Real-world comparison of fidaxomicin versus vancomycin or metronidazole in the treatment of Clostridium difficile infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Comprehensive review of Clostridium difficile infection: Epidemiology, diagnosis, prevention, and treatment

In recent years, nosocomial infections caused by Clostridium difficile (C. difficile) have risen, becoming a leading cause of hospital-acquired diarrhea. The global prevalence of C. difficile infection (CDI) varies across regions and populations. The diagnosis relies primarily on laboratory testing, including toxin, glutamate dehydrogenase, and nucleic acid amplification tests. Treatment strategies for CDI include antimicrobial therapy (e.g., metronidazole, vancomycin, and fidamycin), fecal transplantation, and immunotherapy (e.g., belotozumab), depending on the patient's specificity and severity. This paper reviews recent research on CDI's epidemiological characteristics, risk factors, diagnosis, treatment, and prevention, aiming to support hospitals and public health initiatives in implementing effective detection, prevention, and treatment strategies.

Clinical and economic outcomes associated with fidaxomicin in comparison to vancomycin, metronidazole, and FMT: A systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

There are an estimated half a million cases of Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI), in the United States annually. Fidaxomicin, vancomycin, and metronidazole are commonly used for CDI treatment, with fidaxomicin recommended by clinical guidelines as the preferred treatment for initial and recurrent CDI. This systematic literature review aimed to explore clinical and economic outcomes associated with fidaxomicin use with or without comparison to vancomycin, metronidazole, or fecal microbiota transplantation (FMT).

METHODS

The EMBASE, Medline, EconLit, and Evidence Based Medicine Reviews databases were searched from January 1st, 2012 to December 6th, 2022, as fidaxomicin was first approved for adult use in 2011. Identified publications were assessed and extracted by 2 independent reviewers.

RESULTS

Seventy-nine publications were included. Articles reporting at least 50 patients with follow-up ≤90 days were selected to obtain comparable outcome definitions (N = 14). Sustained clinical cure rate at 30- and 60-days follow-up was higher among fidaxomicin-treated patients (70.0-75.1% and 63.2-78.9%; N = 3) than vancomycin (45.1-58.2% and 38.9-50.0%; N = 3). Lower recurrence rates were reported post-fidaxomicin treatment compared to vancomycin, however the ranges overlapped at 30-, 60-, and 90-days follow-up. Limited outcomes for comparators metronidazole and FMT were identified. Healthcare resource use data were limited, with 2 studies reporting direct costs finding that fidaxomicin use-associated savings were driven by reduced hospital admission-related costs. Fidaxomicin was cost-effective in 14 of 21 economic analyses (11 vs vancomycin). Three studies reported vancomycin or FMT as more cost-effective than fidaxomicin. Fidaxomicin was consistently cost-effective or cost-saving among patients receiving concomitant antibiotics, and patients with cancer or renal impairment. Ten publications reported that the higher acquisition cost of fidaxomicin was offset by reduced recurrence and hospital readmission costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Fidaxomicin was clinically effective compared to vancomycin. Fidaxomicin is often reported as cost-effective, consistently within high-risk subpopulations.

The Clinical Effectiveness of Fidaxomicin Compared to Vancomycin in the Treatment of Clostridioides difficile Infection, A Single-Center Real-World Experience

BACKGROUND

The use of fidaxomicin is recommended as first-line therapy for all patients with Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI). However, real-world studies have shown conflicting evidence of superiority.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective single-center study of patients diagnosed with CDI between 2011 and 2021. A primary composite outcome of clinical failure, 30-day relapse, or CDI-related death was used. A multivariable cause-specific Cox proportional hazards model was used to evaluate fidaxomicin compared to vancomycin in preventing the composite outcome. A separate model was fit on a subset of patients with C. difficile ribotypes adjusting for ribotype.

RESULTS

There were 598 patients included, of whom 84 received fidaxomicin. The primary outcome occurred in 8 (9.5%) in the fidaxomicin group compared to 111 (21.6%) in the vancomycin group. The adjusted multivariable model showed fidaxomicin was associated with 63% reduction in the risk of the composite outcome compared to vancomycin (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], .17-.80). In the 337 patients with ribotype data after adjusting for ribotype 027, the results showing superiority of fidaxomicin were maintained (HR = 0.19; 95% CI, .05-.77).

CONCLUSIONS

In the treatment of CDI, we showed that real-world use of fidaxomicin is associated with lower risk of a composite end point of treatment failure.

Clostridioides difficile infection: history, epidemiology, risk factors, prevention, clinical manifestations, treatment, and future options

SUMMARYClostridioides difficile infection (CDI) is one of the major issues in nosocomial infections. This bacterium is constantly evolving and poses complex challenges for clinicians, often encountered in real-life scenarios. In the face of CDI, we are increasingly equipped with new therapeutic strategies, such as monoclonal antibodies and live biotherapeutic products, which need to be thoroughly understood to fully harness their benefits. Moreover, interesting options are currently under study for the future, including bacteriophages, vaccines, and antibiotic inhibitors. Surveillance and prevention strategies continue to play a pivotal role in limiting the spread of the infection. In this review, we aim to provide the reader with a comprehensive overview of epidemiological aspects, predisposing factors, clinical manifestations, diagnostic tools, and current and future prophylactic and therapeutic options for C. difficile infection.

Comparison of fidaxomicin, metronidazole and vancomycin for initial episode and recurrence of Clostridioides difficile infection - An observational cohort study

Objectives

The main aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of patients attended in our area with Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) (sustained cure, recurrence or death) in relation to treatment to normal or hypervirulent C. difficile as a risk factor and to describe the resistance profile to metronidazole and vancomycin antibiotics in our hospital over a one-year period.

Methods

A retrospective, cross-sectional and observational study was conducted between June 2022 and June 2023 to compare the clinical cure and/or recurrence of CDI in adult patients treated in a Spanish secondary Hospital depending on the prescribed antibiotic treatment. In addition, we performed an antimicrobial susceptibility study to vancomycin and metronidazole in all C. difficile isolated in bacterial culture.

Results

Out of 194 selected patients the treatments were as follow: 43.81 % vancomycin, 21.65 % metronidazole, 8.25 % a combination of both, 6.70 % fidaxomicin and 19.59 % were untreated. Vancomycin and fidaxomicin patients had higher odds ratio of prolonged hospitalization (p = 0.041 and p = 0.040, respectively). Fidaxomicin had increased odds of suffering another episode of C. difficile (p = 0.009) and it was inferior to metronidazole for recurrent CDI (rCDI) (p = 0.035).Resistance profile for C. difficile was 4.07 % for vancomycin and 3.49 % for metronidazole. Hypervirulent C. difficile was identified in 17 (8.76 %) patients with 29.41 % of mortality (5/17; p > 0.05).

Conclusion

Fidaxomicin treated patients had statistically increased odds of rCDI. Compared to other treatments, fidaxomicin was inferior to metronidazole for rCDI in our cohort;Hypervirulent C. difficile was not associated with death.Vancomycin resistance of C. difficile statistically decreased, whereas metronidazole resistance did not vary during the studied period.

The effect of antibiotic therapy for Clostridioides difficile infection on mortality and other patient-relevant outcomes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Current practice guidelines favour fidaxomicin over vancomycin and exclude metronidazole from the recommended standard regimen for Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI), based on lower recurrence rates with fidaxomicin, giving little weight to mortality or the clinical implications of recurrences.

OBJECTIVES

To compile the effects of metronidazole, glycopeptides (vancomycin or teicoplanin), and fidaxomicin for CDI on mortality and other patient-relevant outcomes.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, the Cochrane Library, ClinicalTrials.gov, conference proceedings, and Google Scholar, until August 2023.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

PARTICIPANTS

Adult patients experiencing primary or recurrent CDI.

INTERVENTIONS

Glycopeptides versus fidaxomicin or metronidazole (comparators).

ASSESSMENT OF RISK OF BIAS

We used the Risk of Bias 2 (RoB 2) tool for randomized trials, focusing on the outcome of all-cause mortality.

