Cefpodoxime 100mg tablets

Background and Objective: Although interest in predicting drug-drug interactions is growing, many predictions are not verified by real-world data. This study aimed to confirm whether predicted polypharmacy side effects using public data also occur in data from actual patients. Methods: We utilized a deep learning-based polypharmacy side effects prediction model to identify cefpodoxime-chlorpheniramine-lung edema combination with a high prediction score and a significant patient population. The retrospective study analyzed patients over 18 years old who were admitted to the Asan medical center between January 2000 and December 2020 and took cefpodoxime or chlorpheniramine orally. The three groups, cefpodoxime-treated, chlorpheniramine-treated, and cefpodoxime & chlorpheniramine-treated were compared using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) to balance them. Differences between the three groups were analyzed using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards model. Results: The study population comprised 54,043 patients with a history of taking cefpodoxime, 203,897 patients with a history of taking chlorpheniramine, and 1,628 patients with a history of taking cefpodoxime and chlorpheniramine simultaneously. After adjustment, the 1-year cumulative incidence of lung edema in the patient group that took cefpodoxime and chlorpheniramine simultaneously was significantly higher than in the patient groups that took cefpodoxime or chlorpheniramine only (p=0.001). Patients taking cefpodoxime and chlorpheniramine together had an increased risk of lung edema compared to those taking cefpodoxime alone [hazard ratio (HR) 2.10, 95% CI 1.26-3.52, p<0.005] and those taking chlorpheniramine alone, which also increased the risk of lung edema (HR 1.64, 95% CI 0.99-2.69, p=0.05). Conclusions: Validation of polypharmacy side effect predictions with real-world data can aid patient and clinician decision-making before conducting randomized controlled trials. Simultaneous use of cefpodoxime and chlorpheniramine was associated with a higher long-term risk of lung edema compared to the use of cefpodoxime or chlorpheniramine alone.

Abstract licence: CC BY

Objectives: Antibiotics are the most commonly administered medications among pediatric patients. However most of the time, accurate dose administration to children becomes a problem due to the extremely bitter taste. Cefpodoxime proxetil (CP) and roxithromycin (ROX) are antibiotics often prescribed to the pediatric population and have a bitter taste. Marketed formulations of these drugs are dry suspension and/or tablets. The lyophilization method involves various steps and thus is time consuming and expensive. The objective of this study was to mask the bitter taste of CP and ROX without compromising the solubility and drug release profile compared to marketed formulations, as well as to overcome the disadvantages associated with the currently used lyophilization technique. Methods: taste-masking efficiency. Results: taste-masking studies. Conclusion: The current work presents solvent-free, scalable, and continuous HME technology for addressing the bitter taste issues of CP and ROX. The disadvantages associated with the currently used lyophilization technique were overcome by developing the formulations using HME technology.

Abstract licence: CC BY-NC-ND

Abstract The Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute stated that cefpodoxime susceptibility among Enterobacterales can be inferred from cefazolin, but this may overcall cefpodoxime resistance. We report a categorical agreement rate of 64% for cefazolin and 97% for ceftriaxone with cefpodoxime (P = .0001). Ceftriaxone appears to be a more useful cefpodoxime surrogate.

Abstract licence: Public domain

Background: Cefpodoxime's prodrug form was absorbed and de-esterified by enterocytes to release the active metabolite, and it shows good In vitro activity against bacterial pathogens causing common RTIs. It was unknown, nevertheless, how clinicians considered about cefpodoxime. Objective: To gather expert opinion on the use of cefpodoxime in the management of respiratory tract infections (RTIs) in Indian settings. Methodology: The cross-sectional survey utilized a 19-item, multiple-response questionnaire to gather expert opinions from specialists with expertise in managing RTIs. The survey encompassed questions about current prescription practices, clinical observations, preferences, and experiences related to the use of cefpodoxime in routine settings for RTI management. The data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Results: Approximately 53% of the clinicians reported prescribing cefpodoxime in cases of upper respiratory tract infections (URTIs), while 44% of them indicated using it for lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs). Cefpodoxime emerged as the most commonly prescribed antimicrobial agent for treating URTIs, as reported by 86% of the clinicians. Majority (86.02%) of the clinicians favored cefpodoxime as the oral drug of choice for treating acute otitis media. More than half (68.34%) of the clinicians indicated prescribing cefpodoxime for approximately 5 to 7 days in cases of URTIs. The advantages of cefpodoxime, including its broad spectrum, favorable pharmacokinetic profile, and good bacteriological and clinical efficacy, were acknowledged by 65% of clinicians. Conclusion: The survey findings corroborated cefpodoxime as a widely used antibiotic in Indian settings for managing URTIs and acute otitis media. Clinicians reported that its broad-spectrum coverage, favorable pharmacokinetic profile, and clinical efficacy contribute to its popularity in the management of RTIs.

Abstract licence: CC BY