Treatment of critically ill patients with cefiderocol for infections caused by multidrug-resistant pathogens: review of the evidence.

Appropriate antibiotic treatment for critically ill patients with serious Gram-negative infections in the intensive care unit is crucial to minimize morbidity and mortality. Several new antibiotics have shown in vitro activity against carbapenem-resistant Enterobacterales (CRE) and difficult-to-treat resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Cefiderocol is the first approved siderophore beta-lactam antibiotic with potent activity against multidrug-resistant, carbapenem-resistant, difficult-to-treat or extensively drug-resistant Gram-negative pathogens, which have limited treatment options. The spectrum of activity of cefiderocol includes drug-resistant strains of Acinetobacter baumannii, P. aeruginosa, Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, Achromobacter spp. and Burkholderia spp. and CRE that produce serine- and/or metallo-carbapenemases. Phase 1 studies established that cefiderocol achieves adequate concentration in the epithelial lining fluid in the lung and requires dosing adjustment for renal function, including patients with augmented renal clearance and continuous renal-replacement therapy (CRRT); no clinically significant drug-drug interactions are expected. The non-inferiority of cefiderocol versus high-dose, extended-infusion meropenem in all-cause mortality (ACM) rates at day 14 was demonstrated in the randomized, double-blind APEKS-NP Phase 3 clinical study in patients with nosocomial pneumonia caused by suspected or confirmed Gram-negative bacteria. Furthermore, the efficacy of cefiderocol was investigated in the randomized, open-label, pathogen-focused, descriptive CREDIBLE-CR Phase 3 clinical study in its target patient population with serious carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative infections, including hospitalized patients with nosocomial pneumonia, bloodstream infection/sepsis, or complicated urinary tract infections. However, a numerically greater ACM rate with cefiderocol compared with BAT led to the inclusion of a warning in US and European prescribing information. Cefiderocol susceptibility results obtained with commercial tests should be carefully evaluated due to current issues regarding their accuracy and reliability. Since its approval, real-world evidence in patients with multidrug-resistant and carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative bacterial infections suggests that cefiderocol can be efficacious in certain critically ill patient groups, such as those requiring mechanical ventilation for COVID-19 pneumonia with subsequently acquired Gram-negative bacterial superinfection, and patients with CRRT and/or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. In this article, we review the microbiological spectrum, pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics, efficacy and safety profiles and real-world evidence for cefiderocol, and look at future considerations for its role in the treatment of critically ill patients with challenging Gram-negative bacterial infections.

A Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator-Derived Predictive Model for Postoperative Respiratory Failure in a Heterogeneous Adult Elective Surgery Patient Population.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative respiratory failure (PRF) is associated with increased hospital charges and worse patient outcomes. Reliable prediction models can help to guide postoperative planning to optimize care, to guide resource allocation, and to foster shared decision-making with patients. RESEARCH QUESTION: Can a predictive model be developed to accurately identify patients at high risk of PRF? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: In this single-site proof-of-concept study, we used structured query language to extract, transform, and load electronic health record data from 23,999 consecutive adult patients admitted for elective surgery (2014-2021). Our primary outcome was PRF, defined as mechanical ventilation after surgery of > 48 h. Predictors of interest included demographics, comorbidities, and intraoperative factors. We used logistic regression to build a predictive model and the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator procedure to select variables and to estimate model coefficients. We evaluated model performance using optimism-corrected area under the receiver operating curve and area under the precision-recall curve and calculated sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and Brier scores. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-five patients (0.94%) demonstrated PRF. The 18-variable predictive model included: operations on the cardiovascular, nervous, digestive, urinary, or musculoskeletal system; surgical specialty orthopedic (nonspine); Medicare or Medicaid (as the primary payer); race unknown; American Society of Anesthesiologists class ≥ III; BMI of 30 to 34.9 kg/m2; anesthesia duration (per hour); net fluid at end of the operation (per liter); median intraoperative FIO2, end title CO2, heart rate, and tidal volume; and intraoperative vasopressor medications. The optimism-corrected area under the receiver operating curve was 0.835 (95% CI,0.808-0.862) and the area under the precision-recall curve was 0.156 (95% CI, 0.105-0.203). INTERPRETATION: This single-center proof-of-concept study demonstrated that a structured query language extract, transform, and load process, based on readily available patient and intraoperative variables, can be used to develop a prediction model for PRF. This PRF prediction model is scalable for multicenter research. Clinical applications include decision support to guide postoperative level of care admission and treatment decisions.

