Safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of an adult pneumococcal conjugate vaccine, V116 (STRIDE-3): a randomised, double-blind, active comparator controlled, international phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The same pneumococcal conjugate vaccines (PCVs) have been used in adults and children in many settings. Differences in the epidemiology of pneumococcal disease between populations necessitates an adult-specific PCV. We aimed to assess the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of V116, an investigational 21-valent PCV designed for adults. METHODS: This randomised, double-blind, active comparator controlled, international phase 3 trial enrolled adults with or without stable chronic medical conditions at 112 clinical sites in 11 countries or territories. Random assignment was performed using a central electronic interactive response technology system. Cohort 1 (≥50 years) was stratified by age (50-64, 65-74, 75-84, and ≥85 years) and randomised 1:1 to receive one intramuscular dose of V116, or the active comparator, PCV20. Cohort 2 (18-49 years) was randomised 2:1 to receive one intramuscular dose of V116 or PCV20. Pneumococcal serotype-specific opsonophagocytic activity (OPA) and IgG responses were measured before (day 1) and after vaccination (day 30). Four primary immunogenicity outcomes were assessed per-protocol. First, in cohort 1, non-inferiority of V116 to PCV20 was tested using serotype-specific OPA geometric mean titres (GMT) ratios for serotypes common to both vaccines; the lower bound of the 95% CI had to be greater than 0·5 for non-inferiority. Second, superiority of V116 to PCV20 was tested for OPA GMT ratios for the serotypes unique to V116; the lower bound of the 95% CI had to be greater than 2·0 for superiority. Third, superiority of V116 to PCV20 was evaluated by the proportions of participants with a four-fold or greater rise from day 1 to day 30 for serotypes unique to V116; the lower bound of the 95% CI of the differences in proportions (V116 - PCV20) had to be greater than 10% for superiority. Finally, in cohort 2, immunobridging was assessed for all 21 serotypes in V116 for adults aged 18-49 years to 50-64 years; the lower bound of the 95% CI for the OPA GMTs had to be greater than 0·5 for non-inferiority. The safety analysis included all randomly assigned participants who received study vaccine. The primary safety outcome was the proportion of participants with solicited injection site and solicited systemic adverse events until day 5 and vaccine-related serious adverse events up to 6 months after vaccination. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05425732). FINDINGS: Between July 13, and Nov 22, 2022, 2754 individuals were screened and 2663 participants were randomly assigned. 2656 individuals were vaccinated (1179 in V116 cohort 1; 1177 in PCV20 cohort 1; 200 in V116 cohort 2; and 100 in PCV20 cohort 2). V116 met non-inferiority criteria compared with PCV20 for the ten serotypes common to both vaccines at day 30 in cohort 1 (p<0·0001 for each common serotype). V116 met superiority criteria compared with PCV20 in cohort 1 for ten of the 11 serotypes unique to V116 at day 30 (OPA GMT ratio: p<0·0001 for all unique serotypes except 15C, which was p=0·41; four-fold or greater rise in OPA from day 1-30: p<0·0001 for all serotypes except 15C, which was p=0·67). Immune responses in V116 participants aged 18-49 years were non-inferior compared with V116 participants aged 50-64 years for all V116 serotypes (p<0·0001 for all V116 serotypes). In cohort 1, 685 (58·2%) of participants in V116, and 778 (66·2%) of participants in PCV20 reported one or more adverse event. In cohort 2, 164 (82·0%) participants in V116 and 79 participants (79·0%) in PCV20 reported one or more adverse event. Six deaths were reported, all in cohort 1, none of which were considered vaccine-related (in V116: one due to sepsis, one due to cerebrovascular accident, one due to myocardial infarction, and one due to hepatic cirrhosis and hepatic encephalopathy; in PCV20: one due to cardiac arrest and one due to abdominal abscess). There were no vaccine-related serious adverse events. INTERPRETATION: V116 was non-inferior to PCV20 for the ten serotypes common to both vaccines and superior to PCV20 for all serotypes unique to V116, except for 15C. Immune responses successfully immunobridged between younger and older adults for all serotypes in V116. V116 was generally well tolerated with safety profile similar to PCV20. FUNDING: Merck Sharp & Dohme, subsidiary of Merck & Co, Rahway, NJ, USA (MSD).

A population pharmacokinetic model for posaconazole intravenous solution and oral powder for suspension formulations in pediatric patients with neutropenia.

The objective of this study was to support posaconazole dose regimens in pediatric patients aged ≥2 years, using a population pharmacokinetic (PK) approach with data from a phase 1b study (NCT02452034). A one-compartment model with first-order absorption was fit to pharmacokinetic data from 144 participants aged 2 to 17 years, who were administered posaconazole as intravenous (IV) and powder for oral suspension (PFS) formulations, or IV only, at dosing regimens of 3.5, 4.5, and 6 mg/kg. The influence of demographic and clinical factors on pharmacokinetic parameters was evaluated using a stepwise forward inclusion/backward exclusion procedure. The final model simulated posaconazole exposure in patients aged 2 to <7 and 7 to 17 years at dosing regimens of 4.5, 6, and 7.5 mg/kg. Plasma concentration data following IV and PFS administration were well-described by a one-compartment model with first-order absorption and estimated bioavailability, where clearance and volume were subject to allometric scaling by body weight. The 6-mg/kg dosing regimen achieved the pharmacokinetic target (90% of the pediatric population having an average steady-state plasma concentration of ≥500 and <2,000 ng/mL) for both age groups, regardless of whether patients received IV and PFS or IV only. In a virtual adolescent population (body weight >40 kg), the 300 mg/day posaconazole tablet was also predicted to achieve the pharmacokinetic target and remain within a safe range of exposure. These data informed a weight-based nomogram for PFS dosing to maximize the number of pediatric patients achieving the pharmacokinetic target across weight bands, while also maintaining a favorable benefit/risk profile.

Perspectives on the use of ceftolozane/tazobactam: a review of clinical trial data and real-world evidence.

Hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia (HABP) and ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (VABP) are common healthcare-associated infections linked to high morbidity and mortality. Gram-negative pathogens, such as Pseudomonas aeruginosa, exhibit multidrug resistance and are recognized as major public health concerns, particularly among critically ill patients with HABP/VABP. Ceftolozane/tazobactam is a novel combination antibacterial agent comprising ceftolozane (a potent antipseudomonal cephalosporin) and tazobactam (a ß-lactamase inhibitor). Phase III trials have demonstrated non-inferiority of ceftolozane/tazobactam to comparators, leading to the approval of ceftolozane/tazobactam for the treatment of complicated urinary tract infections, complicated intra-abdominal infections, and nosocomial pneumonia. In this article, we review the clinical trial evidence and key real-world effectiveness data of ceftolozane/tazobactam for the treatment of serious healthcare-associated Gram-negative infections, focusing on patients with HABP/VABP.

Highlights from a review of ceftolozane/tazobactam for the treatment of serious infectionsSerious infections that can affect people in hospitals can cause serious illness or loss of life. Antibiotics are a type of medicine designed to kill the bacteria that cause these infections. However, bacteria have evolved over time, which means that antibiotics are not as effective at killing the bacteria and treating the infection. This is known as antibiotic resistance. To treat serious infections in hospital, there is a need for new antibiotics that can overcome this resistance and successfully fight off bacteria. This paper looks at an antibiotic known as ceftolozane/tazobactam (C/T), which can be used to treat people with serious infections that are picked up in hospitals. Clinical and laboratory studies have been reviewed to evaluate how effective, safe, and suitable C/T is for patients. The studies discussed in this paper highlight how well C/T works in people with serious infections, including those who are already ill and have been put on a ventilator to help with their breathing. Some of these studies showed that C/T worked well against lots of different types of bacteria that are known to cause serious infections in hospital and are linked to a high risk of death. Antibiotic resistance is a major problem all over the world. There is a need for effective antibiotics that can treat a range of infections caused by resistant bacteria. The results of this paper show that there is a lot of evidence to support the use of C/T in hospitals for people with serious bacterial infections.

Estimation of Absolute and Relative Body Fat Content Using Noninvasive Surrogates: Can DXA Be Bypassed?

Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scanning is used for objective determination of body composition, but instrumentation is expensive and not generally available in customary clinical practice. Anthropometric surrogates are often substituted as anticipated correlates of absolute and relative body fat content in the clinical management of obesity and its associated medical risks. DXA and anthropometric data from a cohort of 9230 randomly selected American subjects, available through the ongoing National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, was used to evaluate combinations of surrogates (age, height, total weight, waist circumference) as predictors of DXA-determined absolute and relative body fat content. Multiple regression analysis yielded linear combinations of the 4 surrogates that were closely predictive of DXA-determined absolute fat content (R2  = 0.93 and 0.96 for male and female subjects). Accuracy of the new algorithm was improved over customary surrogate-based predictors such as body mass index. However prediction of relative body fat was less robust (R2  less than 0.75), probably due to the nonlinear relation between degree of obesity (based on body mass index) and relative body fat. The paradigm was validated using an independent cohort from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, as well as two independent external subject groups. The described regression-based algorithm is likely to be a sufficiently accurate predictor of absolute body fat (but not relative body fat) to substitute for DXA scanning in many clinical situations. Further work is needed to assess algorithm validity for subgroups of individuals with "atypical" body construction.

Clinical Consequences of Altered Drug Disposition in Obesity: Call for Change.

Obesity is a serious condition with many known comorbid conditions and other health risks. Despite the rising global rates of obesity, drug disposition in this population is typically understudied, which results in limited information guiding the use of drugs in patients with obesity. Presently, dosing adjustments for patients with obesity typically focus on addressing altered drug clearance with body size and are therefore limited to chronic dosing recommendations. These instructions are variable and rarely based on dedicated studies in people with obesity. This review briefly discusses the current clinical use of body measurements to guide chronic dosing instructions and highlights the need for obesity-specific dosing instructions when the half-life of a drug is prolonged (typically through increased volume of distribution) in people with obesity. Examples of drugs with apparent opportunities for either ramp-up, loading, or washout instructions for patients based on body mass index are identified, specifically for vortioxetine, posaconazole, and brexpiprazole. We call for inclusion of people with obesity in clinical studies as a special subpopulation during drug development and propose the use of body mass index to guide dosing decisions among these patients.

