Dataset Information

Clinical and Microbiological Outcomes of Ceftazidime-Avibactam Treatment in Adults with Gram-Negative Bacteremia: A Subset Analysis from the Phase 3 Clinical Trial Program.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

This exploratory analysis assessed efficacy and safety outcomes in patients with Gram-negative bacteremia treated with ceftazidime-avibactam or comparator across five phase 3, randomized, controlled, multi-center trials in adults with complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI), complicated urinary tract infection (cUTI)/pyelonephritis, hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP), and ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP).

Methods

In each trial, RECLAIM and RECLAIM 3 (cIAI; NCT01499290/NCT01726023), REPRISE (cIAI/cUTI; NCT01644643), RECAPTURE (cUTI; NCT01595438/NCT01599806), and REPROVE (HAP/VAP; NCT01808092), patients were randomized 1:1 to intravenous ceftazidime-avibactam (plus metronidazole for those with cIAI) or comparators (carbapenems in > 97% patients) for 5-21 days. Efficacy assessments included clinical and microbiological responses at the test-of-cure visit in the pooled Gram-negative extended microbiologically evaluable (GNeME) population (bacteremia subset). Safety outcomes were summarized for patients with positive bacterial blood culture(s) at baseline who received ≥ 1 dose of study treatment.

Results

The overall safety population included 4050 patients (ceftazidime-avibactam, n = 2024; comparator, n = 2026). The GNeME population (bacteremia subset) comprised 101 patients (ceftazidime-avibactam, n = 54; comparator, n = 47). Clinical cure rates (all indications combined) were 47/54 (87.0%) for ceftazidime-avibactam and 39/47 (83.0%) for comparators; favorable microbiological response rates were 43/54 (79.6%) and 32/47 (68.1%), respectively. Clinical and microbiological responses in the bacteremia subset were generally similar to those in the overall set. The pattern of adverse events in patients with bacteremia was similar between treatment groups and was consistent with the known safety profile of ceftazidime-avibactam.

Conclusion

This analysis provides supportive evidence of the efficacy and safety of ceftazidime-avibactam in patients with Gram-negative bacteremia associated with cIAI, cUTI/pyelonephritis, or HAP/VAP.

SUBMITTER: Mazuski JE

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8353612 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Objective: To systematically review and compare the efficacy and posttreatment resistance of ceftazidime-avibactam therapy and ceftazidime-avibactam-based combination therapy in patients with Gram-negative pathogens. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, CNKI, and Wanfang Data databases were searched from their inception up to March 31, 2021, to obtain studies on ceftazidime-avibactam therapy versus ceftazidime-avibactam-based combination therapy in patients with carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative pathogens. The primary outcome was mortality rate, and the second outcomes were microbiologically negative, clinical success, and the development of resistance after ceftazidime-avibactam treatment. Results: Seventeen studies representing 1,435 patients (837 received ceftazidime-avibactam-based combination therapy and 598 received ceftazidime-avibactam therapy) were included in the meta-analysis. The results of the meta-analysis showed that no statistically significant difference was found on mortality rate (Petos odds ratio (OR) = 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.79-1.34), microbiologically negative (OR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.54-1.81), and clinical success (OR =0.95, 95% CI 0.64-1.39) between ceftazidime-avibactam-based combination therapy and ceftazidime-avibactam therapy. Although there was no difference in posttreatment resistance of ceftazidime-avibactam (OR = 0.65, 95% CI 0.34-1.26) in all included studies, a trend favoring the combination therapy was found (according to the pooled three studies, OR = 0.18, 95% CI 0.04-0.78). Conclusions: The current evidence suggests that ceftazidime-avibactam-based combination therapy may not have beneficial effects on mortality, microbiologically negative, and clinical success to patients with carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative pathogens. A trend of posttreatment resistance occurred more likely in ceftazidime-avibactam therapy than the combination therapy. Due to the limited number of studies that can be included, additional high-quality studies are needed to verify the above conclusions.

