Dataset Information

Clinical utility of telavancin for treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia: focus on non-ventilator-associated pneumonia.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) is the most common health care-associated infection contributing to death. Studies have indicated that there may be differences in the causative pathogens and outcomes of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) and non-ventilator-associated pneumonia (NV-HAP). However, with limited NV-HAP-specific data available, treatment is generally based on data from studies of VAP. The Phase 3 Assessment of Telavancin for Treatment of Hospital-Acquired Pneumonia (ATTAIN) studies were two double-blind randomized controlled trials that demonstrated the non-inferiority of telavancin to vancomycin for treatment of Gram-positive HAP. We conducted a post hoc subgroup analysis of patients enrolled in the ATTAIN studies who had NV-HAP. METHODS:Data from the two ATTAIN studies were pooled, and patients with NV-HAP were analyzed. The all-treated (AT) population consisted of all randomized patients who received ?1 dose of study medication, and the clinically evaluable (CE) population consisted of AT patients who were protocol-adherent or who died on or after study day 3, where death was attributable to the HAP episode under study. The primary endpoint was clinical response (cure, failure, or indeterminate) at the follow-up/test of cure visit, conducted 7-14 days after the end of therapy. RESULTS:A total of 1,076 patients (71.6% of overall ATTAIN AT population) had NV-HAP (533 and 543 patients in the telavancin and vancomycin treatment groups, respectively). Clinical cure rates in the CE population were similar for patients with NV-HAP treated with telavancin and vancomycin (83.1% [201/242] and 84.1% [233/277], respectively). In patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolated at baseline, cure rates in the CE population were 74.8% (77/103) for telavancin and 79.3% (96/121) for vancomycin. The incidence of adverse events, serious adverse events, and deaths in patients with NV-HAP was similar whether patients received telavancin or vancomycin. CONCLUSION:This post hoc subgroup analysis of the ATTAIN studies demonstrated similar cure rates for telavancin and vancomycin for treatment of NV-HAP.

SUBMITTER: Rubinstein E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4035308 | biostudies-literature | 2014

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Clinical utility of telavancin for treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia: focus on non-ventilator-associated pneumonia.

Rubinstein Ethan E Stryjewski Martin E ME Barriere Steven L SL

Infection and drug resistance 20140520

<h4>Background</h4>Hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) is the most common health care-associated infection contributing to death. Studies have indicated that there may be differences in the causative pathogens and outcomes of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) and non-ventilator-associated pneumonia (NV-HAP). However, with limited NV-HAP-specific data available, treatment is generally based on data from studies of VAP. The Phase 3 Assessment of Telavancin for Treatment of Hospital-Acquired Pneu ...[more]

PMID: 24876786

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionThe efficacy and safety of telavancin versus vancomycin in microbiologically evaluable patients with hospital-acquired or ventilator-associated pneumonia (HAP/VAP) caused by Staphylococcus aureus with vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) ≥ 1.0 µg/mL was analyzed using data derived from previously reported Assessment of Telavancin for Treatment of Hospital-Acquired Pneumonia (ATTAIN) trials.MethodsThis post hoc subgroup analysis of two randomized, double-blind, comparator-controlled, parallel-group phase 3 trials conducted at 274 sites in 38 countries included 194 microbiologically evaluable patients with HAP/VAP caused by monomicrobial S. aureus with vancomycin MIC ≥ 1.0 µg/mL. Patients received intravenous telavancin (10 mg/kg every 24 h) or intravenous vancomycin (1 g every 12 h with site-specific modifications) for 7-21 days. Efficacy was assessed by clinical cure, defined as improvement or non-progression of radiographic findings at end of treatment and resolution of pneumonia signs and symptoms at follow-up/test-of-cure visits, and survival 28 days post-randomization. Safety was assessed from categorical shifts in creatinine clearance during therapy and adverse events (AEs).ResultsClinical cure rates were numerically greater following telavancin versus vancomycin treatment overall (85.4% vs. 74.3%; treatment difference [95% confidence interval (CI)], 11.1% [- 0.002%, 22.2%]) and in patients aged ≥ 65 years (81.6% vs. 66.2%; treatment difference [95% CI], 15.5% [- 0.9%, 30.2%]) patients with VAP (92.3% vs. 47.6%; treatment difference [95% CI], 44.7% [18.1%, 64.9%]), and patients with baseline Acute Physiology And Chronic Health Evaluation II score ≥ 20 (71.4% vs. 55.6%; treatment difference [95% CI], 15.9% [- 11.7%, 40.5%]). Renal function declined in 7 (7.9%) patients receiving telavancin and 6 (5.7%) patients receiving vancomycin. Survival proportion was numerically higher (85.2% vs. 80.2%; treatment difference [95% CI], 5.0% [- 5.8%, 15.8%]) and AEs were comparable in patients treated with telavancin versus vancomycin.ConclusionTelavancin is an alternative to vancomycin for HAP/VAP caused by S. aureus with vancomycin MIC ≥ 1 µg/mL.FundingTheravance Biopharma R&D, Inc., South San Francisco, CA, USA.

Project description:ImportanceNon-ventilator-associated hospital-acquired pneumonia (NV-HAP) is a common and deadly hospital-acquired infection. However, inconsistent surveillance methods and unclear estimates of attributable mortality challenge prevention.ObjectiveTo estimate the incidence, variability, outcomes, and population attributable mortality of NV-HAP.Design, setting, and participantsThis cohort study retrospectively applied clinical surveillance criteria for NV-HAP to electronic health record data from 284 US hospitals. Adult patients admitted to the Veterans Health Administration hospital from 2015 to 2020 and HCA Healthcare hospitals from 2018 to 2020 were included. The medical records of 250 patients who met the surveillance criteria were reviewed for accuracy.ExposuresNV-HAP, defined as sustained deterioration in oxygenation for 2 or more days in a patient who was not ventilated concurrent with abnormal temperature or white blood cell count, performance of chest imaging, and 3 or more days of new antibiotics.Main outcomes and measuresNV-HAP incidence, length-of-stay, and crude inpatient mortality. Attributable inpatient mortality by 60 days follow-up was estimated using inverse probability weighting, accounting for both baseline and time-varying confounding.ResultsAmong 6 022 185 hospitalizations (median [IQR] age, 66 [54-75] years; 1 829 475 [26.1%] female), there were 32 797 NV-HAP events (0.55 per 100 admissions [95% CI, 0.54-0.55] per 100 admissions and 0.96 per 1000 patient-days [95% CI, 0.95-0.97] per 1000 patient-days). Patients with NV-HAP had multiple comorbidities (median [IQR], 6 [4-7]), including congestive heart failure (9680 [29.5%]), neurologic conditions (8255 [25.2%]), chronic lung disease (6439 [19.6%]), and cancer (5,467 [16.7%]); 24 568 cases (74.9%) occurred outside intensive care units. Crude inpatient mortality was 22.4% (7361 of 32 797) for NV-HAP vs 1.9% (115 530 of 6 022 185) for all hospitalizations; 12 449 (8.0%) were discharged to hospice. Median [IQR] length-of-stay was 16 (11-26) days vs 4 (3-6) days. On medical record review, pneumonia was confirmed by reviewers or bedside clinicians in 202 of 250 patients (81%). It was estimated that NV-HAP accounted for 7.3% (95% CI, 7.1%-7.5%) of all hospital deaths (total hospital population inpatient death risk of 1.87% with NV-HAP events included vs 1.73% with NV-HAP events excluded; risk ratio, 0.927; 95% CI, 0.925-0.929).Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study, NV-HAP, which was defined using electronic surveillance criteria, was present in approximately 1 in 200 hospitalizations, of whom 1 in 5 died in the hospital. NV-HAP may account for up to 7% of all hospital deaths. These findings underscore the need to systematically monitor NV-HAP, define best practices for prevention, and track their impact.

Project description:BackgroundResistant bacterial infections, particularly those caused by gram-negative pathogens, are associated with high mortality and economic burdens. Ceftolozane/tazobactam demonstrated efficacy comparable to meropenem in patients with ventilated hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia in the ASPECT-NP study. One cost-effectiveness analysis in the United States revealed that ceftolozane/tazobactam was cost effective, but no Japanese studies have been conducted. Therefore, the objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of ceftolozane/tazobactam compared to meropenem for patients with ventilated hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia from a health care payer perspective.MethodsA hybrid decision-tree Markov decision-analytic model with a 5-year time horizon were developed to estimate costs and quality-adjusted life-years and to calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio associated with ceftolozane/tazobactam and meropenem in the treatment of patients with ventilated hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia. Clinical outcomes were based on the ASPECT-NP study, costs were based on the national fee schedule of 2022, and utilities were based on published data. One-way sensitivity analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were also conducted to assess the robustness of our modeled estimates.ResultsAccording to our base-case analysis, compared with meropenem, ceftolozane/tazobactam increased the total costs by 424,731.22 yen (£2,626.96) and increased the quality-adjusted life-years by 0.17, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 2,548,738 yen (£15,763.94) per quality-adjusted life-year gained for ceftolozane/tazobactam compared with meropenem. One-way sensitivity analysis showed that although the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio remained below 5,000,000 yen (£30,925) for most of the parameters, the incremental net monetary benefit may have been less than 0 depending on the treatment efficacy outcome, especially the cure rate and mortality rate for MEPM and mortality rate for CTZ/TAZ. 53.4% of the PSA simulations demonstrated that CTZ/TAZ was more cost-effective than MEPM was.ConclusionAlthough incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was below ￥5,000,000 in base-case analysis, whether ceftolozane/tazobactam is a cost-effective alternative to meropenem for ventilated hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia in Japan remains uncertain. Future research should examine the unobserved heterogeneity across patient subgroups and decision-making settings, to characterise decision uncertainty and its consequences so as to assess whether additional research is required.

Dataset Information

Clinical utility of telavancin for treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia: focus on non-ventilator-associated pneumonia.

Publications

Clinical utility of telavancin for treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia: focus on non-ventilator-associated pneumonia.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets