ABSTRACT
Nirmatrelvir (coadministered with ritonavir as PAXLOVIDTM) reduces the risk of COVID-19-related hospitalizations and all-cause death in individuals with mild-to-moderate COVID-19 at high risk of progression to severe disease. Ritonavir is coadministered as a pharmacokinetic enhancer. However, ritonavir may cause drug-drug interactions (DDIs) due to its interactions with various drug-metabolizing enzymes and transporters, including cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A, CYP2D6, and P-glycoprotein transporters. To better understand the extent of DDIs (or lack thereof) of nirmatrelvir; ritonavir in a clinical setting, this study used real-world evidence (RWE) from the Optum Clinformatics Data Mart database to identify the top 100 drugs most commonly prescribed to US patients at high risk of progression to severe COVID-19 disease. The top 100 drugs were identified based on total counts associated with drugs prescribed to high-risk patients (i.e., ≥ 1 medical condition associated with an increased risk of severe COVID-19) who were continuously enrolled in the database throughout 2019 and had ≥ 1 prescription claim. Each of the 100 drugs was then assessed for DDI risk based on their metabolism, excretion, and transport pathways identified from available US prescribing and medical literature sources. Seventy drugs identified were not expected to have DDIs with nirmatrelvir; ritonavir, including many cardiovascular agents, anti-infectives, antidiabetic agents, and antidepressants. Conversely, 30 drugs, including corticosteroids, narcotic analgesics, anticoagulants, statins, and sedatives/hypnotics, were expected to cause DDIs with nirmatrelvir; ritonavir. This RWE analysis is complementary to the prescribing information and other DDI management tools for guiding healthcare providers in managing DDIs.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Ritonavir , Humans , COVID-19 Drug Treatment , Drug Interactions , Cytochrome P-450 CYP3A , Antiviral Agents/therapeutic useABSTRACT
AIMS: This retrospective analysis of the Optum Clinformatics Data Mart database evaluated US patient characteristics, healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), costs, and treatment patterns among unvaccinated adults with outpatient-diagnosed COVID-19 to quantify US economic burden. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The index event was the earliest outpatient diagnosis of confirmed COVID-19 from May 1 to December 10, 2020. Patients had 12 months' continuous enrollment before and were followed for ≥60 days after index date until insurance dis-enrollment or study end. RESULTS: 236,589 patients had outpatient-diagnosed COVID-19 (7,692 with and 228,897 without subsequent COVID-19-related inpatient admission >48 h post-diagnosis). The median age was 51 years (≥65 years, 30.0%); 72.4% had ≥1 risk factor. Patients with versus without subsequent inpatient admission were more often male, older, Black/Hispanic, and had comorbidities/risk factors. With a median follow-up of 162 days, patients had a median of 1 COVID-19-related outpatient visit (with inpatient admission, 5 outpatient visits). Those with inpatient admission had a median of 1 COVID-19-related inpatient visit (median length of stay [LOS], 6 days), 33.3% were admitted to intensive care (median LOS, 8 days), 8.4%, 7.1%, and 13.3% received invasive mechanical ventilation, noninvasive mechanical ventilation, and supplemental oxygen, respectively; 13.5% experienced readmission. Inpatient mortality was 6.0% (0.3% for nonhospitalized patients). Antithrombotic therapy, antibiotics, corticosteroids, and remdesivir use increased among patients with inpatient admission versus without. Median total COVID-19-related non-zero medical costs were $208 for patients without inpatient admission (with inpatient admission, $39,187). LIMITATIONS: Results reflect the circulating SARS-CoV-2 and treatment landscape during the study period. Requirements for continuous enrollment could have biased the population. Cost measurements may have included allowed (typically higher) and charge amounts. CONCLUSIONS: Given the numbers of the US population who are still not fully vaccinated and the evolving epidemiology of the pandemic, this study provides relevant insights on real-world treatment patterns, HCRU, and the cost burden of outpatient-diagnosed COVID-19.