RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Vancomycin (VAN)-associated acute kidney injury (AKI) is increased when VAN is combined with certain beta-lactams (BLs) such as piperacillin-tazobactam (TZP) but has not been evaluated with ceftolozane-tazobactam (C/T). Our aim was to investigate the AKI incidence of VAN in combination with C/T (VAN/C/T) compared with VAN in combination to TZP (VAN-TZP). METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, observational, comparative study across the United States. The primary analysis was a composite outcome of AKI and risk, injury, failure, loss, end stage renal disease; Acute Kidney Injury Network; or VAN-induced nephrotoxicity according to the consensus guidelines. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was conducted to adjust for confounding variables and stratified Kaplan-Meir analysis to assess the time to nephrotoxicity between the 2 groups. RESULTS: We included VAN/C/T (n = 90) and VAN-TZP (n = 284) at an enrollment ratio of 3:1. The primary outcome occurred in 12.2% vs 25.0% in the VAN-C/T and VAN-TZP groups, respectively (P = .011). After adjusting for confounding variables, VAN-TZP was associated with increased odds of AKI compared with VAN-C/T; with an adjusted odds ratio of 3.308 (95% confidence interval, 1.560-6.993). Results of the stratified Kaplan-Meir analysis with log-rank time-to-nephrotoxicity analysis indicate that time to AKI was significantly shorter among patients who received VAN-TZP (P = .004). Cox proportional hazards analysis demonstrated that TZP was consistent with the primary analysis (P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: Collectively, our results suggest that the AKI is not likely to be related to tazobactam but rather to piperacillin, which is a component in VAN-TZP but not in VAN-C/T.
Asunto(s)
Lesión Renal Aguda , Efectos Colaterales y Reacciones Adversas Relacionados con Medicamentos , Humanos , Vancomicina/efectos adversos , Antibacterianos/efectos adversos , beta-Lactamas/efectos adversos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Combinación Piperacilina y Tazobactam/efectos adversos , Tazobactam/efectos adversos , Piperacilina/efectos adversos , Lesión Renal Aguda/inducido químicamente , Lesión Renal Aguda/epidemiología , Lesión Renal Aguda/tratamiento farmacológico , Quimioterapia CombinadaRESUMEN
Drug-resistant tuberculosis (TB) is a major public health concern and contributes to high morbidity and mortality. New evidence supports the use of shorter duration, all-oral regimens, which represent an encouraging treatment strategy for drug-resistant TB. As a result, the landscape of drug-resistant TB pharmacotherapy has drastically evolved regarding treatment principles and preferred agents. This narrative review focuses on the key updates of drug-resistant TB treatment, including the use of short-duration all-oral regimens, while calling attention to current gaps in knowledge that may be addressed in future observational studies.
Asunto(s)
Mycobacterium tuberculosis , Tuberculosis Resistente a Múltiples Medicamentos , Humanos , Antituberculosos/farmacología , Antituberculosos/uso terapéutico , Tuberculosis Resistente a Múltiples Medicamentos/tratamiento farmacológico , PulmónRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Long-acting lipoglycopeptides such as dalbavancin may have utility in patients with Gram-positive bloodstream infections (BSI), particularly in those with barriers to discharge or who require prolonged parenteral antibiotic courses. A retrospective cohort study was performed to provide further multicenter real-world evidence on dalbavancin use as a sequential therapy for Gram-positive BSI. METHODS: One hundred fifteen patients received dalbavancin with Gram-positive BSI, defined as any positive blood culture or diagnosed with infective endocarditis, from 13 centers geographically spread across the United States between July 2015 and July 2021. RESULTS: Patients had a mean (SD) age of 48.5 (17.5) years, the majority were male (54%), with many who injected drugs (40%). The most common infection sources (non-exclusive) were primary BSI (89%), skin and soft tissue infection (SSTI) (25%), infective endocarditis (19%), and bone and joint infection (17%). Staphylococcus aureus accounted for 72% of index cultures, coagulase-negative Staphylococcus accounted for 18%, and Streptococcus species in 16%. Dalbavancin started a median (Q1-Q3) of 10 (6-19) days after index culture collection. The most common regimen administered was dalbavancin 1500 mg as one dose for 50% of cases. The primary outcome of composite clinical failure occurred at 12.2%, with 90-day mortality at 7.0% and 90-day BSI recurrence at 3.5%. CONCLUSIONS: Dalbavancin may serve as a useful tool in facilitating hospital discharge in patients with Gram-positive BSI. Randomized controlled trials are anticipated to validate dalbavancin as a surrogate to current treatment standards.
RESUMEN
Bloodstream infections (BSIs) due to Gram-positive organisms have traditionally been treated with prolonged courses of intravenous antimicrobials. However, this dogma is associated with substantial burden to the patient and health care system. Consequently, there is growing interest in the utilization of oral stepdown therapy, defined as the transition of intravenous therapy to an active oral agent, for this indication. This review highlights available literature examining oral stepdown in adult patients with BSI due to commonly encountered Gram-positive pathogens, including Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus spp., and Enterococcus spp. Support for oral stepdown in this setting is primarily derived from observational studies subject to selection bias. Nevertheless, this treatment strategy exhibits promising potential in carefully selected patients as it is consistently associated with reductions in hospital length of stay without jeopardizing clinical cure or survivability. Prospective, randomized trials are needed for validation of oral stepdown in Gram-positive BSI and to identify the optimal patient population and regimen.
Asunto(s)
Bacteriemia , Sepsis , Infecciones Estafilocócicas , Adulto , Humanos , Bacteriemia/tratamiento farmacológico , Estudios Prospectivos , Sepsis/tratamiento farmacológico , Infecciones Estafilocócicas/tratamiento farmacológico , Staphylococcus aureus , Antibacterianos/uso terapéuticoRESUMEN
Background: Limited data suggest that serious infections caused by Enterobacterales with a moderate to high risk of clinically significant AmpC production can be successfully treated with cefepime if the cefepime minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) is ≤2â µg/mL. However, isolates with a cefepime-susceptible dose-dependent (SDD) MIC of 4-8â µg/mL should receive a carbapenem due to target attainment and extended-spectrum ß-lactamase (ESBL) concerns. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of hospitalized patients with E. cloacae, K. aerogenes, or C. freundii bacteremia from January 2015 to March 2022 receiving high-dose cefepime or a carbapenem. Cox regression models were used with incorporation of inverse probability of treatment weighting and time-varying covariates. Results: Of the 315 patients included, 169 received cefepime and 146 received a carbapenem (ertapenem n = 90, meropenem n = 56). Cefepime was not associated with an increased risk of 30-day mortality compared with carbapenem therapy (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.45; 95% CI, 0.79-2.14), which was consistent for patients with cefepime SDD isolates (aHR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.52-1.77). Multivariable weighted Cox models identified Pitt bacteremia score >4 (aHR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.04-1.92), deep infection (aHR, 2.27; 95% CI, 1.21-4.32), and ceftriaxone-resistant AmpC-E (aHR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.03-1.59) to be independent predictors associated with increased mortality risk, while receipt of prolonged-infusion ß-lactam was protective (aHR, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.40-0.89). Conclusions: Among patients with bacteremia caused by Enterobacterales with moderate to high risk of clinically significant AmpC production, these data demonstrate similar risk of 30-day mortality for high-dose cefepime or a carbapenem as definitive ß-lactam therapy.
RESUMEN
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) categorized carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) infections as an "urgent" health care threat requiring public attention and research. Certain patients with CRE infections may be at higher risk for poor clinical outcomes than others. Evidence on risk or protective factors for CRE infections are warranted in order to determine the most at-risk populations, especially with newer beta-lactam/beta-lactamase inhibitor (BL/BLI) antibiotics available to treat CRE. We aimed to identify specific variables involved in CRE treatment that are associated with clinical failure (either 30-day mortality, 30-day microbiologic recurrence, or clinical worsening/failure to improve throughout antibiotic treatment). We conducted a retrospective, observational cohort study of hospitalized patients with CRE infection sampled from 2010 to 2020 at two medical systems in Detroit, Michigan. Patients were included if they were ≥18 years old and culture positive for an organism in the Enterobacterales order causing clinical infection with in vitro resistance by Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) breakpoints to at least one carbapenem. Overall, there were 140 confirmed CRE infections of which 39% had clinical failure. The most common infection sources were respiratory (38%), urinary (20%), intra-abdominal (16%), and primary bacteremia (14%). A multivariable logistic regression model was developed to identify statistically significant associated predictors with clinical failure, and they included Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.18; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.06 to 1.32), chronic dialysis (aOR, 5.86; 95% CI, 1.51-22.7), and Klebsiella pneumoniae in index culture (aOR, 3.09; 95% CI, 1.28 to 7.47). Further research on CRE infections is needed to identify best practices to promote treatment success. IMPORTANCE This work compares carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) infections using patient, clinical, and treatment variables to understand which characteristics are associated with the highest risk of clinical failure. Knowing which risk factors are associated with CRE infection failure can provide clinicians better prognostic and targeted interventions. Research can also further investigate why certain risk factors cause more clinical failure and can help develop treatment strategies to mitigate associated risk factors.
