Comparison of MwPharm 3.30 (DOS) and MwPharm ++ (Windows) Versions of Pharmacokinetic Software for PK/PD Modelling of Vancomycin in Continuous Administration

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00843989%3A_____%2F22%3AE0109980" target="_blank" >RIV/00843989:_____/22:E0109980 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://www.klinickafarmakologie.cz/pdfs/far/2022/03/01.pdf" target="_blank" >https://www.klinickafarmakologie.cz/pdfs/far/2022/03/01.pdf</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.36290/far.2022.014" target="_blank" >10.36290/far.2022.014</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Comparison of MwPharm 3.30 (DOS) and MwPharm ++ (Windows) Versions of Pharmacokinetic Software for PK/PD Modelling of Vancomycin in Continuous Administration

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Objective: For a long time, the MwPharm software suite (MEDIWARE, Prague, Czech Republic/Groningen, Netherlands) has been used for PK/PD modelling in therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). The aim of this study was to find the best model in the newer Windows version of MwPharm++ 1.3.5.558 (WIN) for continuous administration of vancomycin. Patients: Twenty adult patients with a mean age of 66 ± 12 years, body weight 85 ± 16 kg, and median dose 1,625 g/24 h were repeatedly examined for vancomycin. Methods: Concentrations predicted by “#vancomycin_adult_k_C2”, “#vancomycin_adult_C2”, “vancomycin_adult_C2”, “vancomycin_C1” WIN models and “vancomycin (cont.inf.) %ahz” (DOS1) and “vancomycin adult” DOS models were compared with the measured values and with the DOS1 model. Statistics: Percentage prediction error (%PE) calculated as (predicted-measured)/measured or (predicted-DOS1)/DOS1, RMSE, Bland-Altman bias, Pearson’s coefficient of rank correlation (R), Student’s t-test. Statistical analysis was performed using the GraphPad Prism version 5.00 for Windows. Results: %PE values varied between -3.2 ± 33.0% and -7.4 ± 36.7%, with the exception of “vancomycin_C1”, the only one-compartment model, where it was -20.8 ± 39.4%. The best outcomes were achieved with “vancomycin adult”. The “#vancomycin_adult_k_C2” model produced the lowest %PE, RMSE, and Bland-Altman bias among the WIN models, but its correlation (Pearson’s R) was less tight. RMSE was the same in “vancomycin_adult_C2” while %PE and Bland-Altman bias were similar, with slightly better correlation when compared to “#vancomycin_adult_k_C2”. The %PE value between the two DOS models was 4.1 ± 13.9% (NS); “vancomycin adult” produced slightly better outcomes than DOS1. Conclusion: “vancomycin_adult_C2” and “#vancomycin_adult_k_C2” produced the best outcomes between WIN models. Both DOS models produced lower bias and their prediction was comparable.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Comparison of MwPharm 3.30 (DOS) and MwPharm ++ (Windows) Versions of Pharmacokinetic Software for PK/PD Modelling of Vancomycin in Continuous Administration

Popis výsledku anglicky

Objective: For a long time, the MwPharm software suite (MEDIWARE, Prague, Czech Republic/Groningen, Netherlands) has been used for PK/PD modelling in therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). The aim of this study was to find the best model in the newer Windows version of MwPharm++ 1.3.5.558 (WIN) for continuous administration of vancomycin. Patients: Twenty adult patients with a mean age of 66 ± 12 years, body weight 85 ± 16 kg, and median dose 1,625 g/24 h were repeatedly examined for vancomycin. Methods: Concentrations predicted by “#vancomycin_adult_k_C2”, “#vancomycin_adult_C2”, “vancomycin_adult_C2”, “vancomycin_C1” WIN models and “vancomycin (cont.inf.) %ahz” (DOS1) and “vancomycin adult” DOS models were compared with the measured values and with the DOS1 model. Statistics: Percentage prediction error (%PE) calculated as (predicted-measured)/measured or (predicted-DOS1)/DOS1, RMSE, Bland-Altman bias, Pearson’s coefficient of rank correlation (R), Student’s t-test. Statistical analysis was performed using the GraphPad Prism version 5.00 for Windows. Results: %PE values varied between -3.2 ± 33.0% and -7.4 ± 36.7%, with the exception of “vancomycin_C1”, the only one-compartment model, where it was -20.8 ± 39.4%. The best outcomes were achieved with “vancomycin adult”. The “#vancomycin_adult_k_C2” model produced the lowest %PE, RMSE, and Bland-Altman bias among the WIN models, but its correlation (Pearson’s R) was less tight. RMSE was the same in “vancomycin_adult_C2” while %PE and Bland-Altman bias were similar, with slightly better correlation when compared to “#vancomycin_adult_k_C2”. The %PE value between the two DOS models was 4.1 ± 13.9% (NS); “vancomycin adult” produced slightly better outcomes than DOS1. Conclusion: “vancomycin_adult_C2” and “#vancomycin_adult_k_C2” produced the best outcomes between WIN models. Both DOS models produced lower bias and their prediction was comparable.

Druh

J_SC - Článek v periodiku v databázi SCOPUS

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

30104 - Pharmacology and pharmacy

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

V - Vyzkumna aktivita podporovana z jinych verejnych zdroju

Rok uplatnění

2022

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Klinická farmakologie a farmacie

ISSN

1212-7973

e-ISSN

1803-5353

Svazek periodika

36

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

3

Stát vydavatele periodika

CZ - Česká republika

Počet stran výsledku

8

Strana od-do

85-92

Kód UT WoS článku

—

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85141212550