Dataset Information

Large retrospective evaluation of the effectiveness and safety of ceftaroline fosamil therapy.

ABSTRACT: Ceftaroline has been approved for acute bacterial skin infections and community-acquired bacterial pneumonia. Limited clinical experience exists for use outside these indications. The objective of this study was to describe the outcomes of patients treated with ceftaroline for various infections. Retrospective analyses of patients receiving ceftaroline ?72 h from 2011 to 2013 were included. Clinical and microbiological outcomes were analyzed. Clinical success was defined as resolution of all signs and symptoms of infection with no further need for escalation while on ceftaroline treatment during hospitalization. A total of 527 patients received ceftaroline, and 67% were treated for off-label indications. Twenty-eight percent (148/527) of patients had bacteremia. Most patients (80%) were initiated on ceftaroline after receipt of another antimicrobial, with 48% citing disease progression as a reason for switching. The median duration of ceftaroline treatment was 6 days, with an interquartile range of 4 to 9 days. A total of 327 (62%) patients were culture positive, and the most prevalent pathogen was Staphylococcus aureus, with a frequency of 83% (271/327). Of these patients, 88.9% (241/271) were infected with methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA). Clinically, 88% (426/484) achieved clinical success and hospital mortality was seen in 8% (40/527). While on ceftaroline, adverse events were experienced in 8% (41/527) of the patients and 9% (28/307) were readmitted within 30 days after discharge for the same infection. Patients treated with ceftaroline for both FDA-approved and off-label infections had favorable outcomes. Further research is necessary to further describe the role of ceftaroline in a variety of infections and its impact on patient outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Casapao AM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3993242 | biostudies-literature | 2014 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Large retrospective evaluation of the effectiveness and safety of ceftaroline fosamil therapy.

Casapao Anthony M AM Davis Susan L SL Barr Viktorija O VO Klinker Kenneth P KP Goff Debra A DA Barber Katie E KE Kaye Keith S KS Mynatt Ryan P RP Molloy Leah M LM Pogue Jason M JM Rybak Michael J MJ

Antimicrobial agents and chemotherapy 20140218 5

Ceftaroline has been approved for acute bacterial skin infections and community-acquired bacterial pneumonia. Limited clinical experience exists for use outside these indications. The objective of this study was to describe the outcomes of patients treated with ceftaroline for various infections. Retrospective analyses of patients receiving ceftaroline ≥72 h from 2011 to 2013 were included. Clinical and microbiological outcomes were analyzed. Clinical success was defined as resolution of all sig ...[more]

PMID: 24550331

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionThis retrospective analysis compares the probability of target attainment (PTA) for ceftriaxone, levofloxacin and ceftaroline fosamil against Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus pneumoniae and Haemophilus influenzae in a representative patient population with moderate-to-severe community-acquired pneumonia (CAP).MethodsPublished pharmacokinetic (PK) models for levofloxacin and ceftriaxone, and an existing model for ceftaroline, were used with standard dosage regimens for simulating individual PK data with covariates representative of patients with CAP (5000 patients/drug regimen). PTA for clinically relevant pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) targets was calculated from steady state PK profiles for a range of minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs). Cumulative fractions of response (CFRs) were also calculated using MIC distributions from 2012 to 2017 global surveillance data.ResultsCeftaroline fosamil (600 mg q12 h) achieved > 90% PTA at all exposure targets for each pathogen at European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST)/Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) susceptibility breakpoints, and CFRs were > 99%. Ceftriaxone, but not levofloxacin, achieved 100% PTA and > 90% CFR against S. pneumoniae. Both levofloxacin and ceftriaxone achieved high PTA and CFR against H. influenzae. Levofloxacin achieved PTAs < 90% at EUCAST/CLSI breakpoints and ceftriaxone achieved PTAs < 90% at MICs up to 2 mg/L against S. aureus; both agents produced generally low CFRs against S. aureus (except levofloxacin against methicillin-sensitive S. aureus), reflecting the lack of activity of these agents against methicillin-resistant S. aureus.ConclusionCeftaroline fosamil demonstrated higher overall PTA rates than levofloxacin and ceftriaxone, in particular against S. aureus. These results provide insight regarding the potential comparative efficacy of the described antibiotics for moderate-to-severe CAP.FundingPfizer.

