Resource use in patients hospitalized with complicated skin and soft tissue infections in Europe and analysis of vulnerable groups: the REACH study

Ceftaroline Fosamil for the Empiric Treatment of Hospitalized Adults with cSSTI: An Economic Analysis from the Perspective of the Spanish National Health System

Purpose

Complicated skin and soft tissue infections (cSSTI) are associated with high healthcare resource use and costs. The emergency nature of cSSTI hospitalizations requires starting immediate empiric intravenous (IV) antibiotic treatment, making the appropriate choice of initial antibiotic therapy crucial.

Patients and Methods

The use of ceftaroline fosamil (CFT) as an alternative to other IV antibiotic therapies for the empiric treatment of hospitalized adults with cSSTI (vancomycin, linezolid, daptomycin, cloxacillin, tedizolid) was evaluated through cost consequences analysis. The model structure was a decision tree accounting for four different pathways: patients demonstrating early response (ER) either discharged early (with oral antibiotic) or remaining in hospital to continue the initial therapy; non-responders either remaining on the initial IV therapy or switching to a second-line antibiotic. The model perspective was the Spanish National Health System.

Results

CFT resulted in average percentage of patients discharged early (PDE) of 24.6% (CI 19.49–30.2%) with average total cost per patient of €6763 (€6268–€7219). Vancomycin, linezolid, daptomycin and tedizolid resulted in average PDE of 22% (17.34–27.09%), 26.4% (20.5–32.32%), 28.6% (22.08–35.79%) and 26.5% (20.39–33.25%), respectively, for a total cost per patient of €6,619 (€5,902–€6,929), €6,394 (€5,881–€6,904), €6,855 (€5,800–€7,410) and €7,173 (€6,608–€7,763), respectively. Key model drivers were ER and antibiotic treatment duration, with hospital costs accounting for over 83% of the total expenditures.

Conclusion

Given its clinical and safety profile, CFT is an acceptable choice for cSSTI empiric therapy providing comparable ER and costs to other relevant antibiotic options.

Treatment of Recurrent Severe Cellulitis with a Pill in Pocket Approach

Cellulitis is a common condition that plagues healthcare systems and is associated with significant healthcare costs and resource allocations. With ample antimicrobial therapy this infectious syndrome can be easily treated but recurrence is common. Many conditions predispose patients to be at risk for recurrent cellulitis with chronic lymphoedema being a significant risk factor secondary to pooling of lymphatic fluid and impaired local immune responses. Moreover, patients with chronic lymphoedema can be at risk for acute onset of severe cellulitis requiring urgent medical evaluation and treatment. Consequently, to prevent recurrent cellulitis episodes, the use of long-term oral antibiotics has been advocated, but when recurrences occur despite long-term antibiotic use limited options are available. In this case report, a unique treatment approach for preventing severe cellulitis is discussed with a pill in the pocket approach with the use of oral tedizolid. This has thwarted the need for recurrent hospitalizations and reduced health care costs for this individual patient. Herein this treatment approach is discussed as is the rationale for using tedizolid instead of other antibiotics.

Current and future options for treating complicated skin and soft tissue infections: focus on fluoroquinolones and long-acting lipoglycopeptide antibiotics

Bacterial skin and soft tissue infections are among the most common bacterial infections and constitute a major burden for patients and healthcare systems. Care is complicated by the variety of potential pathogens, some with resistance to previously effective antimicrobial agents, the wide spectrum of clinical presentations and the risk of progression to life-threatening forms. More-efficient care pathways are needed that can reduce hospital admissions and length of stay, while maintaining a high quality of care and adhering to antimicrobial stewardship principles. Several agents approved recently for treating acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections have characteristics that meet these requirements. We address the clinical and pharmacological characteristics of the fourth-generation fluoroquinolone delafloxacin, and the long-acting lipoglycopeptide agents dalbavancin and oritavancin.

Update on the epidemiology of healthcare-acquired bacterial infections: focus on complicated skin and skin structure infections

Healthcare-associated infections (HCAIs) are a threat to patient safety and cause substantial medical and economic burden in acute care and long-term care facilities. Risk factors for HCAIs include patient characteristics, the type of care and the setting. Local surveillance data and microbiological characterization are crucial tools for guiding antimicrobial treatment and informing efforts to reduce the incidence of HCAI. Skin and soft tissue infections, including superficial and deep incisional surgical site infections, are among the most frequent HCAIs. Other skin and soft tissue infections associated with healthcare settings include vascular access site infections, infected burns and traumas, and decubitus ulcer infections.

Emerging drugs for treating methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus

Introduction: In clinical practice, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) represents a major threat and has been associated with high rates of inadequate antibiotic treatment and significant increases in morbidity, mortality, and overall healthcare costs. The association between the prescription of an inappropriate or delayed antibiotic and impaired clinical outcomes has been widely described. Areas covered: To address the threat of MRSA, many new therapeutic options with a peculiar activity against MRSA have been recently developed and approved. New agents are characterized by specific issues in terms of spectrum of activity, pharmacokinetics, risk of drug-drug interactions, and toxicity, with potential advantages that should be considered in everyday clinical practice. Expert opinion: The most attractive characteristic of new drugs is represented by the broad spectrum of activity against multidrug-resistant pathogens; moreover, new compounds in most cases are characterized by favorable toxicity profiles compared with old drugs currently used in clinical practice. Some of the new antimicrobials will be also available as oral formulations, with the potential for oral switch, even in infections due to resistant pathogens. In particular conditions/populations (e.g. liver failure, renal disease, pregnancy, diabetic, children, and elderly), novel antibiotics with reduced toxicity could be an important option, including after hospital discharge.

The optimal duration of treatment for skin and soft tissue infections and acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize the current finding on SSTIs/ABSSSIs treatment duration.

RECENT FINDINGS

In 2013, the FDA approved the definition of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs). From a clinical point of view, the new definition may present some advantages: the definition of the severity of the disease, the measurement of reduction in lesion size, and effectiveness of treatment primary endpoint at 48-72 h after treatment initiation. New therapeutic options with improved efficacy, safety, and/or pharmacodynamics are available for ABSSSIs and so far, several questions still need to be addressed for the management of these infections, including treatment duration.

SUMMARY

There is a wide variation of duration of antimicrobial treatment in skin and soft tissue infections. Plenty of published data available suggest that we should focus on the early response to shorten duration of treatment, and that the antimicrobial stewardship perspective is extremely helpful in underscoring the need for composite outcomes in clinical practice, as multiple tools are available to increase cost-efficacy, including reduction of treatment changes, early oral switch, early discharge (even from the Emergency Department), outpatient antimicrobial treatment, long-acting antibiotics, and all together, de-escalation treatment strategies.

Fast track SSTI management program based on a rapid molecular test (GeneXpert® MRSA/SA SSTI) and antimicrobial stewardship

PURPOSE

This study examines the impacts of a skin and soft tissue infection (SSTI) management program involving a rapid diagnostic algorithm (Gram stain plus real-time PCR, GeneXpert® MRSA/SA SSTI) performed directly on clinical samples plus antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) counseling of the responsible physician.

METHODS

Participants were 155 consecutive adult inpatients with SSTI and good quality clinical samples submitted to the microbiology laboratory from April 2016 to January 2017. Results of the rapid test and AMS recommendations were phoned through to the responsible physician. The comparison group was a historical cohort.

RESULTS

Most SSTI were surgical wound infections (41.3% vs 38.1% for the intervention and comparison groups respectively) followed by diabetic foot (14.2% and 18.1%), abscesses (13.5% both) and cellulitis (12.9% both). Isolated microorganisms were mostly Gram-negative bacilli (two-thirds), followed by Staphylococcus aureus (SA). The ratio methicillin-susceptible SA (MSSA) to methicillin-resistant SA (MRSA) was 4:1. Improvements in the intervention cohort were: DOT (22.0 vs. 24.3 days, p = 0.007), treatment duration per SSTI episode (14.1 vs. 15.0 days, p = 0.072), treatment cost (433.1 vs. 533.3 €, p = 0.039), length of stay (18.6 vs 20.7 days, p = 0.031), related mortality (1 vs. 4 patients, p = 0.022) and Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) (4 vs. 8 patients, p = 0.050). In 48 cases (31.4%) in the intervention group, advice was given to improve empiric antibiotic treatment.

CONCLUSION

This type of program could help adjust antibiotic treatment when inappropriate, reducing antibiotic use and costs, length of stay, CDI and related mortality.

Emerging Nanomedicine Therapies to Counter the Rise of Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus

In a recent report, the World Health Organisation (WHO) classified antibiotic resistance as one of the greatest threats to global health, food security, and development. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) remains at the core of this threat, with persistent and resilient strains detectable in up to 90% of S. aureus infections. Unfortunately, there is a lack of novel antibiotics reaching the clinic to address the significant morbidity and mortality that MRSA is responsible for. Recently, nanomedicine strategies have emerged as a promising therapy to combat the rise of MRSA. However, these approaches have been wide-ranging in design, with few attempts to compare studies across scientific and clinical disciplines. This review seeks to reconcile this discrepancy in the literature, with specific focus on the mechanisms of MRSA infection and how they can be exploited by bioactive molecules that are delivered by nanomedicines, in addition to utilisation of the nanomaterials themselves as antibacterial agents. Finally, we discuss targeting MRSA biofilms using nano-patterning technologies and comment on future opportunities and challenges for MRSA treatment using nanomedicine.

The role of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in skin and soft tissue infections

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) has become a major public health issue worldwide over the last years. MRSA is frequently implicated in the development of skin and soft tissue infections, leading to significant increases in morbidity, mortality and overall healthcare costs.

RECENT FINDINGS

In order to face the threat of MRSA, major changes in clinical management of skin and soft tissue infections are required. The identification of populations at risk for the acquisition of infections due to MRSA, together with the improvement of the diagnostic techniques, is paramount. Moreover, a number of new antimicrobials with activity against MRSA have been recently developed and approved for the treatment of skin and soft tissue infections, however, the use of the new drugs in the wide clinical practice remains limited.

SUMMARY

We reviewed the current epidemiology of MRSA in skin and soft tissue infections, with particular focus on implications for clinical management. The potential role of new antibiotic options against MRSA infections is also discussed.

Tedizolid and Linezolid for Treatment of Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infections of the Lower Extremity versus Non-Lower-Extremity InfectionsPooled Analysis of Two Phase 3 Trials

BACKGROUND

Tedizolid phosphate, the prodrug of the oxazolidinone tedizolid, has been approved in a number of countries, including the United States, those in the European Union, and Canada, for treatment of patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI). Two phase 3 trials demonstrated the noninferior efficacy of tedizolid (200 mg once daily for 6 days) to linezolid (600 mg twice daily for 10 days) in patients with ABSSSI. Because of the challenges of treating lower-extremity ABSSSI, the efficacy and safety of tedizolid and linezolid for treating lower-extremity versus non-lower-extremity infections were compared.

METHODS

This was a post hoc analysis of pooled data from patients with lower-extremity infections enrolled in two phase 3 studies, ESTABLISH-1 (NCT01170221) and ESTABLISH-2 (NCT01421511), comparing tedizolid to linezolid in patients with ABSSSI.

RESULTS

Lower-extremity ABSSSI were present in 40.7% of tedizolid-treated and 42.2% of linezolid-treated patients. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) was present in 34.7% of all patients with a baseline causative pathogen. Early clinical responses at 48 to 72 hours and investigator-assessed responses at the post-therapy evaluation were similar between tedizolid and linezolid, regardless of ABSSSI type. With both treatments, the early clinical response was slightly higher in patients with non-lower-extremity infection than in those with lower-extremity ABSSSI (tedizolid, 84.8% versus 77.0%; linezolid, 81.4% versus 76.6%, respectively); however, by the post-therapy evaluation visit, response rates were similar (tedizolid, 87.1% versus 86.3%; linezolid, 86.6% versus 87.2%, respectively). Gastrointestinal adverse events and low platelet counts were observed more frequently with linezolid treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Post-therapy evaluations showed that the clinical response of lower-extremity ABSSSI to tedizolid and linezolid was comparable to that of ABSSSI in other locations. A short 6-day course of once-daily tedizolid was as effective as a 10-day course of twice-daily linezolid in treating patients with lower-extremity ABSSSI.

Interventions for the prevention of recurrent erysipelas and cellulitis

BACKGROUND

Erysipelas and cellulitis (hereafter referred to as 'cellulitis') are common bacterial skin infections usually affecting the lower extremities. Despite their burden of morbidity, the evidence for different prevention strategies is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the beneficial and adverse effects of antibiotic prophylaxis or other prophylactic interventions for the prevention of recurrent episodes of cellulitis in adults aged over 16.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases up to June 2016: the Cochrane Skin Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, and LILACS. We also searched five trials registry databases, and checked reference lists of included studies and reviews for further references to relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We searched two sets of dermatology conference proceedings, and BIOSIS Previews.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials evaluating any therapy for the prevention of recurrent cellulitis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently carried out study selection, data extraction, assessment of risks of bias, and analyses. Our primary prespecified outcome was recurrence of cellulitis when on treatment and after treatment. Our secondary outcomes included incidence rate, time to next episode, hospitalisation, quality of life, development of resistance to antibiotics, adverse reactions and mortality.

MAIN RESULTS

We included six trials, with a total of 573 evaluable participants, who were aged on average between 50 and 70. There were few previous episodes of cellulitis in those recruited to the trials, ranging between one and four episodes per study.Five of the six included trials assessed prevention with antibiotics in participants with cellulitis of the legs, and one assessed selenium in participants with cellulitis of the arms. Among the studies assessing antibiotics, one study evaluated oral erythromycin (n = 32) and four studies assessed penicillin (n = 481). Treatment duration varied from six to 18 months, and two studies continued to follow up participants after discontinuation of prophylaxis, with a follow-up period of up to one and a half to two years. Four studies were single-centre, and two were multicentre; they were conducted in five countries: the UK, Sweden, Tunisia, Israel, and Austria.Based on five trials, antibiotic prophylaxis (at the end of the treatment phase ('on prophylaxis')) decreased the risk of cellulitis recurrence by 69%, compared to no treatment or placebo (risk ratio (RR) 0.31, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.13 to 0.72; n = 513; P = 0.007), number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) six, (95% CI 5 to 15), and we rated the certainty of evidence for this outcome as moderate.Under prophylactic treatment and compared to no treatment or placebo, antibiotic prophylaxis reduced the incidence rate of cellulitis by 56% (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.89; four studies; n = 473; P value = 0.02; moderate-certainty evidence) and significantly decreased the rate until the next episode of cellulitis (hazard ratio (HR) 0.51, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.78; three studies; n = 437; P = 0.002; moderate-certainty evidence).The protective effects of antibiotic did not last after prophylaxis had been stopped ('post-prophylaxis') for risk of cellulitis recurrence (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.31; two studies; n = 287; P = 0.52), incidence rate of cellulitis (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.36; two studies; n = 287; P = 0.74), and rate until next episode of cellulitis (HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.56; two studies; n = 287). Evidence was of low certainty.Effects are relevant mainly for people after at least two episodes of leg cellulitis occurring within a period up to three years.We found no significant differences in adverse effects or hospitalisation between antibiotic and no treatment or placebo; for adverse effects: RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.30; four studies; n = 469; P = 0.48; for hospitalisation: RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.57; three studies; n = 429; P = 0.47, with certainty of evidence rated low for these outcomes. The existing data did not allow us to fully explore its impact on length of hospital stay.The common adverse reactions were gastrointestinal symptoms, mainly nausea and diarrhoea; rash (severe cutaneous adverse reactions were not reported); and thrush. Three studies reported adverse effects that led to discontinuation of the assigned therapy. In one study (erythromycin), three participants reported abdominal pain and nausea, so their treatment was changed to penicillin. In another study, two participants treated with penicillin withdrew from treatment due to diarrhoea or nausea. In one study, around 10% of participants stopped treatment due to pain at the injection site (the active treatment group was given intramuscular injections of benzathine penicillin).None of the included studies assessed the development of antimicrobial resistance or quality-of-life measures.With regard to the risks of bias, two included studies were at low risk of bias and we judged three others as being at high risk of bias, mainly due to lack of blinding.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In terms of recurrence, incidence, and time to next episode, antibiotic is probably an effective preventive treatment for recurrent cellulitis of the lower limbs in those under prophylactic treatment, compared with placebo or no treatment (moderate-certainty evidence). However, these preventive effects of antibiotics appear to diminish after they are discontinued (low-certainty evidence). Treatment with antibiotic does not trigger any serious adverse events, and those associated are minor, such as nausea and rash (low-certainty evidence). The evidence is limited to people with at least two past episodes of leg cellulitis within a time frame of up to three years, and none of the studies investigated other common interventions such as lymphoedema reduction methods or proper skin care. Larger, high-quality studies are warranted, including long-term follow-up and other prophylactic measures.

Current and future trends in antibiotic therapy of acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections

In 2013 the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued recommendations and guidance on developing drugs for treatment of skin infection using a new definition of acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infection (ABSSSI). The new classification includes cellulitis, erysipelas, major skin abscesses and wound infection with a considerable extension of skin involvement, clearly referring to a severe subset of skin infections. The main goal of the FDA was to better identify specific infections where the advantages of a new antibiotic could be precisely estimated through quantifiable parameters, such as improvement of the lesion size and of systemic signs of infection. Before the spread and diffusion of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in skin infections, antibiotic therapy was relatively straightforward. Using an empiric approach, a β-lactam was the preferred therapy and cultures from patients were rarely obtained. With the emergence of MRSA in the community setting, initial ABSSSI management has been changed and readdressed. Dalbavancin, oritavancin and tedizolid are new drugs, approved or in development for ABSSSI treatment, that also proved to be efficient against MRSA. Dalbavancin and oritavancin have a long half-life and can be dosed less frequently. This in turn makes it possible to treat patients with ABSSSI in an outpatient setting, avoiding hospitalization or potentially allowing earlier discharge, without compromising efficacy. In conclusion, characteristics of long-acting antibiotics could represent an opportunity for the management of ABSSSI and could profoundly modify the management of these infections by reducing or in some cases eliminating both costs and risks of hospitalization.

Acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections in internal medicine wards: old and new drugs

Skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) are a common cause of hospital admission among elderly patients, and traditionally have been divided into complicated and uncomplicated SSTIs. In 2010, the FDA provided a new classification of these infections, and a new category of disease, named acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs), has been proposed as an independent clinical entity. ABSSSIs include three entities: cellulitis and erysipelas, wound infections, and major cutaneous abscesses This paper revises the epidemiology of SSTIs and ABSSSIs with regard to etiologies, diagnostic techniques, and clinical presentation in the hospital settings. Particular attention is owed to frail patients with multiple comorbidities and underlying significant disease states, hospitalized on internal medicine wards or residing in nursing homes, who appear to be at increased risk of infection due to multi-drug resistant pathogens and treatment failures. Management of ABSSSIs and SSTIs, including evaluation of the hemodynamic state, surgical intervention and treatment with appropriate antibiotic therapy are extensively discussed.

Epidemiology and Outcomes of Complicated Skin and Soft Tissue Infections among Inpatients in Southern China from 2008 to 2013

Complicated skin and soft tissue infections (cSSTI) are some of the most commonly treated infections in hospitals, and place heavy economic burdens on patients and society. Here we report the findings from an analysis of cSSTI based on a retrospective study which was conducted within the Chinese inpatient population. We focused our research on the analysis of the patient population, antibiotic treatment, clinical outcome and economic burden. The study population comprised 527 selected patients hospitalized between 2008 and 2013. Among the hospitalizations with microbiological diagnoses, 61.41% (n = 113) were diagnosed as infected with Gram-positive bacteria, while 46.20% (n = 85) were infected with Gram-negative bacteria. The most commonly found Gram-positive bacteria was Staphylococcus aureus (40.76%, n = 75), and the most common Gram-negative bacteria was Escherichia coli (14.13%, n = 26). About 20% of the Staphylococcus aureus were methicillin-resistant. The resistance rate of isolated Staphylococcus aureus or Escherichia coli to penicillin was around 90%; in contrast, the resistance rate to vancomycin, linezolid or imipenem was low (<20%). A large percentage of patients were treated with cephalosporins and fluoroquinolones, while vancomycin and imipenem were also included to treat drug-resistant pathogens. Over half of the hospitalizations (58.43%, n = 336) experienced treatment modifications. The cost to patients with antibiotic modifications was relatively higher than to those without. In conclusion, our study offers an analysis of the disease characteristics, microbiological diagnoses, treatment patterns and clinical outcomes of cSSTI in four hospitals in Guangdong Province, and sheds lights on the current clinical management of cSSTI in China.

Examination of hospital length of stay in Canada among patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infection caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus

PURPOSE

Skin infections, particularly those caused by resistant pathogens, represent a clinical burden. Hospitalization associated with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is a major contributor to the economic burden of the disease. This study was conducted to provide current, real-world data on hospitalization patterns for patients with ABSSSI caused by MRSA across multiple geographic regions in Canada.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This retrospective cohort study evaluated length of stay (LOS) for hospitalized patients with ABSSSI due to MRSA diagnosis across four Canadian geographic regions using the Discharge Abstract Database. Patients with ICD-10-CA diagnosis consistent with ABSSSI caused by MRSA between January 2008 and December 2014 were selected and assigned a primary or secondary diagnosis based on a prespecified ICD-10-CA code algorithm.

RESULTS

Among 6,719 patients, 3,273 (48.7%) and 3,446 (51.3%) had a primary and secondary diagnosis, respectively. Among patients with a primary or secondary diagnosis, the cellulitis/erysipelas subtype was most common. The majority of patients presented with 0 or 1 comorbid condition; the most common comorbidity was diabetes. The mean LOS over the study period varied by geographic region and year; in 2014 (the most recent year analyzed), LOS ranged from 7.7 days in Ontario to 13.4 days in the Canadian Prairie for a primary diagnosis and from 18.2 days in Ontario to 25.2 days in Atlantic Canada for a secondary diagnosis. A secondary diagnosis was associated with higher rates of continuing care compared with a primary diagnosis (10.6%-24.2% vs 4.6%-12.1%).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that the mean LOS associated with ABSSSI due to MRSA in Canada was minimally 7 days. Clinical management strategies, including medication management, which might facilitate hospital discharge, have the potential to reduce hospital LOS and related economic burden associated with ABSSSI caused by MRSA.