Assessing the impact of meropenem exposure on ceftolozane/tazobactam-resistance development in Pseudomonas aeruginosa using in vitro serial passage.

BACKGROUND: Patients infected with difficult-to-treat Pseudomonas aeruginosa are likely to receive meropenem (MEM) empirically before escalation to ceftolozane/tazobactam (C/T). We assessed whether pre-exposure to MEM affected C/T resistance development on C/T exposure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Nine clinical P. aeruginosa isolates were exposed to MEM 16 mg/L for 72 h. Then, isolates were serially passaged in the presence of C/T (concentration of 10 mg/L) for 72 h as two groups: an MEM-exposed group inoculated with MEM pre-exposed isolates and a non-MEM control group. At 24 h intervals, samples were plated on drug-free and drug-containing agar (C/T concentration 16/8 mg/L) and incubated to quantify bacterial densities (log10 cfu/mL). Growth on C/T agar indicated resistance development, and resistant population was calculated by dividing the cfu/mL on C/T plates by the cfu/mL on drug-free agar. RESULTS: At 72 h, resistant populations were detected in 6/9 isolates. In five isolates, MEM exposure significantly increased the prevalence of ceftolozane/tazobactam-resistance development; the percentages of resistance population were 100%, 100%, 53.5%, 31% and 3% for the MEM-exposed versus 0%, 0%, 2%, 0.35% and ≤0.0003% in the unexposed groups. One isolate had a similar resistant population at 72 h between the two groups. The remaining isolates showed no development of resistance, regardless of previous MEM exposure. CONCLUSIONS: MEM exposure may pre-dispose to C/T resistance development and thus limit the therapeutic utility of this ß-lactam/ß-lactamase inhibitor. Resistance may be a result of stress exposure or molecular-level mutations conferring cross-resistance. Further in vivo studies are needed to assess clinical implications of these findings.

A New Dosing Frontier: Retrospective Assessment of Effluent Flow Rates and Residual Renal Function Among Critically Ill Patients Receiving Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy.

OBJECTIVES: In 2020, cefiderocol became the first Food and Drug Administration-approved medication with continuous renal replacement therapy (CRRT) dosing recommendations based on effluent flow rates (QE). We aimed to evaluate the magnitude and frequency of factors that may influence these recommendations, that is, QE intrapatient variability and residual renal function. DESIGN: Retrospective observational cohort study. SETTING: ICUs within Hartford Hospital (890-bed, acute-care hospital) in Connecticut from 2017 to 2023. PATIENTS: Adult ICU patients receiving CRRT for greater than 72 hours. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: CRRT settings including QE and urine output (UOP) were extracted from the time of CRRT initiation (0 hr) and trends were assessed. To assess the impact on antibiotic dosing, cefiderocol doses were assigned to 0 hour, 24 hours, 48 hours, and 72 hours QE values per product label, and the proportion of antibiotic dose changes required as a result of changes in inpatient's QE was evaluated. Among the 380 ICU patients receiving CRRT for greater than 72 hours, the median (interquartile range) 0 hour QE was 2.96 (2.35-3.29) L/hr. Approximately 9 QE values were documented per patient per 24-hour window. QE changes of greater than 0.75 L/hr were observed in 21.6% of patients over the first 24 hours and in 7.9% (24-48 hr) and 5.8% (48-72 hr) of patients. Approximately 40% of patients had UOP greater than 500 mL at 24 hours post-CRRT initiation. Due to QE changes within 24 hours of CRRT initiation, a potential cefiderocol dose adjustment would have been warranted in 38% of patients (increase of 21.3%; decrease of 16.6%). QE changes were less common after 24 hours, warranting cefiderocol dose adjustments in less than 15% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Results highlight the temporal and variable dynamics of QE and prevalence of residual renal function. Data also demonstrate a risk of antibiotic under-dosing in the first 24 hours of CRRT initiation due to increases in QE. For antibiotics with QE-based dosing recommendations, empiric dose escalation may be warranted in the first 24 hours of CRRT initiation.

Imipenem/relebactam pharmacokinetics in critically ill patients supported on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation.

