The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Pharmacodynamic Evaluation of Factors Associated with the Development of Bacterial Resistance in Acutely Ill Patients during Therapy
Open accessAbstract
The selection of bacterial resistance was examined in relationship to antibiotic pharmacokinetics (PK) and organism MICs in the patients from four nosocomial lower respiratory tract infection clinical trials. The evaluable database included 107 acutely ill patients, 128 pathogens, and five antimicrobial regimens. Antimicrobial pharmacokinetics were characterized by using serum concentrations, and culture and sensitivity tests were performed daily on tracheal aspirates to examine resistance. Pharmacodynamic (PD) models were developed to identify factors associated with the probability of developing bacterial resistance. Overall, in 32 of 128 (25%) initially susceptible cases resistance developed during therapy. An initial univariate screen and a classification and regression tree analysis identified the ratio of the area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h to the MIC (AUC 0–24/MIC) as a significant predictor of the development of resistance (P< 0.001). The final PK/PD model, a variant of the Hill equation, demonstrated that the probability of developing resistance during therapy increased significantly when antimicrobial exposure was at an AUC 0–24/MIC ratio of less than 100. This relationship was observed across all treatments and within all organism groupings, with the exception of β-lactamase-producing gram-negative organisms (consistent with type I β-lactamase producers) treated with β-lactam monotherapy. Combination therapy resulted in much lower rates of resistance than monotherapy, probably because all of the combination regimens examined had an AUC 0–24/MIC ratio in excess of 100. In summary, the selection of antimicrobial resistance appears to be strongly associated with suboptimal antimicrobial exposure, defined as an AUC 0–24/MIC ratio of less than 100.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
McKinnon, P. S., Paladino, J. A., & Schentag, J. J. (2008) · International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents · doi:10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2007.12.009 · Cited by 464
Self-citationThe pharmacokinetic–pharmacodynamic approach to a rational dosage regimen for antibiotics
Toutain, P. L., del Castillo, J. R. E., & Bousquet-Mélou, A. (2002) · Research in Veterinary Science · doi:10.1016/s0034-5288(02)00039-5 · Cited by 384
Augmented Renal Clearance: Implications for Antibacterial Dosing in the Critically Ill
Udy, A. A., Roberts, J. A., Boots, R. J., Paterson, D. L., & Lipman, J. (2010) · Clinical Pharmacokinetics · doi:10.2165/11318140-000000000-00000 · Cited by 377
Paterson, D. L. (2006) · Clinical Infectious Diseases · doi:10.1086/504476 · Cited by 344
Rayner, C. R., Forrest, A., Meagher, A. K., Birmingham, M. C., & Schentag, J. J. (2003) · Clinical Pharmacokinetics · doi:10.2165/00003088-200342150-00007 · Cited by 306
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Thomas, J. K., Forrest, A., Bhavnani, S. M., Hyatt, J. M., Cheng, A., Ballow, C. H., & Schentag, J. J.
- Venue
- Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
- Publisher
- American Society for Microbiology
- Published
- 1998-03
- Volume
- 42
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 521-527
- ISSN
- 0066-4804 (ISSN-L)
- 1098-6596
- OpenAlex
- W2138984944
- Cited by
- 507
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 20.68
- 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: Pharmacodynamic Evaluation of Factors Associated with the Development of Bacterial Resistance in Acutely Ill Patients during Therapy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/aac.42.3.521
- The paper
- Thomas, J. K., Forrest, A., Bhavnani, S. M., Hyatt, J. M., Cheng, A., Ballow, C. H., & Schentag, J. J. (1998). Pharmacodynamic Evaluation of Factors Associated with the Development of Bacterial Resistance in Acutely Ill Patients during Therapy. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy. https://doi.org/10.1128/aac.42.3.521
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.