Evaluation of a trough-only extrapolated area under the curve vancomycin dosing method on clinical outcomes

Is It Still Beneficial to Monitor the Trough Concentration of Vancomycin? A Quantitative Meta-Analysis of Nephrotoxicity and Efficacy

This study conducted a quantitative meta-analysis to investigate the association of vancomycin indicators, particularly area under the curve over 24 h (AUC24) and trough concentrations (Ctrough), and their relationship with both nephrotoxicity and efficacy. Literature research was performed in PubMed and Web of Science on vancomycin nephrotoxicity and efficacy in adult inpatients. Vancomycin Ctrough, AUC24, AUC24/minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC), nephrotoxicity evaluation and treatment outcomes were extracted. Logistic regression and Emax models were conducted, stratified by evaluation criterion for nephrotoxicity and primary outcomes for efficacy. Among 100 publications on nephrotoxicity, 29 focused on AUC24 and 97 on Ctrough, while of 74 publications on efficacy, 27 reported AUC24/MIC and 68 reported Ctrough. The logistic regression analysis indicated a significant association between nephrotoxicity and vancomycin Ctrough (odds ratio = 2.193; 95% CI 1.582-3.442, p < 0.001). The receiver operating characteristic curve had an area of 0.90, with a cut-off point of 14.55 mg/L. Additionally, 92.3% of the groups with a mean AUC24 within 400-600 mg·h/L showed a mean Ctrough of 10-20 mg/L. However, a subtle, non-statistically significant association was observed between the AUC24 and nephrotoxicity, as well as between AUC24/MIC and Ctrough concerning treatment outcomes. Our findings suggest that monitoring vancomycin Ctrough remains a beneficial and valuable approach to proactively identifying patients at risk of nephrotoxicity, particularly when Ctrough exceeds 15 mg/L. Ctrough can serve as a surrogate for AUC24 to some extent. However, no definitive cut-off values were identified for AUC24 concerning nephrotoxicity or for Ctrough and AUC24/MIC regarding efficacy.

Altered Pharmacokinetics Parameters of Vancomycin in Patients with Hematological Malignancy with Febrile Neutropenia, a Bayesian Software Estimation

The pharmacokinetics of vancomycin vary significantly between specific groups of patients, such as critically ill patients and patients with hematological malignancy (HM) with febrile neutropenia (FN). Recent evidence suggests that the use of the usual standard dose of antibiotics in patients with FN may not offer adequate exposure due to pharmacokinetic variability (PK). Therefore, the purpose of this study is to assess the effect of FN on AUC_0-24 as a key parameter for vancomycin monitoring, as well as to determine which vancomycin PK parameters are affected by the presence of FN using Bayesian software PrecisePK in HM with FN. This study was carried out in King Abdulaziz Medical City. All adult patients who were admitted to the Princess Norah Oncology Center PNOC between 1 January and 2017 and 31 December 2020, hospitalized and received vancomycin with a steady-state trough concentration measured before the fourth dose, were included. During the trial period, 297 patients received vancomycin during their stay at the oncology center, 217 of them meeting the inclusion criteria. Pharmacokinetic parameters were estimated for the neutropenic and non-FN patients using the precise PK Bayesian platform. The result showed that there was a significant difference (p < 0.05) in vancomycin clearance Cl_van, the volume of distribution at a steady-state V_dss, the volume of distribution for peripheral compartment V_dp, half-life for the elimination phase t½_β, and the first-order rate constant for the elimination process β in FN compared to non-FN patients. Furthermore, AUC_0-24 was lower for FN patients compared to non-FN patients, p < 0.05. FN has a significant effect on the PK parameters of vancomycin and AUC_0-24, which may require specific consideration during the treatment initiation.