BACKGROUND: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is a life-saving modality but has the potential to alter the pharmacokinetics (PK) of antimicrobials. Imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam is an antibiotic with utility in treating certain multi-drug resistant Gram-negative infections. Herein, we describe the population pharmacokinetics of imipenem and relebactam in critically ill patients supported on ECMO. METHODS: Patients with infection supported on ECMO received 4-6 doses of imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam per current prescribing information based on estimated creatinine clearance. Blood samples were collected following the final dose of the antibiotic. Concentrations were determined via LC-MS/MS. Population PK models were fit with and without covariates using Pmetrics. Monte Carlo simulations of 1000 patients assessed joint PTA of fAUC0-24/MIC ≥ 8 for relebactam, and ≥40% fT > MIC for imipenem for each approved dosing regimen. RESULTS: Seven patients supported on ECMO were included in PK analyses. A two-compartment model with creatinine clearance as a covariate on clearance for both imipenem and relebactam fitted the data best. The mean ±â€Šstandard deviation parameters were: CL0, 15.21 ±â€Š6.52 L/h; Vc, 10.13 ±â€Š2.26 L; K12, 2.45 ±â€Š1.16 h-1 and K21, 1.76 ±â€Š0.49 h-1 for imipenem, and 6.95 ±â€Š1.34 L/h, 9.81 ±â€Š2.69 L, 2.43 ±â€Š1.13 h-1 and 1.52 ±â€Š0.67 h-1 for relebactam. Simulating each approved dose of imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam according to creatinine clearance yielded PTAs of ≥90% up to an MIC of 2 mg/L. CONCLUSIONS: Imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam dosed according to package insert in patients supported on ECMO is predicted to achieve exposures sufficient to treat susceptible Gram-negative isolates, including Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

Non-KPC Attributes of Newer ß-lactamase/ß-lactamase Inhibitors, Part 1: Enterobacterales and Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

Gram-negative antibiotic resistance continues to grow as a global problem due to the evolution and spread of ß-lactamases. The early ß-lactamase inhibitors (BLIs) are characterized by spectra limited to class A ß-lactamases and ineffective against carbapenemases and most extended spectrum ß-lactamases. In order to address this therapeutic need, newer BLIs were developed with the goal of treating carbapenemase producing, carbapenem resistant organisms (CRO), specifically targeting the Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC). These BL/BLI combination drugs, ceftazidime/avibactam, meropenem/vaborbactam, and imipenem/relebactam, have proven to be indispensable tools in this effort. However, non-KPC mechanisms of resistance are rising in prevalence and increasingly challenging to treat. It is critical for clinicians to understand the unique spectra of these BL/BLIs with respect to non-KPC CRO. In Part 1of this two-part series, we describe the non-KPC attributes of the newer BL/BLIs with a focus on utility against Enterobacterales and Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

Assessing the in vivo impact of novel ß-lactamase inhibitors on the efficacy of their partner ß-lactams against serine carbapenemase-producing Pseudomonas aeruginosa using human-simulated exposures.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of human-simulated regimens (HSRs) of ceftazidime, ceftazidime/avibactam, imipenem, imipenem/relebactam, meropenem and meropenem/vaborbactam in a murine thigh infection model against serine carbapenemase-producing Pseudomonas aeruginosa. METHODS: Nine P. aeruginosa clinical isolates harbouring GES-5 (n = 1), GES-20 (n = 1), GES-5/20 (n = 1), GES-19, GES-20 (n = 3) and KPC (n = 3) were evaluated. Six mice were administered HSRs of ceftazidime 2 g q8h (2 h infusion), ceftazidime/avibactam 2.5 g q8h (2 h infusion), meropenem 2 g q8h (3 h infusion), imipenem 0.5 g q6h (0.5 h infusion), imipenem/relebactam 1.25 g q6h (0.5 h infusion) and meropenem/vaborbactam 4 g q8h (3 h infusion). Change in bacterial burden relative to baseline and the percent of isolates meeting the 1 log10 kill endpoint were assessed. RESULTS: The addition of avibactam to ceftazidime increased the percentage of isolates meeting 1 log10 kill from 33% to 100% of GES- or KPC-harbouring isolates. Imipenem/relebactam HSR produced ≥1 log10 of kill against 83% and 100% of GES- and KPC-harbouring isolates, respectively, while imipenem alone failed to reach 1 log10 kill for any isolates. Vaborbactam resulted in variable restoration of meropenem activity as 1 log10 kill was achieved in only 33% and 66% of GES- and KPC-harbouring isolates, respectively, compared with no isolates for meropenem alone. CONCLUSIONS: Ceftazidime/avibactam and imipenem/relebactam were active against 100% and 89% of KPC- or GES-harbouring isolates tested in vivo. The activity of meropenem/vaborbactam was variable, suggesting this may be an inferior treatment option in this setting. Further studies to evaluate clinical outcomes in GES- and KPC-producing P. aeruginosa are warranted given their increasing prevalence worldwide.

Physical compatibility of sulbactam/durlobactam with select intravenous drugs during simulated Y-site administration.

