A randomized comparison of the safety and efficacy of once-daily gentamicin or thrice-daily gentamicin in combination with ticarcillin-clavulanate

PURPOSE: The primary purpose of the clinical trial was to assess the safety and efficacy of once-a-day compared with three-times-a-day gentamicin in patients with serious infections who had protocol-determined peak serum aminoglycoside concentrations. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 249 hospitalized patients with suspected or proven serious infections were randomized in a 2:2:1 ratio to gentamicin given three times a day with ticarcillin-clavulanate (TC), gentamicin once a day with TC, or ticarcillin-clavulanate (TC) alone. The gentamicin once-a-day dosage for patients with estimated creatinine clearance values of > or =80 mL/min was 5.1 mg/kg. With lower creatinine clearance estimates, the mg/kg dosage of gentamicin was decreased, and the dosage intervals (once daily or three times a day) were maintained. Evaluability required documentation of achievement of protocol-defined peak serum gentamicin levels. RESULTS: Of the total 175 evaluable patients, there were no significant differences found between treatment regimens with respect to clinical or microbiologic efficacy. Bedside audiometry proved impractical due to the frequency of altered mental state in ill patients. Based on the traditional increase in serum creatinine values from baseline values, no differences in renal toxicity between the treatment groups was identified. When changes in renal function were reanalyzed based on maintaining, as opposed to worsening, of renal function, preservation of renal function was better in the gentamicin once-a-day patients as opposed to the gentamicin three-times-a-day patients, P <0.01. CONCLUSIONS: Gentamicin once a day plus TC, gentamicin three times a day plus TC, and TC alone had similar effects in seriously ill hospitalized patients. The incidence of nephrotoxicity was similar in the three treatment groups. Using a nonvalidated post-hoc analysis, renal function was better preserved in gentamicin once-a-day + TC and TC-only patients as opposed to gentamicin three-times-a-day + TC.

Effect of once-yearly zoledronic acid 5 mg on fracture risk and change in femoral neck bone mineral density

Context: In the Health Outcomes and Reduced Incidence with Zoledronic Acid Once Yearly - Pivotal Fracture Trial (HORIZON-PFT), zoledronic acid (ZOL) 5 mg significantly reduced fracture risk. Objective: To identify factors associated with greater efficacy during ZOL 5 mg treatment. Design, Setting and Patients: Subgroup analysis (preplanned and post hoc) of a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 36-month trial in 7765 women with postmenopausal osteoporosis. Intervention: Single infusion of ZOL 5 mg or placebo at baseline, 12 and 24 months. Main Outcome Measures: Primary endpoints: new vertebral fracture and hip fracture. Secondary endpoints: non-vertebral fracture, change in femoral neck bone mineral density (BMD). Baseline risk factor subgroups: age, BMD T-score and vertebral fracture status, total hip BMD, race, weight, geographical region, smoking, height loss, history of falls, physical activity, prior bisphosphonates, creatinine clearance, body mass index (BMI), concomitant osteoporosis medications. Results: Greater ZOL induced effects on vertebral fracture risk with younger age (treatment-by-subgroup interaction P=0.05), normal creatinine clearance (P=0.04), and BMI >/=25 kg/m(2) (P=0.02). There were no significant treatment-factor interactions for hip or non-vertebral fracture or for change in BMD. Conclusions: ZOL appeared more effective in preventing vertebral fracture in younger women, overweight/obese women and women with normal renal function. ZOL had similar effects irrespective of fracture risk factors or femoral neck BMD.

Once daily dosing of netilmicin in neonatal and pediatric intensive care

OBJECTIVE: To examine a once daily dosing regimen of netilmicin in critically ill neonates and children. DESIGN AND SETTING: Open, prospective study on 81 antibiotic courses in 77 critically ill neonates and children, hospitalized in a multidisciplinary pediatric/neonatal intensive care unit. For combined empiric therapy (aminoglycoside and beta-lactam), netilmicin was given intravenously over 5 min once every 24 h. The dose ranged from 3.5-6 mg/kg, mainly depending upon gestational and postnatal age. Peak levels were determined by immunoassay 30 min after the second dose and trough levels 1 h before the third and fifth dose or after adaptation of dosing. RESULTS: All peak levels (n = 28) were clearly above 12 mumol/l (mean 22, range 13-41 mumol/l). Eighty-nine trough levels were within desired limits (< 4 mumol/l) and 11 (11%) above 4 mumol/l, mostly in conjunction with impaired renal function. CONCLUSIONS: Optimal peak and trough levels of netilmicin can be achieved by once daily dosing, adapted to gestational/postnatal age and renal function.

