Impact of ceftazidime/avibactam versus best available therapy on mortality from infections caused by carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales (CAVICOR study).

BACKGROUND: Infections caused by carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales (CPE) are not well represented in pivotal trials with ceftazidime/avibactam. The best strategy for the treatment of these infections is unknown. METHODS: We conducted a multicentre retrospective observational study of patients who received ≥48 h of ceftazidime/avibactam or best available therapy (BAT) for documented CPE infections. The primary outcome was 30 day crude mortality. Secondary outcomes were 21 day clinical response and microbiological response. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to identify factors predictive of 30 day crude mortality. A propensity score to receive treatment with ceftazidime/avibactam was used as a covariate in the analysis. RESULTS: The cohort included 339 patients with CPE infections. Ceftazidime/avibactam treatment was used in 189 (55.8%) patients and 150 (44.2%) received BAT at a median of 2 days after diagnosis of infection. In multivariate analysis, ceftazidime/avibactam treatment was associated with survival (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.20-0.80; P = 0.01), whereas INCREMENT-CPE scores of >7 points (OR 2.57, 95% CI 1.18-1.5.58; P = 0.01) and SOFA score (OR 1.20, 95% CI 1.08-1.34; P = 0.001) were associated with higher mortality. In patients with INCREMENT-CPE scores of >7 points, ceftazidime/avibactam treatment was associated with lower mortality compared with BAT (16/73, 21.9% versus 23/49, 46.9%; P = 0.004). Ceftazidime/avibactam was also an independent factor of 21 day clinical response (OR 2.43, 95% CI 1.16-5.12; P = 0.02) and microbiological eradication (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.18-0.85; P = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Ceftazidime/avibactam is an effective alternative for the treatment of CPE infections, especially in patients with INCREMENT-CPE scores of >7 points. A randomized controlled trial should confirm these findings.

Use of carbapenems in the combined treatment of emerging ceftazidime/avibactam-resistant and carbapenem-susceptible KPC-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae infections: Report of a case and review of the literature.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the case of a patient with infection due to a KPC-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae (K. pneumoniae) isolate developing ceftazidime-avibactam resistance with restored carbapenem susceptibility during ceftazidime-avibactam therapy. To review the clinical/microbiological cure and survival rates using carbapenems in other similar case reports and case series. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A patient with an intra-abdominal infection due to K. pneumoniae producing the KPC-48 variant (L169P-A172T) (resistant to ceftazidime/avibactam and susceptible to carbapenems) who was treated with imipenem-cilastatin in combination with tigecycline and gentamicin. The literature was reviewed in order to summarise the in vivo (clinical/microbiological cure and survival rate) use of carbapenems in this emerging scenario. RESULTS: The patient was successfully treated with the indicated regimen. In other reported cases (mostly with pneumonia) all-cause mortality was 50% and clinical cure was 62.5%. Meropenem-vaborbactam has been successful used in an additional case. CONCLUSIONS: A carbapenem-based regimen of combination therapy seems to be an option for treating patients infected with K. pneumoniae resistant to ceftazidime/avibactam and susceptible to carbapenems, at least when the risk of mortality is low.

Prognosis of urinary tract infection caused by KPC-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae: The impact of inappropriate empirical treatment.

INTRODUCTION: There is scarce information on the prognosis of urinary tract infections (UTI) caused by KPC carbapenemase-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae (KPC-Kp). OBJETIVE: To investigate the association between KPC-Kp aetiology and clinical failure and all cause mortality and to explore the impact of inappropriate empirical treatment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This is a retrospective observational study of hospitalized patients with UTI due to K. pneumoniae. We explored clinical failure at day 21 and 30-day all-cause mortality using different models of adjusted analysis. RESULTS: We analyzed 142 episodes of UTI; 46 episodes (32.4%) were due to KPC-Kp and 96 episodes (67.6%) were due to non-KPC-Kp strains (62 wild type and 34 EBSL producer). Clinical failure was more frequent in the KPC-Kp group (41.3% vs. 15.6%, p = 0.001). KPC-Kp aetiology and inappropriate empirical therapy were associated in the non-adjusted analysis with clinical failure. When analysed in separate adjusted models, both were found to be associated; inappropriate empirical treatment (OR 2.51; 95% CI, 1.03-6.12; p = 0.04) and KPC-Kp (OR 2.73; 95% CI, 1.03-7.22; p = 0.04) were associated with increased risk of failure. All-cause 30-day mortality was higher in patients with KPC-Kp UTI (39.1% vs. 15.6%, p = 0.002). Bacteraemia was more frequent in patients with KPC-Kp etiology (23.9% vs. 10.4%; p = 0.034). In both cases, the association was not confirmed in the adjusted analysis. CONCLUSION: KPC-Kp UTI is associated with higher clinical failure and may be due to an increase in inappropriate empirical treatment.

