Single-dose oritavancin in the treatment of acute bacterial skin infections

Oritavancin in vitro activity against gram-positive organisms from European and United States medical centers: results from the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program for 2010-2014

The in vitro activity of oritavancin was assessed against 44,715 gram-positive pathogens causing infections in European and United States (US) hospitals (2010-2014). There were no substantive differences (>±2-fold dilution) in oritavancin MIC₅₀ or MIC₉₀ values for different species/organism groups over time or by region. Oritavancin (99.9% susceptible) showed modal MIC, MIC₅₀, and MIC₉₀ results of 0.03, 0.03, and 0.06-0.12 mg/L when tested against Staphylococcus aureus, regardless of methicillin susceptibility, year, or region. Coagulase-negative staphylococci from the US and Europe demonstrated equal MIC₅₀ values for oritavancin (MIC₅₀, 0.03 mg/L). Oritavancin inhibited 99.9% of Enterococcus faecalis and all E. faecium at ≤0.5 mg/L, including vancomycin-resistant isolates. Oritavancin exhibited MIC₅₀ results of 0.03 and ≤0.008 mg/L when tested against β-hemolytic and viridans group streptococci isolates, respectively, regardless of geographical region. Oritavancin maintained potent activity in vitro against this contemporary collection of European and US gram-positive isolates over 5 years (2010-2014).

What is new in the management of skin and soft tissue infections in 2016?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) are the most frequent infectious cause of referrals to emergency departments and hospital admissions in developed world, contributing to significant morbidity and healthcare expenditures. We sought to review recent literature covering epidemiology and management of SSTIs.

RECENT FINDINGS

Incidence trends of SSTIs were increasing worldwide with Staphylococcus aureus and streptococci predominating and methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) posing additional challenges, because of high rates of treatment failure and relapse. Development of new antimicrobials was associated with an appraisal of regulatory definitions and endpoints. Prediction of clinical response can be very tricky, because of variable risk factors for recurrence or treatment failure, depending mostly on the host. Precise indications for new antimicrobials should be established; their integration into clinical practice algorithms may serve reduction of unnecessary admissions, overtreatment and total costs.

SUMMARY

New antimicrobials with activity against MRSA have been recently launched. Long-acting agents, mainly oritavancin and dalbavancin, provide the opportunity of single-dose treatment and early discharge. Further outpatient treatment options include new per os antibiotics such as oxazolidinones. Validated assessment tools are urgently needed to support decision-making toward rational resource utilization and delivery of optimal treatment.

Evaluation of Oritavancin Use at a Community Hospital

Background: Oritavancin is a lipoglycopeptide antibiotic indicated for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and soft tissue infections. The prolonged half-life of this agent allows for a course of therapy to be completed with a single dose. Oritavancin was added to our formulary as an option for treatment of acute bacterial skin and soft tissue infection to reduce admission and length of stay. Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine whether oritavancin is used appropriately at our hospital and to evaluate the impact to the institution. Methods: A retrospective and concurrent chart review was performed on all patients who had received oritavancin within our health system between June 2015 and December 2016. The primary endpoint was to determine the appropriateness of oritavancin use. Secondary endpoints include documenting readmission rates for patients prescribed oritavancin and assessing potential financial benefits to the institution. Results: In the 67 patients identified, 51 (76%) patients received oritavancin for an appropriate indication. Orders from infectious disease physicians constituted 81% of inappropriate cases of oritavancin use. No patients who received oritavancin required readmission within 14 days of therapy. The estimated potential financial benefit to our institution when using oritavancin to prevent hospital admissions was $653,451. Conclusions: The majority of oritavancin use at our institution is appropriate according to indication. Oritavancin offers an outpatient option for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and soft tissue infections with the potential to decrease hospital cost by reducing admissions and length of stay.

Purified citritin in combination with vancomycin inhibits VRE in vitro and in vivo

Gram-positive pathogens such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium (VRE) have been frequently associated with bacterial resistance mechanisms. These mechanisms, in turn, restrict a range of therapeutic opportunities for the treatment of infections caused by these micro-organisms. Faced with this problem, the present study aims to isolate and characterize molecules with antimicrobial activity derived from the fungus Penicillium citrinum isolated from Cerrado soil. Furthermore, we also tested possible antibacterial potential alone and in combination with commercial antimicrobial agents. In this context, citrinin was isolated and characterized by nuclear magnetic resonance and electrospray ionization. Functional analyses showed MIC of 128 µg ml^-1 against S. aureus ATCC 25923, E. faecalis ATCC 29212 and a clinical isolate of vancomycin-resistant E. faecium (VRE01). However, for a clinical strain of methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA01), the MIC was 256 µg ml^-1. In order to avoid such high concentrations and reduce the collateral effects, additive effects were evidenced by combining citrinin with cefoxitin against MRSA01 (FIC index=0.5) and also citrinin with vancomycin toward VRE01 (FIC index=0.5). In vivo studies with BALB/c-tipe mice (MRSA assay) demonstrated a clinical ineffectiveness of cefoxitin associated with citrinin (9.8 mg kg^-1 of cefoxitin +0.2 mg kg^-1 of citrinin), with this combination being inefficient to increase animal survival. However, the combination used in the treatment of VRE (23.5 mg kg^-1 of citrinin +1.5 mg kg^-1 of vancomycin) sepsis model was extremely promising, leading to an animal survival rate of 80 percent. In summary, our data show, for the first time, the possible successful use of citrinin associated with vancomycin for pathogenic bacteria control.

Once-Daily Treatments for Methicillin-Susceptible Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia: Are They Good Enough?

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

Methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) bacteremia is a common cause of morbidity and mortality. First-line treatment requires frequent daily doses of an anti-staphylococcal beta-lactam. However, some physicians prescribe simpler once-daily regimens to improve compliance and improve healthcare utilization. We reviewed the literature regarding advantages, pitfalls, and efficacy of once-daily treatment options for MSSA bacteremia.

RECENT FINDINGS

Several once-daily antibiotics are effective in vitro against MSSA (ceftriaxone, daptomycin, telavancin, dalbavancin, oritavancin, tedizolid, ertapenem, fluoroquinolones, and others), but there is insufficient evidence to support these agents for MSSA bacteremia. Ceftriaxone may be considered for therapy completion with MSSA bacteremia from osteomyelitis, and daptomycin may be considered in patients who cannot tolerate first-line therapy. However, they have not been compared to traditional second-line agents, and their role remains uncertain. Current evidence does not support the use of once-daily treatment options for MSSA bacteremia.

Risk factors for amendment in type, duration and setting of prescribed outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) for adult patients with cellulitis: a retrospective cohort study and CART analysis

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

To measure the percentage rate and risk factors for amendment in the type, duration and setting of outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) for the treatment of cellulitis.

STUDY DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study of adult patients receiving OPAT for cellulitis was performed. Treatment amendment (TA) was defined as hospital admission or change in antibiotic therapy in order to achieve clinical response. Multivariable logistic regression (MVLR) and classification and regression tree (CART) analysis were performed.

RESULTS

There were 307 patients enrolled. TA occurred in 36 patients (11.7%). Significant risk factors for TA on MVLR were increased age, increased Numerical Pain Scale Score (NPSS) and immunocompromise. The median OPAT duration was 7 days. Increased age, heart rate and C reactive protein were associated with treatment prolongation. CART analysis selected age <64.5 years, female gender and NPSS <2.5 in the final model, generating a low-sensitivity (27.8%), high-specificity (97.1%) decision tree.

CONCLUSIONS

Increased age, NPSS and immunocompromise were associated with OPAT amendment. These identified risk factors can be used to support an evidence-based approach to patient selection for OPAT in cellulitis. The CART algorithm has good specificity but lacks sensitivity and is shown to be inferior in this study to logistic regression modelling.

Newer glycopeptide antibiotics for treatment of complicated skin and soft tissue infections: systematic review, network meta-analysis and cost analysis

OBJECTIVES

Skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) carry significant economic burden, as well as morbidity and mortality, especially when caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). Several new MRSA-active antibiotics have been developed, including semisynthetic glycopeptides (telavancin, dalbavancin and oritavancin). Of these, dalbavancin and oritavancin offer extended dosing intervals.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review, network meta-analysis and cost analysis to compare the newer glycopeptides to standard care and to each other for the treatment of complicated SSTIs (cSSTI). A search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted in Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. We also developed a model to evaluate the costs associated with dalbavancin and oritavancin from the third-party payer perspective.

RESULTS

Seven RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Network meta-analyses suggested that the clinical response to telavancin, dalbavancin and oritavancin was similar to standard care (odds ratio (OR) 1.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90-1.33; OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.52-1.18; and OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.85-1.33, respectively). Head-to-head comparisons showed no difference in clinical response between oritavancin and dalbavancin (OR 1.36; 95% CI 0.85-2.18), oritavancin and telavancin (OR 0.98; 95% CI 0.72-1.31) or dalbavancin and telavancin (OR 0.72; 95% CI 0.45-1.13). Telavancin had a higher incidence of overall adverse events compared to standard care (OR 1.33; 95% CI 1.10-1.61). Compared to telavancin, there were fewer overall adverse events with dalbavancin (OR 0.58; 95% CI 0.45-0.76) and oritavancin (OR 0.71; 95% CI 0.55-0.92). Studies were of high quality overall. Our cost analyses demonstrated that dalbavancin and oritavancin were less costly compared to standard care under baseline assumptions and many scenarios evaluated. The use of dalbavancin could save third-party payers $1442 to $4803 per cSSTI, while the use of oritavancin could save $3571 to $6932 per cSSTI.

CONCLUSIONS

Dalbavancin and oritavancin demonstrate efficacy and safety comparable to standard care in well-designed RCTs and result in cost savings when standard care is treatment that covers MRSA.

Management of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections with a focus on patients at high risk of treatment failure

Over the last 25 years, the terminology of skin and soft tissue infections, as well as their classification for optimal management of patients, has changed. The so-called and recently introduced term 'acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections' (ABSSSIs), a cluster of fairly common types of infection, including abscesses, cellulitis, and wound infections, require an immediate effective antibacterial treatment as part of a timely and cautious management. The extreme level of resistance globally to many antibiotic drugs in the prevalent causative pathogens, the presence of risk factors of treatment failure, and the high epidemic of comorbidities (e.g. diabetes and obesity) make the appropriate selection of the antibiotic for physicians highly challenging. The selection of antibiotics is primarily empirical for ABSSSI patients which subsequently can be adjusted based on culture results, although rarely available in outpatient management. There is substantial evidence suggesting that inappropriate antibiotic treatment is given to approximately 20-25% of patients, potentially prolonging their hospital stay and increasing the risk of morbidity and mortality. The current review paper discusses the concerns related to the management of ABSSSI and the patient types who are most vulnerable to poor outcomes. It also highlights the key management time-points that treating physicians and surgeons must be aware of in order to achieve clinical success and to discharge patients from the hospital as early as possible.

Future trends in the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infection: An in-depth review of newer antibiotics active against an enduring pathogen

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) continues to be a major public health problem. Vancomycin and teicoplanin have been in clinical use for several decades but their drawbacks are well described. In the last 10 years, several antibiotics have been made available for clinical use. Daptomycin and linezolid have been extensively used during this period. Other agents such as ceftaroline, ceftobiprole, dalbavancin, oritavancin, tedizolid and telavancin have been approved by regulatory agencies since 2009. Many others, such as the newer tetracyclines, fluoroquinolones, oxazolidinones and pleuromutilins, are in various stages of development. In addition, an ongoing multicentre trial is investigating the role of combination of vancomycin or daptomycin with β-lactam antibiotics. This review discusses the role of the newer antibiotics, reflecting the views of the 6th MRSA Consensus Conference meeting of the International Society of Chemotherapy MRSA Working Group that took place in 2016.

