Large retrospective evaluation of the effectiveness and safety of ceftaroline fosamil therapy

Ceftaroline Fosamil for the Treatment of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus Bacteremia: A Real-World Comparative Clinical Outcomes Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia results in substantial morbidity and mortality. As current treatments often lead to unsatisfactory outcomes, evidence guiding alternative treatment options is needed. This study evaluated real-world clinical outcomes of ceftaroline fosamil for the treatment of MRSA bacteremia.

METHODS

This retrospective study included adults hospitalized with MRSA bacteremia between 2011 and 2019. Patients were classified according to treatment with ceftaroline fosamil (ceftaroline), vancomycin, or daptomycin: Group 1, ceftaroline; Group 2, vancomycin or daptomycin (without ceftaroline); Group 3, combination therapy with ≥ 2 of these three agents. Clinical outcomes were compared using propensity-score-adjusted odds ratios (ORs) from logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Overall, 24,479 patients were included (Group 1, n = 532; Group 2, n = 21,555; Group 3, n = 2392). Mean age was 59.6, 60.8, and 57.4 years in Groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Mean post-index treatment length of stay was 8.8, 8.8, and 8.0 days, respectively. The most frequent line of therapy was ceftaroline first-line (42.1%), vancomycin or daptomycin first-line (95.4%), and combination therapy third-line or later (67.8%) in Groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. Compared with Group 2, Groups 1 and 3 had similar favorable clinical responses {odds ratio [OR] = 1.18 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.98-1.44], p = 0.08; OR = 1.20 [95% CI 0.97-1.47], p = 0.09, respectively} and were less likely to switch treatment (both p < 0.001). Compared with Group 2, Group 1 was more likely to undergo 30-day all-cause readmission [OR = 1.38 (95% CI 1.06-1.80), p = 0.02], whereas this was less likely for Group 3 [OR = 0.77 (95% CI 0.58-1.00), p = 0.05].

CONCLUSIONS

Patients receiving ceftaroline more often had favorable clinical responses than those receiving vancomycin or daptomycin monotherapy. In the absence of large-scale randomized controlled trials, these real-world data provide insights into the potential role of ceftaroline for treating MRSA bacteremia.

In vitro Activity of Ceftaroline Against Isolates of Gram-Positive Bacteria from Patients with Bloodstream Infections Collected as a Part of ATLAS Between 2017 and 2020

Purpose

To assess the in vitro activity of ceftaroline and a panel of comparator agents against isolates of Gram-positive bacteria, including Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus pneumoniae, β-hemolytic streptococci, and coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS) from blood collected in Africa and Middle East (AfME), Asia Pacific (APAC), Europe, Latin America (LATAM), and North America from 2017 to 2020 as a part of the Antimicrobial Testing Leadership and Surveillance (ATLAS) program.

Methods

Susceptibility and minimum inhibitory concentration were determined using broth microdilution for all antimicrobial agents by a central reference laboratory according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) and European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing (EUCAST) guidelines.

Results

Ceftaroline showed good activity (susceptibility ≥89.8%, MIC90 0.008-2 mg/L) against all Gram-positive isolates tested. All isolates of methicillin-susceptible S. aureus, penicillin-susceptible S. pneumoniae, S. agalactiae, S. dysgalactiae, and S. pyogenes were susceptible to ceftaroline (MIC90 0.008-0.25 mg/L). Ceftaroline susceptibility for MRSA isolates was 89.8% globally (MIC90 2 mg/L). Among the comparator agents, all isolates were susceptible to vancomycin, except S. epidermis (susceptibility, 99.9%). Among other agents, daptomycin, linezolid, and tigecycline showed potent activity (susceptibility ≥97.9%, MIC90 0.03-2 mg/L) against all isolates tested.

Conclusion

Ceftaroline showed potent in vitro activity against global bloodstream isolates of Gram-positive bacteria collected between 2017 and 2020. Monitoring and surveillance of global as well as regional longitudinal trends of resistance rates among Gram-positive isolates causing bloodstream infections are important to limit the spread of AMR, establish stewardship measures, and manage and appropriately treat infections.

Safety and effectiveness of fifth generation cephalosporins for the treatment of methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infections: a narrative review exploring past, present, and future

INTRODUCTION

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bloodstream infection (BSI) is a major issue in healthcare, since it is often associated with endocarditis or deep site foci. Relevant morbidity and mortality associated with MRSA-BSIs forced the development of new antibiotic strategies; in particular, this review will focus the attention on fifth-generation cephalosporins (ceftaroline/ceftobiprole), that are the only ß-lactams active against MRSA.

AREAS COVERED

The review discusses the available randomized controlled trials and real-world observational studies conducted on safety and effectiveness of ceftaroline/ceftobiprole for the treatment of MRSA-BSIs. Finally, a proposal of MRSA-BSI treatment flowchart, based on fifth-generation cephalosporins, is described.

EXPERT OPINION

The use of anti-MRSA cephalosporins is an acceptable choice either in monotherapy or combination therapy for the treatment of MRSA-BSIs due to their relevant effectiveness and safety. Particularly, their use may be advisable in combination therapy in case of severe infections (including endocarditis or persistent bacteriemia) or in monotherapy in subjects at higher risk of drugs-induced toxicity with older regimens. On the contrary, caution should be taken in case of suspected/ascertained central nervous system infections due to inconsistent data regarding penetration of these drugs in cerebrospinal fluid and brain tissues.

Impact of Key Components of Intensified Ceftaroline Dosing on Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Target Attainment

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Ceftaroline fosamil is a β-lactam antibiotic approved as a 600 mg twice daily dose (≤1 h infusion, 'standard dosing') or a 600 mg thrice daily dose (2 h infusion) to treat complicated skin and soft tissue infections caused by Staphylococcus aureus (minimum inhibitory concentration [MIC] 2-4 mg/L). We sought to systematically evaluate the relative impact of the three key components of the intensified dosing regimen (i.e. shortened dosing interval, prolonged infusion duration and increased total daily dose [TDD]) on the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) target attainment given different grades of bacterial susceptibility.

METHODS

A population PK model was developed using data from 12 healthy volunteers (EudraCT-2012-005134-11) receiving standard or intensified dosing. PK/PD target attainment (ƒT>MIC = 35% and 100%) after 24 h was compared following systematically varied combinations of the (1) dosing interval (every 12 h [q12h]→ every 8 h [q8h]); (2) infusion duration (1 h→2 h); and (3) individual and total daily dose (400→900 mg, i.e. TDD 1200→1800 mg), as well as for varying susceptibility of S. aureus (MIC 0.032-8 mg/L).

RESULTS

A two-compartment model with linear elimination adequately described ceftaroline concentrations (n = 274). The relevance of the dosing components dosing interval/infusion duration/TDD for ƒT>MIC systematically changed with pathogen susceptibility. For susceptible pathogens with MIC ≤1 mg/L, shortened dosing intervals appeared as the main driver of the improved target attainment associated with the intensified dosing regimen, followed by increased TDD and infusion duration. For less susceptible pathogens, the advantage of q8h dosing and 2 h infusions declined, and increased TDD improved ƒT>MIC the most.

CONCLUSION

The analysis calls to mind consideration of dose increases when prolonging the infusion duration in the case of low bacterial susceptibility.

Systematic review of ceftaroline fosamil in the management of patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus pneumonia

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is responsible for an array of problematic community- and healthcare-acquired infections, including pneumonia, and is frequently associated with severe disease and high mortality rates. Standard recommended treatments for empiric and targeted coverage of suspected MRSA in patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) and hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP), including ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), are vancomycin and linezolid. However, adverse events such as acute kidney injury and Clostridium difficile infection have been associated with these antibiotics. Ceftaroline fosamil is a β-lactam/extended-spectrum cephalosporin approved for the treatment of adults and children with CAP and complicated skin and soft tissue infections. Ceftaroline has in vitro activity against a range of common Gram-positive bacteria and is distinct among the β-lactams in retaining activity against MRSA. Due to the design of the pivotal randomised controlled trials of ceftaroline fosamil, outcomes in patients with MRSA CAP were not evaluated. However, various reports of real-world outcomes with ceftaroline fosamil for pneumonia caused by MRSA, including CAP and HAP/VAP, been published since its approval. A systematic literature review and qualitative analysis of relevant publications was undertaken to collate and summarise relevant published data on the efficacy and safety of ceftaroline fosamil in patients with MRSA pneumonia. While relatively few real-world outcomes studies are available, the available data suggest that ceftaroline fosamil is a possible alternative to linezolid and vancomycin for MRSA pneumonia. Specific scenarios in which ceftaroline fosamil might be considered include bacteraemia and complicating factors such as empyema.

