Cargando…
Predictors of Voriconazole Trough Concentrations in Patients with Child–Pugh Class C Cirrhosis: A Prospective Study
This prospective observational study aimed to clinically describe voriconazole administrations and trough concentrations in patients with Child–Pugh class C and to investigate the variability of trough concentration. A total of 144 voriconazole trough concentrations from 43 Child–Pugh class C patien...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8470058/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34572712 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics10091130 |
Sumario: | This prospective observational study aimed to clinically describe voriconazole administrations and trough concentrations in patients with Child–Pugh class C and to investigate the variability of trough concentration. A total of 144 voriconazole trough concentrations from 43 Child–Pugh class C patients were analyzed. The majority of patients (62.8%) received adjustments. The repeated measured trough concentration was higher than the first and final ones generally (median, 4.33 vs. 2.99, 3.90 mg/L). Eight patients with ideal initial concentrations later got supratherapeutic with no adjusted daily dose, implying accumulation. There was a significant difference in concentrations among the six groups by daily dose (p = 0.006). The bivariate correlation analysis showed that sex, CYP2C19 genotyping, daily dose, prothrombin time activity, international normalized ratio, platelet, and Model for end-stage liver disease score were significant factors for concentration. Subsequently, the first four factors mentioned above entered into a stepwise multiple linear regression model (variance inflation factor <5), implying that CYP2C19 testing makes sense for precision medicine of Child–Pugh class C cirrhosis patients. The equation fits well and explains the 34.8% variety of concentrations (R(2) = 0.348). In conclusion, it needs more cautious administration clinically due to no recommendation for Child–Pugh class C patients in the medication label. The adjustment of the administration regimen should be mainly based on the results of repeated therapeutic drug monitoring. |
---|