1. Trang chủ
  2. » Tất cả

A RCT of sitafloxacin vs ertapenem for AP caused by ESBL

7 11 0

Đang tải... (xem toàn văn)

THÔNG TIN TÀI LIỆU

Thông tin cơ bản

Định dạng
Số trang 7
Dung lượng 345,83 KB

Các công cụ chuyển đổi và chỉnh sửa cho tài liệu này

Nội dung

Original Articleswitch therapy after treatment for acute pyelonephritis caused by Chitprasong Malaisria, Angsana Phuphuakrata, Arrug Wibulpolprasertb, Pitak Santanirandc, Sasisopin Kiert

Trang 1

Original Article

switch therapy after treatment for acute pyelonephritis caused by

Chitprasong Malaisria, Angsana Phuphuakrata, Arrug Wibulpolprasertb,

Pitak Santanirandc, Sasisopin Kiertiburanakula,*

a Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand

b Department of Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand

c Department of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:

Received 23 January 2017

Received in revised form

8 April 2017

Accepted 11 May 2017

Available online xxx

Keywords:

Pyelonephritis

Ertapenem

Extended-spectrum beta lactamase (ESBL)

Escherichia coli

Sitafloxacin

a b s t r a c t

Background: The overuse and misuse of carbapenems have contributed to the antibiotic resistance crisis The role of oralfluoroquinolones as a switch therapy for the treatment of urinary tract infection from Escherichia coli (ESBL-EC) is limited

Objective: To compare the clinical and bacteriological efficacy of sitafloxacin and ertapenem for non-bacteremic acute pyelonephritis caused by ESBL-EC

Methods: A prospective randomized controlled trial of patients with acute pyelonephritis caused by ESBL-EC was performed as a pilot study One of the carbapenems was initially given to the patients After day 3, patients were randomized to receive either sitafloxacin or ertapenem

Results: Thirty-six patients were enrolled: 19 (52.8%) in the sitafloxacin group and 17 (47.2%) in the ertapenem group There was no statistically significant difference in baseline characteristics between the two groups except a lower proportion of previous urinary catheter insertion in the sitafloxacin group (15.8% vs 52.9%, p¼ 0.018) Signs and symptoms at presentation were similar between the two groups except a higher proportion of patients with chills in the sitafloxacin group (68.4% vs 29.4%, p ¼ 0.019) At day 10, all but one patient in the ertapenem group had clinical cure Microbiological eradication was comparable between the sitafloxacin and ertapenem groups (84.2% vs 75%, p ¼ 0.677) There were no significant adverse effects

Conclusions: Treatment of non-bacteremic acute pyelonephritis caused by ESBL-EC with carbapenem followed by oral sitafloxacin is effective and well-tolerated Sitafloxacin may be considered as an alter-native choice of switch therapy in this clinical setting

© 2017 Japanese Society of Chemotherapy and The Japanese Association for Infectious Diseases

Published by Elsevier Ltd All rights reserved

1 Introduction

As many as 80% of urinary tract infections (UTIs) are caused by

Escherichia coli [1,2] Since the first clinical isolation in 1983,

extended-spectrumb-lactamase (ESBL)-producing organisms have become recognized as a worldwide problem, and their incidence has been increasing[3,4] ESBLs, which are found predominantly in Klebsiella pneumoniae and E coli, can hydrolyze all penicillins, cephalosporins, and monobactams[5], but they do not affect car-bapenems (e.g imipenem or meropenem) Cephamycins (e.g cefoxitin and cefotetan) are not hydrolyzed by majority of ESBLs, but they are hydrolyzed by associated AmpC-type b-lactamase ESBL-producing E coli (ESBL-EC) are now a frequent cause of infection in the community and in healthcare centers [6e8] In recent years, an increase in infection with such ESBL-producing organisms has been observed in outpatient settings, especially

* Presentation: Parts of this manuscript were presented at the 24th European

Congress of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (Barcelona), May 10e13,

2014 [abstract P0253].

* Corresponding author Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Medicine,

Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok 10400,

Thailand Fax: þ66 2 201 2232.

E-mail address: sasisopin.kie@mahidol.ac.th (S Kiertiburanakul).

Contents lists available atScienceDirect

Journal of Infection and Chemotherapy

jo u rn a l h o m e p a g e :h t t p : / / w w w e l s e v i e r c o m / l o c a t e / j i c

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jiac.2017.05.005

1341-321X/© 2017 Japanese Society of Chemotherapy and The Japanese Association for Infectious Diseases Published by Elsevier Ltd All rights reserved.

J Infect Chemother xxx (2017) 1e7

Trang 2

related to UTIs, and treatment options have been reduced to a

limited number of antibiotics[9e11]

Treatment of infection with ESBL-EC is difficult because the

or-ganisms are frequently resistant to multiple antibiotics

Carbape-nems, which are not affected by ESBLs, are considered the drugs of

choice for treating severe infections caused by ESBL-producing

organisms In vitro, ESBL-producing organisms may sometimes

appear to be susceptible tob-lactams/b-lactamase inhibitors,

third-and fourth-generation cephalosporins, aminoglycosides, third-and

fluo-roquinolones Susceptibility rates for these antibiotics are 0e80%,

depending on the geographical location of the study site[12,13]

Clinicians are increasingly considering using carbapenems either as

empiric or definitive therapy in moderate or severe

community-onset and nosocomial infections whenever an ESBL-producing

or-ganism is suspected or demonstrated This may be leading to an

increase in the consumption of carbapenems, which is particularly

worrisome in a scenario where carbapenemase-producing

organ-isms are also spreading [14,15] In addition, widespread use of

carbapenems may be associated with further selection of

patho-gens with acquired (K pneumoniae, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and

Acinetobacter baumannii) and inherited (Stenotrophomonas

malto-philia) antibiotic resistance[16,17] Thus, alternatives to

carbape-nems for the treatment of ESBL-producing organism infections are

urgently needed

Fluoroquinolones may be considered as the treatment of choice

for UTIs due to ESBL-producing organisms if there is no in vitro

resistance to fluoroquinolones [18] Unfortunately, increasing

in vitro resistance of ESBL-producing organisms tofluoroquinolones

could limit the role of these antibiotics in the future [6]

Sita-floxacin, a broad-spectrum oral fluoroquinolone, is active against

many gram-positive, gram-negative, and anaerobic bacteria,

including strains resistant to other fluoroquinolones[19] It was

approved in Japan for the treatment of respiratory tract infection

and genitourinary tract infection Several in vitro activity studies

regarding sitafloxacin have been conducted showing that

sita-floxacin is very active against a variety of bacteria, including

Streptococcus pneumoniae, Staphylococcus aureus,

Enterobacteri-aceae, P aeruginosa, A baumannii, and Bacteroides fragilis[20e24]

Furthermore, a recent in vitro activity study found that sitafloxacin

is more active than levofloxacin, ciprofloxacin, and moxifloxacin

against bacteria isolated from patients with UTIs, including

antibiotic-resistant bacteria such as ESBL-producing

gram-nega-tives, and carbapenem-resistant A baumannii[25]

The aim of our study was to evaluate sitafloxacin as compared to

ertapenem as a switch therapy for the treatment of non-bacteremic

acute pyelonephritis caused by ESBL-EC Clinical and bacteriological

outcomes of participants were evaluated We hypothesized that if

sitafloxacin could be successfully applied in this clinical setting, the

lower rate of carbapenem use might reduce multi-drug resistant

organism problems

2 Materials and methods

2.1 Study design

A prospective, open-label, randomized, controlled trial was

conducted at Ramathibodi Hospital, a 1200-bed university hospital

in Bangkok, Thailand, from November 2012 to June 2015 Written

informed consent was obtained from all patients The protocol was

approved by the institutional review board of the Faculty of

Med-icine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University This study was

registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under registration number

NCT02537847

When the results of urine culture were reported, the patients

were then allocated to oral sitafloxacin treatment or intravenous

(IV) ertapenem treatment in a 1:1 ratio After randomization, all patients were initially given one of the IV carbapenems for 3 days and then switched to oral sitafloxacin or IV ertapenem Carbape-nems included meropenem 1 gm IV every 8 h, imipenem 500 mg IV every 6 h, doripenem 500 mg IV every 8 h, and ertapenem 1 gm IV once daily Randomization was performed using a computer-generated random number allocation schedule with a block size

of four The patients were allocated to the sitafloxacin group or the ertapenem group determining by the sealed envelope method The total duration of antibiotic treatment was 10 days

2.2 Patients Both hospitalized and non-hospitalized patients were consid-ered eligible if they: (1) were over 18 years of age; (2) had a pre-sumptive diagnosis of acute pyelonephritis, defined as pyuria (10 leukocytes per high-powerfield (HPF) in urine analysis) combined with all of the following: fever (body temperature 38C), urinary

syndrome (dysuria, urgency, or urinary frequency),flank pain, or costovertebral angle tenderness; (3) had positive urine culture of