Project description:The activities of the novel β-lactam-β-lactamase inhibitor combination ceftazidime-avibactam and comparator agents were evaluated against a contemporary collection of clinically significant Gram-negative bacilli. Avibactam is a novel non-β-lactam β-lactamase inhibitor that inhibits Ambler class A, C, and some D enzymes. A total of 10,928 Gram-negative bacilli-8,640 Enterobacteriaceae, 1,967 Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and 321 Acinetobacter sp. isolates-were collected from 73 U.S. hospitals and tested for susceptibility by reference broth microdilution methods in a central monitoring laboratory (JMI Laboratories, North Liberty, IA, USA). Ceftazidime was combined with avibactam at a fixed concentration of 4 μg/ml. Overall, 99.8% of Enterobacteriaceae strains were inhibited at a ceftazidime-avibactam MIC of ≤4 μg/ml. Ceftazidime-avibactam was active against extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)-phenotype Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae, meropenem-nonsusceptible (MIC≥2 μg/ml) K. pneumoniae, and ceftazidime-nonsusceptible Enterobacter cloacae. Among ESBL-phenotype K. pneumoniae strains, 61.1% were meropenem susceptible and 99.3% were inhibited at a ceftazidime-avibactam MIC of ≤4 μg/ml. Among P. aeruginosa strains, 96.9% were inhibited at a ceftazidime-avibactam MIC of ≤8 μg/ml, and susceptibility rates for meropenem, ceftazidime, and piperacillin-tazobactam were 82.0, 83.2, and 78.3%, respectively. Ceftazidime-avibactam was the most active compound tested against meropenem-nonsusceptible P. aeruginosa (MIC50/MIC90, 4/16 μg/ml; 87.3% inhibited at ≤8 μg/ml). Acinetobacter spp. (ceftazidime-avibactam MIC50/MIC90, 16/>32 μg/ml) showed high rates of resistance to most tested agents. In summary, ceftazidime-avibactam demonstrated potent activity against a large collection of contemporary Gram-negative bacilli isolated from patients in U.S. hospitals in 2012, including organisms that are resistant to most currently available agents, such as K. pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC)-producing Enterobacteriaceae and meropenem-nonsusceptible P. aeruginosa.

