Suppr超能文献

贝叶斯剂量优化软件和计算危重症患者万古霉素曲线下面积方程的回顾与验证。

Review and Validation of Bayesian Dose-Optimizing Software and Equations for Calculation of the Vancomycin Area Under the Curve in Critically Ill Patients.

机构信息

School of Pharmacy, Pacific University, Hillsboro, Oregon.

Department of Pharmacy, Legacy Health, Hillsboro, Oregon.

出版信息

Pharmacotherapy. 2018 Dec;38(12):1174-1183. doi: 10.1002/phar.2191. Epub 2018 Nov 23.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Vancomycin area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) has been linked to efficacy and safety. An accurate method of calculating the AUC is needed.

METHODS

Bayesian dose-optimizing software programs available for clinician use and first-order pharmacokinetic equations were evaluated for their ability to estimate vancomycin AUC. A previously published rich pharmacokinetic data set of 19 critically ill patients was used for validation of the AUC estimation. The AUC estimated using subsets of the full data set by Bayesian software and equations was compared with the reference AUC. Accuracy (ratio of estimated AUC to the reference AUC) and bias (percentage difference of estimated AUC to reference AUC) were calculated.

RESULTS

Five Bayesian dose-optimizing software programs (Adult and Pediatric Kinetics [APK], BestDose, DoseMe, InsightRx, and Precise PK) and two first-order pharmacokinetic equations were included. Of the Bayesian programs, InsightRx was the most adaptable, visually appealing, easiest to use, and had the most company support. Utilizing only the trough, accuracy (range 0.79-1.03) and bias (range 5.1-21.2%) of the Bayesian dose-optimizing software were variable. Precise PK and BestDose had the most accurate estimates with the accuracy values of BestDose exhibiting the most variability of all the programs; however, both programs were more difficult to use. Precise PK was the least biased (median 5.1%). Using a single nontrough value produced similar results to that of the trough for most programs. The addition of a second level to the trough improved the accuracy and bias for DoseMe and InsightRx but not Precise PK and BestDose. APK did not reliably estimate the AUC with input of two levels. Using two levels, the pharmacokinetic equations produced similar or better accuracy and bias as compared with Bayesian software.

CONCLUSION

Bayesian dose-optimizing software using one or more vancomycin levels and pharmacokinetic equations utilizing two vancomycin levels produce similar estimates of the AUC.

摘要

背景

万古霉素浓度-时间曲线下面积(AUC)与疗效和安全性相关。需要一种准确的 AUC 计算方法。

方法

评估了可供临床医生使用的贝叶斯剂量优化软件程序和一阶药代动力学方程,以评估其估算万古霉素 AUC 的能力。使用先前发表的 19 例危重症患者的丰富药代动力学数据集对 AUC 估计进行验证。使用贝叶斯软件和方程对全数据集的子集进行 AUC 估计,并与参考 AUC 进行比较。计算准确性(估计 AUC 与参考 AUC 的比值)和偏差(估计 AUC 与参考 AUC 的百分比差异)。

结果

纳入了 5 种贝叶斯剂量优化软件程序(成人和儿科动力学 [APK]、BestDose、DoseMe、InsightRx 和 Precise PK)和 2 种一阶药代动力学方程。在贝叶斯程序中,InsightRx 适应性最强,视觉效果最好,使用最方便,且公司支持最多。仅使用谷值时,贝叶斯剂量优化软件的准确性(范围为 0.79-1.03)和偏差(范围为 5.1-21.2%)各不相同。Precise PK 和 BestDose 的估计最准确,其中 BestDose 的准确性值变化最大;然而,这两个程序都更难使用。Precise PK 的偏差最小(中位数为 5.1%)。对于大多数程序,使用单个非谷值与使用谷值产生的结果相似。在 DoseMe 和 InsightRx 中,添加第二个谷值水平可提高准确性和偏差,但在 Precise PK 和 BestDose 中则不然。APK 输入两个水平时不能可靠地估算 AUC。使用两个水平时,药代动力学方程产生的 AUC 估计值与贝叶斯软件相似或更好。

结论

使用一个或多个万古霉素水平的贝叶斯剂量优化软件和利用两个万古霉素水平的药代动力学方程可产生相似的 AUC 估计值。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验