Antibiotics for treatment of leptospirosis.

BACKGROUND: Leptospirosis is a disease transmitted from animals to humans through water, soil, or food contaminated with the urine of infected animals, caused by pathogenic Leptospira species. Antibiotics are commonly prescribed for the management of leptospirosis. Despite the widespread use of antibiotic treatment for leptospirosis, there seems to be insufficient evidence to determine its effectiveness or to recommend antibiotic use as a standard practice. This updated systematic review evaluated the available evidence regarding the use of antibiotics in treating leptospirosis, building upon a previously published Cochrane review. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the benefits and harms of antibiotics versus placebo, no intervention, or another antibiotic for the treatment of people with leptospirosis. SEARCH METHODS: We identified randomised clinical trials following standard Cochrane procedures. The date of the last search was 27 March 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA: We searched for randomised clinical trials of various designs that examined the use of antibiotics for treating leptospirosis. We did not impose any restrictions based on the age, sex, occupation, or comorbidities of the participants involved in the trials. Our search encompassed trials that evaluated antibiotics, regardless of the method of administration, dosage, and schedule, and compared them with placebo or no intervention, or compared different antibiotics. We included trials regardless of the outcomes reported. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: During the preparation of this review, we adhered to the Cochrane methodology and used Review Manager. The primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and serious adverse events (nosocomial infection). Our secondary outcomes were quality of life, proportion of people with adverse events considered non-serious, and days of hospitalisation. To assess the risk of bias of the included trials, we used the RoB 2 tool, and for evaluating the certainty of evidence we used GRADEpro GDT software. We presented dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RR) and continuous outcomes as mean differences (MD), both accompanied by their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI). We used the random-effects model for all our main analyses and the fixed-effect model for sensitivity analyses. For our primary outcome analyses, we included trial data from the longest follow-up period. MAIN RESULTS: We identified nine randomised clinical trials comprising 1019 participants. Seven trials compared two intervention groups and two trials compared three intervention groups. Amongst the trials comparing antibiotics versus placebos, four trials assessed penicillin and one trial assessed doxycycline. In the trials comparing different antibiotics, one trial evaluated doxycycline versus azithromycin, one trial assessed penicillin versus doxycycline versus cefotaxime, and one trial evaluated ceftriaxone versus penicillin. One trial assessed penicillin with chloramphenicol and no intervention. Apart from two trials that recruited military personnel stationed in endemic areas or military personnel returning from training courses in endemic areas, the remaining trials recruited people from the general population presenting to the hospital with fever in an endemic area. The participants' ages in the included trials was 13 to 92 years. The treatment duration was seven days for penicillin, doxycycline, and cephalosporins; five days for chloramphenicol; and three days for azithromycin. The follow-up durations varied across trials, with three trials not specifying their follow-up periods. Three trials were excluded from quantitative synthesis; one reported zero events for a prespecified outcome, and two did not provide data for any prespecified outcomes. Antibiotics versus placebo or no intervention The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of penicillin versus placebo on all-cause mortality (RR 1.57, 95% CI 0.65 to 3.79; I2 = 8%; 3 trials, 367 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of penicillin or chloramphenicol versus placebo on adverse events considered non-serious (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.35 to 3.17; I2 = 0%; 2 trials, 162 participants; very low-certainty evidence). None of the included trials assessed serious adverse events. Antibiotics versus another antibiotic The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of penicillin versus cephalosporin on all-cause mortality (RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.47 to 4.04; I2 = 0%; 2 trials, 348 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or versus doxycycline (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.13 to 6.46; 1 trial, 168 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of cefotaxime versus doxycycline on all-cause mortality (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.01 to 3.78; 1 trial, 169 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of penicillin versus doxycycline on serious adverse events (nosocomial infection) (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.11 to 3.62; 1 trial, 168 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or versus cefotaxime (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.15 to 7.02; 1 trial, 175 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of doxycycline versus cefotaxime on serious adverse events (nosocomial infection) (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.15 to 7.02; 1 trial, 175 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of penicillin versus cefotaxime (RR 3.03, 95% CI 0.13 to 73.47; 1 trial, 175 participants; very low-certainty evidence), versus doxycycline (RR 2.80, 95% CI 0.12 to 67.66; 1 trial, 175 participants; very low-certainty evidence), or versus chloramphenicol on adverse events considered non-serious (RR 0.74, 95% CI 0.15 to 3.67; 1 trial, 52 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Funding Six of the nine trials included statements disclosing their funding/supporting sources and three trials did not mention funding source. Four of the six trials mentioning sources received funds from public or governmental sources or from international charitable sources, and the remaining two, in addition to public or governmental sources, received support in the form of trial drug supply directly from pharmaceutical companies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: As the certainty of evidence is very low, we do not know if antibiotics provide little to no effect on all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, or adverse events considered non-serious. There is a lack of definitive rigorous data from randomised trials to support the use of antibiotics for treating leptospirosis infection, and the absence of trials reporting data on clinically relevant outcomes further adds to this limitation.

