Real-World Use of Oritavancin for the Treatment of Osteomyelitis

Pharmacotherapies for multidrug-resistant gram-positive infections: current options and beyond

INTRODUCTION

Infections due to multidrug-resistant organisms (MDRO) are a serious concern for public health with high morbidity and mortality. Though many antibiotics have been introduced to manage these infections, there are remaining concerns regarding the optimal management of Gram-positive MDROs.

AREAS COVERED

A literature search on the PubMed/Medline database was conducted. We applied no language and time limits for the search strategy. In this narrative review, we discuss the current options for managing Gram-positive MDROs as well as non-traditional antibacterial agents in development.

EXPERT OPINION

Despite their introduction more than 70 years ago, glycopeptides are still the cornerstone in treating Gram-positive infections: all registrative studies of new antibiotics have glycopeptides as control; these studies are designed as not inferior studies, therefore it is almost impossible to give recommendations other than the use of glycopeptides in the treatment of Gram-positive infections. The best evidence on treatments different from glycopeptides comes from post-hoc analysis and meta-analysis. Non-traditional antibacterial agents are being studied to aid in short and effective antibiotic therapies. The use of non-traditional antibacterial agents is not restricted to replacing traditional antibacterial agents with alternative therapies; instead, they should be used in combination with antibiotic therapies.

Left ventricular assist device-associated driveline infections as a specific form of complicated skin and soft tissue infection/acute bacterial skin and skin structure infection - issues and therapeutic options

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review comments on the current guidelines for the treatment of wound infections under definition of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI). However, wound infections around a catheter, such as driveline infections of a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) are not specifically listed under this definition in any of the existing guidelines.

RECENT FINDINGS

Definitions and classification of LVAD infections may vary across countries, and the existing guidelines and recommendations may not be equally interpreted among physicians, making it unclear if these infections can be considered as ABSSSI. Consequently, the use of certain antibiotics that are approved for ABSSSI may be considered as 'off-label' for LVAD infections, leading to rejection of reimbursement applications in some countries, affecting treatment strategies, and hence, patients' outcomes. However, we believe driveline exit site infections related to LVAD can be included within the ABSSSI definition.

SUMMARY

We argue that driveline infections meet the criteria for ABSSSI which would enlarge the 'on-label' antibiotic armamentarium for treating these severe infections, thereby improving the patients' quality of life.

Oritavancin Versus Daptomycin for Osteomyelitis Treatment After Surgical Debridement

INTRODUCTION

Weekly intravenous (IV) oritavancin and daily daptomycin were compared in an outpatient setting following extensive surgical debridement for treating patients with osteomyelitis.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, observational study of patients diagnosed with acute osteomyelitis. Exclusion criteria were the use of Gram-negative antibiotic therapy, use of antibiotics for more than 48 h prior to oritavancin or daptomycin or prior use of > 2 doses of oritavancin or more than 4 weeks of daptomycin. Clinical success was resolution or improvement of symptoms and no further treatment. Data were analyzed with Chi-square test or Fisher's exact test.

RESULTS

Consecutive outpatients (n = 150) with acute osteomyelitis who were treated with oritavancin or daptomycin (1:1) following extensive surgical debridement were identified. Staphylococcus aureus was the most common pathogen (n = 117). No patient in either group received prior antibiotic therapy (previous 30 days) or was hospitalized within 90 days prior to surgical debridement. Twenty-one (28%) patients prescribed oritavancin had chronic kidney disease, seven of whom were receiving hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis. Compared to oritavancin, patients prescribed daptomycin had higher rates of all-cause readmission [odds ratio (OR) 2.89; p < 0.001], more infection-related readmission (OR 3.19; p < 0.001), and greater likelihood of receiving antibiotics post-discontinuation of initial therapy (OR 2.13; p < 0.001). Repeat surgical debridement was required for 68.0% with daptomycin vs. 23.1% with oritavancin (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Oritavancin demonstrated a significantly higher rate of clinical success compared to daptomycin, with lower all-cause and infection-related readmissions, reduced need for repeat surgical debridement, and fewer additional antibiotic requirements.

