Risk factors for linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia in patients without haemato-oncologic diseases

Incidence and predictors of linezolid-associated thrombocytopenia in critically ill patients: nomogram development based on comprehensive screening of over 70 factors

BACKGROUND

Linezolid-associated thrombocytopenia (LAT) is a significant complication in intensive care unit (ICU) patients, increasing bleeding risk and leading to treatment discontinuation. This study aims to assess LAT incidence, identify risk and protective factors, and develop a predictive nomogram.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included 422 adult ICU patients treated with linezolid. Over 70 clinical, demographic, laboratory, and therapeutic variables were analyzed. Logistic regression identified key risk and protective factors for LAT, and a nomogram was developed for risk prediction.

RESULTS

LAT occurred in 39.8% of patients. Risk factors included linezolid therapy > 10 days (OR 5.80, p < 0.01), solid organ tumor (OR 2.18, p = 0.03), hemodialysis (OR 5.12, p < 0.01), elevated lactate (OR 1.13, p = 0.03), and vasopressor use (OR 4.48, p < 0.01). Protective factors were surgery (OR 0.34, p < 0.01), IV N-acetylcysteine (OR 0.12, p < 0.01), oral N-acetylcysteine (OR 0.17, p < 0.01), higher baseline platelets (OR 0.79, p = 0.05), and acetaminophen (OR 0.42, p < 0.01). The nomogram showed strong discrimination (AUC 0.834, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

LAT is common in ICU patients and associated with adverse outcomes. Prolonged therapy, solid organ tumors, dialysis, high lactate, and vasopressor use increase risk; high platelet counts, N-acetylcysteine, and IV acetaminophen decrease risk. External validation and prospective trials are warranted.

Development and validation of a nomogram to predict linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia in hospitalized adults

BACKGROUND

Linezolid (LZD) is used to treat infectious diseases caused by Gram-positive bacteria, but thrombocytopenia is one of the main adverse reactions to LZD administration. Early prediction of linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia (LI-TP) is of great importance to improve the clinical outcomes and prognoses. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a prediction model for LI-TP.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort of hospitalized adults receiving LZD therapy (January 2014-June 2022) was analyzed. Independent risk factors for LI-TP were identified via logistic regression in the training set (n = 757). A nomogram model for LI-TP were developed based on independent risk factors, and verified in validation set (n = 123).

RESULTS

The incidence of LI-TP was 13.5% (102/757). A logistic regression model was developed based on the seven independent risk factors, including age (≥ 60 y), duration of LZD therapy (> 11 d), bPLT (< 308 × 109/L), ALT (> 100 IU/L), Ccr (< 67.5 mL/min), and concomitant use with VPA or Tac (p < 0.01) and transformed into a quantifiable nomogram. The nomogram demonstrated strong discrimination with AUCs of 0.760 in training (95% CI: 0.709-0.812, P < 0.001) and 0.767 in validation (95% CI: 0.635-0.899, P < 0.001). The calibration curves and Hosmer-Lemeshow tests confirmed good reliability and specificity of the nomogram model.

CONCLUSION

This nomogram provides a practical tool for stratifying LI-TP risk, which provide an important reference for enabling timely clinical interventions to enhance LZD safety.

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.

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.

Linezolid in enterococcal urinary tract infection: a multicentre study

PURPOSE

Few data have been published on the efficacy of linezolid in enterococcal urinary tract infection (e-UTI). The aims of this study were to describe the characteristics of patients with enterococci UTI treated with linezolid, and to evaluate the efficacy and the tolerance of linezolid treatment.

METHODS

An observational multicentre retrospective study was conducted in 5 hospitals in France. Patients were included if they met the following criteria: ≥18 years, clinical and microbiological criteria for enterococcal UTI and linezolid treatment > 48 h. Primary outcome was clinical failure.

RESULTS

Eighty-one patients were included between January 2015 and December 2021. The median age was 73.0 [64; 83] years and 47 (58%) were men. The median Charlson comorbidity index was 3.00 [2; 6]. E. faecium was reported in 65 (80%) cases and E. faecalis in 26 cases (32%). Polymicrobial infections occurred in 41 (51%) cases. No enterococci was resistant to vancomycin. Before linezolid prescription an empiric antimicrobial treatment was started in 48 (59%) cases and was effective against enterococci in 19/48 (39.5%) patients for a median of 3.5 days [2.0; 4.0]. The median duration of linezolid antibiotic treatment was 13 days [10; 14]. Three adverse events were reported, none were serious but one led to discontinuation of treatment. Treatment failure was reported in 2 cases (2.5%).

CONCLUSION

This study provides evidence for efficacy and safety of linezolid in enterococcal UTI.

Evaluation of pharmacokinetic target attainment and hematological toxicity of linezolid in pediatric patients

BACKGROUND

Linezolid is commonly used to treat severe and/or resistant Gram-positive infections. Few studies have assessed its pharmacokinetic (PK) target attainment in pediatrics.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the percentage of pediatrics achieving the PK targets of linezolid with standard dosing regimens and to assess the incidence and risk factors associated with its hematologic toxicity.

