Abstract
Background
This study describes the conditions of use of ceftolozane/tazobactam (C/T) and associated outcomes in French hospital settings.
Methods
This was a prospective, multicenter, French observational study. Patients who received at least 1 dose of C/T were included and followed up as per routine clinical practice, until stop of C/T.
Results
A total of 260 patients were enrolled between October 2018 and December 2019 in 30 centers across France. Of these, 177 (68.0%) received C/T as per indication of usage following the results of the antibiogram (documented cases). Among documented patients, the mean age was 61.8 years, 73.4% were males, and 93.8% presented with multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacteria at inclusion. C/T was most frequently prescribed for pneumonia (48.6%), bacteremia (14.7%), complicated intra-abdominal infections (13.0%), or complicated urinary tract infections (9.6%). Pseudomonas aeruginosa was the species most frequently isolated with 212 strains from 155 patients, and 96.2% of these strains were susceptible to C/T. The median duration of C/T treatment was 16.1 days (1–115, n = 176). Complete or partial cure was achieved in 71.7% of patients, C/T was discontinued upon adaptation to microbiology results in 11.3% of patients for the following reasons: treatment failure in 2.8%, death in 4.0%, adverse events in 1.7%, and other in 8.5%.
Conclusions
This is the first prospective observational study of C/T utilization in a health care setting enrolling many patients in France. C/T demonstrated a high rate of clinical effectiveness in MDR infections, confirming it as an effective treatment option for complicated infections in a high-risk population.
Keywords: ceftolozane-tazobactam, France, infectious disease, pneumonia, real-world evidence
The steady increase in the infections caused by multidrug-resistant (MDR) bacteria has become a major public health concern [1], including in France. MDR gram-negative pathogens are responsible for hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP), complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAIs), and urinary tract infections (cUTIs), including acute pyelonephritis (PN). As a result, they are associated with significant morbidity and mortality, as well as increased health care costs [2].
In response to the resistance surge to cephalosporins and fluoroquinolones, carbapenem use has increased for infections caused by MDR Enterobacteriaceae, including those producing extended-spectrum ß-lactamases (ESBL) [1, 2]. Consequently, Enterobacteriaceae have started producing carbapenemase, a ß-lactamase enzyme capable of hydrolyzing ß-lactams, mostly carbapenem. Antibiotic stewardship programs have been set up, including policies put in place by the French health authorities to monitor and reduce carbapenem use [3].
Ceftolozane/tazobactam (C/T) is a novel cephalosporin combined with a β-lactamase inhibitor, developed in response to the increasing prevalence of antibiotic resistance in gram-negative pathogens. C/T demonstrated in vitro activity against several gram-negative pathogens, including MDR Pseudomonas aeruginosa and ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae strains [4, 5]. Current indications for C/T therapy include cIAI, cUTI, acute PN, and HAP (including ventilator-associated pneumonia [VAP]) [6]. The current authorized dosing for C/T is 3 g/1.5 g per day for cIAI and cUTI and 6 g/3 g per day for pneumonia. C/T should be administered intravenously as a 1-hour infusion for all indications [6]. C/T obtained reimbursement by social insurance in France on July 26, 2016, for the treatment of cIAI, cUTI, and acute PN in adult patients [7]. Market authorization for HAP and VAP in adult patients was obtained on March 3, 2020 [6, 8].
Phase 3, prospective, randomized, double-blind trials for the treatment of cIAI (NCT01445665, NCT01445678) and cUTI (NCT01345929, NCT01345955) have reported the safety and therapeutic efficacy of C/T [9, 10]. The results showed the noninferiority of C/T therapy vs meropenem in cIAI patients and improved outcomes in cUTI patients compared with levofloxacin therapy [9, 10]. The efficacy and safety of C/T for the treatment of HAP, VAP ,or ventilated nosocomial pneumonia were evaluated in another phase 3, multicentric, prospective, double-blind randomized trial vs meropenem (NCT02070757). Study results demonstrated noninferiority of C/T compared with meropenem for treating nosocomial pneumonia [11].
Research on real-world C/T use for MDR infections has been published previously in the form of case reports, case series, and retrospective observational studies [12–18]. A real-world study conducted by Jorgensen et al. reported that C/T is effective for the treatment of complicated MDR infections in patients with limited therapeutic options [12]. However, there is need for additional real-world evidence concerning the use of C/T for complicated infections in France. This article presents the results from the CONDUCT study: Conditions of Post marketing Use of Ceftolozane/Tazobactam (ZERBAXA) in Real-World Settings: A French Multicenter Prospective Observational Study. This postauthorization study was requested by the Transparency Commission of the French National Authority for Health (HAS) to evaluate C/T use in real-world settings.
The objective of this study was to describe the demographic and clinical characteristics, susceptibility, and resistance patterns of clinical bacterial isolates to C/T and the real-world treatment patterns and outcomes of patients treated with C/T.
METHODS
Study Design and Population
CONDUCT was a prospective, multicenter observational study across 28 sites in France. Consecutive patients who had received at least 1 dose of C/T were included in a registry between 11/10/2018 and 30/12/2019. Each patient was followed up until stop of C/T (last dose received). The total study duration, including the observational period for all study patients, was ∼17 months.
As C/T can only be prescribed in the hospital, the study setting was limited to hospitals (both public and private) and included all hospital wards and intensive care units responsible for the management of infections. A registry was maintained to collect data regarding all C/T prescriptions to control for potential selection bias. Therefore, participating centers were collecting data about C/T prescription, and then corresponding patients were solicited for their consent to be part of the study. All patients were treated as per the standard of care at each site, and treatment decisions were at the physician’s discretion.
Variables and Measurements
Relevant demographic, clinical, laboratory, and infection characteristics, C/T prescription, and prior and concomitant treatment data were collected using an electronic case report form. The Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), which predicts 10-year survival in patients with multiple comorbidities, was calculated for all patients [19]. Severity was assessed using the Sequential (Sepsis-related) Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score [20]. Patients with a SOFA score of 6 or higher were classified as severely ill. Information concerning risk factors for MDR infection was collected as per the French Society of Anesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine (SFAR) guidelines. MDR was defined as acquired nonsusceptibility to at least 1 agent in 3 or more antimicrobial categories [21].
Outcomes included: complete cure—not requiring therapy escalation or additional antibacterial therapy or resolution of the index infection; partial cure—partial resolution of clinical signs and symptoms and/or additional antibiotic therapy at the end of C/T therapy; and treatment failure—any situation requiring a change in antibacterial therapy for the index infection due to documented lack of clinical response, need for therapy escalation, a positive culture reported at the end of C/T treatment, the need for reoperation for source control, or death while receiving C/T. Any antibiotic started before or on the day of C/T initiation and administered for at least 2 days along with C/T was considered concomitant treatment. The position of C/T in therapy was described with respect to prior antibiotic and concomitant antibiotic therapy and following therapeutic lines. Microbiology results concerning bacterial susceptibility to C/T were analyzed by a central laboratory.
Statistical Analysis
All objectives were analyzed using standard descriptive statistics. Continuous variables were summarized with number, mean, standard deviation, median, interquartile range (IQR), minimum and maximum, and number of missing data, where applicable. Categorical variables were summarized with frequencies, percentages, and number of missing data. Missing data were considered missing without any imputation. SAS statistical software (version 9.4; SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA) was used for all analyses.
Ethics
CONDUCT was approved by the French Ethics Committee (CCTIRS) on May 14, 2018, (application number 2018-A00308-47). The protocol was approved by the French Informatics Commission (CNIL) on February 3, 2017 (application number 2031803).
RESULTS
A total of 260 patients among 432 patients entered in the registry were enrolled in the study. Of note, among the patients who were in the registry but were not included in the study (n = 174), there was a significantly greater proportion of patients aged >65 years and with cUTI compared with the enrolled group. A detailed analysis of the registry is presented in Supplementary Table 1. Reasons for noninclusion as reported by the investigating centers are listed in Supplementary Table 2.
Out of 260 enrolled patients, 177 (68.0%) received C/T following the results of the antibiogram. The remaining 83 patients were treated empirically; their main clinical baseline data as well as outcomes are reported in Supplementary Table 3. We will focus the description on patients who were treated following the result of the antibiogram (documented patients).
The baseline demographic and clinical characteristics of documented patients, the MDR subgroup, and the severely ill subgroups are presented in Table 1. The mean age (SD) was 61.8 (17.0) years, and most patients (73.4%) were male. The most frequent comorbidities were chronic pulmonary disease (32.8%), diabetes (27.1%), and renal failure (21.5%). In total, 32.8% of patients were immunocompromised (n = 58/177; ie, with ongoing immunosuppressive therapy or with ongoing chemo-/radio-/corticotherapy, or with hemopathy, metastatic cancer, or HIV+ with CD4 lymphocytes <500/mm3 at inclusion). In a majority of patients (n = 166), MDR isolates were linked to the infection, and 25.6% (n = 41/160) were classified as severely ill (SOFA score ≥6) at inclusion (Table 1). Risk factors for MDR were reported for 129 patients. In total, 46 patients (35.7%) had 1 risk factor for MDR infection, and 83 presented with >1 risk factor (64.3%). The most common risk factors for MDR infection were being a carrier of an ESBL-positive Enterobacteriaceae or ceftazidime-resistant P. aeruginosa identified on microbiology in the last 3 months, previous treatment with a third-generation cephalosporin or fluoroquinolone in the past 3 months, and treatment failure with broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy with third-generation cephalosporin or fluroquinolone or piperacillin/tazobactam (Table 1).
