IgM PRODUCTION IN HYPOGAMMAGLOBULINAEMIC PATIENTS DURING NON-A, NON-B HEPATITIS

L. Hammarström,C. I. Smith

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(86)91139-6

IF: 202.731

1986-03-29

The Lancet

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Bacitracin Enhances Ceftriaxone Susceptibility of the High-Level Ceftriaxone-Resistant Gonococcal FC428 Clone

Yuhua Gu,Shuaijie Song,Qingrui Zhu,Ruilin Jiao,Xu'ai Lin,Fan Yang,Stijn van der Veen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1128/spectrum.02449-23

IF: 3.7

2023-01-01

Microbiology Spectrum

Abstract:ABSTRACT Neisseria gonorrhoeae is a multidrug-resistant bacterial pathogen for which ceftriaxone mono-antimicrobial therapy and ceftriaxone plus azithromycin dual-antimicrobial therapy are the only remaining effective therapies. However, ceftriaxone efficacy is threatened by the global dissemination of the high-level ceftriaxone-resistant FC428 clone, while azithromycin has in recent years been removed from the recommended dual therapy in some countries as a result of increasing (high-level) azithromycin resistance. Inclusion of an alternative second antimicrobial could be an effective strategy to protect ceftriaxone from (further) resistance development. In this study, we investigated gonococcal susceptibility to bacitracin and determined its synergistic anti-gonococcal activity with ceftriaxone. Gonococcal susceptibility to bacitracin was investigated for 449 contemporary clinical isolates using the agar dilution method. Bacitracin displayed consistent activity against the N. gonorrhoeae strain collection, with a minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) range of 2–32 mg/L and a MIC90 of 32 mg/L. Furthermore, bacitracin was bactericidal in time-kill assays, particularly against the tested FC428-associated isolate, which showed 105-fold inactivation after 8 hours of exposure to a 4× MIC dose. Importantly, bacitracin and ceftriaxone displayed synergistic activity, with a fractional inhibitory concentration index ≤0.5 for the majority of tested strains. Finally, spot assays showed strong synergistic activity against the FC428-associated isolates, with up to 200-fold reduced plating efficacy for bacitracin combined with ceftriaxone compared with ceftriaxone only. In conclusion, bacitracin shows synergistic anti-gonococcal activity with ceftriaxone and might therefore be an interesting candidate for inclusion in a dual-antimicrobial therapy with ceftriaxone. IMPORTANCE Ceftriaxone-based antimicrobial therapies for gonorrhea are threatened by waning ceftriaxone susceptibility levels and the global dissemination of the high-level ceftriaxone-resistant gonococcal FC428 clone. Combination therapy can be an effective strategy to restrain the development of ceftriaxone resistance, and for that purpose, it is important to find an alternative antimicrobial to replace azithromycin, which has recently been removed in some countries from the recommended ceftriaxone plus azithromycin dual-antimicrobial therapy. Ideally, the second antimicrobial should display synergistic activity with ceftriaxone. We hypothesized that bacitracin might display synergistic activity with ceftriaxone because of their distinct mechanisms targeting bacterial cell wall synthesis. In this study, we showed that bacitracin indeed displays synergistic activity with ceftriaxone against Neisseria gonorrhoeae. Importantly, strains associated with the FC428 clone appeared to be particularly susceptible to the bacitracin plus ceftriaxone combination, which might therefore be an interesting dual therapy for further in vivo testing.
Efficacy and Safety of Ceftazidime–avibactam Versus Polymyxins in the Treatment of Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae Infection: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Ping Yang,Yinyan Li,Xiaojuan Wang,Na Chen,Xiaoyang Lu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2022-070491

IF: 3.006

2023-01-01

BMJ Open

Abstract:Objectives Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae is increasingly recognised as a significant public health concern. Ceftazidime-avibactam (CAZ-AVI) and polymyxins are considered as the last therapeutic options worldwide. This is the first meta-analysis of recently published data to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of CAZ-AVI with polymyxins in the treatment of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae infections. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched, for publications in any language, from database inception to February 2023. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Studies comparing the clinical efficacy and safety of CAZ-AVI with polymyxins were included. Mortality, clinical success, microbiological eradication and nephrotoxicity were assessed as the main outcomes. Data extraction and synthesis Literature screening, data extraction and the quality evaluation of studies were conducted by two researchers independently, with disagreements resolved by another researcher. The Newcastle–Ottawa Scale was used to assess the bias risk for the included studies. Review Manager V.5.3 was employed for the meta-analysis. Results The meta-analysis included seven retrospective and four prospective cohort studies with 1111 patients enrolled. The CAZ-AVI groups demonstrated a lower 30-day mortality (risk ratio (RR)=0.48, 95% CI of 0.37 to 0.63, I 2 =10%, p<0.0001) in nine studies with 766 patients; higher clinical success (RR=1.71, 95% CI 1.33 to 2.20, I 2 =35%, p<0.0001) in four studies with 463 patients; and lower nephrotoxicity in seven studies with 696 patients (RR=0.42, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.77, I 2 =35%, p<0.05). However, no significant difference in microbiological eradication rates was observed in 249 patients from two studies (RR=1.16, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.39, I 2 =0, p>0.05). Conclusion Available evidence suggested that CAZ-AVI treatment held a dominant position with respect to efficacy and safety compared with polymyxins in carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae infections. However, the analysis included only observational studies, and high-quality, large-scale, multicentre, double-blind randomised controlled trials are needed to confirm the advantage of CAZ-AVI.
Comparison of Cefprozil, Cefpodoxime Proxetil, Loracarbef, Cefixime, and Ceftibuten

