Phase 3 study comparing tigecycline and ertapenem in patients with diabetic foot infections with and without osteomyelitis

Brazilian Society of Angiology and Vascular Surgery 2023 guidelines on the diabetic foot

The diabetic foot interacts with anatomical, vascular, and neurological factors that challenge clinical practice. This study aimed to compile the primary scientific evidence based on a review of the main guidelines, in addition to articles published on the Embase, Lilacs, and PubMed platforms. The European Society of Cardiology system was used to develop recommendation classes and levels of evidence. The themes were divided into six chapters (Chapter 1 - Prevention of foot ulcers in people with diabetes; Chapter 2 - Pressure relief from foot ulcers in people with diabetes; Chapter 3 -Classifications of diabetic foot ulcers; Chapter 4 - Foot and peripheral artery disease; Chapter 5 - Infection and the diabetic foot; Chapter 6 - Charcot's neuroarthropathy). This version of the Diabetic Foot Guidelines presents essential recommendations for the prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up of patients with diabetic foot, offering an objective guide for medical practice.

IWGDF/IDSA guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of diabetes-related foot infections (IWGDF/IDSA 2023)

The International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) has published evidence-based guidelines on the management and prevention of diabetes-related foot diseases since 1999. The present guideline is an update of the 2019 IWGDF guideline on the diagnosis and management of foot infections in persons with diabetes mellitus. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was used for the development of this guideline. This was structured around identifying clinically relevant questions in the P(A)ICO format, determining patient-important outcomes, systematically reviewing the evidence, assessing the certainty of the evidence, and finally moving from evidence to the recommendation. This guideline was developed for healthcare professionals involved in diabetes-related foot care to inform clinical care around patient-important outcomes. Two systematic reviews from 2019 were updated to inform this guideline, and a total of 149 studies (62 new) meeting inclusion criteria were identified from the updated search and incorporated in this guideline. Updated recommendations are derived from these systematic reviews, and best practice statements made where evidence was not available. Evidence was weighed in light of benefits and harms to arrive at a recommendation. The certainty of the evidence for some recommendations was modified in this update with a more refined application of the GRADE framework centred around patient important outcomes. This is highlighted in the rationale section of this update. A note is also made where the newly identified evidence did not alter the strength or certainty of evidence for previous recommendations. The recommendations presented here continue to cover various aspects of diagnosing soft tissue and bone infections, including the classification scheme for diagnosing infection and its severity. Guidance on how to collect microbiological samples, and how to process them to identify causative pathogens, is also outlined. Finally, we present the approach to treating foot infections in persons with diabetes, including selecting appropriate empiric and definitive antimicrobial therapy for soft tissue and bone infections; when and how to approach surgical treatment; and which adjunctive treatments may or may not affect the infectious outcomes of diabetes-related foot problems. We believe that following these recommendations will help healthcare professionals provide better care for persons with diabetes and foot infections, prevent the number of foot and limb amputations, and reduce the patient and healthcare burden of diabetes-related foot disease.

Interventions in the management of diabetes-related foot infections: A systematic review

The optimal approaches to managing diabetic foot infections remain a challenge for clinicians. Despite an exponential rise in publications investigating different treatment strategies, the various agents studied generally produce comparable results, and high-quality data are scarce. In this systematic review, we searched the medical literature using the PubMed and Embase databases for published studies on the treatment of diabetic foot infections from 30 June 2018 to 30 June 2022. We combined this search with our previous literature search of a systematic review performed in 2020, in which the infection committee of the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot searched the literature until June 2018. We defined the context of the literature by formulating clinical questions of interest, then developing structured clinical questions (Patients-Intervention-Control-Outcomes) to address these. We only included data from controlled studies of an intervention to prevent or cure a diabetic foot infection. Two independent reviewers selected articles for inclusion and then assessed their relevant outcomes and methodological quality. Our literature search identified a total of 5,418 articles, of which we selected 32 for full-text review. Overall, the newly available studies we identified since 2018 do not significantly modify the body of the 2020 statements for the interventions in the management of diabetes-related foot infections. The recent data confirm that outcomes in patients treated with the different antibiotic regimens for both skin and soft tissue infection and osteomyelitis of the diabetes-related foot are broadly equivalent across studies, with a few exceptions (tigecycline not non-inferior to ertapenem [±vancomycin]). The newly available data suggest that antibiotic therapy following surgical debridement for moderate or severe infections could be reduced to 10 days and to 3 weeks for osteomyelitis following surgical debridement of bone. Similar outcomes were reported in studies comparing primarily surgical and predominantly antibiotic treatment strategies in selected patients with diabetic foot osteomyelitis. There is insufficient high-quality evidence to assess the effect of various recent adjunctive therapies, such as cold plasma for infected foot ulcers and bioactive glass for osteomyelitis. Our updated systematic review confirms a trend to a better quality of the most recent trials and the need for further well-designed trials to produce higher quality evidence to underpin our recommendations.

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.

Tigecycline and Hypoglycemia, When and How?

Objective: To describe the clinical characteristics of hypoglycemia that develop with tigecycline therapy and to review and summarize the current evidence of this uncommonly occurring metabolic adverse effect of tigecycline therapy. Underlying risk factors and potential mechanisms are also discussed. Data source: A 3-phase literature search was performed. In phase 1, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) Library, MEDLINE, and Embase electronic databases were searched for hypoglycemia and tigecycline, published from inception until August 2023. In phase 2, MEDLINE was searched for tigecycline randomized controlled trials and results were manually screened for hypoglycemia. In phase 3, the US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System public dashboard was searched for reports on tigecycline and hypoglycemia from June 2005 until July 2023. Study selection and data extraction: Relevant English-language citations and those conducted in humans were considered. Relevance to patient care and clinical practice: Hypoglycemia of various causes is an independent mortality risk. This review raises awareness among clinicians about the possibility of hypoglycemia with tigecycline therapy. Conclusion: Data on tigecycline-related hypoglycemia are scarce. Hypoglycemia may occur at any time during tigecycline therapy and can be severe and persist for days after tigecycline cessation. Renal dysfunction or renal replacement therapy may predispose to severe hypoglycemia during tigecycline therapy. Tigecycline-related hypoglycemia may develop in patients with or without diabetes mellitus and appears independent of insulin or antidiabetic agents. Intravenous dextrose showed efficacy in the restoration of euglycemia. Studies are needed to determine whether tigecycline-related hypoglycemia is iatrogenic or spontaneous.

Eravacycline, the first four years: health outcomes and tolerability data for 19 hospitals in 5 U.S. regions from 2018 to 2022

IMPORTANCE

The rise of multidrug-resistant (MDR) pathogens, especially MDR Gram-negatives, poses a significant challenge to clinicians and public health. These resilient bacteria have rendered many traditional antibiotics ineffective, underscoring the urgency for innovative therapeutic solutions. Eravacycline, a broad-spectrum fluorocycline tetracycline antibiotic approved by the FDA in 2018, emerges as a promising candidate, exhibiting potential against a diverse array of MDR bacteria, including Gram-negative, Gram-positive, anaerobic strains, and Mycobacterium. However, comprehensive data on its real-world application remain scarce. This retrospective cohort study, one of the largest of its kind, delves into the utilization of eravacycline across various infectious conditions in the USA during its initial 4 years post-FDA approval. Through assessing clinical, microbiological, and tolerability outcomes, the research offers pivotal insights into eravacycline's efficacy in addressing the pressing global challenge of MDR bacterial infections.