Project description: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.

Project description:BackgroundCeftaroline fosamil is US Food and Drug Administration-approved for acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections and community-acquired bacterial pneumonia, but it is not known how ceftaroline is being used in real-world settings or how adverse effects (AEs) and mortality compare to clinical trials.ObjectiveThis study describes ceftaroline use, AEs, and mortality in US Veterans Health Administration (VHA) hospital patients.MethodsThis phase IV, population-based, epidemiologic study analyzed patients ≥18 years old who received one or more ceftaroline doses within 14 days of admission to 69 VHA hospitals in 41 US states/territories from 1 October 2010 to 30 September 2014. VHA repository data were linked using unique patient identifiers. Diagnoses and AEs were determined using ICD9-CM and CSS codes. Demographics, AEs within 30 days of therapy initiation, and all-cause in-hospital mortality were summarized using descriptive statistics.Results764 Patients met study criteria. Patients were 97% male and 56% White, with a median age of 61 years and a Charlson score of 6. Diagnoses included skin (40%), sepsis (30%), osteomyelitis (25%), diabetic foot (22%), pneumonia (16%), bacteremia (11%), endocarditis (6%), meningitis (2%), and device (2%) infections. Ceftaroline was used first-line (37%), second-line (56%), and third-line or greater (7%). Patients received ceftaroline a median of 3 days after hospital admission. All-cause in-hospital mortality rates were: overall (5%), skin (2%), sepsis (9%), osteomyelitis (3%), diabetic foot (1%), pneumonia (13%), bacteremia (6%), endocarditis (11%), meningitis (6%), and device (13%). Eosinophilia, leukopenia, leukocytosis, fibromyalgia, myalgia and myositis, and polymyalgia rates were <1% each.ConclusionsCeftaroline is used in VHA hospitals for various diagnoses. Mortality was low and comparable with rates from clinical trials. Additional studies comparing ceftaroline to other drugs used in similar situations are needed.

Project description:Ceftaroline fosamil (ceftaroline hereafter) is the latest addition to the armamentarium for the treatment of patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). It is currently approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP), which is a recent FDA indication that centers on individuals with documented bacterial pneumonias that arise in the community setting. The purpose of this review is to summarize and discuss the major findings from the Phase III CAP clinical trials as well as the clinical experience with ceftaroline among patients with CAP in the "Ceftaroline Assessment Program and Teflaro(®) Utilization Registry" (CAPTURE). In its two Phase III CAP trials, ceftaroline was compared to ceftriaxone among adults with radiographically confirmed CAP requiring hospitalization who were classified as Pneumonia Outcomes Research Team (PORT) risk class III or IV. Among patients with CAP, clinical success at test of cure was 84.3% vs 77.7% (difference 6.6%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.6-11.8%) in those treated with ceftaroline and ceftriaxone, respectively, across the two Phase III clinical trials. Among patients with a culture-confirmed CABP, day 4 response rates were numerically higher, albeit non-significant, among patients that received ceftaroline vs. ceftriaxone (69.5% for ceftaroline vs. 59.4% for ceftriaxone, difference 10.1%, 95% CI, -0.6% to 20.6%). The efficacy of ceftaroline is supported by real-world observational data from CAPTURE for patients with both CAP and CABP. In addition, the CAPTURE program afforded an opportunity to assess the outcomes of patients who were excluded or limited in the original Phase III trials in a non-comparative fashion. These underrepresented patient populations with CAP included: patients that received prior antibiotics, patients in the ICU, patients with severe renal dysfunction, and those with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) isolated from respiratory or blood culture. As CAPTURE is a retrospective, non-comparator convenience sample registry, all the findings need to be interpreted with caution.

Dataset Information

Large retrospective evaluation of the effectiveness and safety of ceftaroline fosamil therapy.

Publications

Large retrospective evaluation of the effectiveness and safety of ceftaroline fosamil therapy.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets