Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 198

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Linezolid: a Retrospective Monocentric Analysis

Open access
Pea, Federico, Furlanut, Mario, Cojutti, Piergiorgio, Cristini, Francesco, Zamparini, Eleonora, Franceschi, Loretta, Viale, Pierluigi·2010·Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy

Abstract

The objective of the present retrospective observational study carried out in patients receiving a standard dosage of linezolid and undergoing routine therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) was to assess the interindividual variability in plasma exposure, to identify the prevalence of attainment of optimal pharmacodynamics, and to define if an intensive program of TDM may be warranted in some categories of patients. Linezolid plasma concentrations (trough [ C min ] and peak [ C max ] levels) were analyzed by means of a high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) method, and daily drug exposure was estimated (daily area under the plasma concentration-time curve [AUC 24 ]). The final database included 280 C min and 223 C max measurements performed in 92 patients who were treated with the fixed 600-mg dose every 12 h (q12h) intravenously ( n = 58) or orally ( n = 34). A wide variability was observed (median values [interquartile range]: 3.80 mg/liter [1.75 to 7.53 mg/liter] for C min , 14.70 mg/liter [10.57 to 19.64] for C max , and 196.08 mg·h/liter [144.02 to 312.10 mg·h/liter] for estimated AUC 24 ). Linezolid C min was linearly correlated with estimated AUC 24 ( r 2 = 0.85). Optimal pharmacodynamic target attainment (defined as C min of ≥2 mg/liter and/or AUC 24 /MIC 90 ratio of >80) was obtained in about 60 to 70% of cases, but potential overexposure (defined as C min of ≥10 mg/liter and/or AUC 24 of ≥400 mg·h/liter) was documented in about 12% of cases. A significantly higher proportion of cases with potential overexposure received cotreatment with omeprazole, amiodarone, or amlodipine. Our study suggests that the application of TDM might be especially worthwhile in about 30% of cases with the intent of avoiding either the risk of dose-dependent toxicity or that of treatment failure.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1128/aac.00177-10

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 198

Metadata

Authors
Pea, F., Furlanut, M., Cojutti, P., Cristini, F., Zamparini, E., Franceschi, L., & Viale, P.
Venue
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
Published
2010-11
Volume
54
Issue
11
Pages
4605-4610
ISSN
  • 0066-4804 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-6596
OpenAlex
W2118901469
Cited by
198
References
1
FWCI
6.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Linezolid: a Retrospective Monocentric Analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/aac.00177-10
The paper
Pea, F., Furlanut, M., Cojutti, P., Cristini, F., Zamparini, E., Franceschi, L., & Viale, P. (2010). Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Linezolid: a Retrospective Monocentric Analysis. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy. https://doi.org/10.1128/aac.00177-10

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.