In Vitro Activity of Ceftolozane-Tazobactam, Imipenem-Relebactam, Ceftazidime-Avibactam, and Comparators against Pseudomonas aeruginosa Isolates Collected in United States Hospitals According to Results from the SMART Surveillance Program, 2018 to 2020

Effectiveness of ceftazidime-avibactam versus ceftolozane-tazobactam for multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections in the USA (CACTUS): a multicentre, retrospective, observational study

BACKGROUND

Ceftolozane-tazobactam and ceftazidime-avibactam are preferred treatment options for multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections; however, real-world comparative effectiveness studies are scarce. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic differences between the agents might affect clinical response rates. We aimed to compare the effectiveness of ceftolozane-tazobactam and ceftazidime-avibactam for treatment of invasive multidrug-resistant P aeruginosa infections.

METHODS

This multicentre, retrospective, observational study was conducted at 28 hospitals in the USA between Jan 1, 2016, and Dec 31, 2023. Eligible patients were adults (age ≥18 years old) with microbiologically confirmed multidrug-resistant P aeruginosa pneumonia or bacteraemia treated with ceftolozane-tazobactam or ceftazidime-avibactam for more than 48 h. Patients were matched (1:1) by study site, severity of illness, time to treatment initiation (≤72 h or >72 h), and infection type. The primary outcome was clinical success at day 30, which was defined as survival, resolution of signs and symptoms of infection with the intended treatment course, and the absence of recurrent infection due to P aeruginosa. Secondary outcomes included all-cause mortality and development of resistance to study drug.

FINDINGS

420 eligible patients were included (210 in each treatment group), of whom 350 (83%) had pneumonia and 70 (17%) had bacteraemia. Baseline demographics, comorbidities, and severity of illness indicators were similar between groups. On treatment initiation, 336 (80%) patients were in the intensive care unit, 296 (70%) were receiving mechanical ventilation, and 168 (40%) required vasopressor support. Clinical success was observed in 128 (61%) of 210 patients treated with ceftolozane-tazobactam and 109 (52%) of 210 patients treated with ceftazidime-avibactam. By conditional logistic regression analysis, the adjusted odds ratio (aOR) of success after treatment with ceftolozane-tazobactam compared with ceftazidime-avibactam was 2·07 (95% CI 1·16-3·70). For patients with pneumonia, clinical success was observed in 110 (63%) of 175 patients in the ceftolozane-tazobactam group and 89 (51%) of 175 patients in the ceftazidime-avibactam group (aOR 2·34 [95% CI 1·22-4·47]). Among patients with bacteraemia, rates of clinical success were 51% (18 of 35 patients) for patients treated with ceftolozane-tazobactam and 57% (20 of 35 patients) for those treated with ceftazidime-avibactam (0·76 [0·23-2·57]). There were no significant differences between groups in 30-day or 90-day mortality. Among patients whose baseline isolates were tested for susceptibility, resistance developed in 22% (38 of 173) of patients treated with ceftolozane-tazobactam and 23% (40 of 177) of patients treated with ceftazidime-avibactam.

INTERPRETATION

Treatment with ceftolozane-tazobactam resulted in higher rates of clinical success compared with ceftazidime-avibactam for invasive infections due to multidrug-resistant P aeruginosa. Differences were driven by improved response rates for patients with pneumonia who were treated with ceftolozane-tazobactam. There were no significant differences between study groups with respect to all-cause mortality; treatment-emergent resistance was common with both agents.

FUNDING

Merck Sharp & Dohme.

β-Lactamase diversity in Pseudomonas aeruginosa

Pseudomonas aeruginosa is a clinically important Gram-negative pathogen responsible for a wide variety of serious nosocomial and community-acquired infections. Antibiotic resistance is a major concern, as this organism has a wide variety of resistance mechanisms, including chromosomal class C (blaPDC) and D (blaOXA-50 family) β-lactamases, efflux pumps, porin channels, and the ability to readily acquire additional β-lactamases. Surveillance studies can reveal the diversity and distribution of β-lactamase alleles but are difficult and expensive to conduct. Herein, we apply a novel approach, using publicly available data derived from whole genome sequences, to explore the diversity and distribution of β-lactamase alleles across 30,452 P. aeruginosa isolates. The most common alleles were blaPDC-3, blaPDC-5, blaPDC-8, blaOXA-488, blaOXA-50, and blaOXA-486. Interestingly, only 43.6% of assigned blaPDC alleles were encountered, and the 10 most common blaPDC and intrinsic blaOXA alleles represent approximately 75% of their respective total alleles, while many other assigned alleles were extremely uncommon. As anticipated, differences were observed over time and geography. Surprisingly, more distinct unassigned alleles were encountered than distinct assigned alleles. Understanding the diversity and distribution of β-lactamase alleles helps to prioritize variants for further research, select targets for drug development, and may aid in selecting therapies for a given infection.

Benchmarking antimicrobial use to antimicrobial resistance: a comparative study of two hospitals using current National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) metrics

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to determine whether benchmarking antimicrobial use (AU) to antimicrobial resistance (AR) using select AU/AR ratios is more informative than AU metrics in isolation.

DESIGN

We retrospectively measured AU (antimicrobial therapy days per 1,000 days present) and AU/AR ratios (specific antimicrobial therapy days per corresponding AR event) in two hospitals during 2020 through 2022. We then had antimicrobial stewardship committee members evaluate each AU and corresponding AU/AR value and indicate whether they believed it represented potential overuse, appropriate use, or potential underuse of the antimicrobials, or whether they could not provide an assessment.

SETTING

Two acute-care hospitals.

PATIENTS

Hospitalized patients.

