Cargando…

2262. Ceftazidime–Avibactam vs. Polymyxin B in the Treatment of Infections Due to Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae

BACKGROUND: Pharmacotherapy for carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) infections is limited. There is a paucity of evidence to guide optimal management of CRE infections. Ceftazidime–avibactam, a novel cephalosporin/β-lactamase inhibitor, may be a reasonable alternative to colistin for CRE i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: John, Jamie, Nelson, Brian, Macesic, Nenad
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6811330/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.1940
_version_ 1783462458823802880
author John, Jamie
Nelson, Brian
Macesic, Nenad
author_facet John, Jamie
Nelson, Brian
Macesic, Nenad
author_sort John, Jamie
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Pharmacotherapy for carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) infections is limited. There is a paucity of evidence to guide optimal management of CRE infections. Ceftazidime–avibactam, a novel cephalosporin/β-lactamase inhibitor, may be a reasonable alternative to colistin for CRE infections, but data on polymyxin B (PB) are lacking. Given the improved pharmacokinetic profile of PB compared with colistin, we sought to evaluate clinical and microbiological outcomes of patients treated with CAZ-AVI vs. PB for CRE infections. METHODS: We conducted retrospective cohort study in adult patients treated with CAZ-AVI or PB for a CRE infection between June 2010 and August 2018. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 30 days. Secondary outcomes included clinical cure, microbiological cure, and development of resistance. Endpoints were analyzed using standard statistical measures. The influence of clinical variables other than antimicrobial therapy was assessed in a multivariable regression analysis. RESULTS: The study included 117 patients, with 42 patients receiving CAZ-AVI and 75 receiving PB. Respiratory and urinary tract infections were most common, occurring in 37.6% and 20.5% of patients, respectively. Bloodstream infections occurred in 45 (35.9%) patients. In the CAZ-AVI group, there were 9 deaths (21.4%), compared with 19 deaths (25.3%) in the PB group (P = 0.653). No statistically significant differences were found in clinical cure or microbiologic cure between CAZ-AVI and PB. PB was associated with a higher incidence of nephrotoxicity (19% vs. 43%; P = 0.048). After adjustment for duration of therapy, combination therapy, and initial WBC, use of PB was not an independent predictor of mortality. CONCLUSION: No statistically significant differences between CAZ-AVI and PB were found in clinical or microbiologic outcomes in this cohort of patients treated for CRE infection. Further studies are necessary to confirm these preliminary findings to optimize clinical practice. DISCLOSURES: All authors: No reported disclosures.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6811330
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-68113302019-10-28 2262. Ceftazidime–Avibactam vs. Polymyxin B in the Treatment of Infections Due to Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae John, Jamie Nelson, Brian Macesic, Nenad Open Forum Infect Dis Abstracts BACKGROUND: Pharmacotherapy for carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) infections is limited. There is a paucity of evidence to guide optimal management of CRE infections. Ceftazidime–avibactam, a novel cephalosporin/β-lactamase inhibitor, may be a reasonable alternative to colistin for CRE infections, but data on polymyxin B (PB) are lacking. Given the improved pharmacokinetic profile of PB compared with colistin, we sought to evaluate clinical and microbiological outcomes of patients treated with CAZ-AVI vs. PB for CRE infections. METHODS: We conducted retrospective cohort study in adult patients treated with CAZ-AVI or PB for a CRE infection between June 2010 and August 2018. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 30 days. Secondary outcomes included clinical cure, microbiological cure, and development of resistance. Endpoints were analyzed using standard statistical measures. The influence of clinical variables other than antimicrobial therapy was assessed in a multivariable regression analysis. RESULTS: The study included 117 patients, with 42 patients receiving CAZ-AVI and 75 receiving PB. Respiratory and urinary tract infections were most common, occurring in 37.6% and 20.5% of patients, respectively. Bloodstream infections occurred in 45 (35.9%) patients. In the CAZ-AVI group, there were 9 deaths (21.4%), compared with 19 deaths (25.3%) in the PB group (P = 0.653). No statistically significant differences were found in clinical cure or microbiologic cure between CAZ-AVI and PB. PB was associated with a higher incidence of nephrotoxicity (19% vs. 43%; P = 0.048). After adjustment for duration of therapy, combination therapy, and initial WBC, use of PB was not an independent predictor of mortality. CONCLUSION: No statistically significant differences between CAZ-AVI and PB were found in clinical or microbiologic outcomes in this cohort of patients treated for CRE infection. Further studies are necessary to confirm these preliminary findings to optimize clinical practice. DISCLOSURES: All authors: No reported disclosures. Oxford University Press 2019-10-23 /pmc/articles/PMC6811330/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.1940 Text en © The Author(s) 2019. 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
John, Jamie
Nelson, Brian
Macesic, Nenad
2262. Ceftazidime–Avibactam vs. Polymyxin B in the Treatment of Infections Due to Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae
title 2262. Ceftazidime–Avibactam vs. Polymyxin B in the Treatment of Infections Due to Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae
title_full 2262. Ceftazidime–Avibactam vs. Polymyxin B in the Treatment of Infections Due to Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae
title_fullStr 2262. Ceftazidime–Avibactam vs. Polymyxin B in the Treatment of Infections Due to Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae
title_full_unstemmed 2262. Ceftazidime–Avibactam vs. Polymyxin B in the Treatment of Infections Due to Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae
title_short 2262. Ceftazidime–Avibactam vs. Polymyxin B in the Treatment of Infections Due to Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae
title_sort 2262. ceftazidime–avibactam vs. polymyxin b in the treatment of infections due to carbapenem-resistant enterobacteriaceae
topic Abstracts
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6811330/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofz360.1940
work_keys_str_mv AT johnjamie 2262ceftazidimeavibactamvspolymyxinbinthetreatmentofinfectionsduetocarbapenemresistantenterobacteriaceae
AT nelsonbrian 2262ceftazidimeavibactamvspolymyxinbinthetreatmentofinfectionsduetocarbapenemresistantenterobacteriaceae
AT macesicnenad 2262ceftazidimeavibactamvspolymyxinbinthetreatmentofinfectionsduetocarbapenemresistantenterobacteriaceae