Abstract
Gentamicin is recommended as first-line treatment of neonatal sepsis. The use of gentamicin is associated with toxicity which complicates neonatal dosing and necessitates therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM).
In a proof-of-concept investigation, we sought to compare (1) gentamicin concentrations obtained using volumetric absorptive microsampling (VAMS) to standard TDM plasma samples, and (2) the time taken to report results obtained using VAMS compared to standard TDM by the local hospital chemical pathology service.
The difference between gentamicin concentrations obtained from plasma collected for routine clinical care and calculated plasma concentrations, based on samples collected in whole blood using VAMS, was −18.0% and −0.4% for two patients. The research laboratory reported results within the time taken for the routine chemical pathology laboratory to report results. This proof-of-concept study demonstrates that the use of microsampling for TDM by pathology services can fulfil the requirements of providing an accurate gentamicin concentration in a timely manner.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was funded by a Royal Brisbane & Womens Hospital Foundation grant. SLP and ADI are recipients of National Health and Medical Research Council-funded Fellowships (APP1142757 and APP1197743, respectively), JAR is a recipient of a National Health and Medical Research Council-funded Centre for Research Excellence Research Excellence (APP1044941), Project Grant (1062040) and Fellowship (APP1048652).
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Royal Brisbane and Womens Hospital human research ethics committee HREC/2020/QRBW/55401
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information
