Piperacillin/tazobactam vs. cefoperazone/sulbactam in adult low-risk febrile neutropenia cases

The clinical features, treatment and prognosis of neutropenic fever and Coronavirus disease 2019 results of the multicentre teos study

This multicentre (22 centres in Turkey) retrospective cohort study aimed to assess the clinical outcomes of patients with neutropenic fever and SARS-CoV-2 positivity. Study period was 15 March 2020-15 August 2021. A total of 170 cases (58 female, aged 59 ± 15.5 years) that fulfilled the inclusion criteria were included in the study. One-month mortality rate (OMM) was 44.8%. The logistic regression analysis showed the following significant variables for the mentioned dependent variables: (i) achieving PCR negativity: receiving a maximum of 5 days of favipiravir (p = 0.005, OR 5.166, 95% CI 1.639-16.280); (ii) need for ICU: receiving glycopeptide therapy at any time during the COVID-19/FEN episode (p = 0.001, OR 6.566, 95% CI 2.137-20.172), the need for mechanical ventilation (p < 0.001, OR 62.042, 95% CI 9.528-404.011); (iii) need for mechanical ventilation: failure to recover from neutropenia (p < 0.001, OR 17.869, 95% CI 3.592-88.907), receiving tocilizumab therapy (p = 0.028, OR 32.227, 95% CI 1.469-707.053), septic shock (p = 0.001, OR 15.4 96% CI 3.164-75.897), and the need for ICU (p < 0.001, OR 91.818, 95% CI 15.360-548.873), (iv) OMM: [mechanical ventilation (p = 0.001, OR 19.041, 95% CI 3.229-112.286) and septic shock (p = 0.010, OR 5.589,95% CI 1.509-20.700)]. Although it includes a relatively limited number of patients, our findings suggest that COVID-19 and FEN are associated with significant mortality and morbidity.

Use of cefepime, meropenem, or piperacillin/tazobactam as initial treatment for febrile neutropenia in patients with hematological malignancy — a real-life experience

Background

Antimicrobials like fourth-generation cephalosporins, carbapenems, or β-lactams are widely used in treatment of febrile neutropenia (FN). The present study aimed to compare the efficacy of cefepime, meropenem, and piperacillin/tazobactam as initial treatment for chemo-induced FN in patients with hematological malignancy.

Methods

This was an observational study conducted in the Department of Hematology of Dhaka Medical College Hospital from July 2020 to June 2021 including 99 adult FN patients with hematological malignancy who were randomized equally to three treatment arms to receive cefepime, meropenem, or piperacillin/tazobactam as an empirical antibiotic. Response to therapy was defined as improvement in symptoms (e.g., defervescence) or in laboratory values including neutrophil counts on day 3 and day 7 after the initiation of the therapy. Chi-square test and Fisher’s exact test were used to compare the efficacy of the treatment regimens.

Results

Response rate to initial treatment with different antibiotic regimens was similar without any statistically significant difference (60.6%, 63.6%, and 51.5% on day 3 and 63.6%, 75.8%, and 66.7% on day 7 for cefepime, meropenem, and piperacillin/tazobactam, respectively, p-value > 0.05) irrespective of underlying diagnosis, the severity of neutropenia, and cause of fever.

Conclusion

Initial therapy with cefepime, meropenem, or piperacillin/tazobactam is safe and equally effective in chemo-induced FN in patients with hematological malignancy. This finding may be considered in clinical practice for optimum therapeutic outcomes.

The cost-effectiveness of empirical antibiotic treatments for high-risk febrile neutropenic patients: A decision analytic model

PURPOSE

Febrile neutropenia has a significant clinical and economic impact on cancer patients. This study evaluates the cost-effectiveness of different current empiric antibiotic treatments.

METHODS

A decision analytic model was constructed to compare the use of cefepime, meropenem, imipenem/cilastatin, and piperacillin/tazobactam for treatment of high-risk patients. The analysis was performed from the perspective of U.S.-based hospitals. The time horizon was defined to be a single febrile neutropenia episode. Cost-effectiveness was determined by calculating costs and deaths averted. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curves for various willingness-to-pay thresholds (WTP), were used to address the uncertainty in cost-effectiveness.

