| Literature DB >> 25887462 |
John C Lam1, Ranjani Somayaji2, Michael G Surette3,4, Harvey R Rabin5,6, Michael D Parkins7,8.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Pulmonary exacerbations (PEx) are critical events in cystic fibrosis (CF), responsible for reduced quality of life and permanent loss of lung function. Approximately 1/4 of PEx are associated with failure to recover lung function and/or resolve symptoms. Developing tools to optimize PEx treatment is of paramount importance.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25887462 PMCID: PMC4392784 DOI: 10.1186/s12879-015-0856-5
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Infect Dis ISSN: 1471-2334 Impact factor: 3.090
Figure 1Change in CFU/ml during PEx. A). Change in CFU from baseline sputum to admission at time of PEx. B). Change in CFU at EARLY time point (~day 4) of antibiotic treatment relative to admission. C). Change in CFU at the END of antibiotic treatment for PEx relative to admission. D). Change in CFU at follow-up clinic visit relative to admission. Black bars represent all P. aeruginosa isolates, grey bars only MUC, and white bars with black dots NON.
Bacteriologic response does not predict clinical outcomes of pulmonary exacerbations
|
|
|
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
| |||
|
| ALL | 1 | 26% (18/68) vs 33% (17/51) | 0.78 (0.46-1.38) | 0.42 |
| 2 | 27% (15/55) vs 31% (20/64) | 0.87 (0.5-1.5) | 0.68 | ||
| MUC | 1 | 28% (21/74) vs 23% (6/26) | 1.22 (0.56-2.70) | 0.79 | |
| 2 | 30% (17/56) vs 22% (10/44) | 1.36 (0.68-2.62) | 0.49 | ||
| NON | 1 | 30% (19/64) vs 35% (16/46) | 0.85 (0.49-1.47) | 0.68 | |
| 2 | 33% (17/51) vs 30% (18/59) | 1.1 (0.63-1.88) | 0.84 | ||
|
| 2 | 46% (12/26) vs 0% (0/3) | n/a | 0.25 | |
| 4 | 31% (5/16) vs 54% (7/13) | 0.58 (0.28-1.58) | 0.27 | ||
| Oral Flora | 1 | 22% (13/60) vs 34% (23/67) | 0.63 (0.35-1.13) | 0.12 | |
| 2 | 23% (9/39) vs 31% (27/88) | 0.75 (0.39-1.44) | 0.52 | ||
*Failure was defined as failing to achieve 90% of baseline percent predicted FEV1 at time of follow-up.
**Risk of failure to achieve outcome in those PEx achieving the log drop in bacterial counts relative to those events where a drop was not observed.
ALL = all P. aeruginosa morphotypes, MUC = mucoid, NON = non-mucoid isolates, OR = odds ration, CI = confidence intervals.
Treatment factors associated with reduced bacterial burden at END of PEx therapies
|
|
|
|
| |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
| Antibiotics* | ||||||||||||
| FEP vs other ABx | 7/22 vs 61/97 | 0.51 (0.27-0.95), p = 0.009 | 6/22 vs 49/97 | 0.54 (0.26-1.08), p = 0.06 | 13/20 vs 61/81 | 0.86 (0.61-1.22), p = 0.40 | 7/20 vs 49/81 | 0.57 (0.31-1.00), p = 0.05 | 9/21 vs 55/89 | 0.69 (0.41-1.16), p = 0.14 | 6/21 vs 45/89 | 0.56 (0.28-1.14), p = 0.08 |
| CAZ vs other ABx | 36/56 vs 32/63 | 1.27 (0.93-1.73), p = 0.19 | 29/56 vs 26/63 | 1.25 (0.85-1.85), p = 0.27 | 36/49 vs 38/52 | 1.00 (0.8-1.27), p = 1.0 | 32/49 vs 24/52 | 1.41 (0.99-2.02), p = 0.08 | 34/50 vs 30/60, | 1.36 (0.99-1.86), p = 0.07 | 27/50 vs 24/60 | 1.35 (0.90-2.01, p = 0.18 |
| Treatment parameters* | ||||||||||||
| <14 vs ≥14 days | 32/68 vs 29/52 | 0.84 (0.6-1.2), p = 0.36 | 23/55 vs 38/65 | 0.7 (0.5-1.24), p = 0.09 | 38/74 vs 13/28 | 1.1 (0.7-1.74), p = 0.8 | 25/56 vs 26/46 | 0.78 (0.53-1.16),p = 0.3 | 30/64 vs 28/46 | 0.77 (0.54-1.1), p = 0.17 | 20/51 vs 38/59 | 0.6 (0.41-0.9), p = 0.01 |
*Other antibiotics including aztreonam, meropenem, ciprofloxacin and dosing of tobramycin did not show significance and have not been included.
CAZ = Ceftazidime, FEP = Cefepime, ABx = antibiotics.