RESULTS

In semi-annual facility-wide analyses, echinocandins had a median AU/AR ratio of 658.5 therapy days per fluconazole-resistant Candida event in Hospital A, IV vancomycin had a median AU/AR ratio of 114.9 and 108.2 therapy days per methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus event in Hospital A and B, respectively, and linezolid had a median AU/AR ratio of 33.8 and 88.0 therapy days per vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus event in Hospital A and B, respectively. When AU and AU/AR values were evaluated by stewardship committees, more respondents were able to assess antimicrobial use based on AU/AR values compared to AU values. Based on AU/AR ratios, most respondents identified potential overuse of echinocandins and IV vancomycin in Hospital A, and potential overuse of linezolid and IV vancomycin in Hospital B.

CONCLUSION

Select AU/AR ratios provided informative metrics to antimicrobial stewardship personnel, which can be used to motivate audits of antimicrobial administration to determine appropriateness.

Activity of Aztreonam-avibactam and other β-lactamase inhibitor combinations against Gram-negative bacteria isolated from patients hospitalized with pneumonia in United States medical centers (2020-2022)

BACKGROUND

Initial antimicrobial therapy for pneumonia is frequently empirical and resistance to antimicrobial agents represents a great challenge to the treatment of patients hospitalized with pneumonia. We evaluated the frequency and antimicrobial susceptibility of Gram-negative bacteria causing pneumonia in US hospitals.

METHODS

Bacterial isolates were consecutively collected (1/patient) from patients hospitalized with pneumonia and the susceptibility of Gram-negative bacilli (3,911 Enterobacterales and 2,753 non-fermenters) was evaluated by broth microdilution in a monitoring laboratory. Isolates were collected in 69 medical centers in 2020-2022. Aztreonam-avibactam was tested with avibactam at fixed 4 mg/L and a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic susceptible (S) breakpoint of ≤ 8 mg/L was applied for comparison. Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE; isolates with MIC values of > 2 mg/L for imipenem and/or meropenem) isolates were screened for carbapenemases by whole genome sequencing.

RESULTS

Gram-negative bacilli represented 71.1% of organisms. The most common Gram-negative species were Pseudomonas aeruginosa (22.4% of organisms), Klebsiella pneumoniae (8.8%), Escherichia coli (6.6%), Serratia marcescens (6.2%), Stenotrophomonas maltophilia (4.9%), and Enterobacter cloacae complex (4.8%). Aztreonam-avibactam inhibited 100.0% of Enterobacterales at ≤ 8 mg/L and 99.9% at ≤ 4 mg/L and showed potent activity against CRE (MIC50/90, 0.25/1 mg/L). Ceftazidime-avibactam and meropenem-vaborbactam were active against 89.4% and 88.5% of CREs, respectively. Aztreonam-avibactam retained activity against Enterobacterales non-susceptible to ceftazidime-avibactam and/or meropenem-vaborbactam (n = 19; MIC50/90, 0.25/4 mg/L). The most common carbapenemases were KPC (69.2% of CREs), NDM (9.6%), and SME (4.8%). A carbapenemase gene was not identified in 16.3% of CREs. Ceftazidime-avibactam and meropenem-vaborbactam were highly active against KPC and SME producers but showed limited activity against MBL producers. The most active comparators against CRE were tigecycline (95.2%S), amikacin (73.1%S), and gentamicin (60.6%S). Among Pseudomonas aeruginosa, 79.1% were inhibited at ≤ 8 mg/L of aztreonam-avibactam, 77.2% were meropenem susceptible, and 77.2% were piperacillin-tazobactam susceptible. Aztreonam-avibactam was highly active against S. maltophilia, inhibiting 99.5% of isolates at ≤ 8 mg/L.

CONCLUSIONS

Aztreonam-avibactam displayed potent in vitro activity against a large collection of contemporary Gram-negative organisms isolated from patients hospitalized with pneumonia, including CRE isolates resistant to ceftazidime-avibactam and/or meropenem-vaborbactam. Results of surveillance programs are valuable for planning empiric antimicrobial therapy guidelines and infection control measures.

In vitro mimicry of in vivo KPC mutations by ceftazidime-avibactam: phenotypes, mechanisms, genetic structure and kinetics of enzymatic hydrolysis

Ceftazidime-avibactam (CZA) is employed for the treatment of infections caused by Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase-producing K. pneumoniae (KPC-KP). Resistance to CZA is frequently linked to point mutations in the blaKPC. We conducted in vitro simulations of in vivo blaKPC mutations using CZA. Four pre-therapy KPC-KP isolates (K1, K2, K3, and K4) were evaluated, all initially exhibited susceptibility to CZA and produced KPC-2. The crucial distinction was that following CZA treatment, the blaKPC-2 mutated in K1, K2, and K3, rendering them resistant to CZA, while K4 achieved microbiological clearance, and blaKPC-2 remained unaltered. The induction assay identified various blaKPC-2 variants, including blaKPC-25, blaKPC-127, blaKPC-100, blaKPC-128, blaKPC-137, blaKPC-138, blaKPC-144 and blaKPC-180. Our findings suggest that the resistance of KPC-KP to CZA primarily results from the emergence of KPC variants, complemented by increased blaKPC expression. A close correlation exists between avibactam concentration and the rate of increased CZA minimum Inhibitory concentration, as well as blaKPC mutation. Inadequate avibactam concentration is more likely to induce resistance in strains against CZA, there is also a higher likelihood of mutation in the blaKPC-2 and the optimal avibactam ratio remains to be determined. Simultaneously, we selected a blaKPC-33-producing K. pneumoniae strain (mutated from blaKPC-2) and induced it with imipenem and meropenem, respectively. The blaKPC-2 was detected during the process, indicating that the mutation is reversible. Clinical use of carbapenems to treat KPC variant strains increases the risk of infection, as the gene can mutate back to blaKPC-2, rendering the strain even more cross-resistant to carbapenems and CZA.

