Winter, ME. Basic Clinical Pharmacokinetics. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott, Williams, and Wilkins, 2010.Google Scholar

Shargel, L, Wu-Pong, S, Yu, A. Applied Biopharmaceutics and Pharmacokinetics. 6th ed. New York: McGraw Hill, 2012.Google Scholar

Jelliffe, RW, Schumitzky, A, Van Guilder, M, et al. Individualizing drug dosage regimens: roles of population pharmacokinetic and dynamic models, Bayesian fitting, and adaptive control. Ther Drug Monit 1993; 15(5):380–393.Google Scholar

Bonate, P. Pharmacokinetic-Pharmacodynamic Modeling and Simulation. 2nd ed. Springer, 2011.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Pfizer. VFEND® IV (voriconazole) for injection, VFEND® tablets, VFEND® for oral suspension. (Accessed February 18, 2016, at www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2010/021266s0321bl.pdf.)Google Scholar

Cederbaum, AI. Alcohol Metabolism. Clinics in Liver Disease 2012; 16(4):667–685.Google Scholar

National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism. Alcohol alert: alcohol metabolism. No. 35, PH 371. Bethesda, MD: 1997. (Accessed February 18, 2016, at http://pubs.niaaa.nih.gov/publications/aa35.htm.)Google Scholar

Craig, WA. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic parameters: rationale for antibacterial dosing of mice and men. Clin Infect Dis 1998; 26(1):1–10; quiz 1–2.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Scheetz, MH, Hurt, KM, Noskin, GA, Oliphant, CM. Applying antibiotic pharmacodynamics to resistant gram-negative pathogens. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2006; 63(14): 1346–1360.Google Scholar

Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Methods for dilution antibiotic susceptibility tests for bacteria that grow aerobically; approved standard. 10th ed. CLSI document M07-A10. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 2015.Google Scholar

Finberg, RW, Moellering, RC, Tally, FP, et al. The importance of bactericidal drugs: future directions in infectious disease. Clin Infect Dis 2004; 39(9): 1314–1320.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

National Committee for Clinical Laboratory Standards. Methods for determining bactericidal activity of antibiotic agents. Approved Guideline M26-A. NCCLS, Wayne, PA, 1999.Google Scholar

Goutelle, S, Maurin, M, Rougier, F, et al. The Hill equation: a review of its capabilities in pharmacological modelling. Fundam Clin Pharmacol 2008; 22(6):633–648.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Rex, JH, Pfaller, MA. Has antifungal susceptibility testing come of age? Clin Infect Dis 2002; 35(8): 982–989.Google Scholar

Spellberg, B, Talbot, GH, Boucher, HW, et al. Antibiotic agents for complicated skin and skin-structure infections: justification of noninferiority margins in the absence of placebo-controlled trials. Clin Infect Dis 2009; 49(3):383–391.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Spellberg, B, Talbot, GH, Brass, EP, et al. Position paper: recommended design features of future clinical trials of antibacterial agents for community-acquired pneumonia. Clin Infect Dis 2008; 47(Suppl 3);S249–265.Google ScholarPubMed

Lamoth, F, Buclin, T, Pascual, A, et al. High cefepime plasma concentrations and neurological toxicity in febrile neutropenic patients with mild impairment of renal function. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2010; 54(10):4360–4367.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Rhodes, NJ, Kuti, JL, Nicolau, DP, Neely, MN, Nicasio, AM, Scheetz, MH. An exploratory analysis of the ability of a cefepime trough concentration greater than 22 mg/L to predict neurotoxicity. J Infect Chemother 2016; 22(2):78–83.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Dudley, MN, Ambrose, PG, Bhavnani, SM, et al. Background and rationale for revised clinical and laboratory standards institute interpretive criteria (breakpoints) for Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa: I. Cephalosporins and Aztreonam. Clin Infect Dis 2013; 56(9):1301–1309.Google Scholar

Crandon, JL, Nicolau, DP. In vivo activities of simulated human doses of cefepime and cefepime-AAI101 against multidrug-resistant Gram-negative Enterobacteriaceae. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2015; 59(5):2688–2694.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Crandon, JL, Bulik, CC, Kuti, JL, Nicolau, DP. Clinical pharmacodynamics of cefepime in patients infected with Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2010; 54(3):1111–1116.Google Scholar

Rhodes, NJ, Kuti, JL, Nicolau, DP, et al. Defining clinical exposures of cefepime for Gram negative bloodstream infections that are associated with improved survival. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2015 60(3):1401–1410.Google Scholar

Kim, A, Kuti, JL, Nicolau, DP. Probability of pharmacodynamic target attainment with standard and prolonged-infusion antibiotic regimens for empiric therapy in adults with hospital-acquired pneumonia. Clin Ther 2009; 31(11):2765–2778.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