Clinical practice recommendations for infectious disease management of diabetic foot infection (DFI) - 2023 SPILF

In march 2020, the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) published an update of the 2015 guidelines on the diagnosis and management of diabetic foot infection (DFI). While we (the French ID society, SPILF) endorsed some of these recommendations, we wanted to update our own 2006 guidelines and specifically provide informative elements on modalities of microbiological diagnosis and antibiotic treatment (especially first- and second-line regiments, oral switch and duration). The recommendations put forward in the present guidelines are addressed to healthcare professionals managing patients with DFI and more specifically focused on infectious disease management of this type of infection, which clearly needs a multidisciplinary approach. Staging of the severity of the infection is mandatory using the classification drawn up by the IWGDF. Microbiological samples should be taken only in the event of clinical signs suggesting infection in accordance with a strict preliminarily established protocol. Empirical antibiotic therapy should be chosen according to the IWGDF grade of infection and duration of the wound, but must always cover methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus. Early reevaluation of the patient is a fundamental step, and duration of antibiotic therapy can be shortened in many situations. When osteomyelitis is suspected, standard foot radiograph is the first-line imagery examination and a bone biopsy should be performed for microbiological documentation. Histological analysis of the bone sample is no longer recommended. High dosages of antibiotics are recommended in cases of confirmed osteomyelitis.

Oritavancin as sequential therapy for Gram-positive bloodstream infections

BACKGROUND

Oritavancin, a long-acting lipoglycopeptide approved for use in acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections, has limited data evaluating use in serious infections due to Gram-positive organisms. We aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of oritavancin for consolidative treatment of Gram-positive bloodstream infections (BSI), including infective endocarditis (IE).

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study evaluating adult patients admitted to University of Colorado Hospital from March 2016 to January 2022 who received ≥ 1 oritavancin dose for treatment of Gram-positive BSI. Patients were excluded if the index culture was drawn at an outside facility or were > 89 years of age. The primary outcome was a 90-day composite failure (clinical or microbiological failure) in those with 90-day follow-up. Secondary outcomes included individual components of the primary outcome, acute kidney injury (AKI), infusion-related reactions (IRR), and institutional cost avoidance.

RESULTS

Overall, 72 patients were included. Mean ± SD age was 54 ± 16 years, 61% were male, and 10% had IE. Organisms most commonly causing BSI were Staphylococcus aureus (68%, 17% methicillin-resistant), followed by Streptococcus spp. (26%), and Enterococcus spp. (10%). Patients received standard-of-care antibiotics before oritavancin for a median (IQR) of 11 (5-17) days. Composite failure in the clinically evaluable population (n = 64) at 90-days occurred in 14% and was composed of clinical and microbiological failure, which occurred in 14% and 5% of patients, respectively. Three patients (4%) experienced AKI after oritavancin, and two (3%) experienced an IRR. Oritavancin utilization resulted in earlier discharge for 94% of patients corresponding to an institutional cost-avoidance of $3,055,804 (mean $44,938/patient) from 1,102 hospital days saved (mean 16 days/patient).

CONCLUSIONS

The use of oritavancin may be an effective sequential therapy for Gram-positive BSI to facilitate early discharge resulting in institutional cost avoidance.

The Clinical Efficacy of Multidose Oritavancin: A Systematic Review

Oritavancin (ORI) is a semisynthetic lipoglycopeptide approved as a single 1200 mg dose intravenous infusion for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs) caused by Gram-positive organisms in adults. The pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) linear kinetic profile and long terminal half-life (~393 h) of ORI make it therapeutically attractive for the treatment of other Gram-positive infections for which prolonged therapy is needed. Multidose regimens are adopted in real-world clinical practice with promising results, but aggregated efficacy data are still lacking. A comprehensive search on PubMed/Medline, Scopus, Cochrane and Google Scholar databases was performed to include papers published up to the end of January 2023. All articles on ORI multiple doses usage, including case reports, with quantitative data and relevant clinical information were included. Two reviewers independently assessed papers against the inclusion/exclusion criteria and for methodological quality. Differences in opinion were adjudicated by a third party. From 1751 potentially relevant papers identified by this search, a total of 16 studies met the inclusion criteria and were processed further in the final data analysis. We extracted data concerning clinical response, bacteriologic response, mortality and adverse events (AEs). From the 16 included papers, 301 cases of treatment with multidose ORIs were identified. Multidose regimens comprised an initial ORI dose of 1200 mg followed by 1200 mg or 800 mg subsequent doses with a varying total number and frequency of reinfusions. The most often treated infections and isolates were osteomyelitis (148; 54.4%), ABSSSI (35; 12.9%) and cellulitis (14; 5.1%); and MRSA (121), MSSA (66), CoNS (17), E. faecalis (13) and E. faecium (12), respectively. Clinical cure and improvement by multidose ORI regimens were observed in 85% (231/272) and 8% (22/272) patients, respectively. Multidose ORI was safe and well tolerated; the most frequent AEs were infusion-related reactions and hypoglycemia. A multidose ORI regimen may be beneficial in treating other Gram-positive infections besides ABSSSIs, with a good safety profile. Further studies are warranted to ascertain the superiority of one multidose ORI scheme or posology over the other.

