Incidence and risk factors for mortality in patients treated with combined ceftaroline for Gram-positive infective endocarditis.

BACKGROUND: Ceftaroline is a fifth-generation cephalosporin and represents an alternative in the treatment of infective endocarditis (IE). The main objective of this study was to describe the incidence of in-hospital and 42-day mortality in patients with IE treated with ceftaroline. METHODS: An observational retrospective study included adult patients with IE admitted during a 3.5-year period (January 2018-June 2021) and treated with ceftaroline in a single center. All cases were definite or possible IE according to the modified Duke criteria. RESULTS: Seventy cases were analyzed. The mean age was 67.35 ± 16.62 (16-89) and 39 (55.7%) were males. The mean number of days of treatment with ceftaroline was 21.26 ± 16.17 (1-75). Overall mortality at 42 days was 30%, 20.7% in the first line, and 36.6% in rescue therapy. Predictors of 42 days-mortality were increased Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) (OR of 1.7 per 1 point increment, 95% CI 1.2-2.4, P 0.001), presence of methicillin-resistance (OR 6.8, 95% CI 1.3-36.8, P 0.026) and evidence of septic shock (OR 8.6 95% CI 1.7-44.2, P 0.01). Predictors of 42 days of therapeutic failure were the increase in the CCI (OR of 1.6 per 1 point increment, 95% CI 1.3-2.1, P 0.000) and septic shock (OR 4.5 95% CI 1.1-18 P 0.036). Adverse effects were described in 6/70 (8.6%) of the patients, precipitating in 4/70 (5.7%) the definitive withdrawal of the antibiotic. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of in-hospital and 42 day-mortality of IE patients treated with ceftaroline remains similar to literature data. Increased CCI, septic shock, and methicillin resistance are associated with poor prognosis.

Use of Ceftaroline Fosamil in Osteomyelitis: CAPTURE Study Experience.

BACKGROUND: Osteomyelitis is often challenging to treat. This analysis examined the clinical experience of patients with gram-positive osteomyelitis treated with ceftaroline fosamil in the phase 4 Clinical Assessment Program and Teflaro® Utilization Registry (CAPTURE) study. METHODS: Data including patient demographics, past illnesses, risk factors, disease characteristics, antibiotic use, pathogens isolated, and clinical outcome were collected between September 2013 and February 2015 by review of randomly ordered patient charts from participating sites in the United States. Clinical success was defined as discontinuation of ceftaroline fosamil following clinical cure with no further need for antibiotics or clinical improvement with switch to another antibiotic treatment. RESULTS: A total of 150 patients with gram-positive osteomyelitis were treated with ceftaroline fosamil. Most patients (117/150; 78.0%) were treated with 600 mg ceftaroline fosamil per dose; 143/150 patients (95.3%) received a dose every 12 h. The majority (89/150 patients; 59.3%) had been previously diagnosed with diabetes mellitus or peripheral arterial disease. Osteomyelitis was associated with hardware in 32/150 patients (21.3%). Methicillin-resistant and methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA; MSSA) were the most commonly isolated pathogens, observed in 93/150 (62.0%) and 21/150 (14.0%) patients, respectively. Clinical success with ceftaroline fosamil therapy was observed in 139/150 (92.7%) patients overall, 81/89 (91.0%) patients with diabetes or peripheral arterial disease, and 18/20 (90.0%) patients who had hardware implanted before ceftaroline fosamil therapy (none had hardware removed during therapy). Patients who received prior antibiotic therapy or ceftaroline fosamil as monotherapy experienced clinical success rates of 93.9% (107/114) and 91% (91/100), respectively. Among patients who received concurrent antibiotic therapy, the clinical success rate was 96.0% (48/50). Patients who were infected with MRSA or MSSA had clinical success rates of 92.5% (86/93) and 100% (21/21), respectively. A total of 2/150 (1.3%) patients discontinued ceftaroline fosamil therapy because of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical success rates with ceftaroline fosamil were high in patients with gram-positive osteomyelitis, including those with diabetes or peripheral arterial disease and those with MRSA or MSSA.

New antimicrobial approaches to gram positive respiratory infections.

