Aminopenicillins vs non-aminopenicillins for treatment of enterococcal lower urinary tract infections.

Aminopenicillins (APs) achieve urinary concentrations that exceed typical minimum inhibitory concentrations for enterococcal lower urinary tract infection (UTI). The local clinical microbiology laboratory discontinued routine susceptibilities on enterococcal urine isolates, and reports that 'APs are predictably reliable for uncomplicated enterococcal UTI'. The objective of this study was to compare outcomes of APs with non-APs (NAPs) for enterococcal lower UTIs. This was an institutional-review-board-approved, retrospective cohort of adults hospitalized with symptomatic enterococcal lower UTIs from 2013 to 2021. The primary endpoint was composite clinical success at 14 days, defined as resolution of symptoms without new symptoms and no repeat culture growth of the index organism. A non-inferiority analysis was utilized with a 15% margin, and logistic regression evaluated characteristics associated with 14-day failure. In total, 178 subjects were included: 89 AP patients and 89 NAP patients. Vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) were identified in 73 (82%) AP patients and 76 (85%) NAP patients (P=0.54); in total, 34 (38.2%) AP patients and 66 (74.2%) NAP patients had confirmed Enterococcus faecium (P<0.001). Amoxicillin (n=36, 40.5%) and ampicillin (n=36, 40.5%) were the most commonly used APs, and linezolid (n=41, 46%) and fosfomycin (n=30, 34%) were the most commonly used NAPs. Fourteen-day clinical success rates for APs and NAPs were 83.1% and 82.0%, respectively [1.1% difference, 97.5% confidence interval (CI) -0.117 to 0.139]. Among the E. faecium subgroup, 14-day clinical success was observed in 27/34 (79.4%) AP patients and 53/66 (80.3%) NAP patients (P=0.916). On logistic regression, APs were not associated with 14-day clinical failure (adjusted odds ratio 0.84, 95% CI 0.38-1.86). APs were non-inferior to NAPs for treating enterococcal lower UTIs, and may be considered irrespective of susceptibility results.

Impact of Race and Socioeconomic Status on Outcomes in Patients Hospitalized with COVID-19.

BACKGROUND: The impact of race and socioeconomic status on clinical outcomes has not been quantified in patients hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between patient sociodemographics and neighborhood disadvantage with frequencies of death, invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), and intensive care unit (ICU) admission in patients hospitalized with COVID-19. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Four hospitals in an integrated health system serving southeast Michigan. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients admitted to the hospital with a COVID-19 diagnosis confirmed by polymerase chain reaction. MAIN MEASURES: Patient sociodemographics, comorbidities, and clinical outcomes were collected. Neighborhood socioeconomic variables were obtained at the census tract level from the 2018 American Community Survey. Relationships between neighborhood median income and clinical outcomes were evaluated using multivariate logistic regression models, controlling for patient age, sex, race, Charlson Comorbidity Index, obesity, smoking status, and living environment. KEY RESULTS: Black patients lived in significantly poorer neighborhoods than White patients (median income: $34,758 (24,531-56,095) vs. $63,317 (49,850-85,776), p < 0.001) and were more likely to have Medicaid insurance (19.4% vs. 11.2%, p < 0.001). Patients from neighborhoods with lower median income were significantly more likely to require IMV (lowest quartile: 25.4%, highest quartile: 16.0%, p < 0.001) and ICU admission (35.2%, 19.9%, p < 0.001). After adjusting for age, sex, race, and comorbidities, higher neighborhood income ($10,000 increase) remained a significant negative predictor for IMV (OR: 0.95 (95% CI 0.91, 0.99), p = 0.02) and ICU admission (OR: 0.92 (95% CI 0.89, 0.96), p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Neighborhood disadvantage, which is closely associated with race, is a predictor of poor clinical outcomes in COVID-19. Measures of neighborhood disadvantage should be used to inform policies that aim to reduce COVID-19 disparities in the Black community.

The Impact of Sociodemographic Factors, Comorbidities, and Physiologic Responses on 30-Day Mortality in Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Patients in Metropolitan Detroit.

BACKGROUND: The relationship of health disparities and comorbidities in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)-related outcomes are an ongoing area of interest. This report assesses risk factors associated with mortality in patients presenting with COVID-19 infection and healthcare disparities. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients presenting to emergency departments within an integrated health system who tested positive for COVID-19 between 7 March and 30 April 2020 in metropolitan Detroit. The primary outcomes were hospitalization and 30-day mortality. RESULTS: A total of 3633 patients with a mean age of 58 years were included. The majority were female and Black non-Hispanic. Hospitalization was required for 64% of patients, 56% of whom were Black. Hospitalized patients were older, more likely to reside in a low-income area, and had a higher burden of comorbidities. By 30 days, 433 (18.7%) hospitalized patients died. In adjusted analyses, the presence of comorbidities, an age >60 years, and more severe physiological disturbance were associated with 30-day mortality. Residence in low-income areas (odds ratio [OR], 1.02; 95% confidence interval [CI], .76-1.36) and public insurance (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, .76-2.01) were not independently associated with a higher risk of mortality. Black female patients had a lower adjusted risk of mortality (OR, 0.46; 95% CI, .27-.78). CONCLUSIONS: In this large cohort of COVID-19 patients, those with comorbidities, advanced age, and physiological abnormalities on presentation had higher odds of death. Disparities in income or source of health insurance were not associated with outcomes. Black women had a lower risk of dying.

Treatment with hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and combination in patients hospitalized with COVID-19.

SIGNIFICANCE: The United States is in an acceleration phase of the COVID-19 pandemic. Currently there is no known effective therapy or vaccine for treatment of SARS-CoV-2, highlighting urgency around identifying effective therapies. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the role of hydroxychloroquine therapy alone and in combination with azithromycin in hospitalized patients positive for COVID-19. DESIGN: Multi-center retrospective observational study. SETTING: The Henry Ford Health System (HFHS) in Southeast Michigan: large six hospital integrated health system; the largest of hospitals is an 802-bed quaternary academic teaching hospital in urban Detroit, Michigan. PARTICIPANTS: Consecutive patients hospitalized with a COVID-related admission in the health system from March 10, 2020 to May 2, 2020 were included. Only the first admission was included for patients with multiple admissions. All patients evaluated were 18 years of age and older and were treated as inpatients for at least 48h unless expired within 24h. EXPOSURE: Receipt of hydroxychloroquine alone, hydroxychloroquine in combination with azithromycin, azithromycin alone, or neither. MAIN OUTCOME: The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Of 2,541 patients, with a median total hospitalization time of 6 days (IQR: 4-10 days), median age was 64 years (IQR:53-76 years), 51% male, 56% African American, with median time to follow-up of 28.5 days (IQR:3-53). Overall in-hospital mortality was 18.1% (95% CI:16.6%-19.7%); by treatment: hydroxychloroquine+azithromycin, 157/783 (20.1% [95% CI: 17.3%-23.0%]), hydroxychloroquine alone, 162/1202 (13.5% [95% CI: 11.6%-15.5%]), azithromycin alone, 33/147 (22.4% [95% CI: 16.0%-30.1%]), and neither drug, 108/409 (26.4% [95% CI: 22.2%-31.0%]). Primary cause of mortality was respiratory failure (88%); no patient had documented torsades de pointes. From Cox regression modeling, predictors of mortality were age>65 years (HR:2.6 [95% CI:1.9-3.3]), white race (HR:1.7 [95% CI:1.4-2.1]), CKD (HR:1.7 [95%CI:1.4-2.1]), reduced O2 saturation level on admission (HR:1.5 [95%CI:1.1-2.1]), and ventilator use during admission (HR: 2.2 [95%CI:1.4-3.3]). Hydroxychloroquine provided a 66% hazard ratio reduction, and hydroxychloroquine+azithromycin 71% compared to neither treatment (p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this multi-hospital assessment, when controlling for COVID-19 risk factors, treatment with hydroxychloroquine alone and in combination with azithromycin was associated with reduction in COVID-19 associated mortality. Prospective trials are needed to examine this impact.

Genomic insights on heterogeneous resistance to vancomycin and teicoplanin in Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: A first report from South India.