Cefepime versus carbapenems for treatment of AmpC beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacterales bloodstream infections.

PURPOSE: Cefepime is recommended for treating infections caused by AmpC beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacterales (AmpC-PE), though supporting evidence is limited. Therefore, this study compared outcomes associated with cefepime versus carbapenem therapy for bloodstream infections (BSIs) caused by AmpC-PE after phenotypic exclusion of ESBL-co-producing isolates. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study compared definite cefepime versus carbapenem treatment for AmpC-PE BSI in hospitalized patients of the University Hospital Basel, Switzerland, between 01/2015 and 07/2020. Primary outcomes included in-hospital death, renal impairment and neurologic adverse events; secondary outcomes included length of hospital stay and recurrent infection. RESULTS: Two hundred and seventy episodes of AmpC-PE BSI were included, 162, 77 and 31 were treated with a carbapenem, cefepime and other antibiotics, respectively. Patients treated with carbapenems were more likely to be transferred to the ICU on admission and more frequently had central venous catheter as a source of infection. In uni- and multivariable analyses, primary and secondary outcomes did not differ between the two treatment groups, except for more frequent occurrence of neurological adverse events among patients treated with carbapenems and shorter length of hospital stay among survivors treated with cefepime. CONCLUSION: After excluding isolates with phenotypic ESBL-co-production, cefepime was not associated with adverse outcomes compared to carbapenems when used to treat BSIs caused by AmpC-PE. Our study provides evidence to support the use of cefepime as a safe treatment strategy for AmpC-PE BSI, particularly in clinically stable patients without initial renal impairment or increased susceptibility to neurological adverse events.

Emergent "Bloody Diarrhea" Associated with the Use of Oral Cefdinir in Young Children: A Brief Report and Review of Literature.

BACKGROUND: Cefdinir is an extended-spectrum, third-generation, oral cephalosporin widely used in pediatric population to treat common bacterial infections, including otitis media and streptococcal pharyngitis. It is considered a safe and well-tolerated alternative to penicillin and macrolides. CASE REPORT: This report describes a case series of 3 infants presenting to the emergency department for evaluation of "bloody diarrhea." The parents noticed red stools when their children were started on oral cefdinir when they were previously receiving iron-containing preparations. Reddish-colored heme-negative stools observed in all cases were due to the interaction of the drug with supplemental iron or iron-containing formula feeds. This adverse effect was reversible on discontinuation of cefdinir. WHY SHOULD AN EMERGENCY PHYSICIAN BE AWARE OF THIS?: Red stools due to cefdinir is an underreported benign adverse drug reaction with fewer than 10 cases described in the literature. Thorough history taking with an appropriate focus on diet and drug history are essential to avoid parental anxiety, unnecessary patient workup, and economic burden to the caregivers in these cases. Awareness of this unusual adverse effect among emergency physicians could prevent further inconvenience for already overburdened health systems.

The efficacy and safety of ceftolozane-tazobactam in the treatment of GNB infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical studies.

