Literature DB >> 34909691

Real-life experience with compassionate use of cefiderocol for difficult-to-treat resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (DTR-P) infections.

Marianna Meschiari1, Sara Volpi1, Matteo Faltoni1, Giovanni Dolci1, Gabriella Orlando1, Erica Franceschini1, Marianna Menozzi1, Mario Sarti2, Giovanni Del Fabro3, Benedetta Fumarola3,4, Francesco Guarneri3, Paola Lanza3, Silvia Lorenzotti3, Barbara Saccani3, Liana Signorini3, Evelyn Van Hauwermeiren3, Milo Gatti5, Federico Pea5, Francesco Castelli3,4, Cristina Mussini1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To describe our real-life experience with cefiderocol in XDR and difficult-to-treat resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (DTR-P) infections without any other available treatment options.
METHODS: We included patients with a proven infection due to an XDR/DTR-P, who had failed on previous regimens, and were treated with cefiderocol, following them prospectively to day 90 or until hospital discharge or death.
RESULTS: Seventeen patients treated for >72 h with cefiderocol were included: 14 receiving combination regimens (82.4%) and 3 receiving monotherapy (17.6%). Fourteen patients were males (82%) with a median age of 64 years (IQR 58-73). Fifteen patients (88.2%) were admitted to the ICU and five had septic shock (29%). Seven cases (41.2%) were ventilator-associated pneumonia, of which 71% (5/7) occurred in COVID-19 patients. Four were complicated intrabdominal infections, one ecthyma gangrenosum, one nosocomial pneumonia and one empyema, one osteomyelitis, one primary bacteraemia, and one nosocomial external ventricular drainage meningitis. Clinical cure and microbiological cure rates were 70.6% and 76.5%, respectively. There were six deaths (35.3%) after a median of 8 days (IQR 3-10) from the end of treatment, but only two of them (11.7%) were associated with P. aeruginosa infection progression.
CONCLUSIONS: Our experience collecting this large case series of DTR-P treated with cefiderocol may help clinicians consider this new option in this hard-to-manage setting. Our results are even more relevant in the current scenario of ceftolozane/tazobactam shortage. Importantly, this is the first study providing real-life data indicating adequate cefiderocol concentrations in CSF.
© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Society for Antimicrobial Chemotherapy.

Entities:  

Year:  2021        PMID: 34909691      PMCID: PMC8665210          DOI: 10.1093/jacamr/dlab188

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAC Antimicrob Resist        ISSN: 2632-1823


Introduction

Cefiderocol is a new siderophore cephalosporin that exploits iron transport systems to penetrate bacterial cells and that has been developed to meet the treatment challenge of carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacteria (CRGNB). It has shown potent in vitro activity against carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE), such as strains producing KPC and metallo-β-lactamases (NDM, VIM and IMP), and against carbapenem-resistant non-fermenting Gram-negative bacteria (Acinetobacter baumannii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia). Two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have highlighted the efficacy of cefiderocol compared with regimens including carbapenems in complicated urinary tract infections (cUTI; APEKS-cUTI) and nosocomial pneumonia (APEKS-NP), while the CREDIBLE-CR study demonstrated its efficacy in the treatment of CRGNB when compared with best available therapy (BAT)., Nevertheless, in this latter randomized study, the prevalence of P. aeruginosa in the cefiderocol group was only 15%, and real-life studies exploring this specific setting are currently limited. Our aim was to further evaluate the role of cefiderocol in extensively drug resistant (XDR) and difficult-to-treat resistant P. aeruginosa (DTR-P) infections unresponsive to the BAT or without any other available treatment options.

Patients and methods

We conducted a prospective, observational study enrolling all the patients treated with compassionate use of cefiderocol admitted to two large tertiary-care hospitals in Northern Italy (the University Hospitals of Modena and Brescia) from February 2020 to May 2021. We included patients with a proven infection due to an XDR/DTR-P who failed previous treatment regimens or without any other available antibiotic option. Cefiderocol was administered at a standard dose of 2 g every 8 h, each given as a 3 h infusion, with a renal adjustment dose according to the manufacturer recommendations, unless otherwise noted. The patients were prospectively followed from start of cefiderocol to day 90 or until hospital discharge or death. Clinical cure was defined as a resolution, or an improvement of baseline signs and symptoms related to the infection; microbiological cure was defined as the absence of the same CRGNB isolates, both assessed after 7 days from the end of treatment (EOT) with cefiderocol. We also evaluated the occurrence and the time onset of relapse of the clinical signs and/or symptoms (referred to hereafter as ‘relapse’) or the microbiological recurrence of the baseline pathogen from an appropriate specimen (referred to hereafter as ‘recurrence’), in those patients who previously reached clinical and microbiological cure. Thirty and 90 day all-cause mortality rates were also recorded. All collected isolates were identified by MALDI-TOF MS using VITEK MS (bioMérieux, Marcy ĺEtoile, France) following the manufacturer’s instructions. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed by VITEK MS (bioMérieux) and for cefiderocol by broth microdilution panel YEUMDROF [Thermo Fisher Diagnostics S.p.A., Rodano (MI), Italia]. P. aeruginosa ATCC 27853 was used as QC strain. MICs were interpreted according to the EUCAST breakpoints, Version 11.0, 2021. Each P. aeruginosa isolate was classified according to the Magiorakos et al. criteria as MDR, XDR or pandrug resistant (PDR) and further characterized according to Kadri et al. as difficult-to-treat resistance (DTR). Finally, we performed therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) in the case of meningitis. Cefiderocol concentrations were determined by means of a validated liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method, using cefiderocol-d12 at a concentration of 10 ppm as internal standard working solution. The lower limit of quantification for cefiderocol was 0.25 mg/L.

Ethics

According to the Early Access Program of Shionogi & Co. Ltd (closed on 26 April 2021), each single request for cefiderocol compassionate use was approved by the Institutional Ethics Committee of Modena and Brescia University hospitals.

Results

Table 1 shows the MIC values of the P. aeruginosa isolates.
Table 1.

MIC values and EUCAST breakpoints of the P. aeruginosa isolates

MIC/EUCAST breakpoint (mg/L)
PatientIsolateGENAMKIPMMEMCIPTZPFEPCAZCZAC/TFOFATMCSTFDC
P1 P. aeruginosa 2/IE4/16>8/4>8/80.5/0.516/1616/816/88/81/4NANA≤0.5/2≤2/2
P2a P. aeruginosa 2/IE≤32/16>8/432/81/0.564/1632/832/816/88/432NA2/21/2
P3 P. aeruginosa ≤1/IE32/168/4≥16/80.5/0.532/1616/816/8≥16/81/4>64128/16NA0.25/2
P4 P. aeruginosa NA4/16>8/416/81/0.5≥128/1616/816/816/82/4>6432/162/20.5/2
P5b P. aeruginosa 2/IE4/162/42/82/0.532/168/82/82/81/4NANA<0.5/2≤2/2
P6 P. aeruginosa ≤1/IE2/16>8/4>8/80.12/0.5>64/1616/816/8>8/88d/4NANA1/2≤2/2
P7 P. aeruginosa ≤1/IE≤1/16>8/4>8/8>2/0.5>64/16NA/832/8>8/82d/4NANA≤0.5/2≤2/2
P8c P. aeruginosa ≤1/IE2/16>8/432/81/0.532/1616/816/816/81/4128>256/162/2NA
P9 P. aeruginosa >8/IE8/16>8/4>8/8>2/0.5>64/16>16/8>32/8>8/84/464NA≤0.5/2≤2/2
P10 P. aeruginosa 2/IE2/16>8/464/80.5/0.516/16>32/8>32/88/82/4328/16NA0.12/2
P11 P. aeruginosa ≤1/IE2/16NA32/80.25/0.5≥128/16>32/8≥64/8≥16/88/464>64/16NA0.5/2
P12 P. aeruginosa 4/IE8/16>8/464/81/0.5≥128/16≥32/8≥64/8>16/88/4>256>256/162/2NA
P13 P. aeruginosa ≥16/IE8/16NA16/8≥4/0.532/16≥32/8≥64/8>16/8>16/4>64>16/161/21/2
P14 P. aeruginosa 4/IE4/16NA>8/8>2/0.532/16NA16/84/81d/4128NA≤0.5/2≤2/2
P15 P. aeruginosa 2/IE4/16>8/4>8/80.5/0.5>64/1616/8>32/8>8/81d/4NANA2/2≤2/2
P16 P. aeruginosa >8/IE4/16>8/4>8/8>2/0.5>64/1616/88/82/81/464NA≤0.5/2≤2/2
P17 P. aeruginosa 4/IE4/16>8/4>8/80.12/0.5>64/1616/8>32/8>8/84/4NANA≤0.5/2≤2/2

Abbreviations: GEN, gentamicin; AMK, amikacin; IPM, imipenem; MEM, meropenem; CIP, ciprofloxacin; TZP, piperacillin/tazobactam; FEP, cefepime; CAZ, ceftazidime; CZA, ceftazidime/avibactam; C/T, ceftolozane/tazobactam; FOF, fosfomycin; ATM, aztreonam; CST, colistin; FDC, cefiderocol; NA, not available; IE, insufficient evidence.

Coinfected with PDR A. baumannii.

Coinfected with MDR S. maltophilia.

Coinfected with K. pneumoniae KPC.

C/T available in that period.

MIC values and EUCAST breakpoints of the P. aeruginosa isolates Abbreviations: GEN, gentamicin; AMK, amikacin; IPM, imipenem; MEM, meropenem; CIP, ciprofloxacin; TZP, piperacillin/tazobactam; FEP, cefepime; CAZ, ceftazidime; CZA, ceftazidime/avibactam; C/T, ceftolozane/tazobactam; FOF, fosfomycin; ATM, aztreonam; CST, colistin; FDC, cefiderocol; NA, not available; IE, insufficient evidence. Coinfected with PDR A. baumannii. Coinfected with MDR S. maltophilia. Coinfected with K. pneumoniae KPC. C/T available in that period. A total of 17 patients were treated for >72 h with cefiderocol, 14 with combination regimens (82.4%) and 3 with monotherapy (17.6%). All the XDR/DTR-P were susceptible to cefiderocol (MIC ≤2 mg/L, MIC was not available for three strains). The median duration of therapy was 14 days (IQR 12–21). Cefiderocol was administered in all but one patient as a rescue therapy after experiencing failure of previous treatment regimens. Median time to switch was 3 days (IQR 2–5). Fourteen patients were males (82%) with a median age of 64 years (IQR 58–73). Fifteen patients (88.2%) were admitted to ICU, five had septic shock (29%) and 13/17 (76.5%) underwent endotracheal intubation (ETI). Seven cases (41.2%) were ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) of which 71% (5/7) occurred in COVID-19 patients, one of them complicated with bacteraemia. Four cases were complicated intrabdominal infections: two peritonitis with retroperitoneal abscess following an acute necrotic-haemorrhagic pancreatitis and a pancreatectomy, one cholangitis in cholangiocarcinoma and one aortic graft infection with associated tertiary peritonitis. Finally, there was one osteomyelitis, one ecthyma gangrenosum, one nosocomial pneumonia, one recurrent thoracic empyema, one primary bacteraemia and one nosocomial external ventricular drainage meningitis. Patient characteristics, type of infections, pathogens and therapies are described in Table 2.
Table 2.

Description of patient characteristics, type of infections, pathogens and therapies

PatientAge (years)/ sexUnderlying conditionsICUETICRRT/ ECMOType of infectionSeptic shockPathogensCombination therapy with FDCFDC MIC (mg/L)FDC doseDays of therapyFDC Adverse eventsPrevious/ empirical treatment regimenOutcome (after 7 days from EOT)Death (days after EOT)Relapse/ recurrence (days after EOT)
P166/MHaematologic cancer with neutropeniaNoNoNoHAPNoXDR/DTR-PFDC+CST≤22 g q8h21NoTZP+CST (aerosol)CC, MCNoNo
P273/MRhino-pharyngeal cancerYesYesNoVAPNoXDR/DTR-P, A. baumannii PDRFDC+CST (aerosol)NA2 g q8h5NoCST (aerosol) +TGC+SAMCF, NAYes (9)No
P364/MCOVID-19YesYesCRRTVAPNoXDR/DTR-PFDC0.252 g q12h13NoNoneCC, MCNoYes (recurrence+ relapse, 12)
P451/MCOVID-19YesYesECMOVAPYesXDR/DTR-PFDC+FOF0.52 g q6h (ECMO)18NoCZA+FOFCF, MFYes (0)No
P553/MCOVID-19YesYesNoVAPNo P. aeruginosa MDR, S. maltophiliaFDC+CST (aerosol) +MXF≤22 g q8h13NoMEMCC, MCNoNo
P653/MLeft upper sleeve lobectomy in thoracotomy, poorly differentiated adenocarcinomaYesYesNoVAPNoXDR/DTR-PFDC+CST≤22 g q8h14NoMEM+FOF+ C/T+CIPCC, MCNoNo
P762/MCOVID-19YesYesNoVAPYesXDR/DTR-PFDC+CST (aerosol+ev)≤22 g q8h16NoC/T+CST (aerosol)CC, MCNoNo
P874/MCOVID-19YesYesCRRTVAP, BSIYesXDR/DTR-P, K. pneumoniae KPCFDC+CZA+FOFNA1 g q8h7NoCZA+FOFCF, MCYes (7)No
P970/FRelapsing infections in hip replacementYesYesNoOsteomyelitis with PJINoXDR/DTR-PFDC+CST≤22 g q8h25NoTEC+RIF+TZPCF, MFYes (10)No
P1077/MCraniotomy after cerebellar AVM bleedingYesYesNoNosocomial external ventricular drainage meningitisNoXDR/DTR-PFDC+FOF+CZA0.122 g q6h14NoCZA+FOF +ATMCC, MCNoNo
P1164/FRecurrent cholangitis, cholangiocarcinomaYesYesNoCholangitisYesXDR/DTR-PFDC+FOF0.52 g q8h (CRRT)/1 g q8h12NoCZA+AMK +ATMCF, MCYes (3)No
P1274/MRupture abdominal aortic aneurysm, colon perforationYesYesNoAortic graft infection, peritonitisYesXDR/DTR-PFDC+CZANA1.5 g q8h15NoCZA+FOF +AMKCC, MCNoNo
P1373/MMultiple myelomaNoNoNocSSTI (ecthyma gangrenosum)NoXDR/DTR-PFDC+AMK12 g q8h5YesMEM+FOFCC, MFNoYes (relapse, 10)
P1464/MMesotheliomaYesNoNoRecurrent thoracic empyemaNoXDR/DTR-PFDC≤22 g q8h28NoC/T+GENCC, MCNoNo
P1550/FAcute necrotic- haemorrhagic pancreatitisYesYesNoPeritonitis and retroperitoneal abscessNoXDR/DTR-PFDC+CIP≤22 g q8h21NoC/T+CIP +AMKCC, MCYes (23)No
P1658/MPancreatic cancer, pancreatectomyYesNoCRRTPeritonitis and retroperitoneal abscess, BSINoXDR/DTR-PFDC+TGC+RIF≤21.5 g q8h (10), 2 g q8h (13)23NoCZA+TGCCC, MCNoNo
P1777/MEndocarditis with cerebral embolization by E. faecalisYesYesNoPrimary bacteraemiaNoXDR/DTR-PFDC≤22 g q8h12NoTZP+AMKCC, MCNoYes (relapse, 10)

Abbreviations: ICU, intensive care unit; ETI, endotracheal intubation; CRRT, continuous renal replacement therapies; ECMO, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation; MIC, minimal inhibitory concentration; EOT, end of treatment; F, female; M, male; COVID-19, coronavirus disease 2019; AVM, arteriovenous malformation; HAP, hospital-acquired pneumonia; VAP, ventilator-associated pneumonia; BSI, bloodstream infection; PJI, prosthetic joint infection; cSSTI, complicated skin and soft tissue infection; MDR, multidrug-resistant; XDR, extensively drug-resistant; PDR, pandrug-resistant; DTR-P, difficult-to-treat resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa; KPC, Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase; NA, not available; FDC, cefiderocol; CST, colistin; TZP, piperacillin/tazobactam; FOF, fosfomycin; SAM, ampicillin/sulbactam; TGC, tigecycline; CZA, ceftazidime/avibactam; MXF, moxifloxacin; MEM, meropenem; C/T, ceftolozane/tazobactam; CIP, ciprofloxacin; TEC, teicoplanin; RIF, rifampicin; ATM, aztreonam; AMK, amikacin; GEN, gentamicin; CC, clinical cure; MC, microbiological cure; CF, clinical failure; MF, microbiological failure.

Description of patient characteristics, type of infections, pathogens and therapies Abbreviations: ICU, intensive care unit; ETI, endotracheal intubation; CRRT, continuous renal replacement therapies; ECMO, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation; MIC, minimal inhibitory concentration; EOT, end of treatment; F, female; M, male; COVID-19, coronavirus disease 2019; AVM, arteriovenous malformation; HAP, hospital-acquired pneumonia; VAP, ventilator-associated pneumonia; BSI, bloodstream infection; PJI, prosthetic joint infection; cSSTI, complicated skin and soft tissue infection; MDR, multidrug-resistant; XDR, extensively drug-resistant; PDR, pandrug-resistant; DTR-P, difficult-to-treat resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa; KPC, Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase; NA, not available; FDC, cefiderocol; CST, colistin; TZP, piperacillin/tazobactam; FOF, fosfomycin; SAM, ampicillin/sulbactam; TGC, tigecycline; CZA, ceftazidime/avibactam; MXF, moxifloxacin; MEM, meropenem; C/T, ceftolozane/tazobactam; CIP, ciprofloxacin; TEC, teicoplanin; RIF, rifampicin; ATM, aztreonam; AMK, amikacin; GEN, gentamicin; CC, clinical cure; MC, microbiological cure; CF, clinical failure; MF, microbiological failure. In most cases XDR/DTR P. aeruginosa was the only pathogen isolated, while three cases were polymicrobial: one with a PDR A. baumannii, one with S. maltophilia and one with a carbapenem and ceftazidime/avibactam-resistant KPC-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae. In the whole population, clinical cure was observed in 12/17 patients (70.6%), all but one of them also obtained microbiological cure (13/17; 76.5%). We did not observe breakthrough infections during therapy with cefiderocol. Clinical relapse was observed in three patients (17.6%). The median time from cefiderocol discontinuation to relapse/recurrence was 10 days (IQR 10–12). Unfortunately, we were able to re-test cefiderocol in only one case (P3), in which the MIC increased from 0.25 to 1 mg/L. Considering only patients with XDR/DRT-P HAP or VAP, the clinical and microbiological cure rates were respectively 62.5% (5/8) and 75% (6/8). The 30 day and 90 day all-cause mortality rates were respectively 23.5% and 35.3%. The median time to death was 8 days (IQR 3–10) from the EOT. Importantly, only two deaths were associated with both clinical and microbiological failures. There was no evidence of mild-to-moderate side effects, except for one case (P13) with a possible neurological drug-related adverse event (encephalopathy) requiring the discontinuation of cefiderocol (and amikacin) after 5 days of therapy. Concerning the TDM for the meningitis case (P10), trough and peak cefiderocol serum levels were collected immediately before (–0.25 h) administration and at the end of 3 h infusion, respectively, resulting in concentrations of 105 mg/L (Cmin) and 170 mg/L (Cmax). CSF levels (13 mg/L) were measured 25 min before cefiderocol administration, concomitantly with serum trough concentrations, accounting for a Cmin CSF/serum ratio of 12.4%. It is important to remark that P10 showed moderate renal impairment (creatinine clearance 44.8 mL/min) and was treated with high-dose cefiderocol (2000 mg q6h by 3 h infusion), to optimize drug penetration into the CSF, without developing adverse events despite the high dosage.

Discussion

Our study described a successful experience with the compassionate use of cefiderocol as rescue therapy in a series of 17 patients with severe infection due to XDR/DRT-P with no other antibiotic options available. We report a rate of clinical and microbiological success respectively of 70.6% and 76.5%. Although the rate of clinical cure reported in our study is in line with those previously reported in the larger RCTs, this result is relevant considering the peculiarity of our population. First of all, the prevalence of DRT-P infections was much higher than in previous studies: the rate was only 15% in the CREDIBLE-CR (including also MDR P. aeruginosa), and in the study by Bavaro et al., while no cases were reported by Falcone et al. Only Bleibtreu et al. reported 9 of 12 cases (75%) of XDR P. aeruginosa, and 5 of them were non-susceptible to cefiderocol at baseline, contributing to the 55% overall clinical failure. Second, the clinical pictures of patients included were particularly challenging. Indeed, our series included difficult-to-treat-infections (meningitis, aortic prosthetic graft infections, osteomyelitis with prosthetic joint infection, acute necrotic-haemorrhagic pancreatitis and thoracic empyema) that are characterized by poor penetration of antibiotics, inadequate source control and inadequate host defence/cellular response. All these factors could affect the antibiotic pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic aspects and may influence clinical outcome. Finally, these favourable outcomes are even more relevant since almost 90% of the patients were admitted to intensive care and they all had an extended follow-up of 90 days, significantly longer than other published case series,, and 30% of our cases were critically ill COVID-19 patients with a VAP due to XDR/DRT-P, associated per se with a significantly increased 28 day mortality rate. Concerning mortality, there is still an open debate after the alarming results reported by the CREDIBLE-CR study, in which the authors reported numerically more deaths in the cefiderocol group, especially in patients affected by Acinetobacter spp. infections., In our series, six patients died (35.3%) but only two of them reported both clinical and microbiological failure. The first case was a COVID-19 patient (P4) with a DTR-P VAP who died during cefiderocol therapy after 18 days and after 40 days of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). The second one, P9, with a prosthetic joint infection and osteomyelitis, died while waiting for joint replacement. Therefore, our study, in agreement with previous studies,, confirms that inadequate source control together with failing to achieve adequate drug exposure still represents a crucial risk factor for death related to infection. To date, no real-world evidence regarding the administration of cefiderocol during ECMO exists and optimizing the drug dosage in this emerging clinical scenario could be extremely difficult. Notably, this is the first study providing real-life data on CSF and plasma cefiderocol concentrations. Our findings suggest that high-dose cefiderocol could allow adequate CSF concentrations to be achieved. However, further confirmation through the assessment of AUC CSF:plasma ratio will be required. Lastly, in our series, cefiderocol has been mostly used in combination therapy. The main combinations were with colistin (often by inhalation for VAP), fosfomycin, ceftazidime/avibactam and amikacin. It is important to highlight that two out of three patients treated with cefiderocol monotherapy experienced microbiological relapse and one of them (P3) reported an MIC creep. Currently, there is still no agreement about how to use cefiderocol, whether in monotherapy or in combinations,, and further studies are needed. Our study has several limitations. The limited sample size from only two Italian centres does not allow us to draw universal and definitive conclusions. Moreover, information about molecular mechanisms of P. aeruginosa resistance and about in vivo development of cefiderocol resistance observed in other real-life series are lacking in our study and need future investigations., In conclusion, our experience describing a large number of cases of DTR-P susceptible to cefiderocol allows us to provide promising data that may help clinicians with the use of cefiderocol in this hard-to-manage setting. Our results are even more relevant in the current scenario of ceftolozane/tazobactam shortage.
  15 in total

1.  Cefiderocol versus imipenem-cilastatin for the treatment of complicated urinary tract infections caused by Gram-negative uropathogens: a phase 2, randomised, double-blind, non-inferiority trial.

Authors:  Simon Portsmouth; David van Veenhuyzen; Roger Echols; Mitsuaki Machida; Juan Camilo Arjona Ferreira; Mari Ariyasu; Peter Tenke; Tsutae Den Nagata
Journal:  Lancet Infect Dis       Date:  2018-10-25       Impact factor: 25.071

2.  Cefiderocol as Rescue Therapy for Acinetobacter baumannii and Other Carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative Infections in Intensive Care Unit Patients.

Authors:  Marco Falcone; Giusy Tiseo; Manuela Nicastro; Alessandro Leonildi; Alessandra Vecchione; Costanza Casella; Francesco Forfori; Paolo Malacarne; Fabio Guarracino; Simona Barnini; Francesco Menichetti
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2021-06-01       Impact factor: 9.079

3.  Difficult-to-Treat Resistance in Gram-negative Bacteremia at 173 US Hospitals: Retrospective Cohort Analysis of Prevalence, Predictors, and Outcome of Resistance to All First-line Agents.

Authors:  Sameer S Kadri; Jennifer Adjemian; Yi Ling Lai; Alicen B Spaulding; Emily Ricotta; D Rebecca Prevots; Tara N Palmore; Chanu Rhee; Michael Klompas; John P Dekker; John H Powers; Anthony F Suffredini; David C Hooper; Scott Fridkin; Robert L Danner
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2018-11-28       Impact factor: 9.079

4.  In vitro antimicrobial activity of S-649266, a catechol-substituted siderophore cephalosporin, when tested against non-fermenting Gram-negative bacteria.

Authors:  Akinobu Ito; Naoki Kohira; Samuel K Bouchillon; Joshua West; Stephen Rittenhouse; Helio S Sader; Paul R Rhomberg; Ronald N Jones; Hidenori Yoshizawa; Rio Nakamura; Masakatsu Tsuji; Yoshinori Yamano
Journal:  J Antimicrob Chemother       Date:  2015-12-07       Impact factor: 5.790

5.  Evolution of Cefiderocol Non-Susceptibility in Pseudomonas aeruginosa in a Patient Without Previous Exposure to the Antibiotic.

Authors:  Ana Paula Streling; Mohanad M Al Obaidi; William D Lainhart; Tirdad Zangeneh; Ayesha Khan; An Q Dinh; Blake Hanson; Cesar A Arias; William R Miller
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2021-12-06       Impact factor: 9.079

6.  In Vitro Activity of Cefiderocol Against a Broad Range of Clinically Important Gram-negative Bacteria.

Authors:  Yoshinori Yamano
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2019-11-13       Impact factor: 9.079

Review 7.  Evaluating Cefiderocol in the Treatment of Multidrug-Resistant Gram-Negative Bacilli: A Review of the Emerging Data.

Authors:  Daniele Roberto Giacobbe; Eugenio Ciacco; Corrado Girmenia; Federico Pea; Gian Maria Rossolini; Giovanni Sotgiu; Carlo Tascini; Mario Tumbarello; Pierluigi Viale; Matteo Bassetti
Journal:  Infect Drug Resist       Date:  2020-12-29       Impact factor: 4.003

8.  Susceptibility Testing Is Key for the Success of Cefiderocol Treatment: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Authors:  Alexandre Bleibtreu; Laurent Dortet; Remy A Bonnin; Benjamin Wyplosz; Sophie-Caroline Sacleux; Liliana Mihaila; Hervé Dupont; Helga Junot; Vincent Bunel; Nathalie Grall; Keyvan Razazi; Clara Duran; Pierre Tattevin; Aurélien Dinh; On Behalf Of The Cefiderocol French Study Group
Journal:  Microorganisms       Date:  2021-01-30

9.  Simple and accurate quantitative analysis of cefiderocol and ceftobiprole in human plasma using liquid chromatography-isotope dilution tandem mass spectrometry: interest for their therapeutic drug monitoring and pharmacokinetic studies.

Authors:  Benoit Llopis; Alexandre Bleibtreu; Dimitri Schlemmer; Pascal Robidou; Olivier Paccoud; Nadine Tissot; Gaëlle Noé; Helga Junot; Charles-Édouard Luyt; Christian Funck-Brentano; Noël Zahr
Journal:  Clin Chem Lab Med       Date:  2021-07-12       Impact factor: 3.694

10.  Cefiderocol-Based Combination Therapy for "Difficult-to-Treat" Gram-Negative Severe Infections: Real-Life Case Series and Future Perspectives.

Authors:  Davide Fiore Bavaro; Alessandra Belati; Lucia Diella; Monica Stufano; Federica Romanelli; Luca Scalone; Stefania Stolfa; Luigi Ronga; Leonarda Maurmo; Maria Dell'Aera; Adriana Mosca; Lidia Dalfino; Salvatore Grasso; Annalisa Saracino
Journal:  Antibiotics (Basel)       Date:  2021-05-29
View more
  9 in total

1.  Treatment with cefiderocol in K. pneumoniae KPC nosocomial external ventricular drainage meningitis: A brief report.

Authors:  Francesco Colombo; Ali Waheed; Sandro Panese; Claudio Scarparo; Maria Solinas; Saverio Giuseppe Parisi; Nicholas Geremia
Journal:  Infez Med       Date:  2022-09-01

Review 2.  Cefiderocol: Systematic Review of Mechanisms of Resistance, Heteroresistance and In Vivo Emergence of Resistance.

Authors:  Stamatis Karakonstantis; Maria Rousaki; Evangelos I Kritsotakis
Journal:  Antibiotics (Basel)       Date:  2022-05-27

Review 3.  New Drugs for the Treatment of Pseudomonas aeruginosa Infections with Limited Treatment Options: A Narrative Review.

Authors:  Angela Raffaella Losito; Francesca Raffaelli; Paola Del Giacomo; Mario Tumbarello
Journal:  Antibiotics (Basel)       Date:  2022-04-26

4.  Outcomes with Cefiderocol Treatment in Patients with Bacteraemia Enrolled into Prospective Phase 2 and Phase 3 Randomised Clinical Studies.

Authors:  David L Paterson; Masahiro Kinoshita; Takamichi Baba; Roger Echols; Simon Portsmouth
Journal:  Infect Dis Ther       Date:  2022-02-20

Review 5.  Current and Potential Therapeutic Options for Infections Caused by Difficult-to-Treat and Pandrug Resistant Gram-Negative Bacteria in Critically Ill Patients.

Authors:  Helen Giamarellou; Ilias Karaiskos
Journal:  Antibiotics (Basel)       Date:  2022-07-26

Review 6.  Cefiderocol for Carbapenem-Resistant Bacteria: Handle with Care! A Review of the Real-World Evidence.

Authors:  Pasquale Sansone; Luca Gregorio Giaccari; Francesco Coppolino; Caterina Aurilio; Alfonso Barbarisi; Maria Beatrice Passavanti; Vincenzo Pota; Maria Caterina Pace
Journal:  Antibiotics (Basel)       Date:  2022-07-06

7.  Clinical Cure of a Difficult-to-Treat Resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa Ventriculitis Using Cefiderocol: A Case Report and Literature Review.

Authors:  Cristina Marcelo; Alejandro de Gea Grela; María Martínez Palazuelos; Javier Veganzones; David Grandioso; Beatriz Díaz-Pollán
Journal:  Open Forum Infect Dis       Date:  2022-08-01       Impact factor: 4.423

8.  In Vitro Activity of Cefiderocol against Extensively Drug-Resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa: CANWARD, 2007 to 2019.

Authors:  James A Karlowsky; Andrew J Walkty; Melanie R Baxter; Heather J Adam; Philippe R S Lagacé-Wiens; Frank Schweizer; Denice Bay; Joseph P Lynch; Michael R Mulvey; George G Zhanel
Journal:  Microbiol Spectr       Date:  2022-06-27

9.  Case series of cefiderocol for salvage therapy in carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative infections.

Authors:  Victoria Gavaghan; Jessica L Miller; Jennifer Dela-Pena
Journal:  Infection       Date:  2022-10-06       Impact factor: 7.455

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.