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infection is an important clinical concern in patients, and is often associated with significant disease burden and metastatic infections. There is an increasing evidence of heterogeneous vancomycin-intermediate S. aureus (hVISA) associated treatment failure. In this study, we aim to understand the molecular mechanism of teicoplanin resistant MRSA (TR-MRSA) and hVISA. A total of 482 MRSA isolates were investigated for these phenotypes. Of the tested isolates, 1% were identified as TR-MRSA, and 12% identified as hVISA. A highly diverse amino acid substitution was observed in tcaRAB, vraSR, and graSR genes in TR-MRSA and hVISA strains. Interestingly, 65% of hVISA strains had a D148Q mutation in the graR gene. However, none of the markers were reliable in differentiating hVISA from TR-MRSA. Significant pbp2 upregulation was noted in three TR-MRSA strains, which had teicoplanin MICs of 16 or 32 µg/ml, whilst significant pbp4 downregulation was not noted in these strains. In our study, multiple mutations were identified in the candidate genes, suggesting a complex evolutionary pathway involved in the development of TR-MRSA and hVISA strains.

Evaluation of a Hospital-Based Post-Prescription Review and Feedback Pilot in Kathmandu, Nepal.

Capacity building is needed in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) to combat antimicrobial resistance (AMR). Stewardship programs such as post-prescription review and feedback (PPRF) are important components in addressing AMR. Little data are available regarding effectiveness of PPRF programs in LMIC settings. An adapted PPRF program was implemented in the medicine, surgery, and obstetrics/gynecology wards in a 125-bed hospital in Kathmandu. Seven "physician champions" were trained. Baseline and post-intervention patient chart data were analyzed for changes in days of therapy (DOT) and mean number of course days for intravenous and oral antibiotics, and for specific study antibiotics. Charts were independently reviewed to determine justification for prescribed antibiotics. Physician champions documented recommendations. Days of therapy per 1,000 patient-days for courses of aminoglycoside (P < 0.001) and cephalosporin (P < 0.001) decreased. In the medicine ward, data indicate increased justified use of antibiotics (P = 0.02), de-escalation (P < 0.001), rational use of antibiotics (P < 0.01), and conforming to guidelines in the first 72 hours (P = 0.02), and for definitive therapy (P < 0.001). Physician champions documented 437 patient chart reviews and made 138 recommendations; 78.3% of recommendations were followed by the attending physician. Post-prescription review and feedback can be successfully implemented in LMIC hospitals, which often lack infectious disease specialists. Future program adaptation and training will focus on identifying additional stewardship programming and support mechanisms to optimize antibiotic use in LMICs.

Clinical Data on Daptomycin plus Ceftaroline versus Standard of Care Monotherapy in the Treatment of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia.

Vancomycin (VAN) and daptomycin (DAP) are approved as a monotherapy for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia. A regimen of daptomycin plus ceftaroline (DAP+CPT) has shown promise in published case series of MRSA salvage therapy, but no comparative data exist to compare up-front DAP+CPT head-to-head therapy versus standard monotherapy as an initial treatment. In a pilot study, we evaluated 40 adult patients who were randomized to receive 6 to 8 mg/kg of body weight per day of DAP and 600 mg intravenous (i.v.) CPT every 8 h (q8h) (n = 17) or standard monotherapy (n = 23) with vancomycin (VAN; dosed to achieve serum trough concentrations of 15 to 20 mg/liter; n = 21) or 6 to 8 mg/kg/day DAP (n = 2). Serum drawn on the first day of bacteremia was sent to a reference laboratory post hoc for measurement of interleukin-10 (IL-10) concentrations and correlation to in-hospital mortality. Sources of bacteremia, median Pitt bacteremia scores, Charlson comorbidity indices, and median IL-10 serum concentrations were similar in both groups. Although the study was initially designed to examine bacteremia duration, we observed an unanticipated in-hospital mortality difference of 0% (0/17) for combination therapy and 26% (6/23) for monotherapy (P = 0.029), causing us to halt the study. Among patients with an IL-10 concentration of >5 pg/ml, 0% (0/14) died in the DAP+CPT group versus 26% (5/19) in the monotherapy group (P = 0.057). Here, we share the full results of this preliminary (but aborted) assessment of early DAP+CPT therapy versus standard monotherapy in MRSA bacteremia, hoping to encourage a more definitive clinical trial of its potential benefits against this leading cause of infection-associated mortality. (The clinical study discussed in this paper has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under identifier NCT02660346.).

