Ceftolozane/tazobactam for hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia due to ESBL-producing Enterobacterales: a subgroup analysis of the ASPECT-NP clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: After the MERINO trial with piperacillin/tazobactam, the efficacy of ß-lactam/tazobactam combinations in serious infections involving extended-spectrum ß-lactamase (ESBL)-producing pathogens merits special evaluation. OBJECTIVES: To further confirm the efficacy of ceftolozane/tazobactam in treating hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (HABP/VABP) involving ESBL-positive and/or AmpC-producing Enterobacterales. METHODS: Retrospective subgroup analysis of the ASPECT-NP trial comparing ceftolozane/tazobactam with meropenem for treating HABP/VABP in mechanically ventilated adults (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02070757). ESBLs were identified using whole genome sequencing. Chromosomal AmpC production was quantified employing a high-sensitivity mRNA transcription assay. RESULTS: Overall, 61/726 (8.4%) participants had all baseline lower respiratory tract (LRT) isolates susceptible to both study treatments and ≥1 baseline ESBL-positive/AmpC-overproducing Enterobacterales isolate. In this subgroup (ceftolozane/tazobactam n = 30, meropenem n = 31), baseline characteristics were generally comparable between treatment arms. The most frequent ESBL-positive and/or AmpC-overproducing Enterobacterales isolates (ceftolozane/tazobactam n = 31, meropenem n = 35) overall were Klebsiella pneumoniae (50.0%), Escherichia coli (22.7%), and Proteus mirabilis (7.6%). The most prevalent ESBLs were CTX-M-15 (75.8%), other CTX-M (19.7%), and SHV (4.5%); 10.6% of isolates overproduced chromosomal AmpC. Overall, 28 day all-cause mortality was 6.7% (2/30) with ceftolozane/tazobactam and 32.3% (10/31) with meropenem (25.6% difference, 95% CI: 5.54 to 43.84). Clinical cure rate at test-of-cure, 7-14 days after end of therapy, was 73.3% (22/30) with ceftolozane/tazobactam and 61.3% (19/31) with meropenem (12.0% difference, 95% CI: -11.21 to +33.51). Per-isolate microbiological response at test-of-cure was 64.5% (20/31) with ceftolozane/tazobactam and 74.3% (26/35) with meropenem (-9.8% difference, 95% CI: -30.80 to +12.00). CONCLUSIONS: These data confirm ceftolozane/tazobactam as an effective treatment option for HABP/VABP involving ceftolozane/tazobactam-susceptible ESBL-positive and/or AmpC-producing Enterobacterales.

Clinical and microbiological outcomes, by causative pathogen, in the ASPECT-NP randomized, controlled, Phase 3 trial comparing ceftolozane/tazobactam and meropenem for treatment of hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia.

OBJECTIVES: In the ASPECT-NP trial, ceftolozane/tazobactam was non-inferior to meropenem for treating nosocomial pneumonia; efficacy outcomes by causative pathogen were to be evaluated. METHODS: Mechanically ventilated participants with hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia were randomized to 3 g ceftolozane/tazobactam (2 g ceftolozane/1 g tazobactam) q8h or 1 g meropenem q8h. Lower respiratory tract (LRT) cultures were obtained ≤36 h before first dose; pathogen identification and susceptibility were confirmed at a central laboratory. Prospective secondary per-pathogen endpoints included 28 day all-cause mortality (ACM), and clinical and microbiological response at test of cure (7-14 days after the end of therapy) in the microbiological ITT (mITT) population. RESULTS: The mITT population comprised 511 participants (264 ceftolozane/tazobactam, 247 meropenem). Baseline LRT pathogens included Klebsiella pneumoniae (34.6%), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (25.0%) and Escherichia coli (18.2%). Among baseline Enterobacterales isolates, 171/456 (37.5%) were ESBL positive. For Gram-negative baseline LRT pathogens, susceptibility rates were 87.0% for ceftolozane/tazobactam and 93.3% for meropenem. For Gram-negative pathogens, 28 day ACM [52/259 (20.1%) and 62/240 (25.8%)], clinical cure rates [157/259 (60.6%) and 137/240 (57.1%)] and microbiological eradication rates [189/259 (73.0%) and 163/240 (67.9%)] were comparable with ceftolozane/tazobactam and meropenem, respectively. Per-pathogen microbiological eradication for Enterobacterales [145/195 (74.4%) and 129/185 (69.7%); 95% CI: -4.37 to 13.58], ESBL-producing Enterobacterales [56/84 (66.7%) and 52/73 (71.2%); 95% CI: -18.56 to 9.93] and P. aeruginosa [47/63 (74.6%) and 41/65 (63.1%); 95% CI: -4.51 to 19.38], respectively, were also comparable. CONCLUSIONS: In mechanically ventilated participants with nosocomial pneumonia owing to Gram-negative pathogens, ceftolozane/tazobactam was comparable with meropenem for per-pathogen 28 day ACM and clinical and microbiological response.

Outcomes in participants with failure of initial antibacterial therapy for hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia prior to enrollment in the randomized, controlled phase 3 ASPECT-NP trial of ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem.

