Oritavancin Versus Daptomycin for Osteomyelitis Treatment After Surgical Debridement.

INTRODUCTION: Weekly intravenous (IV) oritavancin and daily daptomycin were compared in an outpatient setting following extensive surgical debridement for treating patients with osteomyelitis. METHODS: This was a retrospective, observational study of patients diagnosed with acute osteomyelitis. Exclusion criteria were the use of Gram-negative antibiotic therapy, use of antibiotics for more than 48 h prior to oritavancin or daptomycin or prior use of > 2 doses of oritavancin or more than 4 weeks of daptomycin. Clinical success was resolution or improvement of symptoms and no further treatment. Data were analyzed with Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: Consecutive outpatients (n = 150) with acute osteomyelitis who were treated with oritavancin or daptomycin (1:1) following extensive surgical debridement were identified. Staphylococcus aureus was the most common pathogen (n = 117). No patient in either group received prior antibiotic therapy (previous 30 days) or was hospitalized within 90 days prior to surgical debridement. Twenty-one (28%) patients prescribed oritavancin had chronic kidney disease, seven of whom were receiving hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis. Compared to oritavancin, patients prescribed daptomycin had higher rates of all-cause readmission [odds ratio (OR) 2.89; p < 0.001], more infection-related readmission (OR 3.19; p < 0.001), and greater likelihood of receiving antibiotics post-discontinuation of initial therapy (OR 2.13; p < 0.001). Repeat surgical debridement was required for 68.0% with daptomycin vs. 23.1% with oritavancin (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Oritavancin demonstrated a significantly higher rate of clinical success compared to daptomycin, with lower all-cause and infection-related readmissions, reduced need for repeat surgical debridement, and fewer additional antibiotic requirements.

What's New in Antibiograms? Updating CLSI M39 Guidance with Current Trends.

A vast amount of antimicrobial susceptibility test (AST) data is generated from routine testing in diagnostic laboratories for the primary purpose of guiding clinicians in antimicrobial therapy decisions for their patients. However, there is additional value for these data when they are compiled at the local, regional, national, and global levels. Cumulative AST data can be used to prepare antibiograms at the individual health care facility level. These reports can be used to gain insight into appropriate empirical therapy options prior to the availability of AST results on an individual patient's isolate. Different types of cumulative AST data reports can also be compiled at the regional, national, and global levels to estimate susceptibility rates in geographic regions, document trends in evolving microbial populations, and recognize the appearance and spread of emerging antimicrobial resistance threats. The first CLSI M39 Guideline for Analysis and Presentation of Cumulative AST Data was published in 2000. Since that time, there have been changes to AST and reporting recommendations as well as the introduction of advanced informatics technologies to analyze and present data. The 5th edition of M39 has taken into consideration these changes to assist those who analyze, present, and utilize routine antibiograms and other types of cumulative AST data reports as well as those who design information systems for the capturing and analyzing of AST data. Furthermore, antimicrobial stewardship programs (ASPs) have expanded considerably, and uses of the antibiogram by ASPs have been addressed. This minireview will remind users of the basic recommendations for analysis and presentation of antibiograms and provide new suggestions to enhance these reports.

The Practical Problem With Carbapenem Testing and Reporting Accurate Bacterial Susceptibilities.

Background: Antibiotic resistance is an evolving issue which requires constant review. Susceptibility breakpoints are revised in line with new microbiological and pharmacological data. Susceptibility breakpoints for carbapenems and Enterobacterales were revised in response to the rise in resistance and the potential for standard doses of carbapenems to provide the necessary antibiotic exposure and to accurately identify rates of carbapenem resistance. Objectives: This review sought to identify real-world implications associated with lack of testing and reporting current carbapenem breakpoints and potential barriers that may impede implementation of these strategies. Methods: A literature review was conducted using PubMed and Google Scholar electronic databases. Results: The failure to adopt revised breakpoints incurs negative clinical outcomes and carries increased cost implications. However, there were several impediments highlighted which are barriers for laboratories to implement breakpoint updates. Conclusion: Possible practical steps to implement revised breakpoints which apply to carbapenems and Enterobacterales are proposed. The challenge for laboratories is to be aware and implement these changes to provide accurate and relevant susceptibility results for clinicians.

