1
|
Li X, Song Z, Yi Z, Qin J, Jiang D, Wang Z, Li H, Zhao R. Therapeutic drug monitoring guidelines in oncology: what do we know and how to move forward? Insights from a systematic review. Ther Adv Med Oncol 2024; 16:17588359241250130. [PMID: 38812991 PMCID: PMC11135096 DOI: 10.1177/17588359241250130] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/23/2023] [Accepted: 04/09/2024] [Indexed: 05/31/2024] Open
Abstract
Background Compared with anti-infective drugs, immunosuppressants and other fields, the application of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) in oncology is somewhat limited. Objective We aimed to provide a comprehensive understanding of TDM guidelines for antineoplastic drugs and to promote the development of individualized drug therapy in oncology. Design This study type is a systematic review. Data sources and methods This study was performed and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses 2020 statement. Databases including PubMed, Embase, the official websites of TDM-related associations and Chinese databases were comprehensively searched up to March 2023. Two investigators independently screened the literature and extracted data. The methodological and reporting quality was evaluated using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II (AGREE II) and the Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare (RIGHT), respectively. Recommendations and quality evaluation results were presented by visual plots. This study was registered in PROSPERO (No. CRD42022325661). Results A total of eight studies were included, with publication years ranging from 2014 to 2022. From the perspective of guideline development, two guidelines were developed using evidence-based methods. Among the included guidelines, four guidelines were for cytotoxic antineoplastic drugs, three for small molecule kinase inhibitors, and one for antineoplastic biosimilars. Currently available guidelines and clinical practice provided recommendations of individualized medication in oncology based on TDM, as well as influencing factors. With regard to methodological quality based on AGREE II, the average overall quality score was 55.21%. As for the reporting quality by RIGHT evaluation, the average reporting rate was 53.57%. Conclusion From the perspective of current guidelines, TDM in oncology is now being expanded from cytotoxic antineoplastic drugs to newer targeted treatments. Whereas, the types of antineoplastic drugs involved are still small, and there is still room for quality improvement. Furthermore, the reflected gaps warrant future studies into the exposure-response relationships and population pharmacokinetics models.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Xinya Li
- Department of Pharmacy, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China
- Institute for Drug Evaluation, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, China
- Therapeutic Drug Monitoring and Clinical Toxicology Center, Peking University, Beijing, China
- Department of Pharmacy Administration and Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Peking University, Beijing, China
| | - Zaiwei Song
- Department of Pharmacy, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China
- Institute for Drug Evaluation, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, China
- Therapeutic Drug Monitoring and Clinical Toxicology Center, Peking University, Beijing, China
| | - Zhanmiao Yi
- Department of Pharmacy, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China
- Institute for Drug Evaluation, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, China
- Therapeutic Drug Monitoring and Clinical Toxicology Center, Peking University, Beijing, China
| | - Jiguang Qin
- Department of Pharmacy, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China
- Institute for Drug Evaluation, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, China
- Therapeutic Drug Monitoring and Clinical Toxicology Center, Peking University, Beijing, China
- Department of Pharmacy Administration and Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Peking University, Beijing, China
| | - Dan Jiang
- Department of Pharmacy, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China
- Institute for Drug Evaluation, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, China
- Therapeutic Drug Monitoring and Clinical Toxicology Center, Peking University, Beijing, China
- Department of Pharmacy Administration and Clinical Pharmacy, School of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Peking University, Beijing, China
| | - Zhitong Wang
- Department of Pharmacy, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China
- Institute for Drug Evaluation, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, China
- Therapeutic Drug Monitoring and Clinical Toxicology Center, Peking University, Beijing, China
| | - Huibo Li
- School of Pharmacy, Faculty of Medicine, Macau University of Science and Technology, Macau SAR, China
- Department of Pharmacy, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, China
- Institute for Drug Evaluation, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, China
- Therapeutic Drug Monitoring and Clinical Toxicology Center, Peking University, Beijing, China
| | - Rongsheng Zhao
- Department of Pharmacy, Peking University Third Hospital, 49 North Garden Road, Haidian District, Beijing 100191, China
