Cystatin C Outperforms Creatinine in Predicting Cefepime Clearance in Pediatric Stem Cell Transplant Recipients.

Pediatric hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) patients are at risk of developing both sepsis and altered kidney function. Cefepime is used for empiric coverage post-HSCT and requires dose adjustment based on kidney function. Since cefepime's antimicrobial efficacy is determined by the time free concentrations exceed bacterial minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC), it is important to assess kidney function accurately to ensure adequate concentrations. Serum creatinine (SCr) is routinely used to estimate glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) but varies with muscle mass, which can be significantly lower in HSCT patients, making SCr an inaccurate kidney function biomarker. Cystatin C (CysC) eGFR is independent of muscle mass, though steroid use increases CysC. Objectives of this study were to describe how eGFR impacts cefepime pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) target attainment in pediatric HSCT patients, to investigate which method of estimating GFR (SCr, CysC, combined) best predicts cefepime clearance, and to explore additional predictors of cefepime clearance. Patients admitted to the pediatric HSCT unit who received ≥2 cefepime doses were prospectively enrolled. We measured total cefepime peak/trough concentrations between the second and fourth cefepime doses and measured SCr and CysC if not already obtained clinically within 24h of cefepime samples. eGFRs were calculated with Chronic Kidney Disease in Children U25 equations. Bayesian estimates of cefepime clearance were determined with a pediatric cefepime PK model and PK software MwPharm++. Simple linear regression was used to compare cefepime clearance normalized to body surface area (BSA) to BSA-normalized SCr-, CysC-, and SCr-/CysC-eGFRs, while multiple linear regression was used to account for additional predictors of cefepime clearance. For target attainment, we assessed the percentage of time free cefepime concentrations exceeded 1x MIC (%fT>1x MIC) and 4x MIC (%fT>4x MIC) using a susceptibility breakpoint of 8 mg/L for Pseudomonas aeruginosa. We enrolled 53 patients (ages 1 to 30 years, median 8.9 years). SCr- and CysC-eGFRs were lower in patients who attained 100% fT>1xMIC compared to those who did not attain this target: 115 versus 156 mL/min/1.73m2 (p = .01) for SCr-eGFR and 73.5 versus 107 mL/min/1.73m2 (p < .001) for CysC-eGFR. SCr-eGFR was weakly positively correlated with cefepime clearance (adjusted [a]r2= 0.14), while CysC-eGFR and SCr-/CysC-eGFR had stronger positive correlations (ar2 = 0.30 CysC, ar2 = 0.28 combo. There was a weak, significant linear association between increasing CysC-eGFR and decreased %fT>1xMIC (ar2 = 0.32) and %fT>4xMIC (ar2 = 0.14). No patients with a CysC-eGFR >120 mL/min/1.73 m2 achieved 100% fT>1xMIC or 50% fT>4x MIC. In multiple regression models, underlying diagnosis of hemoglobinopathy (in all models) and being pretransplant (in SCr and combined models) were associated with increased cefepime clearance, while concomitant use of calcineurin inhibitors was associated with decreased cefepime clearance in all models. Overall, the combo-eGFR model with timing pretransplant, hemoglobinopathy, and use of calcineurin inhibitors had the best performance (ar2 = 0.63). CysC-based eGFRs (CysC alone and combined) predicted cefepime clearance better than SCr-eGFR, even after considering steroid use. Increasing CysC eGFR correlated with decreased probability of PD target attainment, raising concerns for underdosing at high eGFRs. CysC should be included when estimating kidney function to provide adequate dosing of cefepime in pediatric HSCT patients.

Towards optimizing cefepime/tazobactam (WCK 4282) exposure to achieve efficacy against piperacillin/tazobactam-resistant ESBL infections: dose recommendations for various renal functions, including intermittent haemodialysis, in healthy individuals.