Comparative evaluation of early treatment with ceftolozane/tazobactam versus ceftazidime/avibactam for non-COVID-19 patients with pneumonia due to multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa

BACKGROUND

Ceftolozane/tazobactam and ceftazidime/avibactam are commonly used in patients with MDR-Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PSA) pneumonia (PNA). This study compared outcomes between non-COVID-19 hospitalized patients with MDR-PSA PNA who received ceftolozane/tazobactam or ceftazidime/avibactam.

METHODS

The study included non-COVID-19 adult hospitalized patients with MDR-PSA PNA in the PINC AI Healthcare Database (2016-22) who received ceftolozane/tazobactam or ceftazidime/avibactam within 3 days of index culture for ≥2 days. Outcomes were mortality, recurrent MDR-PSA PNA, discharge destination, post-index culture day length of stay (LOS) and costs (in US dollars, USD), and hospital readmission.

RESULTS

The final sample included 197 patients (117 ceftolozane/tazobactam, 80 ceftazidime/avibactam). No significant differences were observed in mortality and post-index culture LOS and costs between groups. In the multivariable analyses, patients who received ceftolozane/tazobactam versus ceftazidime/avibactam had lower recurrent MDR-PSA PNA (7.9% versus 18.0%, P = 0.03) and 60 day PNA-related readmissions (11.1% versus 28.5%, P = 0.03) and were more likely to be discharged home (25.8% versus 9.8%, P = 0.03). Compared with ceftazidime/avibactam patients, ceftolozane/tazobactam patients had lower adjusted median total antibiotic costs (5052 USD versus 8099 USD, P = 0.003) and lower adjusted median comparator (ceftolozane/tazobactam or ceftazidime/avibactam) antibiotic costs (3938 USD versus 6441 USD, P = 0.005). In the desirability of outcome ranking (DOOR) analysis, a ceftolozane/tazobactam-treated patient was more likely to have a more favourable outcome than a ceftazidime/avibactam-treated patient [DOOR probability: 59.6% (95% CI: 52.5%-66.8%)].

CONCLUSIONS

Early treatment with ceftolozane/tazobactam may offer some clinical and cost benefits over ceftazidime/avibactam in patients with MDR-PSA PNA. Further large-scale studies are necessary to comprehensively understand the outcomes associated with these treatments for MDR-PSA PNA.

Multicenter evaluation of activity of aztreonam in combination with avibactam, relebactam, and vaborbactam against metallo-β-lactamase-producing carbapenem-resistant gram-negative bacilli

Treatment options for carbapenem-resistant gram-negative bacilli (CR-GNB), especially metallo-β-lactamase (MBL)-producing CR-GNB, are limited. Aztreonam (ATM) in combination with avibactam (AVI) has shown potential for treating MBL-producing carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CREs) and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia. However, data on ATM in combination with other β-lactamase inhibitors (BLIs) are limited. We performed a multicenter study to evaluate the in vitro activities of ATM in combination with AVI, vaborbactam (VAB), relebactam (REL), tazobactam (TAZ) as well as with their commercially available formulations against CREs and S. maltophilia using broth microdilution. AVI restored ATM activity for MBL-producing CREs (ATM: 9.8% vs ATM-AVI: 78.0%) and S. maltophilia (ATM: 0% vs ATM-AVI: 93.3%). REL also moderately restored activity of ATM in MBL-producing CREs (ATM: 9.8% vs ATM-REL: 42.7%) and S. maltophilia (ATM: 0% vs ATM-REL: 68.9%). VAB and TAZ demonstrated very limited effect on the activity of ATM against CR-GNB evaluated. The combination of ATM with ceftazidime-AVI (CAZ-AVI) demonstrated maximum activity against CREs. Although ATM-CAZ-AVI is the most potent regimen available for CREs and S. maltophilia, ATM-IMI-REL might be a reasonable alternative.

Evolving resistance landscape in gram-negative pathogens: An update on β-lactam and β-lactam-inhibitor treatment combinations for carbapenem-resistant organisms

Antibiotic resistance has become a global threat as it is continuously growing due to the evolution of β-lactamases diminishing the activity of classic β-lactam (BL) antibiotics. Recent antibiotic discovery and development efforts have led to the availability of β-lactamase inhibitors (BLIs) with activity against extended-spectrum β-lactamases as well as Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC)-producing carbapenem-resistant organisms (CRO). Nevertheless, there is still a lack of drugs that target metallo-β-lactamases (MBL), which hydrolyze carbapenems efficiently, and oxacillinases (OXA) often present in carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii. This review aims to provide a snapshot of microbiology, pharmacology, and clinical data for currently available BL/BLI treatment options as well as agents in late stage development for CRO harboring various β-lactamases including MBL and OXA-enzymes.

Treatment of infections caused by multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacilli: A practical approach by the Italian (SIMIT) and French (SPILF) Societies of Infectious Diseases

INTRODUCTION

The emergence of multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacilli and the development of new antibiotics have complicated the selection of optimal regimens. International guidelines are valuable tools, but are limited by the scarcity of high-quality randomized trials in many situations.

METHODS

A panel of experts from the French and Italian Societies of Infectious Diseases aimed to address unresolved issues in clinical practice based on their experience, an updated literature review and open discussions.

