Impact of Underlying Comorbidities on Outcomes of Patients Treated with Ceftaroline Fosamil for Complicated Skin and Soft Tissue Infections: Pooled Results from Three Phase III Randomized Clinical Trials

Treatment challenges in the management of difficult-to-treat gram-positive infections: A consensus view apropos therapeutic role of novel anti-MRSA antibiotics, levonadifloxacin (IV) and alalevonadifloxacin (oral)

PURPOSE

Treatment of antibiotic-resistant Gram-positive infections (GPIs), including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is becoming increasingly difficult, particularly in patients with multiple co-morbidities who require antibiotics with greater safety and a consistent pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) profile. Such difficult-to-treat GPIs are often associated with poor outcomes, extended hospital stay and increased expenditure. This can be partly attributed to the limited safety and aberrant PK/PD profile of existing anti-MRSA antibiotics. In this context, intravenous levonadifloxacin and its oral prodrug alalevonadifloxacin are novel anti-MRSA antibiotics that have significant advantages over conventional anti-Gram-positive antibiotics. The purpose of this paper was to generate a consensus on the optimal use of levonadifloxacin and alalevonadifloxacin for tackling resistant Gram-positive infections in patients with multiple co-morbidities.

METHOD

Using a modified Delphi approach that combines critical appraisal of evidence and expert opinion, therapeutic use of levonadifloxacin and alalevonadifloxacin in various clinical scenarios and specific unmet conditions was deliberated. Fifteen expert members from medicine, critical-care, emergency, microbiology, and intensive-care disciplines participated and voted on 11 pre-conceived statements. When there was at least 70 % agreement, a consensus was reached.

RESULTS

Following the voting, agreements were reached on 10 out of the 11 statements. Broadly, a consensus was reached in defining the therapeutic role of levonadifloxacin and alalevonadifloxacin in the treatment of various clinical indications involving resistant Gram-positive pathogens, including MRSA, in patients with co-morbidities, such as co-existing or increased risk for kidney dysfunction or hepatic disease and/or immunosuppression; also, in therapeutically challenging conditions caused by Gram-positive bacteria such as bacteraemia, bone and joint infection, diabetic foot infection, febrile neutropenia, and hospital-acquired pneumonia.

CONCLUSIONS

This consensus supports the therapeutic use of levonadifloxacin and alalevonadifloxacin in the treatment of antibiotic-resistant GPIs, including those caused by MRSA and certain polymicrobial infections, in patients with multiple co-morbidities requiring drug with adequate safety and consistent efficacy.

Clinical evidence supporting ceftaroline fosamil and ceftobiprole for complicated skin and soft tissue infections

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Ceftaroline and ceftobiprole are advanced generation cephalosporins with activity against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). This review summarizes their clinical efficacy for complicated skin and soft tissue infections (cSSTIs).

RECENT FINDINGS

Both these agents retain excellent in vitro activity against both MRSA and Gram-negative isolates from patients with CSSTIs. Both these agents are registered for the management of cSSTIs based on the results of large scale phase III noninferiority trials. Ceftaroline and ceftobiprole are noninferior to the combination of vancomycin and aztreonam as this was assessed by their clinical cure rate at the test-of-cure visits. Furthermore, ceftobiprole is noninferior to comparators for the achievement of early clinical success at 72 h. Ceftaroline achieves 81% clinical cure against diabetic foot infections.

SUMMARY

Ceftaroline and ceftobiprole can be used as monotherapy for the treatment of cSSTIs.

Comprehensive guidance for antibiotic dosing in obese adults: 2022 update

Drug dosing in obese patients continues to be challenging due to a lack of high-quality evidence to guide dosing recommendations. We first published guidance for antibiotic dosing in obese adults in 2017, in which we critically reviewed articles identified from a broad search strategy to develop dosing recommendations for 35 antimicrobials. In this updated narrative review, we searched Pubmed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library using Medical Subject Headings including anti-infectives, specific generic antimicrobial names, obese, pharmacokinetics, and others. We reviewed 393 articles, cross-referenced select cited references, and when applicable, referenced drug databases, package inserts, and clinical trial data to update dosing recommendations for 41 antimicrobials. Most included articles were pharmacokinetic studies, other less frequently included articles were clinical studies (mostly small, retrospective), case reports, and very rarely, guidelines. Pharmacokinetic changes are frequently reported, can be variable, and sometimes conflicting in this population, and do not always translate to a documented difference in clinical outcomes, yet are used to inform dosing strategies. Extended infusions, high doses, and therapeutic drug monitoring remain important strategies to optimize dosing in this population. Additional studies are needed to clinically validate proposed dosing strategies, clarify optimal body size descriptors, dosing weight scalars, and estimation method of renal function in obese patients.