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Adult , Delivery of Health Care , Health Care Costs , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Outpatients , Retrospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , United StatesABSTRACT
Pseudomonas aeruginosa is an opportunistic Gram-negative pathogen that causes a range of serious infections that are often challenging to treat, as this pathogen can express multiple resistance mechanisms, including multidrug-resistant (MDR) and extensively drug-resistant (XDR) phenotypes. Ceftazidime-avibactam is a combination antimicrobial agent comprising ceftazidime, a third-generation semisynthetic cephalosporin, and avibactam, a novel non-ß-lactam ß-lactamase inhibitor. This review explores the potential role of ceftazidime-avibactam for the treatment of P. aeruginosa infections. Ceftazidime-avibactam has good in vitro activity against P. aeruginosa relative to comparator ß-lactam agents and fluoroquinolones, comparable to amikacin and ceftolozane-tazobactam. In Phase 3 clinical trials, ceftazidime-avibactam has generally demonstrated similar clinical and microbiological outcomes to comparators in patients with complicated intra-abdominal infections, complicated urinary tract infections or hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated pneumonia caused by P. aeruginosa. Although real-world data are limited, favourable outcomes with ceftazidime-avibactam treatment have been reported in some patients with MDR and XDR P. aeruginosa infections. Thus, ceftazidime-avibactam may have a potentially important role in the management of serious and complicated P. aeruginosa infections, including those caused by MDR and XDR strains.
ABSTRACT
Ceftazidime/avibactam (CAZ-AVI) is a novel, fixed-dose combination antibiotic that has been approved in Europe and the United States for patients with complicated urinary tract infections (cUTIs) based on results of a Phase III, randomized, comparative study (RECAPTURE study). The present analysis evaluated cost-effectiveness of CAZ-AVI as an empirical treatment for hospitalized patients with cUTIs from the Italian publicly funded healthcare (third-party payer) perspective. A sequential, patient-level simulation model was developed that followed the clinical course of cUTI and generated 5000 pairs of identical patients (CAZ-AVI or imipenem as empirical treatment). The model included additional impact of resistant pathogens; patients who did not respond to empirical treatment were switched to second-line treatment of colistin+high dose carbapenem in both groups. The time horizon of the model was five years, with an annual discount rate of 3% applied to both costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The analysis demonstrated that an intervention sequence (CAZ-AVI followed by colistin+high dose carbapenem) compared with a comparator sequence (imipenem followed by colistin+high dose carbapenem) was associated with a net incremental cost of 1015 per patient but provided better health outcomes in terms of clinical cure (97.65% vs. 91.08%; ∆â¯=â¯6.57%), shorter hospital stays (10.65 vs. 12.55 days; ∆â¯=â¯1.90 days), and QALYs gained per patient (4.190 vs. 4.063; ∆â¯=â¯0.126). The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was 8039/QALY, which is well below the willingness-to-pay threshold of 30 000/QALY in Italy. The results showed that CAZ-AVI is expected to be a cost-effective treatment compared with imipenem for cUTI in Italy.
