3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Ceftolozane-Tazobactam Combination Therapy Compared to Ceftolozane-Tazobactam Monotherapy for the Treatment of Severe Infections: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          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.

          Abstract

          Ceftolozane-tazobactam (C/T) is a combination of an advanced-generation cephalosporin (ceftolozane) with a β-lactamase inhibitor (tazobactam). It is approved for the treatment of complicated urinary-tract/intra-abdominal infections and hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated pneumonia. This systematic review and meta-analysis (registered prospectively on PROSPERO, no. CRD42019134099, on 20 January 2020) aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of C/T combination therapy compared to C/T monotherapy for the treatment of severe infections and to describe the prevalence of microorganisms in the included studies. We retrieved literature from PubMed, EMBASE, and CENTRAL, until 26 November 2020. Eligible studies were both randomised trials and nonrandomised studies with a control group, published in the English language and peer-reviewed journals. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality; secondary outcomes were (i) clinical improvement and (ii) microbiological cure. Eight nonrandomised studies were included in the qualitative synthesis: Seven retrospective cohort studies and one case-control study. The meta-analysis of the four studies evaluating all-cause mortality (in total 148 patients: 87 patients treated with C/T alone and 61 patients treated with C/T combination therapy) showed a significant reduction of mortality in patients receiving C/T combination therapy, OR: 0.31, 95% CI: 0.10–0.97, p = 0.045. Conversely, the meta-analysis of the studies evaluating clinical improvement and microbiological cure showed no differences in C/T combination therapy compared to C/T monotherapy. The most consistent data come from the analysis of the clinical improvement, n = 391 patients, OR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.54–1.74, p = 0.909. In 238 of the 391 patients included (60.8%), C/T was used for the treatment of infections caused by Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

          Related collections

          Most cited references16

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

          Combating antimicrobial resistance: policy recommendations to save lives.

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

            Ceftolozane-Tazobactam for the Treatment of Multidrug-Resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa Infections: Clinical Effectiveness and Evolution of Resistance

            Twenty-one patients were treated with ceftolozane-tazobactam for multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections, predominantly pneumonia. Thirty- and 90-day mortality rates were 10% and 48%, respectively. Resistance emerged in 3 patients, which was associated with mutations in and/or increased expression of ampC β-lactamase. Background Data on the use of ceftolozane-tazobactam and emergence of ceftolozane-tazobactam resistance during multidrug resistant (MDR)- Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections are limited. Methods We performed a retrospective study of 21 patients treated with ceftolozane-tazobactam for MDR- P. aeruginosa infections. Whole genome sequencing and quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction were performed on longitudinal isolates. Results Median age was 58 years; 9 patients (43%) were transplant recipients. Median simplified acute physiology score-II (SAPS-II) was 26. Eighteen (86%) patients were treated for respiratory tract infections; others were treated for bloodstream, complicated intraabdominal infections, or complicated urinary tract infections. Ceftolozane-tazobactam was discontinued in 1 patient (rash). Thirty-day all-cause and attributable mortality rates were 10% (2/21) and 5% (1/21), respectively; corresponding 90-day mortality rates were 48% (10/21) and 19% (4/21). The ceftolozane-tazobactam failure rate was 29% (6/21). SAPS-II score was the sole predictor of failure. Ceftolozane-tazobactam resistance emerged in 3 (14%) patients. Resistance was associated with de novo mutations, rather than acquisition of resistant nosocomial isolates. ampC overexpression and mutations were identified as potential resistance determinants. Conclusions In this small study, ceftolozane-tazobactam was successful in treating 71% of patients with MDR- P. aeruginosa infections, most of whom had pneumonia. The emergence of ceftolozane-tazobactam resistance in 3 patients is worrisome and may be mediated in part by AmpC-related mechanisms. More research on treatment responses and resistance during various types of MDR- P. aeruginosa infections is needed to define ceftolozane-tazobactam’s place in the armamentarium.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Antimicrobial activity of ceftolozane-tazobactam tested against Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa with various resistance patterns isolated in U.S. Hospitals (2011-2012).

