Linezolid versus vancomycin for the treatment of infections caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in Japan

Novel fluorobenzothiazole as a dual inhibitor of gyrase B and topoisomerase IV against Gram-positive pathogens

Aim: The development of a novel inhibitor targeting gyrase B and topoisomerase IV offers an opportunity to combat multidrug resistance. Methods: We investigated the activity of RBx 10080758 against Gram-positive bacteria in vitro and in vivo. Results: RBx 10080758 showed a potent 50% inhibitory concentration of 0.13 μM and 0.25 μM against gyrase B and topoisomerase IV, respectively, and exhibited strong whole-cell in vitro activity with MIC ranges of 0.015-0.06 and 0.015-0.03 μg/ml against Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pneumoniae, respectively. In a rat thigh infection model with methicillin-resistant S. aureus, RBx 10080758 at 45 mg/kg exhibited a >3 log10 CFU reduction in thigh muscles. Conclusion: RBx 10080758 displayed potent activity against multiple multidrug-resistant Gram-positive bacteria with a dual-targeting mechanism of action.

Protective role of resveratrol against VCM-induced hepatotoxicity in male wistar rats

Background: Vancomycin is a glycopeptide antibiotic with a high risk of acute liver injury. Resveratrol is believed to protect the liver against toxicity. Aim: To investigate the ability of resveratrol to attenuate vancomycin-induced liver toxicity in rats injected with vancomycin. Method: Twenty-four adult male Wistar rats were distributed into three groups. The control group received only a vehicle, while the treated group received either vancomycin 200 (mg/kg, i. p.) only or vancomycin (200 mg/kg, i. p.) with resveratrol (20 mg/kg, oral gavage). All groups received their dose once daily for 7 days. Hepatic damage was assessed by measuring biochemical parameter levels in serum, aspartate transaminase (AST), alanine transaminase (ALT), alkaline phosphatase (ALP), and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH). Also, antioxidants and inflammation biomarkers such as Interleukin-6 (IL-6), malondialdehyde (MDA), nitric oxide (NO), and glutathione (GSH) were measured. Furthermore, the vancomycin-induced pathological changes in the liver were evaluated by histopathological studies. Results: In the vancomycin-treated group, hepatic serum biomarkers such as AST, ALT, ALP, IL-6, and MDA were elevated, while NO and GSH were depleted. However, resveratrol co-treatment with vancomycin prevented the elevation of AST, ALT, ALP, IL-6, and MDA and it protected the liver from NO and GSH depletion. Also, regarding vancomycin-induced degeneration of hepatocytes, resveratrol co-treatment with vancomycin prevented such degeneration and improved mononuclear cells in the liver. Conclusion: The results showed that oral administration of resveratrol has a significant hepatoprotective effect against vancomycin-induced hepatotoxicity.

Oral minocycline plus rifampicin versus oral linezolid for complicated skin and skin structure infections caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: The AIDA open label, randomized, controlled Phase 4 trial

BACKGROUND

The need for oral, cost-effective treatment for complicated skin and skin structure infections (cSSSIs) due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) was addressed by the non-inferiority comparisons of oral minocycline plus rifampicin with linezolid.

METHODS

In the AIDA multicenter, open label, randomized, controlled clinical trial, hospitalized adults with cSSSI and documented MRSA were randomly assigned at a 2:1 ratio to either oral 600 mg rifampicin qd plus 100 mg minocycline bid or oral 600 mg linezolid bid for 10 days. The primary endpoint was the clinical cure rate in the clinically evaluable (CE) population at the test-of-cure visit (14 days). Non-inferiority was confirmed if the lower confidence limit (CI) did not fall below the accepted error margin of 15%. The study is registered with EudraCT number 2014-001276-56.

FINDINGS

123 patients recruited between November 2014 and January 2017 were randomly assigned to treatment (81 patients to minocycline plus rifampicin and 42 patients to linezolid). Cure rates were 78.% (46/59, 90% CI 67.3-86.5) and 68.6% (24/35, 90% CI 53.4-81.3), respectively (P = 0.337). The percent difference in cure rates was 9.4% (90% CI -7.2 to 26.8%). Minocycline plus rifampicin combination was deemed non-inferior to linezolid as the lower CI was -7.2% i.e. smaller than the accepted error margin of -15%. Although statistically not significant, the overall rate of adverse events was higher in the linezolid group (47.6%, 20/42 versus 38.3%, 31/81).

INTERPRETATION

Oral minocycline plus rifampicin was non-inferior to oral linezolid treatment providing alternative oral treatment for cSSSI.

FUNDING

The EU Seventh Research Framework Programme.

Distribution and Antibiotic Resistance Characteristics of Bacteria Isolated from Blood Culture in a Teaching Hospital in Vietnam During 2014-2021

Purpose

Studies on the epidemiology of bloodstream infection (BSI) and antimicrobial resistance (AMR) are limited in Vietnam. Thus, the present study aimed to elucidate the epidemiology of BSI and AMR of BSI-causing bacteria in Vietnam.

Methods

Data regarding blood cultures from 2014 to 2021 were collected and analyzed using the chi-square test, Cochran-Armitage test, and binomial logistic regression model.

Results

Overall, 2405 (14.15%) blood cultures were positive during the study period. In total, 55.76% of BSIs occurred in patients aged ≥60 years. The male-to-female ratio of patients with BSI was 1.87:1. Escherichia coli (26.11%), Staphylococcus aureus (15.79%), Klebsiella pneumoniae (10.44%), Acinetobacter baumannii (4.70%), and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (3.45%) were the leading bacterial species causing BSI. The AMR rate of these bacteria isolated in the intensive care unit (ICU) was significantly higher compared with that of those in other wards. E. coli was the least resistant to carbapenems (2.39%-4.14%), amikacin (3.85%), and colistin (11.54%) and most resistant to penicillins (>80.0%). S. aureus was the least resistant to glycopeptides (0%-3.38%), quinupristin-dalfopristin (0.59%), and linezolid (1.02%) and most resistant to clindamycin (71.57%). K. pneumoniae was the least resistant to ertapenem (8.86%), amikacin (9.39%), and colistin (15.38%) and most resistant to aztreonam (83.33%). A. baumannii was the least resistant to amikacin (16.67%) and colistin (16.67%) and highly resistant to other antibiotics (≥50.0%). P. aeruginosa was the least resistant to colistin (16.33%) and piperacillin (28.17%) and highly resistant to other antibiotics (≥50.0%). Notably, the multidrug resistance rate of E. coli (76.41%) was the highest among common pathogens, followed by A. baumannii (71.57%), P. aeruginosa (64.56%), S. aureus (56.99%), and K. pneumoniae (43.72%).

Conclusion

The AMR rate of BSI-causing bacteria, particularly strains isolated from ICU, was alarmingly high. There is a need for new antibiotics, therapeutic strategies, as well as prevention and control to combat BSI and AMR.

Safety of linezolid in patients with decreased renal function and trough monitoring: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Linezolid causes hematological toxicity, mostly thrombocytopenia, which leads to treatment discontinuation and failure. Recent studies revealed that during linezolid therapy, the incidence of treatment-related hematological toxicity is significantly higher in patients with decreased renal function (DRF) than in those with normal renal function. Linezolid monitoring is necessary due to the high frequency of hematological toxicity in patients with DRF and the relationship between blood concentration and safety. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the safety correlation between DRF and trough monitoring.

METHODS

Articles published before June 24, 2022, on MEDLINE, Web of Sciences, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov were systematically analyzed. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using the Mantel-Haenszel method and the variable effects model.

RESULTS

The incidence of hematological toxicity was significantly higher in patients with DRF than in those without DRF (OR = 2.37; p < 0.001). Subgroup analysis, performed according to hematotoxicity classification, including thrombocytopenia, anemia, and pancytopenia, revealed a significantly higher incidence of thrombocytopenia (OR = 2.45; p < 0.001) and anemia (OR = 2.31; p = 0.006) in patients with DRF than in those without; pancytopenia (OR = 1.41; p = 0.80) incidences were not significantly higher. Based on a systematic review, linezolid trough concentrations > 6-7 μg/mL may be associated with an increased incidence of thrombocytopenia. However, no confidential threshold values for the development of thrombocytopenia were found in the area under the concentration curve values for children or adults.

CONCLUSION

We observed a high frequency of hematological toxicity during linezolid therapy in patients with DRF. To ensure safety, linezolid trough concentrations should be ≤6-7 μg/mL.

Linezolid-resistance Staphylococcus aureus – Prevalence, Emerging Resistance Mechanisms, Challenges and Perspectives

Staphylococcus aureus, an opportunistic pathogen, can root several infections viz skin and tissue infections, bacteraemia, food poisoning, pneumonia, and many other clinical conditions with some variations of virulence factors. In treatment of infections, caused by this Gram-positive pathogen, several antibiotics are being used importantly Methicillin and Vancomycin. This pathogen has high capability of antibiotic resistance development and had evolved new strains such as Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), and Vancomycin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (VRSA). Meta-analysis in Ethiopia showed that pooled prevalence of MRSA in environment, food, animal, and human was 54%, 77%, 15%, and 38% respectively (2022). Risk of MRSA isolates from burn ICU was 55 % higher (2018). In Bangladesh, 37.1% isolates from frozen meat chicken (2021) were identified as MRSA. This problem is being dealt with a novel drug called Linezolid which has been proved effective against both MRSA and VRSA. Exacerbating the situation, this pathogen has shown resistance against this unprecedented drug by means of a number of drug resistance mechanisms. Its prevalence has been reporting since the adoption of the drug, but with a minute ratio at one time/place to the very high percentage at another time/place. This inconsistent prevalence must not be ignored, and its surveillance should be augmented as antibiotic treatment is critical for fighting against microbial infections. This review highlights the worldwide reports in which Staphylococcus aureus of either wildtype or Methicillin or Vancomycin resistance that have shown resistance to Linezolid drug for the past 2 decades. At the same time where incidences of Linezolid Resistant Staphylococcus aureus (LRSA) indications are reporting, there is a call for comprehensive strategies to overcome this challenge of antibiotic resistance.

Design, dynamic docking, synthesis, and in vitro validation of a novel DNA gyrase B inhibitor

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and vancomycin-intermediate-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (VRSA) are among the WHO's high priority pathogens. Among these two, MRSA is the most globally documented pathogen that necessitates the pressing demand for new classes of anti-MRSA drugs. Bacterial gyrase targeted therapeutics are unique strategies to overcome cross-resistance as they are present only in bacteria and absent in higher eukaryotes. The GyrB subunit is essential for the catalytic functions of the bacterial enzyme DNA Gyrase, thereby constituting a promising druggable target. The current study performed a structure-based virtual screening to designing GyrB target-specific candidate molecules. The de novo ligand design of novel hit molecules was performed using a rhodanine scaffold. Through a systematic in silico screening process, the hit molecules were screened for their synthetic accessibility, drug-likeness and pharmacokinetics properties in addition to its target specific interactions. Of the 374 hit molecules obtained through de novo ligand design, qsl-304 emerged as the most promising ligand. The molecular dynamic simulation studies confirmed the stable interaction between the key residues and qsl-304. qsl-304 was synthesized through a one-step chemical synthesis procedure, and the in vitro activity was proven, with an IC₅₀ of 31.23 µg/mL against the novobiocin resistant clinical isolate, Staphylococcus aureus sa-P2003. Further studies on time-kill kinetics showed the bacteriostatic nature with the diminished recurrence of resistance. The on-target gyrB inhibition further proved the efficacy of qsl-304.Communicated by Ramaswamy H. Sarma.

Linezolid vs Vancomycin in Induced Thrombocytopenia

INTRODUCTION

Linezolid and vancomycin have an important place among therapeutic antimicrobial options for multidrug-resistant gram-positive infections. Thrombocytopenia is an adverse effect reported with both and can lead to treatment interruption. Our objective was to compare the incidence of thrombocytopenia in patients receiving linezolid or vancomycin and to identify risk factors associated with thrombocytopenia.

METHODS

This was a retrospective observational cohort study that involved patients who received linezolid (intravenously or orally) or vancomycin (intravenously) at a tertiary care hospital, between January 2016 and October 2019, for a minimum of 5 days and in whom platelet values were measured during treatment. Data on platelet count were collected during therapy in each group to identify the incidence of thrombocytopenia.

RESULTS

A total of 453 patients fulfilled the study criteria; 241 patients received linezolid and 212 patients vancomycin. The main logistic regression analysis revealed that patients in the linezolid group had approximately a four times higher incidence of thrombocytopenia (OR 4.39; 95% CI 2.38-8.08) compared to vancomycin. An increased incidence of thrombocytopenia was associated with advanced age, baseline platelet count and vasopressor use.

CONCLUSION

Clinicians considering vancomycin or linezolid for a susceptible infection should weigh the higher risk of thrombocytopenia that may be observed with linezolid vs. vancomycin in their decision.

Risk Factors and Algorithms for the Empirical Treatment of Hospital-Acquired Pneumonia and Ventilator-Associated Pneumonia

Hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) and ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) continue to be major concerns for morbidity and mortality, especially in patients treated in the intensive care unit. With the rise in multidrug-resistant organisms, HAP and VAP treatment is challenged by the need for early appropriate treatment, with broad-spectrum agents, while still being aware of the principles of antibiotic stewardship. The two major society guidelines proposed a series of risk factors in their most recent guidelines to help identify patients who can most benefit from narrow- or broad-spectrum initial empiric antibiotic therapy. The guidelines reveal differences in the proposed risk factors and treatment approaches, as well as major similarities.

Novel FtsZ inhibitor with potent activity against Staphylococcus aureus

OBJECTIVES

FtsZ is an essential bacterial protein and an unexplored target for the development of antibacterial drugs. The development of a novel inhibitor targeting FtsZ offers a potential opportunity to combat drug resistance. DS01750413, a new derivative of PC190723, is a novel FtsZ inhibitor with improved in vitro and in vivo activity. The objective of this study was to investigate the efficacy of DS01750413 against Staphylococcus spp., including MRSA, in in vitro and in vivo models.

METHODS

In vitro activities of DS01750413 and standard-of-care antibiotics were evaluated against clinical isolates of Gram-positive pathogens. The in vivo efficacy was evaluated in a murine systemic infection model caused by MRSA.

RESULTS

DS01750413 showed potent in vitro activity against MRSA clinical isolates with MIC ranges of 0.5-1 mg/L and also demonstrated concentration-dependent bactericidal killing. In the murine bacteraemia infection model of MRSA, treatment with DS01750413 resulted in prolonged survival of animals compared with placebo-treated animals and exhibited a significant reduction in the bacterial load in liver, spleen, lungs and kidneys.

CONCLUSIONS

DS01750413 showed encouraging in vitro and in vivo activity against MRSA. As a novel chemical class, DS01750413 has the potential to become clinically viable antibiotics to address the drug resistance problem by its unique novel targeting mechanism of action.

Attributable nephrotoxicity of vancomycin in critically ill patients: a marginal structural model study

BACKGROUND

Although vancomycin nephrotoxicity is recognizable, critically ill patients have other potential reasons for acute kidney injury (AKI) and determining its attributable nephrotoxic risk in this population can be cumbersome.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the risk of AKI attributable to vancomycin, controlling for baseline and time-dependent confounders.

METHODS

Time-fixed and daily time-varying variables were extracted from a large public database. The exposures analysed were: (i) IV vancomycin; (ii) serum trough level greater than 15 and 20 mg/L; and (iii) concomitant exposure to vancomycin and piperacillin/tazobactam or other antipseudomonal β-lactams. Censoring and exposure inverse probability of treatment weighting were calculated. Marginal structural models were plotted to evaluate AKI, severe AKI (stage 2/3) and need of renal replacement therapy (RRT).

RESULTS

A total of 26 865 patients were included; 19.7% received vancomycin during ICU stay. After adjusting for fixed and time-variable confounders, vancomycin exposure was associated with AKI (HR = 1.24, 95% CI = 1.09-1.38), but not with severe AKI or need of RRT (HR = 1.05, 95% CI = 0.91-1.23 and HR = 0.97, 95% CI = 0.74-1.29, respectively). A serum trough level greater than 20 mg/L was associated with AKI (HR = 1.90, 95% CI = 1.52-2.30) and severe AKI (HR = 1.69, 95% CI = 1.31-2.19), but showed no statistically significant association with need of RRT (HR = 1.48, 95% CI = 0.92-2.56). The vancomycin + piperacillin/tazobactam combination was not associated with a greater risk than vancomycin alone.