The pharmacotherapeutic options in patients with catecholamine-resistant vasodilatory shock.

INTRODUCTION: Septic and vasoplegic shock are common types of vasodilatory shock (VS) with high mortality. After fluid resuscitation and the use of catecholamine-mediated vasopressors (CMV), vasopressin, angiotensin II, methylene blue (MB), and hydroxocobalamin can be added to maintain blood pressure. AREAS COVERED: VS treatment utilizes a phased approach with secondary vasopressors added to vasopressor agents to maintain an acceptable mean arterial pressure (MAP). This review covers additional vasopressors and adjunctive therapies used when fluid and catecholamine-mediated vasopressors fail to maintain target MAP. EXPERT OPINION: Evidence supporting additional vasopressor agents in catecholamine-resistant VS is limited to case reports, series, and a few randomized control trials (RCTs) to guide recommendations. Vasopressin is the most common agent added next when MAPs are not adequately supported with CMV. VS patients failing fluids and vasopressors with cardiomyopathy may have cardiotonic agents such as dobutamine or milrinone added before or after vasopressin. Angiotensin II, another class of vasopressor, is used in VS to maintain adequate MAP. MB and/or hydroxocobalamin, vitamin C, thiamine, and corticosteroids are adjunctive therapies used in refractory VS. More RCTs are needed to confirm the utility of these drugs, at what doses, which combinations and in what order they should be given.

Outcomes and risk factors for delayed-onset postoperative respiratory failure: a multi-center case-control study by the University of California Critical Care Research Collaborative (UC3RC).

BACKGROUND: Few interventions are known to reduce the incidence of respiratory failure that occurs following elective surgery (postoperative respiratory failure; PRF). We previously reported risk factors associated with PRF that occurs within the first 5 days after elective surgery (early PRF; E-PRF); however, PRF that occurs six or more days after elective surgery (late PRF; L-PRF) likely represents a different entity. We hypothesized that L-PRF would be associated with worse outcomes and different risk factors than E-PRF. METHODS: This was a retrospective matched case-control study of 59,073 consecutive adult patients admitted for elective non-cardiac and non-pulmonary surgical procedures at one of five University of California academic medical centers between October 2012 and September 2015. We identified patients with L-PRF, confirmed by surgeon and intensivist subject matter expert review, and matched them 1:1 to patients who did not develop PRF (No-PRF) based on hospital, age, and surgical procedure. We then analyzed risk factors and outcomes associated with L-PRF compared to E-PRF and No-PRF. RESULTS: Among 95 patients with L-PRF, 50.5% were female, 71.6% white, 27.4% Hispanic, and 53.7% Medicare recipients; the median age was 63 years (IQR 56, 70). Compared to 95 matched patients with No-PRF and 319 patients who developed E-PRF, L-PRF was associated with higher morbidity and mortality, longer hospital and intensive care unit length of stay, and increased costs. Compared to No-PRF, factors associated with L-PRF included: preexisiting neurologic disease (OR 4.36, 95% CI 1.81-10.46), anesthesia duration per hour (OR 1.22, 95% CI 1.04-1.44), and maximum intraoperative peak inspiratory pressure per cm H20 (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.06-1.22). CONCLUSIONS: We identified that pre-existing neurologic disease, longer duration of anesthesia, and greater maximum intraoperative peak inspiratory pressures were associated with respiratory failure that developed six or more days after elective surgery in adult patients (L-PRF). Interventions targeting these factors may be worthy of future evaluation.