105colony-forming units (CFU)/mL ESBL-EC; and (4) voluntarily consented to be enrolled in the study Exclusion criteria were as follows: (1) urine culture growing more than one organism; (2) severe sepsis or septic shock; (3) positive hemoculture; (4) had other sources of infection; (5) known mechanical abnormality of the urinary tract; (6) immunocompromised host, e.g receiving prednisolone >15 mg/day, post-organ transplantation, aplastic anemia, or solid and hematologic malignancy receiving chemo-therapy; (7) retaining Foley catheter; (8) pregnancy or lactation; (9) previous UTIs within four weeks; and (10) contraindication to flu-oroquinolones and/or carbapenems

All eligible patients were given one of the carbapenems as an initial antibiotic agent After day 3, patient were enrolled and randomized to either the sitafloxacin or ertapenem group All an-tibiotics were renally adjusted according to creatinine clearance (CrCl), as calculated by the CockcrofteGault equation For patients receiving sitafloxacin, the dosage for those with CrCl more than

50 mL/min was 100 mg twice daily Among patients with renal impairment, the dosage was 50 mg once daily for patients with CrCl

30e50 mL/min and 50 mg every 48 h for those with CrCl 10e30 mL/ min Patients who were allocated to the ertapenem group were given ertapenem 1 g infused over 30 min once daily; the dosage was 0.5 g once daily for patients with CrCl<30 mL/min

On the day of enrollment, initial laboratory evaluation included complete blood count (CBC), hemoculture, serum creatinine (Cr), alanine aminotransferase (ALT), urinalysis (UA), and urine culture (UC) The follow-up laboratory monitoring at day 3 and day 10 included CBC, hemoculture, ALT (day 10 only), UA, and UC On day 7, clinical assessment of treatment outcomes, both symptoms and drug tolerability, was performed by interviewing the patients at the ward or via telephone if the patient had been discharged Adher-ence to medication was checked by pill-counting and medical re-cords The tolerability of study drugs and occurrence of adverse events (AEs) were evaluated by a physician At the last follow-up visit on day 30, UA and UC were reassessed The patients were evaluated for clinical signs and symptoms of acute pyelonephritis at the clinic on day 10 and day 30 During the study period, based on clinical judgment the physician could terminate the treatment for safety reasons or due to abnormal laboratoryfindings attributed to sitafloxacin or ertapenem administration

2.3 Study outcomes The clinical responses were based on clinical signs and symp-toms of acute pyelonephritis as determined by physical

C Malaisri et al / J Infect Chemother xxx (2017) 1e7 2

Trang 3

examination, including body temperature, costovertebral angle

tenderness, and urinary syndrome Primary clinical outcomes were

cure vs failure at day 10 Cure was defined as free of symptoms;

failure was defined as persistent symptoms Secondary clinical

outcome was recurrent which was defined as new onset of clinical

signs and symptoms at the end of the study or at day 30

The bacteriological responses were assessed by quantitative

urine culture at day 10 It was categorized as either: (1) eradication,

defined as yielding sterile UC; (2) persistence, defined as 104CFU/

mL ESBL-EC grown from UC; or (3) superinfection, defined as an

emergence of a new bacterial isolate (another organisms, not

ESBL-EC)105CFU/mL grown from UC

2.4 Microbiology

All hemoculture and UC isolates were identified at the

micro-biology laboratory, Department of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine

Ramathibodi Hospital All isolates were tested for ESBL production

by the combined disk method, according to Clinical and Laboratory

Standards Institute (CLSI) recommendations[26] Pathogens

iden-tified from UC were tested for in vitro susceptibility to ampicillin,

gentamicin, amikacin, amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, piperacillin/

tazobactam, cefuroxime, ceftriaxone, ceftazidime, cefepime,

ami-kacin, trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole, ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin,

ertapenem, imipenem, meropenem, colistin, and tigecycline by the

minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) method, following the CLSI

2012 guidelines In vitro susceptibility to sitafloxacin was

deter-mined by the disk diffusion method The resistance breakpoint

used for sitafloxacin was >2 mg/L (zone size <16 mm)[27]

2.5 Statistical analysis

The intention-to-treat principle was applied based on the initial

treatment assignment and not on the treatment eventually

received Median with interquartile range (IQR) and frequencies (%)

were used to describe patients' characteristics Chi-square or

Fisher's exact test was used to compare categorical variables

be-tween the two groups Student's t test or ManneWhitney U was

used to compare continuous variables between the two groups All

p-values were two-tailed with those less than 0.05 considered

statistically significant Stata version 12.0 (StataCorp, College

Sta-tion, TX, USA) was used for all statistical analysis

3 Results

Thirty-six patients (24 women and 12 men) with a presumptive

diagnosis of acute pyelonephritis were enrolled (Fig 1) They were

randomized into either the sitafloxacin group (19 patients, 52.8%)

