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
Letter to the Editor

Should In Vitro and In Vivo Studies on Antimicrobial Agents during Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy Comply with General Principles of Pharmacokinetics?

Frédéric J. Baud, Pascal Houzé
Frédéric J. Baud
aAssistance Publique - Hopitaux de Paris, Paris, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • ORCID record for Frédéric J. Baud
Pascal Houzé
aAssistance Publique - Hopitaux de Paris, Paris, France
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
DOI: 10.1128/AAC.00388-20
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

LETTER

We carefully read the article on the clearance of isavuconazole during continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) (1). However, we are concerned by the methods, the results, and the conclusions.

The comparison of six sessions using AN69 filters to one session using a polyethersulfone filter is questionable owing to major differences regarding adsorption of drugs (2).

In vitro studies are usually designed to assess the clearance provided by the different routes of elimination, which include not only dialysis and filtration but also adsorption (3–6). The authors said that, in in vitro study, values in the effluent samples were below the lower limit of quantification (LLOQ) that precluded any calculation. However, owing to the method of calculation of the extraction coefficient (CE), it seems unlikely the values of the postfilter concentrations being under the LLOQ, even in the range of tested initial concentrations. Therefore, the authors should have been able to report values of the CE. There is a recent trend to perform in vitro studies over a period of time as short as 1 h (7). For drugs exhibiting an elimination half-life of about 100 h, such a duration is questionable. Extending results from 1 to 24 h requires the assumption that the CE is constant. In contrast, in the present study, in patients receiving continuous venovenous hemofiltration (CVVH), there was a ten-fold decrease of the CE over 24 h, thus evidencing time-dependent kinetics. What about patients receiving continuous venovenous hemodiafiltration (CVVHDF)? The authors acknowledged the limitation related to the incomplete elimination phase sampling data. Conclusions based on the time dependency of the clearance of isavuconazole might have been more appropriate (8). Indeed, time dependency of the values of the sieving coefficient (SC) and CE means time dependency of filtration and dialysis clearances that are frequently missed (9). Actually, both filtration and dialysis using fresh crystalloids are nonsaturable mechanisms of elimination. Therefore, time-dependency of SC and CE suggests a masked mechanism of elimination, including adsorption, which is a saturable mechanism defined by a maximal rate of elimination (Vmax) and a concentration corresponding to half the Vmax (Km).

The authors reported values of clearance of isavuconazole in the CVVH patient of 13.31 liters/h; meanwhile, the diafiltration flowrate was set at 2 liters/h. Such a discrepancy raises questions about accuracy of determinations. As stated by the authors (1), the clearance induced by filtration is nothing but the filtration flow rate (2 liters/h) multiplied by the SC of isavuconazole (about 0.025). Therefore, the filtration clearance of isavuconazole should have been on the order of 0.05 liters/h. Clarification is needed to explain the discrepancy between clearances measured in patients receiving CVVH compared to those receiving CVVHDF, as the flow rate seems to be the same in both modes of CRRT, 2 liters/h. However, isavuconazole, a small non-ionized molecule easily eliminated by filtration and dialysis, is >90% protein bound, a factor that strongly decreases its elimination by CRRT.

It would be more appropriate to increase data collection on a limited number of parameters rather than drawing conclusions based on a few heterogenous results with limited clinical relevance. As correctly stated by the authors (1), adsorption of isavuconazole by filters remains a pending question.

FOOTNOTES

  • For the author reply, see https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.00401-20.

  • Copyright © 2020 American Society for Microbiology.

All Rights Reserved.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    1. Biagi M,
    2. Butler D,
    3. Tan X,
    4. Qasmieh S,
    5. Tejani K,
    6. Patel S,
    7. Rivosecchi RM,
    8. Nguyen MH,
    9. Clancy CJ,
    10. Shields RK,
    11. Wenzler E
    . 2019. Pharmacokinetics and dialytic clearance of isavuconazole during in vitro and in vivo continuous renal replacement therapy. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 63:e01085-19. doi:10.1128/AAC.01085-19.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  2. 2.↵
    1. Tian Q,
    2. Gomersall CD,
    3. Leung PP,
    4. Choi GY,
    5. Joynt GM,
    6. Tan PE,
    7. Wong AS
    . 2008. The adsorption of vancomycin by polyacrylonitrile, polyamide, and polysulfone hemofilters. Artif Organs 32:81–84.
    OpenUrlPubMedWeb of Science
  3. 3.↵
    1. Houzé P,
    2. Baud FJ,
    3. Raphalen J-H,
    4. Winchenne A,
    5. Moreira S,
    6. Gault P,
    7. Carli P,
    8. Lamhaut L
    . 2020. Diafiltration flowrate modifies routes of elimination of amikacin in renal replacement therapy using AN69 filter: an in vitro study. Int J Artif Organs 43:87–93. doi:10.1177/0391398819865748.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  4. 4.↵
    1. Kronfol NO,
    2. Lau AH,
    3. Barakat MM
    . 1987. Aminoglycoside binding to polyacrylonitrile hemofilter membranes during continuous hemofiltration. ASAIO Trans 33:300–303.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  5. 5.↵
    1. Purohit PJ,
    2. Elkomy MH,
    3. Frymoyer A,
    4. Sutherland SM,
    5. Drover DR,
    6. Hammer GB,
    7. Su F
    . 2019. Antimicrobial disposition during pediatric continuous renal replacement therapy using an ex vivo model. Crit Care Med 47:e767–e773. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000003895.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  6. 6.↵
    1. Tian Q,
    2. Gomersall CD,
    3. Ip M,
    4. Tan PE,
    5. Joynt GM,
    6. Choi GY
    . 2008. Adsorption of amikacin, a significant mechanism of elimination by hemofiltration. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 52:1009–1013. doi:10.1128/AAC.00858-07.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  7. 7.↵
    1. Chaijamorn W,
    2. Shaw AR,
    3. Lewis SJ,
    4. Mueller BA
    . 2017. Ex vivo ceftolozane/tazobactam clearance during continuous renal replacement therapy. Blood Purif 44:16–23. doi:10.1159/000455897.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  8. 8.↵
    1. Baud FJ,
    2. Houze P,
    3. Raphalen JH,
    4. Lamhaut L
    . 2020. Does pharmacokinetics in the central compartment evidence routes of elimination during continuous renal replacement therapy in ex vivo model? Crit Care Med 48:e163–e164. doi:10.1097/CCM.0000000000004036.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
  9. 9.↵
    1. Baud FJ,
    2. Houze P
    . 2019. RE to manuscript ‘In vitro removal of anti-infective agents by a novel cytokine adsorbent system.’ Int J Artif Organs 42:528–529. doi:10.1177/0391398819854461.
    OpenUrlCrossRef
PreviousNext
Back to top
Download PDF
Citation Tools
Should In Vitro and In Vivo Studies on Antimicrobial Agents during Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy Comply with General Principles of Pharmacokinetics?
Frédéric J. Baud, Pascal Houzé
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy May 2020, 64 (6) e00388-20; DOI: 10.1128/AAC.00388-20

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.
Should In Vitro and In Vivo Studies on Antimicrobial Agents during Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy Comply with General Principles of Pharmacokinetics?
(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
Should In Vitro and In Vivo Studies on Antimicrobial Agents during Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy Comply with General Principles of Pharmacokinetics?
Frédéric J. Baud, Pascal Houzé
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy May 2020, 64 (6) e00388-20; DOI: 10.1128/AAC.00388-20
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Top
  • Article
    • LETTER
    • FOOTNOTES
    • REFERENCES
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

KEYWORDS

modeling
pharmacokinetics
renal replacement therapy

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