Mortality Associated with Bacteremia Due to Colistin-Resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae with High-Level Meropenem Resistance: Importance of Combination Therapy without Colistin and Carbapenems.

Combination therapy including colistin and a carbapenem has been found to be associated with lower mortality in the treatment of bloodstream infections (BSI) due to KPC-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae when the isolates show a meropenem or imipenem MIC of <16 mg/liter. However, the optimal treatment of BSI caused by colistin- and high-level carbapenem-resistant KPC-producing K. pneumoniae is unknown. A prospective cohort study including episodes of bacteremia caused by colistin-resistant and high-level meropenem-resistant (MIC ≥ 64 mg/liter) KPC-producing K. pneumoniae diagnosed from July 2012 to February 2016 was performed. The impact of combination therapy on crude 30-day mortality was analyzed by Cox regression using a propensity score as a covariate to control for indication bias and in an inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) cohort. The study sample comprised 104 patients, of which 32 (30.8%) received targeted monotherapy and 72 (69.2%) received targeted combination therapy; none of them received either colistin or a carbapenem. The 30-day crude mortality rate was 30.8% (43.8% in patients treated with monotherapy and 25% in patients receiving combination therapy). In the Cox regression analysis, 30-day mortality was independently associated with septic shock at BSI onset (hazard ratio [HR], 6.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.65 to 21.9; P = 0.006) and admission to the critical care unit (HR, 2.87; 95% CI, 0.99 to 8.27; P = 0.05). Targeted combination therapy was associated with lower mortality only in patients with septic shock (HR, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.67; P = 0.01). These results were confirmed in the Cox regression analysis of the IPTW cohort. Combination therapy is associated with reduced mortality in patients with bacteremia due to colistin-resistant KPC-producing K. pneumoniae with high-level carbapenem resistance in patients with septic shock.

Clinical efficacy of ceftazidime/avibactam versus other active agents for the treatment of bacteremia due to carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae in hematologic patients.

OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to describe clinical features, treatment and outcomes in patients with carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae (CPE) bacteremia. Additionally, patients treated with ceftazidime/avibactam (study group) were compared to the rest of the patients (comparator group) to determine the influence of the treatment in both crude mortality and clinical cure. METHODS: Multicenter and retrospective study that included patients with hematologic malignancies who had CPE bacteremia. A bivariate analysis was performed to compare the clinical variables between the study group and the control group. RESULTS: 31 patients were included. Bacteremia was considered primary in 14 (45%) patients. Overall crude mortality at 30days was 45.2% (n=14). Mortality was more frequent when septic shock (78.6% vs 11.8%; p>0.001) and higher Pitt score (6+14 vs 1.5+4; p<0.01) were present. 8 patients (25.8%) received treatment with ceftazidime/avibactam. No significant differences in crude mortality were found between study and comparator groups (p=0.19). In contrast, patients in study group had higher clinical cure rates than the comparator group within 14days of initiating treatment (85.7% vs. 34.8%, respectively, p=0.031). CONCLUSIONS: CPE bacteremia is associated with high mortality in patients with hematologic malignancies. Ceftazidime/avibactam may be an effective alternative for treating these patients.

Ceftazidime-Avibactam as Salvage Therapy for Infections Caused by Carbapenem-Resistant Organisms.

Ceftazidime-avibactam (CAZ-AVI) is a recently approved ß-lactam-ß-lactamase inhibitor combination with the potential to treat serious infections caused by carbapenem-resistant organisms. Few patients with such infections were included in the CAZ-AVI clinical trials, and clinical experience is lacking. We present a case series of patients with infections caused by carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) or Pseudomonas aeruginosa (CRPa) who were treated with CAZ-AVI salvage therapy on a compassionate-use basis. Physicians who had prescribed CAZ-AVI completed a case report form. We used descriptive statistics to summarize patient characteristics and treatment outcomes. We used the Wilcoxon rank sum test and Fisher's exact test to compare patients by treatment outcome. The sample included 36 patients infected with CRE and two with CRPa. The most common infections were intra-abdominal. Physicians categorized 60.5% of patients as having life-threatening infections. All but two patients received other antibiotics before CAZ-AVI, for a median of 13 days. The median duration of CAZ-AVI treatment was 16 days. Twenty-five patients (65.8%) concurrently received other antibiotics to which their pathogen was nonresistant in vitro Twenty-eight patients (73.7%, 95% confidence interval [CI], 56.9 to 86.6%) experienced clinical and/or microbiological cure. Five patients (20.8%) with documented microbiological cure died, whereas 10 patients (71.4%) with no documented microbiological cure died (P = 0.01). In three-quarters of cases, CAZ-AVI (alone or combined with other antibiotics) cured infections caused by carbapenem-resistant organisms, 95% of which had failed previous therapy. Microbiological cure was associated with improved survival. CAZ-AVI shows promising clinical results for infections for which treatment options are limited.

Salvage Therapy with Ceftolozane-Tazobactam for Multidrug-Resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa Infections.

Infections caused by multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (MDRPA) present a major problem for therapeutic management. We report here our experience with 12 patients with a severe MDRPA infection (6 of which were pneumonia) who received salvage therapy with ceftolozane-tazobactam after inappropriate empirical treatment and/or suboptimal targeted treatment. Although 10 of the 12 patients (83.3%) experienced septic shock, only 3 patients (25%) died during the follow-up period. Microbiological cure in 7 patients (58.3%) was observed.

Future alternatives for the treatment of infections caused by carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae: what is in the pipeline?

The emergence and spread of carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae is an important and very concerning problem. There is an urgent need of new antibimicrobials for treating these infections. Currently there are some options in the pipeline. Several new beta-lactamase and carbapenemase inhibitors as avibactam and MK-7655, combined with old or new betalactams are a very interesting option. Some combinations as ceftazidime-avibactam are in the late stages of clinical development and could reach the market in the next years. New aminoglycosides as plazomicin, tetracycline derivates as eravacycline, and several other new molecules as monosulfactams are currently in different stages of development.

Future alternatives for the treatment of infections caused by carbapenemaseproducing Enterobacteriaceae: What is in the pipeline? / Alternativas futuras para el tratamiento de las infecciones causadas por enterobacterias productoras de carbapenemasas: ¿qué hay en proyecto?

The emergence and spread of carbapenemase-producing Enterobacteriaceae is an important and very concerning problem. There is an urgent need of new antibimicrobials for treating these infections. Currently there are some options in the pipeline. Several new beta-lactamase and carbapenemase inhibitors as avibactam and MK-7655, combined with old or new betalactams are a very interesting option. Some combinations as ceftazidime-avibactam are in the late stages of clinical development and could reach the market in the next years. New aminoglycosides as plazomicin, tetracycline derivates as eravacycline, and several other new molecules as monosulfactams are currently in different stages of development (AU)

La aparición y diseminación de enterobacterias productoras de carbapenemasas es un problema importante y muy preocupante. Existe una necesidad urgente de nuevos antimicrobianos para tratar estas infecciones. Actualmente hay varias opciones en desarrollo. Varios inhibidores nuevos de betalactamasas y de carbapenemasas, como el avibactam y el MK-7665, combinados con betalactámicos antiguos y nuevos son una opción interesante. Algunas combinaciones como ceftazidima-avibactam están en las últimas fases del desarrollo clínico y podrían llegar al mercado en los próximos años. Otros compuestos que están en diferentes fases de desarrollo son aminoglucósidos nuevos, como la plazomicina, derivados de las tetraciclinas como la eravacilina, y otras moléculas nuevas como los monosulfactams (AU)

