Optimizing ceftaroline dosing in critically ill patients undergoing continuous renal replacement therapy.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Currently, no dosing information exists for ceftaroline fosamil in patients undergoing continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT). The objectives of this study are to characterize the pharmacokinetics of ceftaroline in critically ill patients undergoing CRRT modalities and to derive individualized dosing recommendations. METHODS: This pharmacokinetic study aimed to enroll critically ill patients receiving ceftaroline fosamil and any CRRT modality from adult intensive care units. Selection of the specific CRRT modality and dosing regimen was based on clinical discretion. Pre-filter, post-filter, and ultrafiltrate samples were obtained before the administration of the fourth dose, after the completion of the infusion, and up to five additional time points post-infusion. Plasma concentrations were measured using a validated ultra-high performance liquid chromatography assay. Individual pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated using non-compartmental analysis. RESULTS: Four patients were enrolled to investigate the need for dosing adjustments. The average sieving coefficient for ceftaroline was 0.81 ± 0.1, indicating high filter efficiency. The average volume of distribution was 41.8 L (0.48 L/kg) and is within the previously reported range in patients with normal renal function. Non-renal clearance accounted for more than 50% of the total clearance observed in patients. The observed pharmacokinetic profiles suggest that the pharmacodynamic target for 2-log10  CFU reduction from baseline (%fT >1 mg/L of 50%) was met for each patient. Due to the impact of CRRT and non-renal clearance, dosing recommendations were derived for different ranges of effluent flow rates and adjusted body weights. For a patient with an adjusted body weight of 70 kg and receiving CRRT at an effluent flow rate of 3 L/h, a ceftaroline fosamil dosing regimen of 400 mg every 12 h is proposed. CONCLUSION: Ceftaroline is cleared extensively in critically ill patients receiving CRRT and may impact pharmacodynamic target achievement. Dose adjustments should be based on the intensity of the CRRT regimen, patient weight, and the clinical status of the patient.

Antimicrobial Therapy in Septic Shock Is Conservative During Resuscitation and Maintenance Phases.

Background: Maximal dosing of early antimicrobials with high loading and maintenance doses may optimize pharmacokinetic parameters to achieve and maintain therapeutic concentrations at the site of infection in septic shock. Little is known about the current practice of early antimicrobial dosing in septic shock. Objective: To characterize early antimicrobial dosing in patients in the resuscitation phase of septic shock. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included patients admitted to the medical intensive care unit (ICU) with septic shock. The primary outcome was the percentage of early antibiotic orders that were maximal or conservative during the resuscitation (0 to 48 hours) phase based on predefined dosing criteria. The secondary outcomes were the correlations of different dosing strategies on hospital length of stay (LOS), ICU LOS, and hospital mortality. Results: This study evaluated 161 patients and 692 antibiotic orders; 504 (72.8%) of the orders during the resuscitation phase were conservative. There were no differences in mortality (odds ratio = 0.66; 95% confidence interval = 0.35-1.25; P = .20), hospital LOS (median = 20 [interquartile range (IQR) = 10-34] vs 19 [IQR = 11-32] days; P = .93), or ICU LOS (median = 8 [IQR = 5-16] vs 9 [IQR = 5-15] days; P = .63) between maximal and conservative dosing groups, respectively, in the resuscitation phase. Limitations of this study included the use of institution-specific antimicrobial dosing guidelines and its retrospective nature. Conclusions: Early antibiotic dosing is conservative for a majority of patients in septic shock. Future studies are needed to evaluate the impact of dosing strategy on patient-centered outcomes in septic shock.