IWGDF/IDSA Guidelines on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Diabetes-related Foot Infections (IWGDF/IDSA 2023)

The International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) has published evidence-based guidelines on the management and prevention of diabetes-related foot diseases since 1999. The present guideline is an update of the 2019 IWGDF guideline on the diagnosis and management of foot infections in persons with diabetes mellitus. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) framework was used for the development of this guideline. This was structured around identifying clinically relevant questions in the P(A)ICO format, determining patient-important outcomes, systematically reviewing the evidence, assessing the certainty of the evidence, and finally moving from evidence to the recommendation. This guideline was developed for healthcare professionals involved in diabetes-related foot care to inform clinical care around patient-important outcomes. Two systematic reviews from 2019 were updated to inform this guideline, and a total of 149 studies (62 new) meeting inclusion criteria were identified from the updated search and incorporated in this guideline. Updated recommendations are derived from these systematic reviews, and best practice statements made where evidence was not available. Evidence was weighed in light of benefits and harms to arrive at a recommendation. The certainty of the evidence for some recommendations was modified in this update with a more refined application of the GRADE framework centred around patient important outcomes. This is highlighted in the rationale section of this update. A note is also made where the newly identified evidence did not alter the strength or certainty of evidence for previous recommendations. The recommendations presented here continue to cover various aspects of diagnosing soft tissue and bone infections, including the classification scheme for diagnosing infection and its severity. Guidance on how to collect microbiological samples, and how to process them to identify causative pathogens, is also outlined. Finally, we present the approach to treating foot infections in persons with diabetes, including selecting appropriate empiric and definitive antimicrobial therapy for soft tissue and bone infections; when and how to approach surgical treatment; and which adjunctive treatments may or may not affect the infectious outcomes of diabetes-related foot problems. We believe that following these recommendations will help healthcare professionals provide better care for persons with diabetes and foot infections, prevent the number of foot and limb amputations, and reduce the patient and healthcare burden of diabetes-related foot disease.

What’s old is new again: Insights into diabetic foot microbiome

Diabetes is a chronic disease that is considered one of the most stubborn global health problems that continues to defy the efforts of scientists and physicians. The prevalence of diabetes in the global population continues to grow to alarming levels year after year, causing an increase in the incidence of diabetes complications and health care costs all over the world. One major complication of diabetes is the high susceptibility to infections especially in the lower limbs due to the immunocompromised state of diabetic patients, which is considered a definitive factor in all cases. Diabetic foot infections continue to be one of the most common infections in diabetic patients that are associated with a high risk of serious complications such as bone infection, limb amputations, and life-threatening systemic infections. In this review, we discussed the circumstances associated with the high risk of infection in diabetic patients as well as some of the most commonly isolated pathogens from diabetic foot infections and the related virulence behavior. In addition, we shed light on the different treatment strategies that aim at eradicating the infection.

Systemic Antimicrobial Therapy for Diabetic Foot Infections: An Overview of Systematic Reviews

Diabetic foot infections (DFIs) are a common complication of diabetes; however, there is clinical uncertainty regarding the optimal antimicrobial selection. The aim of this review was to critically evaluate the recent systematic reviews on the efficacy and safety of systemic (parenteral or oral) antimicrobials for DFI. Medline, Embase, CENTRAL, and CINAHL databases and the PROSPERO register were searched from January 2015 to January 2023. Systematic reviews with or without meta-analyses on systemic antimicrobials for DFI, with outcomes of clinical infection resolution or complications, were included. Of the 413 records identified, 6 systematic reviews of 29 individual studies were included. Heterogeneity of individual studies precluded meta-analysis, except for ertapenem versus piperacillin-tazobactam (RR 1.07, 95% CI [0.96-1.19]) and fluoroquinolones versus piperacillin-tazobactam (RR 1.03, 95% CI [0.89-1.20]) in one review. The application of the AMSTAR-2 tool determined two reviews to be of high quality. There was no statistical difference in the clinical resolution of infections for 24 different antimicrobial regimens (penicillins, cephalosporins, carbapenems, fluoroquinolones, vancomycin, metronidazole, clindamycin, linezolid, daptomycin, and tigecycline). However, tigecycline did not meet non-inferiority against ertapenem ± vancomycin (absolute difference -5.5%, 95% CI [-11.0-0.1]) and was associated with a higher incidence of adverse drug events. There is minimal systematic review evidence to suggest one regimen is superior to another for DFI.

Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of antimicrobial agents for complicated intra-abdominal infection: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Which antimicrobial agents provide the optimal efficacy, safety, and tolerability for the empirical treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI) remains unclear but is paramount in the context of evolving antimicrobial resistance. Therefore, updated meta-analyses on this issue are warranted.

METHODS

We systematically searched four major electronic databases from their inception through October 2022. Randomized controlled trials examining antimicrobial agents for cIAI treatment were included. Two reviewers independently assessed the quality of included studies utilizing the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool as described in the updated version 1 of the Cochrane Collaboration Handbook and extracted data from all manuscripts according to a predetermined list of topics. All meta-analyses were conducted using R software. The primary outcome was clinical success rate in patients with cIAIs.

RESULTS

Forty-five active-controlled trials with low to medium methodological quality and involving 14,267 adults with cIAIs were included in the network meta-analyses. The vast majority of patients with an acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II score < 10 had low risk of treatment failure or death. Twenty-one regimens were investigated. In the network meta-analyses, cefepime plus metronidazole was more effective than tigecycline and ceftolozane/tazobactam plus metronidazole (odds ratio [OR] = 1.96, 95% credibility interval [CrI] 1.05 ~ 3.79; OR = 3.09, 95% CrI 1.02 ~ 9.79, respectively). No statistically significant differences were found among antimicrobial agents regarding microbiological success rates. Cefepime plus metronidazole had lower risk of all-cause mortality than tigecycline (OR = 0.22, 95% CrI 0.05 ~ 0.85). Statistically significant trends were observed favoring cefotaxime plus metronidazole, which exhibited fewer discontinuations because of adverse events (AEs) when compared with eravacycline, meropenem and ceftolozane/tazobactam plus metronidazole (OR = 0.0, 95% CrI 0.0 ~ 0.8; OR = 0.0, 95% CrI 0.0 ~ 0.7; OR = 0.0, 95% CrI 0.0 ~ 0.64, respectively). Compared with tigecycline, eravacycline was associated with fewer discontinuations because of AEs (OR = 0.17, 95% CrI 0.03 ~ 0.81). Compared with meropenem, ceftazidime/avibactam plus metronidazole had a higher rate of discontinuation due to AEs (OR = 2.09, 95% CrI 1.0 ~ 4.41). In pairwise meta-analyses, compared with ceftriaxone plus metronidazole, ertapenem and moxifloxacin (one trial, OR = 1.93, 95% CI 1.06 ~ 3.50; one trial, OR = 4.24, 95% CI 1.18 ~ 15.28, respectively) were associated with significantly increased risks of serious AEs. Compared with imipenem/cilastatin, tigecycline (four trials, OR = 1.57, 95%CI 1.07 ~ 2.32) was associated with a significantly increased risk of serious AEs. According to the surface under the cumulative ranking curve, Cefepime plus metronidazole was more likely to be optimal among all treatments in terms of efficacy and safety, tigecycline was more likely to be worst regimen in terms of tolerability, and eravacycline was more likely to be best tolerated.

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that cefepime plus metronidazole is optimal for empirical treatment of patients with cIAIs and that tigecycline should be prescribed cautiously considering the safety and tolerability concerns. However, it should be noted that data currently available on the effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of antimicrobial agents pertain mostly to lower-risk patients with cIAIs.

