Linezolid: a pharmacoeconomic review of its use in serious Gram-positive infections

Linezolid for the treatment of postneurosurgical infection caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus

Background

Postneurosurgical infection (PNSI) is a major problem. Linezolid is a bacteriostatic oxazolidinone antibiotic with a highly activity against Gram-positive cocci resistant to methicillin and a good cerebrospinal fluid penetration. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of linezolid in the treatment of PNSI caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus (MRS).

Methods

We conducted an observational study for all patients over 14 years old and diagnosed with MRS PNSI. Demographic, clinical, and laboratory information were collected prospectively.

Results

A total of 10 patients with PNSI (6 meningitis, 2 ventriculitis, and 2 subdural empyema) received linezolid. MRS isolated was Staphylococcus aureus in seven cases and Staphylococcus epidermidis in three cases. All isolated microorganisms were susceptible to vancomycin (minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) = 2 mg/L) and linezolid (MIC = 1). The rate of microbiologic efficacy was 100% for patients with meningitis or ventriculitis. In the case of subdural empyema, focal infection had improved between 14 and 18 days. No adverse effects occurred during this study.

Conclusion

Our results suggest that linezolid as an alternative to vancomycin for the treatment of PNSI caused by MRS with a high rate of efficacy.

Infectious Diseases: Pharmacologic Treatment Options for Nosocomial Pneumonia Involving Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus

Objective:

To discuss current and potential treatment options for nosocomial pneumonia due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA).

Data Sources:

A MEDLINE search (1966–January 2007) was conducted to identify English-language literature on pharmacotherapy of nosocomial pneumonia and the bibliographies of pertinent articles. Programs and abstracts from infectious disease meetings were also searched. Search terms included MRSA, nosocomial pneumonia, pulmonary infections, vancomycin, quinupristin/dalfopristin, linezolid, daptomycin, tigecycline, dalbavancin, oritavancin, and ceftobiprole.

Data Selection and Data Extraction:

All articles were critically evaluated and all pertinent information was included in this review.

Data Synthesis:

Vancomycin has been the drug of choice for MRSA infections for many years. Recent data suggest that linezolid may be superior to vancomycin in the treatment of MRSA nosocomial pneumonia. However, there are limitations to the available data. Therefore, prospective, randomized studies are needed before linezolid is recommended as the preferred first-line therapy. Other approved agents for nosocomial MRSA infections, such as quinupristin/dalfopristin and daptomycin, should not be used in the treatment of MRSA pneumonia, as they were inferior in clinical trials. Tigecycline has excellent activity against MRSA in vitro, but should not be routinely used for the treatment of MRSA pneumonia, as clinical data are lacking. In a Phase III clinical trial, an anti-MRSA cephalosporin, ceftobiprole, is being evaluated for effectiveness against nosocomial pneumonia. Investigational glycopeptides may eventually have a role in the treatment of nosocomial pneumonia, but data are currently lacking.

Conclusions:

Vancomycin is still the drug of choice for treatment of MRSA pneumonia, and linezolid should be used as an alternative agent. Linezolid should carry strong consideration for patients with vancomycin-induced nephrotoxicity or a documented lack of response to vancomycin. Tigecycline and investigational agents with activity against MRSA may be future options for nosocomial pneumonia due to MRSA.

Sequential antimicrobial treatment with linezolid for neurosurgical infections: efficacy, safety and cost study

BACKGROUND

Evidence for the effectiveness of linezolid in neurosurgical infections (NSIs) is growing. The comfortable oral dosage and tolerance of linezolid opens the possibility for sequential antimicrobial treatment (SAT) in stable patients after a period of intravenous treatment.

METHODS

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of SAT with oral linezolid in patients with NSI and to analyse the cost implications, an observational, non-comparative, prospective cohort study was conducted on clinically stable consecutive adult patients at the Neurosurgical Service. Following intravenous treatment, patients were discharged with SAT with oral linezolid.

RESULTS

A total of 77 patients were included. The most common NSIs were: 41 surgical wound infections, 20 subdural empyemas, 18 epidural abscesses, and 16 brain abscesses. Forty-four percent of patients presented two or more concomitant NSIs. Aetiological agents commonly isolated were: Propionibacterium acnes (36 %), Staphylococcus aureus (23 %), Staphylococcus epidermidis (21 %) and Streptococcus spp. (13 %). The median duration of the SAT was 15 days (range, 3-42). The SAT was interrupted in five cases due to adverse events. The remainder of the patients were cured at the end of the SAT. A total of 1,163 days of hospitalisation were saved. An overall cost reduction of €516,188 was attributed to the SAT. Eight patients with device infections did not require removal of the device, with an additional cost reduction of €190,595. The mean cost saving per patient was €9,179.

CONCLUSIONS

SAT with linezolid was safe and effective for the treatment of NSI. SAT reduces hospitalisation times, which means significant savings of health and economic resources.

Estimating the potential annual welfare impact of innovative drugs in use in Switzerland

Expenditures of health care systems are increasing from year to year. Therefore, this study aimed to estimate the difference in costs and benefits of innovative pharmaceuticals launched 2000 onward compared to standard treatment on the national economy of Switzerland in 2010. The approach and formula described in the pilot study by Tsiachristas et al. (1), which analyzed the situation of welfare effects in the Netherlands, served as a model for our own calculations. A literature search was performed to identify cost-utility or cost-effectiveness studies of drugs launched 2000 onward compared to standard treatment. All parameters required for the calculation of welfare effects were derived from these analyses. The base-case threshold value of a quality-adjusted life year was set to CHF 100,000. Overall, 31 drugs were included in the welfare calculations. The introduction of innovative pharmaceuticals since 2000 onward to the Swiss market led to a potential welfare gain of about CHF 781 million in the year 2010. Univariate sensitivity analysis showed that results were robust. Probably because of the higher benefits of new drugs on health and quality of life compared to standard treatment, these drugs are worth the higher costs. The literature search revealed that there is a lack of information about the effects of innovative pharmaceuticals on the overall economy of Switzerland. Our study showed that potential welfare gains in 2010 by introducing innovative pharmaceuticals to the Swiss market were substantial. Considering costs and benefits of new drugs is important.

Antimicrobial agents, drug adverse reactions and interactions, and cancer

The intent of this chapter is to review the types of adverse drug reactions and interactions associated with antimicrobial agents, specifically in the setting of patients with malignancies. The initial sections will discuss categorizing and describing the mechanisms of adverse reactions and interactions. The later sections include a detailed discussion about adverse reactions and drug interactions associated with commonly used antibacterial, antiviral, and antifungal agents in this subpopulation. Where relevant, the clinical use and indication for the drugs will be reviewed. The antibacterial section will specifically address the emergence of antimicrobial resistance and drugs of last resort (newer agents, such as linezolid and daptomycin and novel uses of older previously retired agents, such as polymyxin B). The antifungal section will address the ramification of pharmacokinetic interactions and the need to measure drug levels. The chapter is not meant to be exhaustive and as such will not extensively address all antimicrobials or all interactions for each of these agents.

Linezolid interaction with serotonin reuptake inhibitors: report of two cases and incidence assessment

BACKGROUND

Prompted by the advent of potentially life-threatening neuromuscular symptoms following initiation of linezolid therapy in two patients receiving treatment with a serotonin reuptake inhibitor antidepressant, an evaluation was conducted to determine the incidence and characteristics of symptomatic serotonin toxicity among hospitalized patients receiving combined treatment with these medications.

METHODS

Patients admitted between January 1, 2006 and August 30, 2008 who received linezolid concurrently with citalopram or escitalopram were identified and their medical records were examined. Patients were judged to have serotonin toxicity if their records contained documentation of clinical evidence adequate to fulfill requisites of the Hunter Serotonin Toxicity Criteria. Severity of serotonin-related symptoms was graded according to previously established criteria.

RESULTS

During the period of observation, 24 patients received concurrent treatment with linezolid and citalopram or escitalopram. Of these, one patient (4%) treated with citalopram met evidentiary requirements for diagnosis of serotonin toxicity. The severity of symptoms in this patient was graded as mild. No evidence of serious harm related to a possible drug interaction was identified.

CONCLUSIONS

Severe symptoms associated with serotonin toxicity were shown to be uncommon in patients receiving linezolid and selected serotonin reuptake inhibitors. Nonetheless, serious interaction-related toxicity has been observed at our institution and reported in detail by others. Accordingly, concurrent use of these medications is categorized as contraindicated. Alternative antimicrobial therapy should be instituted in most cases. If no suitable alternative is available, recipient patients should be hospitalized for expectant observation and rigorous monitoring.