New Antimicrobials and New Therapy Strategies for Endocarditis: Weapons That Should Be Defended

The overall low-quality evidence concerning the clinical benefits of different antibiotic regimens for the treatment of infective endocarditis (IE), which has made it difficult to strongly support or reject any regimen of antibiotic therapy, has led to a discrepancy between the available guidelines and clinical practice. In this complex scenario, very recently published guidelines have attempted to fill this gap. Indeed, in recent years several antimicrobials have entered the market, including ceftobiprole, ceftaroline, and the long-acting lipoglycopeptides dalbavancin and oritavancin. Despite being approved for different indications, real-world data on their use for the treatment of IE, alone or in combination, has accumulated over time. Furthermore, an old antibiotic, fosfomycin, has gained renewed interest for the treatment of complicated infections such as IE. In this narrative review, we focused on new antimicrobials and therapeutic strategies that we believe may provide important contributions to the advancement of Gram-positive IE treatment, providing a summary of the current in vitro, in vivo, and clinical evidence supporting their use in clinical practice.

Heartbreaking Decisions: The Dogma and Uncertainties of Antimicrobial Therapy in Infective Endocarditis

Infective endocarditis (IE) is a rare but increasingly prevalent disease with high morbidity and mortality, requiring antimicrobials and at times surgical intervention. Through the decades of healthcare professionals' experience with managing IE, certain dogmas and uncertainties have arisen around its pharmacotherapy. The introduction of new antimicrobials and novel combinations are exciting developments but also further complicate IE treatment choices. In this review, we provide and evaluate the relevant evidence focused around contemporary debates in IE treatment pharmacotherapy, including beta-lactam choice in MSSA IE, combination therapies (aminoglycosides, ceftaroline), the use of oral antimicrobials, the role of rifamycins, and long-acting lipoglycopeptides.

Outcomes of Daptomycin Plus Ceftaroline Versus Alternative Therapy for Persistent Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) Bacteraemia

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate both efficacy and safety of combination therapy with daptomycin plus ceftaroline (DAP/CPT) versus alternative therapy in the treatment of persistent methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia (MRSAB).

METHODS

This retrospective, single-centre study investigated adult patients who underwent a change in antibiotic therapy for persistent MRSAB. Daptomycin plus ceftaroline was compared with alternative therapy after initial treatment with vancomycin or DAP monotherapy was modified. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality, and several secondary efficacy and safety outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 68 patients with persistent MRSAB had initial therapy switched to DAP/CPT (n = 43) or alternative therapy (n = 25). In-hospital mortality was similar with DAP/CPT versus alternative therapy (16.3% vs. 16%; P = 1.0). On average, the total duration of bacteraemia was numerically 1 day less in patients switched to DAP/CPT (11.4 days vs. 12.5 days; P = 0.5). Daptomycin plus ceftaroline was de-escalated in 81% of patients after receiving combination therapy for an average of 12.5 days. Secondary outcomes, including rates of adverse events and emergence of antimicrobial resistance, were similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Switching to DAP/CPT after approximately 1 week of persistent MRSA bacteraemia may result in similar clinical outcomes when compared with alternative therapy. Rates of adverse events and emergence of antimicrobial resistance were low without a statistically significant difference observed between DAP/CPT and alternative therapy. These findings, as well as the impact of earlier switch or prolonged treatment with the combination, require further investigation.

Ceftaroline: Systematic Review of Clinical Uses and Emerging Drug Resistance

OBJECTIVE

To assess the success rates of off-label uses of ceftaroline for infections caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and evaluate emerging ceftaroline resistance.

DATA SOURCES

We queried PubMed/MEDLINE, with the search term "Ceftaroline." Articles were restricted to the English language and year of publication (January 1, 2009-January 31, 2022).

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

Clinical trials, observational studies, and case reports that reported efficacy, safety, pharmacokinetics, use in MRSA infections other than acute bacterial skin infection and community-acquired pneumonia, and ceftaroline resistance were selected.

DATA SYNTHESIS

The search pooled 103 publications and all abstracts were reviewed. Forty-six articles that reported efficacy, safety, pharmacokinetics, or off-label use in multiple patients and 7 articles on ceftaroline resistance are used in this review. Ceftaroline has been approved for treatment of acute skin/soft tissue infection and community-acquired pneumonia. Ceftaroline's efficacy in off-label infections ranged from 66.7% to 87.3% depending on the types of infection. There were 14 documented cases of ceftaroline resistance associated with PBP2a changes.

RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE

Case series and observational studies have documented success with ceftaroline alone or in combination with vancomycin or daptomycin for treatment of MRSA bone and joint, endovascular, diabetic foot infections, and bacteremia from other causes.

CONCLUSION

Despite the lack of randomized controlled trials, ceftaroline is used as salvage therapy for different MRSA infections. The data from case series and observational studies are promising but ceftaroline should be used judiciously as ceftaroline-resistant MRSA begin to emerge.

A review of recent advances in the treatment of adults with complicated urinary tract infection

INTRODUCTION

Complicated urinary tract infections (cUTIs) entail diverse clinical conditions that could be managed differently and not necessarily with premature empiric therapy. Since multidrug-resistant organisms (MDROs) are widely spreading worldwide, the possibility of encountering these resistant bacteria is inevitably part of the daily life of physicians who manage cUTIs.

AREAS COVERED

The advances in the management of cUTIs are explored, illustrating: 1) a proposed therapeutical approach to cUTIs within the antimicrobial stewardship context; 2) evidence regarding novel antibiotics targeting MDROs. Evidence research has been performed through MEDLINE/PubMed using appropriate keywords and terms regarding cUTIs published before June 2022.

EXPERT OPINION

Novel antimicrobial drugs are available in the clinicians' armamentarium. Selecting the optimal therapy for suitable patients may be challenging given the multifaceted group of cUTIs. Carbapenems use is widely increasing, the role of old β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitors is constantly revised, and novel drugs lack real-life studies. Understanding the different ranges of the complexity of patients affected by cUTIs may help select the most suitable antibiotic for every single case. More multicentric observational studies targeting cUTIs are needed to elucidate the appropriate drug based on patient characteristics and presentations, providing stronger recommendations for cases encountered in everyday clinical practice.

Comparing the Outcomes of Ceftaroline plus Vancomycin or Daptomycin Combination Therapy versus Vancomycin or Daptomycin Monotherapy in Adults with Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia—A Meta-Analysis

Introduction: Combination therapy with daptomycin plus ceftaroline to treat methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia has been reported to reduce methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia-related mortality. The purpose of the current meta-analysis was to compare the clinical outcome of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia in patients treated with daptomycin or vancomycin plus ceftaroline combination therapy versus daptomycin or vancomycin monotherapy. Methods: Studies were included if they directly compared the efficacy of daptomycin or vancomycin plus ceftaroline combination therapy with that of daptomycin or vancomycin monotherapy in the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia in adult patients. Results: One randomized controlled trial and five retrospective studies were included in the meta-analysis. The combination therapy group had an in-hospital mortality, duration of bacteremia, and adverse event rate similar to those patients who had monotherapy. There was less bacteremia recurrence in the combination group. Initial combination therapy with ceftaroline for the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia showed a trend of reducing the risk of in-hospital mortality in the current meta-analysis. Conclusions: Randomized controlled trials are needed to further study the role of initial combination therapy with daptomycin or vancomycin plus ceftaroline in the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia.

Incidence and risk factors for mortality in patients treated with combined ceftaroline for Gram-positive infective endocarditis

BACKGROUND

Ceftaroline is a fifth-generation cephalosporin and represents an alternative in the treatment of infective endocarditis (IE). The main objective of this study was to describe the incidence of in-hospital and 42-day mortality in patients with IE treated with ceftaroline.

