Use of in vitro critical inhibitory concentration, a novel approach to predict in vivo synergistic bactericidal effect of combined amikacin and piperacillin against pseudomonas aeruginosa in a systemic rat infection model

PURPOSE: This study was undertaken to explore the use of in vitro critical inhibitory concentration (CIC) as a surrogate marker relating the pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters to in vivo bactericidal synergistic effect [pharmacodynamic (PD)] of amikacin + piperacillin combination against Pseudomonas aeruginosa in a systemic rat infection model. METHODS: The in vitro antibacterial activities of amikacin and piperacillin, alone and in combinations at various ratios of the concentrations, were tested against a standard [5 x 10(5) colony-forming units (CFU)/ml] and a large (1.5 x 10(8) CFU/ml) inoculum of P. aeruginosa ATCC 9027 using a modified survival-time method. The CIC of each individual antibiotic for the different combinations was determined using a cup-plate method. In vivo studies were performed on Sprague-Dawley rats using a systemic model of infection with P. aeruginosa ATCC 9027. PK profiles and in vivo killing effects of the combination at different dosing ratios were studied. RESULTS: An inoculum effect was observed with the antibiotics studied. Synergy was seen against both the inocula at the following concentration ratios: 70% C(ami) + 30% C(pip) and 75% C(ami) + 25% C(pip), where C(ami) and C(pip) are the concentrations of amikacin and piperacillin to produce a 1000-fold decrease in bacterial population over 5 h, respectively. The CIC values determined corroborated with the order of in vitro bacterial killing observed for the antibiotic combinations. The dosing ratio of 12.6 mg/kg amikacin + 36 mg/kg piperacillin (a 70:30 ratio of the individual doses) exhibited the greatest killing in vivo when compared to the other ratios. The PK-PD relationships were described by simple, linear regression equations using the area under the in vivo killing curve as a PD marker and the AUCIC(ami)/CIC(ami) + AUCIC(pip)/CIC(pip), AUC(ami)/CIC(ami) + AUC(pip)/CIC(pip), C(max,ami)/CIC(ami) + C(max,pip)/CIC(pip), and AUCIC(ami)/MIC(ami) + AUCIC(pip)/MIC(pip) as PK markers for the amikacin + piperacillin combination. CONCLUSION: The combination of amikacin and piperacillin exhibited synergistic killing effect on P. aeruginosa that could be modeled using CIC as a surrogate marker relating the PK parameters to in vivo bactericidal effect.

Evidence based drug therapy : are optimal doses and multiple medication therapies realistic in patients with chronic heart failure

Background: Chronic Heart Failure (CHF) has a high mortality and morbidity. Large scale randomised controlled trials have proven the benefits of beta blockade and ACE inhibitors in reducing mortality in patients with CHF and expert guidelines mandate their use. In spite of these recommendations, important therapies are under-prescribed and under-utilised.

Method: 1015 consecutive patients enrolled in CHF management programs across Australia were surveyed during 2005-2006 to determine prescribing patterns in heart failure medications. These patients were followed-up for a period of 6 months.

Results: The survey revealed that beta blockers were prescribed to 80% of patients (more than 85% were on sub-optimal doses) and 70% were prescribed Angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors (approximately 50% were on sub-optimal dose). 19% of patients were prescribed Angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs). By 6 months <25% of the patients who were on sub-optimal dose beta blockers or ACE inhibitors at baseline, had been up-titrated to maximum dose (p<0.0001). In CHF programs, were nurses were able to titrate medications, 75% of patients reached optimal dose of beta blockers compared to those programs with no nurse-led medication titration, where only 25% of patients reached optimal dose (p<0.004). When examining optimal dosage for any two of these mandatory medications, less patients were on optimal therapy. Beta blockers and ACE inhibitors, were both prescribed in combination in 60% of patients. While beta blockers and ARBs were prescribed to 15% of patients.

Conclusion: Whilst prescribing rates for a single medication strategy of beta blockers, or ACE inhibitors were greater than 70%, an increase in dosage of these medications and utilisation of proven combination therapy of these medications was poor. It is suggested that clinical outcomes for this cohort of patients could be further improved by adherence to evidence-based practice, ESC guidelines, and optimisation of these medications by heart failure nurses in a CHF program. On the basis of these findings and in the absence of ready access to a polypill, focussing on evidence-based practice to increase utilisation and optimal dosage of combination medication therapy is critical.

Quality of life in restless legs syndrome: A systematic review of clinical trials and a critical review of instruments

Restless legs syndrome (RLS) is a neurological movement disorder characterized by sensory symptoms and motor disturbances. While the underlying cause remains unknown, it is suggested that 20–25% of people with RLS are affected seriously enough to require pharmacological treatment. Dopamine agonists (DAs) are the most common treatment and act by increasing the low levels of dopamine to which RLS is often attributed. A growing literature highlights the debilitating and distressing nature of this condition from the patient's perspective. While sleep problems are most commonly reported, the impact of RLS on quality of life (QOL) is wide ranging, affecting relationships with partners, sex life, family life, social life, leisure activities, friendships, everyday activities, concentration, travel, career/work, sleep, and health.

We conducted a systematic review of clinical trials in which DAs have been evaluated in terms of RLS-specific QOL, i.e. their impact on the QOL of people with RLS, and critically reviewed the development history and measurement properties of RLS-specific QOL instruments.

A systematic search using terms synonymous with RLS, DAs and QOL was conducted using Scopus software, which includes MEDLINE, PsycINFO, EMBASE, and CINAHL. Our search covered publications from 2000 (prior to which RLS-specific QOL measures did not exist) to August 2009. Trials were included in our review if they evaluated DAs for the treatment of adults with RLS and reported evaluation using an RLS-specific QOL measure. We also ran citation searches to identify papers reporting the development history and measurement properties of the identified RLS-specific QOL instruments.

Three measures of RLS-specific QOL have been developed in recent years and are reviewed here: the Restless Legs Syndrome Quality of Life (RLSQOL) questionnaire, the Restless Legs Syndrome Quality of Life Instrument (RLS-QLI), and the Quality of Life Restless Legs Syndrome (QOL-RLS) measure. Critical review indicates that each has limitations (particularly in terms of published developmental history and content validity). Eleven trials of DAs were identified that included assessment of RLS-specific QOL (nine using the RLSQOL and two using the QOL-RLS). In all studies, significant improvements in RLS-specific QOL were observed, although these were mostly short term (12 weeks) and large placebo effects were also noted.

In people with RLS, the use of DAs has been shown to improve RLS-specific QOL. Longer-term, large-scale studies may be needed to confirm these findings and demonstrate statistically significant improvements in RLS-specific QOL at lower doses. Further development of the RLS-specific QOL measures is needed to ensure that the full impact of RLS (and the full benefit of new treatments) on aspects of life identified as important to individuals is captured in future studies.