BACKGROUND: Ceftolozane-tazobactam is a novel cephalosporin/ß-lactamase inhibitor combination with activity against Gram-negative bacteria (GNB). We aimed to comprehensively evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of ceftolozane-tazobactam in treating GNB infections in adult patients. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases were retrieved until August 2022. Randomized trials and non-randomized controlled studies evaluating ceftolozane-tazobactam and its comparators in adult patients with GNB infections were included. RESULTS: A total of 13 studies were included. Overall, patients receiving ceftolozane-tazobactam had significant advantages in clinical cure (odds ratio [OR], 1.62; 95% CI, 1.05-2.51) and microbiological eradication (OR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.19-1.71), especially in Pseudomonas aeruginosa-infected patients. Ceftolozane-tazobactam had a significant advantage in clinical success or microbial eradication compared with polymyxin/aminoglycosides (PL/AG) or levofloxacin. There were no significant differences in adverse events (AEs), Clostridium difficile infection (CDI), and mortality between ceftolozane-tazobactam and comparators. Notably, ceftolozane-tazobactam showed a significantly lower risk of acute kidney injury compared with PL/AG. CONCLUSIONS: Ceftolozane-tazobactam showed excellent clinical and microbiological efficacy in treating GNB, especially P. aeruginosa-induced infections. The overall safety profile of ceftolozane-tazobactam was comparable to other antimicrobials, with no increased risk of CDI and obvious advantage over antibacterial agents with high nephrotoxicity.

Treatment options for neonatal infections in the post-cefotaxime era.

INTRODUCTION: Cefotaxime has been used for the management of neonatal infections since the 1990s for suspected meningitis and to mitigate gentamicin-associated renal injury. Its shortage in 2015 and subsequent removal from the U.S. pharmaceutical market forced providers to consider alternatives. Ceftriaxone, a cephalosporin with an identical antibacterial spectrum of activity to cefotaxime, is contraindicated in neonates due to its risk of biliary pseudolithiasis. Ceftazidime was recommended as an alternative by the American Academy of Pediatrics but is inequivalent. AREAS COVERED: This article addresses indications for cephalosporin use and considerations when selecting an alternative to cefotaxime. Differences among cefotaxime, ceftriaxone, ceftazidime, and cefepime are discussed and compared to the standard-of-care presumptive regimen, ampicillin, and gentamicin. The authors consider the data behind the neonatal contraindication to ceftriaxone and provide recommendations for their application to practice. EXPERT OPINION: The data against ceftriaxone use in neonates remain poor, particularly in the context of the cefotaxime shortage and lack of an equivalent alternative. Ceftriaxone could be considered in low-risk neonates without hyperbilirubinemia or exposure to calcium-containing fluids on a case-by-case basis. Ceftazidime monotherapy for presumptive management of neonatal infections is inappropriate; cefepime should be more frequently utilized in neonates who are poor candidates for ceftriaxone.

Safety and efficacy of cefiderocol for off-label treatment indications: A systematic review.

PURPOSE: Cefiderocol is a siderophore cephalosporin recently approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of hospital- and ventilator-acquired bacterial pneumonia and complicated urinary tract infections. However, there is potential for cefiderocol utility for a variety of other infections. The purpose of this systematic review was to identify literature examining the safety and efficacy of cefiderocol for off-label indications. METHODS: The PRISMA guidelines were utilized for reporting. Databases searched included PubMed, Scopus, and Embase, from inception to September 2021. Manuscripts describing cefiderocol off-label use in clinical settings were included. Exclusion criteria were studies focused on labeled indications, animal studies, pharmacodynamic/pharmacokinetic studies, in vitro or laboratory studies, and manuscripts in languages other than English or Arabic. Each stage of review utilized two independent investigators, with conflicts resolved and critical appraisal performed. Data regarding presentation, clinical course, and infection characteristics were extracted and descriptively analyzed. RESULTS: The search identified a total of 985 records, narrowed to a final set of 27 studies. Among studies included were 18 (66.7%) case reports, 8 (29.6%) case series, and 1 (3.7%) phase 3 clinical trial. Cefiderocol was most frequently used off-label for bacteremia/sepsis with or without an identified source in 51 (67.1%) out of a total of 76 included patients. Among case series/reports with available data, 43 of 53 patients (81.1%) received combination antibiotic therapy. The most common pathogens identified included multi/extensively drug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa and/or Acinetobacter baumannii. Various clinical end points were reported, while microbiological end points were reported in 18 (66.7%) studies. Cefiderocol-related side effects were uncommon and rarely use-limiting. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review depicts relative clinical effectiveness of off-label cefiderocol, most commonly for P. aeruginosa and A. baumannii infections as combination antibiotic therapy. Further study is needed to elucidate the safety and efficacy of cefiderocol across an expanded set of patients and indications.

Ceftolozane-tazobactam versus meropenem for definitive treatment of bloodstream infection due to extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) and AmpC-producing Enterobacterales ("MERINO-3"): study protocol for a multicentre, open-label randomised non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) and AmpC-producing Enterobacterales are common causes of bloodstream infection. ESBL-producing bacteria are typically resistant to third-generation cephalosporins and result in a sizeable economic and public health burden. AmpC-producing Enterobacterales may develop third-generation cephalosporin resistance through enzyme hyper-expression. In no observational study has the outcome of treatment of these infections been surpassed by carbapenems. Widespread use of carbapenems may drive the development of carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacilli. METHODS: This study will use a multicentre, parallel group open-label non-inferiority trial design comparing ceftolozane-tazobactam and meropenem in adult patients with bloodstream infection caused by ESBL or AmpC-producing Enterobacterales. Trial recruitment will occur in up to 40 sites in six countries (Australia, Singapore, Italy, Spain, Saudi Arabia and Lebanon). The sample size is determined by a predefined quantity of ceftolozane-tazobactam to be supplied by Merck, Sharpe and Dohme (MSD). We anticipate that a trial with 600 patients contributing to the primary outcome analysis would have 80% power to declare non-inferiority with a 5% non-inferiority margin, assuming a 30-day mortality of 5% in both randomised groups. Once randomised, definitive treatment will be for a minimum of 5 days and a maximum of 14 days with the total duration determined by treating clinicians. Data describing demographic information, risk factors, concomitant antibiotics, illness scores, microbiology, multidrug-resistant organism screening, discharge and mortality will be collected. DISCUSSION: Participants will have bloodstream infection due to third-generation cephalosporin non-susceptible E. coli and Klebsiella spp. or Enterobacter spp., Citrobacter freundii, Morganella morganii, Providencia spp. or Serratia marcescens. They will be randomised 1:1 to ceftolozane-tazobactam 3 g versus meropenem 1 g, both every 8 h. Secondary outcomes will be a comparison of 14-day all-cause mortality, clinical and microbiological success at day 5, functional bacteraemia score, microbiological relapse, new bloodstream infection, length of hospital stay, serious adverse events, C. difficile infection, multidrug-resistant organism colonisation. The estimated trial completion date is December 2024. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The MERINO-3 trial is registered under the US National Institute of Health ClinicalTrials.gov register, reference number: NCT04238390 . Registered on 23 January 2020.

Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Ceftolozane/Tazobactam in Critically Ill Patients With Augmented Renal Clearance.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether established ceftolozane/tazobactam (C/T) dosing is adequate for patients with augmented renal clearance (ARC) and bacterial infection. METHODS: ARC (creatinine clearance [CrCl] ≥ 130 mL/min) was confirmed by directly measured CrCl in 11 critically ill patients in a phase 1 pharmacokinetics study. Patients received 3 g C/T (ceftolozane 2 g/tazobactam 1 g) as a 60-minute intravenous infusion. Pharmacokinetic sampling occurred at 0 (predose), 1, 2, 4, 6, and 8 hours after the start of the infusion. Noncompartmental analyses were conducted on concentration data. The following pharmacodynamic targets were evaluated: time that free (unbound) drug concentrations exceeded the minimum inhibitory concentration (fT>MIC) of 4 µg/mL for ceftolozane and time that the unbound concentration exceeded the 1 µg/mL target threshold (fT>threshold = 1 µg/mL) for > 20% of the dosing interval for tazobactam. Safety was evaluated. RESULTS: Mean (SD) area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to infinity, clearance and volume of distribution at steady state (Vss) were 236 (118) h*µg/mL, 10.4 (4.5) L/h and 30.8 (10.8) L, respectively, for ceftolozane; and 35.5 (18.5) h*µg/mL, 35.3 (16.5) L/h and 54.8 (20.1) L, respectively, for tazobactam. Clearance and Vss were higher for both ceftolozane and tazobactam in patients with ARC compared with healthy individuals. The mean estimated ceftolozane fT>MIC at 4 µg/mL was 86.4%; the mean estimated tazobactam fT>threshold = 1 µg/mL was 54.9%. Treatment-emergent adverse events were mild to moderate. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with ARC, a 3 g C/T dose met respective pharmacodynamic targets for ceftolozane and tazobactam. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT02387372.

Randomized controlled trial investigating the effect of 2 selective dry-cow therapy protocols on udder health and performance in the subsequent lactation.

The objective of this study was to compare culture- and algorithm-guided selective dry-cow therapy (SDCT) programs with blanket dry-cow therapy (BDCT) in a multi-site, randomized, natural exposure clinical trial for the following cow-level outcomes: clinical mastitis, removal from the herd, and Dairy Herd Improvement Association (DHIA) test-day milk yield and SCC measures during the first 120 d in milk (DIM). Two days before planned dry-off, cows in each of 7 herds were randomly allocated to BDCT, culture-guided SDCT (cult-SDCT), or algorithm-guided SDCT (alg-SDCT). At dry-off, BDCT cows received an intramammary antibiotic (500 mg of ceftiofur hydrochloride) in all 4 quarters. Antibiotic treatments were selectively allocated to quarters of cult-SDCT cows by only treating quarters from which aseptically collected milk samples tested positive on a rapid culture system after 30 to 40 h of incubation. For alg-SDCT cows, antibiotic treatments were selectively allocated at the cow level, with all quarters receiving antibiotic treatment if the cow met at least one of the following criteria: (1) any DHIA test with a somatic cell count >200,000 cells/mL during the current lactation, and (2) ≥2 clinical mastitis cases during the current lactation. All quarters of all cows were treated with an internal teat sealant. Clinical mastitis and removal from the herd events (i.e., culling or death) and DHIA test-day data from dry-off to 120 DIM were extracted from herd records. Hazard ratios (HR) for the effect of treatment group on clinical mastitis and removal from the herd during 1 to 120 DIM were determined using Cox proportional hazards regression. The effects of treatment group on test-day loge-transformed SCC and milk yield were determined using linear mixed models. Final models indicated that either SDCT program was unlikely to increase clinical mastitis risk (HRcult-SDCT/BDCT = 0.82, 95% CI: 0.58, 1.15; HRalg-SDCT/BDCT = 0.83, 95% CI: 0.63, 1.09) or test-day logeSCC (cult-SDCT minus BDCT = 0.05, 95% CI: -0.09, 0.18; alg-SDCT minus BDCT = 0.07, 95% CI: -0.07, 0.21). Risk of removal from the herd and test-day milk yield were similar between treatment groups. Findings from this study indicate that culture- or algorithm-guided SDCT can be used at dry-off without negatively affecting cow health and performance in early lactation.

Ceftolozane/Tazobactam Treatment of Multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa Infections in Children.

The clinical use, safety and effectiveness of ceftolozane/tazobactam among 13 patients 3 months to 19 years of age infected with multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa are described. All but one patient achieved clinical cure after initial treatment. Adverse drug events attributed to treatment included transaminitis and neutropenia which occurred in 2 patients and resolved upon dose reduction.

Antibiotic Exposure and Risk for Hospital-Associated Clostridioides difficile Infection.

Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) is a health care-associated infection associated with significant morbidity and cost, with highly varied risk across populations. More effective, risk-based prevention strategies are needed. Here, we investigate risk factors for hospital-associated CDI in a large integrated health system. In a retrospective cohort of all adult admissions to 21 Intermountain Healthcare hospitals from 2006 to 2012, we identified all symptomatic (i) hospital-onset and (ii) health care-facility-associated, community-onset CDI. We then evaluated the risk associated with antibiotic exposure, including that of specific agents, using multivariable logistic regression. A total of 2,356 cases of CDI among 506,068 admissions were identified (incidence, 46.6 per 10,000). Prior antibiotic use was the dominant risk factor, where for every antibiotic day of therapy prior to the index admission, the odds of subsequent CDI increased by 12.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 12.2 to 13.4%; P < 0.0001). This was a much stronger association than was inpatient antibiotic exposure (odds ratio [OR], 1.007 [95% CI, 1.005 to 1.009]; P < 0.0001). The highest-risk antibiotics included second-generation and later cephalosporins (especially oral), carbapenems, fluoroquinolones, and clindamycin, while doxycycline and daptomycin were associated with a lower CDI risk. We concluded that cumulative antibiotic exposure prior to admission is the greatest contributor to the risk of subsequent CDI. Most classes of antibiotics carry some risk, which varies by drug and route. This information may be useful for antimicrobial stewardship efforts.

Summary of the safety and tolerability of two treatment regimens of ceftaroline fosamil: 600 mg every 8 h versus 600 mg every 12 h.

BACKGROUND: The recommended adult dose of ceftaroline fosamil is 600 mg q12h by 1 h intravenous (iv) infusion for 5-14 days in complicated skin and soft tissue infection (cSSTI) and 5-7 days in community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). A dosage of 600 mg q8h by 2 h iv infusion is approved in some regions for cSSTI patients with Staphylococcus aureus infection where the ceftaroline MIC is 2 or 4 mg/L. This analysis compares the safety profiles of the q8h and q12h regimens. METHODS: Safety data from six Phase III, randomized, double-blind clinical trials were collated into the q8h cSSTI pool (ceftaroline fosamil n = 506; NCT01499277) and the q12h pool {ceftaroline fosamil n = 1686; comprising five studies [two cSSTI (NCT00424190 and NCT00423657) and three CAP (NCT01371838, NCT00621504 and NCT00509106)]}. RESULTS: The pattern and incidence of adverse events were similar between the q8h and q12h ceftaroline fosamil pools. Most were gastrointestinal and of mild or moderate intensity. Overall, rash intensity was similar between the q8h pool and the q12h pool. For the q8h regimen, there was a higher frequency of rash in some Asian study sites, associated with longer duration of therapy (≥7 days); most cases were mild and resolved following treatment discontinuation. No dose-related vital sign or ECG abnormalities were detected with either regimen. CONCLUSIONS: The q8h regimen in cSSTI was generally well tolerated; the observed safety profile was consistent with the known safety profile of ceftaroline fosamil, reflective of the cephalosporin class and qualitatively consistent with the q12h regimen.

A Case-Control Study of Real-Life Experience with Ceftolozane-Tazobactam in Patients with Hematologic Malignancy and Pseudomonas aeruginosa Infection.

We present our experience in patients with hematologic malignancy and Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection treated with ceftolozane-tazobactam. We performed a single-center case-control study comparing patients with hematologic malignancy and P. aeruginosa infection treated with ceftolozane-tazobactam (study group) with similar patients not treated with ceftolozane-tazobactam (control group) to assess safety and efficacy. Nineteen cases and 38 controls were analyzed. Cases were younger (45.6 years versus 57.6 years; P = 0.012) and less frequently had bacteremia (52.6% versus 86.8%; P = 0.008). They also had worse Multinational Association for Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) scores (10.2 versus 16.1; P = 0.0001), more hospital-acquired infections (78.9% versus 47.4%; P = 0.013), and more extremely drug-resistant (XDR) P. aeruginosa infections (47.4% versus 21.1%; P = 0.015). Cases received a median of 14 days (7 to 18 days) of ceftolozane-tazobactam (monotherapy in 11 cases [57.9.6%]). Ceftolozane-tazobactam was mostly used as targeted therapy (16 cases; 84.2%) because of resistance (9 cases; 47.4%), failure (4 cases; 21.1%), and toxicity (3 cases; 15.8%). Ten cases had bacteremia (52.6%). The sources were pneumonia (26.3%), catheter-related bacteremia (21.1%), primary bacteremia (21.1%), and perianal/genital (15.7%), urinary (10.5%), and skin/soft tissue (5.3%) infection. No toxicity was attributed to ceftolozane-tazobactam. More than 60% had neutropenia, and 15.8% fulfilled the criteria for sepsis. There were no significant differences in clinical cure at day 14 (89.5% versus 71.1%; P = 0.183) or recurrence (15.8% versus 10.5%; P = 0.675). Thirty-day mortality was lower among cases (5.3% versus 28.9%; P = 0.045). Ceftolozane-tazobactam was well tolerated and at least as effective as other alternatives for P. aeruginosa infection in patients with hematologic malignancy, including neutropenic patients with sepsis caused by XDR strains.