or the ertapenem group (17 patients, 47.2%) One patient in the

ertapenem group passed away from secretion obstruction on day 7

after randomization Baseline characteristics, clinical signs and

symptoms, laboratory results, and risk factors for

antimicrobial-resistant uropathogens of both groups were generally

compara-ble There was no statistically significant difference in baseline

characteristics between the two groups except there was a higher

proportion of previous urinary catheter insertion during the last 3

months in the ertapenem group (52.9% vs 15.8%, p¼ 0.018) Signs

and symptoms at hospital presentation were similar except a

higher proportion of patients with chills in the sitafloxacin group

(68.4% vs 29.4%, p¼ 0.019) Baseline characteristics of the patients

are shown inTable 1

All patients had good compliance They received a seven-day

course of either sitafloxacin or ertapenem according to the

proto-col The outcomes of treatment at day 10 were as the following; the

clinical cure rates were 100% in the sitafloxacin group and 94.1% in

the ertapenem group (p¼ 0.472) Bacterial eradication was 84.2% and 75.0% in sitafloxacin and ertapenem groups, respectively (p¼ 0.472) Two patients in the sitafloxacin group had persistent ESBL-EC infection One patient in the sitafloxacin group and four patients in the ertapenem group had superinfection Urine culture

of one patient in sitafloxacin group grew 105 CFU/mL of ESBL-producing K pneumoniae (ESBL-KP) and that of four patients in the ertapenem group grew Enterococcus spp

For the outcomes of treatment at day 30, two patients in the sitafloxacin group had recurrent acute pyelonephritis Clinical and bacteriological outcomes of the two groups are shown inTable 2 The stratified analysis by complicated (n ¼ 31) and uncomplicated pyelonephritis (n¼ 5) condition was performed Complicated py-elonephritis was defined as male, age >60 years, had diabetes mellitus or malignancy, receiving steroid, chemotherapy or radia-tion, and having anatomical/functional abnormality of the urinary system There was no statistically significant different in clinical cure rate at day 10 among patients with complicated pyelonephritis (100% in sitafloxacin group vs 93.8% in ertapenem group,

p¼ 0.999) and those with uncomplicated pyelonephritis (100% in sitafloxacin group vs 100% in ertapenem group, p ¼ 0.999) In addition, there was no statistically significant different in recurrent rate at day 30 among patients with complicated pyelonephritis (6.7% in sitafloxacin group vs 0% in ertapenem group, p ¼ 0.999) and those with uncomplicated pyelonephritis (25% in sitafloxacin group vs 0% in ertapenem group, p¼ 0.999)

Antibiotic susceptibilities of 36 isolates of ESBL-EC were all susceptible to tested carbapenems including ertapenem, imipe-nem, meropeimipe-nem, and doripenem They also showed high sus-ceptible rate to sitafloxacin (94.4%) comparing to ciprofloxacin (25.0%) and levofloxacin (25.0%) In addition, amikacin showed a similar susceptible rate as sitafloxacin while only 30.6% were sus-ceptible to gentamicin (Table 3) All ESBL-EC isolated from patients

in sitafloxacin group were susceptible to sitafloxacin

AEs were observed in one patient in the sitafloxacin group, giving an incidence of 5.3% This patient developed diarrhea, but the symptom resolved spontaneously within 3 days Sitafloxacin was continued without any remedial action Liver function test findings were within the normal range in both groups

4 Discussion Our primary aim was tofind an oral antimicrobial agent that could be substituted for IV carbapenem for the treatment of acute pyelonephritis caused by ESBL-EC as a switch therapy This study was thefirst randomized controlled trial regarding the use of flu-oroquinolones for treatment of this condition The results indicated that the overall clinical cure rate of acute pyelonephritis caused by ESBL-EC infection and the microbiological outcome of patients receiving sitafloxacin were not significantly different from those who received ertapenem, when sitafloxacin was used as a switch therapy after empirical carbapenem treatment

The only current proven therapeutic option for severe infections caused by ESBL-producing organisms is the carbapenem family However, carbapenems are currently available only in IV form The option of using ertapenem once a day makes it a useful parenteral antimicrobial agent for the treatment of serious UTIs in nursing homes and outpatient health care settings [28,29] Ertapenem is also an ideal choice for outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT) because of its once-daily dosage Previous studies have found that OPAT results in considerable cost savings compared with inpatient care[30], while at the same time being preferred by most patients [31] However, some patients are not comfortable receiving OPAT, and it might induce a local IV reaction, such as phlebitis

C Malaisri et al / J Infect Chemother xxx (2017) 1e7 3

Trang 4

Assessed for eligibility (n=36)

Randomized (n = 36)

Allocated to sitafloxacin (n = 19) Received allocated intervention (n = 19)

Allocated to ertapenem (n = 17) Received allocated intervention (n = 17)

Lost to follow-up at day 30 (n = 4)

Lost to follow-up at day 30 (n = 3)

Died from secretion obstruction (n = 1)

Fig 1 Flow diagram of enrollment of patients with acute pyelonephritis.

