Evidence Hub

Global estimates and determinants of antituberculosis drug pharmacokinetics in children and adolescents: a systematic review and individual patient data meta-analysis

Gafar F, Wasmann RE, McIlleron HM, Aarnoutse RE, Schaaf HS, Marais BJ, Agarwal D, Antwi S et al.

The European respiratory journal, 2023

1,628 participants · 33 citations

Abstract

Background: Suboptimal exposure to antituberculosis (anti-TB) drugs has been associated with unfavourable treatment outcomes. We aimed to investigate estimates and determinants of first-line anti-TB drug pharmacokinetics in children and adolescents at a global level.

Methods: We systematically searched MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science (1990-2021) for pharmacokinetic studies of first-line anti-TB drugs in children and adolescents. Individual patient data were obtained from authors of eligible studies. Summary estimates of total/extrapolated area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h post-dose (AUC0-24) and peak plasma concentration (C max) were assessed with random-effects models, normalised with current World Health Organization-recommended paediatric doses. Determinants of AUC0-24 and C max were assessed with linear mixed-effects models.

Results: Of 55 eligible studies, individual patient data were available for 39 (71%), including 1628 participants from 12 countries. Geometric means of steady-state AUC0-24 were summarised for isoniazid (18.7 (95% CI 15.5-22.6) h·mg·L-1), rifampicin (34.4 (95% CI 29.4-40.3) h·mg·L-1), pyrazinamide (375.0 (95% CI 339.9-413.7) h·mg·L-1) and ethambutol (8.0 (95% CI 6.4-10.0) h·mg·L-1). Our multivariate models indicated that younger age (especially 0-24 for all first-line anti-TB drugs, while severe malnutrition was associated with lower AUC0-24 for isoniazid and pyrazinamide. N-acetyltransferase 2 rapid acetylators had…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 1,628 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free