Nowadays, we face growing resistance among gram-positive and gram-negative pathogens that cause respiratory infection in the hospital and in the community. The spread of penicillin- and macrolide-resistant pneumococci, Community-acquired methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus (Ca-MRSA), the emergence of glycopeptide-resistant staphylococci underline the need for underline the need for therapeutic alternatives. A number of new therapeutic agents, with activity against the above Gram (+) respiratory pathogens, as ceftaroline, ceftopibrole, telavancin, tedizolid have become available, either in clinical trials or have been approved for clinical use. Especially, the development of new oral antibiotics, as nemonaxacin, omadacyclin, cethromycin and solithromycin will give a solution to the lack of oral drugs for outpatient treatment. In the future the clinician needs to optimize the use of old and new antibiotics to treat gram (+) respiratory serious infections.

Ceftaroline Fosamil for the Treatment of Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia Secondary to Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infections or Community-Acquired Bacterial Pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: The Clinical Assessment Program and Teflaro® Utilization Registry is designed to collect information on the clinical use of ceftaroline fosamil in the Unites States. This report presents data on the treatment of patients with Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (SAB) secondary to acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs) or community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP). METHODS: Patients diagnosed with ABSSSI or CABP were identified through sequential review of randomly ordered charts generated from pharmacy listings from August 2011 to February 2013. Data were collected by chart review 30 days or more after completion of ceftaroline fosamil therapy. RESULTS: Secondary SAB was reported in a total of 48 of 1428 evaluable patients (27 with ABSSSI, 21 with CABP). The mean (SD) patient age was 61 (15) years. At least 1 comorbidity was recorded for 74% of patients with ABSSSI and 81% with CABP. Methicillin-resistant S. aureus was isolated from 59% of patients with ABSSSI and 76% with CABP. The mean (SD) duration of ceftaroline fosamil therapy was 5.8 (4.8) days for ABSSSI and 7.0 (3.8) days for CABP. Clinical success among all patients with SAB treated with ceftaroline fosamil was 58% (52% for SAB secondary to ABSSSI, 67% for SAB secondary to CABP). Clinical success rates of methicillin-resistant S. aureus SAB were 50% (8/16) for ABSSSI and 63% (10/16) for CABP. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports the use of ceftaroline fosamil as a viable treatment option in hospitalized patients with SAB secondary to ABSSSI or CABP. Further studies evaluating the use of ceftaroline fosamil for the treatment of SAB are warranted.

Safety, local tolerability and pharmacokinetics of ceftaroline fosamil administered in a reduced infusion volume.

AIMS: The standard dose of ceftaroline fosamil for patients with normal renal function is 600 mg diluted in 250 ml by 60 min intravenous infusion every 12 h. This two part phase I trial (NCT01577589) assessed safety and local tolerability of multiple ceftaroline fosamil 50 ml and 250 ml infusions, and pharmacokinetics following single administrations of each infusion volume. METHODS: Part A was a placebo-controlled, double-blind, multiple dose crossover study. Twenty-four healthy subjects were randomized to simultaneous, bilateral ceftaroline fosamil 600 mg and placebo infusions in each arm (50 ml then 250 ml or vice versa) every 12 h for 72 h, with a ≥ 4.5 day washout. Local tolerability was evaluated by the Visual Infusion Phlebitis scale, with scores ≥2 considered infusion site reactions (ISRs). Part B was an open label crossover study. Ten subjects were randomized to single 50 ml and 250 ml ceftaroline fosamil 600 mg infusions on days 1 and 3 (washout on day 2). Blood samples for pharmacokinetic analysis were taken over 24 h. RESULTS: In part A, four subjects (16.7%) experienced ISRs, all of which were associated with placebo infusions. No ISRs were reported for either ceftaroline fosamil 50 ml or 250 ml. Plasma pharmacokinetics (ceftaroline fosamil, active ceftaroline and an inactive metabolite) were similar following single 50 ml and 250 ml infusions in part B. CONCLUSIONS: No new safety concerns were identified for ceftaroline fosamil 600 mg 50 ml compared with 250 ml. These findings suggest infusion volumes down to 50 ml may be used in patients with fluid intake restrictions.

[Ceftaroline fosamil in community-acquired and nosocomial pneumonia]. / Ceftarolina fosamil en la neumonía comunitaria y nosocomial.

Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a common infection in developed countries and causes a large number of hospital admissions and deaths. In recent years, the incidence of this disease has increased, caused by progressive population aging. Following the introduction of the conjugate vaccine against Streptococcus pneumoniae, there have been significant epidemiological changes that require close monitoring because of the possible emergence of new patterns of resistance. This article aims to review the role of ceftaroline fosamil, a new parenteral cephalosporin with antibacterial activity against Gram-negative and Gram-positive pathogens, in the treatment of pneumonia. Several in vitro and in vivo studies have shown the efficacy of ceftaroline fosamil against penicillin-resistant S. pneumoniae and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). Additionally, ceftaroline has shown similar efficacy and safety to ceftriaxone in the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia with severe prognosis (prognostic severity index III and IV) in two phase III clinical trials. Although a non-inferiority design was used for these clinical trials, some data suggest a superior efficacy of ceftaroline, with earlier clinical response and higher cure rate in infections caused by S. pneumoniae, making this drug particularly interesting for critically-ill patients admitted to the intensive care unit. Ceftaroline may also be considered for empirical and directed treatment of MRSA pneumonia.

Comparison of the in vivo efficacy of ceftaroline fosamil, vancomycin and daptomycin in a murine model of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia.

The need for alternative drugs to treat methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteraemia has led to a focus on ceftaroline, for which clinical data remain scarce. Herein, the efficacy of ceftaroline fosamil for the treatment of experimental MRSA bacteraemia was compared with that of approved therapies. Five MRSA strains were tested in an immunocompetent BALB/c bacteraemia model. Serum pharmacokinetics of ceftaroline fosamil were determined using HPLC/MS Q-TOF. Two hours after infection with the MRSA strains, mice were administered 50 mg/kg of ceftaroline fosamil every 6 h, for 24 h. This regimen yielded a T>MIC of 61.5% for an MIC of 1 mg/L and proved efficacious against all strains, including an hVISA strain with non-susceptibility to daptomycin, as indicated by the reduction (mean ± s.d.) in log10 CFU/mL in blood of 2.34 ± 0.33 and log10 CFU/g in kidney of 2.08 ± 0.22. Similarly, treatment with daptomycin yielded a log reduction of 2.30 ± 0.60 in blood and 2.14 ± 0.31 in kidney. The decrease in bacterial density was less accentuated after treatment with vancomycin, which yielded 1.84 ± 0.73 and 1.95 ± 0.32 log reductions in blood and kidney, respectively. The results of the study showed that the efficacy of ceftaroline fosamil against MRSA bacteraemia in mice is not inferior to that of vancomycin and daptomycin, and indicated the potential use of ceftaroline fosamil against difficult-to-treat S. aureus bacteraemia. Considering these promising data, clinical trials should be conducted to ascertain the efficacy of the drug for treating bloodstream infections in humans.

Ceft-to-Ceft Study: Real-Life Experience with Ceftaroline and Ceftobiprole in Treatment of the Principal Infectious Syndromes in a Spanish Multicenter Hospital Cohort.

BACKGROUND: To compare the real-life effectiveness and safety of ceftaroline fosamil (ceftaroline-F) and ceftobiprole medocaril (ceftobiprole-M) for infections in hospitalized patients. METHODS: This comparative, observational, retrospective, and multicenter Spanish study included patients receiving outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) and hospitalized patients treated for at least 48 h with ceftaroline-F or ceftobiprole-M between their first incorporation in the clinical protocol of each hospital and 31 July 2022. RESULTS: Ceftaroline-F was administered to 227 patients and ceftobiprole-M to 212. In comparison to the latter, ceftaroline-F-treated participants were younger (63.02 vs. 66.40 years, OR 1.1; 95%CI: 1.001-1.05) and had higher rates of septic shock (OR 0.27; 95%CI: 0.09-0.81) and higher frequencies of targeted (57.7 vs. 29.7%; OR: 0.35; 95%CI: 0.18-0.69) and combined (89.0 vs. 45.8%, OR: 0.13; 95%CI: 0.06-0.28) therapies that were second line or more (82.4% vs. 64.6%%; OR 0.35; 95%CI: 0.18-0.69), and higher rates of infections due to Gram-positive cocci (92.7 vs. 64.7%, p = 0.001), bacteremia (51.9 vs. 21.7%, p = 0.001), infective endocarditis (24.2 vs. 2.4%, p = 0.0001), and mechanical ventilation-associated pneumonia (8.8 vs. 2.4%, p = 0.0001). Ceftobiprole-M was more frequently administered against polymicrobial infections (38.1 vs. 14.0%, p = 0.001), those produced by Gram-negative bacilli (19.7 vs. 6.0%, p = 0.0001), nosocomial pneumonia (33 vs. 10.6%, p = 0.0001), and skin and soft-tissue infections (25.4 vs. 10.1%, p = 0.0001). Patients treated with ceftaroline-F had a longer hospital stay (36 (IQR: 19-60) vs. 19.50 (IQR: 12-30.75, p = 0.0001) days), with no difference in infection-related mortality at 14 (13.2 vs. 8.0%, p = 0.078) or 28 (4.8 vs. 3.3%, p = 0.415) days or in dropout rate for adverse effects (2.2 vs. 0.9%; p = 1). CONCLUSIONS: The fifth-generation cephalosporins, ceftaroline-F and ceftobiprole-M, are safe and effective in real life, with no difference between them in health outcomes.

Impact of Underlying Comorbidities on Outcomes of Patients Treated with Ceftaroline Fosamil for Complicated Skin and Soft Tissue Infections: Pooled Results from Three Phase III Randomized Clinical Trials.

INTRODUCTION: In three phase III randomized controlled trials, ceftaroline fosamil was shown to be non-inferior to vancomycin plus aztreonam for the treatment of complicated skin and soft tissue infections (cSSTIs). This exploratory analysis evaluated the impact of underlying comorbidities on clinical outcomes in patients with cSSTI pooled from these three studies. METHODS: CANVAS 1 and 2 and COVERS evaluated ceftaroline fosamil (600 mg every 12 h [q12h]; 600 mg every 8 h [q8h; COVERS]) versus vancomycin plus aztreonam (1 g q12h each [CANVAS 1 and 2]; vancomycin 15 mg/kg q12h and aztreonam 1 g q8h [COVERS]) in hospitalized adults with cSSTI. The primary efficacy variable in each trial was clinical response at the test-of-cure (TOC) visit. Subgroup analyses were performed on the pooled clinically evaluable (CE) population, exploring the impact of age and various baseline comorbidities. RESULTS: Overall, 1808 patients were included in the CE population (1005 ceftaroline fosamil; 803 vancomycin plus aztreonam). Clinical cure rates at TOC were 89.7% (ceftaroline fosamil) and 90.8% (vancomycin plus aztreonam) (difference [95% confidence interval] - 1.13 [- 3.87, 1.67]). Clinical response rates were similar between treatment groups, regardless of age (≤ 65 years or > 65 years), and in subgroups of patients with and without diabetes mellitus, peripheral vascular disease, cancer/malignancy, renal impairment, and obesity; within these subgroups, efficacy and safety results were generally consistent with those of the overall cSSTI population. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis provides supportive evidence of the efficacy of ceftaroline fosamil in patients with cSSTI and underlying comorbidities. TRIAL REGISTRATION: CANVAS 1, NCT00424190 and CANVAS 2, NCT00423657 (both trials first posted on ClinicalTrials.gov 18/01/2007); COVERS, NCT01499277 (first posted on ClinicalTrials.gov 26/12/2011).

Ceftaroline Fosamil for the Empiric Treatment of Hospitalized Adults with cSSTI: An Economic Analysis from the Perspective of the Spanish National Health System.

Purpose: Complicated skin and soft tissue infections (cSSTI) are associated with high healthcare resource use and costs. The emergency nature of cSSTI hospitalizations requires starting immediate empiric intravenous (IV) antibiotic treatment, making the appropriate choice of initial antibiotic therapy crucial. Patients and Methods: The use of ceftaroline fosamil (CFT) as an alternative to other IV antibiotic therapies for the empiric treatment of hospitalized adults with cSSTI (vancomycin, linezolid, daptomycin, cloxacillin, tedizolid) was evaluated through cost consequences analysis. The model structure was a decision tree accounting for four different pathways: patients demonstrating early response (ER) either discharged early (with oral antibiotic) or remaining in hospital to continue the initial therapy; non-responders either remaining on the initial IV therapy or switching to a second-line antibiotic. The model perspective was the Spanish National Health System. Results: CFT resulted in average percentage of patients discharged early (PDE) of 24.6% (CI 19.49-30.2%) with average total cost per patient of €6763 (€6268-€7219). Vancomycin, linezolid, daptomycin and tedizolid resulted in average PDE of 22% (17.34-27.09%), 26.4% (20.5-32.32%), 28.6% (22.08-35.79%) and 26.5% (20.39-33.25%), respectively, for a total cost per patient of €6,619 (€5,902-€6,929), €6,394 (€5,881-€6,904), €6,855 (€5,800-€7,410) and €7,173 (€6,608-€7,763), respectively. Key model drivers were ER and antibiotic treatment duration, with hospital costs accounting for over 83% of the total expenditures. Conclusion: Given its clinical and safety profile, CFT is an acceptable choice for cSSTI empiric therapy providing comparable ER and costs to other relevant antibiotic options.

Treatment outcomes of secondary bacteraemia in patients treated with ceftaroline fosamil: pooled results from six phase III clinical trials.

OBJECTIVES: This exploratory pooled analysis assessed the efficacy and safety of ceftaroline fosamil and comparators across six phase III clinical trials in adults with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) or complicated skin and soft-tissue infection (cSSTI) and secondary bacteraemia. METHODS: In each trial, FOCUS 1 and 2 (CAP), Asia CAP trial, CANVAS 1 and 2 (cSSTI) and COVERS (cSSTI), patients were randomised to ceftaroline fosamil [600 mg q12h by 1-h i.v. infusion, except in COVERS (600 mg q8h by 2-h i.v. infusion), adjusted for renal function] or comparator. Efficacy assessments included clinical and microbiological responses at test-of-cure visit [microbiological modified intent-to-treat (mMITT) population]. Safety outcomes were assessed. RESULTS: The pooled mMITT population comprised 1976 patients, of whom 138 had baseline bacteraemia (ceftaroline fosamil, n = 72; comparator, n = 66). Predominant baseline blood pathogens were Staphylococcus aureus (n = 29), Streptococcus pneumoniae (n = 19) and other streptococci (n = 12). Clinical cure rates in bacteraemic patients were 55/72 (76.4%) and 51/66 (77.3%) for ceftaroline fosamil and comparators, respectively, and in non-bacteraemic patients were 822/966 (85.1%) and 717/872 (82.2%). Favourable microbiological response rates in bacteraemic patients were 56/72 (77.8%) for ceftaroline fosamil and 54/66 (81.8%) for comparators, and in non-bacteraemic patients were 825/966 (85.4%) and 719/872 (82.5%). Adverse events in bacteraemic patients were consistent with the known ceftaroline fosamil safety profile or the underlying indications. CONCLUSION: These pooled clinical and microbiological efficacy data demonstrate generally favourable outcomes for ceftaroline fosamil in patients with CAP or cSSTI and secondary bacteraemia. [Trial Registration: NCT00621504, NCT00509106; NCT01371838; NCT00424190, NCT00423657; NCT01499277].

Ceftaroline fosamil: clinical experience after 23-month prescription in a tertiary hospital.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the indications, success rate and adverse effects of ceftaroline fosamil treatment in a tertiary hospital. METHODS: In total, 84 cases from February 2018 to December 2019 were retrospectively analysed. No exclusion criteria were applied. RESULTS: Eighty-four patients, with a median age of 70 years, of which, 6.7% (56) were male, were treated with ceftaroline fosamil for a median of 14 days. Most indications were off-label, including 29 endocarditis (34.5%), 14 bacteraemia (16.6%), 5 Central nervous system (CNS) infections (6%) and 19 osteoarticular infections (22.6%). Staphylococcus aureus was the most frequently isolated microorganism, including 28 methicillin-sensitive S. aureus (MSSA; 33.3%) and 14 methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA; 16.7%), followed by coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (23, 27.4%). The main reason for ceftaroline fosamil prescription was the failure of previous treatment (41.7% of cases). Treatment was successful in 60/84 patients (71.4%) and failed clinically or microbiologically in 14 (16.7%). Eight patients died for a reason not related to the infection and two were found to have a non-infectious condition. Twenty-two of thirty-five (62.8%) patients prescribed ceftaroline because of failure of previous treatment improved, including eight endocarditis and seven bacteraemia. Adverse effects were reported in five patients (5.9%) including neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, transaminases elevation and creatinine elevation; all except one were mild and all resolved after discontinuation of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Ceftaroline fosamil is a well-tolerated cephalosporine, effective against multi- resistant gram-positive and many gram-negative microorganisms. Our experience suggests that it is effective as a rescue or first-line therapy in other indications than those currently approved.