Table 1.
Baseline Demographic and Clinical Characteristics of Documented Patients, the MDR Subgroup, and the Severely Ill Subgroup
| Documented Patients (n = 177)a |
MDR Subgroup (n = 166)a | Severely Ill (SOFA Score ≥6) Subgroup (n = 41)a |
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, mean (SD), y | 61.8 (17.0) | 61.5 (17.3) | 65.1 (14.4) |
| Male sex | 130 (73.4) | 121 (72.9) | 34 (82.9) |
| BMI, mean (SD), kg/m2 | 25.5 (6.4) | 25.6 (6.5) | 28.3 (6.5) |
| Underweight [<18.5] | 23 (13.5) | 21 (13.1) | 2 (5.0) |
| Overweight [≥25 to 30] | 46 (26.9) | 42 (26.3) | 14 (35.0) |
| Obese [>30] | 35 (20.5) | 34 (21.3) | 13 (32.5) |
| Patients with medical or surgical history | 153 (86.4) | 143 (86.1) | 36 (87.8) |
| Patients with >1 medical/surgical antecedent | 93 (60.8) | 89 (62.2) | 19 (52.8) |
| Most frequent comorbidities | … | … | … |
| Chronic pulmonary pathology | 58 (32.8) | 54 (32.5) | 10 (24.4) |
| Diabetes | 48 (27.1) | 47 (28.3) | 12 (29.3) |
| Renal failure | 38 (21.5) | 36 (21.7) | 12 (29.3) |
| Tumor without metastases [tumors diagnosed >5 y before inclusion were excluded] | 29 (16.4) | 27 (16.3) | 8 (19.5) |
| Myocardial infarction | 17 (9.6) | 17 (10.2) | 4 (9.8) |
| Congestive heart failure | 13 (7.3) | 13 (7.8) | 2 (4.9) |
| Immunocompromised patients | 58 (32.8) | 54 (32.5) | 15 (36.6) |
| Charlson comorbidity index ≥5 | 85 (48.0) | 80 (48.2) | 25 (61.0) |
| Baseline creatinine clearance, mL/min | n = 169 | n = 158 | n = 37 |
| Glomerular hyperfiltration >150 | 21 (12.4) | 19 (12.0) | 1 (2.7) |
| 50–150 | 101 (59.8) | 96 (60.8) | 14 (37.8) |
| 30–50 | 20 (11.8) | 17 (10.8) | 12 (32.4) |
| 15–30 | 18 (10.7) | 17 (10.8) | 6 (16.2) |
| Severe renal impairment <15 | 9 (5.3) | 9 (5.7) | 4 (10.8) |
| Risk factors for MDR infection for patients with only 1 risk factor | n = 129 | n = 121 | n = 28 |
| Carrier of an ESBL-positive enterobacterium or ceftazidime-resistant P. aeruginosa on a sample <3 mo old | 19 (41.3) | 19 (42.2) | 2 (25.0) |
| Previous treatment with a third-generation cephalosporin or fluroquinolone in the past 3 mo | 17 (37.0) | 16 (35.6) | 4 (50.0) |
| Treatment failure with broad-spectrum antibiotic therapy with third-generation cephalosporin or fluroquinolone or piperacillin/tazobactam | 6 (13.0) | 6 (13.3) | 1 (12.5) |
| Early recurrence [<15 d] of an infection treated with piperacillin-tazobactam for at least 3 d | 2 (4.3) | 2 (4.4) | 1 (12.5) |
| Patient living in a nursing home or long-term care with an indwelling catheter and/or a gastrostomy | 2 (4.3) | 2 (4.4) | - |
Abbreviations: BMI, body mass index; ESBL, extended-spectrum ß-lactamase; MDR, multidrug-resistant; SOFA, Sequential (Sepsis-related) Organ Failure Assessment score.
aUnless otherwise specified, values refer to No. (%).
Among patients who received treatment after documentation, 133 patients (75.1%) had a reported nosocomial index infection, while 44 patients (24.9%) had a community-acquired index infection. Of all patients, 15.8% (n = 28/177) were reported with 2 or more infection sites. Figure 1 reports the number of infection sites at baseline (1 or 2 sites) for patients with community-acquired and nosocomial infections.
Figure 1.
Number of infection sites at baseline for patients with nosocomial and community-acquired index infections in the documented population. Only 1 patient with a community-acquired infection presented with 3 infection sites at baseline.
In total, 48.6% (n = 86) of patients had a diagnosis of pneumonia. Furthermore, 64 (74.4%) pneumonia infections were hospital-acquired, and a total of 43 pneumonia patients required mechanical ventilation. Bacteremia, cIAI, cUTI, skin and soft tissue infection, and acute PN were less frequently reported (respectively: 14.7%, 13.0%, 9.6%, 7.3%, and 5.6%). Catheter infection and sepsis of undetermined origin were reported in 2.8% and 0.6%, respectively. Table 2 reports the indications for all infection sites.
Table 2.
Description of C/T Indications at Baseline for Documented Patients—All Infection Sites
| Documented Patients (n = 177) | Nosocomial Infection Subgroup (n = 133) |
Community-Acquired Infection Subgroup (n = 44) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| All infection sitesa | … | … | … |
| No. | 200 | 153 | 47 |
| cIAI | 23 (13.0) | 19 (14.3) | 4 (9.1) |
| cUTI | 17 (9.6) | 13 (9.8) | 4 (9.1) |
| Acute PN | 10 (5.6) | 6 (4.5) | 4 (9.1) |
| Pneumonia | 86 (48.6) | 64 (48.1) | 22 (50.0) |
| Bacteremia | 26 (14.7) | 23 (17.3) | 3 (6.8) |
| Skin and soft tissue infection | 13 (7.3) | 10 (7.5) | 3 (6.8) |
| Catheter infection | 5 (2.8) | 4 (3.0) | 1 (2.3) |
| Sepsis of undetermined origin | 1 (0.6) | 1 (0.8) | - |
| Other | 19 (10.7) | 13 (9.8) | 6 (13.6) |
| Bone infectionb | 4 (21.1) | 3 (23.1) | 1 (16.7) |
| Osteoarticular infectionb | 4 (21.1) | 3 (23.1) | 1 (16.7) |
| Other respiratory infectionb | 3 (15.8) | … | 3 (50.0) |
| Not specified/otherb | 8 (42.1) | 7 (53.8) | 1 (16.7) |
Abbreviation: C/T, ceftolozane/tazobactam; cIAI, complicated intra-abdominal infection; cUTI, complicated urinary tract infection.
aPercentages were calculated using the total number of patients in each of the 3 groups.
bPercentages were calculated using the total number of patients in the group “other.”
Previous Treatments
For the index infection, 77.4% (n = 137/177) of patients received antibiotic treatment before C/T, of whom 91 (66.4%) received >1 therapeutic line. Distribution of the number of prior treatments is reported in Figure 2. Carbapenems were the most commonly prescribed antibiotic in the therapeutic line immediately before C/T (25.5% of patients), followed by cephalosporins (18.2% of patients) and penicillins (16.1% of patients). Stop of prior antibiotics was more often due to adaptation to microbiology results (72.3% of cases).
Figure 2.
Number of therapeutic lines for the treatment of the index infection in patients with a documented prescription before C/T initiation. Abbreviation: C/T, ceftolozane/tazobactam.
Ceftolozane/Tazobactam Prescription
Many of the patients receiving C/T were in the intensive care unit (ICU; 44.6%), followed by the pneumology department (11.3%). The most frequently administered daily doses were 3 g/1.5 g and 6 g/3 g, irrespective of severity of illness or higher CCI scores. Figure 3 reports the various C/T daily doses prescribed. Among patients with pneumonia and a creatinine clearance >50 mL/min, we observed a balanced distribution between total daily doses of 3 g/1.5 g or 6 g/3 g.
Figure 3.
Daily dose of C/T prescribed at baseline for documented patients. The dose was missing for 1 patient. Abbreviation: C/T, ceftolozane/tazobactam.
Among the 46 patients with impaired renal function (<50 mL/min), 21 (45.6%) patients were prescribed C/T at daily doses <3 g/1.5 g. Among the 21 patients with glomerular hyperfiltration, 11 (52.4%) received a total daily dose of 6 g/3 g. The median duration of therapy was 10 days for patients with C/T therapy. A longer median duration was observed for patients with C/T and concomitant treatments for 15 days.
Concomitant Treatments
Almost half of the patients (40.7%, n = 72/177) received concomitant antibiotic therapy. Among patients receiving concomitant treatment, 25 patients initiated another antibiotic before C/T start, while concomitant treatment was initiated on the same day as C/T for 50 (69.4%) patients. Of the patients receiving concomitant antibiotics, 15 (21.0%) received 2 or more. Concomitant antibiotics targeting gram-negative bacteria (G– and G+/–) accounted for 73.3% (n = 66/90) of prescriptions. Among patients receiving only 1 concomitant treatment, the most frequently administered classes of antibiotics were aminoglycosides (29.8%, n = 17/57) and fluoroquinolones (21.1%, n = 12/57). The mean duration of concomitant treatment was 16.4 ± 17.5 days, with a median of 11.5 days.
Microbiology Results and Patients With P. aeruginosa Isolates
In total, MDR isolates tested for susceptibility to C/T were found in 149 (84.2%) of all documented patients. Pseudomonas aeruginosa was the species most frequently isolated. From 138 patients, 185 strains of P. aeruginosa were isolated, of which 96.8% were susceptible to C/T. Table 3 reports the microbiology results in detail.
Table 3.
Microbiology Results—MDR Bacteria Isolated From Documented Patients Tested for Susceptibility to C/T
| No. of Patients (n = 149) | No. of Strains (n = 235) | Susceptibility to C/T (n = 221) | Resistance to C/T (n = 14) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Bacteria | ||||
| Citrobacter braakii | 1 | 1 | 1 (100) | - |
| Citrobacter freundii | 1 | 1 | 1 (100) | - |
| Citrobacter koseri | 1 | 1 | 1 (100) | - |
| Enterobacter aerogenes | 1 | 1 | - | 1 (100) |
| Enterobacter cloacae | 5 | 5 | 5 (100) | - |
| Escherichia coli | 11 | 12 | 12 (100) | - |
| Klebsiella aerogenes | 1 | 1 | - | 1 (100) |
| Klebsiella oxytoca | 1 | 1 | 1 (100) | - |
| Klebsiella pneumoniae | 17 | 23 | 19 (82.6) | 4 (17.4) |
| Klebsiella variicola | 1 | 1 | 1 (100) | - |
| Pseudomonas aeruginosa | 138 | 185 | 179 (96.8) | 6 (3.2) |
| Serratia marcescens | 2 | 2 | 1 (50) | 1 (50) |
| Stenotrophomonas maltophilia | 1 | 1 | - | 1 (100) |
Abbreviations: C/T, ceftolozane/tazobactam; MDR, multidrug-resistant.
At inclusion, 90.4% of patients presented with P. aeruginosa (n = 160/177) isolates. Of these, 141 had at least 1 medical antecedent, with chronic pulmonary disease (n = 56), diabetes (n = 47), and renal failure (n = 37) being the most frequent ones. The majority were diagnosed with pneumonia (51.3%, n = 82), 21 with cIAI (13.1%), 19 with bacteraemia (11.9%), and 14 with cUTI (8.8%). Most patients received 1 or more treatments before C/T to treat the index infection (76.9%, n = 123/160), with carbapenems being the most frequently prescribed immediately before C/T (22.8%). The majority of patients received either the 3 g/1.5 g (48.4%, n = 77) or the 6 g/3 g (32.1%, n = 51) C/T daily doses, irrespective of type of index infection. In total, 40.7% of documented P. aeruginosa patients received at least 1 concomitant treatment (n = 68): 23 (33.8%) were initiated before start of C/T, while 48 (70.6%) were initiated on the same day as C/T. The mean duration of concomitant treatment (SD) for this subgroup was 15.8 (17.6) days.
Outcomes (Reasons for Stopping C/T)
Patient outcomes are reported in Table 4. More than two-thirds of all patients stopped C/T thanks to complete cure (63.8%, n = 113/177) or partial cure (7.9%, n = 14/177). Therapy de-escalation following microbiology results was the main reason for C/T discontinuation (11.3%, n = 20/177). C/T was stopped due to treatment failure in 5 (2.8%) patients and due to occurrence of an adverse event (AE) in 3 (1.7%) patients. Of the 177 patients with documented prescriptions, 113 (63.8%) were reported completely cured, while in patients with P. aeruginosa isolates the percentage was slightly higher, with 66.3% (n = 106/160); adaptation to microbiology results was the reason to stop C/T in 15 (9.4%) patients, due to occurrence of an AE in 3 (1.9%) and due to treatment failure in 4 (2.5%). Other reasons were cited for 12 (7.5%) P. aeruginosa–infected patients. In total, 7 (4.4%) deaths were reported at the end of C/T treatment. Four (57.1%) were linked to the index infection.
Table 4.
Description of Outcomes of Reasons for Stopping C/T for Documented Patients
| Outcomes of Reasons for Stopping C/T | Documented Patients (n = 177) |
|---|---|
| Cured | 113 |
| Mean duration of treatment until stop (SD), d | 18.8 (17.3) |
| Median | 15.0 |
| Range | 1.0–115.0 |
| Partial cure | 14 |
| Mean duration of treatment until stop (SD), d | 15.0 (8.2) |
| Median | 11.5 |
| Range | 5.0–31.0 |
| Adaptation to microbiology results | 20 |
| Mean duration of treatment until stop (SD), d | 8.4 (11.8) |
| Median | 4.5 |
| Range | 1.0–49.0 |
| Occurrence of an adverse event leading to stop of C/T | 3 |
| Mean duration of treatment until stop (SD), d | 8.7 (4.0) |
| Median | 8.0 |
| Range | 5.0–13.0 |
| Treatment failure | 5 |
| Mean duration of treatment until stop (SD), d | 8.3 (6.7) |
| Median | 7.5 |
| Range | 1.0–17.0 |
| Death | 7 |
| Mean age at death (SD), y | 66.9 (23.0) |
| Median | 72.3 |
| Range | 19.3–87.5 |
| Mean duration of treatment (SD), d | 11.3 (13.7) |
| Median | 5.0 |
| Range | 2.0–41.0 |
| Death linked to infection | 4 (57.1) |
| Other reasons for stop | 15 |
| Mean duration of treatment until stop (SD), d | 12.7 (12.2) |
| Median | 9.0 |
| Range | 1.0–45.0 |
Abbreviation: C/T, ceftolozane/tazobactam.
DISCUSSION
Phase 3 registration trials should always be confirmed in real-world practice. It is essential to obtain real-world evidence to ascertain the external validity of trial results in routine treatment and to demonstrate the value of the drug [6, 12, 22]. This real-world evidence study sought to add to currently available evidence by assessing the real-world treatment pattern of C/T across several tertiary hospitals in France. The diversity of tertiary hospitals included in this study was interesting given their geographical location across all France and their typology, that is, teaching university hospital, general hospital, public and private–public settings.
Most C/T prescriptions followed the indication of usage and were documented by the results of the antibiogram. This is in line with the HAS guidelines, which recommend avoidance of empirical prescriptions [3]. A majority of patients who received C/T were infected by MDR bacteria and had multiple comorbidities. Despite this, the outcomes among patients treated with C/T were positive, as 63.8% were fully cured. Susceptibility testing demonstrated that there was a high rate of susceptibility to C/T for a majority of the isolates tested, including P. aeruginosa. It should be noted that 96.2% of P. aeruginosa strains were susceptible to C/T. The elaborate microbiology testing highlights the well-organized laboratory system in place in French hospitals. In contrast to randomized controlled trials, 40.7% of patients were on concomitant antibiotic treatment, with a majority targeting gram-negative bacteria [6, 12]. C/T dosing of 3 g/1.5 g and 6 g/3 g daily was evenly distributed among patients with normal creatinine clearance. C/T dose adaptation for subjects with impaired renal function or glomerular hyperfiltration was prescribed for ∼50% of patients. For the remaining patients, dose adaptation was not strictly followed, probably due to their clinical characteristics, such as older age, CCI ≥3–4, and severe comorbidities (data not shown).
It was observed that C/T was mainly prescribed for P. aeruginosa infections. As seen in previous studies, C/T susceptibility was high among P. aeruginosa strains, with 96.8% strains demonstrating C/T susceptibility [23, 24]. As published in other studies, C/T maintains a high level of susceptibility even when MDR or difficult-to-treat resistant (DTR) strains are tested. It should also be noted that C/T’s susceptibility level makes it a drug of choice when treating P. aeruginosa infections, especially in case of resistance to first-line treatments [25, 26].
The rate of complete cure was 63.8%, with low mortality (4.0%, n = 7/177). Treatment failures were also low (2.8%, n = 5). Among these 5 patients, 4 presented with MDR isolates at inclusion, and only 1 developed resistant phenotypes to C/T during treatment. The low rate of development of resistance observed is aligned with observation made during the ASPECT-NP trial, in which no Pseudomonas strains acquired resistance during treatment [27].
Direct comparison of these results with randomized controlled trials like ASPECT is not feasible as the study design did not permit recording of clinical outcomes post–C/T stop for other reasons. Outcomes could be impacted by several factors, including concomitant antimicrobial therapy, delayed treatment, clinical management, and other unobservable factors [6]. Nonetheless, other observational studies like SPECTRA have demonstrated the same results in terms of the efficacy and indications treated [28]. A systematic literature review recently published corroborated those results, demonstrating that C/T is effective in clinical practice, despite the diverse group of seriously ill patients, different levels of resistance of the pathogens treated, and varying dosing regimens used [29].
Our study, being observational in nature, could be impacted by selection bias. We have attempted to limit this by performing consecutive inclusion of patients and the maintenance of a registry to record all C/T prescriptions made at participating sites. Moreover, although the study included only French patients (and, therefore, the generalizability of the results to other countries should be carefully taken into account according to national guidelines), the relatively large cohort provides an adequate description of patients treated with C/T in real-life clinical conditions.
CONCLUSIONS
This real-world prospective study adds to the literature on management of complicated infections using C/T. This is the first study focusing on French patients demonstrating that C/T is mainly used for high-risk patients with complicated infections. Most patients presented with P. aeruginosa infections, mainly MDR, in which C/T achieved 96.8% susceptibility. Overall, the rate of success is encouraging for a real-world study, especially given the severity of included patients.
Supplementary Material
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank members of the Scientific Committee for their valuable advice and support throughout the duration of the study. We acknowledge all the individuals who made a contribution: the patients and their families, the members, and staff from all the centers that participated in the study. The Project Management (study launch, data collection coordination, data management, and statistical analyses) was conducted by ClinSearch–Malakoff (France).
Financial support. This work was supported by Merck Sharp and Dohme (MSD), France, a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA.
Author contributions. 1. Contribution to the concept or design of the article, or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the article: J.F.T., J.M., B.A., X.B., B.C., C.M., D.B., R.R. 2. Drafted the article or revised it critically for important intellectual content; J.F.T., J.M., B.A., X.B., I.B., B.C., C.M., L.M.-T., F.B., D.B., R.R. 3. Approved the version to be published: J.F.T., J.M., B.A., X.B., I.B., B.C., C.M., D.B., R.R. 4. Agreed to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved: J.F.T., X.B., C.M.
Informed consent. Patient consent was obtained before starting the study.
Ethical compliance. In accordance with Articles L. 1123-6 and R. 1123-20 of the Public Health Code, this study was submitted to an ethics committee (Comité de Protection des Personnes [CPP]), which issued a favorable opinion for this investigation. This study was conducted in accordance with the standard methodology related to the processing of personal data used in health research (MR003- CNIL).
Contributor Information
Jean-François Timsit, Réanimation Médicale et Infectieuse, AP-HP Bichat, Paris, France.
Joy Mootien, Unité Fonctionnelle de Conseil en Antibiothérapie, CHU Mulhouse, Mulhouse, France.
Brune Akrich, MSD France, Puteaux, France.
Xavier Bourge, MSD France, Puteaux, France.
Isabelle Brassac, MSD France, Puteaux, France.
Bernard Castan, Service de Médecine Interne et Maladies Infectieuses, CH Périgueux, Périgueux, France.
Carole Mackosso, MSD France, Puteaux, France.
Linsay Monteiro Tavares, ClinSearch, Malakoff, France.
Fabrice Ruiz, ClinSearch, Malakoff, France.
David Boutoille, Service des Maladies Infectieuses, Nantes Université, CIC 1413, Inserm, Nantes, France.
Raymond Ruimy, Laboratoire Médicale, CHU Nice, Nice.
Supplementary Data
Supplementary materials are available at Open Forum Infectious Diseases online. Consisting of data provided by the authors to benefit the reader, the posted materials are not copyedited and are the sole responsibility of the authors, so questions or comments should be addressed to the corresponding author.
References
- 1. Watkins RR, Bonomo RA. Increasing prevalence of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae and strategies to avert a looming crisis. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther 2013; 11:543–5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Jacobson KL, Cohen SH, Inciardi JF, et al. The relationship between antecedent antibiotic use and resistance to extended-spectrum cephalosporins in group I beta-lactamase-producing organisms. Clin Infect Dis 1995; 21:1107–13. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Haute Autorité de Santé (HAS) . Antibiothérapie des infections à entérobactéries et à Pseudomonasaeruginosa chez l’adulte: place des carbapénèmes et de leurs alter-natives. 2019. Available at: https://www.has-sante.fr/upload/docs/application/pdf/2019-06/synthese_infections_enterobacteries.pdf. Accessed 1 July 2023.
- 4. Titelman E, Karlsson IM, Ge Y, Giske CG. In vitro activity of CXA-101 plus tazobactam (CXA-201) against CTX-M-14–and CTX-M-15–producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2011; 70:137–41. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Sader HS, Farrell DJ, Flamm RK, Jones RN. Ceftolozane/tazobactam activity tested against aerobic gram-negative organisms isolated from intra-abdominal and urinary tract infections in European and United States hospitals (2012). J Infect 2014; 69:266–77. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Castan B, Akrich B, Levy-Bachelot L, et al. Real-world evaluation of ceftolozane/tazobactam therapy and clinical outcomes in France. Infect Dis Now 2021; 51:532–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Ministère des Affaires Sociales et de la Santé . Arrêté du 26 juillet 2016 modifiant la liste des spécialités pharmaceutiques agréées à l’usage des collectivités et divers services publics. 2016. Available at: https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/download/pdf? id=SRej_KDAUdP9pmCl9KeI6YPCIFRafx3LLgujSD-i24w. Accessed 1 July 2023.
- 8. Ministère des Affaires Sociales et de la Santé . Arrêté du 3 mars 2020 modifiant la liste des spécialités pharmaceutiques agréées à l'usage des collectivités et divers services publics. 2020. Available at: https://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/download/pdf? id=Vq9iu9Vg-IaPc6MdzqOrmYOIURU_fHHytH0XV8ClOKk. Accessed 1 July 2023.
