Efficacy and safety of tigecycline compared with vancomycin or linezolid for treatment of serious infections with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus or vancomycin-resistant enterococci: a Phase 3, multicentre, double-blind, randomized study.

INTRODUCTION: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) are causing serious nosocomial infections. Tigecycline was evaluated in hospitalized patients with MRSA or VRE infection. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A randomized (3:1), double-blind, multicentre, Phase 3 study compared the safety and efficacy of tigecycline with vancomycin or linezolid in hospitalized patients with MRSA or VRE infection, respectively. Patients were treated for 7-28 days and the test-of-cure (TOC) assessment was made 12-37 days after the last dose. The primary efficacy endpoint was the clinical response (cure, failure and indeterminate) in the co-primary, microbiologically evaluable (ME) and microbiologically modified intent-to-treat (m-mITT) populations at the TOC assessment. RESULTS: For MRSA infection, clinical cure rates in the ME population (n = 117) were 81.4% (70 of 86 patients) with tigecycline and 83.9% (26 of 31 patients) with vancomycin. In the m-mITT population (n = 133), clinical cure occurred in 75 of 100 tigecycline-treated patients (75.0%) and in 27 of 33 vancomycin-treated patients (81.8%). In patients with complicated skin and skin structure infections caused by MRSA, cure rates were similar with tigecycline or vancomycin (86.4% versus 86.9% in ME population; and 78.6% versus 87.0% in m-mITT population). In patients with MRSA infection, nausea or vomiting occurred more frequently with tigecycline than with vancomycin (41.0% versus 17.9%); most cases were mild, with only three patients discontinuing treatment. In patients with VRE (total enrollment, 15), 3 of 3 and 3 of 8 patients in the ME and m-mITT populations, respectively, were cured by tigecycline, compared with 2 of 3 patients in the ME and m-mITT populations treated with linezolid. CONCLUSIONS: Tigecycline is safe and effective in hospitalized patients with serious infection caused by MRSA. There were too few cases of VRE to draw any conclusions.

Local pulse pressure and regression of arterial wall hypertrophy during long-term antihypertensive treatment.

BACKGROUND: Local pulse pressure (PP) is an independent determinant of carotid artery wall thickness, stronger than mean blood pressure (BP). The present study was designed to assess whether a beta-adrenoceptor antagonist-based or an ACE inhibitor-based treatment was able to reduce carotid artery wall hypertrophy through a reduction in carotid PP rather than by lowering mean BP and whether the influence of local PP reduction could also be detected at the site of a muscular artery, the radial artery. METHODS AND RESULTS: Ninety-eight essential hypertensive patients were randomized to 9 months of double-blind treatment with either celiprolol or enalapril. Arterial parameters were determined with high-resolution echo-tracking systems. PP was measured locally with applanation tonometry and independently of mean BP. After 9 months of treatment, mean BP, carotid PP, and intimal-medial thickness (IMT) decreased significantly, with no difference between the 2 groups. The reduction in carotid PP but not in mean BP was a major independent determinant of the reduction in carotid IMT. Radial artery IMT and PP decreased significantly with both treatments. However, the reduction in radial artery IMT was not related to the changes in radial artery PP. CONCLUSIONS: The regression of carotid artery wall hypertrophy during long-term antihypertensive treatment was dependent on the reduction in local PP rather than on the lowering of mean BP. The effect of PP lowering on IMT reduction was observed at the site of an elastic artery but not at the site of a muscular artery.

The efficacy and safety of tigecycline in the treatment of skin and skin-structure infections: results of 2 double-blind phase 3 comparison studies with vancomycin-aztreonam.

Two phase 3, double-blind studies in hospitalized adults with complicated skin and skin-structure infections (cSSSI) determined the safety and efficacy of tigecycline versus that of vancomycin-aztreonam. Patients received tigecycline (100 mg, followed by 50 mg intravenously twice daily) or vancomycin (1 g intravenously twice daily) plus aztreonam (2 g intravenously twice daily) for up to 14 days. Populations were as follows: 1116 patients (566 treated with tigecycline, and 550 treated with vancomycin-aztreonam) constituted the modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population, 1057 patients (538 treated with tigecycline, and 519 treated with vancomycin-aztreonam) constituted the clinical mITT (c-mITT) population, and 833 patients (422 treated with tigecycline, and 411 treated with vancomycin-aztreonam) constituted the clinically evaluable population. Clinical responses to tigecycline and vancomycin-aztreonam at test-of-cure were similar: c-mITT, 79.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 76.1%-83.1%) versus 81.9% (95% CI, 78.3%-85.1%) (P = .4183); and clinically evaluable, 86.5% (95% CI, 82.9%-89.6%) versus 88.6% (95% CI, 85.1%-91.5%) (P = .4233). Adverse events were similar, with increased nausea and vomiting in the tigecycline group and increased rash and elevated hepatic aminotransferase levels in the vancomycin-aztreonam group. Tigecycline monotherapy is as safe and efficacious as the vancomycin-aztreonam combination in treating patients with cSSSI.