Quantification of Ceftaroline in Human Plasma Using High-Performance Liquid Chromatography with Ultraviolet Detection: Application to Pharmacokinetic Studies.

This study was conducted to develop a rapid, simple and reproducible method for the quantification of ceftaroline in plasma samples by high-performance liquid chromatography with ultraviolet detection (HPLC-UV). Sample processing consisted of methanol precipitation and then, after centrifugation, the supernatant was injected into the HPLC system, working in isocratic mode. Ceftaroline was detected at 238 nm at a short acquisition time (less than 5 min). The calibration curve was linear over the concentration range from 0.25 to 40 µg/mL, and the method appeared to be selective, precise and accurate. Ceftaroline in plasma samples was stable at -80 °C for at least 3 months. The method was successfully applied to characterize the pharmacokinetic profile of ceftaroline in two critically ill patients and to evaluate whether the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) target was reached or not with the dose regimen administered.

Comparing probability of target attainment against Staphylococcus aureus for ceftaroline fosamil, vancomycin, daptomycin, linezolid, and ceftriaxone in complicated skin and soft tissue infection using pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic models.

For recently licensed antibiotics, such as the cephalosporin ceftaroline fosamil, probability of target attainment (PTA) curves, showing the percentage of patients reaching a predefined pharmacokinetic (PK)/pharmacodynamic (PD) target at different bacterial minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs), have been used to support and justify dose recommendations across patient populations. However, information on PTA for older antibiotics is limited. A retrospective analysis was conducted to construct PTA curves for 4 antibiotics against Staphylococcus aureus in patients with complicated skin and soft tissue infections (cSSTIs). PK models for vancomycin, linezolid, daptomycin, and ceftriaxone were selected from the literature based on large numbers of subjects with covariates representative of patients in Europe and/or the United States. An existing model was available for ceftaroline fosamil. Standard and high-dosage regimens were used to compare the PTA of each antibiotic at MIC values 0.03 to 64 mg/L for a simulated set of patients with cSSTI caused by S. aureus. These were compared to proportions of S. aureus isolates at each MIC from global surveillance data. Ceftaroline achieved PTAs >99.9% for bacteriostatic and bactericidal targets at the MIC90 (1 mg/L), whereas the comparators failed to achieve PTAs >90%, at bacteriostatic or bactericidal targets, even when clinical doses were increased beyond those recommended. PTA analysis can be used to compare different drugs with the same simulated patient dataset, subject to availability of an appropriate PK model and robust exposure targets. This analysis shows that some antibiotics commonly used to treat cSSTIs may fail to reach high PTAs relative to contemporary MIC90 estimates.

Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Target Attainment in Adult and Pediatric Patients Following Administration of Ceftaroline Fosamil as a 5-Minute Infusion.

The key pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) efficacy index for ß-lactam antibiotics is the percentage of time that free drug concentrations exceed the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of bacteria during each dosing interval (fT>MIC). Ceftaroline fosamil, the prodrug of the ß-lactam ceftaroline, was initially approved for administration as 60-minute intravenous (IV) infusions. Population PK analyses comparing exposure and PK/PD target attainment for 5-minute and 60-minute IV infusions, described here, have supported ceftaroline fosamil labeling updates to include variable infusion durations of 5 to 60 minutes in adults and children aged ≥2 months. A 2-compartment disposition PK model for ceftaroline fosamil and ceftaroline was used to predict steady-state ceftaroline exposures (maximum plasma concentrations [Cmax,ss ] and area under the plasma concentration-time curve over 24 hours [AUCss,0-24 ]) and probability of target attainment in simulated adult and pediatric patients with various degrees of renal function receiving standard doses of ceftaroline fosamil as 5-minute or 60-minute IV infusions. Across age groups and renal function categories, median ceftaroline AUCss,0-24 values were similar for 5-minute and 60-minute infusions, whereas Cmax,ss was up to 42% higher for 5-minute infusions. Both infusion durations achieved >99% probability of target attainment based on PK/PD targets for Staphylococcus aureus (35% fT>MIC) and Streptococcus pneumoniae (44% fT>MIC) at European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing/Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute MIC breakpoints (1 mg/L and 0.25/0.5 mg/L, respectively). These findings support administration of standard ceftaroline fosamil doses over 5 to 60 minutes for adults and children aged ≥2 months, providing added flexibility to clinicians and patients.

Ceftaroline Cerebrospinal Fluid Penetration in the Treatment of a Ventriculopleural Shunt Infection: A Case Report.

Pharmacokinetic data regarding ceftaroline fosamil (CPT) penetration into cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) are limited to a rabbit model (15% inflamed) and adult case reports. We describe serum and CSF CPT concentrations in a 21-year-old, 34.8 kg female, medically complex patient presented with a 4-day history of fevers (Tmax 39.2°C), tachypnea, tachycardia, fatigue, and a 1-week history of pus and blood draining from the ventriculopleural (VPL) shunt. A head CT and an ultrasound of the neck revealed septated complex fluid collection surrounding the shunt. Therapy was initiated with vancomycin and ceftriaxone. Blood and CSF cultures from hospital day (HD) 1 were positive for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus with a CPT MIC of 0.5 mg/L and a vancomycin MIC range of 0.5 to 1 mg/L. On HD 3, CPT was added. On HD 7, simultaneous serum (69.4, 44, and 30.2 mg/L) and CSF (1.7, 2.3, and 2.3 mg/L) concentrations were obtained at 0.25, 1.5, and 4.75 hours from the end of an infusion. Based on these concentrations, CPT CSF penetration ratio ranged from 2.4% to 7.6%. After addition of CPT, the blood and CSF cultures remained negative on a regimen of vancomycin plus CPT. On HD 14, a new left-sided VPL shunt was placed. The patient continued on CPT for a period of 7 days after the new VPL shunt placement. This case demonstrated CPT CSF penetration in a range of 2.4% to 7.6%, approximately half of the rabbit model. This allowed for CSF concentrations at least 50% free time > 4 to 6× MIC of the dosing interval with a dosing regimen of 600 mg IV every 8 hours in a 34.8 kg chronic patient and resulted in a successful clinical outcome with no identified adverse outcomes.

Economic analysis of ceftaroline fosamil for treating community-acquired pneumonia in Spain.

Background: Adults admitted to hospital with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) impose significant burden upon limited hospital resources. To achieve early response and possibly early discharge, thus reducing hospital expenditure, the choice of initial antibiotic therapy is pivotal.Methods: A cost-consequences model was developed to evaluate ceftaroline fosamil (CFT) as an alternative to other antibiotic therapies (ceftriaxone, co-amoxiclav, moxifloxacin, levofloxacin) for the empiric treatment of hospitalized adults with moderate/severe CAP (PORT score III-IV) from the perspective of the Spanish National Health System (NHS).Findings: Compared with ceftriaxone, the model predicted an increase in the number of CFT-treated patients discharged early (PDE) (30.6% vs. 26.1%) while decreasing initial antibiotic failures (3.8% vs. 7.6%). For patients with pneumococcal pneumonia, CFT was cost-saving vs. ceftriaxone (by 1.2%) and significantly increased PDE (32.1% vs. 24.6%). CFT resulted in cost-saving vs. levofloxacin, due lower initial antibiotic therapy costs and increased PDE (30.6% vs. 14.9%). Moxifloxacin and co-amoxiclav early response rate of 53.63% and 54.24% resulted in cost neutrality vs. CFT, with direct comparison hampered by the significantly different early response criteria utilized in the literature.Conclusions: Despite a higher unit cost, CFT is a reasonable alternative to other agents for adults hospitalized with moderate/severe CAP, given the projected higher PDE achieved with similar or lower total costs.

New Antibiotics for the Treatment of Acute Bacterial Skin and Soft Tissue Infections in Pediatrics.

Acute bacterial skin and soft tissue infections (aSSTIs) are a large group of diseases that can involve exclusively the skin or also the underlying subcutaneous tissues, fascia, or muscles. Despite differences in the localization and severity, all these diseases are due mainly to Gram-positive bacteria, especially Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pyogenes. aSSTI incidence increased considerably in the early years of this century due to the emergence and diffusion of community-acquired methicillin-resistant S. aureus (CA-MRSA). Despite the availability of antibiotics effective against CA-MRSA, problems of resistance to these drugs and risks of significant adverse events have emerged. In this paper, the present knowledge on the potential role new antibiotics for the treatment of pediatric aSSTIs is discussed. The most recent molecules that have been licensed for the treatment of aSSTIs include ozenoxacin (OZ), ceftaroline fosamil (CF), dalbavancin (DA), oritavancin (OR), tedizolid (TD), delafloxacin (DL), and omadacycline (OM). However, only OZ and CF have been licensed for use in children with aSSTIs, although the superiority of these antibiotics to those routinely used for the treatment of aSSTIs should be further demonstrated. Waiting for additional studies, OZ and CF should be prescribed for aSSTI treatment in the presence of the potential failure of old molecules.

Baseline Characteristics and Outcomes Among Patients with Complicated Skin and Soft Tissue Infections Admitted to the Intensive Care Unit: Analysis of the Phase 3 COVERS Randomized Trial of Ceftaroline Fosamil Versus Vancomycin Plus Aztreonam.

AIM: Exploratory analyses evaluated patient characteristics and outcomes among patients with complicated skin and soft tissue infection (cSSTI) in the phase 3 COVERS study who were admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU). METHODS: Adults with cSSTI (surface area ≥ 75 cm2) and evidence of systemic inflammation and/or underlying comorbidities were randomized 2:1 to intravenous ceftaroline fosamil (600 mg every 8 h [q8h]) or vancomycin (15 mg/kg every 12 h) plus aztreonam (1 g q8h) for 5-14 days. Clinical response and ICU length of stay (LOS) within first hospitalization were evaluated in the modified intent-to-treat (MITT) and clinically evaluable (CE) populations; a Cox proportional hazards model identified factors associated with increased hospital LOS. RESULTS: Overall, 42 of 761 randomized patients were admitted to the ICU (ceftaroline fosamil, n = 32; vancomycin plus aztreonam, n = 10) prior to, or at start of, study treatment. Baseline differences between the ICU and non-ICU populations were indicative of more severe disease in ICU patients; within this subset, there were also some notable imbalances between treatment groups. Clinical cure rates at test-of-cure (ceftaroline fosamil vs. vancomycin plus aztreonam) were generally similar in the non-ICU and ICU subsets (MITT population 79% vs. 79% and 69% vs. 90.0%, respectively; CE population 87% vs. 85% and 80% vs. 89%, respectively). Median ICU LOS was 8 vs. 13 days, respectively. ICU admission was a risk factor predicting increased hospital LOS (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical outcomes for patients admitted to the ICU were generally similar to non-ICU patients, despite more severe baseline disease, with shorter median treatment duration in the ceftaroline fosamil group. ICU admission was associated with longer hospital LOS. Given the small sample size and unbalanced patient and disease characteristics within the ICU subgroup, differences between treatment groups should be interpreted with caution. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT01499277.

Off-label use of ceftaroline fosamil: A systematic review.

Ceftaroline fosamil is a fifth-generation cephalosporin with anti-methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) activity. It has been approved by the EMA and FDA for the treatment of adults and children with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP) and acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI). However, ceftaroline fosamil has a broad spectrum of activity, and a good safety and tolerability profile, so is frequently used off-label. The aim of this systematic review was to summarize the safety and efficacy of off-label use of ceftaroline. The review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL databases (2010-2018) were searched using as the main term ceftaroline fosamil and its synonyms in combination with names of infectious diseases of interest. A total of 21 studies with 1901 patients were included: the most common off-label indications for ceftaroline use were bacteremia (n=595), endocarditis (n=171), osteoarticular infections (n=368), hospital-acquired pneumonia (n=115) and meningitis (n=23). The most common reasons for off-label use were persistent or recurrent infection after standard treatment or non-susceptibility to vancomycin and daptomycin. Clinical success was evaluated in 933 patients, and 724 (77%) of these reached this positive outcome. Incidence of adverse events (AEs) was reported in 11 studies. In 83 (9%) cases there were AEs related to the use of ceftaroline; the most common reported AEs were nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, rash and neutropenia. The review results show that ceftaroline may be used in clinical settings other than those currently approved; however, the use of ceftaroline in these contexts deserves further investigation.