              Ceftolozane/tazobactam, a novel antimicrobial agent with activity against Pseudomonas aeruginosa (including drug-resistant strains) and other common Gram-negative pathogens (including most extended-spectrum-β-lactamase [ESBL]-producing Enterobacteriaceae strains), and comparator agents were susceptibility tested by a reference broth microdilution method against 7,071 Enterobacteriaceae and 1,971 P. aeruginosa isolates. Isolates were collected consecutively from patients in 32 medical centers across the United States during 2011 to 2012. Overall, 15.7% and 8.9% of P. aeruginosa isolates were classified as multidrug resistant (MDR) and extensively drug resistant (XDR), and 8.4% and 1.2% of Enterobacteriaceae were classified as MDR and XDR. No pandrug-resistant (PDR) Enterobacteriaceae isolates and only one PDR P. aeruginosa isolate were detected. Ceftolozane/tazobactam was the most potent (MIC50/90, 0.5/2 μg/ml) agent tested against P. aeruginosa and demonstrated good activity against 310 MDR strains (MIC50/90, 2/8 μg/ml) and 175 XDR strains (MIC50/90, 4/16 μg/ml). Ceftolozane/tazobactam exhibited high overall activity (MIC50/90, 0.25/1 μg/ml) against Enterobacteriaceae and retained activity (MIC50/90, 4/>32 μg/ml) against many 601 MDR strains but not against the 86 XDR strains (MIC50, >32 μg/ml). Ceftolozane/tazobactam was highly potent (MIC50/90, 0.25/0.5 μg/ml) against 2,691 Escherichia coli isolates and retained good activity against most ESBL-phenotype E. coli isolates (MIC50/90, 0.5/4 μg/ml), but activity was low against ESBL-phenotype Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates (MIC50/90, 32/>32 μg/ml), explained by the high rate (39.8%) of meropenem coresistance observed in this species phenotype. In summary, ceftolozane/tazobactam demonstrated high potency and broad-spectrum activity against many contemporary Enterobacteriaceae and P. aeruginosa isolates collected in U.S. medical centers. Importantly, ceftolozane/tazobactam retained potency against many MDR and XDR strains.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Antibiotics (Basel)
                Antibiotics (Basel)
                antibiotics
                Antibiotics
                MDPI
                2079-6382
                15 January 2021
                January 2021
                : 10
                : 1
                : 79
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Women, Child and General and Specialized Surgery, University of Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli”, 80138 Naples, Italy; antonio.corrente.md@ 123456gmail.com (A.C.); caterina.pace@ 123456libero.it (M.C.P.); anielloalfieri@ 123456gmail.com (A.A.)
                [2 ]Medical Statistics Unit, Department of Public, Clinical and Preventive Medicine, University of Campania “Luigi Vanvitelli”, 80138 Naples, Italy; vittoriosimeon@ 123456gmail.com
                [3 ]Department of Surgical, Oncological and Oral Science (Di.Chir.On.S.), University of Palermo, 90127 Palermo, Italy; ippolito.mariachiara@ 123456gmail.com (M.I.); antonino.giarratano@ 123456unipa.it (A.G.); andrea.cortegiani@ 123456unipa.it (A.C.)
                [4 ]Department of Anaesthesiology, Intensive Care and Emergency, Policlinico Paolo Giaccone, 90127 Palermo, Italy
                Author notes
                [* ]Correspondence: marco.fiore@ 123456unicampania.it ; Tel.: +39-3280785918
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7263-0229
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1330-5968
                https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2387-4125
                Article
                antibiotics-10-00079
                10.3390/antibiotics10010079
                7830767
                33467508
                c4ae3289-fb36-4128-aa71-ce66dc055ae4
                © 2021 by the authors.

                Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

                History
                : 11 December 2020
                : 13 January 2021
                Categories
                Article

                pseudomonas aeruginosa,esbls,multidrug resistance,β-lactamase inhibitors,anti-infective agents,bacteremia,ceftolozane,sepsis,infection,systematic review,meta-analysis

                Comments

                Comment on this article