Evaluation of Dalbavancin Use on Clinical Outcomes, Cost-Savings, and Adherence at a Large Safety Net Hospital

Use of lipoglycopeptides for moderate to severe ABSSSI in the emergency department

The burden of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) continue to plague the healthcare system. One approach to managing moderate-to-severe ABSSSI in low-risk patients involves use of a single dose lipoglycopeptide (LGP), dalbavancin or oritavancin, in the emergency department (ED) and discharge to home with follow-up care. Limited ED studies indicate decreased hospital stays, ED revisits, readmissions, and healthcare costs, as well as improved patient satisfaction with use of these antibiotics. However, existing literature has limitations and gaps, such as insufficient quantifiable data on patient selection criteria, outcome predictors, and risk factors leading to treatment failure. Moreover, there is lack of research on the impact of LGPs on organizational productivity, patient quality of life, and utility in indications beyond ABSSSI. This review focuses on the role of long-acting LGPs in the ED setting for select patients presenting with ABSSSI, aiming to avoid hospitalizations, expedite patient discharge, and prevent readmissions while acknowledging potential limitations of therapy. Additionally, it provides insights into strategies and considerations specifically relevant to implementing this therapeutic approach in the ED.

Management of People Who Inject Drugs With Serious Injection-Related Infections in an Outpatient Setting: A Scoping Review

Background

People who inject drugs (PWID) are at risk of severe injection-related infection (SIRI), which is challenging to manage. We conducted a scoping review to map the existing evidence on management of PWID with SIRI in an outpatient setting.

Methods

We conducted a literature search in MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Central, and CINAHL from their inception until 6 December 2023. Studies were included if they focused on PWID with SIRI requiring ≥2 weeks of antibiotic therapy, with a proportion of management occurring outside hospitals. Studies were categorized inductively and described.

Results

The review included 68 articles with the following themes. PWID generally prefer outpatient management if deemed safe and effective. Most studies support outpatient management, finding it to be as effective and safe as inpatient care, as well as less costly. Successful transition to outpatient management requires multidisciplinary discharge planning with careful consideration of patient-specific factors. Emerging evidence supports the effectiveness and safety of outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy, long-acting lipoglycopeptides, and oral antibiotic therapy, each having unique advantages and disadvantages. Various specialized outpatient settings, such as skilled nursing facilities and residential treatment centers, are available for management of these infections. Finally, all patients are likely to benefit from adjunctive addiction care.

Conclusions

Emerging evidence indicates that outpatient management is effective and safe for SIRI, which is preferred by most PWID. Key components of outpatient management include multidisciplinary discharge planning, appropriate antibiotic modality, suitable care settings, and adjunctive addiction care. These elements should be carefully tailored to patient needs and circumstances.

Current practices and challenges of outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy: a narrative review

Extended hospitalization for infection management increases inpatient care costs and the risk of healthcare-associated adverse events, including infections. The growing global demand for healthcare, the diminishing availability of hospital beds and an increasing patient preference for care within their own home have been the primary drivers of the expansion of hospital-in-the-home programmes. Such programmes include the use of IV antimicrobials in outpatient settings, known as outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT). However, OPAT practices vary globally. This review article aims to describe the current OPAT practices and challenges worldwide. OPAT practice begins with patient evaluation and selection using eligibility criteria, which requires collaboration between the interdisciplinary OPAT team, patients and caregivers. Depending on care requirements, eligible patients may be enrolled to various models of care, receiving medication by healthcare professionals at outpatient infusion centres, hospital clinics, home visits or through self-administration. OPAT can be used for the management of many infections where an effective oral treatment option is lacking. Various classes of parenteral antimicrobials, including β-lactams, aminoglycosides, glycopeptides, fluoroquinolones and antifungals such as echinocandins, are used globally in OPAT practice. Despite its benefits, OPAT has numerous challenges, including complications from medication administration devices, antimicrobial side effects, monitoring requirements, antimicrobial instability, patient non-adherence, patient OPAT rejection, and challenges related to OPAT team structure and administration, all of which impact its outcome. A negative outcome could include unplanned hospital readmission. Future research should focus on mitigating these challenges to enable optimization of the OPAT service and thereby maximize the documented benefits for the healthcare system, patients and healthcare providers.

Cost evaluation of continuation of therapy with dalbavancin compared to standard-of-care antibiotics alone in hospitalized persons who inject drugs with severe gram-positive infections

PURPOSE

Persons who inject drugs (PWID) are at risk for severe gram-positive infections and may require prolonged hospitalization and intravenous (IV) antibiotic therapy. Dalbavancin (DBV) is a long-acting lipoglycopeptide that may reduce costs and provide effective treatment in this population.

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of PWID with severe gram-positive infections. Patients admitted from January 1, 2017, to November 1, 2019 (standard-of-care [SOC] group) and from November 15, 2019, to March 31, 2022 (DBV group) were included. The primary outcome was the total cost to the healthcare system. Secondary outcomes included hospital days saved and treatment failure.

RESULTS

A total of 87 patients were included (37 in the DBV group and 50 in the SOC group). Patients were a median of 34 years old and were predominantly Caucasian (82%). Staphylococcus aureus (82%) was the most common organism, and bacteremia (71%) was the most common type of infection. Compared to the SOC group, the DBV group would have had a median of 14 additional days of hospitalization if they had stayed to complete their therapy (P = 0.014). The median total cost to the healthcare system was significantly lower in the DBV group than in the SOC group ($31,698.00 vs $45,093.50; P = 0.035). The rate of treatment failure was similar between the groups (32.4% in the DBV group vs 36% in the SOC group; P = 0.729).

CONCLUSION

DBV is a cost-saving alternative to SOC IV antibiotics for severe gram-positive infections in PWID, with similar treatment outcomes. Larger prospective studies, including other patient populations, may demonstrate additional benefit.

Dalbavancin Use in Persons Who Use Drugs May Increase Adherence Without Increasing Cost

Background: Dalbavancin (DAL) may obviate concerns regarding misuse of IV access in persons who use drugs (PWUD) completing treatment for infections in an outpatient setting. However, hesitancy to adopt its use exists due to the cost-prohibitive nature of DAL and perceived issues with insurance reimbursement. Our study looks to determine the financial impact of DAL use in actual, measured cost, and health care utilization, data as well as the effect on treatment completion rates. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort comparing cost information and treatment completion rates of patients who received DAL to a random sample of patients with Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia prior to the institutional availability of DAL. Results: From June 2020 to January 2022, 29 PWUD received DAL. Dalbavancin use resulted in the completion of intended duration in 19 patients (66%) compared with 11 (55%) without DAL. The contribution margin with DAL use was $7180 compared with $6655 without; this was not statistically significant (P = 0.47). Conclusion: Dalbavancin use in PWUD may increase treatment completion, with no statistically significant difference in contribution margins.

Clinical, organizational, and pharmacoeconomic perspectives of dalbavancin vs standard of care in the infectious disease network

Introduction

The therapeutic approach to the patient with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infection (ABSSSI) and complicated infections often involves the early transition from intravenous to oral therapy (early switch) or early discharge. Our study aimed to evaluate sustainable and innovative care models that can be transferred to community healthcare and the economic impact of dalbavancin therapy vs Standard of Care (SoC) therapy for the treatment of ABSSSI and other Gram-positive infections including those by multidrug-resistant organisms. We also described the organization of an infectious disease network that allows optimizing the treatment of ABSSSI and other complex infections with dalbavancin.

Materials and Methods

We retrospectively studied all patients treated with dalbavancin in the University Hospital "S. Anna" of Ferrara, Italy, between November 2016 and December 2022. The clinical information of each patient was collected from the hospital's SAP database and used to evaluate the impact of dalbavancin in early discharge with reduction of length of stay promoting dehospitalization and in improving adherence to antibiotic therapy.

Results

A total of 287 patients (165 males and 122 females) were included in the study of which 62 were treated with dalbavancin. In 13/62 patients dalbavancin was administered in a single dose at the completion of therapy to facilitate early discharge. Assuming a 12-day hospitalization required for the treatment of ABSSSI or to complete the treatment of osteomyelitis or spondilodiscitis, the treatment with dalbavancin results in a cost reduction of more than €3,200 per single patient compared to SoC (dancomycin, linezolid or vancomycin).

Conclusions

Dalbavancin has proven to be a valid therapeutic aid in the organization of a territorial infectious disease network given its prolonged action, which allows the dehospitalization with management of even patients with complex infections in outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy.

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.

Real-World Data Regarding Dalbavancin Use before and during the COVID-19 Pandemic-A Single-Center Retrospective Study

Dalbavancin is a semisynthetic lipoglycopeptide, which possesses great potential for bactericidal activity similar to antimicrobials with the same mechanism of action, such as vancomycin and teicoplanin. Due to its very prolonged half-life, it can be used in a single or two-dose regimen to treat infections by Gram-positive microorganisms, even resistant ones, such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). Currently, it is approved only for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs). The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical and microbiological characteristics of patients to whom dalbavancin was administered at the University Hospital of Heraklion and evaluate its use in regard to the COVID-19 pandemic. In total, 146 patients were included in this retrospective cohort study evaluating the use of dalbavancin from the first time it was used in 2017 until the end of 2022. The median age was 68 years (range: 21-96 years), and 86 (59%) patients were male. The most common indications for dalbavancin use were osteoarticular infections in 43%, followed by ABSSSIs in 37%, and cardiovascular infections in 10%. Dalbavancin was used empirically in one out of three patients, most commonly with the indication of ABSSSIs, and most commonly in the post-COVID-19 era. The most frequently isolated pathogens were coagulase-negative staphylococci in 70%, S. aureus in 27%, Enterococcus spp. in 22%, and Streptococcus spp. in 8%, while one out of three infections were polymicrobial. In 12% of patients, the infection was not cured, but no patients died. For patients with ABSSSIs, endocarditis and vascular infections, and bacteremia, the cure rates were more than 90%, and in osteoarticular infections, the cure rate was 76%. Thus, dalbavancin has great potential for use in complicated and invasive infections that may require prolonged intravenous antimicrobial treatment. However, further studies are required to formally investigate its role in such infections.

Dalbavancin in Bone and Joint Infections: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Approved for acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections, dalbavancin (DBV) has gradually acquired over the years a role as an off-label treatment for several infections caused by Gram-positive bacteria even in other anatomical sites. Osteoarticular (OA) infections are one of the most difficult-to-treat infections and, since the absence of recommendations, clinicians use different and heterogenic DBV dosing schedule regimens for the off-label treatment of osteomyelitis, spondylodiscitis, and septic arthritis. Our aim is to systematically review the current literature to describe DBV administration schedules and their outcome in OA infections.

METHODS

According to the 2020 updated PRISMA guidelines, all peer-reviewed articles regarding the use of DBV in OA infections were included. We conducted a literature search on PubMed and Cochrane Controlled Trials.

RESULTS

A total of 23 studies and 450 patients were included, prevalently male (144/195, 73.8%) and diabetic (53/163, 32.5%). Overall, 280 (280/388, 72.2%) osteomyelitis, 79 (79/388, 20.4%) spondylodiscitis, and 29 (29/388, 7.5%) septic arthritis were considered. Staphylococcus aureus (164/243, 67.5%) was the most common pathogen isolated. A previous treatment failure (45/96, 46.9%) was the main reason for a switch to a long-acting antibiotic. Most patients were successfully cured with DBV (318/401, 79.3%). A source control was performed in most patients with a favourable outcome (80.4%), while MRSA was prevalently isolated in people with an unfavourable outcome (57%). While a higher percentage of success was found in people who received three doses of DBV 1 week apart (92.3%), a higher rate of treatment failure was recorded in cases of when the DBV cycle was composed of less than two or more than four doses (27.8%).

CONCLUSIONS

DBV has shown to be effective as a treatment for OA infections. The most favourable outcome was found in patients receiving three doses of DBV and with an adequate surgical management prior to antibiotic treatment. Although a rigorous administration schedule does not exist, DBV is a viable treatment option in the management of OA infections.