PURPOSE: Sulbactam/durlobactam is a combination antibiotic designed to target Acinetobacter baumannii, including carbapenem-resistant and multidrug-resistant strains. The objective of this study was to determine the physical compatibility of sulbactam/durlobactam solution during simulated Y-site administration with 95 intravenous (IV) drugs. METHODS: Vials of sulbactam/durlobactam solution were diluted in 0.9% sodium chloride injection to a volume of 100 mL (the final concentration of both drugs was 15 mg/mL). All other IV drugs were reconstituted according to the manufacturer's recommendations and diluted with 0.9% sodium chloride injection to the upper range of concentrations used clinically or tested undiluted as intended for administration. Y-site conditions were simulated by mixing 5 mL of sulbactam/durlobactam with 5 mL of the tested drug solutions in a 1:1 ratio. Solutions were inspected for physical characteristics (clarity, color, and Tyndall effect), turbidity, and pH changes before admixture, immediately post admixture, and over 4 hours. Incompatibility was defined as any observed precipitation, significant color change, positive Tyndall test, or turbidity change of ≥0.5 nephelometric turbidity unit during the observation period. RESULTS: Sulbactam/durlobactam was physically compatible with 38 out of 42 antimicrobials tested (90.5%) and compatible overall with 86 of 95 drugs tested (90.5%). Incompatibility was observed with albumin, amiodarone hydrochloride, ceftaroline fosamil, ciprofloxacin, daptomycin, levofloxacin, phenytoin sodium, vecuronium, and propofol. CONCLUSION: The Y-site compatibility of sulbactam/durlobactam with 95 IV drugs was described. These compatibility data will assist pharmacists and nurses to safely coordinate administration of IV medications with sulbactam/durlobactam.

Effects of clinically achievable pulmonary antibiotic concentrations on the recovery of bacteria: in vitro comparison of the BioFire FILMARRAY Pneumonia Panel versus conventional culture methods in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid.

Empiric antibiotics may affect bacterial pathogen recovery using conventional culture methods (CCMs), while PCR-based diagnostics are likely less affected. Herein, we conducted an in vitro study of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BAL) inoculated with bacteria and clinically relevant antibiotic concentrations to compare the recovery between the BioFire FILMARRAY Pneumonia Panel (Pn Panel) and CCMs. Remnant clinical BAL specimens were inoculated to ~105 cfu/mL using 12 clinical isolates. Isolates consisted of one wild-type (WT) and one or more resistant strains of: Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Acinetobacter baumannii, and Staphylococcus aureus. Piperacillin-tazobactam, cefepime, meropenem, levofloxacin, or vancomycin was added to achieve pulmonary epithelial lining fluid peak and trough concentrations. Post-exposure cfu/mL was quantified by CCMs and simultaneously tested by the PN Panel for identification and semi-quantitative genetic copies/mL. CCM results were categorized as significant growth (SG) (≥1 × 104), no significant growth (NSG) (≥1 × 103, <1 × 104), or no growth (NG) (<1 × 103). The PN Panel accurately identified all isolates, resistance genes, and reported ≥106 genetic copies/mL regardless of antibiotic exposure. The CCM also identified all S. aureus strains exposed to vancomycin. For WT Gram-negative isolates exposed to antibiotics, SG, NSG, and NG were observed in 7/52 (13%), 18/52 (35%), and 27/52 (52%) of CCM experiments, respectively. For resistant Gram-negatives isolates, SG, NSG, and NG were observed in 62/88 (70%), 17/88 (19%), and 9/88 (10%), respectively. These in vitro data demonstrate that the PN Panel is able to identify Gram-negative pathogens in the presence of clinically significant antibiotic concentrations when CCM may not.

In vitro activity of cefiderocol against a global collection of carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa with a high level of carbapenemase diversity.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the in vitro activity of cefiderocol in a global collection of carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa including >200 carbapenemase-producing isolates. METHODS: Isolates (n = 806) from the ERACE-PA Surveillance Program were assessed. Broth microdilution MICs were determined for cefiderocol (iron-depleted CAMHB) and comparators (CAMHB). Susceptibility was interpreted by CLSI and EUCAST breakpoints and reported as percent of isolates. The MIC distribution of cefiderocol in the entire cohort and by carbapenemase status was assessed. RESULTS: In the entire cohort, cefiderocol was the most active agent (CLSI 98% susceptible; EUCAST 95% susceptible; MIC50/90, 0.25/2 mg/L). Amikacin (urinary only breakpoint) was the second most active, with 70% of isolates testing as susceptible. The percentage of isolates susceptible to all other agents was low (<50%) including meropenem/vaborbactam, imipenem/relebactam, piperacillin/tazobactam and levofloxacin. Cefiderocol maintained significant activity against the most commonly encountered carbapenemases including VIM- (CLSI 97% susceptible; EUCAST 92% susceptible) and GES (CLSI 100% susceptible; EUCAST 97% susceptible)-harbouring isolates. The cefiderocol MIC distribution was similar regardless of carbapenemase status, with MIC50/90 values of 0.5/4 mg/L, 0.5/2 mg/L and 0.25/1 mg/L for MBL, serine carbapenemase and molecular carbapenemase-negative isolates, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Cefiderocol displayed potent in vitro activity in this global cohort of carbapenem-resistant P. aeruginosa including >200 carbapenemase-harbouring isolates. Cefiderocol was highly active against MBL-producing isolates, where treatment options are limited. These data can help guide empirical therapy guidelines based on local prevalence of carbapenemase-producing P. aeruginosa or in response to rapid molecular diagnostics.