RESULTS

The panel reached consensus for the following 'first choices': (i) cefepime for ventilator-acquired pneumonia due to AmpC β-lactamase-producing Enterobacterales; (ii) the β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitor combination most active in vitro, or cefiderocol combined with fosfomycin, and aerosolized colistin or aminoglycosides, for severe pneumonia due to Pseudomonas aeruginosa resistant to ceftolozane-tazobactam; (iii) high-dose piperacillin-tazobactam (including loading dose and continuous infusion) for complicated urinary tract infections (cUTIs) caused by extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing Enterobacterales with piperacillin-tazobactam minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) ≤8 mg/L; (iv) high-dose cefepime for cUTIs due to AmpC β-lactamase-producing Enterobacterales other than Enterobacter spp. if cefepime MIC ≤2 mg/L; (v) ceftolozane-tazobactam or ceftazidime-avibactam plus metronidazole for intra-abdominal infections (IAIs) due to third-generation cephalosporin-resistant Enterobacterales; (vi) ceftazidime-avibactam plus aztreonam plus metronidazole for IAIs due to metallo-β-lactamase-producing Enterobacterales; (vii) ampicillin-sulbactam plus colistin for bloodstream infections (BSIs) caused by carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii; (viii) meropenem-vaborbactam for BSIs caused by Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales; and (ix) ceftazidime-avibactam plus fosfomycin for neurological infections caused by carbapenem-resistant P. aeruginosa.

CONCLUSIONS

These expert choices were based on the necessary balance between antimicrobial stewardship principles and the need to provide optimal treatment for individual patients in each situation.

Real-world evaluation of imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam across US medical centres

We assessed 160 patients who received imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam for ≥2 days. At treatment initiation, the median Charlson Comorbidity Index was 5, 45% were in the intensive care unit, and 19% required vasopressor support. The in-hospital mortality rate was 24%. These data advance our understanding of real-world indications and outcomes of imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam use.

In vitro activity of antibiotics potentially effective against difficult-to-treat strains of Gram-negative rods: retrospective study

Bacterial resistance surveillance is one of the main outputs of microbiological laboratories and its results are important part of antimicrobial stewardship (AMS). In this study, the susceptibility of specific bacteria to selected antimicrobial agents was tested. The susceptibility of 90 unique isolates of pathogens of critical priority obtained from clinically valid samples of ICU patients in 2017-2021 was tested. 50% of these fulfilled difficult-to-treat resistance (DTR) criteria and 50% were susceptible to all antibiotics included in the definition. 10 Enterobacterales strains met DTR criteria, and 2 (20%) were resistant to colistin (COL), 2 (20%) to cefiderocol (FCR), 7 (70%) to imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam (I/R), 3 (30%) to ceftazidime/avibactam (CAT) and 5 (50%) to fosfomycin (FOS). For Enterobacterales we also tested aztreonam/avibactam (AZA) for which there are no breakpoints yet. The highest MIC of AZA observed was 1 mg/l, MIC range in the susceptible cohort was 0.032-0.064 mg/l and in the DTR cohort (incl. class B beta-lactamase producers) it was 0.064-1 mg/l. Two (13.3%) isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa (15 DTR strains) were resistant to COL, 1 (6.7%) to FCR, 13 (86.7%) to I/R, 5 (33.3%) to CAT, and 5 (33.3%) to ceftolozane/tazobactam. All isolates of Acinetobacter baumannii with DTR were susceptible to COL and FCR, and at the same time resistant to I/R and ampicillin/sulbactam. New antimicrobial agents are not 100% effective against DTR. Therefore, it is necessary to perform susceptibility testing of these antibiotics, use the data for surveillance (including local surveillance) and conform to AMS standards.

Antimicrobial and Diagnostic Stewardship of the Novel β-Lactam/β-Lactamase Inhibitors for Infections Due to Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacterales Species and Pseudomonas aeruginosa

Carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacterial infections are a major public health threat due to the limited therapeutic options available. The introduction of the new β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitors (BL/BLIs) has, however, altered the treatment options for such pathogens. Thus, four new BL/BLI combinations-namely, ceftazidime/avibactam, meropenem/vaborbactam, imipenem/relebactam, and ceftolozane/tazobactam-have been approved for infections attributed to carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales species and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Nevertheless, although these antimicrobials are increasingly being used in place of other drugs such as polymyxins, their optimal clinical use is still challenging. Furthermore, there is evidence that resistance to these agents might be increasing, so urgent measures should be taken to ensure their continued effectiveness. Therefore, clinical laboratories play an important role in the judicious use of these new antimicrobial combinations by detecting and characterizing carbapenem resistance, resolving the presence and type of carbapenemase production, and accurately determining the minimum inhibitor concentrations (MICs) for BL/BLIs. These three targets must be met to ensure optimal BL/BLIs use and prevent unnecessary exposure that could lead to the development of resistance. At the same time, laboratories must ensure that results are interpreted in a timely manner to avoid delays in appropriate treatment that might be detrimental to patient safety. Thus, we herein present an overview of the indications and current applications of the new antimicrobial combinations and explore the diagnostic limitations regarding both carbapenem resistance detection and the interpretation of MIC results. Moreover, we suggest the use of alternative narrower-spectrum antibiotics based on susceptibility testing and present data regarding the effect of synergies between BL/BLIs and other antimicrobials. Finally, in order to address the absence of a standardized approach to using the novel BL/BLIs, we propose a diagnostic and therapeutic algorithm, which can be modified based on local epidemiological criteria. This framework could also be expanded to incorporate other new antimicrobials, such as cefiderocol, or currently unavailable BL/BLIs such as aztreonam/avibactam and cefepime/taniborbactam.