Liraglutide once a day versus exenatide twice a day for type 2 diabetes: a 26-week randomised, parallel-group, multinational, open-label trial (LEAD-6)

BACKGROUND: Unlike most antihyperglycaemic drugs, glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists have a glucose-dependent action and promote weight loss. We compared the efficacy and safety of liraglutide, a human GLP-1 analogue, with exenatide, an exendin-based GLP-1 receptor agonist. METHODS: Adults with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes on maximally tolerated doses of metformin, sulphonylurea, or both, were stratified by previous oral antidiabetic therapy and randomly assigned to receive additional liraglutide 1.8 mg once a day (n=233) or exenatide 10 microg twice a day (n=231) in a 26-week open-label, parallel-group, multinational (15 countries) study. The primary outcome was change in glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA(1c)). Efficacy analyses were by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00518882. FINDINGS: Mean baseline HbA(1c) for the study population was 8.2%. Liraglutide reduced mean HbA(1c) significantly more than did exenatide (-1.12% [SE 0.08] vs -0.79% [0.08]; estimated treatment difference -0.33; 95% CI -0.47 to -0.18; p<0.0001) and more patients achieved a HbA(1c) value of less than 7% (54%vs 43%, respectively; odds ratio 2.02; 95% CI 1.31 to 3.11; p=0.0015). Liraglutide reduced mean fasting plasma glucose more than did exenatide (-1.61 mmol/L [SE 0.20] vs -0.60 mmol/L [0.20]; estimated treatment difference -1.01 mmol/L; 95% CI -1.37 to -0.65; p<0.0001) but postprandial glucose control was less effective after breakfast and dinner. Both drugs promoted similar weight losses (liraglutide -3.24 kg vs exenatide -2.87 kg). Both drugs were well tolerated, but nausea was less persistent (estimated treatment rate ratio 0.448, p<0.0001) and minor hypoglycaemia less frequent with liraglutide than with exenatide (1.93 vs 2.60 events per patient per year; rate ratio 0.55; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.88; p=0.0131; 25.5%vs 33.6% had minor hypoglycaemia). Two patients taking both exenatide and a sulphonylurea had a major hypoglycaemic episode. INTERPRETATION: Liraglutide once a day provided significantly greater improvements in glycaemic control than did exenatide twice a day, and was generally better tolerated. The results suggest that liraglutide might be a treatment option for type 2 diabetes, especially when weight loss and risk of hypoglycaemia are major considerations.

Therapeutic drug monitoring of once daily aminoglycoside dosing: comparison of two methods and investigation of the optimal blood sampling strategy.

PURPOSE Therapeutic drug monitoring of patients receiving once daily aminoglycoside therapy can be performed using pharmacokinetic (PK) formulas or Bayesian calculations. While these methods produced comparable results, their performance has never been checked against full PK profiles. We performed a PK study in order to compare both methods and to determine the best time-points to estimate AUC0-24 and peak concentrations (C max). METHODS We obtained full PK profiles in 14 patients receiving a once daily aminoglycoside therapy. PK parameters were calculated with PKSolver using non-compartmental methods. The calculated PK parameters were then compared with parameters estimated using an algorithm based on two serum concentrations (two-point method) or the software TCIWorks (Bayesian method). RESULTS For tobramycin and gentamicin, AUC0-24 and C max could be reliably estimated using a first serum concentration obtained at 1 h and a second one between 8 and 10 h after start of the infusion. The two-point and the Bayesian method produced similar results. For amikacin, AUC0-24 could reliably be estimated by both methods. C max was underestimated by 10-20% by the two-point method and by up to 30% with a large variation by the Bayesian method. CONCLUSIONS The ideal time-points for therapeutic drug monitoring of once daily administered aminoglycosides are 1 h after start of a 30-min infusion for the first time-point and 8-10 h after start of the infusion for the second time-point. Duration of the infusion and accurate registration of the time-points of blood drawing are essential for obtaining precise predictions.

Hepatocellular carcinoma: sorafenib: for once age is not an issue.

Are some patients with hepatocellular carcinoma just too old to be treated? More specifically, should the age of a patient influence the way sorafenib is prescribed? A new study has tried to address these questions, providing helpful information to guide clinicians making these decisions.