Cargando…
1422. Comparative Monte-Carlo Analysis of Aztreonam-Avibactam vs. Ceftazidime–Avibactam Against Carbapenem-Resistant Gram-Negative Pathogens
BACKGROUND: The new β-lactamase inhibitor, avibactam (AVI), has recently been combined with ceftazidime (CAZ) as CAZ-AVI. AVI is also in Phase 3 clinical trials combined with aztreonam as ATM-AVI. Both drug combinations have similar in vitro activity against some organisms, but ATM-AVI is more poten...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6253416/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofy210.1253 |
_version_ | 1783373489210654720 |
---|---|
author | Smith, Aaron White, Roger |
author_facet | Smith, Aaron White, Roger |
author_sort | Smith, Aaron |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: The new β-lactamase inhibitor, avibactam (AVI), has recently been combined with ceftazidime (CAZ) as CAZ-AVI. AVI is also in Phase 3 clinical trials combined with aztreonam as ATM-AVI. Both drug combinations have similar in vitro activity against some organisms, but ATM-AVI is more potent against metallo-β-lactamase (MBL) producing organisms. However, against P. aeruginosa (PA), CAZ-AVI is more potent. Since these compounds have similar pharmacokinetic (PK)/pharmacodynamic (PD) profiles, and there is a need for drugs for the treatment of resistant microorganisms, a Monte-Carlo analysis (MCA) was used to assess their potential efficacy against carbapenem-resistant pathogens. METHODS: MCA (n = 10,000) was performed for ATM-AVI and CAZ-AVI using PK parameters, CrCl vs. Cl regression, PD targets, and recent MICs from peer-reviewed literature against five carbapenem-resistant (CR) organisms: P. aeruginosa (CR-PA), E. cloacae (CR-EC), K. pneumoniae (CR-KP), Enterobacteriaceae (CR-ENT), and MBL producing Enterobacteriaceae (MBL-ENT). Only MIC studies that directly evaluated both combinations were utilized. Our institution’s inpatient CrCl distribution (range: 10–120 mL/minute) was used to assess drug clearance. The ATM-AVI regimen was 1.5 g q6h with a 3 hours infusion and adjusted for renal function) and the CAZ-AVI regimen was 2 g q8h with a 2-hour infusion and adjusted for renal function). PD targets (%fT>MIC) for ATM-AVI were 40 and 60% and for CAZ-AVI were 40 and 70%. RESULTS: Target attainment (TA%) for each regimen and organism was: CONCLUSION: Both ATM-AVI and CAZ-AVI displayed very high TA% (>95%) for CR-EC, CR-KP, and CR-ENT at both PD targets. However, TA% for MBL-ENT was very low for CAZ-AVI and ≥99% for ATM-AVI. Against CR-PA, CAZ-AVI was had much higher TA% than ATM-AVI (87–93% vs. 43–48%). These differences suggest different roles for each drug combination in clinical practice. DISCLOSURES: All authors: No reported disclosures. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6253416 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-62534162018-11-28 1422. Comparative Monte-Carlo Analysis of Aztreonam-Avibactam vs. Ceftazidime–Avibactam Against Carbapenem-Resistant Gram-Negative Pathogens Smith, Aaron White, Roger Open Forum Infect Dis Abstracts BACKGROUND: The new β-lactamase inhibitor, avibactam (AVI), has recently been combined with ceftazidime (CAZ) as CAZ-AVI. AVI is also in Phase 3 clinical trials combined with aztreonam as ATM-AVI. Both drug combinations have similar in vitro activity against some organisms, but ATM-AVI is more potent against metallo-β-lactamase (MBL) producing organisms. However, against P. aeruginosa (PA), CAZ-AVI is more potent. Since these compounds have similar pharmacokinetic (PK)/pharmacodynamic (PD) profiles, and there is a need for drugs for the treatment of resistant microorganisms, a Monte-Carlo analysis (MCA) was used to assess their potential efficacy against carbapenem-resistant pathogens. METHODS: MCA (n = 10,000) was performed for ATM-AVI and CAZ-AVI using PK parameters, CrCl vs. Cl regression, PD targets, and recent MICs from peer-reviewed literature against five carbapenem-resistant (CR) organisms: P. aeruginosa (CR-PA), E. cloacae (CR-EC), K. pneumoniae (CR-KP), Enterobacteriaceae (CR-ENT), and MBL producing Enterobacteriaceae (MBL-ENT). Only MIC studies that directly evaluated both combinations were utilized. Our institution’s inpatient CrCl distribution (range: 10–120 mL/minute) was used to assess drug clearance. The ATM-AVI regimen was 1.5 g q6h with a 3 hours infusion and adjusted for renal function) and the CAZ-AVI regimen was 2 g q8h with a 2-hour infusion and adjusted for renal function). PD targets (%fT>MIC) for ATM-AVI were 40 and 60% and for CAZ-AVI were 40 and 70%. RESULTS: Target attainment (TA%) for each regimen and organism was: CONCLUSION: Both ATM-AVI and CAZ-AVI displayed very high TA% (>95%) for CR-EC, CR-KP, and CR-ENT at both PD targets. However, TA% for MBL-ENT was very low for CAZ-AVI and ≥99% for ATM-AVI. Against CR-PA, CAZ-AVI was had much higher TA% than ATM-AVI (87–93% vs. 43–48%). These differences suggest different roles for each drug combination in clinical practice. DISCLOSURES: All authors: No reported disclosures. Oxford University Press 2018-11-26 /pmc/articles/PMC6253416/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofy210.1253 Text en © The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of Infectious Diseases Society of America. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com |
spellingShingle | Abstracts Smith, Aaron White, Roger 1422. Comparative Monte-Carlo Analysis of Aztreonam-Avibactam vs. Ceftazidime–Avibactam Against Carbapenem-Resistant Gram-Negative Pathogens |
title | 1422. Comparative Monte-Carlo Analysis of Aztreonam-Avibactam vs. Ceftazidime–Avibactam Against Carbapenem-Resistant Gram-Negative Pathogens |
title_full | 1422. Comparative Monte-Carlo Analysis of Aztreonam-Avibactam vs. Ceftazidime–Avibactam Against Carbapenem-Resistant Gram-Negative Pathogens |
title_fullStr | 1422. Comparative Monte-Carlo Analysis of Aztreonam-Avibactam vs. Ceftazidime–Avibactam Against Carbapenem-Resistant Gram-Negative Pathogens |
title_full_unstemmed | 1422. Comparative Monte-Carlo Analysis of Aztreonam-Avibactam vs. Ceftazidime–Avibactam Against Carbapenem-Resistant Gram-Negative Pathogens |
title_short | 1422. Comparative Monte-Carlo Analysis of Aztreonam-Avibactam vs. Ceftazidime–Avibactam Against Carbapenem-Resistant Gram-Negative Pathogens |
title_sort | 1422. comparative monte-carlo analysis of aztreonam-avibactam vs. ceftazidime–avibactam against carbapenem-resistant gram-negative pathogens |
topic | Abstracts |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6253416/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofy210.1253 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT smithaaron 1422comparativemontecarloanalysisofaztreonamavibactamvsceftazidimeavibactamagainstcarbapenemresistantgramnegativepathogens AT whiteroger 1422comparativemontecarloanalysisofaztreonamavibactamvsceftazidimeavibactamagainstcarbapenemresistantgramnegativepathogens |