OBJECTIVES: WCK 4282 is a novel combination of cefepime 2 g and tazobactam 2 g being developed for the treatment of infections caused by piperacillin/tazobactam-resistant ESBL infections. The dosing regimen for cefepime/tazobactam needs to be optimized to generate adequate exposures to treat infections caused by ESBL-producing pathogens resistant to both cefepime and piperacillin/tazobactam. METHODS: We developed pharmacokinetic population models of cefepime and tazobactam to evaluate the optimal dose adjustments in patients, including those with augmented renal clearance as well as various degrees of renal impairment, and also for those on intermittent haemodialysis. Optimal doses for various degrees of renal function were identified by determining the PTA for a range of MICs. To cover ESBL-producing pathogens with an cefepime/tazobactam MIC of 16 mg/L, a dosing regimen of 2 g q8h infused over 1.5 h resulted in a combined PTA of 99% for the mean murine 1 log10-kill target for the cefepime/tazobactam combination. RESULTS: We found that to adjust for renal function, doses need to be reduced to 1 g q8h, 500 mg q8h and 500 mg q12h for patients with CLCR of 30-59, 15-29 and 8-14 mL/min (as well as patients with intermittent haemodialysis), respectively. In patients with high to augmented CLR (estimated CLCR 120-180 mL/min), a prolonged 4 h infusion of standard dose is required. CONCLUSIONS: The suggested dosing regimens will result in exposures of cefepime and tazobactam that would be adequate for infections caused by ESBL-producing pathogens with a cefepime/tazobactam MICs up to 16 mg/L.

Pharmacokinetic Analysis of Intravenous Push Cefepime in Burn Patients with Augmented Renal Clearance.

Patients with augmented renal clearance (ARC) are a subset of critically ill patients including burn patients that exhibit increased renal elimination of medications beyond that of similarly injured patients. Currently approved maximum regimens of medications primarily eliminated by the kidney, such as cefepime (>90% unchanged in the urine), may be inadequate (eg, compromising the bactericidal activity of cefepime) in patients with ARC. Due to recent resource limitations, centers have changed infusion practices of commonly prescribed medications to intravenous push (IVP), potentially exacerbating the problem of maintaining bactericidal cefepime concentrations. The hypothesis of the study was patients with ARC are not currently achieving adequate target attainment, when receiving cefepime 2 g every 8 h IVP. Eight blood samples were collected from each patient, and concentrations measured via LC-MS/MS. WinNonlin (version 8.3) was used to estimate the pharmacokinetic parameters of cefepime and simulate plasma concentrations of cefepime in each of the ten subjects. Simulations of cefepime plasma concentrations produced by a 2 g dose given every 8 h and a 1 g dose given every 4 h were performed and the time above a MIC of 4 mg/L, 8 mg/L, and 16 mg/L compared. The 2 g every 8 h regimen remained above the breakpoints for 92%, 85%, and 71% of the dosing interval, respectively. The 1 g every 4 h regimen remained above the same breakpoints at a frequency of 100%, 99%, and 92% of the dosing interval. Giving cefepime 1 g every 4 h is a simple approach to increase the likelihood of maintaining the optimal bactericidal activity of cefepime in patients with ARC.

Cefepime pharmacokinetics in adult extracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients.

BACKGROUND: The impact of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) on the pharmacokinetics/dynamics (PK/PD) of beta-lactam antibiotics have not been well studied in general, but cefepime specifically has the least amount of data. We aimed to investigate whether ECMO alters the PK of cefepime in adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients. METHODS: This single-center, retrospective case-control study evaluated cefepime therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) results from ECMO patients that were matched 1:1 with TDM results in non-ECMO patients for drug regimen and renal function. The primary outcome was the difference in PK/PD of cefepime in ECMO compared with non-ECMO ICU patients. Secondary outcomes included hospital length of stay, treatment failure, superinfection, bacterial resistance, and survival to discharge. RESULTS: Eighty-two patients were included with 44 matched cefepime concentrations in each group. ECMO patients had higher free maximum concentrations (fCmax) (p = 0.003), lower free minimum concentration (fCmin)/1x minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) ratios (p = 0.040), and lower attainment of free Cmin/4x MIC (p = 0.010). There were no differences between the groups for free Cmin, time above 1xMIC or 4x MIC, and pharmacokinetic parameters (ke, half-life, and Vd). Of those who survived to discharge, hospital length of stay was longer in the ECMO group (p < 0.001). Patients on ECMO were more likely to experience treatment failure (p = 0.036). The incidence of bacterial resistance, superinfection, or survival were similar among the groups. CONCLUSION: These data suggest that more aggressive empiric dosing may be warranted in patients on ECMO. Therapeutic drug monitoring and future prospective studies would provide more evidence to guide decision making regarding dose adjustments.