The Epidemiology of Antibiotic-Related Adverse Events in the Treatment of Diabetic Foot Infections: A Narrative Review of the Literature

The use of antibiotics for the treatment of diabetic foot infections (DFIs) over an extended period of time has been shown to be associated with adverse events (AEs), whereas interactions with concomitant patient medications must also be considered. The objective of this narrative review was to summarize the most frequent and most severe AEs reported in prospective trials and observational studies at the global level in DFI. Gastrointestinal intolerances were the most frequent AEs, from 5% to 22% among all therapies; this was more common when prolonged antibiotic administration was combined with oral beta-lactam or clindamycin or a higher dose of tetracyclines. The proportion of symptomatic colitis due to Clostridium difficile was variable depending on the antibiotic used (0.5% to 8%). Noteworthy serious AEs included hepatotoxicity due to beta-lactams (5% to 17%) or quinolones (3%); cytopenia's related to linezolid (5%) and beta-lactams (6%); nausea under rifampicin, and renal failure under cotrimoxazole. Skin rash was found to rarely occur and was commonly associated with the use of penicillins or cotrimoxazole. AEs from prolonged antibiotic use in patients with DFI are costly in terms of longer hospitalization or additional monitoring care and can trigger additional investigations. The best way to prevent AEs is to keep the duration of antibiotic treatment short and with the lowest dose clinically necessary.

Re-establishing the utility of tetracycline-class antibiotics for current challenges with antibiotic resistance

The progressive increase in antibiotic resistance in recent decades calls for urgent development of new antibiotics and antibiotic stewardship programs to help select appropriate treatments with the goal of minimising further emergence of resistance and to optimise clinical outcomes. Three new tetracycline-class antibiotics, eravacycline, omadacycline, and tigecycline, have been approved within the past 15 years, and represent a new era in the use of tetracyclines. These drugs overcome the two main mechanisms of acquired tetracycline-class resistance and exhibit a broad spectrum of in vitro activity against gram-positive, gram-negative, anaerobic, and atypical pathogens, including many drug-resistant strains. We provide an overview of the three generations of tetracycline-class drugs, focussing on the efficacy, safety, and clinical utility of these three new third-generation tetracycline-class drugs. We also consider various scenarios of unmet clinical needs where patients might benefit from re-engagement with tetracycline-class antibiotics including outpatient treatment options, patients with known β-lactam antibiotic allergy, reducing the risk of Clostridioides difficile infection, and their potential as monotherapy in polymicrobial infections while minimising the risk of any potential drug-drug interaction. KEY MESSAGESThe long-standing safety profile and broad spectrum of activity of tetracycline-class antibiotics made them a popular choice for treatment of various bacterial infections; unfortunately, antimicrobial resistance has limited the utility of the early-generation tetracycline agents.The latest generation of tetracycline-class antibiotics, including eravacycline, tigecycline, and omadacycline, overcomes the most common acquired tetracycline resistance mechanisms.Based on in vitro characteristics and clinical data, these newer tetracycline agents provide an effective antibiotic option in the treatment of approved indications in patients with unmet clinical needs - including patients with severe penicillin allergy, with renal or hepatic insufficiency, recent Clostridioides difficile infection, or polymicrobial infections, and those at risk of drug-drug interactions.

Australian guideline on management of diabetes-related foot infection: part of the 2021 Australian evidence-based guidelines for diabetes-related foot disease

BACKGROUND

Diabetes-related foot infections cause substantial morbidity and mortality, both globally and in Australia. There is a need for up-to-date evidence-based guidelines to ensure optimal management of patients with diabetes-related foot infections. We aimed to identify and adapt high quality international guidelines to the Australian context to become the new Australian evidence-based guideline for people with a diabetes-related foot infection.

METHODS

Following Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) procedures we identified the 2019 International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) guidelines as suitable for adaptation to the Australian context. Guidelines were screened, assessed and judged by an expert panel for the Australian context using the guideline adaptation frameworks ADAPTE and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). Judgements led to recommendations being adopted, adapted or excluded, with additional consideration regarding their implementation, monitoring and future research for the Australian context. Clinical pathways were then developed to assist implementation.

RESULTS

Of 36 original diabetes-related foot infection IWGDF sub-recommendations, 31 were adopted, four were adapted and one was excluded. Adaption was primarily undertaken due to differences or clarification of the sub-recommendations' intended population. One sub-recommendation was excluded due to substantial differences in judgements between the panel and IWGDF and unacceptable heterogeneity of the target population. Therefore, we developed 35 evidence-based sub-recommendations for the Australian context that should guide best practice diagnosis and management of people with diabetes-related foot infection in Australia. Additionally, we incorporated these sub-recommendations into two clinical pathways to assist Australian health professionals to implement these evidence-based sub-recommendations into clinical practice. The six guidelines and the full protocol can be found at: https://www.diabetesfeetaustralia.org/new-guidelines/ .

CONCLUSIONS

A new national guideline for the diagnosis and management of people with diabetes-related foot infections were successfully developed for the Australian context. In combination with simplified clinical pathway tools they provide an evidence-based framework to ensure best management of individuals with diabetes-related foot infections across Australia and highlight considerations for implementation and monitoring.

A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials of Antibiotic Use in Diabetic Foot Ulcer Infections: Focus on Clinical Cure

Background

Materials and Methods

Results

Conclusion

Safety evaluation of current therapies for high-risk severely ill patients with carbapenem-resistant infections

INTRODUCTION

Infections due to carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacteria (CR-GNB) are increasingly frequent events, which are associated with a high mortality rate. Traditionally, combination regimens including high doses of "old antibiotics" such as polymyxins, tigecycline, and aminoglycosides have been used to treat these infections, but they were often associated with low efficacy and high excess of side effects and toxicity, especially nephrotoxicity. Along with the development of new compounds, the last decade has seen substantial improvements in the management of CR infections.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, we aimed to discuss the safety characteristics and tolerability of different new options for treatment of CR infections.

EXPERT OPINION

The availability of new drugs showing a potent in vitro activity against CR-GNB represents a unique opportunity to face the threat of resistance, while potentially reducing toxicity. A thorough understanding of the safety profile from clinical trials may guide the use of these new drugs in critically ill patients at high risk for the development of adverse events. Future data coming from real-life studies for drugs targeting CR infections are crucial to confirm the safety profile observed in pivotal trials.

Advances in pharmacotherapy for diabetic foot osteomyelitis

Introduction: The diagnosis of diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) is usually clinical. Its severity is related to the location and depth of the lesion, and the presence of necrosis or gangrene. The aetiology of diabetic foot osteomyelitis (DFO) is usually polymicrobial, and DFO is often associated with chronic or recurring ulceration.Areas covered: We built on the  International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) guidelines on the management of diabetic foot infection, providing an outline of the current and new concepts in pharmacotherapy in DFO. We assess future strategies in both medical, surgical and combination management of DFO.Expert opinion: Surgical removal of infected bone is considered as the standard treatment, but a medical approach of certain selected situations has now proven efficacy in selected patients. The combination of new modalities in local antibiotic delivery may provide better long-term solutions and more lasting remission and avoid the disadvantages of prolonged systemic antibiotics.

Medical Versus Surgical Treatment for the Management of Diabetic Foot Osteomyelitis: A Systematic Review

A systematic review and quality assessment was performed to assess the management of diabetic foot osteomyelitis by medical or surgical treatment. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist was used. All selected studies were evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool to assess the risk of bias for randomized controlled trials. The literature was revised using PubMed (Medline) and Embase (Elsevier) up to September 2020 to identify clinical trials assessing medical or surgical treatment to manage diabetic foot osteomyelitis. A total of six clinical trials that met our inclusion criteria, with a total of 308 participants. Healing rate, complete closure of the wound, and type of complications were the outcomes evaluated. Risk of bias assessment showed that only two of the six clinical trials included in the systematic review had a low risk of bias. Based on our findings, we believe that the management of diabetic foot osteomyelitis remains challenging. There are few high-quality clinical trials that both stratify clinical presentations and compare these treatments. We conclude that the available evidence is insufficient to identify the best option to cure diabetic foot osteomyelitis.

