Ceftazidime-Avibactam Therapy Versus Ceftazidime-Avibactam-Based Combination Therapy in Patients With Carbapenem-Resistant Gram-Negative Pathogens: A Meta-Analysis

Ceftazidime-avibactam combination therapy versus monotherapy for treating carbapenem-resistant gram-negative infection: a systemic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This meta-analysis was conducted to compare the efficacy of ceftazidime-avibactam combination therapy with that of monotherapy in the treatment of carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacterial (CR-GNB).

METHODS

A literature search of PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov was conducted until September 1, 2023. Only studies that compared CZA combination therapy with monotherapy for CR-GNB infections were included.

RESULTS

A total of 25 studies (23 retrospective observational studies and 2 prospective studies) involving 2676 patients were included. There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality between the study group receiving combination therapy and the control group receiving monotherapy (risk ratio [RR] 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.71-1.18). In addition, no significant differences were observed between the study and the control group in terms of in-hospital mortality (RR 1.00; 95% CI 0.79-1.27), 14-day mortality (RR 1.54; 95% CI 0.24-9.91), 90-day mortality (RR 1.18; 95% CI 0.62-2.22), and clinical cure rate (RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.84-1.08). However, the combination group had a borderline higher microbiological eradication rate than the control group (RR 1.15; 95% CI 1.00-1.32).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to monotherapy, CZA combination therapy did not yield additional clinical benefits. However, combination therapy may be associated with favorable microbiological outcomes.

Clinical outcomes and risk factors for mortality in recipients with carbapenem-resistant gram-negative bacilli infections after kidney transplantation treated with ceftazidime-avibactam: a retrospective study

Background

Ceftazidime-avibactam is a treatment option for carbapenem-resistant gram-negative bacilli (CR-GNB) infections. However, the risk factors associated with ceftazidime-avibactam (CAZ-AVI) treatment failure in kidney transplant (KT) recipients and the need for CAZ-AVI-based combination therapy remain unclear.

Methods

From June 2019 to December 2023, a retrospective observational study of KT recipients with CR-GNB infection treated with CAZ-AVI was conducted, with the primary outcome being 30-day mortality and secondary outcomes being clinical cure, microbiological cure, and safety. Risk factors for 30-day mortality and clinical failure were also investigated.

Results

A total of 81 KT recipients treated with CAZ-AVI were included in this study. Forty recipients (49.4%) received CAZ-AVI monotherapy, with a 30-day mortality of 22.2%. The clinical cure and microbiological cure rates of CAZ/AVI therapy were 72.8% and 66.7%, respectively. CAZ-AVI alone or in combination with other medications had no effect on clinical cure or 30-day mortality. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that a higher Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score (odds ratio [OR]: 4.517; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.397-14.607; P = 0.012) was an independent risk factor for 30-day mortality. Clinical cure was positively associated with the administration of CAZ-AVI within 48 hours of infection onset (OR: 11.009; 95% CI: 1.344-90.197; P=0.025) and negatively associated with higher APACHE II scores (OR: 0.700; 95% CI: 0.555-0.882; P=0.002). Four (4.9%) recipients experienced recurrence within 90 days after the initial infection, 3 (3.7%) recipients experienced CAZ-AVI-related adverse events, and no CAZ-AVI resistance was identified.

Conclusion

CAZ-AVI is an effective medication for treating CR-GNB infections following kidney transplantation, even as monotherapy. Optimization of CAZ/AVI therapy (used within 48 hours of infection onset) is positively associated with potential clinical benefit. Further larger-scale studies are needed to validate these findings.

Risk Factors for Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacterales Clinical Treatment Failure

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) categorized carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) infections as an "urgent" health care threat requiring public attention and research. Certain patients with CRE infections may be at higher risk for poor clinical outcomes than others. Evidence on risk or protective factors for CRE infections are warranted in order to determine the most at-risk populations, especially with newer beta-lactam/beta-lactamase inhibitor (BL/BLI) antibiotics available to treat CRE. We aimed to identify specific variables involved in CRE treatment that are associated with clinical failure (either 30-day mortality, 30-day microbiologic recurrence, or clinical worsening/failure to improve throughout antibiotic treatment). We conducted a retrospective, observational cohort study of hospitalized patients with CRE infection sampled from 2010 to 2020 at two medical systems in Detroit, Michigan. Patients were included if they were ≥18 years old and culture positive for an organism in the Enterobacterales order causing clinical infection with in vitro resistance by Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) breakpoints to at least one carbapenem. Overall, there were 140 confirmed CRE infections of which 39% had clinical failure. The most common infection sources were respiratory (38%), urinary (20%), intra-abdominal (16%), and primary bacteremia (14%). A multivariable logistic regression model was developed to identify statistically significant associated predictors with clinical failure, and they included Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.18; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.06 to 1.32), chronic dialysis (aOR, 5.86; 95% CI, 1.51-22.7), and Klebsiella pneumoniae in index culture (aOR, 3.09; 95% CI, 1.28 to 7.47). Further research on CRE infections is needed to identify best practices to promote treatment success. IMPORTANCE This work compares carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) infections using patient, clinical, and treatment variables to understand which characteristics are associated with the highest risk of clinical failure. Knowing which risk factors are associated with CRE infection failure can provide clinicians better prognostic and targeted interventions. Research can also further investigate why certain risk factors cause more clinical failure and can help develop treatment strategies to mitigate associated risk factors.

Benefits and Safety of Empiric Antibiotic Treatment Active Against KPC-K. pneumoniae in Febrile Neutropenic Patients with Acute Leukemia Who are Colonized with KPC-K. pneumoniae. A 7-Years Retrospective Observational Cohort Study

Purpose

To evaluate the benefits and safety of the empiric antibiotic treatment (EAT) active against KPC-K. pneumoniae in febrile neutropenic patients with acute leukaemia (AL) who are colonised by KPC-K. pneumoniae.

Patients and Methods

A 7-year (2013-2019) retrospective observational cohort study was conducted at the Haematology, Sapienza Rome University (Italy) on 94 febrile neutropenia episodes (FNE) in AL patients KPC-K. pneumoniae carriers treated with active EAT.

Results

Eighty-two (87%) FNE were empirically treated with antibiotic combinations [38 colistin-based and 44 ceftazidime-avibactam (CAZAVI)-based], 12 with CAZAVI monotherapy. Successful outcomes were observed in 88/94 (94%) FNE, 46/49 (94%) microbiologically documented infections, and 24/27 (89%) gram-negative bloodstream infections (GNB-BSI). Mortality due to infective causes was 4.2% (2.1% within 1 week). KPC-K. pneumoniae infections caused 28/94 FNE (30%) and KPC-K. pneumoniae-BSI was documented in 22 FNE (23.4%) (85% of GNB-BSI), in all cases patients received active EAT, and 21 survived. KPC-K.pneumoniae-BSI mortality rate was 4.5%. CAZAVI-based EAT showed better results than colistin-based EAT (55/56 vs 33/38, p = 0.037), overall and without EAT modification (41/56 vs 20/38, p = 0.02). Empirical combinations including CAZAVI were successful in 98% of cases (43/44 vs 33/38 for colistin-based EAT, p = 0.01), without modifications in 82% (36/44 vs 20/28, p = 0.02). All deaths occurred in patients treated with colistin-based EAT (4/38 vs 0/56, p = 0.02). CAZAVI-containing EAT was the only independent factor for an overall successful response (HR 0.058, CI 0.013-1.072, p = 0.058). Nephrotoxicity occurred in 3(8%) patients undergoing colistin-based EAT (none in those undergoing CAZAVI-based EAT, p = 0.02).

Conclusion

KPC-K. pneumoniae infections are frequent in colonised AL patients with FNE. EAT with active antibiotics, mainly CAZAVI-based combinations, was effective, safe, and associated with low overall and KPC-K. pneumoniae-BSI-related mortality.

Efficacy of Combination Therapies for the Treatment of Multi-Drug Resistant Gram-Negative Bacterial Infections Based on Meta-Analyses

There is increasing evidence regarding the optimal therapeutic strategies for multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacteria that cause common infections and are resistant to existing antibiotics. Combination therapies, such as β-lactam combined with β-lactamase inhibitors or combination antibiotics, is a therapeutic strategy to overcome MDR bacteria. In recent years, the therapeutic options have expanded as certain combination drugs have been approved in more countries. However, only a handful of guidelines support these options, and the recommendations are based on low-quality evidence. This review describes the significance and efficacy of combination therapy as a therapeutic strategy against Gram-negative MDR pathogens based on previously reported meta-analyses.

Efficacy of Ceftazidime-Avibactam Versus Polymyxin B and Risk Factors Affecting Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Carbapenem-Resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae Infections a Retrospective Study

Background: The worldwide outbreak of carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae (CRKP) has become an urgent public health problem. High mortality and lack of effective treatments further pose new challenges to control this infection. However, studies about the evaluation of available antibiotics for CRKP infection are limited. The present study aimed to compare the efficacy of polymyxin B versus ceftazidime-avibactam (CAZ/AVI) in Chinese patients with CRKP infections and to identify risk factors affecting 7-day bacterial eradication and 28-day all-cause mortality. Methods: From January 8, 2018, to July 6, 2020, a total of 115 adult CRKP infected patients from two tertiary teaching hospitals in Shanghai, China were enrolled based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. By reviewing electronic medical records of these patients, demographic and clinical data were extracted. The selected patients were divided into polymyxin B and CAZ/AVI groups according to primary antibiotic exposure to compare therapeutic effects. Binary logistic and cox's regression analysis were performed to identify risk factors for 7-day bacterial eradication and all-cause mortality. Results: One hundred and five patients were treated with polymyxin B (67.8%) or CAZ/AVI (32.2%). Patients in the CAZ/AVI group had significantly lower rates of 28-day mortality (8.1 vs 29.5%, p = 0.013), higher microbiological eradication and 28-day clinical success. Multivariate analysis showed that Charlson comorbidity index (≥3) and prior antibiotic use within 90 days were independent risk factors for poor microbiological eradication. Cox's regression analysis indicated that the length of hospitalization after CRKP infection and baseline creatinine clearance negatively affected 28-day mortality. Conclusion: CAZ/AVI was more effective than polymyxin B and appeared to be a promising drug for CRKP infection, especially for critically ill patients.