Ceftolozane/Tazobactam Plus Metronidazole for Complicated Intra-abdominal Infections in an Era of Multidrug Resistance: Results From a Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase 3 Trial (ASPECT-cIAI)

Joseph Solomkin, Ellie Hershberger, Benjamin Miller, Myra Popejoy, Ian Friedland, Judith Steenbergen, Minjung Yoon, Sylva Collins, Guojun Yuan, Philip S Barie, Christian Eckmann, Joseph Solomkin, Ellie Hershberger, Benjamin Miller, Myra Popejoy, Ian Friedland, Judith Steenbergen, Minjung Yoon, Sylva Collins, Guojun Yuan, Philip S Barie, Christian Eckmann

Abstract

Background: Increasing antimicrobial resistance among pathogens causing complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAIs) supports the development of new antimicrobials. Ceftolozane/tazobactam, a novel antimicrobial therapy, is active against multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa and most extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL)-producing Enterobacteriaceae.

Methods: ASPECT-cIAI (Assessment of the Safety Profile and Efficacy of Ceftolozane/Tazobactam in Complicated Intra-abdominal Infections) was a prospective, randomized, double-blind trial. Hospitalized patients with cIAI received either ceftolozane/tazobactam (1.5 g) plus metronidazole (500 mg) every 8 hours or meropenem (1 g) every 8 hours intravenously for 4-14 days. The prospectively defined objectives were to demonstrate statistical noninferiority in clinical cure rates at the test-of-cure visit (24-32 days from start of therapy) in the microbiological intent-to-treat (primary) and microbiologically evaluable (secondary) populations using a noninferiority margin of 10%. Microbiological outcomes and safety were also evaluated.

Results: Ceftolozane/tazobactam plus metronidazole was noninferior to meropenem in the primary (83.0% [323/389] vs 87.3% [364/417]; weighted difference, -4.2%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -8.91 to .54) and secondary (94.2% [259/275] vs 94.7% [304/321]; weighted difference, -1.0%; 95% CI, -4.52 to 2.59) endpoints, meeting the prespecified noninferiority margin. In patients with ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae, clinical cure rates were 95.8% (23/24) and 88.5% (23/26) in the ceftolozane/tazobactam plus metronidazole and meropenem groups, respectively, and 100% (13/13) and 72.7% (8/11) in patients with CTX-M-14/15 ESBLs. The frequency of adverse events (AEs) was similar in both treatment groups (44.0% vs 42.7%); the most common AEs in either group were nausea and diarrhea.

Conclusions: Treatment with ceftolozane/tazobactam plus metronidazole was noninferior to meropenem in adult patients with cIAI, including infections caused by multidrug-resistant pathogens.

Clinical trials registration: NCT01445665 and NCT01445678.

Keywords: Enterobacteriaceae; ceftolozane/tazobactam; complicated intra-abdominal infection; gram-negative bacteria; multidrug resistance.

© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Infectious Diseases Society of America.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Patient disposition in ASPECT-cIAI (Assessment of the Safety Profile and Efficacy of Ceftolozane/Tazobactam in Complicated Intra-abdominal Infections). aPatients could be excluded for more than one reason. Abbreviations: BIP, baseline infecting pathogen; CE, clinically evaluable; MITT, microbiological ITT.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Primary and secondary analysis endpoints at the test-of-cure visit. In the microbiological intent-to-treat (MITT) population, a treatment failure approach was used, where indeterminate clinical responses were imputed as failures. In the microbiologically evaluable (ME) population, a data-as-observed approach was used, where indeterminate clinical responses were excluded from the analysis. Abbreviations: CI, confidence interval; NI, noninferiority margin.

References

    1. Herzog T, Chromik AM, Uhl W. Treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections in the era of multi-drug resistant bacteria. Eur J Med Res 2010; 15:525–32.
    1. Barie PS, Hydo LJ, Eachempati SR. Longitudinal outcomes of intra-abdominal infection complicated by critical illness. Surg Infect (Larchmt) 2004; 5:365–73.
    1. Gauzit R, Péan Y, Barth X, Mistretta F, Lalaude O. Epidemiology, management, and prognosis of secondary non-postoperative peritonitis: a French prospective observational multicenter study. Surg Infect (Larchmt) 2009; 10:119–27.
    1. Sartelli M, Catena F, Ansaloni L, et al. Complicated intra-abdominal infections worldwide: the definitive data of the CIAOW Study. World J Emerg Surg 2014; 9:37.
    1. Solomkin JS, Mazuski JE, Bradley JS, et al. Diagnosis and management of complicated intra-abdominal infection in adults and children: guidelines by the Surgical Infection Society and the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis 2010; 50:133–64.
    1. Solomkin JS, Mazuski JE, Bradley JS, et al. Diagnosis and management of complicated intra-abdominal infection in adults and children: guidelines by the Surgical Infection Society and the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Surg Infect (Larchmt) 2010; 11:79–109.
    1. Edelsberg J, Berger A, Schell S, Mallick R, Kuznik A, Oster G. Economic consequences of failure of initial antibiotic therapy in hospitalized adults with complicated intra-abdominal infections. Surg Infect (Larchmt) 2008; 9:335–47.
    1. Sturkenboom MC, Goettsch WG, Picelli G, et al. Inappropriate initial treatment of secondary intra-abdominal infections leads to increased risk of clinical failure and costs. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2005; 60:438–43.
    1. Bare M, Castells X, Garcia A, Riu M, Comas M, Egea MJ. Importance of appropriateness of empiric antibiotic therapy on clinical outcomes in intra-abdominal infections. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 2006; 22:242–8.
    1. Kumar A, Ellis P, Arabi Y, et al. Initiation of inappropriate antimicrobial therapy results in a fivefold reduction of survival in human septic shock. Chest 2009; 136:1237–48.
    1. Bush K. Proliferation and significance of clinically relevant beta-lactamases. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2013; 1277:84–90.
    1. Morrissey I, Hackel M, Badal R, Bouchillon S, Hawser S, Biedenbach D. A review of ten years of the Study for Monitoring Antimicrobial Resistance Trends (SMART) from 2002 to 2011. Pharmaceuticals (Basel) 2013; 6:1335–46.
    1. Farrell DJ, Flamm RK, Sader HS, Jones RN. Antimicrobial activity of ceftolozane-tazobactam tested against Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa with various resistance patterns isolated in U.S. hospitals (2011–2012). Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2013; 57:6305–10.
    1. Sader HS, Farrell DJ, Flamm RK, Jones RN. Ceftolozane/tazobactam activity tested against aerobic gram-negative organisms isolated from intra-abdominal and urinary tract infections in European and United States hospitals (2012). J Infect 2014; 69:266–77.
    1. Sader HS, Farrell DJ, Castanheira M, Flamm RK, Jones RN. Antimicrobial activity of ceftolozane/tazobactam tested against Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Enterobacteriaceae with various resistance patterns isolated in European hospitals (2011–12). J Antimicrob Chemother 2014; 69:2913–722.
    1. Walkty A, Karlowsky JA, Adam H, et al. In vitro activity of ceftolozane-tazobactam against Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates obtained from patients in Canadian hospitals in the CANWARD study, 2007 to 2012. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2013; 57:5707–9.
    1. Brown NP, Pillar CM, Draghi DC, et al. Activity profile of CXA-101 against gram-positive and gram-negative pathogens by broth and agar dilution. In: 48th Annual International Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy, Washington, DC, 25–28 October 2008. Poster F1-354.
    1. Lucasti C, Hershberger E, Miller B, et al. A multicenter, double-blind, randomized, phase II trial to assess the safety and efficacy of ceftolozane/tazobactam plus metronidazole compared with meropenem in adult patients with complicated intra-abdominal infections. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2014; 58:5350–7.
    1. US Food and Drug Administration . Guidance for industry. Antibacterial therapies for patients with unmet medical need for the treatment of serious bacterial diseases. Available at: Accessed 15 June 2014.
    1. Miller B, Hershberger E, Benziger D, Trinh M, Friedland I. Pharmacokinetics and safety of intravenous ceftolozane-tazobactam in healthy adult subjects following single and multiple ascending doses. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2012; 56:3086–91.
    1. Dellinger RP, Levy MM, Rhodes A, et al. Surviving sepsis campaign: international guidelines for management of severe sepsis and septic shock: 2012. Crit Care Med 2013; 41:580–637.
    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Surveillance definitions for specific types of infections. Available at: . Accessed 19 February 2015.
    1. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing; 22nd informational supplement. Wayne, PA: CLSI, 2012.
    1. Schein M, Marshall J. Source control for surgical infections. World J Surg 2004; 28:638–45.
    1. Yan X, Su XG. Stratified Wilson and Newcombe confidence intervals for multiple binomial proportions. Stat Biopharm Res 2010; 2:329–35.
    1. Mehrotra DV, Railkar R. Minimum risk weights for comparing treatments in stratified binomial trials. Stat Med 2000; 19:811–25.
    1. Boucher HW, Talbot GH, Benjamin DK, Jr, et al. 10×'20 progress—development of new drugs active against gram-negative bacilli: an update from the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis 2013; 56:1685–94.
    1. World Health Organization. Antimicrobial resistance. Global report on surveillance. Available at: Accessed 19 September 2014.
    1. De Waele JJ, Tellado JM, Alder J, et al. Randomised clinical trial of moxifloxacin versus ertapenem in complicated intra-abdominal infections: results of the PROMISE study. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2013; 41:57–64.
    1. Oliva ME, Rekha A, Yellin A, et al. A multicenter trial of the efficacy and safety of tigecycline versus imipenem/cilastatin in patients with complicated intra-abdominal infections [Study ID numbers: 3074A1–301-WW; identifier: NCT00081744]. BMC Infect Dis 2005; 5:88.
    1. Qvist N, Warren B, Leister-Tebbe H, et al. Efficacy of tigecycline versus ceftriaxone plus metronidazole for the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections: results from a randomized, controlled trial. Surg Infect (Larchmt) 2012; 13:102–9.
    1. Solomkin JS, Yellin AE, Rotstein OD, et al. Ertapenem versus piperacillin/tazobactam in the treatment of complicated intraabdominal infections: results of a double-blind, randomized comparative phase III trial. Ann Surg 2003; 237:235–45.
    1. Lucasti C, Popescu I, Ramesh MK, Lipka J, Sable C. Comparative study of the efficacy and safety of ceftazidime/avibactam plus metronidazole versus meropenem in the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections in hospitalized adults: results of a randomized, double-blind, phase II trial. J Antimicrob Chemother 2013; 68:1183–92.
    1. Low DE, File TM, Jr, Eckburg PB, et al. FOCUS 2: a randomized, double-blinded, multicentre, phase III trial of the efficacy and safety of ceftaroline fosamil versus ceftriaxone in community-acquired pneumonia. J Antimicrob Chemother 2011; 66(Suppl 3):iii33–44.
    1. File TM, Jr, Low DE, Eckburg PB, et al. FOCUS 1: a randomized, double-blinded, multicentre, phase III trial of the efficacy and safety of ceftaroline fosamil versus ceftriaxone in community-acquired pneumonia. J Antimicrob Chemother 2011; 66(Suppl 3):iii19–32.
    1. Woerther PL, Burdet C, Chachaty E, Andremont A. Trends in human fecal carriage of extended-spectrum beta-lactamases in the community: toward the globalization of CTX-M. Clin Microbiol Rev 2013; 26:744–58.
    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Antibiotic resistance threats in the United States, 2013. Available at: Accessed 12 June 2014.
    1. Vardakas KZ, Tansarli GS, Rafailidis PI, Falagas ME. Carbapenems versus alternative antibiotics for the treatment of bacteraemia due to Enterobacteriaceae producing extended-spectrum beta-lactamases: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Antimicrob Chemother 2012; 67:2793–803.
    1. Hawser S, Hoban D, Bouchillon S, Badal R, Carmeli Y, Hawkey P. Antimicrobial susceptibility of intra-abdominal gram-negative bacilli from Europe: SMART Europe 2008. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2011; 30:173–9.
    1. Augustin P, Dinh AT, Valin N, et al. Pseudomonas aeruginosa post-operative peritonitis: clinical features, risk factors, and prognosis. Surg Infect (Larchmt) 2013; 14:297–303.
    1. Hoban DJ, Bouchillon SK, Hawser SP, Badal RE, Labombardi VJ, DiPersio J. Susceptibility of gram-negative pathogens isolated from patients with complicated intra-abdominal infections in the United States, 2007–2008: results of the Study for Monitoring Antimicrobial Resistance Trends (SMART). Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2010; 54:3031–4.
    1. Micek ST, Lloyd AE, Ritchie DJ, Reichley RM, Fraser VJ, Kollef MH. Pseudomonas aeruginosa bloodstream infection: importance of appropriate initial antimicrobial treatment. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2005; 49:1306–11.

Source: PubMed

Sponsor e collaboratori

Condizioni mediche

Interventi farmacologici

3
Sottoscrivi