METHODS

This prospective observational study included pediatric patients aged 0-14 who received linezolid for suspected or proven Gram-positive infections. Linezolid trough concentrations and the 24-h area under the curve (AUC24) were estimated, and hematologic toxicity was assessed.

RESULTS

Seventeen pediatric patients (5 neonates and 12 older pediatrics) were included. A wide variability was observed in linezolid's trough and AUC24 (ranging from 0.5 to 14.4 mg/L and from 86 to 700 mg.h/L, respectively). The median AUC24 was significantly higher in neonates than older pediatrics (436 [350-574] vs. 200 [134-272] mg,h/L, P = 0.01). Out of all patients, only 41% achieved adequate drug exposure (AUC24 160-300 mg.h/L and trough 2-7 mg/L), with 24% having subtherapeutic, and 35% having higher-than-optimal exposures. Hematological toxicity was observed in 53% of cases. Identified risk factors include treatment duration over 7 days, baseline platelet counts below 150 × 109/L, sepsis/septic shock, and concomitant use of meropenem.

CONCLUSIONS

Linezolid's standard dosing failed to achieve its PK targets in approximately half of our pediatric cohort. Our findings highlight the complex interplay between the risk factors of linezolid-associated hematological toxicity and underscore the importance of its vigilant use and monitoring, particularly in pediatrics with concomitant multiple risk factors.

A nomogram incorporating linezolid and metabolite concentrations for predicting linezolid induced thrombocytopenia in patients with renal impairment

A nomogram to estimate the risk of linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia in patients with renal impairment is not available. The aim of the study is to develop a nomogram for predicting linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia in patients with renal impairment and to investigate the incremental value of PNU-142300 concentration beyond clinical factors and linezolid trough concentration (Cmin) for risk prediction. Logistic regression was used to identify independent risk factors for linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia in patients with renal impairment and nomograms were established. The performance of the nomograms was assessed in terms of area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), net reclassification improvement (NRI), integrated discrimination improvement (IDI) , decision curve analysis (DCA) and calibration. Internal validation and external validation of the nomograms were also performed. Four nomograms were created: nomogram A including total bilirubin, creatinine clearance and concomitant mannitol use; nomogram B containing linezolid Cmin additionally; nomogram C containing total bilirubin, concomitant mannitol use, linezolid Cmin, and PNU142300 concentration; nomogram D including total bilirubin, concomitant mannitol use, and PNU142300 concentration. Nomogram C improved the prediction performance than nomogram A (AUROC 0.881 vs. 0.749; NRI 0.290; IDI 0.226) and nomogram B (AUROC 0.881 vs. 0.812; NRI 0.152; IDI 0.130) in the training cohort. DCA analysis showed that nomogram C yielded a greater net benefit. Compared with nomogram A and nomogram B, nomogram C also showed superior discriminatory efficacy, good calibration and clinical usefulness in the external validation cohort. The nomogram containing PNU-142300 concentration and linezolid Cmin had better predictive capability than that containing linezolid Cmin for predicting linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia in patients with renal impairment.

Evaluation of the rational prescription of linezolid, the prevalence of thrombocytopenia and major drug interactions in patients with cardiovascular diseases: are there any cautions?

The present study evaluated the rational prescription of linezolid, the prevalence of thrombocytopenia, and major drug interactions in patients with cardiovascular diseases. We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional study on linezolid-treated patients at Shahid Chamran Heart Hospital in Isfahan from March 21, 2021, to March 20, 2022. Our research involved 132 patients who received linezolid. We reported 43.18% of linezolid prescriptions as irrational. Linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia is more common than previous studies, with a prevalence of 47.9%. We found a significant relationship between thrombocytopenia and the concomitant use of aspirin. The duration of treatment was identified as predicting factor for linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia. Moreover, the prevalence of interactions in the X and D categories was determined. Serotonergic and catecholamine medications were associated with 56.1% and 47.7% medication interactions, respectively. Our study found a high prevalence of linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia among patients with cardiovascular diseases. Based on this study, physicians should focus more closely on prescribing linezolid to patients with cardiovascular diseases. In addition to following rational antibiotic use, this susceptible group is also at an elevated risk of side effects (thrombocytopenia) and medication interactions.

Retrospective Analysis of Risk Factors for Cefoperazone/Sulbactam-Induced Thrombocytopenia in Adult Chinese Patients: A Six-Year Real-World Study

Background

Drug-induced thrombocytopenia is a rare adverse reaction of drug therapy and usually underdiagnosed. Cefoperazone/sulbactam is a compound preparation composed of the third generation of cephalosporin and β-lactamase inhibitor, of which thrombocytopenia is an uncommon but serious adverse reaction. However, the existing literature on cefoperazone/sulbactam-induced thrombocytopenia remains limited, and the specific risk factors associated with this adverse effect have not been thoroughly elucidated. Consequently, this study aims to investigate the clinical characteristics and identify the risk factors for thrombocytopenia in adult patients undergoing cefoperazone/sulbactam therapy.

