Cargando…
Outcomes with Cefiderocol Treatment in Patients with Bacteraemia Enrolled into Prospective Phase 2 and Phase 3 Randomised Clinical Studies
INTRODUCTION: A post hoc, descriptive analysis of three prospective, randomised, controlled clinical studies investigating cefiderocol in gram-negative bacterial infections was conducted to assess its efficacy in patients with baseline bacteraemia. METHODS: Data from APEKS-cUTI (NCT02321800), APEKS-...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Healthcare
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8960491/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35184255 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40121-022-00598-9 |
_version_ | 1784677391991308288 |
---|---|
author | Paterson, David L. Kinoshita, Masahiro Baba, Takamichi Echols, Roger Portsmouth, Simon |
author_facet | Paterson, David L. Kinoshita, Masahiro Baba, Takamichi Echols, Roger Portsmouth, Simon |
author_sort | Paterson, David L. |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: A post hoc, descriptive analysis of three prospective, randomised, controlled clinical studies investigating cefiderocol in gram-negative bacterial infections was conducted to assess its efficacy in patients with baseline bacteraemia. METHODS: Data from APEKS-cUTI (NCT02321800), APEKS-NP (NCT03032380) and CREDIBLE-CR (NCT02714595) studies were assessed individually. Patients received cefiderocol 2g, q8h, for 7–14 days or comparators (imipenem/cilastatin [APEKS-cUTI], meropenem [APEKS-NP] or best available therapy [BAT; CREDIBLE-CR]). Bacteraemia and clinical outcomes were assessed at early assessment (EA), end of treatment (EOT) and test of cure (TOC) for patients in the intention-to-treat populations with baseline blood samples positive for aerobic gram-negative species. Eradication, persistence or recurrence of baseline blood pathogen was confirmed from follow-up blood cultures; in the absence of follow-up blood cultures, clinical response, administration of additional antibiotics and vital status were used to assess bacteraemia outcome. RESULTS: Of 885 patients randomised, 84 had bacteraemia and 89 (cefiderocol: 55, comparators: 34) gram-negative pathogens were isolated, namely Enterobacterales (n = 62) and non-fermenters (n = 27). At EA, on-therapy bacteraemia eradication rates in APEKS-cUTI, APEKS-NP and CREDIBLE-CR were 100% (19/19), 50.0% (4/8) and 72.0% (18/25) with cefiderocol. Corresponding rates for comparators were 77.8% (7/9), 100% (10/10) and 69.2% (9/13), respectively. Persistence in blood at EA was seen in six patients overall (cefiderocol: 3, comparators: 3); indeterminate responses were common (cefiderocol: 8, comparators: 3), usually due to lack of blood cultures. Clinical cure/improvement rates at EA in APEKS-cUTI, APEKS-NP and CREDIBLE-CR were 100% (19/19), 62.5% (5/8) and 64.0% (16/25) with cefiderocol. Corresponding rates for comparators were 77.8% (7/9), 90.0% (9/10) and 30.8% (4/13), respectively. Bacteraemia eradication rates with cefiderocol in APEKS-cUTI, APEKS-NP and CREDIBLE-CR were 89.5%, 37.5% and 60.0% at EOT and 78.9%, 12.5% and 44.0% at TOC. CONCLUSION: This descriptive analysis suggests that cefiderocol may be a useful treatment option for gram-negative bacteraemia, including pathogens resistant to other antibiotics. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40121-022-00598-9. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8960491 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Springer Healthcare |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-89604912022-04-12 Outcomes with Cefiderocol Treatment in Patients with Bacteraemia Enrolled into Prospective Phase 2 and Phase 3 Randomised Clinical Studies Paterson, David L. Kinoshita, Masahiro Baba, Takamichi Echols, Roger Portsmouth, Simon Infect Dis Ther Original Research INTRODUCTION: A post hoc, descriptive analysis of three prospective, randomised, controlled clinical studies investigating cefiderocol in gram-negative bacterial infections was conducted to assess its efficacy in patients with baseline bacteraemia. METHODS: Data from APEKS-cUTI (NCT02321800), APEKS-NP (NCT03032380) and CREDIBLE-CR (NCT02714595) studies were assessed individually. Patients received cefiderocol 2g, q8h, for 7–14 days or comparators (imipenem/cilastatin [APEKS-cUTI], meropenem [APEKS-NP] or best available therapy [BAT; CREDIBLE-CR]). Bacteraemia and clinical outcomes were assessed at early assessment (EA), end of treatment (EOT) and test of cure (TOC) for patients in the intention-to-treat populations with baseline blood samples positive for aerobic gram-negative species. Eradication, persistence or recurrence of baseline blood pathogen was confirmed from follow-up blood cultures; in the absence of follow-up blood cultures, clinical response, administration of additional antibiotics and vital status were used to assess bacteraemia outcome. RESULTS: Of 885 patients randomised, 84 had bacteraemia and 89 (cefiderocol: 55, comparators: 34) gram-negative pathogens were isolated, namely Enterobacterales (n = 62) and non-fermenters (n = 27). At EA, on-therapy bacteraemia eradication rates in APEKS-cUTI, APEKS-NP and CREDIBLE-CR were 100% (19/19), 50.0% (4/8) and 72.0% (18/25) with cefiderocol. Corresponding rates for comparators were 77.8% (7/9), 100% (10/10) and 69.2% (9/13), respectively. Persistence in blood at EA was seen in six patients overall (cefiderocol: 3, comparators: 3); indeterminate responses were common (cefiderocol: 8, comparators: 3), usually due to lack of blood cultures. Clinical cure/improvement rates at EA in APEKS-cUTI, APEKS-NP and CREDIBLE-CR were 100% (19/19), 62.5% (5/8) and 64.0% (16/25) with cefiderocol. Corresponding rates for comparators were 77.8% (7/9), 90.0% (9/10) and 30.8% (4/13), respectively. Bacteraemia eradication rates with cefiderocol in APEKS-cUTI, APEKS-NP and CREDIBLE-CR were 89.5%, 37.5% and 60.0% at EOT and 78.9%, 12.5% and 44.0% at TOC. CONCLUSION: This descriptive analysis suggests that cefiderocol may be a useful treatment option for gram-negative bacteraemia, including pathogens resistant to other antibiotics. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40121-022-00598-9. Springer Healthcare 2022-02-20 2022-04 /pmc/articles/PMC8960491/ /pubmed/35184255 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40121-022-00598-9 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License, which permits any non-commercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Original Research Paterson, David L. Kinoshita, Masahiro Baba, Takamichi Echols, Roger Portsmouth, Simon Outcomes with Cefiderocol Treatment in Patients with Bacteraemia Enrolled into Prospective Phase 2 and Phase 3 Randomised Clinical Studies |
title | Outcomes with Cefiderocol Treatment in Patients with Bacteraemia Enrolled into Prospective Phase 2 and Phase 3 Randomised Clinical Studies |
title_full | Outcomes with Cefiderocol Treatment in Patients with Bacteraemia Enrolled into Prospective Phase 2 and Phase 3 Randomised Clinical Studies |
title_fullStr | Outcomes with Cefiderocol Treatment in Patients with Bacteraemia Enrolled into Prospective Phase 2 and Phase 3 Randomised Clinical Studies |
title_full_unstemmed | Outcomes with Cefiderocol Treatment in Patients with Bacteraemia Enrolled into Prospective Phase 2 and Phase 3 Randomised Clinical Studies |
title_short | Outcomes with Cefiderocol Treatment in Patients with Bacteraemia Enrolled into Prospective Phase 2 and Phase 3 Randomised Clinical Studies |
title_sort | outcomes with cefiderocol treatment in patients with bacteraemia enrolled into prospective phase 2 and phase 3 randomised clinical studies |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8960491/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35184255 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40121-022-00598-9 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT patersondavidl outcomeswithcefiderocoltreatmentinpatientswithbacteraemiaenrolledintoprospectivephase2andphase3randomisedclinicalstudies AT kinoshitamasahiro outcomeswithcefiderocoltreatmentinpatientswithbacteraemiaenrolledintoprospectivephase2andphase3randomisedclinicalstudies AT babatakamichi outcomeswithcefiderocoltreatmentinpatientswithbacteraemiaenrolledintoprospectivephase2andphase3randomisedclinicalstudies AT echolsroger outcomeswithcefiderocoltreatmentinpatientswithbacteraemiaenrolledintoprospectivephase2andphase3randomisedclinicalstudies AT portsmouthsimon outcomeswithcefiderocoltreatmentinpatientswithbacteraemiaenrolledintoprospectivephase2andphase3randomisedclinicalstudies |