Activity of ceftolozane/tazobactam, imipenem/relebactam and ceftazidime/avibactam against clinical Gram-negative isolates-SMART United States 2019-21

Background

Ongoing national and international surveillance efforts are critical components of antimicrobial stewardship, resistance monitoring, and drug development programs. In this report, we summarize the results of ceftolozane/tazobactam, imipenem/relebactam, ceftazidime/avibactam and comparator agent testing against 10 509 Enterobacterales and 2524 Pseudomonas aeruginosa collected by USA clinical laboratories in 2019-21 as part of the SMART global surveillance programme.

Methods

MICs were determined by CLSI broth microdilution and interpreted using 2023 CLSI M100 breakpoints.

Results

Most Enterobacterales were ceftazidime/avibactam susceptible (>99%), meropenem susceptible (99%) and ceftolozane/tazobactam susceptible (94%). Non-Morganellaceae Enterobacterales were also highly susceptible to imipenem/relebactam (99%). Ceftolozane/tazobactam inhibited 94% of Escherichia coli and 89% of Klebsiella pneumoniae with ceftriaxone non-susceptible/non-carbapenem-resistant phenotypes. Against P. aeruginosa, ceftolozane/tazobactam (97% susceptible) was more active than ceftazidime/avibactam (95%) and imipenem/relebactam (91%). MDR and difficult-to-treat resistance (DTR) phenotypes were identified in 13% and 7% of P. aeruginosa isolates, respectively. Ceftolozane/tazobactam remained active against 78% of MDR P. aeruginosa (13% and 23% higher than ceftazidime/avibactam and imipenem/relebactam, respectively) and against 74% of DTR P. aeruginosa (24% and 37% higher than ceftazidime/avibactam and imipenem/relebactam, respectively). Length of hospital stay at the time of specimen collection, ward type and infection type resulted in percent susceptible value differences of >5% across isolate demographic strata for some antimicrobial agent/pathogen combinations.

Conclusions

We conclude that in the USA, in 2019-21, carbapenem (meropenem) resistance remained uncommon in Enterobacterales and ceftolozane/tazobactam was more active than both ceftazidime/avibactam and imipenem/relebactam against P. aeruginosa.

Real-world in vitro activity of newer antibiotics against Enterobacterales and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, including carbapenem-non-susceptible and multidrug-resistant isolates: a multicenter analysis

IMPORTANCE

Newer antibiotics against Gram-negative pathogens provide important treatment options, especially for antibiotic-resistant bacteria, but little is known about their use during routine clinical care. To use these agents appropriately, clinicians need to have access to timely susceptibility data. We evaluated 27,531 facility-reported susceptibility results from the BD Insights Research Database to gain a better understanding of real-world testing practices and susceptibility rates for six newer antibiotics. Escherichia coli was the most frequently tested potential pathogen, and ceftazidime-avibactam and ceftolozane-tazobactam had the greatest numbers of susceptibility results. For cefiderocol, eravacycline, imipenem-relabactam, and meropenem-vaborbactam, susceptibility data were available for fewer than 2% of isolates. Susceptibility comparisons should be considered with caution. Ceftazidime-avibactam had the highest susceptibility rates for Enterobacterales while cefiderocol had the highest susceptibility rates for Pseudomonas aeruginosa. New antibiotics have the potential to improve the management of Gram-negative infections, but their use may be hampered by the absence of susceptibility data.

Approaches to Testing Novel β-Lactam and β-Lactam Combination Agents in the Clinical Laboratory

The rapid emergence of multi-drug resistant Gram-negative pathogens has driven the introduction of novel β-lactam combination agents (BLCs) to the antibiotic market: ceftolozane-tazobactam, ceftazidime-avibactam, meropenem-vaborbactam, imipenem-relebactam, cefiderocol, and sulbactam-durlobactam. These agents are equipped with innovative mechanisms that confer broad Gram-negative activity, notably against certain challenging carbapenemases. While their introduction offers a beacon of hope, clinical microbiology laboratories must navigate the complexities of susceptibility testing for these agents due to their diverse activity profiles against specific β-lactamases and the possibility of acquired resistance mechanisms in some bacterial isolates. This review explores the complexities of these novel antimicrobial agents detailing the intricacies of their application, providing guidance on the nuances of susceptibility testing, interpretation, and result reporting in clinical microbiology laboratories.

Management strategies for severe Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review focuses on the management of severe Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections in critically ill patients.

RECENT FINDINGS

Pseudomonas aeruginosa is the most common pathogen in intensive care; the main related infections are nosocomial pneumonias, then bloodstream infections. Antimicrobial resistance is common; despite new antibiotics, it is associated with increased mortality, and can lead to a therapeutic deadlock.

SUMMARY

Carbapenem resistance in difficult-to-treat P. aeruginosa (DTR-PA) strains is primarily mediated by loss or reduction of the OprD porin, overexpression of the cephalosporinase AmpC, and/or overexpression of efflux pumps. However, the role of carbapenemases, particularly metallo-β-lactamases, has become more important. Ceftolozane-tazobactam, ceftazidime-avibactam and imipenem-relebactam are useful against DTR phenotypes (noncarbapenemase producers). Other new agents, such as aztreonam-ceftazidime-avibactam or cefiderocol, or colistin, might be effective for carbapenemase producers. Regarding nonantibiotic agents, only phages might be considered, pending further clinical trials. Combination therapy does not reduce mortality, but may be necessary for empirical treatment. Short-term treatment of severe P. aeruginosa infections should be preferred when it is expected that the clinical situation resolves rapidly.