Ceftaroline fosamil monotherapy for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia: a comparative clinical outcomes study.

OBJECTIVES: Vancomycin is the treatment of choice for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia; however, its use has been subject to scrutiny due to failure in severe infections. Ceftaroline fosamil (CPT-F) is approved for MRSA acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections, but not for bloodstream infections. The clinical outcomes of treatment with CPT-F in patients with MRSA bacteremia were evaluated. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with MRSA bacteremia at Henry Ford Hospital in Detroit, Michigan, USA, involving isolates with a vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration ≥1.0mg/l and susceptible in vitro to CPT-F, were systematically reviewed retrospectively. Ceftaroline fosamil-treated patients were matched with at least two vancomycin- and/or one daptomycin-treated control patient based on age-patients age 65 years or greater or less than 65 years of age. Outcomes evaluated included the duration of hospitalization, duration of therapy, adverse events, relapse, hospital readmission, and death. RESULTS: Thirty consecutive cases of MRSA bacteremia treated with CPT-F during the period May 2011 to June 2013 were identified; these patients were matched to 56 MRSA bacteremia patients treated with vancomycin and 46 MRSA bacteremia patients treated with daptomycin. The primary source of MRSA bacteremia in the cohort treated with CPT-F was endocarditis (n=7, 23%), skin/wound (n=9, 30%), and bone/joint (n=8, 27%). The MRSA bacteremia in those treated with CPT-F was community-acquired in 43% of cases, healthcare-associated in 43%, and hospital-acquired in 13%. The mean length of hospital stay for these patients was 22 days. The overall 30-day mortality rate was 13% (n=4) in CPT-F patients versus 24% (n=11) in daptomycin patients and 11% (n=6) in vancomycin patients (p=0.188). CONCLUSIONS: CPT-F demonstrated comparable clinical outcomes in MRSA bacteremia patients compared with the other agents, especially as salvage therapy.

Comparative Effectiveness of Vancomycin Versus Daptomycin for MRSA Bacteremia With Vancomycin MIC >1 mg/L: A Multicenter Evaluation.

PURPOSE: Clinical studies comparing vancomycin with alternative therapy for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia are limited. The objective of this study was to compare outcomes of early daptomycin versus vancomycin treatment for MRSA bacteremia with high vancomycin MICs in a geographically diverse multicenter evaluation. METHODS: This nationwide, retrospective, multicenter (N = 11), matched, cohort study compared outcomes of early daptomycin with vancomycin for MRSA bloodstream infection (BSI) with vancomycin MICs 1.5 to 2 µg/mL. Matching variables, based on propensity regression analysis, included age, intensive care unit (ICU), and type of BSI. Outcomes were as follows: (1) composite failure (60-day all-cause mortality, 7-day clinical or microbiologic failure, 30-day BSI relapse, or end-of-treatment failure (EOT; discontinue/change daptomycin or vancomycin because of treatment failure or adverse event]); (2) nephrotoxicity; and (2) day 4 BSI clearance. FINDINGS: A total of 170 patients were included. The median (interquartile range) age was 60 years (50-74); the median (range) Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score was 15 (10-18); 31% were in an ICU; and 92% had an infectious disease consultation. BSI types included endocarditis/endovascular (39%), extravascular (55%), and central catheter (6%). The median daptomycin dose was 6 mg/kg, and the vancomycin trough level was 17 mg/L. Overall composite failure was 35% (59 of 170): 15% due to 60-day all-cause mortality, 14% for lack of clinical or microbiologic response by 7 days, and 17% due to failure at end of therapy (discontinue/change because of treatment failure or adverse event). Predictors of composite failure according to multivariate analysis were age >60 years (odds ratio, 3.7; P < 0.01) and ICU stay (odds ratio, 2.64; P = 0.03). Notable differences between treatment groups were seen with: (1) end of therapy failure rates (11% vs 24% for daptomycin vs vancomycin; P = 0.025); (2) acute kidney injury rates (9% vs 23% for daptomycin vs vancomycin; P = 0.043); and (3) day 4 bacteremia clearance rates for immunocompromised patients (n = 26) (94% vs 56% for daptomycin vs vancomycin; P = 0.035). IMPLICATIONS: Results from this multicenter study provide, for the first time, a geographically diverse evaluation of daptomycin versus vancomycin for patients with vancomycin-susceptible MRSA bacteremia with vancomycin MIC values >1 µg/mL. Although the overall composite failure rates did not differ between the vancomycin and daptomycin groups when intensively matched according to risks for failure, the rates of acute kidney injury were significantly lower in the daptomycin group. These findings suggest that daptomycin is a useful therapy for clinicians treating patients who have MRSA bacteremia. Prospective, randomized trials should be conducted to better assess the potential significance of elevated vancomycin MIC.

Outcomes of Aminopenicillin Therapy for Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococcal Urinary Tract Infections.

Vancomycin-resistant urinary tract infections are often challenging to treat. This retrospective cohort study compared outcomes between patients treated for vancomycin-resistant enterococcal urinary tract infection with an aminopenicillin and those treated with a non-ß-lactam antibiotic. Inpatients treated with an enterococcus-active agent for their first symptomatic vancomycin-resistant enterococcal urinary tract infection between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2013 were considered for inclusion. Patients with colonization, on hospice, or receiving comfort care only were excluded. The primary endpoint of clinical cure was defined as resolution of clinical symptoms, or symptom improvement to the extent that no additional antibacterial drug therapy was necessary, and lack of microbiologic persistence. Secondary endpoints of 30-day readmission or retreatment and 30-day all-cause mortality were also compared. A total of 316 urinary isolates were screened, and 61 patients with symptomatic urinary tract infection were included. Twenty (35%) of the 57 isolates tested were ampicillin susceptible. Thirty-one patients received an aminopenicillin, and 30 received a non-ß-lactam. Rates of clinical cure for aminopenicillin versus non-ß-lactam treatment were 26/31 (83.9%) and 22/30 (73.3%) (P = 0.315), respectively. Rates of 30-day readmission (6/31, or 19.4%, versus 9/30, or 30%, respectively; P = 0.334), 30-day retreatment (4/31, or 12.9%, versus 4/30, 13.3%, respectively; P = 0.960), and 30-day all-cause mortality (2/31, or 6.5%, versus 1/30, or 3.3%, respectively; P = 0.573) were also not significantly different between groups. Aminopenicillins may be a viable option for treating vancomycin-resistant urinary tract infection regardless of the organism's ampicillin susceptibility. Prospective validation with larger cohorts of patients should be considered.

Clinical Outcomes of Daptomycin for Vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus Bacteremia.

PURPOSE: In light of recent evidence suggesting enhancement of daptomycin activity against vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (VRE) by ampicillin and other ß-lactam antibiotics, we evaluated the safety profile and clinical efficacy of daptomycin with and without concomitant ß-lactam antimicrobials in the treatment of VRE (faecium or faecalis) bacteremia from multiple centers across the United States. METHODS: Data were collected retrospectively as part of a larger multicenter registry (The Cubicin Outcomes Registry and Experience). Efficacy and clinical outcomes in patients with VRE bacteremia who received at least 3 days of daptomycin with or without concomitant ß-lactams were analyzed. Although all the cases involved daptomycin-susceptible VRE, additional analysis was performed to examine whether the adjunctive ß-lactam would play a more pivotal role in cases where the daptomycin MIC was in the upper limit of the susceptibility range, indicating that daptomycin monotherapy efficacy may be relatively compromised compared with cases with lower daptomycin MICs. FINDINGS: Two hundred sixty-two patients from 33 hospitals were evaluated. Most patients had at least one significant comorbidity, such as solid-organ or bone marrow transplantation (16%), neutropenia (36%), dialysis dependency (20%), or critical illness (36%) requiring care in an intensive care unit. Overall treatment success was 86% (n = 225/262), and treatment success for patients taking concomitant ß-lactams was 86% (n = 105/122). Logistic regression identified treatment failure to be associated with sepsis (odds ratio = 3.42; P = 0.009) and an elevated daptomycin MIC (3-4 µg/mL) (odds ratio = 3.23, P = 0.013). No significant increase in clinical failure was seen among patients with elevated daptomycin MIC who received concomitant ß-lactam therapy (clinical success, 88% vs 79% for MIC ≤2 vs 3-4 µg/mL, respectively; P = 0.417). Of 262 patients, 33 (13%) experienced ≥1 adverse event possibly related to daptomycin (increased creatine kinase in 8 patients). IMPLICATIONS: Overall, daptomycin was effective and well tolerated for VRE bacteremia, with lower effectiveness noted with daptomycin MIC of 3 to 4 µg/mL. Concomitant ß-lactam therapy with daptomycin may improve clinical outcomes in this setting. Further studies are needed to characterize the potential benefit of concomitant ß-lactams with daptomycin.

Prediction of failure in vancomycin-treated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infection: a clinically useful risk stratification tool.

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is a common cause of bloodstream infection (BSI) and is often associated with invasive infections and high rates of mortality. Vancomycin has remained the mainstay of therapy for serious Gram-positive infections, particularly MRSA BSI; however, therapeutic failures with vancomycin have been increasingly reported. We conducted a comprehensive evaluation of the factors (patient, strain, infection, and treatment) involved in the etiology and management of MRSA BSI to create a risk stratification tool for clinicians. This study included consecutive patients with MRSA BSI treated with vancomycin over 2 years in an inner-city hospital in Detroit, MI. Classification and regression tree analysis (CART) was used to develop a risk prediction model that characterized vancomycin-treated patients at high risk of clinical failure. Of all factors, the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE-II) score, with a cutoff point of 14, was found to be the strongest predictor of failure and was used to split the population into two groups. Forty-seven percent of the population had an APACHE-II score < 14, a value that was associated with low rates of clinical failure (11%) and mortality (4%). Fifty-four percent of the population had an APACHE-II score ≥ 14, which was associated with high rates of clinical failure (35%) and mortality (23%). The risk stratification model identified the interplay of three other predictors of failure, including the vancomycin MIC as determined by Vitek 2 analysis, the risk level of the source of BSI, and the USA300 strain type. This model can be a useful tool for clinicians to predict the likelihood of success or failure in vancomycin-treated patients with MRSA bloodstream infection.

Relationship of vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration to mortality in patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus hospital-acquired, ventilator-associated, or health-care-associated pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is a leading cause of hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP), ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), and health-care-associated pneumonia (HCAP). These infections are associated with significant morbidity, mortality, and cost. The impact of vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) on mortality for patients with MRSA pneumonia has not been determined. METHODS: Adult patients in ICUs with a diagnosis of MRSA HAP, VAP, or HCAP were entered in the study. Clinical and laboratory information were prospectively collected. Vancomycin MIC and heteroresistance were determined for each MRSA isolate. Data were collected from February 2006 through August 2007. The primary outcome variable was all-cause mortality at day 28. A propensity score approach was used to adjust for confounding variables. RESULTS: The study sample consisted of 158 patients. All-cause mortality at day 28 was 32.3%. The majority of MRSA isolates had a vancomycin MIC ≥ 1.5 mg/mL (115/158, 72.8%). Propensity score analysis demonstrated an increase in 28-day mortality as vancomycin MIC increased from 0.75 to 3 mg/mL (P ≤ .001). Heteroresistance to vancomycin, demonstrated in 21.5% isolates, was not associated with mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Mortality in patients with MRSA HAP, VAP, and HCAP increases as a function of the vancomycin MIC, even for strains with MIC values within the susceptible range. Evaluation of vancomycin MICs should be contemplated at the institutional level and for individual cases of MRSA pneumonia. The use of vancomycin therapy in patients with MRSA pneumonia caused by isolates with MICs between 1 and 2 mg/mL should be undertaken with caution, and alternative therapies should be considered.

Treatment options for uncomplicated community-acquired skin and soft tissue infections caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: oral antimicrobial agents.

