Dataset Information

Comparative Effectiveness of Switching to Daptomycin Versus Remaining on Vancomycin Among Patients With Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) Bloodstream Infections.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infections (MRSA BSI) usually receive initial treatment with vancomycin but may be switched to daptomycin for definitive therapy, especially if treatment failure is suspected. Our objective was to evaluate the effectiveness of switching from vancomycin to daptomycin compared with remaining on vancomycin among patients with MRSA BSI.

Methods

Patients admitted to 124 Veterans Affairs Hospitals who experienced MRSA BSI and were treated with vancomycin during 2007-2014 were included. The association between switching to daptomycin and 30-day mortality was assessed using Cox regression models. Separate models were created for switching to daptomycin any time during the first hospitalization and for switching within 3 days of receiving vancomycin.

Results

In total, 7411 patients received vancomycin for MRSA BSI. Also, 606 (8.2%) patients switched from vancomycin to daptomycin during the first hospitalization, and 108 (1.5%) switched from vancomycin to daptomycin within 3 days of starting vancomycin. In the multivariable analysis, switching to daptomycin within 3 days was significantly associated with lower 30-day mortality (hazards ratio [HR] = 0.48; 95% confidence interval [CI]: .25, .92). However, switching to daptomycin at any time during the first hospitalization was not significantly associated with 30-day mortality (HR: 0.87; 95% CI: .69, 1.09).

Conclusions

Switching to daptomycin within 3 days of initial receipt of vancomycin is associated with lower 30-day mortality among patients with MRSA BSI. This benefit was not seen when the switch occurred later. Future studies should prospectively assess the benefit of early switching from vancomycin to other anti-MRSA antibiotics.

SUBMITTER: Schweizer ML

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7850170 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Vancomycin remains the mainstay treatment for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bloodstream infections (BSIs) despite increased treatment failures. Daptomycin has been shown to improve clinical outcomes in patients with BSIs caused by MRSA isolates with vancomycin MICs of >1 mg/liter, but these studies relied on automated testing systems. We evaluated the outcomes of BSIs caused by MRSA isolates for which vancomycin MICs were determined by standard broth microdilution (BMD). A retrospective, matched cohort of patients with MRSA BSIs treated with vancomycin or daptomycin from January 2010 to March 2015 was completed. Patients were matched using propensity-adjusted logistic regression, which included age, Pitt bacteremia score, primary BSI source, and hospital of care. The primary endpoint was clinical failure, which was a composite endpoint of the following metrics: 30-day mortality, bacteremia with a duration of ?7 days, or a change in anti-MRSA therapy due to persistent or worsening signs or symptoms. Secondary endpoints included MRSA-attributable mortality and the number of days of MRSA bacteremia. Independent predictors of failure were determined through conditional backwards-stepwise logistic regression with vancomycin BMD MIC forced into the model. A total of 262 patients were matched. Clinical failure was significantly higher in the vancomycin cohort than in the daptomycin cohort (45.0% versus 29.0%; P = 0.007). All-cause 30-day mortality was significantly higher in the vancomycin cohort (15.3% versus 6.1%; P = 0.024). These outcomes remained significant when stratified by vancomycin BMD MIC. There was no significant difference in the length of MRSA bacteremia. Variables independently associated with treatment failure included vancomycin therapy (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 2.16, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.24 to 3.76), intensive care unit admission (aOR = 2.46, 95% CI = 1.34 to 4.54), and infective endocarditis as the primary source (aOR = 2.33, 95% CI = 1.16 to 4.68). Treatment of MRSA BSIs with daptomycin was associated with reduced clinical failure and 30-day mortality; these findings were independent of vancomycin BMD MIC.

Project description:Although methicillin (meticillin)-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) strains with reduced susceptibility to vancomycin (RVS-MRSA; including vancomycin-intermediate S. aureus [VISA] and heterogeneous VISA [hVISA]) have been linked with vancomycin treatment failure, it is unclear whether they are more pathogenic than vancomycin-susceptible MRSA (VS-MRSA). We prospectively assessed patients with clinical MRSA isolates during a 10-month period to determine clinical status (infection versus colonization) and therapeutic outcome before correlating these findings with the results of detailed in vitro assessment of vancomycin susceptibility, including population analysis profile (PAP) testing. hVISA and VISA were defined by standard PAP criteria (area-under-the-curve ratio compared to that of the reference hVISA strain Mu3 [>or=0.9]) and routine CLSI criteria (vancomycin MIC, 4 to 8 microg/ml), respectively. Among the 117 patients assessed, 58 had RVS-MRSA isolates (56 hVISA and 2 VISA) and 59 had VS-MRSA isolates; the patient demographics and comorbidities were similar. RVS-MRSA was associated with a lower rate of infection than VS-MRSA (29/58 versus 46/59; P = 0.003), including a lower rate of bacteremia (3/58 versus 20/59, respectively; P < 0.001). The cure rates in RVS-MRSA and VS-MRSA groups were not statistically different (16/26 versus 31/42; P = 0.43), but the post hoc assessment of treatment regimes and study size made detailed conclusions difficult. The results of the macro method Etest correlated well with the PAP results (sensitivity, 98.3%, and specificity, 91.5%), but broth microdilution and our preliminary RVS-MRSA detection method correlated poorly. All isolates were susceptible to linezolid and daptomycin. These data suggest that detailed prospective laboratory identification of RVS-MRSA isolates may be of limited value and that, instead, such in vitro investigation should be reserved for isolates from patients who are failing appropriate anti-MRSA therapy.