z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
1619. Meta-analysis of Randomized Control Trials Evaluating New Beta-Lactamase Combination Antibiotics
Author(s) -
Geneva Wilson,
Margaret A. Fitzpatrick,
Kyle Walding,
Beverly González,
Katie J. Suda,
Charlesnika T. Evans
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
open forum infectious diseases
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.546
H-Index - 35
ISSN - 2328-8957
DOI - 10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.1799
Subject(s) - medicine , antibiotics , observational study , randomized controlled trial , ceftazidime/avibactam , meta analysis , meropenem , avibactam , imipenem , aztreonam , tazobactam , ceftazidime , antibiotic resistance , pseudomonas aeruginosa , microbiology and biotechnology , genetics , bacteria , biology
Background Ceftolozane/ Tazobactam (C/T), Ceftazidime/ Avibactam (C/A), Meropenem/ Vaborbactam (M/V) and Imipenem/ Relebactam (I/R) are new combination beta-lactam/ beta-lactamase inhibitor antibiotics primarily used to treat multidrug-resistant (MDR) Gram-negative infections. This study synthesized outcomes of comparative observational studies and randomized control trials (RCTs) that evaluated clinical success of these antibiotics compared to other therapies. Methods PubMed, EMBASE, and Google Scholar were searched from January 1st, 2013 through October 1st, 2019 for comparative observational studies and RCTs of C/T, C/A, M/V and I/R in patients with pneumonia, complicated intra-abdominal and urinary tract infections. Study and patient demographics were collected along with clinical and microbiological success rates. Meta-regression analysis was used to determine the pooled effectiveness of C/T, C/A, M/V, and I/R. Heterogeneity and publication bias were assessed via I2 values and funnel plots, respectively. Results Literature search returned 1,645 results. After exclusion criteria, 21 publications representing 6,246 patients were retained: 16 RCTs (8 C/A, 3 C/T, 3 I/R, 2 M/V) and 5 comparative observational studies (3 C/A, 2 C/T). Pooled risk ratios for clinical success showed that all four antibiotics were non-inferior to comparator antibiotics (0.99 (95% CI (0.97-1.01)). Eleven of the sixteen RCTs evaluated microbiological success; pooled risk ratio was 1.08 (95% CI 1.04-1.13), indicating that older therapies were more successful at microbiological eradication than newer antibiotics. Only 6 of the included studies (3 RCTs and 2 observational studies) focused on patients with MDR infections. Limiting the analysis to MDR RCTs did not change the overall conclusions. Conclusion Although older therapies had slightly higher microbiologic clearance, pooled clinical success rates for C/A, C/T, M/V, and I/R were non-inferior to older therapies, including in studies focused on patients with MDR infections. Additional studies are needed to further evaluate these drugs’ effectiveness for treatment of MDR infections. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom