Utilising sigmoid models to predict the spread of antimicrobial resistance at the country level.

BackgroundThe spread of antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is of worldwide concern. Public health policymakers and pharmaceutical companies pursuing antibiotic development require accurate predictions about the future spread of AMR.AimWe aimed to identify and model temporal and geographical patterns of AMR spread and to predict future trends based on a slow, intermediate or rapid rise in resistance.MethodsWe obtained data from five antibiotic resistance surveillance projects spanning the years 1997 to 2015. We aggregated the isolate-level or country-level data by country and year to produce country-bacterium-antibiotic class triads. We fitted both linear and sigmoid models to these triads and chose the one with the better fit. For triads that conformed to a sigmoid model, we classified AMR progression into one of three characterising paces: slow, intermediate or fast, based on the sigmoid slope. Within each pace category, average sigmoid models were calculated and validated.ResultsWe constructed a database with 51,670 country-year-bacterium-antibiotic observations, grouped into 7,440 country-bacterium-antibiotic triads. A total of 1,037 triads (14%) met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 326 (31.4%) followed a sigmoid (logistic) pattern over time. Among 107 triads for which both sigmoid and linear models could be fit, the sigmoid model was a better fit in 84%. The sigmoid model deviated from observed data by a median of 6.5%; the degree of deviation was related to the pace of spread.ConclusionWe present a novel method of describing and predicting the spread of antibiotic-resistant organisms.

Ceftazidime, Carbapenems, or Piperacillin-tazobactam as Single Definitive Therapy for Pseudomonas aeruginosa Bloodstream Infection: A Multisite Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: The optimal antibiotic regimen for Pseudomonas aeruginosa bacteremia is controversial. Although ß-lactam monotherapy is common, data to guide the choice between antibiotics are scarce. We aimed to compare ceftazidime, carbapenems, and piperacillin-tazobactam as definitive monotherapy. METHODS: A multinational retrospective study (9 countries, 25 centers) including 767 hospitalized patients with P. aeruginosa bacteremia treated with ß-lactam monotherapy during 2009-2015. The primary outcome was 30-day all-cause mortality. Univariate and multivariate, including propensity-adjusted, analyses were conducted introducing monotherapy type as an independent variable. RESULTS: Thirty-day mortality was 37/213 (17.4%), 42/210 (20%), and 55/344 (16%) in the ceftazidime, carbapenem, and piperacillin-tazobactam groups, respectively. Type of monotherapy was not significantly associated with mortality in either univariate, multivariate, or propensity-adjusted analyses (odds ratio [OR], 1.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52-2.46, for ceftazidime; OR, 1.3; 95% CI, 0.67-2.51, for piperacillin-tazobactam, with carbapenems as reference in propensity adjusted multivariate analysis; 542 patients). No significant difference between antibiotics was demonstrated for clinical failure, microbiological failure, or adverse events. Isolation of P. aeruginosa with new resistance to antipseudomonal drugs was significantly more frequent with carbapenems (36/206 [17.5%]) versus ceftazidime (25/201 [12.4%]) and piperacillin-tazobactam (28/332 [8.4%] (P = .007). CONCLUSIONS: No significant difference in mortality, clinical, and microbiological outcomes or adverse events was demonstrated between ceftazidime, carbapenems, and piperacillin-tazobactam as definitive treatment of P. aeruginosa bacteremia. Higher rates of resistant P. aeruginosa after patients were treated with carbapenems, along with the general preference for carbapenem-sparing regimens, suggests using ceftazidime or piperacillin-tazobactam for treating susceptible infection.

Colistin Resistance Development Following Colistin-Meropenem Combination Therapy Versus Colistin Monotherapy in Patients With Infections Caused by Carbapenem-Resistant Organisms.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated whether carbapenem-colistin combination therapy reduces the emergence of colistin resistance, compared to colistin monotherapy, when given to patients with infections due to carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative organisms. METHODS: This is a pre-planned analysis of a secondary outcome from a randomized, controlled trial comparing colistin monotherapy with colistin-meropenem combination for the treatment of severe infections caused by carbapenem-resistant, colistin-susceptible Gram-negative bacteria. We evaluated rectal swabs taken on Day 7 or later for the presence of new colistin-resistant (ColR) isolates. We evaluated the emergence of any ColR isolate and the emergence of ColR Enterobacteriaceae (ColR-E). RESULTS: Data were available for 214 patients for the primary analysis; emergent ColR organisms were detected in 22 (10.3%). No difference was observed between patients randomized to treatment with colistin monotherapy (10/106, 9.4%) versus patients randomized to colistin-meropenem combination therapy (12/108, 11.1%; P = .669). ColR-E organisms were detected in 18/249 (7.2%) patients available for analysis. No difference was observed between the 2 treatment arms (colistin monotherapy 6/128 [4.7%] vs combination therapy 12/121 [9.9%]; P = .111). Enterobacteriaceae, as the index isolate, was found to be associated with development of ColR-E (hazard ratio, 3.875; 95% confidence interval, 1.475-10.184; P = .006). CONCLUSIONS: Carbapenem-colistin combination therapy did not reduce the incidence of colistin resistance emergence in patients with infections due to carbapenem-resistant organisms. Further studies are necessary to elucidate the development of colistin resistance and methods for its prevention.