Activity of novel ß-lactam/ß-lactamase inhibitor combinations against serine carbapenemase-producing carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial resistance in Pseudomonas aeruginosa is complex and multifaceted. While the novel ß-lactamase inhibitors (BLIs) avibactam, relebactam and vaborbactam inhibit serine-based ß-lactamases, the comparative potency of the novel ß-lactam (BL)/BLI combinations against serine carbapenemase-producing P. aeruginosa is unknown. OBJECTIVES: To compare the in vitro activity of ceftazidime/avibactam, ceftazidime, imipenem/relebactam, imipenem, meropenem/vaborbactam and meropenem against serine ß-lactamase-producing P. aeruginosa. METHODS: Carbapenem-resistant P. aeruginosa were collated through the Enhancing Rational Antimicrobials against Carbapenem-resistant P. aeruginosa (ERACE-PA) Global Surveillance. Isolates positive for serine-based carbapenemases were assessed. MICs were determined by broth microdilution to each novel BL/BLI and BL alone. RESULTS: GES was the most common carbapenemase identified (n = 59) followed by KPC (n = 8). Ceftazidime/avibactam had MIC50/MIC90 values of 4/8 mg/L and 91% of isolates were susceptible. Conversely, ceftazidime alone was active against only 3% of isolates. The MIC50/MIC90 of imipenem/relebactam were 16/>16 mg/L and 13% of all isolates were defined as susceptible. Of the KPC-producing isolates, 38% were susceptible to imipenem/relebactam, compared with 0% to imipenem. The meropenem/vaborbactam MIC50/MIC90 were >16/>16 mg/L, and 6% of isolates were susceptible, which was similar to meropenem alone (MIC50/90, >8/>8 mg/L; 3% susceptible) suggesting the addition of vaborbactam cannot overcome co-expressed, non-enzymatic resistance mechanisms. CONCLUSIONS: Among the novel BL/BLIs, ceftazidime/avibactam displayed better in vitro activity and thus is a rational treatment option for serine carbapenemase-harbouring P. aeruginosa. While imipenem/relebactam displayed some activity, particularly against isolates with blaKPC, meropenem/vaborbactam exhibited poor activity, with MICs similar to meropenem alone.

In vitro activity of imipenem/relebactam against Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolated from patients with cystic fibrosis.

Pseudomonas aeruginosa is a common multidrug-resistant pathogen in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF). The in vitro activity of imipenem/relebactam and imipenem was compared with other antipseudomonal antibiotics against 105 isolates from patients with CF from three US hospitals. Imipenem/relebactam, imipenem, meropenem, ceftazidime/avibactam, and ceftolozane/tazobactam susceptibilities were 77%, 55%, 58%, 90%, and 92%, respectively. Relebactam potentiates imipenem against CF P. aeruginosa by fourfold leading imipenem/relebactam to retain susceptibility against most isolates in this cohort.

In vitro synergy of the combination of sulbactam-durlobactam and cefepime at clinically relevant concentrations against A. baumannii, P. aeruginosa and Enterobacterales.

BACKGROUND: Sulbactam-durlobactam is a potent combination active against Acinetobacter baumannii; however, it lacks activity against other nosocomial pathogens. Cefepime is a common first-line therapy for hospital/ventilator-associated pneumonia caused by Gram-negative pathogens including Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Enterobacterales. With increasing resistance to cefepime, and the significant proportion of polymicrobial nosocomial infections, effective therapy for infections caused by Acinetobacter baumannii, P. aeruginosa and Enterobacterales is needed. This study investigated the in vitro synergy of sulbactam-durlobactam plus cefepime against relevant pathogens. METHODS: Static time-kills assays were performed in duplicate against 14 cefepime-resistant isolates (A. baumannii, n = 4; P. aeruginosa, n = 4; Escherichia coli, n = 3; Klebsiella pneumoniae, n = 3). One WT K. pneumoniae isolate was included. Antibiotic concentrations simulated the free-steady state average concentration of clinically administered doses in patients. RESULTS: Sulbactam-durlobactam alone showed significant activity against A. baumannii consistent with the MIC values. Sulbactam-durlobactam plus cefepime showed synergy against one A. baumannii isolate with an elevated MIC to sulbactam-durlobactam (32 mg/L). Against all P. aeruginosa isolates, synergy was observed with sulbactam-durlobactam plus cefepime. For the Enterobacterales, one E. coli isolate demonstrated synergy while the others were indifferent due to significant kill from sulbactam-durlobactam alone. The combination of sulbactam-durlobactam plus cefepime showed synergy against one of the K. pneumoniae and additive effects against the other two K. pneumoniae tested. No antagonism was observed in any isolates including the WT strain. CONCLUSIONS: Synergy and no antagonism was observed with a combination of sulbactam-durlobactam and cefepime; further in vivo pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamics data and clinical correlation are necessary to support our findings.

Imipenem/funobactam (formerly XNW4107) in vivo pharmacodynamics against serine carbapenemase-producing Gram-negative bacteria: a novel modelling approach for time-dependent killing.

BACKGROUND: Imipenem/funobactam (formerly XNW4107) is a novel ß-lactam/ß-lactamase inhibitor with activity against MDR Acinetobacter baumannii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Enterobacterales strains. Using a neutropenic murine thigh infection model, we aimed to determine the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) index, relative to funobactam exposure, that correlated most closely with the in vivo efficacy of imipenem/funobactam combination and the magnitude of index required for efficacy against serine carbapenemase-producing clinical strains. METHODS: Dose-fractionation was conducted against three strains. Imipenem human-simulated regimen (HSR, 500 mg q6h 1 h infusion) efficacy in combination with escalating funobactam exposures against seven A. baumannii, four P. aeruginosa and four Klebsiella pneumoniae (imipenem/funobactam MICs 0.25-16 mg/L) was assessed as 24 h change in log10cfu/thigh. RESULTS: Increased funobactam fractionation enhanced efficacy, indicating time-dependent killing. Changes in log10cfu/thigh versus %fT > MIC were poorly predictive of efficacy; bactericidal activity was observed at %fT > MIC = 0%. Across different threshold plasma funobactam concentrations (CTs), %fT > CT(1 mg/L) had the highest correlation with efficacy. Normalizing the %fT > CT = 1 mg/L index to the respective isolate imipenem/funobactam MIC ([%fT > CT]/MIC) allowed integration of the isolate's susceptibility, which further enhanced the correlation. Median (%fT > CT[1 mg/L])/MIC values associated with 1-log reductions were 9.82 and 9.90 for A. baumannii and P. aeruginosa, respectively. Median (%fT > CT[1 mg/L])/MIC associated with stasis was 55.73 for K. pneumoniae. Imipenem/funobactam 500/250 mg q6h 1 h infusion HSR produced >1-log kill against 6/7 A. baumannii, 4/4 P. aeruginosa and stasis against 4/4 K. pneumoniae. CONCLUSIONS: Imipenem/funobactam showed potent in vivo efficacy against serine carbapenemase-producers. The novel PK/PD index (%fT > CT)/MIC appeared to best describe in vivo activity.

Cefepime in vivo activity against carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales that test as cefepime susceptible or susceptible-dose dependent in vitro: implications for clinical microbiology laboratory and clinicians.

BACKGROUND: Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) are a public health concern. Among these isolates, there are reports of isolates that test as cefepime susceptible or susceptible-dose dependent (SDD) in vitro despite presence of a carbapenemase. This study aimed to evaluate the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profile of cefepime against carbapenemase-producing (CP-CRE) and non-producing (non-CP-CRE) isolates with a range of cefepime MICs. METHODS: Reference broth microdilution and modified carbapenem inactivation method (mCIM) were performed on genotypically characterized clinical CRE isolates. Ultimately, CP-CRE (n = 21; blaKPC) and non-CP-CRE (n = 19) isolates with a distribution of cefepime MICs (≤0.5 to >256 mg/L) were utilized in the murine thigh infection model. Mice were treated with cefepime human-simulated regimens (HSRs) representative of a standard dose (1 g q12h 0.5 h infusion) or the SDD dose (2 g q8h 0.5 h infusion). Efficacy was assessed as the change in bacterial growth at 24 h compared with 0 h control, where ≥1 log bacterial reduction is considered translational value for clinical efficacy. RESULTS: Among both cohorts of CRE isolates, i.e. CP-CRE and non-CP-CRE, that tested as SDD to cefepime in vitro, 1 log bacterial reduction was not attainable with cefepime. Further blunting of cefepime efficacy was observed among CP-CRE isolates compared with non-CP-CRE across both susceptible and SDD categories. CONCLUSIONS: Data indicate to avoid cefepime for the treatment of serious infections caused by CRE isolates that test as cefepime susceptible or SDD. Data also provide evidence that isolates with the same antibiotic MIC may have different pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profiles due to their antimicrobial resistance mechanism.

Cefiderocol is Not Sequestered in an Ex Vivo Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation (ECMO) Circuit.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is used in critically ill patients that require respiratory and/or cardiac support. Cefiderocol is a novel siderophore antibiotic that may require use in infected critically ill patients supported by ECMO. The objective of this study was to determine the loss of cefiderocol through an ex vivo adult ECMO circuit using a Quadrox-iD oxygenator. METHODS: A 3/8-inch, simulated, ex vivo closed-loop ECMO circuit was prepared with a Quadrox-iD adult oxygenator and primed with fresh whole blood. Cefiderocol was administered into the circuit to achieve a starting concentration of approximately 90 mg/L. Post-oxygenator blood samples were collected at 0, 0.25, 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6, 12, and 24 h after the addition of the drug to determine the loss in the circuit. A glass control jar was prepared with the same blood matrix and maintained at the same temperature to determine drug degradation. The experiment was conducted in triplicate. The rate of cefiderocol loss in the ECMO circuit was compared with that in the control by one-way analysis of variance. RESULTS: At 0 h, the difference between the pre- and post-oxygenator concentrations was - 4 ± 4% (range 0 to - 7%). After 24 h, the cefiderocol percent reduction was similar between the ECMO circuit and control (50% ± 13 vs. 50% ± 9, p = 1.0). CONCLUSIONS: The degradation rate of cefiderocol did not differ significantly within the ECMO circuit and control, suggesting no loss due to sequestration or adsorption. Pharmacokinetic studies in patients supported by ECMO are warranted to determine final dosing recommendations.

Assessing the in vivo efficacy of rational antibiotics and combinations against difficult-to-treat Pseudomonas aeruginosa producing GES ß-lactamases.

OBJECTIVES: We evaluated the in vivo efficacy of human-simulated regimens (HSRs) of cefiderocol, ceftazidime/avibactam, meropenem and ceftazidime/avibactam/meropenem combination against Guiana-extended spectrum (GES)-producing Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates. METHODS: Eighteen P. aeruginosa isolates producing GES-1 (n = 5), GES-5 (n = 5) or miscellaneous GESs (combinations of GES-19, GES-20 and/or GES-26; n = 8) were evaluated. In vitro MIC testing was determined using broth microdilution. In a validated murine thigh infection model, HSRs of cefiderocol 2 g q8h as a 3 h IV infusion, ceftazidime/avibactam 2.5 g q8h as a 2 h IV infusion, meropenem 2 g q8h as a 3 h IV infusion or ceftazidime/avibactam/meropenem were administered. Change in bacterial burden relative to baseline and the proportion of isolates in each genotypic group meeting 1-log10 kill endpoint were assessed. RESULTS: Modal MICs (mg/L) ranged from 0.125 to 1 for cefiderocol, 4 to >64 for ceftazidime/avibactam and 2 to >64 for meropenem. Cefiderocol produced >1-log10 of kill against all 18 tested isolates. Meropenem was active against all GES-1 isolates whereas activity against GES-5 and miscellaneous GESs was lacking, consistent with the MICs. Ceftazidime/avibactam was active against all GES-1 and GES-5 isolates and retained activity against 62.5% of miscellaneous GESs including isolates with elevated MICs. For isolates where ceftazidime/avibactam failed, the addition of meropenem restored the in vivo efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: As monotherapy, cefiderocol was active in vivo against all tested isolates. The activities of meropenem or ceftazidime/avibactam alone were variable; however, a combination of both was active against all isolates. Cefiderocol and ceftazidime/avibactam/meropenem could be valuable therapeutic options for GES-producing P. aeruginosa infections. Clinical confirmatory data are warranted.

Prospective role of cefiderocol in the management of carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii infections: Review of the evidence.

Carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii (CRAB) has been classified by the World Health Organization as being in the critical category of pathogens requiring urgent new antibiotic treatment options. Cefiderocol, the first approved siderophore cephalosporin, was designed for the treatment of carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative pathogens, particularly the non-fermenting species A. baumannii and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Cefiderocol is mostly stable against hydrolysis by serine ß-lactamases and metallo-ß-lactamases, which are leading causes of carbapenem resistance. This review collates the available evidence on the in vitro activity, pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics, and efficacy and safety of cefiderocol, and outlines its current role in the management of CRAB infections. In vitro surveillance data show susceptibility rates of >90% for cefiderocol against CRAB isolates as well as in vitro synergism with a variety of antibiotics recommended in guidelines. Clinical efficacy of cefiderocol monotherapy against CRAB infections has been demonstrated in the descriptive, open-label CREDIBLE-CR and the non-inferiority, double-blind APEKS-NP randomised clinical trials as well as in real-world cases in patients with underlying health problems. To date, the frequency of on-therapy development of cefiderocol resistance in A. baumannii appears to be low, but monitoring is highly recommended. Within current treatment guidelines for moderate-to-severe CRAB infections, cefiderocol is recommended for infections in which other antibiotics failed and in combination with other active antibiotics. In vivo pre-clinical data support the combination of sulbactam or avibactam with cefiderocol to enhance efficacy and to suppress the emergence of cefiderocol resistance. The benefit of combination therapy in the clinical setting is yet to be determined in prospective studies.

In Vivo Pharmacodynamic Profile of EVER206, a Novel Polymyxin Antimicrobial, against Gram-Negative Bacteria in the Murine Thigh Infection Model.

The objective was to determine the magnitude of the EVER206 free-plasma area under the concentration time curve (fAUC)/MIC target associated with bacteriostasis and 1-log10 kill against clinically relevant Gram-negative bacteria in the murine thigh model. Twenty-seven clinical isolates (Pseudomonas aeruginosa, n = 10; Escherichia coli, n = 9; Klebsiella pneumoniae, n = 5; Enterobacter cloacae, n = 2; and Klebsiella aerogenes, n = 1) were tested. Mice were pretreated with cyclophosphamide (induce neutropenia) and uranyl nitrate (increase the exposure of test compound through predictable renal dysfunction). Two hours postinoculation, five doses of EVER206 were administered subcutaneously. EVER206 pharmacokinetics were determined in infected mice. Data were fit using maximum effect (Emax) models to elucidate the fAUC/MIC targets for stasis and 1-log10 bacterial kill (reported as mean [range] by species). EVER206 MICs (mg/L) ranged from 0.25 to 2 mg/L (P. aeruginosa), 0.06 to 2 mg/L (E. coli), 0.06 to 0.125 mg/L (E. cloacae), 0.06 mg/L (K. aerogenes), and 0.06 to 2 mg/L (K. pneumoniae). In vivo, the mean 0-h baseline bacterial burden was 5.57 ± 0.39 log10 CFU/thigh. Stasis was achieved in 9/10 P. aeruginosa (fAUC/MIC, 88.13 [50.33 to 129.74]), 9/9 E. coli (fAUC/MIC, 112.84 [19.19 to 279.38]), 2/2 E. cloacae (fAUC/MIC, 259.28 [124.08 to 394.47]), 0/1 K. aerogenes, and 4/5 K. pneumoniae (fAUC/MIC, 99.26 [62.3 to 144.43]) isolates tested. 1-log10 kill was achieved in 9/10 for P. aeruginosa (fAUC/MIC, 106.43 [55.22 to 152.08]), 3/9 for E. coli (fAUC/MIC, 258.96 [74.08 to 559.4]), and 1/2 for E. cloacae (fAUC/MIC, 255.33). Using the murine thigh model, the fAUC/MIC targets of EVER206 were assessed across a broad MIC distribution. Integrating these data with microbiologic and clinical exposure data will aid in determining the clinical dose of EVER206.

Imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam efficacy, safety and probability of target attainment in adults with hospital-acquired or ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia among patients with baseline renal impairment, normal renal function, and augmented renal clearance.

Objectives: To assess the relationship between renal function and efficacy/safety of imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam for the treatment of hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated pneumonia (HABP/VABP) from RESTORE-IMI 2 and determine the PTA. Methods: Adults with HABP/VABP were randomized 1:1 to IV imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam 1.25 g or piperacillin/tazobactam 4.5 g every 6 h for 7-14 days. Initial doses were selected by CLCR and adjusted thereafter, as appropriate. Outcomes included Day 28 all-cause mortality (ACM), clinical response, microbiological response and adverse events. Population pharmacokinetic modelling and Monte Carlo simulations assessed PTA. Results: The modified ITT population comprised those with normal renal function (n = 188), augmented renal clearance (ARC; n = 88), mild renal impairment (RI; n = 124), moderate RI (n = 109) and severe RI (n = 22). ACM rates were comparable between treatment arms among all baseline renal function categories. Clinical response rates were comparable between treatment arms for participants with RI and normal renal function but were higher (91.7% versus 44.4%) for imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam-treated versus piperacillin/tazobactam-treated participants with CLCR ≥250 mL/min (n = 21). Microbiologic response rates were comparable between treatment arms for participants with RI but higher among those treated with imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam in participants with CLCR ≥90 mL/min (86.6% versus 67.2%). Adverse events were comparable between treatment arms across renal function categories. Joint PTA was >98% for key pathogen MICs for susceptible pathogens (MIC ≤2 mg/L). Conclusions: Prescribing information-defined dose adjustments in participants with baseline RI and full dosing of imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam 1.25 g every 6 h for participants with normal renal function or augmented renal clearance achieved sufficiently high drug exposures and favourable safety and efficacy profiles.