Beth S Schatz,Kellie Tefakis Karavokiros,Mary A Taeubel,Gail S Itokazu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/106002809603000310

IF: 3.4628

1996-03-01

Annals of Pharmacotherapy

Abstract:OBJECTIVE: To discuss the pharmacokinetics, spectrum of activity, clinical trials, and adverse effects of cefprozil, cefpodoxime proxetil, loracarbef, cefixime, and ceftibuten, an investigational cephalosporin. DATA SOURCES: Literature was identified by a MEDLINE search from 1986 to January 1995. STUDY SELECTION: Randomized, controlled studies were selected for evaluation; however, uncontrolled studies were included when data were limited for indications approved by the Food and Drug Administration. DATA EXTRACTION: Data were evaluated with respect to in vitro activity, study design, clinical and microbiologic outcomes, and adverse drug reactions. DATA SYNTHESIS: Cefprozil, cefpodoxime proxetil, loracarbef, cefixime, and ceftibuten are active in vitro against organisms frequently involved in community-acquired infections such as Streptococcus pneumoniae, Escherichia coli, beta-lactamase-positive or -negative Haemophilus influenzae, and Moraxella catarrhalis. Except for cefixime and ceftibuten, they all are active against methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus. Even though there were problems in study design (discussed within the text), clinical data demonstrate that these new oral beta-lactam compounds are as efficacious as conventional therapies for a variety of community-acquired infections. CONCLUSIONS: Cefprozil, cefpodoxime, cefixime, loracarbef, and ceftibuten demonstrate in vitro activity against the major organisms that cause community-acquired infections. Clinical trials confirm that these agents are as effective as traditional therapies for the management of acute otitis media, pharyngitis/tonsillitis, sinusitis, bronchitis, pneumonia, urinary tract infections, and skin and skin-structure infections. In addition, cefixime and cefpodoxime are effective therapies for uncomplicated gonococcal infections. Selection of a specific agent will be influenced by susceptibility data and safety, as well as issues of compliance and cost.

pharmacology & pharmacy
Ceftriaxone versus Cefepime or Carbapenems for Definitive Treatment of Low-Risk AmpC-Harboring Enterobacterales Bloodstream Infections in Hospitalized Adults: a Retrospective Cohort Study

Jessica L. Mulbah,Rachel M. Kenney,Robert J. Tibbetts,Anita B. Shallal,Michael P. Veve

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2024.116557

IF: 2.983

2024-10-15

Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease

Abstract:Objective To compare outcomes of ceftriaxone to AmpC-stable therapies in patients with bacteremia caused by low-risk AmpC harboring Enterobacterales. Methods IRB-approved, retrospective cohort of hospitalized patients ≥18 years old with Serratia marcescens , Morganella morganii , or Providencia spp. bacteremia from 1/1/2017-2/28/2024. Patients were compared by definitive therapy with ceftriaxone vs AmpC-stable therapy (cefepime, carbapenem). The primary endpoint was 30-day all-cause mortality; secondary endpoints were clinical failure and development of ceftriaxone resistance. Results 163 patients were included; 33.1% received ceftriaxone, 66.9% AmpC-stable therapies. 30-day all-cause mortality was 9.3% ceftriaxone vs 10.1% AmpC stable patients ( P =0.87); ceftriaxone definitive therapy was not associated with 30-day all-cause mortality (adjOR, 0.79; 95%CI, 0.23-2.3). There were no differences in clinical failure (9.3% vs 21.1%, P= 0.059) or relapsing infection (5.6% vs 9.3%, P =0.55) between ceftriaxone and AmpC-stable treated patients. Conclusions Patients treated with definitive ceftriaxone for low-risk AmpC Enterobacterales bacteremia had similar outcomes to AmpC stable therapies.

infectious diseases,microbiology
Comparison of Cefazolin and Ceftriaxone Enterobacterales Susceptibilities for Inpatient Treatment of Urinary Tract Infections and Risk of Hospital-onset Clostridioides difficile Infection

