isepamicin and Acute-Disease

The pharmacokinetics (PK) of isepamicin were studied in 8 febrile neutropenic patients with hematologic malignancy and in 20 young women with acute pelvic inflammatory disease (PID). Isepamicin was given as a slow intravenous infusion over 30 min at a dose of 15 mg/kg once daily (OD). Serum levels of isepamicin were determined by fluorescence polarization immunoassay, and PK analyses were obtained based on a one-compartment open model after 24 hours (steady state) and after 7 days. On day 1, the volume of distribution (Vd) of isepamicin, for both populations, appeared about 30% higher than classically reported in healthy individuals: 0.31 and 0.36 L/kg for neutropenic and PID patients respectively. However on day 7, Vd displayed significant reduction (0.28 and 0.27 L/kg, respectively for neutropenic and PID patients). A reduction of isepamicin clearance was also observed between day 1 and day 7 (137 vs 120 mL/min and 130 vs 101 mL/min for neutropenic and PID populations, respectively). Such changes are consistent with a significant increase in the Cmax concentrations (45 vs 50 mg/L, and 38 vs 49 mg/L) and in the AUC (136 vs 158 and 137 vs 162 mg/L.h) observed after a week of treatment in neutropenic and PID patients, respectively. In conclusion, taking into account the importance of reaching early active concentrations, we recommend the use of higher loading dose of isepamicin (>15 mg/kg) in neutropenic cancer patients and in women with PID, particularly in case of a combination with a possibly ineffective antibacterial agent, in case of infection with bacteria at upper limit of susceptibility, in the presence of high infectious inoculum or in the presence of sequestered sites of infection.

Topics: Acute Disease; Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Area Under Curve; Female; Fever; Gentamicins; Hematologic Neoplasms; Humans; Infusions, Intravenous; Middle Aged; Neutropenia; Pelvic Inflammatory Disease

A randomized multicenter study in intensive care unit (ICU) patients, evaluated the capacity of a Bayesian method to obtain an optimal first isepamicin (ISP) peak of 80 mg/L in comparison to a fixed loading dose (LD). Patients (n=236) over 18 years of age were enrolled from 6 September 1997 to 17 July 1999 and randomly assigned to received ISP in a calculated dose (CD) or a loading dose (LD) of 25 mg/kg body weight. The CD was estimated using a specific population model with Bayesian methodology implemented in the PKS program (Abbott PKS, Abbott Diagnostics, Rungis, France). The data required included age, body weight, height, gender and serum creatinine. ISP disposition is described by a one-compartment model. Blood samples were drawn 1 and 24 h after the start of infusion for fluorescence polarization immunoassay measurement of serum ISP concentrations. The predictive performance was assessed by computing bias and precision. Peak concentrations were significantly higher in CD group than the LD group (84.2 +/- 28.6 vs. 74.7 +/- 24.1 mg/L, respectively; P=0.008), but trough levels were comparable. The optimal ISP peak was attained by a significantly higher percentage of CD patients (P=0.018), and by significantly more CD patients on mechanical ventilation (P=0.025), and with simplified acute physiological scores (SAPS) > 35 (P=0.002). Pharmacokinetic parameters were similar for the two groups with large interindividual variations. Mean (+/- SD) volume of distribution of ventilated patients (72%) was significantly higher than of nonventilated patients (23.31 +/- 7.35 vs. 20.60 +/- 6.30 L, respectively; P=0.001). No relationship was found between the volume of distribution and SAPS. Total clearance was significantly correlated with estimated CLCR (creatinine clearance) (P=0.0001). Precision (RMSE) is better for CD than for LD strategy, respectively 27.96 and 28.66 mg/L. The Bayesian method was significantly more accurate and performed particularly well in ventilated patients and patients with high SAPS, compare to an LD of 25 mg/kg to obtain a first ISP peak of 80 mg/L in ICU patients. Therefore, a fixed dose of 28.5 mg/kg would be also adequate to reach a peak of 80 mg/L.