RESULTS

The base-case analysis results showed that treatments were equally effective but differed mainly in their cost. In increasing order: treatment with imipenem/cilastatin cost $52,647, cefepime $57,270, piperacillin/tazobactam $57,277, and meropenem $63,778. In the probabilistic analysis, mean costs were $52,554 (CI: $52,242-$52,866) for imipenem/cilastatin, $57,272 (CI: $56,951-$57,593) for cefepime, $57,294 (CI: $56,978-$57,611) for piperacillin/tazobactam, and $63,690 (CI: $63,370-$64,009) for meropenem. Furthermore, with a WTP set at $0 to $50,000, imipenem/cilastatin was cost-effective in 66.2% to 66.3% of simulations compared to all other high-risk options.

DISCUSSION

Imipenem/cilastatin is a cost-effective strategy and results in considerable health care cost-savings at various WTP thresholds. Cost-effectiveness analyses can be used to differentiate the treatments of febrile neutropenia in high-risk patients.

Efficacy and safety of cefoperazone-sulbactam in empiric therapy for febrile neutropenia: A systemic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

This meta-analysis assessed the clinical efficacy and safety of cefoperazone-sulbactam for empiric therapy febrile neutropenia.

METHODS

The PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCO, Cochrane Library, Ovid Medline, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrial.gov database were searched through May 10, 2019. Only clinical trials comparing cefoperazone-sulbactam with other antibiotics for empiric treatment of febrile neutropenia were included. The primary outcome was treatment success without modification, and the secondary outcomes were all-cause mortality and adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

Ten randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 1 retrospective cohort study were included. Overall, cefoperazone-sulbactam exhibited a treatment success rate similar to those of comparator drugs for the treatment of febrile neutropenia (odds ratio [OR], 1.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85 to 1.24, I = 0%). A similar finding was noted in pooled analysis of 10 RCTs (OR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.30, I = 0%). Subgroup analysis showed that cefoperazone-sulbactam had a treatment success rate similar to the rates of comparators for adults (OR, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.38, I = 0%) and children (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.63 to 1.46, I = 0%). Cefoperazone-sulbactam did not differ significantly from comparators in the risks of all-cause mortality (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.58 to 1.58, I = 0%) or common AEs, namely rash, nausea/vomiting, and superinfection.

CONCLUSION

The clinical efficacy and tolerability of cefoperazone-sulbactam are comparable to those of comparator drugs in the treatment of febrile neutropenia.

Antimicrobial activity of cefoperazone-sulbactam tested against Gram-Negative organisms from Europe, Asia-Pacific, and Latin America

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the antimicrobial activities of cefoperazone-sulbactam and comparator agents tested against a large collection of clinical isolates of Gram-negative organisms.

METHODS

A total of 19545 Gram-negative organisms were collected from medical centers located in western Europe (W-EUR; n=10626), eastern Europe and the Mediterranean region (E-EUR; n=4029), the Asia-Pacific region (APAC; n=2491), and Latin America (LATAM; n=2399) in 2015-2016 and susceptibility tested by reference broth microdilution methods.

RESULTS

Overall, 91.5% of Enterobacterales were susceptible (≤16mg/L) to cefoperazone-sulbactam, with susceptibility rates ranging from 82.0% (E-EUR) to 94.4% (W-EUR); overall susceptibility to cefoperazone-sulbactam, piperacillin-tazobactam, imipenem, and ceftriaxone was 91.5%, 85.4%, 90.5%, and 72.1%, respectively. Among Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates, cefoperazone-sulbactam susceptibility rates were higher in W-EUR, APAC, and LATAM (83.0-84.6%) compared to E-EUR (59.5%). Susceptibility to piperacillin-tazobactam, imipenem, and ceftazidime was 78.3%, 76.2%, and 82.0% in W-EUR; 52.3%, 43.5%, and 57.4% in E-EUR; 83.5%, 80.1%, and 84.5% in APAC; and 81.5%, 72.8%, and 83.0% in LATAM, respectively. Acinetobacter spp. susceptibility rates varied from 43.0% in E-EUR to 75.8% in LATAM (53.2% overall) for cefoperazone-sulbactam and from 19.8% in E-EUR to 40.2% in W-EUR (26.4% overall) for imipenem.

CONCLUSIONS

Susceptibility rates varied widely among geographic regions and were generally lowest in E-EUR. Based on the potency and activity spectrum, cefoperazone-sulbactam remains among the most active compounds in vitro at published breakpoints.

Daptomycin vs. glycopeptides in the treatment of febrile neutropenia: results of the Izmir matched cohort study

PURPOSE

In this multicentre, retrospective, matched cohort study we aimed to evaluate the outcomes of neutropenic fever cases that were treated with daptomycin or a glycopeptide (vancomycin or teicoplanin).

METHODS

Data and outcomes of adult (aged > 18-years old) patients with neutropenic fever [(1) without clinical and radiological evidence of pneumonia, (2) who were treated with daptomycin or a glycopeptide (teicoplanin or vancomycin) for any reason and for at least 72 h] were extracted from the hospital databases. Matching was performed with all of the three following criteria: (1) underlying disease, (2) reason for starting daptomycin or glycopeptide (microbiologic evidence vs. microbiologic evidence, clinical infection vs. clinical infection and empirical therapy vs. empirical therapy) and (3) neutropenic status.

RESULTS

Overall 128 patients [(69/123) (56.1%) in the daptomycin cohort (D) and 59/123 (48%) in the glycopeptide cohort (G)] had a resolution of fever at the end of 72 h antibiotic treatment (p = 0.25). There was no significant difference in cured, improved and (cured + improved) rates between (D) and (G) cohorts as well as fever of unknown origin cases or microbiologically confirmed infections or clinically defined infections subgroups (p > 0.05). There was also no significant difference (p > 0.05), in terms of persistent response in the (D) versus (G) cohorts, CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that although not better, daptomycin efficacy is comparable to vancomycin if used as empiric therapy in the treatment of adult febrile neutropenia. We conclude that daptomycin may be used at least as a salvage therapy alternative to glycopeptides in the treatment of adult febrile neutropenia cases. A large, randomized-controlled trial may further consolidate the evidence related to this question.

Tracking Cefoperazone/Sulbactam Resistance Development In vivo in A. baumannii Isolated from a Patient with Hospital-Acquired Pneumonia by Whole-Genome Sequencing

Cefoperazone/sulbactam has been shown to be efficacious for the treatment of infections caused by Acinetobacter baumannii; however, the mechanism underlying resistance to this synergistic combination is not well understood. In the present study, two A. baumannii isolates, AB1845 and AB2092, were isolated from a patient with hospital-acquired pneumonia before and after 20 days of cefoperazone/sulbactam therapy (2:1, 3 g every 8 h with a 1-h infusion). The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of cefoperazone/sulbactam for AB1845 and AB2092 was 16/8 and 128/64 mg/L, respectively. Blood samples were collected on day 4 of the treatment to determine the concentration of cefoperazone and sulbactam. The pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) indices (%T_>MIC) were calculated to evaluate the dosage regimen and resistance development. The results showed that %T_>MIC of cefoperazone and sulbactam was 100% and 34.5% for AB1845, and 0% and 0% for AB2092, respectively. Although there was no available PK/PD target for sulbactam, it was proposed that sulbactam should be administered at higher doses or for prolonged infusion times to achieve better efficacy. To investigate the mechanism of A. baumannii resistance to the cefoperazone/sulbactam combination in vivo, whole-genome sequencing of these two isolates was further performed. The sequencing results showed that 97.6% of the genome sequences were identical and 33 non-synonymous mutations were detected between AB1845 and AB2092. The only difference of these two isolates was showed in sequencing coverage comparison. There was a 6-kb amplified DNA fragment which was three times higher in AB2092, compared with AB1845. The amplified DNA fragment containing the bla_OXA-23 gene on transposon Tn2009. Further quantitative real-time PCR results demonstrated that gene expression at the mRNA level of bla_OXA-23 was >5 times higher in AB2092 than in AB1845. These results suggested that the bla_OXA-23 gene had higher expression level in AB2092 via gene amplification and following transcription. Because gene amplification plays a critical role in antibiotic resistance in many bacteria, it is very likely that the bla_OXA-23 amplification results in the development of cefoperazone/sulbactam resistance in vivo.