Cefiderocol: early clinical experience for multi-drug resistant gram-negative infections.

Multi-drug resistant gram-negative bacteria present a significant global health threat. Cefiderocol (CFDC), a siderophore cephalosporin, has shown potential in combating this threat, but with the currently available data, its role in therapy remains poorly defined. This multi-center, retrospective cohort study evaluated the real-world application of CFDC across six U.S. medical centers from January 2018 to May 2023. Patients aged ≥18 years and who had received ≥72 hours of CFDC were included. The primary outcome was a composite of clinical success: survival at 30 days, absence of symptomatic microbiologic recurrence at 30 days following CFDC treatment initiation, and resolution of signs and symptoms. Secondary outcomes included time to CFDC therapy and on-treatment non-susceptibility to CFDC. A total of 112 patients were included, with median (interquartile range [IQR]) APACHE II scores of 15 (19-18). Clinical success was observed in 68.8% of patients, with a mortality rate of 16.1% and comparable success rates across patients infected with carbapenem-resistant gram-negative infections. The most common isolated organisms were Pseudomonas aeruginosa (61/112, 54.5%, of which 55/61 were carbapenem-resistant) and carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (32/112, 28.6%). Median (IQR) time to CFDC therapy was 77 (14-141) hours. Two patients experienced a non-anaphylactic rash as an adverse drug reaction. On-treatment non-susceptibility to CFDC was found in six patients, notably due to P. aeruginosa and A. baumannii.IMPORTANCECFDC was safe and clinically effective as a monotherapy or in combination in treating a variety of carbapenem-resistant gram-negative infections. Further prospective studies are warranted to confirm these findings.

Novel method of calculating adjusted antibiotic use by microbiological burden.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the usefulness of adjusting antibiotic use (AU) by prevalence of bacterial isolates as an alternative method for risk adjustment beyond hospital characteristics. DESIGN: Retrospective, observational, cross-sectional study. SETTING: Hospitals in the southeastern United States. METHODS: AU in days of therapy per 1,000 patient days and microbiologic data from 2015 and 2016 were collected from 26 hospitals. The prevalences of Pseudomonas aeruginosa, extended-spectrum ß-lactamase (ESBL)-producing bacteria, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), and vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) were calculated and compared to the average prevalence of all hospitals in the network. This proportion was used to calculate the adjusted AU (a-AU) for various categories of antimicrobials. For example, a-AU of antipseudomonal ß-lactams (APBL) was the AU of APBL divided by (prevalence of P. aeruginosa at that hospital divided by the average prevalence of P. aeruginosa). Hospitals were categorized by bed size and ranked by AU and a-AU, and the rankings were compared. RESULTS: Most hospitals in 2015 and 2016, respectively, moved ≥2 positions in the ranking using a-AU of APBL (15 of 24, 63%; 22 of 26, 85%), carbapenems (14 of 23, 61%; 22 of 25; 88%), anti-MRSA agents (13 of 23, 57%; 18 of 26, 69%), and anti-VRE agents (18 of 24, 75%; 15 of 26, 58%). Use of a-AU resulted in a shift in quartile of hospital ranking for 50% of APBL agents, 57% of carbapenems, 35% of anti-MRSA agents, and 75% of anti-VRE agents in 2015 and 50% of APBL agents, 28% of carbapenems, 50% of anti-MRSA agents, and 58% of anti-VRE agents in 2016. CONCLUSIONS: The a-AU considerably changes how hospitals compare among each other within a network. Adjusting AU by microbiological burden allows for a more balanced comparison among hospitals with variable baseline rates of resistant bacteria.