Institute of Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, DPMSC, University of Udine, Piazzale S. Maria della Misericordia 3, Udine, Italy.
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2010 Nov;54(11):4605-10. doi: 10.1128/AAC.00177-10. Epub 2010 Aug 23.
The objective of the present retrospective observational study carried out in patients receiving a standard dosage of linezolid and undergoing routine therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) was to assess the interindividual variability in plasma exposure, to identify the prevalence of attainment of optimal pharmacodynamics, and to define if an intensive program of TDM may be warranted in some categories of patients. Linezolid plasma concentrations (trough [C(min)] and peak [C(max)] levels) were analyzed by means of a high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) method, and daily drug exposure was estimated (daily area under the plasma concentration-time curve [AUC(24)]). The final database included 280 C(min) and 223 C(max) measurements performed in 92 patients who were treated with the fixed 600-mg dose every 12 h (q12h) intravenously (n = 58) or orally (n = 34). A wide variability was observed (median values [interquartile range]: 3.80 mg/liter [1.75 to 7.53 mg/liter] for C(min), 14.70 mg/liter [10.57 to 19.64] for C(max), and 196.08 mg·h/liter [144.02 to 312.10 mg·h/liter] for estimated AUC(24)). Linezolid C(min) was linearly correlated with estimated AUC(24) (r(2) = 0.85). Optimal pharmacodynamic target attainment (defined as C(min) of ≥2 mg/liter and/or AUC(24)/MIC(90) ratio of >80) was obtained in about 60 to 70% of cases, but potential overexposure (defined as C(min) of ≥10 mg/liter and/or AUC(24) of ≥400 mg·h/liter) was documented in about 12% of cases. A significantly higher proportion of cases with potential overexposure received cotreatment with omeprazole, amiodarone, or amlodipine. Our study suggests that the application of TDM might be especially worthwhile in about 30% of cases with the intent of avoiding either the risk of dose-dependent toxicity or that of treatment failure.
本研究回顾性观察研究的目的是评估接受标准剂量利奈唑胺治疗并进行常规治疗药物监测(TDM)的患者的个体间血浆暴露差异,确定获得最佳药效学的比例,并确定是否某些患者类别可能需要进行密集的 TDM 计划。采用高效液相色谱(HPLC)法分析利奈唑胺的血浆浓度(谷浓度[C(min)]和峰浓度[C(max)]),并估计每日药物暴露量(24 小时内血浆浓度-时间曲线下面积[AUC(24)])。最终数据库包括 92 名患者的 280 次 C(min)和 223 次 C(max)测量值,这些患者以 600mg 剂量每 12 小时(q12h)静脉内(n=58)或口服(n=34)给药。观察到广泛的变异性(中位数[四分位间距]:C(min)为 3.80mg/L[1.75 至 7.53mg/L],C(max)为 14.70mg/L[10.57 至 19.64],AUC(24)为 196.08mg·h/L[144.02 至 312.10mg·h/L])。利奈唑胺 C(min)与 AUC(24)呈线性相关(r(2)=0.85)。约 60%至 70%的情况下达到了最佳药效学目标(定义为 C(min)≥2mg/L 和/或 AUC(24)/MIC(90)比值≥80),但约 12%的情况下记录到潜在的过度暴露(定义为 C(min)≥10mg/L 和/或 AUC(24)≥400mg·h/L)。潜在过度暴露的病例中,接受奥美拉唑、胺碘酮或氨氯地平联合治疗的比例明显更高。我们的研究表明,约 30%的病例应用 TDM 可能特别有价值,目的是避免剂量依赖性毒性或治疗失败的风险。