Kimyrsa, An Oritavancin-Containing Product: Clinical Study and Review of Properties.

Background: There is a need for improved antibiotic formulations for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and soft structure infection (ABSSSI), especially with the rise of antimicrobial resistance among Gram-positive bacteria. A new formulation of oritavancin was developed to reduce intravenous infusion volume (from 1000 mL to 250 mL), shorten infusion time (from 3 hours to 1 hour), and provide pharmacies with flexibility in oritavancin preparation (from 5% dextrose in sterile water to either normal saline or 5% dextrose in sterile water) compared with the current formulation. Methods: A total of 102 adult patients with a diagnosis of ABSSSI suspected or confirmed to be caused by a Gram-positive pathogen were randomized 1:1 to receive either the new formulation of oritavancin or the current formulation. After a single 1200-mg intravenous infusion of oritavancin, the relative area-under-the-curve exposure of the new formulation and current formulation groups were compared. Safety and tolerability of the new formulation were assessed for treatment-emergent adverse events, serious adverse events, and changes to laboratory parameters. Results: The area under the curve for 0 hour to 72 hours postdose was very similar in the new formulation group compared with the current formulation group. No differences in treatment-emergent adverse events were observed between the current and new formulation groups, and all treatment-emergent adverse events were consistent with the known safety profile of the current formulation. Conclusions: The new formulation of oritavancin with reduced volume and duration of intravenous infusion demonstrates a safety profile and pharmacokinetics similar to that of the original formulation.

Antimicrobial Management of Respiratory Infections in Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Patients: Clinical and Antimicrobial Stewardship Programs Conundrums.

The role of empirical and even directed antimicrobial management of patients hospitalized with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection is problematic; antibiotics are used frequently among these patients to treat confirmed or suspected coinfection or just the symptoms. In the rapidly changing clinical landscape of SARS-CoV-2, there is minimal guidance for selecting appropriate treatment versus non-antimicrobial treatment, and clinicians are pressed to make daily decisions under the stress of absence of data while watching patients deteriorate. We review current data and patterns of antimicrobial use and the potential approach for antimicrobial stewardship in the context of SARS-CoV-2.

Real-World Evidence Studies of Oritavancin Use in Gram-Positive Infections Augment Randomized Controlled Trials to Address Clinical and Economic Outcomes.

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) sponsored by pharmaceutical manufacturers for regulatory approval are conducted with restrictive criteria in an effort to definitively demonstrate the safety and efficacy of a drug or biologic. Unfortunately, the strict enrollment criteria in RCTs may exclude patients likely to receive the medication in a real-world clinical practice. Antibiotic RCTs for registration are designed to show noninferiority against standard of care or best available therapy, often minimizing clinical differentiation needed by clinicians to select the optimal agent for their patients. Lastly, RCTs do not include pharmacoeconomic data that would add a cost basis for determining the value of one product over another. Real-world studies may add support to the safety and efficacy demonstrated from RCTs and address patient populations excluded from clinical development programs. This supplement presents several real-world studies demonstrating the clinical and economic outcomes of various uses of oritavancin to augment the evidence published from RCTs. Clinicians may decide how to use this information in their own practice settings.

The CHROME Study, a Real-world Experience of Single- and Multiple-Dose Oritavancin for Treatment of Gram-Positive Infections.

BACKGROUND: Oritavancin (ORI) is a long-acting lipoglycopeptide indicated for the treatment of adult patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs) caused or suspected to be caused by susceptible Gram-positive (GP) pathogens. METHODS: Data collected from a retrospective observational program (2014-2017), Clinical and Historic Registry and Orbactiv Medical Evaluation (CHROME), describe the utilization, outcomes, and adverse events (AEs) associated with ORI in 440 patients treated at 26 US sites for ABSSSI and other GP infections. RESULTS: Clinical success in evaluable patients receiving at least 1 dose of oritavancin was 88.1% (386/438). In a subgroup of patients who received ORI for skin and soft tissue infections (n = 401) and bacteremia (n = 7), clinical success was achieved in 89.0% and 100%, respectively. A cohort of 32 patients received 2-10 ORI doses separated by no more than 14 days for complicated GP infections. Clinical success was observed in 30 of 32 patients (93.8%), including 10 of 11 (90.9%) patients with bone and joint infections and 7 of 8 (87.5%) patients with osteomyelitis. In the safety evaluable population, the overall rate of AEs was 6.6%. CONCLUSIONS: We describe results from a real-world program that includes the largest multicenter, retrospective, observational study in patients who received at least 1 dose of ORI for the treatment of GP infections. This study confirms that ORI is an effective, well-tolerated antibiotic used in single and multiple doses for the treatment of ABSSSIs and complicated GP infections.

