Recombinant production of Trx-Ib-AMP4 and Trx-E50-52 antimicrobial peptides and antimicrobial synergistic assessment on the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus under in vitro and in vivo situations.

PURPOSE: The production of alternative novel antimicrobial agents is considered an efficient way to cope with multidrug resistance among pathogenic bacteria. E50-52 and Ib-AMP4 antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) have illustrated great proven antibacterial effects. The aim of this study was recombinant production of these AMPs and investigation of their synergistic effects on methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). METHOD: At first, the codon optimized sequences of the Ib-AMP4 (UniProt: 024006 (PRO_0000020721), and E50-52 (UniProtKB: P85148) were individually ligated into the pET-32α vector and transformed into E. coli. After the optimization of production and purification steps, the MIC (Minimum inhibitory concentration), time kill and growth kinetic tests of recombinant proteins were determined against MRSA. Finally, the in vivo wound healing efficiency was tested. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: The recorded MIC of recombinant Trx-Ib-AMP4, Trx-E50-52 against MRSA bacterium were 0.375 and 0.0875 mg/mL respectively. The combination application of the produced AMPs by the checkerboard method confirmed their synergic activity. The results of the time-kill showed sharply decrease of the number of viable cells with over five time reductions in log10 CFU/mL by the combination of Trx-E50-52 and Trx-IbAMP4 at 2 × MIC within 240 min. The growth kinetic results confirmed the combination of Trx-E50-52 and Trx-IbAMP4 had much greater success in the reduction of over 50 % of MRSA suspensions' turbidity within the first hour. Wound healing assay and histological analysis of infected mice treated with Trx-Ib-AMP4 or Trx-E50-52 compared with those treated with a combination of Trx-Ib-AMP4 and Trx-E50-52 showed significant synergic effects.

Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Analyses To Determine the Optimal Fixed Dosing Regimen of Iclaprim for Treatment of Patients with Serious Infections Caused by Gram-Positive Pathogens.

Iclaprim is a bacterial dihydrofolate reductase inhibitor that is currently being evaluated in two phase 3 trials for the treatment of patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI). Prior animal infection model studies suggest that the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) drivers for efficacy are area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h at steady state (AUC0-24ss), AUC/MIC, and time above the MIC during the dosing interval (T > MIC), while QTc prolongation was associated with the maximal concentration at steady state (Cmaxss) in a thorough QTc phase 1 study. Using PK data collected from 470 patients from the previously conducted phase 3 complicated skin and skin structure infection (cSSSI) trials, population PK modeling and Monte Carlo simulation (MCS) were used to identify a fixed iclaprim dosage regimen for the ongoing phase 3 ABSSSI studies that maximizes AUC0-24ss, AUC/MIC, and T > MIC while minimizing the probability of a Cmaxss of ≥800 ng/ml relative to the values for the previously employed cSSSI regimen of 0.8 mg/kg of body weight infused intravenously over 0.5 h every 12 h. The MCS analyses indicated that administration of 80 mg as a 2-h infusion every 12 h provides 28%, 28%, and 32% increases in AUC0-24ss, AUC/MIC, and T > MIC, respectively, compared to values for the 0.8-mg/kg cSSSI regimen, while decreasing the probability of a Cmaxss of ≥800 ng/ml, by 9%. Based on PK/PD analyses, 80 mg iclaprim administered over 2 h every 12 h was selected as the dosing scheme for subsequent phase 3 clinical trials.

Assessment of telavancin minimal inhibitory concentrations by revised broth microdilution method in phase 3 complicated skin and skin-structure infection clinical trial isolates.

The broth microdilution (BMD) MIC testing method for telavancin was recently revised BMD (rBMD) to improve accuracy and reproducibility. Staphylococcus aureus isolates from telavancin phase 3 complicated skin and skin-structure infection (cSSSI) studies were tested using the rBMD method. Retesting of 1132 isolates produced MICs ranging from ≤0.015 to 0.12µg/mL that were 8-fold lower than the original method. All isolates tested remained susceptible to telavancin at the revised susceptibility breakpoint of 0.12µg/mL. The clinical cure and microbiological eradication rates were 90% (368/409) and 89% (366/409) for telavancin-treated patients, and were similar for patients with methicillin-susceptible and -resistant S. aureus isolates and S. aureus isolates with elevated vancomycin MICs (≥1µg/mL). The data presented here are aimed to update the literature and better inform clinicians and clinical microbiologists about the revised telavancin MICs, as well as the corresponding clinical and microbiological cure rates for cSSSI patients.

MRSA in Croatia: prevalence and management.

Infections caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) are associated with increased morbidity, mortality and length of hospital stay. MRSA is a major pathogen in hospitals and an important pathogen in community infections with few severe and fatal cases. However, MRSA causes the majority of skin and soft tissue infections in the US. The burden of community MRSA is much smaller in Europe, but there are reports of livestock-associated MRSA (LA-MRSA) isolated from pigs and cattle causing significant infections in the people who are connected to these farms. MRSA has been present in Croatia for more than 45 years, and it exerts a different impact on health-care infections. A remarkable increase in MRSA percentage was noted in primarily sterile samples in 2002 (37%) in comparison to 2001 (31%). This percentage remained quite high until 2008, when the first signs of a reduced trend were observed. The lowest percentage was 22% in 2012.

Assessing the economic value of avoiding hospital admissions by shifting the management of gram+ acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections to an outpatient care setting.

OBJECTIVE: To estimate, from a US payer perspective, the cost offsets of treating gram positive acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections (ABSSSI) with varied hospital length of stay (LOS) followed by outpatient care, as well as the cost implications of avoiding hospital admission. METHODS: Economic drivers of care were estimated using a literature-based economic model incorporating inpatient and outpatient components. The model incorporated equal efficacy, adverse events (AE), resource use, and costs from literature. Costs of once- and twice-daily outpatient infusions to achieve a 14-day treatment were analyzed. Sensitivity analyses were performed. Costs were adjusted to 2015 US$. RESULTS: Total non-drug medical cost for treatment of ABSSSI entirely in the outpatient setting to avoid hospital admission was the lowest among all scenarios and ranged from $4039-$4924. Total non-drug cost for ABSSSI treated in the inpatient setting ranged from $9813 (3 days LOS) to $18,014 (7 days LOS). Inpatient vs outpatient cost breakdown was: 3 days inpatient ($6657)/11 days outpatient ($3156-$3877); 7 days inpatient ($15,017)/7 days outpatient ($2495-$2997). Sensitivity analyses revealed a key outpatient cost driver to be peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) costs (average per patient cost of $873 for placement and $205 for complications). LIMITATIONS: Drug and indirect costs were excluded and resource use was not differentiated by ABSSSI type. It was assumed that successful ABSSSI treatment takes up to 14 days per the product labels, and that once-daily and twice-daily antibiotics have equal efficacy. CONCLUSION: Shifting ABSSSI care to outpatient settings may result in medical cost savings greater than 53%. Typical outpatient scenarios represent 14-37% of total medical cost, with PICC accounting for 28-43% of the outpatient burden. The value of new ABSSSI therapies will be driven by eliminating the need for PICC line, reducing length of stay and the ability to completely avoid a hospital stay.

Managing skin and soft-tissue infection and nosocomial pneumonia caused by MRSA: a 2014 follow-up survey.

As a follow-up to our 2009 survey, in order to explore opinion and practice on the epidemiology and management of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in Europe, we conducted a second survey to elicit current opinions on this topic, particularly around antibiotic choice, dose, duration and route of administration. We also aimed to further understand how the management of MRSA has evolved in Europe during the past 5 years. Members of an expert panel of infectious diseases specialists convened in London (UK) in January 2014 to identify and discuss key issues in the management of MRSA. Following this meeting, a survey was developed comprising 36 questions covering a wide range of topics on MRSA complicated skin and soft-tissue infection and nosocomial pneumonia management. The survey instrument, a web-based questionnaire, was sent to the International Society of Chemotherapy for distribution to registered European infection societies and their members. This article reports the survey results from the European respondents. At the time of the original survey, the epidemiology of MRSA varied significantly across Europe and there were differing views on best practice. The current findings suggest that the epidemiology of healthcare-associated MRSA in Europe is, if anything, even more polarised, whilst community-acquired MRSA has become much more common. However, there now appears to be a much greater knowledge of current treatment/management options, and antimicrobial stewardship has moved forward considerably in the 5 years since the last survey.

Socio-economic profile of patients with community-acquired skin and soft tissue infections in Delhi.

AIM: To study the socio-demographic and clinical profile of patients with community-acquired skin and soft tissue infections (CA-SSTIs). METHODS: This study was a cross sectional, observational study. Patients with CA-SSTIs (ICD-10 L00-L08) were enrolled from February to August 2013. Clinical and microbiological data of all patients were recorded. Socioeconomic status (SES) of each patient was calculated using the Modified Kuppuswamy Scale. RESULTS: Seventy-three patients were studied, of whom 45 had SSTIs caused by Staphylococcus aureus. Of the 45, 11 (24%) were methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) and 34 (76%) were methicillin-sensitive S. aureus (MSSA). Patients with MRSA infections had significantly lower monthly income and lower educational status than those with MSSA infections. However, SES was not significantly different in the two groups. CONCLUSION: S. aureus was the most common cause of CA-SSTIs, of which, MRSA was isolated in 24% of the cases. Patients with MRSA SSTIs had significantly lesser family income and lower education levels compared to patients with MSSA SSTIs.

Antibiotic treatment patterns across Europe in patients with complicated skin and soft-tissue infections due to meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: a plea for implementation of early switch and early discharge criteria.

This retrospective observational medical chart review aimed to describe country-specific variations across Europe in real-world meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) complicated skin and soft-tissue infection (cSSTI) treatment patterns, antibiotic stewardship activity, and potential opportunities for early switch (ES) from intravenous (i.v.) to oral formulations and early discharge (ED) from hospital using standardised data collection and criteria and economic implications of these opportunities. Patients were randomly sampled from 12 countries (Austria, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Poland, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain and the UK), aged ≥18 years, with documented MRSA cSSTI, hospitalised between 1 July 2010 and 30 June 2011, discharged alive by 31 July 2011. Of 1502 patients, 1468 received MRSA-targeted therapy. Intravenous-to-oral switch rates ranged from 2.0% to 20.2%, i.v. length of therapy from 10.1 to 18.6 days and hospital length of stay (LoS) from 15.2 to 25.0 days across Europe. Of 341 sites, 82.9% had antibiotic steering committees, 23.7% had i.v.-to-oral switch antibiotic protocols and 12.9% had ED protocols for MRSA cSSTI. ES and ED eligibility ranged from 12.0% (Slovakia) to 56.3% (Greece) and from 10% (Slovakia) to 48.2% (Portugal), respectively. Potential cost savings per ED-eligible patient ranged from €414 (Slovakia) to €2703 (France). MRSA cSSTI treatment patterns varied widely across countries, but further reductions in i.v. therapy, hospital LoS and associated costs could be realised. These data provide insight into clinical practice patterns across diverse European healthcare systems and identify potential opportunities for local clinicians and policy-makers to improve clinical care and cost-effectiveness of this therapeutic area.

Economic evaluation of treatment for MRSA complicated skin and soft tissue infections in Glasgow hospitals.

In the UK, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)-associated skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) are predominantly managed in the hospital using intravenous (IV) glycopeptides. We set out to explore the potential for and relative healthcare costs of earlier hospital discharge through switch to oral antibiotic therapy (linezolid or rifampicin and doxycycline) or continuation of IV therapy (teicoplanin) via an outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) service. Over 16 months, 173 patients were retrospectively identified with MRSA SSTI, of whom 82.8 % were treated with IV therapy. Thirty-seven patients were potentially suitable for earlier discharge with outpatient therapy. The model assumed 3 days of inpatient management and a maximum of 14 days of outpatient therapy. For the status quo, where patients received only inpatient care with IV therapy, hospital costs were calculated at £12,316 per patient, with 97 % of costs accounted for by direct bed day costs. The mean total cost savings achievable through OPAT or oral therapy was estimated to be £6,136 and £6,159 per patient treated, respectively. A significant proportion of patients with MRSA SSTI may be suitable for outpatient management with either oral therapy or via OPAT, with the potential for significant reduction in healthcare costs.

Using daptomycin in hospitalised patients with cSSTI caused by Staphylococcus aureus has an impact on costs.

BACKGROUND: The aim was to assess the cost impact of daptomycin compared to vancomycin treatment in patients hospitalised for complicated skin and soft-tissue infection (cSSTI) with suspected methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection in the UK. METHODS: A decision model was developed to estimate the costs associated with cSSTI treatment. Data on efficacy, treatment duration and early discharge from published clinical trials were used, with data gaps on standard clinical practice being filled by means of clinician interviews. RESULTS: Total health-care costs per patient were GBP 6,214 and GBP 6,491 for daptomycin and vancomycin, respectively. A sensitivity analysis suggested that modifying the parameters within a reasonable range does not impact on the conclusion that the higher cost of daptomycin is likely to be offset by lower costs of monitoring and hospitalisation. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that daptomycin not only provides an alternative treatment for multiple resistant infections, but may also reduce National Health Service costs.

Cost-effectiveness of linezolid in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus skin and skin structure infections.

Linezolid is a novel oxazolidinone antibacterial agent with a broad clinical application, especially in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus skin and soft-tissue infections and skin and skin-structure infections. Pharmacoeconomic advantages include decreased hospital duration, reduction in intravenous antibiotic use and early discharge opportunities that contribute to an overall reduction in healthcare resources. Linezolid's oral formulation has a pharmacokinetic profile that is similar to its intravenous formulation, which creates opportunities for early discharge not available to comparators like vancomycin and daptomycin. Both vancomycin and daptomycin require intravenous therapy, which compounds the resources required in treating methicillin-resistant S. aureus skin and soft tissue/skin and skin structure infections. Pharmacoeconomic studies have demonstrated an overall reduction in total direct costs to the payer in favor of linezolid over its comparators. Its overall reduction in healthcare utilization makes it an appropriate alternative to the standard therapy, vancomycin.

Cost avoidance using linezolid for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections in a specialist diabetes foot clinic.

OBJECTIVES: An audit was performed to determine whether linezolid (Zyvox, Pharmacia Limited, Sandwich, UK) was being used in accordance with local guidelines and if this had an effect on admissions for diabetes foot ulceration. METHODS: Seven hundred and four patient records from 2005 to 2010 in the Diabetes Foot Clinic, Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh were audited for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections, admissions and antibiotic use. RESULTS: Seventeen percent (n = 119) of patients had proven MRSA infections. Of these, 28% (n = 33) were prescribed linezolid, 94% (n = 31) for up to 14 days and none for >28 days. Eight (24%) had repeated courses. Ninety-one percent (n = 30) either avoided admission or were discharged early with resolution of infection. Four out of 33 patients had reversible blood abnormalities. The total cost for linezolid over this period was £58 000. However, 420 bed days, costing £500/day, were avoided, producing a total saving of £210 000 on inpatient costs. CONCLUSIONS: Linezolid guidelines reduced lengths of stay, inpatient costs and overuse of this expensive but effective treatment.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of linezolid, daptomycin, and vancomycin in methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: complicated skin and skin structure infection using Bayesian methods for evidence synthesis.

BACKGROUND: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) complicated skin and skin structure infection (cSSSI) is a prominent infection encountered in hospital and outpatient settings that is associated with high resource use for the health-care system. OBJECTIVE: A decision analytic (DA) model was developed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA) of linezolid, daptomycin, and vancomycin in MRSA cSSSI. METHODS: Bayesian methods for evidence synthesis were used to generate efficacy and safety parameters for a DA model using published clinical trials. CEA was done from the US health-care perspective. Efficacy was defined as a successfully treated patient at the test of cure without any adverse reaction. Primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio between linezolid and vancomycin, daptomycin and vancomycin, and linezolid and daptomycin in MRSA cSSSI. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of the model. RESULTS: The total direct costs of linezolid, daptomycin, and vancomycin were $18,057, $20,698, and $23,671, respectively. The cost-effectiveness ratios for linezolid, daptomycin, and vancomycin were $37,604, $44,086, and $52,663 per successfully treated patient, respectively. Linezolid and daptomycin were dominant strategies compared to vancomycin. However, linezolid was dominant when compared to daptomycin. The model was sensitive to the duration of daptomycin and linezolid treatment. CONCLUSION: Linezolid and daptomycin are potentially cost-effective based on the assumptions of the DA model; however, linezolid appears to be more cost-effective compared to daptomycin and vancomycin for MRSA cSSSIs.

Invasive community-associated MRSA infections: epidemiology and antimicrobial management.

IMPORTANCE OF THE FIELD: Community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (CA-MRSA) is now a predominant cause of infections in the community and is adding to the overwhelming MRSA burden in the hospital setting. CA-MRSA is most commonly noted as a prominent pathogen in skin and soft tissue infections (SSTI) but has been increasingly described in more invasive disease. New developments in the epidemiology and treatment of CA-MRSA have emerged to improve the understanding of this disease. AREAS COVERED IN THIS REVIEW: We present the latest epidemiologic and clinical treatment studies of CA-MRSA in a variety of infection types. The methods used involve a comprehensive literature search of the previous 10 years, including a detailed focus on new literature in the last 5 years. The search terms used were 'CA-MRSA epidemiology', 'S. aureus resistance', 'CA-MRSA treatment', and 'S. aureus virulence'. WHAT THE READER WILL GAIN: An in-depth understanding of the changing epidemiology of CA-MRSA and management of SSTI and more invasive infections with this pathogen. Adjunctive and alternative therapies are also reviewed. TAKE HOME MESSAGE: The epidemiology of CA-MRSA is rapidly evolving. Increasing multi-drug resistance along with virulence factors associated with this serious disease complicate its treatment. Additional clinical trials are needed to select optimal regimens in the treatment of invasive CA-MRSA infections.

