The influence of continuous venovenous haemodialysis on the pharmacokinetics of multiple oral moxifloxacin administration to patients with severe renal dysfunction

A Prospective Study of the Efficacy, Safety and Pharmacokinetics of Enteral Moxifloxacin in the Treatment of Hemodialysis Patients with Pneumonia

Objectives To investigate the efficacy of oral moxifloxacin (MFLX) as a treatment for pneumonia in hemodialysis (HD) patients and the pharmacokinetic (PK) profile of MFLX after oral administration. Methods Thirteen adult patients who required HD due to chronic renal failure were enrolled in the present study, which was performed to investigate the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia in HD patients. A standard dose of MFLX (400 mg, once daily) was administered. The therapy was continued, discontinued, or switched to another antibiotic depending on the response of the pneumonia to MFLX. A population PK model was developed using the post-hoc method. Results In total, 13 HD patients with pneumonia (male, n=7; female, n=6) were enrolled in the present study. The evaluation on the 3rd day showed that treatment was successful in 11 patients (84.6%) and that 10 patients were cured (76.9%). In the one case in which MFLX treatment failed, the patient was cured by switching to ceftriaxone (CTRX) (2 g, intravenously) plus levofloxacin (LVFX) (250 mg, orally). The causative bacterium in this male patient was P. aeruginosa. It did not display resistance to fluoroquinolones. One patient had liver dysfunction due to MFLX. The estimated PK parameters of MFLX were as follows: AUC_0→24, 61.04±17.74 μg h/mL; C_max, 5.25±1.12 μg/mL; and C_trough, 1.15±0.45 μg/mL. The PK parameters of MFLX among the patients in whom adverse events occurred or in whom a cure was not achieved did not differ from those of the other patients to a statistically significant extent. Conclusion MFLX showed good efficacy and safety in HD patients with community-acquired pneumonia and the results of the PK analysis were favorable. Further prospective studies with larger numbers of patients will be needed to draw definitive conclusions.

Gender analysis of moxifloxacin clinical trials

PURPOSE

To determine the inclusion of women and the sex-stratification of results in moxifloxacin Clinical Trials (CTs), and to establish whether these CTs considered issues that specifically affect women, such as pregnancy and use of hormonal therapies. Previous publications about women's inclusion in CTs have not specifically studied therapeutic drugs. Although this type of drug is taken by men and women at a similar rate, adverse effects occur more frequently in the latter.

METHODS

We reviewed 158 published moxifloxacin trials on humans, retrieved from MedLine and the Cochrane Library (1998-2010), to determine whether they complied with the gender recommendations published by U.S. Food and Drug Administration Guideline.

RESULTS

Of a total of 80,417 subjects included in the moxifloxacin CTs, only 33.7% were women in phase I, in contrast to phase II, where women accounted for 45%, phase III, where they represented 38.3% and phase IV, where 51.3% were women. About 40.9% (n=52) of trials were stratified by sex and 15.3% (n=13) and 9% (n=7) provided data by sex on efficacy and adverse effects, respectively. We found little information about the influence of issues that specifically affect women. Only 3 of the 59 journals that published the moxifloxacin CTs stated that authors should stratify their results by sex.

CONCLUSIONS

Women are under-represented in the published moxifloxacin trials, and this trend is more marked in phase I, as they comprise a higher proportion in the other phases. Data by sex on efficacy and adverse effects are scarce in moxifloxacin trials. These facts, together with the lack of data on women-specific issues, suggest that the therapeutic drug moxifloxacin is only a partially evidence-based medicine.

Presence and accuracy of drug dosage recommendations for continuous renal replacement therapy in tertiary drug information references

BACKGROUND

Clinicians commonly rely on tertiary drug information references to guide drug dosages for patients who are receiving continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT). It is unknown whether the dosage recommendations in these frequently used references reflect the most current evidence.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the presence and accuracy of drug dosage recommendations for patients undergoing CRRT in 4 drug information references.