New Antimicrobials for Gram-Positive Sustained Infections: A Comprehensive Guide for Clinicians

Antibiotic resistance is a public health problem with increasingly alarming data being reported. Gram-positive bacteria are among the protagonists of severe nosocomial and community infections. The objective of this review is to conduct an extensive examination of emerging treatments for Gram-positive infections including ceftobiprole, ceftaroline, dalbavancin, oritavancin, omadacycline, tedizolid, and delafloxacin. From a methodological standpoint, a comprehensive analysis on clinical trials, molecular structure, mechanism of action, microbiological targeting, clinical use, pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic features, and potential for therapeutic drug monitoring will be addressed. Each antibiotic paragraph is divided into specialized microbiological, clinical, and pharmacological sections, including detailed and appropriate tables. A better understanding of the latest promising advances in the field of therapeutic options could lead to the development of a better approach in managing antimicrobial therapy for multidrug-resistant Gram-positive pathogens, which increasingly needs to be better stratified and targeted.

Treatment of Enterococcus faecalis Infective Endocarditis: A Continuing Challenge

Today, Enterococcus faecalis is one of the main causes of infective endocarditis in the world, generally affecting an elderly and fragile population, with a high mortality rate. Enterococci are partially resistant to many commonly used antimicrobial agents such as penicillin and ampicillin, as well as high-level resistance to most cephalosporins and sometimes carbapenems, because of low-affinity penicillin-binding proteins, that lead to an unacceptable number of therapeutic failures with monotherapy. For many years, the synergistic combination of penicillins and aminoglycosides has been the cornerstone of treatment, but the emergence of strains with high resistance to aminoglycosides led to the search for new alternatives, like dual beta-lactam therapy. The development of multi-drug resistant strains of Enterococcus faecium is a matter of considerable concern due to its probable spread to E. faecalis and have necessitated the search of new guidelines with the combination of daptomycin, fosfomycin or tigecycline. Some of them have scarce clinical experience and others are still under investigation and will be analyzed in this review. In addition, the need for prolonged treatment (6–8 weeks) to avoid relapses has forced to the consideration of other viable options as outpatient parenteral strategies, long-acting administrations with the new lipoglycopeptides (dalbavancin or oritavancin), and sequential oral treatments, which will also be discussed.

Off-label use versus formal recommendations of conventional and novel antibiotics for the treatment of infections caused by multidrug-resistant bacteria

The infections caused by multidrug- and extensively drug-resistant (MDR, XDR) bacteria, including Gram-positive cocci (GPC, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, MDR-Streptococcus pneumoniae and vancomycin-resistant enterococci) and Gram-negative bacilli (GNB, including carbapenem-resistant [CR] Enterobacterales, CR-Pseudomonas aeruginosa and XDR/CR-Acinetobacter baumannii complex) can be quite challenging for physicians with respect to treatment decisions. Apart from complicated urinary tract and intra-abdominal infections (cUTIs, cIAIs), bloodstream infections and pneumonia, these difficult-to-treat bacteria also cause infections at miscellaneous sites (bones, joints, native/prosthetic valves and skin structures, etc.). Antibiotics like dalbavancin, oritavancin, telavancin and daptomycin are currently approved for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structural infections (ABSSSIs) caused by GPC. Additionally, ceftaroline, linezolid and tigecycline have been formally approved for the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia and ABSSSI. Cefiderocol and meropenem-vaborbactam are currently approved for the treatment of cUTIs caused by XDR-GNB. The spectra of ceftazidime-avibactam and imipenem/cilastatin-relebactam are broader than that of ceftolozane-tazobactam, but these three antibiotics are currently approved for the treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia, cIAIs and cUTIs caused by MDR-GNB. Clinical investigations of other novel antibiotics (including cefepime-zidebactam, aztreonam-avibactam and sulbactam-durlobactam) for the treatment of various infections are ongoing. Nevertheless, evidence for adequate antibiotic regimens against osteomyelitis, arthritis and infective endocarditis due to several GPC and MDR-GNB is still mostly lacking. A comprehensive review of PubMed publications was undertaken and the formal indications and off-label use of important conventional and novel antibiotics against MDR/XDR-GPC and GNB isolates cultured from miscellaneous sites are presented in this paper.

Kimyrsa and Orbactiv - A Tale of Two Formulations

Kimyrsa is a new formulation (NF) of the original formulation of oritavancin ([OF] Orbactiv). Comparatively, the obvious benefit with this product is the shortened infusion time and flexibility with solution compatibility, but otherwise maintains a similar pharmacokinetic and microbiologic profile. At present, the NF lacks significant real-world experience relative to other available lipoglycopeptides and thus its place in therapy remains difficult to predict but would not be expected to be significantly different than its OF.