Longitudinal DRG-based survey of all-cause and pneumococcal pneumonia and meningitis for inpatients in France (2005-2010).

OBJECTIVE: This population-based retrospective study quantified the burden of all-cause and pneumococcal pneumonia and meningitis in the Rhône-Alpes region of France from 2005 to 2010, when the 7-valent pneumococcal conjugate vaccine uptake increased from 50 to>90% in children. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Hospital admission data was obtained from the French Diagnosis Related Groups program database (French acronym PMSI). Patients were residents of the Rhône-Alpes region hospitalized for the diseases of interest during 2005-2010. Hospitalization and in-hospital mortality rates were calculated by age, sex, and year on the basis of the Rhône-Alpes region population. Hospitalization and in-hospital mortality rates were compared using Chi(2) tests with statistical significance adjusted for multiple comparisons. RESULTS: The highest hospitalization rates by age group were: all-cause pneumonia, oldest group (>65 years); all-cause and pneumococcal meningitis, youngest group (0-4 years), and pneumococcal pneumonia, youngest and oldest groups. Hospitalization rates significantly decreased for all-cause pneumonia (5-19 years: -12.71%) and all-cause meningitis (20-49 years: -29.22%). Pneumococcal disease rates did not significantly change in any age group. Mortality rates from all-cause pneumonia and meningitis were highest in the oldest age groups. CONCLUSIONS: The burden of all-cause and pneumococcal pneumonia and meningitis remains substantial. Significant changes (decreases) between 2005 and 2010 in hospitalization rates were limited and varied among age groups, most likely because this study began 2 years after PCV7 was first introduced in France for children at broadly-defined high risk. Further research is needed on the relationship between serotype epidemiology and clinical patterns of disease.

Treatment of heart failure with celiprolol, a cardioselective beta blocker with beta-2 agonist vasodilatory properties. The CELICARD Group.

Treatment with beta blockers results in improvement in functional status, and reduces mortality in patients with heart failure. A number of differences in the results noted could be due to additional properties of the specific beta blockers studied: absence of cardioselectivity, and existence of a vasodilator effect and of an associated antioxidant effect. We studied the effects of celiprolol, a cardioselective beta blocker with a stimulant effect on beta2 receptors. One hundred thirty-two patients presenting with chronic heart failure of various etiologies, with an ejection fraction of <40% and New York Heart Association cardiac functional status grades II and III were included in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. The maximum dose of celiprolol (100 mg) was attained after 1 month. The study lasted 1 year. The primary evaluation criterion was functional class as evaluated using the Goldman questionnaire. There was no difference in efficacy between the 2 treatment groups in terms of functional class (p = 0.56). With regard to the secondary evaluation criteria, an improvement in DiBianco functional score was seen with celiprolol (p = 0.03), as well as a significant reduction in heart rate (p = 0.01). Ejection fraction increased in both groups (p = 0.15). There was no difference regarding improvement in left ventricular volume as determined at echocardiography or in exercise capacity. The safety profile of celiprolol was excellent. There was no difference in terms of cardiovascular mortality (2 receiving celiprolol vs 4 placebo), onset of arrhythmias (2 receiving celiprolol vs 3 placebo), worsening of heart failure (26 receiving celiprolol vs 23 placebo), or noncardiovascular adverse events (9 receiving celiprolol vs 14 placebo). The absence of a significant efficacy of celiprolol, a beta blocker with vasodilator properties, but exerting stimulation of beta2 receptors, suggests an unfavorable role of this latter property in heart failure. However, the safety profile of celiprolol was excellent. This beta blocker may consequently be used for its other indications, hypertension and angina, in patients presenting with altered cardiac function.

Effect of celiprolol treatment in hypertensive patients with sleep apnea.

The effects of a beta-blocker, celiprolol, on sleep and arterial blood pressure (BP) were evaluated during a single-blind study in seven hypertensive patients with sleep apnea. Diurnal ambulatory BP measurements with an automatic cuff-inflation device and polysomnography with simultaneous Finapres BP recording were performed separately on consecutive days at the end of two 21-day treatment periods involving placebo followed by celiprolol (200 mg/day). Age was 59 +/- 2.5 yr (m +/- sem) and body mass index 33.2 +/- 2.3 kg. m-2. Diurnal ambulatory BP was significantly lower with celiprolol than with placebo (systolic 139 +/- 4 vs 152 +/- 5 mmHg, diastolic 86 +/- 2 vs 96 +/- 2 mmHg). The apnea-hypopnea index was similar under celiprolol and placebo (48 +/- 7.4 vs 53 +/- 7.8, respectively), as were the total sleep time and percent of duration of the different sleep stages. Individual average BP values were significantly lower during REM sleep under celiprolol but remained similar under celiprolol and placebo in the other sleep stages. Variability of nocturnal BP (assessed by the SD of distribution of BP variations) was not affected by celiprolol. In conclusion, celiprolol which decreased daytime BP, did not affect sleep pattern or respiratory disturbances, or nocturnal BP variability related to apnea.

[Local pulse pressure and regression of arterial wall hypertrophy during antihypertensive treatment. CELIMENE study. The Celiprolol Intima-Media Enalapril Efficacy study]. / Pression pulsée locale et régression de l'hypertrophie pariétale artérielle au cours du traitement antihypertenseur. Etude Celimene. Celiprolol Intima-Media Enalapril Efficacy.

BACKGROUND: Local Pulse Pressure (PP) is an independent determinant of carotid artery wall thickness, stronger than mean BP. The present study was designed to assess whether a beta-adrenoceptor antagonist or an ACE inhibitor-based treatment was able to reduce carotid artery wall hypertrophy through the reduction in carotid PP rather than by lowering mean BP, and whether the influence of local PP reduction could also be detected at the site of a muscular artery, the radial artery. METHODS AND RESULTS: Ninety-eight essential hypertensive patients were randomised to 9 months of double-blind treatment with either celiprolol or enalapril. Arterial parameters were determined with high resolution echotracking systems. PP was measured locally with PP applanation tonometry, and independently of mean BP. After 9 month's treatment, mean BP, carotid PP and intima-media thickness (IMT) decreased significantly, with no difference between the tow groups. The reduction in carotid pression pulsée, but not in mean BP, was a major independent determinant of the reduction in carotid IMT. Radial artery IMT and PP decreased significantly with both treatments. However, the reduction in radial artery IMT was not related to the changes in radial artery PP. CONCLUSION: The regression of carotid artery wall hypertrophy during long-term antihypertensive treatment was dependent on the reduction in local PP rather than on the lowering of mean BP. The effect of PP lowering on IMT reduction was observed at the site of an elastic artery but not at the site of a muscular artery.

Tigecycline versus levofloxacin for the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia: European experience.

Tigecycline (TGC), a first-in-class glycylcycline that has been approved for treating complicated skin and skin structure infections and complicated intra-abdominal infections, has an expanded spectrum of activity against Gram-positive, Gram-negative, anaerobic, and atypical bacteria, including resistant strains. The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of TGC with levofloxacin (LEV) in adult hospitalised patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in a randomised, doubleblind, phase 3 multinational trial. This analysis evaluated TGC efficacy and safety in the European region. Hospitalised patients from 53 centres in 18 countries received 7-14 days of i.v. TGC (100-mg loading dose followed by 50 mg every 12 hours) or i.v. LEV (500 mg once or twice daily). Co-primary efficacy endpoints were clinical response in clinically evaluable (CE) and clinical modified intent-to-treat (c-mITT) populations at test-of-cure (TOC). Results indicated that 358 patients received at least 1 dose of study medication (mITT: TGC 177, LEV 181), 245 were CE (TGC 125, LEV 120). Demographics were similar in both groups and the majority of patients had a Fine Pneumonia Severity Index of II to IV (84.4% TGC, 78.2% LEV, mITT). At TOC (CE), TGC cured 112/125 patients (89.6%; 95% CI 82.9, 94.3) and LEV cured 103/120 patients (85.8%; 95% CI 78.3, 91.5), absolute difference of TGC-LEV 3.8% (95% CI -5.3, 12.8; test for noninferiority p<0.001). For those CE patients with a Fine score of

The efficacy and safety of tigecycline for the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections - the European experience.

The polymicrobial nature of complicated intra-abdominal infections makes these infections particularly challenging to treat. The initial selection of antimicrobial therapy is therefore extremely important. Inappropriate empiric antimicrobial therapy has been shown to delay clinical resolution, increase length of hospital stay, and increase the risk of mortality. In addition, the increasing frequency with which resistant isolates (e.g., extended spectrum beta-lactamases [ESBLs]) are recovered from patients mandates that empiric antimicrobial therapy covers these difficult-to-treat organisms. Here, we assessed the efficacy of a new antimicrobial agent, tigecycline. This is a combined analysis of data from the European sites that participated in two Phase III, double-blind trials to evaluate the efficacy and safety of tigecycline, versus that of imipenem/cilastatin, in adults with complicated intra-abdominal infections. Patients received either tigecycline (initial dose of 100 mg, followed by 50 mg intravenously every 12 hours) or imipenem/cilastatin (500/500 mg intravenously every 6 hours) for 5-14 days. The primary end point was the clinical response at the test-of-cure visit (12-44 days after therapy) in the co-primary microbiologically evaluable (ME) and microbiological modified intent-to-treat (m-mITT) populations. For the ME group, clinical cure rates at the test-of-cure visit were 92.4% (219/237) for tigecycline versus 88.8% (198/223) for imipenem/cilastatin (95% CI = -2.2, 9.4). Clinical cure rates for the mmITT populations were 87.3% (247/283) for tigecycline versus 83.5% (228/273) for imipenem/cilastatin (95% CI = -2.5, 10.0) at the test-of-cure visit. Pretherapy in vitro activity against baseline isolates for tigecycline and imipenem/cilastatin were also determined. The mean MIC(90) for tigecycline against the most commonly isolated aerobes and anaerobes was < or =2.0 microg/mL. No pretherapy isolates displayed resistance to tigecycline based on the breakpoints used. Bacterial susceptibilities to tigecycline appeared to be consistent with clinical responses. Most commonly reported treatment emergent adverse events for tigecycline and imipenem/cilastatin were nausea (14.7% and 11.8%, respectively, p = 0.267) and vomiting (10.7% and 7.3%, respectively p = 0.146). This combined analysis demonstrates that tigecycline is safe and effective for the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections, and reflects the findings of the global population.

Overview of tigecycline efficacy and safety in the treatment of complicated skin and skin structure infections - a European perspective.

In a randomized, double-blind, multicenter, multinational, controlled trial, 546 patients with complicated skin and skin structure infections received tigecycline 100 mg/day (a 100-mg initial dose and then 50 mg intravenously twice daily) or the combination of vancomycin 2 g/day (1 g intravenously twice daily) and aztreonam 4 g/day (2 g intravenously twice daily) for up to 14 days. Three hundred eighty-five (385) were from Europe. The primary endpoint was the clinical response in the clinical modified intent-to-treat (c-mITT) and clinically evaluable populations at the test-of-cure visit 12 to 92 days after the last dose. The microbiologic response at the test-of-cure visit was also assessed. Safety was assessed by physical examination, laboratory results and adverse event reporting. Of the patients enrolled in Europe, 376 patients were included in the c-mITT population (tigecycline group, n = 189; vancomycin/aztreonam group, n = 187), and 326 were clinically evaluable (tigecycline group, n = 167; vancomycin/aztreonam group, n = 159). The clinical responses in the tigecycline and the vancomycin/aztreonam groups in the clinically evaluable population were 89.8% versus 95.0%. Microbiologic eradication (documented or presumed) occurred in 84.8% of the European patients receiving tigecycline and 93.2% of the European patients receiving vancomycin/aztreonam. The number of European patients reporting adverse events was similar in the two groups, with increased nausea and vomiting rates in the tigecycline group and an increased incidence of rash and increases in alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase levels in the vancomycin/aztreonam group. Current data support findings from the overall results in the Phase 3 study and suggest that tigecycline is safe and effective for the treatment of complicated skin and skin structure infections.