Eric Wombwell,Allison Rosa

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinthera.2024.02.011

Abstract:Purpose: Urinary tract infection (UTI) is the second most common indication for antibiotic therapy among inpatients in the United States. Ceftriaxone, a third-generation cephalosporin, is habitually chosen to treat inpatient UTIs due to familiarity, cost, and perceived safety. However, third-generation cephalosporins increase the risk of health care facility-onset Clostridioides difficile infection (HOCDI) more than any other antibiotic group, while no statistical risk exists for first-generation cephalosporins. Recent evidence comparing Enterobacterales susceptibility for first- and third-generation cephalosporins in urinary specimens in the United States is limited. This analysis assessed the comparative activity of cefazolin and ceftriaxone for Enterobacterales urinary isolates and incidence of HOCDI to determine the usefulness of cefazolin as an empirical agent to manage inpatient UTI and limit ceftriaxone collateral damage. Methods: This was a retrospective single-center observational study. Microbiologic susceptibility data were analyzed for Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, and Proteus mirabilis urinary specimens taken from adult inpatients admitted from January 1, 2022, to December 31, 2022. Primary outcome was incidence of E coli, K pneumoniae, and P mirabilis susceptibility to cefazolin in uncomplicated UTI (MIC <16 µg/mL). Secondary outcomes include susceptibility for complicated UTI and HOCDI risk associated with cefazolin and ceftriaxone. Findings: A total of 1150 urine samples were identified as E coli, K pneumoniae, and P mirabilis in 2022. Susceptibility to cefazolin was observed in 1064 (92.5%) of 1150 isolates using the MIC breakpoint for uncomplicated UTI and to ceftriaxone in 1115 (97.0%) of 1150 isolates (P < 0.001). From 2016 to 2022, either cefazolin or ceftriaxone was administered in 26,462 inpatient admissions, with HOCDI diagnoses occurring in 89 admissions. HOCDI developed in 78 admissions (0.40%) with ceftriaxone exposure, and 11 cases (0.15%) developed in cefazolin-exposed admissions (adjusted odds ratio, 2.44; 95% CI, 1.25-4.76; P < 0.001). Implications: Cefazolin exhibits high susceptibility for uropathogens commonly implicated in cases of uncomplicated UTI, the most common UTI diagnosis among inpatients. Although ceftriaxone shows a higher susceptibility rate against these common uropathogens, it more than doubles the risk for HOCDI compared with cefazolin. For institutions evaluating opportunities to reduce ceftriaxone use to limit associated collateral damage such as HOCDI, use of cefazolin for uncomplicated UTI may be evaluated by using local susceptibility data.
An In Vitro Susceptibility Study of Cefotaxime-Sulbactam on Clinical Bacterial Isolates From Various Regions in India: A Comparison With Ceftriaxone-Sulbactam

Ajitkumar A Gondane,Dattatray B Pawar

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.36078

2023-03-13

Cureus

Abstract:Background and objective Combining sulbactam with cefotaxime/ceftriaxone augments its antimicrobial activity against β-lactamase-producing bacteria. They are widely used as empirical treatment for many clinical infections. However, there is a scarcity of data on the susceptibility of various organisms to these antibiotics in the Indian region. In light of this, the present in vitro study evaluated the susceptibility of bacterial isolates to cefotaxime-sulbactam and compared it with ceftriaxone-sulbactam. Methodology Clinical samples with positive bacterial cultures from various laboratories in India were subjected to antibiotic sensitivity testing using in vitro E-test strips and disk diffusion methods to determine the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) and zone of inhibition (ZOI), respectively. MIC50 and MIC90 values were determined along with the measurement of the ZOI for the effectiveness of antibiotics. Interpretations of MIC and ZOI values were made as per the criteria set by the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) guidelines to estimate the proportion of sensitive organisms. Results Among 400 clinical isolates evaluated, Escherichia coli (E. coli) (47.75%) was the most common organism isolated followed by Klebsiella (26%), Salmonella (7.75%), Proteus (3.8%), and Acinetobacter (2.8%). The mean ZOI was found significantly higher for E. coli, Klebsiella, and Salmonella in the cefotaxime-sulbactam group than in the ceftriaxone-sulbactam group. MIC50 values for E. coli and Klebsiella were 0.25 and 0.19 µg/ml, respectively in the cefotaxime-sulbactam group as compared to 0.38 and 0.25 µg/ml, respectively for ceftriaxone-sulbactam. The proportion of sensitive isolates was also higher in the cefotaxime-sulbactam group for E. coli, Klebsiella, and Salmonella. Conclusions The in vitro effect of cefotaxime-sulbactam on organisms is similar to that of ceftriaxone-sulbactam in terms of MIC, ZOI, and proportion of sensitivity based on our study involving clinical isolates from various parts of India. Cefotaxime-sulbactam may be preferred in the empirical management of various clinical infections.
A Prospective Randomized Study Comparing Ceftolozane/Tazobactam to Standard of Care in the Management of Neutropenia and Fever in Patients with Hematological Malignancies.

Anne-Marie Chaftari,Ray Hachem,Alexandre E. Malek,Victor E. Mulanovich,Ariel D. Szvalb,Ying Jiang,Ying Yuan,Shahnoor Ali,Rita Deeba,Patrick Chaftari,Issam Raad

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofac079

2022-01-01

Open Forum Infectious Diseases

Abstract:Ceftolozane/tazobactam can be used as empiric treatment in cancer patients with neutropenia and fever. It is safe and is associated with better clinical outcomes compared to other standard-of-care antimicrobial agents. Background With increased use of antibiotics in high-risk patients, the investigation of new antibiotics to cover potentially resistant pathogens is warranted. In this prospective randomized trial, we compared ceftolozane/tazobactam (C/T), a new cephalosporin/beta-lactamase inhibitor, to the standard of care (SOC) for the empiric treatment of neutropenia and fever in patients with hematological malignancies. Methods We enrolled 100 patients to receive intravenous (IV) C/T or SOC antibiotics (cefepime, piperacillin/tazobactam, or meropenem) in combination with gram-positive antibacterial agents. We evaluated responses at the end of IV therapy (EOIV), test of cure (TOC; days 21-28), and late follow-up (LFU; days 35-42). Results We analyzed 47 C/T patients and 50 SOC patients. C/T patients had a higher rate of favorable clinical response at EOIV (87% vs 72%). A 1-sided noninferiority analysis indicated that C/T was at least not inferior to the SOC for favorable clinical response at EOIV (P = .002), TOC (P = .004), and LFU (P = .002). Superiority tests showed that C/T led to significantly lower rates of clinical failure at TOC (6% vs 30%; P = .003) and LFU (9% vs 30%; P = .008). C/T and SOC patients with documented infections had similar rates of favorable microbiological response. Serious adverse events leading to drug discontinuation (2% vs 0%; P = .48) and overall mortality (6% vs 4%; P = .67) were similar in both groups. Conclusions The empiric use of C/T in high-risk patients with hematological malignancies and febrile neutropenia is safe and associated with better clinical outcomes than SOC antimicrobial agents.
A Review on the Use of Third-Generation Cephalosporins on Gram-Positive and Gram-Negative Bacteria Based on its Spectrum of Activity

Sudharsan R.,Ahamed Hussain S.,Thawfeeq Ahmad K. MF,Mohamed Akram Ali S.,Rajamohamed H.

DOI: https://doi.org/10.46610/rtpsr.2024.v06i01.001

2024-01-01

Recent Trends in Pharmaceutical Sciences and Research

Abstract:This review explores the clinical usage of third-generation cephalosporins, a class of broad-spectrum antibiotics that are essential for treating gram-positive and gram-negative bacterial infections in a variety of infectious conditions. These antibiotics have bactericidal action by inhibiting the synthesis of bacterial cell walls. Among the well-known members of this class are cefoperazone, cefpodoxime proxetil, ceftibuten, ceftriaxone, cefotaxime, and ceftazidime. Inhibiting transpeptidase is the mechanism of action, which, in the case of gram-negative bacteria, results in cell lysis and death. Third-generation cephalosporins are used to treat a wide range of conditions, including meningitis, genitourinary tract infections, pneumonia, infections of the skin and soft tissues, and bone and joint infections. Each cephalosporin within this generation exhibits a distinct spectrum of activity. For instance, cefpodoxime proxetil acts against Staphylococcus aureus and Klebsiella pneumoniae, whereas cefixime acts against Streptococcus pneumoniae and Escherichia coli. Neisseria gonorrhoea and Pseudomonas aeruginosa are only two examples of the many gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria that ceftriaxone is active against. This review also highlights the synergistic effects of combining third-generation cephalosporins with other antibiotics, demonstrating their versatility in managing complex infections. Despite their effectiveness, third-generation cephalosporins may not be effective against Chlamydia trachomatis. Furthermore, careful consideration of each antibiotic's spectrum guides their specific use in treating conditions such as urinary tract infections, otitis media, bronchitis, and gynecologic infections. In conclusion, the comprehensive spectrum of action of third-generation cephalosporins makes them valuable in addressing a diverse array of bacterial infections. However, their use should be judicious, considering the evolving landscape of antibiotic resistance and the specific bacterial targets for optimal therapeutic outcomes.
[Comparison of Pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of Cefdinir, Cefpodoxime Proxetil and Cefaclor Against Common Bacteria of Community Acquired Infections].

Yong-hong Xiao,Lei Gao,Yun Li,Yuan Lü,Jian Liu,Yan Liu

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/j:issn:0376-2491.2004.22.007

2004-01-01

Abstract:OBJECTIVE:To compare the pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics property of cefdinir, cefpodoxime proxetil and cefaclor against common bacteria of community acquired infections and evaluate the recommended regimens.METHODS:The antibacterial activities of 3 agents against 238 clinical isolates were determined by standard agar dilution test and the pharmacokinetics of these antibiotics in male healthy volunteers were conducted in Latin-square manner. The time over MIC (T > MIC) of serum antibiotic concentrations were calculated with pharmacokinetic equation and MIC.RESULTS:The value of MIC90 s cefdinir against these bacterial strains except penicillin non-sensitive pneumococci were 0.031-1 mg/L. Cefpodoxime held similar antibacterial activity with cefdinir, but was less potent against staphylococci. Cefaclor had much higher MIC values than other two drugs. After oral administration of 250 mg cefaclor, the drug concentration quickly reached peak concentration of 4.95 mg/L +/- 2.41 mg/L and the eliminative half time was 0.69 h +/- 0.6 h; the Tmax, Cmax and T1/2beta of cefdinir and cefpodoxime after oral administration of 100 mg were 2.5 h +/- 0.48 h, 0.81 mg/L +/- 0.19 mg/L, 1.73 h +/- 0.3 h and 2.38 h +/- 0.43 h, 1.12 mg/L +/- 0.28 mg/L, 1.92 h +/- 0.55 h, respectively. T > MIC of cefdinir in thrice daily administration were longer than 40% of medication interval against most of the tested isolates; no T > MIC period was found in cefpodoxime against staphylococci and the T > MICs of cefaclor after 250 mg oral administration were shorter than expected values against most bacteria.CONCLUSION:With powerful antibacterial activity, the T > MICs of cefdinir after 100 mg oral administration can meet with the clinical requirement in most infections; PK/PD value of cefpodoxime proxetil against staphylococci is lower than expectancy and 250 mg cefaclor 3 times daily is not enough to the treatment of common community acquired infections, the regimens of cefpodoxime proxetil and cefclor should be furtherly optimized.
Cefepime Clinical Pharmacokinetics

Mark P. Okamoto,Randall K. Nakahiro,Alfred Chin,Annet Bedikian

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00003088-199325020-00002

1993-08-01

Clinical Pharmacokinetics

Abstract:Cefepime is a new parenteral cephalosporin with antimicrobial activity similar to third-generation cephalosporins. It acts against the Enterobacteriaceae family, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, but maintains Gram-positive activity similar to that of first- or second-generation cephalosporins. Cefepime has in vitro activity against many bacterial isolates resistant to ceftazidime and cefotaxime, is stable against chromosomally mediated β-lactamases, demonstrates lower affinity for these enzymes and shows a high resistance to enzymatic hydrolysis. Clinical uses thus far include treatment of lower respiratory tract, intra-abdominal and urinary tract infections, skin and soft tissue infections and for prophylaxis in biliary tract and prostate surgery.Pharmacokinetic studies indicate that cefepime exhibits linear pharmacokinetic behaviour. Pharmacokinetic variables are not significantly different between single- and multiple-dose administration, indicating a lack of drug accumulation in patients with normal renal function. Cefepime is not highly bound to plasma proteins, with binding values of approximately 16 to 19%. The drug is widely distributed in various biological tissues and fluids. The primary route of elimination is from the kidneys, with over 80% of the drug recovered in the urine as unchanged drug in patients with normal renal function. Total drug clearance and renal clearance are similar to creatinine clearance, and glomerular filtration is thought to be the primary mechanism of renal excretion. The elimination half-life is approximately 2 to 2.5h in patients. Cefepime is removed by haemodialysis (over 3h) and peritoneal dialysis (over 72h) to an appreciable extent, with 40 to 68% and 26% of the drug removed, respectively. Overall, cefepime is well tolerated by patients and no significant drug interactions have been reported to date.

pharmacology & pharmacy
Properties of a classical charged harmonic oscillator accelerated through classical electromagnetic zero-point radiation.

D. Cole

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PHYSREVD.31.1972

1985-04-15

Abstract:
Ceftriaxone Versus Cefazolin Susceptibility as a Surrogate Marker for Cefpodoxime Susceptibility in Enterobacterales

Kaitlyn V Lambert,Ryan Demkowicz,Amanda Murray,Catessa Howard,Douglas Slain

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofae377

2024-06-28

Open Forum Infectious Diseases

Abstract:Abstract The Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute stated that cefpodoxime susceptibility among Enterobacterales can be inferred from cefazolin, but this may overcall cefpodoxime resistance. We report a categorical agreement rate of 64% for cefazolin and 97% for ceftriaxone with cefpodoxime (P = .0001). Ceftriaxone appears to be a more useful cefpodoxime surrogate.

immunology,infectious diseases,microbiology
Cefiderocol Versus Best Available Therapy in the Treatment of Critically Ill Patients with Severe Infections Due to Resistant Gram-Negative Bacteria: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Carlos Risco-Risco,Cesar Henriquez-Camacho,Marta Rueda Herrera,Jose Barberan,David Andaluz Ojeda

