Optimization of levetiracetam dosing regimen in critically ill patients with augmented renal clearance: a Monte Carlo simulation study.

BACKGROUND: Levetiracetam pharmacokinetics is extensively altered in critically ill patients with augmented renal clearance (ARC). Consequently, the dosage regimens commonly used in clinical practice may not be sufficient to achieve target plasma concentrations. The aim of this study is to propose alternative dosage regimens able to achieve target concentrations in this population. Furthermore, the feasibility of the proposed dosing regimens will be discussed from a clinical point of view. METHODS: Different dosage regimens for levetiracetam were evaluated in critically ill patients with ARC. Monte Carlo simulations were conducted with extended or continuous infusions and/or high drug doses using a previously developed population pharmacokinetic model. To assess the clinical feasibility of the proposed dosages, we carried out a literature search to evaluate the information on toxicity and efficacy of continuous administration or high doses, as well as the post-dilution stability of levetiracetam. RESULTS: According to the simulations, target concentrations in patients with CrCl of 160 or 200 mL/min can be achieved with the 3000 mg daily dose by prolonging the infusion time of levetiracetam. For patients with CrCl of 240 mL/min, it would be necessary to administer doses higher than the maximum recommended. Available evidence suggests that levetiracetam administration in continuous infusion or at higher doses than those approved seems to be safe. It would be desirable to re-examinate the current recommendations about drug stability and to achieve a consensus in this issue. CONCLUSIONS: Conventional dosage regimens of levetiracetam (500-1500 mg twice daily in a short infusion) do not allow obtaining drug plasma concentrations among the defined target in critically ill patients with ARC. Therefore, new dosing guidelines with specific recommendations for patients in this subpopulation are needed. This study proposes new dosages for levetiracetam, including extended (4 or 6 h) infusions, continuous infusions or the administration of doses higher than the recommended in the summary of product characteristics (> 3000 mg). These new dosage recommendations take into account biopharmaceutical and pharmacokinetic aspects and meet feasibility criteria, which allow them to be transferred to the clinical environment with safety and efficacy. Nevertheless, further clinical studies are needed to confirm these results.

Population Pharmacokinetics of Levetiracetam and Dosing Evaluation in Critically Ill Patients with Normal or Augmented Renal Function.

Levetiracetam is a broad-spectrum antiepileptic drug commonly used in intensive care units (ICUs). The objective of this study is to evaluate the adequacy of levetiracetam dosing in patients with normal or augmented renal clearance (ARC) admitted to the ICU by population modelling and simulation. A multicentre prospective study including twenty-seven critically ill patients with urinary creatinine clearance (CrCl) > 50 mL/min and treated with levetiracetam was developed. Levetiracetam plasma concentrations were best described by a two-compartment model. The parameter estimates and relative standard errors (%) were clearance (CL) 3.5 L/h (9%), central volume of distribution (V1) 20.7 L (18%), intercompartmental clearance 31.9 L/h (22%), and peripheral volume of distribution 33.5 L (13%). Interindividual variability estimates were, for the CL, 32.7% (21%) and, for V1, 56.1% (29%). The CrCl showed significant influence over CL. Simulations showed that the administration of at least 500 mg every 8 h or 1000 mg every 12 h are needed in patients with normal renal function. Higher doses (1500 or 2000 mg, every 8 h) are needed in patients with ARC. Critically ill patients with normal or ARC treated with levetiracetam could be at high risk of being underdosed.

Augmented Renal Clearance in Critically Ill Patients: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Traditionally, renal function in critically ill patients has been assessed to identify renal dysfunction, and dose adjustment is generally accepted in such a context. Nevertheless, augmented renal clearance (ARC) is a less well-studied phenomenon that could lead to faster elimination of drugs, resulting in subtherapeutic concentrations and poorer clinical outcomes when standard dosage guidelines are followed. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review was to gather and summarise all the available evidence on ARC in critically ill patients, including its definition, underlying mechanisms, epidemiology, diagnosis and impact on both drug pharmacokinetics and clinical outcomes. METHOD: A systematic review was conducted to include all the original studies that provided information on ARC in critically ill patients, and is reported following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. RESULTS: Augmented renal clearance, defined as a creatinine clearance (CrCl) > 130 mL/min/1.73 m2, preferably measured in urine, is present in 20-65% of critically ill patients. Younger age, polytrauma and lower severity illness have been identified as risk factors. An influence of ARC on antimicrobial pharmacokinetics has been observed, with ARC consistently being associated with subtherapeutic antibiotic plasma concentrations. CONCLUSION: ARC is a prevalent condition in critically ill patients, especially in young people, with urinary CrCl being the best diagnostic method because mathematical estimates tend to underestimate CrCl. ARC increases renal drug elimination and has a clear influence on certain antimicrobial plasma levels, but is yet to define its impact on clinical outcomes and on pharmacokinetics of other types of drugs. Research on the need to stage ARC and establish specific dosing guidelines is warranted.

Drug interactions with sunitinib.

PURPOSE: Sunitinib is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor indicated for the treatment of gastrointestinal stromal tumor, advanced renal cell carcinoma, and pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. The aim of this article is to describe the pharmacological interactions between sunitinib and commonly prescribed drugs. METHOD: We reviewed available information on pharmacological interactions between sunitinib and concomitantly prescribed drugs. Drugs were grouped into different therapeutic groups according to the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) classification. RESULTS: Sunitinib interacts with CYP3A4 inducers or inhibitors and with P-glycoprotein and ABCG2 substrates. Pharmacodynamic interactions with drugs have also been found. CONCLUSION: Current information on drug interactions between sunitinib and other drugs is scarce and most of the times it is difficult to apply to clinical practice. Even so, this difficulty in managing drug interactions should not be a reason to ignore them as they can help to explain intolerances and treatment failures.