De-escalation: in drug we trust

Targeted simplification versus antipseudomonal broad-spectrum beta-lactams in patients with bloodstream infections due to Enterobacteriaceae (SIMPLIFY): a study protocol for a multicentre, open-label, phase III randomised, controlled, non-inferiority clinical trial

INTRODUCTION

Within the context of antimicrobial stewardship programmes, de-escalation of antimicrobial therapy is one of the proposed strategies for reducing the unnecessary use of broad-spectrum antibiotics (BSA). The empirical treatment of nosocomial and some healthcare-associated bloodstream infections (BSI) frequently includes a beta-lactam with antipseudomonal activity as monotherapy or in combination with other drugs, so there is a great opportunity to optimise the empirical therapy based on microbiological data. De-escalation is assumed as standard of care for experts in infectious diseases. However, it is less frequent than it would desirable.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The SIMPLIFY trial is a multicentre, open-label, non-inferiority phase III randomised controlled clinical trial, designed as a pragmatic 'real-practice' trial. The aim of this trial is to demonstrate the non-inferiority of de-escalation from an empirical beta-lactam with antipseudomonal activity to a targeted narrow-spectrum antimicrobial in patients with BSI due to Enterobacteriaceae. The primary outcome is clinical cure, which will be assessed at the test of cure visit. It will be conducted at 19 Spanish public and university hospitals.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Each participating centre has obtained the approval of the ethics review committee, the agreement of the directors of the institutions and authorisation from the Spanish Regulatory Agency (Agencia Española del Medicamento y Productos Sanitarios). Data will be presented at international conferences and published in peer-reviewed journals.

DISCUSSION

Strategies to reduce the use of BSA should be a priority. Most of the studies that support de-escalation are observational, retrospective and heterogeneous. A recent Cochrane review stated that well-designed clinical trials should be conducted to assess the safety and efficacy of de-escalation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

The European Union Clinical Trials Register: EudraCT number 2015-004219-19. Clinical trials.gov: NCT02795949. Protocol version: V.2.0, dated 16 May 2016. All items from the WHO Trial Registration Data Set are included in the registry.

Frequency of empiric antibiotic de-escalation in an acute care hospital with an established Antimicrobial Stewardship Program

BACKGROUND

Expanding antimicrobial resistance patterns in the face of stagnant growth in novel antibiotic production underscores the importance of antibiotic stewardship in which de-escalation remains an integral component. We measured the frequency of antibiotic de-escalation in a tertiary care medical center with an established antimicrobial stewardship program to provide a plausible benchmark for de-escalation.

METHODS

A retrospective, observational study was performed by review of randomly selected electronic medical records of 240 patients who received simultaneous piperacillin/tazobactam and vancomycin from January to December 2011 at an 885-bed tertiary care medical center. Patient characteristics including antibiotic regimen, duration and indication, culture results, length of stay, and hospital mortality were evaluated. Antibiotic de-escalation was defined as the use of narrower spectrum antibiotics or the discontinuation of antibiotics after initiation of piperacillin/tazobactam and vancomycin therapy. Subjects dying within 72 h of antibiotic initiation were considered not de-escalated for subsequent analysis and were subtracted from the study population in determining a modified mortality rate.

RESULTS

The most commonly documented indications for piperacillin/tazobactam and vancomycin therapy were pneumonia and sepsis. Of the 240 patients studied, 151 (63%) had their antibiotic regimens de-escalated by 72 h. The proportion of patients de-escalated by 96 h with positive vs. negative cultures was similar, 71 and 72%, respectively. Median length of stay was 4 days shorter in de-escalated patients, and the difference in adjusted mortality was not significant (p = 0.82).

CONCLUSIONS

The empiric antibiotic regimens of approximately two-thirds of patients were de-escalated by 72 h in an institution with a well-established antimicrobial stewardship program. While this study provides one plausible benchmark for antibiotic de-escalation, further studies, including evaluations of antibiotic appropriateness and patient outcomes, are needed to inform decisions on potential benchmarks for antibiotic de-escalation.

De-escalation versus continuation of empirical antimicrobial therapy in community-acquired pneumonia

OBJECTIVES

To compare mortality between de-escalation and continued empirical treatment in patients with community-acquired pneumonia.

METHODS

Using a nationwide administrative database, we identified adult patients with community-acquired pneumonia caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae, other streptococci, Haemophilus influenzae, Klebsiella pneumoniae, or Escherichia coli (n = 10,231) or of unknown etiology (n = 8247), discharged between July 2010 and March 2013. De-escalation was determined by the spectrum and number of antimicrobials at day 4. We used propensity score matching to obtain 489 pairs of de-escalation and continuation groups among pathogen-identified patients and 278 pairs among culture-negative patients to compare mortalities.

RESULTS

In the pathogen-identified patients, de-escalation was noninferior to continuation in 15-day mortality [5.3% in de-escalation versus 4.3% in continuation, a difference of 1.0% (95% confidence interval, -1.7% to 3.7%)] and in-hospital mortality [8.0% in de-escalation versus 8.8% in continuation, a difference of -0.8% (95% confidence interval, -4.3% to 2.7%)]. In the culture-negative cases, de-escalation was noninferior to continuation in terms of 15-day mortality but not in terms of in-hospital mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with community-acquired pneumonia of specific etiology, de-escalation was noninferior to continuation of empirical treatment, suggesting that de-escalation is a safe strategy and supporting current recommendations. Safety of de-escalation in culture-negative cases is questionable.

Factors influencing the implementation of antibiotic de-escalation and impact of this strategy in critically ill patients

Introduction

A rational use of antibiotics is of paramount importance in order to prevent the emergence of multidrug resistant bacteria that can lead to therapeutic impasse, especially in intensive care units (ICUs). A de-escalation strategy is therefore naturally advocated as part of better antibiotics usage. However, the clinical impact of such a strategy has not been widely studied. We aimed to assess the feasibility and the clinical impact of a de-escalation strategy in a medical ICU and to identify factors associated when de-escalation was possible.

Methods

We performed a retrospective study of patients hospitalized in a medical ICU over a period of six months. Independent factors associated with de-escalation and its clinical impact were assessed.

Results

Two hundred and twenty-nine patients were included in the study. Antibiotics were de-escalated in 117 patients (51%). The appropriateness of initial antibiotic therapy was the only independent factor associated with the performance of de-escalation (OR = 2.9, 95% CI, 1.5-5.7; P = 0.002). By contrast, inadequacy of initial antibiotic therapy (OR = 0.1, 0.0 to 0.1, P <0.001) and the presence of multidrug resistant bacteria (OR = 0.2, 0.1 to 0.7, P = 0.006) prevented from de-escalation. There were no differences in terms of short (ICU) or long-term (at 1 year) mortality rates or any secondary criteria such as ICU length of stay, duration of antibiotic therapy, mechanical ventilation, incidence of ICU-acquired infection, or multi-drug resistant bacteria emergence.

Conclusions

De-escalation appears feasible in most cases without any obvious negative clinical impact in a medical ICU.