Methods

In this retrospective study, we reviewed patients treated with cefoperazone/sulbactam at Beijing Hospital between January 2017 and June 2023. Patients were categorized into two groups based on the presence or absence of thrombocytopenia: the thrombocytopenia group and the non-thrombocytopenia group. We collected data on demographic features, clinical characteristics, laboratory parameters, treatments, and outcomes. Subsequently, univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to identify potential risk factors for cefoperazone/sulbactam-induced thrombocytopenia.

Results

In total, 6489 patients were included in this study, and 2.4% (155/6489) developed thrombocytopenia. The results of multivariate analysis showed that cefoperazone/sulbactam therapy duration (d) >14, PLT (109/L) <200, daily dose of cefoperazone/sulbactam (g) ≥6, TBil (μmoL/L) >21, AST (U/L) >35, and use of non-invasive ventilator were risk factors for cefoperazone/sulbactam-induced thrombocytopenia.

Conclusion

Despite the low incidence (2.4%), cefoperazone/sulbactam could cause serious thrombocytopenia sometimes accompanied with hemorrhage. In clinical therapy, clinicians should be vigilant in monitoring platelet count, especially for patients with risk factors of cefoperazone/sulbactam-induced thrombocytopenia.

Linezolid-Associated Thrombocytopenia: Assessment of Risk Factors in Patients without Hemato-Oncologic Diseases

Background: Linezolid is used for Gram-positive bacterial infections. Thrombocytopenia is one of its main adverse effects resulting from myelosuppression. Several studies have assessed risk factors that may increase the risk of this adverse effect. However, most studies included patients with hemato-oncologic diseases, which may confound such assessments. This study aimed to investigate risk factors for linezolid-associated thrombocytopenia in patients without hemato-oncologic diseases. Methods: This was a multicenter retrospective case-control study of adult patients treated with linezolid twice daily for ≥3 days. Patients with hemato-oncologic diseases, active dengue fever, active COVID-19, baseline platelet count <100 × 103/mm3, concurrent therapy with trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole or valproic acid, and a recent platelet transfusion within 7 days were excluded. Thrombocytopenia was defined as a drop in platelet count below 100 × 103/mm3. Results: Out of 158 evaluated patients, 33 developed thrombocytopenia, indicating an incidence rate of 20.9%. Of all the risk factors assessed, creatinine clearance of <60 mL/min and bacteremia/infective endocarditis were significantly associated with linezolid-associated thrombocytopenia (adjusted odds ratios, 3.25 and 5.95; 95% CI 1.12-9.45 and 1.23-28.66; p = 0.031 and 0.026, respectively). End of therapy platelet counts were significantly lower in the cases than in the controls (79 vs. 243 × 103/mm3; p < 0.001). Similarly, the percentage of platelet count change was significantly different (-55.1% vs. -10.2%; p < 0.001). Conclusions: In our study, the incidence rate of linezolid-associated thrombocytopenia was 20.9%, and we found that patients with renal impairment and bacteremia may need close monitoring of platelet counts. Prospective studies are warranted to evaluate the potential need for renal dose adjustment.

Predictive Modeling of Drug-Related Adverse Events with Real-World Data: A Case Study of Linezolid Hematologic Outcomes

Electronic health records (EHRs) provide meaningful knowledge of drug-related adverse events (AEs) that are not captured in standard drug development and postmarketing surveillance. Using variables obtained from EHR data in the University of California San Francisco de-identified Clinical Data Warehouse, we aimed to evaluate the potential of machine learning to predict two hematological AEs, thrombocytopenia and anemia, in a cohort of patients treated with linezolid for 3 or more days. Features for model input were extracted at linezolid initiation (index), and outcomes were characterized from index to 14 days post-treatment. Random forest classification (RFC) was used for AE prediction, and reduced feature models were evaluated using cumulative importance (cImp) for feature selection. Grade 3+ thrombocytopenia and anemia occurred in 31% of 2,171 and 56% of 2,170 evaluable patients, respectively. Of the total 53 features, as few as 7 contributed at least 50% cImp, resulting in prediction accuracies of 70% or higher and area under the receiver operating characteristic curves of 0.886 for grade 3+ thrombocytopenia and 0.759 for grade 3+ anemia. Sensitivity analyses in strictly defined patient subgroups revealed similarly high predictive performance in full and reduced feature models. A logistic regression model with the same 50% cImp features showed similar predictive performance as RFC and good concordance with RFC probability predictions after isotonic calibration, adding interpretability. Collectively, this work demonstrates potential for machine learning prediction of AE risk in real-world patients using few variables regularly available in EHRs, which may aid in clinical decision making and/or monitoring.

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.