A randomized controlled trial of tea tree oil (5%) body wash versus standard body wash to prevent colonization with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in critically ill adults: research protocol.

BACKGROUND: Over the past ten years MRSA has become endemic in hospitals and is associated with increased healthcare costs. Critically ill patients are most at risk, in part because of the number of invasive therapies that they require in the intensive care unit (ICU). Washing with 5% tea tree oil (TTO) has been shown to be effective in removing MRSA on the skin. However, to date, no trials have evaluated the potential of TTO body wash to prevent MRSA colonization or infection. In addition, detecting MRSA by usual culture methods is slow. A faster method using a PCR assay has been developed in the laboratory, but requires evaluation in a large number of patients. METHODS/DESIGN: This study protocol describes the design of a multicentre, phase II/III prospective open-label randomized controlled clinical trial to evaluate whether a concentration of 5% TTO is effective in preventing MRSA colonization in comparison with a standard body wash (Johnsons Baby Softwash) in the ICU. In addition we will evaluate the cost-effectiveness of TTO body wash and assess the effectiveness of the PCR assay in detecting MRSA in critically ill patients. On admission to intensive care, swabs from the nose and groin will be taken to screen for MRSA as per current practice. Patients will be randomly assigned to be washed with the standard body wash or TTO body wash. On discharge from the unit, swabs will be taken again to identify whether there is a difference in MRSA colonization between the two groups. DISCUSSION: If TTO body wash is found to be effective, widespread implementation of such a simple colonization prevention tool has the potential to impact on patient outcomes, healthcare resource use and patient confidence both nationally and internationally.

Cost-effectiveness of telavancin versus vancomycin for treatment of complicated skin and skin structure infections.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine the cost-effectiveness of telavancin versus vancomycin for the treatment of complicated skin and skin structure infections (cSSSIs). DESIGN: Pharmacoeconomic analysis conducted from the hospital's perspective using data from the Assessment of Telavancin in Complicated Skin and Skin Structure Infections (ATLAS) phase III clinical trial. SETTING: One hundred twenty-nine hospitals in the United States and internationally. PATIENTS: A total of 1044 clinically evaluable patients who were hospitalized with a cSSSI during the ATLAS trial and who received at least one dose of telavancin or vancomycin in the hospital. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Diagnosis-related group-specific hospital bed costs, antibiotic acquisition prices, and cost of vancomycin monitoring were applied to the resource utilization data collected during the ATLAS trial. Infection-related length of stay (LOS(ir)) and hospitalization costs (COST(ir)) were compared between the telavancin (514 patients) and vancomycin (530 patients) groups. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) were calculated for the total population and a subset of patients infected with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) by using a 25,000-sample bootstrap analysis. During sensitivity analyses, the daily acquisition price for telavancin was increased from the equivalent to vancomycin ($13.44) to $50, $100, $150, or $200, and the rate of MRSA acquisition was varied between 30% and 75%. The median (interquartile range) LOS(ir) was 8 days (6-12 days) for both telavancin and vancomycin (p=0.742), and median (interquartile range) COST(ir) was $8118 ($6291-11,758) and $8185 ($6474-11,405), respectively (p=0.560). Similar findings were observed for the MRSA subset. Telavancin cost-effectiveness was greater for the MRSA population versus the total population. During bootstrap analyses of the MRSA population, the ICER for telavancin ranged from dominant (-$9560) to $27,889 as acquisition price was increased. CONCLUSIONS: Telavancin LOS(ir) and total COST(ir) were similar to those of vancomycin for the treatment of cSSSIs. Particularly in those infected with MRSA, telavancin may be more cost-effective than vancomycin over the range of acquisition prices tested.

Antibiotic options for treating community-acquired MRSA.

Community-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (CA-MRSA) infections are developing as a prominent public-health threat. While minor CA-MRSA infections are treatable in an out-patient setting, the pharmacotherapeutic options for oral therapies are dwindling as resistance continues to rise in general and levels of susceptibility vary geographically. In many instances, fluoroquinolones and clindamycin are not reasonable empiric treatment choices, leaving physicians with trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, doxycycline or linezolid as viable options, depending on patient-specific circumstances and the impact of potential adverse effects. Resistance to intravenous options remains low and attention should be focused on the site and severity of infection when choosing antibiotic/intravenous immunoglobulin treatment. Clinical trials directly comparing antibiotic options in both out-patient and in-patient settings are needed to enhance recommendations for empiric therapy algorithms.