- Institute for Drug Evaluation, Peking University Health Science Center, Beijing, China
- Therapeutic Drug Monitoring and Clinical Toxicology Center, Peking University, Beijing, China
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Hassan S, Hassanain O, Kamal S, Shalaby L, Nagy M. Knowledge, attitudes and practices of Egyptian healthcare professionals toward therapeutic drug monitoring service as a principal component of personalized medicine. Per Med 2022; 19:509-521. [DOI: 10.2217/pme-2022-0031] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/21/2022]
Abstract
Aim: To assess pharmacists' and physicians' knowledge, attitudes and practices toward therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) service at the Children's Cancer Hospital Egypt 57357. Materials & methods: This was a single-site cross-sectional study where all practicing pharmacists and physicians were eligible to participate. Results: A statistically significant difference in the knowledge scores between pharmacists and physicians (p = 0.022) was found. In general, attitudes toward TDM among pharmacists and physicians were positive. Regarding practices, pharmacists were more likely than physicians to agree or strongly agree that they have studied some scientific references on TDM (p = 0.034), but more physicians recommend the TDM service (p = 0.046). Conclusion: A multidisciplinary educational program in Egypt for TDM for both medicine and pharmacy staff will improve interprofessional collaboration in the clinical setting, leading to better personalized medication management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sahar Hassan
- Department of Pharmaceutical Services, Children's Cancer Hospital Egypt, Cairo, 57357, Egypt
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Saarland University, Campus C5 3, Saarbrücken, 66123, Germany
| | - Omneya Hassanain
- Epidemiology and Biostatistics Unit, Department of Clinical Research, Children's Cancer Hospital Egypt, Cairo, 57357, Egypt
| | - Sherif Kamal
- Department of Pharmaceutical Services, Children's Cancer Hospital Egypt, Cairo, 57357, Egypt
| | - Lobna Shalaby
- Infectious Disease Unit, Children's Cancer Hospital Egypt, Cairo, 57357, Egypt
- Department of Pediatric Oncology, National Cancer Institute, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt
| | - Mohamed Nagy
- Department of Pharmaceutical Services, Children's Cancer Hospital Egypt, Cairo, 57357, Egypt
- Personalized Medication Management Unit, Children's Cancer Hospital Egypt, Cairo, 57357, Egypt
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Kim H, Mousa SA. Colony stimulating factors for prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia in children. Expert Rev Clin Pharmacol 2022; 15:977-986. [PMID: 35929962 DOI: 10.1080/17512433.2022.2110066] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/04/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Febrile neutropenia (FN) is one of the complications of chemotherapy that can increase the risk of infection and mortality. Granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) are used in practice to prevent and treat episodes of neutropenia. The use of G-CSFs in children with cancer has not been studied much for primary prophylaxis of FN. AREAS COVERED Current data suggest that G-CSFs have a similar pharmacokinetic profile in children and adults. Clinical trials published from 2002 to 2021 using G-CSFs in pediatric cancer patients were reviewed. All evaluated clinical trials used a dosage of 5 mcg/kg of filgrastim daily until neutrophil recovery or a single dose of 100 mcg/kg pegfilgrastim. Filgrastim demonstrated the benefit in decreasing the duration of fever, hospital stay, and antibiotic use in high-risk neuroblastoma patients. Pegfilgrastim showed similar efficacy in reducing the occurrence of FN and infections, with bone pain as an adverse effect. EXPERT OPINION Filgrastim 5 mcg/kg/day or pegfilgrastim 100 mcg/kg single dose is appropriate when given at least 24 hours or after the chemotherapy in pediatric patients who weigh 45 kg or more. More prospective randomized trials are necessary to further investigate the efficacy and safety of G-CSFs in children with different types of cancer.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Heeyeon Kim
- The Pharmaceutical Research Institute at Albany College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Rensselaer, NY USA
| | - Shaker A Mousa
- The Pharmaceutical Research Institute at Albany College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Rensselaer, NY USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Clinical pharmacology of cytotoxic drugs in neonates and infants: Providing evidence-based dosing guidance. Eur J Cancer 2021; 164:137-154. [PMID: 34865945 PMCID: PMC8914347 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2021.11.001] [Citation(s) in RCA: 12] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/10/2021] [Revised: 10/11/2021] [Accepted: 11/01/2021] [Indexed: 01/29/2023]
Abstract