Table 1

Baseline characteristics of the 36 patients.

Median (IQR) duration of fever, days 2 (1.0e3.0) 1 (1.0e2.0) 0.851 Risk factors for antimicrobial-resistant uropathogens in the last 3 months, n (%)

Clinical signs and symptoms, n (%)

Underlying disease, n (%)

Laboratory data

Median (IQR) white blood cells at day 0, cells/mm 3 12,870 (11,010e15,800) 11,850 (9680e17,870) 0.438 Median (IQR) white blood cells at day 3, cells/mm 3 7330 (6100e11,680) 8000 (6500e9500) 0.812 Median (IQR) baseline white cells in urine, cells/HPF 75 (35e200) 150 (75e200) 0.548 Median (IQR) baseline serum creatinine, mg/dL 1.03 (0.91e1.16) 1.03 (0.78e1.58) 0.824 Median (IQR) baseline ALT, U/L 51.0 (32.0e91.0) 46.0 (29.0e55.0) 0.326 ALT, alanine aminotransferase; COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; HIV, human immunodeficiency virus; HPF, high-power field; IQR, interquartile range.

a Urinary syndrome: dysuria, urgency, or urinary frequency.

C Malaisri et al / J Infect Chemother xxx (2017) 1e7 4

Trang 5

Sitafloxacin is active against most bacterial isolates collected

from patients with UTIs The activity of sitafloxacin against

multidrug-resistant (MDR) gram-negative bacteria, such as

ESBL-EC and ESBL-KP, was found to be comparable to or greater than

that of someb-lactam/b-lactamase inhibitors, cephalosporins, or

carbapenems[25] Since sitafloxacin is available in oral

formula-tion, it is a convenient therapy for infections in outpatient settings

as well as hospitalized patients who do not require parenteral

an-tibiotics, and can also be used as a continued therapy after

paren-teral therapy with other antibiotics Although some previous

studies found that carbapenems were superior tofluoroquinolones

in serious infections [32,33], other studies reported equivalent

effectiveness of fluoroquinolones and carbapenems in the

treat-ment of bacteremia caused by ESBL-EC and ESBL-KP[34,35]

The resistance patterns of uropathogens have changed signi

fi-cantly over the past few decades worldwide; the proportion of

ESBL-producing organisms has gradually increased to 17.9e27.7% [36] The 2009e2010 Study for Monitoring Antimicrobial Resis-tance Trends also found that ciprofloxacin and levofloxacin were not effective against ESBL-positive isolates, with only 14.6% and 15.9% susceptible, respectively [36] Several other studies also found high rates of resistance to ciprofloxacin (71e84.8%)[37e39] Thus, the increasing in vitro resistance of ESBL-producing organ-isms tofluoroquinolones has limited the role of these antibiotics In

a study by Tiengrim et al., sitafloxacin demonstrated in vitro activity against 58%e85% of ESBL-EC isolates from Thai patients with UTIs and lower respiratory tract infections[25]

Our study revealed that oral sitafloxacin was clinically and microbiologically effective and well-tolerated in patients with non-bacteremic acute pyelonephritis caused by ESBL-EC The dosage of sitafloxacin (100 mg twice daily) was not therapeutically inferior to that of ertapenem (1 g once daily), given that ESBL-EC was

Table 2

Clinical and bacteriological outcomes of 36 patients at the follow-up visits.

Primary clinical outcomes, n (%)

Secondary clinical outcome, n (%)

Bacteriological outcomes, n (%)

Superinfection at day 10

Positive urine culture at day 30

Median (IQR) white blood cells at day 10, cells/mm 3 7690 (5900e10,010) 8405 (6625e9680) 0.596 Median (IQR) ALT at day 10, U/L 41.0 (36.0e67.0) 39.0 (28.5e56.0) 0.456 ALT, alanine aminotransferase; ESBL-EC, extended-spectrumb-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli; ESBL-KP, extended-spectrumb-lactamase-producing Klebsiella pneu-moniae; IQR, interquartile range.

Table 3

Antibiotic resistance patterns of 36 ESBL-producing E coli isolates.

Antimicrobial drugs Sitafloxacin

n (%)

Ertapenem

n (%)

P value MIC breakpoints (mg/mL) a

Amoxicillin/clavulanic acid 6 (31.6) 6 (35.3) 0.813 8/4 16/8 32/16

Trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole 14 (73.7) 8 (50.0) 0.149 2/38 4/76

I, indeterminate, R, resistant, S, susceptible.

a Clinical Lab Standards Institute, Performance standards for antimicrobial susceptibility testing; eighteenth informational supplement CLSI document M02-A12 and M07-A10, Wayne, PA: Clinical and Lab Standards Institute, 2016.

b MIC breakpoints 2mg/mL was equivalent to zone diameter breakpoints 16 mm.

c Tigecycline local Product document, rev no.: 4.1 (S22 þ N22): September 07, 2015.

C Malaisri et al / J Infect Chemother xxx (2017) 1e7 5

Trang 6

susceptible to sitafloxacin The overall favorable microbiological

response was 84.2% of the patients receiving sitafloxacin and 75.0%

of those receiving ertapenem In this study, the clinical efficacy of

switch therapy from carbapenems to sitafloxacin was comparable

to ertapenem therapy, demonstrating that sitafloxacin is highly

effective as a switch therapy in the management of non-bacteremic

acute pyelonephritis There could be several explanations for this

Firstly, sitafloxacin is a new oral fluoroquinolone with a low MIC

against uropathogens and favorable pharmacokinetics [35]

Sec-ondly, the exclusion criteria of this study eliminated patients with

serious infection (bacteremia and severe sepsis/septic shock)

Finally, the median duration of acute pyelonephritis symptoms was

only 1 or 2 days, which might be classified as early detection of the

disease For these reasons, the clinical cure rate in the current study

was very high

For superinfection, one ESBL-KP was found in the sitafloxacin

group and four Enterococcus spp were found in the ertapenem

group These patients had no symptoms Thus, positive bacterial

growth was asymptomatic bacteriuria This might be because

sitafloxacin was found to be active against 43%e59% of

Entero-coccus spp [25], while ertapenem was not active against

Enterococcus spp

In this study, the overall safety profile and local tolerability of

sitafloxacin were similar to those of ertapenem The most common

sitafloxacin-related AEs previously reported were headache, mild

gastrointestinal symptoms (diarrhea) (17.2%), and mild to moderate

elevation of aminotransferase levels (16.2%) [40] Kawada et al

reported that the proportion of AEs was significantly higher in

patients with complicated UTIs who received sitafloxacin

compared with those who received levofloxacin (24.6% vs 11.6%,

p¼ 0.008)[41] Another study revealed that diarrhea was a more

commonly reported adverse reaction among sitafloxacin recipients

than among those receiving levofloxacin (7.9% vs 4.3%) [42]

However, in our study only one patient in the sitafloxacin group

(5.3%) had diarrhea

The strengths of this study include: its well-defined design;

evaluation of recurrent acute pyelonephritis at approximately 3

weeks after the end of treatment; a high proportion of patient

adherence to medication; and no drop-out patients before the

end of treatment However, this study has some potential

weaknesses that should be taken into consideration Firstly, the

study was only performed at a single center, and local

antimi-crobial susceptibility patterns of ESBL-EC might differ from place

to place Secondly, ultrasonography was not routinely performed

in all patients due to the budget constraints Thus, some patients

might have had complicated pyelonephritis, which could

contribute to unfavorable treatment response Finally, the study

had a limited sample size

In conclusion, our study demonstrated favorable clinical and

microbiological outcomes for sitafloxacin as a switch therapy in the

majority of patients with non-bacteremic acute pyelonephritis

caused by ESBL-EC A treatment regimen of carbapenem followed

by sitafloxacin was effective and well-tolerated among patients

with acute pyelonephritis A large prospective study to determine

the clinical efficacy of sitafloxacin for treatment of ESBL-producing

gram-negative bacterial infections is warranted

Conflict of interest

This study was supported by a grant from Daiichi Sankyo

(Thailand) Ltd This study was designed by the authors Sitafloxacin

was provided by Daiichi Sankyo (Thailand) Ltd, which had no part

in the design or performance of the study, in the data analysis, in

the writing or editing of the manuscript, or in the decision to

submit the manuscript for publication

Acknowledgements

We thank all patients who participated in this study The author would like to thank the staff of the Department of Medicine and Department of Emergency Medicine, Faculty of Medicine Ram-athibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, for taking care of patients

We also would like to thank the staff of Department of Pathology, Faculty of Medicine Ramathibodi Hospital, Mahidol University, for doing bacteria culture and susceptibility testing

References [1] Foxman B Epidemiology of urinary tract infections: incidence, morbidity, and economic costs Am J Med 2002;113(Suppl 1A):5Se13S

