KLINICKÁ FARMAKOLOGIE A FARMACIE / Klin Farmakol Farm 2022;36(3):85-92 / www.klinickafarmakologie.cz 92 be useful to use one model for intermittent and another for continuous administration, with respective therapeutic ranges saved into eachmodel, preferablyWIN3 / DOS2 andWIN1/ DOS1, respectively (16). We did not identify any papers in the literature (PubMed) testing the predictive performance of the Mw\Pharm models. Fuchs et al. (6) compared 12 programs for TDM in 2013. All programs were scored against pharmacokinetic relevance, user-friendliness, computing aspects, interfacing, and storage. Mw\Pharm and TCIWorks scored the highest. Altogether, five programs were able to handle data for continuous administration, irregular regimens, and changes in the drug kinetics due to changes in renal function or interruption of drug treatment (Mw\Pharm, TCIWorks, MMUSC*PACK©, Kinetidex®, and T.D.M.S. 2000TM). Avent et al. (17) compared seven Bayesian dosing programs for antimicrobial therapy, including Mw\Pharm, that were available in 2019. All of those programs allow an a-priori regimen, the first dose handled, and a non- -steady-state situation. The programs were not assessed for continuous administration. All programs allow the flexibility to choose appropriate target parameters to tailor the recommendations to a given patient. However, they require skilled personnel with an understanding of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics to use and interpret the information. Conclusion The Windows models “#vancomycin_adult_k_C2”, “#vancomycin_adult_C2”, “vancomycin_adult_C2”, “vancomycin_C1” and DOS models “vancomycin (cont.inf.) %ahz” and “vancomycin adult” in the Mw\Pharm software versions ++1.3.5.558 (Windows) and 3 : 30 (DOS) were compared. Both DOS models produced comparable results. The best results among the WIN models were achieved by using the “vancomycin_adult_C2” (WIN3) and “#vancomycin_adult_k_C2” (WIN1) models. As the predictions made by the DOS models produced lower bias, we recommend the addition of the DOS vancomycin models into the WIN software version. Limitations The models are used to assess extrapolations and the conclusions are also limited to the accuracy of these particular extrapolations, not to the accuracy of the models in general. For optimal pharmacokinetic modelling in the Mw\Pharm, all users need to assess the extrapolations for their patients. Acknowledgement Supported by the grant of University of Ostrava SGS08/LF2019–2020. REFERENCES 1. He N, Su S, Yan Y et al. The benefit of individualized vancomycin dosing via pharmacokinetic tools: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Pharmacother. 2020;54:331-343. 2. Rybak MJ. The pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of vancomycin. Clin Inf Dis. 2006;42:S35-S39. 3. Rybak MJ, Le J, Lodise T et al. Executive summary: therapeutic monitoring of vancomycin for serious methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections: A revised consensus guideline and review of the American Society of Health-system Pharmacists, the Infectious Diseases Society of America, the Pediatric Infectious Diseases Society, and the Society of Infectious Diseases Pharmacists. Pharmacotherapy 2020;40:363-367. 4. Abdul-Aziz MH, Alffenaar JVC, Bassetti M et al. Antimicrobial therapeutic drug monitoring in critically ill adult patiens: a position paper. Intensive Care Med. 2020;46:1127-1153. 5. Flannery AH, Bissell BD et al. Continuous versus intermittent infusion of vancomycin and the risk of acute kidney injury in critically ill adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Crit Care Med. 2020;48:912-918. 6. Fuchs A, Csajka C, Thoma Y et al. Benchmarking therapeutic drug monitoring software: a review of available computer tools, Clin Pharmacokinet. 2013;52:9-22. 7. Mw\Pharm 3:30 a MediWare Product in cooperation with: University Center for Pharmacy, Dept of Pharmackokinetics and Drug Delivery, University of Groningen, The Netherlands. Supervision DKF Meier, JH Proost. Copyright 19871999 MediWare. 8. Brozmanova H, Kacirova I, Urinovska R et al. New liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry methods for routine TDM of vancomycin in patients with both normal and impaired renal functions and comparison with results of polarization fluoroimmunoassay in light of varying creatinine concentrations. Clin Chim Acta 2017;469:136-143. 9. Jelliffe RW, Jelliffe SM. A computer program for estimation of creatinine clearance from unstable serum creatinine levels, age, sex, and weight. Math. Biosc.1972;14:17-24. 10. Du Bois D, Du Bois EF. A formula to estimate the approximate surface area if height and weight be known. Arch Intern Med. 1916;17:863-871. 11. Chennavasin P, Brater DC. Aminoglycoside dosage adjustment in renal failure: a hand-held calculator program. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 1982;22:91-94. 12. MW\Pharm Manual version 3.15, 1995. 13. https://tdm-monografie.org/monografie/vancomycine [in Dutch], assessed Jan 3rd, 2022. 14. Rodvold KA, Pryka RD, GarrisonM, et al. Evaluation of a two- -compartment Bayesian forecasting program for predicting vancomycin concentrations Ther DrugMonit. 1989;11:269-275. 15. Shingde RV, Graham GG, Reuter SE et al. Comparison of the area under the curve for vancomycin estimated using compartmental and noncompartmental methods in adult patients with normal renal fiction. Ther. Drug. Monit. 2019;41:726-731. 16. Schön K, Koristkova B, Kacirova I et al. Comparison of Mw\ Pharm 3.30 and Mw\Pharm ++ a Windows version of pharmacokinetic software for PK/PD monitoring of vancomycin. Part 1 – a posteriori modelling. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 2021. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 2022;214, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpb.2021.106552. 17. Avent ML, Rogers BA. Optimising antimicrobial therapy through the use of Bayesian dosing programs. Int J Clin Pharm 2019;41:1121-1130. ORIGINÁLNÍ PRÁCE COMPARISON OF MW\PHARM 3.30 (DOS) AND MW\PHARM ++ (WINDOWS) VERSIONS OF PHARMACOKINETIC SOFTWARE FOR PK/PD MODELLING OF VANCOMYCIN IN CONTINUOUS ADMINISTRATION
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NDA4Mjc=