BACKGROUND: Ceftolozane/tazobactam, a combination antibacterial agent comprising an anti-pseudomonal cephalosporin and ß-lactamase inhibitor, is approved for the treatment of hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (HABP/VABP) in adults. Participants in the ASPECT-NP trial received ceftolozane/tazobactam (3 g [2 g ceftolozane/1 g tazobactam] every 8 h) or meropenem (1 g every 8 h). Participants failing prior antibacterial therapy for the current HABP/VABP episode at study entry had lower 28-day all-cause mortality (ACM) rates with ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem treatment. Here, we report a post hoc analysis examining this result. METHODS: The phase 3, randomized, controlled, double-blind, multicenter, noninferiority trial compared ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem for treatment of adults with ventilated HABP/VABP; eligibility included those failing prior antibacterial therapy for the current HABP/VABP episode at study entry. The primary and key secondary endpoints were 28-day ACM and clinical response at test of cure (TOC), respectively. Participants who were failing prior therapy were a prospectively defined subgroup; however, subgroup analyses were not designed for noninferiority testing. The 95% CIs for treatment differences were calculated as unstratified Newcombe CIs. Post hoc analyses were performed using multivariable logistic regression analysis to determine the impact of baseline characteristics and treatment on clinical outcomes in the subgroup who were failing prior antibacterial therapy. RESULTS: In the ASPECT-NP trial, 12.8% of participants (93/726; ceftolozane/tazobactam, n = 53; meropenem, n = 40) were failing prior antibacterial therapy at study entry. In this subgroup, 28-day ACM was higher in participants who received meropenem versus ceftolozane/tazobactam (18/40 [45.0%] vs 12/53 [22.6%]; percentage difference [95% CI]: 22.4% [3.1 to 40.1]). Rates of clinical response at TOC were 26/53 [49.1%] for ceftolozane/tazobactam versus 15/40 [37.5%] for meropenem (percentage difference [95% CI]: 11.6% [- 8.6 to 30.2]). Multivariable regression analysis determined concomitant vasopressor use and treatment with meropenem were significant factors associated with risk of 28-day ACM. Adjusting for vasopressor use, the risk of dying after treatment with ceftolozane/tazobactam was approximately one-fourth the risk of dying after treatment with meropenem. CONCLUSIONS: This post hoc analysis further supports the previously demonstrated lower ACM rate for ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem among participants who were failing prior therapy, despite the lack of significant differences in clinical cure rates. CLINICALTRIALS: gov registration NCT02070757 . Registered February 25, 2014, clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02070757 .

Molecular Characterization of Baseline Enterobacterales and Pseudomonas aeruginosa Isolates from a Phase 3 Nosocomial Pneumonia (ASPECT-NP) Clinical Trial.

We reviewed ß-lactam-resistant baseline Enterobacterales species and Pseudomonas aeruginosa lower respiratory tract isolates collected during the ASPECT-NP phase 3 clinical trial that evaluated the safety and efficacy of ceftolozane-tazobactam compared with meropenem for the treatment of nosocomial pneumonia in ventilated adults. Isolates were subjected to whole-genome sequencing, real-time PCR for the quantification of the expression levels of ß-lactamase and efflux pump genes, and Western blot analysis for the detection of OprD (P. aeruginosa only). Extended-spectrum ß-lactamase (ESBL) genes were detected in 168 of 262 Enterobacterales isolates, and among these, blaCTX-M-15 was the most common, detected in 125 isolates. Sixty-one Enterobacterales isolates carried genes encoding carbapenemases, while 33 isolates did not carry ESBLs or carbapenemases. Carbapenemase-producing isolates carried mainly NDM and OXA-48 variants, with ceftolozane-tazobactam MIC values ranging from 4 to 128 µg/ml. Most ceftolozane-tazobactam-nonsusceptible Enterobacterales isolates that did not carry carbapenemases were Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates that exhibited disrupted OmpK35, specific mutations in OmpK36, and, in some isolates, elevated expression of blaCTX-M-15 Among 89 P. aeruginosa isolates, carbapenemases and ESBL-encoding genes were observed in 12 and 22 isolates, respectively. P. aeruginosa isolates without acquired ß-lactamases displaying elevated expression of AmpC (14 isolates), elevated expression of efflux pumps (11 isolates), and/or a decrease or loss of OprD (22 isolates) were susceptible to ceftolozane-tazobactam. Ceftolozane-tazobactam was active against >75% of the Enterobacterales isolates from the ASPECT-NP trial that did not carry carbapenemases. K. pneumoniae strains resistant to ceftolozane-tazobactam might represent a challenge for treatment due to their multiple resistance mechanisms. Ceftolozane-tazobactam was among the agents that displayed the greatest activity against P. aeruginosa isolates. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under registration no. NCT02070757.).

Ceftolozane/tazobactam probability of target attainment and outcomes in participants with augmented renal clearance from the randomized phase 3 ASPECT-NP trial.

BACKGROUND: The randomized, double-blind, phase 3 ASPECT-NP trial evaluated the efficacy of 3 g of ceftolozane/tazobactam (C/T) versus 1 g of meropenem infused every 8 h for 8 to 14 days for treatment of adults with hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia (HABP) or ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (VABP). We assessed the probability of target attainment and compared efficacy outcomes from ASPECT-NP in participants with augmented renal clearance (ARC) versus those with normal renal function. METHODS: Baseline renal function was categorized as normal renal function (creatinine clearance 80-130 mL/min) or ARC (creatinine clearance > 130 mL/min). Population pharmacokinetic models informed Monte Carlo simulations to assess probability of target attainment in plasma and pulmonary epithelial lining fluid. Outcomes included 28-day all-cause mortality and clinical cure and per-participant microbiologic cure rates at the test-of-cure visit. RESULTS: A > 99% and > 80% probability of target attainment was demonstrated for ceftolozane and tazobactam, respectively, in simulated plasma and epithelial lining fluid. Within treatment arms, 28-day all-cause mortality rates in participants with normal renal function (C/T, n = 131; meropenem, n = 123) and ARC (C/T, n = 96; meropenem, n = 113) were comparable (data comparisons presented as rate; treatment difference [95% CI]) (C/T: normal renal function, 17.6%; ARC, 17.7%; 0.2 [- 9.6 to 10.6]; meropenem: normal renal function, 20.3%; ARC, 17.7%; - 2.6 [- 12.6 to 7.5]). Clinical cure rates at test-of-cure were also comparable across renal function groups within treatment arms (C/T: normal renal function, 57.3%; ARC, 59.4%; - 2.1 [- 14.8 to 10.8]; meropenem: normal renal function, 59.3%; ARC, 57.5%; 1.8 [- 10.6 to 14.2]). Per-participant microbiologic cure rates at test-of-cure were consistent across renal function groups within treatment arms (C/T: normal renal function, 72.2% [n/N = 70/97]; ARC, 71.4% [n/N = 55/77]; 0.7 [- 12.4 to 14.2]; meropenem: normal renal function, 75.0% [n/N = 66/88]; ARC, 70.0% [n/N = 49/70]; 5.0 [- 8.7 to 19.0]). CONCLUSIONS: C/T and meropenem resulted in 28-day all-cause mortality, clinical cure, and microbiologic cure rates that were comparable between participants with ARC or normal renal function. In conjunction with high probability of target attainment, these results confirm that C/T (3 g) every 8 h is appropriate in patients with HABP/VABP and ARC. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02070757, registered February 25, 2014; EudraCT: 2012-002862-11.

Ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem in patients with ventilated hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia: subset analysis of the ASPECT-NP randomized, controlled phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Ceftolozane/tazobactam is approved for treatment of hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (HABP/VABP) at double the dose approved for other infection sites. Among nosocomial pneumonia subtypes, ventilated HABP (vHABP) is associated with the lowest survival. In the ASPECT-NP randomized, controlled trial, participants with vHABP treated with ceftolozane/tazobactam had lower 28-day all-cause mortality (ACM) than those receiving meropenem. We conducted a series of post hoc analyses to explore the clinical significance of this finding. METHODS: ASPECT-NP was a multinational, phase 3, noninferiority trial comparing ceftolozane/tazobactam with meropenem for treating vHABP and VABP; study design, efficacy, and safety results have been reported previously. The primary endpoint was 28-day ACM. The key secondary endpoint was clinical response at test-of-cure. Participants with vHABP were a prospectively defined subgroup, but subgroup analyses were not powered for noninferiority testing. We compared baseline and treatment factors, efficacy, and safety between ceftolozane/tazobactam and meropenem in participants with vHABP. We also conducted a retrospective multivariable logistic regression analysis in this subgroup to determine the impact of treatment arm on mortality when adjusted for significant prognostic factors. RESULTS: Overall, 99 participants in the ceftolozane/tazobactam and 108 in the meropenem arm had vHABP. 28-day ACM was 24.2% and 37.0%, respectively, in the intention-to-treat population (95% confidence interval [CI] for difference: 0.2, 24.8) and 18.2% and 36.6%, respectively, in the microbiologic intention-to-treat population (95% CI 2.5, 32.5). Clinical cure rates in the intention-to-treat population were 50.5% and 44.4%, respectively (95% CI - 7.4, 19.3). Baseline clinical, baseline microbiologic, and treatment factors were comparable between treatment arms. Multivariable regression identified concomitant vasopressor use and baseline bacteremia as significantly impacting ACM in ASPECT-NP; adjusting for these two factors, the odds of dying by day 28 were 2.3-fold greater when participants received meropenem instead of ceftolozane/tazobactam. CONCLUSIONS: There were no underlying differences between treatment arms expected to have biased the observed survival advantage with ceftolozane/tazobactam in the vHABP subgroup. After adjusting for clinically relevant factors found to impact ACM significantly in this trial, the mortality risk in participants with vHABP was over twice as high when treated with meropenem compared with ceftolozane/tazobactam. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02070757. Registered 25 February, 2014, clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02070757.

Outcomes in Participants with Renal Impairment from a Phase 3 Clinical Trial for Ceftolozane/Tazobactam Treatment of Nosocomial Pneumonia (ASPECT-NP).

In the phase 3 ASPECT-NP trial (NCT02070757), ceftolozane/tazobactam (C/T) was noninferior to meropenem for treatment of Gram-negative ventilated hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia and ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (vHABP/VABP). Here, we report outcomes in participants from ASPECT-NP with renal impairment (RI). Participants were categorized by their baseline renal function as follows: normal renal function (NRF; creatinine clearance [CLCR], ≥80 ml/min), mild RI (CLCR, >50 to <80 ml/min), moderate RI (CLCR, ≥30 to ≤50 ml/min), and severe RI (CLCR, ≥15 to <30 ml/min). Dosing of both study drugs was adjusted based on renal function. The following C/T doses were administered every 8 h: NRF or mild RI, 3 g; moderate RI, 1.5 g; and severe RI, 0.75 g. The primary and key secondary endpoints were day 28 all-cause mortality (ACM) and clinical response at the test-of-cure visit in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population, respectively. In the ITT population, day 28 ACM rates for the C/T arm versus the meropenem arm were 17.6% versus 19.1% (NRF), 36.6% versus 28.6% (mild RI), 31.4% versus 38.5% (moderate RI), and 35.3% versus 61.9% (severe RI). Rates of clinical cure in the ITT population for the C/T arm versus the meropenem arm were 58.1% versus 58.5% (NRF), 54.9% versus 45.5% (mild RI), 37.1% versus 42.3% (moderate RI), and 41.2% versus 47.6% (severe RI). Small sample sizes in the RI groups resulted in large 95% confidence intervals (CIs), limiting conclusive interpretation of the analysis. Both drugs were well tolerated across all renal function groups. Overall, these results support the use of the study dosing regimens of C/T for treatment of vHABP/VABP in patients with RI. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under identifier NCT02070757.).

Efficacy of ceftolozane/tazobactam against urinary tract and intra-abdominal infections caused by ESBL-producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae: a pooled analysis of Phase 3 clinical trials.