Subject(s)
Anti-Bacterial Agents/economics , Azabicyclo Compounds/economics , Ceftazidime/economics , Cost-Benefit Analysis/methods , Imipenem/economics , Length of Stay/economics , Urinary Tract Infections/drug therapy , Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Azabicyclo Compounds/therapeutic use , Carbapenems/economics , Carbapenems/therapeutic use , Ceftazidime/therapeutic use , Colistin/economics , Colistin/therapeutic use , Drug Combinations , Europe , Gram-Negative Bacteria/drug effects , Humans , Imipenem/therapeutic use , National Health Programs , United States , Urinary Tract Infections/microbiologyABSTRACT
Background: The rising incidence of resistance to currently available antibiotics among pathogens, particularly Gram-negative pathogens, in complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAIs) has become a challenge for clinicians. Ceftazidime/avibactam (CAZ-AVI) is a fixed-dose antibiotic approved in Europe and the United States for treating (in combination with metronidazole) cIAI in adult hospitalised patients who have limited or no alternative treatment options. The approval was based on the results of RECLAIM, a Phase III, parallel-group, comparative study (RECLAIM 1 [NCT01499290] and RECLAIM 2 [NCT01500239]). The objective of our study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of CAZ-AVI plus metronidazole compared with 1) ceftolozane/tazobactam plus metronidazole and 2) meropenem, as an empiric treatment for the management of cIAI in Italy. Methods: A sequential, patient-level simulation model, with a 5-year time horizon and 3% annual discount rate (applied to both costs and health benefits), was developed using Microsoft Excel® to demonstrate the clinical course of the disease. The impact of resistant pathogens was included as an additional factor. Results: In the base-case analysis, the CAZ-AVI sequence (CAZ-AVI plus metronidazole followed by a colistin + tigecycline + high-dose meropenem combination after treatment failure), when compared to sequences for ceftolozane/tazobactam (ceftolozane/tazobactam plus metronidazole followed by colistin + tigecycline + high-dose meropenem after treatment failure) and meropenem (meropenem followed by colistin + tigecycline + high-dose meropenem after treatment failure), had better clinical outcomes with higher cure rates (93.04% vs. 91.52%; 92.98% vs. 90.24%, respectively), shorter hospital stays (∆ = - 0.38 and ∆ = - 1.24 days per patient, respectively), and higher quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained per patient (4.021 vs. 3.982; 4.019 vs. 3.960, respectively). The incremental cost effectiveness ratio in the CAZ-AVI sequence was 4099 and 15,574 per QALY gained versus each comparator sequence, respectively, well below the willingness-to-pay threshold of 30,000 per QALY accepted in Italy. Conclusions: The model results demonstrated that CAZ-AVI plus metronidazole could be a cost-effective alternative when compared with other antibiotic treatment options, as it is expected to provide better clinical benefits in hospitalised patients with cIAI in Italy.
Subject(s)
Anti-Bacterial Agents/therapeutic use , Azabicyclo Compounds/therapeutic use , Ceftazidime/therapeutic use , Cephalosporins/therapeutic use , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Intraabdominal Infections/drug therapy , Meropenem/therapeutic use , Tazobactam/therapeutic use , Adult , Anti-Bacterial Agents/economics , Azabicyclo Compounds/economics , Bacterial Infections/complications , Bacterial Infections/drug therapy , Bacterial Infections/economics , Ceftazidime/economics , Cephalosporins/economics , Drug Combinations , Hospitalization/economics , Humans , Intraabdominal Infections/economics , Intraabdominal Infections/microbiology , Italy , Meropenem/economics , Models, Economic , Tazobactam/economicsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The need for antimicrobial therapies effective against multidrug resistant organisms for children remains unmet. Tigecycline shows antibacterial activity across a broad spectrum of bacteria and is approved for treating complicated skin and skin-structure infections, complicated intra-abdominal infections and, in the United States, community-acquired bacterial pneumonia for adult patients. No blinded, randomized phase 3 tigecycline clinical trials on neonates or children have been completed or planned. This review aimed to provide a comprehensive synthesis of all the existing data sources, both on-label and off-label, for tigecycline use in children. METHODS: Data on tigecycline use in children were identified from published and unpublished sources including clinical trials, expanded access and compassionate use programs, databases of healthcare records and patient safety monitoring. RESULTS: Pharmacokinetic simulations predicted that tigecycline 1.2 mg/kg (maximum dose 50 mg) every 12 hours (q12h) in children 8-11 years and 50 mg q12h in children 12 to <18 years would achieve exposure similar to adults receiving 50 mg q12h. Available phase 2 pediatric clinical trial data and data from other sources demonstrated similar clinical efficacy between adult and pediatric patients treated with tigecycline. These data showed no new or unexpected safety concerns with tigecycline in children. CONCLUSIONS: Information presented here may help guide the appropriate use of tigecycline in children with multidrug resistant infections. Continued pharmacovigilance from real-world observational studies may also further refine appropriate use of tigecycline.