Natural protein engineering in the Ω-loop: the role of Y221 in ceftazidime and ceftolozane resistance in Pseudomonas-derived cephalosporinase

A wide variety of clinically observed single amino acid substitutions in the Ω-loop region have been associated with increased minimum inhibitory concentrations and resistance to ceftazidime (CAZ) and ceftolozane (TOL) in Pseudomonas-derived cephalosporinase and other class C β-lactamases. Herein, we demonstrate the naturally occurring tyrosine to histidine substitution of amino acid 221 (Y221H) in Pseudomonas-derived cephalosporinase (PDC) enables CAZ and TOL hydrolysis, leading to similar kinetic profiles (k cat = 2.3 ± 0.2 µM and 2.6 ± 0.1 µM, respectively). Mass spectrometry of PDC-3 establishes the formation of stable adducts consistent with the formation of an acyl enzyme complex, while spectra of E219K (a well-characterized, CAZ- and TOL-resistant comparator) and Y221H are consistent with more rapid turnover. Thermal denaturation experiments reveal decreased stability of the variants. Importantly, PDC-3, E219K, and Y221H are all inhibited by avibactam and the boronic acid transition state inhibitors (BATSIs) LP06 and S02030 with nanomolar IC50 values and the BATSIs stabilize all three enzymes. Crystal structures of PDC-3 and Y221H as apo enzymes and complexed with LP06 and S02030 (1.35-2.10 Å resolution) demonstrate ligand-induced conformational changes, including a significant shift in the position of the sidechain of residue 221 in Y221H (as predicted by enhanced sampling well-tempered metadynamics simulations) and extensive hydrogen bonding between the enzymes and BATSIs. The shift of residue 221 leads to the expansion of the active site pocket, and molecular docking suggests substrates orientate differently and make different intermolecular interactions in the enlarged active site compared to the wild-type enzyme.

In vitro activity of imipenem/relebactam against Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolated from patients with cystic fibrosis

Pseudomonas aeruginosa is a common multidrug-resistant pathogen in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF). The in vitro activity of imipenem/relebactam and imipenem was compared with other antipseudomonal antibiotics against 105 isolates from patients with CF from three US hospitals. Imipenem/relebactam, imipenem, meropenem, ceftazidime/avibactam, and ceftolozane/tazobactam susceptibilities were 77%, 55%, 58%, 90%, and 92%, respectively. Relebactam potentiates imipenem against CF P. aeruginosa by fourfold leading imipenem/relebactam to retain susceptibility against most isolates in this cohort.

Global Resistance of Imipenem/Relebactam against Gram-Negative Bacilli: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Relebactam, previously known as MK-7655, is currently being tested in combination with imipenem as a class A and class C β-lactamase inhibitor, including KPC from Klebsiella pneumoniae.

Objective

The objective of the current study was to evaluate the activity of imipenem/relebactam against gram-negative bacilli.

Methods

After applying exclusion and inclusion criteria, 72 articles with full texts that describe the prevalence of imipenem/relebactam resistance were chosen for the meta-analysis and systematic review. Articles published between January 2015 and February 2023 were surveyed. The systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Scopus.

Results

The pooled estimation of 282,621 sample isolates revealed that the prevalence rate of imipenem/relebactam resistance is roughly 14.6% (95% CI, 0.116%-0.182%).

Conclusions

The findings of this analysis show that imipenem/relebactam resistance is rare in the majority of developed countries. Given that relebactam has proven to restore the activity of imipenem against current clinical isolates, further research into imipenem/relebactam is necessary.

Characterization of Pseudomonas aeruginosa resistance to ceftolozane-tazobactam due to ampC and/or ampD mutations observed during treatment using semi-mechanistic PKPD modeling

A double ampC (AmpCG183D) and ampD (AmpDH157Y) genes mutations have been identified by whole genome sequencing in a Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PaS) that became resistant (PaR) in a patient treated by ceftolozane/tazobactam (C/T). To precisely characterize the respective contributions of these mutations on the decreased susceptibility to C/T and on the parallel increased susceptibility to imipenem (IMI), mutants were generated by homologous recombination in PAO1 reference strain (PAO1- AmpCG183D, PAO1-AmpDH157Y, PAO1-AmpCG183D/AmpDH157Y) and in PaR (PaR-AmpCPaS/AmpDPaS). Sequential time-kill curve experiments were conducted on all strains and analyzed by semi-mechanistic PKPD modeling. A PKPD model with adaptation successfully described the data, allowing discrimination between initial and time-related (adaptive resistance) effects of mutations. With PAO1 and mutant-derived strains, initial EC50 values increased by 1.4, 4.1, and 29-fold after AmpCG183D , AmpDH157Y and AmpCG183D/AmpDH157Y mutations, respectively. EC50 values were increased by 320, 12.4, and 55-fold at the end of the 2 nd experiment. EC50 of PAO1-AmpCG183D/AmpDH157Y was higher than that of single mutants at any time of the experiments. Within the PaR clinical background, reversal of AmpCG183D, and AmpDH157Y mutations led to an important decrease of EC50 value, from 80.5 mg/L to 6.77 mg/L for PaR and PaR-AmpCPaS/AmpDPaS, respectively. The effect of mutations on IMI susceptibility mainly showed that the AmpCG183D mutation prevented the emergence of adaptive resistance. The model successfully described the separate and combined effect of AmpCG183D and AmpDH157Y mutations against C/T and IMI, allowing discrimination and quantification of the initial and time-related effects of mutations. This method could be reproduced in clinical strains to decipher complex resistance mechanisms.

