Healthcare Resource Utilization of Ceftolozane/Tazobactam Versus Meropenem for Ventilated Nosocomial Pneumonia from the Randomized, Controlled, Double-Blind ASPECT-NP Trial

被引:4
|
作者
Lodise, Thomas [1 ]
Yang, Joe [2 ]
Puzniak, Laura A. [2 ]
Dillon, Ryan [2 ]
Kollef, Marin [3 ]
机构
[1] Albany Coll Pharm & Hlth Sci, Albany, NY USA
[2] Merck & Co Inc, Kenilworth, NJ 07033 USA
[3] Washington Univ, Sch Med, St Louis, MO USA
关键词
Ceftolozane; tazobactam; Hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia; Hospitalization; Mechanical ventilation; Meropenem; Multidrug resistance; Pseudomonas aeruginosa; Ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia; FOR-DISEASE-CONTROL; PREVENTION;
D O I
10.1007/s40121-020-00343-0
中图分类号
R51 [传染病];
学科分类号
100401 ;
摘要
Introduction Hospital-acquired and ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (HABP and VABP) are associated with significant healthcare resource utilization (HCRU). This a priori, exploratory, secondary analysis from the ASPECT-NP clinical trial evaluated resource utilization among patients with ventilated HABP (vHABP)/VABP treated with ceftolozane/tazobactam or meropenem. Methods This analysis used data from the randomized, double-blind, noninferiority phase 3 ASPECT-NP trial of patients with vHABP/VABP randomized to receive ceftolozane/tazobactam 3 g (ceftolozane 2 g/tazobactam 1 g) or meropenem 1 g for 8-14 days. Day 28 outcomes included hospital length of stay (LOS), intensive care unit (ICU) LOS, and time to mechanical ventilation extubation in the microbiological intention-to-treat (mITT) population and in an HCRU population. The HCRU population, a subset of patients from the mITT population that were alive at day 28, was used to remove resource use bias influenced by mortality rates. Results Ceftolozane/tazobactam-treated versus meropenem-treated patients, respectively, had fewer deaths (20.1% vs. 25.5%), fewer hospital discharges (30.7% vs. 32.4%), and higher ICU discharges (60.0% vs. 58.3%) and extubations (51.9% vs. 48.2%) by day 28. In the HCRU population, adjusted LOS differences (95% confidence intervals) for ceftolozane/tazobactam compared with meropenem were 0.1 (- 1.4 to 1.6) hospitalization days, - 1.4 (- 2.9 to 0.2) ICU days, and - 0.9 (- 2.4 to 0.7) mechanical ventilation days. Patterns were similar among the VABP andPseudomonas aeruginosasubgroups. Conclusion Similar 28-day resource utilization outcomes were observed between ceftolozane/tazobactam and meropenem in the mITT population of patients from ASPECT-NP with vHABP/VABP due to gram-negative pathogens. ASPECT-NP was not powered to detect differences in resource utilization outcomes between treatment groups; however, numerical differences in ICU LOS and duration of mechanical ventilation were noted. Further study is needed to assess resource utilization in the real-world practice setting, especially among patients excluded from ASPECT-NP, including those with resistantP. aeruginosainfections.
引用
收藏
页码:953 / 966
页数:14
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] The effect of diabetes mellitus on outcomes of patients with nosocomial pneumonia caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: data from a prospective double-blind clinical trial comparing treatment with linezolid versus vancomycin
    Equils, Ozlem
    da Costa, Christopher
    Wible, Michele
    Lipsky, Benjamin A.
    BMC INFECTIOUS DISEASES, 2016, 16
  • [32] Safety and efficacy of oral nemonoxacin versus levofloxacin in treatment of community-acquired pneumonia: A phase 3, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled, non-inferiority trial
    Yuan, Jinyi
    Mo, Biwen
    Ma, Zhuang
    Lv, Yuan
    Cheng, Shih-Lung
    Yang, Yanping
    Tong, Zhaohui
    Wu, Renguang
    Sun, Shenghua
    Cao, Zhaolong
    Wu, Jufang
    Zhu, Demei
    Chang, Liwen
    Zhang, Yingyuan
    Zhao, Li
    Wang, Xiongbiao
    Wang, Xuefen
    Wang, Dexi
    Li, Xiangyang
    Peng, Yiqiang
    Liang, Yongjie
    Liu, Hua
    Xiao, Zuke
    Lv, Xiaoju
    Wu, Shiman
    Dai, Yuanrong
    Huang, Yijiang
    Hu, Zhenghong
    Qiu, Chen
    Li, Xi
    Zhang, Suiyang
    Li, Wenpu
    Liu, Shuang
    Shi, Yi
    Xiong, Chang
    Kuang, Jiulong
    Xiu, Qingyu
    Cui, Shehuai
    Li, Jianguo
    Lin, Qichang
    Huang, Wenxiang
    Wan, Yixin
    Li, Qimangu
    Shen, Ce
    Xiao, Yi
    Wu, Xiaoju
    Chuang, Yin Ching
    Perng, Wann Cherng
    Tsao, Shih-Ming
    Hsu, Jeng-Yuan
    JOURNAL OF MICROBIOLOGY IMMUNOLOGY AND INFECTION, 2019, 52 (01) : 35 - 44
  • [33] SCLEROTHERAPY PLUS OCTREOTIDE VERSUS SCLEROTHERAPY ALONE IN THE PREVENTION OF EARLY REBLEEDING FROM ESOPHAGEAL-VARICES - A RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND, PLACEBO-CONTROLLED, MULTICENTER TRIAL
    PRIMIGNANI, M
    ANDREONI, B
    CARPINELLI, L
    CAPRIA, A
    ROCCHI, G
    LORENZINI, I
    STAUDACHER, C
    BERETTA, L
    MOTTA, R
    DEFRANCHIS, R
    ARCIDIACONO, PG
    BENEDETTI, G
    CARLUCCI, M
    CASADEI, A
    COSENTINO, F
    GELONI, M
    GERUNDA, G
    LACCHIN, T
    LOMAZZI, A
    MAIOLO, P
    MARINI, A
    MIGLIO, F
    MOSCA, P
    NOLTE, A
    RIVOLTA, R
    SABLICH, R
    SANTAMBROGIO, R
    SPINA, G
    TOGNINI, L
    VITAGLIANO, P
    HEPATOLOGY, 1995, 21 (05) : 1322 - 1327
  • [34] Natalizumab Versus Placebo in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke (AIS): Results from ACTION, a Multicenter, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Randomized Phase 2 Clinical Trial
    Elkins, Jacob
    Elkind, Mitchell
    Veltkamp, Roland
    Montaner, Joan
    Johnston, S.
    Singhal, Aneesh
    Becker, Kyra
    Lansberg, Maarten
    Chang, Ih
    Tang, Weihua
    Gheuens, Sarah
    Mehta, Lahar
    NEUROLOGY, 2016, 86
  • [35] Natalizumab Versus Placebo in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke (AIS): Results from ACTION, a Multicenter, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Randomized Phase 2 Clinical Trial
    Elkins, Jacob
    Elkind, Mitchell
    Veltkamp, Roland
    Montaner, Joan
    Johnston, S.
    Singhal, Aneesh
    Becker, Kyra
    Lansberg, Maarten
    Chang, Ih
    Tang, Weihua
    Gheuens, Sarah
    Mehta, Lahar
    NEUROLOGY, 2016, 86
  • [36] Natalizumab Versus Placebo in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke (AIS): Results from ACTION, a Multicenter, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Randomized Phase 2 Clinical Trial
    Elkins, Jacob
    Elkind, Mitchell
    Veltkamp, Roland
    Montanera, Joan
    Johnston, S.
    Singhal, Aneesh
    Becker, Kyra
    Lansberg, Maarten
    Chang, Ih
    Tang, Weihua
    Gheuens, Sarah
    Mehta, Lahar
    NEUROLOGY, 2016, 86
  • [37] Natalizumab Versus Placebo in Patients with Acute Ischemic Stroke (AIS): Results from ACTION, a Multicenter, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Randomized Phase 2 Clinical Trial
    Elkins, Jacob
    Elkind, Mitchell
    Veltkamp, Roland
    Montaner, Joan
    Johnston, S.
    Singhal, Aneesh
    Becker, Kyra
    Lansberg, Maarten
    Chang, Ih
    Tang, Weihua
    Gheuens, Sarah
    Mehta, Lahar
    NEUROLOGY, 2016, 86
  • [38] Reductions in acute medication use and healthcare resource utilization in patients with chronic migraine: a secondary analysis of a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of galcanezumab with open-label extension (REGAIN)
    Tobin, Joshua A.
    Joshi, Shivang
    Ford, Janet H.
    Nichols, Russell M.
    Foster, Shonda A.
    Ruff, Dustin
    Detke, Holland C.
    Aurora, Sheena K.
    JOURNAL OF MEDICAL ECONOMICS, 2022, 25 (01) : 1030 - 1038
  • [39] Natalizumab versus placebo in patients with secondary progressive multiple sclerosis (SPMS): Results from ASCEND, a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized phase 3 clinical trial
    Steiner, Deborah
    Arnold, Douglas
    Freedman, Mark
    Goldman, Myla
    Hartung, Hans-Peter
    Havrdova, Eva
    Jeffery, Douglas
    Kapoor, Raj
    Miller, Aaron
    Sellebjerg, Finn
    Amarante, Diogo
    Cadavid, Diego
    Yu, Bei
    Forrestal, Fiona
    Liu, Kezhen
    NEUROLOGY, 2016, 87 (02) : E22 - E22
  • [40] Patient and Health Care Provider Responses from a Prospective, Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Vapocoolant Spray versus Placebo Spray in Adults Undergoing Venipuncture in the Emergency Department
    Barbour, Tracy
    O'Keefe, Sharon
    Mace, Sharon E.
    PAIN MANAGEMENT NURSING, 2018, 19 (04) : 391 - 399