Meropenem pharmacokinetics in cerebrospinal fluid: comparing intermittent and continuous infusion strategies in critically ill patients-a prospective cohort study.

Meropenem penetration into the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) is subject to high interindividual variability resulting in uncertain target attainment in CSF. Recently, several authors recommended administering meropenem as a continuous infusion (CI) to optimize CSF exposure. This study aimed to compare the concentrations and pharmacokinetics of meropenem in CSF after intermittent infusion (II) and CI. This prospective, observational study (NCT04426383) included critically ill patients with external ventricular drains who received either II or CI of meropenem. Meropenem pharmacokinetics in plasma and CSF were characterized using population pharmacokinetic modeling (NONMEM 7.5). The developed model was used to compare the concentration-time profile and probability of target attainment (PTA) between II and CI. A total of 16 patients (8 CI, 8 II; samples: nplasma = 243, nCSF = 263) were recruited, with nine patients (5 CI, 4 II) suffering from cerebral and seven patients from extracerebral infections. A one-compartment model described the plasma concentrations adequately. Meropenem penetration into the CSF (partition coefficient (KP), cCSF/cplasma) was generally low (6.0%), exhibiting substantial between-subject variability (coefficient of variation: 84.0%). There was no correlation between the infusion mode and KP, but interleukin (IL)-6 measured in CSF showed a strong positive correlation with KP (P < 0.001). Dosing simulations revealed no relevant differences in CSF concentrations and PTA in CSF between CI and II. Our study did not demonstrate increased penetration rates or higher concentrations of meropenem in the CSF with CI compared with II. CLINICAL TRIALS: This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT04426383.

Population Pharmacokinetic Modeling of Unbound Meropenem in Patients Undergoing Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy: An Observational Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: The most effective dosing strategy of meropenem for patients undergoing continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) remains uncertain. This study aimed to analyze the population pharmacokinetics (popPKs) of unbound meropenem and establish an appropriate dosing approach. METHODS: This prospective study involved 19 patients for the development of a popPK model and an additional 10 for its validation. Ethical approval was obtained. RESULTS: The clearance of unbound meropenem was influenced by the sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score [=2.22 × (SOFA score/12)^1.88] and the effluent flow rate from the CRRT device, with an interindividual variability of 44.5%. The volume of distribution was affected by the simplified acute physiology score II [=23.1 × (simplified acute physiology score II/52)^1.54]. Monte Carlo simulations suggested meropenem doses ranging from 1.0 to 3.0 g/d using continuous infusion to achieve a target time above the 4 times of minimum inhibitory concentration of the unbound form (% f T >4×MIC ) of 100% for definitive therapy. For empirical therapy, a dose of 1.0 g/d using continuous infusion was recommended to target % f T >MIC of 100%. CONCLUSIONS: This study developed a popPK model for unbound meropenem in patients undergoing CRRT and formulated dosing guidelines. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: UMIN000024321.

Meropenem pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic target attainment and clinical response in ICU patients: A prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Several studies report lack of meropenem pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) target attainment (TA) and risk of therapeutic failure with intermittent bolus infusions in intensive care unit (ICU) patients. The aim of this study was to describe meropenem TA in an ICU population and the clinical response in the first 72 h after therapy initiation. METHODS: A prospective observational study of ICU patients ≥18 years was conducted from 2014 to 2017. Patients with normal renal clearance (NRC) and augmented renal clearance (ARC) and patients on continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) were included. Meropenem was administered as intermittent bolus infusions, mainly at a dose of 1 g q6h. Peak, mid, and trough levels were sampled at 24, 48, and 72 h after therapy initiation. TA was defined as 100% T > 4× MIC or trough concentration above 4× MIC. Meropenem PK was estimated using traditional calculation methods and population pharmacokinetic modeling (P-metrics®). Clinical response was evaluated by change in C-reactive protein (CRP), Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score, leukocyte count, and defervescence. RESULTS: Eighty-seven patients were included, with a median Simplified Acute Physiology (SAPS) II score 37 and 90 days mortality rate of 32%. Median TA was 100% for all groups except for the ARC group with 45.5%. Median CRP fell from 175 (interquartile range [IQR], 88-257) to 70 (IQR, 30-114) (p < .001) in the total population. A reduction in SOFA score was observed only in the non-CRRT groups (p < .001). CONCLUSION: Intermittent meropenem bolus infusion q6h gives satisfactory TA in an ICU population with variable renal function and CRRT modality, except for ARC patients. No consistent relationship between TA and clinical endpoints were observed.

Beta-lactam antibiotic concentrations in critically ill patients with standard and adjusted dosages: A prospective observational study.

INTRODUCTION: Antibiotic concentration target attainment is known to be poor in critically ill patients. Dose adjustment is recommended in patients with altered clearance, obesity and those with bacterial species with intermediate susceptibility. The aim of this study was to investigate the variation of antibiotic concentration in critically ill patients with standard or adjusted dosing regimens. METHODS: The concentration of three beta-lactam antibiotics used in the intensive care unit (ICU) setting, cefotaxime, piperacillin/tazobactam, and meropenem, was measured in patients with confirmed or suspected infection. Mid-dose and trough values were collected during a single dosing interval. The pharmacokinetic endpoints were a free antibiotic concentration that, during the whole dosing interval, was above MIC (100% ƒT > MIC, primary endpoint) or above four times MIC (100% ƒT > 4MIC, secondary endpoint). Non-species related MIC breakpoints were used (1 mg/L for cefotaxime, 8 mg/L for piperacillin/tazobactam, and 2 mg/L for meropenem). RESULTS: We included 102 patients (38 cefotaxime, 30 piperacillin/tazobactam, and 34 meropenem) at a single ICU, with a median age of 66 years. In total, 73% were males, 40% were obese (BMI ≥30) and the median SAPS 3 score was 63 points. Of all patients, 78 patients (76%) reached the primary endpoint (100%ƒT > MIC), with 74% for cefotaxime, 67% for piperacillin/tazobactam and 88% for meropenem. Target attainment for 100% ƒT > 4MIC was achieved in 40 (39%) patients, overall, with 34% for cefotaxime, 30% for piperacillin/tazobactam and 53% for meropenem. In patients with standard dose 71% attained 100%ƒT > MIC and 37% for 100%ƒT > 4MIC. All patients with reduced dose attained 100%ƒT > MIC and 27% attained 100% ƒT > 4MIC. In patients with increased dose 79% attained 100%ƒT > MIC and 48% 100%ƒT > 4MIC respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Beta-lactam antibiotics concentration vary widely in critically ill patients. The current standard dosing regimens employed during the study were not sufficient to reach 100% ƒT > MIC in approximately a quarter of the patients. In patients where dose adjustment was performed, the group with increased dose also had low target attainment, as opposed to patients with dose reduction, who all reached target. This suggests the need for further individualization of dosing where therapeutic drug monitoring can be an alternative to further increase target attainment.

Systematic Evaluation of Pharmacokinetic Models for Model-Informed Precision Dosing of Meropenem in Critically Ill Patients Undergoing Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy.

The altered pharmacokinetics of renally cleared drugs such as meropenem in critically ill patients receiving continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) might impact target attainment. Model-informed precision dosing (MIPD) is applied to individualize meropenem dosing. However, most population pharmacokinetic (PopPK) models developed to date have not yet been evaluated for MIPD. Eight PopPK models based on adult CRRT patients were identified in a systematic literature research and encoded in NONMEM 7.4. A data set of 73 CRRT patients from two different study centers was used to evaluate the predictive performance of the models using simulation and prediction-based diagnostics for i) a priori dosing based on patient characteristics only and ii) Bayesian dosing by including the first measured trough concentration. Median prediction error (MPE) for accuracy within |20%| (95% confidence intervals including zero) and median absolute prediction error (MAPE) for precision ≤ 30% were considered clinically acceptable. For a priori dosing, most models (n = 5) showed accuracy and precision MPE within |20%| and MAPE <35%. The integration of the first measured meropenem concentration improved the predictive performance of all models (median MAPE decreased from 35.4 to 25.0%; median MPE decreased from 21.8 to 4.6%). The best predictive performance for intermittent infusion was observed for the O'Jeanson model, including residual diuresis as covariate (a priori and Bayesian dosing MPE within |2%|, MAPE <30%). Our study revealed the O'Jeanson model as the best-predicting model for intermittent infusion. However, most of the selected PopPK models are suitable for MIPD in CRRT patients when one therapeutic drug monitoring sample is available.

Evaluation of Empirical Dosing Regimens for Meropenem in Intensive Care Unit Patients Using Population Pharmacokinetic Modeling and Target Attainment Analysis.

