In complicated UTIs, cefepime-taniborbactam increased treatment success vs. meropenem at 19 to 23 d.

SOURCE CITATION: Wagenlehner FM, Gasink LB, McGovern PC, et al; CERTAIN-1 Study Team. Cefepime-taniborbactam in complicated urinary tract infection. N Engl J Med. 2024;390:611-622. 38354140.

A targeted likelihood estimation comparing cefepime and piperacillin/tazobactam in critically ill patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP).

Cefepime and piperacillin/tazobactam are antimicrobials recommended by IDSA/ATS guidelines for the empirical management of patients admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). Concerns have been raised about which should be used in clinical practice. This study aims to compare the effect of cefepime and piperacillin/tazobactam in critically ill CAP patients through a targeted maximum likelihood estimation (TMLE). A total of 2026 ICU-admitted patients with CAP were included. Among them, (47%) presented respiratory failure, and (27%) developed septic shock. A total of (68%) received cefepime and (32%) piperacillin/tazobactam-based treatment. After running the TMLE, we found that cefepime and piperacillin/tazobactam-based treatments have comparable 28-day, hospital, and ICU mortality. Additionally, age, PTT, serum potassium and temperature were associated with preferring cefepime over piperacillin/tazobactam (OR 1.14 95% CI [1.01-1.27], p = 0.03), (OR 1.14 95% CI [1.03-1.26], p = 0.009), (OR 1.1 95% CI [1.01-1.22], p = 0.039) and (OR 1.13 95% CI [1.03-1.24], p = 0.014)]. Our study found a similar mortality rate among ICU-admitted CAP patients treated with cefepime and piperacillin/tazobactam. Clinicians may consider factors such as availability and safety profiles when making treatment decisions.

Mortality of Patients With Sepsis Administered Piperacillin-Tazobactam vs Cefepime.

Importance: Experimental and observational studies have suggested that empirical treatment for bacterial sepsis with antianaerobic antibiotics (eg, piperacillin-tazobactam) is associated with adverse outcomes compared with anaerobe-sparing antibiotics (eg, cefepime). However, a recent pragmatic clinical trial of piperacillin-tazobactam and cefepime showed no difference in short-term outcomes at 14 days. Further studies are needed to help clarify the empirical use of these agents. Objective: To examine the use of piperacillin-tazobactam compared with cefepime in 90-day mortality in patients treated empirically for sepsis, using instrumental variable analysis of a 15-month piperacillin-tazobactam shortage. Design, Setting, and Participants: In a retrospective cohort study, hospital admissions at the University of Michigan from July 1, 2014, to December 31, 2018, including a piperacillin-tazobactam shortage period from June 12, 2015, to September 18, 2016, were examined. Adult patients with suspected sepsis treated with vancomycin and either piperacillin-tazobactam or cefepime for conditions with presumed equipoise between piperacillin-tazobactam and cefepime were included in the study. Data analysis was conducted from December 17, 2022, to April 11, 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was 90-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included organ failure-free, ventilator-free, and vasopressor-free days. The 15-month piperacillin-tazobactam shortage period was used as an instrumental variable for unmeasured confounding in antibiotic selection. Results: Among 7569 patients (4174 men [55%]; median age, 63 [IQR 52-73] years) with sepsis meeting study eligibility, 4523 were treated with vancomycin and piperacillin-tazobactam and 3046 were treated with vancomycin and cefepime. Of patients who received piperacillin-tazobactam, only 152 (3%) received it during the shortage. Treatment groups did not differ significantly in age, Charlson Comorbidity Index score, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score, or time to antibiotic administration. In an instrumental variable analysis, piperacillin-tazobactam was associated with an absolute mortality increase of 5.0% at 90 days (95% CI, 1.9%-8.1%) and 2.1 (95% CI, 1.4-2.7) fewer organ failure-free days, 1.1 (95% CI, 0.57-1.62) fewer ventilator-free days, and 1.5 (95% CI, 1.01-2.01) fewer vasopressor-free days. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with suspected sepsis and no clear indication for antianaerobic coverage, administration of piperacillin-tazobactam was associated with higher mortality and increased duration of organ dysfunction compared with cefepime. These findings suggest that the widespread use of empirical antianaerobic antibiotics in sepsis may be harmful.

