ArticleEuropean journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice2023
Factors affecting voriconazole concentration to dose ratio changes according to route of administration.
Article in European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Associated factors with voriconazole plasma concentration: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Pooled it
- Evaluation of Fentanyl-Emerged Adverse Events and Pharmacokinetics in Neonates: A Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling Approach.Clinical pharmacokinetics · 2025Article
- A Real-Time Plasma Concentration Prediction Model for Voriconazole in Elderly Patients via Machine Learning Combined with Population Pharmacokinetics.Drug design, development and therapy · 2025Article
- Factors influencing plasma concentration of voriconazole and voriconazole- N-oxide in younger adult and elderly patients.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVoriconazole (VRCZ) is commonly used as oral and intravenous (IV) formulations. Few studies have comprehensively analysed the variation factors for the weight-corrected VRCZ serum concentration/dose (C/D) ratio based on the administration route. We retrospectively investigated the risk factors that influence the VRCZ C/D ratio in patients treated with oral or IV formulations.
methodsA total of 325 patients were divided into two groups (IV and oral groups). Propensity score matching was performed and linear regression analyses were used to identify the risk factors that affect the VRCZ C/D ratio according to the administration route. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were also used to assess the predictive potential for VRCZ trough concentration >5 µg/mL.
resultsThe VRCZ C/D ratio in the oral group was significantly lower than that in the IV group (p<0.001). Propensity score matching resulted in 65 in the IV group matched with 65 in the oral group. Multivariate analysis showed that age (p=0.039), aspartate aminotransferase (AST) (p=0.016) and total bilirubin (TBIL) (p=0.041) levels were independent influencing factors of the VRCZ C/D ratio in the oral group. ROC curves showed that the predicted probability of combined age, AST and TBIL had maximal area under the curve (AUC) of 0.901 for VRCZ trough level >5 µg/mL. Meanwhile, the ratio of TBIL (p=0.005) and single dose (p=0.015) were independent factors in the IV group with ROC
conclusionsTo obtain optimal VRCZ efficacy and safety, dose adjustment is required based on multiple factors that may cause the observed difference in the VRCZ C/D ratio and trough levels between oral and IV administration.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.