Development and validation of a risk prediction model for linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia in elderly patients

OBJECTIVES

Linezolid is the first oxazolidinone antimicrobial agent developed for treating multi-drug-resistant gram-positive bacterial infections. The study aimed to investigate the risk factors of linezolid (LI)-induced thrombocytopenia (LI-TP) and to develop and validate a risk prediction model to identify elderly patients at high risk of developing LI-TP during linezolid therapy.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed at Zhongshan Hospital, FuDan University, China. The study involved elderly Chinese patients aged ≥65 years administered with linezolid (600 mg) twice a day between January 2015 and April 2021. We collected the patients' clinical characteristics and demographic data from electronic medical records, and compared the differences between LI-TP patients and those who had not developed thrombocytopenia (NO-TP) after linezolid treatment. The risk prediction model was developed based on the regression coefficient generated from logistic regression model.

RESULTS

A total of 343 inpatients were enrolled from January 2015 to August 2020 and were used as the training set. Among them, 67 (19.5%) developed LI-TP. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that baseline platelet counts <150×109·L-1 (odds ratio (OR)=3.576; p<0.001), age ≥75 years (OR=2.258; p=0.009), estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR <60 mL·(min·1.73 m2)-1 (OR=2.553; p=0.002), duration of linezolid therapy ≥10 d (OR=3.218; p<0.001), intensive care unit (ICU) admittance (OR=2.682; p=0.004), concomitant piperacillin-tazobactam (OR=3.863; p=0.006) were independent risk factors for LI-TP in elderly patients. The LI-TP risk prediction model was established using a scoring method based on the regression coefficient and exhibited a good discriminative power, with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.795 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.740 to 0.851) and 0.849 (95% CI 0.760 to 0.939) in the training set (n=343) and validation set (n=90) respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings indicate that duration of linezolid therapy, age, eGFR, ICU admittance, baseline platelet counts, concomitant piperacillin-tazobactam were significantly associated with LI-TP in elderly patients. A risk prediction model based on these risk factors showed a good discriminative performance and may be useful for clinicians to identify patients at high risk of developing LI-TP.

Prediction of risk factors for linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia based on neural network model

Background: Based on real-world medical data, the artificial neural network model was used to predict the risk factors of linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia to provide a reference for better clinical use of this drug and achieve the timely prevention of adverse reactions. Methods: The artificial neural network algorithm was used to construct the prediction model of the risk factors of linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia and further evaluate the effectiveness of the artificial neural network model compared with the traditional Logistic regression model. Results: A total of 1,837 patients receiving linezolid treatment in a hospital in Xi 'an, Shaanxi Province from 1 January 2011 to 1 January 2021 were recruited. According to the exclusion criteria, 1,273 cases that did not meet the requirements of the study were excluded. A total of 564 valid cases were included in the study, with 89 (15.78%) having thrombocytopenia. The prediction accuracy of the artificial neural network model was 96.32%, and the AUROC was 0.944, which was significantly higher than that of the Logistic regression model, which was 86.14%, and the AUROC was 0.796. In the artificial neural network model, urea, platelet baseline value and serum albumin were among the top three important risk factors. Conclusion: The predictive performance of the artificial neural network model is better than that of the traditional Logistic regression model, and it can well predict the risk factors of linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia.

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.

Comparison of Adjuvant Clindamycin vs Linezolid for Severe Invasive Group A Streptococcus Skin and Soft Tissue Infections

Background

Linezolid may be an option for severe group A Streptococcus (GAS) infections based on its potent in vitro activity and antitoxin effects, but clinical data supporting its use over clindamycin are limited. This study evaluated treatment outcomes in patients with severe GAS skin and soft tissue infections who received either linezolid or clindamycin.

Methods

This retrospective single-center cohort study examined patients with GAS isolated from blood and/or tissue cultures with invasive soft tissue infection or necrotizing fasciitis who underwent surgical debridement and received linezolid or clindamycin for at least 48 hours. The primary outcome was percentage change in Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score from baseline through 72 hours of hospitalization.

Results

After adjustment for time to first surgical intervention among patients with a baseline SOFA score >0 (n = 23 per group), there was no difference in reduction of SOFA score over the first 72 hours in patients receiving clindamycin vs linezolid. In the entire cohort (n = 26, clindamycin; n = 29, linezolid), there was no difference in inpatient mortality (2% vs 1%) or any secondary outcomes, including duration of vasopressor therapy, intensive care unit length of stay, and antibiotic-associated adverse drug events.

Conclusions

There was no difference in reduction of critical illness as measured by SOFA score between baseline and 72 hours among patients treated with clindamycin vs linezolid. Given its more favorable side effect profile, linezolid may be a viable option for the treatment of serious GAS infections and should be further studied.

Risk factors for thrombocytopenia in patients receiving linezolid therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The incidence of linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia (LIT) has been reported to vary widely across studies. We performed a meta-analysis to identify the risk factors for thrombocytopenia among patients who received linezolid treatment.

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to November 2022 to identify eligible studies. Data on the potential predictors of incidence in LIT were pooled using a random effects model. Sensitivity analyses were performed to determine the robustness of the results when significant heterogeneity was observed.

RESULTS

Forty observational studies involving 6454 patients treated with linezolid were included in the analysis. LIT was estimated to occur in 37% of patients. The following important factors were associated with the incidence of LIT: advanced age, body mass index, concurrent renal impairment or liver disease, abnormal laboratory parameters (including white blood cell count, serum creatinine, baseline platelet count, albumin, creatinine clearance rate, and estimated glomerular filtration rate), treatment duration and renal replacement therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

A variety of risk factors related to the occurrence of LIT were revealed in our analysis. Early identification of these factors could help patients improve clinical outcomes.

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.

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.

Effect of linezolid on platelet count in critically ill patients with thrombocytopenia

INTRODUCTION

Linezolid (LZD) is one of the antibiotics used to treat methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. In Japan, the dose of LZD is not generally adjusted by renal function or therapeutic drug monitoring and is readily available for critically ill patients. The adverse effects of LZD include pancytopenia, especially thrombocytopenia. We investigated the effect of LZD on platelet counts in critically ill patients with thrombocytopenia during admission to the intensive care unit (ICU).

METHODS

Fifty-five critically ill patients with existing thrombocytopenia (platelet count < 100 ×103 /μL) who received LZD for five days or more during the period from January 2011 to October 2018 were included. Changes in platelet count and frequency of platelet concentrate (PC) transfusion were evaluated retrospectively.

RESULTS

Mean (± standard error) platelet count prior to initiation of LZD was 47 ± 4 ×103 /uL, which increased significantly to 86 ± 13 ×103 /uL on day 15 (p<0.01). Median [interquartile range] duration of LZD therapy was 9 [8-12] days. Thirty-two patients (58.2%) required PC transfusion in the 15-day study period. The daily rate of PC transfusion decreased from 30.2% on days 1-5 to 18.2% on days 11-15. Similar tendencies were observed in patients with non-hematological and hematological disease.

CONCLUSION

Thrombocytopenia in critically ill patients in the ICU did not worsen after initiation of LZD therapy, and may be considered for the treatment of MRSA in this setting.

Prevalence and risk factors for severe linezolid-associated thrombocytopenia in pediatric patients: An analysis of a public database

Linezolid is widely used in various clinical settings. Studies have revealed that it may cause thrombocytopenia in adults. However, the correlation between the use of linezolid and thrombocytopenia in pediatric patients is still unclear. This study aimed to identify the impact of Linezolid on the occurrence of thrombocytopenia in children. A retrospective observational study was conducted using data on patients treated with linezolid from the Pediatric Intensive Care clinical database. Univariate and multiple logistic regression analyses were performed to identify the risk factors of linezolid-related severe thrombocytopenia. A total of 134 patients were included. The prevalence of severe thrombocytopenia was 8.96% (12/134). Univariate analysis indicated that the severe thrombocytopenia group showed significantly higher proportion of concomitant carbapenem (75% vs 44.3%; P < .05) and piperacillin/tazobactam (25% vs 6.6%; P < .05) than that of the non-severe thrombocytopenia group. Multivariate analysis also revealed that the occurrence of severe thrombocytopenia was significantly associated with concurrent use of carbapenem (odd ratio = 4.058; 95% confidence interval: 1.012-16.274; P = .048) and piperacillin/tazobactam (odd ratio = 5.335; 95% confidence interval: 1.117-25.478; P = .036). 75% of patients (9/12) developed severe thrombocytopenia within the first 7 days of linezolid use. The concomitant use of carbapenem and piperacillin/tazobactam was associated with an increased probability of severe thrombocytopenia in pediatric patients undergoing linezolid treatment. Further prospective clinical studies are required, and more detailed mechanisms of blood toxicity in pediatric patients must be investigated.

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.

Complicated Case of Multidrug-Resistant Tuberculosis with Multiple Comorbidities, Successfully Treated After Several Treatment Modifications

A 59-year-old man with relapsed pulmonary TB developed rifampin resistance. He presented with chronic untreated hepatitis B, which developed into liver cirrhosis, type 2 diabetes with diabetic retinopathy, and osteoarthritis of right knee. His initial MDR regimen included levofloxacin, cycloserine, bedaquiline, linezolid, and high-dose isoniazid. He developed episodes of linezolid-induced myelosuppression, resulting in temporary discontinuation and dose reduction, and ultimately, substitution of linezolid. On the seventh month of treatment, he developed severe depression with visual hallucination, resulting in cycloserine dose reduction. We maintained the principle of at least 4 active drugs throughout his treatment. He was considered cured after 26 months of treatment.

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.