A plain language summary of how lefamulin alone can be used to treat pneumonia caught outside of the hospital due to common bacterial causes, including drug-resistant bacteria.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: Bacterial pneumonia is an infection of the lung caused by bacteria that is potentially deadly, costly, and affects millions of people worldwide every year. Treatment is becoming more challenging-many current treatments no longer work well because some strains of bacteria that cause pneumonia have become resistant to current antibiotics. Many of the antibiotics that do still work have undesirable side effects. Therefore, new antibiotics that work differently are needed to treat bacterial pneumonia. Lefamulin (brand name, Xenleta®) is an antibiotic that was approved to treat bacterial pneumonia caught outside a hospital (also called community-acquired bacterial pneumonia, or CABP) based on results of two clinical studies. In both studies, participants started treatment with lefamulin before the type of bacteria causing the infection was known. Lefamulin was well tolerated and worked well in 5 to 7 days to kill the bacteria causing the infection and to improve symptoms in almost all participants with CABP. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: After the studies were completed, the researchers looked back at what kinds of bacteria were identified from the study participants. Lefamulin worked well to kill bacteria and to improve CABP symptoms for most kinds of infecting bacteria, including bacteria resistant to many current antibiotics. WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?: These results suggest that lefamulin, by itself, provides a much-needed treatment option for CABP that covers most of the key bacteria causing this infection.

Real-world impact of vaccination on coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) incidence in healthcare personnel at an academic medical center.

OBJECTIVE: Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination effectiveness in healthcare personnel (HCP) has been established. However, questions remain regarding its performance in high-risk healthcare occupations and work locations. We describe the effect of a COVID-19 HCP vaccination campaign on SARS-CoV-2 infection by timing of vaccination, job type, and work location. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of COVID-19 vaccination acceptance, incidence of postvaccination COVID-19, hospitalization, and mortality among 16,156 faculty, students, and staff at a large academic medical center. Data were collected 8 weeks prior to the start of phase 1a vaccination of frontline employees and ended 11 weeks after campaign onset. RESULTS: The COVID-19 incidence rate among HCP at our institution decreased from 3.2% during the 8 weeks prior to the start of vaccinations to 0.38% by 4 weeks after campaign initiation. COVID-19 risk was reduced among individuals who received a single vaccination (hazard ratio [HR], 0.52; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.40-0.68; P < .0001) and was further reduced with 2 doses of vaccine (HR, 0.17; 95% CI, 0.09-0.32; P < .0001). By 2 weeks after the second dose, the observed case positivity rate was 0.04%. Among phase 1a HCP, we observed a lower risk of COVID-19 among physicians and a trend toward higher risk for respiratory therapists independent of vaccination status. Rates of infection were similar in a subgroup of nurses when examined by work location. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings show the real-world effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccination in HCP. Despite these encouraging results, unvaccinated HCP remain at an elevated risk of infection, highlighting the need for targeted outreach to combat vaccine hesitancy.

Pooled microbiological findings and efficacy outcomes by pathogen in adults with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia from the Lefamulin Evaluation Against Pneumonia (LEAP) 1 and LEAP 2 phase 3 trials of lefamulin versus moxifloxacin.

OBJECTIVES: Lefamulin, a pleuromutilin antibiotic approved for community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP), was evaluated for microbiological efficacy in a prespecified pooled analysis of LEAP 1 and 2 phase 3 clinical trial data in patients with CABP. METHODS: In LEAP 1, adults (PORT risk class III‒V) received intravenous (IV) lefamulin 150 mg every 12 h (q12h) for 5‒7 days or moxifloxacin 400 mg every 24 h (q24h) for 7 days, with optional IV-to-oral switch. In LEAP 2, adults (PORT II‒IV) received oral lefamulin 600 mg q12h for 5 days or moxifloxacin 400 mg q24h for 7 days. Primary outcomes were early clinical response (ECR) at 96 ± 24 h after treatment start and investigator assessment of clinical response (IACR) 5‒10 days after the last dose. Secondary outcomes included ECR and IACR in patients with a baseline CABP pathogen (detected via culture, urinary antigen testing, serology and/or real-time PCR). RESULTS: Baseline CABP pathogens were detected in 709/1289 patients (55.0%; microbiological intention-to-treat population). The most frequently identified pathogens were Streptococcus pneumoniae (61.9% of patients) and Haemophilus influenzae (29.9%); 25.1% had atypical pathogens and 33.1% had polymicrobial infections. Pathogens were identified most frequently by PCR from sputum, followed by culture from respiratory specimens. In patients with baseline CABP pathogens, ECR rates were 89.3% (lefamulin) and 93.0% (moxifloxacin); IACR success rates were 83.2% and 86.7%, respectively. Results were consistent across CABP pathogens, including drug-resistant isolates and polymicrobial infections. CONCLUSION: Lefamulin is a valuable IV and oral monotherapy option for empirical and directed CABP treatment in adults.

