Skip to main content
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems
  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About AAC
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • AAC Podcast
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
  • ASM
    • Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
    • Applied and Environmental Microbiology
    • Clinical Microbiology Reviews
    • Clinical and Vaccine Immunology
    • EcoSal Plus
    • Eukaryotic Cell
    • Infection and Immunity
    • Journal of Bacteriology
    • Journal of Clinical Microbiology
    • Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education
    • Journal of Virology
    • mBio
    • Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews
    • Microbiology Resource Announcements
    • Microbiology Spectrum
    • Molecular and Cellular Biology
    • mSphere
    • mSystems

User menu

  • Log in
  • My alerts
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
publisher-logosite-logo

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current Issue
    • Accepted Manuscripts
    • COVID-19 Special Collection
    • Archive
    • Minireviews
  • For Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Scope
    • Editorial Policy
    • Submission, Review, & Publication Processes
    • Organization and Format
    • Errata, Author Corrections, Retractions
    • Illustrations and Tables
    • Nomenclature
    • Abbreviations and Conventions
    • Publication Fees
    • Ethics Resources and Policies
  • About the Journal
    • About AAC
    • Editor in Chief
    • Editorial Board
    • For Reviewers
    • For the Media
    • For Librarians
    • For Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • AAC Podcast
    • RSS
    • FAQ
  • Subscribe
    • Members
    • Institutions
Clinical Therapeutics

Population Pharmacokinetics of Anidulafungin in Critically Ill Patients

S. Luque, W. Hope, N. Campillo, R. Muñoz-Bermúdez, L. Sorli, J. Barceló-Vidal, E. González-Colominas, F. Alvarez-Lerma, J. R. Masclans, M. Montero, J. P. Horcajada, S. Grau
S. Luque
aPharmacy Department, Hospital del Mar, Parc de Salut Mar, Barcelona, Spain
bInfectious Pathology and Antimicrobials Research Group (IPAR), Institut Hospital del Mar d’Investigacions Mèdiques (IMIM), Barcelona, Spain
cSpanish Network for Research in Infectious Diseases (REIPI RD 16/0016/0015), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain
dAntimicrobial Pharmacodynamics and Therapeutics, Department of Molecular and Clinical Pharmacology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
jUniversitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Barcelona, Spain
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
W. Hope
dAntimicrobial Pharmacodynamics and Therapeutics, Department of Molecular and Clinical Pharmacology, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
eRoyal Liverpool Broadgreen University Hospital Trust, Liverpool, United Kingdom
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for W. Hope
N. Campillo
aPharmacy Department, Hospital del Mar, Parc de Salut Mar, Barcelona, Spain
bInfectious Pathology and Antimicrobials Research Group (IPAR), Institut Hospital del Mar d’Investigacions Mèdiques (IMIM), Barcelona, Spain
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
R. Muñoz-Bermúdez
fCritical Care Department, Hospital del Mar, Parc de Salut Mar, Barcelona, Spain
gCritical Illness Research Group (GREPAC), Institut Hospital del Mar d’Investigacions Mèdiques (IMIM), Barcelona, Spain
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
L. Sorli
bInfectious Pathology and Antimicrobials Research Group (IPAR), Institut Hospital del Mar d’Investigacions Mèdiques (IMIM), Barcelona, Spain
cSpanish Network for Research in Infectious Diseases (REIPI RD 16/0016/0015), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain
hInfectious Diseases Department, Hospital del Mar, Parc de Salut Mar, Barcelona, Spain
iUniversitat Pompeu Fabra (UPF), Barcelona, Spain
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
J. Barceló-Vidal
aPharmacy Department, Hospital del Mar, Parc de Salut Mar, Barcelona, Spain
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
E. González-Colominas
aPharmacy Department, Hospital del Mar, Parc de Salut Mar, Barcelona, Spain
jUniversitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Barcelona, Spain
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
F. Alvarez-Lerma
fCritical Care Department, Hospital del Mar, Parc de Salut Mar, Barcelona, Spain
gCritical Illness Research Group (GREPAC), Institut Hospital del Mar d’Investigacions Mèdiques (IMIM), Barcelona, Spain
jUniversitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Barcelona, Spain
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
J. R. Masclans
fCritical Care Department, Hospital del Mar, Parc de Salut Mar, Barcelona, Spain
gCritical Illness Research Group (GREPAC), Institut Hospital del Mar d’Investigacions Mèdiques (IMIM), Barcelona, Spain
jUniversitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Barcelona, Spain
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
M. Montero
bInfectious Pathology and Antimicrobials Research Group (IPAR), Institut Hospital del Mar d’Investigacions Mèdiques (IMIM), Barcelona, Spain
cSpanish Network for Research in Infectious Diseases (REIPI RD 16/0016/0015), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain
hInfectious Diseases Department, Hospital del Mar, Parc de Salut Mar, Barcelona, Spain
jUniversitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Barcelona, Spain
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
J. P. Horcajada
bInfectious Pathology and Antimicrobials Research Group (IPAR), Institut Hospital del Mar d’Investigacions Mèdiques (IMIM), Barcelona, Spain
cSpanish Network for Research in Infectious Diseases (REIPI RD 16/0016/0015), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain
hInfectious Diseases Department, Hospital del Mar, Parc de Salut Mar, Barcelona, Spain
jUniversitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Barcelona, Spain
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for J. P. Horcajada
S. Grau
aPharmacy Department, Hospital del Mar, Parc de Salut Mar, Barcelona, Spain
bInfectious Pathology and Antimicrobials Research Group (IPAR), Institut Hospital del Mar d’Investigacions Mèdiques (IMIM), Barcelona, Spain
cSpanish Network for Research in Infectious Diseases (REIPI RD 16/0016/0015), Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain
jUniversitat Autònoma de Barcelona (UAB), Barcelona, Spain
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1128/AAC.00378-19
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

ABSTRACT

A two-compartment pharmacokinetic (PK) population model of anidulafungin was fitted to PK data from 23 critically ill patients (age, 65 years [range, 28 to 81 years]; total body weight [TBW], 75 kg [range, 54 to 168 kg]). TBW was associated with clearance and incorporated into a final population PK model. Simulations suggested that patients with higher TBWs had less-extensive MIC coverage. Dosage escalation may be warranted in patients with high TBWs to ensure optimal drug exposures for treatment of Candida albicans and Candida glabrata infections.

TEXT

The 2009 Infectious Diseases Society of America treatment guidelines for candidemia recommend the use of an echinocandin as initial therapy for critically ill patients (1). Anidulafungin is commonly used for the treatment of diseases caused by Candida spp. in critically ill patients. However, there are relatively limited population pharmacokinetic (PK) data for this patient population (1, 2). A deep understanding of PK-pharmacodynamic relationships underpins the design of safe and effective regimens and highlights circumstances where a standard fixed regimen may fail. Herein, we describe the population PK of anidulafungin in critically ill patients and evaluate the probability of achieving target area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h (AUC0–24)/MIC values at steady state against Candida albicans and Candida glabrata with the currently licensed regimen.

A total of 23 critically ill patients with proven or suspected invasive fungal infection (from Hospital del Mar, Barcelona, Spain) who were receiving anidulafungin were recruited. The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Parc de Salut Mar (2016/6987/I) in Barcelona, Spain, and written informed consent was obtained from patients or their legal representatives before enrollment.

All patients received a loading dose of 200 mg of anidulafungin (Ecalta) followed by a maintenance dose of 100 mg/24 h infused over 1 h. Sampling occurred after day 3 of treatment, and blood was collected preinfusion and 1, 3, 5, 8, 18, and 24 h postadministration in most of the patients. Anidulafungin concentrations were measured using a previously described validated high-pressure liquid chromatography method (3).

Population PK modeling was performed using Pmetrics (4, 5). One- and two-compartment models were fitted to the data. The elimination from the central compartment and intercompartmental distribution were modeled as first-order processes. Age, sex, total body weight (TBW), acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) severity score, and liver cirrhosis were evaluated as covariates using stepwise linear regression. Potential covariates were entered separately into the model and retained if their inclusion resulted in a statistically significant improvement in the log-likelihood value and/or improvements in the observed-predicted plots.

The fit of each model to the data was assessed using linear regression of observed-predicted values before and after the Bayesian step. The mean prediction error and the mean bias-adjusted squared prediction error were used to assess bias and imprecision, respectively. Models were compared by calculating twice the difference in log-likelihood values, which was then assessed against χ2 distribution using the appropriate degrees of freedom (i.e., difference in number of parameters for each model). To further assess the predictive accuracy of the final model, a visual predictive check (VPC) was performed.