Interventions for the prevention of recurrent erysipelas and cellulitis

BACKGROUND

Erysipelas and cellulitis (hereafter referred to as 'cellulitis') are common bacterial skin infections usually affecting the lower extremities. Despite their burden of morbidity, the evidence for different prevention strategies is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and adverse effects of antibiotic prophylaxis or other prophylactic interventions for the prevention of recurrent episodes of cellulitis in adults aged over 16.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases up to June 2016: the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS. We also searched five trials registry databases, and checked reference lists of included studies and reviews for further references to relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We searched two sets of dermatology conference proceedings, and BIOSIS Previews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials evaluating any therapy for the prevention of recurrent cellulitis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently carried out study selection, data extraction, assessment of risks of bias, and analyses. Our primary prespecified outcome was recurrence of cellulitis when on treatment and after treatment. Our secondary outcomes included incidence rate, time to next episode, hospitalisation, quality of life, development of resistance to antibiotics, adverse reactions and mortality.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six trials, with a total of 573 evaluable participants, who were aged on average between 50 and 70. There were few previous episodes of cellulitis in those recruited to the trials, ranging between one and four episodes per study.Five of the six included trials assessed prevention with antibiotics in participants with cellulitis of the legs, and one assessed selenium in participants with cellulitis of the arms. Among the studies assessing antibiotics, one study evaluated oral erythromycin (n = 32) and four studies assessed penicillin (n = 481). Treatment duration varied from six to 18 months, and two studies continued to follow up participants after discontinuation of prophylaxis, with a follow-up period of up to one and a half to two years. Four studies were single-centre, and two were multicentre; they were conducted in five countries: the UK, Sweden, Tunisia, Israel, and Austria.Based on five trials, antibiotic prophylaxis (at the end of the treatment phase ('on prophylaxis')) decreased the risk of cellulitis recurrence by 69%, compared to no treatment or placebo (risk ratio (RR) 0.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.13 to 0.72; n = 513; P = 0.007), number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) six, (95% CI 5 to 15), and we rated the certainty of evidence for this outcome as moderate.Under prophylactic treatment and compared to no treatment or placebo, antibiotic prophylaxis reduced the incidence rate of cellulitis by 56% (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.89; four studies; n = 473; P value = 0.02; moderate-certainty evidence) and significantly decreased the rate until the next episode of cellulitis (hazard ratio (HR) 0.51, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.78; three studies; n = 437; P = 0.002; moderate-certainty evidence).The protective effects of antibiotic did not last after prophylaxis had been stopped ('post-prophylaxis') for risk of cellulitis recurrence (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.31; two studies; n = 287; P = 0.52), incidence rate of cellulitis (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.36; two studies; n = 287; P = 0.74), and rate until next episode of cellulitis (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.56; two studies; n = 287). Evidence was of low certainty.Effects are relevant mainly for people after at least two episodes of leg cellulitis occurring within a period up to three years.We found no significant differences in adverse effects or hospitalisation between antibiotic and no treatment or placebo; for adverse effects: RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.30; four studies; n = 469; P = 0.48; for hospitalisation: RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.57; three studies; n = 429; P = 0.47, with certainty of evidence rated low for these outcomes. The existing data did not allow us to fully explore its impact on length of hospital stay.The common adverse reactions were gastrointestinal symptoms, mainly nausea and diarrhoea; rash (severe cutaneous adverse reactions were not reported); and thrush. Three studies reported adverse effects that led to discontinuation of the assigned therapy. In one study (erythromycin), three participants reported abdominal pain and nausea, so their treatment was changed to penicillin. In another study, two participants treated with penicillin withdrew from treatment due to diarrhoea or nausea. In one study, around 10% of participants stopped treatment due to pain at the injection site (the active treatment group was given intramuscular injections of benzathine penicillin).None of the included studies assessed the development of antimicrobial resistance or quality-of-life measures.With regard to the risks of bias, two included studies were at low risk of bias and we judged three others as being at high risk of bias, mainly due to lack of blinding.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In terms of recurrence, incidence, and time to next episode, antibiotic is probably an effective preventive treatment for recurrent cellulitis of the lower limbs in those under prophylactic treatment, compared with placebo or no treatment (moderate-certainty evidence). However, these preventive effects of antibiotics appear to diminish after they are discontinued (low-certainty evidence). Treatment with antibiotic does not trigger any serious adverse events, and those associated are minor, such as nausea and rash (low-certainty evidence). The evidence is limited to people with at least two past episodes of leg cellulitis within a time frame of up to three years, and none of the studies investigated other common interventions such as lymphoedema reduction methods or proper skin care. Larger, high-quality studies are warranted, including long-term follow-up and other prophylactic measures.

Managing acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections: Focus on new lipoglycopeptides

Acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) are some of the most commonly encountered infections worldwide. Hospitalizations as a result of ABSSSI are associated with high mortality. This article discusses the role of oritavancin and dalbavancin, two new lipoglycopeptides, in the context of the other I.V. available standard therapy options.

Use of Oritavancin in Moderate-to-Severe ABSSSI Patients Requiring IV Antibiotics: A U.S. Payer Budget Impact Analysis

BACKGROUND

It is estimated that acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) account for nearly 10% of hospital admissions and 3.4-3.8 million emergency department visits per year in the United States. Analyses of hospital discharge records indicate 74% of ABSSSI admissions involve empiric treatment with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) active antibiotics. Analysis has shown that payer costs could be reduced if moderate-to-severe ABSSSI patients were treated to a greater extent in the observational unit followed by discharge to outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT). Oritavancin is a lipoglycopeptide antibiotic with bactericidal activity against gram-positive bacteria, including MRSA.

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the impact on a U.S. payer's budget of using single-dose oritavancin in ABSSSI patients with suspected MRSA involvement who are indicated for intravenous antibiotics.

METHODS

A decision analytic model based on current clinical practice was developed to estimate the economic value of decreased hospital resource consumption by using single-dose oritavancin over a 1-year time horizon. Use of antibiotics was informed by an analysis of the Premier Research Database. Demographic and clinical data were derived from a targeted literature review. Emergency department, observation, laboratory, and administration costs used were Medicare National Limitation amounts. Drug costs were 2014 wholesale acquisition costs.

RESULTS

For a hypothetical U.S. payer with 1,000,000 members, it is expected that approximately 14,285 members per year will be diagnosed with ABSSSI severe enough to indicate intravenous antibiotics with MRSA activity. Based on this simulation, use of single-dose oritavancin in 26% of these patients was estimated to reduce the number of inpatient admissions, reduce length of stay for patients requiring admission, and reduce the number of days a patient needs to receive daily infusions in the OPAT clinic. The total patient days decreased from 171,125 to 133,435 with a total annual budget impact of -$12,550,000 or -$1.05 per member per month (PMPM). Total inpatient and outpatient costs were reduced by $9,970,000 (19.7%) and $2,580,000 (4.2%), respectively. Inpatient cost savings were derived from a reduction in admissions, length of stay, and lower drug administration burden. Outpatient costs were reduced by lower drug administration burden in the OPAT setting. A sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the model was most sensitive to population estimates.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of single-dose oritavancin in moderate-to-severe ABSSSI patients, including those with suspected MRSA, was projected to deliver an estimated cost reduction to U.S. payers of $1.05 PMPM by avoiding hospitalization in appropriate patients and reducing outpatient costs associated with multiday parenteral antibiotic therapy.

DISCLOSURES

This work was funded by The Medicines Company. Jensen, Wu, and Cyr are employees of ICON Health Economics, which provides consulting services to the biopharmaceutical industry, including The Medicines Company. Fan and Sulman are employees and shareholders of The Medicines Company. Dufour and Lodise have provided consulting services to The Medicines Company. Nicolau provided model input but did not receive an honorarium for contributions on this project. Nicolau is a speaker for The Medicines Company. Study concept and design were contributed by Jensen and Wu, along with the other authors. Jensen, Wu, Fan, and Sulham collected the data, with assistance from Cyr. Data interpretation was performed by Sulham, Jensen, Wu, and Fan, assisted by Lodise, Nicolau, and Dufour. The manuscript was written by Jensen, Wu, and Sulham, with assistance from Cyr, and revised by Lodise, Nicolau, and Dufour, with assistance from the other authors.

Real-World Experience with Oritavancin Therapy in Invasive Gram-Positive Infections

Introduction

Oritavancin is a novel lipoglycopeptide approved for acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections. The pharmacokinetic profile and convenient one-time dosing make oritavancin an enticing option for other serious Gram-positive infections requiring prolonged treatment courses. Unfortunately, data for using oritavancin in these populations are limited.

Methods

We report ten cases of oritavancin use for invasive Gram-positive infections in our health system, and provide a review of the currently available literature regarding oritavancin therapy for invasive infections.

Results

Among the ten patients who received oritavancin, the most common infection was methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) bacteremia (n = 5, 50%). Other indications for oritavancin use included methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) bursitis (n = 1, 10%), group B streptococcal bacteremia with native tricuspid valve infective endocarditis (n = 1, 10%), coagulase-negative staphylococcal bacteremia (n = 1, 10%), MSSA deep tissue infection (n = 1, 10%), and enterococcal bacteremia (n = 1, 10%). Oritavancin was well tolerated, and 7/10 (70%) patients were successfully treated.

Conclusion

Oritavancin is a potential option for patients with invasive Gram-positive infections. Further study is warranted.

New strategies for targeting and treatment of multi-drug resistant Staphylococcus aureus

Staphylococcus aureus is a major cause of bacterial infection in humans, and has been notoriously able to acquire resistance to a variety of antibiotics. An example is methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA), which despite having been initially associated with clinical settings, now is one of the key causative agents of community-acquired infections. Antibiotic resistance in S. aureus involves mechanisms ranging from drug efflux to increased expression or mutation of target proteins, and this has required innovative approaches to develop novel treatment methodologies. This review provides an overview of the major mechanisms of antibiotic resistance developed by S. aureus, and describes the emerging alternatives being sought to circumvent infection and proliferation, including new generations of classic antibiotics, synergistic approaches, antibodies, and targeting of virulence factors.

Dosing strategies to optimize currently available anti-MRSA treatment options (Part 1: IV options)

INTRODUCTION

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) continues to be a predominant pathogen resulting in significant morbidity and mortality. Optimal dosing of anti-MRSA agents is needed to help prevent the development of antimicrobial resistance and to increase the likelihood of a favorable clinical outcome. Areas covered: This review summarizes the available data for antimicrobials routinely used for MRSA infections that are not administered orally or topically. We make recommendations and highlight the current gaps in the literature. A PubMed (1966 - Present) search was performed to identify relevant literature for this review. Expert commentary: Improvements in MIC determination and therapeutic drug monitoring are needed to fully implement individualized dosing that optimizes antimicrobial pharmacodynamics.Additional data will become available for these agents in regards to effectiveness for severe MRSA infections and pharmacokinetic data for special patient populations.

Proposal for shorter antibiotic therapies

OBJECTIVES

Reducing antibiotic consumption has now become a major public health priority. Reducing treatment duration is one of the means to achieve this objective. Guidelines on the therapeutic management of the most frequent infections recommend ranges of treatment duration in the ratio of one to two. The Recommendation Group of the French Infectious Diseases Society (SPILF) was asked to collect literature data to then recommend the shortest treatment durations possible for various infections.

METHODS

Analysis of the literature focused on guidelines published in French and English, supported by a systematic search on PubMed. Articles dating from one year before the guidelines publication to August 31, 2015 were searched on the website.

RESULTS

The shortest treatment durations based on the relevant clinical data were suggested for upper and lower respiratory tract infections, central venous catheter-related and uncomplicated primary bacteremia, infective endocarditis, bacterial meningitis, intra-abdominal, urinary tract, upper reproductive tract, bone and joint, skin and soft tissue infections, and febrile neutropenia. Details of analyzed articles were shown in tables.

CONCLUSION

This work stresses the need for new well-conducted studies evaluating treatment durations for some common infections. Following the above-mentioned work focusing on existing literature data, the Recommendation Group of the SPILF suggests specific study proposals.

Pharmacokinetic drug evaluation of tedizolid for the treatment of skin infections

INTRODUCTION

Tedizolid is indicated for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI). Although tedizolid shares many similar properties with linezolid, another oxazolidinone used to treat ABSSSI, the two antibiotics have several key differences. Areas covered: This review provides a detailed summary of the overall pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy, and safety of tedizolid for the treatment of ABSSSI. Expert opinion: Compared to other antibiotics used for ABSSSI, tedizolid has several advantages. Tedizolid has a long half-life, allowing for once daily dosing. Tedizolid also has broad spectrum of activity against Gram-positive pathogens, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, Coagulase-negative Staphylococci, and Enterococci - including isolates demonstrating resistance to linezolid. It is available in both oral and intravenous formulations, and, has outstanding oral bioavailability, allowing for oral-step down therapy. There is also some evidence that, tedizolid has fewer significant interactions with serotonin reuptake inhibitors or monoamine oxidase inhibitors than linezolid. Finally, thrombocytopenia may occur less often with tedizolid than linezolid. However, these benefits must be weighed against the financial cost of tedizolid and the availability of alternative antibiotic choices.

Effects of Oritavancin on Coagulation Tests in the Clinical Laboratory

Previous studies have shown that some lipoglycopeptide and lipopeptide antimicrobial agents may cause falsely elevated values for some phospholipid-dependent coagulation tests. The effect of oritavancin, a lipoglycopeptide antibiotic, on coagulation test results was explored using pooled human plasma samples spiked with drug and in a clinical study after an infusion of a single 1,200-mg intravenous dose of oritavancin in normal healthy volunteers. Pooled plasma with oritavancin added ex vivo showed concentration-dependent prolongation of prothrombin time/international normalized ratio (PT/INR), activated partial thromboplastin time (aPTT), and dilute Russell viper venom time (DRVVT) test results. In contrast, oritavancin had no effect on the activated protein C resistance assay, chromogenic anti-factor Xa assay (anti-FXa), thrombin time, and an immunoassay for the laboratory diagnosis of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia. In participants that received a single dose of oritavancin, elevations in PT/INR result, aPTT, DRVVT, activated clotting time, and silica clotting time occurred, with the maximum times to resolution of test interference determined to be 12, 120, 72, 24, and 18 h, respectively. The anti-FXa assay was unaffected, whereas transient elevations in D dimer levels were observed in 30% of participants, with a maximum time to resolution of 72 h. Although oritavancin has no impact on the coagulation system in vivo, a single dose of oritavancin can produce falsely elevated values of some coagulation tests used to monitor hemostasis. The interference of oritavancin on affected tests is transient, and the test results revert to normal ranges within specified times after dosing.

In vitro activity of Oritavancin against gram-positive pathogens isolated in Canadian hospital laboratories from 2011 to 2015

Gram-positive bacterial pathogens isolated from patient specimens submitted to 15 Canadian hospital laboratories from 2011 to 2015 were tested in the coordinating laboratory for susceptibility to oritavancin and comparative antimicrobial agents using the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute M07-A10 (2015) broth microdilution method. Oritavancin's in vitro activity was equivalent to, or more potent than, vancomycin, daptomycin, linezolid, and tigecycline against methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (n=2680; oritavancin MIC₉₀, 0.12μg/mL; 99.9% oritavancin-susceptible), methicillin-resistant S. aureus (n=728; oritavancin MIC₉₀, 0.12μg/mL; 99.7% oritavancin-susceptible), Streptococcus pyogenes (n=218; oritavancin MIC₉₀, 0.25μg/mL; 100% oritavancin-susceptible), Streptococcus agalactiae (n=269; oritavancin MIC₉₀, 0.12μg/mL; 100% oritavancin-susceptible), and vancomycin-susceptible Enterococcus faecalis (n=508; oritavancin MIC₉₀, 0.06μg/mL; 100% oritavancin-susceptible). Oritavancin, dalbavancin, and telavancin demonstrated equivalent in vitro activities (MIC₉₀, μg/mL) against 602 isolates of MSSA (0.06, 0.06, 0.06, respectively) and 144 isolates of MRSA (0.12, 0.06, 0.06, respectively) collected in 2015.

Efficacy and Safety of Oritavancin Relative to Vancomycin for Patients with Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infections (ABSSSI) in the Outpatient Setting: Results From the SOLO Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND

The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of oritavancin compared with vancomycin for patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs) who received treatment in the outpatient setting in the Phase 3 SOLO clinical trials.

METHODS

SOLO I and SOLO II were 2 identically designed comparative, multicenter, double-blind, randomized studies to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a single 1200-mg dose of intravenous (IV) oritavancin versus 7-10 days of twice-daily IV vancomycin for the treatment of ABSSSI. Protocols were amended to allow enrolled patients to complete their entire course of antimicrobial therapy in an outpatient setting. The primary efficacy outcome was a composite endpoint (cessation of spread or reduction in size of the baseline lesion, absence of fever, and no rescue antibiotic at early clinical evaluation [ECE]) (48 to 72 hours). Key secondary endpoints included investigator-assessed clinical cure 7 to 14 days after end of treatment (posttherapy evaluation [PTE]) and 20% or greater reduction in lesion area at ECE. Safety was assessed until day 60.

RESULTS

Seven hundred ninety-two patients (oritavancin, 392; vancomycin, 400) received entire course of treatment in the outpatient setting. Efficacy response rates at ECE and PTE were similar (primary composite endpoint at ECE: 80.4% vs 77.5% for oritavancin and vancomycin, respectively) as was incidence of adverse events. Five patients (1.3%) who received oritavancin and 9 (2.3%) vancomycin patients were subsequently admitted to a hospital.

CONCLUSIONS

Oritavancin provides a single-dose alternative to multidose vancomycin for treatment of ABSSSI in the outpatient setting.

Treatment of Staphylococcus aureus Infections

Staphylococcus aureus, although generally identified as a commensal, is also a common cause of human bacterial infections, including of the skin and other soft tissues, bones, bloodstream, and respiratory tract. The history of S. aureus treatment is marked by the development of resistance to each new class of antistaphylococcal antimicrobial drugs, including the penicillins, sulfonamides, tetracyclines, glycopeptides, and others, complicating therapy. S. aureus isolates identified in the 1960s were sometimes resistant to methicillin, a ß-lactam antimicrobial active initially against a majority S. aureus strains. These MRSA isolates, resistant to nearly all ß-lactam antimicrobials, were first largely confined to the health care environment and the patients who attended it. However, in the mid-1990s, new strains, known as community-associated (CA-) MRSA strains, emerged. CA-MRSA organisms, compared with health care-associated (HA-) MRSA strain types, are more often susceptible to multiple classes of non ß-lactam antimicrobials. While infections caused by methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) strains are usually treated with drugs in the ß-lactam class, such as cephalosporins, oxacillin or nafcillin, MRSA infections are treated with drugs in other antimicrobial classes. The glycopeptide drug vancomycin, and in some countries teicoplanin, is the most common drug used to treat severe MRSA infections. There are now other classes of antimicrobials available to treat staphylococcal infections, including several that have been approved after 2009. The antimicrobial management of invasive and noninvasive S. aureus infections in the ambulatory and in-patient settings is the topic of this review. Also discussed are common adverse effects of antistaphylococcal antimicrobial agents, advantages of one agent over another for specific clinical syndromes, and the use of adjunctive therapies such as surgery and intravenous immunoglobulin. We have detailed considerations in the therapy of noninvasive and invasive S. aureus infections. This is followed by sections on specific clinical infectious syndromes including skin and soft tissue infections, bacteremia, endocarditis and intravascular infections, pneumonia, osteomyelitis and vertebral discitis, epidural abscess, septic arthritis, pyomyositis, mastitis, necrotizing fasciitis, orbital infections, endophthalmitis, parotitis, staphylococcal toxinoses, urogenital infections, and central nervous system infections.

Early Clinical Response as a Predictor of Late Treatment Success in Patients With Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infections: Retrospective Analysis of 2 Randomized Controlled Trials

In the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections, pooled data from 2 clinical trials (N = 1333 patients) showed that programmatic and investigator-assessed early treatment success both had a high positive predictive value (94.3%-100.0%) for late clinical cure, including among hospitalized patients. The negative predictive value of programmatic early success was <20%. These exploratory findings require prospective real-world evaluation.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

 NCT01170221; NCT01421511.

Vancomycin and the Risk of AKI: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Vancomycin has been in use for more than half a century, but whether it is truly nephrotoxic and to what extent are still highly controversial. The objective of this study was to determine the risk of AKI attributable to intravenous vancomycin.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

We conducted a systematic review of randomized, controlled trials and cohort studies that compared patients treated with intravenous vancomycin with a control group of patients given a comparator nonglycopeptide antibiotic and in which kidney function or kidney injury outcomes were reported. PubMed and Cochrane Library were searched from 1990 to September of 2015. Two reviewers extracted data and assessed study risk of bias, and one reviewer adjudicated the assessments. A meta-analysis was conducted on seven randomized, controlled trials (total of 4033 patients).

RESULTS

Moderate quality evidence suggested that vancomycin treatment is associated with a higher risk of AKI, with a relative risk of 2.45 (95% confidence interval, 1.69 to 3.55). The risk of kidney injury was similar in patients treated for skin and soft tissue infections compared with those treated for nosocomial pneumonia and other complicated infections. There was an uncertain risk of reporting bias, because kidney function was not a prespecified outcome in any of the trials. The preponderance of evidence was judged to be indirect, because the majority of studies compared vancomycin specifically with linezolid.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that there is a measurable risk of AKI associated with vancomycin, but the strength of the evidence is moderate. A randomized, controlled trial designed to study kidney function as an outcome would be needed to draw unequivocal conclusions.