Foliculitis del jacuzzi: descripción de un brote de 6 casos / Whirlpool folliculitis: 6 cases outbreak report

No disponible

Luces y sombras de la infección por citomegalovirus en el trasplante de órgano sólido / Lights and shadows of cytomegalovirus infection in solid organ transplantation

La infección por citomegalovirus (CMV) aparece en el 30–80% de los pacientes sometidos a trasplante de órgano sólido (TOS). Su incidencia y la presencia de enfermedad sintomática varían dependiendo del tipo de trasplante, de la presencia de factores de riesgo asociados, de la intensidad de inmunosupresión y de las estrategias de prevención. El impacto que el CMV tiene en el TOS no sólo viene dado por sus efectos directos produciendo una enfermedad por CMV, sino también por sus múltiples efectos indirectos dado su papel inmunomodulador y de inmunoactivación debido a la latencia viral. Las 2 estrategias de profilaxis (profilaxis universal y terapia anticipada) son igualmente útiles, presentan ventajas e inconvenientes y quedan dudas por resolver en cuanto a las poblaciones que la deben recibir y el período que se debe administrar. Es necesario tanto para el diagnóstico y pronóstico como para la evaluación de la respuesta terapéutica que los pacientes con TOS sean monitorizados virológicamente para detectar la infección por CMV. Las nuevas técnicas de PCR real time han supuesto numerosas ventajas, pero hay problemas de estandarización y es preciso obtener valores de referencia comunes. Disponemos de antivirales anti-CMV específicos, pero temas como el papel del valganciclovir frente al ganciclovir, la aparición de resistencias y la duración óptima del tratamiento son objeto de debate. La terapia complementaria con inhibidores mTOR o el ensayo de vacunas frente a CMV son aspectos terapéuticos alternativos sobre los que no hay datos concluyentes (AU)

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) develops in 30-80% of patients undergoing solid organ transplantation (SOT). The incidence and presence of symptomatic disease varies depending on the type of transplant, the presence of associated risk factors, the intensity of immunosuppression, and the prevention strategies used. The impact of CMV on SOT is due not only to the effects of CMV disease per se, but also to its multiple indirect effects resulting from its immunomodulatory role and immunoactivation caused by viral latency. The two prophylactic strategies used (universal prophylaxis and preemptive therapy) are equally useful. Both strategies have advantages and disadvantages, and uncertainties remain on the populations that should receive prophylaxis and for how long. Viral monitoring to detect CMV infection is important for diagnosis, prognosis and evaluation of treatment response. The new real-time polymerase chain reaction techniques have provided numerous advantages but standardization remains an issue and common reference values are required. Specific anti-CMV drugs are available but issues such as the role of valganciclovir versus ganciclovir, the development of resistances and optimal treatment length are still being debated. Complementary therapy with mTOR inhibitors and vaccine strategies against CMV are alternatives for which conclusive data are lacking (AU)

Infecciones en pacientes tratados con antagonistas del factor de necrosis tumoral: incidencia, etiología y mortalidad en el registro BIOBADASER / Infections in patients treated with tumor necrosis factor antagonists: incidence, etiology and mortality in the BIOBADASER registry