Lefamulin in Patients with Community-Acquired Bacterial Pneumonia Caused by Atypical Respiratory Pathogens: Pooled Results from Two Phase 3 Trials.

Lefamulin was the first systemic pleuromutilin antibiotic approved for intravenous and oral use in adults with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia based on two phase 3 trials (Lefamulin Evaluation Against Pneumonia [LEAP]-1 and LEAP-2). This pooled analysis evaluated lefamulin efficacy and safety in adults with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia caused by atypical pathogens (Mycoplasma pneumoniae, Legionella pneumophila, and Chlamydia pneumoniae). In LEAP-1, participants received intravenous lefamulin 150 mg every 12 h for 5-7 days or moxifloxacin 400 mg every 24 h for 7 days, with optional intravenous-to-oral switch. In LEAP-2, participants received oral lefamulin 600 mg every 12 h for 5 days or moxifloxacin 400 mg every 24 h for 7 days. Primary outcomes were early clinical response at 96 ± 24 h after first dose and investigator assessment of clinical response at test of cure (5-10 days after last dose). Atypical pathogens were identified in 25.0% (91/364) of lefamulin-treated patients and 25.2% (87/345) of moxifloxacin-treated patients; most were identified by ≥1 standard diagnostic modality (M. pneumoniae 71.2% [52/73]; L. pneumophila 96.9% [63/65]; C. pneumoniae 79.3% [46/58]); the most common standard diagnostic modality was serology. In terms of disease severity, more than 90% of patients had CURB-65 (confusion of new onset, blood urea nitrogen > 19 mg/dL, respiratory rate ≥ 30 breaths/min, blood pressure <90 mm Hg systolic or ≤60 mm Hg diastolic, and age ≥ 65 years) scores of 0-2; approximately 50% of patients had PORT (Pneumonia Outcomes Research Team) risk class of III, and the remaining patients were more likely to have PORT risk class of II or IV versus V. In patients with atypical pathogens, early clinical response (lefamulin 84.4-96.6%; moxifloxacin 90.3-96.8%) and investigator assessment of clinical response at test of cure (lefamulin 74.1-89.7%; moxifloxacin 74.2-97.1%) were high and similar between arms. Treatment-emergent adverse event rates were similar in the lefamulin (34.1% [31/91]) and moxifloxacin (32.2% [28/87]) groups. Limitations to this analysis include its post hoc nature, the small numbers of patients infected with atypical pathogens, the possibility of PCR-based diagnostic methods to identify non-etiologically relevant pathogens, and the possibility that these findings may not be generalizable to all patients. Lefamulin as short-course empiric monotherapy, including 5-day oral therapy, was well tolerated in adults with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia and demonstrated high clinical response rates against atypical pathogens.

SARS-CoV-2 detection and genomic sequencing from hospital surface samples collected at UC Davis.

RATIONALE: There is little doubt that aerosols play a major role in the transmission of SARS-CoV-2. The significance of the presence and infectivity of this virus on environmental surfaces, especially in a hospital setting, remains less clear. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to analyze surface swabs for SARS-CoV-2 RNA and infectivity, and to determine their suitability for sequence analysis. METHODS: Samples were collected during two waves of COVID-19 at the University of California, Davis Medical Center, in COVID-19 patient serving and staff congregation areas. qRT-PCR positive samples were investigated in Vero cell cultures for cytopathic effects and phylogenetically assessed by whole genome sequencing. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Improved cleaning and patient management practices between April and August 2020 were associated with a substantial reduction of SARS-CoV-2 qRT-PCR positivity (from 11% to 2%) in hospital surface samples. Even though we recovered near-complete genome sequences in some, none of the positive samples (11 of 224 total) caused cytopathic effects in cultured cells suggesting this nucleic acid was either not associated with intact virions, or they were present in insufficient numbers for infectivity. Phylogenetic analysis suggested that the SARS-CoV-2 genomes of the positive samples were derived from hospitalized patients. Genomic sequences isolated from qRT-PCR negative samples indicate a superior sensitivity of viral detection by sequencing. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the low likelihood that SARS-CoV-2 contamination on hospital surfaces contains infectious virus, disputing the importance of fomites in COVID-19 transmission. Ours is the first report on recovering near-complete SARS-CoV-2 genome sequences directly from environmental surface swabs.

Lefamulin efficacy and safety in a pooled phase 3 clinical trial population with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia and common clinical comorbidities.

BACKGROUND: Lefamulin, a first-in-class pleuromutilin antibiotic approved for intravenous and oral use in adults with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP), was noninferior to moxifloxacin in the Lefamulin Evaluation Against Pneumonia (LEAP) 1 intravenous-to-oral switch study and the LEAP 2 oral-only study. Using pooled LEAP 1/2 data, we examined lefamulin efficacy/safety overall and within subgroups of patients presenting with comorbidities typical in CABP management. METHODS: In LEAP 1, adults with CABP were randomized to receive intravenous lefamulin (150 mg every 12 h) for 5‒7 days or moxifloxacin (400 mg every 24 h) for 7 days, with optional intravenous-to-oral switch if predefined improvement criteria were met. In LEAP 2, adults with CABP were randomized to receive oral lefamulin (600 mg every 12 h) for 5 days or moxifloxacin (400 mg every 24 h) for 7 days. Both studies assessed early clinical response (ECR) at 96 ± 24 h after first study drug dose and investigator assessment of clinical response (IACR) at test-of-cure (5‒10 days after last dose). Pooled analyses of the overall population used a 10% noninferiority margin. RESULTS: Lefamulin (n = 646) was noninferior to moxifloxacin (n = 643) for ECR (89.3% vs 90.5%, respectively; difference - 1.1%; 95% CI - 4.4 to 2.2); IACR success rates at test-of-cure were similarly high (≥ 85.0%). High efficacy with both lefamulin and moxifloxacin was also demonstrated across all well-represented patient subgroups, including those with advanced age, diabetes mellitus, a history of cardiovascular diseases (e.g., hypertension, congestive heart failure, or arrhythmia) or chronic lung diseases (e.g., asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease), elevated liver enzymes, or mild-to-moderate renal dysfunction. No new safety signals were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Lefamulin may provide a valuable intravenous/oral monotherapy alternative to fluoroquinolones or macrolides for empiric treatment of patients with CABP, including cases of patients at risk for poor outcomes due to age or various comorbidities. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov LEAP 1 (NCT02559310; Registration Date: 24/09/2015) and LEAP 2 (NCT02813694; Registration Date: 27/06/2016).

Oral 5-Day Lefamulin for Outpatient Management of Community-Acquired Bacterial Pneumonia: Post-hoc Analysis of the Lefamulin Evaluation Against Pneumonia (LEAP) 2 Trial.