Monte Carlo simulations (n = 1,000) of plasma concentrations were used to calculate the free AUC0–24/MIC at steady state (i.e., from 144 to 168 h after treatment initiation). From the 1,000 simulated concentration-time profiles, a probability of target attainment (PTA) against C. albicans and C. glabrata was calculated using free AUC0–24/MIC targets of 20 and 7, respectively. These targets have been associated with the stasis endpoint by using a preclinical model of disseminated candidiasis with CLSI methodology (6). A range of MIC values (0.002 to 16 mg/liter) and a range of TBWs (70 to 150 kg) were examined. Human protein binding of 99% was used to estimate free-drug concentrations of anidulafungin (7).

The demographics of the study population were as follows: 10 patients (43.5%) were male, median age was 65 years (range, 28 to 81 years), TBW was 75 kg (range, 54 to 168 kg), and median APACHE severity score was 21 (range, 10 to 48). Nine patients (39.1%) had liver cirrhosis with Child-Pugh scores of A (n = 1), B (n = 3), and C (n = 5). The median estimated AUC0–24 was 102.19 mg · h/liter (range, 51.22 to 185.64 mg · h/liter). The concentration-time profiles of anidulafungin in patients are shown in Fig. 1.

FIG 1
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIG 1

Anidulafungin concentration-time profile of patients receiving a loading dose of 200 mg intravenously followed by a maintenance dose of 100 mg intravenously every 24 h. Intensive sampling was performed after the day 3 of treatment.

The final model was a two-compartment model. Estimates for central tendency, dispersion, and 95% credibility limits for the population PK parameters are shown in Table 1. TBW was the only covariate that explained any portion of the observed variance. In the final model, the clearance (CL) of anidulafungin was described using a power function [CL = CL1 · (TBW/70)0.75]. Figure 2 shows the observed-predicted values before and after the Bayesian step. After maximum a posteriori probability-Bayesian estimation, the observed-versus-predicted plot had an intercept and slope of −0.432 and 1.03, respectively, and an r2 value of 0.967. The bias and imprecision were both acceptable (bias, 0.0729 mg/liter; imprecision, 0.982 mg/liter). The predictive value of the model was further confirmed using a VPC plot (Fig. 3).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
TABLE 1

Population pharmacokinetic parameters of anidulafungin

FIG 2
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIG 2

Population (A) and individual (B) predicted anidulafungin concentrations versus observed concentrations of anidulafungin. Broken line, line of identity (observed = predicted concentrations).

FIG 3
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIG 3

Visual predictive check of anidulafungin plasma concentrations versus time for the final model. Gray shading, confidence bound around each simulated centile; open circles, observed concentrations of anidulafungin.

Patients with greater TBWs who received a standard dosage of anidulafungin developed less drug exposure than smaller patients. The difference in predicted MIC coverage between patients weighing 70 and 150 kg was a single MIC dilution. For C. albicans isolates, a PTA of ≥90% was achieved for patients with a TBW of ≤70 kg for C. albicans isolates with MIC values of ≤0.032 mg/liter. For heavier patients, the coverage of C. albicans MIC was not as extensive, and high PTAs were only achieved for isolates with MIC values of ≤0.016 mg/liter. This difference was mitigated by an increase in the maintenance dose to 150 mg/day in heavier patients (data not shown). For C. glabrata isolates, a PTA of ≥90% was achieved for MIC values of ≤0.064 mg/liter for patients with a TBW up to 150 kg who received the standard anidulafungin dosage (Fig. 4). When the same dosage increase was simulated, a PTA of ≥90% was achieved for MIC values of ≤0.125 and ≤0.064 mg/liter for patients with TBWs of 70 and 150 kg, respectively (data not shown).

FIG 4
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
FIG 4

PTA of anidulafungin for patients with different total body weights (70 and 150 kg) against C. albicans and C. glabrata infections and MIC distributions according to CLSI methodology (11).