New agents approved for treatment of acute staphylococcal skin infections

Vancomycin has been a predominant treatment for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections for decades. However, growing reservations about its efficacy led to an urgent need for new antibiotics effective against MRSA and other drug-resistant Staphylococcus aureus strains. This review covers three new anti-MRSA antibiotics that have been recently approved by the FDA: dalbavancin, oritavancin, and tedizolid. The mechanism of action, indications, antibacterial activity profile, microbial resistance, pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy, adverse effects, interactions as well as available formulations and administration of each of these new antibiotics are described. Dalbavancin is a once-a-week, two-dose, long-acting intravenous bactericidal lipoglycopeptide antibiotic. Oritavancin, a lipoglycopeptide with bactericidal activity, was developed as a single-dose intravenous treatment for acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections (ABSSSI), which offers simplifying treatment of infections. Tedizolid is an oxazolidinone-class bacteriostatic once-daily agent, available for intravenous as well as oral use. Increased ability to overcome bacterial resistance is the main therapeutic advantage of the novel agents over existing antibiotics.

Safety and efficacy of daptomycin in outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy: a prospective and multicenter cohort study (DAPTODOM trial)

BACKGROUND

Daptomycin is an optimal choice for outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT) because of its safety, once-daily administration and its activity against Gram-positive bacteria. Although daptomycin is increasingly being used in OPAT, limited information about its safety in this scenario is available.

METHODS

We performed a prospective multicentre pilot study to evaluate the safety of daptomycin in outpatients with proved or suspected Gram-positive infections (DAPTODOM). The primary objective was to evaluate the safety and the secondary objective to evaluate the efficacy in OPAT. We also looked at the development of daptomycin resistance in those cases with microbiological failure.

RESULTS

We included 54 patients from 12 Spanish hospitals, 67% male with a mean age of 67.1 years. Most patients (87%) had chronic underlying diseases. The main reason for inclusion was skin and soft-tissue infections in 52%, followed by bacteremia or endocarditis in 34%. Staphylococcus aureus accounted for 44% of the isolates (24% were methicillin-resistant), coagulase-negative staphylococci 15% and enterococci 7%. Two patients (4%) had to be readmitted because of complications; only one patient had an adverse effect related to daptomycin (increase in serum creatine kinase levels), which disappeared after discontinuation (2%). At the end of follow-up, 96% of patients had good outcome and only 4% of patients did not have a clinical or microbiological cure. The use of a 2-minute bolus in 18 cases was not associated with adverse effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Daptomycin was safe and efficacious in outpatients with Gram-positive bacterial infections and can be administered in 2-minute bolus infusion.

New therapeutic options for skin and soft tissue infections

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The occurrence of methicillin-resistance in Staphylococcus aureus, that represents the most frequent cause of complicated skin and soft tissue infections (cSSTIs) worldwide, is a major concern and has been associated with increased length of stay, health care costs, and overall mortality. Although vancomycin is still considered the standard therapy in this setting, limitations of its use in clinical practice are represented by a progressive increase in methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) minimum inhibitory concentrations, drug-related toxicity, and the lack of an oral formulation. New therapeutic options for MRSA cSSTIs have recently become available, with promising implications for the management of cSSTIs in clinical practice.

RECENT FINDINGS

A number of new antimicrobials with activity against MRSA have been recently approved for the treatment of cSSTIs, and other agents are under investigation. We have reviewed the recent developments, with a specific focus on the possible advantages of new drugs for the management of cSSTIs into the everyday clinical practice.

SUMMARY

The new approved drugs for the treatment of cSSTIs are expected to offer many advantages for the management of patients with suspected or confirmed MRSA cSSTIs. The most promising features of the new compounds include the availability of oral formulations, once-weekly intravenous regimens, and broad spectra of activity.

Use of Oritavancin in Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infections Patients Receiving Intravenous Antibiotics: A US Hospital Budget Impact Analysis

Background and Objective

Nearly 10 % of all US hospital admissions are attributed to acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs). While most antibacterials used to treat these infections require multi-day and multi-dose regimens, a single-dose treatment is now available. The objective of this analysis is to estimate the annual budget impact of using single-dose oritavancin in patients with moderate to severe ABSSSIs receiving intravenous methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)-active antibacterials from a US hospital perspective.

Methods

A decision-analytic model based on current clinical practice was developed to estimate the economic impact of oritavancin. Utilization of antibacterials and rates of hospital admission were derived from the Premier Research Database. Demographic and clinical data were informed by the published literature and 2014 wholesale drug acquisition costs were used. Other costs were based on the published literature and Medicare National Limitation amounts. All costs were inflated to 2014 US dollars. Two base-case scenarios were considered: one for hospitals with ambulatory services and one for hospitals without ambulatory services.

Results

For a US hospital with ambulatory services with 1000 ABSSSI patients receiving intravenous MRSA antibiotics annually, use of oritavancin in 26 % of patients is estimated to reduce the total annual budget by 12.9 % (US$1.23 million), or approximately US$1234.67 per patient. Total inpatient costs will be reduced by 22.3 % (US$1.40 million) and outpatient costs will increase slightly by 1.7 % (US$55,310). Pharmaceutical cost increases are offset by savings in the inpatient setting from fewer hospital admissions. Hospitals without ambulatory services are estimated to receive overall cost savings of 9.3 % (US$0.63 million).

Conclusion

Use of single-dose oritavancin in select ABSSSI patients with suspected or confirmed MRSA involvement is estimated to save US hospitals approximately 9.3–12.9 % per year by reducing hospital admissions and lowering drug administration burden.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40261-015-0365-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Newly approved antibiotics and antibiotics reserved for resistant infections: Implications for emergency medicine

Millions of patients are evaluated every year in the emergency department (ED) for bacterial infections. Emergency physicians often diagnose and prescribe initial antibiotic therapy for a variety of bacterial infections, ranging from simple urinary tract infections to severe sepsis. In life-threatening infections, inappropriate choice of initial antibiotic has been shown to increase morbidity and mortality. As such, initiation of appropriate antibiotic therapy on the part of the emergency physician is critical. Increasing rates of antibiotic resistance, drug allergies, and antibiotic shortages further complicates the choice of antibiotics. Patients may have a history of prior resistant infections or culture data indicating that common first-line antibiotics used in the ED may be ineffective. In recent years, there have been several new antibiotic approvals as well as renewed interest in second and third line antibiotics because of the aforementioned concerns. In addition, several newly approved antibiotics have the advantage of being administered once weekly or even as a single infusion, which has the potential to decrease hospitalizations and healthcare costs. This article reviews newly approved antibiotics and antibiotics used to treat resistant infections with a focus on implications for emergency medicine.

Oritavancin: a review in acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections

Oritavancin (Orbactiv(®)) is a new generation lipoglycopeptide approved for use in adult patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI). It is administered as a single 1200 mg intravenous infusion over 3 h. In phase 3 trials in adult patients with ABSSSI, oritavancin was noninferior to vancomycin in terms of a composite outcome (cessation of spreading or reduction in the size of the baseline lesion, absence of fever and no rescue antibacterials required; primary endpoint) assessed at an US FDA-recommended early timepoint of 48-72 h after initiation of treatment. Oritavancin was also noninferior to vancomycin in terms of a ≥20 % reduction in the baseline lesion size at the early timepoint and clinical cure rate 7-14 days after the end of treatment. Oritavancin was generally well tolerated in the phase 3 trials, with most treatment-emergent adverse reactions being mild in severity. The most common adverse events occurring in oritavancin recipients were nausea, headache, vomiting, limb and subcutaneous abscesses, and diarrhoea. Oritavancin offers a number of potential advantages, including a convenient single dose treatment that may shorten or eliminate hospital stays, a reduction in healthcare resource utilization and cost, no need for dosage adjustment in patients with mild to moderate hepatic or renal impairment, no need for therapeutic drug monitoring, and elimination of compliance concerns. Therefore, oritavancin is a useful treatment option for adults with ABSSSI.

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections: A review of the currently available treatment options

This review is the result of discussions that took place at the 5th MRSA Working Group Consensus Meeting and explores the possible treatment options available for different types of infections due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), focusing on those antibiotics that could represent a valid alternative to vancomycin. In fact, whilst vancomycin remains a viable option, its therapy is moving towards individualised dosing. Other drugs, such as the new lipoglycopeptides (oritavancin, dalbavancin and telavancin) and fifth-generation cephalosporins (ceftaroline and ceftobiprole), are showing good in vitro potency and in vivo efficacy, especially for patients infected with micro-organisms with higher vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs). Tedizolid is an attractive agent for use both in hospital and community settings, but the post-marketing data will better clarify its potential. Daptomycin and linezolid have shown non-inferiority to vancomycin in the treatment of MRSA bacteraemia and non-inferiority/superiority to vancomycin in the treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia. Thus, several options are available, but more data from clinical practice, especially for invasive infections, are needed to assign specific roles to each antibiotic and to definitely include them in the new antibacterial armamentarium.

Infective endocarditis

Infective endocarditis (IE) is a rare, life-threatening disease that has long-lasting effects even among patients who survive and are cured. IE disproportionately affects those with underlying structural heart disease and is increasingly associated with health care contact, particularly in patients who have intravascular prosthetic material. In the setting of bacteraemia with a pathogenic organism, an infected vegetation may form as the end result of complex interactions between invading microorganisms and the host immune system. Once established, IE can involve almost any organ system in the body. The diagnosis of IE may be difficult to establish and a strategy that combines clinical, microbiological and echocardiography results has been codified in the modified Duke criteria. In cases of blood culture-negative IE, the diagnosis may be especially challenging, and novel microbiological and imaging techniques have been developed to establish its presence. Once diagnosed, IE is best managed by a multidisciplinary team with expertise in infectious diseases, cardiology and cardiac surgery. Antibiotic prophylaxis for the prevention of IE remains controversial. Efforts to develop a vaccine that targets common bacterial causes of IE are ongoing, but have not yet yielded a commercially available product.

Dalbavancin and Oritavancin: An Innovative Approach to the Treatment of Gram-Positive Infections

Health care-associated infections, especially those caused by multidrug-resistant gram-positive organisms, such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), are a growing public health threat. In 2014, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved two new lipoglycopeptides, oritavancin and dalbavancin, for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections. The rationale for the development of these antimicrobials was partly to aid in the battle against vancomycin resistance in both Staphylococcus and Enterococcus. Considered a subclass of the glycopeptide antibiotics, the new lipoglycopeptides have similar mechanisms of action of binding to the carboxyl terminal d-alanyl-d-alanine residue of the growing peptide chains but differ from their parent glycopeptides by the addition of lipophilic tails. This addition allows for these agents to have prolonged half-lives, giving them unique dosing profiles. In addition, by concentrating at the site of action, they have increased potency against MRSA compared with vancomycin, the current mainstay of therapy. In this review, we focus on comparing and contrasting these two new agents with regard to their pharmacology, mechanisms of action, spectrum of activity, safety profiles, dosage and administration, and drug and laboratory interactions, and we review the clinical trials evaluating their use.

Clinician-reported lesion measurements in skin infection trials: Definitions, reliability, and association with patient-reported pain

OBJECTIVES

Outcome assessments as clinical trial endpoints should be well-defined, reliable, and reflect meaningful treatment benefits. For acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) trials, recent recommendations suggest a primary endpoint of reduction in skin lesion area. Objectives were: evaluate ABSSSI lesion area measurement reliability, evaluate impact of various lesion area definitions on treatment effect size, and explore relationships between lesion area and pain.

METHODS

Data from two randomized, double-blinded Phase 3 trials comparing tedizolid to linezolid in ABSSSI and one open-label, non-comparative Phase 2 study of tedizolid in cellulitis/erysipelas and skin abscess were analyzed. Repeated lesion area measurements were prospectively obtained in all studies. In the open-label study, lesion area was measured by two investigators, using four different definitions. Repeated pain assessments using two patient-reported outcome instruments (Visual Analog Scale [VAS] and Faces Rating Scale [FRS]) were elicited in the randomized trials.

RESULTS

At baseline, lesion size did not correlate with pain intensity: r=0.02 for VAS and r<0.01 for FRS pain scores. However, decreasing lesion size and decreasing pain were strongly associated over time, regardless of initial lesion size or pain intensity (r=0.20 for VAS and r=0.21 for FRS scores at Day 10-13). Each lesion area definition demonstrated high inter-observer reliability (intra-class correlation coefficient>0.95).

CONCLUSIONS

Decreasing lesion area (indirect clinician-reported measure of benefit) and pain (direct patient-reported measure of benefit) were strongly associated over time, and lesion area measurements were reliable, regardless of their definition. These findings support both measures as outcome assessments in ABSSSI clinical trials.

REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.govNCT01519778, NCT01170221, and NCT01421511.

Antimicrobial agents - optimising the ecological balance

BACKGROUND

There is no more challenging a group of pharmaceuticals than antimicrobials. With the antibiotic era came great optimism as countless deaths were prevented from what were previously fatal conditions. Although antimicrobial resistance was quickly identified, the abundance of antibiotics entering the market helped cement attitudes of arrogance as the "battle against pestilence appeared won". Opposite emotions soon followed as many heralded the return of the pre-antibiotic era, suggesting that the "antibiotic pipeline had dried up" and that our existing armament would soon be rendered worthless.