Tigecycline antibacterial activity, clinical effectiveness, and mechanisms and epidemiology of resistance: narrative review

Tigecycline is unique glycylcycline class of semisynthetic antimicrobial agents developed for the treatment of polymicrobial infections caused by multidrug-resistant Gram-positive and Gram-negative pathogens. Tigecycline evades the main tetracycline resistance genetic mechanisms, such as tetracycline-specific efflux pump acquisition and ribosomal protection, via the addition of a glycyclamide moiety to the 9-position of minocycline. The use of the parenteral form of tigecycline is approved for complicated skin and skin structure infections (excluding diabetes foot infection), complicated intra-abdominal infections, and community-acquired bacterial pneumonia in adults. New evidence also suggests the effectiveness of tigecycline for the treatment of severe Clostridioides difficile infections. Tigecycline showed in vitro susceptibility to Coxiella spp., Rickettsia spp., and multidrug-resistant Neisseria gonnorrhoeae strains which indicate the possible use of tigecycline in the treatment of infections caused by these pathogens. Except for intrinsic, or often reported resistance in some Gram-negatives, tigecycline is effective against a wide range of multidrug-resistant nosocomial pathogens. Herein, we summarize the currently available data on tigecycline pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, its mechanism of action, the epidemiology of tigecycline resistance, and its clinical effectiveness.

[Off label uses of tigecycline]

INTRODUCTION

Tigecycline is a relatively new antibiotic that have very limited valid indications. When no other alternative is available, this drug is widely used off label with promising results. The objective of this study is to summarize the different off label uses of tigecycline so that we can decide when and how to prescribe it in the absence of guidelines.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This study a revue of the literature collecting all the articles concerning the off label uses of tigecycline.

RESULTS

Tigecycline was widely prescribed, off label, to treat infections with controversial results. Randomised clinical trials were conducted to evaluate its use to treat pneumonia. The results for this indication have a respectable level of evidence. For the other indications, the data collected was insufficient to support tigecycline prescription. In fact, different protocols were used which makes it hard to evaluate the efficacy and to conclude to the best treatment regimen. A tendency to prescribe high doses of the molecule was noted in different studies. When prescribed off label, tigecycline prescriptions were associated with a higher mortality and incidence of side effects.

CONCLUSION

The tigecycline remains a valid option for the treatment of infections dues to multi-resistant bacteria especially when other alternatives are scarce or in cases of renal failure.

IGNITE4: Results of a Phase 3, Randomized, Multicenter, Prospective Trial of Eravacycline vs Meropenem in the Treatment of Complicated Intraabdominal Infections

Background

Increasing antimicrobial resistance among pathogens that cause complicated intraabdominal infections (cIAIs) supports the development of new antimicrobials. Eravacycline, a novel member of the fluorocycline family, is active against multidrug-resistant bacteria including extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL) and carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae.

Methods

IGNITE4 was a prospective, randomized, double-blind trial. Hospitalized patients with cIAI received either eravacycline 1 mg/kg every 12 hours or meropenem 1 g every 8 hours intravenously for 4–14 days. The primary objective was to demonstrate statistical noninferiority (NI) in clinical cure rates at the test-of-cure visit (25–31 days from start of therapy) in the microbiological intent-to-treat population using a NI margin of 12.5%. Microbiological outcomes and safety were also evaluated.

Results

Eravacycline was noninferior to meropenem in the primary endpoint (177/195 [90.8%] vs 187/205 [91.2%]; difference, –0.5%; 95% confidence interval [CI], –6.3 to 5.3), exceeding the prespecified margin. Secondary endpoints included clinical cure rates in the modified ITT population (231/250 [92.4%] vs 228/249 [91.6%]; difference, 0.8; 95% CI, –4.1, 5.8) and the clinically evaluable population (218/225 [96.9%] vs 222/231 [96.1%]; (difference, 0.8; 95% CI –2.9, 4.5). In patients with ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae, clinical cure rates were 87.5% (14/16) and 84.6% (11/13) in the eravacycline and meropenem groups, respectively. Eravacycline had relatively low rates of adverse events for a drug of this class, with less than 5%, 4%, and 3% of patients experiencing nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea, respectively.

Conclusions

Treatment with eravacycline was noninferior to meropenem in adult patients with cIAI, including infections caused by resistant pathogens.

Clinical Trials Registration

NCT01844856.

Microbiologic characteristics and antibiotic resistance rates of diabetic foot infections

PURPOSE

the purpose of this research was to identify the sociodemographic and microbiological characteristics and antibiotic resistance rates of patients with diabetic foot infections, hospitalized in an emergency reference center.

METHODS

it was an observational and transversal study. The sociodemographic data were collected by direct interview with the patients. During the surgical procedures, specimens of tissue of the infected foot lesions were biopsied to be cultured, and for bacterial resistance analysis.

RESULTS

the sample consisted of 105 patients. The majority of patierns were men, over 50 years of age, married and with low educational level. There was bacterial growth in 95 of the 105 tissue cultures. In each positive culture only one germ was isolated. There was a high prevalence of germs of the Enterobacteriaceae family (51,5%). Gram-negative germs were isolated in 60% of cultures and the most individually isolated germs were the Gram-positive cocci, Staphylococcus aureus (20%) and Enterococcus faecalis (17,9%). Regarding antibiotic resistance rates, a high frequency of Staphylococcus aureus resistant to methicillin (63,0%) and to ciprofloxacin (55,5%) was found; additionally, 43,5% of the Gram-negative isolated germs were resistant to ciprofloxacin.

CONCLUSIONS

the majority of patients were men, over 50 years of age, married and with low educational level. The most prevalent isolated germs from the infected foot lesions were Gram-negative bacteria, resistant to ciprofloxacin, and the individually most isolated germ was the methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus.

Tigecycline-Induced Severe Hypoglycemia in a Non-Diabetic Individual: A Case Report and Brief Review of Tigecycline-Induced Severe Hypoglycemia

Patient: Male, 45-year-old

Final Diagnosis: Tigecycline-induced severe hypoglycemia in a non-diabetic individual

Symptoms: Hypoglycemia

Medication:—

Clinical Procedure: —

Specialty: Critical Care Medicine • Metabolic Disorders and Diabetics • Pharmacology and Pharmacy

Calculated initial parenteral treatment of bacterial infections: Skin and soft tissue infections

This is the ninth chapter of the guideline "Calculated Parenteral Initial Therapy of Adult Bacterial Disorders - Update 2018" in the 2nd updated version. The German guideline by the Paul-Ehrlich-Gesellschaft für Chemotherapie e.V. (PEG) has been translated to address an international audience. The chapter contains the first German S2k guidelines for bacterial skin and soft tissue infections. They encompass recommendations on diagnosis and treatment of the defined entities erysipelas (caused by beta-hämolytic streptococci), limited superficial cellulitis (S. aureus), severe cellulitis, abscess, complicated skin and soft tissue infections, infections of feet in diabetic patients ("diabetic foot"), necrotizing soft tissue infection and bite injuries.