The finding that TBW had an influence on anidulafungin clearance is consistent with a significant body of evidence supporting this observation for the echinocandin class in general (1, 8–10). Both linear and exponential relationships have been used to describe the effect of weight on clearance (10). Regardless of the function that is ultimately used, heavier patients require progressively higher absolute dosages to achieve drug exposures comparable to those observed in smaller patients. For C. albicans and C. glabrata isolates, a TBW of 150 kg resulted in the loss of an MIC dilution that could be covered by using the current licensed regimen compared with that in 70-kg patients. Critically ill patients with high TBWs may require higher dosages of anidulafungin for the treatment of C. albicans or C. glabrata infections to avoid potential clinical failures. Further prospectively conducted studies are warranted.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

W.H. holds or has recently held research grants with F2G, AiCuris, Astellas Pharma, Spero Therapeutics, Matinas Biosciences, Antabio, Amplyx, Allecra, Bugworks, NAEJA-RGM, AMR Centre, and Pfizer. He holds awards from the National Institutes of Health, Medical Research Council, National Institute for Health Research, FDA, and European Commission (FP7 and IMI) and has received consulting fees for F2G, Amplyx, Ausperix, Spero Therapeutics, and BLC/TAZ. W.H. is an Ordinary Council Member for the British Society of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy. S.G. has received personal fees from Merck Sharp & Dohme, Angelini Pharma, and Pfizer. J.P.H. has received personal fees from Pfizer, Merck Sharp & Dohme, and Astellas Pharma and has held research grants with Merck Sharp & Dohme.

All other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

FOOTNOTES

    • Received 19 February 2019.
    • Returned for modification 11 March 2019.
    • Accepted 25 April 2019.
    • Accepted manuscript posted online 6 May 2019.
  • Copyright © 2019 American Society for Microbiology.

All Rights Reserved.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Pappas PG,
    2. Kauffman CA,
    3. Andes D,
    4. Benjamin DK, Jr,
    5. Calandra TF,
    6. Edwards JE, Jr,
    7. Filler SG,
    8. Fisher JF,
    9. Kullberg B,
    10. Ostrosky-Zeichner L,
    11. Reboli AC,
    12. Rex JH,
    13. Walsh TJ,
    14. Sobel JD
    , Infectious Diseases Society of America. 2009. Clinical practice guidelines for the management of candidiasis: 2009 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis 48:503–535. doi:10.1086/596757.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  2. 2.↵
    1. Liu P,
    2. Ruhnke M,
    3. Meersseman W,
    4. Paiva JA,
    5. Kantecki M,
    6. Damle B
    . 2013. Pharmacokinetics of anidulafungin in critically ill patients with candidemia/invasive candidiasis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 57:1672–1676. doi:10.1128/AAC.02139-12.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. 3.↵
    1. Martens-Lobenhoffer J,
    2. Rupprecht V,
    3. Bode-Böger SM
    . 2011. Determination of micafungin and anidulafungin in human plasma: UV- or mass spectrometric quantification? J Chromatogr B Analyt Technol Biomed Life Sci 879:2051–2056. doi:10.1016/j.jchromb.2011.05.033.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. 4.↵
    1. Tatarinova T,
    2. Neely M,
    3. Bartroff J,
    4. van Guilder M,
    5. Yamada W,
    6. Bayard D,
    7. Jelliffe R,
    8. Leary R,
    9. Chubatiuk A,
    10. Schumitzky A
    . 2013. Two general methods for population pharmacokinetic modeling: non-parametric adaptive grid and non-parametric Bayesian. J Pharmacokinet Pharmacodyn 40:189–199. doi:10.1007/s10928-013-9302-8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Neely MN,
    2. van Guilder MG,
    3. Yamada WM,
    4. Schumitzky A,
    5. Jelliffe RW
    . 2012. Accurate detection of outliers and subpopulations with Pmetrics, a nonparametric and parametric pharmacometric modeling and simulation package for R. Ther Drug Monit 34:467–476. doi:10.1097/FTD.0b013e31825c4ba6.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  6. 6.↵
    1. Andes D,
    2. Diekema DJ,
    3. Pfaller MA,
    4. Bohrmuller J,
    5. Marchillo K,
    6. Lepak A
    . 2010. In vivo comparison of the pharmacodynamic targets for echinocandin drugs against Candida species. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 54:2497–2506. doi:10.1128/AAC.01584-09.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. 7.↵
    1. Bellmann R,
    2. Smuszkiewicz P
    . 2017. Pharmacokinetics of antifungal drugs: practical implications for optimized treatment of patients. Infection 45:737–779. doi:10.1007/s15010-017-1042-z.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  8. 8.↵
    1. Dowell JA,
    2. Knebel W,
    3. Ludden T,
    4. Stogniew M,
    5. Krause D,
    6. Henkel T
    . 2004. Population pharmacokinetic analysis of anidulafungin, an echinocandin antifungal. J Clin Pharmacol 44:590–598. doi:10.1177/0091270004265644.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMedWeb of Science
  9. 9.↵
    1. Liu P
    . 2013. Population pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic analysis of anidulafungin in adult patients with fungal infections. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 57:466–474. doi:10.1128/AAC.01473-12.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  10. 10.↵
    1. Hope WW,
    2. Seibel NL,
    3. Schwartz CL,
    4. Arrieta A,
    5. Flynn P,
    6. Shad A,
    7. Albano E,
    8. Keirns JJ,
    9. Buell DN,
    10. Gumbo T,
    11. Drusano GL,
    12. Walsh TJ
    . 2007. Population pharmacokinetics of micafungin in pediatric patients and implications for antifungal dosing. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 51:3714–3719. doi:10.1128/AAC.00398-07.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  11. 11.↵
    1. Pfaller MA,
    2. Espinel-Ingroff A,
    3. Bustamante B,
    4. Canton E,
    5. Diekema DJ,
    6. Fothergill A,
    7. Fuller J,
    8. Gonzalez GM,
    9. Guarro J,
    10. Lass-Flörl C,
    11. Lockhart SR,
    12. Martin-Mazuelos E,
    13. Meis JF,
    14. Ostrosky-Zeichner L,
    15. Pelaez T,
    16. St-Germain G,
    17. Turnidge J
    . 2014. Multicenter study of anidulafungin and micafungin MIC distributions and epidemiological cutoff values for eight Candida species and the CLSI M27-A3 broth microdilution method. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 58:916–922. doi:10.1128/AAC.02020-13.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
View Abstract
PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
Population Pharmacokinetics of Anidulafungin in Critically Ill Patients
S. Luque, W. Hope, N. Campillo, R. Muñoz-Bermúdez, L. Sorli, J. Barceló-Vidal, E. González-Colominas, F. Alvarez-Lerma, J. R. Masclans, M. Montero, J. P. Horcajada, S. Grau
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy Jun 2019, 63 (7) e00378-19; DOI: 10.1128/AAC.00378-19