Incomplete Data and Potential Risks of Drugs in People with Obesity.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To provide examples of knowledge gaps in current pharmaceutical treatments for people with obesity and call for changes to regulatory and pharmaceutical clinical research requirements during the drug discovery and development process. RECENT FINDINGS: Treatment of obesity and its comorbidities often require the use of prescription drugs, many of which have not been fully evaluated in people with obesity. Despite a growing body of research on this topic, the impact of obesity on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of drugs is often under-studied by drug sponsors and regulators, and subsequently underappreciated by clinicians and caretakers. There are currently multiple opportunities for pharmaceuticals to include dosing information specifically for patients with obesity in order to ensure safety and efficacy of drugs in this population. Additionally, there are serious gaps between what is known about the effects of obesity on drug disposition and the current use of drugs according to drug prescribing information and clinical practice. There is currently no requirement to test drugs in people with obesity during the drug approval process, even when preliminary data suggests there may be altered kinetics in this population. The lack of information on the safe and effective use of drugs in people with obesity may be contributing to poorer health outcomes in this population.

Subgroup analysis of phase 2 study of ceftolozane/tazobactam in neonates and young infants with pyelonephritis.

Ceftolozane/tazobactam is approved for the treatment of patients from birth to <18 y old with complicated urinary tract infections (cUTI). This post hoc analysis evaluated the safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics (PK) of ceftolozane/tazobactam compared with meropenem in neonates and young infants. NCT03230838 was a phase 2, randomized, active comparator-controlled, double-blind study of patients from birth to <18 y of age with cUTI, including pyelonephritis, given ceftolozane/tazobactam or meropenem in a 3:1 ratio. This subset analysis included only neonates and young infants < 3 mo of age. The microbiologic modified intent-to-treat population (mMITT) included 20 patients (ceftolozane/tazobactam, n = 14; meropenem, n = 6). All patients had pyelonephritis at baseline; two patients in each treatment group had bacteremia (overall 4/20, 20%). Escherichia coli was the most common baseline pathogen (overall 16/20, 80%). Safety and efficacy results were similar between treatment groups and consistent with the overall pediatric population. There were no serious drug-related adverse events (AEs), no discontinuations due to AEs, and no AEs leading to death in either treatment group. For the ceftolozane/tazobactam and meropenem treatment groups, clinical cure rates in the mMITT population were 92.9% and 100%, respectively. The population PK analysis of neonates and young infants demonstrated similar ceftolozane and tazobactam exposures to those of adults, achieving pharmacodynamic targets associated with clinical and microbiologic cure. Ceftolozane/tazobactam has a favorable safety profile and achieves high clinical cure and microbiologic eradication rates in neonates and young infants < 3 mo of age with cUTI and pyelonephritis. IMPORTANCE Extrapolation of antibacterial agent pharmacokinetics from adults to newborns and young infants may not be appropriate; similarly, the clinical manifestations of infectious diseases and outcomes following antibacterial treatment may not be similar. Ceftolozane/tazobactam is an antibacterial drug combination active against Pseudomonas aeruginosa and other multidrug-resistant gram-negative bacteria. A clinical study led to the approval for ceftolozane/tazobactam in patients from birth to 18 y of age who have complicated urinary tract infections, including those with serious kidney infections. Based on data collected during that clinical study, we compared newborns and young infants who were treated with ceftolozane/tazobactam (14 patients) and those who were treated with meropenem (6 patients). We found that ceftolozane/tazobactam treatment of newborns and young infants up to 3 mo of age who have complicated urinary tract infections demonstrated a favorable safety profile and high clinical cure and microbiologic eradication rates, similar to meropenem.

Safety and Efficacy of Ceftolozane/Tazobactam Plus Metronidazole Versus Meropenem From a Phase 2, Randomized Clinical Trial in Pediatric Participants With Complicated Intra-abdominal Infection.

BACKGROUND: Ceftolozane/tazobactam, a cephalosporin-ß-lactamase inhibitor combination, is approved for the treatment of complicated urinary tract infections and complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAI). The safety and efficacy of ceftolozane/tazobactam in pediatric participants with cIAI were assessed. METHODS: This phase 2 study (NCT03217136) randomized participants to either ceftolozane/tazobactam+metronidazole or meropenem for treatment of cIAI in pediatric participants (<18 years). The primary objective was to assess the safety and tolerability of intravenous ceftolozane/tazobactam+metronidazole. Clinical cure at end of treatment (EOT) and test of cure (TOC) visits were secondary end points. RESULTS: The modified intent-to-treat (MITT) population included 91 participants (ceftolozane/tazobactam+metronidazole, n = 70; meropenem, n = 21). Complicated appendicitis was the most common diagnosis (93.4%); Escherichia coli was the most common pathogen (65.9%). Adverse events (AEs) occurred in 80.0% and 61.9% of participants receiving ceftolozane/tazobactam+metronidazole and meropenem, drug-related AEs occurred in 18.6% and 14.3% and serious AEs occurred in 11.4% and 0% of participants receiving ceftolozane/tazobactam+metronidazole and meropenem, respectively. No drug-related serious AEs or discontinuations due to drug-related AEs occurred. Rates of the clinical cure for ceftolozane/tazobactam+metronidazole and meropenem at EOT were 80.0% and 95.2% (difference: -14.3; 95% confidence interval: -26.67 to 4.93) and at TOC were 80.0% and 100.0% (difference: -19.1; 95% confidence interval: -30.18 to -2.89), respectively; 6 of the 14 clinical failures for ceftolozane/tazobactam+metronidazole at TOC were indeterminate responses imputed as failures per protocol. CONCLUSION: Ceftolozane/tazobactam+metronidazole was well tolerated in pediatric participants with cIAI and had a safety profile similar to the established safety profile in adults. In this descriptive efficacy analysis, ceftolozane/tazobactam+metronidazole appeared efficacious.