Cancer in neonates and infants is a rare but challenging entity. Treatment is complicated by marked physiological changes during the first year of life, excess rates of toxicity, mortality, and late effects. Dose optimisation of chemotherapeutics may be an important step to improving outcomes. Body size–based dosing is used for most anticancer drugs used in infants. However, dose regimens are generally not evidence based, and dosing strategies are frequently inconsistent between tumour types and treatment protocols. In this review, we collate available pharmacological evidence supporting dosing regimens in infants for a wide range of cytotoxic drugs. A systematic review was conducted, and available data ranked by a level of evidence (1–5) and a grade of recommendation (A–D) provided on a consensus basis, with recommended dosing approaches indicated as appropriate. For 9 of 29 drugs (busulfan, carboplatin, cyclophosphamide, daunorubicin, etoposide, fludarabine, isotretinoin, melphalan and vincristine), grade A was scored, indicating sufficient pharmacological evidence to recommend a dosing algorithm for infants. For busulfan and carboplatin, sufficient data were available to recommend therapeutic drug monitoring in infants. For eight drugs (actinomycin D, blinatumomab, dinutuximab, doxorubicin, mercaptopurine, pegaspargase, thioguanine and topotecan), some pharmacological evidence was available to guide dosing (graded as B). For the remaining drugs, including commonly used agents such as cisplatin, cytarabine, ifosfamide, and methotrexate, pharmacological evidence for dosing in infants was limited or non-existent: grades C and D were scored for 10 and 2 drugs, respectively. The review provides clinically relevant evidence-based dosing guidance for cytotoxic drugs in neonates and infants. Treating cancer in neonates and infants is challenging. Dose optimisation of cytotoxic drugs is an important step to improving outcomes. Clinical pharmacological evidence supporting dosing regimens in infants was collated. All available pharmacological evidence was ranked by a level of evidence. A grade of recommendation was derived and a recommended dose per agent provided.
Collapse
|
5
|
van der Perk MEM, Broer L, Yasui Y, Robison LL, Hudson MM, Laven JSE, van der Pal HJ, Tissing WJE, Versluys B, Bresters D, Kaspers GJL, de Vries ACH, Lambalk CB, Overbeek A, Loonen JJ, Beerendonk CCM, Byrne J, Berger C, Clemens E, Dirksen U, Falck Winther J, Fosså SD, Grabow D, Muraca M, Kaiser M, Kepák T, Kruseova J, Modan-Moses D, Spix C, Zolk O, Kaatsch P, Krijthe JH, Kremer LCM, Brooke RJ, Baedke JL, van Schaik RHN, van den Anker JN, Uitterlinden AG, Bos AME, van Leeuwen FE, van Dulmen-den Broeder E, van der Kooi ALLF, van den Heuvel-Eibrink MM. Effect of Genetic Variation in CYP450 on Gonadal Impairment in a European Cohort of Female Childhood Cancer Survivors, Based on a Candidate Gene Approach: Results from the PanCareLIFE Study. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:4598. [PMID: 34572825 PMCID: PMC8470074 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13184598] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/23/2021] [Revised: 09/01/2021] [Accepted: 09/04/2021] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Female childhood cancer survivors (CCSs) carry a risk of therapy-related gonadal dysfunction. Alkylating agents (AA) are well-established risk factors, yet inter-individual variability in ovarian function is observed. Polymorphisms in CYP450 enzymes may explain this variability in AA-induced ovarian damage. We aimed to evaluate associations between previously identified genetic polymorphisms in CYP450 enzymes and AA-related ovarian function among adult CCSs. METHODS Anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels served as a proxy for ovarian function in a discovery cohort of adult female CCSs, from the pan-European PanCareLIFE cohort (n = 743; age (years): median 25.8, interquartile range (IQR) 22.1-30.6). Using two additive genetic models in linear and logistic regression, nine genetic variants in three CYP450 enzymes were analyzed in relation to cyclophosphamide equivalent dose (CED) score and their impact on AMH levels. The main model evaluated the effect of the variant on AMH and the interaction model evaluated the modifying effect of the variant on the impact of CED score on log-transformed AMH levels. Results were validated, and meta-analysis performed, using the USA-based St. Jude Lifetime Cohort (n = 391; age (years): median 31.3, IQR 26.6-37.4). RESULTS CYP3A4*3 was significantly associated with AMH levels in the discovery and replication cohort. Meta-analysis revealed a significant main deleterious effect (Beta (95% CI): -0.706 (-1.11--0.298), p-value = 7 × 10-4) of CYP3A4*3 (rs4986910) on log-transformed AMH levels. CYP2B6*2 (rs8192709) showed a significant protective interaction effect (Beta (95% CI): 0.527 (0.126-0.928), p-value = 0.01) on log-transformed AMH levels in CCSs receiving more than 8000 mg/m2 CED. CONCLUSIONS Female CCSs CYP3A4*3 carriers had significantly lower AMH levels, and CYP2B6*2 may have a protective effect on AMH levels. Identification of risk-contributing variants may improve individualized counselling regarding the treatment-related risk of infertility and fertility preservation options.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M. E. Madeleine van der Perk
- Princess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology, 3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands; (H.J.v.d.P.); (W.J.E.T.); (B.V.); (D.B.); (G.J.L.K.); (A.C.H.d.V.); (E.C.); (L.C.M.K.); (E.v.D.-d.B.); (A.-L.L.F.v.d.K.); (M.M.v.d.H.-E.)