METHODS

Medications commonly prescribed during CRRT were identified from an institutional medication inventory database, and evidence-based dosage recommendations for this setting were developed from the primary and secondary literature. The American Hospital Formulary System-Drug Information (AHFS-DI), Micromedex 2.0 (specifically the DRUGDEX and Martindale databases), and the 5th edition of Drug Prescribing in Renal Failure (DPRF5) were assessed for the presence of drug dosage recommendations in the CRRT setting. The dosage recommendations in these tertiary references were compared with the recommendations derived from the primary and secondary literature to determine concordance.

RESULTS

Evidence-based drug dosage recommendations were developed for 33 medications administered in patients undergoing CRRT. The AHFS-DI provided no dosage recommendations specific to CRRT, whereas the DPRF5 provided recommendations for 27 (82%) of the medications and the Micromedex 2.0 application for 20 (61%) (13 [39%] in the DRUGDEX database and 16 [48%] in the Martindale database, with 9 medications covered by both). The dosage recommendations were in concordance with evidence-based recommendations for 12 (92%) of the 13 medications in the DRUGDEX database, 26 (96%) of the 27 in the DPRF5, and all 16 (100%) of those in the Martindale database.

CONCLUSIONS

One prominent tertiary drug information resource provided no drug dosage recommendations for patients undergoing CRRT. However, 2 of the databases in an Internet-based medical information application and the latest edition of a renal specialty drug information resource provided recommendations for a majority of the medications investigated. Most dosage recommendations were similar to those derived from the primary and secondary literature. The most recent edition of the DPRF is the preferred source of information when prescribing dosage regimens for patients receiving CRRT.

Moxifloxacin does not alter ciclosporin pharmacokinetics in transplant patients: a multiple-dose, uncontrolled, single-centre study

BACKGROUND

Moxifloxacin has a broad antibacterial spectrum and rapid bactericidal activity, and is thus a good option for the treatment of bacterial infections in patients who have undergone organ or bone marrow transplantation. Transplant patients also receive immunosuppressant therapy such as ciclosporin.

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective of this study was to assess the steady-state pharmacokinetics of ciclosporin with and without concomitant treatment with moxifloxacin in transplant recipients. A secondary objective was to determine the safety and tolerability of the combined treatment.

METHODS

Patients (n = 9) with stable graft function after bone marrow or renal transplantation and who were already receiving ciclosporin therapy were enrolled into the study. The patients were given ciclosporin (Sandimmun Optoral) capsules twice daily (total daily dosage 150-380 mg/day) throughout the study period. Moxifloxacin (Avolox) tablets 400 mg once daily were given on days 2-8 inclusive. The primary outcome measure was the change in ciclosporin pharmacokinetics on coadministration with moxifloxacin. Secondary outcomes were the steady-state pharmacokinetics of moxifloxacin and ciclosporin plus its metabolites in patients receiving moxifloxacin and ciclosporin concomitantly. Moxifloxacin pharmacokinetic parameters in the presence of ciclosporin were compared with previously published pharmacokinetic data for moxifloxacin in healthy individuals.

RESULTS

No significant changes occurred in the concentration-time curves of ciclosporin and its metabolites following combination therapy with moxifloxacin. The geometric means of whole blood concentrations of ciclosporin and ciclosporin plus its metabolites on day 1 were similar to those on day 8 following combined administration of ciclosporin and moxifloxacin for 7 days. The ratio of combination treatment to monotherapy for ciclosporin was 1.01 (90% CI 0.91, 1.11) for the area under the blood concentration-time curve from time zero to 12 hours at steady state (AUC(12,ss)) and 0.96 (90% CI 0.88, 1.04) for the maximum steady-state blood drug concentration (C(max,ss)). For ciclosporin plus its metabolites the ratio was 1.07 (90% CI 0.99, 1.17) for AUC(12,ss) and 1.03 (90% CI 0.98, 1.09) for C(max,ss). The pharmacokinetic parameters for moxifloxacin were unaffected by the presence of ciclosporin.

CONCLUSIONS

Concomitant administration of moxifloxacin does not alter the pharmacokinetic parameters of ciclosporin or ciclosporin plus its metabolites in immunosuppressed patients. Therefore, no dose adjustments or additional drug monitoring are required when ciclosporin is coadministered with moxifloxacin.