Compassionate use of a novel β-lactam enhancer-based investigational antibiotic cefepime/zidebactam (WCK 5222) for the treatment of extensively-drug-resistant NDM-expressing Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection in an intra-abdominal infection-induced sepsis patient: a case report

Infections in critically-ill patients caused by extensively-drug-resistant (XDR)-Pseudomonas aeruginosa are challenging to manage due to paucity of effective treatment options. Cefepime/zidebactam, which is currently in global Phase 3 clinical development (Clinical Trials Identifier: NCT04979806, registered on July 28, 2021) is a novel mechanism of action based β-lactam/ β-lactam-enhancer combination with a promising activity against a broad-range of Gram-negative pathogens including XDR P. aeruginosa. We present a case report of an intra-abdominal infection-induced sepsis patient infected with XDR P. aeruginosa and successfully treated with cefepime/zidebactam under compassionate use. The 50 year old female patient with past-history of bariatric surgery and recent elective abdominoplasty and liposuction developed secondary pneumonia and failed a prolonged course of polymyxins. The organism repeatedly isolated from the patient was a New-Delhi metallo β-lactamase-producing XDR P. aeruginosa resistant to ceftazidime/avibactam, imipenem/relebactam and ceftolozane/tazobactam, susceptible only to cefepime/zidebactam. As polymyxins failed to rescue the patient, cefepime/zidebactam was administered under compassionate grounds leading to discharge of patient in stable condition. The present case highlights the prevailing precarious scenario of antimicrobial resistance and the need for novel antibiotics to tackle infections caused by XDR phenotype pathogens.

Susceptibility profile and β-lactamase content of global Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates resistant to ceftolozane/tazobactam and/or imipenem/relebactam-SMART 2016-21

Objectives

To determine susceptibility profiles and β-lactamase content for ceftolozane/tazobactam-resistant and imipenem/relebactam-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates collected in eight global regions during 2016-21.

Methods

Broth microdilution MICs were interpreted using CLSI breakpoints. PCR to identify β-lactamase genes or WGS was performed on selected isolate subsets.

Results

Ceftolozane/tazobactam-resistant [from 0.6% (Australia/New Zealand) to 16.7% (Eastern Europe)] and imipenem/relebactam-resistant [from 1.3% (Australia/New Zealand) to 13.6% (Latin America)] P. aeruginosa varied by geographical region. Globally, 5.9% of isolates were both ceftolozane/tazobactam resistant and imipenem/relebactam resistant; 76% of these isolates carried MBLs. Most ceftolozane/tazobactam-resistant/imipenem/relebactam-susceptible isolates carried ESBLs (44%) or did not carry non-intrinsic (acquired) β-lactamases (49%); 95% of imipenem/relebactam-resistant/ceftolozane/tazobactam-susceptible isolates did not carry non-intrinsic β-lactamases. Isolates that carried indicators of strong PDC (Pseudomonas-derived cephalosporinase) up-regulation without a mutation known to expand the spectrum of PDC, or non-intrinsic β-lactamases, showed an 8-fold increase in ceftolozane/tazobactam modal MIC; however, this rarely (3%) resulted in ceftolozane/tazobactam resistance. Isolates with a PDC mutation and an indicator for PDC upregulation were ceftolozane/tazobactam non-susceptible (MIC,  ≥ 8 mg/L). MICs ranged widely (1 to >32 mg/L) for isolates with a PDC mutation and no positively identified indicator for PDC up-regulation. Imipenem/relebactam-resistant/ceftolozane/tazobactam-susceptible isolates without non-intrinsic β-lactamases frequently (91%) harboured genetic lesions implying OprD loss of function; however, this finding alone did not account for this phenotype. Among imipenem-non-susceptible isolates without non-intrinsic β-lactamases, implied OprD loss only shifted the distribution of imipenem/relebactam MICs up by 1-2 doubling dilutions, resulting in ∼10% imipenem/relebactam-resistant isolates.

Conclusions

P. aeruginosa with ceftolozane/tazobactam-resistant/imipenem/relebactam-susceptible and imipenem/relebactam-resistant/ceftolozane/tazobactam-susceptible phenotypes were uncommon and harboured diverse resistance determinants.

Multifactorial resistance mechanisms associated with resistance to ceftazidime-avibactam in clinical Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates from Switzerland

Background

Increasing reports of multidrug resistance (MDR) in clinical Pseudomonas aeruginosa have led to a necessity for new antimicrobials. Ceftazidime-avibactam (CZA) is indicated for use against MDR P. aeruginosa across a broad range of infection types and particularly those that are carbapenem resistant. This study sought to determine the molecular mechanisms of CZA and imipenem (IPM)-resistance in clinical P. aeruginosa isolates obtained from Swiss hospitals.

Methods

Clinical P. aeruginosa isolates were obtained from inpatients in three hospitals in Switzerland. Susceptibility was determined by either antibiotic disc testing or broth microdilution according to EUCAST methodology. AmpC activity was determined using cloxacillin and efflux activity was determined using phenylalanine-arginine β-naphthylamide, in agar plates. Whole Genome Sequencing was performed on 18 clinical isolates. Sequence types (STs) and resistance genes were ascertained using the Centre for Genomic Epidemiology platform. Genes of interest were extracted from sequenced isolates and compared to reference strain P. aeruginosa PAO1.

Results

Sixteen different STs were identified amongst the 18 isolates in this study indicating a high degree of genomic diversity. No carbapenemases were detected but one isolate did harbor the ESBL bla PER-1. Eight isolates were CZA-resistant with MICs ranging from 16-64 mg/L, and the remaining ten isolates had either low/wildtype MICs (n=6; 1-2 mg/L) or elevated, but still susceptible, MICs (n=4; 4-8 mg/L). Ten isolates were IPM-resistant, seven of which had mutations resulting in truncations of OprD, and the remaining nine IPM-susceptible isolates had intact oprD genes. Within CZA-R isolates, and those with reduced susceptibility, mutations resulting in ampC derepression, OprD loss, mexAB overexpression and ESBL (bla PER-1) carriage were observed in various combinations and one harbored a truncation of the PBP4 dacB gene. Within the six isolates with wildtype-resistance levels, five had no mutations that would affect any antimicrobial resistance (AMR) genes of interest when compared to PAO1.