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Print

Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email

Thank you for sharing this Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy article.

NOTE: We request your email address only to inform the recipient that it was you who recommended this article, and that it is not junk mail. We do not retain these email addresses.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Population Pharmacokinetics of Anidulafungin in Critically Ill Patients
(Your Name) has forwarded a page to you from Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
(Your Name) thought you would be interested in this article in Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Share
Population Pharmacokinetics of Anidulafungin in Critically Ill Patients
S. Luque, W. Hope, N. Campillo, R. Muñoz-Bermúdez, L. Sorli, J. Barceló-Vidal, E. González-Colominas, F. Alvarez-Lerma, J. R. Masclans, M. Montero, J. P. Horcajada, S. Grau
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy Jun 2019, 63 (7) e00378-19; DOI: 10.1128/AAC.00378-19
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
    • ABSTRACT
    • TEXT
    • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
    • FOOTNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

KEYWORDS

Candida
Monte Carlo simulation
anidulafungin
critical care unit
pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics

Related Articles

Cited By...

About

  • About AAC
  • Editor in Chief
  • Editorial Board
  • Policies
  • For Reviewers
  • For the Media
  • For Librarians
  • For Advertisers
  • Alerts
  • AAC Podcast
  • RSS
  • FAQ
  • Permissions
  • Journal Announcements

Authors

  • ASM Author Center
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Article Types
  • Ethics
  • Contact Us

Follow #AACJournal

@ASMicrobiology

       

ASM Journals

ASM journals are the most prominent publications in the field, delivering up-to-date and authoritative coverage of both basic and clinical microbiology.

About ASM | Contact Us | Press Room

 

ASM is a member of

Scientific Society Publisher Alliance

 

American Society for Microbiology
1752 N St. NW
Washington, DC 20036
Phone: (202) 737-3600

Copyright © 2021 American Society for Microbiology | Privacy Policy | Website feedback

Print ISSN: 0066-4804; Online ISSN: 1098-6596