Figure 2Percentage of PEx achieving a 1 or 2-log reduction in sputum density at end of antibacterial therapy as a function of the number of empirically provided antibiotics with predicted activity from admission sputum sample. A). Antibiotics with activity against Mucoid isolates. B). Antibiotics with activity against Non-Mucoid isolates.
Figure 3Percentage of PEx achieving a 1 or 2-log reduction in sputum density at end of antibacterial therapy as a function of the β-lactam antibiotic used.
Relation of predicted susceptibility to reduction in bacterial burden at END of PEx therapies
|
|
|
|
| |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
| All Isolates S to β-lactam vs not | 59/91 vs 8/27 | 2.18 (CI 1.2-3.99) p = 0.002 | 48/91 vs 6/27 | 2.38 (1.14-4.94) p < 0.01 | 63/79 vs 10/20 | 1.59 (1.02-2.51), p = 0.01 | 48/79 vs 7/20, | 1.73 (1.0-3.23) p = 0.05 | 55/81 vs 8/27 | 2.29 (1.26-4.18), p < 0.001 | 44/81 vs 6/27 | 2.44 (1.17-5.09), p = 0.004 |
| All isolates S to TOB vs not | 32/53 vs 35/65 | 1.12 (0.82-1.53), p = 0.56 | 29/55 vs 25/65 | 1.37 (0.92-2.03), p = 0.14 | 34/46 vs 39/53 | 1.0 (0.79-1.27), p = 1 | 28/46 vs 27/53 | 1.19 (0.84-1.69), p = 0.41 | 28/45 vs 35/63 | 1.12 (0.82-1.54), p = 0.56 | 25/45 vs 25/63 | 1.4 (0.94-2.1), p = 0.12 |
| Regimen with 2 vs ≤1 MUC agent* | 47/73 vs 12/25 | 1.34 (0.87-2.08), p = 0.16 | 39/73 vs 9/25 | 1.48 (0.85-2.61), p = 0.16 | 57/74 vs 16/25 | 1.2 (0.88-1.66), p = 0.29 | 45/74 vs 10/25 | 1.52 (0.91-2.54), p = 0.1 | N/A | N/A | ||
| Regimen with 2 vs ≤1 NON agent* | 29/41 vs 33/67 | 1.43 (1.05-1.96), p = 0.04 | 26/41 vs 24/67 | 1.77 (CI 1.19-2.63), p = 0.006 | N/A | N/A | 30/41 vs 33/67 | 1.49 (1.09-2.02), p = 0.02 | 26/41 vs 24/67 | 1.77 (1.19-2.63), p = 0.006 | ||
| MDR at PEx* vs not | N/A | N/A | 2/5 vs 59/77 | 0.52 (0.18-1.54), p = 0.1 | 1/5 vs 46/77 | 0.33 (0.06-1.95) p = 0.15 | 19/41 vs 33/47 | 0.66 (0.45-0.96), p = 0.03 | 14/41 vs 27/47 | 0.6 (0.36-0.97), p = 0.03 | ||
| MDR in prior year* vs not | N/A | N/A | 13/18 vs 47/63 | 0.96 (0.96-0.7-1.3), p = 1 | 11/18 vs 36/63 | 1.06 (0.7-1.63), p = 0.8 | 22/51 vs 30/36, | 0.52 (0.36-0.73), p < 0.001 | 17/51 vs 24/36 | 0.5 (0.32-0.78), p = 0.003 | ||
| PDR at PEx* vs not | N/A | N/A | 0/1 vs 61/81 | n/a p = 0.21 | 0/1 vs 46/79 | n/a p = 0.4 | 5/13 vs 47/75 | 0.61 (0.3-1.29),p = 0.13 | 4/13 vs 37/75 | 0.62 (0.27-1.45), p = 0.24 | ||
| PDR in prior year* vs not | N/A | N/A | 0/1 vs 59/79 | n/a p = 0.26 | 0/1 vs 46/79 | n/a p = 0.43 | 8/22 vs 43/65 | 0.55 (0.31-0.98), p = 0.02 | 7/22 vs 34/65 | 0.61 (0.32-1.17), p = 0.14 | ||
*In these events, bacteriologic response of P. aeruginosa was evaluated specifically against the morphotype type that susceptibility was being evaluated.
S = sensitive as defined by CLSI criteria. TOB = tobramycin. MUC = mucoid isolate, NON = non-mucoid isolate. PEx = pulmonary exacerbation. OR = Odds ratio, CI = confidence interval. N/A = not applicable.
MDR/PDR at event = Presence of an MDR/PDR isolate at admission sputum sample of the PEx being evaluated.
MDR/PDR in prior year = Presence of an MDR/PDR isolate at any time-point in the one year prior to the PEx event being evaluated.
Figure 4Correlation in change in CFU from admission sputum sample Early in to exacerbation therapy (Y axis) to End of therapy (X axis). A). ALL P. aeruginosa morphotypes, B). Mucoid only isolates, C). Non-mucoid Isolates.