Population pharmacokinetics and toxicodynamics of continuously infused linezolid in critically-ill patients

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.

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.

Linezolid Pharmacokinetics in Critically Ill Patients: Continuous Versus Intermittent Infusion

BACKGROUND

Linezolid has been found to have considerable interindividual variability, especially in critically ill patients, which can lead to suboptimal plasma concentration. To overcome this shortcoming, several solutions have been proposed. These include using loading dose, higher maintenance doses, and dose stratification according to the patient's particularities, therapeutic drug monitoring, and drug administration via continuous infusion (CI) instead of intermittent infusion (II). In the present study, we aim to compare the pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters of linezolid after administration as II versus CI to critically ill patients.

METHODS

In a prospective study conducted in an intensive care unit, we compared the same two daily doses of linezolid administered via II versus CI. The serum concentration was measured, and pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated. The pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) indices for efficacy chosen were area under the concentration-time curve at steady state divided by the minimum inhibitory concentration over 80 (AUC24-48/MIC > 80).

RESULTS

Greater serum concentration variability was observed in the II group than in the CI group. The %T > MIC > 80% was achieved for MICs of 1 and 2 µg/mL 100% of the time, whereas for the II group, this was 93% and 73%, respectively. AUC24-48/MIC > 80 was reached in 100% of cases in the CI group compared with 87% in the II group for a MIC of 1 µg/mL.

CONCLUSIONS

The two infusion methods may be used comparably, but utilizing CI as an alternative to II may have potential benefits, including avoiding periods of suboptimal concentrations, which may enhance safety profiles and clinical outcomes. Considering the relatively few studies performed on linezolid to date, which are increasing in number, the results of the present study may be of interest.

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Linezolid in Drug-Resistant Tuberculosis Patients: Clinical Factors and Hematological Toxicities

Purpose

Previous studies have indicated that the development of severe adverse events is associated with linezolid peak concentration (Cmax), but the factors affecting linezolid Cmax and evidences on therapeutic drug monitoring to anticipate toxicity in drug-resistant tuberculosis (DR-TB) patients have not been clarified clearly. This study aimed to explore the factors influencing linezolid Cmax and investigate the association between linezolid concentration and hematological toxicity.

Patients and Methods

This study included patients with drug-resistant tuberculosis treated with linezolid from January 2022 to September 2023. We analyzed the factors affecting linezolid Cmax using chi-squared and binary logistic regression. The diagnostic utility of linezolid Cmax in predicting hematological toxicity was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis.

Results

A total of 76 patients were enrolled in the study. 63.20% met the standard rates for linezolid Cmax. Age (P=0.036), weight (P=0.0016), and creatinine clearance (P=0.0223) significantly correlated with the Cmax. Hematological toxicity was observed in 46.05% (35/76) of patients, characterized by thrombocytopenia (31.58%, 24/76), anemia (6.58%, 5/76), and leukopenia (21.05%, 16/76). ROC curve analysis confirmed the predictive value of linezolid Cmax for thrombocytopenia with an area under curve of 0.728.

Conclusion

Suboptimal linezolid Cmax was prevalent among patients with DR-TB, with age, weight, and renal function emerging as influential factors. Elevated linezolid Cmax increases the risk of thrombocytopenia. Meticulous monitoring of linezolid Cmax is imperative during anti-DR-TB therapy to tailor treatment and mitigate hematological toxicity.

Drug monitoring during ciprofloxacin prophylaxis of allogeneic stem cell transplant patients: associations with bacterial infections through a monocentric observational prospective study

BACKGROUND

Bacterial infection ranks amongst the most common causes of morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloHSCT). Although ciprofloxacin (CIP) prophylaxis is recommended, information on serum levels and clinical course is lacking.

AIM

To investigate relationships between CIP level and failure of prophylaxis, particularly in terms of whether different pharmacokinetic (PK) indices [area under the concentration-time curve (AUC0-24h) vs single time samples] correlate differently with the outcome.

METHODS

This prospective observational monocentric study was conducted at a 1500-bed teaching hospital (March 2018-March 2019), including 63 adult patients with alloHSCT receiving CIP prophylaxis. Blood samples were drawn at three sampling times (1, 6 and 12 h post-administration), twice per week, and measured via high performance liquid chromatography. The onset of febrile episodes (FEBs) indicated suspected failure of CIP prophylaxis. Positive blood cultures [bloodstream infection (BSI)] indicated confirmed failure of prophylaxis.

FINDINGS

Seven of 63 patients died without significant differences in their average CIP levels compared with survivors, with patients experiencing FEBs (54/63) displaying a 13% [95% confidence interval (CI) 4-22%] lower probability of survival. In total, 225 sets of three values (triplets) were obtained from 58 primary CIP episodes. Triplets preceding BSI with Gram-negative bacteria (GNB-BSI) showed lower AUC0-24h on average, but similar single time sample indices. An AUC0-24h of ≤21.61 mgh/L resulted in four-fold higher odds of GNB-BSI (adjusted odds ratio 3.96, 95% CI 1.21-13.00). These results were independent of the administration route, patient demographics or sampling protocol deviations, indicating reduced CIP exposure upon GNB-BSI events.

CONCLUSION

Monitoring CIP levels, using multiple sampling times, may be useful to reduce alloHSCT-associated bacterial infections. Further analysis is needed to investigate causality.

Contemporary pharmacologic treatments of MRSA for hospitalized adults: rationale for vancomycin versus non-vancomycin therapies as first line agents

INTRODUCTION

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) remains an important pathogen in the hospital setting and causes significant morbidity and mortality each year. Since the initial discovery over 60 years ago, vancomycin has remained a first-line treatment for many different types of MRSA infections. However, significant concerns related to target attainment and nephrotoxicity have spurred efforts to develop more effective agents in the last two decades.

AREAS COVERED

Newer anti-MRSA antibiotics that have been approved since 2000 include linezolid, daptomycin, and ceftaroline. As clinical evidence has accumulated, these newer agents have become more frequently used, and some are now recommended as co-first-line options (along with vancomycin) in clinical practice guidelines. For this review, a scoping review of the literature was conducted to support our findings and recommendations.

EXPERT OPINION

Vancomycin remains an important standard of care for MRSA infections but is limited with respect to nephrotoxicity and rapid target attainment. Newer agents such as linezolid, daptomycin, and ceftaroline have specific indications for treating different types of MRSA infections; however, newer agents also have unique attributes which require consideration during therapy.

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.

Serum linezolid concentrations are reduced in critically ill patients with pulmonary infections: A prospective observational study

RATIONALE

The concentration-time profile of linezolid varies considerably in critically ill patients. Question of interest is, if the site of infection influences linezolid serum concentrations.

METHODS

68 critically ill patients, treated with linezolid, were included. The concentration-time-profile for linezolid was determined using maximum a-posteriori predictions. A trough concentration (C_min) between 2 and 10 mg/L was defined as the target. A generalized linear model (GLM) was established to evaluate potential covariates.

RESULTS

The indications for linezolid therapy were in descending order: peritonitis (38.2%), pneumonia (25.0%), infectious acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) (19.1%), and other non-pulmonary infection (17.7%). 27.2 and 7.9% of C_min were subtherapeutic and toxic, respectively. In the GLM, ARDS (mean: -2.1 mg/L, CI: -3.0 to -1.2 mg/L) and pneumonia (mean: -2.2 mg/L, CI: -2.8 to -1.6 mg/L) were significant (p < 0.001) determinants of C_min. Patients with ARDS (mean: 2.3 mg/L, 51.2% subtherapeutic, 0.0% toxic) and pneumonia (mean: 3.5 mg/L, 41.5% subtherapeutic, 7.7% toxic) had significantly (p < 0.001) lower C_min than those with peritonitis (mean: 5.5 mg/L, 14.4% subtherapeutic, 9.3% toxic) and other non-pulmonary infection (mean: 5.2 mg/L, 3.3% subtherapeutic, 16.5% toxic).

CONCLUSION

Linezolid serum concentrations are reduced in patients with pulmonary infections. Future studies should investigate if other linezolid thresholds are needed in those patients due to linezolid pooling in patients´ lung.

Antimicrobial stewardship

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The optimal use of antimicrobials is necessary to slow resistance development and improve patient outcomes. Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) is a bundle of interventions aimed at promoting the responsible use of antiinfectives. The ICU is an important field of activity for AMS because of high rates of antimicrobial use, high prevalence of resistant pathogens and complex pharmacology. This review discusses aims and interventions of AMS with special emphasis on the ICU.

RECENT FINDINGS

AMS-interventions can improve the quality and quantity of antimicrobial prescribing in the ICU without compromising patient outcomes. The de-escalation of empiric therapy according to microbiology results and the limitation of treatment duration are important steps to reduce resistance pressure. Owing to the complex nature of critical illness, the pharmacological optimization of antimicrobial therapy is an important goal in the ICU. AMS-objectives and strategies are also applicable to patients with sepsis. This is reflected in the most recent guidelines by the Surviving Sepsis Campaign. AMS-interventions need to be adapted to their respective setting and be mindful of local prescribing cultures and prescribers' attitudes.

SUMMARY

AMS in the ICU is effective and safe. Intensivists should be actively involved in AMS-programs and propagate responsible use of antimicrobials.

Tissue Penetration of Antimicrobials in Intensive Care Unit Patients: A Systematic Review-Part II

In patients that are admitted to intensive care units (ICUs), the clinical outcome of severe infections depends on several factors, as well as the early administration of chemotherapies and comorbidities. Antimicrobials may be used in off-label regimens to maximize the probability of therapeutic concentrations within infected tissues and to prevent the selection of resistant clones. Interestingly, the literature clearly shows that the rate of tissue penetration is variable among antibacterial drugs, and the correlation between plasma and tissue concentrations may be inconstant. The present review harvests data about tissue penetration of antibacterial drugs in ICU patients, limiting the search to those drugs that mainly act as protein synthesis inhibitors and disrupting DNA structure and function. As expected, fluoroquinolones, macrolides, linezolid, and tigecycline have an excellent diffusion into epithelial lining fluid. That high penetration is fundamental for the therapy of ventilator and healthcare-associated pneumonia. Some drugs also display a high penetration rate within cerebrospinal fluid, while other agents diffuse into the skin and soft tissues. Further studies are needed to improve our knowledge about drug tissue penetration, especially in the presence of factors that may affect drug pharmacokinetics.