In the present study, population pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis was performed based on meropenem data from a prospective study conducted in 114 critically ill patients with a wide range of renal functions and various disease conditions. The final model was a one-compartment model with linear elimination, with creatinine clearance and continuous renal replacement therapy affecting clearance, and total bodyweight impacting the volume of distribution. Our model is a valuable addition to the existing meropenem population PK models, and it could be particularly useful during implementation of a therapeutic drug monitoring program combined with Bayesian forecasting. Based on the final model developed, comprehensive Monte Carlo simulations were performed to evaluate the probability of target attainment (PTA) of 16 different dosing regimens. Simulation results showed that 2 g administered every 8 h with 3-h prolonged infusion (PI) and 4 g/day by continuous infusion (CI) appear to be two empirical dosing regimens that are superior to many other regimens when both target attainment and potential toxicity are considered and renal function information is not available. Following a daily CI dose of 6 g or higher, more than 30% of the population with a creatinine clearance of <60 mL/min is predicted to have neurotoxicity. With the availability of institution- and/or unit-specific meropenem susceptibility patterns, as well as an individual patient's renal function, our PTA results may represent useful references for physicians to make dosing decisions.

Population Pharmacokinetic Model and Dosing Simulation of Meropenem Using Measured Creatinine Clearance for Patients with Sepsis.

PURPOSE: Creatinine clearance (CCr) and pharmacokinetic parameters are markedly affected by pathophysiological changes in patients with sepsis. However, only a few reports have assessed renal function in patients with sepsis using the measured CCr. Furthermore, the administration regimen has not been sufficiently evaluated using a population PK (PPK) model across renal function broad ranges. Therefore, this study was performed to construct a meropenem PPK model for patients with sepsis using the measured CCr and evaluate the optimized meropenem dosing regimen based on the CCr. METHODS: Patients with sepsis who received intravenous meropenem at the Showa University Hospital were enrolled in this prospective observational study. The PPK model was constructed using blood samples and clinical information of patients. The probability of target attainment (PTA) indicates the likelihood of achieving 50% time above the minimum inhibitory concentration (% T > MIC) based on 10,000 virtual patients using Monte Carlo simulations. The PTA for each meropenem regimen was 50% T > MIC based on different renal functions using the Monte Carlo simulation. RESULTS: One hundred samples were collected from 31 patients. The final PPK model incorporating the measured CCr as a covariate in CL displayed the best fit. The recommended dosing regimen to achieve a PTA of 50% T > MIC of 4 mcg/mL was 1 g every 8 hours as a 3-hour prolonged infusion for patients with CCr 85-130 mL/min and 1 g every 8 hours as an 8-hour continuous infusion for patients with CCr ≥ 130 mL/min. CONCLUSIONS: This model precisely predicted meropenem concentrations in patients with sepsis by accurately evaluating renal function using the measured CCr. Extended dosing was demonstrated to be necessary to achieve a PTA of 50% T > MIC for patients with CCr ≥ 85 mL/min. Meropenem effectiveness can be maximized in patients with sepsis by selecting the appropriate dosing regimen based on renal function and the MIC.

Plasma and Cerebrospinal Fluid Population Pharmacokinetics of Meropenem in Neurocritical Care Patients: a Prospective Two-Center Study.

Morbidity and mortality related to ventriculitis in neurocritical care patients remain high. Antibiotic dose optimization may improve therapeutic outcomes. In this study, a population pharmacokinetic model of meropenem in infected critically ill patients was developed. We applied the final model to determine optimal meropenem dosing regimens required to achieve targeted cerebrospinal fluid exposures. Neurocritical care patients receiving meropenem and with a diagnosis of ventriculitis or extracranial infection were recruited from two centers to this study. Serial plasma and cerebrospinal fluid samples were collected and assayed. Population pharmacokinetic modeling and Monte Carlo dosing simulations were performed using Pmetrics. We sought to determine optimized dosing regimens that achieved meropenem cerebrospinal fluid concentrations above pathogen MICs for 40% of the dosing interval, or a higher target ratio of meropenem cerebrospinal fluid trough concentrations to pathogen MIC of ≥1. In total, 53 plasma and 34 cerebrospinal fluid samples were obtained from eight patients. Meropenem pharmacokinetics were appropriately described using a three-compartment model with linear plasma clearance scaled for creatinine clearance and cerebrospinal fluid penetration scaled for patient age. Considerable interindividual pharmacokinetic variability was apparent, particularly in the cerebrospinal fluid. Percent coefficients of variation for meropenem clearance from plasma and cerebrospinal fluid were 41.7% and 89.6%, respectively; for meropenem, the volume of distribution in plasma and cerebrospinal fluid values were 63.4% and 58.3%, respectively. High doses (up to 8 to 10 g/day) improved attainment of meropenem cerebrospinal fluid target exposures, particularly for less susceptible organisms (MICs, ≥0.25 mg/L). Standard meropenem doses of 2 g every 8 h may not achieve effective concentrations in cerebrospinal fluid in all critically ill patients. Higher doses, or alternative dosing methods (e.g., loading dose followed by continuous infusion) may be required to optimize cerebrospinal fluid exposures. Doses of up to 8 to 10 g/day either as intermittent boluses or continuous infusion would be suitable for patients with augmented renal clearance; lower doses may be considered for patients with impaired renal function as empirical suggestions. Ongoing dosing should be tailored to the individual patient circumstances. Notably, the study population was small and dosing recommendations may not be generalizable to all critically ill patients.

