Efficacy and safety of ceftazidime/avibactam in patients with infections caused by ß-lactamase-producing Gram-negative pathogens: a pooled analysis from the Phase 3 clinical trial programme.

OBJECTIVES: This post hoc pooled analysis evaluated clinical and microbiological outcomes and safety in patients with infections caused by ß-lactamase-producing Gram-negative pathogens across five Phase 3, randomized, controlled, multicentre trials of ceftazidime/avibactam in adults with complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI), complicated urinary tract infection (cUTI)/pyelonephritis and nosocomial pneumonia (NP), including ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). METHODS: In each trial, RECLAIM/RECLAIM 3 (cIAI), REPRISE (cIAI/cUTI), RECAPTURE (cUTI) and REPROVE (NP, including VAP) patients were randomized 1:1 to IV ceftazidime/avibactam (plus metronidazole for patients with cIAI) or comparators (carbapenems in >97% patients) for 5-21 days. Clinical and microbiological responses at the test-of-cure visit were assessed for patients with ESBLs, and/or plasmidic and/or overexpression of chromosomal AmpC, and/or serine carbapenemases without MBLs identified in baseline Gram-negative isolates by phenotypic screening and molecular characterization in the pooled microbiological modified ITT (mMITT) population. RESULTS: In total, 813 patients (ceftazidime/avibactam, n = 389; comparator, n = 424) had ≥1 ß-lactamase-producing baseline pathogen identified, amongst whom 792 patients (ceftazidime/avibactam, n = 379; comparator, n = 413) had no MBLs. The most frequent ß-lactamase-producing pathogens across treatment groups were Escherichia coli (n = 381), Klebsiella pneumoniae (n = 261) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (n = 53). Clinical cure rates in the pooled non-MBL ß-lactamase-producing mMITT population were 88.1% (334/379) for ceftazidime/avibactam and 88.1% (364/413) for comparators; favourable microbiological response rates were 76.5% (290/379) and 68.8% (284/413), respectively. The safety profile of ceftazidime/avibactam was consistent with previous observations. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis provides supportive evidence of the efficacy and safety of ceftazidime/avibactam in patients with infections caused by ESBLs, AmpC and serine carbapenemase-producing Gram-negative pathogens. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01499290; NCT01726023; NCT01644643; NCT01595438/NCT01599806; NCT01808092.

The Use and Effectiveness of Ceftazidime-Avibactam in Real-World Clinical Practice: EZTEAM Study.

INTRODUCTION: Ceftazidime-avibactam has proven activity against multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacteria in clinical trials and real-world studies. This study was conducted to describe the patterns of use of ceftazidime-avibactam (including indications and associated antibiotics), and the effectiveness and safety of ceftazidime-avibactam in real-world clinical practice. METHODS: This non-interventional medical chart review study was conducted in 11 countries across the European and Latin American (LATAM) regions. Consecutive patients treated in clinical practice with at least one dose of ceftazidime-avibactam for an approved indication per country label since 01 January 2018 (or launch date in the country if posterior) were enrolled. Effectiveness analyses were conducted in patients treated with ceftazidime-avibactam for at least 72 h. RESULTS: Of the 569 eligible patients enrolled, 516 (90.7%) were treated for at least 72 h (354 patients from Europe and 162 patients from LATAM); 390 patients (75.7%) had switched from another antibiotic line for Gram-negative coverage. Infection sources were intra-abdominal, urinary, respiratory, bloodstream infections, and other infections (approximately 20% each). K. pneumoniae was the most common microorganism identified in the latest microbiological evaluation before starting ceftazidime-avibactam (59.3%). Two-thirds of microorganisms tested for susceptibility were MDR, of which 89.3% were carbapenem-resistant. The common MDR mechanisms for K. pneumoniae were carbapenemase (33.9%), oxacillinase 48 (25.2%), extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (21.5%), or metallo-beta-lactamase (14.2%) production. Without prior patient exposure, 17 isolates (mostly K. pneumoniae) were resistant to ceftazidime-avibactam. Treatment success was achieved in 77.3% of patients overall (88.3% among patients with urinary infection), regardless of first or second treatment line. In-hospital mortality rate was 23.1%. Adverse events were reported for six of the 569 patients enrolled. CONCLUSION: This study provides important real-world evidence on treatment patterns, effectiveness, and safety of ceftazidime-avibactam in clinical practice through its recruitment in the European and LATAM regions. Ceftazidime-avibactam is one of the antibiotics to consider for treatment of MDR bacteria. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03923426.