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics13111048

2024-11-06

Antibiotics

Abstract:Background: This study aims to assess the effectiveness and safety of cefiderocol in treating severe infections caused by multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria (MDR-GNB) in critically ill patients, particularly those in intensive care units (ICUs). Methods: A meta-analysis of studies, including randomized clinical trials and observational studies in adult patients, was performed. Studies with at least 50% of critically ill patients were included. Studies with small sample size or without comparison groups were excluded. Sources included PubMed, Scopus, or Google Scholar, up to 14 August 2024. Risk of bias was assessed according to the Cochrane tool. The main outcome examined was 30-day mortality, while secondary outcomes assessed included clinical cure rates and adverse effects. Results were expressed with odds ratios. No funding was received for this study. It was registered in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) with reference CRD42024563041. Results: eight studies, with 1339 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Cefiderocol treatment was associated with a lower 30-day mortality rate than other available therapies (pooled OR 0.47; 95% CI: 0.23–0.97, p = 0.04), particularly in cases of carbapenem-resistant A. baumannii infections (pooled OR 0.29; 95% CI: 0.14–0.60, p < 0.001). Although there was a non-significant trend toward higher clinical cure rates in the cefiderocol group (OR 1.59; 95% CI: 0.96–2.62, p = 0.07), the drug demonstrated at least non-inferiority when compared to other treatment options. Study limitations included moderate heterogeneity between studies, and a high risk of bias in non-RCT studies. (Five cohort studies were included). Another limitation is that five of the eight studies compared cefiderocol versus colistine, an antibiotic with known toxicity. Conclusions: The findings suggest that cefiderocol is a promising therapeutic option for managing severe MDR-GNB infections in critically ill patients, offering a potential global benefit on mortality and at least non-inferiority in the cure rate when compared with other therapies.

pharmacology & pharmacy,infectious diseases
Impact of Ceftolozane–Tazobactam vs. Best Alternative Therapy on Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Multidrug-Resistant and Extensively Drug-Resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa Lower Respiratory Tract Infections

Dana J. Holger,Nicholas S. Rebold,Sara Alosaimy,Taylor Morrisette,Abdalhamid Lagnf,Ana Christine Belza,Ashlan J. Kunz Coyne,Amer El Ghali,Michael P. Veve,Michael J. Rybak

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40121-022-00687-9

2022-09-02

Infectious Diseases and Therapy

Abstract:Infections caused by multidrug-resistant (MDR), extensively drug-resistant (XDR), and difficult-to-treat (DTR) Pseudomonas aeruginosa are increasingly challenging to combat. Ceftolozane–tazobactam (C/T) is a novel β-lactam–β-lactamase inhibitor combination now commonly used to treat MDR and XDR P. aeruginosa . Lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs) remain the most common source of infection caused by MDR/XDR P. aeruginosa . Comparative effectiveness studies to date have been limited by the type of comparator agents (i.e., aminoglycosides and polymyxins) and the inclusion of multiple infection sources (i.e., urinary tract, abdominal, skin and soft tissue, etc.).

infectious diseases
Cefdinir vs cephalexin for the treatment of urinary tract infections: A retrospective evaluation

Andie Lloyd,Jonathan Grey,Christopher Fronczek,Heather Durkin,Kerry Marr

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ajhp/zxae026

2024-02-13

American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy

Abstract:Abstract Purpose Cefdinir and cephalexin are cephalosporin antibiotics commonly used in the treatment of urinary tract infections (UTIs). Their efficacy depends on achieving sufficient time with concentrations exceeding the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC). Despite being frequently prescribed for UTIs, cefdinir has markedly lower urine penetration compared to cephalexin. It is possible that differences in pharmacokinetics could result in dissimilar efficacy between these agents; however, comparative studies of cephalosporins in UTIs are lacking. Methods This was a retrospective comparative study of patients discharged from emergency departments within a community health system with a diagnosis of acute cystitis who were prescribed cefdinir or cephalexin. Treatment failure rates at 7 and 14 days were compared between the 2 agents using a χ2 or Fisher’s exact test, as appropriate. Results There were no differences in overall treatment failure between the cefdinir and cephalexin groups. Treatment failure at 7 days occurred in 11.6% (n = 14) of patients in the cefdinir group and 8.3% (n = 10) of patients in the cephalexin group (P = 0.389). Treatment failure at 14 days was higher for cefdinir at 20.7% (n = 25) than for cephalexin at 11.8% (n = 14), but this difference was not statistically significant (P = 0.053). There were no differences in the rate of treatment failure in subgroup analyses of uncomplicated or complicated UTIs. Conclusion The results of this study suggest that cefdinir and cephalexin have comparable efficacy for the treatment of lower UTIs. While there was a numerically higher rate of treatment failure with cefdinir, there were no significant differences in treatment failure between the agents.

pharmacology & pharmacy
The Assessment and Efficiency of Cefixime in Upper Respiratory Tract Infections: Insights and Perspectives