Cefepime-induced encephalopathy in an older patient with polypharmacy and renal insufficiency: a case report.

The world population is rapidly aging. Societal aging poses many challenges for individuals, families, nations, and the global healthcare system. Therefore, geriatric care is a crucial issue that demands our attention. In this case report, we describe a woman in her early 70s with multiple comorbidities, polypharmacy, and renal insufficiency who developed cefepime-induced encephalopathy with moderate to severe cerebral dysfunction during treatment of a urinary tract infection. The patient's consciousness level gradually improved, and no further seizures were observed following the discontinuation of cefepime for several days. This case report underscores the fact that polypharmacy and medication safety are significant concerns that are often overlooked when caring for older patients. The report also highlights the increased susceptibility of older individuals to antibiotic-associated adverse reactions during the management of infectious diseases. Therefore, optimization of antibiotic therapy for older patients is a critical issue that requires thorough investigation and consideration in geriatric care.

Cefepime/Enmetazobactam: First Approval.

Cefepime/enmetazobactam (EXBLIFEP®), an intravenous (IV) antibacterial fixed-dose combination of a 4th generation cephalosporin and an extended-spectrum ß-lactamase (ESBL) inhibitor, is being developed by Allecra Therapeutics and ADVANZ PHARMA for the treatment of infections caused by multi-drug-resistant (MDR) Gram-negative bacteria. In February 2024, cefepime/enmetazobactam was approved in the USA for use in adults with complicated urinary tract infections (cUTI) including pyelonephritis, caused by susceptible strains of Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Proteus mirabilis, and Enterobacter cloacae complex. In March 2024, cefepime/enmetazobactam was approved in the EU for use in adults for the treatment of cUTI, including pyelonephritis, and hospital-acquired pneumonia, including ventilator associated pneumonia, and the treatment of patients with bacteraemia occurring in association with or suspected to be associated with any of these infections. This article summarizes the milestones in the development of cefepime/enmetazobactam leading to this first approval for the treatment of adults with infections caused by MDR Gram-negative bacteria.

Patient outcomes by baseline pathogen resistance phenotype and genotype in CERTAIN-1, a Phase 3 study of cefepime-taniborbactam versus meropenem in adults with complicated urinary tract infection.

CERTAIN-1 was a Phase 3, double-blind, randomized, parallel group study of the efficacy and safety of cefepime-taniborbactam versus meropenem in the treatment of adults with complicated urinary tract infection (cUTI), including acute pyelonephritis. We determined susceptibility of Enterobacterales and Pseudomonas aeruginosa baseline pathogens to cefepime-taniborbactam and comparators and characterized ß-lactam resistance mechanisms. Microbiologic response and clinical response were assessed in patient subsets defined by baseline pathogens that were of cefepime-, multidrug-, or carbapenem-resistant phenotype or that carried ß-lactamase genes. Among Enterobacterales baseline pathogens, 26.8%, 4.1%, and 3.0% carried genes for extended-spectrum ß-lactamases (ESBLs), AmpC, and carbapenemases, respectively. Within each treatment group, while composite success rates at Test of Cure in resistant subsets by pathogen species were similar to those by pathogen overall, composite success rates in meropenem patients were numerically lower for cefepime-resistant Escherichia coli (9/19; 47.4%) and ESBL E. coli (13/25; 52.0%) compared with E. coli overall (62/100; 62.0%). Cefepime-taniborbactam achieved composite success in 7/8 (87.5%) patients with carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales and 8/9 (88.9%) patients with Enterobacterales with a carbapenemase gene (5 OXA-48-group; 2 KPC-3; 2 NDM-1). Cefepime-taniborbactam also achieved composite success in 8/16 (50.0%) patients and clinical success in 13/16 (81.3%) patients with P. aeruginosa; corresponding rates were 4/7 (57.1%) and 6/7 (85.7%) for meropenem. Cefepime-taniborbactam demonstrated efficacy in adult cUTI patients with cefepime-, multidrug-, and carbapenem-resistant pathogens including pathogens with ESBL, AmpC, and carbapenemase genes. CLINICAL TRIALS: This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT03840148.

Cefepime-taniborbactam and CERTAIN-1: Can we treat carbapenem-resistant infections?

