Efficacy and safety of linezolid in liver transplant patients

Bacterial infections are the main cause of death within the first year after liver transplantation, and the increased incidence of multidrug-resistant gram-positive pathogens has created a major challenge in the treatment of these patients. Linezolid, the first US Food & Drug Administration-approved oxazolidinone, offers a valuable novel treatment option for serious gram-positive infections. Linezolid is relatively non-toxic but prolonged treatment with linezolid was associated with thrombocytopenia. Here we report on the experience of linezolid treatment in adult liver transplant patients, who are at an increased risk for thrombocytopenia because of hypersplenism. From November 2003 until December 2009, we evaluated the clinical course of 46 liver transplant patients (27 male/19 female) in our surgical intensive care unit. For proven or probable gram-positive infection, all patients received linezolid 600 mg intravenously every 12 h. On clinical improvement, treatment was changed to oral linezolid 600 mg twice daily. Treatment duration was 11 ± 7 days. Treatment indications were pneumonia (n = 8), blood stream infection (n = 30), and surgical site/abdominal infection (n = 3). Clinical cure was achieved in 43 out of 46 patients. During the course of treatment, no cases of severe thrombocytopenia occurred and a statistically significant platelet count increase was seen from day 1 (110 ± 73/nL) to day 7 (165 ± 116/nL) and day 14 (180 ± 140/nL). We did not observe any further adverse events, especially no severe neurological complications (e.g., serotonin syndrome) or signs of lactate acidosis. Two patients died from uncontrolled vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium sepsis with septic shock and one due to uncontrolled methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus pneumonia. These deaths were considered to be unrelated to linezolid treatment, and linezolid was regarded as the optimal treatment choice in these patients. A subgroup analysis of patients treated for >14 days revealed no statistically significant differences when compared with patients on shorter treatment. In particular, no cases of thrombocytopenia occurred during longer treatment. In conclusion, linezolid is a safe and effective treatment for adult liver transplant patients with gram-positive infections.

Diagnosis, management and prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia: an update

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) affects 10-20% of mechanically ventilated patients and is associated with increased morbidity and mortality and high costs. Early diagnosis is crucial for rapid appropriate antimicrobial therapy to be instituted, but debate remains as to the optimal diagnostic strategy. Noninvasive clinical-based diagnosis is rapid but may not be as accurate as invasive techniques. Increased use of biomarkers and advances in genomics and proteomics may help speed up diagnosis. Management of VAP relies principally on appropriate antimicrobial therapy, which should be selected according to individual patient factors, such as previous antibacterial therapy and length of hospitalization or mechanical ventilation, and local infection and resistance patterns. In addition, once bacterial culture and sensitivity results are available, broad-spectrum therapy should be de-escalated to provide a more specific, narrower-spectrum cover. Optimum duration of antibacterial therapy is difficult to define and should be tailored to clinical response. Biomarker levels may be useful to monitor response to therapy. With the high morbidity and mortality, prevention of VAP is important and several strategies have been shown to reduce the rates of VAP in mechanically ventilated patients, including using noninvasive ventilation where possible, and semi-recumbent positioning. Other potentially beneficial preventive techniques include subglottal suctioning, oral decontamination strategies and antimicrobial-coated endotracheal tubes, although further study is needed to confirm the cost effectiveness of these strategies.

Nosocomial methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) pneumonia: linezolid or vancomycin? - Comparison of pharmacology and clinical efficacy

The incidence of nosocomial pneumonia involving methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus strains (MRSA) is on the rise worldwide. For years, vancomycin has been used as the drug of choice in the treatment of MRSA infections and was recommended as such by clinical guidelines. There is growing evidence that vancomycin, despite low resistance rates is a suboptimal therapeutic option in critically ill patients, particularly in patients with pneumonia. Disadvantages of vancomycin are i) slow bactericide action, ii) poor penetration into pulmonary tissue, iii) the globally slowly increasing vancomycin MICs ("creep") that result in increased clinical failure despite being susceptible according to defined break points and iv) nephrotoxicity. In contrast to other novel antibiotics with MRSA activity, Linezolid is currently approved for the treatment of nosocomial pneumonia in the USA and Europe. Several studies have compared vancomycin with linezolid for nosocomial pneumonia with conflicting results. This review compares both substances regarding pharmacodynamics, resistance, safety and clinical efficacy and discusses preliminary data of the ZEPHyR study. This study compared linezolid versus vancomycin in patients with proven MRSA pneumonia and was the largest trial ever conducted in this population.

Clinical practice guidelines by the infectious diseases society of america for the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections in adults and children

Evidence-based guidelines for the management of patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections were prepared by an Expert Panel of the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA). The guidelines are intended for use by health care providers who care for adult and pediatric patients with MRSA infections. The guidelines discuss the management of a variety of clinical syndromes associated with MRSA disease, including skin and soft tissue infections (SSTI), bacteremia and endocarditis, pneumonia, bone and joint infections, and central nervous system (CNS) infections. Recommendations are provided regarding vancomycin dosing and monitoring, management of infections due to MRSA strains with reduced susceptibility to vancomycin, and vancomycin treatment failures.