METHODS

An observational retrospective study included adult patients with IE admitted during a 3.5-year period (January 2018-June 2021) and treated with ceftaroline in a single center. All cases were definite or possible IE according to the modified Duke criteria.

RESULTS

Seventy cases were analyzed. The mean age was 67.35 ± 16.62 (16-89) and 39 (55.7%) were males. The mean number of days of treatment with ceftaroline was 21.26 ± 16.17 (1-75). Overall mortality at 42 days was 30%, 20.7% in the first line, and 36.6% in rescue therapy. Predictors of 42 days-mortality were increased Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) (OR of 1.7 per 1 point increment, 95% CI 1.2-2.4, P 0.001), presence of methicillin-resistance (OR 6.8, 95% CI 1.3-36.8, P 0.026) and evidence of septic shock (OR 8.6 95% CI 1.7-44.2, P 0.01). Predictors of 42 days of therapeutic failure were the increase in the CCI (OR of 1.6 per 1 point increment, 95% CI 1.3-2.1, P 0.000) and septic shock (OR 4.5 95% CI 1.1-18 P 0.036). Adverse effects were described in 6/70 (8.6%) of the patients, precipitating in 4/70 (5.7%) the definitive withdrawal of the antibiotic.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of in-hospital and 42 day-mortality of IE patients treated with ceftaroline remains similar to literature data. Increased CCI, septic shock, and methicillin resistance are associated with poor prognosis.

Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Hospital-Acquired Pneumonia/Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is a common cause of hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) and ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). MRSA pneumonia is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Several virulence factors allow S. aureus to become an effective pathogen. The polysaccharide intracellular adhesin allows for the production of biofilms, some strains can produce capsular polysaccharides that protect against phagocytosis, microbial surface components recognizing adhesive matrix molecules (MSCRAMMs) allow for colonization of epithelial surfaces, and S. aureus secretes several exotoxins that aid in tissue destruction. The α-hemolysin exotoxin secreted by S. aureus is one of the most important virulence factors for the bacteria. The diagnosis of MRSA pneumonia can be challenging; the infection may present as a mild respiratory infection or severe respiratory failure and septic shock. Many individuals are colonized with MRSA and thus a positive nasopharyngeal swab does not confirm infection in the lower respiratory tract. The management of MRSA pneumonia has evolved. Historically, vancomycin has been the primary antibiotic used to treat MRSA pneumonia. Over the past decade, prospective studies have shown that linezolid leads to higher rates of clinical cure. Monoclonal antibodies are being studied as potential therapeutic options. MRSA is an important cause of HAP/VAP; novel diagnostics may facilitate rapid diagnosis of this infection and the available literature should be used to make informed decisions on management.

Ceftaroline versus vancomycin for treatment of acute pulmonary exacerbations of cystic fibrosis in adults

OBJECTIVES

Vancomycin remains a first-line treatment for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)-mediated acute pulmonary exacerbations (APEs) in adult cystic fibrosis (CF) patients; however, optimal alternatives remain poorly defined. The aim of this study was to determine the safety and efficacy of ceftaroline for MRSA-mediated APEs of CF in adults.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective, observational cohort study comparing ceftaroline with vancomycin for the treatment of MRSA-mediated APEs in adult CF patients. The primary endpoint was the return to at least 90% of baseline lung function measured by discharge FEV1% predicted in comparison with baseline FEV1% predicted.

RESULTS

A total of 55 patients were included in the analysis (22 receiving ceftaroline and 33 receiving vancomycin). Of the patients included in the analysis, 13 patients (59%) in the ceftaroline group and 24 patients (73%) in the vancomycin group met the primary outcome (P = 0.38). FEV1 measurements at baseline, admission and discharge were not different between treatments. Secondary outcomes including 30-day re-admission rate, 30-day mortality, treatment duration and adverse events (neutropenia, Clostridioides difficile infection and acute kidney injury) were similar between groups.

CONCLUSION

Our small cohort study supports ceftaroline as an alternative treatment option for MRSA-mediated APE of CF in adults.

Investigational agents for the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia: progress in clinical trials

INTRODUCTION

Bacteremia caused by Staphylococcus aureus is common. Cases caused by methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) are particularly formidable and often lethal. The mortality associated with MRSA bacteremia has not significantly decreased over the past couple of decades and concerns regarding efficacy and toxicity of standard therapy highlight the need for novel agents and new therapeutic approaches.

AREAS COVERED

This paper explores clinical trials investigating novel therapeutic approaches to S. aureus bacteremia. There is a special focus on MRSA bacteremia. Monotherapy and combination therapies and novel antimicrobials and adjunctive therapies that are only recently being established for therapeutic use are discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

The unfavorable safety profile of combination antimicrobial therapy in clinical trials has outweighed its benefits. Therefore, future investigation should focus on optimizing duration and de-escalation protocols. Antibody and bacteriophage lysin-based candidates have mostly been limited to safety trials, but progress with these agents is demonstrated through a lysin-based agent receiving a phase III trial. Antibiotics indicated for use in treating MRSA skin infections see continued investigation as treatments for MRSA bacteremia despite the difficulty of completing trials in this patient population. Promising agents include dalbavancin, ceftobiprole, ceftaroline, and exebacase.

Multicenter Cohort Study of Ceftaroline versus Daptomycin for Treatment of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Bloodstream Infection

Background

Observational data suggest ceftaroline may be effective for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bloodstream infection (BSI), but comparative data with standard of care are limited. This analysis compares the outcomes of MRSA BSI treated with ceftaroline or daptomycin.

Methods

Multicenter, retrospective, observational cohort study of adult patients with MRSA BSI from 2010 to 2017. Patients treated with ≥72 hours of ceftaroline or daptomycin were included. Those clearing BSI before study drug and those with a pneumonia source were excluded. The primary outcome was composite treatment failure, defined as 30-day mortality, BSI duration ≥7 days on study drug, and 60-day MRSA BSI recurrence. Inverse probability of treatment weighted risk difference in composite failure between daptomycin and ceftaroline groups was computed and 15% noninferiority margin applied.

Results

Two hundred seventy patients were included; 83 ceftaroline and 187 daptomycin. Ceftaroline was noninferior to daptomycin with respect to composite failure (39% daptomycin, 32.5% ceftaroline; weighted risk difference, 7.0% [95% confidence interval, –5.0% to 19.0%]). No differences between treatment groups was observed for 30-day mortality or other secondary efficacy outcomes. Creatine phosphokinase elevation was significantly more common among daptomycin patients (5.3% vs 0%, P = .034). Rash was significantly more common among ceftaroline patients (10.8 vs 1.1%, P = .001).

Conclusions

No difference in treatment failure or mortality was observed between MRSA BSI treated with ceftaroline or daptomycin. These data support future study of ceftaroline as a primary MRSA BSI treatment and current use of ceftaroline when an alternative to vancomycin and daptomycin is required.

How I manage a patient with MRSA bacteraemia

BACKGROUND

Staphylococcus aureus bloodstream infections are common and associated with a high mortality of 15-25%. Methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) bloodstream infection accounts for 10-40% of cases, and has an even higher mortality. Despite being the 'bread and butter' of clinical infectious diseases practice, robust evidence to guide optimal management is often lacking and there is wide variation in practice.

OBJECTIVES

To provide a real-world example of a case of MRSA bacteraemia and the thought processes of the authors as key management decision points are reached.

SOURCES

The discussion is based on recent literature searches of relevant topics. In making recommendations, randomized clinical trial data have been prioritized and highlighted, and where these are not available recommendations are based on the experience and opinions of the authors.

CONTENT

For a patient with MRSA bacteraemia and a primary bone and joint infection the following points are discussed: empirical antibiotic choice for suspected S. aureus bacteraemia; directed antibiotic choice for MRSA; monitoring and dosing of vancomycin; the role of combination therapy when bacteraemia is persistent; and the duration of therapy and role of switching to oral antibiotics.

IMPLICATIONS

While broad principles of aggressive source control and appropriate choice and duration of antibiotics are important, the heterogeneity of S. aureus bacteraemia means that a tailored rather than algorithmic approach to management is often required. Further randomized controlled trials are needed to strengthen the evidence base for the management of MRSA bacteraemia.

Clinical Outcomes With Definitive Treatment of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia With Retained Daptomycin and Ceftaroline Combination Therapy vs De-escalation to Monotherapy With Vancomycin, Daptomycin, or Ceftaroline

Background

Lower mortality has been observed with combination therapy compared to monotherapy for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia; however, there is a lack of evidence for continued combination therapy over de-escalation to monotherapy following bacteremia clearance.

Methods

This was a single-center, retrospective study evaluating patients with MRSA bacteremia hospitalized from November 1, 2011, through July 31, 2019. Patients who received three to ten days of combination therapy followed by de-escalation to monotherapy were directly compared to patients retained on combination therapy. The primary composite outcome included inpatient infection-related mortality, 60-day readmission, and 60-day bacteremia recurrence.

Results

A total of 286 patients with MRSA bacteremia were identified, with 146 patients omitted based on exclusion criteria. The study population included 66 in the combination therapy group and 74 in the monotherapy group. Study population was 51% female (n = 71) and 78% white (n = 109) with median age of 46 years (IQR 34.5-61). No significant difference was observed in the primary composite outcome (21% combination therapy group vs 24% monotherapy group; P =.66), with retained observations after controlling for confounders. Within this outcome, there was no significant difference in 60-day readmission (20% combination therapy group vs 18% monotherapy group; P =.75), bacteremia recurrence (3% combination therapy group vs 7% monotherapy group; P =.45), or inpatient infection-related mortality (2% combination therapy group vs 5% monotherapy group; P = 1.00).

Conclusions

No difference was found in the composite outcome of 60-day bacteremia recurrence, readmission, or inpatient infection-related mortality for patients with MRSA bacteremia retained on combination therapy versus those de-escalated to monotherapy.

Novel Cephalosporins in Septic Subjects and Severe Infections: Present Findings and Future Perspective

In past decade, cephalosporins have developed significantly, and data regarding novel cephalosporins (i.e., ceftobiprole, ceftaroline, ceftolozane/tazobactam, ceftazidime/avibactam, and cefiderocol) within septic and bacteremic subjects are rising. These compounds generally offer very promising in vitro microbiological susceptibility, although the variability among gram-negative and -positive strains of different cohorts is noticed in the literature. We require further pharmacological data to measure the best dose in order to prevent sub-therapeutic drug levels in critically ill patients. These new compounds in theory are the sparing solution in the Enterobacteriales infection group for different antimicrobial classes such as aminoglycosides notably within endovascular and GNB-bacteremias, as well as colistin and carbapenem-sparing strategies, favoring good safety profile molecules. Moreover, new cephalosporins are the basis for the actual indications to open up new and exciting prospects for serious infections in the future. In future, patients will be addressed with the desirable approach to sepsis and serious infections in terms of their clinical situation, inherent features of the host, the sensitivity profile, and local epidemiology, for which evidence of the use of new cephalosporin in the treatment of severe infections will fill the remaining gaps.

New-Generation Antibiotics for Treatment of Gram-Positive Infections: A Review with Focus on Endocarditis and Osteomyelitis

Infective endocarditis, osteomyelitis, and osteosynthesis-associated infections are mostly caused by Gram-positive bacteria. They are often difficult to treat and are associated with a poor prognosis. In the past 20 years, nine antibiotic drugs with predominant activity against Gram-positive bacteria have been introduced and approved by the Food and Drug Administration or the European Medicines Agency: ceftaroline, daptomycin, telavancin, dalbavancin, oritavancin, linezolid, tedizolid, delafloxacin, and omadacycline. This narrative review aims to provide an overview on these antibiotics with a special focus on their use in infective endocarditis, osteomyelitis, and osteosynthesis-associated infections. Although some of these approved antibiotics are promising, they should not be used as first- or second-line therapy, awaiting more clinical data.

Ceftaroline fosamil: clinical experience after 23-month prescription in a tertiary hospital

OBJECTIVE

To determine the indications, success rate and adverse effects of ceftaroline fosamil treatment in a tertiary hospital.

METHODS

In total, 84 cases from February 2018 to December 2019 were retrospectively analysed. No exclusion criteria were applied.

RESULTS

Eighty-four patients, with a median age of 70 years, of which, 6.7% (56) were male, were treated with ceftaroline fosamil for a median of 14 days. Most indications were off-label, including 29 endocarditis (34.5%), 14 bacteraemia (16.6%), 5 Central nervous system (CNS) infections (6%) and 19 osteoarticular infections (22.6%). Staphylococcus aureus was the most frequently isolated microorganism, including 28 methicillin-sensitive S. aureus (MSSA; 33.3%) and 14 methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA; 16.7%), followed by coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (23, 27.4%). The main reason for ceftaroline fosamil prescription was the failure of previous treatment (41.7% of cases). Treatment was successful in 60/84 patients (71.4%) and failed clinically or microbiologically in 14 (16.7%). Eight patients died for a reason not related to the infection and two were found to have a non-infectious condition. Twenty-two of thirty-five (62.8%) patients prescribed ceftaroline because of failure of previous treatment improved, including eight endocarditis and seven bacteraemia. Adverse effects were reported in five patients (5.9%) including neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, transaminases elevation and creatinine elevation; all except one were mild and all resolved after discontinuation of treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Ceftaroline fosamil is a well-tolerated cephalosporine, effective against multi- resistant gram-positive and many gram-negative microorganisms. Our experience suggests that it is effective as a rescue or first-line therapy in other indications than those currently approved.

Ceftaroline activity against Staphylococcus aureus isolated from patients with infective endocarditis, worldwide (2010-2019)

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the antimicrobial activity of ceftaroline against Staphylococcus aureus isolated from patients with infective endocarditis (IE).

METHODS

23,833 S. aureus isolates were collected consecutively from patients with bloodstream infections (BSI) from 2010 to 2019, via the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program, including 396 isolates from patients with a diagnosis of IE. Isolates were collected from 340 medical centers worldwide and susceptibility tested by reference broth microdilution in a monitoring laboratory.

RESULTS

The oxacillin resistance (MRSA) rate was 29.0% among IE isolates, and was higher in North America (40.3%) than in Europe (25.4%) or the Latin America/Asia-Pacific region (LATAM-APAC; 18.6%). Ceftaroline was active against 95.2% of IE isolates (MIC50/90, 0.25/1 mg/L), with ceftaroline susceptibility higher in North America (99.2%) and LATAM-APAC (98.3%) than in Europe (92.0%). Among MRSA isolates from IE (n = 115; MIC50/90, 1/2 mg/L), ceftaroline susceptibility was 98.0% in North America, 90.9% in LATAM-APAC, and 68.5% in Europe. Among BSI isolates, MRSA rates were 43.6% in North America and 25.6% in Europe, while ceftaroline susceptibility rates were 98.1% in North America and 95.4% in Europe.

CONCLUSIONS

Ceftaroline demonstrated potent in vitro activity against a large collection of S. aureus isolates recovered from patients with BSI, including IE.

Bacteremia due to Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus: An Update on New Therapeutic Approaches

Vancomycin and daptomycin are options for the initial treatment of patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia. Treatment options for persistent MRSA bacteremia or bacteremia due to vancomycin-intermediate or vancomycin-resistant strains include daptomycin, ceftaroline, and combination therapies. There is a critical need for high-level evidence from clinical trials to allow optimally informed decisions in the treatment of MRSA bacteremia.

Acute infectious osteomyelitis in children: new treatment strategies for an old enemy

BACKGROUND

Acute osteomyelitis still represents a significant clinical challenge, with an increasing incidence in paediatric population. A careful assessment and a rapid diagnosis with proper timing and choice of empirical antimicrobial therapy are necessary to avoid sequelae. The initial treatment should consist of empirical antibiotic therapy, to cover the major responsible pathogens in each age group.

DATA SOURCES

We made a literature search with PubMed and Cochrane database from 2000 to 2019 in English, French, and Spanish languages using the key words "osteomyelitis, children, clinical, diagnosis, and treatment".