OBJECTIVES: The increase in infections caused by drug-resistant ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae (ESBL-ENT) is a global concern. The characteristics and outcomes of patients infected with ESBL-ENT were examined in a pooled analysis of Phase 3 clinical trials of ceftolozane/tazobactam in patients with complicated urinary tract infections (ASPECT-cUTI) and complicated intra-abdominal infections (ASPECT-cIAI). METHODS: Trials were randomized and double blind. The ASPECT-cUTI regimen was 7 days of either intravenous ceftolozane/tazobactam (1.5 g) every 8 h or levofloxacin (750 mg) once daily. The ASPECT-cIAI regimen was 4-14 days of either intravenous ceftolozane/tazobactam (1.5 g) plus metronidazole (500 mg) or meropenem (1 g) every 8 h. Baseline cultures were obtained in both indications. Enterobacteriaceae were selected for ESBL characterization based on predefined criteria and were verified genotypically. Outcomes were assessed at the test-of-cure visit 5-9 days post-therapy in ASPECT-cUTI and 24-32 days post-randomization in ASPECT-cIAI among microbiologically evaluable (ME) patients. RESULTS: Of 2076 patients randomized, 1346 were included in the pooled ME population and 150 of 1346 (11.1%) had ESBL-ENT at baseline. At US FDA/EUCAST breakpoints of ≤2/≤1 mg/L, 81.8%/72.3% of ESBL-ENT (ESBL-Escherichia coli, 95%/88.1%; ESBL-Klebsiella pneumoniae, 56.7%/36.7%) were susceptible to ceftolozane/tazobactam versus 25.3%/24.1% susceptible to levofloxacin and 98.3%/98.3% susceptible to meropenem at CLSI/EUCAST breakpoints. Clinical cure rates for ME patients with ESBL-ENT were 97.4% (76/78) for ceftolozane/tazobactam [ESBL-E. coli, 98.0% (49 of 50); ESBL-K. pneumoniae, 94.4% (17 of 18)], 82.6% (38 of 46) for levofloxacin and 88.5% (23 of 26) for meropenem. CONCLUSIONS: Randomized trial data demonstrated high clinical cure rates with ceftolozane/tazobactam treatment of cIAI and cUTI caused by ESBL-ENT.

Analysis of patients with diabetes and complicated intra-abdominal infection or complicated urinary tract infection in phase 3 trials of ceftolozane/tazobactam.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes mellitus and hyperglycemia are associated with increased susceptibility to bacterial infections and poor treatment outcomes. This post hoc evaluation of the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAI) and complicated urinary tract infections (cUTI) aimed to evaluate baseline characteristics, efficacy, and safety in patients with and without diabetes treated with ceftolozane/tazobactam and comparators. Ceftolozane/tazobactam is an antibacterial with potent activity against Gram-negative pathogens and is approved for the treatment of cIAI (with metronidazole) and cUTI (including pyelonephritis). METHODS: Patients from the phase 3 ASPECT studies with (n = 245) and without (n = 1802) diabetes were compared to evaluate the baseline characteristics, efficacy, and safety of ceftolozane/tazobactam and active comparators. RESULTS: Significantly more patients with than without diabetes were 65 years of age or older; patients with diabetes were also more likely to weigh ≥75 kg at baseline (57.1% vs 44.5%), to have renal impairment (48.5% vs 30.2%), or to have APACHE II scores ≥10 (33.8% vs 17.0%). More patients with diabetes had comorbidities and an increased incidence of complicating factors in both cIAI and cUTI. Clinical cIAI and composite cure cUTI rates across study treatments were lower in patients with than without diabetes (cIAI, 75.4% vs 86.1%, P = 0.0196; cUTI, 62.4% vs 74.7%, P = 0.1299) but were generally similar between the ceftolozane/tazobactam and active comparator treatment groups. However, significantly higher composite cure rates were reported with ceftolozane/tazobactam than with levofloxacin in patients without diabetes with cUTI (79.5% vs 69.9%; P = 0.0048). Significantly higher rates of adverse events observed in patients with diabetes were likely due to comorbidities because treatment-related adverse events were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this post hoc analysis, patients with diabetes in general were older, heavier, and had a greater number of complicating comorbidities. Patients with diabetes had lower cure rates and a significantly higher frequency of adverse events than patients without diabetes, likely because of the higher rates of medical complications in this subgroup. Ceftolozane/tazobactam was shown to be at least as effective as comparators in treating cUTI and cIAI in this population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: cIAI, NCT01445665 and NCT01445678 (both trials registered prospectively on September 26, 2011); cUTI, NCT01345929 and NCT01345955 (both trials registered prospectively on April 28, 2011).

Efficacy of ceftolozane/tazobactam versus levofloxacin in the treatment of complicated urinary tract infections (cUTIs) caused by levofloxacin-resistant pathogens: results from the ASPECT-cUTI trial.