ESBL E coli and P. aeruginosa Resistance to Ceftolozane-Tazobactam in a Patient with a Liver Abscess. The Search for an Omnipotent Antibiotic Goes On!

Multi drug resistant (MDR) Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Extended- Spectrum-lactamase (ESBL) Enterobacteriaceae are becoming an increasing difficult clinical problem. Immediate resistance to some of the new antimicrobials such as ceftolozane/tazobactam is unusual and is due to a variety of mechanisms such as hyper-production of inactivating enzymes and gene mutation. In addition, previous antimicrobial administration is a well-recognized risk factor to develop resistance. We present a patient with a liver abscess where the organism was resistant to ceftolozane/tazobactam resulting in a poor clinical outcome.

Acute vanishing bile duct syndrome after therapy with cephalosporin, metronidazole, and clotrimazole: A case report.

RATIONALE: Vanishing bile duct syndrome (VBDS) consists of a series of diseases characterized by the loss of >50% bile duct in portal areas. Many factors are associated with VBDS including infections, neoplasms, and drugs. Antibiotic is one of the most frequently reported causes of VBDS. PATIENT CONCERNS: A 29-year-old female was admitted because of liver injury for over 3 months. Tests for viruses that can cause hepatitis and autoantibodies were all negative. She was prescribed with antibiotics approximately a week before liver injury while there was no history of alcohol consumption. DIAGNOSES: Liver biopsy demonstrated a loss of intrahepatic bile duct in most of the portal tracts. INTERVENTIONS: This patient was treated with ursodeoxycholic acid, polyene phosphatidylcholine, and bicyclol. Most importantly, the treatments in our hospital were proved by the ethics committee of Department of Infectious Disease, Anhui Provincial Hospital. OUTCOMES: The symptoms were improved. She is still under treatment. LESSONS: VBDS is rare but can be severe. A liver biopsy offers an important evidence for the diagnosis of VBDS, especially for those with a history of susceptible drugs taking.

Trends in culprit drugs and clinical entities in cutaneous adverse drug reactions: a retrospective study.

PURPOSE: Morbidity due to cutaneous adverse drug reactions (CADRs) is quite common. The specific culprit drugs change over time and clinicians must be kept informed with updated knowledge, thus preventing potential CADRs. This retrospective study is a survey of CADRs encountered in a hospital-based population in Southern China during three time intervals, from 1984 to 2015. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The clinical records were review of 306 patients with CADRs who were admitted to our hospital from 2011 to 2015. These data were compared with patients visiting our hospital during 1984-1994 and 2003-2010. RESULTS: From 2011 to 2015, the most common CADRs were exanthematous reactions (40.8%) and Stevens-Johnson syndrome/toxic epidermal necrolysis (SJS/TEN; 17.0%). There were eight cases (2.6%) of CADRs related to targeted therapy in oncology. In the 205 CADR cases that were due to single medications, the most common offending drugs were allopurinol (21.5%), cephalosporins (10.7%) and carbamazepine (10.2%). The percentages of CADR cases due to allopurinol, carbamazepine, or epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors were significantly higher from 2011 to 2015 compared with 1984-1994 or 2003-2010. The rate of SJS/TEN occurrence was significantly higher in the two recent periods compared with 1984-1994. CONCLUSIONS: Changes in drug prescriptions are a major factor that affects the CADRs seen in clinical records. Newer drugs can be culpable for CADRs, and more CADRs are now documented with increased severity at clinical presentation. Reliable screening tests for specific drugs are urgently required to eliminate possible fatalities.

Efficacy and safety of 3 day versus 7 day cefditoren pivoxil regimens for acute uncomplicated cystitis: multicentre, randomized, open-label trial.

