Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 304

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Issues in Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Anti-Infective Agents: Kill Curves versus MIC

Open access
Mueller, Markus, de la Peña, Amparo, Derendorf, Hartmut·2004·Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy

Abstract

The success of antimicrobial therapy is determined by complex interactions between an administered drug, a host, and an infecting agent. In a clinical situation, the complexity of these interactions is usually reflected by a high variability in the dose-response relationship. Therefore, to minimize the dose-response variability, key characteristics of the drug, the infecting agent and the host have to be taken into account for selecting an appropriate antibiotic and an appropriate dose. Failure to do so may result in either therapeutic failure or emergence of resistant strains. To date, dose and drug selection is mostly based on a static in vitro parameter, the MIC and on the drug′s serum concentration as a pharmacokinetic parameter. In practice, however, a pharmacodynamic effect in vivo is rather the result of a dynamic exposure of the infective agent to the unbound antibiotic drug fraction at the relevant effect site. Thus, static conditions in an in vitro setting hardly reflect a dynamic situation in a target organ under in vivo conditions. Furthermore, serum concentrations do not reflect the unbound concentrations at the target site. In recent years substantial efforts were devoted to systematically elucidate the dynamic relationship between pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic variables. The main concept of this pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic approach is to use the concentration-effect relationship of the drug of interest in dosage adjustment and product development in a logical way and minimize trial-and-error approaches (29, 80). This approach can potentially result in substantial savings of time and expenses and may help to avoid unnecessary and, hence, unethical clinical studies (97). Thus, dosages and dosing intervals of antimicrobial agents should be designed with reference to dynamic pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters. Accordingly, several efficacy indices or surrogate markers that take into account both pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic information have been defined and used by different authors to describe the antibacterial activity of various classes of antimicrobial agents (100, 106, 59). Currently there are two main trends for antibiotic pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic models; those based on the MIC and those based on a kill-curve approach, both of which will be described in detail in the following.

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.48.2.369-377.2004

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.

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

Cited by

See all 304

Metadata

Authors
Mueller, M., de la Peña, A., & Derendorf, H.
Venue
Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy
Published
2004-02
Volume
48
Issue
2
Pages
369-377
ISSN
  • 0066-4804 (ISSN-L)
  • 1098-6596
OpenAlex
W2129122463
Cited by
304
References
0
FWCI
8.02
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: Issues in Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Anti-Infective Agents: Kill Curves versus MIC. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1128/aac.48.2.369-377.2004
The paper
Mueller, M., de la Peña, A., & Derendorf, H. (2004). Issues in Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Anti-Infective Agents: Kill Curves versus MIC. Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy. https://doi.org/10.1128/aac.48.2.369-377.2004

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.