Directed carbapenemase testing is no longer just for Enterobacterales: cost, labor, and workflow assessment of expanding carbapenemase testing to carbapenem-resistant P. aeruginosa.

Molecular carbapenem-resistance testing, such as for the presence of carbapenemases genes, is commonly implemented for the detection of carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales. Carbapenemase-producing P. aeruginosa is also associated with significant morbidity and mortality, although; prevalence may be underappreciated in the United States due to a lack of carbapenemase testing. The present study sought to compare hands-on time, cost and workflow implementation of carbapenemase gene testing in Enterobacterales and P. aeruginosa isolates versus sending out isolates to a public health laboratory (PHL) for testing to assess if in-house can provide actionable results. The time to carbapenemase gene results were compared. Differences in cost for infection prevention measures were extrapolated from the time of positive carbapenemase gene detection in-house versus PHL. The median time to perform carbapenemase gene testing was 7.5 min (range 5-14) versus 10 min (range 8-22) for preparation to send isolates to the PHL. In-house testing produced same day results compared with a median of 6 days (range 3-14) to receive results from PHL. Cost of in-house testing and send outs were similar ($46.92 versus $40.53, respectively). If contact precautions for patients are implemented until carbapenemase genes are ruled out, in-house testing can save an estimated $76,836.60 annually. Extension of in-house carbapenemase testing to include P. aeruginosa provides actionable results 3-14 days earlier than PHL Standard Pathway testing, facilitating guided therapeutic decisions and infection prevention measures. Supplemental phenotypic algorithms can be implemented to curb the cost of P. aeruginosa carbapenemases testing by identifying isolates most likely to harbour carbapenemases.

In vivo efficacy & resistance prevention of cefiderocol in combination with ceftazidime/avibactam, ampicillin/sulbactam or meropenem using human-simulated regimens versus Acinetobacter baumannii.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the in vivo efficacy and resistance prevention of cefiderocol in combination with ceftazidime/avibactam, ampicillin/sulbactam and meropenem using human-simulated regimens (HSR) in the murine infection model. METHODS: In total, 15 clinical A. baumannii were assessed: cefiderocol MICs, 2 mg/L (previously developed resistance on therapy), n = 3; 8 mg/L, n = 2; ≥32 mg/L, n = 10 (including VEB and PER-harbouring isolates). Mice received inactive control, cefiderocol, cefiderocol + ceftazidime/avibactam (C-CZA), cefiderocol + ampicillin/sulbactam (C-SAM) or cefiderocol + meropenem (C-MEM) HSRs. The mean change in log10 cfu/thigh compared with starting inoculum was assessed. Resistance development on treatment was a >4-fold increase in MIC relative control animals. In vitro activities of combinations were assessed by disc stacking. RESULTS: Against cefiderocol-non-susceptible isolates, combinations produced significant kill with C-CZA -3.75 ±â€Š0.37 reduction in log10 cfu/thigh, C-SAM produced -3.55 ±â€Š0.50 and C-MEM produced -2.18 ±â€Š1.75 relative to baseline. Elevated MICs in cefiderocol treated animals occurred in three out of three isolates with MICs of 2 mg/L. Of these isolates, one developed elevated MICs with C-MEM compared with none treated with C-CZA or C-SAM. Disc stacking with C-CZA or C-SAM returned all isolates to at least the CLSI intermediate breakpoint, which may correlate with in vivo efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: Against cefiderocol-non-susceptible isolates, cefiderocol + ceftazidime/avibactam or ampicillin/sulbactam HSR produced in vivo kill against all 12 cefiderocol-non-susceptible isolates. Cefiderocol with ceftazidime/avibactam or ampicillin/sulbactam prevented the development of resistance during treatment against cefiderocol-high-end-susceptible isolates with a propensity for resistance on therapy. These data support the clinical evaluation of cefiderocol with ceftazidime/avibactam or ampicillin/sulbactam against A. baumannii, including multi-drug-resistant isolates.