OBJECTIVES: Empirical fluoroquinolone therapy is widely used in treating complicated urinary tract infections (cUTIs), even in areas of high fluoroquinolone resistance. While it is believed that high antibiotic concentrations in urine might be sufficient to overcome and effectively treat infections caused by resistant bacteria, clinical trial data validating this assumption are limited. This post hoc analysis evaluated the efficacy of ceftolozane/tazobactam versus levofloxacin in the subgroup of patients with cUTIs caused by levofloxacin-resistant pathogens in a randomized, controlled trial (NCT01345929/NCT01345955). METHODS: Hospitalized adults with cUTI/pyelonephritis were randomized to 7 days of 1.5 g of ceftolozane/tazobactam every 8 h or 750 mg of levofloxacin once daily, before availability of culture and susceptibility data. A composite of microbiological eradication and clinical cure 5 to 9 days post-therapy was assessed in the microbiological modified ITT (mMITT; n = 800) and microbiologically evaluable (ME; n = 694) populations. RESULTS: In the mMITT population, there were 212 patients (26.5%) with at least one baseline uropathogen that was resistant to levofloxacin. The majority of uropathogens in this subgroup were Enterobacteriaceae (n = 186) that were susceptible to ceftolozane/tazobactam [MIC ≤2 mg/L, 88.7% (165/186)]. Among patients with levofloxacin-resistant pathogens, ceftolozane/tazobactam demonstrated significantly higher composite cure rates than levofloxacin in both the mMITT [60.0% (60/100) versus 39.3% (44/112); 95% CI for the treatment difference, 7.2%-33.2%] and ME [64.0% (57/89) versus 43.4% (43/99); 95% CI for the treatment difference, 6.3%-33.7%] populations, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: High urinary levels of levofloxacin did not reliably cure cUTIs. Seven day treatment with ceftolozane/tazobactam was more effective than high-dose levofloxacin treatment in patients with cUTI caused by levofloxacin-resistant bacteria, and it may be an alternative treatment in settings of increased fluoroquinolone resistance.

Subgroup analysis of phase 2 study of ceftolozane/tazobactam in neonates and young infants with pyelonephritis.

Ceftolozane/tazobactam is approved for the treatment of patients from birth to <18 y old with complicated urinary tract infections (cUTI). This post hoc analysis evaluated the safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics (PK) of ceftolozane/tazobactam compared with meropenem in neonates and young infants. NCT03230838 was a phase 2, randomized, active comparator-controlled, double-blind study of patients from birth to <18 y of age with cUTI, including pyelonephritis, given ceftolozane/tazobactam or meropenem in a 3:1 ratio. This subset analysis included only neonates and young infants < 3 mo of age. The microbiologic modified intent-to-treat population (mMITT) included 20 patients (ceftolozane/tazobactam, n = 14; meropenem, n = 6). All patients had pyelonephritis at baseline; two patients in each treatment group had bacteremia (overall 4/20, 20%). Escherichia coli was the most common baseline pathogen (overall 16/20, 80%). Safety and efficacy results were similar between treatment groups and consistent with the overall pediatric population. There were no serious drug-related adverse events (AEs), no discontinuations due to AEs, and no AEs leading to death in either treatment group. For the ceftolozane/tazobactam and meropenem treatment groups, clinical cure rates in the mMITT population were 92.9% and 100%, respectively. The population PK analysis of neonates and young infants demonstrated similar ceftolozane and tazobactam exposures to those of adults, achieving pharmacodynamic targets associated with clinical and microbiologic cure. Ceftolozane/tazobactam has a favorable safety profile and achieves high clinical cure and microbiologic eradication rates in neonates and young infants < 3 mo of age with cUTI and pyelonephritis. IMPORTANCE Extrapolation of antibacterial agent pharmacokinetics from adults to newborns and young infants may not be appropriate; similarly, the clinical manifestations of infectious diseases and outcomes following antibacterial treatment may not be similar. Ceftolozane/tazobactam is an antibacterial drug combination active against Pseudomonas aeruginosa and other multidrug-resistant gram-negative bacteria. A clinical study led to the approval for ceftolozane/tazobactam in patients from birth to 18 y of age who have complicated urinary tract infections, including those with serious kidney infections. Based on data collected during that clinical study, we compared newborns and young infants who were treated with ceftolozane/tazobactam (14 patients) and those who were treated with meropenem (6 patients). We found that ceftolozane/tazobactam treatment of newborns and young infants up to 3 mo of age who have complicated urinary tract infections demonstrated a favorable safety profile and high clinical cure and microbiologic eradication rates, similar to meropenem.

Outcomes in participants with ventilated nosocomial pneumonia and organ failure treated with ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem: a subset analysis of the phase 3, randomized, controlled ASPECT-NP trial.

BACKGROUND: The pivotal ASPECT-NP trial showed ceftolozane/tazobactam was non-inferior to meropenem for the treatment of ventilated hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (vHABP/VABP). Here, we evaluated treatment outcomes by degree of respiratory or cardiovascular dysfunction. METHODS: This was a subset analysis of data from ASPECT-NP, a randomized, double-blind, non-inferiority trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02070757). Adults with vHABP/VABP were randomized 1:1 to 3 g ceftolozane/tazobactam or 1 g meropenem every 8 h for 8-14 days. Outcomes in participants with a baseline respiratory component of the Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (R-SOFA) ≥ 2 (indicative of severe respiratory failure), cardiovascular component of the SOFA score (CV-SOFA) ≥ 2 (indicative of shock), or R-SOFA ≥ 2 plus CV-SOFA ≥ 2 were compared by treatment arm. The efficacy endpoint of primary interest was 28-day all-cause mortality. Clinical response, time to death, and microbiologic response were also evaluated. RESULTS: There were 726 participants in the intention-to-treat population; 633 with R-SOFA ≥ 2 (312 ceftolozane/tazobactam, 321 meropenem), 183 with CV-SOFA ≥ 2 (84 ceftolozane/tazobactam, 99 meropenem), and 160 with R-SOFA ≥ 2 plus CV-SOFA ≥ 2 (69 ceftolozane/tazobactam, 91 meropenem). Baseline characteristics, including causative pathogens, were generally similar in participants with R-SOFA ≥ 2 or CV-SOFA ≥ 2 across treatment arms. The 28-day all-cause mortality rate was 23.7% and 24.0% [difference: 0.3%, 95% confidence interval (CI) - 6.4, 6.9] for R-SOFA ≥ 2, 33.3% and 30.3% (difference: - 3.0%, 95% CI - 16.4, 10.3) for CV-SOFA ≥ 2, and 34.8% and 30.8% (difference: - 4.0%, 95% CI - 18.6, 10.3), respectively, for R-SOFA ≥ 2 plus CV-SOFA ≥ 2. Clinical cure rates were as follows: 55.8% and 54.2% (difference: 1.6%, 95% CI - 6.2, 9.3) for R-SOFA ≥ 2, 53.6% and 55.6% (difference: - 2.0%, 95% CI - 16.1, 12.2) for CV-SOFA ≥ 2, and 53.6% and 56.0% (difference: - 2.4%, 95% CI - 17.6, 12.8), respectively, for R-SOFA ≥ 2 plus CV-SOFA ≥ 2. Time to death was comparable in all SOFA groups across both treatment arms. A higher rate of microbiologic eradication/presumed eradication was observed for CV-SOFA ≥ 2 and R-SOFA ≥ 2 plus CV-SOFA ≥ 2 with ceftolozane/tazobactam compared to meropenem. CONCLUSIONS: The presence of severe respiratory failure or shock did not affect the relative efficacy of ceftolozane/tazobactam versus meropenem; either agent may be used to treat critically ill patients with vHABP/VABP. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02070757. Registered 25 February 2014, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02070757.

Safety and Efficacy of Ceftolozane/Tazobactam Plus Metronidazole Versus Meropenem From a Phase 2, Randomized Clinical Trial in Pediatric Participants With Complicated Intra-abdominal Infection.

BACKGROUND: Ceftolozane/tazobactam, a cephalosporin-ß-lactamase inhibitor combination, is approved for the treatment of complicated urinary tract infections and complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAI). The safety and efficacy of ceftolozane/tazobactam in pediatric participants with cIAI were assessed. METHODS: This phase 2 study (NCT03217136) randomized participants to either ceftolozane/tazobactam+metronidazole or meropenem for treatment of cIAI in pediatric participants (<18 years). The primary objective was to assess the safety and tolerability of intravenous ceftolozane/tazobactam+metronidazole. Clinical cure at end of treatment (EOT) and test of cure (TOC) visits were secondary end points. RESULTS: The modified intent-to-treat (MITT) population included 91 participants (ceftolozane/tazobactam+metronidazole, n = 70; meropenem, n = 21). Complicated appendicitis was the most common diagnosis (93.4%); Escherichia coli was the most common pathogen (65.9%). Adverse events (AEs) occurred in 80.0% and 61.9% of participants receiving ceftolozane/tazobactam+metronidazole and meropenem, drug-related AEs occurred in 18.6% and 14.3% and serious AEs occurred in 11.4% and 0% of participants receiving ceftolozane/tazobactam+metronidazole and meropenem, respectively. No drug-related serious AEs or discontinuations due to drug-related AEs occurred. Rates of the clinical cure for ceftolozane/tazobactam+metronidazole and meropenem at EOT were 80.0% and 95.2% (difference: -14.3; 95% confidence interval: -26.67 to 4.93) and at TOC were 80.0% and 100.0% (difference: -19.1; 95% confidence interval: -30.18 to -2.89), respectively; 6 of the 14 clinical failures for ceftolozane/tazobactam+metronidazole at TOC were indeterminate responses imputed as failures per protocol. CONCLUSION: Ceftolozane/tazobactam+metronidazole was well tolerated in pediatric participants with cIAI and had a safety profile similar to the established safety profile in adults. In this descriptive efficacy analysis, ceftolozane/tazobactam+metronidazole appeared efficacious.

Safety and Efficacy of Ceftolozane/Tazobactam Versus Meropenem in Neonates and Children With Complicated Urinary Tract Infection, Including Pyelonephritis: A Phase 2, Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Ceftolozane/tazobactam, a cephalosporin-ß-lactamase inhibitor combination, active against multidrug-resistant Gram-negative pathogens, is approved for treatment of adults with complicated urinary tract infections (cUTI). Safety and efficacy of ceftolozane/tazobactam in pediatric participants with cUTI, including pyelonephritis, were assessed. METHODS: This phase 2 study (NCT03230838) compared ceftolozane/tazobactam with meropenem for treatment of cUTI in participants from birth to <18 years of age. The primary objective was safety and tolerability. Key secondary end points included clinical cure and per-participant microbiologic response rates at end of treatment (EOT) and test of cure (TOC) visits. RESULTS: The microbiologic modified intent-to-treat (mMITT) population included 95 participants (ceftolozane/tazobactam, n = 71; meropenem, n = 24). The most common diagnosis and pathogen were pyelonephritis (ceftolozane/tazobactam, 84.5%; meropenem, 79.2%) and Escherichia coli (ceftolozane/tazobactam, 74.6%; meropenem, 87.5%); 5.7% (ceftolozane/tazobactam) and 4.8% (meropenem) of E. coli isolates were extended-spectrum ß-lactamase-producers. Rates of adverse events were similar between treatment groups (any: ceftolozane/tazobactam, 59.0% vs. meropenem, 60.6%; drug-related: ceftolozane/tazobactam, 14.0% vs. meropenem, 15.2%; serious: ceftolozane/tazobactam, 3.0% vs. meropenem, 6.1%). Rates of clinical cure for ceftolozane/tazobactam and meropenem at EOT were 94.4% and 100% and at TOC were 88.7% and 95.8%, respectively. Rates of microbiologic eradication for ceftolozane/tazobactam and meropenem at EOT were 93.0% and 95.8%, and at TOC were 84.5% and 87.5%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Ceftolozane/tazobactam had a favorable safety profile in pediatric participants with cUTI; rates of clinical cure and microbiologic eradication were high and similar to meropenem. Ceftolozane/tazobactam is a safe and effective new treatment option for children with cUTI, especially due to antibacterial-resistant Gram-negative pathogens.

Intrapulmonary penetration of ceftolozane/tazobactam and piperacillin/tazobactam in healthy adult subjects.

OBJECTIVES: Appropriate antibiotic exposure at the site of infection is important for clinically effective therapy. This study compared the epithelial lining fluid (ELF) penetration of ceftolozane/tazobactam, which has potent in vitro activity against many Gram-negative pathogens causing nosocomial pneumonia, with that of piperacillin/tazobactam in healthy adult volunteers. METHODS: In this Phase 1, open-label trial, 51 healthy adult subjects were randomized to receive three doses of either ceftolozane/tazobactam 1.5 g administered every 8 h via a 60 min infusion or piperacillin/tazobactam 4.5 g administered every 6 h via a 30 min infusion. Serial blood samples were obtained for determination of plasma drug concentrations. Bronchoscopy and bronchoalveolar lavage were performed at pre-specified timepoints in five subjects per timepoint in each treatment group to determine the ELF drug concentration. The penetration of individual analytes into the ELF was determined from the ratio of the area under the plasma concentration-time curve in ELF to that in plasma (AUC(ELF)/AUC(plasma)). RESULTS: Plasma and ELF concentrations of ceftolozane, piperacillin and tazobactam increased rapidly, reaching maximal concentrations at the end of the infusion. Mean maximum concentration and AUC from time 0 to the end of the dosing interval (AUC(0-τ)) for ceftolozane in ELF were 21.8 mg/L and 75.1 mg·h/L, respectively. Corresponding values for piperacillin were 58.8 mg/L and 94.5 mg·h/L. The ELF/plasma AUC ratio for ceftolozane was 0.48 compared with 0.26 for piperacillin. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that ceftolozane penetrated well into the ELF following parenteral administration of ceftolozane/tazobactam.

Daptomycin therapy for osteomyelitis: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Daptomycin is a rapidly bactericidal agent with broad coverage against Gram-positive organisms, including Staphylococcus aureus, the most frequent cause of osteomyelitis. The objective of this study was to describe the clinical outcome of patients with non-hardware associated osteomyelitis, and the safety profile of daptomycin in the treatment of these infections. METHODS: All patients with osteomyelitis, excluding concurrent orthopedic foreign body infections, treated with daptomycin and identified between 2007-2008 in a retrospective, multicenter, observational registry, were included. Investigators assessed patient outcome (cured, improved, failed, non-evaluable) at the end of daptomycin therapy. Patients with a successful outcome at the end of daptomycin therapy were reassessed in 2009. All patients were included in the safety analysis; evaluable patients were included in the efficacy analysis. Data was assessed using descriptive statistics. A Kaplan Meier analysis was used to assess time to clinical failure. RESULTS: Two-hundred and nine osteomyelitis patients successfully completed daptomycin therapy in 2007-2008, 71 of which (34%) had a follow-up visit in 2009 and had an evaluable clinical outcome. The median (min, max) daptomycin dose and duration were 6 mg/kg (4, 10) and 42 days (1, 88), respectively. Of the 52 patients with a documented pathogen, S. aureus was the most common (42%); primarily methicillin-resistant S. aureus. All patients were included in the safety analysis; evaluable patients were included in the efficacy analysis. Clinical resolution was reported in 94% (CI - 86.2%, 98.44%) of patients. A Kaplan Meier analysis of time to clinical failure showed that approximately 85% (CI - 64%, 95%) of patients had a continued successful outcome at the time of re-evaluation. Eighteen patients (25%) in the safety population experienced an adverse event; 13 patients (18%) had an adverse event that was possibly-related to daptomycin treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Daptomycin appears to be an effective therapeutic choice with an acceptable safety profile in the management of osteomyelitis that does not involve hardware.

A phase III, multicenter, double-blind, randomized clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ceftolozane/tazobactam plus metronidazole versus meropenem in Chinese participants with complicated intra-abdominal infections.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ceftolozane/tazobactam (C/T) plus metronidazole versus meropenem plus placebo for the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI) in Chinese adult participants. METHODS: In this phase III clinical trial (NCT03830333), Chinese adult participants with cIAI were randomized 1:1 to receive C/T plus metronidazole or meropenem plus placebo. The primary objective was to assess C/T plus metronidazole for noninferiority versus meropenem for clinical response rate at the test of cure (TOC; 28 ± 2 days after study start) visit in the clinically evaluable population. Secondary endpoints included clinical and microbiologic responses at the TOC and end-of-treatment (≤24 hours after last dose) visits and adverse event rates. RESULTS: Clinical cure at the TOC visit in the clinically evaluable population was 95.2% and 93.1% for C/T plus metronidazole and meropenem, respectively (between-treatment difference: 2.1% [95% confidence interval: -4.7%, 8.8%]); thus, noninferiority was met. Clinical responses at the TOC and end-of-treatment visits and microbiologic responses at the TOC visit were consistent with the primary efficacy endpoint. Safety was comparable between study treatment groups. CONCLUSION: In Chinese adult participants with cIAI, C/T plus metronidazole was noninferior to meropenem, with comparable safety.

Evaluating the emergence of nonsusceptibility among Pseudomonas aeruginosa respiratory isolates from a phase-3 clinical trial for treatment of nosocomial pneumonia (ASPECT-NP).