Mohammad K Shafi,Azher A Shah,Muhammad A Khan,Sarwat Faisal,Sarmad Iqbal

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.64539

2024-07-14

Cureus

Abstract:Upper respiratory tract infections (URTIs) are common in patients of the pediatric age group and often lead to significant morbidity and mortality. Antibiotics such as cefixime have contributed to the management of URTIs, particularly when bacterial etiology is suspected. Several studies have evaluated the effectiveness of cefixime in pediatric URTIs, showing promising results in alleviating symptoms and reducing the duration of illness. Cefixime, a third-generation cephalosporin, exhibits broad-spectrum activity against common pathogens implicated in URTIs, including Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae, and Moraxella catarrhalis, which are resistant to hydrolysis by several β-lactamases. Due to its unique three-hour elimination half-life, cefixime allows for twice-daily or, in most cases, once-daily dosage. As a third-generation cephalosporin, cefixime effectively targets the common bacterial pathogens associated with these infections. Its notable efficacy is coupled with a favorable safety profile, making it a preferred choice for pediatricians and family physicians. The safety profiles of cefixime in children have been extensively studied with generally favorable outcomes. Adverse events are typically mild and infrequent, with gastrointestinal disturbances being most commonly reported. Notably, cefixime has a low propensity to induce bacterial resistance, making it a valuable option in the era of increasing antibiotic resistance. Cefixime may serve as a substitute for penicillin and first-generation cephalosporins in cases of acute upper and lower respiratory tract infections, acute otitis media, and acute uncomplicated urinary tract infections. This review aimed to provide a comprehensive outline of the use of cefixime in the treatment of URTIs in the pediatric population, focusing on its efficacy, safety, and overall clinical applications.
Cefpodoxime Proxetil: A New, Broad-Spectrum, Oral Cephalosporin

E C Chocas,C M Paap,P J Godley,Elaine C. Chocas,Christopher M. Paap,Paul J. Godley

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/106002809302701111

IF: 3.4628

1993-11-01

Annals of Pharmacotherapy

Abstract:OBJECTIVE: To discuss the chemistry, pharmacokinetics, spectrum of activity, clinical trials, adverse effects, drug interactions, and dosage guidelines of cefpodoxime proxetil. DATA SOURCES: Literature was identified through a MEDLINE search from 1988 to the present and from review of bibliographies in that literature. STUDY SELECTION: Data were limited to comparative trials published in the English literature. Although many studies were conducted in Japan, the results often were available only in Japanese or partly in English. As these studies could not be completely evaluated, they are not included in this review. DATA SYNTHESIS: Cefpodoxime exhibits good activity against many gram-positive and gram-negative organisms. In clinical trials, cefpodoxime was similar in both clinical and bacteriologic efficacy to amoxicillin, cefaclor, amoxicillin/clavulanate, and penicillin in the treatment of respiratory and urinary tract infections. It also appeared effective in the treatment of skin and soft tissue infections, although no comparative trials have been performed. Cefpodoxime is well tolerated by children and is effective in the treatment of otitis media and pharyngitis. It has a similar adverse effect profile to that of other penicillins and cephalosporins, with gastrointestinal effects being most common. CONCLUSIONS: Cefpodoxime demonstrates good in vitro activity against pathogens frequently associated with respiratory tract, urinary tract, and skin and tissue infections. It has not demonstrated greater efficacy than the other antibiotics to which it has been compared. The available published clinical trials are fraught with methodologic, statistical, and evaluative flaws. Thus, further trials comparing cefpodoxime with established treatments, as well as the newer cephalosporins, are needed before its place in therapy can be established.

pharmacology & pharmacy
Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Cefepime

Gwendolyn M. Pais,Jack Chang,Erin F. Barreto,Gideon Stitt,Kevin J. Downes,Mohammad H. Alshaer,Emily Lesnicki,Vaidehi Panchal,Maria Bruzzone,Argyle V. Bumanglag,Sara N. Burke,Marc H. Scheetz

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40262-022-01137-y

2022-06-30

Clinical Pharmacokinetics

Abstract:Cefepime is a broad-spectrum fourth-generation cephalosporin with activity against Gram-positive and Gram-negative pathogens. It is generally administered as an infusion over 30–60 min or as a prolonged infusion with infusion times from 3 h to continuous administration. Cefepime is widely distributed in biological fluids and tissues with an average volume of distribution of ~ 0.2 L/kg in healthy adults with normal renal function. Protein binding is relatively low (20%), and elimination is mainly renal. About 85% of the dose is excreted unchanged in the urine, with an elimination half-life of 2–2.3 h. The pharmacokinetics of cefepime is altered under certain pathophysiological conditions, resulting in high inter-individual variability in cefepime volume of distribution and clearance, which poses challenges for population dosing approaches. Consequently, therapeutic drug monitoring of cefepime may be beneficial in certain patients including those who are critically ill, have life-threatening infections, or are infected with more resistant pathogens. Cefepime is generally safe and efficacious, with a goal exposure target of 70% time of the free drug concentration over the minimum inhibitory concentration for clinical efficacy. In recent years, reports of neurotoxicity have increased, specifically in patients with impaired renal function. This review summarizes the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and toxicodynamics of cefepime contemporarily in the setting of increasing cefepime exposures. We explore the potential benefits of extended or continuous infusions and therapeutic drug monitoring in special populations.

