Wallenburg E, Brüggemann RJM, Roberts JA, Jager NGL, Ulldemolins M, Wilkes S, Schouten J, Chin PKL, Ter Heine R. A meta-analysis of protein binding of flucloxacillin in healthy volunteers and hospitalized patients.
Clin Microbiol Infect 2021;
28:446.e1-446.e7. [PMID:
34245903 DOI:
10.1016/j.cmi.2021.06.039]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/15/2021] [Revised: 06/21/2021] [Accepted: 06/26/2021] [Indexed: 12/18/2022]
Abstract
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this study was to develop a mechanistic protein-binding model to predict the unbound flucloxacillin concentrations in different patient populations.
METHODS
A mechanistic protein-binding model was fitted to the data using non-linear mixed-effects modelling. Data were obtained from four datasets, containing 710 paired total and unbound flucloxacillin concentrations from healthy volunteers, non-critically ill and critically ill patients. A fifth dataset with data from hospitalized patients was used for evaluation of our model. The predictive performance of the mechanistic model was evaluated and compared with the calculation of the unbound concentration with a fixed unbound fraction of 5%. Finally, we performed a fit-for-use evaluation, verifying whether the model-predicted unbound flucloxacillin concentrations would lead to clinically incorrect dose adjustments.
RESULTS
The mechanistic protein-binding model predicted the unbound flucloxacillin concentrations more accurately than assuming an unbound fraction of 5%. The mean prediction error varied between -26.2% to 27.8% for the mechanistic model and between -30.8% to 83% for calculation with a fixed factor of 5%. The normalized root mean squared error varied between 36.8% and 69% respectively between 57.1% and 134%. Predicting the unbound concentration with the use of the mechanistic model resulted in 6.1% incorrect dose adjustments versus 19.4% if calculated with a fixed unbound fraction of 5%.
CONCLUSIONS
Estimating the unbound concentration with a mechanistic protein-binding model outperforms the calculation with the use of a fixed protein binding factor of 5%, but neither demonstrates acceptable performance. When performing dose individualization of flucloxacillin, this should be done based on measured unbound concentrations rather than on estimated unbound concentrations from the measured total concentrations. In the absence of an assay for unbound concentrations, the mechanistic binding model should be preferred over assuming a fixed unbound fraction of 5%.
Collapse