Systematic Evaluation of Pharmacokinetic Models for Model-Informed Precision Dosing of Meropenem in Critically Ill Patients Undergoing Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy

Population Pharmacokinetic Modeling of Unbound Meropenem in Patients Undergoing Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy: An Observational Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

The most effective dosing strategy of meropenem for patients undergoing continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) remains uncertain. This study aimed to analyze the population pharmacokinetics (popPKs) of unbound meropenem and establish an appropriate dosing approach.

METHODS

This prospective study involved 19 patients for the development of a popPK model and an additional 10 for its validation. Ethical approval was obtained.

RESULTS

The clearance of unbound meropenem was influenced by the sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score [=2.22 × (SOFA score/12)^1.88] and the effluent flow rate from the CRRT device, with an interindividual variability of 44.5%. The volume of distribution was affected by the simplified acute physiology score II [=23.1 × (simplified acute physiology score II/52)^1.54]. Monte Carlo simulations suggested meropenem doses ranging from 1.0 to 3.0 g/d using continuous infusion to achieve a target time above the 4 times of minimum inhibitory concentration of the unbound form (%fT>4×MIC) of 100% for definitive therapy. For empirical therapy, a dose of 1.0 g/d using continuous infusion was recommended to target %fT>MIC of 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

This study developed a popPK model for unbound meropenem in patients undergoing CRRT and formulated dosing guidelines.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

UMIN000024321.

Therapeutic drug monitoring of imipenem/cilastatin and meropenem in critically ill adult patients

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the factors influencing imipenem/cilastatin (IMI) and meropenem (MEM) concentrations in critically ill adult patients and the role of these concentrations in the clinical outcome.

METHODS

Plasma trough concentrations of IMI and MEM were detected by high-performance liquid chromatography. A target value of 100%-time above MIC was used for the drugs.

RESULTS

A total of 186 patients were included, with 87 receiving IMI and 99 receiving MEM. The percentages of patients reaching the target IMI and MEM concentrations were 44.8% and 38.4%, respectively. The proportions of patients infected with drug-resistant bacteria were 57.5% and 69.7% in the IMI group and MEM group, respectively. In the multivariate analysis, the risk factors for an IMI concentration that did not reach the target were infection with drug-resistant bacteria, and those for MEM were infection with drug-resistant bacteria, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and diabetes mellitus. A total of 47.1% of patients had good outcomes in the IMI cohort, and 38.1% of patients had good outcomes in the MEM cohort. The duration of mechanical ventilation and IMI concentration were associated with ICU stay in patients in the IMI cohort, while MEM concentration and severe pneumonia affected the clinical outcome of patients in the MEM cohort.

CONCLUSION

Infection with drug-resistant bacteria is an important factor influencing whether IMI and MEM concentrations reach the target. Furthermore, IMI and MEM concentrations are associated with the clinical outcome, and elevated doses of IMI and MEM should be given to patients who are infected with drug-resistant bacteria.

Impact of Various Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate Equations on the Pharmacokinetics of Meropenem in Critically Ill Adults

IMPORTANCE

Meropenem dosing is typically guided by creatinine-based estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), but creatinine is a suboptimal GFR marker in the critically ill.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to develop and qualify a population pharmacokinetic model for meropenem in critically ill adults and to determine which eGFR equation based on creatinine, cystatin C, or both biomarkers best improves model performance.

DESIGN SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

This single-center study evaluated adults hospitalized in an ICU who received IV meropenem from 2018 to 2022. Patients were excluded if they had acute kidney injury, were on kidney replacement therapy, or were treated with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Two cohorts were used for population pharmacokinetic modeling: a richly sampled development cohort (n = 19) and an opportunistically sampled qualification cohort (n = 32).

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

A nonlinear mixed-effects model was developed using parametric methods to estimate meropenem serum concentrations.

RESULTS

The best-fit structural model in the richly sampled development cohort was a two-compartment model with first-order elimination. The final model included time-dependent weight normalized to a 70-kg adult as a covariate for volume of distribution (Vd) and time-dependent eGFR for clearance. Among the eGFR equations evaluated, eGFR based on creatinine and cystatin C expressed in mL/min best-predicted meropenem clearance. The mean (se) Vd in the final model was 18.2 (3.5) liters and clearance was 11.5 (1.3) L/hr. Using the development cohort as the Bayesian prior, the opportunistically sampled cohort demonstrated good accuracy and low bias.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Contemporary eGFR equations that use both creatinine and cystatin C improved meropenem population pharmacokinetic model performance compared with creatinine-only or cystatin C-only eGFR equations in adult critically ill patients.