Topics: Acute Disease; Adult; Aged; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Bayes Theorem; Creatinine; Critical Care; Female; Gentamicins; Humans; Infusions, Intravenous; Intensive Care Units; Linear Models; Male; Metabolic Clearance Rate; Middle Aged; Respiration, Artificial; Treatment Outcome

Isepamicin is a new aminoglycoside antibiotic which has a superior stability to aminoglycoside-inactivating enzymes compared with other available aminoglycosides. In this multicentre, randomised, open study, the safety and efficacy of isepamicin plus ceftazidime was compared with that of amikacin plus ceftazidime in adults with acute lower respiratory tract infection. Patients with severe infections received intravenous administration of isepamicin 15 mg/kg once daily + ceftazidime 2g twice daily (n = 121) or amikacin 7.5 mg/kg twice daily + ceftazidime 2g twice daily (n = 61). Those with less severe infection received intramuscular or intravenous administration of isepamicin 8 mg/kg once daily + ceftazidime 1g twice daily (n = 56) or amikacin 7.5 mg/kg twice daily + ceftazidime 1g twice daily (n = 28). In the efficacy populations, the proportion of patients clinically cured in the isepamicin group (87/100; 87%) was similar to that in the amikacin group (36/47; 77%). Significantly more patients in the isepamicin group were cured or improved compared with the amikacin group (97% vs 89%; p = 0.042). The difference between treatment groups was also significant in patients with pneumonia (p = 0.05). The most commonly isolated target organisms were Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Escherichia coli, Staphylococcus aureus and Klebsiella pneumoniae. The proportion of patients in the efficacy population whose pretreatment valid target organisms were eliminated was similar in each treatment group (90% isepamicin vs 89% amikacin). A retrospective analysis showed there were slightly fewer clinical successes and a higher death rate in patients with nosocomial rather than community acquired pneumonia. Both treatments were well tolerated . Fourteen per cent of isepamicin and 11% of amikacin patients experienced adverse events. The incidence of ototoxicity and nephrotoxicity was low.

Topics: Acute Disease; Amikacin; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Bronchitis; Ceftazidime; Cross Infection; Drug Administration Schedule; Drug Therapy, Combination; Female; Gentamicins; Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Pneumonia, Bacterial; Respiratory Tract Infections; Retrospective Studies

To assess the efficacy of a combined regimen of levofloxacin (LVFX) plus isepamicin (ISP) as prophylaxis for transrectal ultrasound-guided needle biopsy of the prostate (TRUSP-Bx).. Overall, 562 patients undergoing TRUSP-Bx were included in the present study. All patients were administered a single-dose of oral LVFX (500 mg) in the morning and intravenous ISP (400 mg) 60 min before biopsy. All biopsies were performed via TRUSP-Bx with an 18-gauge needle, and 12-core specimens were routinely obtained. Before initiating antibiotic treatment, urine and blood bacterial cultures were tested to determine the causative microorganisms in the patients with acute bacterial prostatitis.. Acute bacterial prostatitis developed in three (0.53%) participants. The incidence rates of acute bacterial prostatitis in the low- and high-risk groups were 0.79% and 0.46%, respectively. These patients showed clinical symptoms of acute bacterial prostatitis 12-24 h after their biopsy. Escherichia coli (E. coli) was isolated in the urine or bladder cultures of all of patients. All three isolates were determined to be LVFX-resistant E. coli, although they had good sensitivity to aminoglycosides, cephalosporins, and carbapenems. All patients were administered antibiotic treatment (cephalosporin or carbapenem) immediately and were treated successfully with no evidence of further disease progression.. Antibiotic prophylaxis with LVFX plus ISP was effective, resulting in a lower incidence of acute bacterial prostatitis after TRUSP-Bx in both low- and high-risk patients.

Topics: Acute Disease; Administration, Intravenous; Administration, Oral; Aged; Antibiotic Prophylaxis; Bacteria; Biopsy, Large-Core Needle; Drug Therapy, Combination; Gentamicins; Humans; Incidence; Levofloxacin; Male; Postoperative Complications; Prostate; Prostatic Neoplasms; Prostatitis; Rectum; Retrospective Studies; Ultrasonography, Interventional