BACKGROUND: Safe and effective oral antibiotics are needed for outpatient management of moderate to severe community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP). OBJECTIVE: We describe a post-hoc analysis of adults with CABP managed as outpatients from the Lefamulin Evaluation Against Pneumonia (LEAP) 2 double-blind, noninferiority, phase 3 clinical trial. METHODS: LEAP 2 compared the efficacy and safety of oral lefamulin 600 mg every 12 h (5 days) vs. oral moxifloxacin 400 mg every 24 h (7 days) in adults (inpatients and outpatients) with Pneumonia Outcomes Research Team (PORT) risk classes II‒IV. RESULTS: Overall, 41% (151 of 368) of patients receiving lefamulin and 43% (159 of 368) of patients receiving moxifloxacin started treatment as outpatients-44% and 40%, respectively, were PORT risk class III/IV, and 21% in both groups had CURB-65 scores of 2‒3. Early clinical response (at 96 ± 24 h) and investigator assessment of clinical response success rates at test of cure (5‒10 days after last study drug dose) were high and similar in both groups among all (lefamulin, 91% vs. moxifloxacin, 89‒90%), PORT risk class III/IV (89‒91% vs. 88‒91%), and CURB-65 score 2‒3 (87‒90% vs. 82‒88%) outpatients. Few outpatients (lefamulin, 2.6%; moxifloxacin, 2.5%) discontinued the study drug because of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). No outpatient in the lefamulin group was hospitalized for a TEAE, compared with 5 patients (3%), including two deaths, in the moxifloxacin group. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that 5 days of oral lefamulin can be given in lieu of fluoroquinolones for outpatient treatment of adults with CABP and PORT risk class III/IV or CURB-65 scores of 2‒3.

Global travel and Gram-negative bacterial resistance; implications on clinical management.

INTRODUCTION: Antimicrobial resistance (AR) is escalating worldwide with the potential for dire consequences, global travel contributes to the dissemination of resistant pathogens from one region to another. The World Health Organization identified the rapid emergence and prevalence of carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative species, including Enterobacterales, Acinetobacter baumannii, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, as an international crisis due to treatment challenges, poor health outcomes, increased mortality, and high economic costs caused by these pathogens. AREAS COVERED: This review describes key carbapenem-resistant (CR) Gram-negative species, changes in current global and regional trends, AR surveillance and reporting, and identifies drivers of change, specifically travel. Finally, we review clinical implications and challenges of treating CR infections which exist due to widespread dissemination of CR bacteria. A literature search was conducted using PubMed, Google Scholar, Ebsco, and ProQuest (from 2000 to December 2019). EXPERT OPINION: The level of global travel is increasing, and antimicrobial resistance continues to disseminate worldwide. Healthcare providers risk assessment for AR needs to consider a patient's recent travel history, including pre-travel and intra-travel antimicrobial prescription, and potential exposure based on geography. Patient education, healthcare provider awareness, and access to data and surveillance resources are critical to inform antimicrobial selection and improve health outcomes.

Investigation of nosocomial SARS-CoV-2 transmission from two patients to healthcare workers identifies close contact but not airborne transmission events.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the pattern of transmission of severe acute respiratory coronavirus virus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) during 2 nosocomial outbreaks of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) with regard to the possibility of airborne transmission. DESIGN: Contact investigations with active case finding were used to assess the pattern of spread from 2 COVID-19 index patients. SETTING: A community hospital and university medical center in the United States, in February and March, 2020, early in the COVID-19 pandemic. PATIENTS: Two index patients and 421 exposed healthcare workers. METHODS: Exposed healthcare workers (HCWs) were identified by analyzing the electronic medical record (EMR) and conducting active case finding in combination with structured interviews. Healthcare coworkers (HCWs) were tested for COVID-19 by obtaining oropharyngeal/nasopharyngeal specimens, and RT-PCR testing was used to detect SARS-CoV-2. RESULTS: Two separate index patients were admitted in February and March 2020, without initial suspicion for COVID-19 and without contact or droplet precautions in place; both patients underwent several aerosol-generating procedures in this context. In total, 421 HCWs were exposed in total, and the results of the case contact investigations identified 8 secondary infections in HCWs. In all 8 cases, the HCWs had close contact with the index patients without sufficient personal protective equipment. Importantly, despite multiple aerosol-generating procedures, there was no evidence of airborne transmission. CONCLUSION: These observations suggest that, at least in a healthcare setting, most SARS-CoV-2 transmission is likely to take place during close contact with infected patients through respiratory droplets, rather than by long-distance airborne transmission.

