Safety Profile of Ceftazidime-Avibactam: Pooled Data from the Adult Phase II and Phase III Clinical Trial Programme.

INTRODUCTION: Ceftazidime-avibactam combines the established anti-pseudomonal cephalosporin, ceftazidime, with the novel non-ß-lactam ß-lactamase inhibitor, avibactam. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of ceftazidime-avibactam in adults using pooled data from two phase II (NCT00690378, NCT00752219) and five phase III (NCT01499290, NCT01726023, NCT01644643, NCT01808093 and NCT01595438/NCT01599806) clinical studies. METHODS: Safety data from seven multicentre, randomised, active-comparator studies were pooled by study group at the patient level for descriptive analyses, comprising patients with complicated urinary tract infection (cUTI), including pyelonephritis, complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI), or nosocomial pneumonia (NP), including ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), treated with ceftazidime-avibactam ± metronidazole or comparator. RESULTS: In total, 4050 patients (ceftazidime-avibactam ± metronidazole, n = 2024; comparator, n = 2026) were included in the pooled analysis. Adverse events (AEs) up to the last study visit occurred in 996 (49.2%) and 965 (47.6%) patients treated with ceftazidime-avibactam ± metronidazole and comparator, respectively. The most common AEs across treatment groups were diarrhoea, nausea, headache, vomiting and pyrexia. There were few discontinuations due to AEs (2.5% and 1.7% for ceftazidime-avibactam ± metronidazole and comparators, respectively). Overall rates of serious AEs were 8.7% for ceftazidime-avibactam ± metronidazole and 7.2% for comparators; respective rates of AEs with an outcome of death were 2.0% and 1.8%. AEs considered causally related to the study drug or procedures occurred in 10.7% and 9.6% of patients treated with ceftazidime-avibactam ± metronidazole and comparators; the most common drug-related AEs in both groups were diarrhoea, headache, nausea and increased alanine aminotransferase. No impact to the safety profile of ceftazidime-avibactam ± metronidazole was found with regard to intrinsic factors, such as age or renal function at baseline, or extrinsic factors, such as geographical origin. Potentially clinically significant changes in laboratory parameters were infrequent with no trends or safety concerns identified. CONCLUSION: The observed safety profile of ceftazidime-avibactam across infection types is consistent with the established safety profile of ceftazidime monotherapy and no new safety findings were identified. This analysis supports the use of ceftazidime-avibactam as a treatment option in adults with cUTI, cIAI and NP, including VAP.

Safety and Efficacy of Ceftazidime-Avibactam Plus Metronidazole in the Treatment of Children ≥3 Months to <18 Years With Complicated Intra-Abdominal Infection: Results From a Phase 2, Randomized, Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Ceftazidime-avibactam plus metronidazole is effective in the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI) in adults. This single-blind, randomized, multicenter, phase 2 study (NCT02475733) evaluated the safety, efficacy and pharmacokinetics of ceftazidime-avibactam plus metronidazole in children with cIAI. METHODS: Hospitalized children (≥3 months to <18 years) with cIAI were randomized 3:1 to receive intravenous ceftazidime-avibactam plus metronidazole, or meropenem, for a minimum of 72 hours (9 doses), with optional switch to oral therapy thereafter for a total treatment duration of 7-15 days. Safety and tolerability were assessed throughout the study, along with clinical and microbiologic outcomes, and pharmacokinetics. A blinded observer determined adverse event (AE) causality, and clinical outcomes up to the late follow-up visit. RESULTS: Eighty-three children were randomized and received study drug (61 ceftazidime-avibactam plus metronidazole and 22 meropenem); most (90.4%) had a diagnosis of appendicitis. Predominant Gram-negative baseline pathogens were Escherichia coli (79.7%) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (33.3%); 2 E. coli isolates were ceftazidime-non-susceptible. AEs occurred in 52.5% and 59.1% of patients in the ceftazidime-avibactam plus metronidazole and meropenem groups, respectively. Serious AEs occurred in 8.2% and 4.5% of patients, respectively; none was considered drug related. No deaths occurred. Favorable clinical/microbiologic responses were observed in ≥90% of patients in both treatment groups at end-of-intravenous treatment and test-of-cure visits. CONCLUSIONS: Ceftazidime-avibactam plus metronidazole was well tolerated, with a safety profile similar to ceftazidime alone, and appeared effective in pediatric patients with cIAI due to Gram-negative pathogens, including ceftazidime-non-susceptible strains.

Safety and Efficacy of Ceftazidime-Avibactam in the Treatment of Children ≥3 Months to <18 Years With Complicated Urinary Tract Infection: Results from a Phase 2 Randomized, Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Ceftazidime-avibactam is effective and well tolerated in adults with complicated urinary tract infection (cUTI), but has not been evaluated in children with cUTI. METHODS: This single-blind, multicenter, active-controlled, phase 2 study (NCT02497781) randomized children ≥3 months to <18 years with cUTI (3:1) to receive intravenous (IV) ceftazidime-avibactam or cefepime for ≥72 hours, with subsequent optional oral switch. Total treatment duration was 7-14 days. Primary objective was assessment of safety. Secondary objectives included descriptive efficacy and pharmacokinetics. A blinded observer determined adverse event (AE) causality and clinical outcomes up to the late follow-up visit (20-36 days after the last dose of IV/oral therapy). RESULTS: In total, 95 children received ≥1 dose of IV study drug (ceftazidime-avibactam, n = 67; cefepime, n = 28). The predominant baseline Gram-negative uropathogen was Escherichia coli (92.2%). AEs occurred in 53.7% and 53.6% patients in the ceftazidime-avibactam and cefepime groups, respectively. Serious AEs occurred in 11.9% (ceftazidime-avibactam) and 7.1% (cefepime) patients. One serious AE (ceftazidime-avibactam group) was considered drug related. In the microbiologic intent-to-treat analysis set, favorable clinical response rates >95% were observed for both groups at end-of-IV and remained 88.9% (ceftazidime-avibactam) and 82.6% (cefepime) at test-of-cure. Favorable per-patient microbiologic response at test-of-cure was 79.6% (ceftazidime-avibactam) and 60.9% (cefepime). CONCLUSIONS: Ceftazidime-avibactam was well tolerated in children with cUTI, with a safety profile consistent with that of adults with cUTI and of ceftazidime alone, and appeared effective in children with cUTI due to Gram-negative pathogens.

Ceftazidime-Avibactam Susceptibility Breakpoints against Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

Clinical susceptibility breakpoints against Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa for the ceftazidime-avibactam dosage regimen of 2,000/500 mg every 8 h (q8h) by 2-h intravenous infusion (adjusted for renal function) have been established by the FDA, CLSI, and EUCAST as susceptible (MIC, ≤8 mg/liter) and resistant (MIC, >8 mg/liter). The key supportive data from pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic analyses, in vitro surveillance, including molecular understanding of relevant resistance mechanisms, and efficacy in regulatory clinical trials are collated and analyzed here.

Clinical activity of ceftazidime/avibactam against MDR Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa: pooled data from the ceftazidime/avibactam Phase III clinical trial programme.

Objectives: This analysis evaluated the clinical activity of ceftazidime/avibactam against MDR Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates pooled from the adult Phase III clinical trials in patients with complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI), complicated urinary tract infection (cUTI) or nosocomial pneumonia (NP) including ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). Methods: Baseline isolates from five Phase III randomized controlled trials of ceftazidime/avibactam versus predominantly carbapenem comparators in patients with cIAI (RECLAIM 1 and 2; NCT01499290 and RECLAIM 3; NCT01726023), cUTI (RECAPTURE 1 and 2; NCT01595438 and NCT01599806), NP including VAP (REPROVE; NCT01808092) and cIAI or cUTI caused by ceftazidime-non-susceptible Gram-negative pathogens (REPRISE; NCT01644643) were tested for MDR status and susceptibility to ceftazidime/avibactam and carbapenem-based comparators using CLSI broth microdilution methodology. Microbiological and clinical responses for patients with ≥1 MDR Enterobacteriaceae or P. aeruginosa isolate were assessed at the test-of-cure (TOC) visit. Results: In the pooled microbiologically modified ITT population, 1051 patients with MDR Enterobacteriaceae and 95 patients with MDR P. aeruginosa isolates were identified. Favourable microbiological response rates at TOC for all MDR Enterobacteriaceae and MDR P. aeruginosa were 78.4% and 57.1%, respectively, for ceftazidime/avibactam and 71.6% and 53.8%, respectively, for comparators. The proportions of patients with ≥1 MDR isolate who were clinically cured at TOC were similar in the ceftazidime/avibactam (85.4%) and comparator (87.9%) arms. Conclusions: Ceftazidime/avibactam demonstrated similar clinical efficacy to predominantly carbapenem comparators against MDR Enterobacteriaceae and P. aeruginosa, and may be a suitable alternative to carbapenem-based therapies for cIAI, cUTI and NP/VAP caused by MDR Gram-negative pathogens.

