Efficacy of ceftaroline fosamil for bacteremia associated with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia

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.

Contemporary pharmacologic treatments of MRSA for hospitalized adults: rationale for vancomycin versus non-vancomycin therapies as first line agents

INTRODUCTION

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) remains an important pathogen in the hospital setting and causes significant morbidity and mortality each year. Since the initial discovery over 60 years ago, vancomycin has remained a first-line treatment for many different types of MRSA infections. However, significant concerns related to target attainment and nephrotoxicity have spurred efforts to develop more effective agents in the last two decades.

AREAS COVERED

Newer anti-MRSA antibiotics that have been approved since 2000 include linezolid, daptomycin, and ceftaroline. As clinical evidence has accumulated, these newer agents have become more frequently used, and some are now recommended as co-first-line options (along with vancomycin) in clinical practice guidelines. For this review, a scoping review of the literature was conducted to support our findings and recommendations.

EXPERT OPINION

Vancomycin remains an important standard of care for MRSA infections but is limited with respect to nephrotoxicity and rapid target attainment. Newer agents such as linezolid, daptomycin, and ceftaroline have specific indications for treating different types of MRSA infections; however, newer agents also have unique attributes which require consideration during therapy.

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.

Treatment outcomes of secondary bacteraemia in patients treated with ceftaroline fosamil: pooled results from six phase III clinical trials

OBJECTIVES

This exploratory pooled analysis assessed the efficacy and safety of ceftaroline fosamil and comparators across six phase III clinical trials in adults with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) or complicated skin and soft-tissue infection (cSSTI) and secondary bacteraemia.

METHODS

In each trial, FOCUS 1 and 2 (CAP), Asia CAP trial, CANVAS 1 and 2 (cSSTI) and COVERS (cSSTI), patients were randomised to ceftaroline fosamil [600 mg q12h by 1-h i.v. infusion, except in COVERS (600 mg q8h by 2-h i.v. infusion), adjusted for renal function] or comparator. Efficacy assessments included clinical and microbiological responses at test-of-cure visit [microbiological modified intent-to-treat (mMITT) population]. Safety outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

The pooled mMITT population comprised 1976 patients, of whom 138 had baseline bacteraemia (ceftaroline fosamil, n = 72; comparator, n = 66). Predominant baseline blood pathogens were Staphylococcus aureus (n = 29), Streptococcus pneumoniae (n = 19) and other streptococci (n = 12). Clinical cure rates in bacteraemic patients were 55/72 (76.4%) and 51/66 (77.3%) for ceftaroline fosamil and comparators, respectively, and in non-bacteraemic patients were 822/966 (85.1%) and 717/872 (82.2%). Favourable microbiological response rates in bacteraemic patients were 56/72 (77.8%) for ceftaroline fosamil and 54/66 (81.8%) for comparators, and in non-bacteraemic patients were 825/966 (85.4%) and 719/872 (82.5%). Adverse events in bacteraemic patients were consistent with the known ceftaroline fosamil safety profile or the underlying indications.

CONCLUSION

These pooled clinical and microbiological efficacy data demonstrate generally favourable outcomes for ceftaroline fosamil in patients with CAP or cSSTI and secondary bacteraemia. [Trial Registration: NCT00621504, NCT00509106; NCT01371838; NCT00424190, NCT00423657; NCT01499277].

Plasma and Lung Tissue Pharmacokinetics of Ceftaroline Fosamil in Patients Undergoing Cardiac Surgery with Cardiopulmonary Bypass: an In Vivo Microdialysis Study

Ceftaroline fosamil, a fifth-generation cephalosporin antibiotic with activity against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), is currently approved for the treatment of pneumonia and complicated skin and soft tissue infections. However, pharmacokinetics data on free lung tissue concentrations in critical patient populations are lacking. The aim of this study was to evaluate the pharmacokinetics of the high-dose regimen of ceftaroline in plasma and lung tissue in cardiac surgery patients during intermittent and continuous administration. Nine patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery on cardiopulmonary bypass were included in this study and randomly assigned to intermittent or continuous administration. Eighteen hundred milligrams of ceftaroline fosamil was administered intravenously as either 600 mg over 2 h every 8 h (q8h) (intermittent group) or 600 mg over 2 h (loading dose) plus 1,200 mg over 22 h (continuous group). Interstitial lung tissue concentrations were measured by in vivo microdialysis. Relevant pharmacokinetics parameters were calculated for each group. Plasma exposure levels during intermittent and continuous administration were comparable to those of previously published studies and did not differ significantly between the two groups. In vivo microdialysis demonstrated reliable and adequate penetration of ceftaroline into lung tissue during intermittent and continuous administration. The steady-state area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 8 h (AUCss 0-8) and the ratio of AUCSS 0-8 in lung tissue and AUC in plasma (AUClung/plasma) were descriptively higher in the continuous group. Continuous administration of ceftaroline fosamil achieved a significantly higher proportion of time for which the free drug concentration remained above 4 times the minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) during the dosing interval (% fT>4xMIC) than intermittent administration for pathogens with a MIC of 1 mg/liter. Ceftaroline showed adequate penetration into interstitial lung tissue of critically ill patients undergoing major cardiothoracic surgery, supporting its use for pneumonia caused by susceptible pathogens.

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.