CONCLUSIONS

The attributable nephrotoxicity of vancomycin in critically ill patients is significantly lower than previously suggested and severe AKI is related to vancomycin only when trough serum levels are greater than 20 mg/L.

Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Vancomycin, Linezolid, Tedizolid, and Daptomycin in Treating Patients with Suspected or Proven Complicated Skin and Soft Tissue Infections: An Updated Network Meta-Analysis

Introduction

Skin and soft structure infections (SSTIs) caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) pose serious health risks and cause significant cost burdens, and a conclusive recommendation about antibiotics has not yet been generated. Therefore, we performed this updated network meta-analysis to determine the preferred drug for the treatment of MRSA-caused SSTIs.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library to identify any potentially eligible randomized controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the comparative efficacy and safety of any two of vancomycin, linezolid, tedizolid, and daptomycin in MRSA-caused SSTIs. All statistical analyses were conducted with RevMan, ADDIS, and STATA software.

Results

Twenty eligible RCTs involving 7804 patients were included for the final analysis. Direct meta-analysis suggested that linezolid was superior to vancomycin in improving clinical (odds ratio [OR], 1.46; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07–1.99; P = 0.02) and microbiological (OR, 1.89; 95% CI, 1.24–2.86; P = 0.003) success, which were all confirmed by network meta-analyses. No statistical differences were identified regarding other comparisons. Meanwhile, there were no significant differences between any two antibiotics related to safety. Moreover, ranking probabilities indicated that linezolid had the highest probability of being ranked best in terms of clinical and microbiological success.

Conclusion

Based on the limited evidence, linezolid may be a preferred antibiotic for the treatment of MRSA-caused SSTIs because it showed superiority in clinical and microbiological success without difference regarding safety.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40121-021-00456-0.

Meta-analysis of vancomycin versus linezolid in pneumonia with proven methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus

OBJECTIVE

American Thoracic Society/Infectious Diseases Society of America (ATS/IDSA) guidelines suggest that linezolid (LZD) is preferred over vancomycin (VCM) for treating methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) pneumonia. We conducted a systematic review and comparative meta-analysis to compare VCM and LZD efficacy against proven MRSA pneumonia.

METHODS

We searched EMBASE, CINAHL, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and PubMed up to November 2019. The outcomes of the meta-analysis were mortality, clinical cure, microbiological evaluation, and adverse events.

RESULTS

Seven randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with a total of 1239 patients and eight retrospective cohort or case-control studies (CSs) with a total 6125 patients were identified. Clinical cure and microbiological eradication rates were significantly increased in patients treated with LZD in RCTs (clinical cure: risk ratio (RR) = 0.81, 95% confidential interval (CI) = 0.71-0.92; microbiological eradication: RR = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.62-0.81) and CSs (clinical cure: odds ratio (OR) = 0.35, 95% CI = 0.18-0.69). However, mortality was comparable between patients treated with VCM and LZD in RCTs (RR = 1.08, 95% CI = 0.88-1.32) and CSs (OR = 1.20, 95% CI = 0.94-1.53). Likewise, there was no significant difference in adverse events between VCM and LZD in CSs (thrombocytopenia: OR = 0.95, 95% CI = 0.50-1.82; nephrotoxicity: OR = 1.72, 95% CI = 0.85-3.45).

CONCLUSIONS

According to our meta-analysis of RCTs and CSs conducted worldwide, we found robust evidence to corroborate the IDSA guidelines for the treatment of proven MRSA pneumonia.

Complete Genome Sequences of Eight Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Strains Isolated from Patients in Japan

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is a major pathogen causing nosocomial infections, and the clinical manifestations of MRSA range from asymptomatic colonization of the nasal mucosa to soft tissue infection to fulminant invasive disease. Here, we report the complete genome sequences of eight MRSA strains isolated from patients in Japan.

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is a major pathogen causing nosocomial infections, and the clinical manifestations of MRSA range from asymptomatic colonization of the nasal mucosa to soft tissue infection to fulminant invasive disease. Here, we report the complete genome sequences of eight MRSA strains isolated from patients in Japan.

In Vitro and In Vivo Activities of DS-2969b, a Novel GyrB Inhibitor, and Its Water-Soluble Prodrug, DS11960558, against Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus

DS-2969b is a novel GyrB inhibitor under clinical development. In this study, the in vitro activity of DS-2969b and the in vivo activities of DS-2969b and its water-soluble prodrug, DS11960558, against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) were evaluated. DS-2969b inhibited the supercoiling activity of S. aureus DNA gyrase and the decatenation activity of its topoisomerase IV. DS-2969b showed antibacterial activity against Gram-positive aerobes but not against Gram-negative aerobes, except for Moraxella catarrhalis and Haemophilus influenzae DS-2969b was active against MRSA with an MIC₉₀ of 0.25 μg/ml, which was 8-fold lower than that of linezolid. The presence of a pulmonary surfactant did not affect the MIC of DS-2969b. DS-2969b showed time-dependent slow killing against MRSA. The frequency of spontaneous resistance development was less than 6.2 × 10^-10 in all four S. aureus isolates at 4× MIC of DS-2969b. In a neutropenic MRSA-induced murine muscle infection model, DS-2969b was more efficacious than linezolid by both the subcutaneous and oral routes. DS-2969b and DS11960558 showed efficacy in a neutropenic murine MRSA lung infection model. The pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of DS-2969b and DS11960558 against MRSA were characterized in a neutropenic murine thigh infection model; the percentage of time during the dosing period in which the free drug concentration exceeded the MIC (fT_MIC) correlated best with in vivo efficacy, and the static percent fT_MIC was 43 to 49%. A sufficient fT_MIC was observed in a phase 1 multiple-ascending-dose study of DS-2969b given orally at 400 mg once a day. These results suggest that DS11960558 and DS-2969b have potential for use as intravenous-to-oral step-down therapy for treating MRSA infections with a higher efficacy than linezolid.

Efficacy and safety of linezolid compared with other treatments for skin and soft tissue infections: a meta-analysis

Linezolid with other treatments for skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) has been evaluated in several studies. However, the conclusions remain controversial. By searching PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane library databases, we conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate linezolid and other treatments for skin and soft tissue infections. The study was summarized, and the risk ratio (RR) and its 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated. Eleven related articles were included in the meta-analysis. Our results revealed that linezolid was associated with a significantly better clinical (RR = 1.09, 95% CI: 1.02–1.16, P_{heterogeneity} = 0.326, I² = 13.0%) and microbiological cure rates (RR = 1.08, 95% CI: 1.01–1.16, P_{heterogeneity} = 0.089, I² = 41.7%) when comparing with vancomycin. There was no significant difference in the incidence of anemia, nausea, and mortality; however, the incidence of vomiting, diarrhea, and thrombocytopenia in patients treated with linezolid is significantly higher than that with other treatments. Our study confirmed that linezolid seems to be more effective than vancomycin for treating people with SSTIs. It is recommended that linezolid be monitored for thrombocytopenia, vomiting, and diarrhea. Further studies with larger dataset and well-designed models are required to validate our findings.

Vancomycin-Induced Thrombocytopenia: A Narrative Review

Thrombocytopenia has been reported as an adverse reaction of numerous drugs. Vancomycin is often overlooked as a culprit but has been associated with several cases of thrombocytopenia that were not well described in the literature. A literature search was conducted to find reports of thrombocytopenia induced by vancomycin. Biomedical databases including 'PubMed', 'Scopus', and 'Web of Science' were searched using terms 'vancomycin', 'platelet', 'pancytopenia', 'thrombocytopenia', and 'bleeding'. English language articles published before July 2015 were included. Thirty-nine papers including 29 case reports (30 cases), five observational studies, two clinical trials, two letters, and one case series remained for final analysis. The main route of administration was intravenous infusion. This adverse reaction seems to be duration dependent with the mean time to platelet nadir count of 8 days in reported cases. The interval may be significantly shorter in re-exposure to the drug. Platelet nadir counts ranged from 2000 to 100,000/mL in patients who experienced bleeding. Vancomycin-specific antibodies were detected in 13 of 17 patients who were tested in the case reports. Based on the Naranjo Adverse Drug Reaction Probability Scale, reaction was 'definite', 'probable', and 'possible' in 1, 15, and 14 patients, respectively. Among 30 cases, vancomycin was discontinued in 29 patients and platelets returned to normal counts within 5-6 days in 17 of them; in one patient, vancomycin was not discontinued, but platelet count recovered 11 days after the nadir time. Transfusion might be recommended if severe thrombocytopenia and bleeding occurs. Intravenous immunoglobulins, corticosteroids, rituximab, and plasma exchange should be reserved for patients with resistant thrombocytopenia and severe bleeding as mentioned in a number of reports.