Renal replacement therapy and concurrent fluconazole therapy increase linezolid-related thrombocytopenia among adult patients

Linezolid has been reported to be associated with thrombocytopenia. However, limited information is available on susceptibility to thrombocytopenia after linezolid usage. We aimed to investigate the risk factors for linezolid-associated thrombocytopenia (LAT). We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients aged ≥ 18 years who received linezolid for ≥ 5 d during hospitalization in 2019. Information was extracted from electronic medical records. Thrombocytopenia was defined as a platelet count of < 100 × 10⁹/L or a reduction from baseline ≥ 25%. Binary logistic regression and survival analyses were used to evaluate the risk factors for LAT. A total of 98 patients were enrolled. Thrombocytopenia occurred in 53.1% patients, with a median of 9 d after initiation of linezolid. There was no significant difference in the mortality or proportion of platelet transfusions between patients with and without thrombocytopenia. A higher risk of LAT was found in patients who received renal replacement therapy (RRT) (OR 4.8 [1.4–16.4]), or concurrent fluconazole (OR 3.5 [1.2–9.8]). Patients who received RRT (8 vs. 15 d) or concurrent fluconazole (11 vs. 15 d) had a shorter median time to develop thrombocytopenia. Those who simultaneously received RRT and fluconazole had the shortest median of time (6.5 d) and the highest risk of developing thrombocytopenia (87.5%).

Linezolid induced thrombocytopenia in critically ill patients: Risk factors and development of a machine learning-based prediction model

INTRODUCTION

Linezolid is an antimicrobial with broad activity against Gram-positive bacteria. Thrombocytopenia is one of its most common side effects often leading to severe complications. The aim of this study is to identify factors related with development of this condition in critically ill patients and to develop and evaluate a predictive machine learning-based model considering easy-to-obtain clinical variables.

METHODS

Data was obtained from the Medical Information Mart for Intensive Care III. Patients who received linezolid for over three days were considered, excluding those under 18 years and/or lacking laboratory data. Thrombocytopenia was considered as a platelet decrease of at least 50% from baseline.

RESULTS

Three hundred and twenty patients met inclusion criteria of which 63 developed thrombocytopenia and presented significant greater duration of treatment, aspartate-aminotransferase, bilirubin and international normalized ratio; and lower renal clearance and platelet count at baseline. Thrombocytopenia development was associated with a worse outcome (30 days mortality [OR: 2.77; CI95%: 1.87-5.89; P < .001], 60 days mortality [OR: 3.56; CI95%: 2.18-7.26; P < .001]). Thrombocytopenia was also correlated with higher length of hospital stays (35.56 [20.40-52.99] vs 22.69 [10.05-38.61]; P < .001). Median time until this anomaly was of 23 days (CI95%:19.0-NE). Two multivariate models were performed. Accuracy, sensitivity, specificity and AUROC obtained in the best of them were of 0.75, 0.78, 0.62 and 0.80, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Linezolid associated thrombocytopenia entails greater mortality rates and hospital stays. Although the proposed predictive model has to be subsequently validated in a real clinical setting, its application could identify patients at risk and establish screening and surveillance strategies.

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.

Risk factors for linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia in adult inpatients

Background Previous reports about risk factors for linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia have been insufficient, often due to the variability in study design and population, and some factors have not yet been studied. Aim The aims of this study are to determine potential risk factors for linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia, and to analyze the influencing factors of different thrombocytopenia definitions. Method This retrospective study involved patients who were administered intravenous linezolid for ≥ 1 day between January 1, 2015 and January 1, 2021. Their demographic and clinical data were extracted from electronic medical records. Thrombocytopenia was defined as: ①thrombocytopenia with platelet count < 100 × 10⁹/L and a decrease in 25% or more from baseline of the platelet count (criterion 1); ②thrombocytopenia due to a platelet count drop decrease of 25% or more from baseline (criterion 2). Risk factors were determined via binary logistic regression analysis. Results This study included 320 patients. Binary logistic regression analysis indicated that baseline platelet count (p < 0.001), linezolid therapy duration (p = 0.001) and shock (patients require vasoactive medications) (p = 0.019) were independent risk factors for criterion-1thrombocytopenia, while linezolid therapy duration (p < 0.001) and shock (p = 0.015) were independent risk factors for criterion-2 thrombocytopenia. There was also a significant correlation between shock and early-onset thrombocytopenia (p = 0.005 and 0.019 for criterion 1 and criterion 2, respectively). Conclusion Linezolid therapy duration and shock were common causes of different thrombocytopenia definitions; shock was correlated with early-onset thrombocytopenia. Platelet count should be monitored during linezolid therapy especially during long-duration therapy and in shock patients.

A risk factor-based predictive model for linezolid-induced anaemia: A 7-year retrospective study

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

The primary adverse reaction of linezolid is haematological toxicity, leading to thrombocytopenia and anaemia. This study aimed to investigate the risk factors of linezolid-induced anaemia (LI-AN) and establish a predictive model by multivariate logistic regression model analysis to predict LI-AN risks in Chinese adult patients.

METHODS

Demographic and clinical data of patients who underwent linezolid therapy for more than three days between January 2014 and December 2020 in Zhongshan Hospital, Fudan University, were retrieved from the hospital's electronic medical record for analysis. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was employed to establish a predictive model, whose predictability was further evaluated by the area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The study comprised 298 patients among the 2322 patients who underwent linezolid treatment between 2014 and 2020. Among the 298 patients, 32 (10.7%) developed anaemia with an average of 11.4 (SD 6.2) days after the initiation of linezolid therapy. Multivariate logistic analysis revealed that age ≥60 years (odds ratio [OR] 2.815, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.242-6.379), higher total bilirubin (TBi) (OR 1.031, 95% CI 1.011-1.051), eGFR < 60 ml/(min·1.73 m² ) (OR 2.537, 95% CI 1.054-6.106), duration of linezolid therapy (DLT) (OR 1.091, 95% CI 1.023-1.163) and intensive care unit (ICU) admittance (OR 2.664, 95% CI 1.150-6.174) were the independent risk factors for anaemia occurrence among patients receiving linezolid therapy. A logistic regression equation based on the five risk factors was subsequently established and transformed to obtain the calculation formula of the combined predictor: Y_{(Combined predictor)}  = X_TBi  + 34.5 × X_Age≥60  + 31.1 × X_eGFR<60  + 32.7 × X_ICU  + 2.9 × X_DLT , (where Age ≥60 years, yes = 1, no = 0; eGFR < 60 ml/(min·1.73 m² ), yes = 1, no = 0; ICU admittance, yes = 1, no = 0). The area under the ROC curve of the combined predictors equation was 0.773 with an optimal cut-off point value of 92.4, corresponding to a 75.0% sensitivity and 76.7% specificity.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

LI-AN is associated with age (≥60 years), higher TBi, eGFR < 60 ml/(min·1.73 m² ), DLT and ICU admittance. Physicians should thus calculate the combined predictor value at the beginning of linezolid treatment to predict and evaluate the risk of LI-AN. An optimal cut-off value larger than 92.4 indicates that the patient has a higher LI-AN risk. As such, Hb levels should be monitored regularly, and dosage regimens adjusted accordingly to prevent anaemia occurrence. This study provides an evidence-based logistic model that reduces LI-AN incidences and promotes the safe clinical use of linezolid.

Treatment of Intracranial Infection Caused by Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus epidermidis with Linezolid Following Poor Outcome of Vancomycin Therapy: A Case Report and Literature Review

The pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) parameter for evaluating the efficacy of vancomycin is now recommended to target an AUC/MIC (area under the curve, AUC; minimum inhibitory concentration, MIC) ratio of 400 to 600, and trough concentration should not be used as a substitute. We report a case of intracranial infection caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus epidermidis (MRSE), which was sensitive to vancomycin (MIC=2µg/mL) and linezolid (MIC=4µg/mL). The trough concentration of vancomycin in serum was 18.3 µg/mL, and the vancomycin concentration in CSF was 5.0 µg/mL, all within normal range. However, the AUC/MIC ratio was calculated to be 125 mg·h·L^-1, unable to reach target AUC/MIC. Vancomycin was replaced with linezolid after 36 days of treatment due to poor outcome, and the patient was eventually cured. Further, 23 cases of intracranial methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) or methicillin-resistant coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (MRCoNS) infections were reported, of which 1 case with MRSA had a vancomycin MIC of 1 µg/mL, while the remaining 22 cases had vancomycin MICs >1 µg/mL. The linezolid-containing regimen was used after drug susceptibility results or if the initial treatment failed, leading to recovery in 19 patients, microbial clearance in 3 patients, and treatment failure in 1 case. In conclusion, vancomycin dosing should be based on AUC-guided dosing and monitoring. When the vancomycin MIC of MRSA/MRCoNS is >1 µg/mL, the target AUC/MIC may not be achieved. In such cases, linezolid can effectively be considered as a good alternative to vancomycin.

Effect of renal function on the risk of thrombocytopenia in patients receiving linezolid therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Aims

The association of renal function and linezolid‐induced thrombocytopaenia (LIT) remains controversial. We performed a meta‐analysis to determine whether impaired renal function is associated with an increased LIT risk.

Methods

We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library from inception to February 2021 for eligible studies evaluating the relationship between renal function and LIT. Indicators of renal function included renal impairment (RI), severe RI, haemodialysis status, creatinine clearance rate (Ccr) and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). Unadjusted and adjusted estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated separately using a random‐effect model.

Results

A total of 24 studies with 3580 patients were included in the meta‐analysis. RI patients had an increased LIT risk compared to non‐RI patients in both the unadjusted (OR 3.54; 95% CI 2.27, 5.54; I² = 77.7%) and adjusted analyses (OR 2.51; 95% CI 1.82, 3.45; I² = 17.9%). This association persisted in the subset of studies involving only patients receiving a fixed conventional dose (600 mg every 12 h) and other subgroup analyses by ethnicity, sample size and study quality. Moreover, the LIT risk was significantly higher in patients with severe RI and haemodialysis than in patients without severe RI and haemodialysis. The eGFR and Ccr were significantly lower in LIT patients than in non‐LIT patients.

Conclusions

Impaired renal function is associated with an increased risk of LIT. A reduced linezolid dose may be considered in RI patients at a low risk of treatment failure, ideally guided by therapeutic drug monitoring.

