Disposition of cefpodoxime proxetil in hemodialysis patients

Status of Hemodialysis of Drugs in 2002

Hemodialysis is a life-sustaining chronic therapy for individuals with end stage renal disease (ESRD). It is also frequently used for days to weeks for patients with acute renal failure who are awaiting the recovery of their kidneys from the acute toxic or traumatic event. Both populations of patients often require complex pharmacotherapeutic regimens, and it is not uncommon for them to be receiving 10 or more concomitant medications. Optimization of care for these patients is dependent on the selection of the most appropriate drug as well as dosage regimen design, which accounts for the influence of hemodialysis therapy on drug disposition. During the last 10 to 15 years there have been several significant changes in the prescribed dose of dialysis and the composition and size of dialyzers available for use. Furthermore, reuse of dialyzers, which was rare in the early 1980s, is now common; it is employed with over 70% of patients with ESRD. The new synthetic dialyzers, which are now used for over 60% of ESRD patients in the United States, are uniformly associated with dramatic improvements in drug removal; dialysis clearance increases of 3 to 10 fold were common for the few drugs evaluated. The influence of these changes in hemodialysis therapy on drug disposition are discussed in a quantitative fashion, and a conceptual framework for drug therapy regimen decision making is presented. For the majority of the drugs reviewed, however, there were no data in the literature regarding dialyzability with currently available dialyzers. The generation of dialyzability data for old and new pharmacotherapeutic agents with state of the art dialysis procedures is clearly needed.

Pharmacokinetic study of an oral cephalosporin, cefdinir, in hemodialysis patients

The pharmacokinetics of cefdinir were investigated in six hemodialysis patients. For the present study, two tests were carried out, one with 4 h of hemodialysis and the other without hemodialysis. Cefdinir was given orally to each patient in a dose of 100 mg, and blood was collected serially for 48 h after dosing in the test without dialysis and for 72 h in the test with dialysis. In the test without dialysis, the maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) was 2.36 +/- 0.53 micrograms/ml (mean +/- standard deviation) and the time to Cmax was 9.00 +/- 2.45 h. The terminal elimination half-life (t1/2) and area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) were 16.95 +/- 1.20 h and 69.05 +/- 14.84 micrograms.h/ml, respectively. In the test with dialysis, t1/2 during hemodialysis decreased approximately to one-sixth of that obtained in the test without dialysis, although t1/2 in the latter elimination phase did not differ from that in the nondialysis test. AUC was reduced to 43% of that in the test without dialysis. The fractional removal of cefdinir by hemodialysis was 61%. These findings indicate that clearance of cefdinir is prolonged in patients with renal failure, and cefdinir is well removed by introduction of hemodialysis, although t1/2 (during hemodialysis) and AUC were two and eight times higher than the data previously reported for healthy volunteers, respectively. The pharmacokinetic data suggest that 100 mg of oral cefdinir once a day would result in a sufficient concentration in plasma in hemodialysis patients, but this remains to be confirmed by multiple-dose studies.

Pharmacokinetics and ex vivo susceptibility of cefpodoxime proxetil in patients receiving continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis

Pharmacokinetics of cefpodoxime, an extended-spectrum cephalosporin, were determined for eight noninfected patients on continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) and eight healthy volunteers. Subjects were matched for sex, age (+/- 6 years), and body weight (+/- 10 kg, except for one pair) and received a single 200-mg (cefpodoxime equivalents) oral dose of the prodrug cefpodoxime proxetil in an open-label, paired-design fashion. Dialysate (CAPD group only), plasma, and urine samples were collected and assayed for cefpodoxime by a microbiologic method. In addition, mean bactericidal titers of the effluent dialysate against selected bacterial strains often associated with CAPD-related peritonitis were determined at 6 and 24 h after the dose. There was a significant difference (P < 0.05) in all pharmacokinetic parameters between healthy and CAPD subjects, except for lag time to absorption. The mean peak plasma cefpodoxime concentration of 1.88 +/- 0.6 micrograms/ml occurred at 2.44 +/- 0.5 h for healthy volunteers, while the peak concentration of 3.25 +/- 1.4 micrograms/ml occurred at 12.0 +/- 4.2 h for patients on CAPD. The average elimination half-life in CAPD patients was approximately 12 times greater than that seen in healthy volunteers. Peritoneal dialysis had a minimal effect on cefpodoxime clearance. In healthy volunteers, 24.2% +/- 13% of the dose was recovered from the urine, in contrast to only 5.59% +/- 6.9% for CAPD patients. The mean bactericidal titers for all CAPD patients, at 6 and 24 h, were mostly less than 1:2 and did not exceed 1:4 for any of the isolates. Because of the decreased renal clearance and negligible dialysate clearance of cefpodoxime, and delayed drug absorption, the dosage interval for cefpodoxime proxetil may need to be extended in CAPD patients.

Cefpodoxime proxetil: a new, broad-spectrum, oral cephalosporin

OBJECTIVE

To discuss the chemistry, pharmacokinetics, spectrum of activity, clinical trials, adverse effects, drug interactions, and dosage guidelines of cefpodoxime proxetil.

DATA SOURCES

Literature was identified through a MEDLINE search from 1988 to the present and from review of bibliographies in that literature.

STUDY SELECTION

Data were limited to comparative trials published in the English literature. Although many studies were conducted in Japan, the results often were available only in Japanese or partly in English. As these studies could not be completely evaluated, they are not included in this review.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Cefpodoxime exhibits good activity against many gram-positive and gram-negative organisms. In clinical trials, cefpodoxime was similar in both clinical and bacteriologic efficacy to amoxicillin, cefaclor, amoxicillin/clavulanate, and penicillin in the treatment of respiratory and urinary tract infections. It also appeared effective in the treatment of skin and soft tissue infections, although no comparative trials have been performed. Cefpodoxime is well tolerated by children and is effective in the treatment of otitis media and pharyngitis. It has a similar adverse effect profile to that of other penicillins and cephalosporins, with gastrointestinal effects being most common.

CONCLUSIONS

Cefpodoxime demonstrates good in vitro activity against pathogens frequently associated with respiratory tract, urinary tract, and skin and tissue infections. It has not demonstrated greater efficacy than the other antibiotics to which it has been compared. The available published clinical trials are fraught with methodologic, statistical, and evaluative flaws. Thus, further trials comparing cefpodoxime with established treatments, as well as the newer cephalosporins, are needed before its place in therapy can be established.