Interventions in the management of infection in the foot in diabetes: a systematic review

The optimal approaches to managing diabetic foot infections remain a challenge for clinicians. Despite an exponential rise in publications investigating different treatment strategies, the various agents studied generally produce comparable results, and high-quality data are scarce. In this systematic review, we searched the medical literature using the PubMed and Embase databases for published studies on the treatment of diabetic foot infections as of June 2018. This systematic review is an update of previous reviews, the first of which was undertaken in 2010 and the most recent in 2014, by the infection committee of the International Working Group of the Diabetic Foot. We defined the context of literature by formulating clinical questions of interest, then developing structured clinical questions (PICOs) to address these. We only included data from controlled studies of an intervention to prevent or cure a diabetic foot infection. Two independent reviewers selected articles for inclusion and then assessed their relevant outcomes and the methodological quality. Our literature search identified a total of 15 327 articles, of which we selected 48 for full-text review; we added five more studies discovered by means other than the systematic literature search. Among these selected articles were 11 high-quality studies published in the last 4 years and two Cochrane systematic reviews. Overall, the outcomes in patients treated with the different antibiotic regimens for both skin and soft tissue infection and osteomyelitis of the diabetic foot were broadly equivalent across studies, except that treatment with tigecycline was inferior to ertapenem (±vancomycin). Similar outcomes were also reported in studies comparing primarily surgical and predominantly antibiotic treatment strategies in selected patients with diabetic foot osteomyelitis. There is insufficient high-quality evidence to assess the effect of various adjunctive therapies, such as negative pressure wound therapy, topical ointments or hyperbaric oxygen, on infection related outcomes of the diabetic foot. In general, the quality of more recent trial designs are better in past years, but there is still a great need for further well-designed trials to produce higher quality evidence to underpin our recommendations.

Guidelines on the diagnosis and treatment of foot infection in persons with diabetes (IWGDF 2019 update)

The International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot (IWGDF) has published evidence-based guidelines on the prevention and management of diabetic foot disease since 1999. This guideline is on the diagnosis and treatment of foot infection in persons with diabetes and updates the 2015 IWGDF infection guideline. On the basis of patient, intervention, comparison, outcomes (PICOs) developed by the infection committee, in conjunction with internal and external reviewers and consultants, and on systematic reviews the committee conducted on the diagnosis of infection (new) and treatment of infection (updated from 2015), we offer 27 recommendations. These cover various aspects of diagnosing soft tissue and bone infection, including the classification scheme for diagnosing infection and its severity. Of note, we have updated this scheme for the first time since we developed it 15 years ago. We also review the microbiology of diabetic foot infections, including how to collect samples and to process them to identify causative pathogens. Finally, we discuss the approach to treating diabetic foot infections, including selecting appropriate empiric and definitive antimicrobial therapy for soft tissue and for bone infections, when and how to approach surgical treatment, and which adjunctive treatments we think are or are not useful for the infectious aspects of diabetic foot problems. For this version of the guideline, we also updated four tables and one figure from the 2016 guideline. We think that following the principles of diagnosing and treating diabetic foot infections outlined in this guideline can help clinicians to provide better care for these patients.

Successful Treatment of Acute Prostatitis Caused by Multidrug-Resistant Escherichia coli With Tigecycline Monotherapy

We present a successful treatment, with tigecycline monotherapy, of acute prostatitis caused by multidrug-resistant Escherichia coli harboring an NDM-1 carbapemenase along with a CMY-2 cephalosporinase and a TEM ESBL.

Eravacycline: a new treatment option for complicated intra-abdominal infections in the age of multidrug resistance

Aim: Recently approved for use in complicated intra-abdominal infection, eravacycline is a novel fluorocycline with broad spectrum of activity against resistant Gram-negative pathogens. This manuscript is a pooled analysis of two Phase III trials. Clinical efficacy: Clinical cure rates were 86.8% for eravacycline versus 87.6% for ertapenem, and 90.8% for eravacycline versus 91.2% for meropenem in the Intent to Treat (micro-ITT) populations, and 87.0% for eravacycline versus 88.8% ertapenem, and 92.4 versus 91.6% for meropenem in the Modified Intent to Treat (MITT) populations. Safety: Eravacycline is well tolerated, with lower rates of nausea, vomiting and diarrhea than other tetracyclines. Conclusion: Eravacycline is an effective new option for use in complicated intra-abdominal infections, and in particular, for the treatment of extended-spectrum β-lactamase- and carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae-expressing organisms.

Combinatorial Drug Therapy for Controlling Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Its Association With Chronic Condition of Diabetic Foot Ulcer

Diabetic foot ulcer (DFU) is a major complication of diabetes mellitus, major observations of DFU cases have reported on amputation of foot region, and microbial bioburden during DFU is a major cause that affects healing of the wound regions. Pathogenic microbes are routinely isolated from these wound regions, especially Staphylococcus, Pseudomonas, Klebsiella, and Escherichia coli have been reported, whereas higher prevalence of Pseudomonas species during chronic condition in the deeper part of the wound, when left untreated, leads to gangrene. Multiple drug-resistant Pseudomonas strains are a new threat because of their biofilm-forming ability, making it more potent and incurable. Acyl homoserine lactones (AHL) are a group of signaling molecules that can regulate biofilm growth, and Las and Rhl operon generally work in tandem to initiate biofilm formation by Pseudomonas species. These signaling molecules also initiate virulence factors that correlates upregulation of inflammatory responses, and AHL can be a therapeutic target in order to prevent the efficacy of multiple drug-resistant strains that form biofilm and also can be an alternative solution against control of multiple drug-resistant strains.

Tigecycline-induced sustained severe hypoglycemia: a case report

Background

Tigecycline, the first glycylcycline-class drug, is a broad-spectrum antibiotic with activity against multi-drug resistant (MDR) organisms. We describe a case of sustained and severe hypoglycemia in a patient treated with tigecycline for pneumonia due to MDR Klebsiella pneumoniae.

Case presentation

A 74-year-old man was admitted for treatment of pneumonia. At admission he had prediabetes. In the hospital he developed renal failure. On day 3, the patient experienced severe shortness of breath. He was intubated and transferred to the intensive care unit (ICU) for ventilator support. In the ICU the antibiotic regimen was cefoperazone and sulbactam (1 g every 12 h). Continuous Renal Replacement Therapy was started on that day. Test for anti-neutrophil cytoplasmic antibodies (ANCA) was positive, and so the nephrologist and rheumatologist agreed on a diagnosis of ANCA-associated vasculitis, with renal and pulmonary involvement and acute renal failure. Plasmapheresis, and high-dose methylprednisolone treatment were started on day 6, and there was obvious improvement in the patient’s condition. The steroid regimen was gradually tapered to oral prednisone (35 mg every day) on day 19. Afterwards, the patient’s pneumonia worsened. Sputum culture showed Klebsiella pneumoniae sensitive to only tigecycline. Tigecycline treatment (100 mg every 12 h) was administered on day 20. Hypoglycemia started about 37 h after the first dose of tigecycline. Infusion of 50% glucose through the femoral vein was required for over 20 h to maintain normal blood glucose concentrations. Tigecycline was stopped, but the hypoglycemia resolved only after a further 34 h. The insulin and C-peptide levels were found to be markedly elevated during the hypoglycemia. The Naranjo scale score of 7 indicated that the likelihood of tigecycline causing severe hypoglycemia was “probable.”

Conclusion

This is the first report of sustained severe hypoglycemia due to tigecycline. Oversecretion of insulin appears to have been the cause of the hypoglycemia in our patient. The mechanism needs to be investigated.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s40360-019-0321-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

The safety of treatment options for acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections

INTRODUCTION

Acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections (ABSSSI) may develop in both in-patients and out-patients, possibly with a severe clinical presentation. Since most phase 3 randomized clinical trials have shown non-inferiority in efficacy across different agents, considerations regarding their different safety profiles inevitably play a crucial role in the everyday choice about which of them should be employed for the treatment of ABSSSI.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, the authors discuss the safety profile of different treatment options for ABSSSI.

