Impact of Underlying Comorbidities on Outcomes of Patients Treated with Ceftaroline Fosamil for Complicated Skin and Soft Tissue Infections: Pooled Results from Three Phase III Randomized Clinical Trials

Mark Wilcox, Jean Li Yan, Pedro L Gonzalez, Matthew Dryden, Gregory G Stone, Michal Kantecki, Mark Wilcox, Jean Li Yan, Pedro L Gonzalez, Matthew Dryden, Gregory G Stone, Michal Kantecki

Abstract

Introduction: In three phase III randomized controlled trials, ceftaroline fosamil was shown to be non-inferior to vancomycin plus aztreonam for the treatment of complicated skin and soft tissue infections (cSSTIs). This exploratory analysis evaluated the impact of underlying comorbidities on clinical outcomes in patients with cSSTI pooled from these three studies.

Methods: CANVAS 1 and 2 and COVERS evaluated ceftaroline fosamil (600 mg every 12 h [q12h]; 600 mg every 8 h [q8h; COVERS]) versus vancomycin plus aztreonam (1 g q12h each [CANVAS 1 and 2]; vancomycin 15 mg/kg q12h and aztreonam 1 g q8h [COVERS]) in hospitalized adults with cSSTI. The primary efficacy variable in each trial was clinical response at the test-of-cure (TOC) visit. Subgroup analyses were performed on the pooled clinically evaluable (CE) population, exploring the impact of age and various baseline comorbidities.

Results: Overall, 1808 patients were included in the CE population (1005 ceftaroline fosamil; 803 vancomycin plus aztreonam). Clinical cure rates at TOC were 89.7% (ceftaroline fosamil) and 90.8% (vancomycin plus aztreonam) (difference [95% confidence interval] - 1.13 [- 3.87, 1.67]). Clinical response rates were similar between treatment groups, regardless of age (≤ 65 years or > 65 years), and in subgroups of patients with and without diabetes mellitus, peripheral vascular disease, cancer/malignancy, renal impairment, and obesity; within these subgroups, efficacy and safety results were generally consistent with those of the overall cSSTI population.

Conclusions: This analysis provides supportive evidence of the efficacy of ceftaroline fosamil in patients with cSSTI and underlying comorbidities.

Trial registration: CANVAS 1, NCT00424190 and CANVAS 2, NCT00423657 (both trials first posted on ClinicalTrials.gov 18/01/2007); COVERS, NCT01499277 (first posted on ClinicalTrials.gov 26/12/2011).

Keywords: Ceftaroline fosamil; Comorbidities; Complicated skin and soft tissue infection.

© 2021. The Author(s).

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Clinical cure rates at TOC by baseline age, BMI, and comorbidity subgroups in patients with cSSTI (CE population)a. BMI body mass index, CE clinically evaluable, CLCR creatinine clearance, cSSTI complicated skin and soft tissue infection, PVD peripheral vascular disease, TOC test of cure. aValues above bars represent treatment differences (95% CI)

References

    1. Corey GR, Wilcox MH, Talbot GH, Thye D, Friedland D, Baculik T. CANVAS 1: the first Phase III, randomized, double-blind study evaluating ceftaroline fosamil for the treatment of patients with complicated skin and skin structure infections. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2010;65(Suppl 4):iv41–iv51.
    1. Esposito S, Bassetti M, Concia E, et al. Diagnosis and management of skin and soft-tissue infections (SSTI). A literature review and consensus statement: an update. J Chemother (Florence, Italy). 2017;29(4):197–214. doi: 10.1080/1120009X.2017.1311398.
    1. Zervos MJ, Freeman K, Vo L, et al. Epidemiology and outcomes of complicated skin and soft tissue infections in hospitalized patients. J Clin Microbiol. 2012;50(2):238–245. doi: 10.1128/JCM.05817-11.
    1. Garau J, Ostermann H, Medina J, Avila M, McBride K, Blasi F. Current management of patients hospitalized with complicated skin and soft tissue infections across Europe (2010–2011): assessment of clinical practice patterns and real-life effectiveness of antibiotics from the REACH study. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2013;19(9):E377–E385. doi: 10.1111/1469-0691.12235.
    1. Ki V, Rotstein C. Bacterial skin and soft tissue infections in adults: a review of their epidemiology, pathogenesis, diagnosis, treatment and site of care. Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol. 2008;19(2):173–184. doi: 10.1155/2008/846453.
    1. Bassetti M, Baguneid M, Bouza E, Dryden M, Nathwani D, Wilcox M. European perspective and update on the management of complicated skin and soft tissue infections due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus after more than 10 years of experience with linezolid. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2014;20(Suppl 4):3–18. doi: 10.1111/1469-0691.12463.
    1. Stevens DL, Bisno AL, Chambers HF, et al. Practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of skin and soft tissue infections: 2014 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis. 2014;59(2):e10–52. doi: 10.1093/cid/ciu296.
    1. Wilcox MH, Corey GR, Talbot GH, Thye D, Friedland D, Baculik T. CANVAS 2: the second phase III, randomized, double-blind study evaluating ceftaroline fosamil for the treatment of patients with complicated skin and skin structure infections. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2010;65(suppl 4):iv53–iv65.
    1. Dryden M, Zhang Y, Wilson D, Iaconis JP, Gonzalez J. A Phase III, randomized, controlled, non-inferiority trial of ceftaroline fosamil 600 mg every 8 h versus vancomycin plus aztreonam in patients with complicated skin and soft tissue infection with systemic inflammatory response or underlying comorbidities. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2016;71(12):3575–3584. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkw333.
    1. Matzneller P, Lackner E, Lagler H, Wulkersdorfer B, Österreicher Z, Zeitlinger M. Single- and repeated-dose pharmacokinetics of ceftaroline in plasma and soft tissues of healthy volunteers for two different dosing regimens of ceftaroline fosamil. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2016;60(6):3617–3625. doi: 10.1128/AAC.00097-16.
    1. Corey GR, Wilcox MH, Gonzalez J, et al. Ceftaroline fosamil therapy in patients with acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections with systemic inflammatory signs: a retrospective dose comparison across three pivotal trials. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2019;53(6):830–837. doi: 10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2019.01.016.
    1. Miettinen O, Nurminen M. Comparative analysis of two rates. Stat Med. 1985;4(2):213–226. doi: 10.1002/sim.4780040211.
    1. Kofteridis DP, Valachis A, Koutsounaki E, et al. Skin and soft tissue infections in patients with solid tumours. Scientific World J. 2012;2012:804518. doi: 10.1100/2012/804518.
    1. Maroz N, Simman R. Wound healing in patients with impaired kidney function. J Am Coll Clin Wound Special. 2013;5(1):2–7. doi: 10.1016/j.jccw.2014.05.002.
    1. Pinder M, Bellomo R, Lipman J. Pharmacological principles of antibiotic prescription in the critically ill. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2002;30(2):134–144. doi: 10.1177/0310057X0203000203.
    1. Skhirtladze K, Hutschala D, Fleck T, et al. Impaired target site penetration of vancomycin in diabetic patients following cardiac surgery. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2006;50(4):1372–1375. doi: 10.1128/AAC.50.4.1372-1375.2006.
    1. Lipsky BA, Itani KM, Weigelt JA, et al. The role of diabetes mellitus in the treatment of skin and skin structure infections caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: results from three randomized controlled trials. Int J Infect Dis. 2011;15(2):e140–e146. doi: 10.1016/j.ijid.2010.10.003.
    1. Eckmann C, Nathwani D, Lawson W, et al. Comparison of vancomycin and linezolid in patients with peripheral vascular disease and/or diabetes in an observational European study of complicated skin and soft-tissue infections due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2015;21(Suppl 2):S33–S39. doi: 10.1016/j.cmi.2015.01.011.
    1. Pesanti EL. Immunologic defects and vaccination in patients with chronic renal failure. Infect Dis Clin N Am. 2001;15(3):813–832. doi: 10.1016/S0891-5520(05)70174-4.
    1. Tognetti L, Martinelli C, Berti S, et al. Bacterial skin and soft tissue infections: review of the epidemiology, microbiology, aetiopathogenesis and treatment: a collaboration between dermatologists and infectivologists. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol JEADV. 2012;26(8):931–941. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-3083.2011.04416.x.
    1. Bury D, ter Heine R, van de Garde EMW, Nijziel MR, Grouls RJ, Deenen MJ. The effect of neutropenia on the clinical pharmacokinetics of vancomycin in adults. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2019;75(7):921–928. doi: 10.1007/s00228-019-02657-6.
    1. de Gatta MMF, Fruns I, Hernández JM, et al. Vancomycin pharmacokinetics and dosage requirements in hematologic malignancies. Clin Pharm. 1993;12(7):515–520.
    1. Hochart C, Berthon C, Corm S, et al. Vancomycin serum concentration during febrile neutropenia in patients with acute myeloid leukemia. Med Mal Infect. 2011;41(12):652–656. doi: 10.1016/j.medmal.2011.09.014.
    1. Theofiles M, Maxson J, Herges L, Marcelin A, Angstman KB. Cellulitis in obesity: adverse outcomes affected by increases in body mass index. J Prim Care Community Health. 2015;6(4):233–238. doi: 10.1177/2150131915583659.
    1. Halilovic J, Heintz BH, Brown J. Risk factors for clinical failure in patients hospitalized with cellulitis and cutaneous abscess. J Infect. 2012;65(2):128–134. doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2012.03.013.
    1. Falagas ME, Athanasoulia AP, Peppas G, Karageorgopoulos DE. Effect of body mass index on the outcome of infections: a systematic review. Obes Rev. 2009;10(3):280–289. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-789X.2008.00546.x.
    1. Longo C, Bartlett G, Macgibbon B, et al. The effect of obesity on antibiotic treatment failure: a historical cohort study. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2013;22(9):970–976. doi: 10.1002/pds.3461.
    1. Justo JA, Mayer SM, Pai MP, et al. Pharmacokinetics of ceftaroline in normal body weight and obese (classes I, II, and III) healthy adult subjects. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2015;59(7):3956–3965. doi: 10.1128/AAC.00498-15.
    1. Ramakrishnan K, Salinas RC, Agudelo Higuita NI. Skin and soft tissue infections. Am Fam Physician. 2015;92(6):474–483.
    1. Allergan. TEFLARO™ (ceftaroline fosamil) injection for intravenous (IV) use. 2020. . Accessed 28 Apr 2021.
    1. Pfizer. Zinforo 600 mg powder for concentrate for solution for infusion: summary of product characteristics. 2020. . Accessed 28 Apr 2021.
    1. Cheng K, Newell P, Chow JW, et al. Safety profile of ceftazidime-avibactam: pooled data from the adult phase II and phase III clinical trial programme. Drug Saf. 2020;43(8):751–766. doi: 10.1007/s40264-020-00934-3.

Source: PubMed

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

3
Abonnieren