pharmacology & pharmacy
Consent: adult, refusal of consent, capacity: Re M.B. (Medical Treatment)

I. Kennedy

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/MEDLAW/5.3.317

1997-09-21

Medical Law Review

Abstract:
Ceftobiprole mono-therapy versus combination or non-combination regimen of standard antibiotics for the treatment of complicated infections: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Wissal Jame,Bilgen Basgut,Abdikarim Abdi

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2024.116263

IF: 2.983

2024-03-18

Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease

Abstract:Objective Various bacteria produce complicated infections that are difficult to treat worldwide. Ceftobiprole is effective against resistant Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria. Methods This review assessed effectiveness and safety of ceftobiprole monotherapy for severe infections. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing clinical cure, microbiological cure, and safety of ceftobiprole alone to a combination or non-combination antibiotic regimen was conducted. Until December 20, 2022, we searched a major databases. Results This study includes 4168 patients from six trials. Ceftobiprole and comparator-received patients had similar clinical responses for all patient population. Also, the eradication rate of all organisms and specific pathogenic bacteria in microbiologically examined patients was comparable between the groups. Ceftobiprole induced more gastrointestinal side events than comparable drugs, mostly nausea [OR 1.91 (1.26-2.90), p =<0.01 ]. While skin-related adverse events were significantly associated with comparator antibiotics [6 trials, 4062 patients; OR 0.77 (0.60-0.99), p =0.03]. Conclusion: Ceftobiprole monotherapy is effective and safe for severe infections caused by Gram-positive or Gram-negative bacteria.

infectious diseases,microbiology

IgM PRODUCTION IN HYPOGAMMAGLOBULINAEMIC PATIENTS DURING NON-A, NON-B HEPATITIS

Bacitracin Enhances Ceftriaxone Susceptibility of the High-Level Ceftriaxone-Resistant Gonococcal FC428 Clone

Efficacy and Safety of Ceftazidime–avibactam Versus Polymyxins in the Treatment of Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae Infection: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Comparison of Cefprozil, Cefpodoxime Proxetil, Loracarbef, Cefixime, and Ceftibuten

Ceftriaxone versus Cefepime or Carbapenems for Definitive Treatment of Low-Risk AmpC-Harboring Enterobacterales Bloodstream Infections in Hospitalized Adults: a Retrospective Cohort Study

Comparison of Cefazolin and Ceftriaxone Enterobacterales Susceptibilities for Inpatient Treatment of Urinary Tract Infections and Risk of Hospital-onset Clostridioides difficile Infection

An In Vitro Susceptibility Study of Cefotaxime-Sulbactam on Clinical Bacterial Isolates From Various Regions in India: A Comparison With Ceftriaxone-Sulbactam

A Prospective Randomized Study Comparing Ceftolozane/Tazobactam to Standard of Care in the Management of Neutropenia and Fever in Patients with Hematological Malignancies.

A Review on the Use of Third-Generation Cephalosporins on Gram-Positive and Gram-Negative Bacteria Based on its Spectrum of Activity

[Comparison of Pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of Cefdinir, Cefpodoxime Proxetil and Cefaclor Against Common Bacteria of Community Acquired Infections].

Cefepime Clinical Pharmacokinetics

Properties of a classical charged harmonic oscillator accelerated through classical electromagnetic zero-point radiation.

Ceftriaxone Versus Cefazolin Susceptibility as a Surrogate Marker for Cefpodoxime Susceptibility in Enterobacterales

Cefiderocol Versus Best Available Therapy in the Treatment of Critically Ill Patients with Severe Infections Due to Resistant Gram-Negative Bacteria: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Impact of Ceftolozane–Tazobactam vs. Best Alternative Therapy on Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Multidrug-Resistant and Extensively Drug-Resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa Lower Respiratory Tract Infections

Cefdinir vs cephalexin for the treatment of urinary tract infections: A retrospective evaluation

The Assessment and Efficiency of Cefixime in Upper Respiratory Tract Infections: Insights and Perspectives

Cefpodoxime Proxetil: A New, Broad-Spectrum, Oral Cephalosporin

Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Cefepime

Consent: adult, refusal of consent, capacity: Re M.B. (Medical Treatment)

Ceftobiprole mono-therapy versus combination or non-combination regimen of standard antibiotics for the treatment of complicated infections: A systematic review and meta-analysis.