Comparative efficacy and safety of antibiotics used to treat acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections: Results of a network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This NMA compared the efficacy and safety between IV antibiotics that are used in the current standard of care for managing adult patients (≥18 years of age) with ABSSSI.

METHODS

Comparators were chosen on the basis that both direct and indirect comparisons between the interventions of interest could be performed. Outcomes of the analysis were selected on the basis that they are frequently measured and reported in trials involving ABSSSI patients, and only published randomised control trials of any size and duration and with any blinding status were eligible for inclusion in the analysis. The NMA was performed using both a fixed-effect and random-effect model. Efficacy-related endpoints were (1) clinical treatment success and (2) microbiological success at TOC visit. Safety-related endpoints were (1) number of discontinuations due to AEs/SAEs, (2) patients experiencing AEs, (3) patients experiencing SAEs and (4) all-cause mortality.

RESULTS

Study interventions included daptomycin, dalbavancin, linezolid and tigecycline. Vancomycin was the comparator in all studies, except in two where it was linezolid and teicoplanin. The NMA showed that irrespective of patient subgroup, the likelihood of clinical and microbiological success with dalbavancin was statistically similar to the comparators studied. No statistically significant differences were observed between dalbavancin and any of the comparators in the discontinuation rate due to AEs/SAEs. In contrast, dalbavancin was associated with a significantly lower likelihood of experiencing an AE than linezolid, a significantly lower likelihood of experiencing a SAE than vancomycin and daptomycin, and a significantly lower risk of all-cause mortality than vancomycin, linezolid and tigecycline.

CONCLUSION

Dalbavancin affords a promising, new alternative IV antimicrobial agent which is as effective as traditional therapies, but with the added benefit of enabling clinicians to treat patients with ABSSSI in different organisational settings. Notwithstanding, any introduction of an effective treatment with a differential mode of administration into healthcare systems must be followed by a change in clinical practice and patient management in order to fully achieve desirable economic outcomes.

Pharmacokinetics of linezolid during continuous hemodiafiltration: A case report

The pharmacokinetics of linezolid clearance (CL_LZD) during continuous hemodiafiltration (CHDF) has not been comprehensively analyzed. Here, we examined CL_LZD by CHDF in a patient with septic shock and disseminated intravascular coagulation due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. The extraction ratio of LZD by CHDF was 22.6%, and the protein-binding rate was 17.9% ± 7.7%. In addition, it was determined that the calculated total body clearance of LZD was 30.2 mL/min, plasma elimination half-life was 8.66 h, and the CL_LZD by the dialyzer used for CHDF was 23.0 mL/min. From the obtained pharmacokinetics, the CL_LZD of patients continuing CHDF was estimated to be approximately half of the reported CL_LZD for healthy subjects. In addition, the LZD concentration of the sepsis patient who underwent CHDF remained higher than the minimum inhibitory concentration and was similar to the LZD concentrations reported in normal renal function patients. Although further studies are warranted, when LZD is administered to patients treated with CHDF, the present findings suggest that dose regulation is not required.

Systematic review and network meta-analysis of tedizolid for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections caused by MRSA

BACKGROUND

Tedizolid, the active moiety of tedizolid phosphate, is approved in the United States, the European Union, Canada and a number of other countries for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) caused by certain susceptible bacteria, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). This network meta-analysis (NMA) evaluates the comparative effectiveness of tedizolid and other antibacterials indicated for the treatment of ABSSSI caused by MRSA.

METHODS

Systematic review of 10 databases was undertaken to inform an NMA to estimate the relative effectiveness of tedizolid and established monotherapy comparators (ceftaroline, daptomycin, linezolid, teicoplanin, tigecycline, vancomycin) for treating MRSA-associated ABSSSI. Randomized controlled trials enrolling adults with ABSSSI or complicated skin and skin structure infections caused by suspected/documented MRSA were eligible for inclusion. Networks were developed based on similarity of study design, patient characteristics, outcome measures and available data. Outcomes of interest included clinical response at end of therapy (EOT), post-therapy evaluation (PTE) or test-of-cure assessment and treatment discontinuations resulting from adverse events (AEs). Bayesian NMA was conducted for each outcome using fixed-effects and random effects models.

RESULTS

Literature searches identified 3,618 records; 15 trials met the inclusion criteria and were considered suitable for NMA comparison. In fixed-effects models, tedizolid had higher odds of clinical response at EOT (odds ratio [OR], 1.7; credible interval, 1.0, 3.0) and PTE than vancomycin (OR, 1.6; credible interval, 1.1, 2.5). No differences in odds of clinical response at EOT or PTE were observed between tedizolid and other comparators. There was no evidence of a difference among treatments for discontinuation due to AEs. Results from random effects and fixed-effects models were generally consistent.

CONCLUSIONS

Tedizolid was superior to vancomycin for clinical response at EOT and PTE. There was no evidence of a difference between tedizolid and other comparators and no evidence of a difference between tedizolid and all comparators when evaluating discontinuation due to AEs. These findings suggest that tedizolid provides an alternative option for the management of serious skin infections caused by suspected or documented MRSA. This study is subject to the limitations inherent in all NMAs, and the results should be interpreted accordingly.

Vancomycin and the Risk of AKI: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Vancomycin has been in use for more than half a century, but whether it is truly nephrotoxic and to what extent are still highly controversial. The objective of this study was to determine the risk of AKI attributable to intravenous vancomycin.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS

We conducted a systematic review of randomized, controlled trials and cohort studies that compared patients treated with intravenous vancomycin with a control group of patients given a comparator nonglycopeptide antibiotic and in which kidney function or kidney injury outcomes were reported. PubMed and Cochrane Library were searched from 1990 to September of 2015. Two reviewers extracted data and assessed study risk of bias, and one reviewer adjudicated the assessments. A meta-analysis was conducted on seven randomized, controlled trials (total of 4033 patients).

RESULTS

Moderate quality evidence suggested that vancomycin treatment is associated with a higher risk of AKI, with a relative risk of 2.45 (95% confidence interval, 1.69 to 3.55). The risk of kidney injury was similar in patients treated for skin and soft tissue infections compared with those treated for nosocomial pneumonia and other complicated infections. There was an uncertain risk of reporting bias, because kidney function was not a prespecified outcome in any of the trials. The preponderance of evidence was judged to be indirect, because the majority of studies compared vancomycin specifically with linezolid.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that there is a measurable risk of AKI associated with vancomycin, but the strength of the evidence is moderate. A randomized, controlled trial designed to study kidney function as an outcome would be needed to draw unequivocal conclusions.

Vancomycin-induced thrombocytopenia in a newborn

Neonatal thrombocytopenia is common and is frequently seen in neonatal sepsis. Drug-induced thrombocytopenia is likely to be missed unless a high index of suspicion is present. Changing of antibiotics for assumed nonresolution of sepsis may lead to persistent thrombocytopenia in a neonate if drug-induced thrombocytopenia is missed. Vancomycin-induced neonatal thrombocytopenia is rarely described in scientific literature. We describe a newborn who was diagnosed with early onset sepsis and vancomycin-induced thrombocytopenia. Other causes of thrombocytopenia such as sepsis, alloimmune thrombocytopenia, thrombosis etc. were excluded. The platelet counts normalized within 72 h of stopping vancomycin. Vancomycin-induced IgM platelet antibodies could not be done in our case (due to financial constraints), but their absence does not exclude the diagnosis of vancomycin-induced thrombocytopenia.

Linezolid versus vancomycin for nosocomial pneumonia due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in the elderly: A retrospective cohort analysis: Effectiveness of linezolid in the elderly

OBJECTIVES

Several reports have compared the efficacy of linezolid (LZD) in Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections with that of vancomycin (VCM); however, these two antibiotics for the treatment of nosocomial MRSA pneumonia in elderly patients has not been well evaluated. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of LZD compared with VCM for the treatment of elderly patients with nosocomial MRSA pneumonia in a retrospective chart review of a cohort.

