therapeutic ranges of vancomycin, teicoplanin, and arbekacin have been determined, and therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is performed in clinical practice. However, TDM is not obligatory for daptomycin, linezolid, or tedizolid. In this study, we examined whether TDM will be necessary for these 3 drugs in the future. There was no significant difference in therapeutic effects on acute bacterial skin and skin structure infection between linezolid and tedizolid by meta-analysis. Concerning the therapeutic effects on pneumonia, the rate of effectiveness after treatment with tedizolid was significantly lower than with linezolid. With respect to safety, the incidences of gastrointestinal adverse events and blood/lymphatic system disorders related to tedizolid were significantly lower than those related to linezolid. Linezolid exhibits potent therapeutic effects on pneumonia, but the appearance of adverse reactions is indicated as a problem. There was a dose-dependent decrease in the platelet count, and the target trough concentration (C_trough) was estimated to be 4-6 or 2-7 µg/mL in accordance with the patient's condition. The efficacy of linezolid may be obtained while minimizing the appearance of adverse reactions by performing TDM. The target therapeutic range of tedizolid cannot be achieved in immunocompromised or severe patients. Therefore, we concluded that TDM was unnecessary, considering step-down therapy with oral drugs, use in non-severe patients, and high-level safety. Concerning daptomycin, high-dose administration is necessary to achieve an area under the curve (AUC) of ≥666 as an index of efficacy. To secure its safety, C_trough (<20 µg/mL) monitoring is important. Therefore, TDM is necessary.

A Review of Population Pharmacokinetic Analyses of Linezolid

In recent years, many studies on population pharmacokinetics of linezolid have been conducted. This comprehensive review aimed to summarize population pharmacokinetic models of linezolid, by focusing on dosage optimization to maximize the probability of attaining a certain pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic parameter in special populations. We searched the PubMed and EMBASE databases for population pharmacokinetic analyses of linezolid using a parametric non-linear mixed-effect approach, including both observational and prospective trials. Of the 32 studies, 26 were performed in adults, four in children, and one in both adults and children. High between-subject variability was determined in the majority of the models, which was in line with the variability of linezolid concentrations previously detected in observational studies. Some studies found that patients with renal impairment, hepatic failure, advanced age, or low body weight had higher exposure and adverse reactions rates. In contrast, lower concentrations and therapeutic failure were associated with obese patients, young patients, and patients who had undergone renal replacement techniques. In critically ill patients, the inter-individual and intra-individual variability was even greater, suggesting that this population is at an even higher risk of underexposure and overexposure. Therapeutic drug monitoring may be warranted in a large proportion of patients given that the Monte Carlo simulations demonstrated that the one-size-fits-all labeled dosing of 600 mg every 12 h could lead to toxicity or therapeutic failure for high values of the minimum inhibitory concentration of the target pathogen. Further research on covariates, including renal function, hepatic function, and drug–drug interactions related to P-glycoprotein could help to explain variability and improve linezolid dosing regimens.

Parametric Population Pharmacokinetics of Linezolid: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Linezolid is often used for infections caused by drug-resistant Gram-positive bacteria. Recent studies suggest that large between-subject variability (BSV) and within-subject variability could alter drug pharmacokinetics (PK) during linezolid therapy due to pathophysiological changes.

OBJECTIVE

This review synthesized information on linezolid population PK studies and summarized the significant covariates that influence linezolid PK.

METHODS

A literature search was performed using PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase from their inception to 30 September 2021. Published studies were included if they contained data analyzing linezolid PK parameters in humans using a population approach with a nonlinear mixed-effects model.

RESULTS

Twenty-five studies conducted in adults and five in pediatrics were included. One- and two-compartment models were the commonly used structural models for linezolid. Body size (weight, lean body weight, and body surface area), creatinine clearance (CLcr), and age significantly influenced linezolid PK. The median clearance (CL) values (ranges) in infants [0.128 L/h/kg (0.121-0.135)] and children [0.107 L/h/kg (0.088-0.151)] were higher than in adults [0.098 L/h/kg (0.044-0.237)]. For patients with severe renal impairment (CLcr ≤ 30 mL/min), the CL was 37.2% (15.2-55.3%) lower than in patients with normal renal function.

CONCLUSION

The optimal linezolid dosage should be adjusted based on the patient's body size, renal function, and age. More studies are needed to explore the exact mechanism of linezolid elimination and evaluate the PK characteristics in pediatric patients.

Dosage Strategy of Linezolid According to the Trough Concentration Target and Renal Function in Chinese Critically Ill Patients

Background: Linezolid is associated with myelosuppression, which may cause failure in optimally treating bacterial infections. The study aimed to define the pharmacokinetic/toxicodynamic (PK/TD) threshold for critically ill patients and to identify a dosing strategy for critically ill patients with renal insufficiency.

Methods: The population pharmacokinetic (PK) model was developed using the NONMEM program. Logistic regression modeling was conducted to determine the toxicodynamic (TD) threshold of linezolid-induced myelosuppression. The dosing regimen was optimized based on the Monte Carlo simulation of the final model.

Results: PK analysis included 127 linezolid concentrations from 83 critically ill patients at a range of 0.25–21.61 mg/L. Creatinine clearance (CrCL) was identified as the only covariate of linezolid clearance that significantly explained interindividual variability. Thirty-four (40.97%) of the 83 patients developed linezolid-associated myelosuppression. Logistic regression analysis showed that the trough concentration (Cmin) was a significant predictor of myelosuppression in critically patients, and the threshold for Cmin in predicting myelosuppression with 50% probability was 7.8 mg/L. The Kaplan–Meier plot revealed that the overall median time from the initiation of therapy to the development of myelosuppression was 12 days. Monte Carlo simulation indicated an empirical dose reduction to 600 mg every 24 h was optimal to balance the safety and efficacy in critically ill patients with CrCL of 30–60 ml/min, 450 mg every 24 h was the alternative for patients with CrCL &lt;30 ml/min, and 600 mg every 12 h was recommended for patients with CrCL ≥60 ml/min.

Conclusion: Renal function plays a significant role in linezolid PKs for critically ill patients. A dose of 600 mg every 24 h was recommended for patients with CrCL &lt;60 ml/min to minimize linezolid-induced myelosuppression.

Initial trough concentration may be beneficial in preventing linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia

We assessed whether prospective therapeutic drug monitoring to optimise the therapeutic range could prevent linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia. This prospective interventional study was conducted from September 2017 to October 2020 among 37 adult patients receiving linezolid. Patients were administered one of the following two initial dosages: 600 mg twice or once daily for patients with a creatinine clearance rate of ≥50 or <50 mL/min, respectively. Linezolid dosage adjustment was performed on days 3-5 based on the trough concentration. The serum linezolid levels in 22 and 15 patients were within and above the therapeutic range (2-7 µg/mL), respectively. The incidence of thrombocytopenia was significantly lower among patients whose linezolid levels were within the therapeutic range (4.5%;1/22) than in those whose levels were above the therapeutic range (80%; 12/15). It is important to maintain the linezolid level within the therapeutic range at the first therapeutic drug monitoring to prevent thrombocytopenia.