[2] Ronald A The etiology of urinary tract infection: traditional and emerging pathogens Dis Mon 2003;49:71e82

[3] Livermore DM.b-Lactamase-mediated resistance and opportunities for its control J Antimicrob Chemother 1998;41(Suppl D):25e41

[4] Thaden JT, Fowler VG, Sexton DJ, Anderson DJ Increasing incidence of extended-spectrum b-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli in community hospitals throughout the southeastern United States Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2016;37:49e54

[5] Paterson DL, Ko WC, Von Gottberg A, Casellas JM, Mulazimoglu L, Klugman KP,

et al Outcome of cephalosporin treatment for serious infections due to apparently susceptible organisms producing extended-spectrum b -lacta-mases: implications for the clinical microbiology laboratory J Clin Microbiol 2001;39:2206e12

[6] Paterson DL, Bonomo RA Extended-spectrumb-lactamases: a clinical update Clin Microbiol Rev 2005;18:657e86

[7] Pitout JDD, Laupland KB Extended-spectrumb-lactamase-producing Entero-bacteriaceae: an emerging public-health concern Lancet Infect Dis 2008;8: 159e66

[8] Rodríguez-Ba~no J, Pascual A Clinical significance of extended-spectrum beta-lactamases Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther 2008;6:671e83

[9] Chaudhary U, Aggarwal R Extended spectrumb-lactamases (ESBL) e an emerging threat to clinical therapeutics Indian J Med Microbiol 2004;22:75e80 [10] Paterson DL Resistance in gram-negative bacteria: Enterobacteriaceae Am J Infect Control 2006;34:S20e8 discussion S64e73

[11] Turner PJ Extended-spectrumb-lactamases Clin Infect Dis 2005;41(Suppl 4): S273e5

[12] Goossens H, MYSTIC Study Group MYSTIC program: summary of European data from 1997 to 2000 Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2001;41:183e9 [13] Winokur PL, Canton R, Casellas JM, Legakis N Variations in the prevalence of strains expressing an extended-spectrumb-lactamase phenotype and char-acterization of isolates from Europe, the Americas, and the Western Pacific region Clin Infect Dis 2001;32(Suppl 2):S94e103

[14] Kumarasamy KK, Toleman MA, Walsh TR, Bagaria J, Butt F, Balakrishnan R,

et al Emergence of a new antibiotic resistance mechanism in India, Pakistan, and the UK: a molecular, biological, and epidemiological study Lancet Infect Dis 2010;10:597e602

[15] Schwaber MJ, Carmeli Y Carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae: a poten-tial threat JAMA 2008;300:2911e3

[16] Bradford PA Extended-spectrumb-lactamases in the 21st century: charac-terization, epidemiology, and detection of this important resistance threat Clin Microbiol Rev 2001;14:933e51

[17] Cunha BA Pseudomonas aeruginosa: resistance and therapy Semin Respir Infect 2002;17:231e9

[18] Ranjan KP, Ranjan N Complicated urinary tract infection caused by extended spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli Urol Ann 2014;6:112e3 [19] Keating GM Sitafloxacin: in bacterial infections Drugs 2011;71:731e44 [20] Deshpande LM, Jones RN Antimicrobial activity of advanced-spectrum fluo-roquinolones tested against more than 2000 contemporary bacterial isolates

of species causing community-acquired respiratory tract infections in the United States Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 1999;2000:139e42

[21] Marshall SA, Jones RN, Murray PR, Washington JA, Allen SD, Gerlach EH, et al In-vitro comparison of DU-6859a, a novel fluoroquinolone, with other quin-olones and oral cephalosporins tested against 5086 recent clinical isolates.

J Antimicrob Chemother 1993;32:877e84 [22] Milatovic D, Schmitz FJ, Brisse S, Verhoef J, Fluit AC In vitro activities of sitafloxacin (DU-6859a) and six other fluoroquinolones against 8,796 clinical bacterial isolates Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2000;44:1102e7 [23] Wang M, Sahm DF, Jacoby GA, Zhang Y, Hooper DC Activities of newer quinolones against Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae containing the plasmid-mediated quinolone resistance determinant qnr Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2004;48:1400e1

[24] Yamaguchi K, Ohno A, Ishii Y, Tateda K, Iwata M, Kanda M, et al In vitro susceptibilities to levofloxacin and various antibacterial agents of 12,919 clinical isolates obtained from 72 centers in 2007 [In Japanese] Jpn J Antibiot 2009;62:346e70

[25] Tiengrim S, Phiboonbanakit D, Thunyaharn S, Tantisiriwat W, Santiwatanakul S, Susaengrat W, et al Comparative in vitro activity of