Community-Acquired Bacterial Pneumonia-Changing Epidemiology, Resistance Patterns, and Newer Antibiotics: Spotlight on Delafloxacin.

Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a major cause of morbidity and mortality both in the USA and globally. As the burden of CAP continues to increase due to several factors, the advances in its diagnosis, prevention, and treatment have taken on even greater interest and importance. The majority of CAP patients are treated empirically, and selection of appropriate antibiotic treatment is increasingly difficult because the epidemiology of CAP is changing, in part due to antimicrobial resistance, and the causative CAP pathogens differ between countries and regions. There is also an increasing prevalence of chronic co-morbid diseases among CAP patients. Treatment of CAP has become challenging because of these factors along with the varying safety profiles and efficacy of well-established antibiotics, as well as limited new therapeutic options. Recently, however, new antibiotics have been approved, which will expand the treatment options for CAP, particularly in those patients with underlying complications. Recently approved delafloxacin, an anionic fluoroquinolone, has a unique structure and distinct chemical characteristics; it demonstrated non-inferiority to moxifloxacin in a phase III clinical trial, but was shown to be superior to moxifloxacin at early clinical response in CAP patients who also have chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or asthma as a co-morbidity, and in CAP patients who may have severe illness. Delafloxacin could offer an additional therapy against resistant isolates and among these difficult-to-treat patients. This review summarizes the development, latest research, and safety profile of the new antibiotic delafloxacin, and its potential future role in the treatment of CAP.

Travel/Tropical Medicine and Pandemic Considerations for the Global Surgeon.

International travel goes hand in hand with medical delivery to underserved communities. The global health care worker can be exposed to a wide range of infectious diseases during their global experiences. A pretravel risk assessment visit and all appropriate vaccinations and education must be performed. Universal practices of water safety, food safety, and insect avoidance will prevent most travel-related infections and complications. Region-specific vaccinations will further reduce illness risk. An understanding of common travel-related illness signs and symptoms is helpful. Emerging pathogens that can cause a pandemic should be understood to avoid health care worker infection and spread.

Oral Lefamulin vs Moxifloxacin for Early Clinical Response Among Adults With Community-Acquired Bacterial Pneumonia: The LEAP 2 Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: New antibacterials are needed to treat community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP) because of growing antibacterial resistance and safety concerns with standard care. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and adverse events of a 5-day oral lefamulin regimen in patients with CABP. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A phase 3, noninferiority randomized clinical trial conducted at 99 sites in 19 countries that included adults aged 18 years or older with a Pneumonia Outcomes Research Team (PORT) risk class of II, III, or IV; radiographically documented pneumonia; acute illness; 3 or more CABP symptoms; and 2 or more vital sign abnormalities. The first patient visit was on August 30, 2016, and patients were followed up for 30 days; the final follow-up visit was on January 2, 2018. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive oral lefamulin (600 mg every 12 hours for 5 days; n = 370) or moxifloxacin (400 mg every 24 hours for 7 days; n = 368). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) primary end point was early clinical response at 96 hours (within a 24-hour window) after the first dose of either study drug in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population (all randomized patients). Responders were defined as alive, showing improvement in 2 or more of the 4 CABP symptoms, having no worsening of any CABP symptoms, and not receiving any nonstudy antibacterial drug for current CABP episode. The European Medicines Agency coprimary end points (FDA secondary end points) were investigator assessment of clinical response at test of cure (5-10 days after last dose) in the modified ITT population and in the clinically evaluable population. The noninferiority margin was 10% for early clinical response and investigator assessment of clinical response. RESULTS: Among 738 randomized patients (mean age, 57.5 years; 351 women [47.6%]; 360 had a PORT risk class of III or IV [48.8%]), 707 (95.8%) completed the trial. Early clinical response rates were 90.8% with lefamulin and 90.8% with moxifloxacin (difference, 0.1% [1-sided 97.5% CI, -4.4% to ∞]). Rates of investigator assessment of clinical response success were 87.5% with lefamulin and 89.1% with moxifloxacin in the modified ITT population (difference, -1.6% [1-sided 97.5% CI, -6.3% to ∞]) and 89.7% and 93.6%, respectively, in the clinically evaluable population (difference, -3.9% [1-sided 97.5% CI, -8.2% to ∞]) at test of cure. The most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse events were gastrointestinal (diarrhea: 45/368 [12.2%] in lefamulin group and 4/368 [1.1%] in moxifloxacin group; nausea: 19/368 [5.2%] in lefamulin group and 7/368 [1.9%] in moxifloxacin group). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with CABP, 5-day oral lefamulin was noninferior to 7-day oral moxifloxacin with respect to early clinical response at 96 hours after first dose. TRIAL REGISTRATIONS: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02813694; European Clinical Trials Identifier: 2015-004782-92.