RESULTS

The child's clinical features, age, and the microbiological profile of the geographic area should be evaluated for diagnosis and in the choice of antibiotic treatment. Latest data suggest the administration of intravenous antibiotics for a short period, with subsequent oral therapy, according to the improvement of clinical status and inflammatory markers. For children older than 3 months, the shift to oral medications is already possible after a short course of intravenous therapy, until recovery. The timing for the shift from cefazolin to cephalexin or cefuroxime, intravenous clindamycin to oral clindamycin, and intravenous ceftriaxone + oxacillin to oral equivalents will be decided according to the improvement of clinical status and inflammatory markers. We also present the approach to osteomyelitis due to difficult pathogens, such as Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and Panton-Valentine leukocidin (PVL)-positive S. aureus infections.

CONCLUSION

In this review, we present the current approach to the clinical diagnosis and management of osteomyelitis in childhood, with an update on recent recommendations, as a useful instrument to understand the rationale of antibiotic therapy.

The Emerging Role of β-Lactams in the Treatment of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Bloodstream Infections

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bloodstream infections (BSI) are associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. Monotherapy with first-line antimicrobials such as vancomycin (VAN; glycopeptide) and daptomycin (DAP; lipopeptide) are inadequate in some cases due to reduced antibiotic susceptibilities or therapeutic failure. In recent years, β-lactam antibiotics have emerged as a potential option for combination therapy with VAN and DAP that may meet an unmet therapeutic need for MRSA BSI. Ceftaroline (CPT), the only commercially available β-lactam in the United States with intrinsic in vitro activity against MRSA, has been increasingly studied in the setting of VAN and DAP failures. Novel combinations of first-line agents (VAN and DAP) with β-lactams have been the subject of many recent investigations due to in vitro findings such as the "seesaw effect," where β-lactam susceptibility may be improved in the presence of decreased glycopeptide and lipopeptide susceptibility. The combination of CPT and DAP, in particular, has become the focus of many scientific evaluations, due to intrinsic anti-MRSA activities and potent in vitro synergistic activity against various MRSA strains. This article reviews the available literature describing these innovative therapeutic approaches for MRSA BSI, focusing on preclinical and clinical studies, and evaluates the potential benefits and limitations of each strategy.

Effect of Ceftaroline, Vancomycin, Gentamicin, Macrolides, and Ciprofloxacin against Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Isolates: An In Vitro Study

Background: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infection remains a challenging threat because of limited treatment options. Ceftaroline was identified as having potent anti-MRSA activity. Aim: To evaluate the susceptibility of MRSA to gentamicin, macrolides, ciprofloxacin, vancomycin, and ceftaroline and to perform molecular characterization of different resistance genes as aminoglycoside modifying enzyme genes, ermA and ermC, and vanA and vanB genes. Patients and Methods: One hundred non-duplicate MRSA strains were isolated from different samples of hospitalized patients in Cairo University teaching hospitals from November 2015 to August 2016. Determination of antibiotic susceptibility was done using disk diffusion test and minimum inhibitory concentration followed by detection of resistance genes by multiplex polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Results: Of 100 MRSA isolates, 63 (63%) were resistant to gentamicin, erythromycin, clindamycin, and ciprofloxacin, however, all were sensitive to ceftaroline. Fifteen isolates (15%) were vancomycin intermediate resistant and were sensitive to ceftaroline as well. Conclusion: Ceftaroline was potent against MRSA, which was found to be non-susceptible to vancomycin, ciprofloxacin, erythromycin, clindamycin, and gentamicin and it may represent a successful treatment for MRSA infections.

Ceftobiprole versus daptomycin in Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia: a novel protocol for a double-blind, Phase III trial

Although Staphylococcus aureus is a common cause of bacteremia, treatment options are limited. The need for new therapies is particularly urgent for methicillin-resistant S. aureus bacteremia (SAB). Ceftobiprole is an advanced-generation, broad-spectrum cephalosporin with activity against both methicillin-susceptible and -resistant S. aureus. This is a Phase III, randomized, double-blind, active-controlled, parallel-group, multicenter, two-part study to establish the efficacy and safety of ceftobiprole compared with daptomycin in the treatment of SAB, including infective endocarditis. Anticipated enrollment is 390 hospitalized adult patients, aged ≥18 years, with confirmed or suspected complicated SAB. The primary end point is overall success rate. Target completion of the study is in the second half of 2021.

Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03138733

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: an overview of basic and clinical research

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is one of the most successful modern pathogens. The same organism that lives as a commensal and is transmitted in both health-care and community settings is also a leading cause of bacteraemia, endocarditis, skin and soft tissue infections, bone and joint infections and hospital-acquired infections. Genetically diverse, the epidemiology of MRSA is primarily characterized by the serial emergence of epidemic strains. Although its incidence has recently declined in some regions, MRSA still poses a formidable clinical threat, with persistently high morbidity and mortality. Successful treatment remains challenging and requires the evaluation of both novel antimicrobials and adjunctive aspects of care, such as infectious disease consultation, echocardiography and source control. In this Review, we provide an overview of basic and clinical MRSA research and summarize the expansive body of literature on the epidemiology, transmission, genetic diversity, evolution, surveillance and treatment of MRSA.

Multicenter Cohort of Patients With Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia Receiving Daptomycin Plus Ceftaroline Compared With Other MRSA Treatments

Background

Daptomycin and ceftaroline (DAP-CPT) have been used for persistent methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (MRSAB), but have rarely been compared with other therapies. This study provides an exploratory analysis of patients placed on DAP-CPT vs standard of care (SOC) for MRSAB.

Methods

This is a retrospective, matched cohort study MRSAB patients at 4 hospitals in the United States. Patients receiving DAP-CPT for ≥72 hours at any point in therapy were matched 2:1 when possible, 1:1 otherwise, to SOC, first by infection source, then age and renal function. SOC was empiric treatment with vancomycin or daptomycin and any subsequent combination antibiotic(s), except for DAP-CPT.

Results

Fifty-eight patients received DAP-CPT with 113 matched SOC. Ninety-six percent of SOC received vancomycin, and 56% (63/113) escalated therapy at least once in the treatment course. Twenty-four patients received DAP-CPT within 72 hours of index culture; 2 (8.3%) died within 30 days vs 14.2% (16/113) with SOC (P > .05). Subgroup analysis identified numerically lower mortality in DAP-CPT patients with a Charlson comorbidity index ≥3, endovascular source, and receipt of DAP-CPT within 72 hours of index culture. The median MRSAB duration was 9.3 vs 4.8 days for DAP-CPT and SOC, respectively. DAP-CPT was initiated on day 6 on average; after receipt of DAP-CPT, MRSAB duration was 3.3 days.

Conclusions

DAP-CPT treatment is often delayed in MRSAB. Combination therapy may be more beneficial if initiated earlier, particularly in patients at higher risk for mortality. Blinded, randomized, prospective studies are needed to eliminate selection bias inherent in retrospective analyses when examining DAP-CPT vs SOC.

Off-label use of ceftaroline fosamil: A systematic review

Ceftaroline fosamil is a fifth-generation cephalosporin with anti-methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) activity. It has been approved by the EMA and FDA for the treatment of adults and children with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP) and acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI). However, ceftaroline fosamil has a broad spectrum of activity, and a good safety and tolerability profile, so is frequently used off-label. The aim of this systematic review was to summarize the safety and efficacy of off-label use of ceftaroline. The review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL databases (2010-2018) were searched using as the main term ceftaroline fosamil and its synonyms in combination with names of infectious diseases of interest. A total of 21 studies with 1901 patients were included: the most common off-label indications for ceftaroline use were bacteremia (n=595), endocarditis (n=171), osteoarticular infections (n=368), hospital-acquired pneumonia (n=115) and meningitis (n=23). The most common reasons for off-label use were persistent or recurrent infection after standard treatment or non-susceptibility to vancomycin and daptomycin. Clinical success was evaluated in 933 patients, and 724 (77%) of these reached this positive outcome. Incidence of adverse events (AEs) was reported in 11 studies. In 83 (9%) cases there were AEs related to the use of ceftaroline; the most common reported AEs were nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, rash and neutropenia. The review results show that ceftaroline may be used in clinical settings other than those currently approved; however, the use of ceftaroline in these contexts deserves further investigation.

