Efficacy and Safety of Weight-based Dosing of Daptomycin in Obese Patients: A Systematic Review

Purpose: To provide a comprehensive review of daptomycin weight-based dosing methods for obese patients. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched through December 31, 2022. Studies relevant to daptomycin weight-based dosing methods in obese adult patients were included. Results: Sixteen studies were included, of which five were case reports and 11 were cohort studies. Obese patients were included in all case reports, of which one was pregnant. The infections improved after receiving a daptomycin dose based on actual body weight (ABW) in all cases. Seven studies demonstrated that ABW, ideal body weight (IBW), and adjusted body weight (AjBW)-based daptomycin dosing differed in terms of treatment success, microbiological clearance, and creatinine phosphokinase (CPK) elevation. However, AjBW was not statistically equivalent to ABW in all evaluated outcomes, except for treatment success. Three studies showed a higher area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) by 60% in obese patients, whereas two studies indicated a higher maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) of ~2 folds. One study demonstrated that obese patients had higher levels of total clearance and volume of distribution, whereas other pharmacokinetic parameters were comparable between obese and non-obese patients. Conclusion: While most of the available evidence reported daptomycin dosing based on actual or total body weight, a few other studies have reported the use of ideal or adjusted body weight. A significant elevation in CPK was observed when daptomycin was administered based on AdjBW, but not with ABW and IBW. Further research is required to determine the optimal daptomycin weight-based dosing method in obese patients (AU)

Evaluating pharmacists' knowledge, attitude, and practices toward amiodarone cross-reactivity with iodine: a cross-sectional pilot study.

Introduction: Iodine is a vital mineral of the human body that acts by maintaining the health of the thyroid gland. Research has shown that iodine-rich food allergy (i.e., seafood allergy) is not caused by iodine itself; instead, it is caused by other proteins including tropomyosin and parvalbumin in shellfish and fish, respectively. Amiodarone is a commonly used antiarrhythmic agent containing a significant amount of iodine. Objective: This study's objective was to assess pharmacists' knowledge, attitude, and practices toward the misconception of iodine allergy and the cross-reactivity with amiodarone. Methods: In February 2020, a cross-sectional study was conducted by sending out an online survey to three pharmaceutical organizations (Saudi Pharmaceutical Society, Kuwait Pharmaceutical Association, and Oman Pharmaceutical Society). Additionally, an electronic questionnaire was administered to pharmacists attending the Dubai International Pharmaceuticals and Technologies Conference and Exhibition 2020 (DUPHAT). Chi-square or Fisher's exact test, when appropriate, were used to compare categorical variables. The statistical analyses were carried out using SPSS software. Results: Data were collected from 66 respondents. However, only 61 (92.4%) were included in the final analysis following the exclusion of incomplete responses. The mean age of participants was 35 ± 8.48 years. The majority of participants did not have the Board of Pharmacy Specialties Certification (54.1%). Moreover, (41%) of participants licensed as pharmacists with more than 10 years of initial pharmacy licensure. Forty-three (70.5%) of participants had the misconception that iodine allergy should be considered before amiodarone administration, 20/32 (62.5%) of whom considered iodine allergy alone thought that premedication with corticosteroids and/or antihistamines is necessary. Concerning iodine allergy and amiodarone use, there was no significant difference in knowledge between the pharmacists who have board certification and those who did not. Conclusion: Pharmacists' misconception concerning iodine allergy and cross-reactivity with amiodarone was evident. Implementation of educational programs targeting pharmacists is necessary to correct these misconceptions.

Tocilizumab effectiveness in mechanically ventilated COVID-19 patients (T-MVC-19 Study): a multicenter real-world evidence.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of tocilizumab in mechanically ventilated patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This retrospective multicenter study included adults (≥18 years) diagnosed with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) by real-time polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) from nasopharyngeal swab, and requiring invasive mechanical ventilation during admission. Survival analyses with inverse propensity score treatment weighting (IPTW) and propensity score matching (PSM) were conducted. To account for immortal bias, we used Cox proportional modeling with time-dependent covariance. Competing risk analysis was performed for the extubation endpoint. RESULTS: A total of 556 (tocilizumab = 193, control = 363) patients were included. Males constituted the majority of the participants (69.2% in tocilizumab arm,74.1% in control arm). Tocilizumab was not associated with a reduction in mortality with hazard ratio [(HR) = 0.82,95% confidence interval (95%CI): 0.62-1.10] in the Inverse propensity score weighting (IPTW) analysis and (HR = 0.86,95% CI: 0.64-1.16) in the PSM analysis. However, tocilizumab was associated with an increased rate of extubation (33.6%) compared to the control arm (11.9%); subdistributional hazards (SHR) = 3.1, 95% CI: 1.86-5.16). CONCLUSIONS: Although tocilizumab was not found to be effective in reducing mortality, extubation rate while on mechanical ventilation was higher among tocilizumab treated group.