Are contemporary antifungal doses sufficient for critically ill patients? Outcomes from an international, multicenter pharmacokinetics study for......

Are contemporary antifungal doses sufficient for critically ill patients? Outcomes from an international, multicenter pharmacokinetics study for......

Roberts, J.A., Sime, F.B., Lipman, J. et al. Are contemporary antifungal doses sufficient for critically ill patients? Outcomes from an international, multicenter pharmacokinetics study for Screening Antifungal Exposure in Intensive Care Units—the SAFE-ICU study. Intensive Care Med (2025). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-025-07793-5


Summary of "Are Contemporary Antifungal Doses Sufficient for Critically Ill Patients? Outcomes from an International, Multicenter Pharmacokinetics Study for Screening Antifungal Exposure in Intensive Care Units—The SAFE-ICU Study"

Abstract

This study evaluates the adequacy of current antifungal dosing regimens in critically ill patients by analyzing pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) target attainment across multiple antifungal agents. Conducted in 30 ICUs across 12 countries, the study found that while prophylactic antifungal use often met PK/PD targets, significant variability and subtherapeutic exposures were observed in treatment settings, particularly with voriconazole, posaconazole, micafungin, and amphotericin B. The findings highlight the need for individualized dosing strategies and therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) to optimize antifungal therapy in critically ill patients.

Key Points

  1. Variability in Antifungal Target Attainment: The study demonstrated significant differences in PK/PD target attainment across antifungal agents, with low target attainment observed in patients receiving voriconazole (57.1%), posaconazole (63.2%), micafungin (64.1%), and amphotericin B (41.7%).
  2. Impact of Pharmacokinetics in Critical Illness: Altered pharmacokinetics in critically ill patients, driven by factors such as organ dysfunction, fluid shifts, and concurrent medications, can lead to unpredictable drug exposures and suboptimal therapeutic outcomes.
  3. Differences Between Prophylaxis and Treatment: Prophylactic antifungal dosing generally resulted in higher target attainment (>80% in most cases), whereas treatment regimens demonstrated more variability, with some agents achieving subtherapeutic levels.
  4. Antifungal Dosing Inadequacy: Standard dosing regimens often failed to reach the predefined PK/PD targets in critically ill patients, indicating that current dosing strategies may need revision to ensure effective therapeutic exposure.
  5. Influence of Site of Infection: Patients with infections outside of the blood, intra-abdominal, and urinary tract sites had lower target attainment and increased rates of clinical failure, suggesting that infection location plays a role in antifungal efficacy.
  6. Association with Organ Failure and Mortality: Higher Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores correlated with increased clinical failure and 30-day mortality, emphasizing the need for optimized antifungal management in critically ill patients.
  7. Significance of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring (TDM): Given the wide interpatient variability in antifungal pharmacokinetics, TDM is crucial in ensuring that drug exposures remain within therapeutic ranges while minimizing toxicity risks.
  8. Dosing Challenges with Azoles and Echinocandins: Fluconazole demonstrated better target attainment compared to voriconazole and posaconazole, which showed significant treatment failures. Similarly, micafungin and anidulafungin exhibited suboptimal exposures in a subset of patients.
  9. Need for Individualized Dosing Approaches: The study suggests that weight-based and severity-adjusted dosing strategies may be necessary to improve antifungal efficacy, particularly in ICU settings with altered pharmacokinetics.
  10. Global Implications for Antifungal Therapy: The findings underscore the importance of reassessing antifungal dosing guidelines for critically ill patients worldwide, with a focus on individualized, PK-guided dosing regimens to improve patient outcomes.


PK/PD target-related exposures per occasion of the study antifungals prescribed for treatment. The shaded area represents the PK/PD target used in this study. For fluconazole, 15 data points are outside the y-axis limits (max AUC0-24/MIC value was 3250.3);
Conclusion

The SAFE-ICU study highlights significant variability in antifungal PK/PD target attainment in critically ill patients, demonstrating that contemporary dosing regimens are often inadequate. Improved strategies incorporating TDM, individualized dosing, and pathogen-specific MIC assessment are necessary to optimize antifungal efficacy and reduce mortality in ICU settings.

ACCESS FULL ARTICLE HERE


Are Contemporary Antifungal Doses Sufficient for Critically Ill Patients? Outcomes from an International, Multicenter Pharmacokinetics Study for Screening Antifungal Exposure in Intensive Care Units—The SAFE-ICU Study
Watch the following video on "[Webinar] Antibiotic Resistance" by ICU Management & Practice
Discussion Questions

  1. How can therapeutic drug monitoring be better integrated into ICU protocols to optimize antifungal dosing?
  2. What modifications to current antifungal dosing strategies would improve target attainment in critically ill patients?
  3. How can future research address the variability in antifungal pharmacokinetics to refine dosing recommendations?


Take Advantage of This Resource

I encourage you to explore this growing library of articles and leverage it to stay informed on the latest in critical care. Visit the collection today at: https://perfusfind.com/ic/

This is another step in making high-quality, evidence-based information easily accessible to the critical care community. As always, thank you for your continued support!


Javier Amador-Casta?eda, BHS, RRT, FCCM

Interprofessional Critical Care Network (ICCN)


Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.


Sarah Cooke

Advanced Pharmacist Practitioner ICU & ECMO; Intensive Care Society Pharmacy Professional Advisory Group Member; Labrador UK Action Group volunteer.

2 周

Hakeem Yusuff MRCP FRCA FFICM as I understand it we have surprisingly good local sensitivity to azoles still, so for prophylaxis we still use fluconazole. Whereas other areas really struggle. However our ECMO population aren't necessarily local, and we seldom use fluconazole, as we mostly choose to treat until biomarkers are back, rather than prophylact. But when we do use fluconazole in our patient group, we tend to use 400mg BD as they're often filtered too. I can't wait to see our vori data, and the genotyping results, and I'm really interested to see how it compares to Haifa Lyster's work too ?? Not long now!

要查看或添加评论,请登录

Javier Amador-Casta?eda, BHS, RRT, FCCM的更多文章

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了