Treatment Outcomes of Colistin- and Carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii Infections: An Exploratory Subgroup Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the association between mortality and colistin resistance in Acinetobacter baumannii infections and the interaction with antibiotic therapy. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of a randomized controlled trial of patients with carbapenem-resistant gram-negative bacterial infections treated with colistin or colistin-meropenem combination. We evaluated patients with infection caused by carbapenem-resistant A. baumannii (CRAB) identified as colistin susceptible (CoS) at the time of treatment and compared patients in which the isolate was confirmed as CoS with those whose isolates were retrospectively identified as colistin resistant (CoR) when tested by broth microdilution (BMD). The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. RESULTS: Data were available for 266 patients (214 CoS and 52 CoR isolates). Patients with CoR isolates had higher baseline functional capacity and lower rates of mechanical ventilation than patients with CoS isolates. All-cause 28-day mortality was 42.3% (22/52) among patients with CoR strains and 52.8% (113/214) among patients with CoS isolates (P = .174). After adjusting for variables associated with mortality, the mortality rate was lower among patients with CoR isolates (odds ratio [OR], 0.285 [95% confidence interval {CI}, .118-.686]). This difference was associated with treatment arm: Mortality rates among patients with CoR isolates were higher in those randomized to colistin-meropenem combination therapy compared to colistin monotherapy (OR, 3.065 [95% CI, 1.021-9.202]). CONCLUSIONS: Colistin resistance determined by BMD was associated with lower mortality among patients with severe CRAB infections. Among patients with CoR isolates, colistin monotherapy was associated with a better outcome compared to colistin-meropenem combination therapy. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT01732250.

Predicting Antibiotic Resistance in Urinary Tract Infection Patients with Prior Urine Cultures.

To improve antibiotic prescribing, we sought to establish the probability of a resistant organism in urine culture given a previous resistant culture in a setting endemic for multidrug-resistant (MDR) organisms. We performed a retrospective analysis of inpatients with paired positive urine cultures. We focused on ciprofloxacin-resistant (cipro(r)) Gram-negative bacteria, extended-spectrum-beta-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Enterobacteriaceae, carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE), and carbapenem-resistant nonfermenters (CRNF). Comparisons were made between the frequency of each resistance phenotype following a previous culture with the same phenotype and the overall frequency of that phenotype, and odds ratios (ORs) were calculated. We performed a regression to assess the effects of other variables on the likelihood of a repeat resistant culture. A total of 4,409 patients (52.5% women; median age, 70 years) with 19,546 paired positive urine cultures were analyzed. The frequencies of cipro(r) bacteria, ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae, CRE, and CRNF among all cultures were 47.7%, 30.6%, 1.7%, and 2.6%, respectively. ORs for repeated resistance phenotypes were 1.87, 3.19, 48.25, and 19.02 for cipro(r) bacteria, ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae, CRE, and CRNF, respectively (P < 0.001 for all). At 1 month, the frequencies of repeated resistance phenotypes were 77.4%, 66.4%, 57.1%, and 33.3% for cipro(r) bacteria, ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae, CRE, and CRNF, respectively. Increasing time between cultures and the presence of an intervening nonresistant culture significantly reduced the chances of a repeat resistant culture. Associations were statistically significant over the duration of follow-up (60 months) for CRE and for up to 6 months for all other pathogens. Knowledge of microbiology results in the six preceding months may assist with antibiotic stewardship and improve the appropriateness of empirical treatment for urinary tract infections (UTIs).

Multicentre open-label randomised controlled trial to compare colistin alone with colistin plus meropenem for the treatment of severe infections caused by carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative infections (AIDA): a study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: The emergence of antibiotic-resistant bacteria has driven renewed interest in older antibacterials, including colistin. Previous studies have shown that colistin is less effective and more toxic than modern antibiotics. In vitro synergy studies and clinical observational studies suggest a benefit of combining colistin with a carbapenem. A randomised controlled study is necessary for clarification. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a multicentre, investigator-initiated, open-label, randomised controlled superiority 1:1 study comparing colistin monotherapy with colistin-meropenem combination therapy for infections caused by carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacteria. The study is being conducted in 6 centres in 3 countries (Italy, Greece and Israel). We include patients with hospital-associated and ventilator-associated pneumonia, bloodstream infections and urosepsis. The primary outcome is treatment success at day 14, defined as survival, haemodynamic stability, stable or improved respiratory status for patients with pneumonia, microbiological cure for patients with bacteraemia and stability or improvement of the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score. Secondary outcomes include 14-day and 28-day mortality as well as other clinical end points and safety outcomes. A sample size of 360 patients was calculated on the basis of an absolute improvement in clinical success of 15% with combination therapy. Outcomes will be assessed by intention to treat. Serum colistin samples are obtained from all patients to obtain population pharmacokinetic models. Microbiological sampling includes weekly surveillance samples with analysis of resistance mechanisms and synergy. An observational trial is evaluating patients who met eligibility requirements but were not randomised in order to assess generalisability of findings. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by ethics committees at each centre and informed consent will be obtained for all patients. The trial is being performed under the auspices of an independent data and safety monitoring committee and is included in a broad dissemination strategy regarding revival of old antibiotics. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01732250 and 2012-004819-31; Pre-results.