+1 Recommend
1 collections
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Ceftaroline fosamil for the treatment of community-acquired bacterial pneumonia in the intensive care unit

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.


          The Clinical Assessment Program and Teflaro ® Utilization Registry (CAPTURE) is a multicenter study evaluating the clinical use of ceftaroline fosamil in patients with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP) or acute bacterial skin and skin structure infection. Data were collected between August 2011 and February 2013, from 398 evaluable patients receiving treatment at 33 sites in the USA. This manuscript presents data collected from patients with CABP who received care in an intensive care unit (ICU) or in general medical wards (35% and 64% of evaluable patients, respectively). The majority of ICU and general medical ward patients had underlying comorbidities (78% and 74%, respectively), with structural lung disease being the most common (42% in the ICU and 40% in general medical wards). Patients admitted to the ICU had a longer duration of stay, a longer duration of symptoms before treatment, and a longer duration of ceftaroline fosamil therapy than did general medical ward patients. Most patients treated in the ICU and in general medical wards were given ceftaroline fosamil as second-line therapy (87% and 80%, respectively). The overall rate of clinical success for patients treated with ceftaroline fosamil was 68% in the ICU and 85% in the general medical wards. Clinical success for patients receiving ceftaroline fosamil as a second-line agent was 84% in the ICU and 86% in general medical wards. These findings indicate that ceftaroline fosamil is a viable treatment option for CABP, both in the ICU and in general medical wards.

          Related collections

          Most cited references 20

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Burden of community-acquired pneumonia in North American adults.

          To determine the burden of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) affecting adults in North America, a comprehensive literature review was conducted to examine the incidence, morbidity and mortality, etiology, antibiotic resistance, and economic impact of CAP in this population. In the United States, there were approximately 4.2 million ambulatory care visits for pneumonia in 2006. Pneumonia and influenza continue to be a common cause of death in the United States (ranked eighth) and Canada (ranked seventh). In 2005, there were >60,000 deaths due to pneumonia in persons aged>or=15 years in the United States alone. The hospitalization rate for all infectious diseases increased from 1525 hospitalizations per 100 000 persons in 1998 to 1667 per 100 000 persons in 2005. Admission to an intensive care unit was required in 10% to 20% of patients hospitalized with pneumonia. The mean length of stay for pneumonia was >or=5 days and the 30-day rehospitalization rate was as high as 20%. Mortality was highest for CAP patients who were hospitalized; the 30-day mortality rate was as high as 23%. All-cause mortality for CAP patients was as high as 28% within 1 year. Streptococcus pneumoniae continues to be the most frequently identified pathogen associated with CAP, and pneumococcal resistance to antimicrobials may make treatment more difficult. The economic burden associated with CAP remains substantial at >$17 billion annually in the United States. Despite the availability and widespread adherence to recommended treatment guidelines, CAP continues to present a significant burden in adults. Furthermore, given the aging population in North America, clinicians can expect to encounter an increasing number of adult patients with CAP. Given the significance of the disease burden, the potential benefit of pneumococcal vaccination in adults is substantial.
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Diagnostic tests for agents of community-acquired pneumonia.

