Single-Center Investigation of the Pharmacokinetics of WCK 4282 (Cefepime-Tazobactam Combination) in Renal Impairment.

WCK 4282 is a combination product of cefepime (FEP) and tazobactam (TAZ) in a 1:1 ratio currently under development for the treatment of multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacterial infections. We investigated the effect of renal impairment on the pharmacokinetics (PK) and safety of WCK 4282 in 48 subjects with various degrees of renal function. Subjects were categorized on the basis of their Cockcroft-Gault equation-estimated creatinine clearance (CLCR). We enrolled 6 subjects each into those with mild (CLCR, 60 to <90 ml/min), moderate (CLCR, 30 to <60 ml/min), or severe (CLCR, <30 ml/min) renal impairment and those with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) requiring hemodialysis and 24 healthy control subjects (CLCR, ≥90 ml/min). Healthy subjects and subjects with mild and moderate renal impairment received a single 90-min infusion of 4 g of WCK 4282 (2 g FEP and 2 g TAZ). Subjects with severe renal impairment and ESRD received 2 g of WCK 4282 (1 g FEP and 1 g TAZ) over 90 min. The plasma exposure of FEP-TAZ increased as renal function decreased. In subjects with mild, moderate, and severe renal impairment and ESRD, the mean exposure (area under the plasma concentration versus time curve from time zero extrapolated to infinity) of FEP and TAZ increased by 1.3- and 1.2-fold, 2.3- and 2.3-fold, 4.7- and 4.0-fold, and 8.5- and 11.6-fold, respectively. The urinary recovery of FEP and TAZ decreased with increasing renal impairment. There were no adverse events reported during the study. The findings suggest that dose adjustments for WCK 4282 will be required according to the degree of renal impairment. A single infusion of WCK 4282 was found to be safe and well tolerated in subjects with normal and impaired renal function. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under identifier NCT02709382.).

Ceftaroline fosamil therapy in patients with acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections with systemic inflammatory signs: A retrospective dose comparison across three pivotal trials.

This post-hoc analysis compared the pharmacokinetics and clinical outcomes of ceftaroline fosamil 600 mg every 12 (q12h) versus every 8 hours (q8h) in patients with acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infection (ABSSSI) and signs of sepsis. Clinical outcomes at test-of-cure in patients with ABSSSI and systemic inflammatory signs/systemic inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS) as well as ceftaroline minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) against baseline pathogens were compared between the COVERS trial (ceftaroline fosamil 600 mg q8h, 2-h infusion) and the CANVAS 1 and 2 trials (ceftaroline fosamil 600 mg q12h, 1-h infusion). Ceftaroline exposure among patients in COVERS with or without markers of sepsis was compared using population pharmacokinetic modelling. In COVERS, 62% (312/506) and 41% (208/506) of ceftaroline fosamil-treated patients had ≥1 systemic inflammatory sign or SIRS, respectively, compared with 55% (378/693) and 22% (155/693), respectively, in the CANVAS trials. Clinical cure rates for the modified intent-to-treat population in COVERS and CANVAS were similar for ceftaroline fosamil-treated patients with ≥1 sign of sepsis [82% (255/312) and 85% (335/394)] and for those with SIRS [84% (168/199) and 85% (131/155)]. Ceftaroline MIC distributions were similar across trials. Sepsis did not affect predicted individual steady-state ceftaroline exposure. Clinical cure rates in patients with ≥1 systemic inflammatory sign or SIRS were comparable for both ceftaroline fosamil dosage regimens. Pathogen susceptibilities to ceftaroline were similar across trials. Ceftaroline exposure was not affected by disease severity. Ceftaroline fosamil 600 mg q12h is a robust dosage regimen for most ABSSSI patients with sepsis [ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT01499277, NCT00424190, NCT00423657].

Single-Center Evaluation of the Pharmacokinetics of WCK 5222 (Cefepime-Zidebactam Combination) in Subjects with Renal Impairment.