In vitro activity of ceftazidime-avibactam against Enterobacterales and Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates collected in Latin America as part of the ATLAS global surveillance program, 2017-2019.

The Antimicrobial Testing Leadership and Surveillance (ATLAS) global surveillance program collected clinical isolates of Enterobacterales (n = 8416) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (n = 2521) from 41 medical centers in 10 Latin American countries from 2017 to 2019. In vitro activities of ceftazidime-avibactam and comparators were determined using the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) broth microdilution method. Overall, 98.1% of Enterobacterales and 86.9% of P. aeruginosa isolates were susceptible to ceftazidime-avibactam. When isolates were analyzed by country of origin, susceptibility to ceftazidime-avibactam for Enterobacterales ranged from 97.8% to 100% for nine of 10 countries (except Guatemala, 86.3% susceptible) and from 75.9% to 98.4% for P. aeruginosa in all 10 countries. For Enterobacterales, 100% of AmpC-positive, ESBL- and AmpC-positive, GES-type carbapenemase-positive, and OXA-48-like-positive isolates were ceftazidime-avibactam-susceptible as were 99.8%, 91.8%, and 74.7% of ESBL-positive, multidrug-resistant (MDR), and meropenem-nonsusceptible isolates. Among meropenem-nonsusceptible isolates of Enterobacterales, 24.4% (139/570) carried a metallo-ß-lactamase (MBL); 83.3% of the remaining meropenem-nonsusceptible isolates carried another class of carbapenemase and 99.4% of those isolates were ceftazidime-avibactam-susceptible. Among meropenem-non-susceptible isolates of P. aeruginosa (n = 835), 25.6% carried MBLs; no acquired ß-lactamase was identified in the majority of isolates (64.8%; 87.2% of those isolates were ceftazidime-avibactam-susceptible). Overall, clinical isolates of Enterobacterales collected in Latin America from 2017 to 2019 were highly susceptible to ceftazidime-avibactam, including isolates carrying ESBLs, AmpCs, and KPCs. Country-specific variation in susceptibility to ceftazidime-avibactam was more common among isolates of P. aeruginosa than Enterobacterales. The frequency of MBL-producers among Enterobacterales from Latin America was low (1.7% of all isolates; 146/8,416), but higher than reported in previous surveillance studies.

Review of Ceftazidime-Avibactam for the Treatment of Infections Caused by Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

Pseudomonas aeruginosa is an opportunistic Gram-negative pathogen that causes a range of serious infections that are often challenging to treat, as this pathogen can express multiple resistance mechanisms, including multidrug-resistant (MDR) and extensively drug-resistant (XDR) phenotypes. Ceftazidime-avibactam is a combination antimicrobial agent comprising ceftazidime, a third-generation semisynthetic cephalosporin, and avibactam, a novel non-ß-lactam ß-lactamase inhibitor. This review explores the potential role of ceftazidime-avibactam for the treatment of P. aeruginosa infections. Ceftazidime-avibactam has good in vitro activity against P. aeruginosa relative to comparator ß-lactam agents and fluoroquinolones, comparable to amikacin and ceftolozane-tazobactam. In Phase 3 clinical trials, ceftazidime-avibactam has generally demonstrated similar clinical and microbiological outcomes to comparators in patients with complicated intra-abdominal infections, complicated urinary tract infections or hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated pneumonia caused by P. aeruginosa. Although real-world data are limited, favourable outcomes with ceftazidime-avibactam treatment have been reported in some patients with MDR and XDR P. aeruginosa infections. Thus, ceftazidime-avibactam may have a potentially important role in the management of serious and complicated P. aeruginosa infections, including those caused by MDR and XDR strains.

