In vitro activity of ceftazidime/avibactam against clinical isolates of ESBL-producing Enterobacteriaceae in Italy

References

• World Health Organization. Global priority list of antibiotic-resistant bacteria to guide research, discovery, and development of new antibiotics. 2017. Available from: http://www.who.int/medicines/publications/WHO-PPL-Short_Summary_25Feb-ET_NM_WHO.pdf?ua=1. Accessed 16 March 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Antibiotic resistance threats in the United States, 2013 CDC. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/drugresistance/threat-report-2013/index.html. Last accessed on May 22, 2019.
   Google Scholar
• European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC). Surveillance of antimicrobial resistance in Europe - Annual report of the European Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance Network (EARS-Net) 2017. Stockholm: ECDC; 2018. Available from: https://ecdc.europa.eu/sites/portal/files/documents/EARS-Net-report-2017-update-jan-2019.pdf. Accessed 22 May, 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Giani T, Antonelli A, Caltagirone M, Mauri C, Nicchi J, Arena F, et al. Evolving β- lactamase epidemiology in Enterobacteriaceae from Italian nationwide surveillance, October 2013: KPC-carbapenemase spreading among outpatients. Euro Surveill. 2017; 22:30583.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• US FDA. Avycaz (ceftazidime and avibactam) for injection, for intravenous use: US prescribing information. 2018. Available from: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov. Accessed 16 March, 2018.
   Google Scholar
• European Medicines Agency. Zavicefta: summary of product characteristics. 2018. Available from: http://www.ema.europa.eu. Accessed 16 March, 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Sharma R, Park TE, Moy S. Ceftazidime-avibactam: a novel cephalosporin/β-lactamase inhibitor combination for the treatment of resistant gram-negative organisms. Clin Ther. 2016;38:431–444.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lagacé-Wiens P, Walkty A, Karlowsky JA. Ceftazidime-avibactam: an evidence-based review of its pharmacology and potential use in the treatment of Gram-negative bacterial infections. Core Evid. 2014; 9:13–25.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wagenlehner FM, Sobel JD, Newell P, Armstrong J, Huang X, Stone GG, et al. Ceftazidime-avibactam versus doripenem for the treatment of complicated urinary tract infections, including acute pyelonephritis: RECAPTURE, a phase 3 randomized trial program. Clin Infect Dis. 2016;63:754–62.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carmeli Y, Armstrong J, Laud PJ, Newell P, Stone G, Wardman A, et al. Ceftazidime-avibactam or best available therapy in patients with ceftazidime-resistant Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa complicated urinary tract infections or complicated intra-abdominal infections (REPRISE): a randomised, pathogen-directed, phase 3 study. Lancet Infect Dis. 2016;16:661–73.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mazuski JE, Gasink LB, Armstrong J, Broadhurst H, Stone GG, Rank D, et al. Efficacy and safety of ceftazidime-avibactam plus metronidazole versus meropenem in the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infection: results from a randomized, controlled, double-blind, phase 3 program. Clin Infect Dis. 2016;62:1380–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Qin X, Tran BG, Kim MJ, Wang L, Nguyen DA, Chen Q, et al. A randomised, double-blind, phase 3 study comparing the efficacy and safety of ceftazidime/avibactam plus metronidazole versus meropenem for complicated intra-abdominal infections in hospitalised adults in Asia. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2017;49:579–88.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torres A, Zhong N, Pachl J, Timsit JF, Kollef M, Chen Z, et al. Ceftazidime-avibactam versus meropenem in nosocomial pneumonia, including ventilator-associated pneumonia (REPROVE): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 non-inferiority trial. Lancet Infect Dis. 2018;18:285–95.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Asli A, Brouillette E, Krause KM, Nichols WW, Malouin F. Distinctive binding of avibactam to penicillin-binding proteins of gram-negative and Gram-positive bacteria. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2016;60:752–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karlowsky JA, Biedenbach DJ, Kazmierczak KM, Stone GG, Sahm DF. Activity of Ceftazidime-avibactam against extended-spectrum- and AmpC β-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae collected in the INFORM global surveillance study from 2012 to 2014. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2016;60:2849–57.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stone GG, Bradford PA, Newell P, Wardman A. In vitro activity of ceftazidime-avibactam against isolates in a phase 3 open-label clinical trial for complicated intra-abdominal and urinary tract infections caused by ceftazidime-nonsusceptible Gram-negative pathogens. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2017;61:e01820–16.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mendes RE, Castanheira M, Gasink L, Stone GG, Nichols WW, Flamm RK, et al. β-lactamase characterization of Gram-negative pathogens recovered from patients enrolled in the phase 2 trials for ceftazidime-avibactam: clinical efficacies analyzed against subsets of molecularly characterized isolates. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2016;60:1328–35.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sader HS, Castanheira M, Flamm RK. Antimicrobial activity of ceftazidime-avibactam against gram-negative bacteria isolated from patients hospitalized with pneumonia in U.S. Medical Centers, 2011 to 2015. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2017;61:e02083–16.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Castanheira M, Mendes RE, Jones RN, Sader HS. Changes in the frequencies of β-lactamase genes among Enterobacteriaceae isolates in U.S. hospitals, 2012 to 2014: activity of ceftazidime-avibactam tested against β-lactamase-producing isolates. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2016;60:4770–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levasseur P, Girard AM, Miossec C, Pace J, Coleman K. In vitro antibacterial activity of the ceftazidime-avibactam combination against Enterobacteriaceae, including strains with well-characterized β-lactamases. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2015;59:1931–4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• EUCAST 2018. Breakpoint tables for interpretation of MICs and zone diameters. Version 8.1, May 2018, 2018. Available from: http://www.eucast.org/clinical_breakpoints/. Accessed 22 May, 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Kresken M, Körber-Irrgang B. Performance of the etest for susceptibility testing of Enterobacterales (Enterobacteriaceae) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa toward ceftazidime-avibactam. J Clin Microbiol. 2018;56:e00528–18.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shields RK, Clancy CJ, Pasculle AW, Press EG, Haidar G, Hao B, et al. Verification of ceftazidime-avibactam and ceftolozane-tazobactam susceptibility testing methods against carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Clin Microbiol. 2018;56:e01093–17.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC). Rapid risk assessment: carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae – first update. 4 June 2018. Stockholm: ECDC; 2018. Available from: https://ecdc.europa.eu/sites/portal/files/documents/RRA-Enterobacteriaceae-Carbapenems-European-Union-countries.pdf. Accessed 22 May, 2019.
   Google Scholar
• Tamma PD, Rodriguez-Bano J. The use of noncarbapenem β-lactams for the treatment of extended-spectrum β-lactamase infections. Clin Infect Dis. 2017;64:972–80.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van den Bijllaardt W, Schijffelen MJ, Bosboom RW, Cohen Stuart J, Diederen B, Kampinga G, et al. Susceptibility of ESBL Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae to fosfomycin in the Netherlands and comparison of several testing methods including Etest, MIC test strip, Vitek2, Phoenix and disc diffusion. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2018;73:2380–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hirsch EB, Raux BR, Zucchi PC, Kim Y, McCoy C, Kirby JE, et al. Activity of fosfomycin and comparison of several susceptibility testing methods against contemporary urine isolates. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2015;46:642–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomson KS, Moland ES. Cefepime, piperacillin-tazobactam, and the inoculum effect in tests with extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2001;45:3548–54.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lopez-Cerero L, Picon E, Morillo C, et al. Comparative assessment of inoculum effects on the antimicrobial activity of amoxycillin-clavulanate and piperacillin-tazobactam with extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing and extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-non-producing Escherichia coli isolates. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2010;16:132–6.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harris PNA, Tambyah PA, Lye DC, Mo Y, Lee TH, Yilmaz M, et al. MERINO Trial Investigators and the Australasian Society for Infectious Disease Clinical Research Network (ASID-CRN). Effect of piperacillin-tazobactam vs meropenem on 30-day mortality for patients with E. coli or Klebsiella pneumoniae bloodstream infection and ceftriaxone resistance: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2018;320:984–94.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC). Rapid risk assessment: emergence of resistance of ceftazidime-avibactam in carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae. Stockholm: ECDC; 2018. Available from: https://ecdc.europa.eu/sites/portal/files/documents/RRA-Emergence-of-resistance-to%20CAZ-AVI-in-CRE-Enterobacteriaceae.pdf. Accessed 12 June 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Shields RK, Chen L, Cheng S, Chavda KD, Press EG, Snyder A, et al. Emergence of ceftazidime-avibactam resistance due to plasmid-borne bla(KPC-3) mutations during treatment of carbapenem-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae Infections. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2017;61:e02097–16.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haidar G, Clancy CJ, Shields RK, Hao B, Cheng S, Nguyen MH. Mutations in bla(KPC-3) that confer ceftazidime-avibactam resistance encode novel KPC-3 variants that function as extended-spectrum β-lactamases. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2017;61:e02534–16.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shields RK, Nguyen MH, Press EG, Chen L, Kreiswirth BN, Clancy CJ. Emergence of ceftazidime-avibactam resistance and restoration of carbapenem susceptibility in Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemase-producing K pneumoniae: a case report and review of literature. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2017;4:ofx101.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Humphries RM, Yang S, Hemarajata P, Ward KW, Hindler JA, Miller SA, et al. First report of ceftazidime-avibactam resistance in a KPC-3-expressing Klebsiella pneumoniae isolate. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2015;59:6605–07.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gaibani P, Campoli C, Lewis RE, Volpe SL, Scaltriti E, Giannella M, et al. In vivo evolution of resistant subpopulations of KPC-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae during ceftazidime/avibactam treatment. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2018;73:1525–29.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Humphries RM, Hemarajata P. Resistance to ceftazidime-avibactam in Klebsiella pneumoniae due to porin mutations and the increased expression of KPC-3. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2017;61:e00537–17.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nelson K, Hemarajata P, Sun D, Rubio-Aparicio D, Tsivkovski R, Yang S, et al. Resistance to ceftazidime avibactam is due to transposition of KPC in a porin-deficient strain of Klebsiella pneumoniae with increased efflux activity. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2017;61:e00989–17.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shen Z, Ding B, Ye M, Wang P, Bi Y, Wu S, et al. High ceftazidime hydrolysis activity and porin OmpK35 deficiency contribute to the decreased susceptibility to ceftazidime/avibactam in KPC-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2017;72:1930–36.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giddins MJ, Macesic N, Annavajhala MK, Stump S, Khan S, McConville TH, et al. Successive emergence of ceftazidime-avibactam resistance through distinct genomic adaptations in blaKPC-2-harboring Klebsiella pneumoniae sequence type 307 isolates. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2018;62:e02101–17.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar