| Literature DB >> 35184255 |
David L Paterson1, Masahiro Kinoshita2, Takamichi Baba2, Roger Echols3, Simon Portsmouth4.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: A post hoc, descriptive analysis of three prospective, randomised, controlled clinical studies investigating cefiderocol in gram-negative bacterial infections was conducted to assess its efficacy in patients with baseline bacteraemia.Entities:
Keywords: Bloodstream infection; Carbapenem resistance; Cefiderocol; ESBL; Eradication; Gram-negative bacteraemia; Metallo-beta-lactamase; Multidrug resistance
Year: 2022 PMID: 35184255 PMCID: PMC8960491 DOI: 10.1007/s40121-022-00598-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Infect Dis Ther ISSN: 2193-6382
Post hoc analysis determination of bacteraemia outcome
| Post-baseline blood culture | Other criteria meta | Bacteraemia outcome at EA, EOT, TOC | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Post-baseline blood culture available | Use as first criteria for outcome | Original species eradicated (even if sample is positive for a new species) AND No additional antibiotic was given AND Patient alive | Eradication |
| Positive for the baseline pathogen with no post-randomisation negative blood culture | Persistence | ||
| Positive for the baseline pathogen after prior eradication | Recurrence | ||
Additional antibiotic was given AND Patient alive | Indeterminateb | ||
| No post-baseline blood culture available | Use additional criteria for outcome | Missing sample AND Clinical cure at the same visit AND No additional antibiotic was given AND Patient alive | Presumed eradication |
Missing sample AND Clinical failure or Clinically indeterminate at the same visit AND Patient alive | Indeterminateb | ||
Additional antibiotic AND Clinical cure, Clinical failure or Clinically indeterminate at the same visit AND Patient alive | |||
| Death | |||
EA early assessment, EOT end of treatment, TOC test of cure
aFor each time point, the outcome is defined by the criteria met at that time point
bIndeterminate bacteraemia response was not carried forward for patients alive
Fig. 1Patient disposition. BAT best available therapy, BSI bloodstream infection, CFDC cefiderocol, cUTI complicated urinary tract infection, EOT end of treatment, HAP hospital-acquired pneumonia, HCAP healthcare-associated pneumonia, I/C imipenem-cilastatin, ITT intent to treat, MEM meropenem, TOC test of cure, VAP ventilator-associated pneumonia. aSource of bacteraemia. bTwo patients (both from CREDIBLE-CR) had also gram-positive species in the blood at screening (cefiderocol arm, E. faecium; BAT arm, E. faecalis and E. faecium). In addition, gram-positive superinfection in blood was seen in three patients receiving cefiderocol (2 with E. faecium by EOT, 1 with E. faecalis by EOT and 1 with S. epidermidis by follow-up) and in 1 receiving BAT (S. agalactiae by TOC). cBAT was given according to local guidelines
Demographics and characteristics at baseline of patients with positive blood culture in the three studies (intention-to-treat population)
| APEKS-cUTI | APEKS-NP | CREDIBLE-CR | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cefiderocol | Imipenem/ | Cefiderocol | Meropenem | Cefiderocol | BAT | |
| Age | ||||||
| Mean (SD), years | 60.5 (16.6) | 60.8 (24.3) | 73.5 (11.5) | 66.8 (12.4) | 61.4 (20.3) | 61.9 (16.8) |
| Median (range), years | 64.0 (32–83) | 68.0 (21–89) | 74.0 (58–89) | 66.0 (46–87) | 68.0 (21–85) | 64.0 (28–84) |
| ≥ 65 years, | 9 (47.4) | 5 (55.6) | 5 (62.5) | 5 (50.0) | 15 (60.0) | 6 (46.2) |
| Sex, | ||||||
| Male | 8 (42.1) | 5 (55.6) | 4 (50.0) | 4 (40.0) | 18 (72.0) | 8 (61.5) |
| Region, | ||||||
| North America | 0 | 0 | 1 (12.5) | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| South America | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 (4.0) | 0 |
| Europe | 15 (78.9) | 7 (77.8) | 6 (75.0) | 9 (90.0) | 22 (88.0) | 12 (92.3) |
| Asia/Pacific | 4 (21.1) | 2 (22.2) | 1 (12.5) | 1 (10.0) | 2 (8.0) | 1 (7.7) |
| CrCL, ml/min | ||||||
| Mean (SD) | 72.9 (30.5) | 57.1 (23.9) | 68.7 (50.5) | 58.1 (53.0) | 94.0 (113.0) | 89.6 (53.4) |
| Median (range) | 74.0 (32–130) | 53.0 (26–112) | 43.9 (18–139) | 37.1 (13–197) | 49.6 (10–540) | 63.2 (37–216) |
| ≥ 120, | 3 (15.8) | 0 | 2 (25.0) | 1 (10.0) | 5 (20.0) | 3 (23.1) |
| > 80– < 120, | 3 (15.8) | 1 (11.1) | 1 (12.5) | 1 (10.0) | 4 (16.0) | 2 (15.4) |
| > 50–80, | 8 (42.1) | 5 (55.6) | 1 (12.5) | 2 (20.0) | 3 (12.0) | 5 (38.5) |
| 30–50, | 5 (26.3) | 2 (22.2) | 2 (25.0) | 3 (30.0) | 7 (28.0) | 3 (23.1) |
| < 30, | 0 | 1 (11.1) | 2 (25.0) | 3 (30.0) | 6 (24.0) | 0 |
| APACHE II | ||||||
| Mean (SD) | n/a | n/a | 20.5 (9.1) | 20.3 (8.5) | 16.4 (6.0) | 17.1 (6.3) |
| Median (range) | n/a | n/a | 19.5 (10–34) | 20.5 (8–35) | 15.0 (5–29) | 18.0 (6–26) |
| ≥ 16, | n/a | n/a | 5 (62.5) | 7 (70.0) | 12 (48.0) | 7 (53.8) |
| SOFA | ||||||
| Mean (SD) | ||||||
| Ventilated | n/a | n/a | 9.3 (4.1) | 8.4 (2.6) | 6.5 (4.1) | 6.5 (4.8) |
| Non-ventilated | n/a | n/a | 3.0 (1.8) | 4.7 (3.1) | ||
| Median (range) | ||||||
| Ventilated | n/a | n/a | 10.0 (4–13) | 9.0 (4–11) | 7.0 (0–17) | 7.0 (0–16) |
| Non-ventilated | n/a | n/a | 3.0 (1–5) | 4.0 (2–8) | ||
| Original site of infection, | ||||||
| cUTI | 3 (12.0) | 0 | ||||
| cUTI with pyelonephritis | 7 (36.8) | 4 (44.4) | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a |
| cUTI without pyelonephritis | 4 (21.1) | 1 (11.1) | n/a | n/a | ||
| Acute uncomplicated pyelonephritis | 8 (42.1) | 4 (44.4) | n/a | n/a | ||
| Respiratory tract | n/a | n/a | ||||
| VAP | 4 (50.0) | 7 (70.0) | 2 (8.0) | 2 (15.4) | ||
| HAP | 3 (37.5) | 1 (10.0) | 0 | 0 | ||
| | ||||||
| HCAP | 1 (12.5) | 2 (20.0) | 0 | 0 | ||
| | ||||||
| BSI/sepsis | n/a | n/a | n/a | n/a | ||
| cIAI | 4 (16.0) | 2 (15.4) | ||||
| SSSI | 2 (8.0) | 0 | ||||
| IV line | 3 (12.0) | 5 (38.5) | ||||
| Other | 4 (16.0) | 1 (7.7) | ||||
| Unknown | 7 (28.0) | 3 (23.1) | ||||
APACHE II Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II, BAT best available therapy, cIAI complicated intra-abdominal infection, CrCL creatinine clearance, cUTI complicated urinary tract infection, HAP hospital-acquired pneumonia, HCAP healthcare-associated pneumonia, IV intravenous, n/a not available, SD standard deviation, SOFA Sequential Organ Failure Assessment, SSSI skin and skin structure infection, VAP ventilator-associated pneumonia
N, total number of patients with gram-negative bacteraemia at randomisation
Distribution of baseline gram-negative pathogens in blood at randomisation in the three studies (intention-to-treat population)
| APEKS-cUTIa | APEKS-NPb | CREDIBLE-CRc | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cefiderocol | Imipenem/cilastatin | Cefiderocol | Meropenem | Cefiderocol | BAT | |
| Enterobacterales, | 18 | 8 | 6 | 8 | 15 | 7 |
| | 0 | 0 | 3 | 4 | 11 | 5 |
| | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
| | 16 | 8 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 0 |
| | 0 | 0 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Non-fermenters, | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 12 | 8 |
| | 0 | 1 | 2 | 0 | 12 | 6 |
| | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 2 |
| | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
BAT best available therapy
N, total number of patients with gram-negative bacteraemia at randomisation
N’, total number of gram-negative pathogens from the blood
aAPEKS-cUTI: 24/28 (85.7%) gram-negative pathogens were E. coli
bAPEKS-NP: 7/19 (36.8%) gram-negative pathogens were K. pneumoniae; 5/19 (26.3%) were non-fermenters
cCREDIBLE-CR: 17/42 (40.5%) gram-negative pathogens were Klebsiella spp.; 18/42 (42.9%) were Acinetobacter spp
Clinical and microbiological bacteraemia outcomes at early assessment by patient in the three studies (intention-to-treat population)
| APEKS-cUTI | APEKS-NP | CREDIBLE-CR | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cefiderocol | Imipenem/ | Cefiderocol | Meropenem | Cefiderocol | BAT | |
| Bacteraemia outcome, | ||||||
| Eradication | 19 (100) | 7 (77.8) | 4 (50.0) | 10 (100) | 18 (72.0) | 9 (69.2) |
| | ||||||
| | ||||||
| Persistence | 0 | 1 (11.1)a | 1 (12.5)b | 0 | 2 (8.0)c,d | 2 (15.4)e,f |
| Indeterminate | 0 | 1 (11.1) | 3 (37.5) | 0 | 5 (20.0) | 2 (15.4) |
| Clinical outcome, | ||||||
| Cure | 19 (100) | 7 (77.8) | 5 (62.5) | 9 (90.0) | 16 (64.0) | 4 (30.8) |
| Failure | 0 | 2 (22.2) | 1 (12.5) | 1 (10.0) | 7 (28.0) | 8 (61.5) |
| Indeterminate | 0 | 0 | 2 (25.0) | 0 (0) | 2 (8.0) | 1 (7.7) |
BAT best available therapy, BSI bloodstream infection, CR carbapenem resistant, CS carbapenem susceptible, cUTI complicated urinary tract infection, EOT end of treatment, MIC minimum inhibitory concentration, TOC test of cure, VAP ventilator-associated pneumonia
aOne cUTI patient with E. coli (imipenem MIC ≤ 0.06 µg/ml), blood isolate was eradicated at EOT and TOC
bOne VAP patient with CS S. marcescens (cefiderocol MIC 0.12 µg/ml), blood isolate was eradicated at EOT and missing sample at TOC due to death
cOne BSI patient with CR A. baumannii (cefiderocol MIC 0.06 µg/ml), no follow-up sample available because of death on Day 6 due to septic shock
dOne cUTI patient with cefiderocol-resistant (MIC 32 µg/ml) and CR E. coli expressing NDM-5, following use of nephrostomy tube, blood isolate was eradicated at EOT and TOC
eOne BSI patient (gentamicin treatment) with CS K. pneumoniae, blood isolate eradicated at EOT and TOC
fOne sepsis patient (colistin and ertapenem treatment) with CR A. baumannii and CS M. morganii, indeterminate bacteraemia response at EOT and TOC due to additional antibiotic
Outcomes by resistance mechanisms/extended-spectrum beta-lactamase for Enterobacterales in CREDIBLE-CR (intention-to-treat population)
| Resistance mechanism | Response, | Cefiderocol ( | BAT ( |
|---|---|---|---|
| Metallo-beta-lactamase (NDM, VIM, IMP) | Eradication at EA | 3/4 (75.0) | 1/2 (50.0) |
| Persistence at EA | 1/4 (25.0) | 0/2 (0) | |
| Clinical cure at TOC | 3/4 (75.0) | 0/2 (0) | |
| Day 14 ACM | 0/4 (0) | 0/2 (0) | |
| Day 28 ACM | 0/4 (0) | 1/2 (50.0) | |
| Serine-beta-lactamase (KPC, OXA-48-like) | Eradication at EA | 6/8 (75.0) | 3/4 (75.0) |
| Persistence at EA | 0/8 (0) | 0/4 (0) | |
| Clinical cure at TOC | 4/8 (50.0) | 2/4 (50.0) | |
| Day 14 ACM | 1/8 (12.5) | 0/4 (0) | |
| Day 28 ACM | 1/8 (12.5) | 2/4 (50.0) | |
| ESBLa | Eradication at EA | 5/7 (71.4) | 2/4 (50.0) |
| Persistence at EA | 1/7 (14.3) | 1/4 (25.0) | |
| Clinical cure at TOC | 4/7 (57.1) | 1/4 (25.0) | |
| Day 14 ACM | 1/7 (14.3) | 0/4 (0) | |
| Day 28 ACM | 1/7 (14.3) | 2/4 (50.0) |
ACM all-cause mortality, BAT best available therapy, EA early assessment, ESBL extended-spectrum beta-lactamase, IMP imipenemase metallo-beta-lactamase, KPC Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase, NDM New Delhi metallo-beta-lactamase, OXA oxacillinase, TOC test of cure, VIM Verona integron-encoded metallo-beta-lactamase
N, total number of patients with gram-negative bacteraemia at randomisation
N’, total number of Enterobacterales isolates with the specific resistance mechanism(s)
aSulphydryl variant of TEM extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (SHV), cefotaxime-hydrolysing beta-lactamase (CTX-M), cephamycin-hydrolysing beta-lactamase (CMY), Dhahran Hospital in Saudi Arabia β-lactamase (DHA)
| Randomised clinical trials in infectious diseases routinely obtain blood cultures at baseline; however, follow-up blood cultures to determine bacterial clearance from blood at later time points are often not systematically evaluated. |
| The objective of this post hoc analysis of three randomised clinical trials was to investigate clearance of gram-negative bacteria from blood in patients who were treated with cefiderocol (and comparator antibiotics). |
| This post hoc descriptive analysis used data from three prospective randomised clinical trials involving patients with complicated urinary tract infections (cUTI), nosocomial pneumonia (NP) and serious carbapenem-resistant (CR) infections to assess the clinical and microbiological efficacy of the siderophore cephalosporin cefiderocol (and comparators) in patients with baseline bacteraemia. |
| Cefiderocol rapidly cleared bacteraemia due to aerobic gram-negative pathogens, including both Enterobacterales and non-fermenters, in most patients, including isolates that were often CR and/or expressed an extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) enzyme; persistence and recurrence occurred infrequently and were related to inadequate source control. |
| The species of pathogens causing bacteraemia were closely related to the primary infection type, that is: |
| This analysis suggests that cefiderocol may be a treatment option for gram-negative bacteraemia. |
| Further randomised clinical trials to define the treatment benefit of cefiderocol for gram-negative bacteraemia are indicated. |