Wagenlehner and colleagues1 demonstrated non-inferiority and superiority with respect to a primary endpoint of composite success (microbiological plus clinical) of cefepime/taniborbactam vs. meropenem in treating complicated urinary tract infections and acute pyelonephritis caused by carbapenem-susceptible gram-negative bacteria in adults. A major area of interest in real-world application of cefepime/taniborbactam is its potential role in treating carbapenem-resistant infections, which deserves further investigation.

Effect modification of dosing strategy (AUC or trough) on AKI associated with vancomycin in combination with piperacillin/tazobactam or cefepime and meropenem.

Piperacillin-tazobactam (TZP), cefepime (FEP), or meropenem (MEM) and vancomycin (VAN) are commonly used in combination for sepsis. Studies have shown an increased risk of acute kidney injury (AKI) with TZP and VAN compared to FEP or MEM. VAN guidelines recommend area under the curve (AUC) monitoring over trough (Tr) to minimize the risk of AKI. We investigated the association of AKI and MAKE-30 with the two VAN monitoring strategies when used in combination with TZP or FEP/MEM. Adult patients between 2015 and 2019 with VAN > 72 hours were included. Patients with AKI prior to or within 48 hours of VAN or baseline CrCl of ≤30 mL/min were excluded. Four cohorts were defined: FEP/MEM/Tr, FEP/MEM/AUC, TZP/Tr, and TZP/AUC. A Cox Proportional Hazard Model was used to model AKI as a function of the incidence rate of at-risk days, testing monitoring strategy as a treatment effect modification. Multivariable logistic regression was used to model MAKE-30. Overall incidence of AKI was 18.6%; FEP/MEM/Tr = 115 (14.6%), FEP/MEM/AUC = 52 (14.9%), TZP/Tr = 189 (26%), and TZP/AUC = 96 (17.1%) (P < 0.001). Both drug group [(TZP; P = 0.0085)] and monitoring strategy [(Tr; P = 0.0007)] were highly associated with the development of AKI; however, the effect was not modified with interaction term [(TZP*Tr); 0.085)]. The odds of developing MAKE-30 were not different between any group and FEP/MEM/AUC. The effect of VAN/TZP on the development of AKI was not modified by the VAN monitoring strategy (AUC vs trough). MAKE-30 outcomes were not different among the four cohorts.

Treatment of infections caused by multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacilli: A practical approach by the Italian (SIMIT) and French (SPILF) Societies of Infectious Diseases.

INTRODUCTION: The emergence of multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacilli and the development of new antibiotics have complicated the selection of optimal regimens. International guidelines are valuable tools, but are limited by the scarcity of high-quality randomized trials in many situations. METHODS: A panel of experts from the French and Italian Societies of Infectious Diseases aimed to address unresolved issues in clinical practice based on their experience, an updated literature review and open discussions. RESULTS: The panel reached consensus for the following 'first choices': (i) cefepime for ventilator-acquired pneumonia due to AmpC ß-lactamase-producing Enterobacterales; (ii) the ß-lactam/ß-lactamase inhibitor combination most active in vitro, or cefiderocol combined with fosfomycin, and aerosolized colistin or aminoglycosides, for severe pneumonia due to Pseudomonas aeruginosa resistant to ceftolozane-tazobactam; (iii) high-dose piperacillin-tazobactam (including loading dose and continuous infusion) for complicated urinary tract infections (cUTIs) caused by extended-spectrum ß-lactamase-producing Enterobacterales with piperacillin-tazobactam minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) ≤8 mg/L; (iv) high-dose cefepime for cUTIs due to AmpC ß-lactamase-producing Enterobacterales other than Enterobacter spp. if cefepime MIC ≤2 mg/L; (v) ceftolozane-tazobactam or ceftazidime-avibactam plus metronidazole for intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) due to third-generation cephalosporin-resistant Enterobacterales; (vi) ceftazidime-avibactam plus aztreonam plus metronidazole for IAIs due to metallo-ß-lactamase-producing Enterobacterales; (vii) ampicillin-sulbactam plus colistin for bloodstream infections (BSIs) caused by carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii; (viii) meropenem-vaborbactam for BSIs caused by Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales; and (ix) ceftazidime-avibactam plus fosfomycin for neurological infections caused by carbapenem-resistant P. aeruginosa. CONCLUSIONS: These expert choices were based on the necessary balance between antimicrobial stewardship principles and the need to provide optimal treatment for individual patients in each situation.