Project description:The correlation of the clinical efficacies of ceftazidime-avibactam and comparators (carbapenems) was evaluated against baseline Gram-negative isolates having characterized ?-lactam resistance mechanisms from complicated urinary tract infection (cUTI) and complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI) phase 2 trials. Enterobacteriaceae displaying ceftriaxone and/or ceftazidime MICs of ? 2 ?g/ml (69 isolates) and nonfermentative Gram-negative bacilli (NF-GNB [three isolates]) with ceftazidime MICs of ? 16 ?g/ml were characterized for their narrow- and extended-spectrum ?-lactamase (ESBL) content. Enterobacteriaceae (one isolate) and NF-GNB (three isolates) with imipenem/meropenem MICs of ? 2 and ? 16 ?g/ml, respectively, were tested for carbapenemases. All cUTI E. coli had the lineage background investigated (ST131-like versus non-ST131-like). The primary efficacy endpoint was microbiological response (eradication) at test of cure (TOC) for cUTI and clinical response (inferred microbiological eradication) at TOC for cIAI. A total of 34.1% of baseline cUTI (36.4%) and cIAI (33.1%) pathogens met the MIC-based screening criteria (screen positive). All screen-positive cUTI pathogens were CTX-M-producing E. coli, except for one E. cloacae isolate with AmpC overexpression. The majority (66.7%) of screen-positive cIAI isolates produced CTX-M-type coupled with a diverse array of other ?-lactamases. Similar favorable responses were observed with ceftazidime-avibactam (93.3%) and carbapenems (90.9%), when a non-ESBL Enterobacteriaceae isolate was recovered at the baseline visit. When an ESBL Enterobacteriaceae isolate was present, the favorable responses were 85.7% and 80.0% with ceftazidime-avibactam and carbapenems, respectively. Higher favorable responses were observed with ceftazidime-avibactam (75.0%) than with carbapenems (66.7%) when an ST131-like E. coli isolate was recovered at baseline, as when a non-ST131-like isolate was present (93.8% versus 86.7%, respectively). The efficacy of ceftazidime-avibactam was similar to that of carbapenems for treatment of cUTI and cIAI caused by ESBL organisms.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Experience in real clinical practice with ceftazidime-avibactam for the treatment of serious infections due to gram-negative bacteria (GNB) other than carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) is very limited. METHODS:We carried out a retrospective multicenter study of patients hospitalized in 13 Italian hospitals who received ?72 h of ceftazidime-avibactam for GNB other than CRE to assess the rates of clinical success, resistance development, and occurrence of adverse events. RESULTS:Ceftazidime-avibactam was used to treat 41 patients with GNB infections other than CRE. Median age was 62 years and 68% of them were male. The main causative agents were P. aeruginosa (33/41; 80.5%) and extended spectrum beta lactamase (ESBL)-producing Enterobacterales (4/41, 9.8%). Four patients had polymicrobial infections. All strains were susceptible to ceftazidime-avibactam. The most common primary infection was nosocomial pneumonia (n = 20; 48.8%), primary bacteremia (n = 7; 17.1%), intra-abdominal infection (n = 4; 9.8%), and bone infection (n = 4; 9.8%). Ceftazidime-avibactam was mainly administered as a combination treatment (n = 33; 80.5%) and the median length of therapy was 13 days. Clinical success at the end of the follow-up period was 90.5%, and the only risk factor for treatment failure at multivariate analysis was receiving continuous renal replacement therapy during ceftazidime-avibactam. There was no association between clinical failures and type of primary infection, microbiological isolates, and monotherapy with ceftazidime-avibactam. Only one patient experienced recurrent infection 5 days after the end of treatment. Development of resistance to ceftazidime-avibactam was not detected in any case during the whole follow-up period. No adverse events related to ceftazidime-avibactam were observed in the study population. CONCLUSIONS:Ceftazidime-avibactam may be a valuable therapeutic option for serious infections due to GNB other than CRE.

Project description:IntroductionA systematic literature review was undertaken to evaluate real-world use of ceftazidime-avibactam for infections due to aerobic Gram-negative organisms in adults with limited treatment options.MethodsLiterature searches retrieved peer-reviewed publications and abstracts from major international infectious disease congresses from January 2015 to February 2021. Results were screened using pre-defined criteria to limit the dataset to relevant publications (notable exclusions were paediatric data and outcomes data for bacteria intrinsically resistant to ceftazidime-avibactam). Data for included publications were subjected to qualitative synthesis.ResultsSeventy-three relevant publications (62 peer-reviewed articles; 10 abstracts) comprising 1926 patients treated with ceftazidime-avibactam (either alone or combined with other antimicrobials) and 1114 comparator/control patients were identified. All patients were hospitalised for serious illness and most had multiple comorbidities. The most common infections were pneumonia, bacteraemia, and skin/soft tissue, urinary tract, or abdominal infections; smaller numbers of patients with meningitis, febrile neutropenia, osteomyelitis, and cystic fibrosis were also included. Carbapenem-resistant or carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales (CRE; n = 1718) and carbapenem-resistant, multidrug-resistant (MDR), and extensively drug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (n = 150) were the most common pathogens. Most publications reported positive outcomes for ceftazidime-avibactam treatment (clinical success rates ranged from 45 to 100% and reported 30-day mortality from 0 to 63%), which were statistically superior versus comparators in some studies. ceftazidime-avibactam resistance emergence occurred infrequently and mostly in Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC)-producing K. pneumoniae strains.ConclusionThis review provides qualitative evidence of successful use of ceftazidime-avibactam for the treatment of hospitalised patients with CRE and MDR P. aeruginosa infections with limited treatment options.