Daptomycin in the Clinical Setting: 8-Year Experience with Gram-positive Bacterial Infections from the EU-CORE(SM) Registry.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes and safety of daptomycin therapy in patients with serious Gram-positive infections. METHODS: Patients were enrolled in the European Cubicin(®) Outcomes Registry and Experience (EU-CORE(SM)), a non-interventional, multicenter, observational registry. The real-world data were collected across 18 countries (Europe, Latin America, and Asia) for patients who had received at least one dose of daptomycin between January 2006 and April 2012. Two-year follow-up data were collected until 2014 for patients with endocarditis, intracardiac/intravascular device infection, osteomyelitis, or orthopedic device infection. RESULTS: A total of 6075 patients were enrolled. The most common primary infections were complicated skin and soft tissue infection (31.7%) and bacteremia (20.7%). Staphylococcus aureus was the most frequently reported pathogen (42.9%; methicillin-resistant S. aureus [MRSA], 23.2%), followed by Staphylococcus epidermidis and other coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS, 28.5%). The most commonly prescribed dose of daptomycin was 6 mg/kg/day (43.6%), and the median duration of therapy was 11 (range 1-300) days. Overall clinical success rate was 80.5%, and was similar whether daptomycin was used as first-line (82.9%) or second-line (79.2%) therapy. Clinical success rates were high in patients with S. aureus (83.9%; MRSA 83.0%) and CoNS (including S. epidermidis, 82.5%) infections. The majority of patients with endocarditis or intracardiac/intravascular device infection (86.7%) or osteomyelitis/orthopedic device infection (85.9%) had a sustained response during the 2-year follow-up period. There were no new or unexpected safety findings. CONCLUSION: Results from real-world clinical experience showed that daptomycin is a valuable therapeutic option in the management of various difficult-to-treat Gram-positive infections. FUNDING: This study was funded by Novartis Pharma AG.

Safety and efficacy of daptomycin as first-line treatment for complicated skin and soft tissue infections in elderly patients: an open-label, multicentre, randomized phase IIIb trial.

BACKGROUND: Daptomycin has proven efficacy in patients with Gram-positive complicated skin and soft tissue infections (cSSTIs), including those caused by Staphylococcus aureus, regardless of methicillin susceptibility. OBJECTIVE: This study was undertaken to evaluate the efficacy and safety of daptomycin in elderly patients. STUDY DESIGN: This was an open-label, multicentre, randomized phase IIIb study conducted in hospitalized patients PATIENTS: Patients aged ≥65 years with a diagnosis of Gram-positive cSSTIs with or without bacteraemia were included. In addition, infections were required to be of sufficient severity to require inpatient hospitalization and treatment with parenteral antibiotics for at least 96 h. The main exclusion criterion was the presence of a non-complicated SSTI that could heal by itself or be cured by surgical removal of the site of infection. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomized (2:1) to intravenous daptomycin or pooled intravenous standard therapies (semi-synthetic penicillin or vancomycin, referred to as the 'comparator'). Duration of treatment was between 5 and 14 days for cSSTIs without bacteraemia and between 10 and 28 days for cSSTIs with bacteraemia. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The primary objective was descriptive comparison of clinical success in clinically evaluable patients at test of cure, 7-14 days post treatment. Secondary objectives were microbiological outcome, duration of treatment and safety. RESULTS: In total, 120 patients were randomized (81 to daptomycin; 39 to the comparator) and 102 patients completed the study. Baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups. Common infections included cellulitis, ulcers and abscesses; six patients had bacteraemia [five documented (daptomycin, n = 3; comparator, n = 2); and one suspected (daptomycin, n = 1)]. Test-of-cure clinical success rates were numerically higher for daptomycin than for the comparator [89.0 % (65/73) vs. 83.3 % (25/30); odds ratio 1.65 (95 % confidence interval 0.49-5.54)]. For patients with S. aureus infections, cure rates were 89.7 % (35/39) versus 69.2 % (9/13), respectively; percentage points difference, 20.5 (95 % confidence interval -12.2 to 50.9)]. Rates of adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs were similar in both treatment arms; however, discontinuation rates for AEs/serious AEs were lower for daptomycin than for the comparator (3.8 % vs. 10.0 %). Three serious AEs were considered to be related to the study drug: one case each of pancytopenia (semi-synthetic penicillin), renal failure (vancomycin) and asymptomatic increase in creatine phosphokinase concentrations (daptomycin). CONCLUSION: In elderly patients, for whom data were previously limited, the efficacy and safety of daptomycin have been confirmed, including for infections caused by S. aureus, regardless of methicillin susceptibility.

Pregabalin for relief of neuropathic pain associated with diabetic neuropathy: a randomized, double-blind study.

Seven published, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials with pregabalin have shown robust efficacy for relief of neuropathic pain from DPN and PHN. An investigation of the efficacy and safety of twice daily pregabalin enrolled 395 adults with painful DPN for > or = 1 year in a 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Patients were randomized to placebo, 150, 300, or 600 mg/day pregabalin (n = 96, 99, 99, and 101). Primary efficacy measure was change from baseline in endpoint mean pain score from patients' daily pain diaries. Secondary efficacy measures included pain-related sleep-interference scores, Patient and Clinical Global Impressions of Change (PGIC, CGIC), and the EuroQOL Health Utilities Index (EQ-5D). Statistically significant reduction in pain was observed in patients receiving pregabalin 600 mg/day, and 46% of patients treated with 600 mg/day pregabalin reported > or = 50% improvement in mean pain scores from baseline (vs 30% of placebo patients, p = 0.036). Number needed to treat to achieve such response was 6.3. Pregabalin 600 mg/day was significantly superior to placebo in improving pain-related sleep-interference scores (p = 0.003), PGIC (p = 0.021), and CGIC (p = 0.009). (Neither pregabalin 150 nor 300 mg/day separated from placebo on these measures, largely because of an atypically large placebo response in one country representing 42% of patients.) All pregabalin dosages were superior to placebo in improving EQ-5D utility scores (all p > or = 0.0263 vs placebo). Pregabalin was well tolerated at all dosages; adverse events were generally mild to moderate. Number needed to harm (discontinuation because of adverse events) was 10.3 for pregabalin 600 mg/day.