Comparative-effectiveness of ceftaroline and daptomycin as first-line MRSA therapy for patients with sepsis admitted to hospitals in the United States Veterans Health Care System

Objectives: This study compared hospital readmission and mortality for patients with sepsis who received ceftaroline or daptomycin as first-line MRSA therapy.Methods: This retrospective comparative-effectiveness study included adults ≥18 years old hospitalized in the United States Veterans Health Care System with sepsis between 10/1/2010-9/30/2014, who received ceftaroline or daptomycin within 14 days of hospital admission as the first antibiotic effective against methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). Patients with pneumonia, and those who received both study drugs, were excluded. Baseline characteristics were compared using Chi-square, Fischer's exact, Student's t, and Wilcoxon Rank Sum tests. Patient outcomes were compared with multivariable logistic regression models.Results: 409 patients were included (ceftaroline = 67, daptomycin = 342). Ceftaroline patients were older, less likely to be Black, more likely to have diabetes with complications, and had higher Charlson comorbidity scores. Median (interquartile range) time from admission to drug initiation was 1 (0-1) day for ceftaroline and 1 (1-3) day for daptomycin (p = 0.01). Unadjusted hospital readmission rates for ceftaroline and daptomycin, respectively, were: 30-day (25%/37%, p = 0.06), 60-day (27%/44%, p = 0.008), and 90-day (28%/46%, p = 0.01). Unadjusted mortality rates were: in-hospital (7%/12%, p = 0.4), 30-day (3%/9%, p = 0.1), 60-day (6%/12%, p = 0.2), and 90-day (7%/15%, p = 0.1). In multivariable models with all divergent baseline characteristics included as covariates, patients treated with ceftaroline were less likely to experience (OR, 95% CI): 30/60/90-day hospital readmission (0.54, 0.29-0.98; 0.42, 0.23-0.76; 0.42, 0.23-0.75) and 30/60/90-day mortality (0.23, 0.04-0.82; 0.34, 0.10-0.93; 0.34, 0.11-0.86).Conclusion: In patients with sepsis, ceftaroline was associated with fewer hospital readmissions and lower mortality as compared to daptomycin. Prospective investigations in larger, more generalized cohorts are needed to examine outcomes with specific MRSA therapies.

Comparison of Neutropenia Associated with Ceftaroline or Ceftriaxone in Patients Receiving at Least 7 Days of Therapy for Severe Infections

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Ceftarolinefosamil is a cephalosporin with broad clinical utility; however, limited data suggest that prolonged ceftaroline exposure may be associated with neutropenia. The objective was to determine drug and patient factors associated with neutropenia in patients receiving ceftaroline or ceftriaxone for deep-seated infections.

DESIGN

Retrospective, ratio-matched cohort study.

SETTING

Four acute-care hospitals within an urban health care system.

PATIENTS

A total of 176 hospitalized adults who received definitive ceftaroline (44 patients) or ceftriaxone (132 patients) therapy for at least 7 days between January 2013 and April 2017 for any of the following indications: bone and joint infections (BJI), infective endocarditis (IE), or bloodstream infections (BSI).

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The primary outcome was development of neutropenia while receiving cephalosporin therapy, defined as an absolute neutrophil count (ANC) <1500 cells/mm3 . Neutropenia severity and patient characteristics were described and compared between the ceftaroline and ceftriaxone groups. The median (interquartile range [IQR]) antibiotic prescription duration was 41 (29-44) days for the ceftaroline group and 40 (28-44) days for the ceftriaxone group (p=0.9). Cephalosporin indications were 112 (64%) BJI, 27 (15%) BSI, 16 (9%) IE, and 21 (12%) multiple infections; ceftaroline was more commonly used in BJI (p=0.03), and ceftriaxone was more commonly used in IE (p=0.01). Neutropenia developed in 16 (9%) patients: 8 (18%) in the ceftaroline group and 8 (6%) in the ceftriaxone group (p=0.03). Median (IQR) onset to neutropenia was 22 (15-28) days, and median (IQR) change in ANC was 2.86 (1.50-4.08) cells/mm3 ; most cases of neutropenia were mild (12 patients [75%]). The median (IQR) time to mild or moderate-severe neutropenia was not significantly different (p=0.68): 22 (14-28) and 22 (21-36) days, respectively. Treatment was discontinued in 4 (25%) patients due to neutropenia. Ceftaroline use was independently associated with neutropenia (adjusted odds ratio 3.2, 95% confidence interval 1.2-10.5) after adjusting for lower body mass index strata (18.5-25 kg/m2 ).

CONCLUSION

Prolonged ceftaroline use was an independent risk factor for developing mild neutropenia. Clinicians should be cognizant of ANC monitoring in scenarios where prolonged ceftaroline courses are prescribed.

Ceftaroline fosamil for the treatment of Gram-positive endocarditis: CAPTURE study experience

BACKGROUND

The clinical experience of ceftaroline fosamil (CPT-F) therapy for Gram-positive infective endocarditis is reported from CAPTURE, a retrospective study conducted in the USA.

METHODS

Data, including patient demographics, medical history, risk factors, microbiological aetiology and clinical outcomes, were collected by review of patient charts between September 2013 and February 2015.

RESULTS

Patients (n=55) with Gram-positive endocarditis were treated with CPT-F. The most common risk factors were intravascular devices (43.6%), diabetes mellitus (40.0%) and injection drug use (38.2%). The most commonly isolated pathogens were meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA; 80%), meticillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA; 7.3%) and coagulase-negative staphylococci (7.3%). CPT-F was given as first-line therapy in 7.3% of patients and as second-line or later therapy in 92.7% of patients, and as monotherapy in 41.8% of patients and as concurrent therapy in 58.2% of patients. Clinical success was observed in 82.6% (19/23) of patients treated with CPT-F as monotherapy. In patients treated with CPT-F as first-line therapy or second-line or later therapy, 75.0% (3/4) and 70.6% (36/51) achieved success, respectively. Clinical success was observed in 77.3% (34/44) of patients with MRSA and 25% (1/4) of patients with MSSA. Two patients discontinued treatment with CPT-F due to an adverse event.

CONCLUSIONS

CPT-F treatment was associated with a high rate of clinical success in patients with Gram-positive infective endocarditis, including those with risk factors and infections caused by MRSA. A high rate of clinical success was observed in patients treated with CPT-F used as first- line therapy or second-line or later therapy, or as monotherapy or in combination with other antibiotics.

A Mini-Review on Ceftaroline in Bacteremia Patients with Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) Infections

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this review is to describe the outcomes of patients treated with ceftaroline in the non-Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved indication of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections in both pediatric and adult populations.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic overview was conducted by searching PubMed, Medline, and The Cochrane Library up to January 2019.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

All English-language clinical trials and case reports related to the efficacy of ceftaroline in new, not-yet-approved FDA indications in MRSA infections in pediatric or adult populations.

DATA SYNTHESIS

In the case of MRSA bacteremia (MRSAB) infections, three different randomized studies in pediatric patients showed effectiveness of ceftaroline. When used in the case of adult populations with MRSA bacteremia, a small trial of 16 patients showed 50% clinical success in patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections versus 63% clinical success in patients with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia. Another case series of six refractory case reports showed 50% clinical success of ceftaroline in patients with MRSA.

CONCLUSIONS

Although there are few case reports and limited data to date, ceftaroline fosamil should continue to be studied as an alternative therapy in MRSA infections in both pediatric and adult populations. Clinical success rates of ceftaroline were, in most cases, considered high when treating patients with MRSA infection. More clinical trials need to be studied. In the specific case of MRSA bacteremia, the treatment options remain few and ceftaroline should be extensively studied for the salvage treatment of MRSAB.

Use of Ceftaroline Fosamil in Osteomyelitis: CAPTURE Study Experience

BACKGROUND

Osteomyelitis is often challenging to treat. This analysis examined the clinical experience of patients with gram-positive osteomyelitis treated with ceftaroline fosamil in the phase 4 Clinical Assessment Program and Teflaro® Utilization Registry (CAPTURE) study.