Linezolid vs glycopeptide antibiotics for the treatment of suspected methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus nosocomial pneumonia: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is an important cause of nosocomial pneumonia. Societal guidelines suggest linezolid may be the preferred treatment of MRSA nosocomial pneumonia. We investigated the efficacy of linezolid compared with glycopeptide antibiotics (vancomycin or teicoplanin) for nosocomial pneumonia.

METHODS

This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of English language, randomized, controlled trials comparing linezolid to glycopeptide antibiotics for suspected MRSA pneumonia in subjects > 12 years of age. A highly sensitive search of PubMed MEDLINE and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases identified relevant studies.

RESULTS

Eight trials encompassing 1,641 subjects met entry criteria. Linezolid was not superior to glycopeptide antibiotics for end points of clinical success (relative risk [RR] linezolid vs glycopeptide, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.97-1.11; P = .28), microbiologic success (RR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.97-1.31; P = .12), or mortality (RR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.69-1.18; P = .47). In addition, clinical success in the subgroup of subjects with MRSA-positive respiratory tract culture (RR, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.97-1.57; P = .09) was not significantly different from those without MRSA (RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.83-1.09; P = .48), P for interaction, 0.07. The risk for adverse events was not different between the two antibiotic classes (RR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.86-1.07; P = .48).

CONCLUSION

Randomized controlled trials do not support superiority of linezolid over glycopeptide antibiotics for the treatment of nosocomial pneumonia. We recommend that decisions between linezolid or glycopeptide antibiotics for empirical or MRSA-directed therapy of nosocomial pneumonia depend on local availability, antibiotic resistance patterns, preferred routes of delivery, and cost, rather than presumed differences in efficacy.

A European survey of antibiotic management of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection: current clinical opinion and practice

Although the epidemiology of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) varies across Europe, healthcare-associated MRSA infections are common in many countries. Despite several national guidelines, the approach to treatment of MRSA infections varies across the continent, and there are multiple areas of management uncertainty for which there is little clinical evidence to guide practice. A faculty, convened to explore some of these areas, devised a survey that was used to compare the perspectives of infection specialists from across Europe on the management of MRSA infections with those of the faculty specialists. The survey instrument, a web-based questionnaire, was sent to 3840 registered delegates of the 19th European Congress of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, held in April 2009. Of the 501 (13%) respondents to the survey, 84% were infection/microbiology specialists and 80% were from Europe. This article reports the survey results from European respondents, and shows a broad range of opinion and practice on a variety of issues pertaining to the management of minor and serious MRSA infections, such as pneumonia, bacteraemia, and skin and soft tissue infections. The issues include changing epidemiology, when and when not to treat, choice of treatment, and duration and route of treatment. The survey identified areas where practice can be improved and where further research is needed, and also identified areas of pan-European consensus of opinion that could be applied to European guidelines for the management of MRSA infection.

Management of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus pneumonia

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Staphylococcus aureus, and particularly methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) has become an increasingly important etiology of pneumonia, both in healthcare and community settings. Associated with highest morbidity, mortality and costs in public health, it represents a major challenge for the management of this group of patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

MRSA is one of the most common pathogens of ventilator associated pneumonia, whereas its estimated incidence for hospital acquired pneumonia, healthcare associated pneumonia and community acquired pneumonia has risen in the past decades. Although vancomycin at standard doses remains as the mainstay for its treatment, the increasing rate of treatment failure has prompted other strategies of use (more frequent administration, continuous infusion, combination therapy), and the use of newer antimicrobials, particularly linezolid, with pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles which produce promisingly improved clinical results.

SUMMARY

Overall, MRSA is an important cause of pneumonia; optimal management strategies for improving morbidity and mortality are still under development.

Vancomycin-associated nephrotoxicity: grave concern or death by character assassination?

Vancomycin-associated nephrotoxicity was reported in 0% to 5% of patients in the 1980s. This has been confirmed by numerous clinical trials comparing novel anti-methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus agents with vancomycin at the Food and Drug Administration-approved dosage of 1 g every 12 hours. Treatment failures of vancomycin in patients with methicillin-resistant S. aureus infections have been reported despite in vitro susceptibility. These failures have led to the use of vancomycin doses higher than those approved by the Food and Drug Administration. Higher doses are being administered to achieve goal vancomycin trough concentrations of 10 to 20 microg/mL recommended by several clinical practice guidelines endorsed by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Recent studies suggest that increased rates of nephrotoxicity are associated with aggressive vancomycin dosing. These increased rates are confounded by concomitant nephrotoxins, renal insufficiency, or changing hemodynamics. These studies also have demonstrated that vancomycin's nephrotoxicity risk is minimal in patients without risk factors for nephrotoxicity. Clinicians unwilling to dose vancomycin in accordance with clinical practice guidelines should use an alternative agent because inadequate dosing increases the likelihood of selecting heteroresistant methicillin-resistant S. aureus isolates.