- 9. Wagenlehner FM, Umeh O, Steenbergen J, Yuan G, Darouiche RO. Ceftolozane-tazobactam compared with levofloxacin in the treatment of complicated urinary-tract infections, including pyelonephritis: a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial (ASPECT-cUTI). Lancet 2015; 385:1949–56. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Solomkin J, Hershberger E, Miller B, et al. Ceftolozane/tazobactam plus metronidazole for complicated intra-abdominal infections in an era of multidrug resistance: results from a randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial (ASPECT-cIAI). Clin Infect Dis 2015; 60:1462–71. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11. Kollef MH, Nováček M, Kivistik Ü, et al. Ceftolozane–tazobactam versus meropenem for treatment of nosocomial pneumonia (ASPECT-NP): a randomised, controlled, double-blind, phase 3, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Infect Dis 2019; 19:1299–311. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12. Jorgensen SCJ, Trinh TD, Zasowski EJ, et al. Real-world experience with ceftolozane-tazobactam for multidrug-resistant gram-negative bacterial infections. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2020; 64:e02291-19. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Castón JJ, De la Torre Á, Ruiz-Camps I, et al. Salvage therapy with ceftolozane-tazobactam for multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2017; 61:e02136-16. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14. Munita JM, Aitken SL, Miller WR, et al. Multicenter evaluation of ceftolozane/tazobactam for serious infections caused by carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Clin Infect Dis 2017; 65:158–61. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15. Hakki M, Lewis JS. Ceftolozane-tazobactam therapy for multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections in patients with hematologic malignancies and hematopoietic-cell transplant recipients. Infection 2018; 46:431–4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16. Haidar G, Philips NJ, Shields RK, et al. Ceftolozane-tazobactam for the treatment of multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections: clinical effectiveness and evolution of resistance. Clin Infect Dis 2017; 65:110–20. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17. Gallagher JC, Satlin MJ, Elabor A, et al. Ceftolozane-tazobactam for the treatment of multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa infections: a multicenter study. Open Forum Infect Dis 2018; 5:XXX–XX. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18. Dietl B, Sánchez I, Arcenillas P, et al. Ceftolozane/tazobactam in the treatment of osteomyelitis and skin and soft-tissue infections due to extensively drug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa: clinical and microbiological outcomes. Int J Antimicrob Agents 2018; 51:498–502. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 1987; 40:373–83. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20. Lambden S, Laterre PF, Levy MM, Francois B. The SOFA score-development, utility and challenges of accurate assessment in clinical trials. Crit Care 2019; 23:374. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21. Magiorakos AP, Srinivasan A, Carey RB, et al. Multidrug-resistant, extensively drug-resistant and pandrug-resistant bacteria: an international expert proposal for interim standard definitions for acquired resistance. Clin Microbiol Infect 2012; 18:268–81. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22. Booth CM, Karim S, Mackillop WJ. Real-world data: towards achieving the achievable in cancer care. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2019; 16:312–25. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23. Farrell DJ, Flamm RK, Sader HS, Jones RN. Antimicrobial activity of ceftolozane-tazobactam tested against Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa with various resistance patterns isolated in US hospitals (2011–2012). Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2013; 57:6305–10. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24. Livermore DM, Mushtaq S, Meunier D, et al. Activity of ceftolozane/tazobactam against surveillance and ‘problem’ Enterobacteriaceae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and non-fermenters from the British isles. J Antimicrob Chemother 2017; 72:2278–89. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25. Moise PA, Gonzalez M, Alekseeva I, et al. Collective assessment of antimicrobial susceptibility among the most common gram-negative respiratory pathogens driving therapy in the ICU. JAC Antimicrob Resist 2021; 3:dlaa129. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26. Sader HS, Carvalhaes CG, Shortridge D, Castanheira M. Comparative activity of newer β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitor combinations against Pseudomonas aeruginosa from patients hospitalized with pneumonia in European medical centers in 2020. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 2022; 41:319–24. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27. Johnson MG, Bruno C, Castanheira M, et al. Evaluating the emergence of nonsusceptibility among Pseudomonas aeruginosa respiratory isolates from a phase-3 clinical trial for treatment of nosocomial pneumonia (ASPECT-NP). Int J Antimicrob Agents 2021; 57:106278. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28. Soriano A, Puzniak LA, Paterson D, et al. 673. Study of prescribing patterns and effectiveness of ceftolozane/tazobactam real-world analysis (SPECTRA): results from a multi-national, multicenter observational study. Open Forum Infect Dis 2022; 9(Suppl 2):XXX–XX. [Google Scholar]
- 29. Puzniak L, Dillon R, Palmer T, Collings H, Enstone A. Real-world use of ceftolozane/tazobactam: a systematic literature review. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control 2021; 10:68. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
Associated Data
This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.