WCK 5222 is a novel ß-lactam-ß-lactam-enhancer combination of cefepime (FEP) and zidebactam (ZID). ZID is a novel ß-lactam enhancer with a dual action of binding to Gram-negative penicillin-binding protein 2 (PBP2) and ß-lactamase inhibition. WCK 5222 is being developed as a new therapeutic option for the treatment of complicated multidrug-resistant Gram-negative pathogen infections. We investigated the effect of renal impairment on the pharmacokinetics (PK) and safety of WCK 5222 in 48 subjects based on Cockcroft-Gault-estimated creatinine clearance (CLCR). We enrolled mild (n = 6; CLCR, 60 to <90 ml/min), moderate (n = 6; CLCR, 30 to <60 ml/min), and severe (n = 6; CLCR, <30 ml/min; not on dialysis) impairment, end-stage renal disease (ESRD) on hemodialysis (HD) (n = 6), and matched normal controls (n = 24; CLCR, ≥90 ml/min). Healthy control subjects and mild and moderate renal impairment subjects received a single 60-min intravenous (i.v.) infusion of 3 g WCK 5222 (2 g FEP/1 g ZID); severe renal impairment and HD subjects received a single 60-min i.v. infusion of 1.5 g WCK 5222 (1 g FEP plus 0.5 g ZID). Body and renal clearance decreased, and plasma half-life (t1/2) and the area under the concentration-time curve from time zero extrapolated to infinity (AUC0-∞ [h µg/ml]) increased in a graded relationship with severity of renal impairment for both FEP and ZID. Our findings suggest that dose adjustments for WCK 5222 will be required according to the degree of renal impairment. Overall, WCK 5222 (FEP-ZID) was found to be safe and well tolerated in subjects with normal and impaired renal function. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under identifier NCT02942810.).

Plasma and Intrapulmonary Concentrations of Cefepime and Zidebactam following Intravenous Administration of WCK 5222 to Healthy Adult Subjects.

WCK 5222 is a combination of cefepime and the novel ß-lactam enhancer zidebactam being developed for the treatment of serious Gram-negative bacterial infections. The objective of this study was to compare plasma (total), epithelial lining fluid (ELF), and alveolar macrophage (AM) concentrations of cefepime and zidebactam in healthy adult subjects. The WCK 5222 dosing regimen was 2 g cefepime/1 g zidebactam administered as a 1-h intravenous infusion every 8 h for a total of 7 doses. Subjects were assigned to one bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) sampling time at 0.5, 1.25, 3, 6, 8, or 10 h after the seventh dose. Noncompartmental pharmacokinetic parameters were determined from serial plasma concentrations collected over 8-hour and 10-hour intervals following the first and seventh doses, respectively. Penetration ratios were calculated from the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to 8 h (AUC0-8) for plasma, ELF, and AM using mean and median concentrations at each BAL sampling time. The plasma maximum concentration of drug (Cmax) and AUC values of cefepime and zidebactam increased by 8% to 9% after the seventh versus the first dose of WCK 5222. The respective AUC0-8 values based on mean concentrations of cefepime and zidebactam in ELF were 127.9 and 52.0 mg · h/liter, and 87.9 and 13.2 mg · h/liter in AM. The ELF to total plasma penetration ratios of cefepime and zidebactam based on mean AUC0-8 values were 0.39 and 0.38, respectively. The AM to total plasma ratios were 0.27 and 0.10, respectively. The observed plasma, ELF, and AM concentrations of cefepime and zidebactam support studies of WCK 5222 for treatment of pneumonia caused by susceptible pathogens.

Comparison of Plasma and Intrapulmonary Concentrations of Nafithromycin (WCK 4873) in Healthy Adult Subjects.

The nafithromycin concentrations in the plasma, epithelial lining fluid (ELF), and alveolar macrophages (AM) of 37 healthy adult subjects were measured following repeated dosing of oral nafithromycin at 800 mg once daily for 3 days. The values of noncompartmental pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters were determined from serial plasma samples collected over a 24-h interval following the first and third oral doses. Each subject underwent one standardized bronchoscopy with bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) at 3, 6, 9, 12, 24, or 48 h after the third dose of nafithromycin. The mean ± standard deviation values of the plasma PK parameters after the first and third doses included maximum plasma concentrations (Cmax) of 1.02 ± 0.31 µg/ml and 1.39 ± 0.36 µg/ml, respectively; times to Cmax of 3.97 ± 1.30 h and 3.69 ± 1.28 h, respectively; clearances of 67.3 ± 21.3 liters/h and 52.4 ± 18.5 liters/h, respectively, and elimination half-lives of 7.7 ± 1.1 h and 9.1 ± 1.7 h, respectively. The values of the area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) from time zero to 24 h postdosing (AUC0-24) for nafithromycin based on the mean or median total plasma concentrations at BAL fluid sampling times were 16.2 µg · h/ml. For ELF, the respective AUC0-24 values based on the mean and median concentrations were 224.1 and 176.3 µg · h/ml, whereas for AM, the respective AUC0-24 values were 8,538 and 5,894 µg · h/ml. Penetration ratios based on ELF and total plasma AUC0-24 values based on the mean and median concentrations were 13.8 and 10.9, respectively, whereas the ratios of the AM to total plasma concentrations based on the mean and median concentrations were 527 and 364, respectively. The sustained ELF and AM concentrations for 48 h after the third dose suggest that nafithromycin has the potential to be a useful agent for the treatment of lower respiratory tract infections. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under registration no. NCT02453529.).

Macrolide therapy for community-acquired pneumonia due to atypical pathogens: outcome assessment at an early time point.

BACKGROUND: Therapy directed against atypical pathogens in patients with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is often recommended. This post-hoc analysis evaluated the effect of addition of a macrolide to ceftaroline fosamil or ceftriaxone treatment in atypical CAP. METHODS: Two phase 3, double-blind, comparative safety and efficacy studies of ceftaroline fosamil vs. ceftriaxone, FOCUS 1 and FOCUS 2, enrolled adults with CAP. Only FOCUS 1 included 24-h adjunctive clarithromycin therapy for all patients on day 1. Day 4 and test-of-cure (TOC) outcomes were compared for adjunctive vs. no adjunctive therapy. RESULTS: Of 1240 enrolled patients, 130 patients with CAP due to atypical pathogens alone were included (FOCUS 1, n = 64; FOCUS 2, n = 66). Among patients infected with Mycoplasma pneumoniae and/or Chlamydophila pneumoniae alone, a higher clinical response rate was observed with clarithromycin plus ceftaroline fosamil or ceftriaxone compared with treatment without additional clarithromycin at day 4 [38/49 (77.6%; FOCUS 1) vs. 24/43 (55.8%; FOCUS 2)], but not at the TOC assessment [42/49 (85.7%; FOCUS 1) vs. 41/43 (95.3%; FOCUS 2)]. In patients infected with Legionella pneumophila alone, a higher clinical response rate with adjunctive clarithromycin therapy was observed at the TOC assessment alone [12/12 (100%; FOCUS 1) vs. 14/19 (73.7%; FOCUS 2)]. The unadjusted odds ratio of a favourable clinical response at day 4 with adjunctive clarithromycin vs. no adjunctive clarithromycin was 2.4 (95% confidence interval 1.1-5.1; P = 0.0299) for all pathogens combined. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that empirical antibiotic therapy against atypical pathogens may improve early clinical response rate. This hypothesis is best evaluated in a prospective trial.

A Randomized, Prospective Study of Pediatric Patients With Community-acquired Pneumonia Treated With Ceftaroline Versus Ceftriaxone.

BACKGROUND: Community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP) remains a major infection among children, despite the use of pneumococcal vaccination. Ceftaroline fosamil is a broad-spectrum cephalosporin antibiotic with activity against many bacteria, including Streptococcus pneumoniae (both penicillin-nonsusceptible and multidrug-resistant strains) and Staphylococcus aureus (including methicillin-resistant S. aureus). This article describes the safety, tolerability, and effectiveness of ceftaroline fosamil in the treatment of pediatric patients hospitalized with CABP, from a randomized, active-controlled, observer-blinded clinical study (registration number NCT01530763). METHODS: Pediatric patients were stratified into 4 age cohorts and randomized (3:1) to receive either intravenous ceftaroline fosamil or ceftriaxone, with optional oral switch for a total treatment duration of 5-14 days. Enrollment was planned for 160 patients. Data collected included demographics, infection characteristics and pathogens. Treatment-emergent adverse events, clinical outcomes, and microbiologic responses were assessed. RESULTS: Ceftaroline fosamil was well tolerated. Similar percentages of patients in the ceftaroline fosamil (55/121; 45%) and ceftriaxone (18/39; 46%) groups reported treatment-emergent adverse events. Coombs seroconversion was observed in 17% of patients in the ceftaroline fosamil group; however, no evidence of hemolytic anemia or hemolysis was found. No deaths were reported during the study. Ceftaroline fosamil had similar effectiveness to ceftriaxone, with high clinical cure rates at test-of-cure in the modified intent-to-treat population (94/107; 88% and 32/36; 89%, respectively). Three documented S. aureus infections were successfully treated in the ceftaroline group, including one caused by methicillin-resistant S. aureus. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that ceftaroline fosamil may be an important treatment option for pediatric patients hospitalized with CABP.

Ceftaroline fosamil versus ceftriaxone for the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia: individual patient data meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: We conducted a meta-analysis of clinical trials of adults hospitalized with pneumonia outcomes research team (PORT) risk class 3-4 community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) receiving ceftaroline fosamil versus ceftriaxone. METHODS: Three Phase III trials (clinicaltrials.gov registration numbers NCT00621504, NCT00509106 and NCT01371838) including 1916 hospitalized patients with CAP randomized 1:1 to empirical ceftaroline fosamil (600 mg every 12 h) or ceftriaxone (1-2 g every 24 h) for 5-7 days were included in the meta-analysis. Primary outcome was clinical response at the test-of-cure visit (8-15 days after end of treatment) in the PORT risk class 3-4 modified ITT (MITT) and clinically evaluable (CE) populations. Data were tested for heterogeneity (χ(2) test) and, if not significant, results were pooled and OR and 95% CI constructed. A logistic regression analysis assessed factors impacting cure rate and treatment interactions. RESULTS: Clinical cure rates in each trial consistently favoured ceftaroline fosamil versus ceftriaxone, with no evidence of heterogeneity. In the meta-analysis, ceftaroline fosamil was superior to ceftriaxone in the MITT (OR: 1.66; 95% CI 1.34, 2.06; P < 0.001) and CE (OR: 1.65; 95% CI 1.26, 2.16; P < 0.001) populations. Results were consistent across various patient- and disease-related factors including patients' age and PORT score. Prior antimicrobial use within 96 h of starting study treatment was associated with diminished differences in cure rates between treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Ceftaroline fosamil was superior to ceftriaxone for empirical treatment of adults hospitalized with CAP. Receipt of prior antimicrobial therapy appeared to diminish the observed treatment effect.

Ceftaroline fosamil as first-line versus second-line treatment for acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) or community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP).

The Clinical Assessment Program and Teflaro(®) Utilization Registry (CAPTURE) is a multicenter registry study of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infection (ABSSSI) and community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP) patients treated with ceftaroline fosamil in the US. Data for this analysis were collected between August 2011 and February 2013 at US study centres by randomly ordered chart review. Clinical success rates among ABSSSI patients were >81% when ceftaroline fosamil was used as first- or second-line therapy, including monotherapy and concurrent therapy. Among CABP patients, clinical success rates were >77% among first-line and second-line patients and patients who received first-line concurrent therapy or second line monotherapy or concurrent therapy. For CABP patients treated with ceftaroline fosamil as first-line monotherapy, the clinical success rate was 70%. Ceftaroline fosamil is an effective treatment option for patients with ABSSSI or CABP with similar clinical success rates when used as first-line or second-line treatment.

Ceftaroline fosamil for the treatment of community-acquired bacterial pneumonia in the intensive care unit.

The Clinical Assessment Program and Teflaro(®) Utilization Registry (CAPTURE) is a multicenter study evaluating the clinical use of ceftaroline fosamil in patients with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP) or acute bacterial skin and skin structure infection. Data were collected between August 2011 and February 2013, from 398 evaluable patients receiving treatment at 33 sites in the USA. This manuscript presents data collected from patients with CABP who received care in an intensive care unit (ICU) or in general medical wards (35% and 64% of evaluable patients, respectively). The majority of ICU and general medical ward patients had underlying comorbidities (78% and 74%, respectively), with structural lung disease being the most common (42% in the ICU and 40% in general medical wards). Patients admitted to the ICU had a longer duration of stay, a longer duration of symptoms before treatment, and a longer duration of ceftaroline fosamil therapy than did general medical ward patients. Most patients treated in the ICU and in general medical wards were given ceftaroline fosamil as second-line therapy (87% and 80%, respectively). The overall rate of clinical success for patients treated with ceftaroline fosamil was 68% in the ICU and 85% in the general medical wards. Clinical success for patients receiving ceftaroline fosamil as a second-line agent was 84% in the ICU and 86% in general medical wards. These findings indicate that ceftaroline fosamil is a viable treatment option for CABP, both in the ICU and in general medical wards.

Ceftaroline Fosamil for the Treatment of Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia Secondary to Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infections or Community-Acquired Bacterial Pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: The Clinical Assessment Program and Teflaro® Utilization Registry is designed to collect information on the clinical use of ceftaroline fosamil in the Unites States. This report presents data on the treatment of patients with Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (SAB) secondary to acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs) or community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP). METHODS: Patients diagnosed with ABSSSI or CABP were identified through sequential review of randomly ordered charts generated from pharmacy listings from August 2011 to February 2013. Data were collected by chart review 30 days or more after completion of ceftaroline fosamil therapy. RESULTS: Secondary SAB was reported in a total of 48 of 1428 evaluable patients (27 with ABSSSI, 21 with CABP). The mean (SD) patient age was 61 (15) years. At least 1 comorbidity was recorded for 74% of patients with ABSSSI and 81% with CABP. Methicillin-resistant S. aureus was isolated from 59% of patients with ABSSSI and 76% with CABP. The mean (SD) duration of ceftaroline fosamil therapy was 5.8 (4.8) days for ABSSSI and 7.0 (3.8) days for CABP. Clinical success among all patients with SAB treated with ceftaroline fosamil was 58% (52% for SAB secondary to ABSSSI, 67% for SAB secondary to CABP). Clinical success rates of methicillin-resistant S. aureus SAB were 50% (8/16) for ABSSSI and 63% (10/16) for CABP. CONCLUSIONS: This study supports the use of ceftaroline fosamil as a viable treatment option in hospitalized patients with SAB secondary to ABSSSI or CABP. Further studies evaluating the use of ceftaroline fosamil for the treatment of SAB are warranted.

Ceftaroline fosamil for treating skin and skin structure infections or community-acquired pneumonia in patients with renal insufficiency.

The Clinical Assessment Program and Teflaro(®) Utilization Registry (CAPTURE) is a multicenter retrospective study, conducted in the USA, describing the contemporary use of ceftaroline fosamil. Ceftaroline is primarily excreted by the kidneys and the dose should be reduced in patients with moderate to severe renal insufficiency. This article describes the clinical effectiveness of ceftaroline fosamil in the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infection (ABSSSI) or community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP) patients with renal insufficiency. There were 985 ABSSSI patients and 344 CABP patients, of which 22 and 31%, respectively, had renal insufficiency. Ceftaroline fosamil was mostly administered to patients as second-line therapy. Overall clinical success was 78-91% among ABSSSI or CABP patients with renal insufficiency and, overall, >50% of patients were discharged to home. Ceftaroline fosamil is an effective treatment option for ABSSSI or CABP patients with renal insufficiency.

Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic analysis for efficacy of ceftaroline fosamil in patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections.

Ceftaroline is a cephalosporin with broad-spectrum in vitro activity against pathogens commonly associated with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI), including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Ceftaroline fosamil, the prodrug of ceftaroline, is approved for the treatment of patients with ABSSSI. Using data from the microbiologically evaluable population from two phase 2 and two phase 3 randomized, multicenter, double-blind studies of patients with ABSSSI, an analysis examining the relationship between drug exposure, as measured by the percentage of time during the dosing interval that free-drug steady-state concentrations remain above the MIC (f%T>MIC), and clinical and microbiological responses was undertaken. The analysis population included 526 patients, of whom 423 had infections associated with S. aureus. Clinical and microbiological success percentages were 94.7 and 94.5%, respectively, among all of the patients and 95.3 and 95.7%, respectively, among those with S. aureus infections. Univariable analysis based on data from all of the patients and those with S. aureus infections demonstrated significant relationships between f%T>MIC and microbiological response (P < 0.001 and P = 0.026, respectively). Multivariable logistic regression analyses demonstrated other patient factors in addition to f%T>MIC to be significant predictors of microbiological response, including age and infection type for all of the patients evaluated and age, infection type, and the presence of diabetes mellitus for patients with S. aureus infections. Results of these analyses confirm that a ceftaroline fosamil dosing regimen of 600 mg every 12 h provides exposures associated with the upper plateau of the pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic relationship for efficacy.

Ceftaroline fosamil for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections in obese patients.

BACKGROUND: Ceftaroline fosamil is a broad-spectrum antibiotic approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs) and community-acquired bacterial pneumonia. The Clinical Assessment Program and Teflaro Utilization Registry (CAPTURE) is a multicenter registry study of patients treated with ceftaroline fosamil in the United States for ABSSSI or community-acquired bacterial pneumonia. OBJECTIVE: To describe the clinical effectiveness of ceftaroline fosamil in the treatment of ABSSSI in obese patients [body mass index (BMI) ≥ 30] compared with patients with a normal BMI (18.5 to ≤ 24.9). METHODS: Data were collected at US study centers by randomly ordered chart review. RESULTS: Data from 261 patients with a normal BMI and 690 patients with an obese BMI were collected. The percentage of males was higher in the normal BMI than in the obese category (58.2% and 49.0%, respectively). The mean and median ages at baseline were similar. Most patients (91%) were treated on a general hospital ward, and the mean and median lengths of stay were similar between the 2 groups (approximately 11 days and 7 days, respectively). A total of 73.2% of normal BMI patients and 77.5% of obese patients were discharged to home. Rates of diabetes mellitus were 26.4% in the normal BMI group and 55.1% in the obese group. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus was isolated from 26.1% of normal BMI patients and 20.5% of obese patients (16.4% morbidly obese subset). Mean treatment duration for all patients was 5.9 days. Of patients with a normal BMI, 57.5% received ceftaroline fosamil as monotherapy as did 63.3% of obese patients. Clinical success was high in both the normal BMI (85.1%) and the obese (89.0%) groups. CONCLUSION: Ceftaroline fosamil is an effective treatment option for obese patients with ABSSSI with a similar clinical success rate, mean and median length of stay, and discharge destination to home when compared with normal BMI patients.

Ceftaroline fosamil for the treatment of community-acquired bacterial pneumonia in elderly patients.

The Clinical Assessment Program and Teflaro Utilization Registry (CAPTURE) is a multicenter study, assessing the contemporary use of ceftaroline fosamil in patients with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP) or acute bacterial skin and skin structure infection. This article discusses the data collected from 528 evaluable patients with CABP, from 39 sites in the United States, between August 2011 and April 2013. The majority of patients (51%) were elderly (aged ≥ 65 years), most of whom were treated in general hospital wards (70%). Approximately one quarter of elderly patients had ≥ 2 comorbidities (26%), the most common of which was structural lung disease (51%). The majority of elderly patients received ceftaroline fosamil as second-line therapy (85%), concurrently with other antibiotics (61%). Similar patterns of ceftaroline fosamil usage were noted in younger patients (aged < 65 years). Fifteen patients died (3%), 10 of whom were elderly. The overall clinical success of ceftaroline fosamil was 81% for elderly patients with CABP and 82% for younger patients. These data suggest that ceftaroline fosamil is a potentially effective treatment option for CABP in the elderly.

Efficacy of ceftaroline fosamil for bacteremia associated with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia.