EXPERT OPINION

The spread of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in the last decades has inevitably influenced the therapeutic approach to ABSSSI. Adequate knowledge of the peculiar toxicity profile of each drug active against MRSA is essential for guiding, monitoring and managing adverse events, in turn reducing any unfavorable impact of toxicity on patients' outcomes. In the next five years, potential toxicity will play a critical role in establishing the best available therapy for each specific patient, together with consideration regarding the possibility of avoiding hospitalization or allowing a switch from intravenous to oral therapy and early discharge.

Systematic review of randomized controlled trials on antibiotic treatment for osteomyelitis in diabetes

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy of antibiotic therapy in osteomyelitis treatment among people with diabetes.

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, AMED, Web of Science, the WHO trial registry, Cochrane library databases, and ClinicalTrials.gov, in addition to hand-searching, was undertaken in July 2018. Two reviewers independently extracted data. The studies' methodological quality was assessed using the modified Jadad scale. Descriptive analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Seven randomized controlled trials, with 393 participants in total, were included. The antibiotic regimens, treatments and follow-up durations varied among the trials. The total scores showed that the overall methodological quality of the seven studies was high, despite two studies showing some flaws in double-blinding and withdrawals/drop-outs. Of four studies comparing different antibiotic regimens, three implied a similar remission effect, while one implied that ertapenem ± vancomycin treatment showed a higher remission rate than tigecycline treatment; this conclusion was not robust because of low power and small sample size. In the other three studies, which included two different doses of ciprofloxacin, an antibiotics group and a conservative surgical group, and two durations of the same antibiotic strategy, no significant differences in remission were reported between the groups. No difference was observed in the analyses of microbiological outcomes, superinfections and relapse, except adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

There is no definitive evidence supporting the superiority of any particular antibiotic agent, dose, or administration duration in the treatment of osteomyelitis in diabetes. As the included studies had some flaws and limitations, further research is necessary.

Antibiotic therapy of diabetic foot infections: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials

Diabetic foot infection is a common diabetic complication that may end in lower limb amputation if not treated properly. We performed this systematic review to assess the clinical efficacy of different antibiotic regimens, whether systemic or topical, in the treatment of moderate to severe diabetic foot infections. We searched Medline, Web of Science, SCOPUS, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ScienceDirect for randomized controlled trials that evaluated the efficacy of antibiotic regimens in moderate to severe diabetic foot infections. The primary outcome of interest was the clinical efficacy (cure/improvement rates) of the regimens. We included 16 trials (4,158 patients) in this review, from which we extracted 10 comparisons: some trials compared systemic antibiotics to each other, others compared systemic to topical agents, while one study compared the combined topical and systemic agents to systemic antibiotics alone. Qualitative analysis of the findings of these studies showed that: (1) pipracillin/tazobactam was superior to ertapenem in severe infections (clinical resolution rate: 91.5% compared with PIP/TAZ 97.2%, p ≤ 0.04), but had similar efficacy in moderate infections, (2) ertapenem was more effective than tigecycline in moderate to severe infections (absolute difference -5.5, [95% CI -11.0, 0.1]), (3) the adjuvant use of topical agents with systemic antibiotics improved the outcomes, compared with systemic antibiotics alone (p = 0.024), (4) the rates of recurrence and re-ulceration were significantly lower in patients using the amino-penicillin regimen, compared with those using oral/intravenous ofloxacin, and (5) lower rates of complications accompanied the imipenem/cilastatin regimen, compared with the pipracillin/tazobactam regimen (p = 0.13). In conclusion, data from the included studies showed better results for ertapenem when compared with tigecycline; however, it was inferior to pipracillin/tazobactam in severe infections. The adjuvant use of topical agents improves the efficacy of systemic antibiotics in diabetic foot infection.

Classification, microbiology and treatment of diabetic foot infections

Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) are a common complication of type-1 and type-2 diabetes. About 10-15% of patients with diabetes develop foot ulcers. A validated foot ulcer classification system that will support the development of treatment strategis is necessary for clinicians managing DFUs. More than 10 classification systems have been described by researchers. Another important aspect of the management of DFUs is the proper identification of causative pathogens that trigger infections. While conventional diagnostic methods, such as swabs, cultures and biopsies are more widely used, novel molecular techniques have been exploring bacterial identification and quantification. Knowledge of the microbial aetiologies in diabetic foot infections, and understanding of antibiotic resistance, is critical for the effective management and treatment of these infected wounds. Initial antibiotic regimens are usually selected empirically. A set of common principles may help avoid selecting either an unnecessarily broad or inappropriately narrow antibiotic treatment regimen. In this review we provide a comprehensive summary and description of classification systems of diabetic foot infections, and a comprehensive discussion of microbiology.

Burden and Management of Multidrug-Resistant Organisms in Palliative Care

Palliative care includes comprehensive strategies to optimize quality of life for patients and families confronting terminal illness. Infections are a common complication in terminal illness, and infections due to multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) are particularly challenging to manage in palliative care. Limited data suggest that palliative care patients often harbor MDRO. When MDROs are present, distinguishing colonization from infection is challenging due to cognitive impairment or metastatic disease limiting symptom assessment and the lack of common signs of infection. Multidrug-resistant organisms also add psychological burden through infection prevention measures including patient isolation and contact precautions which conflict with the goals of palliation. Moreover, if antimicrobial therapy is indicated per goals of care discussions, available treatment options are often limited, invasive, expensive, or associated with adverse effects that burden patients and families. These issues raise important ethical considerations for managing and containing MDROs in the palliative care setting.

Efficacy of intravenous tigecycline in patients with Acinetobacter complex infections: results from 14 Phase III and Phase IV clinical trials

Background

Acinetobacter infections, especially multidrug-resistant (MDR) Acinetobacter infections, are a global health problem. This study aimed to describe clinical outcomes in patients with confirmed Acinetobacter spp. isolates who were treated with tigecycline in randomized clinical trials.

Materials and methods

Data from 14 multinational, randomized (open-label or double-blind), and active-controlled (except one) Phase III and IV studies were analyzed using descriptive statistics.

Results

A total of 174 microbiologically evaluable patients with Acinetobacter spp. infections (including MDR infections) were identified, and 95 received tigecycline to treat community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), diabetic foot infections (DFIs), hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP), complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAIs), infections with resistant pathogens (RPs), or complicated skin and skin-structure infections. The rate of cure of tigecycline for most indications was 70%–80%, with the highest (88.2%) in cIAIs. The rate of cure of the comparators was generally higher than tigecycline, but within each indication the 95% CIs for clinical cure for each treatment group overlapped. For most Acinetobacter isolates, the minimum inhibitory concentration of tigecycline was 0.12–2 μg/mL, with seven at 4 μg/mL and one at 8 μg/mL. The cure rate by tigecycline was 50% (95% CI 12.5%–87.5% in CAP) to 88.2% (95% CI 66.2%–97.1% in cIAIs) for all Acinetobacter, and 72.7% (95% CI 54.5%–93.2% in HAP) to 100% (95% CI 25%–100.0% in cIAIs) for MDR Acinetobacter. For the comparators, it was 83.8% (95% CI 62.8%–95.9% in HAP) to 100% (95% CI 75%–100% in cIAIs and 25%–100.0% in RPs) and 88% (95% CI 66%–97% in HAP) to 100% (95% CI 25%–100% in cIAIs and 75%–100% in DFIs), respectively.