Asunto(s)
Carbapenémicos , Infecciones por Enterobacteriaceae , Humanos , Adolescente , Carbapenémicos/farmacología , Carbapenémicos/uso terapéutico , Estudios Retrospectivos , Infecciones por Enterobacteriaceae/tratamiento farmacológico , Infecciones por Enterobacteriaceae/microbiología , Antibacterianos/efectos adversos , Inhibidores de beta-Lactamasas , Insuficiencia del Tratamiento , Factores de Riesgo , Pruebas de Sensibilidad MicrobianaRESUMEN
Multidrug-resistant (MDR) and extensively drug-resistant (XDR) Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates are frequent causes of serious nosocomial infections that may compromise the selection of antimicrobial therapy. The goal of this review is to summarize recent epidemiologic, microbiologic, and clinical data pertinent to the therapeutic management of patients with infections caused by MDR/XDR-P. aeruginosa. Historically, conventional antipseudomonal ß-lactam antibiotics have been used for the empiric treatment of MDR/XDR-P. aeruginosa. Owing to the remarkable capacity of P. aeruginosa to confer resistance via multiple mechanisms, these traditional therapies are often rendered ineffective. To increase the likelihood of administering empiric antipseudomonal therapy with in vitro activity, a second agent from a different antibiotic class is often administered concomitantly with a traditional antipseudomonal ß-lactam. However, combination therapy may pose an increased risk of antibiotic toxicity and secondary infection, notably, Clostridioides difficile. Multiple novel agents that demonstrate in vitro activity against MDR-P. aeruginosa (e.g., ß-lactam/ß-lactamase inhibitor combinations and cefiderocol) have been recently granted US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval and are promising additions to the antipseudomonal armamentarium. Even so, comparative clinical data pertaining to these novel agents is sparse, and concerns surrounding the scarcity of antibiotics active against refractory MDR/XDR-P. aeruginosa necessitates continued assessment of alternative therapies. This is particularly important in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) who may be chronically colonized and suffer from recurrent infections and disease exacerbations due in part to limited efficacious antipseudomonal agents. Bacteriophages represent a promising candidate for combatting recurrent and refractory infections with their ability to target specific host bacteria and circumvent traditional mechanisms of antibiotic resistance seen in MDR/XDR-P. aeruginosa. Future goals for the management of these infections include increased comparator clinical data of novel agents to determine in what scenario certain agents may be preferred over others. Until then, appropriate treatment of these infections requires a thorough evaluation of patient- and infection-specific factors to guide empiric and definitive therapeutic decisions.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Infections caused by multidrug-resistant (MDR), extensively drug-resistant (XDR), and difficult-to-treat (DTR) Pseudomonas aeruginosa are increasingly challenging to combat. Ceftolozane-tazobactam (C/T) is a novel ß-lactam-ß-lactamase inhibitor combination now commonly used to treat MDR and XDR P. aeruginosa. Lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs) remain the most common source of infection caused by MDR/XDR P. aeruginosa. Comparative effectiveness studies to date have been limited by the type of comparator agents (i.e., aminoglycosides and polymyxins) and the inclusion of multiple infection sources (i.e., urinary tract, abdominal, skin and soft tissue, etc.). METHODS: We performed a multicenter, retrospective analysis of adults with LRTI caused by MDR or XDR P. aeruginosa admitted from January 2014 to December 2019. We aimed to compare clinical outcomes between patients who received C/T (n = 118) versus best alternative therapy (n = 88). The primary outcome was clinical failure, defined as 30-day mortality and/or an adverse drug reaction on antibiotic therapy. RESULTS: Two hundred and six patients met inclusion criteria. The C/T group had a significantly higher proportion of XDR P. aeruginosa and ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (VABP). After multivariable logistic regression, C/T treatment was independently associated with a 73.3% reduction in clinical failure compared to those who received best alternative therapy (P < 0.001). The number needed to harm with best alternative therapy was 3. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that C/T is a safe and effective therapeutic regimen for patients with MDR and XDR P. aeruginosa LRTI.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Inappropriate antibiotic use in COVID-19 is often due to treatment of presumed bacterial coinfection. Predictive factors to distinguish COVID-19 from COVID-19 with bacterial coinfection or bloodstream infection are limited. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 595 COVID-19 patients admitted between March 8, 2020, and April 4, 2020, to describe factors associated with a bacterial bloodstream coinfection (BSI). The primary outcome was any characteristic associated with BSI in COVID-19, with secondary outcomes including 30-day mortality and days of antibiotic therapy (DOT) by antibiotic consumption (DOT/1000 patient-days). Variables of interest were compared between true BSI (n = 25) and all other COVID-19 cases (n = 570). A secondary comparison was performed between positive blood cultures with true BSI (n = 25) and contaminants (n = 33) on antibiotic use. RESULTS: Fever (> 38 °C) (as a COVID-19 symptom) was not different between true BSI (n = 25) and all other COVID-19 patients (n = 570) (p = 0.93), although it was different as a reason for emergency department (ED) admission (p = 0.01). Neurological symptoms (ED reason or COVID-19 symptom) were significantly higher in the true BSI group (p < 0.01, p < 0.01) and were independently associated with true BSI (ED reason: OR = 3.27, p < 0.01; COVID-19 symptom: OR = 2.69, p = 0.03) on multivariate logistic regression. High (15-19.9 × 109/L) white blood cell (WBC) count at admission was also higher in the true BSI group (p < 0.01) and was independently associated with true BSI (OR = 2.56, p = 0.06) though was not statistically significant. Thirty-day mortality was higher among true BSI (p < 0.01). Antibiotic consumption (DOT/1000 patient-days) between true BSI and contaminants was not different (p = 0.34). True bloodstream coinfection was 4.2% (25/595) over the 28-day period. CONCLUSION: True BSI in COVID-19 was associated with neurological symptoms and nonsignificant higher WBC, and led to overall higher 30-day mortality and worse patient outcomes.
RESUMEN
The 2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) has quickly become one of the most dire international pandemic crises since the 1918 Spanish flu. Evidence for COVID-19 pharmacological therapies has shown rapid growth and a diverse array of results, but an assessment of the value of each piece of evidence must be reinforced. This article aims to review utilized therapies, the evidence level supporting these therapies, as well as drugs under investigation for the treatment of COVID-19. Primary scrutinized therapies include antiviral regimens, such as remdesivir, hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine, lopinavir/ritonavir, immunomodulating drugs, such as corticosteroids and interleukin (IL) inhibitors, and other therapies including convalescent plasma. Only one therapy, dexamethasone, has shown a mortality benefit in randomized controlled trials and summarized evidence for other therapies show limited positive results. Reviewing these therapies in a historical way shows how limited evidence can drive therapy decisions. A broad summary of available evidence can assist clinicians in a return to hierarchical assessments of evidence which can lead to safer patient outcomes, improved distribution of resources, and better targets for appropriate therapy decisions.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bloodstream infection (BSI) management remains challenging for clinicians. Numerous in vitro studies report synergy when vancomycin (VAN) and daptomycin (DAP) are combined with beta-lactams (BLs), which has led to clinical implementation of these combinations. While shorter durations of bacteremia have often been reported, there has been no significant impact on mortality. METHODS: The Detroit Medical Center (DMC) developed and implemented a clinical pathway algorithm for MRSA BSI treatment in 2016 that included the early use of BL combination therapy with standard of care (VAN or DAP) and a mandatory Infectious Diseases consultation. This was a retrospective, quasi-experimental study at the DMC between 2013 and 2020. Multivariable logistic regression was used to assess the independent association between pathway implementation and 30-day mortality while adjusting for confounding variables. RESULTS: Overall, 813 adult patients treated for MRSA BSI were evaluated. Compared with prepathway (PRE) patients (n = 379), those treated postpathway (POST; n = 434) had a significant reduction in 30-day and 90-day mortality: 9.7% in POST vs 15.6% in PRE (P = .011) and 12.2% in POST vs 19.0% in PRE (P = .007), respectively.The incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) was higher in the PRE compared with the POST group: 9.6% vs 7.2% (P = .282), respectively. After adjusting for confounding variables including Infectious Diseases consult, POST was independently associated with a reduction in 30-day mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.608; 95% CI, 0.375-0.986). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of an MRSA BSI treatment pathway with early use of BL reduced mortality with no increased rate of AKI. Further prospective evaluation of this pathway approach is warranted.
RESUMEN
A multicenter case series of 21 patients were treated with imipenem-cilastatin-relebactam. There were mixed infection sources, with pulmonary infections (11/21,52%) composing the majority. The primary pathogen was Pseudomonas aeruginosa (16/21, 76%), and 15/16 (94%) isolates were multidrug-resistant. Thirty-day survival occurred in 14/21 (67%) patients. Two patients experienced adverse effects.