Background and objectives: Whether the use of tumor necrosis factor antagonists increases the risk of infection remains a subject of open debate. Developing effective strategies of prevention and empirical treatment entails carefully establishing the etiology and prognosis of the infections.Patients and methods: Analysis of the Spanish registry BIOBADASER (Feb-2000 to Jan-2006), a national drug safety registry of patients with rheumatic diseases. Results: 907 episodes of infection occurring in 6,969 patients were analyzed. The infection incidence observed was 53.09 cases/1,000 patients-years (CI 95% 49.69-56.66). The most frequent infections were skin infection (12.18 cases/1,000 patients-yrs), pneumonia (5.97 cases/1,000 patients-yrs), cystitis (3.92 cases/1,000 patients-yrs), tuberculosis (3.51 cases/1,000 patients-yrs) and arthritis (3.76 cases/1,000 patients-yrs). Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus epidermidis, Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Salmonella spp. emerged as important pathogens. Varicella zoster virus and Herpes simplex virus caused most cases of viral infections. Mucocutaneous candidiasis accounted for most fungal infections. Mortality was increased in infected patients (log-rank test p<0.0001). Pneumonia, sepsis, tuberculosis, abdominal infection and endocarditis were associated with significant attributable mortality.Conclusions: A significant number of bacterial, viral and fungal infections occurred in patients with rheumatic diseases treated with TNF antagonists. The information of this study can illuminate clinicians globally on how to address infection in this vulnerable group of patients (AU)

Fundamento y objetivo: El aumento del riesgo de infección en la utilización de los antagonistas del factor de necrosis tumoral (TNF) sigue siendo un tema de debate abierto. El desarrollo de estrategias eficaces de prevención y tratamiento empírico implica establecer la etiología y el pronóstico de las infecciones. Pacientes y métodos: Análisis del registro español BIOBADASER (febrero 2000 a enero 2006), un registro de terapias biológicas en pacientes con enfermedades reumáticas.Resultados: En los 6.969 pacientes registrados a la fecha del análisis, se produjeron 907 episodios de infección. La incidencia de infección observada fue de 53,09 casos/1.000 pacientes-año (IC 95% 49,69-56,66). Las infecciones más frecuentes fueron las de piel (12,18 casos/1.000 pacientes-año), neumonía (5,97 casos/1.000 pacientes-año), cistitis (3,92 casos/1.000 pacientes-año), tuberculosis (3,51 casos/1.000 pacientes-año) y articulares (3,76 casos/1.000 pacientes-año). Emergen como patógenos importantes Staphylococcus aureus, Staphylococcus epidermidis, Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa y Salmonella spp. El virus de la varicela zóster y el virus del herpes simple causaron la mayoría de los casos de infecciones virales con germen identificable. La candidiasis mucocutánea fue la más frecuente entre las infecciones fúngicas. La mortalidad fue mayor en los pacientes infectados (p-log-rank<0,0001). La aparición de una neumonía, sepsis, tuberculosis, infección abdominal y endocarditis se asociaron significativamente con la mortalidad. Conclusiones: Un número significativo de infecciones bacterianas, víricas y fúngicas se produjeron en pacientes con enfermedades reumáticas tratadas con antagonistas del TNF. La información de este estudio puede suponer un avance para la medicina sobre cómo tratar la infección en este grupo vulnerable de pacientes (AU)

[Lights and shadows of cytomegalovirus infection in solid organ transplantation]. / Luces y sombras de la infección por citomegalovirus en el trasplante de órgano sólido.

Cytomegalovirus (CMV) develops in 30-80% of patients undergoing solid organ transplantation (SOT). The incidence and presence of symptomatic disease varies depending on the type of transplant, the presence of associated risk factors, the intensity of immunosuppression, and the prevention strategies used. The impact of CMV on SOT is due not only to the effects of CMV disease per se, but also to its multiple indirect effects resulting from its immunomodulatory role and immunoactivation caused by viral latency. The two prophylactic strategies used (universal prophylaxis and preemptive therapy) are equally useful. Both strategies have advantages and disadvantages, and uncertainties remain on the populations that should receive prophylaxis and for how long. Viral monitoring to detect CMV infection is important for diagnosis, prognosis and evaluation of treatment response. The new real-time polymerase chain reaction techniques have provided numerous advantages but standardization remains an issue and common reference values are required. Specific anti-CMV drugs are available but issues such as the role of valganciclovir versus ganciclovir, the development of resistances and optimal treatment length are still being debated. Complementary therapy with mTOR inhibitors and vaccine strategies against CMV are alternatives for which conclusive data are lacking.