RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Doxapram is used for the treatment of apnea of prematurity in dosing regimens only based on bodyweight, as pharmacokinetic data are limited. This study describes the pharmacokinetics of doxapram and keto-doxapram in preterm infants. METHODS: Data (302 samples) from 75 neonates were included with a median (range) gestational age (GA) 25.9 (23.9-29.4) weeks, bodyweight 0.95 (0.48-1.61) kg, and postnatal age (PNA) 17 (1-52) days at the start of continuous treatment. A population pharmacokinetic model was developed using non-linear mixed-effects modelling (NONMEM®). RESULTS: A two-compartment model best described the pharmacokinetics of doxapram and keto-doxapram. PNA and GA affected the formation clearance of keto-doxapram (CLFORMATION KETO-DOXAPRAM) and clearance of doxapram via other routes (CLDOXAPRAM OTHER ROUTES). For a median individual of 0.95 kg, GA 25.6 weeks, and PNA 29 days, CLFORMATION KETO-DOXAPRAM was 0.115 L/h (relative standard error (RSE) 12%) and CLDOXAPRAM OTHER ROUTES was 0.645 L/h (RSE 9%). Oral bioavailability was estimated at 74% (RSE 10%). CONCLUSIONS: Dosing of doxapram only based on bodyweight results in the highest exposure in preterm infants with the lowest PNA and GA. Therefore, dosing may need to be adjusted for GA and PNA to minimize the risk of accumulation and adverse events. For switching to oral therapy, a 33% dose increase is required to maintain exposure. IMPACT: Current dosing regimens of doxapram in preterm infants only based on bodyweight result in the highest exposure in infants with the lowest PNA and GA. Dosing of doxapram may need to be adjusted for GA and PNA to minimize the risk of accumulation and adverse events. Describing the pharmacokinetics of doxapram and its active metabolite keto-doxapram following intravenous and gastroenteral administration enables to include drug exposure to the evaluation of treatment of AOP. The oral bioavailability of doxapram in preterm neonates is 74%, requiring a 33% higher dose via oral than intravenous administration to maintain exposure.
Assuntos
Doxapram/farmacocinética , Apneia do Sono Tipo Central/tratamento farmacológico , Administração Oral , Peso Corporal , Feminino , Idade Gestacional , Humanos , Lactente , Recém-Nascido de Baixo Peso , Recém-Nascido , Doenças do Recém-Nascido/tratamento farmacológico , Recém-Nascido Prematuro , Doenças do Prematuro/tratamento farmacológico , Masculino , Dinâmica não Linear , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , RiscoRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Respiratory viruses causing lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs) are a major cause of hospital admissions in children. Since the course of these infections is unpredictable with potential fast deterioration into respiratory failure, infants are easily admitted to the hospital for observation. The aim of this study was to examine whether systemic inflammatory markers can be used to predict severity of disease in children with respiratory viral infections. METHODS: Blood and nasopharyngeal washings from children <3 years of age with viral LRTI attending a hospital were collected within 24 hours (acute) and after 4-6 weeks (recovery). Patients were assigned to a mild (observation only), moderate (supplemental oxygen and/or nasogastric feeding) or severe (mechanical ventilation) group. Linear regression analysis was used to design a prediction rule using plasma levels of C reactive protein (CRP), serum amyloid A (SAA), pentraxin 3 (PTX3), serum amyloid P component and properdin. This rule was tested in a validation cohort. RESULTS: One hundred and four children (52% male) were included. A combination of CRP, SAA, PTX3 and properdin was a better indicator of severe disease compared with any of the individual makers and age (69% sensitivity (95% CI 50 to 83), 90% specificity (95% CI 80 to 96)). Validation in 141 patients resulted in 71% sensitivity (95% CI 53 to 85), 87% specificity (95% CI 79 to 92), negative predictive value of 64% (95% CI 47 to 78) and positive predictive value of 90% (95% CI 82 to 95). The prediction rule was not able to identify patients with a mild course of disease. CONCLUSION: A combination of CRP, SAA, PTX3 and properdin was able to identify children with a severe course of viral LRTI disease, even in children under 2 months of age. To assess the true impact on clinical management, these results should be validated in a prospective randomised control study.
Assuntos
Hospitalização/estatística & dados numéricos , Infecções Respiratórias/sangue , Índice de Gravidade de Doença , Viroses/sangue , Doença Aguda , Biomarcadores/sangue , Proteínas Sanguíneas/análise , Feminino , Humanos , Lactente , Masculino , Países Baixos , Valor Preditivo dos Testes , Estudos Prospectivos , Infecções Respiratórias/diagnóstico , Viroses/diagnósticoRESUMO
BACKGROUND: The relation between viral load and disease severity in childhood acute respiratory tract infections (ARI) is not fully understood. OBJECTIVES: To assess the clinical relevance of the relation between viral load, determined by cycle threshold (CT) value of real-time reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction assays and disease severity in children with single- and multiple viral ARI. STUDY DESIGN: 582 children with ARI were prospectively followed and tested for 15 viruses. Correlations were calculated between CT values and clinical parameters. RESULTS: In single viral ARI, statistically significant correlations were found between viral loads of Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) and hospitalization and between viral loads of Human Coronavirus (HCoV) and a disease severity score. In multiple-viral ARI, statistically significant correlations between viral load and clinical parameters were found. In RSV-Rhinovirus (RV) multiple infections, a low viral load of RV was correlated with a high length of hospital stay and a high duration of extra oxygen use. The mean CT value for RV, HCoV and Parainfluenza virus was significantly lower in single- versus multiple infections. CONCLUSION: Although correlations between CT values and clinical parameters in patients with single and multiple viral infection were found, the clinical importance of these findings is limited because individual differences in host-, viral and laboratory factors complicate the interpretation of statistically significant findings. In multiple infections, viral load cannot be used to differentiate between disease causing virus and innocent bystanders.