Population pharmacokinetic model of cefepime for critically ill adults: a comparative assessment of eGFR equations.

Cefepime exhibits highly variable pharmacokinetics in critically ill patients. The purpose of this study was to develop and qualify a population pharmacokinetic model for use in the critically ill and investigate the impact of various estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) equations using creatinine, cystatin C, or both on model parameters. This was a prospective study of critically ill adults hospitalized at an academic medical center treated with intravenous cefepime. Individuals with acute kidney injury or on kidney replacement therapy or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation were excluded. A nonlinear mixed-effects population pharmacokinetic model was developed using data collected from 2018 to 2022. The 120 included individuals contributed 379 serum samples for analysis. A two-compartment pharmacokinetic model with first-order elimination best described the data. The population mean parameters (standard error) in the final model were 7.84 (0.24) L/h for CL1 and 15.6 (1.45) L for V1. Q was fixed at 7.09 L/h and V2 was fixed at 10.6 L, due to low observed interindividual variation in these parameters. The final model included weight as a covariate for volume of distribution and the eGFRcr-cysC (mL/min) as a predictor of drug clearance. In summary, a population pharmacokinetic model for cefepime was created for critically ill adults. The study demonstrated the importance of cystatin C to prediction of cefepime clearance. Cefepime dosing models which use an eGFR equation inclusive of cystatin C are likely to exhibit improved accuracy and precision compared to dosing models which incorporate an eGFR equation with only creatinine.

Cefepime pharmacokinetics in critically ill children and young adults undergoing continuous kidney replacement therapy.

OBJECTIVES: Cefepime is an antibiotic commonly used to treat sepsis and is cleared by renal excretion. Cefepime dosing requires adjustment in patients with decreased kidney function and in those receiving continuous kidney replacement therapy (CKRT). We aimed to characterize cefepime PK in a diverse cohort of critically ill paediatric patients on CKRT. METHODS: Patients were identified from an ongoing pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) study of beta-lactam antibiotics, and were included if they had received at least two cefepime doses in the ICU and were on CKRT for at least 24 h. PK parameters were estimated using MwPharm++ with Bayesian estimation and a paediatric population PK model. Target attainment was assessed as time of free cefepime concentrations above minimum inhibitory concentration (fT > 1× or 4 × MIC). RESULTS: Seven patients were included in the study (ages 2 to 20 years). CKRT indications included liver failure (n = 1), renal failure (n = 4) and fluid overload (n = 2). Total effluent flow rates ranged from 1833 to 3115 (mean 2603) mL/1.73 m2/h, while clearance was 2.11-3.70 (mean 3.0) L/h/70 kg. Effluent flows were lower, but clearance and fT > MIC were similar to paediatric data published previously. Using Pseudomonas aeruginosa MIC breakpoints, all patients had 100% of dosing interval above MIC, but only one had 100% of dosing interval above 4× MIC. CONCLUSIONS: Since most patients failed to attain stringent targets of 100% fT > 4×  MIC, model-informed precision dosing may benefit such patients.

Making the case for precision dosing: visualizing the variability of cefepime exposures in critically ill adults.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate and describe the variability in cefepime exposures among 'real-world', critically ill patients by using population pharmacokinetic modelling and simulations, and with translation of these findings to visualizations. METHODS: A cohort of adult medical ICU patients who received cefepime with therapeutic drug monitoring was studied. Two compartment models were developed to estimate cefepime clearance (Model 1) and simulate cefepime exposures among 1000 patients, each with identical creatinine clearance of 60 mL/min and receiving a regimen of cefepime 1 gram IV over 30 minutes, every 8 hours (Model 2). Variability in the relationship between cefepime clearance and creatinine clearance (CrCL) was visualized, and a random, representative sample of 10 simulated patients was utilized to illustrate variability in cefepime exposures. RESULTS: A total of 75 adult medical ICU patients (52% female) and 98 serum cefepime samples were included in the study. Population parameter estimates for cefepime displayed a wide range of variation in Model 1 (CV: 45% to 95%), with low bias at the individual level at 0.226 mg/L but high bias in the population model 10.6 mg/L. Model 2 displayed similar fits, demonstrating that correcting for individual patient creatinine clearance slightly improves the bias of the population model (bias = 4.31 mg/L). Among 10 simulated patients that a clinician would deem similar from a dosing perspective (i.e. equivalent creatinine clearance), maximum concentrations after three simulated doses varied more than 8-fold from 41.2 to 339 mg/L at the 5th and 95th percentiles, and clearance profiles were highly different. CONCLUSION: Creatinine clearance estimates alone are inadequate for predicting cefepime exposures. Wide variations in cefepime exposure exist among ICU patients, even for those with similar kidney function estimates. Current population adjustment schemes based solely on creatinine clearance will result in unintended high and low exposures leading to safety and efficacy concerns, respectively.

