Cefiderocol use in Gram negative infections with limited therapeutic options: Is combination therapy the key?

Objectives: To date limited information about cefiderocol use is provided by real life studies. Our aim is to evaluate characteristics and outcome of patients with Gram-negative infections with limited therapeutic options treated with cefiderocol in combination or monotherapy. Methods: We retrospect...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of Infection and Public Health
Main Authors: Silvia Corcione, Ilaria De Benedetto, Simone Mornese Pinna, Davide Vita, Tommaso Lupia, Giorgia Montrucchio, Luca Brazzi, Francesco Giuseppe De Rosa
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Elsevier 2022-09-01
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187603412200185X
_version_ 1852697294539849728
author Silvia Corcione
Ilaria De Benedetto
Simone Mornese Pinna
Davide Vita
Tommaso Lupia
Giorgia Montrucchio
Luca Brazzi
Francesco Giuseppe De Rosa
author_facet Silvia Corcione
Ilaria De Benedetto
Simone Mornese Pinna
Davide Vita
Tommaso Lupia
Giorgia Montrucchio
Luca Brazzi
Francesco Giuseppe De Rosa
author_sort Silvia Corcione
collection DOAJ
container_title Journal of Infection and Public Health
description Objectives: To date limited information about cefiderocol use is provided by real life studies. Our aim is to evaluate characteristics and outcome of patients with Gram-negative infections with limited therapeutic options treated with cefiderocol in combination or monotherapy. Methods: We retrospectively collected data on demographical, clinical characteristics and clinical cure, in-hospital and 30-days mortality, microbiological failure and Clostridioides difficile infections of all patients ≥ 18 years old treated with cefiderocol for ≥ 48 h. Results: There were 18 patients of which 14 (77.8%) treated with cefiderocol in combination and 4 (22.2%) with monotherapy. Median age was 54.5 (IQR 35.25–65.75) vs 70.5 (IQR 57.5–78.25) years old, respectively and ward of admission was the ICU in the 78.57% vs 100% of cases. In the 50% vs 100% of cases infections were VAP with concomitant bloodstream infections. Median SOFA score was 10 (IQR 4.5–12.5) vs 5 (IQR 4–6) and APACHE II score was 13.5 (IQR 7.5–18) vs 16 (IQR 8.5–23.5), respectively. Isolated pathogen was carbapenems-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii in 78.57% vs 100% of cases. Median duration of cefiderocol treatment was 9.5 (IQR 7–13.25) vs 9 days (IQR 5.5–12.5) and in 77.8% patients it was used in combination therapy, of which 57.1% were colistin-spairing regimens. Clinical cure was achieved in 64.29% for combination therapy vs 75% of monotherapy treated patients, 30-days mortality rate was 28.57% vs 25% and 30-day ICU admission rate was 14.29% vs 50%, respectively. No statistically significant differences were observed between combination therapy and monotherapy treated patients. Conclusions: To date, no differences have been demonstrated between cefiderocol monotherapy or combination. Further studies are required to understand whether cefiderocol combination therapy could provide an advantage in outcome in seriously-ill patients.
format Article
id doaj-art-39adf3f46ea24235a1ddefc8b4f6700a
institution Directory of Open Access Journals
issn 1876-0341
language English
publishDate 2022-09-01
publisher Elsevier
record_format Article
spelling doaj-art-39adf3f46ea24235a1ddefc8b4f6700a2025-08-19T21:22:01ZengElsevierJournal of Infection and Public Health1876-03412022-09-0115997597910.1016/j.jiph.2022.07.006Cefiderocol use in Gram negative infections with limited therapeutic options: Is combination therapy the key?Silvia Corcione0Ilaria De Benedetto1Simone Mornese Pinna2Davide Vita3Tommaso Lupia4Giorgia Montrucchio5Luca Brazzi6Francesco Giuseppe De Rosa7Department of Medical Sciences, Infectious Diseases, University of Turin, Città della Salute e della Scienza Hospital, Turin, ItalyDepartment of Medical Sciences, Infectious Diseases, University of Turin, Città della Salute e della Scienza Hospital, Turin, Italy; Correspondence to: Department of Medical Sciences, Infectious Diseases, University of Turin, Turin, Italy.Department of Medical Sciences, Infectious Diseases, University of Turin, Città della Salute e della Scienza Hospital, Turin, ItalyDepartment of Medical Sciences, Infectious Diseases, University of Turin, Città della Salute e della Scienza Hospital, Turin, ItalyUnit of Infectious Disease, Cardinal Massaia Hospital, Asti, ItalyDepartment of Anesthesia, Intensive Care and Emergency, Città della Salute e della Scienza Hospital, Turin, Italy; Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Turin, Intensive Care and Emergency, Città della Salute e della Scienza Hospital, Turin, ItalyDepartment of Anesthesia, Intensive Care and Emergency, Città della Salute e della Scienza Hospital, Turin, Italy; Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Turin, Intensive Care and Emergency, Città della Salute e della Scienza Hospital, Turin, ItalyDepartment of Medical Sciences, Infectious Diseases, University of Turin, Città della Salute e della Scienza Hospital, Turin, Italy; Unit of Infectious Disease, Cardinal Massaia Hospital, Asti, ItalyObjectives: To date limited information about cefiderocol use is provided by real life studies. Our aim is to evaluate characteristics and outcome of patients with Gram-negative infections with limited therapeutic options treated with cefiderocol in combination or monotherapy. Methods: We retrospectively collected data on demographical, clinical characteristics and clinical cure, in-hospital and 30-days mortality, microbiological failure and Clostridioides difficile infections of all patients ≥ 18 years old treated with cefiderocol for ≥ 48 h. Results: There were 18 patients of which 14 (77.8%) treated with cefiderocol in combination and 4 (22.2%) with monotherapy. Median age was 54.5 (IQR 35.25–65.75) vs 70.5 (IQR 57.5–78.25) years old, respectively and ward of admission was the ICU in the 78.57% vs 100% of cases. In the 50% vs 100% of cases infections were VAP with concomitant bloodstream infections. Median SOFA score was 10 (IQR 4.5–12.5) vs 5 (IQR 4–6) and APACHE II score was 13.5 (IQR 7.5–18) vs 16 (IQR 8.5–23.5), respectively. Isolated pathogen was carbapenems-resistant Acinetobacter baumannii in 78.57% vs 100% of cases. Median duration of cefiderocol treatment was 9.5 (IQR 7–13.25) vs 9 days (IQR 5.5–12.5) and in 77.8% patients it was used in combination therapy, of which 57.1% were colistin-spairing regimens. Clinical cure was achieved in 64.29% for combination therapy vs 75% of monotherapy treated patients, 30-days mortality rate was 28.57% vs 25% and 30-day ICU admission rate was 14.29% vs 50%, respectively. No statistically significant differences were observed between combination therapy and monotherapy treated patients. Conclusions: To date, no differences have been demonstrated between cefiderocol monotherapy or combination. Further studies are required to understand whether cefiderocol combination therapy could provide an advantage in outcome in seriously-ill patients.http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187603412200185XCefiderocolGram negative bacteriaAcinetobacter baumanniiVAPCombination therapy
spellingShingle Silvia Corcione
Ilaria De Benedetto
Simone Mornese Pinna
Davide Vita
Tommaso Lupia
Giorgia Montrucchio
Luca Brazzi
Francesco Giuseppe De Rosa
Cefiderocol use in Gram negative infections with limited therapeutic options: Is combination therapy the key?
Cefiderocol
Gram negative bacteria
Acinetobacter baumannii
VAP
Combination therapy
title Cefiderocol use in Gram negative infections with limited therapeutic options: Is combination therapy the key?
title_full Cefiderocol use in Gram negative infections with limited therapeutic options: Is combination therapy the key?
title_fullStr Cefiderocol use in Gram negative infections with limited therapeutic options: Is combination therapy the key?
title_full_unstemmed Cefiderocol use in Gram negative infections with limited therapeutic options: Is combination therapy the key?
title_short Cefiderocol use in Gram negative infections with limited therapeutic options: Is combination therapy the key?
title_sort cefiderocol use in gram negative infections with limited therapeutic options is combination therapy the key
topic Cefiderocol
Gram negative bacteria
Acinetobacter baumannii
VAP
Combination therapy
url http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S187603412200185X
work_keys_str_mv AT silviacorcione cefiderocoluseingramnegativeinfectionswithlimitedtherapeuticoptionsiscombinationtherapythekey
AT ilariadebenedetto cefiderocoluseingramnegativeinfectionswithlimitedtherapeuticoptionsiscombinationtherapythekey
AT simonemornesepinna cefiderocoluseingramnegativeinfectionswithlimitedtherapeuticoptionsiscombinationtherapythekey
AT davidevita cefiderocoluseingramnegativeinfectionswithlimitedtherapeuticoptionsiscombinationtherapythekey
AT tommasolupia cefiderocoluseingramnegativeinfectionswithlimitedtherapeuticoptionsiscombinationtherapythekey
AT giorgiamontrucchio cefiderocoluseingramnegativeinfectionswithlimitedtherapeuticoptionsiscombinationtherapythekey
AT lucabrazzi cefiderocoluseingramnegativeinfectionswithlimitedtherapeuticoptionsiscombinationtherapythekey
AT francescogiuseppederosa cefiderocoluseingramnegativeinfectionswithlimitedtherapeuticoptionsiscombinationtherapythekey