From sea to shining IV: the current state of OPAT in the United States

First described in the United States, outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT) has become an indispensable part of treating serious infections. The proportion of infectious disease (ID) physicians utilizing a formal OPAT program has increased in recent years, but remains a minority. In addition, many ID physicians have indicated that OPAT programs have inadequate financial and administrative support. Given the medical complexity of patients receiving OPAT, as well as the challenges of communicating with OPAT providers across health care facilities and systems, OPAT programs ideally should involve a multidisciplinary team. The majority of patients in the United States receive OPAT either at home with assistance from home infusion companies and visiting nurses or at a skilled nursing facility (SNF), though the latter has been associated with lower rates of patient satisfaction. Current and future opportunities and challenges for OPAT programs include providing OPAT services for people who inject drugs (PWID) and incorporating the increasing use of oral antibiotics for infections historically treated with parenteral therapy. In this review, we will discuss the current practice patterns and patient experiences with OPAT in the United States, as well as identify future challenges and opportunities for OPAT programs.

Kimyrsa, An Oritavancin-Containing Product: Clinical Study and Review of Properties

Background

There is a need for improved antibiotic formulations for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and soft structure infection (ABSSSI), especially with the rise of antimicrobial resistance among Gram-positive bacteria. A new formulation of oritavancin was developed to reduce intravenous infusion volume (from 1000 mL to 250 mL), shorten infusion time (from 3 hours to 1 hour), and provide pharmacies with flexibility in oritavancin preparation (from 5% dextrose in sterile water to either normal saline or 5% dextrose in sterile water) compared with the current formulation.

Methods

A total of 102 adult patients with a diagnosis of ABSSSI suspected or confirmed to be caused by a Gram-positive pathogen were randomized 1:1 to receive either the new formulation of oritavancin or the current formulation. After a single 1200-mg intravenous infusion of oritavancin, the relative area-under-the-curve exposure of the new formulation and current formulation groups were compared. Safety and tolerability of the new formulation were assessed for treatment-emergent adverse events, serious adverse events, and changes to laboratory parameters.

Results

The area under the curve for 0 hour to 72 hours postdose was very similar in the new formulation group compared with the current formulation group. No differences in treatment-emergent adverse events were observed between the current and new formulation groups, and all treatment-emergent adverse events were consistent with the known safety profile of the current formulation.

Conclusions

The new formulation of oritavancin with reduced volume and duration of intravenous infusion demonstrates a safety profile and pharmacokinetics similar to that of the original formulation.

Role or oritavancin and dalbavancin in acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections and other potential indications

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To discuss the currently available evidence about the use oritavancin and dalbavancin for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) and for other potential indications.

RECENT FINDINGS

In this review, we briefly summarize the available data on efficacy (from randomized controlled trials) and on effectiveness and cure rates (from observational studies) pertaining to the use of oritavancin and dalbavancin either for ABSSSI or for other indications.

SUMMARY

Oritavancin and dalbavancin are valid options for outpatient therapy and early discharge in patients with ABSSSI, especially when adherence to oral therapy cannot be guaranteed or no oral choices are available. Furthermore, it is worth noting that a non-negligible portion (sometimes the majority) of oritavancin and dalbavancin use in available real-life experiences is for indications other than ABSSSI, especially for Gram-positive osteomyelitis and endocarditis. The number of studies on the use of long-acting lipoglycopeptides for these currently off-label indications is rapidly increasing and will help to further optimize the use of these peculiar antibiotics in the forthcoming future.

Real-World Evidence Studies of Oritavancin Use in Gram-Positive Infections Augment Randomized Controlled Trials to Address Clinical and Economic Outcomes

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) sponsored by pharmaceutical manufacturers for regulatory approval are conducted with restrictive criteria in an effort to definitively demonstrate the safety and efficacy of a drug or biologic. Unfortunately, the strict enrollment criteria in RCTs may exclude patients likely to receive the medication in a real-world clinical practice. Antibiotic RCTs for registration are designed to show noninferiority against standard of care or best available therapy, often minimizing clinical differentiation needed by clinicians to select the optimal agent for their patients. Lastly, RCTs do not include pharmacoeconomic data that would add a cost basis for determining the value of one product over another. Real-world studies may add support to the safety and efficacy demonstrated from RCTs and address patient populations excluded from clinical development programs. This supplement presents several real-world studies demonstrating the clinical and economic outcomes of various uses of oritavancin to augment the evidence published from RCTs. Clinicians may decide how to use this information in their own practice settings.