TABLE 2.
External validation results showing AUC prediction performance of various modelsb
| Data set (No. of TDM occasions) | Performance metric | Prediction model | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SSTA | LR | VancoPK | BSCt | ||
| EWUSH (N = 326) | MdPE, % (95% CI) | −1.5 (-3.2,–0.5) | 4.3 (1.9, 6.4) | −2.2 (-3.5,–1.4) | 1.5 (-0.2, 2.8) |
| IQRPE, % (95% CI) | 13.3 (11.2, 15.0) | 19.0 (16.7, 21.8) | 12.4 (10.6, 14.8) | 15.1 (12.8, 17.1) | |
| MdAPE, % (95% CI) | 6.4 (5.7, 7.5) | 10.1 (9.2, 11.2) | 6.6 (5.8, 7.2) | 7.5 (6.6, 8.5) | |
| P20, % (95% CI) | 87.1 (83.4, 90.5) | 82.5 (78.2, 86.8) | 87.7 (84.0, 91.1) | 83.4 (79.1, 87.4) | |
| MUSI (N = 20)a | MdPE, % (95% CI) | 0.1 (-5.2, 2.3) | −0.8 (-9.4, 2.7) | −7.2 (-10.6,–2.0) | . |
| IQRPE, % (95% CI) | 10.4 (4.7, 18.2) | 14.2 (7.0, 26.2) | 11.1 (5.6, 16.7) | . | |
| MdAPE, % (95% CI) | 5.2 (2.3, 8.7) | 9.4 (3.5, 13.6) | 7.2 (4.4, 10.6) | . | |
| P20, % (95% CI) | 95 (85, 100) | 90 (75, 100) | 95 (85, 100) | . | |
Regarding the infusion time, it is described as “The infusion time was 1 and 2 h for doses of 500 and 750–1500 mg, respectively.” in the referenced literature. The time was not specified for the 675 mg dose; however, since it was between the two dose ranges, the infusion time of the case was roughly considered to be 1.5 hours.
BSCt, Bayesian approach using a single trough concentration; CI, confidence interval; EWUSH, Ewha Womans University Seoul Hospital (Seoul, Korea); IQRPE, interquartile range of percentage error; LR, linear regression model; MdAPE, median absolute percentage error; MdPE, median percentage error; P20, percentage of estimated AUC24 within 20% of reference AUC24; SSTA, simple single-trough equation for AUC; TDM, therapeutic drug monitoring.