Pharmacokinetics of Linezolid Dose Adjustment for Creatinine Clearance in Critically Ill Patients: A Multicenter, Prospective, Open-Label, Observational Study

Purpose

The aim of this study is to use a population pharmacokinetic (PK) approach to evaluate the optimal dosing strategy for linezolid (LNZ) in critically ill patients.

Methods

This multicenter, prospective, open-label, observational study was conducted in 152 patients, and 117 of them were included in the PK model, whereas the rest were in the validation group. The percentage of therapeutic target attainment (PTTA) comprising two pharmacodynamic indices and one toxicity index was used to evaluate dosing regimens based on Monte Carlo simulations stratified by low, normal, and high renal clearance for MICs of 0.25–4 mg/L.

Results

A single-compartment model with a covariate creatinine clearance (CrCL) was chosen as the final model. The PK parameter estimates were clearance of 5.60 L/h, with CrCL adjustment factor of 0.386, and a distribution volume of 43.4 L. For MIC ≤2 mg/L, the standard dosing regimen (600 mg q12h) for patients with severe renal impairment (CrCL, 40 mL/min) and standard dosing or 900 mg q12h for patients with normal renal functions (CrCL, 80 mL/min) could achieve PTTA ≥74%. The dose of 2400 mg per 24-h continuous infusion was ideal for augmented renal clearance (ARC) with MIC ≤1 mg/L. For MICs >2 mg/L, rare optimal dose regimens were found regardless of renal function.

Conclusion

In critically ill patients, the standard dose of 600 mg q12h was sufficient for MIC ≤2 mg/L in patients without ARC. Moreover, a 2400 mg/day 24-h continuous infusion was recommended for ARC patients.

Proactive therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) may be helpful in managing long-term treatment with linezolid safely: findings from a monocentric, prospective, open-label, interventional study

BACKGROUND

Thrombocytopenia may be a dose-dependent adverse effect of linezolid therapy.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether proactive therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) could be helpful in preventing and/or in recovering from the occurrence of linezolid-induced thrombocytopenia during long-term treatment.

METHODS

This was a monocentric, prospective, open-label, interventional study conducted between June 2015 and December 2017 among adult patients receiving >10 days of linezolid therapy and undergoing proactive TDM (desired trough level 2-8 mg/L) and platelet count assessment at day 3-5 and then once weekly up to the end of treatment.

RESULTS

Sixty-one patients were included. Twenty-eight (45.9%) always had desired trough level (group A) and 33 (54.1%) experienced linezolid overexposure (group B) [29/33 transiently (subgroup B1) and 4/33 persistently (subgroup B2)]. No patient experienced linezolid underexposure. Median duration of treatment for the different groups ranged between 19 and 54 days. Thrombocytopenia occurred overall in 14.8% of cases (9/61). The incidence rate of thrombocytopenia was significantly lower (P=0.012) in both group A (10.7%; 3/28) and subgroup B1 (10.3%; 3/29) than in subgroup B2 (75.0%; 3/4). Thrombocytopenic patients belonging to both group A and group B1 recovered from thrombocytopenia without the need for discontinuing therapy. Multivariate linear regression analysis revealed that thrombocytopenia was independently associated with baseline platelet count and with median linezolid trough concentrations.

CONCLUSIONS

Proactive TDM of linezolid may be beneficial either in preventing or in recovering from dose-dependent thrombocytopenia, even when treatment lasts for more than 28 days. Larger prospective studies are warranted to confirm our findings.

Treatment Considerations for CNS Infections Caused by Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcus faecium: A Focused Review of Linezolid and Daptomycin

Objective:

To review the current literature describing pharmacology, pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics (PK/PD), efficacy, and safety of linezolid and daptomycin for the treatment of central nervous system (CNS) infections caused by vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE) faecium.

Data Sources:

A literature search of PubMed/MEDLINE databases was conducted (from 1950 to April 2020) utilizing the following key terms: vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus, VRE, meningitis, ventriculitis, CNS infection, daptomycin, and linezolid.

Study Selection and Data Extraction:

All relevant studies and case reports describing the treatment of VRE faecium from the CNS with linezolid or daptomycin were included.

Data Synthesis:

A total of 17 reports describing 22 cases were identified. There were 15 of 19 cases involving linezolid that reported clinical cure, of which 53.3% were monotherapy. Only 5 of 9 cases involving intravenous (IV) daptomycin resulted in cure; all 4 cases reporting daptomycin administration via the intrathecal or intraventricular route achieved clearance from the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF).

Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice:

The preferred treatment option for VRE faecium infections involving the CNS remains unclear. Supporting evidence through observational case reports have described varying outcomes with linezolid and daptomycin. This review compares reported outcomes between the 2 agents and provides a thorough discussion on drug- and patient-specific variables to consider.

Conclusions:

Linezolid monotherapy appears to be safe and effective for the treatment of susceptible-VRE faecium CNS infections, with consideration of therapeutic drug monitoring in special populations and with prolonged treatment duration. Daptomycin is an effective treatment option via intrathecal or intraventricular administration when neurosurgical access is available. The role of IV daptomycin remains inconclusive.