METHODS OF DATA SYNTHESIS

Random effects meta-analyses were performed for dichotomous outcomes. Outcomes were summarized preferentially for all randomly assigned patients.

RESULTS

Thirteen trials were included. There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality (risk ratio [RR] < 1 favouring the comparator) between vancomycin and fidaxomicin (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.64-1.14, 8 RCTs, 1951 patients) or metronidazole (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.46-1.32, 4 RCTs, 808 patients), with low and very low certainty of evidence, respectively. No significant difference in initial treatment failure between fidaxomicin and vancomycin was found, however, initial treatment failure was higher with metronidazole (RR 1.58, 95% CI 1.10-2.27, 5 RCTs, 843 patients). No study reported on symptomatic recurrence necessitating re-treatment among all randomly assigned patients. Among initially cured patients, symptomatic recurrence necessitating re-treatment was lower with fidaxomicin than with vancomycin (RR 0.54, 95% CI 0.42-0.71, 6 RCTs, 1617 patients). None of the studies reported on other CDI complications or the burden of infection on daily activities.

CONCLUSIONS

Setting patient-relevant outcomes for CDI independently of the RCT definitions and results might lead to less confidence in the guidance for CDI management.

Clinical Efficacy of Fidaxomicin and Oral Metronidazole for Treating Clostridioides difficile Infection and the Associated Recurrence Rate: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) has significant implications for healthcare economics. Although clinical trials have compared fidaxomicin (FDX) and vancomycin, comparisons of FDX and oral metronidazole (MNZ) are limited. Therefore, we compared the therapeutic effects of FDX and oral MNZ. Patients diagnosed with CDI between January 2015 and March 2023 were enrolled. Those treated with oral MNZ or FDX were selected and retrospectively analyzed. The primary outcome was the global cure rate. Secondary outcomes included factors contributing to the CDI global cure rate; the rate of medication change owing to initial treatment failure; and incidence rates of clinical cure, recurrence, and all-cause mortality within 30 days. Of the 264 enrolled patients, 75 and 30 received initial oral MNZ and FDX treatments, respectively. The corresponding CDI global cure rates were 53.3% and 70% (p = 0.12). In multivariate analysis, FDX was not associated with the global cure rate. In the MNZ group, 18.7% of the patients had to change medications owing to initial treatment failure. The FDX group had a higher clinical cure rate and lower recurrence rate than the MNZ group, although not significant. However, caution is necessary owing to necessary treatment changes due to MNZ failure.

The Urgent Threat of Clostridioides difficile Infection: A Glimpse of the Drugs of the Future, with Related Patents and Prospects

Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI) is an urgent threat and unmet medical need. The current treatments for CDI are not enough to fight the burden of CDI and recurrent CDI (r-CDI). This review aims to highlight the future drugs for CDI and their related patented applications. The non-patent literature was collected from PubMed and various authentic websites of pharmaceutical industries. The patent literature was collected from free patent databases. Many possible drugs of the future for CDI, with diverse mechanisms of action, are in development in the form of microbiota-modulating agents (e.g., ADS024, CP101, RBX2660, RBX7455, SYN-004, SER-109, VE303, DAV132, MET-2, and BB128), small molecules (e.g., ridinilazole, ibezapolstat, CRS3123, DNV3837, MGB-BP-3, alanyl-L-glutamine, and TNP-2198), antibodies (e.g., IM-01 and LMN-201), and non-toxic strains of CD (e.g., NTCD-M3). The development of some therapeutic agents (e.g., DS-2969b, OPS-2071, cadazolid, misoprostol, ramoplanin, KB109, LFF571, and Ramizol) stopped due to failed clinical trials or unknown reasons. The patent literature reveals some important inventions for the existing treatments of CDI and supports the possibility of developing more and better CDI-treatment-based inventions, including patient-compliant dosage forms, targeted drug delivery, drug combinations of anti-CDI drugs possessing diverse mechanisms of action, probiotic and enzymatic supplements, and vaccines. The current pipeline of anti-CDI medications appears promising. However, it will be fascinating to see how many of the cited are successful in gaining approval from drug regulators such as the US FDA and becoming medicines for CDI and r-CDI.