DISCUSSION

In reality, humans overrate their ecological importance. For millions of years there has been a balance between factors promoting bacterial survival and those disturbing it. The first half century of the "antibiotic era" was characterised by a cavalier attitude disturbing the natural balance; however, recent efforts have been made through several mechanisms to respond and re-strengthen the antimicrobial armament. Such mechanisms include a variety of incentives, educational efforts and negotiations. Today, there are many more "man-made" factors that will determine a new balance or state of ecological harmony.

CONCLUSION

Antibiotics are not a panacea nor will they ever be inutile. New resistance mechanisms will be identified and new antibiotics will be discovered, but most importantly, we must optimise our application of these extraordinary "biological tools"; therein lays our greatest challenge - creating a society that understands and respects the determinants of the effectiveness of antibiotics.

Acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections in internal medicine wards: old and new drugs

Skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) are a common cause of hospital admission among elderly patients, and traditionally have been divided into complicated and uncomplicated SSTIs. In 2010, the FDA provided a new classification of these infections, and a new category of disease, named acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs), has been proposed as an independent clinical entity. ABSSSIs include three entities: cellulitis and erysipelas, wound infections, and major cutaneous abscesses This paper revises the epidemiology of SSTIs and ABSSSIs with regard to etiologies, diagnostic techniques, and clinical presentation in the hospital settings. Particular attention is owed to frail patients with multiple comorbidities and underlying significant disease states, hospitalized on internal medicine wards or residing in nursing homes, who appear to be at increased risk of infection due to multi-drug resistant pathogens and treatment failures. Management of ABSSSIs and SSTIs, including evaluation of the hemodynamic state, surgical intervention and treatment with appropriate antibiotic therapy are extensively discussed.

Early Response in Cellulitis: A Prospective Study of Dynamics and Predictors

In this prospective study of cellulitis, several nonpharmacological factors were associated with lack of early response. Such early nonresponse was rarely related to inappropriate therapy but strongly predictive of early treatment escalation, suggesting that broadening antibiotic treatment often may be premature.

Background. Skin and soft tissue infections are common reasons for medical care. Use of broad-spectrum therapy and costs have increased. Assessment of early treatment response has been given a central role both in clinical trials and everyday practice. However, there is a paucity of data on the dynamics of response, causes of early nonresponse, and how early nonresponse affects resource use and predicts outcome.

Methods. We prospectively enrolled 216 patients hospitalized with cellulitis. Clinical and biochemical response data during the first 3 days of treatment were analyzed in relation to baseline factors, antibiotic use, surgery, and outcome. Multivariable analysis included logistic lasso regression.

Results. Clinical or biochemical response was observed in the majority of patients the day after treatment initiation. Concordance between clinical and biochemical response was strongest at days 2 and 3. Female sex, cardiovascular disease, higher body mass index, shorter duration of symptoms, and cellulitis other than typical erysipelas were predictors of nonresponse at day 3. In contrast, baseline factors were not predictive of clinical failure assessed posttreatment. Among cases with antibiotic treatment escalation by day 2, 90% (37/41) had nonresponse at day 1, but only 5% (2/40) had inappropriate initial therapy. Nonresponse at day 3 was a predictor of treatment duration >14 days, but not of clinical failure.

Conclusions. Nonpharmacological factors had a major impact on early response dynamics. Delayed response was rarely related to inappropriate therapy but strongly predictive of early treatment escalation, suggesting that broadening antibiotic treatment may often be premature.

Oritavancin: a long-acting antibacterial lipoglycopeptide

Oritavancin is a new lipoglycopeptide antibacterial agent with an exceptionally long terminal half-life and a rapid bactericidal effect. Multiple mechanisms of action lead to a broad activity against Gram-positive bacteria, such as staphylococci, streptococci and enterococci, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Its long terminal half-life allows for single-dose treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections. Oritavancin was found to be safe and effective in treating acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections in adults and it is currently approved in the USA and in Europe for this indication. Unfortunately, data for other indications are lacking. Here, we review chemistry, microbiology, pharmacology, efficacy and tolerability of oritavancin.

New Approaches to Antibiotic Use and Review of Recently Approved Antimicrobial Agents

Antimicrobial drug-resistance continues to force adaptation in our clinical practice. We explore new evidence regarding adjunctive antibiotic therapy for skin and soft tissue abscesses as well as duration of therapy for intra-abdominal abscesses. As new evidence refines optimal practice, it is essential to support clinicians in adopting practice patterns concordant with evidence-based guidelines. We review a simple approach that can 'nudge' clinicians towards concordant practices. Finally, the use of novel antimicrobials will play an increasingly important role in contemporary therapy. We review five new antimicrobials recently FDA-approved for use in drug-resistant infections: dalbavancin, oritavancin, ceftaroline, ceftolozane-tazobactam, and ceftazidime-avibactam.

Single-Dose Oritavancin Treatment of Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infections: SOLO Trial Efficacy by Eron Severity and Management Setting

Introduction

Introduction of new antibiotics enabling single-dose administration, such as oritavancin may significantly impact site of care decisions for patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI). This analysis compared the efficacy of single-dose oritavancin with multiple-dose vancomycin in patients categorized according to disease severity via modified Eron classification and management setting.

Methods

SOLO I and II were phase 3 studies evaluating single-dose oritavancin versus 7–10 days of vancomycin for treatment of ABSSSI. Patient characteristics were collected at baseline and retrospectively analyzed. Study protocols were amended, allowing outpatient management at the discretion of investigators. In this post hoc analysis, patients were categorized according to a modified Eron severity classification and management setting (outpatient vs. inpatient) and the efficacy compared.

Results

Overall, 1910 patients in the SOLO trials were categorized into Class I (520, 26.5%), II (790, 40.3%), and III (600, 30.6%). Of the 767 patients (40%) in the SOLO trials who were managed entirely in the outpatient setting 40.3% were categorized as Class II and 30.6% were Class III. Clinical efficacy was similar between oritavancin and vancomycin treatment groups, regardless of severity classification and across inpatient and outpatient settings. Class III patients had lower response rates (oritavancin 73.3%, vancomycin 76.6%) at early clinical evaluation when compared to patients in Class I (82.6%) or II (86.1%); however, clinical cure rates at the post-therapy evaluation were similar for Class III patients (oritavancin 79.8%, vancomycin 79.9%) when compared to Class I and II patients (79.1–85.7%).

Conclusion

Single-dose oritavancin therapy results in efficacy comparable to multiple-dose vancomycin in patients categorized according to modified Eron disease severity classification regardless of whether management occurred in the inpatient or outpatient setting.

Funding

The Medicines Company, Parsippany, NJ, USA.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers, NCT01252719 (SOLO I) and NCT01252732 (SOLO II).