Adequacy of cefepime concentrations in the early phase of critical illness: A case for precision pharmacotherapy.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: In critically ill patients, adequacy of early antibiotic exposure has been incompletely evaluated. This study characterized factors associated with inadequate cefepime exposure in the first 24 h of critical illness. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Academic Medical Center. PATIENTS: Critically ill adults treated with cefepime. Patients with acute kidney injury or treated with kidney replacement therapy or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation were excluded. INTERVENTION: None. MEASUREMENTS: A nonlinear mixed-effects pharmacokinetic (PK) model was developed to estimate cefepime concentrations for each patient over time. The percentage of time the free drug concentration exceeded 8 mg/L during the first 24 h of therapy was calculated (%ƒT>8; appropriate for the susceptible breakpoint for Pseudomonas aeruginosa). Factors predictive of low %ƒT>8 were explored with multivariable regression. MAIN RESULTS: In the 100 included patients, a one-compartment PK model was developed with first-order elimination with covariates for weight and estimated glomerular filtration rate based on creatinine and cystatin C (eGFRSCr-CysC). The median (interquartile range) %ƒT>8 for cefepime in the first 24 h of therapy based on this model was 85% (66%, 100%). Less than 100% ƒT>8 during first 24 h of therapy occurred in 70 (70%) individuals. Lower Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score (p = 0.032) and higher eGFRSCr-CysC (p < 0.001) predicted a lower %ƒT>8. Central nervous system infection source was protective (i.e., associated with a higher %ƒT>8; p = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: During early critical illness, cefepime concentrations were inadequate in a significant proportion of patients. Antimicrobial optimization is needed to improve the precision of pharmacotherapy in the critically ill patients.

Use of therapeutic drug monitoring to characterize cefepime-related neurotoxicity.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: Data evaluating cefepime thresholds associated with neurotoxicity remain limited. The objectives of this study were to evaluate the incidence of cefepime-related neurotoxicity (CRN) in patients with plasma cefepime concentrations, assess the relationship between cefepime exposure and CRN, investigate clinical factors associated with CRN, and describe electroencephalogram (EEG) abnormalities in CRN. DESIGN: This was a retrospective study of adult inpatients admitted between 2016 and 2018 who received cefepime therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). Potential CRN cases were identified utilizing a standard definition. The primary outcomes of the study were to determine the incidence of CRN and evaluate the relationship between cefepime trough concentrations, the average daily AUC, and neurotoxicity. Bayesian posteriors were generated for each patient using a cefepime pharmacokinetic (PK) model, and the mean daily area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) was calculated. Multiple regression was performed to assess the association between CRN, cefepime PK, and clinical predictors of neurotoxicity. MAIN RESULTS: Four hundred eighty-one patients with 503 hospital encounters received cefepime TDM and were included in the analysis. The incidence of CRN was 4.4% (22/503). Patients with CRN had a higher incidence of renal dysfunction, hypertension, and diabetes mellitus compared to patients without CRN (non-NT). The mean cefepime trough concentration was significantly greater in the CRN patients than in the non-NT group (61.8 ± 33.7 vs. 30 ± 27.7 mg/L, respectively, p = 0.0002). Cefepime trough concentration and renal dysfunction were independently associated with increased risk of CRN in the adjusted multiple regression model. Moderate generalized slowing of the background rhythm was the most common EEG pattern associated with CRN. Delaying cefepime TDM greater than 72 h after the initiation of cefepime was associated with a 3-fold increased risk of CRN. CONCLUSION: Cefepime should be used cautiously in hospitalized patients with renal dysfunction due to the risk of neurotoxicity. Dose optimization utilizing TDM early in cefepime treatment may minimize adverse effects and improve patient safety.

Pharmacokinetics and Time above the MIC Exposure of Cefepime in Critically Ill Patients Receiving Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO).

This study determined the pharmacokinetics of cefepime in patients requiring extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support to guide dosage selection. Cefepime population pharmacokinetics where characterized in Pmetrics for R for six critically ill patients receiving ECMO. Simulation was employed to determine the fT>MIC and total trough concentration of varying regimens in each patient to evaluate ability to achieve optimal pharmacodynamic exposure and thresholds for cefepime-associated neurotoxicity. Of the six participants, two required continuous veno-venous hemodiafiltration (CVVHDF) while four had a CrCL between 92-199 ml/min. All patients received 2 g q8h as a 3h infusion. A two-compartment model fitted the data best with median (range) parameter estimates as follows: clearance, 5.99 (4.10-10.29) L/h; volume of central compartment, 10.08 (2.45-15.14) L; and intercompartment transfer constants (k12), 3.58 (2.01-4.99) h-1 and k21, 1.70 (1.00-2.88) h-1. The 2g q8h (3h infusion) regimen resulted in >70% fT>MIC in all patients up to an MIC of 16 µg/mL, whereas 2g q12h (0.5h) resulted in 5/6 patients achieving 70% ƒT>MIC at 8 µg/mL but only 1/6 at 16 µg/mL. Aggressive dosing regimens resulted in trough concentrations exceeding conservative neurotoxicity thresholds. No patient demonstrated signs or symptoms of neurotoxicity during treatment. For ECMO patients with normal to augmented renal clearance similar to those presented here, or those receiving CVVHDF, these data support dosing regimens of 2g q8h (3h infusions) to empirically target MICs up to 16 µg/mL. Larger studies are needed to determine how ECMO affects cefepime pharmacokinetics.

Ceftazidime and cefepime antagonize 5-fluorouracil's effect in colon cancer cells.

BACKGROUND: Drug-drug interaction (DDI), which can occur at the pharmacokinetics and/or the pharmacodynamics (PD) levels, can increase or decrease the therapeutic or adverse response of a drug itself or a combination of drugs. Cancer patients often receive, along their antineoplastic agents, antibiotics such as ß-lactams to treat or prevent infection. Despite the narrow therapeutic indices of antibiotics and antineoplastic agents, data about their potential interaction are insufficient. 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), widely used against colon cancer, is known for its toxicity and large intra- and inter- individual variability. Therefore, knowledge about its interaction with antibiotics is crucial. METHODS: In this study, we evaluated at the PD levels, against HCT-116 colon cancer cells, DDI between 5-FU and several ß-lactams (ampicillin, benzypenicillin, piperacillin, meropenem, flucloxacillin, ceftazidime (CFT), and cefepime (CFP)), widely used in intensive care units. All drugs were tested at clinically achieved concentrations. MTT assay was used to measure the metabolic activity of the cells. Cell cycle profile and apoptosis induction were monitored, in HCT-116 and DLD-1 cells, using propidium iodide staining and Caspase-3/7 activity assay. The uptake of CFT and CFP by the cells was measured using LC-MS/MS method. RESULTS: Our data indicate that despite their limited uptake by the cells, CFT and CFP (two cephalosporins) antagonized significantly 5-FU-induced S-phase arrest (DLD-1 cells) and apoptosis induction (HCT-116 cells). Remarkably, while CFP did not affect the proliferation of colon cancer cells, CFT inhibited, at clinically relevant concentrations, the proliferation of DLD-1 cells via apoptosis induction, as evidenced by an increase in caspase 3/7 activation. Unexpectedly, 5-FU also antagonized CFT's induced cell death in DLD-1 cells. CONCLUSION: This study shows that CFP and CFT have adverse effects on 5-FU's action while CFT is a potent anticancer agent that inhibits DLD-1 cells by inducing apoptotic cell death. Further studies are needed to decipher the mechanism(s) responsible for CFT's effects against colon cancer as well as the observed antagonism between CFT, CFP, and 5-FU with the ultimate aim of translating the findings to the clinical settings.

Evaluation of Individualized Cefepime Dosing Strategy Using Population Pharmacokinetics.

The use of population pharmacokinetics (PK) to optimize cefepime dosing could be an effective strategy, given the increasing prevalence of resistant gram-negative organisms. The objective of this study is to retrospectively compare dosing using a PK approach (intervention) vs traditional dosing (control) for cefepime in patients with hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) or ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). Adult hospitalized patients with HAP or VAP receiving cefepime for ≥72 hours were screened first from August 2018 to January 2019 to be included in the intervention group, then screened during the preintervention period from August 2017 to July 2018 for the control group. Clinical improvement on day 7 of cefepime therapy was achieved in 72% of the patients in the intervention group and 70% of the patients in the control group (P = .8110). However, the clinical cure rate in the intervention group was higher than that of the control group (50% vs 36.5%; P = .0034). Cefepime dosing using population PK appears to be a novel, effective, and safe dosing strategy for patients with HAP or VAP.

Pharmacokinetics of Cefepime in Children on Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation: External Model Validation, Model Improvement and Dose Optimization.

BACKGROUND: Cefepime is a first-line therapy for Gram-negative infections in children on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. Cefepime pharmacokinetics (PK) in children on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation still needs to be better established. METHODS: This was a prospective single-center PK study. A maximum of 12 PK samples per patient were collected in children <18 years old on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation who received clinically indicated cefepime. External validation of a previously published population PK model was performed by applying the model in a new data set. The predictive performance of the model was determined by calculating prediction errors. Because of poor predictive performance, a revised model was developed using NONMEM and a combined data set that included data from both studies. Dose-exposure simulations were performed using the final model. Optimal dosing was judged based on the ability to maintain free cefepime concentrations above the minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) for 68% and 100% of the dosing interval. RESULTS: Seventeen children contributed 105 PK samples. The mean (95% CI) and median (interquartile range) prediction errors were 33.7% (19.8-47.7) and 17.5% (-22.6 to 74.4). A combined data set was created, which included 33 children contributing 310 PK samples. The final improved 2-compartment model included weight and serum creatinine on clearance and oxygenator day and blood transfusion on volume of the central compartment. At an MIC of 8 mg/L, 50 mg/kg/dose every 8 hours reached target concentrations. CONCLUSIONS: Dosing intervals of 8 hours were needed to reach adequate concentrations at an MIC of 8 mg/L. Longer dosing intervals were adequate with higher serum creatinine and lower MICs.

Cefepime Precision Dosing Tool: from Standard to Precise Dose Using Nonparametric Population Pharmacokinetics.

Cefepime is the second most common cephalosporin used in U.S. hospitals. We aim to develop and validate a cefepime population pharmacokinetic (PK) model and integrate it into a precision dosing tool for implementation. Two data sets (680 patients) were used to build the cefepime PK model in Pmetrics, and three data sets (34 patients) were used for the validation. A separate application data set (115 patients) was used for the implementation and validation of a precision dosing tool. The model support points and covariates were used to generate the optimal initial dose (OID). Cefepime PK was described by a two-compartment model including weight and creatinine clearance (CrCl) as covariates. The median rate of elimination was 0.30 h-1 (adults) and 0.96 h-1 (children), the central volume of distribution was 13.85 L, and the rate of transfer from the central to the peripheral compartments was 1.22 h-1 and from the peripheral to the central compartments was 1.38 h-1. After integration in BestDose, the observed versus predicted cefepime concentration fit using the application data set was excellent (R2 > 0.98), and the median difference between what was observed and what BestDose predicted on a second occasion was 4%. For the OID, cefepime at a 0.5- to 1-g 4-h infusion every 8 to 24 h (q8 to 24 h) with a CrCl of <70 mL/min was needed to achieve a target range of free trough:MIC 1 to 4 at a MIC of 8 mg/L, while continuous infusion was needed for higher CrCl and weight values. In conclusion, we developed and validated a cefepime model for clinical application. The model was integrated in a precision dosing tool for implementation, and the median concentration prediction bias was 4%. The OID algorithm was provided.

Population pharmacokinetics of cefepime in critically ill patients receiving extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (an ASAP ECMO study).

