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

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.

Oral Antibiotics for Bacteremia and Infective Endocarditis: Current Evidence and Future Perspectives

Bacteremia and endocarditis are two clinical syndromes that, for decades, were managed exclusively with parenteral antimicrobials, irrespective of a given patient's clinical condition, causative pathogen, or its antibiotic susceptibility profile. This clinical approach, however, was based on low-quality data and outdated expert opinions. When a patient's condition has improved, gastrointestinal absorption is not compromised, and an oral antibiotic regimen reaching adequate serum concentrations is available, a switch to oral antibacterials can be applied. Although available evidence has reduced the timing of the oral switch in bacteremia to three days/until clinical improvement, there are only scarce data regarding less than 10-day intravenous antibiotic therapy in endocarditis. Many standard or studied oral antimicrobial dosages are smaller than the approved doses for parenteral administration, which is a risk factor for treatment failure; in addition, the gastrointestinal barrier may affect drug bioavailability, especially when the causative pathogen has a minimum inhibitory concentration that is close to the susceptibility breakpoint. A considerable number of patients infected by such near-breakpoint strains may not be potential candidates for oral step-down therapy to non-highly bioavailable antibiotics like beta-lactams; different breakpoints should be determined for this setting. This review will focus on summarizing findings about pathogen-specific tailoring of oral step-down therapy for bacteremia and endocarditis, but will also present laboratory and clinical data about antibiotics such as beta-lactams, linezolid, and fosfomycin that should be studied more in order to elucidate their role and optimal dosage in this context.

Optimal drug therapy for Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia in adults

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Staphylococcus aureus is a significant human pathogen, causing a variety of infections, from skin and soft tissue infections to endocarditis, bone and joint infections and deep tissue abscesses. Mortality from S. aureus bacteraemia remains high, without major therapeutic advances in recent decades.

RECENT FINDINGS

In recent years, optimized dosing of antibiotics is increasingly being recognized as a cornerstone of management for severe infections including S. aureus bacteraemia. This comprehensive review details the pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics (PK/PD) targets for commonly used antistaphylococcal antibiotics and the doses predicted to achieve them in clinical practice. Recent advances in dosing of teicoplanin and use of cefazolin in CNS infections and findings from combination therapy studies are discussed. Drug exposure relationships related to toxicity are also detailed.

SUMMARY

This review details the different PK/PD targets for drugs used to treat S. aureus bacteraemia and how to apply them in various scenarios. The drug doses that achieve them, and the risks of toxicity are also provided.

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.

Monitoring Salivary Concentrations of Tedizolid and Linezolid Using Rats

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is an effective tool for the management of patients who are administered linezolid. The use of saliva for TDM has potential advantages over the use of plasma; however, only a few reports have compared drug concentrations in the saliva and plasma. Moreover, there are no reports on the salivary concentration of tedizolid, an oxazolidinone antibiotic similar to linezolid. In the present study, the concentrations of tedizolid and linezolid in rat submandibular saliva were compared with those measured in the plasma.

METHODS

Tedizolid (10 mg/kg, n = 6) and linezolid (12 mg/kg, n = 5) were administered via the rat tail vein. Submandibular saliva and plasma samples were collected for up to 8 h after the initiation of drug administration, and assayed for the concentrations of tedizolid and linezolid.

RESULTS

A strong correlation was found between the saliva and plasma concentrations of tedizolid (r = 0.964, p < 0.001) and linezolid (r = 0.936, p < 0.001). The value of tedizolid maximum concentration of drug (C_max) was 0.99 ± 0.08 µg/mL in the saliva and 14.46 ± 1.71 µg/mL in the plasma. Meanwhile, the C_max of linezolid was 8.01 ± 1.42 µg/mL in the saliva and 13.00 ± 1.90 µg/mL in the plasma. According to these results, the saliva/plasma concentration ratios of tedizolid and linezolid in rats were 0.0513 ± 0.0080 and 0.6341 ± 0.0339, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Considering the correlation between saliva and plasma concentrations of tedizolid and linezolid, as well as the characteristics of saliva, the results of this study suggest that saliva is a useful matrix for TDM.

Bayesian prediction-based individualized dosing of anti-methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus treatment: Recent advancements and prospects in therapeutic drug monitoring

As one of the efficient techniques for TDM, the population pharmacokinetic (popPK) model approach for dose individualization has been developed due to the rapidly growing innovative progress in computer technology and has recently been considered as a part of model-informed precision dosing (MIPD). Initial dose individualization and measurement followed by maximum a posteriori (MAP)-Bayesian prediction using a popPK model are the most classical and widely used approach among a class of MIPD strategies. MAP-Bayesian prediction offers the possibility of dose optimization based on measurement even before reaching a pharmacokinetically steady state, such as in an emergency, especially for infectious diseases requiring urgent antimicrobial treatment. As the pharmacokinetic processes in critically ill patients are affected and highly variable due to pathophysiological disturbances, the advantages offered by the popPK model approach make it highly recommended and required for effective and appropriate antimicrobial treatment. In this review, we focus on novel insights and beneficial aspects of the popPK model approach, especially in the treatment of infectious diseases with anti-methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus agents represented by vancomycin, and discuss the recent advancements and prospects in TDM practice.

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.

Linezolid pharmacokinetics: a systematic review for the best clinical practice

OBJECTIVES

To summarize the pharmacokinetics of linezolid to optimize the dosing regimen in special populations.

METHODS

A literature search was performed in three largest medical databases, including Embase, Scopus, and PubMed. The main applied keywords were linezolid and pharmacokinetics. Of 3663 retrieved publications in the English language, 35 original research articles, clinical studies, and case reports about linezolid pharmacokinetics in different populations such as pregnant women, pediatrics, elderly subjects, obese people, individuals with organ dysfunction, and critically ill patients were included. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Dose adjustment is not currently recommended for linezolid in patients with mild to moderate renal or hepatic impairment, older adults, and pregnant women. Although dose adjustment is not recommended in patients with severe renal or hepatic impairment, it should be considered that these patients are more vulnerable to linezolid adverse effects and drug interactions. In pediatrics, reducing the linezolid dosing interval to 8 h is suggested. Despite the lack of sufficient information in obese individuals, dosing based on body weight or use of higher dose seems to be justifiable to prevent sub-therapeutic concentrations. Although dose adjustment of linezolid is not recommended in critically ill patients, administration of linezolid as continuous intravenous infusion is suggested in this population. Blood level monitoring should be considered in populations that are vulnerable to linezolid underexposure (such as critically ill patients with augmented renal clearance, pediatrics, overweight, and obese patients) or overexposure (such as elderly, patients with hepatic and renal impairment). To assess the efficacy and safety of linezolid, the area under the concentration-time curve over 24 h to minimum inhibitory concentration (AUC0-24 h/MIC) equal to 80-120, percentage of time above the MIC ≥ 85%, and serum trough concentration between 2 and 7 mg/L are suggested.

Safety Profile of Linezolid in Older Adults With Renal Impairment: A Population-Based Retrospective Cohort Study

Background

The objective of this study was to characterize the safety profile of linezolid in patients with renal impairment compared with patients without renal impairment.

Methods

A population-based retrospective cohort study using linked administrative databases included patients aged 66 years or older in Ontario, Canadawho were prescribed linezolid from 2014 to 2021. Renal impairment was defined using baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate <30 mL/min/1.73 m² or receipt of dialysis. The primary outcomes were change in platelet count and severe thrombocytopenia (platelet count <50 × 10⁹/L) within 90 days. Secondary outcomes included bleeding, neutropenia, peripheral neuropathy, optic neuropathy, acidosis, serotonin syndrome, and mortality. Inverse probability of treatment weighting on propensity score was used to balance comparison groups on baseline health.

Results

Of 625 patients, 98 (15.7%) patients had renal impairment. The mean (SD) platelet change was -88.3 (108.4) 10⁹/L in the renal impairment group and -76.5 (109.8) 10⁹/L in the no renal impairment group, with an adjusted mean difference of -29.4 (95% CI, -53.4 to -5.3; P = .0165). Severe thrombocytopenia occurred in 9.2% for the renal impairment group and 5.9% for the no renal impairment group, with an adjusted risk difference of 2.7% (95% CI, -3.1% to 8.6%; P = .3655). There were no significant differences in secondary outcomes between the 2 groups.

Conclusions

Patients with renal impairment on linezolid therapy had a larger decrease in platelet count, but their risks for severe thrombocytopenia and bleeding were not significantly different than patients without renal impairment. Linezolid is likely safe in renal impairment without dose adjustment or drug level monitoring.

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.

Expert consensus statement on therapeutic drug monitoring and individualization of linezolid

Linezolid is an oxazolidinone antibacterial drug, and its therapeutic drug monitoring and individualized treatment have been challenged since its approval. With the in-depth clinical research of linezolid, we have changed our attitude toward its therapeutic drug monitoring and our view of individualized treatment. On the basis of summarizing the existing clinical studies, and based on the practical experience of each expert in their respective professional fields, we have formed this expert consensus. Our team of specialists is a multidisciplinary team that includes pharmacotherapists, clinical pharmacology specialists, critical care medicine specialists, respiratory specialists, infectious disease specialists, emergency medicine specialists and more. We are committed to the safe and effective use of linezolid in patients in need, and the promotion of its therapeutic drug monitoring.

Clinical efficacy and safety of linezolid in intensive care unit patients

Background

To characterize the population of critically ill patients and infections treated with linezolid in the intensive care unit (ICU), and to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of linezolid therapy.

Methods

This multi-center, observational, real-world study was conducted across 52 hospitals between June 9, 2018, and December 28, 2019. Patients who met the following inclusion criteria were included: (1) admitted to the ICU, (2) of any age group, and (3) having a clinical or laboratory diagnosis of a Gram-positive bacterial infection. Clinical efficacy was categorized as success (cured or improved), failed, or non-evaluable. Adverse events and serious adverse events were recorded during treatment.

Results

A total of 366 ICU patients who met the inclusion criteria were evaluated. Linezolid was used as second- and first-line treatment in 232 (63.4%) and 134 (36.6%) patients, respectively. The most common isolated strain was Staphylococcus aureus (methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: n=37/119, 31.1%; methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus: n=15/119, 12.6%); this was followed by Enterococci (vancomycin-resistant Enterococci: n=8/119, 6.7%; vancomycin-susceptible Enterococci: n=11/119, 9.2%) and Streptococcus pneumoniae (multidrug-resistant: n=4/119, 3.4%; non-multidrug resistant: n=2/119, 1.7%). The main infection sites where pathogens were detected included the lung (n=216/366, 59.6%), skin and soft tissue (n=104/366, 28.4%), and blood (n=50/366, 13.7%). Clinical success was achieved in 301 (82.2%) patients; 34 (9.3%) were cured and 267 (73.0%) improved; treatment failure and non-evaluable outcomes were observed in 29 (7.9%) in 36 (9.8%) patients, respectively. Linezolid-related adverse events were reported in 8 (2.2%) patients. No treatment-related serious adverse events were reported.

Conclusions

Based on real-world results, linezolid was found to be effective and safe in the treatment of Gram-positive bacterial infections in critically ill patients.