OBJECTIVES: Few publications of prospective studies have described patient outcomes in community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP)-associated bacteremia. Our objective, in performing this subgroup analysis, was to assess outcomes in subjects with CABP-associated bacteremia in 2 randomized, double-blind clinical studies comparing treatment with ceftaroline fosamil versus ceftriaxone. METHODS: Our analysis summarizes baseline subject demographics, distribution of baseline pathogens isolated from blood cultures, clinical response rates at Day 4, and clinical cure rates at end of therapy and test of cure (8 to 15 days after end of therapy) in subjects with bacteremic CABP in the ceFtarOline Community-acquired pneUmonia trial vS ceftriaxone in hospitalized patients (FOCUS) studies. RESULTS: In the FOCUS studies, 23 of 614 patients in the ceftaroline fosamil-treated group and 22 of 614 patients in the ceftriaxone-treated group had CABP-associated bacteremia. Baseline demographics were similar between groups. Streptococcus pneumoniae was the most common baseline bloodstream isolate. For subjects with CABP-associated bacteremia, clinical response/cure rates were similar at Day 4 (60.9% vs 59.1%), end of therapy (69.6% vs 72.7%), and test of cure (69.6% vs 68.2%) for ceftaroline fosamil and ceftriaxone, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In subjects with CABP-associated bacteremia, ceftaroline fosamil demonstrated similar clinical outcomes at Day 4, end of therapy, and test of cure compared with ceftriaxone.

Ceftaroline fosamil for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections.

Skin infections have traditionally been classified by the US FDA as uncomplicated and complicated. In August 2010, the FDA released a new guidance document for the development of drugs to treat acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) and this was updated in 2013. Several new issues were addressed and henceforth skin infections in clinical trials were termed ABSSSI. In the USA, the annual prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus-related skin infections have continuously increased from 32.7% in 1998 to 53.8% in 2007. Ceftaroline fosamil is the only cephalosporin approved in the USA for monotherapy treatment of ABSSSI including infections caused by methicillin-resistant S. aureus. The efficacy of ceftaroline fosamil was shown in the CANVAS clinical trials. The CANVAS Day-3 analyses met an earlier, primary efficacy time point requested by the FDA. Ceftaroline has minimal drug-drug interactions, is well tolerated and possesses the safety profile associated with the cephalosporin class.

Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic target attainment analyses to evaluate in vitro susceptibility test interpretive criteria for ceftaroline against Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pneumoniae.

To provide support for in vitro susceptibility test interpretive criteria decisions for ceftaroline against Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pneumoniae, as well as dose adjustment recommendations for renal impairment, pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) target attainment was evaluated for simulated patients administered intravenous (i.v.) ceftaroline fosamil at 600 mg twice daily (q12h) and simulated patients with renal impairment administered various dosing regimens. Using a previously developed population PK model, Monte Carlo simulation was used to generate ceftaroline plasma concentration profiles for simulated patients with normal renal function or mild, moderate, or severe renal impairment. Using these profiles, the percentage of time during the dosing interval that free-drug concentrations remained above the MIC (f%T>MIC) for ceftaroline at steady state was calculated. Percentages of simulated patients achieving f %T>MIC targets for S. aureus and S. pneumoniae based on murine infection models were calculated by MIC. At MICs of 2 mg/liter for S. aureus and 1 mg/liter for S. pneumoniae, the percentages of simulated patients with normal renal function and mild renal impairment following administration of ceftaroline fosamil at 600 mg q12h, moderate renal impairment following administration of ceftaroline fosamil at 400 mg q12h, and severe renal impairment following administration of ceftaroline fosamil at 300 mg q12h achieving f %T>MIC targets (≥26 for S. aureus and ≥44 for S. pneumoniae) exceeded 90%. The results of these analyses, which suggested that in vitro susceptibility test interpretive criteria defining susceptible could be as high as MICs of ≤2 and ≤1 mg/liter for ceftaroline against S. aureus and S. pneumoniae, respectively, provide support for current FDA and CLSI criteria, which define susceptible as MICs of 1 and 0.5 mg/liter, respectively. Recommendations for dose adjustments for patients with renal impairment were also supported by the results of these analyses.

Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic analyses for efficacy of ceftaroline fosamil in patients with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia.

Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) analyses for efficacy using phase III trial data from patients treated with a ceftaroline fosamil dosing regimen of 600 mg intravenously (i.v.) every 12 h (q12h) for 5 to 7 days for community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP) were conducted. High clinical and microbiological success rates (84.7 and 86.3%, respectively) and percentages of time during the dosing interval that free-drug steady-state concentrations remained above the MIC (f%T>MIC) (98.4% had f%T>MIC values of ≥63.3) were observed among 124 microbiologically evaluable patients. As a result, significant PK-PD relationships could not be identified. These data provide support for the use of a ceftaroline fosamil dosing regimen of 600 mg i.v. q12h to treat patients with CABP.