Outcomes in participants with ventilated nosocomial pneumonia and organ failure treated with ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem: a subset analysis of the phase 3, randomized, controlled ASPECT-NP trial.

BACKGROUND: The pivotal ASPECT-NP trial showed ceftolozane/tazobactam was non-inferior to meropenem for the treatment of ventilated hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (vHABP/VABP). Here, we evaluated treatment outcomes by degree of respiratory or cardiovascular dysfunction. METHODS: This was a subset analysis of data from ASPECT-NP, a randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02070757). Adults with vHABP/VABP were randomized 1:1 to 3 g ceftolozane/tazobactam or 1 g meropenem every 8 h for 8-14 days. Outcomes in participants with a baseline respiratory component of the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (R-SOFA) ≥ 2 (indicative of severe respiratory failure), cardiovascular component of the SOFA score (CV-SOFA) ≥ 2 (indicative of shock), or R-SOFA ≥ 2 plus CV-SOFA ≥ 2 were compared by treatment arm. The efficacy endpoint of primary interest was 28-day all-cause mortality. Clinical response, time to death, and microbiologic response were also evaluated. RESULTS: There were 726 participants in the intention-to-treat population; 633 with R-SOFA ≥ 2 (312 ceftolozane/tazobactam, 321 meropenem), 183 with CV-SOFA ≥ 2 (84 ceftolozane/tazobactam, 99 meropenem), and 160 with R-SOFA ≥ 2 plus CV-SOFA ≥ 2 (69 ceftolozane/tazobactam, 91 meropenem). Baseline characteristics, including causative pathogens, were generally similar in participants with R-SOFA ≥ 2 or CV-SOFA ≥ 2 across treatment arms. The 28-day all-cause mortality rate was 23.7% and 24.0% [difference: 0.3%, 95% confidence interval (CI) - 6.4, 6.9] for R-SOFA ≥ 2, 33.3% and 30.3% (difference: - 3.0%, 95% CI - 16.4, 10.3) for CV-SOFA ≥ 2, and 34.8% and 30.8% (difference: - 4.0%, 95% CI - 18.6, 10.3), respectively, for R-SOFA ≥ 2 plus CV-SOFA ≥ 2. Clinical cure rates were as follows: 55.8% and 54.2% (difference: 1.6%, 95% CI - 6.2, 9.3) for R-SOFA ≥ 2, 53.6% and 55.6% (difference: - 2.0%, 95% CI - 16.1, 12.2) for CV-SOFA ≥ 2, and 53.6% and 56.0% (difference: - 2.4%, 95% CI - 17.6, 12.8), respectively, for R-SOFA ≥ 2 plus CV-SOFA ≥ 2. Time to death was comparable in all SOFA groups across both treatment arms. A higher rate of microbiologic eradication/presumed eradication was observed for CV-SOFA ≥ 2 and R-SOFA ≥ 2 plus CV-SOFA ≥ 2 with ceftolozane/tazobactam compared to meropenem. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of severe respiratory failure or shock did not affect the relative efficacy of ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem; either agent may be used to treat critically ill patients with vHABP/VABP. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02070757. Registered 25 February 2014, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02070757.

Safety and Efficacy of Ceftolozane/Tazobactam Versus Meropenem in Neonates and Children With Complicated Urinary Tract Infection, Including Pyelonephritis: A Phase 2, Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Ceftolozane/tazobactam, a cephalosporin-ß-lactamase inhibitor combination, active against multidrug-resistant Gram-negative pathogens, is approved for treatment of adults with complicated urinary tract infections (cUTI). Safety and efficacy of ceftolozane/tazobactam in pediatric participants with cUTI, including pyelonephritis, were assessed. METHODS: This phase 2 study (NCT03230838) compared ceftolozane/tazobactam with meropenem for treatment of cUTI in participants from birth to <18 years of age. The primary objective was safety and tolerability. Key secondary end points included clinical cure and per-participant microbiologic response rates at end of treatment (EOT) and test of cure (TOC) visits. RESULTS: The microbiologic modified intent-to-treat (mMITT) population included 95 participants (ceftolozane/tazobactam, n = 71; meropenem, n = 24). The most common diagnosis and pathogen were pyelonephritis (ceftolozane/tazobactam, 84.5%; meropenem, 79.2%) and Escherichia coli (ceftolozane/tazobactam, 74.6%; meropenem, 87.5%); 5.7% (ceftolozane/tazobactam) and 4.8% (meropenem) of E. coli isolates were extended-spectrum ß-lactamase-producers. Rates of adverse events were similar between treatment groups (any: ceftolozane/tazobactam, 59.0% vs. meropenem, 60.6%; drug-related: ceftolozane/tazobactam, 14.0% vs. meropenem, 15.2%; serious: ceftolozane/tazobactam, 3.0% vs. meropenem, 6.1%). Rates of clinical cure for ceftolozane/tazobactam and meropenem at EOT were 94.4% and 100% and at TOC were 88.7% and 95.8%, respectively. Rates of microbiologic eradication for ceftolozane/tazobactam and meropenem at EOT were 93.0% and 95.8%, and at TOC were 84.5% and 87.5%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Ceftolozane/tazobactam had a favorable safety profile in pediatric participants with cUTI; rates of clinical cure and microbiologic eradication were high and similar to meropenem. Ceftolozane/tazobactam is a safe and effective new treatment option for children with cUTI, especially due to antibacterial-resistant Gram-negative pathogens.

Probability of Target Attainment Analyses to Inform Ceftolozane/Tazobactam Dosing Regimens for Patients With Hospital-Acquired or Ventilator-Associated Bacterial Pneumonia and End-Stage Renal Disease Receiving Intermittent Hemodialysis.

ASPECT-NP, a phase 3 trial of ceftolozane/tazobactam in hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (HABP/VABP), excluded patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). A modeling/simulation approach was undertaken to inform optimal dosing in this population, using previously developed ceftolozane and tazobactam population pharmacokinetic models informed by data from 16 clinical studies. Stochastic simulations were performed using NONMEM to support dose justification. Probability of target attainment (PTA) simulations in plasma and epithelial lining fluid were conducted using a 14-day treatment, with hemodialysis every other weekday for a high-dose (4X), middle-dose (3X), or low-dose (2X) regimen, where X was the recommended dose in patients with complicated intra-abdominal infection/complicated urinary tract infection and ESRD (500 mg/250 mg ceftolozane/tazobactam loading dose and 100 mg/50 mg ceftolozane/tazobactam maintenance dose administered by 1-hour infusion every 8 hours). PTA was determined using established pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic targets: ceftolozane, 30% of the interdose interval (8 hours) in which free ceftolozane concentration exceeded the minimum inhibitory concentration value of 4 µg/mL; tazobactam, 20% of the interdose interval in which free tazobactam concentration exceeded 1 µg/mL. Plasma PTA was >90% for both agents for all 3 regimens. Plasma ceftolozane exposures at the high-dose regimen exceeded those from phase 3 study experience. Epithelial lining fluid PTA was >90% for high- and middle-dose regimens but was <80% for tazobactam on dialysis days at the low-dose regimen. For patients with HABP/VABP and ESRD requiring intermittent hemodialysis, the middle-dose regimen of 1.5 g/0.75 g ceftolozane/tazobactam loading + 300 mg/150 mg maintenance every 8 hours by 1-hour infusion is recommended.

Ceftolozane/Tazobactam Probability of Target Attainment in Patients With Hospital-Acquired or Ventilator-Associated Bacterial Pneumonia.

Probability of target attainment (PTA) analyses were conducted to support the recommended ceftolozane/tazobactam dosing regimens, adjusted for renal function, in patients with hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (HABP/VABP). Previously published population pharmacokinetic models describing the disposition of ceftolozane and tazobactam in plasma and epithelial lining fluid (ELF) in patients with HABP/VABP were used to simulate ceftolozane and tazobactam concentration-time profiles in plasma and ELF over the course of 14 days. The simulations were conducted for patients with normal renal function and for patients receiving adjusted doses for mild, moderate, and severe renal impairment. PTA was calculated using established pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic targets for ceftolozane and tazobactam. Across renal function groups, plasma PTA was 100% for ceftolozane and >99% for tazobactam; ELF PTA was >99% for ceftolozane and >87% for tazobactam. These results provided support for the currently recommended ceftolozane/tazobactam dosing regimens for HABP/VABP, which were efficacious and well tolerated in the Ceftolozane-Tazobactam Versus Meropenem for Treatment of Nosocomial Pneumonia (ASPECT-NP) trial.

Outcomes in participants with failure of initial antibacterial therapy for hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia prior to enrollment in the randomized, controlled phase 3 ASPECT-NP trial of ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem.

BACKGROUND: Ceftolozane/tazobactam, a combination antibacterial agent comprising an anti-pseudomonal cephalosporin and ß-lactamase inhibitor, is approved for the treatment of hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (HABP/VABP) in adults. Participants in the ASPECT-NP trial received ceftolozane/tazobactam (3 g [2 g ceftolozane/1 g tazobactam] every 8 h) or meropenem (1 g every 8 h). Participants failing prior antibacterial therapy for the current HABP/VABP episode at study entry had lower 28-day all-cause mortality (ACM) rates with ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem treatment. Here, we report a post hoc analysis examining this result. METHODS: The phase 3, randomized, controlled, double-blind, multicenter, noninferiority trial compared ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem for treatment of adults with ventilated HABP/VABP; eligibility included those failing prior antibacterial therapy for the current HABP/VABP episode at study entry. The primary and key secondary endpoints were 28-day ACM and clinical response at test of cure (TOC), respectively. Participants who were failing prior therapy were a prospectively defined subgroup; however, subgroup analyses were not designed for noninferiority testing. The 95% CIs for treatment differences were calculated as unstratified Newcombe CIs. Post hoc analyses were performed using multivariable logistic regression analysis to determine the impact of baseline characteristics and treatment on clinical outcomes in the subgroup who were failing prior antibacterial therapy. RESULTS: In the ASPECT-NP trial, 12.8% of participants (93/726; ceftolozane/tazobactam, n = 53; meropenem, n = 40) were failing prior antibacterial therapy at study entry. In this subgroup, 28-day ACM was higher in participants who received meropenem versus ceftolozane/tazobactam (18/40 [45.0%] vs 12/53 [22.6%]; percentage difference [95% CI]: 22.4% [3.1 to 40.1]). Rates of clinical response at TOC were 26/53 [49.1%] for ceftolozane/tazobactam versus 15/40 [37.5%] for meropenem (percentage difference [95% CI]: 11.6% [- 8.6 to 30.2]). Multivariable regression analysis determined concomitant vasopressor use and treatment with meropenem were significant factors associated with risk of 28-day ACM. Adjusting for vasopressor use, the risk of dying after treatment with ceftolozane/tazobactam was approximately one-fourth the risk of dying after treatment with meropenem. CONCLUSIONS: This post hoc analysis further supports the previously demonstrated lower ACM rate for ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem among participants who were failing prior therapy, despite the lack of significant differences in clinical cure rates. CLINICALTRIALS: gov registration NCT02070757 . Registered February 25, 2014, clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02070757 .

A phase III, multicenter, double-blind, randomized clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ceftolozane/tazobactam plus metronidazole versus meropenem in Chinese participants with complicated intra-abdominal infections.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ceftolozane/tazobactam (C/T) plus metronidazole versus meropenem plus placebo for the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI) in Chinese adult participants. METHODS: In this phase III clinical trial (NCT03830333), Chinese adult participants with cIAI were randomized 1:1 to receive C/T plus metronidazole or meropenem plus placebo. The primary objective was to assess C/T plus metronidazole for noninferiority versus meropenem for clinical response rate at the test of cure (TOC; 28 ± 2 days after study start) visit in the clinically evaluable population. Secondary endpoints included clinical and microbiologic responses at the TOC and end-of-treatment (≤24 hours after last dose) visits and adverse event rates. RESULTS: Clinical cure at the TOC visit in the clinically evaluable population was 95.2% and 93.1% for C/T plus metronidazole and meropenem, respectively (between-treatment difference: 2.1% [95% confidence interval: -4.7%, 8.8%]); thus, noninferiority was met. Clinical responses at the TOC and end-of-treatment visits and microbiologic responses at the TOC visit were consistent with the primary efficacy endpoint. Safety was comparable between study treatment groups. CONCLUSION: In Chinese adult participants with cIAI, C/T plus metronidazole was noninferior to meropenem, with comparable safety.

Ceftolozane/tazobactam for hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia due to ESBL-producing Enterobacterales: a subgroup analysis of the ASPECT-NP clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: After the MERINO trial with piperacillin/tazobactam, the efficacy of ß-lactam/tazobactam combinations in serious infections involving extended-spectrum ß-lactamase (ESBL)-producing pathogens merits special evaluation. OBJECTIVES: To further confirm the efficacy of ceftolozane/tazobactam in treating hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (HABP/VABP) involving ESBL-positive and/or AmpC-producing Enterobacterales. METHODS: Retrospective subgroup analysis of the ASPECT-NP trial comparing ceftolozane/tazobactam with meropenem for treating HABP/VABP in mechanically ventilated adults (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02070757). ESBLs were identified using whole genome sequencing. Chromosomal AmpC production was quantified employing a high-sensitivity mRNA transcription assay. RESULTS: Overall, 61/726 (8.4%) participants had all baseline lower respiratory tract (LRT) isolates susceptible to both study treatments and ≥1 baseline ESBL-positive/AmpC-overproducing Enterobacterales isolate. In this subgroup (ceftolozane/tazobactam n = 30, meropenem n = 31), baseline characteristics were generally comparable between treatment arms. The most frequent ESBL-positive and/or AmpC-overproducing Enterobacterales isolates (ceftolozane/tazobactam n = 31, meropenem n = 35) overall were Klebsiella pneumoniae (50.0%), Escherichia coli (22.7%), and Proteus mirabilis (7.6%). The most prevalent ESBLs were CTX-M-15 (75.8%), other CTX-M (19.7%), and SHV (4.5%); 10.6% of isolates overproduced chromosomal AmpC. Overall, 28 day all-cause mortality was 6.7% (2/30) with ceftolozane/tazobactam and 32.3% (10/31) with meropenem (25.6% difference, 95% CI: 5.54 to 43.84). Clinical cure rate at test-of-cure, 7-14 days after end of therapy, was 73.3% (22/30) with ceftolozane/tazobactam and 61.3% (19/31) with meropenem (12.0% difference, 95% CI: -11.21 to +33.51). Per-isolate microbiological response at test-of-cure was 64.5% (20/31) with ceftolozane/tazobactam and 74.3% (26/35) with meropenem (-9.8% difference, 95% CI: -30.80 to +12.00). CONCLUSIONS: These data confirm ceftolozane/tazobactam as an effective treatment option for HABP/VABP involving ceftolozane/tazobactam-susceptible ESBL-positive and/or AmpC-producing Enterobacterales.

Drug Disposition in Subjects With Obesity: The Research Work of Darrell R. Abernethy.

In 1979, the late Dr. Darrell R. Abernethy and colleagues began a series of clinical studies aimed at understanding the pertinent determinants of drug distribution, elimination, and clearance in obesity, and how those variables are interconnected. The studies confirmed that volume of distribution (Vd ) and clearance are the principal independent biological variables, which conjointly determine elimination of half-life as a dependent variable. For drugs distributed by passive diffusion, their pharmacokinetic Vd - after correcting for plasma protein binding - was increased in obesity, depending in part on the physicochemical lipophilicity of the individual drugs, and the quantitative extent of obesity in overweight individuals. Across all studies, the ratio of mean clearance in obese divided by control groups had an overall median value of 1.21 (range, 0.75-3.11), indicating a small and variable effect of obesity on clearance, without clear directionality. Since drug clearance was not clearly related to lipophilicity or degree of obesity, the prolonged half-life of lipophilic drugs in patients with obesity was largely explained by the increased Vd . Dr. Abernethy further identified delayed attainment of steady state after initiation of multiple-dose treatment, and delayed washout after termination of dosage, as potential clinical consequences of the extended half-life in people with obesity. These consequences for specific drugs have been recently emphasized in contemporary studies of chronic dosage in subjects with obesity. Without data identifying an obesity-related change in clearance for a specific drug, maintenance doses (in milligrams) should be based on ideal weight rather than adjusted upward on the basis of total weight.

Exposure-Efficacy Analyses Support Optimal Dosing Regimens of Ceftolozane/Tazobactam in Participants with Hospital-Acquired/Ventilator-Associated Bacterial Pneumonia in ASPECT-NP.

An exposure-efficacy analysis of the phase 3 ASPECT-NP trial was performed to evaluate the relationship between plasma exposure of ceftolozane and tazobactam and efficacy endpoints (primary: 28-day all-cause mortality; key secondary: clinical cure at test-of-cure visit) in adult participants with hospital-acquired or ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (HABP/VABP). Participants (N = 231) from the ceftolozane/tazobactam treatment group in the intention-to-treat population who had pharmacokinetic data available and relevant baseline lower respiratory tract (LRT) pathogen(s) susceptibility data were included. Population pharmacokinetic models were used to predict individual ceftolozane and tazobactam plasma exposure measures (percentage of the interdose interval with free drug concentrations above the MIC [%ƒT>MIC] and %ƒT above a threshold [%ƒT>CT = 1 µg/mL], respectively) associated with the last dose using the highest ceftolozane/tazobactam MIC for the relevant baseline LRT pathogens. Efficacy measures were comparable between the baseline LRT pathogens and across MIC cutoffs (1-8 µg/mL). Most participants (82%) had 99% ƒT>MIC for ceftolozane; 9% (N = 21/231) had 0% ƒT>MIC due to high MICs of the LRT pathogen (64-256 µg/mL). The %ƒT>MIC for ceftolozane exceeded 73% for all participants with baseline LRT pathogen(s) MIC ≤4 µg/mL. All 231 participants achieved the tazobactam pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic target of >20% ƒT>CT where CT = 1 µg/mL. For either efficacy endpoint, median ceftolozane %ƒT>MIC was 99% in participants achieving efficacy. No exposure-efficacy trend was observed for ceftolozane or tazobactam. These results further support the recommended ceftolozane/tazobactam dosing regimens evaluated in ASPECT-NP for patients with HABP/VABP.

Clinical and microbiological outcomes, by causative pathogen, in the ASPECT-NP randomized, controlled, Phase 3 trial comparing ceftolozane/tazobactam and meropenem for treatment of hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia.