Hospitalized Patients with Acute Pneumonia.

Pneumonia is one of the leading causes of mortality and hospitalization among US adults. The decision to admit patients from the emergency department is a major one because of its impact on patients and the hospital. The diagnosis of pneumonia is often clinical and based on symptoms and signs combined with radiographic findings. There are multiple severity assessments available that can guide treatment, prognosis, and disposition. Viruses are an important cause of pneumonia and require early recognition and treatment. The recommended treatment for community-acquired pneumonia includes a beta lactam plus a macrolide or a respiratory fluoroquinolone.

A Rare but Reversible Cause of Hematemesis: "Downhill" Esophageal Varices.

"Downhill" varices are a rare cause of acute upper gastrointestinal bleeding and are generally due to obstruction of the superior vena cava (SVC). Often these cases of "downhill" varices are missed diagnoses as portal hypertension but fail to improve with medical treatment to reduce portal pressure. We report a similar case where recurrent variceal bleeding was initially diagnosed as portal hypertension but later found to have SVC thrombosis presenting with recurrent hematemesis. A 39-year-old female with history of end-stage renal disease presented with recurrent hematemesis. Esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) revealed multiple varices. Banding and sclerotherapy were performed. Extensive evaluation did not show overt portal hypertension or cirrhosis. Due to ongoing bleeding requiring resuscitation, she underwent internal jugular (IJ) and SVC venogram in preparation for transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS), which demonstrated complete IJ and SVC occlusion. She underwent balloon angioplasty with stent placement across SVC occlusion with complete resolution of her varices and resolved hematemesis. "Downhill" varices are extremely rare, though previously well described. Frequently, patients are misdiagnosed with underlying liver disease. High index of suspicion and investigation of alternative causes of varices is prudent in those without underlying liver diseases. Prompt diagnosis and appropriate intervention can significantly improve morbidity and mortality.

The role of telavancin in hospital-acquired pneumonia and ventilator-associated pneumonia.

Hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) due to gram-positive pathogens such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) continues to be a major cause of morbid conditions and death. Telavancin is a lipoglycopeptide antibiotic with potent in vitro activity against a range of gram-positive pathogens, including MRSA, methicillin-susceptible S. aureus, and Streptococcus species. In 2 phase 3 clinical trials, telavancin was noninferior to vancomycin in patients with HAP due to gram-positive pathogens. Clinically evaluable patients with S. aureus as the sole pathogen or S. aureus with a vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration >1 µg/mL, however, had higher cure rates with telavancin than with vancomycin. In patients with bacteremic HAP, telavancin resulted in clearance of blood cultures. It was associated with increased serum creatinine levels and higher mortality rates in patients with moderate to severe renal impairment at baseline; however, on subsequent analysis, the outcomes seemed to have been at least partially affected by the adequacy of empiric gram-negative antimicrobial therapy. Thus, clinicians need to consider the risk-benefit balance when choosing telavancin in patients with severe renal impairment at baseline. Overall, these data support the use of telavancin in the treatment of HAP due to S. aureus, including MRSA and strains with elevated vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentrations, but clinicians should always weigh the risks and benefits of various treatment options.