BACKGROUND: In the United States, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is a major cause of skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs), and toxin-producing community-acquired MRSA (CA-MRSA) strains are becoming the leading cause of SSTIs presenting to emergency departments and outpatient settings. Many of these infections can be treated with oral antibiotics. This review is intended to delineate the types of SSTIs that require antibiotic treatment and to explain which CA-MRSA SSTIs can be treated with oral antibacterial agents. METHODS: Review of the literature related to the treatment of CA-MRSA SSTIs with oral antibacterial agents. RESULTS: Oral antimicrobial agents are available for the treatment of MRSA infection, and most SSTIs caused by CA-MRSA can be treated with these oral agents in an outpatient setting. Variable susceptibilities have been observed for CA-MRSA vs. hospital-acquired MRSA, pointing up the need for clinicians to be vigilant in determining susceptibility patterns. CONCLUSIONS: The growing prevalence of CA-MRSA in SSTIs and the increasing number of these infections observed in both the community and the hospital setting indicates that early, appropriate recognition and treatment are necessary. Many oral antimicrobial agents are available for the treatment of these infections.

Efficacy and safety of 3-day azithromycin versus 5-day moxifloxacin for the treatment of acute bacterial exacerbations of chronic bronchitis.

Antibiotic therapy is of clinical benefit in certain patients with acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis (AECB). In this randomised, investigator-blinded, multicentre trial, azithromycin (500mg once a day (qd) for 3 days) was compared with moxifloxacin (400mg qd for 5 days) for the treatment of outpatients with AECB (forced expiratory volume in 1s (FEV(1)) >35%). Of 342 patients randomised to either treatment, 169 received azithromycin and 173 received moxifloxacin. The mean age in the azithromycin and moxifloxacin groups was 56.4 years and 55.5 years, respectively. In the intent-to-treat analysis, clinical success rates for azithromycin and moxifloxacin were comparable at Days 10-12 (90% versus 90%, respectively) and Days 22-26 (81% versus 82%, respectively). Among patients who were culture-positive at baseline for Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae, Moraxella catarrhalis or Haemophilus parainfluenzae, clinical efficacy for azithromycin versus moxifloxacin at Days 10-12 was 93% versus 84%, respectively, and at Days 22-26 it was 89% versus 73%, respectively. The incidence of at least one treatment-related adverse event (AE) in the azithromycin and moxifloxacin groups was 18.3% and 19.1%, respectively. The most common AEs were diarrhoea, nausea, abdominal pain and vaginitis. Most treatment-related AEs were of mild or moderate severity, with no serious treatment-related AEs. One subject in the moxifloxacin group discontinued treatment owing to a treatment-related AE (precordial pain and dry throat). Compliance with both regimens was >90%. Three-day azithromycin and 5-day moxifloxacin demonstrate comparable efficacy and safety for the treatment of AECB in outpatients.

Daptomycin versus standard therapy for bacteremia and endocarditis caused by Staphylococcus aureus.

BACKGROUND: Alternative therapies for Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia and endocarditis are needed. METHODS: We randomly assigned 124 patients with S. aureus bacteremia with or without endocarditis to receive 6 mg of daptomycin intravenously per kilogram of body weight daily and 122 to receive initial low-dose gentamicin plus either an antistaphylococcal penicillin or vancomycin. The primary efficacy end point was treatment success 42 days after the end of therapy. RESULTS: Forty-two days after the end of therapy in the modified intention-to-treat analysis, a successful outcome was documented for 53 of 120 patients who received daptomycin as compared with 48 of 115 patients who received standard therapy (44.2 percent vs. 41.7 percent; absolute difference, 2.4 percent; 95 percent confidence interval, -10.2 to 15.1 percent). Our results met prespecified criteria for the noninferiority of daptomycin. The success rates were similar in subgroups of patients with complicated bacteremia, right-sided endocarditis, and methicillin-resistant S. aureus. Daptomycin therapy was associated with a higher rate of microbiologic failure than was standard therapy (19 vs. 11 patients, P=0.17). In 6 of the 19 patients with microbiologic failure in the daptomycin group, isolates with reduced susceptibility to daptomycin emerged; similarly, a reduced susceptibility to vancomycin was noted in isolates from patients treated with vancomycin. As compared with daptomycin therapy, standard therapy was associated with a nonsignificantly higher rate of adverse events that led to treatment failure due to the discontinuation of therapy (17 vs. 8, P=0.06). Clinically significant renal dysfunction occurred in 11.0 percent of patients who received daptomycin and in 26.3 percent of patients who received standard therapy (P=0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Daptomycin (6 mg per kilogram daily) is not inferior to standard therapy for S. aureus bacteremia and right-sided endocarditis. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00093067 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).