MacVane, SH, Kuti, JL, Nicolau, DP. Clinical pharmacodynamics of antipseudomonal cephalosporins in patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2014; 58(3):1359–1364.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Bauer, KA, West, JE, O’Brien, JM, Goff, DA. Extended-infusion cefepime reduces mortality in patients with Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2013; 57(7):2907–2912.Google Scholar

Nicasio, AM, Ariano, RE, Zelenitsky, SA, et al. Population pharmacokinetics of high-dose, prolonged-infusion cefepime in adult critically ill patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2009; 53(4):1476–1481.Google Scholar

Nichols, KR, Karmire, LC, Cox, EG, Kays, MB, Knoderer, CA. Implementing extended-infusion cefepime as standard of care in a children’s hospital: a prospective descriptive study. Ann Pharmacother 2015; 49(4):419–426.Google Scholar

Cheatham, SC, Shea, KM, Healy, DP, et al. Steady-state pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of cefepime administered by prolonged infusion in hospitalised patients. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2011; 37(1):46–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Schmidt, S, Rock, K, Sahre, M, et al. Effect of protein binding on the pharmacological activity of highly bound antibiotics. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2008; 52(11):3994–4000.Google Scholar

Heuberger, J, Schmidt, S, Derendorf, H. When is protein binding important? J Pharm Sci 2013; 102(9):3458–3467.Google Scholar

Mouton, JW, Dudley, MN, Cars, O, Derendorf, H, Drusano, GL. Standardization of pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) terminology for anti-infective drugs: an update. J Antimicrob Chemother 2005; 55(5):601–607.Google Scholar

US Department of Health and Human Services. Food and Drug Administration, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, and Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research. Product development under the animal rule guidance for industry. 2015.Google Scholar

US Department of Health and Human Services. Food and Drug Administration, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, and Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research. Guidance for Industry S6 Preclinical Safety Evaluation of Biotechnology-Derived Pharmaceuticals. 1997.Google Scholar

Velkov, T, Bergen, PJ, Lora-Tamayo, J, Landersdorfer, CB, Li, J. PK/PD models in antibacterial development. Curr Opin Microbiol 2013; 16(5):573–579.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Bulitta, JB, Landersdorfer, CB, Forrest, A, et al. Relevance of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic modeling to clinical care of critically ill patients. Curr Pharm Biotechnol 2011; 12(12):2044–2061.Google Scholar

Ambrose, PG, Bhavnani, SM, Rubino, CM, et al. Pharmacokinetics-pharmacodynamics of antibiotic therapy: it’s not just for mice anymore. Clin Infect Dis 2007; 44(1):79–86.Google Scholar

D’Agostino, C, Rhodes, NJ, Skoglund, E, Roberts, JA, Scheetz, MH. Microbiologic clearance following transition from standard infusion piperacillin-tazobactam to extended-infusion for persistent Gram-negative bacteremia and possible endocarditis: a case report and review of the literature. J Infect Chemother 2015; 21(10):742–746.Google Scholar

Defife, R, Scheetz, MH, Feinglass, JM, Postelnick, MJ, Scarsi, KK. Effect of differences in MIC values on clinical outcomes in patients with bloodstream infections caused by gram-negative organisms treated with levofloxacin. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2009; 53(3):1074–1079.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Esterly, JS, Wagner, J, McLaughlin, MM, Postelnick, MJ, Qi, C, Scheetz, MH. Evaluation of clinical outcomes in patients with bloodstream infections due to Gram-negative bacteria according to carbapenem MIC stratification. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2012; 56(9):4885–4890.Google Scholar

US Department of Health and Human Services and Center for Drug Evaluation and Research. Guidance for Industry. Estimating the maximum safe starting dose in initial clinical trials for therapeutics in adult healthy volunteers. 2005.Google Scholar

Guo, B, Abdelraouf, K, Ledesma, KR, Chang, KT, Nikolaou, M, Tam, VH. Quantitative impact of neutrophils on bacterial clearance in a murine pneumonia model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2011; 55(10):4601–4605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Labreche, MJ, Graber, CJ, Nguyen, HM. Recent updates on the role of pharmacokinetics-pharmacodynamics in antibiotic susceptibility testing as applied to clinical practice. Clin Infect Dis 2015; 61(9):1446–1452.Google Scholar

Turnidge, J, Paterson, DL. Setting and revising antibacterial susceptibility breakpoints. Clin Microbiol Rev 2007; 20(3):391–408, Table of Contents.Google Scholar

Bradley, JS, Garonzik, SM, Forrest, A, Bhavnani, SM. Pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and Monte Carlo simulation: selecting the best antibiotic dose to treat an infection. Pediatr Infect Dis J 2010; 29(11):1043–1046.Google Scholar

Roberts, JA, Abdul-Aziz, MH, Lipman, J, et al. Individualised antibiotic dosing for patients who are critically ill: challenges and potential solutions. Lancet Infect Dis 2014; 14(6):498–509.Google Scholar

Perrott, J, Mabasa, VH, Ensom, MH. Comparing outcomes of meropenem administration strategies based on pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic principles: a qualitative systematic review. Ann Pharmacother 2010; 44(3):557–564.Google Scholar

Lodise, TP Jr., Lomaestro, B, Drusano, GL. Piperacillin-tazobactam for Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection: clinical implications of an extended-infusion dosing strategy. Clin Infect Dis 2007; 44(3):357–363.Google Scholar

Moore, RD, Lietman, PS, Smith, CR. Clinical response to aminoglycoside therapy: importance of the ratio of peak concentration to minimal inhibitory concentration. J Infect Dis 1987; 155(1):93–99.Google Scholar

Craig, WA. Once-daily versus multiple-daily dosing of aminoglycosides. J Chemother 1995; 7(Suppl 2):47–52.Google Scholar

Nicolau, DP, Freeman, CD, Belliveau, PP, Nightingale, CH, Ross, JW, Quintiliani, R. Experience with a once-daily aminoglycoside program administered to 2,184 adult patients. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1995; 39(3):650–655.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Wood, MJ, Farrell, W. Comparison of urinary excretion of tobramycin and gentamicin in adults. J Infect Dis 1976; 134:S133–136.Google Scholar

Rybak, MJ, Abate, BJ, Kang, SL, Ruffing, MJ, Lerner, SA, Drusano, GL. Prospective evaluation of the effect of an aminoglycoside dosing regimen on rates of observed nephrotoxicity and ototoxicity. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1999; 43(7):1549–1555.Google Scholar

Tunkel, AR, Hartman, BJ, Kaplan, SL, et al. Practice guidelines for the management of bacterial meningitis. Clin Infect Dis 2004; 39(9):1267–1284.Google Scholar

American Thoracic S, Infectious Diseases Society of A. Guidelines for the management of adults with hospital-acquired, ventilator-associated, and healthcare-associated pneumonia. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2005; 171(4):388–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Moise-Broder, PA, Forrest, A, Birmingham, MC, Schentag, JJ. Pharmacodynamics of vancomycin and other antibiotics in patients with Staphylococcus aureus lower respiratory tract infections. Clin Pharmacokinet 2004; 43(13):925–942.Google Scholar

Rybak, M, Lomaestro, B, Rotschafer, JC, et al. Therapeutic monitoring of vancomycin in adult patients: a consensus review of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists, the Infectious Diseases Society of America, and the Society of Infectious Diseases Pharmacists. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2009; 66(1):82–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Lodise, TP, Drusano, GL, Zasowski, E, et al. Vancomycin exposure in patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infections: how much is enough? Clin Infect Dis 2014; 59(5):666–675.Google Scholar

Jung, Y, Song, KH, Cho, J, et al. Area under the concentration-time curve to minimum inhibitory concentration ratio as a predictor of vancomycin treatment outcome in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2014; 43(2): 179–183.Google Scholar

Holmes, NE, Turnidge, JD, Munckhof, WJ, et al. Vancomycin AUC/MIC ratio and 30-day mortality in patients with Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2013; 57(4):1654–1663.Google Scholar

Brown, J, Brown, K, Forrest, A. Vancomycin AUC24/MIC ratio in patients with complicated bacteremia and infective endocarditis due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and its association with attributable mortality during hospitalization. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2012; 56(2):634–638.Google Scholar

Kullar, R, Davis, SL, Levine, DP, Rybak, MJ. Impact of vancomycin exposure on outcomes in patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia: support for consensus guidelines suggested targets. Clin Infect Dis 2011; 52(8):975–981.Google Scholar

Neely, MN, Youn, G, Jones, B, et al. Are vancomycin trough concentrations adequate for optimal dosing? Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2014; 58(1):309–316.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

van Hal, SJ, Paterson, DL, Lodise, TP. Systematic review and meta-analysis of vancomycin-induced nephrotoxicity associated with dosing schedules that maintain troughs between 15 and 20 milligrams per liter. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2013; 57(2):734–744.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Lodise, TP, Patel, N, Lomaestro, BM, Rodvold, KA, Drusano, GL. Relationship between initial vancomycin concentration-time profile and nephrotoxicity among hospitalized patients. Clin Infect Dis 2009; 49(4):507–514.Google Scholar