In vitro activity of ceftazidime/avibactam against urinary isolates from patients in a Phase 3 clinical trial programme for the treatment of complicated urinary tract infections.

Objectives: To evaluate the in vitro activity of ceftazidime/avibactam relative to comparator agents against Gram-negative isolates from a Phase 3 clinical trial programme for complicated urinary tract infections (RECAPTURE). Methods: The in vitro activity of ceftazidime/avibactam was evaluated against 840 Gram-negative pathogens isolated at baseline from 1033 randomized patients in two pivotal Phase 3 clinical trials for the treatment of complicated urinary tract infections. The trials were conducted in 160 institutions from 25 countries worldwide. Susceptibility testing was performed by broth microdilution at a central laboratory according to CLSI methodologies. Results: Overall, ceftazidime/avibactam showed significant activity against the Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa with MIC 90 values of 0.5 and 8 mg/L, respectively. Against the most common Enterobacteriaceae, MIC 90 values were 0.25 mg/L for Escherichia coli , 1 mg/L for Klebsiella pneumoniae , 0.06 mg/L for Proteus mirabilis and 2 mg/L for Enterobacter cloacae . The ceftazidime/avibactam MIC 90 for 154 ceftazidime-non-susceptible isolates of Enterobacteriaceae was 1 mg/L and the ceftazidime/avibactam MIC 90 for 15 non-susceptible isolates of P. aeruginosa was 64 mg/L. There was a significant reduction in the ceftazidime/avibactam MIC relative to ceftazidime alone for most of the Enterobacteriaceae isolates. Conclusions: The ceftazidime/avibactam in vitro activity against these clinical urinary tract isolates demonstrates the potential utility of the drug in complicated urinary tract infections.

Ceftazidime-avibactam Versus Doripenem for the Treatment of Complicated Urinary Tract Infections, Including Acute Pyelonephritis: RECAPTURE, a Phase 3 Randomized Trial Program.

BACKGROUND: The global emergence of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae highlights the urgent need to reduce carbapenem dependence. The phase 3 RECAPTURE program compared the efficacy and safety of ceftazidime-avibactam and doripenem in patients with complicated urinary tract infection (cUTI), including acute pyelonephritis. METHODS: Hospitalized adults with suspected or microbiologically confirmed cUTI/acute pyelonephritis were randomized 1:1 to ceftazidime-avibactam 2000 mg/500 mg every 8 hours or doripenem 500 mg every 8 hours (doses adjusted for renal function), with possible oral antibiotic switch after ≥5 days (total treatment duration up to 10 days or 14 days for patients with bacteremia). RESULTS: Of 1033 randomized patients, 393 and 417 treated with ceftazidime-avibactam and doripenem, respectively, were eligible for the primary efficacy analyses; 19.6% had ceftazidime-nonsusceptible baseline pathogens. Noninferiority of ceftazidime-avibactam vs doripenem was demonstrated for the US Food and Drug Administration co-primary endpoints of (1) patient-reported symptomatic resolution at day 5: 276 of 393 (70.2%) vs 276 of 417 (66.2%) patients (difference, 4.0% [95% confidence interval {CI}, -2.39% to 10.42%]); and (2) combined symptomatic resolution/microbiological eradication at test of cure (TOC): 280 of 393 (71.2%) vs 269 of 417 (64.5%) patients (difference, 6.7% [95% CI, .30% to 13.12%]). Microbiological eradication at TOC (European Medicines Agency primary endpoint) occurred in 304 of 393 (77.4%) ceftazidime-avibactam vs 296 of 417 (71.0%) doripenem patients (difference, 6.4% [95% CI, .33% to 12.36%]), demonstrating superiority at the 5% significance level. Both treatments showed similar efficacy against ceftazidime-nonsusceptible pathogens. Ceftazidime-avibactam had a safety profile consistent with that of ceftazidime alone. CONCLUSIONS: Ceftazidime-avibactam was highly effective for the empiric treatment of cUTI (including acute pyelonephritis), and may offer an alternative to carbapenems in this setting. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT01595438; NCT01599806.