            Lower respiratory infections are the major cause of death due to infectious disease in the United States and worldwide. Most forms of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) are treatable, and there is consensus that the selection of antimicrobial agents is notably simplified if the pathogen is defined. The rich history of CAP studies in the prepenicillin era showed that an etiologic diagnosis was established in >90% of cases, but the 2009 data from Medicare indicate that a probable pathogen is now detected in 17,000 patients hospitalized with CAP. This review addresses the issue of the state of the art of microbiological studies of CAP in terms of the realities of current-day practice. Unfortunately, the desire for better data to achieve pathogen-directed treatment clashes with a multitude of harsh realities, including cost, Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) requirements for antibiotics to be administered within 6 h of disease onset, guidelines that discourage any microbiological studies in most cases, belief in empiricism that is well supported by at least 1 prospective study, the decline of microbiological analysis standards in most laboratories, and the devastating impact of the Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments (CLIA) regulations that led to the demise of "the house staff laboratory" and the distancing of microbiological analysis from the site of care. Microbiological principles are reviewed, with emphasis on specimen source, pathogenic potential of isolates, concentrations, impact of antecedent antibiotics, and the "Washington criteria" for expectorated sputum. The recommendation is that the high-quality microbiological analysis that is still achieved in some places should be retained but that to advance the field on the basis of the contemporary realities, two goals should be adopted: First is the broad use of antigen tests for Streptococcus pneumoniae and Legionella pneumophila with interpretation by clinical staff under the CLIA waiver for low-complexity tests. The second and more ambitious recommendation is the adoption of molecular techniques, with particular emphasis on nucleic acid detection, which is rapid and sensitive and has already been developed for virtually all recognized pulmonary pathogens. This may be the ultimate solution for many laboratories, and it is likely to have selected use.
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              A comparative study of community-acquired pneumonia patients admitted to the ward and the ICU.

              Limited information is available on the health-care utilization of hospitalized patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) depending on the location of care. Our aim was to compare the clinical characteristics, etiologies, and outcomes of patients with CAP who were admitted to the ICU with those admitted who were to the ward service. A retrospective cohort study, at two tertiary teaching hospitals, one of which was a Veterans Affairs hospital, and the other a county hospital. Eligible subjects had been admitted to the hospital with a diagnosis of CAP between January 1, 1999, and December 31, 2001, had a confirmatory chest radiograph, and a hospital discharge International Classification of Diseases, ninth revision, diagnosis of pneumonia. Subjects were excluded from the study if they had designated "comfort measures only" or had been transferred from another acute care hospital or were nursing home patients. Bivariate and multivariable analysis evaluated 30-day and 90-day mortality as the dependent measures. Data were abstracted on 730 patients (ICU, 145 patients; wards, 585 patients). Compared to ward patients, ICU patients were more likely to be male (p = 0.001), and to have congestive heart failure (p = 0.01) and COPD (p = 0.01). ICU patients also had higher mean pneumonia severity index scores (112 [SD, 35] vs 83 [SD, 30], respectively; p = 0.02). Patients admitted to the ICU had a longer mean length of hospital stay (12 days [SD, 10 days] vs 7 days [SD, 17 days], respectively; p = 0.07), and a higher 30-day mortality rate (23% vs 4%, respectively; p < 0.001) and 90-day mortality rate (28% vs 8%, respectively; p < 0.001) compared to ward patients. ICU patients present with more severe disease and more comorbidities. ICU patients stay longer in the hospital and have a much higher mortality rate when compared to ward patients. Management strategies should be designed to improve clinical outcomes in ICU patients.

                Author and article information

                Ther Clin Risk Manag
                Ther Clin Risk Manag
                Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
                Therapeutics and Clinical Risk Management
                Dove Medical Press
                02 April 2015
                : 11
                : 557-563
                [1 ]Gulf Coast Medical Center, Panama City, FL, USA
                [2 ]Medical College of Georgia, Georgia Regents University, Augusta, GA, USA
                [3 ]Memorial Hermann-Texas Medical Center, Houston, TX, USA
                [4 ]Mountain View Medical Practice (Columbia Memorial Hospital), Catskill, NY, USA
                [5 ]Cerexa, Inc., Oakland, CA, USA
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Christy Maggiore, Gulf Coast Medical Center, 449 West 23rd Street, Panama City, FL 32405, USA, Tel +1 850 770 8945, Fax +1 850 747 7956, Email christy.maggiore@ 123456hcahealthcare.com
                © 2015 Maggiore et al. This work is published by Dove Medical Press Limited, and licensed under Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License

                The full terms of the License are available at http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed.

                Original Research


                capture, registry


                Comment on this article