Revisiting Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Infections

Within less than 50 years, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) made a tremendous impact worldwide. It is not limited to medical facilities and healthcare institutions anymore. Indeed since two decades, cases of MRSA infections arising from the community among apparently healthy individuals are increasing. In this paper, I will present a case of community-associated MRSA sepsis followed by a comprehensive review about the history, pathogenesis, epidemiology, clinical presentations, diagnostic modalities, therapeutic options, contributing factors, growing cost and other pertinent elements of this newly evolving epidemic of MRSA infections.

Teicoplanin versus vancomycin for proven or suspected infection

BACKGROUND

Vancomycin and teicoplanin are commonly used to treat gram-positive infections, particularly those caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). There is uncertainty regarding the effects of teicoplanin compared to vancomycin on kidney function with some previous studies suggesting teicoplanin is less nephrotoxic than vancomycin.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the efficacy and safety of vancomycin versus teicoplanin in patients with proven or suspected infection.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Renal Group's Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, reference lists of nephrology textbooks, review articles with relevant studies and sent letters seeking information about unpublished or incomplete studies to investigators involved in previous studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in any language comparing teicoplanin to vancomycin for patients with proven or suspected infection.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently evaluated methodological quality and extracted data using standardised data extraction forms. Study investigators were contacted for information not available in the original manuscripts. Random effects model was used to estimate the pooled risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence interval (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

We included 24 studies (2,610 patients) in this review. Teicoplanin reduced the risk of nephrotoxicity compared to vancomycin (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.90).The effects of teicoplanin or vancomycin were similar for clinical cure (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.98 to 1.08), microbiological cure (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.03) and mortality (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.79 to1.30). Six studies reported no cases of acute kidney injury (AKI) needing dialysis. Adverse events were less frequent with teicoplanin including cutaneous rash (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.92), red man syndrome (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.59) and total adverse events (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.00). A lower risk of nephrotoxicity with teicoplanin was observed in patients either with (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.30 to 0.88) or without aminoglycosides (RR 0.31, 95% 0.07 to 1.50), and also when vancomycin dosing was guided by serum levels (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.52).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Teicoplanin and vancomycin are both effective in treating those with proven or suspected infection; however the incidence of adverse effects including nephrotoxicity was lower with teicoplanin. There were no cases of AKI needing dialysis. It remains unclear whether the differential effect on kidney function should influence which antibiotic be prescribed, although it may be reasonable to consider teicoplanin for patients at higher risk for AKI needing dialysis.

Health economic issues in the treatment of drug-resistant serious Gram-positive infections

Escalating health care costs have stimulated a paradigm change in the way health care is delivered, reimbursed, and evaluated. Reducing the length of hospital stay and controlling the cost of new technologies and therapies are major factors driving health care decisions. Economic evaluations have had variable success in the decision-making process, partly due to the overall quality, interpretation, and reporting of published analyses. Compared with other Gram-positive pathogens, the economic impact of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections remains the most studied. MRSA infections clearly represent a significant clinical and fiscal burden and future studies analyzing cost-effective strategies that encompass their prevention and optimal management would be beneficial. These studies would need to be carefully designed with clear objectives and explicit perspectives at the onset. Use of an appropriate reference group is key in the design process to measure the true impact of MRSA infections. Health-economic outcome data of the impact of linezolid compared with glycopeptides remain the most robust data available in this therapeutic area.

Cost-effectiveness of linezolid versus vancomycin for hospitalized patients with complicated skin and soft-tissue infections in France

Studies have shown similar clinical cure rates and shorter length of hospitalization when using linezolid compared to vancomycin in patients with complicated skin and soft-tissue infections due to suspected or proven methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA).

OBJECTIVE

This study had for aim to compare the cost-effectiveness of linezolid versus vancomycin in French healthcare settings.

METHOD

A decision-analytic model followed an average patient from the initiation of an empiric treatment until cure, death or second-line treatment failure. A clinical data probability was obtained from clinical trials, resource utilization data (including treatment duration and length of hospitalization) and prevalence of MRSA was obtained from a Delphi panel, and costs from published sources.

RESULTS

First-line cure rate for linezolid-treated patients was 90.7% versus 85.5% for vancomycin; the total cure rates after two lines of treatment were 98.5% and 98.0%, respectively. The average total cost was 7,778euro for linezolid versus 8,777euro for vancomycin. The mean estimated length of hospitalization after two lines of treatment was 10.7 days for linezolid versus 13.3 days for vancomycin. The increased effectiveness and reduced cost lead to more frequent prescription. This did not change after one-way sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSION

Linezolid may be considered as a cost-effective treatment for patients with complicated skin and soft-tissue infections suspected to be MRSA related in France.