Conclusion

These findings suggest that with appropriate monitoring, tigecycline may be a useful consideration for Acinetobacter infections alone or in combination with other anti-infective agents when other therapies are not suitable.

Tigecycline-based prolonged salvage therapy in patients presenting with complex bone and joint infection

OBJECTIVES

To assess the clinical experience of tigecycline-based salvage therapy in patients presenting with Bone and Joint Infections (BJI).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Multicenter retrospective cohort study in France and Turkey (2007-2014).

RESULTS

Thirty-six patients (age 58.2±17.8 years; 21 men) were included. The most frequently isolated bacteria were Enterobacteriaceae and staphylococci. Tigecycline (50mg BID, mainly in combination (69.4%), mean duration of 58 days) was indicated for multidrug resistance (90.6%) and/or previous antibiotic intolerance (36.1%), and/or as second- or third-line therapy (69.4%). Six patients (16.7%) experienced early treatment discontinuation for adverse event (4 severe vomiting, 1 pancreatitis, 1 asymptomatic lipase increase). Clinical success was observed in 23 of 30 assessable patients who completed the tigecycline therapy (mean follow-up: 54.1±57.7 weeks).

CONCLUSION

Prolonged tigecycline-based therapy could be an alternative in patients presenting with BJI requiring salvage therapy, especially if multidrug-resistant Enterobacteriaceae and/or staphylococci are involved.

The efficacy and safety of tigecycline for the treatment of bloodstream infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Patients with bloodstream infections (BSI) are associated with high mortality rates. Due to tigecycline has shown excellent in vitro activity against most pathogens, tigecycline is selected as one of the candidate drugs for the treatment of multidrug-resistant organisms infections. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of the use of tigecycline for the treatment of patients with BSI. The PubMed and Embase databases were systematically searched, to identify published studies, and we searched clinical trial registries to identify completed unpublished studies, the results of which were obtained through the manufacturer. The primary outcome was mortality, and the secondary outcomes were the rate of clinical cure and microbiological success. 24 controlled studies were included in this systematic review. All-cause mortality was lower with tigecycline than with control antibiotic agents, but the difference was not significant (OR 0.85, [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.31-2.33; P = 0.745]). Clinical cure was significantly higher with tigecycline groups (OR 1.76, [95% CI 1.26-2.45; P = 0.001]). Eradication efficiency did not differ between tigecycline and control regimens, but the sample size for these comparisons was small. Subgroup analyses showed good clinical cure result in bacteremia patients with CAP. Tigecycline monotherapy was associated with a OR of 2.73 (95% CI 1.53-4.87) for mortality compared with tigecycline combination therapy (6 studies; 250 patients), without heterogeneity. Five studies reporting on 398 patients with Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase-producing K. pneumoniae BSI showed significantly lower mortality in the tigecycline arm than in the control arm. The combined treatment with tigecycline may be considered the optimal option for severely ill patients with BSI.

Recent updates of carbapenem antibiotics

Carbapenems are among the most commonly used and the most efficient antibiotics since they are relatively resistant to hydrolysis by most β-lactamases, they target penicillin-binding proteins, and generally have broad-spectrum antibacterial effect. In this review, we described the initial discovery and development of carbapenems, chemical characteristics, in vitro/in vivo activities, resistance studies, and clinical investigations for traditional carbapenem antibiotics in the market; imipenem-cilastatin, meropenem, ertapenem, doripenem, biapenem, panipenem/betamipron in addition to newer carbapenems such as razupenem, tebipenem, tomopenem, and sanfetrinem. We focused on the literature published from 2010 to 2016.

The Antibiotic Drug Tigecycline: A Focus on its Promising Anticancer Properties

Tigecycline (TIG), the first member of glycylcycline bacteriostatic agents, has been approved to treat complicated infections in the clinic because of its expanded-spectrum antibiotic potential. Recently, an increasing number of studies have emphasized the anti-tumor effects of TIG. The inhibitory effects of TIG on cancer depend on several activating signaling pathways and abnormal mitochondrial function in cancer cells. The aim of this review is to summarize the cumulative anti-tumor evidence supporting TIG activity against different cancer types, including acute myeloid leukemia (AML), glioma, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), among others. In addition, the efficacy and side effects of TIG in cancer patients are summarized in detail. Future clinical trials are also to be discussed that will evaluate the security and validate the underlying the tumor-killing properties of TIG.

Minocycline and Tigecycline: What Is Their Role in the Treatment of Carbapenem-Resistant Gram-Negative Organisms?

Carbapenem-resistant organisms are increasingly common worldwide, particularly in India and are associated with high mortality rates especially in patients with severe infection such as bacteremia. Existing drugs such as carbapenems and polymyxins have a number of disadvantages, but remain the mainstay of treatment. The tetracycline class of antibiotics was first produced in the 1940s. Minocycline, tetracycline derivative, although licensed for treatment of wide range of infections, has not been considered for treatment of multidrug-resistant organisms until recently and needs further in vivo studies. Tigecycline, a derivative of minocycline, although with certain disadvantages, has been frequently used in the treatment of carbapenem-resistant organisms. In this article, we review the properties of minocycline and tigecycline, the common mechanisms of resistance, and assess their role in the management of carbapenem-resistant organisms.

Tigecycline use in the outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy setting

In the context of globally increasing antimicrobial resistance, tigecycline appears to be a useful therapeutic option. The need for prolonged courses for complex infections has prompted consideration of its use via outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT) programmes, although clinical outcomes when used in this setting remain unknown. We retrospectively reviewed the patient characteristics and outcomes of 11 patients who received tigecycline, most commonly delivered as 100 mg once daily, via OPAT at three tertiary Australian hospitals. Rates of co-morbidity and prior antibiotic use were high. Patients had a wide range of infections including bone and/or joint (n = 5), intra-abdominal (n = 3), lower respiratory tract (n = 2) and parapharyngeal abscess (n = 1). Mycobacterial species (n = 5) were the most frequent pathogen, and multi-resistant organisms were common (n = 4). The median OPAT duration was 14 days (IQR 6-30). Nausea was encountered in 45 % of cases. At completion of OPAT, 1 patient (9 %) was cured, 2 (18 %) had improved and 8 (73 %) failed therapy. Failure occurred due to either progression or non-response of infection (n = 4), re-admission (n = 3), premature cessation of tigecycline due to nausea (n = 3) or death (n = 1). Whilst OPAT delivery of tigecycline is a therapeutic option, when used as second-line therapy for complex, often multi-resistant infections in patients with multiple comorbidities, high rates of clinical failure, readmissions and adverse effects, especially nausea, should be anticipated.

Ertapenem versus piperacillin/tazobactam for diabetic foot infections in China: a Phase 3, multicentre, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, non-inferiority trial

OBJECTIVES

Few randomized controlled studies have compared antibiotic regimens against diabetic foot infections (DFIs) in Chinese patients. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of ertapenem versus piperacillin/tazobactam for the treatment of DFIs in Chinese patients.

METHODS

Patients with moderate to severe DFIs requiring parenteral antibiotics were randomized in a 1 : 1 ratio to receive ertapenem (1.0 g once daily) or piperacillin/tazobactam (4.5 g every 8 h) by 30 min intravenous (iv) infusions for ≥5 days. The primary outcome was favourable clinical response at discontinuation of iv therapy (DCIV). An evaluable-patient population was identified for primary analysis of non-inferiority at -15%. Safety was assessed. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01370616.