| | - Linda Broer
- Department of Internal Medicine, Rotterdam, ErasmusMC University Medical Center Rotterdam, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands; (L.B.); (A.G.U.)
| | - Yutaka Yasui
- Department of Epidemiology and Cancer Control, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, TN 38105, USA; (Y.Y.); (L.L.R.); (M.M.H.); (R.J.B.); (J.L.B.)
| | - Leslie L. Robison
- Department of Epidemiology and Cancer Control, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, TN 38105, USA; (Y.Y.); (L.L.R.); (M.M.H.); (R.J.B.); (J.L.B.)
| | - Melissa M. Hudson
- Department of Epidemiology and Cancer Control, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, TN 38105, USA; (Y.Y.); (L.L.R.); (M.M.H.); (R.J.B.); (J.L.B.)
- Department of Oncology, Division of Survivorship, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, TN 38105, USA
| | - Joop S. E. Laven
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Erasmus MC–University Medical Center, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands;
| | - Helena J. van der Pal
- Princess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology, 3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands; (H.J.v.d.P.); (W.J.E.T.); (B.V.); (D.B.); (G.J.L.K.); (A.C.H.d.V.); (E.C.); (L.C.M.K.); (E.v.D.-d.B.); (A.-L.L.F.v.d.K.); (M.M.v.d.H.-E.)
| | - Wim J. E. Tissing
- Princess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology, 3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands; (H.J.v.d.P.); (W.J.E.T.); (B.V.); (D.B.); (G.J.L.K.); (A.C.H.d.V.); (E.C.); (L.C.M.K.); (E.v.D.-d.B.); (A.-L.L.F.v.d.K.); (M.M.v.d.H.-E.)
| | - Birgitta Versluys
- Princess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology, 3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands; (H.J.v.d.P.); (W.J.E.T.); (B.V.); (D.B.); (G.J.L.K.); (A.C.H.d.V.); (E.C.); (L.C.M.K.); (E.v.D.-d.B.); (A.-L.L.F.v.d.K.); (M.M.v.d.H.-E.)
| | - Dorine Bresters
- Princess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology, 3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands; (H.J.v.d.P.); (W.J.E.T.); (B.V.); (D.B.); (G.J.L.K.); (A.C.H.d.V.); (E.C.); (L.C.M.K.); (E.v.D.-d.B.); (A.-L.L.F.v.d.K.); (M.M.v.d.H.-E.)
| | - Gertjan J. L. Kaspers
- Princess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology, 3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands; (H.J.v.d.P.); (W.J.E.T.); (B.V.); (D.B.); (G.J.L.K.); (A.C.H.d.V.); (E.C.); (L.C.M.K.); (E.v.D.-d.B.); (A.-L.L.F.v.d.K.); (M.M.v.d.H.-E.)
- Department of Pediatric Oncology-Haematology, Emma Children’s Hospital, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Andrica C. H. de Vries
- Princess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology, 3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands; (H.J.v.d.P.); (W.J.E.T.); (B.V.); (D.B.); (G.J.L.K.); (A.C.H.d.V.); (E.C.); (L.C.M.K.); (E.v.D.-d.B.); (A.-L.L.F.v.d.K.); (M.M.v.d.H.-E.)
| | - Cornelis B. Lambalk
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (C.B.L.); (A.O.)
| | - Annelies Overbeek
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, 1105 AZ Amsterdam, The Netherlands; (C.B.L.); (A.O.)