Conclusion

This preliminary study highlights that CZA-resistance in P. aeruginosa is multifactorial and could be caused by the interplay between different resistance mechanisms including ESBL carriage, increased efflux, loss of permeability and derepression of its intrinsic ampC.

Novel Antimicrobial Agents for Gram-Negative Pathogens

Gram-negative bacterial resistance to antimicrobials has had an exponential increase at a global level during the last decades and represent an everyday challenge, especially for the hospital practice of our era. Concerted efforts from the researchers and the industry have recently provided several novel promising antimicrobials, resilient to various bacterial resistance mechanisms. There are new antimicrobials that became commercially available during the last five years, namely, cefiderocol, imipenem-cilastatin-relebactam, eravacycline, omadacycline, and plazomicin. Furthermore, other agents are in advanced development, having reached phase 3 clinical trials, namely, aztreonam-avibactam, cefepime-enmetazobactam, cefepime-taniborbactam, cefepime-zidebactam, sulopenem, tebipenem, and benapenem. In this present review, we critically discuss the characteristics of the above-mentioned antimicrobials, their pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic properties and the current clinical data.

Phenotypic and genotypic profile of ceftolozane/tazobactam-non-susceptible, carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the genotypic and ceftazidime/avibactam-susceptibility profiles amongst ceftolozane/tazobactam-non-susceptible (NS), MBL-negative Pseudomonas aeruginosa in a global surveillance programme.

METHODS

Isolates were collected as part of the ERACE-PA Global Surveillance programme. Carbapenem-resistant P. aeruginosa deemed clinically relevant by the submitting laboratories were included. Broth microdilution MICs were conducted per CLSI standards to ceftolozane/tazobactam, ceftazidime/avibactam, ceftazidime and cefepime. Genotypic carbapenemases were detected using CarbaR and CarbaR NxG (research use only). Isolates negative for carbapenemases by PCR were assessed via WGS. Isolates were included in the analysis if they were ceftolozane/tazobactam-NS and lacked detection of known MBLs.

RESULTS

Of the 807 isolates collected in the ERACE-PA programme, 126 (16%) were ceftolozane/tazobactam-NS and lacked MBLs. Cross-resistance to ceftazidime and cefepime was common, with only 5% and 16% testing susceptible, respectively. Ceftazidime/avibactam retained in vitro activity, with 65% of isolates testing susceptible. GES was the most common enzymology, detected in 57 (45%) isolates, and 89% remained susceptible to ceftazidime/avibactam. Seven isolates harboured KPC and all tested susceptible to ceftazidime/avibactam. In the remaining 62 isolates, WGS revealed various ESBLs or OXA β-lactamases. While 39% remained susceptible to ceftazidime/avibactam, marked variability was observed among the diverse resistance mechanisms.

CONCLUSIONS

Ceftazidime/avibactam remained active in vitro against the majority of ceftolozane/tazobactam-NS, MBL-negative P. aeruginosa. Ceftazidime/avibactam was highly active against isolates harbouring GES and KPC β-lactamases. These data highlight the potential clinical utility of genotypic profiling as well as the need to test multiple novel agents when carbapenem-resistant P. aeruginosa are encountered.

Computing antimicrobial use/antimicrobial resistance ratios: A novel way to assess inpatient antimicrobial utilization using current National Healthcare Safety Network metrics

BACKGROUND

Current methods for benchmarking inpatient antimicrobial use (AU) could benefit from combining AU with antimicrobial resistance (AR) information to provide metrics benchmarked to microbiological data; this may yield more instructive and better risk-adjusted measurements than AU and AR in isolation.

METHODS

In this retrospective single-center study, we computed facility-wide AU/AR ratios from 2019 to 2020 for specific antimicrobial agents and corresponding AR events, and compared median monthly AU/AR ratios between March 2019 through December 2019 (pre-COVID period) and March 2020 through December 2020 (COVID period). Aggregate AU was expressed as a ratio to aggregate AR events for antimicrobials that typically have activity against the AR organism and are frequently used to treat the AR organism in clinical practice. We also computed AU/AR ratios in our surgical intensive care unit in the pre-COVID period.

RESULTS

High-median facility-wide monthly AU/AR ratios were observed for intravenous vancomycin/methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, with 130.0 in the pre-COVID period and 121.3 in the COVID period (p =.520). Decreases in facility-wide median monthly AU/AR ratios were observed between periods for meropenem/ESBL Enterobacterales (20.9 vs. 7.9, p < .001), linezolid/vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (48.5 vs. 15.8, p =.004), and daptomycin/vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus (32.2 vs. 4.8, p = .002). Increases in facility-wide median monthly AU/AR ratios were observed between periods for ceftazidime-avibactam/carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (0.0 vs. 3.2, p = .020) and ceftazidime-avibactam/multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (0.0 vs. 4.0, p = .017). The AU/AR ratio for intravenous vancomycin/methicillin-resistant S. aureus in the surgical intensive care unit was 191.5 in the pre-COVID period.

CONCLUSIONS

AU/AR ratios may be used to supplement current AU and AR metrics. Future directions should include the development of more AU metrics benchmarked to microbiological information. AU metrics more specific to transplant infectious diseases should be developed.