Linezolid for the treatment of drug-resistant infections

Multidrug-resistant pathogens have become increasingly common in contemporary healthcare. Specific to Gram-positive pathogens, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is of particular concern, as it has been associated with increased hospital length of stay, higher healthcare expenditures and poorer outcomes. To date, linezolid is the first and only oxazolidinone approved by the US FDA for the treatment of infections caused by Gram-positive pathogens, including MRSA. This article will serve as a comprehensive review of linezolid, including an overview of the current market and its in vitro activity, with an in-depth review of its pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profile. Emphasis will be placed on clinical data for the drug, both on- and off-label. The article will conclude with a brief overview of linezolid's pharmacoeconomic implications and safety profile, followed by a commentary and 5-year prospective analysis remarking on the future of the antimicrobial field as it relates to MRSA.

Cost-effectiveness of linezolid versus vancomycin for hospitalised patients with complicated skin and soft-tissue infections in Germany

This study used a decision analytic model approach to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of linezolid versus vancomycin in the empirical treatment of complicated skin and soft-tissue infection (cSSTI) due to suspected methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) from the German hospital and health care system perspective. Clinical probabilities were obtained from trial data, resource utilisation and MRSA prevalence rates were obtained through German physician interviews, and costs from published sources were applied to resource units. Outcomes included total cost/patient and cure. The estimated first-line cure rate for linezolid-treated patients was 90.1% versus 85.5% for vancomycin; total cure rates after two lines of treatment were 98.4% and 98.1%, respectively. Average total cost/episode was 8,232 euro for linezolid versus 9,206 euro for vancomycin. The model outcomes were sensitive to changes in length of stay (LOS), isolation days, rate of confirmed MRSA and price of linezolid. Linezolid was expected to result in a shorter intravenous treatment duration and shorter LOS that offset its higher acquisition cost versus vancomycin in cSSTI in Germany.

Vancomycin-resistant enterococcal colonization appears associated with increased mortality among allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant recipients

There are no cohort studies describing outcomes of patients colonized with vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (AHSCT). We therefore conducted a retrospective cohort study of 217 consecutive adults undergoing AHSCT at the Mayo Clinic (Rochester, MN, USA) from 1998 to 2004. We analyzed the association between VRE colonization prior to transplant and 100-day post transplant mortality and morbidity. We identified 22 pretransplant VRE colonized patients and 195 non-colonized patients. Both groups had similar baseline characteristics with the following six exceptions. Colonized patients were more likely to have had pretransplant Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea, pretransplant acute renal failure, AML, Cy/TBI conditioning, decreased platelet count at time of transplantation and myeloablative conditioning regimens. Overall, patients colonized with VRE were twice as likely to die by day 100 post transplant compared to non-colonized patients (hazard ratio: 2.1, P=0.028). This association persisted even after adjusting for differences in baseline characteristics. Increased mortality in the colonized group correlated with the presence of VRE bacteremia. Overall, pretransplant VRE colonization appears to be an independent risk factor for increased mortality post-AHSCT.

Secular trends in mortality associated with new therapeutic strategies in surgical critical illness

BACKGROUND

Since 1999 randomized controlled trials have shown that new therapeutic strategies, such as strict glycemic control, increased use of noninvasive ventilation and of lung-protective ventilation, and early goal-oriented shock therapy, may reduce mortality in selected groups of critically ill patients. Whether these benefits can be translated to a surgical clinical setting is unclear. We wanted to evaluate longitudinally the successive routine implementation of new therapeutic measures and its effect on postsurgical patients admitted to the intensive care unit.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis on data collected prospectively from March 1, 1993 through February 28, 2005.

RESULTS

A cohort of 1,802 consecutive cases requiring intensive care therapy for more than 4 days was analyzed. A significant decrease in mortality was observed in the last years of the study. With adjustment for relevant covariates, treatment after the implementation of new therapeutic strategies was identified as an independent factor linked with a reduced risk of death (odds ratio [OR] .518; 95% confidence interval [CI] .337-.796), whereas older age (OR 1.030; 95% CI 1.015-1.045), a high severity score on admission (OR 1.155; 95% CI 1.113-1.198) or during intensive care unit stay (OR 1.187; 95% CI 1.145-1.231), a high number of failing organs (OR 1.918; 95% CI 1.635-2.250), and peritonitis (OR 3.277; 95% CI 2.046-5.246) were independently associated with death.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementing of a variety of new therapeutic measures into routine care of critically ill surgical patients was associated with improved survival after 2001.

Epidemiology and economic impact of meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: review and analysis of the literature

In the past 2 decades, meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) has become an increasingly prevalent problem in healthcare, both in acute care institutions and in the community. MRSA is associated with worse outcomes and higher costs for care than meticillin sensitive S. aureus (MSSA). MRSA is a particular problem in several conditions, including hospital-acquired pneumonia (including ventilator-associated pneumonia), skin and soft tissue infections, and diabetic foot infections. Hospitalisation costs associated with MRSA infection are substantially greater than those associated with MSSA infection, and MRSA has wider economic effects that involve indirect costs to the patient and to society. In several countries, infection control programmes have shown potential economic benefits, as savings accruing from strict and effective control have been shown to outweigh the cost of policy implementation. Standard therapy is based on glycopeptide treatment, usually with vancomycin, although resistance to this agent has emerged. Alternative available treatments for MRSA include teicoplanin, tigecycline, daptomycin, quinupristin-dalfopristin and the oxazolidinone, linezolid, which has a higher acquisition cost than vancomycin but is available as intravenous and oral formulations. Despite some limitations of analyses to date, linezolid has been shown to be cost effective in the treatment of MRSA and appears to be related, in part, to the drug's potential for facilitating earlier discharge from hospital. Current opinion favours rational prescribing to maximise therapeutic benefit and minimise the risk of further antibacterial resistance.

Community-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus

Published data confirm that community-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections are increasing in incidence in both urban and rural settings. The statistical risk is higher for athletes, military personnel, prison inmates, intravenous drug abusers, the homeless, children in daycare, and certain Native American groups, but the infections are by no means restricted to these populations. Roughly 85% of the infections involve the skin and subcutaneous tissue, with the most common presentations being an abscess or folliculitis. The typical associated gene cassette is quite small and codes only for methicillin resistance. Abscesses generally respond to drainage.

LEARNING OBJECTIVE

At the conclusion of this learning activity, participants should recognize groups at high risk for community-acquired MSRA infections and manage these infections appropriately.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of linezolid compared with vancomycin for the treatment of nosocomial pneumonia caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus

OBJECTIVE

This study compared the cost-effectiveness of linezolid and vancomycin in the treatment of patients with nosocomial pneumonia (NP) caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA).

METHODS

A retrospective decision-analytic model was applied to pooled data from 2 prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blind studies, and claims data from a large health plan (3.3 million members) located in the Mid-Atlantic region. Using hospital claims for patients in the health plan with suspected NP, we then determined their daily billed (submitted) hospital charges for 4 mutually exclusive potential health outcomes of linezolid or vancomycin treatment: survival with bacteremia, survival without bacteremia, nonsurvival with bacteremia, and nonsurvival without bacteremia. To generate the expected total daily billed hospital charge for each drug-treatment group, we weighted the determined daily billed hospital charges by the probabilities of each outcome developing in each treatment arm, as derived from the clinical-trial data. Drug acquisition costs were then incorporated, and the difference in expected total costs relative to the difference in rates of survival between the linezolid and vancomycin arms was used to calculate the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for linezolid.

RESULTS

Costs were higher for nonsurviving patients compared with surviving patients. Estimated median daily billed treatment charges were $2888 for linezolid and $2993 for vancomycin. Based on Monte Carlo simulations, the respective 95% CIs were $2671 to $3106 and $2615 to $3372. Using mean treatment durations of 11.3 and 10.7 days, respectively, we obtained expected total hospitalization charges of $32,636 for linezolid treatment (95% CI, $30,182-$35,098), compared with $32,024 for vancomycin treatment (95% CI, $27,978-$36,078). The ICER for linezolid per life saved was $3600.

CONCLUSIONS

The higher acquisition cost of linezolid was almost completely offset by improved survival and a reduction in health care costs associated with improved survival. As a result, linezolid was almost cost-neutral compared with vancomycin in the treatment of NP caused by MRSA.

3D QSAR studies of N-4-arylacryloylpiperazin-1-yl-phenyl-oxazolidinones: A novel class of antibacterial agents

Three-dimensional QSAR studies for N-4-arylacryloylpiperazin-1-yl-phenyl-oxazolidinones were conducted using TSAR 3.3. The in vitro activities (MICs) of the compounds against Staphylococcus aureus ATCC 25923 exhibited a strong correlation with the prediction made by the model developed in the present study.