New treatments for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is a dynamic pathogen. Rates of MRSA are increasing worldwide. In some centers, MRSA is becoming less susceptible to vancomycin, and these strains have been associated with worse clinical outcomes. Intermediate or fully resistant vancomycin strains of MRSA have emerged clinically, whereas MRSA acquired in the community has become epidemic. The purpose of this manuscript is to provide clinicians with an evidence-based review on new treatments for MRSA.

RECENT FINDINGS

Linezolid, daptomycin and tigecycline have been approved during the last decade to treat infections due to MRSA. Although these agents are extremely valuable in the fight against MRSA, each one has limitations. New lypoglycopeptides (telavancin, dalbavancin and oritavancin) are in advanced phase of clinical development. Similarly, new broad-spectrum cephalosporins active against MRSA (e.g. ceftobiprole and ceftaroline) and a new dihydrofolate reductase inhibitor (iclaprim) are in or have completed phase 3 studies.

SUMMARY

Here, we review the most relevant information on new drugs to treat MRSA. New studies with available agents and upcoming studies with investigational drugs will help to better understand the role of each compound in the treatment of patients infected with MRSA and assist the clinician in keeping pace with this challenging pathogen.

Linezolid versus vancomycin for the treatment of gram-positive bacterial infections: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

This review aimed to compare data regarding the effectiveness and safety of linezolid and vancomycin in the treatment of gram-positive bacterial infections. PubMed and other databases were searched to identify relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Nine RCTs studying 2489 clinically assessed patients were included in the meta-analysis. Overall, there was no difference between linezolid and vancomycin regarding treatment success in clinically assessed patients [odds ratio (OR)=1.22, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.99-1.50]. Linezolid was more effective than vancomycin in patients with skin and soft-tissue infections (OR=1.40, 95% CI 1.01-1.95). However, there was no difference in treatment success for patients with bacteraemia (OR=0.88, 95% CI 0.49-1.58) or pneumonia (OR=1.16, 95% CI 0.85-1.57). Linezolid was associated with better eradication rates in all microbiologically assessed patients compared with vancomycin (OR=1.33, 95% CI 1.03-1.71). There was no difference in total adverse effects possibly or probably related to the study drugs (OR=1.14, 95% CI 0.82-1.59). However, nephrotoxicity was recorded more commonly in patients receiving vancomycin (OR=0.31, 95% CI 0.13-0.74). In conclusion, linezolid is as effective as vancomycin in patients with gram-positive infections. There is superior clinical and microbiological outcome with linezolid in complicated skin and soft-tissue infections caused by Staphylococcus aureus.

Community-associated meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections: epidemiology, recognition and management

Meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is an important cause of infection, particularly in hospitalized patients and those with significant healthcare exposure. In recent years, epidemic community-associated MRSA (CA-MRSA) infections occurring in patients without healthcare risk factors have become more frequent. The most common manifestation of CA-MRSA infection is skin and soft tissue infection, although necrotizing pneumonia, sepsis and osteoarticular infections can occur. CA-MRSA strains have become endemic in many communities and are genetically distinct from previously identified MRSA strains. CA-MRSA may be more capable colonizers of humans and more virulent than other S. aureus strains. Specific mechanisms of pathogenicity have not been elucidated, but several factors have been proposed as responsible for the virulence of CA-MRSA, including the Panton-Valentine leukocidin, phenol-soluble modulins and type I arginine catabolic mobile element. The movement of CA-MRSA strains into the nosocomial setting limits the utility of using clinical risk factors alone to designate community- or healthcare-associated status. Identification of unique genetic characteristics and genotyping are valuable tools for MRSA epidemiological studies. Although the optimum pharmacological therapy for CA-MRSA infections has not been determined, many CA-MRSA strains remain broadly susceptible to several non-beta-lactam antibacterial agents. Empirical antibacterial therapy should include an MRSA-active agent, particularly in areas where CA-MRSA is endemic.

Pneumonia due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: clinical features, diagnosis and management

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The review highlights the clinical findings and the management of community-acquired, health-care associated and nosocomial pneumonia due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA).

RECENT FINDINGS

Although previously considered as a purely nosocomial event, community-acquired MRSA pneumonia is underestimated and is spreading worldwide. A retrospective study showed that almost half of patients with nonnosocomial MRSA pneumonia admitted to a large teaching hospital did not present established criteria for healthcare-associated infections. Recent data show that MRSA ventilator-associated pneumonia is associated with significantly higher mortality than ventilator-associated pneumonia caused by methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus. Therefore, prompt and appropriate therapy is essential. The optimal therapy for MRSA pneumonia has not been fully elucidated. Although vancomycin has been considered the gold standard for the treatment of MRSA infections, clinical failures have also been reported in the presence of in-vitro susceptibility. Linezolid may provide improved outcomes compared with vancomycin in patients with MRSA pneumonia, but validation in a prospective trial is currently lacking. Recently licensed tigecycline and dalbavancin, a drug in phase III trial, look promising. Animal models showed that immunization against a cytolytic toxin secreted by most Staphylococcus aureus strains protects against lethal pneumonia.

SUMMARY

Rapid recognition of possible staphylococcal infection in patients with severe pneumonia is essential. The treatment of MRSA pneumonia must be prompt and effective in order to allow a fast microbiological clearance and to successfully manage the infection.