Comparisons of 30-Day Admission and 30-Day Total Healthcare Costs Between Patients Who Were Treated With Oritavancin or Vancomycin for a Skin Infection in the Outpatient Setting.

OBJECTIVE: Hospital admission is a key cost driver among patients with skin and soft tissue infections (SSTI). Data suggest that many SSTI patients are hospitalized unnecessarily and can be managed effectively and safely in an outpatient setting at a substantially lower cost. Oritavancin (ORI) is a single-dose treatment that has the potential to shift care from the inpatient to the outpatient setting. This study sought to compare the 30-day hospital admission rates and mean healthcare costs among SSTI patients who received outpatient ORI or vancomycin (VAN). METHOD: Over a 1-year period, outpatient prescription claims for VAN and ORI among patients with SSTIs and no hospitalization in past 3 days were for VAN and ORI were analyzed using a retrospective cohort analysis of the Truven Health MarketScan Databases. RESULTS: During the study period, 120 and 6695 patients who received ORI and VAN, respectively, met inclusion criteria. Groups were well matched at baseline. After covariate adjustment, patients who received ORI had a significantly lower 30- day admission rate versus patients who received VAN (6.1% vs 16.2%, respectively; P = .003). Mean healthcare costs 30-day post index were comparable between ORI and VAN patients ($12 695 vs $12 717, respectively; P = 1.0). CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that ORI provides a single-dose alternative to multidose VAN for treatment of SSTI in the outpatient setting and may result in lower 30-day hospital admission rates.

Antibiotic Breakpoints: How Redefining Susceptibility Preserves Efficacy and Improves Patient Care.

Carbapenems are a primary treatment for infections from multidrug-resistant bacterial pathogens. To maintain their efficacy and control the emergence of further resistance, breakpoints that correspond to recommended doses with appropriate PK/PD target attainment are paramount.

A Real-world Patient Registry for Oritavancin Demonstrates Efficacy and Safety Consistent With the Phase 3 SOLO Program.

BACKGROUND: Oritavancin is a lipoglycopeptide used in the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs) in adults. To characterize its use in patients in the postapproval setting, a patient registry was developed. METHODS: Data collected in an ongoing retrospective observational registry are used to evaluate the utilization, outcomes, and adverse events (AEs) associated with oritavancin for the treatment of infections presumed or confirmed to be caused by gram-positive (GP) bacteria in clinical practice. RESULTS: Data for 112 patients from 8 sites were collected. All patients received a single 1200-mg dose of oritavancin mostly in an infusion center. Infection type included cellulitis (67.0%), cutaneous abscess (21.4%), and wound (4.5%). Most patients (72.3%) received 1 or more antimicrobial agents for the index GP infection within 28 days prior to oritavancin treatment. Of positive cultures obtained prior to oritavancin administration, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus was the predominant pathogen (78.4%). A positive clinical response was observed in 92.8% of patients, and microbial eradication was observed in 90.0% of patients with post-therapy cultures. Within 28 days following oritavancin administration, 4 (3.6%) patients were hospitalized for failure of treatment of the index infection. Five (4.5%) patients experienced 1 or more possible drug-related AEs, which were consistent with types previously reported. There were no drug-related serious AEs reported. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical and microbiologic outcomes and safety of single-dose oritavancin 1200 mg were similar in this older patient population with multiple comorbid conditions to those observed in the phase 3 SOLO trials.

Absence of TetB identifies minocycline-susceptible isolates of Acinetobacter baumannii.