| | - Jacqueline J. Loonen
- Department of Haematology, Radboud University Medical Center, 6500 HB Nijmegen, The Netherlands;
| | - Catharina C. M. Beerendonk
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboud University Medical Center, 6500 HB Nijmegen, The Netherlands;
| | - Julianne Byrne
- Boyne Research Institute, 5 Bolton Square, East, Drogheda, A92 RY6K Co. Louth, Ireland;
| | - Claire Berger
- Department of Paediatric Oncology, University Hospital, 42 055 Saint-Etienne, France;
- Lyon University, Jean Monnet University, INSERM, U 1059, Sainbiose, 42023 Saint-Etienne, France
| | - Eva Clemens
- Princess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology, 3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands; (H.J.v.d.P.); (W.J.E.T.); (B.V.); (D.B.); (G.J.L.K.); (A.C.H.d.V.); (E.C.); (L.C.M.K.); (E.v.D.-d.B.); (A.-L.L.F.v.d.K.); (M.M.v.d.H.-E.)
| | - Uta Dirksen
- University Hospital Essen, Pediatrics III, West German Cancer Centre, 45147 Essen, Germany;
- German Cancer Research Centre, DKTK, Site Essen, 45147 Essen, Germany
| | - Jeanette Falck Winther
- Childhood Cancer Research Group, Danish Cancer Society Research Center, 2100 Copenhagen, Denmark;
- Department of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health, Aarhus University and University Hospital, 8200 Aarhus, Denmark
| | - Sophie D. Fosså
- Department of Oncology, Oslo University Hospital, 0372 Oslo, Norway;
| | - Desiree Grabow
- Division of Childhood Cancer Epidemiology, German Childhood Cancer Registry, Institute of Medical Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics (IMBEI), University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, 55131 Mainz, Germany; (D.G.); (M.K.); (C.S.); (P.K.)
| | - Monica Muraca
- Epidemiology and Biostatistics Unit and DOPO Clinic, IRCCS Istituto Giannina Gaslini, 16147 Genova, Italy;
| | - Melanie Kaiser
- Division of Childhood Cancer Epidemiology, German Childhood Cancer Registry, Institute of Medical Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics (IMBEI), University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, 55131 Mainz, Germany; (D.G.); (M.K.); (C.S.); (P.K.)
| | - Tomáš Kepák
- University Hospital Brno, International Clinical Research Center (FNUSA-ICRC), Masaryk University, 656 91 Brno, Czech Republic;
| | | | - Dalit Modan-Moses
- The Edmond and Lily Safra Children’s Hospital, Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer, and the Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel-Aviv University, Tel-Aviv 6997801, Israel;
| | - Claudia Spix
- Division of Childhood Cancer Epidemiology, German Childhood Cancer Registry, Institute of Medical Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics (IMBEI), University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, 55131 Mainz, Germany; (D.G.); (M.K.); (C.S.); (P.K.)
| | - Oliver Zolk
- Institute of Clinical Pharmacology, Brandenburg Medical School Theodor Fontane, Immanuel Klinik Rüdersdorf, 16816 Neuruppin, Germany;
| | - Peter Kaatsch
- Division of Childhood Cancer Epidemiology, German Childhood Cancer Registry, Institute of Medical Biostatistics, Epidemiology and Informatics (IMBEI), University Medical Center of the Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz, 55131 Mainz, Germany; (D.G.); (M.K.); (C.S.); (P.K.)
| | - Jesse H. Krijthe
- Department of Intelligent Systems, Delft University of Technology, 2628 BL Delft, The Netherlands;
| | - Leontien C. M. Kremer
- Princess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology, 3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands; (H.J.v.d.P.); (W.J.E.T.); (B.V.); (D.B.); (G.J.L.K.); (A.C.H.d.V.); (E.C.); (L.C.M.K.); (E.v.D.-d.B.); (A.-L.L.F.v.d.K.); (M.M.v.d.H.-E.)
| | - Russell J. Brooke
- Department of Epidemiology and Cancer Control, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, TN 38105, USA; (Y.Y.); (L.L.R.); (M.M.H.); (R.J.B.); (J.L.B.)
| | - Jessica L. Baedke
- Department of Epidemiology and Cancer Control, St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, TN 38105, USA; (Y.Y.); (L.L.R.); (M.M.H.); (R.J.B.); (J.L.B.)
| | - Ron H. N. van Schaik
- Department of clinical chemistry, Erasmus MC University Medical Center Rotterdam, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands;
| | - John N. van den Anker
- Division of Clinical Pharmacology, Children’s National Hospital, Washington, DC 20010, USA;
| | - André G. Uitterlinden
- Department of Internal Medicine, Rotterdam, ErasmusMC University Medical Center Rotterdam, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands; (L.B.); (A.G.U.)