C Malaisri et al / J Infect Chemother xxx (2017) 1e7 6

Trang 7

sitafloxacin against bacteria isolated from Thai patients with urinary tract

infections and lower respiratory tract infections J Med Assoc Thai

2012;95(Suppl 2):S6e17

[26] Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute Performance standards for

anti-microbial susceptibility testing Wayne, PA: CLSI; 2010

[27] Jones RN, Johnson DM, Erwin ME Interpretive criteria for DU-6859a disk

diffu-sion tests using 5-micrograms disks Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 1994;18:125e7

[28] Alhambra A, Cuadros JA, Cacho J, Gomez-Garces JL, Alos JI In vitro

suscepti-bility of recent antibiotic-resistant urinary pathogens to ertapenem and 12

other antibiotics J Antimicrob Chemother 2004;53:1090e4

[29] Mody RM, Erwin DP, Summers AM, Carrero HA, Selby EB, Ewell AJ, et al.

Ertapenem susceptibility of extended spectrum beta-lactamase-producing

organisms Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob 2007;6:6

[30] Wai AO, Frighetto L, Marra CA, Chan E, Jewesson PJ Cost analysis of an adult

outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT) programme A Canadian

teaching hospital and Ministry of Health perspective Pharmacoeconomics

2000;18:451e7

[31] Chapman ALN, Dixon S, Andrews D, Lillie PJ, Bazaz R, Patchett JD Clinical

efficacy and cost-effectiveness of outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy

(OPAT): a UK perspective J Antimicrob Chemother 2009;64:1316e24

[32] Endimiani A, Luzzaro F, Perilli M, Lombardi G, Colì A, Tamborini A, et al.

Bacteremia due to Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates producing the TEM-52

extended-spectrum b-lactamase: treatment outcome of patients receiving

imipenem or ciprofloxacin Clin Infect Dis 2004;38:243e51

[33] Karas JA, Pillay DG, Muckart D, Sturm AW Treatment failure due to extended

spectrum beta-lactamase J Antimicrob Chemother 1996;37:203e4

[34] Kang CI, Kim SH, Park WB, Lee KD, Kim HB, Kim EC, et al Bloodstream

in-fections due to extended-spectrum b-lactamase-producing Escherichia coli

and Klebsiella pneumoniae: risk factors for mortality and treatment outcome,

with special emphasis on antimicrobial therapy Antimicrob Agents Chemo-ther 2004;48:4574e81

[35] Nakashima M, Uematsu T, Kosuge K, Umemura K, Hakusui H, Tanaka M Pharmacokinetics and tolerance of DU-6859a, a new fluoroquinolone, after single and multiple oral doses in healthy volunteers Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1995;39:170e4

[36] Hoban DJ, Nicolle LE, Hawser S, Bouchillon S, Badal R Antimicrobial suscep-tibility of global inpatient urinary tract isolates of Escherichia coli: results from the Study for Monitoring Antimicrobial Resistance Trends (SMART) program: 2009e2010 Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2011;70:507e11

[37] Arslan H, Azap OK, Erg€onül O, Timurkaynak F, Urinary Tract Infection Study Group Risk factors for ciprofloxacin resistance among Escherichia coli strains isolated from community-acquired urinary tract infections in Turkey.

J Antimicrob Chemother 2005;56:914e8 [38] Meier S, Weber R, Zbinden R, Ruef C, Hasse B Extended-spectrumb -lacta-mase-producing Gram-negative pathogens in community-acquired urinary tract infections: an increasing challenge for antimicrobial therapy Infection 2011;39:333e40

[39] Suankratay C, Jutivorakool K, Jirajariyavej S A prospective study of ceftriaxone treatment in acute pyelonephritis caused by extended-spectrum beta-lacta-mase-producing bacteria J Med Assoc Thai 2008;91:1172e81

[40] Anderson DL Sitafloxacin hydrate for bacterial infections Drugs Today (Barc) 2008;44:489e501

[41] Kawada Y, Ishihara S, Matsui T, Tsugawa M, Matsumoto T, Watanabe K, et al Comparative study on sitafloxacin and levofloxacin in complicated urinary tract infections Jpn J Chemother 2008;56:81e91

[42] Kobayashi H, Watanabe A, Nakata K, Wada K, Yoshihito N, Kohno S Double-blind comparative study of sitafloxacin versus levofloxacin in patients with respiratory tract infection Jpn J Chemother 2008;56:36e48

C Malaisri et al / J Infect Chemother xxx (2017) 1e7 7

Ngày đăng: 30/05/2019, 15:39

🧩 Sản phẩm bạn có thể quan tâm