Optimizing Meropenem in Highly Resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae Environments: Population Pharmacokinetics and Dosing Simulations in Critically Ill Patients.

Critically ill patients are characterized by substantial pathophysiological changes that alter the pharmacokinetics (PK) of hydrophilic antibiotics, including carbapenems. Meropenem is a key antibiotic for multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacilli, and such pathophysiological alterations can worsen treatment outcomes. This study aimed to determine the population PK of meropenem and to propose optimized dosing regimens for the treatment of multidrug-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae in critically ill patients. Two plasma samples were collected from eligible patients over a dosing interval. Nonparametric population PK modeling was performed using Pmetrics. Monte Carlo simulations were applied to different dosing regimens to determine the probability of target attainment and the cumulative fraction of response, taking into account the local MIC distribution for K. pneumoniae. The targets of 40% and 100% for the fraction of time that free drug concentrations remained above the MIC (ƒT>MIC) were tested, as suggested for critically ill patients. A one-compartment PK model using data from 27 patients showed high interindividual variability. Significant PK covariates were the 8-h creatinine clearance for meropenem and the presence of an indwelling catheter for pleural, abdominal, or cerebrospinal fluid drainage for the meropenem volume of distribution. The target 100% ƒT>MIC for K. pneumoniae, with a MIC of ≤2 mg/liter, could be attained by the use of a continuous infusion of 2.0 g/day. Meropenem therapy in critically ill patients could be optimized for K. pneumoniae isolates with an MIC of ≤2 mg/liter by using a continuous infusion in settings with more than 50% isolates have a MIC of ≥32mg/L.

Meropenem Population Pharmacokinetics and Simulations in Plasma, Cerebrospinal Fluid, and Brain Tissue.

Meropenem is a broad spectrum carbapenem used for the treatment of cerebral infections. There is a need for data describing meropenem pharmacokinetics (PK) in the brain tissue to optimize therapy in these infections. Here, we present a meropenem PK model in the central nervous system and simulate dosing regimens. This was a population PK analysis of a previously published prospective study of patients admitted to the neurointesive care unit between 2016 and 2019 who received 2 g of meropenem intravenously every 8 h. Meropenem concentration was determined in blood, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF), and brain microdialysate. Meropenem was described by a six-compartment model: two compartments in the blood, two in the CSF, and two in the brain tissue. Creatinine clearance and brain glucose were included as covariates. The median elimination rate constant was 1.26 h-1, the central plasma volume was 5.38 L, and the transfer rate constants from the blood to the CSF and from the blood to the brain were 0.001 h-1 and 0.02 h-1, respectively. In the first 24 h, meropenem 2 g, administered every 8 h via intermittent and extended infusions achieved good target attainment in the CSF and brain, but continuous infusion (CI) was better at steady-state. Administering a 3 g loading dose (LD) followed by 8 g CI was beneficial for early target attainment. In conclusion, a meropenem PK model was developed using blood, CSF, and brain microdialysate samples. An 8 g CI may be needed for good target attainment in the CSF and brain. Giving a LD prior to the CI improved the probability of early target attainment.

Population Pharmacokinetic Meta-Analysis and Dosing Recommendation for Meropenem in Critically Ill Patients Receiving Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy.