| | - Annelies M. E. Bos
- Department of Reproductive Medicine and Gynecology, University Medical Center Utrecht, 3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands;
| | - Flora E. van Leeuwen
- Department of Epidemiology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands;
| | - Eline van Dulmen-den Broeder
- Princess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology, 3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands; (H.J.v.d.P.); (W.J.E.T.); (B.V.); (D.B.); (G.J.L.K.); (A.C.H.d.V.); (E.C.); (L.C.M.K.); (E.v.D.-d.B.); (A.-L.L.F.v.d.K.); (M.M.v.d.H.-E.)
| | - Anne-Lotte L. F. van der Kooi
- Princess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology, 3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands; (H.J.v.d.P.); (W.J.E.T.); (B.V.); (D.B.); (G.J.L.K.); (A.C.H.d.V.); (E.C.); (L.C.M.K.); (E.v.D.-d.B.); (A.-L.L.F.v.d.K.); (M.M.v.d.H.-E.)
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Erasmus MC–University Medical Center, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands;
| | - Marry M. van den Heuvel-Eibrink
- Princess Máxima Center for Pediatric Oncology, 3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands; (H.J.v.d.P.); (W.J.E.T.); (B.V.); (D.B.); (G.J.L.K.); (A.C.H.d.V.); (E.C.); (L.C.M.K.); (E.v.D.-d.B.); (A.-L.L.F.v.d.K.); (M.M.v.d.H.-E.)
| | | |
Collapse
|
6
|
Abdulla A, Edwina EE, Flint RB, Allegaert K, Wildschut ED, Koch BCP, de Hoog M. Model-Informed Precision Dosing of Antibiotics in Pediatric Patients: A Narrative Review. Front Pediatr 2021; 9:624639. [PMID: 33708753 PMCID: PMC7940353 DOI: 10.3389/fped.2021.624639] [Citation(s) in RCA: 24] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/31/2020] [Accepted: 02/03/2021] [Indexed: 12/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Optimal pharmacotherapy in pediatric patients with suspected infections requires understanding and integration of relevant data on the antibiotic, bacterial pathogen, and patient characteristics. Because of age-related physiological maturation and non-maturational covariates (e.g., disease state, inflammation, organ failure, co-morbidity, co-medication and extracorporeal systems), antibiotic pharmacokinetics is highly variable in pediatric patients and difficult to predict without using population pharmacokinetics models. The intra- and inter-individual variability can result in under- or overexposure in a significant proportion of patients. Therapeutic drug monitoring typically covers assessment of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, and concurrent dose adaptation after initial standard dosing and drug concentration analysis. Model-informed precision dosing (MIPD) captures drug, disease, and patient characteristics in modeling approaches and can be used to perform Bayesian forecasting and dose optimization. Incorporating MIPD in the electronic patient record system brings pharmacometrics to the bedside of the patient, with the aim of a consisted and optimal drug exposure. In this narrative review, we evaluated studies assessing optimization of antibiotic pharmacotherapy using MIPD in pediatric populations. Four eligible studies involving amikacin and vancomycin were identified from 418 records. Key articles, independent of year of publication, were also selected to highlight important attributes of MIPD. Although very little research has been conducted until this moment, the available data on vancomycin indicate that MIPD is superior compared to conventional dosing strategies with respect to target attainment. The utility of MIPD in pediatrics needs to be further confirmed in frequently used antibiotic classes, particularly aminoglycosides and beta-lactams.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alan Abdulla
- Department of Hospital Pharmacy, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Elma E Edwina
- Department of Hospital Pharmacy, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Robert B Flint
- Department of Hospital Pharmacy, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands.,Division of Neonatology, Department of Pediatrics, Sophia Children's Hospital, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Karel Allegaert
- Department of Hospital Pharmacy, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands.,Department of Pharmaceutical and Pharmacological Sciences, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.,Department of Development and Regeneration, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium
| | - Enno D Wildschut
- Department of Pediatric Intensive Care, Sophia Children's Hospital, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Birgit C P Koch
- Department of Hospital Pharmacy, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| | - Matthijs de Hoog
- Department of Pediatric Intensive Care, Sophia Children's Hospital, Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam, Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|