Cargando…

2383. In Vitro Activity of Ceftolozane–Tazobactam in Comparison With Ceftazidime–Avibactam vs. Antimicrobial Non-Susceptible Pseudomonas aeruginosa Clinical Isolates, Including Multidrug-Resistant and Extensively Drug-Resistant Subsets: CANWARD, 2007–2017

BACKGROUND: Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PA) is an important nosocomial pathogen. Treatment options for infections caused by multidrug-resistant (MDR) and extensively drug-resistant (XDR) isolates remain limited. Ceftolozane-tazobactam (C/T) and ceftazidime–avibactam (CZA) are two newer antimicrobials wi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Walkty, Andrew, Adam, Heather J, Baxter, Melanie, Lagace-Wiens, Philippe, Karlowsky, James, Hoban, Daryl, Zhanel, George
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6255566/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofy210.2036
_version_ 1783373971502137344
author Walkty, Andrew
Adam, Heather J
Baxter, Melanie
Lagace-Wiens, Philippe
Karlowsky, James
Hoban, Daryl
Zhanel, George
author_facet Walkty, Andrew
Adam, Heather J
Baxter, Melanie
Lagace-Wiens, Philippe
Karlowsky, James
Hoban, Daryl
Zhanel, George
author_sort Walkty, Andrew
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PA) is an important nosocomial pathogen. Treatment options for infections caused by multidrug-resistant (MDR) and extensively drug-resistant (XDR) isolates remain limited. Ceftolozane-tazobactam (C/T) and ceftazidime–avibactam (CZA) are two newer antimicrobials with antipseudomonal activity. The purpose of this study was to directly compare the in vitro activity of C/T and CZA vs. antimicrobial non-susceptible (NS) PA clinical isolates obtained as part of the CANWARD study. METHODS: Annually from 2007 to 2017, sentinel hospitals across Canada submitted blood, respiratory, urine, and wound isolates (consecutive, one per patient/infection site) from patients attending ERs, medical and surgical wards, hospital clinics, and ICUs (CANWARD). Susceptibility testing was performed using broth microdilution (and breakpoints) as described by CLSI. MDR PA were defined as isolates that tested NS to at least one antimicrobial from ≥3 classes. XDR PA were defined as isolates that tested NS to at least one antimicrobial from ≥5 classes. RESULTS: 4224 PA isolates were obtained as a part of CANWARD. 628 (14.9%) were MDR, and 129 (3.1%) were XDR. The in vitro activity of C/T and CZA (plus relevant comparators) is presented below. CONCLUSION: The in vitro activity of C/T was superior to CZA vs. antimicrobial NS PA clinical isolates (including MDR and XDR isolates) recovered from patients across Canada. DISCLOSURES: D. Hoban, Abbott: Research relationship, Research support. Achaogen: Research relationship, Research support. Astellas: Research relationship, Research support. Merck Canada: Research relationship, Research support. Merck USA: Research relationship, Research support. Paratek Pharma: Research relationship, Research support. Pharmascience: Research relationship, Research support. Sunovion: Research relationship, Research support. Tetraphase: Research relationship, Research support. The Medicines Co.: Reserch relationship, Research support. Zoetis: Research relationship, Research support. G. Zhanel, Achaogen: Research relationship, Research support. Astellas: Research relationship, Research support. Merck Canada: Research relationship, Research support. Merck USA: Research relationship, Research support. Paratek PHarma: Research relationship, Research support. Pharmascience: Research relationship, Research support. Sunovion: Research relationship, Research support. Tetraphase: Research relationship, Research support. The Medicines Co.: Research relationship, Research support. Zoetis: Reserch relationship, Research support.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6255566
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-62555662018-11-28 2383. In Vitro Activity of Ceftolozane–Tazobactam in Comparison With Ceftazidime–Avibactam vs. Antimicrobial Non-Susceptible Pseudomonas aeruginosa Clinical Isolates, Including Multidrug-Resistant and Extensively Drug-Resistant Subsets: CANWARD, 2007–2017 Walkty, Andrew Adam, Heather J Baxter, Melanie Lagace-Wiens, Philippe Karlowsky, James Hoban, Daryl Zhanel, George Open Forum Infect Dis Abstracts BACKGROUND: Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PA) is an important nosocomial pathogen. Treatment options for infections caused by multidrug-resistant (MDR) and extensively drug-resistant (XDR) isolates remain limited. Ceftolozane-tazobactam (C/T) and ceftazidime–avibactam (CZA) are two newer antimicrobials with antipseudomonal activity. The purpose of this study was to directly compare the in vitro activity of C/T and CZA vs. antimicrobial non-susceptible (NS) PA clinical isolates obtained as part of the CANWARD study. METHODS: Annually from 2007 to 2017, sentinel hospitals across Canada submitted blood, respiratory, urine, and wound isolates (consecutive, one per patient/infection site) from patients attending ERs, medical and surgical wards, hospital clinics, and ICUs (CANWARD). Susceptibility testing was performed using broth microdilution (and breakpoints) as described by CLSI. MDR PA were defined as isolates that tested NS to at least one antimicrobial from ≥3 classes. XDR PA were defined as isolates that tested NS to at least one antimicrobial from ≥5 classes. RESULTS: 4224 PA isolates were obtained as a part of CANWARD. 628 (14.9%) were MDR, and 129 (3.1%) were XDR. The in vitro activity of C/T and CZA (plus relevant comparators) is presented below. CONCLUSION: The in vitro activity of C/T was superior to CZA vs. antimicrobial NS PA clinical isolates (including MDR and XDR isolates) recovered from patients across Canada. DISCLOSURES: D. Hoban, Abbott: Research relationship, Research support. Achaogen: Research relationship, Research support. Astellas: Research relationship, Research support. Merck Canada: Research relationship, Research support. Merck USA: Research relationship, Research support. Paratek Pharma: Research relationship, Research support. Pharmascience: Research relationship, Research support. Sunovion: Research relationship, Research support. Tetraphase: Research relationship, Research support. The Medicines Co.: Reserch relationship, Research support. Zoetis: Research relationship, Research support. G. Zhanel, Achaogen: Research relationship, Research support. Astellas: Research relationship, Research support. Merck Canada: Research relationship, Research support. Merck USA: Research relationship, Research support. Paratek PHarma: Research relationship, Research support. Pharmascience: Research relationship, Research support. Sunovion: Research relationship, Research support. Tetraphase: Research relationship, Research support. The Medicines Co.: Research relationship, Research support. Zoetis: Reserch relationship, Research support. Oxford University Press 2018-11-26 /pmc/articles/PMC6255566/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofy210.2036 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
Walkty, Andrew
Adam, Heather J
Baxter, Melanie
Lagace-Wiens, Philippe
Karlowsky, James
Hoban, Daryl
Zhanel, George
2383. In Vitro Activity of Ceftolozane–Tazobactam in Comparison With Ceftazidime–Avibactam vs. Antimicrobial Non-Susceptible Pseudomonas aeruginosa Clinical Isolates, Including Multidrug-Resistant and Extensively Drug-Resistant Subsets: CANWARD, 2007–2017
title 2383. In Vitro Activity of Ceftolozane–Tazobactam in Comparison With Ceftazidime–Avibactam vs. Antimicrobial Non-Susceptible Pseudomonas aeruginosa Clinical Isolates, Including Multidrug-Resistant and Extensively Drug-Resistant Subsets: CANWARD, 2007–2017
title_full 2383. In Vitro Activity of Ceftolozane–Tazobactam in Comparison With Ceftazidime–Avibactam vs. Antimicrobial Non-Susceptible Pseudomonas aeruginosa Clinical Isolates, Including Multidrug-Resistant and Extensively Drug-Resistant Subsets: CANWARD, 2007–2017
title_fullStr 2383. In Vitro Activity of Ceftolozane–Tazobactam in Comparison With Ceftazidime–Avibactam vs. Antimicrobial Non-Susceptible Pseudomonas aeruginosa Clinical Isolates, Including Multidrug-Resistant and Extensively Drug-Resistant Subsets: CANWARD, 2007–2017
title_full_unstemmed 2383. In Vitro Activity of Ceftolozane–Tazobactam in Comparison With Ceftazidime–Avibactam vs. Antimicrobial Non-Susceptible Pseudomonas aeruginosa Clinical Isolates, Including Multidrug-Resistant and Extensively Drug-Resistant Subsets: CANWARD, 2007–2017
title_short 2383. In Vitro Activity of Ceftolozane–Tazobactam in Comparison With Ceftazidime–Avibactam vs. Antimicrobial Non-Susceptible Pseudomonas aeruginosa Clinical Isolates, Including Multidrug-Resistant and Extensively Drug-Resistant Subsets: CANWARD, 2007–2017
title_sort 2383. in vitro activity of ceftolozane–tazobactam in comparison with ceftazidime–avibactam vs. antimicrobial non-susceptible pseudomonas aeruginosa clinical isolates, including multidrug-resistant and extensively drug-resistant subsets: canward, 2007–2017
topic Abstracts
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6255566/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofy210.2036
work_keys_str_mv AT walktyandrew 2383invitroactivityofceftolozanetazobactamincomparisonwithceftazidimeavibactamvsantimicrobialnonsusceptiblepseudomonasaeruginosaclinicalisolatesincludingmultidrugresistantandextensivelydrugresistantsubsetscanward20072017
AT adamheatherj 2383invitroactivityofceftolozanetazobactamincomparisonwithceftazidimeavibactamvsantimicrobialnonsusceptiblepseudomonasaeruginosaclinicalisolatesincludingmultidrugresistantandextensivelydrugresistantsubsetscanward20072017
AT baxtermelanie 2383invitroactivityofceftolozanetazobactamincomparisonwithceftazidimeavibactamvsantimicrobialnonsusceptiblepseudomonasaeruginosaclinicalisolatesincludingmultidrugresistantandextensivelydrugresistantsubsetscanward20072017
AT lagacewiensphilippe 2383invitroactivityofceftolozanetazobactamincomparisonwithceftazidimeavibactamvsantimicrobialnonsusceptiblepseudomonasaeruginosaclinicalisolatesincludingmultidrugresistantandextensivelydrugresistantsubsetscanward20072017
AT karlowskyjames 2383invitroactivityofceftolozanetazobactamincomparisonwithceftazidimeavibactamvsantimicrobialnonsusceptiblepseudomonasaeruginosaclinicalisolatesincludingmultidrugresistantandextensivelydrugresistantsubsetscanward20072017
AT hobandaryl 2383invitroactivityofceftolozanetazobactamincomparisonwithceftazidimeavibactamvsantimicrobialnonsusceptiblepseudomonasaeruginosaclinicalisolatesincludingmultidrugresistantandextensivelydrugresistantsubsetscanward20072017
AT zhanelgeorge 2383invitroactivityofceftolozanetazobactamincomparisonwithceftazidimeavibactamvsantimicrobialnonsusceptiblepseudomonasaeruginosaclinicalisolatesincludingmultidrugresistantandextensivelydrugresistantsubsetscanward20072017