What is the best size descriptor to use for pharmacokinetic studies in the obese?

The prevalence of obesity in the western world is dramatically rising, with many of these individuals requiring therapeutic intervention for a variety of disease states. Despite the growing prevalence of obesity there is a paucity of information describing how doses should be adjusted, or indeed whether they need to be adjusted, in the clinical setting. This review is aimed at identifying which descriptors of body size provide the most information about the relationship between dose and concentration in the obese. The size descriptors, weight, lean body weight, ideal body weight, body surface area, body mass index, fat-free mass, percent ideal body weight, adjusted body weight and predicted normal body weight were considered as potential size descriptors. We conducted an extensive review of the literature to identify studies that have assessed the quantitative relationship between the parameters clearance (CL) and volume of distribution (V) and these descriptors of body size. Surprisingly few studies have addressed the relationship between obesity and CL or V in a quantitative manner. Despite the lack of studies there were consistent findings: (i) most studies found total body weight to be the best descriptor of V. A further analysis of the studies that have addressed V found that total body weight or another descriptor that incorporated fat mass was the preferred descriptor for drugs that have high lipophilicity; (ii) in contrast, CL was best described by lean body mass and no apparent relationship between lipophilicity or clearance mechanism and preference for body size descriptor was found. In conclusion, no single descriptor described the influence of body size on both CL and V equally well. For drugs that are dosed chronically, and therefore CL is of primary concern, dosing for obese patients should not be based on their total weight. If a weight-based dose individualization is required then we would suggest that chronic drug dosing in the obese subject should be based on lean body weight, at least until a more robust size descriptor becomes available.

A standard weight descriptor for dose adjustment in the obese patient

Objective: To develop a standard weight descriptor that can be used for estimation of patient size for obese patients. Patients and methods: Data were available from 3849 patients: 2839 from oncology patients (index data set) and 1010 from general medical patients (validation data set). The patients had a wide range of age (16-100 years), weight (25-165kg) and body mass index (BMI) [12-52 kg/m(2)] in both data sets. From the normal-weight patients in the oncology data set, an equation for male and female patients was developed to predict their normal weight as the sum of the lean body mass and normal fat body mass. The equations were evaluated by predicting the weight of patients in the general medical data set who had a normal BMI (30 kg/m(2)).

Periextubation caffeine in preterm neonates: A randomized dose response trial

Objective: To compare the effectiveness of three dosing regimens of caffeine for preterm infants in the periextubation period. Methods: A randomized double-blind clinical trial of three dosing regimens of caffeine citrate ( 3, 15 and 30 mg/kg) for periextubation management of ventilated preterm infants was undertaken. Infants born < 32 weeks gestation who were ventilated for > 48 h were eligible for the study. Caffeine citrate was given as a once daily dose for a period of 6 days commencing 24 h prior to a planned extubation, or within 6 h of an unplanned extubation. The primary outcome measure was extubation failure, defined as neonates who were unable to be extubated within 48 h of caffeine loading or who required reventilation or doxapram dose within 7 days of caffeine loading. Continuous recordings of oxygen saturation and heart rate were undertaken in a subgroup of enrolled infants. Results: A total of 127 babies were enrolled into the study ( 42, 40, 45, in the 3, 15, and 30 mg/kg groups, respectively). No statistically significant difference was demonstrated in the incidence of extubation failure between dosing groups ( 19, 10, and 11 infants in the 3, 15, and 30 mg/kg groups, respectively), however, infants in the two higher dose groups had statistically significantly less documented apnoea than the lowest dose group. Of the 37 neonates with continuous pulse oximetry recordings, those on higher doses of caffeine recorded a statistically significantly higher mean heart rate, oxygen saturations and less time with oxygen saturations < 85%. Conclusions: This trial indicated there were short-term benefits of decreased apnoea in the immediate periextubation period for ventilated infants born < 32 weeks gestation receiving higher doses of caffeine. Further studies with larger numbers of infants assessing longer-term outcomes are necessary to determine the optimal dosing regimen of caffeine in preterm infants.

Assessing cost-effectiveness of drug interventions for schizophrenia

Objective: To assess from a health sector perspective the incremental cost-effectiveness of eight drug treatment scenarios for established schizophrenia. Method: Using a standardized methodology, costs and outcomes are modelled over the lifetime of prevalent cases of schizophrenia in Australia in 2000. A two-stage approach to assessment of health benefit is used. The first stage involves a quantitative analysis based on disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) averted, using best available evidence. The robustness of results is tested using probabilistic uncertainty analysis. The second stage involves application of 'second filter' criteria (equity, strength of evidence, feasibility and acceptability) to allow broader concepts of benefit to be considered. Results: Replacing oral typicals with risperidone or olanzapine has an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of A$48 000 and A$92 000/DALY respectively. Switching from low-dose typicals to risperidone has an ICER of A$80 000. Giving risperidone to people experiencing side-effects on typicals is more cost-effective at A$20 000. Giving clozapine to people taking typicals, with the worst course of the disorder and either little or clear deterioration, is cost-effective at A$42 000 or A$23 000/DALY respectively. The least cost-effective intervention is to replace risperidone with olanzapine at A$160 000/DALY. Conclusions: Based on an A$50 000/DALY threshold, low-dose typical neuroleptics are indicated as the treatment of choice for established schizophrenia, with risperidone being reserved for those experiencing moderate to severe side-effects on typicals. The more expensive olanzapine should only be prescribed when risperidone is not clinically indicated. The high cost of risperidone and olanzapine relative to modest health gains underlie this conclusion. Earlier introduction of clozapine however, would be cost-effective. This work is limited by weaknesses in trials (lack of long-term efficacy data, quality of life and consumer satisfaction evidence) and the translation of effect size into a DALY change. Some stakeholders, including SANE Australia, argue the modest health gains reported in the literature do not adequately reflect perceptions by patients, clinicians and carers, of improved quality of life with these atypicals.