The optimal dosing regimen for meropenem in critically ill patients undergoing continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) remains undefined due to small studied sample sizes and uninformative pharmacokinetic (PK)/pharmacodynamic (PD) analyses in reported studies. The present study aimed to perform a population PK/PD meta-analysis of meropenem using available literature data to suggest the optimal treatment regimen. A total of 501 meropenem concentration measurements from 78 adult CRRT patients pooled from nine published studies were used to develop the population PK model for meropenem. PK/PD target (40% and 100% of the time with the unbound drug plasma concentration above the MIC) marker-based efficacy and risk of toxicity (trough concentrations of >45 mg/L) for short-term (30 min), prolonged (3 h), and continuous (24 h) infusion dosing strategies for meropenem were investigated. The impact of CRRT dose and identified covariates on the PD probability of target attainment (PTA) and predicted toxicity was also examined. Meropenem concentration data were adequately described by a two-compartment model with linear elimination. Trauma was identified as a pronounced modifier for endogenous clearance of meropenem. Simulations demonstrated that adequate PK/PD targets and low risk of toxicity could be achieved in non-trauma CRRT patients receiving meropenem regimens of 1 g every 6 h infused over 30 min, 1 g every 8 h infused over 3 h, and 2 to 4 g every 24 h infused over 24 h. The impact of CRRT dose (25 to 50 mL/kg/h) on PTA was clinically irrelevant, and continuous infusion of 3 to 4 g every 24 h was suitable for trauma CRRT patients (MICs of ≤0.5 mg/L). A population PK model was developed for meropenem in CRRT patients, and different dosing regimens were proposed for non-trauma and trauma CRRT patients.

Population Pharmacokinetics/Pharmacodynamics and Clinical Outcomes of Meropenem in Critically Ill Patients.

Several pathophysiological changes can alter meropenem pharmacokinetics in critically ill patients, thereby increasing the risk of subtherapeutic concentrations and affecting therapeutic outcomes. This study aimed to characterize the population pharmacokinetic (PPK) parameters of meropenem, evaluate the relationship between the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic index of meropenem and treatment outcomes, and evaluate the different dosage regimens that can achieve 40%, 75%, and 100% of the dosing interval for which the free plasma concentrations remain above the MIC of the pathogens (fT>MIC) targets. Critically ill adult patients treated with meropenem were recruited for this study. Five blood samples were collected from each patient. PPK models were developed using a nonlinear mixed-effects modeling approach, and the final model was subsequently used for Monte Carlo simulations to determine the optimal dosage regimens. A total of 247 concentrations from 52 patients were available for analysis. The two-compartment model with linear elimination adequately described the data. The mean PPK parameters were clearance (CL) of 4.8 L/h, central volume of distribution (VC) of 11.4 L, peripheral volume of distribution (VP) of 14.6 L, and intercompartment clearance of 10.5 L/h. Creatinine clearance was a significant covariate affecting CL, while serum albumin level and shock status were factors influencing VC and VP, respectively. Although 75% of the drug-resistant infection patients had fT>MIC values of >40%, approximately 83% of them did not survive the infection. Therefore, 40% fT>MIC might not be sufficient for critically ill patients, and a higher target, such as 75 to 100% fT>MIC, should be considered for optimizing therapy. A 75% fT>MIC could be reached using approved doses administered via a 3-h infusion.

Combination of Pharmacokinetic and Pathogen Susceptibility Information To Optimize Meropenem Treatment of Gram-Negative Infections in Critically Ill Patients.

Meropenem is one of the most frequently used antibiotics to treat life-threatening infections in critically ill patients. This study aimed to develop a meropenem dosing algorithm for the treatment of Gram-negative infections based on intensive care unit (ICU)-specific resistance data. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing of Gram-negative bacteria obtained from critically ill patients was carried out from 2016 to 2020 at a tertiary care hospital. Based on the observed MIC distribution, stochastic simulations (n = 1,000) of an evaluated pharmacokinetic meropenem model, and a defined pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic target (100%T>4×MIC while minimum concentrations were <44.5 mg/L), dosing recommendations for patients with varying renal function were derived. Pathogen-specific MIC distributions were used to calculate the cumulative fraction of response (CFR), and the overall MIC distribution was used to calculate the local pathogen-independent mean fraction of response (LPIFR) for the investigated dosing regimens. A CFR/LPIFR of >90% was considered adequate. The observed MIC distribution significantly differed from the EUCAST database. Based on the 6,520 MIC values included, a three-level dosing algorithm was developed. If the pathogen causing the infection is unknown (level 1), known (level 2), known to be neither Pseudomonas aeruginosa nor Acinetobacter baumannii, or classified as susceptible (level 3), a continuous infusion of 1.5 g daily reached sufficient target attainment independent of renal function. In all other cases, dosing needs to be adjusted based on renal function. ICU-specific susceptibility data should be assessed regularly and integrated into dosing decisions. The presented workflow may serve as a blueprint for other antimicrobial settings.

Investigation of pharmacokinetic and clinical outcomes of various meropenem regimens in patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia and augmented renal clearance.

INTRODUCTION: Augmented renal clearance (ARC) defined as creatinine clearance (Clcr) above 130 mL/min/1.73m2 may lead to suboptimal antibacterial treatment. The aim of this study was to determine a strategy for meropenem administration to achieve both pharmacodynamic-pharmacokinetic (PK-PD) target (50%fT > MIC) and better clinical outcomes in patients with VAP and ARC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this randomized clinical trial, patients with VAP and high risk for ARC were recruited. An 8-h urine collection was performed on the 1st, 3rd, and 5th days of study to measure Clcr. Included patients were divided into three groups: (1) 1 g meropenem, 3-h infusion, (2) 2 g meropenem, 3-h infusion, (3) 1 g meropenem, 6-h infusion. On the 2nd, 3rd, and 5th days of treatment, peak and trough blood samples were collected to undergo HPLC assay. MICs were assessed using microdilution method. Patients were also clinically monitored for 14 days. RESULTS: Forty-five patients were included. Group 3 showed significanty higher rate of patients achieving fT > MIC > 50% (100% for group 3 versus 40% for group 2 and 13% for group 1; p = 0.0001). Mean fT > MIC% was significantly higher in group 3 (78.77 ± 5.87 for group 3 versus 49.6 ± 7.38 for group 2 and 43.2 ± 7.98 for group 1; p = 0.0001). Statistical analysis showed no significant differences among groups regarding clinical improvement. CONCLUSION: According to the findings of this trial, prolonged meropenem infusion is an appropriate strategy compared to dose elevation among ARC patients.

Semi-mechanistic PK/PD modelling of meropenem and sulbactam combination against carbapenem-resistant strains of Acinetobacter baumannii.

Due to limited treatment options for carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (CR-AB) infections, antibiotic combinations are commonly used. In this study, we explored the potential efficacy of meropenem-sulbactam combination (MEM/SUL) against CR-AB. The checkerboard method was used to screen for synergistic activity of MEM/SUL against 50 clinical CR-AB isolates. Subsequently, time-kill studies against two CR-AB isolates were performed. Time-kill data were described using a semi-mechanistic pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) model. Subsequently, Monte Carlo simulations were performed to estimate the probability of 2-log kill, 1-log kill or stasis at 24-h following combination therapy. The MEM/SUL demonstrated synergy against 28/50 isolates. No antagonism was observed. The MIC50 and MIC90 of MEM/SUL were decreased fourfold, compared to the monotherapy MIC. In the time-kill studies, the combination displayed synergistic killing against both isolates at the highest clinically achievable concentrations. At concentrations equal to the fractional inhibitory concentration, synergism was observed against one isolate. The PK/PD model adequately delineated the data and the interaction between meropenem and sulbactam. The effect of the combination was driven by sulbactam, with meropenem acting as a potentiator. The simulations of various dosing regimens revealed no activity for the monotherapies. At best, the MEM/SUL regimen of 2 g/4 g every 8 h demonstrated a probability of target attainment of 2-log10 kill at 24 h of 34%. The reduction in the MIC values and the achievement of a moderate PTA of a 2-log10 reduction in bacterial burden demonstrated that MEM/SUL may potentially be effective against some CR-AB infections.

Glutathione-Conjugated Hydrogels: Flexible Vehicles for Personalized Treatment of Bacterial Infections.

PURPOSE: Skin and soft tissue infections are increasingly prevalent and often complicated by potentially fatal therapeutic hurdles, such as poor drug perfusion and antibiotic resistance. Delivery vehicles capable of versatile loading may improve local bioavailability and minimize systemic toxicities yet such vehicles are not clinically available. Therefore, we aimed to expand upon the use of glutathione-conjugated poly(ethylene glycol) GSH-PEG hydrogels beyond protein delivery and evaluate the ability to deliver traditional therapeutic molecules. METHODS: PEG and GSH-PEG hydrogels were prepared using ultraviolet light (UV)-polymerization. Hydrogel loading and release of selected drug candidates was examined using UV-visible spectrometry. Therapeutic molecules and GST-fusion protein loading was examined using UV-visible and fluorescent spectrometry. Efficacy of released meropenem was assessed against meropenem-sensitive and -resistant P. aeruginosa in an agar diffusion bioassay. RESULTS: For all tested agents, GSH-PEG hydrogels demonstrated time-dependent loading whereas PEG hydrogels did not. GSH-PEG hydrogels released meropenem over 24 h. Co-loading of biologic and traditional therapeutics into a single vehicle was successfully demonstrated. Meropenem-loaded GSH-PEG hydrogels inhibited the growth of meropenem-sensitive and resistant P. aeruginosa isolates. CONCLUSION: GSH ligands within GSH-PEG hydrogels allow loading and effective delivery of charged therapeutic agents, in addition to biologic therapeutics.

Effectiveness of Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic-Guided Meropenem Treatment in Critically Ill Patients: A Comparative Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: The proper dosage of antibiotics is a key element in the effective treatment of infection, especially in critically ill patients. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of optimized meropenem regimens based on pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic criteria in patients admitted to the intensive care unit. METHODS: This observational, naturalistic, retrospective, unicentric cohort study was performed between May 2011 and December 2017. The clinical and bacteriologic responses of 77 control intensive care unit patients receiving meropenem were compared with those of 77 propensity score-balanced patients who received meropenem dose adjusted by therapeutic drug monitoring. The primary end point of clinical response was a reduction at the end of treatment of at least 80% of the maximum procalcitonin (PCT) value recorded during the meropenem treatment. RESULTS: The primary end point was met by 55 patients (71.4%) in the adjusted group compared with 41 (53.3%) patients in the control group (mean difference 18.1%, P = 0.02). Fifty-one patients (66.2%) in the adjusted group required a meropenem dose adjustment, being necessary in 46 of them (90.2%) to decrease the dose. The reduction of PCT was the greatest in the adjusted group compared with the unadjusted group (93% versus 85%, P = 0.004); a greater percentage of patients reached a PCT level < 0.5 ng/mL (63.6% versus 41.6%, P = 0.006), and there was a trend toward an improved bacteriologic response (relative risk = 1.27; 95% confidence interval: 0.92-1.56). There were no differences in early mortality or safety between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Adjustment of meropenem therapy by monitoring is a useful strategy for improving meropenem effectiveness in the treatment of infection in critically ill patients, with no impact on safety.

Impact of cumulative fluid balance on the pharmacokinetics of extended infusion meropenem in critically ill patients with sepsis.

BACKGROUND: Meropenem dosing for septic critically patients is difficult due to pathophysiological changes associated with sepsis as well as supportive symptomatic therapies. A prospective single-center study assessed whether fluid retention alters meropenem pharmacokinetics and the achievement of the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) targets for efficacy. METHODS: Twenty-five septic ICU patients (19 m, 6f) aged 32-86 years with the mean APACHE II score of 20.2 (range 11-33), suffering mainly from perioperative intra-abdominal or respiratory infections and septic shock (n = 18), were investigated over three days after the start of extended 3-h i.v. infusions of meropenem q8h. Urinary creatinine clearance (CLcr) and cumulative fluid balance (CFB) were measured daily. Plasma meropenem was measured, and Bayesian estimates of PK parameters were calculated. RESULTS: Eleven patients (9 with peritonitis) were classified as fluid overload (FO) based on a positive day 1 CFB of more than 10% body weight. Compared to NoFO patients (n = 14, 11 with pneumonia), the FO patients had a lower meropenem clearance (CLme 8.5 ± 3.2 vs 11.5 ± 3.5 L/h), higher volume of distribution (V1 14.9 ± 3.5 vs 13.5 ± 4.1 L) and longer half-life (t1/2 1.4 ± 0.63 vs 0.92 ± 0.54 h) (p < 0.05). Over three days, the CFB of the FO patients decreased (11.7 ± 3.3 vs 6.7 ± 4.3 L, p < 0.05) and the PK parameters reached the values comparable with NoFO patients (CLme 12.4 ± 3.8 vs 11.5 ± 2.0 L/h, V1 13.7 ± 2.0 vs 14.0 ± 5.1 L, t1/2 0.81 ± 0.23 vs 0.87 ± 0.40 h). The CLcr and Cockroft-Gault CLcr were stable in time and comparable. The correlation with CLme was weak to moderate (CLcr, day 3 CGCLcr) or absent (day 1 and 2 CGCLcr). Dosing with 2 g meropenem q8h ensured adequate concentrations to treat infections with sensitive pathogens (MIC 2 mg/L). The proportion of pre-dose concentrations exceeding the MIC 8 mg/L and the fraction time with a target-exceeding concentration were higher in the FO group (day 1-3 f Cmin > MIC: 67 vs 27%, p < 0.001; day 1%f T > MIC: 79 ± 17 vs 58 ± 17, p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: These findings emphasize the importance of TDM and a cautious approach to augmented maintenance dosing of meropenem to patients with FO infected with less susceptible pathogens, if guided by population covariate relationships between CLme and creatinine clearance.

Evaluation of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters of meropenem in critically ill patients with acute kidney disease.

PURPOSE: No study has been evaluated pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) properties of ß-lactam antibiotics in patients with acute kidney injury (AKI), not requiring renal replacement therapy (RRT). We evaluated the time that plasma concentrations remain above four times the MIC (ft > 4MIC) and PK parameters of meropenem in this population. METHODS: In this prospective, randomized clinical trial (RCT), all patients received standard dose (3 g daily) of meropenem for 48 h, then randomly allocated in standard or adjusted groups. The standard group received meropenem without dose adjustment. In the adjusted group, the meropenem dose was adjusted based on the Cockcroft-Gault(C-G) equation. Meropenem concentrations were measured at the peak and trough times on the 2nd and 5th days of the study. RESULTS: On the 2nd day of the study, 3 out of 10 (30%) of patients attained the PD target (≥ 80%ft > 4MIC). In the 5th day of the study, the PD target was attained in 2 out of 10 (20%) and 1 out of 5 (20%) of patients who received standard and adjusted doses of meropenem, respectively (p = 1). In all samples, increased volume of distribution (Vd) (median; IQR) (46.04; 23.06-103.18 L), terminal half-life (T1/2) (4.51; 2.67-8.88 h) and decreased clearance (6.52; 4.43-10.16 L/h) have been shown. CONCLUSION: In critically ill patients with AKI, who not receive RRT, standard doses, and adjusted according to renal function of meropenem failed to achieve PD target of ≥ 80%ft > 4MIC. Higher doses are required for this target. RETROSPECTIVELY REGISTERED: The study protocol with registered retrospectively and approved on January 19, 2019, with the number of IRCT20160412027346N5.

Meropenem use and therapeutic drug monitoring in clinical practice: a literature review.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: Meropenem, a carbapenem antibiotic, is widely prescribed for the treatment of life-threatening infections. The main parameter associated with its therapeutic success is the percentage of time that the levels remain above the minimum inhibitory concentration. Inadequate levels of meropenem can lead to therapeutic failure and increase the possibility of microbial resistance. The employment of strategies involving dose regimens and drug pharmacodynamics has become increasingly important to optimize therapies. In the present study, we conducted a review with the purpose of assembling information about the clinical use of meropenem and therapeutic drug monitoring. METHODS: A literature review emphasizing the application of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of meropenem in clinical practice has been done. To identify articles related to the topic, we performed a standardized search from January 21, 2020 to December 21, 2020, using specific descriptors in PubMed, Lilacs and Embase. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: In total, 35 studies were included in the review. The daily dose of meropenem commonly ranged from 3 to 6 g/day. Critically ill patients and those with impaired renal function appear to be the most suitable patients for the application of meropenem TDM, in order to guide therapy. We observed that most of the studies recommend TDM and that, in nine locations, the TDM of meropenem and of other beta-lactams is a routine practice. TDM data can help to maximize the clinical outcomes of the treatment with meropenem. It can also improve the patient care by providing suitable levels of meropenem, guiding the most appropriate dose regimens, which is the main parameter associated with therapeutic success. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: The findings from this review suggest that the therapeutic monitoring of meropenem can be beneficial, since it adjusts the treatment and aids clinical outcomes. It does so by indicating the appropriate dosage and preventing failure, toxicity and possible antimicrobial resistance. The multidisciplinary effort, basic knowledge and communication among the medical team are also essential.