Clinical and Microbiological Outcomes of Ceftazidime-Avibactam Treatment in Adults with Gram-Negative Bacteremia: A Subset Analysis from the Phase 3 Clinical Trial Program.

INTRODUCTION: This exploratory analysis assessed efficacy and safety outcomes in patients with Gram-negative bacteremia treated with ceftazidime-avibactam or comparator across five phase 3, randomized, controlled, multi-center trials in adults with complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI), complicated urinary tract infection (cUTI)/pyelonephritis, hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP), and ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). METHODS: In each trial, RECLAIM and RECLAIM 3 (cIAI; NCT01499290/NCT01726023), REPRISE (cIAI/cUTI; NCT01644643), RECAPTURE (cUTI; NCT01595438/NCT01599806), and REPROVE (HAP/VAP; NCT01808092), patients were randomized 1:1 to intravenous ceftazidime-avibactam (plus metronidazole for those with cIAI) or comparators (carbapenems in > 97% patients) for 5-21 days. Efficacy assessments included clinical and microbiological responses at the test-of-cure visit in the pooled Gram-negative extended microbiologically evaluable (GNeME) population (bacteremia subset). Safety outcomes were summarized for patients with positive bacterial blood culture(s) at baseline who received ≥ 1 dose of study treatment. RESULTS: The overall safety population included 4050 patients (ceftazidime-avibactam, n = 2024; comparator, n = 2026). The GNeME population (bacteremia subset) comprised 101 patients (ceftazidime-avibactam, n = 54; comparator, n = 47). Clinical cure rates (all indications combined) were 47/54 (87.0%) for ceftazidime-avibactam and 39/47 (83.0%) for comparators; favorable microbiological response rates were 43/54 (79.6%) and 32/47 (68.1%), respectively. Clinical and microbiological responses in the bacteremia subset were generally similar to those in the overall set. The pattern of adverse events in patients with bacteremia was similar between treatment groups and was consistent with the known safety profile of ceftazidime-avibactam. CONCLUSION: This analysis provides supportive evidence of the efficacy and safety of ceftazidime-avibactam in patients with Gram-negative bacteremia associated with cIAI, cUTI/pyelonephritis, or HAP/VAP.

Ceftazidime-Avibactam for the Treatment of Serious Gram-Negative Infections with Limited Treatment Options: A Systematic Literature Review.

INTRODUCTION: A systematic literature review was undertaken to evaluate real-world use of ceftazidime-avibactam for infections due to aerobic Gram-negative organisms in adults with limited treatment options. METHODS: Literature searches retrieved peer-reviewed publications and abstracts from major international infectious disease congresses from January 2015 to February 2021. Results were screened using pre-defined criteria to limit the dataset to relevant publications (notable exclusions were paediatric data and outcomes data for bacteria intrinsically resistant to ceftazidime-avibactam). Data for included publications were subjected to qualitative synthesis. RESULTS: Seventy-three relevant publications (62 peer-reviewed articles; 10 abstracts) comprising 1926 patients treated with ceftazidime-avibactam (either alone or combined with other antimicrobials) and 1114 comparator/control patients were identified. All patients were hospitalised for serious illness and most had multiple comorbidities. The most common infections were pneumonia, bacteraemia, and skin/soft tissue, urinary tract, or abdominal infections; smaller numbers of patients with meningitis, febrile neutropenia, osteomyelitis, and cystic fibrosis were also included. Carbapenem-resistant or carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales (CRE; n = 1718) and carbapenem-resistant, multidrug-resistant (MDR), and extensively drug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (n = 150) were the most common pathogens. Most publications reported positive outcomes for ceftazidime-avibactam treatment (clinical success rates ranged from 45 to 100% and reported 30-day mortality from 0 to 63%), which were statistically superior versus comparators in some studies. ceftazidime-avibactam resistance emergence occurred infrequently and mostly in Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC)-producing K. pneumoniae strains. CONCLUSION: This review provides qualitative evidence of successful use of ceftazidime-avibactam for the treatment of hospitalised patients with CRE and MDR P. aeruginosa infections with limited treatment options.

Cost-effectiveness Comparison of Ceftazidime/Avibactam Versus Meropenem in the Empirical Treatment of Hospital-acquired Pneumonia, Including Ventilator-associated Pneumonia, in Italy.

PURPOSE: Ceftazidime/avibactam (CAZ-AVI) is a fixed-dose combination antibiotic approved in Europe and the United States for patients with hospital-acquired pneumonia, including ventilator-associated pneumonia (HAP/VAP). The economic benefits of a new drug such as CAZ-AVI are required to be assessed against those of available comparators, from the perspective of health care providers and payers, through cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses. The objective of this analysis was to compare the cost-effectiveness of CAZ-AVI versus meropenem in the empirical treatment of appropriate hospitalized patients with HAP/VAP caused by gram-negative pathogens, from the perspective of publicly funded health care in Italy (third-party perspective, based on the data from the REPROVE (Ceftazidime-Avibactam Versus Meropenem In Nosocomial Pneumonia, Including Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia) clinical study; ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01808092). METHODS: A patient-level, sequential simulation model of the HAP/VAP clinical course was developed using spreadsheet software. The analysis focused on direct medical costs. The time horizon of the model selected was 5 years, with an annual discount rate of 3% on costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). Clinical inputs for treatment comparisons were mainly obtained from the REPROVE clinical study data. In addition to clinical outcomes observed in the trial, the model incorporated impact of resistance pathogens, based on data from published studies and expert opinion. Certain assumptions were made for some model parameters due to a lack of data. FINDINGS: The analysis demonstrated that the intervention sequence (CAZ-AVI followed by colistin + high-dose meropenem) versus the comparator sequence (meropenem followed by colistin + high-dose meropenem) provided a better clinical cure rate (+13.52%), which led to a shorter hospital stay (-0.40 days per patient), and gains in the number of life-years (+0.195) and QALYs (+0.350) per patient. The intervention sequence had an estimated net incremental total cost of €1254 ($1401) per patient, and the estimated incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €3581 ($4000) per QALY gained, well below the willingness-to-pay threshold of €30,000 ($33,507) per QALY in Italy. IMPLICATIONS: The model results showed that CAZ-AVI is expected to provide clinical benefits in hospitalized patients with HAP/VAP in Italy at an acceptable cost compared to meropenem.

A look at clinical trial design for new antimicrobials for the adult population.

Introduction: Antimicrobial resistance poses a substantial threat to global public health since it decreases the probability of effectively treating an infection and increases the risk of morbidity and mortality.Areas covered: In this review, the authors discuss the advantages and disadvantages of classical and novel trial designs for evaluating novel antibiotics for infections due to multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO). An inductive literature search was performed using different keywords pertinent to the reviewed topics.Expert opinion: The need for active, effective compounds has strengthened regulatory, academic, and industry cooperation, leading to the recent approval of some novel anti-MDRO agents, with other promising compounds being also in the late phase of clinical development. Nonetheless, some important issues regarding the design of clinical trials have gained importance that are peculiar for novel anti-MDRO agents and should be addressed for continuing to guarantee the availability of effective treatments in the future. Very importantly, concerted cooperation with regulatory agencies will always be needed for continuously discussing and refining the acceptable level of evidence to be pursued through non-conventional and/or innovative trial designs or development strategies. Failure to do so would seriously pose the risk of perpetuating the unmet need for effective anti-MDRO agents.

