Teicoplanin for treating MRSA pneumonia

Comparison of mortality and clinical failure rates between vancomycin and teicoplanin in patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus pneumonia

Background

Very few studies have compared the effects and side effects of vancomycin and teicoplanin in patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus pneumonia. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of vancomycin and teicoplanin in patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus pneumonia.

Methods

This study examined 116 patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus pneumonia who met the inclusion criteria and were treated with either vancomycin (n = 54) or teicoplanin (n = 62). The primary (i.e., clinical failure during treatment) and secondary outcomes (i.e., mortality rates, discontinuation of study drugs due to treatment failure, side effects, and clinical cure) were evaluated.

Results

The vancomycin group presented lower clinical failure rates (25.9% vs. 61.3%, p < 0.001), discontinuation due to treatment failure (22.2% vs. 41.9%, p = 0.024), and mortality rates (3.7% vs 19.4%, p = 0.010). The Cox proportional hazard model revealed that teicoplanin was a significant clinical failure predictor compared with vancomycin (adjusted odds ratio, 2.198; 95% confidence interval 1.163–4.154). The rates of drug change due to side effects were higher in the vancomycin group than in the teicoplanin group (24.1% vs. 1.6%, p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Vancomycin presented favorable treatment outcomes and more side effects compared with teicoplanin, which suggests that clinicians would need to consider the efficacy and potential side effects of these drugs before prescription.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12879-022-07549-2.

Current pharmacotherapy for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) pneumonia

INTRODUCTION

Currently, several antibiotics are active against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and can be used for the treatment of pneumonia. They show great variability in terms of antibiotic class, indication, pharmacodynamic/pharmacokinetic properties, type of available formulations, spectrum of activity against bacteria other than MRSA, and toxicity profile.

AREAS COVERED

In this narrative review, the authors discuss the characteristics of currently available agents for the treatment of MRSA pneumonia.

EXPERT OPINION

The availability of different agents with anti-MRSA activity, and approved for the treatment of pneumonia can allow a personalized approach for any given patient based on the severity of the disease, the setting of occurrence, the patient's baseline risk of toxicity and drug interactions, and the possibility of oral therapy whenever early discharge or outpatient treatment are possible. Although some gray areas still remain, like the lack of high certainty evidence on the efficacy of some old agents and on the precise role of companion agents with toxin inhibitory activity in the case of necrotizing pneumonia, the frequent availability of different treatment choices, each with peculiar characteristics, is already allowing an important step toward a precision medicine approach for the treatment of MRSA pneumonia.

Peptide and peptide-based inhibitors of SARS-CoV-2 entry

To date, no effective vaccines or therapies are available against the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), the causative pandemic agent of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Due to their safety, efficacy and specificity, peptide inhibitors hold great promise for the treatment of newly emerging viral pathogens. Based on the known structures of viral proteins and their cellular targets, antiviral peptides can be rationally designed and optimized. The resulting peptides may be highly specific for their respective targets and particular viral pathogens or exert broad antiviral activity. Here, we summarize the current status of peptides inhibiting SARS-CoV-2 entry and outline the strategies used to design peptides targeting the ACE2 receptor or the viral spike protein and its activating proteases furin, transmembrane serine protease 2 (TMPRSS2), or cathepsin L. In addition, we present approaches used against related viruses such as SARS-CoV-1 that might be implemented for inhibition of SARS-CoV-2 infection.