METHODS

We included 28 consecutive patients aged ≥65years hospitalized with a confirmed diagnosis of MRSA pneumonia and treated with LZD (n=11) or VCM (n=17) between November 2010 and May 2015. We collected patient, disease, and laboratory data. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. The secondary outcomes were the sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) total, respiratory, renal, coagulation, hepatic, cardiovascular, and central nervous system scores on days 1, 3, 7, and 14.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the two groups with regard to baseline characteristics. The 30-day mortality rate was significantly lower in the LZD group than in the VCM group (0% vs. 41%, P=.02). The SOFA total score on days 3, 7, and 14 were significantly lower those at baseline in the LZD group (P<.05). The SOFA respiratory score on days 14 was also significantly lower than baseline in the LZD group (P<.05).

CONCLUSION

LZD may be more efficacious than VCM for treating elderly patients with nosocomial MRSA pneumonia.

Management of Adults With Hospital-acquired and Ventilator-associated Pneumonia: 2016 Clinical Practice Guidelines by the Infectious Diseases Society of America and the American Thoracic Society

It is important to realize that guidelines cannot always account for individual variation among patients. They are not intended to supplant physician judgment with respect to particular patients or special clinical situations. IDSA considers adherence to these guidelines to be voluntary, with the ultimate determination regarding their application to be made by the physician in the light of each patient's individual circumstances.These guidelines are intended for use by healthcare professionals who care for patients at risk for hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) and ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), including specialists in infectious diseases, pulmonary diseases, critical care, and surgeons, anesthesiologists, hospitalists, and any clinicians and healthcare providers caring for hospitalized patients with nosocomial pneumonia. The panel's recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of HAP and VAP are based upon evidence derived from topic-specific systematic literature reviews.

Linezolid versus vancomycin for skin and soft tissue infections

BACKGROUND

The morbidity and treatment costs associated with skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) are high. Linezolid and vancomycin are antibiotics that are commonly used in treating skin and soft-tissue infections, specifically those infections due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA).

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects and safety of linezolid and vancomycin for treating people with SSTIs.

SEARCH METHODS

For this first update of this review we conducted searches of the following databases: Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 24 March 2015; The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid EMBASE; and EBSCO CINAHL. We also contacted manufacturers for details of unpublished and ongoing trials. We scrutinised citations within all obtained trials and major review articles to identify any additional trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing linezolid with vancomycin in the treatment of SSTIs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. The primary outcomes were clinical cure, microbiological cure, and SSTI-related and treatment-related mortality. We performed subgroup analyses according to age, and whether the infection was due to MRSA.

MAIN RESULTS

No new trials were identified for this first update. We included nine RCTs (3144 participants). Linezolid was associated with a significantly better clinical (RR 1.09, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.16) and microbiological cure rate in adults (RR 1.08, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.16). For those infections due to MRSA, linezolid was significantly more effective than vancomycin in clinical (RR 1.09, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.17) and microbiological cure rates (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.32). No RCT reported SSTI-related and treatment-related mortality. There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality between linezolid and vancomycin (RR 1.44, 95% CI 0.75 to 2.80). There were fewer incidents of red man syndrome (RR 0.04, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.29), pruritus (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.75) and rash (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.58) in the linezolid group compared with vancomycin, however, more people reported thrombocytopenia (RR 13.06, 95% CI 1.72 to 99.22), and nausea (RR 2.45, 95% CI 1.52 to 3.94) when treated with linezolid. It seems, from the available data, that length of stay in hospital was shorter for those in the linezolid group than the vancomycin group. The daily cost of outpatient therapy was less with oral linezolid than with intravenous vancomycin. Although inpatient treatment with linezolid cost more than inpatient treatment with vancomycin per day, the median length of hospital stay was three days shorter with linezolid. Thus, total hospital charges per patient were less with linezolid treatment than with vancomycin treatment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Linezolid seems to be more effective than vancomycin for treating people with SSTIs, including SSTIs caused by MRSA. The available evidence is at high risk of bias and is based on studies that were supported by the pharmaceutical company that makes linezolid. Further well-designed, independently-funded, RCTs are needed to confirm the available evidence.

Economic evaluation among Chinese patients with nosocomial pneumonia caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and treated with linezolid or vancomycin: a secondary, post-hoc analysis based on a Phase 4 clinical trial study

OBJECTIVE

To assess cost-effectiveness of linezolid vs vancomycin in treating nosocomial pneumonia caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA-NP) in China and the impact of renal failure on healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs.

METHODS

Cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted based on data from the ZEPHyR trial, with efficacy measured by treatment success and costs calculated from HCRU. Confidence intervals (CI) for cost, efficacy and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were calculated by non-parametric bootstrap. Chi-square test was used for renal failure rate and t-test for HCRU/cost comparisons. Impact of renal failure was assessed using regression model.

RESULTS

Data from 448 patients (1:1 linezolid:vancomycin) were analyzed. More patients treated with linezolid achieved success (55% [95% CI = 48-62%]) than with vancomycin (45% [38-52%]). Treatment cost were ¥79,551 (95% CI = ¥72,421-¥86,680) for linezolid vs ¥77,587 (¥70,656-¥84,519) for vancomycin in Beijing, ¥90,995 (¥82,598-¥99,393) vs ¥89,448 (¥81,295-¥97,601) in Guangzhou, ¥82,383 (¥74,956-¥89,810) vs ¥80,799 (¥73,545-¥88,054) in Nanjing and ¥59,413 (¥54,366-¥64,460) vs ¥57,804 (¥52,613-¥62,996) in Xi'an. Per successful treatment, the ICER of linezolid over vancomycin were ¥19,719 (-¥143,553 to ¥320,980) (Beijing), ¥15,532 (-¥185,411 to ¥349,693) (Guangzhou), ¥15,904 (-¥161,935 to ¥314,987) (Nanjing) and ¥16,145 (-¥100,738 to ¥234,412) (Xi'an). From simulations, the majority of linezolid cases had greater efficacy and higher costs and more than one third had greater efficacy and lower costs. More vancomycin patients developed renal failure (15% vs 4%, p < 0.001). Patients with renal failure had higher cost (Nanjng: ¥100,449 (SD = ¥65,080) vs ¥74,944 (SD = ¥49,632), p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

Linezolid was more cost-effective than vancomycin in treating MRSA-NP from a Chinese payer's perspective, and associated with less renal failure, HCRU and cost.

Comparative efficacy of antibiotics for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI): a systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

The objective was to conduct a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of existing treatments for ABSSSI focusing on the novel lipoglycopeptide oritavancin.

METHODS

EMBASE, MEDLINE, MEDLINE in Process, CENTRAL (Cochrane), and select conferences were searched for randomized controlled trials investigating antimicrobial agents for the treatment of ABSSSI. NMA was used to estimate the odds ratios of the Test-Of-Cure (TOC) and Early Clinical Response (ECR) outcomes for treatments relative to vancomycin in the ITT populations. Sub-group analyses in MRSA and MSSA populations were conducted for TOC; sensitivity analyses investigated the use of the clinically evaluable (CE) populations and the restriction to trials following the recent FDA guidelines for clinical trials.

RESULTS

The systematic review identified 52 trials. The most commonly investigated treatments were vancomycin and linezolid; most trials reported TOC, but not ECR. The posterior mean and 95% credible intervals for odds ratios of TOC for antimicrobial agents relative to vancomycin were: linezolid (1.55; 0.91-2.57), daptomycin (2.18; 0.90-5.42), and oritavancin 1200 mg (1.06; 0.80-1.43). The odds ratio of ECR for oritavancin 1200 mg was 1.02 (0.23-4.33). In the MRSA sub-group the odds ratios relative to vancomycin for TOC were: linezolid (1.55; 0.96-2.46), daptomycin (0.74; 0.13-3.66), and oritavancin 1200 mg (0.94; 0.44-2.02). In the MSSA sub-group they were linezolid (1.36; 0.15-13.34) and oritavancin 1200 mg (0.82; 0.08-7.83). These results were robust to the sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

This NMA provides a unified framework for the comparison of all available antimicrobial agents used in the treatment of ABSSSI and is the first to assess the ECR end-point. The results suggest equivalence of clinical efficacy between vancomycin, daptomycin, linezolid, and novel antimicrobial agents including oritavancin for the treatment of ABSSSI at TOC. The wide uncertainty margins indicate the heterogeneity of the available evidence and the need for further research.