OBJECTIVES: In the ASPECT-NP trial, ceftolozane/tazobactam was non-inferior to meropenem for treating nosocomial pneumonia; efficacy outcomes by causative pathogen were to be evaluated. METHODS: Mechanically ventilated participants with hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia were randomized to 3 g ceftolozane/tazobactam (2 g ceftolozane/1 g tazobactam) q8h or 1 g meropenem q8h. Lower respiratory tract (LRT) cultures were obtained ≤36 h before first dose; pathogen identification and susceptibility were confirmed at a central laboratory. Prospective secondary per-pathogen endpoints included 28 day all-cause mortality (ACM), and clinical and microbiological response at test of cure (7-14 days after the end of therapy) in the microbiological ITT (mITT) population. RESULTS: The mITT population comprised 511 participants (264 ceftolozane/tazobactam, 247 meropenem). Baseline LRT pathogens included Klebsiella pneumoniae (34.6%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (25.0%) and Escherichia coli (18.2%). Among baseline Enterobacterales isolates, 171/456 (37.5%) were ESBL positive. For Gram-negative baseline LRT pathogens, susceptibility rates were 87.0% for ceftolozane/tazobactam and 93.3% for meropenem. For Gram-negative pathogens, 28 day ACM [52/259 (20.1%) and 62/240 (25.8%)], clinical cure rates [157/259 (60.6%) and 137/240 (57.1%)] and microbiological eradication rates [189/259 (73.0%) and 163/240 (67.9%)] were comparable with ceftolozane/tazobactam and meropenem, respectively. Per-pathogen microbiological eradication for Enterobacterales [145/195 (74.4%) and 129/185 (69.7%); 95% CI: -4.37 to 13.58], ESBL-producing Enterobacterales [56/84 (66.7%) and 52/73 (71.2%); 95% CI: -18.56 to 9.93] and P. aeruginosa [47/63 (74.6%) and 41/65 (63.1%); 95% CI: -4.51 to 19.38], respectively, were also comparable. CONCLUSIONS: In mechanically ventilated participants with nosocomial pneumonia owing to Gram-negative pathogens, ceftolozane/tazobactam was comparable with meropenem for per-pathogen 28 day ACM and clinical and microbiological response.

Impact of Obesity on Brexpiprazole Pharmacokinetics: Proposal for Improved Initiation of Treatment.

Brexpiprazole is an oral antipsychotic agent indicated for use in patients with schizophrenia or as adjunctive treatment for major depressive disorder. As obesity (body mass index ≥35 kg/m2 ) has the potential to affect drug pharmacokinetics and is a common comorbidity of both schizophrenia and major depressive disorder, it is important to understand changes in brexpiprazole disposition in this population. This study uses a whole-body physiologically based pharmacokinetic model to compare the pharmacokinetics of brexpiprazole in obese and normal-weight (body mass index 18-25 kg/m2 ) individuals known to be cytochrome P450 2D6 extensive metabolizers (EMs) and poor metabolizers (PMs). The physiologically based pharmacokinetic simulations demonstrated significant differences in the time to effective concentrations between obese and normal-weight individuals within metabolizer groups according to the label-recommended titration. Simulations using an alternative dosing strategy of 1 week of twice-daily dosing in obese EMs or 2 weeks of twice-daily dosing in obese poor metabolizers, followed by a return to once-daily dosing, yielded more consistent plasma concentrations between normal-weight and obese patients without exceeding the area under the plasma concentration-time curve observed in the normal-weight EMs. These alternative dosing strategies reduce the time to effective concentrations in obese patients and may improve clinical response to brexpiprazole.

Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy genetic risk variants for pharmacovigilance of immunosuppressant therapies.

Background: Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy (PML) is a rare and often lethal brain disorder caused by the common, typically benign polyomavirus 2, also known as JC virus (JCV). In a small percentage of immunosuppressed individuals, JCV is reactivated and infects the brain, causing devastating neurological defects. A wide range of immunosuppressed groups can develop PML, such as patients with: HIV/AIDS, hematological malignancies (e.g., leukemias, lymphomas, and multiple myeloma), autoimmune disorders (e.g., psoriasis, rheumatoid arthritis, and systemic lupus erythematosus), and organ transplants. In some patients, iatrogenic (i.e., drug-induced) PML occurs as a serious adverse event from exposure to immunosuppressant therapies used to treat their disease (e.g., hematological malignancies and multiple sclerosis). While JCV infection and immunosuppression are necessary, they are not sufficient to cause PML. Methods: We hypothesized that patients may also have a genetic susceptibility from the presence of rare deleterious genetic variants in immune-relevant genes (e.g., those that cause inborn errors of immunity). In our prior genetic study of 184 PML cases, we discovered 19 candidate PML risk variants. In the current study of another 152 cases, we validated 4 of 19 variants in both population controls (gnomAD 3.1) and matched controls (JCV+ multiple sclerosis patients on a PML-linked drug ≥ 2 years). Results: The four variants, found in immune system genes with strong biological links, are: C8B, 1-57409459-C-A, rs139498867; LY9 (alias SLAMF3), 1-160769595-AG-A, rs763811636; FCN2, 9-137779251-G-A, rs76267164; STXBP2, 19-7712287-G-C, rs35490401. Carriers of any one of these variants are shown to be at high risk of PML when drug-exposed PML cases are compared to drug-exposed matched controls: P value = 3.50E-06, OR = 8.7 [3.7-20.6]. Measures of clinical validity and utility compare favorably to other genetic risk tests, such as BRCA1 and BRCA2 screening for breast cancer risk and HLA-B*15:02 pharmacogenetic screening for pharmacovigilance of carbamazepine to prevent Stevens-Johnson Syndrome and Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis. Conclusion: For the first time, a PML genetic risk test can be implemented for screening patients taking or considering treatment with a PML-linked drug in order to decrease the incidence of PML and enable safer use of highly effective therapies used to treat their underlying disease.