Minocycline is one of the few options available to treat infections caused by Acinetobacter baumannii. Acquired resistance to minocycline in A. baumannii is associated with presence of the TetB efflux pump. Previous studies suggested that the absence of tetB may predict minocycline minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of ≤4 µg/mL. In this study, a collection of 258 A. baumannii isolates was used to generate MIC frequency distributions for the tetB-positive and -negative sets of isolates. Of the 93 tetB-negative strains, all had minocycline MICs ≤ 4 µg/mL, resulting in a negative predictive value of 100%. Of the 165 tetB-positive strains, 154 had minocycline MICs > 4 µg/mL, resulting in a positive predictive value of 93.3%. In conclusion, this study shows that tetB is highly associated with MICs above the current US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) susceptible breakpoint of 4 µg/mL.

Efficacy and Safety of Oritavancin Relative to Vancomycin for Patients with Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infections (ABSSSI) in the Outpatient Setting: Results From the SOLO Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of oritavancin compared with vancomycin for patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs) who received treatment in the outpatient setting in the Phase 3 SOLO clinical trials. METHODS: SOLO I and SOLO II were 2 identically designed comparative, multicenter, double-blind, randomized studies to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a single 1200-mg dose of intravenous (IV) oritavancin versus 7-10 days of twice-daily IV vancomycin for the treatment of ABSSSI. Protocols were amended to allow enrolled patients to complete their entire course of antimicrobial therapy in an outpatient setting. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite endpoint (cessation of spread or reduction in size of the baseline lesion, absence of fever, and no rescue antibiotic at early clinical evaluation [ECE]) (48 to 72 hours). Key secondary endpoints included investigator-assessed clinical cure 7 to 14 days after end of treatment (posttherapy evaluation [PTE]) and 20% or greater reduction in lesion area at ECE. Safety was assessed until day 60. RESULTS: Seven hundred ninety-two patients (oritavancin, 392; vancomycin, 400) received entire course of treatment in the outpatient setting. Efficacy response rates at ECE and PTE were similar (primary composite endpoint at ECE: 80.4% vs 77.5% for oritavancin and vancomycin, respectively) as was incidence of adverse events. Five patients (1.3%) who received oritavancin and 9 (2.3%) vancomycin patients were subsequently admitted to a hospital. CONCLUSIONS: Oritavancin provides a single-dose alternative to multidose vancomycin for treatment of ABSSSI in the outpatient setting.

Stability and recovery of DIFICID(®) (Fidaxomicin) 200-mg crushed tablet preparations from three delivery vehicles, and administration of an aqueous dispersion via nasogastric tube.

Fidaxomicin is approved for the treatment of adults with Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea, many of whom have difficulty swallowing an intact tablet. The study objective was to evaluate the stability and recovery of crushed DIFICID(®) (fidaxomicin) 200-mg tablets dispersed in water, applesauce, or Ensure(®) brand liquid nutritional supplement, and to determine the recovery of fidaxomicin from the administration of an aqueous dispersion of a crushed DIFICID(®) tablet through a nasogastric (NG) tube. DIFICID(®) tablets were crushed and dispersed in water, applesauce, or Ensure(®). The stability and recovery of fidaxomicin were evaluated over 24 h in these vehicles. In a separate experiment, the ability to recover a full dose of fidaxomicin when administering as an aqueous dispersion through an NG tube was assessed. When DIFICID(®) tablets were crushed and dispersed in water, the active ingredient, fidaxomicin, was stable for up to 2 h at room temperature. Additionally, it was stable for up to 24 h in dispersions with applesauce or Ensure(®). Recovery of fidaxomicin after crushing and dispersing in any of the three vehicles studied ranged from 95 to 108 %, which is within the normal range of individual tablet variability. When crushed, dispersed in water, and administered through an NG tube, the average recovery of fidaxomicin was 96 %. Stability and recovery of fidaxomicin were confirmed when DIFICID(®) tablets were crushed and dispersed in water, applesauce, or Ensure(®). In addition, administration of an aqueous dispersion of a crushed tablet through an NG tube is supported by acceptable recovery of fidaxomicin.