METHODS

Data including patient demographics, past illnesses, risk factors, disease characteristics, antibiotic use, pathogens isolated, and clinical outcome were collected between September 2013 and February 2015 by review of randomly ordered patient charts from participating sites in the United States. Clinical success was defined as discontinuation of ceftaroline fosamil following clinical cure with no further need for antibiotics or clinical improvement with switch to another antibiotic treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 150 patients with gram-positive osteomyelitis were treated with ceftaroline fosamil. Most patients (117/150; 78.0%) were treated with 600 mg ceftaroline fosamil per dose; 143/150 patients (95.3%) received a dose every 12 h. The majority (89/150 patients; 59.3%) had been previously diagnosed with diabetes mellitus or peripheral arterial disease. Osteomyelitis was associated with hardware in 32/150 patients (21.3%). Methicillin-resistant and methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA; MSSA) were the most commonly isolated pathogens, observed in 93/150 (62.0%) and 21/150 (14.0%) patients, respectively. Clinical success with ceftaroline fosamil therapy was observed in 139/150 (92.7%) patients overall, 81/89 (91.0%) patients with diabetes or peripheral arterial disease, and 18/20 (90.0%) patients who had hardware implanted before ceftaroline fosamil therapy (none had hardware removed during therapy). Patients who received prior antibiotic therapy or ceftaroline fosamil as monotherapy experienced clinical success rates of 93.9% (107/114) and 91% (91/100), respectively. Among patients who received concurrent antibiotic therapy, the clinical success rate was 96.0% (48/50). Patients who were infected with MRSA or MSSA had clinical success rates of 92.5% (86/93) and 100% (21/21), respectively. A total of 2/150 (1.3%) patients discontinued ceftaroline fosamil therapy because of adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical success rates with ceftaroline fosamil were high in patients with gram-positive osteomyelitis, including those with diabetes or peripheral arterial disease and those with MRSA or MSSA.

Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Prosthetic Valve Endocarditis: Pathophysiology, Epidemiology, Clinical Presentation, Diagnosis, and Management

Staphylococcus aureus prosthetic valve endocarditis (PVE) remains among the most morbid bacterial infections, with mortality estimates ranging from 40% to 80%. The proportion of PVE cases due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) has grown in recent decades, to account for more than 15% of cases of S. aureus PVE and 6% of all cases of PVE. Because no large studies or clinical trials for PVE have been published, most guidelines on the diagnosis and management of MRSA PVE rely upon expert opinion and data from animal models or related conditions (e.g., coagulase-negative Staphylococcus infection). We performed a review of the literature on MRSA PVE to summarize data on pathogenic mechanisms and updates in epidemiology and therapeutic management and to inform diagnostic strategies and priority areas where additional clinical and laboratory data will be particularly useful to guide therapy. Major updates discussed in this review include novel diagnostics, indications for surgical management, the utility of aminoglycosides in medical therapy, and a review of newer antistaphylococcal agents used for the management of MRSA PVE.

Efficacy and safety of ceftaroline: systematic review and meta-analysis

Background:

Resistance to antibiotics is steadily increasing. Ceftaroline has a broad spectrum of activity against clinically relevant gram-positive strains including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.

Objectives:

This systematic review was conducted to evaluate whether ceftaroline is effective and safe, leading to a lower rate of treatment failures than comparators.

Material and methods:

Studies were included if they were comparing the efficacy and safety of ceftaroline with other antibiotics.

Data sources:

Using the search terms ‘ceftaroline’ or ‘ceftaroline fosamil’, a search strategy was developed. The efficacy endpoint was the rate of treatment failure, while the safety endpoint was the incidence of adverse events. Heterogeneity bias was estimated using the Q-test, and publication bias was estimated using Egger’s test. Null hypothesis was rejected if p value was less than 0.05.

Results:

Only 10 studies were included.

Synthesis of results:

The risk of treatment failure was significantly lower for ceftaroline than for comparators, and cumulative meta-analysis showed that the effect size was relevant and precise. Pooled risk ratio was 0.79 (95% confidence interval = 0.65–0.95). The rates of adverse events were similar among the studies, and there were no statistically significant differences between groups. For this endpoint, there was a significant heterogeneity among studies (p = 0.03). Pooled risk ratio for adverse events was 0.98 (95% confidence interval = 0.87–1.10), without a statistical difference.

Discussion:

The risk of treatment failure was significantly lower for ceftaroline than comparators, while the rate of adverse events was similar. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first systematic review on the efficacy and safety of ceftaroline including children and adults. A limitation is that no randomized controlled trials were found in non-complicated skin- and soft-tissue infection and non-community-acquired pneumonia infections; only few cases with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolations and no patients admitted to the intensive care unit were evaluated.

Interpretation:

Ceftaroline may be an option of treatment in complicated skin- and soft-tissue infection and community-acquired pneumonia.

Efficacy and effectiveness of Ceftaroline Fosamil in patients with pneumonia: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Pneumonia is a relevant clinical and public health issue worldwide frequently associated with infections caused by Multi-Drug Resistant (MDR) pathogens. Ceftaroline fosamil is a promising new antibiotics with broad-spectrum bacterial activity. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to assess the efficacy and the effectiveness of ceftaroline fosamil in community-acquired (CAP), hospital-acquired (HAP), healthcare-associated (HCAP) and ventilator-associated (VAP) pneumonia.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was carried out retrieving both experimental and observational studies.

RESULTS

A total of 2364 records was found and 14 manuscripts were finally considered eligible. The pooled efficacy/effectiveness was 81.2% (I2: 1.2%) in all types of pneumonia. The pooled relative risk of clinical cure was 1.1 (I2: 0.0%). The success rate was higher than 70% for infections caused by S. pneumoniae and S. aureus, including MDR pathogens.

CONCLUSIONS

Ceftaroline fosamil showed a high efficacy/effectiveness in patients with any type of pneumonia with a good safety profile.

Treatment strategies for persistent methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteraemia is a long-standing challenge to health care, often complicated by metastatic infections, treatment failure and mortality. When MRSA bacteraemia persists despite adequate initial treatment, current Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines recommend evaluation and removal of possible sources of infection. In addition, a change in therapy may be considered. The objective of this review was to explore the therapeutic options for the treatment of persistent MRSA bacteraemia.

METHODS

A literature search of PubMed, MEDLINE and Google Scholar was performed using the following search terms: [methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus OR MRSA] AND [bacteraemia OR bloodstream infection] AND [persistent OR persistence OR refractory OR treatment failure OR salvage] AND treatment. We evaluated relevant, adult, English-language, peer-reviewed studies published between 1985 and May 2018. In vitro and animal studies were considered as supportive of in vivo data.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Randomized, controlled trials are lacking. However, case series and case reports support multiple treatment options including high-dose daptomycin in combination with an antistaphylococcal β-lactam, ceftaroline, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (TMP-SMX) or fosfomycin; ceftaroline alone or in combination with vancomycin or TMP-SMX; linezolid alone or in combination with a carbapenem, or telavancin.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

Given the heterogeneity of the data, a preferred regimen has not emerged. Prescribers must take into consideration recent exposure, source control, and available synergy and clinical data. Further comparative trials are needed to establish a preferred regimen and the creation of a universal treatment algorithm.

Ceftaroline for the treatment of osteomyelitis caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: a case series

Despite limited clinical data, ceftaroline is commonly used for treatment of complicated, invasive infections caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). A retrospective chart review was conducted of adult patients receiving ceftaroline for MRSA osteomyelitis admitted between April 2011 and March 2016 at a five-hospital system. Twelve patients met the inclusion criteria. All patients received prior antimicrobial therapy with a median time to switch to ceftaroline of 45.5 days. Five of the 12 patients (41.7%) met criteria for ceftaroline failure. Patients with vertebral osteomyelitis (58%) had a longer length of stay, longer ceftaroline treatment, but similar success rates to those with non-vertebral osteomyelitis (57% vs. 60%). Ceftaroline is a viable alternative for a challenging patient population that has failed or are unable to receive other therapies.

Morbidity, mortality, and management of methicillin-resistant S. aureus bacteremia in the USA: update on antibacterial choices and understanding

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia is associated with significant healthcare costs, morbidity, and mortality in the United States. Complications of MRSA bacteremia include infective endocarditis, osteomyelitis, and sepsis, all of which are difficult to treat. Time to effective therapy and antibacterial choice greatly affect patient outcomes. Vancomycin and daptomycin remain first-line therapies; however, reports of vancomycin-associated treatment failure and reduced daptomycin susceptibility highlight the need to define alternative strategies for MRSA bacteremia treatment. In addition, several patient- and pathogen-specific factors influence the outcomes of MRSA bacteremia. It is, therefore, critical to explore the interaction between host- and pathogen-specific factors and its effect on MRSA bacteremia pathogenesis and mortality. This review discusses the factors that drive the development of MRSA bacteremia and examines alternative treatment strategies.

Comparative analysis of neutropenia in patients receiving prolonged treatment with ceftaroline

Objectives

Ceftaroline is often used in durations greater than that studied in clinical trials. Several retrospective, non-comparative studies have suggested a higher than anticipated incidence of neutropenia in patients receiving prolonged treatment with ceftaroline. We sought to determine if ceftaroline was associated with neutropenia by comparing the incidence with ceftaroline treatment with treatment with several comparative antibiotics.

Methods

Patients receiving 14 or more consecutive days of treatment with ceftaroline were compared with patients receiving cefazolin, daptomycin, linezolid, nafcillin or vancomycin (control group). The primary outcome was the development of neutropenia. Multivariate logistic regression and propensity score weighting using inverse probability weights with regression adjustment were used to control for confounding variables.

Results

A total of 753 patients were included (53 that received ceftaroline and 700 that received a comparative antibiotic). Ceftaroline was associated with a greater incidence of neutropenia as compared with the control group (17.0% versus 3.9%, P < 0.001). Several covariates were also associated with neutropenia and included younger age, lower baseline absolute neutrophil count, liver disease and bone and joint infections. After controlling for these confounders, receipt of ceftaroline continued to be associated with the development of neutropenia (adjusted OR 3.97, P = 0.003). Analysis after propensity score weighting confirmed this finding.

Conclusions

The results of this study suggest that prolonged treatment with ceftaroline is associated with a greater incidence of neutropenia as compared with other antibiotics that are often used for treatment of staphylococcal infections. Careful monitoring of absolute neutrophil count is recommended in patients receiving >14 days of ceftaroline.

Treating Central Catheter-Associated Bacteremia Due to Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus: Beyond Vancomycin

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus is a frequent cause of hospital-associated infections, including central catheter-associated bacteremia. Vancomycin has been the drug of choice for treating this type of bacteremia for decades in patients who have no contraindications to the antibiotic. However, resistance to vancomycin is an emerging problem. Newer antibiotics approved by the Food and Drug Administration have activity against methicillin-resistant S aureus Some of the antibiotics also have activity against strains of S aureus that are intermediately susceptible or resistant to vancomycin. This article uses a case study to highlight the clinical signs of vancomycin failure and describes the indications for and appropriate use of alternative antimicrobials such as ceftaroline, daptomycin, linezolid, tigecycline, and telavancin. (Critical Care Nurse 2016;36[4]:46-57).

Successful treatment of community-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus purulent myopericarditis

A previously healthy 48-year-old active duty man, who had been treated for an elbow abscess 3 weeks earlier, presented to an emergency department in Bahrain with tachycardia, pericardial friction rub and jugular venous distention. Cardiac tamponade was confirmed on transthoracic echocardiogram and he was taken for emergent pericardiocentesis. Pericardial fluid cultures grew community-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus Despite ongoing treatment with intravenous vancomycin, he developed a recurrent fibrinous pericardial effusion and constrictive pericarditis requiring pericardiectomy. Though he initially did well postoperatively, he developed drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms syndrome in response to vancomycin. He was transitioned to ceftaroline and started on high-dose steroids. He recovered during a week-long admission and was discharged home. Several weeks later at follow-up he was doing well and had resumed moderate intensity exercise.

Early Use of Ceftaroline Fosamil in the United States Veterans Health Care System

BACKGROUND

Ceftaroline fosamil is US Food and Drug Administration-approved for acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections and community-acquired bacterial pneumonia, but it is not known how ceftaroline is being used in real-world settings or how adverse effects (AEs) and mortality compare to clinical trials.

OBJECTIVE

This study describes ceftaroline use, AEs, and mortality in US Veterans Health Administration (VHA) hospital patients.

METHODS

This phase IV, population-based, epidemiologic study analyzed patients ≥18 years old who received one or more ceftaroline doses within 14 days of admission to 69 VHA hospitals in 41 US states/territories from 1 October 2010 to 30 September 2014. VHA repository data were linked using unique patient identifiers. Diagnoses and AEs were determined using ICD9-CM and CSS codes. Demographics, AEs within 30 days of therapy initiation, and all-cause in-hospital mortality were summarized using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

764 Patients met study criteria. Patients were 97% male and 56% White, with a median age of 61 years and a Charlson score of 6. Diagnoses included skin (40%), sepsis (30%), osteomyelitis (25%), diabetic foot (22%), pneumonia (16%), bacteremia (11%), endocarditis (6%), meningitis (2%), and device (2%) infections. Ceftaroline was used first-line (37%), second-line (56%), and third-line or greater (7%). Patients received ceftaroline a median of 3 days after hospital admission. All-cause in-hospital mortality rates were: overall (5%), skin (2%), sepsis (9%), osteomyelitis (3%), diabetic foot (1%), pneumonia (13%), bacteremia (6%), endocarditis (11%), meningitis (6%), and device (13%). Eosinophilia, leukopenia, leukocytosis, fibromyalgia, myalgia and myositis, and polymyalgia rates were <1% each.

CONCLUSIONS

Ceftaroline is used in VHA hospitals for various diagnoses. Mortality was low and comparable with rates from clinical trials. Additional studies comparing ceftaroline to other drugs used in similar situations are needed.

Ceftaroline for Severe Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Infections: A Systematic Review

Ceftaroline is approved by the Food and Drug Administration for acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections and community-acquired bacterial pneumonia, including cases with concurrent bacteremia. Use for serious methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections has risen for a multitude of reasons. The aim of this article is to review the literature evaluating clinical outcomes and safety of ceftaroline prescribed for serious MRSA infections. We conducted a literature search in Ovid (Medline) and PubMed for reputable case reports, clinical trials, and reviews focusing on the use of ceftaroline for treatment of MRSA infections. Twenty-two manuscripts published between 2010 and 2016 met inclusion criteria. Mean clinical cure was 74% across 379 patients treated with ceftaroline for severe MRSA infections. Toxicities were infrequent. Ceftaroline treatment resulted in clinical and microbiologic cure for severe MRSA infections. Close monitoring of hematological parameters is necessary with prolonged courses of ceftaroline.

Ceftaroline fosamil monotherapy for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia: a comparative clinical outcomes study

OBJECTIVES

Vancomycin is the treatment of choice for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia; however, its use has been subject to scrutiny due to failure in severe infections. Ceftaroline fosamil (CPT-F) is approved for MRSA acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections, but not for bloodstream infections. The clinical outcomes of treatment with CPT-F in patients with MRSA bacteremia were evaluated.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with MRSA bacteremia at Henry Ford Hospital in Detroit, Michigan, USA, involving isolates with a vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration ≥1.0mg/l and susceptible in vitro to CPT-F, were systematically reviewed retrospectively. Ceftaroline fosamil-treated patients were matched with at least two vancomycin- and/or one daptomycin-treated control patient based on age-patients age 65 years or greater or less than 65 years of age. Outcomes evaluated included the duration of hospitalization, duration of therapy, adverse events, relapse, hospital readmission, and death.

RESULTS

Thirty consecutive cases of MRSA bacteremia treated with CPT-F during the period May 2011 to June 2013 were identified; these patients were matched to 56 MRSA bacteremia patients treated with vancomycin and 46 MRSA bacteremia patients treated with daptomycin. The primary source of MRSA bacteremia in the cohort treated with CPT-F was endocarditis (n=7, 23%), skin/wound (n=9, 30%), and bone/joint (n=8, 27%). The MRSA bacteremia in those treated with CPT-F was community-acquired in 43% of cases, healthcare-associated in 43%, and hospital-acquired in 13%. The mean length of hospital stay for these patients was 22 days. The overall 30-day mortality rate was 13% (n=4) in CPT-F patients versus 24% (n=11) in daptomycin patients and 11% (n=6) in vancomycin patients (p=0.188).

CONCLUSIONS

CPT-F demonstrated comparable clinical outcomes in MRSA bacteremia patients compared with the other agents, especially as salvage therapy.