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to describe the population pharmacokinetics (PK) of cefepime during extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and through dosing simulations, identify a maximally effective and safe dosing strategy. METHODS: Serial cefepime plasma concentrations were measured in patients on ECMO, and data were analysed using a population PK approach with Pmetrics®. Dosing simulations were used to identify the optimal dosing strategy that achieved target trough concentrations (Cmin) of 8-20 mg/L. Six patients were enrolled, of which one was receiving renal replacement therapy. Cefepime was best described in a two-compartment model, with total body weight and creatinine clearance (CrCL) as significant predictors of PK parameters. The mean clearance and central volume of distribution were 2.42 L/h and 15.09 L, respectively. RESULTS: Based on simulations, patients with CrCL of 120 mL/min receiving 1 g 8-hourly dosing achieved a 40-44% probability of efficacy (Cmin > 8 mg/L) and 1-6% toxicity (Cmin > 20 mg/L). Patients with CrCL 30 mL/min and 65 mL/min receiving 1 g 12-hourly dosing achieved an 84-92% and 46-53% probability of efficacy and 8-44% and 1-8% probability of toxicity, respectively. Simulations demonstrated a lower probability of efficacy and higher probability of toxicity with decreasing patient weight. CONCLUSION: This study reported reduced cefepime clearance in patients receiving ECMO, resulting in an increased risk of cefepime toxicity. To avoid drug accumulation, modified dosing regimens should be used in critically ill patients on ECMO. Clinicians should adopt therapeutic drug monitoring when treating less susceptible organisms and in patients with reduced renal clearance on ECMO.

Assessment of cefepime toxicodynamics: comprehensive examination of pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic targets for cefepime-induced neurotoxicity and evaluation of current dosing guidelines.

BACKGROUND: Cefepime-induced neurotoxicity (CIN) is an increasingly reported adverse event; however, the toxicity threshold remains unclear. This study was conducted to provide a comprehensive examination of the most appropriate threshold for CIN, and evaluate the ability of current dosing regimens to attain therapeutic targets. METHODS: Data of the incidence of CIN and cefepime plasma concentrations were collected retrospectively from patients administered cefepime. Population pharmacokinetic modelling was used to determine daily cefepime trough concentration (Cmin), maximum serum concentration and area under the concentration-time curve. The ability of each pharmacokinetic parameter to predict CIN was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, from which optimal toxicity thresholds were determined. Pharmacokinetic simulation was used to evaluate the ability of cefepime dosing guidelines to meet established efficacy targets, whilst maintaining exposure below the determined CIN threshold. RESULTS: In total, 102 cefepime courses were evaluated, with CIN reported in 10. ROC analyses showed that all cefepime pharmacokinetic parameters were strongly predictive of CIN. Cmin of 49 mg/L was identified as the optimal toxicity target, based on its predictive ability (0.88, 95% confidence interval 0.758-0.999, P<0.001) and ease of clinical use. Assessment of cefepime dosing regimens predicted that only 29% of simulated patients achieve therapeutic targets, with patients with impaired renal function more likely to exhibit subtherapeutic concentrations (89%), and patients with normal renal function likely to have potentially toxic exposure (64%). CONCLUSIONS: The findings from this study provide evidence that cefepime exposure is highly predictive of CIN, with Cmin of 49 mg/L being the most appropriate toxicity threshold. Further research is required to optimize cefepime dosing in the context of this therapeutic target.

Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Dosage Individualization of Cefepime in Critically Ill Patients: A Case Study.

OBJECTIVE: The authors report on a case of a 59-year-old man hospitalized in the intensive care unit because of severe SARS-COV-2 infection (COVID-19). BACKGROUND: The patient had several comorbidities, including liver cirrhosis. He developed ventilation-associated bacterial pneumonia for which he was administered cefepime at an initial dose of 2 g/8 hours. Therapeutic drug monitoring was performed, showing overexposure with an initial trough concentration of >60 mg/L. METHODS: Analysis of pharmacokinetic data and model-based dose adjustment was performed using BestDose software. RESULTS: The patient had unexpected pharmacokinetic parameter values. Serum creatinine was only moderately increased, whereas measured creatinine clearance based on urine collection showed impaired renal function. Bacterial minimum inhibitory concentration was also considered in the dosing decisions. After dose reduction to 0.5 g/8 hours, the cefepime trough concentration progressively declined and reached the target values by the end of the therapy. A post-hoc analysis provided a different interpretation of drug overexposure. CONCLUSION: This case report illustrates how physiological, microbiological, and drug concentration data can be used for model-based dosage individualization of cefepime in intensive care unit patients.

Model-based approach to sampling optimization in studies of antibacterial drugs for infants and young children.

Clinical trials for pediatric indications and new pediatric drugs face challenges, including the limited blood volume due to the patients' small bodies. In Japan, the Evaluation Committee on Unapproved or Off-labeled Drugs with High Medical Needs has discussed the necessity of pediatric indications against the background of a lack of Japanese pediatric data. The limited treatment options regarding antibiotics for pediatric patients are associated with the emergence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Regulatory guidelines promote the use of model-based drug development to reduce practical and ethical constraints for pediatric patients. Sampling optimization is one of the key study designs for pediatric drug development. In this simulation study, we evaluated the precision of the empirical Bayes estimates of pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters based on the sampling times optimized by published pediatric population PK models. We selected three previous PK studies of cefepime and ciprofloxacin in infants and young children as paradigms. The number of sampling times was reduced from original full sampling times to two to four sampling times based on the Fisher information matrix. We observed that the precision of empirical Bayes estimates of the key PK parameters and the predicted efficacy based on the reduced sampling times were generally comparable to those based on the original full sampling times. The model-based approach to sampling optimization provided a maximization of PK information with a minimum burden on infants and young children for the future development of pediatric drugs.

Cefepime Dosing in Neonates: What is the Evidence?

OBJECTIVE: Recommended cefepime dosing strategies in neonates varies in commonly utilized dosing references with regard to dose and frequency. The objective of this review is to summarize and evaluate the available literature describing cefepime dosing in neonatal patients. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a literature review in MEDLINE using the keyword cefepime. The search was limited to the English language, humans, and patients <2 months of age. We evaluated four pharmacokinetic studies and two studies describing the use of cefepime in clinical practice. RESULTS: The available studies assessing cefepime serum concentrations in neonatal patients demonstrated maintenance of adequate pharmacokinetic parameters when utilizing a dosing frequency of every 12 hours, specifically for organisms with a minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) ≤ 8 mg/L. In studies evaluating clinical outcomes of cefepime use in neonates, the most frequent adverse effects reported included seizures and hypophosphatemia. Microbiologic cure was demonstrated with a dosing regimen of 50 mg/kg per dose every 12 hours. CONCLUSION: Cefepime dosed 30 to 50 mg/kg per dose every 12 hours may be appropriate to achieve a concentration two to four times above an MIC ≤ 8 mg/L for at least 60% of the dosing interval in neonatal patients.

Demonstrating Feasibility of an Opportunistic Sampling Approach for Pharmacokinetic Studies of ß-Lactam Antibiotics in Critically Ill Children.

There has been increasing interest in incorporating ß-lactam precision dosing into routine clinical care, but robust population pharmacokinetic models in critically ill children are needed for these purposes. The objective of this study was to demonstrate the feasibility of an opportunistic sampling approach that utilizes scavenged residual blood for future pharmacokinetic studies of cefepime, meropenem, and piperacillin. We aimed to show that opportunistic samples would cover the full concentration-versus-time profiles and to evaluate stability of the antibiotics in whole blood and plasma to optimize future use of the opportunistic sampling approach. A prospective observational study was conducted in a single-center pediatric intensive care unit, where pediatric patients administered at least 1 dose of cefepime, meropenem, or piperacillin/tazobactam and who had residual blood scavenged from samples obtained for routine clinical care were enrolled. A total of 138 samples from 22 pediatric patients were collected in a 2-week period. For all 3 antibiotics, the samples collected covered the entire dosing intervals and were not clustered around specific times. There was high variability in the free concentrations and in the percentage of drug bound to protein. There was less than 15% degradation for meropenem or piperacillin when stored in whole blood or plasma at 4°C after 6 days. Cefepime degraded by more than 15% after 3 days. The opportunistic sampling approach is a powerful and feasible method to obtain sufficient samples to study the variability of drug concentrations and protein binding for future pharmacokinetic studies in the pediatric critical care population.