Cefepime-Taniborbactam in Complicated Urinary Tract Infection.

BACKGROUND: Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales species and multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa are global health threats. Cefepime-taniborbactam is an investigational ß-lactam and ß-lactamase inhibitor combination with activity against Enterobacterales species and P. aeruginosa expressing serine and metallo-ß-lactamases. METHODS: In this phase 3, double-blind, randomized trial, we assigned hospitalized adults with complicated urinary tract infection (UTI), including acute pyelonephritis, in a 2:1 ratio to receive intravenous cefepime-taniborbactam (2.5 g) or meropenem (1 g) every 8 hours for 7 days; this duration could be extended up to 14 days in case of bacteremia. The primary outcome was both microbiologic and clinical success (composite success) on trial days 19 to 23 in the microbiologic intention-to-treat (microITT) population (patients who had a qualifying gram-negative pathogen against which both study drugs were active). A prespecified superiority analysis of the primary outcome was performed after confirmation of noninferiority. RESULTS: Of the 661 patients who underwent randomization, 436 (66.0%) were included in the microITT population. The mean age of the patients was 56.2 years, and 38.1% were 65 years of age or older. In the microITT population, 57.8% of the patients had complicated UTI, 42.2% had acute pyelonephritis, and 13.1% had bacteremia. Composite success occurred in 207 of 293 patients (70.6%) in the cefepime-taniborbactam group and in 83 of 143 patients (58.0%) in the meropenem group. Cefepime-taniborbactam was superior to meropenem regarding the primary outcome (treatment difference, 12.6 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, 3.1 to 22.2; P = 0.009). Differences in treatment response were sustained at late follow-up (trial days 28 to 35), when cefepime-taniborbactam had higher composite success and clinical success. Adverse events occurred in 35.5% and 29.0% of patients in the cefepime-taniborbactam group and the meropenem group, respectively, with headache, diarrhea, constipation, hypertension, and nausea the most frequently reported; the frequency of serious adverse events was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Cefepime-taniborbactam was superior to meropenem for the treatment of complicated UTI that included acute pyelonephritis, with a safety profile similar to that of meropenem. (Funded by Venatorx Pharmaceuticals and others; CERTAIN-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03840148.).

Removal of common antimicrobial agents by sustained low-efficiency dialysis.

Adequate dosing of antimicrobials is paramount for treating infections in critically ill patients undergoing kidney replacement therapy; however, little is known about antimicrobial removal by sustained low-efficiency dialysis (SLED). The objective was to quantify the removal of cefepime, daptomycin, meropenem, piperacillin-tazobactam, and vancomycin in patients undergoing SLED. Adult patients ≥18 years with acute kidney injury (AKI) or end-stage kidney disease receiving one of the select antimicrobials and requiring SLED were included. Blood and dialysate flow rates were maintained at 250 and 100 mL/min, respectively. Simultaneous arterial and venous blood samples for the analysis of antibiotic concentrations were collected hourly for 8 hours during SLED (on-SLED). Arterial samples were collected every 2 hours for up to 6 hours while not receiving SLED (off-SLED) for the calculation of SLED clearance, half-life (t1/2) on-SLED and off-SLED, and the fraction of removal by SLED (fD). Twenty-one patients completed the study: 52% male, mean age (±SD) 53 ± 13 years, and mean weight of 98 ± 30 kg. Eighty-six percent had AKI, and 4 patients were receiving cefepime, 3 daptomycin, 10 meropenem, 6 piperacillin-tazobactam, and 13 vancomycin. The average SLED time was 7.3 ± 1.1 hours, and the mean ultrafiltration rate was 95 ± 52 mL/hour (range 10-211). The t1/2 on-SLED was substantially lower than the off-SLED t1/2 for all antimicrobials, and the SLED fD varied between 44% and 77%. An 8-hour SLED session led to significant elimination of most antimicrobials evaluated. If SLED is performed, modification of the dosing regimen is warranted to avoid subtherapeutic concentrations.