RESULTS

Of 565 patients randomized, 443 patients (ertapenem = 219 and piperacillin/tazobactam = 224) were clinically evaluable for primary analysis. In the clinically evaluable population, the proportions of patients with favourable clinical response at DCIV were 93.6% (205/219) and 97.3% (218/224) in the ertapenem and piperacillin/tazobactam groups, respectively (difference: -3.8%, 95% CI: -8.3%, 0.0%). Ertapenem had a significantly lower favourable clinical response rate (91.5% versus 97.2%, 95% CI for difference: -12.1%, -0.3%) at DCIV in severe DFI patients. In the modified ITT population, 88.8% (237/267) and 90.6% (241/266) of patients in the ertapenem and piperacillin/tazobactam groups, respectively, had favourable clinical responses at DCIV (difference: -1.9%, 95% CI: -7.3%, 3.3%). Microbiological eradications of causative pathogens and adverse events were similar between treatment groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with ertapenem was non-inferior to piperacillin/tazobactam in Chinese patients with DFIs. Ertapenem treatment resulted in a markedly lower rate of clinical resolution in severe DFIs.

Diabetic foot infections: Current treatment and delaying the 'post-antibiotic era'

BACKGROUND

Treatment for diabetic foot infections requires properly diagnosing infection, obtaining an appropriate specimen for culture, assessing for any needed surgical procedures and selecting an empiric antibiotic regimen. Therapy will often need to be modified based on results of culture and sensitivity testing. Because of excessive and inappropriate use of antibiotics for treating diabetic foot infections, resistance to the usually employed bacteria has been increasing to alarming levels.

REVIEW

This article reviews recommendations from evidence-based guidelines, informed by results of systematic reviews, on treating diabetic foot infections. Data from the pre-antibiotic era reported rates of mortality of about 9% and of high-level leg amputations of about 70%. Outcomes have greatly improved with appropriate antibiotic therapy. While there are now many oral and parenteral antibiotic agents that have demonstrated efficacy in treating diabetic foot infections, the rate of infection with multidrug-resistant pathogens is growing. This problem requires a multi-focal approach, including providing education to both clinicians and patients, developing robust antimicrobial stewardship programmes and using new diagnostic and therapeutic technologies. Recently, new methods have been developed to find novel antibiotic agents and to resurrect old treatments, like bacteriophages, for treating these difficult infections.

CONCLUSION

Medical and political leaders have recognized the serious global threat posed by the growing problem of antibiotic resistance. By a multipronged approach that includes exerting administrative pressure on clinicians to do the right thing, investing in new technologies and encouraging the profitable development of new antimicrobials, we may be able to stave off the coming 'post-antibiotic era'.

The diabetic foot in 2015: an overview

In 2015, it can be said that the diabetic foot is no longer the Cinderella of diabetic complications. Thirty years ago there was little evidence-based research taking place on the diabetic foot, and there were no international meetings addressing this topic. Since then, the biennial Malvern Diabetic Foot meetings started in 1986, the American Diabetes Association founded their Foot Council in 1987, and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes established a Foot Study Group in 1998. The first International Symposium on the Diabetic Foot in The Netherlands was convened in 1991, and this was soon followed by the establishment of the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot that has produced useful guidelines in several areas of investigation and the management of diabetic foot problems. There has been an exponential rise in publications on diabetic foot problems in high impact factor journals, and a comprehensive evidence-base now exists for many areas of treatment. Despite the extensive evidence available, it, unfortunately, remains difficult to demonstrate that most types of education are efficient in reducing the incidence of foot ulcers. However, there is evidence that education as part of a multi-disciplinary approach to diabetic foot ulceration plays a pivotal role in incidence reduction. With respect to treatment, strong evidence exists that offloading is the best modality for healing plantar neuropathic foot ulcers, and there is also evidence from two randomized controlled trials to support the use of negative-pressure wound therapy in complex post-surgical diabetic foot wounds. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy exhibits the same evidence level and strength of recommendation. International guidelines exist on the management of infection in the diabetic foot. Many randomized trials have been performed, and these have shown that the agents studied generally produced comparable results, with the exception of one study in which tigecycline was shown to be clinically inferior to ertapenem ± vancomycin. Similarly, there are numerous types of wound dressings that might be used in treatment and which have shown efficacy, but no single type (or brand) has shown superiority over others. Peripheral artery disease is another major contributory factor in the development of ulceration, and its presence is a strong predictor of non-healing and amputation. Despite the proliferation of endovascular procedures in addition to open revascularization, many patients continue to suffer from severely impaired perfusion and exhaust all treatment options. Finally, the question of the true aetiopathogenesis of Charcot neuroarthropathy remains enigmatic, although much work is currently being undertaken in this area. In this area, it is most important to remember that a clinically uninfected, warm, insensate foot in a diabetic patient should be considered as a Charcot foot until proven otherwise, and, as such, treated with offloading, preferably in a cast.

Interventions in the management of infection in the foot in diabetes: a systematic review

The expert panel on diabetic foot infection (DFI) of the International Working Group on the Diabetic Foot conducted a systematic review seeking all published reports relating to any type of treatment for infection of the foot in persons with diabetes published as of 30 June 2014. This review, conducted with both PubMed and EMBASE, was used to update an earlier one undertaken on 30 June 2010 using the same search string. Eligible publications included those that had outcome measures reported for both a treated and a control population that were managed either at the same time, or as part of a before-and-after case design. We did not include studies that contained only information related to definition or diagnosis, but not treatment, of DFI. The current search identified just seven new articles meeting our criteria that were published since the 33 identified with the previous search, making a total of 40 articles from the world literature. The identified articles included 37 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and three cohort studies with concurrent controls, and included studies on the use of surgical procedures, topical antiseptics, negative pressure wound therapy and hyperbaric oxygen. Among the studies were 15 RCTs that compared outcomes of treatment with new antibiotic preparations compared with a conventional therapy in the management of skin and soft tissue infection. In addition, 10 RCTs and 1 cohort study compared different treatments for osteomyelitis in the diabetic foot. Results of comparisons of different antibiotic regimens generally demonstrated that newly introduced antibiotic regimens appeared to be as effective as conventional therapy (and also more cost-effective in one study), but one study failed to demonstrate non-inferiority of a new antibiotic compared with that of a standard agent. Overall, the available literature was both limited in both the number of studies and the quality of their design. Thus, our systematic review revealed little evidence upon which to make recommendations for treatment of DFIs. There is a great need for further well-designed trials that will provide robust data upon which to make decisions about the most appropriate treatment of both skin and soft tissue infection and osteomyelitis in diabetic patients.

Efficacy and safety of tigecycline for the treatment of severe infectious diseases: an updated meta-analysis of RCTs

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of tigecycline in comparison with other antimicrobial treatments for infectious diseases.

DESIGN

Databases of PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched through Feb. 2015. The reference lists of the initially identified articles and systemic review articles were manually searched. Randomized controlled trials assessing tigecycline and other antibiotics for infectious diseases in adult patients were included.

RESULTS

Fifteen RCTs including 7689 cases were identified. We found that tigecycline was not as effective as the comparator agents for clinical treatment success (for the clinically evaluable population, odds ratio [OR] = 0.83, 95% confidence interval [CI] = (0.73, 0.96), P=0.01; for the clinically modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population, OR = 0.81, 95% CI = (0.72, 0.92), P=0.001). There was no significant difference in microbiological treatment success with lower eradication rate in tigecycline versus comparators (for the microbiologically evaluable population, OR = 0.94, 95% CI = (0.77, 1.16), P=0.56; for the microbiological mITT populations, OR = 0.91, 95% CI = (0.74, 1.11), P=0.35). Adverse events and all-cause mortality were more common in the tigecycline group.

CONCLUSIONS

Tigecycline is not as effective as other antibiotics with relatively more frequency of adverse events and higher mortality rate.