Daptomycin versus vancomycin for complicated skin and skin structure infections: clinical and economic outcomes.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of daptomycin compared with vancomycin on the clinical and economic outcomes in patients with complicated skin and skin structure infections. DESIGN: Prospective, open-label study. SETTING: Level 1 trauma center in Detroit, Michigan. PATIENTS: Fifty-three adult patients with complicated skin and skin structure infections at risk for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infection who were treated with daptomycin and a matched cohort of 212 patients treated with vancomycin. INTERVENTION: Patients in the prospective arm received intravenous daptomycin 4 mg/kg every 24 hours for at least 3 days but not more than 14 days. Historical controls received at least 3 days of vancomycin dosed to achieve trough concentrations of 5-20 microg/ml. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Outcomes evaluated included blinded assessments of clinical resolution, duration of therapy, and costs. The most common diagnoses were cellulitis (31%), abscess (22%), and both cellulitis with abscess (37%). Microbiology differed significantly between groups, with S. aureus found in 27 patients (51%) in the daptomycin group and 167 patients (79%) in the vancomycin group and MRSA in 22 (42%) and 159 (75%), respectively (p<0.001). The proportions of patients with clinical improvement or resolution of their infections on days 3 and 5 were 90% versus 70% and 98% versus 81% in the daptomycin versus vancomycin groups, respectively (p<0.01 for both comparisons), and 100% at the end of therapy in both groups. Among patients with complete resolution of their infections (41 patients [77%] with daptomycin vs 89 patients [42%] with vancomycin, p<0.05), median duration of intravenous therapy was 4 and 7 days, respectively, (p<0.001), and hospital costs were $5027 and $7552 (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients receiving daptomycin achieved more rapid resolution of symptoms and clinical cure and had a decreased duration of inpatient therapy compared with those receiving vancomycin. This study suggests that daptomycin is a cost-effective alternative to vancomycin for complicated skin and skin structure infections.

A comparison of costs and hospital length of stay associated with intravenous/oral linezolid or intravenous vancomycin treatment of complicated skin and soft-tissue infections caused by suspected or confirmed methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in elderly US patients.

OBJECTIVES: This study compared the costs and hospital length of stay (LOS) and duration of intravenous therapy associated with intravenous/oral linezolid or intravenous vancomycin treatment of complicated skin and soft-tissue infections (cSSTIs) caused by suspected or confirmed methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in elderly US patients. METHODS: Data were obtained from elderly (>or=65 years) US patients participating in a multinational randomized trial of hospitalized cSSTI patients treated with linezolid or vancomycin. Costs (hospital and total) from the provider perspective were estimated for intent-to-treat (ITT) patients (ie, all those receiving >or=1 dose) using national 2003 costs (ward, medication, intravenous administration). LOS for inpatient care, duration of intravenous linezolid and vancomycin therapy (ITT and MRSA groups), and cure rates were evaluated. RESULTS: Of 717 enrolled subjects, 163 (23%) were elderly (87 linezolid, 76 vancomycin), with no significant differences in demographic characteristics between the linezolid and vancomycin groups. Mean hospitalization and total costs were lower with linezolid compared with vancomycin (hospitalization: US $4510 vs US $6478, P<0.001; total: US $6009 vs US $7329, P=0.03). Linezolid was associated with a 3.5-day reduction in LOS and a 9.5-day reduction in the duration of intravenous therapy compared with vancomycin in the ITT group (both, P<0.001). Cure rates were comparable between linezolid and vancomycin in both the ITT group (88.7% vs 81.4%, respectively) and the MRSA group (80.0% vs 71.4%). In multivariate analyses of the ITT group, linezolid patients were 57% less likely than vancomycin patients to have a LOS >7 days (odds ratio = 0.43; 95% CI, 0.21-0.87). Chronic renal failure, malnutrition, and a diagnosis of infected ulcer predicted an LOS >7 days. CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis of data from elderly patients with cSSTI caused by suspected or confirmed MRSA, linezolid treatment was associated with reductions in the costs of care, LOS, and duration of intravenous treatment without affecting the clinical outcomes. Although the use of a subset of patients from a larger trial that did not focus on the elderly can be seen as a study limitation, the elderly represent an important population when evaluating health care resource use and costs.