OBJECTIVES: The emergence of nonsusceptibility to ceftolozane/tazobactam and meropenem was evaluated among Pseudomonas aeruginosa (P. aeruginosa) lower respiratory tract isolates obtained from participants in the ASPECT-NP clinical trial. METHODS: ASPECT-NP was a phase-3, randomised, double-blind, multicentre trial that demonstrated noninferiority of 3 g ceftolozane/tazobactam q8h versus 1 g meropenem q8h for treatment of ventilated hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia. Molecular resistance mechanisms among postbaseline nonsusceptible P. aeruginosa isolates and clinical outcomes associated with participants with emergence of nonsusceptibility were examined. Baseline susceptible and postbaseline nonsusceptible P. aeruginosa isolate pairs from the same participant underwent molecular typing. RESULTS: Emergence of nonsusceptibility was not observed among the 59 participants with baseline susceptible P. aeruginosa isolates in the ceftolozane/tazobactam arm. Among 58 participants with baseline susceptible P. aeruginosa isolates in the meropenem arm, emergence of nonsusceptibility was observed in 13 (22.4%). Among participants who received ceftolozane/tazobactam and meropenem, 5.1% and 3.4% had a new infection with a nonsusceptible strain, respectively. None of the isolates with emergence of nonsusceptibility to meropenem developed co-resistance to ceftolozane/tazobactam. The molecular mechanisms associated with emergence of nonsusceptibility to meropenem were decreased expression or loss of OprD and overexpression of MexXY. CONCLUSIONS: Among participants with emergence of nonsusceptibility to meropenem, clinical outcomes were similar to overall clinical outcomes in the ASPECT-NP meropenem arm. Ceftolozane/tazobactam was more stable to emergence of nonsusceptibility versus meropenem; emergence of nonsusceptibility was not observed in any participants with baseline susceptible P. aeruginosa who received ceftolozane/tazobactam in ASPECT-NP.

Ceftolozane-tazobactam versus meropenem for treatment of nosocomial pneumonia (ASPECT-NP): a randomised, controlled, double-blind, phase 3, non-inferiority trial.

BACKGROUND: Nosocomial pneumonia due to antimicrobial-resistant pathogens is associated with high mortality. We assessed the efficacy and safety of the combination antibacterial drug ceftolozane-tazobactam versus meropenem for treatment of Gram-negative nosocomial pneumonia. METHODS: We conducted a randomised, controlled, double-blind, non-inferiority trial at 263 hospitals in 34 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, were undergoing mechanical ventilation, and had nosocomial pneumonia (either ventilator-associated pneumonia or ventilated hospital-acquired pneumonia). Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) with block randomisation (block size four), stratified by type of nosocomial pneumonia and age (<65 years vs ≥65 years), to receive either 3 g ceftolozane-tazobactam or 1 g meropenem intravenously every 8 h for 8-14 days. The primary endpoint was 28-day all-cause mortality (at a 10% non-inferiority margin). The key secondary endpoint was clinical response at the test-of-cure visit (7-14 days after the end of therapy; 12·5% non-inferiority margin). Both endpoints were assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Investigators, study staff, patients, and patients' representatives were masked to treatment assignment. Safety was assessed in all randomly assigned patients who received study treatment. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02070757. FINDINGS: Between Jan 16, 2015, and April 27, 2018, 726 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned, 362 to the ceftolozane-tazobactam group and 364 to the meropenem group. Overall, 519 (71%) patients had ventilator-associated pneumonia, 239 (33%) had Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores of at least 20, and 668 (92%) were in the intensive care unit. At 28 days, 87 (24·0%) patients in the ceftolozane-tazobactam group and 92 (25·3%) in the meropenem group had died (weighted treatment difference 1·1% [95% CI -5·1 to 7·4]). At the test-of-cure visit 197 (54%) patients in the ceftolozane-tazobactam group and 194 (53%) in the meropenem group were clinically cured (weighted treatment difference 1·1% [95% CI -6·2 to 8·3]). Ceftolozane-tazobactam was thus non-inferior to meropenem in terms of both 28-day all-cause mortality and clinical cure at test of cure. Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 38 (11%) of 361 patients in the ceftolozane-tazobactam group and 27 (8%) of 359 in the meropenem group. Eight (2%) patients in the ceftolozane-tazobactam group and two (1%) in the meropenem group had serious treatment-related adverse events. There were no treatment-related deaths. INTERPRETATION: High-dose ceftolozane-tazobactam is an efficacious and well tolerated treatment for Gram-negative nosocomial pneumonia in mechanically ventilated patients, a high-risk, critically ill population. FUNDING: Merck & Co.

Ceftolozane/tazobactam dose regimens in severely/morbidly obese patients with complicated intra-abdominal infection or complicated urinary tract infection.

Ceftolozane/tazobactam is approved for treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI) and complicated urinary tract infection (cUTI) with renal function-based dose adjustment. Given that creatinine clearance, body weight and sex are highly correlated in severely/morbidly obese patients, this study investigated whether approved dosing regimens for ceftolozane/tazobactam are appropriate in severely/morbidly obese patients based on simulated pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic target attainment, with confirmation from observed clinical outcomes data from the phase 3 clinical development programme. Using a previously published population pharmacokinetic model, 1000 patients were randomly sampled from an internal pooled database of 201 severely/morbidly obese patients (BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2) and were used for Monte Carlo simulation to test whether the labelled dose regimens can achieve ≥90% probability of a target of 32.2% (1-log kill) time above free ceftolozane concentration against pathogens at an MIC up to 8 mg/L. Clinical outcomes data for severely/morbidly obese patients with cIAI or cUTI from pivotal phase 3 studies were summarised to calculate clinical and composite cure rates as a complimentary support. With the approved renal function-based dosing regimens, >90% target attainment of bactericidal activity was achieved at MICs up to 8 mg/L in the simulated severely/morbidly obese patients with cIAI or cUTI, similar to target attainment in non-obese patients and further confirmed by phase 3 outcomes where cure rates in severely/morbidly obese patients and non-obese patients are similar. Approved dosing regimens of ceftolozane/tazobactam, adjusted according to renal function, can achieve adequate target attainment and high clinical cure rates in severely/morbidly obese patients with cIAI or cUTI.