Pamela A Moise1, Darren L Culshaw2, Annie Wong-Beringer3, Joyce Bensman3, Kenneth C Lamp2, Winter J Smith4, Karri Bauer5, Debra A Goff5, Robert Adamson6, Kimberly Leuthner7, Michael D Virata8, James A McKinnell9, Saira B Chaudhry10, Romic Eskandarian11, Thomas Lodise12, Katherine Reyes13, Marcus J Zervos13. 1. Department of Medical Affairs, Merck & Co Inc, Kenilworth, New Jersey. Electronic address: pamela.moise@merck.com. 2. Department of Medical Affairs, Merck & Co Inc, Kenilworth, New Jersey. 3. Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Economics & Policy, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California. 4. Department of Pharmacy: Clinical and Administrative Sciences, University of Oklahoma College of Pharmacy, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. 5. Department of Pharmacy, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, Ohio. 6. Department of Pharmacy, St. Barnabas Health Care System, Livingston, New Jersey. 7. Department of Clinical Pharmacy, University Medical Center of Southern Nevada, Las Vegas, Nevada. 8. Division of Infectious Diseases, Yale-New Haven Hospital-SRC, New Haven, Connecticut. 9. Torrance Memorial Medical Center Division of Infectious Diseases & Infectious Disease Clinical Outcomes Research at LA Biomedical Research Institute, Torrance, California. 10. Department of Pharmacy Practice and Administration, Jersey Shore University Medical Center and Rutgers University, Neptune, New Jersey. 11. Department of Pharmacy, Glendale Adventist Medical Center, Glendale, California. 12. Albany College of Pharmacy, Albany, New York. 13. Division of Infectious Diseases, Henry Ford Hospital and Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Clinical studies comparing vancomycin with alternative therapy for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia are limited. The objective of this study was to compare outcomes of early daptomycin versus vancomycin treatment for MRSA bacteremia with high vancomycin MICs in a geographically diverse multicenter evaluation. METHODS: This nationwide, retrospective, multicenter (N = 11), matched, cohort study compared outcomes of early daptomycin with vancomycin for MRSA bloodstream infection (BSI) with vancomycin MICs 1.5 to 2 µg/mL. Matching variables, based on propensity regression analysis, included age, intensive care unit (ICU), and type of BSI. Outcomes were as follows: (1) composite failure (60-day all-cause mortality, 7-day clinical or microbiologic failure, 30-day BSI relapse, or end-of-treatment failure (EOT; discontinue/change daptomycin or vancomycin because of treatment failure or adverse event]); (2) nephrotoxicity; and (2) day 4 BSI clearance. FINDINGS: A total of 170 patients were included. The median (interquartile range) age was 60 years (50-74); the median (range) Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score was 15 (10-18); 31% were in an ICU; and 92% had an infectious disease consultation. BSI types included endocarditis/endovascular (39%), extravascular (55%), and central catheter (6%). The median daptomycin dose was 6 mg/kg, and the vancomycin trough level was 17 mg/L. Overall composite failure was 35% (59 of 170): 15% due to 60-day all-cause mortality, 14% for lack of clinical or microbiologic response by 7 days, and 17% due to failure at end of therapy (discontinue/change because of treatment failure or adverse event). Predictors of composite failure according to multivariate analysis were age >60 years (odds ratio, 3.7; P < 0.01) and ICU stay (odds ratio, 2.64; P = 0.03). Notable differences between treatment groups were seen with: (1) end of therapy failure rates (11% vs 24% for daptomycin vs vancomycin; P = 0.025); (2) acute kidney injury rates (9% vs 23% for daptomycin vs vancomycin; P = 0.043); and (3) day 4 bacteremia clearance rates for immunocompromised patients (n = 26) (94% vs 56% for daptomycin vs vancomycin; P = 0.035). IMPLICATIONS: Results from this multicenter study provide, for the first time, a geographically diverse evaluation of daptomycin versus vancomycin for patients with vancomycin-susceptible MRSA bacteremia with vancomycin MIC values >1 µg/mL. Although the overall composite failure rates did not differ between the vancomycin and daptomycin groups when intensively matched according to risks for failure, the rates of acute kidney injury were significantly lower in the daptomycin group. These findings suggest that daptomycin is a useful therapy for clinicians treating patients who have MRSA bacteremia. Prospective, randomized trials should be conducted to better assess the potential significance of elevated vancomycin MIC.
PURPOSE: Clinical studies comparing vancomycin with alternative therapy for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia are limited. The objective of this study was to compare outcomes of early daptomycin versus vancomycin treatment for MRSA bacteremia with high vancomycin MICs in a geographically diverse multicenter evaluation. METHODS: This nationwide, retrospective, multicenter (N = 11), matched, cohort study compared outcomes of early daptomycin with vancomycin for MRSA bloodstream infection (BSI) with vancomycin MICs 1.5 to 2 µg/mL. Matching variables, based on propensity regression analysis, included age, intensive care unit (ICU), and type of BSI. Outcomes were as follows: (1) composite failure (60-day all-cause mortality, 7-day clinical or microbiologic failure, 30-day BSI relapse, or end-of-treatment failure (EOT; discontinue/change daptomycin or vancomycin because of treatment failure or adverse event]); (2) nephrotoxicity; and (2) day 4 BSI clearance. FINDINGS: A total of 170 patients were included. The median (interquartile range) age was 60 years (50-74); the median (range) Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score was 15 (10-18); 31% were in an ICU; and 92% had an infectious disease consultation. BSI types included endocarditis/endovascular (39%), extravascular (55%), and central catheter (6%). The median daptomycin dose was 6 mg/kg, and the vancomycin trough level was 17 mg/L. Overall composite failure was 35% (59 of 170): 15% due to 60-day all-cause mortality, 14% for lack of clinical or microbiologic response by 7 days, and 17% due to failure at end of therapy (discontinue/change because of treatment failure or adverse event). Predictors of composite failure according to multivariate analysis were age >60 years (odds ratio, 3.7; P < 0.01) and ICU stay (odds ratio, 2.64; P = 0.03). Notable differences between treatment groups were seen with: (1) end of therapy failure rates (11% vs 24% for daptomycin vs vancomycin; P = 0.025); (2) acute kidney injury rates (9% vs 23% for daptomycin vs vancomycin; P = 0.043); and (3) day 4 bacteremia clearance rates for immunocompromised patients (n = 26) (94% vs 56% for daptomycin vs vancomycin; P = 0.035). IMPLICATIONS: Results from this multicenter study provide, for the first time, a geographically diverse evaluation of daptomycin versus vancomycin for patients with vancomycin-susceptible MRSA bacteremia with vancomycin MIC values >1 µg/mL. Although the overall composite failure rates did not differ between the vancomycin and daptomycin groups when intensively matched according to risks for failure, the rates of acute kidney injury were significantly lower in the daptomycin group. These findings suggest that daptomycin is a useful therapy for clinicians treating patients who have MRSA bacteremia. Prospective, randomized trials should be conducted to better assess the potential significance of elevated vancomycin MIC.
Authors: A Brinkmann; A C Röhr; O R Frey; W A Krüger; T Brenner; D C Richter; K-F Bodmann; M Kresken; B Grabein Journal: Anaesthesist Date: 2018-12 Impact factor: 1.041
Authors: Romney M Humphries; Susan Kircher; Andrea Ferrell; Kevin M Krause; Rianna Malherbe; Andre Hsiung; C A Burnham Journal: J Clin Microbiol Date: 2018-07-26 Impact factor: 5.948
Authors: Marilyn L Mootz; Rachel S Britt; Allison A Mootz; Grace C Lee; Kelly R Reveles; Kirk E Evoy; Chengwen Teng; Christopher R Frei Journal: Hosp Pract (1995) Date: 2019-10-14
Authors: Carlos Bea; Sara Vela; Sergio García-Blas; Jose-Angel Perez-Rivera; Pablo Díez-Villanueva; Ana Isabel de Gracia; Eladio Fuertes; Maria Rosa Oltra; Ana Ferrer; Andreu Belmonte; Enrique Santas; Mauricio Pellicer; Javier Colomina; Alberto Doménech; Vicente Bodi; Maria José Forner; Francisco Javier Chorro; Clara Bonanad Journal: J Cardiovasc Dev Dis Date: 2022-06-17
Authors: Marin L Schweizer; Kelly Richardson; Mary S Vaughan Sarrazin; Michihiko Goto; Daniel J Livorsi; Rajeshwari Nair; Bruce Alexander; Brice F Beck; Michael P Jones; Mireia Puig-Asensio; Daniel Suh; Madeline Ohl; Eli N Perencevich Journal: Clin Infect Dis Date: 2021-01-29 Impact factor: 9.079
Authors: Nagendra N Mishra; Arnold S Bayer; Sarah L Baines; Ashleigh S Hayes; Benjamin P Howden; Christian K Lapitan; Cassandra Lew; Warren E Rose Journal: Microorganisms Date: 2021-05-11