Vancomycin area under the curve versus trough only guided dosing and the risk of acute kidney injury: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Vancomycin is commonly used to treat methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections and is known to cause nephrotoxicity. Previous Vancomycin Consensus Guidelines recommended targeting trough concentrations but the 2020 Guidelines suggest monitoring vancomycin area under the curve (AUC) given the reduced risk of acute kidney injury (AKI) at similar levels of efficacy. This meta-analysis compares vancomycin-induced AKI incidence using AUC-guided dosing strategies versus trough-based monitoring. Literature was queried from Medline (Ovid), Web of Science, and Google Scholar from database inception through November 5, 2021. Interventional or observational studies reporting the incidence of vancomycin-induced AKI between AUC- and trough-guided dosing strategies were included. In the primary analysis, the Vancomycin Consensus Guidelines definition for AKI was used if reported; otherwise, the Risk, Injury, and Failure; and Loss, and End-stage kidney disease (RIFLE) or Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) definitions were used. The incidence of nephrotoxicity was evaluated between the two strategies using a Mantel-Haenszel random-effects model, and odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Subgroup analyses for adjusted ORs and AKI definitions were performed. Heterogeneity was identified using Cochrane's Q test and I² statistics. A total of 10 studies with 4231 patients were included. AUC-guided dosing strategies were associated with significantly less vancomycin-induced AKI than trough-guided strategies [OR 0.625, 95% CI (0.469-0.834), p = 0.001; I²  = 25.476]. A subgroup analysis of three studies reporting adjusted ORs yielded similar results [OR 0.475, 95% CI (0.261-0.863), p = 0.015]. Stratification by AKI definition showed a significant reduction in AKI with the Vancomycin Consensus Guidelines definition [OR 0.552, 95% CI (0.341-0.894), p = 0.016] but failed to find significance in the alternative definitions. Area under the curve-guided dosing strategies are associated with a lower incidence of vancomycin-induced AKI versus trough-guided dosing strategies (GRADE, low). Limitations included the variety of AKI definitions and the potential for confounding bias.

Clinical Practice Guidelines for Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Vancomycin in the Framework of Model-Informed Precision Dosing: A Consensus Review by the Japanese Society of Chemotherapy and the Japanese Society of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring

Background: To promote model-informed precision dosing (MIPD) for vancomycin (VCM), we developed statements for therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). Methods: Ten clinical questions were selected. The committee conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis as well as clinical studies to establish recommendations for area under the concentration-time curve (AUC)-guided dosing. Results: AUC-guided dosing tended to more strongly decrease the risk of acute kidney injury (AKI) than trough-guided dosing, and a lower risk of treatment failure was demonstrated for higher AUC/minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) ratios (cut-off of 400). Higher AUCs (cut-off of 600 μg·h/mL) significantly increased the risk of AKI. Although Bayesian estimation with two-point measurement was recommended, the trough concentration alone may be used in patients with mild infections in whom VCM was administered with q12h. To increase the concentration on days 1–2, the routine use of a loading dose is required. TDM on day 2 before steady state is reached should be considered to optimize the dose in patients with serious infections and a high risk of AKI. Conclusions: These VCM TDM guidelines provide recommendations based on MIPD to increase treatment response while preventing adverse effects.

Impact of Area Under the Concentration-Time Curve on the Prevalence of Vancomycin-Induced Nephrotoxicity in Combination With Tazobactam/Piperacillin or Cefepime: A Single-Institution Retrospective Study

PURPOSE

Risk for vancomycin-induced nephrotoxicity (VIN) is reportedly reduced by AUC-guided vancomycin dosing. However, it remains unknown whether the increased VIN risk in combination treatment with vancomycin and tazobactam/piperacillin, which is a VIN risk factor, can be diminished by AUC-guided vancomycin dosing (vancomycin-AUC). The aim of this study was to assess whether the evaluation of vancomycin-AUC + tazobactam/piperacillin (VT) combination therapy could prevent VIN.

METHODS

The data from patients who received VT or vancomycin + cefepime (VC; the control group) at Tokushima University Hospital (Kuramoto, Japan) between April 2010 and March 2020 were analyzed in this retrospective study. The between-group difference in the prevalence of VIN onset, stratified by AUC, was investigated. The AUC of vancomycin was calculated using the Bayesian method with the blood concentration of vancomycin. The risk factors and probability of VIN onset from the vancomycin exposure-toxicity curve were evaluated using the logistic model.

FINDINGS

The prevalences of VIN were 29.5% (18/61) and 7.1% (3/42) in the VT and VC groups, respectively. Multivariate logistic regression analysis of data from all patients revealed concurrent use of tazobactam/piperacillin (odds ratio [OR] = 4.59; P = 0.039) and AUC increase (OR = 1.01; P < 0.01) as risk factors for VIN, but only concurrent use of tazobactam/piperacillin was identified as a risk factor in patients with an AUC of <600 μg · h/mL, the guideline-recommended value (OR = 9.52; P = 0.041). Moreover, the vancomycin exposure-toxicity curve showed that in the guideline-recommended AUC range, VIN probability was consistently higher and the slope of VIN probability was greater in the VT group than in the VC group.

IMPLICATIONS

VIN risk was higher with VT than with VC, even when the AUC was controlled to the guideline-recommended range. These results strongly suggest that VIN prevention may be difficult with AUC-guided vancomycin dosing in patients receiving VT.