Prevalence of carbapenem resistance and carbapenemase production among Enterobacteriaceae isolated from urine in the UK: results of the UK infection-Carbapenem Resistance Evaluation Surveillance Trial (iCREST-UK).

Objectives: Although carbapenem susceptibility testing has been recommended for all Enterobacteriaceae from clinical specimens, for practical reasons a carbapenem is not included in many primary antibiotic panels for urine specimens. The 'iCREST' study sought carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (CPE) in routine urine specimens yielding Gram-negative growth in five diagnostic laboratories in the UK. We sought also to compare locally and centrally determined MICs of meropenem and ceftazidime/avibactam. Methods: Positive growth from up to 2000 urine specimens per laboratory was plated onto chromID® CARBA SMART agar. Suspected CPE colonies were tested locally by Etest for susceptibility to meropenem and ceftazidime/avibactam, and referred to central laboratories for PCR confirmation of CPE status and microbroth MIC determination. Results: Twenty-two suspected CPE were identified from 7504 urine specimens. Ten were confirmed by PCR to have NDM (5), IMP (2), KPC (2) or OXA-48-like (1) carbapenemases. Locally determined ceftazidime/avibactam MICs showed complete categorical agreement with those determined centrally by microbroth methodology. The seven ceftazidime/avibactam-resistant isolates (MICs ≥256 mg/L) had NDM or IMP metallo-carbapenemases. Conclusions: The frequency of confirmed CPE among Gram-negative urinary isolates was low, at 0.13% (10/7504), but CPE were found in urines at all five participating sites and the diversity of carbapenemase genes detected reflected the complex epidemiology of CPE in the UK. These data can inform local policies about the cost-effectiveness and clinical value of testing Gram-negative bacteria from urine specimens routinely against a carbapenem as part of patient management and/or infection prevention and control strategies.

European and Russian physician awareness of best management approaches for infections due to antibiotic-resistant Gram-negative bacteria.

OBJECTIVES: The rapid spread of infections due to antibiotic-resistant, Gram-negative bacteria in Europe and surrounding regions requires a heightened level of awareness among physicians within their practice settings. METHODS: We surveyed 800 physicians who treat these infections across France, Germany, Spain, Italy, and Russia to assess their awareness of best management approaches. RESULTS: We found that more than two-thirds do not consider themselves highly aware of best management practices. The respondents are facing these resistant infections as evidenced by the antibiotics they report using and their stated interest in newer agents. Respondents indicated that precious time is lost waiting for culture results, but also said they will need more information about accuracy, use, and costs for adopting rapid molecular testing. CONCLUSIONS: The survey further identified the need for treatment guidelines and clinical decision support tools that can be applied at the bedside.

Atherogenic dyslipidemia.

Atherogenic dyslipidemia (AD) refers to elevated levels of triglycerides (TG) and small-dense low-density lipoprotein and low levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C). In addition, elevated levels of large TG rich very low-density lipoproteins, apolipoprotein B and oxidised low-density lipoprotein (LDL), and reduced levels of small high-density lipoproteins plays a critical role in AD. All three elements of AD per se have been recognised as independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease. LDL-C/HDL-C ratio has shown excellent risk prediction of coronary heart disease than either of the two risk markers. Asian Indians have a higher prevalence of AD than western population due to higher physical inactivity, low exercise and diet deficient in polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA). The AD can be well managed by therapeutic lifestyle changes with increased physical activities, regular exercise, and diets low in carbohydrates and high in PUFA such as omega-3-fatty acids, as the primary intervention. This can be supplemented drug therapies such as statin monotherapy or combination therapy with niacin/fibrates. Rosuvastatin is the only statin, presently available, to effectively treat AD in diabetes and MS patients.