BACKGROUND: Fluoroquinolone-non-susceptible Escherichia coli isolated from patients with acute uncomplicated cystitis are a matter of increasing concern. Cefditoren pivoxil is an oral, ß-lactamase-stable, extended-spectrum cephalosporin that is effective against fluoroquinolone-non-susceptible bacteria. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the clinical and microbiological efficacies of cefditoren pivoxil against acute uncomplicated cystitis and to determine the optimal duration of cefditoren pivoxil treatment. METHODS: We compared 3 and 7 day regimens of cefditoren pivoxil in a multicentre, randomized, open-label study. RESULTS: A total of 104 female patients with acute uncomplicated cystitis were enrolled and randomized into 3 day (n = 51) or 7 day (n = 53) treatment groups. At first visit, 94 bacterial strains were isolated from the 104 participants of which 81.7% (85/104) were E. coli. Clinical and microbiological efficacies were evaluated 5-9 days following administration of the final dose of cefditoren pivoxil. The clinical efficacies of the 3 and 7 day groups were 90.9% (40/44) and 93.2% (41/44), respectively (P = 1.000). The microbiological efficacies of the 3 and 7 day groups were 82.5% (33/40) and 90.2% (37/41), respectively (P = 0.349). There were no adverse events due to cefditoren pivoxil treatment, with the exception of a mild allergic reaction in one patient, after which the cefditoren pivoxil was exchanged for another antimicrobial. CONCLUSIONS: Cefditoren pivoxil is safe and effective for uncomplicated cystitis, with no significant differences in clinical and microbiological efficacies between 3 and 7 day regimens.

A Multicenter, Randomized, Observer-blinded, Active-controlled Study to Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of Ceftaroline Versus Comparator in Pediatric Patients With Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infection.

BACKGROUND: Ceftaroline has in vitro activity against bacterial isolates, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. This is the first study to investigate ceftaroline fosamil in pediatric patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs). METHODS: A multicenter, observer-blinded study (NCT01400867) in pediatric patients (2 months-17 years of age) with ABSSSIs. Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive intravenous (IV) ceftaroline fosamil or IV comparator (vancomycin or cefazolin, plus optional aztreonam) with optional switch to oral antibacterials from Day 4. Safety and clinical outcomes were assessed. RESULTS: Of 163 enrolled patients, 159 received treatment. Treatment groups were comparable for baseline characteristics. Rates of study drug-related treatment-emergent adverse events were similar for ceftaroline fosamil [22% (23/106)] and comparator [23% (12/53)]. One serious adverse event, considered to be related to IV study drug, occurred in the ceftaroline fosamil group (hypersensitivity). In both the treatment groups, 85% (ceftaroline fosamil, 91/107 and comparator, 44/52) of the modified intent-to-treat population achieved early clinical response (≥20% reduction in infection area from baseline). Clinical cure rates at test-of-cure were high [ceftaroline fosamil, 94% (101/107) and comparator, 87% (45/52)]. For patients evaluated 8 to 15 days after the last dose of any antibiotic (IV or oral), from whom methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus was initially isolated, a favorable microbiologic response (reflecting the efficacy of oral/IV therapy and capturing a relapse or reinfection) was achieved with ceftaroline fosamil [89% (16/18)] and comparator [57% (4/7)]. CONCLUSIONS: Ceftaroline fosamil, with optional oral switch, was as well-tolerated and effective in pediatric patients with ABSSSIs as comparator therapy.

Helicobacter cinaedi bacteremia resulting from antimicrobial resistance acquired during treatment for X-linked agammaglobulinemia.

This is the first report of penicillin/cephalosporin-resistant Helicobacter cinaedi arising from prolonged treatment. H. cinaedi, common among immunocompromised patients, caused recurrent bacteremia and cellulitis in a 19-year-old Japanese man with X-linked agammaglobulinemia. The minimal inhibitory concentration of these drugs was raised, which subsequently resulted in clinical failure. Prolonged suboptimal treatment may cause bacterial resistance to ß-lactam antibiotics in H. cinaedi. It is possible that this resistance may have contributed to the treatment failure.