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis To Estimate Antibacterial Treatment Effect in Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infection

A systematic literature review and meta-analysis were conducted to estimate the antibacterial treatment effect for linezolid and ceftaroline to inform on the design of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infection (ABSSSI) noninferiority trials. The primary endpoints included an early clinical treatment response (ECTR) defined as cessation of lesion spread at 48 to 72 h postrandomization and the test-of-cure (TOC) response defined as total resolution of the infection at 7 to 14 days posttreatment. The systematic review identified no placebo-controlled trials in ABSSSI, 4 placebo-controlled trials in uncomplicated skin and soft tissue infection as a proxy for placebo in ABSSSI, 12 linezolid trials in ABSSSI, 3 ceftaroline trials in ABSSSI, and 2 trials for nonantibacterial treatment. The ECTR rates at 48 to 72 h and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) were 78.7% (95% CI, 61.1 to 96.3%) for linezolid, 74.0% (95% CI, 69.7 to 78.3%) for ceftaroline, and 59.0% (95% CI, 52.8 to 65.3%) for nonantibacterial treatment. The early clinical treatment effect could not be estimated, given no available placebo or proxy for placebo data for this endpoint. Clinical, methodological, and statistical heterogeneity influenced the selection of trials for the meta-analysis of the TOC treatment effect estimation. The pooled estimates of the TOC treatment response were 31.0% (95% CI, 6.2 to 55.9%) for the proxy for placebo, 88.1% (95% CI, 81.0 to 95.1%) for linezolid, and 86.1% (95% CI, 83.7 to 88.6%) for ceftaroline. The TOC clinical treatment effect estimation was 25.1% for linezolid and 27.8% for ceftaroline. The antibacterial treatment effect estimation at TOC will inform on the design and analysis of future noninferiority ABSSSI clinical trials.

Improving Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Methicillin-Sensitive Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia and Reported Penicillin Allergy

BACKGROUND

Methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) bacteremia is a morbid infection. First-line MSSA therapies (nafcillin, oxacillin, cefazolin) are generally avoided in the 10% of patients reporting penicillin (PCN) allergy, but most of these patients are not truly allergic. We used a decision tree with sensitivity analyses to determine the optimal evaluation and treatment for patients with MSSA bacteremia and reported PCN allergy.

METHODS

Our model simulates 3 strategies: (1) no allergy evaluation, give vancomycin (Vanc); (2) allergy history-guided treatment: if history excludes anaphylactic features, give cefazolin (Hx-Cefaz); and (3) complete allergy evaluation with history-appropriate PCN skin testing: if skin test negative, give cefazolin (ST-Cefaz). Model outcomes included 12-week MSSA cure, recurrence, and death; allergic reactions including major, minor, and potentially iatrogenic; and adverse drug reactions.

RESULTS

Vanc results in the fewest patients achieving MSSA cure and the highest rate of recurrence (67.3%/14.8% vs 83.4%/9.3% for Hx-Cefaz and 84.5%/8.9% for ST-Cefaz) as well as the greatest frequency of allergic reactions (3.0% vs 2.4% for Hx-Cefaz and 1.7% for ST-Cefaz) and highest rates of adverse drug reactions (5.2% vs 4.6% for Hx-Cefaz and 4.7% for ST-Cefaz). Even in a "best case for Vanc" scenario, Vanc yields the poorest outcomes. ST-Cefaz is preferred to Hx-Cefaz although sensitive to input variations.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with MSSA bacteremia and a reported PCN allergy should have the allergy addressed for optimal treatment. Full allergy evaluation with skin testing seems to be preferred, although more data are needed.

The use of bone cement for the localized, controlled release of the antibiotics vancomycin, linezolid, or fusidic acid: effect of additives on drug release rates and mechanical strength

Bone cement containing antibiotics is commonly used to treat orthopedic related infections. However, effective treatment (especially of resistant bacteria, methacillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)) is compromised by very low levels of drug release so that typically less than 10% of loaded drug is released over a 6-week period. The objective of this study was to investigate the effect of incorporation of water soluble excipients (polyethylene glycol, sodium chloride, or dextran) into antibiotic-loaded cement on mechanical strength and drug release properties. Poly(methyl methylacrylate) cement implants containing various amounts of drug (vancomycin, linezolid or fusidic acid (all MRSA active)) and excipients were cast in the form of beads or films and characterized using differential scanning calorimetry. Mechanical strength as assessed by Young's modulus was determined by thermo-mechanical analysis. Drug release was measured by incubation in phosphate buffered saline with analysis by HPLC methods. The inclusion of sodium chloride up to 20% w/w caused only minor reductions in Young's modulus. Vancomycin and linezolid released very slowly from unmodified bone cement beads (less than 3% released by 4 weeks) whereas fusidic acid released more quickly (approximately 8% released by 4 weeks). The inclusion of sodium chloride or dextran in bone cement resulted in major increases in the release rate of vancomycin, linezolid and fusidic acid. These studies support the inclusion of sodium chloride and dextran in bone cement to increase the release rate of vancomycin, linezolid, or fusidic acid without compromising the mechanical strength of the composite material.

Linezolid versus vancomycin for the treatment of suspected methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus nosocomial pneumonia: a systematic review employing meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The optimal therapy involving linezolid or vancomycin for suspected methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) nosocomial pneumonia (NP) remains controversial. This study compared the efficacy and safety of linezolid and vancomycin therapies in patients with NP.

METHODS

A systematic review of randomized controlled trials with meta-analyses performed by searching PubMed, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. We screened for relevant randomized controlled studies in which patients with NP were enrolled and linezolid and vancomycin therapies were compared.

RESULTS

Nine trials involving 2618 pneumonia patients were reviewed. Linezolid was not found to be superior to vancomycin for clinical cure when categories of pathogen were not considered and in a subgroup of NP patients with MRSA infection [relative risk (RR)=1.16, 95 % confidence interval (CI)=0.95-1.43, P=0.15]. Compared with vancomycin, linezolid has no difference in the overall microbiological eradication rate (RR=1.12, 95 % CI=0.96-1.30, P=0.15) and specific MRSA eradication rate (RR=1.16, 95 % CI=0.93-1.45, P=0.19) in NP patients. In addition, nephrotoxicity was more frequent with vancomycin (RR=0.50, 95 % CI=0.31-0.81, P=0.005), but no differences between the treatments were found for all-cause mortality, thrombocytopenia, gastrointestinal effects, and drug discontinuation due to adverse events.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that linezolid is not superior to vancomycin with respect to both clinical and microbiological cure rates in patients with MRSA NP.

The Japanese guidelines for the management of sepsis

This is a guideline for the management of sepsis, developed by the Sepsis Registry Committee of The Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine (JSICM) launched in March 2007. This guideline was developed on the basis of evidence-based medicine and focuses on unique treatments in Japan that have not been included in the Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines (SSCG), as well as treatments that are viewed differently in Japan and in Western countries. Although the methods in this guideline conform to the 2008 SSCG, the Japanese literature and the results of the Sepsis Registry Survey, which was performed twice by the Sepsis Registry Committee in intensive care units (ICUs) registered with JSICM, are also referred. This is the first and original guideline for sepsis in Japan and is expected to be properly used in daily clinical practice.

This article is translated from Japanese, originally published as “The Japanese Guidelines for the Management of Sepsis” in the Journal of the Japanese Society of Intensive Care Medicine (J Jpn Soc Intensive Care Med), 2013; 20:124–73. The original work is at http://dx.doi.org/10.3918/jsicm.20.124.

Predictors of the pathogenicity of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus nosocomial pneumonia

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The clinical characteristics of patients with nosocomial pneumonia (NP) associated with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infection are not well characterized.

METHODS

Three hundred and thirty-seven consecutive patients with MRSA isolation from respiratory specimens who attended our hospital between April 2007 and March 2011 were enrolled. Patients characteristics diagnosed with 'true' MRSA-NP were described with regards to clinical, microbiological features, radiological features and genetic characteristics of the isolates. The diagnosis of 'true' MRSA-NP was confirmed by anti-MRSA treatment effects, Gram-staining or bronchoalveolar lavage fluid culture.

RESULTS

Thirty-six patients were diagnosed with 'true' MRSA-NP, whereas 34 were diagnosed with NP with MRSA colonization. Patients with a MRSA-NP had a Pneumonia Patient Outcomes Research Team score of 5 (58.3% vs 23.5%), single cultivation of MRSA (83.3% vs 38.2%), MRSA quantitative cultivation yielding more than 10(6) CFU/mL (80.6% vs 47.1%), radiological findings other than lobar pneumonia (66.7% vs 26.5%), and a history of head, neck, oesophageal or stomach surgery (30.6% vs 11.8%). These factors were shown to be independent predictors of the pathogenicity of 'true' MRSA-NP by multivariate analysis (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

'True' MRSA-NP shows distinct clinical and radiological features from NP with MRSA colonization.

Predictors of clinical success among a national Veterans Affairs cohort with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus pneumonia

BACKGROUND

The treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) pneumonia is exceedingly complicated, which is concerning because of the high mortality rate associated with the infection. Identification of independent predictors of clinical success can optimize patient care by assisting clinicians in treatment decisions.

OBJECTIVES

Our goal was to identify independent predictors of clinical success in a national Veterans Affairs (VA) cohort of patients with MRSA pneumonia.

METHODS

A nested case-control study was conducted among a cohort of VA patients with MRSA pneumonia receiving linezolid or vancomycin between January 2002 and September 2010. Cases included those demonstrating clinical success, defined as discharge from the hospital or intensive care unit by day 14 after treatment initiation, in the absence of death, therapy change, or intubation by day 14. Control subjects represented nonsuccess, defined as therapy change, intubation, intensive care unit admission, readmission, or death between treatment initiation and day 14. The potential predictors assessed included treatment, patient demographic and admission characteristics, previous health care and medication exposures, comorbidities, and medical history. Odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs were calculated from logistic regression.

RESULTS

Our study included 2442 cases of clinical success and 1290 control subjects. Demographic characteristics varied between the clinical success and nonsuccess groups, including age, race, and region of facility. A current diagnosis of chronic respiratory disease (46% vs 42%) and diagnosis of pneumonia in the year before the MRSA pneumonia admission (37% vs 32%) were both more common in the clinical success group. Despite these significant differences, only 2 predictors of clinical success were identified in our study: previous complication of an implant or graft, including mechanical complications and infections, in the year before the MRSA pneumonia admission (adjusted OR, 1.55 [95% CI, 1.17-2.06]) and treatment with linezolid (adjusted OR, 1.53 [95% CI, 1.12-2.10]). Predictors of nonsuccess (adjusted OR [95% CI) included diagnosis of concomitant urinary tract infection (0.82 [0.70-0.96]), intravenous line (0.76 [0.66-0.89]), previous coagulopathy (0.74 [0.56-0.96]), previous amputation procedure (0.72 [0.53-0.98]), current coagulopathy diagnosis (0.71 [0.53-0.96]), dialysis (0.54 [0.38-0.76]), multiple inpatient procedures (0.53 [0.45-0.62]), inpatient surgery (0.48 [0.41-0.57]), and previous endocarditis (0.24 [0.07-0.81]).

CONCLUSIONS

MRSA pneumonia tends to affect patients with complex care, and identification of the predictors of clinical success is useful when considering different therapeutic approaches. In this national cohort of VA patients with MRSA pneumonia, treatment was the only modifiable variable predicting clinical success.

Linezolid versus vancomycin for skin and soft tissue infections

BACKGROUND

The morbidity and treatment costs associated with skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) are high. Linezolid and vancomycin are antibiotics that are commonly used in treating skin and soft-tissue infections, specifically those infections due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA).

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effects and safety of linezolid and vancomycin for treating people with SSTIs.

SEARCH METHODS

In May 2013 we conducted searches of the following databases: Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register; The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library); Ovid MEDLINE; Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid EMBASE; and EBSCO CINAHL. We also contacted manufacturers for details of unpublished and ongoing trials. We scrutinised citations within all obtained trials and major review articles to identify any additional trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing linezolid with vancomycin in the treatment of SSTIs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected trials, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. The primary outcomes were clinical cure, microbiological cure, and SSTI-related and treatment-related mortality. We performed subgroup analyses according to age, and whether the infection was due to MRSA.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine RCTs (3144 participants). Linezolid was associated with a significantly better clinical (RR 1.09, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.16) and microbiological cure rate in adults (RR 1.08, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.16). For those infections due to MRSA, linezolid was significantly more effective than vancomycin in clinical (RR 1.09, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.17) and microbiological cure rates (RR 1.17, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.32). No RCT reported SSTI-related and treatment-related mortality. There was no significant difference in all-cause mortality between linezolid and vancomycin (RR 1.44, 95% CI 0.75 to 2.80). There were fewer incidents of red man syndrome (RR 0.04, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.29), pruritus (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.17 to 0.75) and rash (RR 0.27, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.58) in the linezolid group compared with vancomycin, however, more people reported thrombocytopenia (RR 13.06, 95% CI 1.72 to 99.22), and nausea (RR 2.45, 95% CI 1.52 to 3.94) when treated with linezolid. It seems, from the available data, that length of stay in hospital was shorter for those in the linezolid group than the vancomycin group. The daily cost of outpatient therapy was less with oral linezolid than with intravenous vancomycin. Although inpatient treatment with linezolid cost more than inpatient treatment with vancomycin per day, the median length of hospital stay was three days shorter with linezolid. Thus, total hospital charges per patient were less with linezolid treatment than with vancomycin treatment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Linezolid seems to be more effective than vancomycin for treating people with SSTIs, including SSTIs caused by MRSA. The available evidence is at high risk of bias and is based on studies that were supported by the pharmaceutical company that makes linezolid. Further well-designed, independently-funded, RCTs are needed to confirm the available evidence.

Comparative effectiveness of linezolid and vancomycin among a national veterans affairs cohort with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus pneumonia

STUDY OBJECTIVE

As variability in vancomycin dosing, susceptibility, and tolerability has driven the need to compare newer agents with vancomycin in real-world clinical settings, we sought to quantify the effectiveness of linezolid compared with vancomycin on clinical outcomes for the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) pneumonia.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

DATA SOURCE

Veterans Health Administration national databases.

PATIENTS

Adults admitted to Veterans Affairs hospitals between January 2002 and September 2010 with diagnosis codes for MRSA and pneumonia, plus initiation and receipt of at least 3 days of continuous intravenous vancomycin therapy (4943 patients) or intravenous or oral linezolid therapy (328 patients) while in the hospital.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Propensity score-adjusted Cox proportional hazards regression models quantified the effect of linezolid compared with vancomycin on time to 30-day mortality (primary outcome), therapy change, hospital discharge, discharge from intensive care, intubation, 30-day readmission, and 30-day MRSA reinfection. In addition, a composite outcome of clinical success was defined as discharge from the hospital or intensive care unit by day 14 after treatment initiation, in the absence of death, therapy change, or intubation by day 14. Subgroup analyses were performed in a validated microbiology-confirmed MRSA subgroup and clinical subgroup meeting clinical criteria for infection. Although a number of baseline variables differed significantly between the vancomycin and linezolid treatment groups, balance was achieved within propensity score quintiles. A significantly lower rate of therapy change was observed in the linezolid group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.68, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.48-0.96). The clinical success rate was significantly higher among patients treated with linezolid (adjusted HR 1.25, 95% CI 1.07-1.47). Comparable findings were observed in the subgroup analyses.

CONCLUSION

Individual clinical outcomes were similar among patients treated for MRSA pneumonia with linezolid compared with vancomycin. A significantly higher rate of the composite outcome of clinical success was observed, however, among patients treated with linezolid compared with vancomycin.

Vancomycin and nephrotoxicity: just another myth?

BACKGROUND

Vancomycin is considered the drug of choice for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection; however, it has also been linked with nephrotoxicity in the past, sometimes leading to its substitution with linezolid. We hypothesized that patients treated with vancomycin for gram-positive (GP) infections would have an increased incidence of rise in creatinine and need for hemodialysis (HD) compared with patients receiving linezolid.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of a prospectively maintained database of all surgical patients treated with either vancomycin or linezolid for GP infections in a single intensive care unit from 2001 to 2008 and managed under a cycling antibiotic protocol. Patients were followed up until hospital discharge. Categorical and continuous variables were evaluated. Multivariable logistic regression was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 545 patients were treated for 1,046 GP infections (571 with vancomycin, 475 with linezolid) over 7 years. Patient demographics were similar between groups; however, the vancomycin group was associated with a longer treatment course (16.2 [0.5] days vs. 14.3 [0.5] days; p = 0.022). Unadjusted outcomes were similar between groups. Multivariable analysis revealed that Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score predicted an increase in creatinine levels greater than 1.0 following antibiotic therapy (relative risk [RR], 3.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.22-7.42) and subsequent need for HD (RR, 3.07; 95% CI, 1.23-7.62). In addition, initial creatinine level predicted an increase in creatinine levels greater than 1.0 following antibiotic therapy (RR, 4.36; 95% CI, 1.46-12.99) and subsequent need for HD (RR, 10.83; 95% CI, 3.19-36.77). Linezolid was found to be protective regarding rise in creatinine levels greater than 1.0 following antibiotic therapy; however, this was only experienced when vancomycin trough levels greater than 20 were encountered (RR, 5.4;95% CI, 1.19-24.51).

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that vancomycin is minimally nephrotoxic and has a similar nephrotoxic profile as compared with linezolid when appropriate dosing is used, even among critically ill patients with complex infections.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/care management, level II.

Comparative evaluation of thrombocytopenia in adult patients receiving linezolid or glycopeptides in a respiratory intensive care unit

Linezolid is an oxazolidinone antibiotic agent, active against gram-positive bacteria that are resistant to traditional antibiotics, including glycopeptides. Linezolid is generally well tolerated, but has been associated with hematologic adverse effects such as thrombocytopenia. The primary objective of this study was to compare the incidence of thrombocytopenia between patients receiving linezolid or glycopeptides in different age groups. The secondary objective was to assess the association between the time-to-event and occurrence of thrombocytopenia. This retrospective study reviewed the medical records of patients who were treated with linezolid or glycopeptides (vancomycin or teicoplanin) between January 2010 and June 2013 in a respiratory intensive care unit. Data were extracted from the patients' electronic medical records, which were obtained from a central database in the hospital, and multivariate analyses were performed. In total, the study included 225 patients who received linezolid or glycopeptides. The cumulative probability of thrombocytopenia was higher in the patients receiving linezolid than in those receiving glycopeptides (P<0.05), however the cumulative probability of thrombocytopenia did not differ significantly between patients receiving linezolid or glycopeptides in the subgroup whose age was <65 years (P>0.05). With a treatment duration of ≥7 days, the incidence of thrombocytopenia and the mean platelet count reduction in the patients receiving linezolid was significantly higher than in those receiving glycopeptides (P<0.05). No significant difference was identified in the mean platelet counts between the patients receiving linezolid and those receiving glycopeptides. In conclusion, it was identified that patients in a respiratory intensive care unit, aged ≥65 years or with a treatment duration of ≥7 days who were treated with linezolid were more likely to develop thrombocytopenia than patients of the same subgroup who were treated with glycopeptides.

Antibiotic therapy for the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in non surgical wounds

BACKGROUND

Non surgical wounds include chronic ulcers (pressure or decubitus ulcers, venous ulcers, diabetic ulcers, ischaemic ulcers), burns and traumatic wounds. The prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) colonisation (i.e. presence of MRSA in the absence of clinical features of infection such as redness or pus discharge) or infection in chronic ulcers varies between 7% and 30%. MRSA colonisation or infection of non surgical wounds can result in MRSA bacteraemia (infection of the blood) which is associated with a 30-day mortality of about 28% to 38% and a one-year mortality of about 55%. People with non surgical wounds colonised or infected with MRSA may be reservoirs of MRSA, so it is important to treat them, however, we do not know the optimal antibiotic regimen to use in these cases.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the benefits (such as decreased mortality and improved quality of life) and harms (such as adverse events related to antibiotic use) of all antibiotic treatments in people with non surgical wounds with established colonisation or infection caused by MRSA.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases: The Cochrane Wounds Group Specialised Register (searched 13 March 2013); The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Issue 2); Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (2013, Issue 2); NHS Economic Evaluation Database (2013, Issue 2); Ovid MEDLINE (1946 to February Week 4 2013); Ovid MEDLINE (In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations, March 12, 2013); Ovid EMBASE (1974 to 2013 Week 10); EBSCO CINAHL (1982 to 8 March 2013).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing antibiotic treatment with no antibiotic treatment or with another antibiotic regimen for the treatment of MRSA-infected non surgical wounds. We included all relevant RCTs in the analysis, irrespective of language, publication status, publication year, or sample size.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently identified the trials, and extracted data from the trial reports. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for comparing the binary outcomes between the groups and planned to calculate the mean difference (MD) with 95% CI for comparing the continuous outcomes. We planned to perform the meta-analysis using both fixed-effect and random-effects models. We performed intention-to-treat analysis whenever possible.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified three trials that met the inclusion criteria for this review. In these, a total of 47 people with MRSA-positive diabetic foot infections were randomised to six different antibiotic regimens. While these trials included 925 people with multiple pathogens, they reported the information on outcomes for people with MRSA infections separately (MRSA prevalence: 5.1%). The only outcome reported for people with MRSA infection in these trials was the eradication of MRSA. The three trials did not report the review's primary outcomes (death and quality of life) and secondary outcomes (length of hospital stay, use of healthcare resources and time to complete wound healing). Two trials reported serious adverse events in people with infection due to any type of bacteria (i.e. not just MRSA infections), so the proportion of patients with serious adverse events was not available for MRSA-infected wounds. Overall, MRSA was eradicated in 31/47 (66%) of the people included in the three trials, but there were no significant differences in the proportion of people in whom MRSA was eradicated in any of the comparisons, as shown below.1. Daptomycin compared with vancomycin or semisynthetic penicillin: RR of MRSA eradication 1.13; 95% CI 0.56 to 2.25 (14 people).2. Ertapenem compared with piperacillin/tazobactam: RR of MRSA eradication 0.71; 95% CI 0.06 to 9.10 (10 people).3. Moxifloxacin compared with piperacillin/tazobactam followed by amoxycillin/clavulanate: RR of MRSA eradication 0.87; 95% CI 0.56 to 1.36 (23 people).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no trials comparing the use of antibiotics with no antibiotic for treating MRSA-colonised non-surgical wounds and therefore can draw no conclusions for this population. In the trials that compared different antibiotics for treating MRSA-infected non surgical wounds, there was no evidence that any one antibiotic was better than the others. Further well-designed RCTs are necessary.

Treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia with linezolid or vancomycin: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Hospital-acquired pneumonia remains the most lethal and expensive nosocomial infection worldwide. Optimal therapy remains controversial. We aimed to compare mortality and clinical response outcomes in patients treated with either linezolid or vancomycin.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, American College of Physicians Journal Club, Evidence-based Medicine BMJ and abstracts from infectious diseases and critical care meetings were searched through April 2013.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

All randomised clinical trials comparing linezolid to vancomycin for hospital-acquired pneumonia.

DATA EXTRACTION

Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines were followed. One author extracted the data and two authors rechecked and verified all data.

RESULTS

Nine randomised trials with a total of 4026 patients were included. The adjusted absolute mortality risk difference (RD) between linezolid and vancomycin was 0.01% (95% CI -2.1% to 2.1%; p=0.992; I(2)=13.5%. The adjusted absolute clinical response difference was 0.9% (95% CI -1.2% to 3.1%; p=0.409; I(2)=0%. The risk of both microbiological (RD=5.6%, 95% CI -2.2% to 13.3%; p=0.159; I(2)=0%) and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (RD=6.4%, 95% CI -4.1% to 16.9%; p=0.230; I(2)=0%) eradication were not different between linezolid and vancomycin. Gastrointestinal side effects were more frequent with linezolid (RD=0.8% (95% CI 0% to 1.5%; p=0.05), but no differences were found with renal failure, thrombocytopenia and drug discontinuation due to adverse events. Our sample size provided 99.9% statistical power to detect differences between drugs regarding clinical response and mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Linezolid and vancomycin have similar efficacy and safety profiles. The high statistical power and the near-zero efficacy difference between both antibiotics demonstrates that no drug is superior for the treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia.