Comparison of antimicrobial activity between ceftolozane-tazobactam and ceftazidime-avibactam against multidrug-resistant isolates of Escherichia coli, Klebsiella pneumoniae, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

This study compared the activity of ceftolozane-tazobactam and ceftazidime-avibactam against 120 bacterial strains, including extended-spectrum beta-lactamase (ESBL) producers, carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE), and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, isolated from patients admitted to Cleveland Clinic Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates. In vitro susceptibility was tested using the Etest strip minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) method, and PCR was used to characterize the carbapenemase enzymes produced by CRE strains. All 29 ESBL isolates were susceptible to ceftazidime-avibactam (MIC50 0.125μg/ml), whereas all but one were susceptible to ceftolozane-tazobactam (MIC50 0.38μg/ml). Twenty-seven (45%) CRE isolates were susceptible to ceftazidime-avibactam (MIC50 ≥256μg/ml), whereas only six (10%) isolates were susceptible to ceftolozane-tazobactam (MIC50 ≥256μg/ml). Very few NDM-1 isolates were susceptible to ceftazidime-avibactam, whereas the majority of OXA-48 isolates were susceptible. Twenty-nine (94%) P. aeruginosa isolates were susceptible to ceftazidime-avibactam (MIC50 1.5μg/ml), whereas 30 (97%) isolates were susceptible to ceftolozane-tazobactam (MIC50 0.75μg/ml). Ceftolozane-tazobactam and ceftazidime-avibactam showed comparable activity against ESBL and P. aeruginosa, with ceftazidime-avibactam having lower MICs against ESBL isolates and ceftolozane-tazobactam having lower MICs against P. aeruginosa. Ceftazidime-avibactam showed better activity against all CRE isolates except for those carrying the NDM-1 enzyme.

Alatoom A ，Elsayed H ，Lawlor K ，AbdelWareth L ，El-Lababidi R ，Cardona L ，Mooty M ，Bonilla MF ，Nusair A ，Mirza I ... -  《-》

Results from the China Antimicrobial Surveillance Network (CHINET) in 2017 of the In Vitro Activities of Ceftazidime-Avibactam and Ceftolozane-Tazobactam against Clinical Isolates of Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

The in vitro activities of ceftazidime-avibactam (CZA), ceftolozane-tazobactam (C-T), and comparators were determined for 1,774 isolates of Enterobacteriaceae and 524 isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa collected by 30 medical centers from the China Antimicrobial Surveillance Network (CHINET) in 2017. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed by the CLSI broth microdilution method, and blaKPC and blaNDM were detected by PCR for all carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE). Ceftazidime-avibactam demonstrated potent activity against almost all Enterobacteriaceae (94.6% susceptibility; MIC50, ≤0.25 mg/liter; MIC90, ≤0.25 to >32 mg/liter) and good activity against P. aeruginosa (86.5% susceptibility; MIC50/90, 2/16 mg/liter). Among the CRE, 50.8% (189/372 isolates) were positive for blaKPC-2, which mainly existed in ceftazidime-avibactam-susceptible Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates (92.1%, 174/189). Among the CRE, 17.7% (66/372 isolates) were positive for blaNDM, which mainly existed in strains resistant to ceftazidime-avibactam (71.7%, 66/92). Ceftolozane-tazobactam showed good in vitro activity against Escherichia coli and Proteus mirabilis (MIC50/90, ≤0.5/2 mg/liter; 90.5 and 93.8% susceptibility, respectively), and the rates of susceptibility of K. pneumoniae (MIC50/90, 2/>64 mg/liter) and P. aeruginosa (MIC50/90, 1/8 mg/liter) were 52.7% and 88.5%, respectively. Among the CRE strains, 28.6% of E. coli isolates and 85% of K. pneumoniae isolates were still susceptible to ceftazidime-avibactam, but only 7.1% and 1.9% of them, respectively, were susceptible to ceftolozane-tazobactam. The rates of susceptibility of the carbapenem-resistant P. aeruginosa isolates to ceftazidime-avibactam (65.7%) and ceftolozane-tazobactam (68%) were similar. Overall, both ceftazidime-avibactam and ceftolozane-tazobactam were highly active against clinical isolates of Enterobacteriaceae and P. aeruginosa recently collected across China, and ceftazidime-avibactam showed activity superior to that of ceftolozane-tazobactam against Enterobacteriaceae, whereas ceftolozane-tazobactam showed a better effect against P. aeruginosa.

Yin D ，Wu S ，Yang Y ，Shi Q ，Dong D ，Zhu D ，Hu F ，China Antimicrobial Surveillance Network (CHINET) Study Group ... -  《-》

Verification of Ceftazidime-Avibactam and Ceftolozane-Tazobactam Susceptibility Testing Methods against Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

Ceftazidime-avibactam and ceftolozane-tazobactam are newly approved agents for the treatment of infections caused by multidrug-resistant Gram-negative bacteria. Resistance to both agents has been described clinically. Susceptibility testing on automated systems is unavailable for either agent. Our objective was to compare the disk diffusion and Etest methods to standard broth microdilution (BMD) methods for testing ceftazidime-avibactam and ceftolozane-tazobactam against a diverse collection of carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) and carbapenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa (CRP) isolates, respectively. Among 74 ceftazidime-avibactam-susceptible and -resistant CRE isolates, BMD categorical agreement was higher with Etest (96%) than with disk diffusion (72%; P = 0.0003). Twenty-eight percent of ceftazidime-avibactam-susceptible CRE isolates were classified as resistant by disk diffusion. Results were comparable to those obtained with resistance defined genotypically. Among 72 ceftolozane-tazobactam-susceptible and -resistant CRP isolates, the levels of BMD categorical agreement with disk diffusion and Etest were 94% and 96%, respectively; the only errors identified were minor. Our findings demonstrate that Etest measurements of ceftazidime-avibactam and ceftolozane-tazobactam susceptibility correlate closely with standard BMD methods, suggesting a useful role clinically. On the other hand, disk diffusion measurements overcalled CRE resistance to ceftazidime-avibactam. A better understanding of ceftazidime-avibactam interpretive breakpoints is needed before disk diffusion is used routinely in the clinic. Until clinicians and microbiologists understand Etest and disk diffusion performance at their centers, test results should be interpreted cautiously.

Shields RK ，Clancy CJ ，Pasculle AW ，Press EG ，Haidar G ，Hao B ，Chen L ，Kreiswirth BN ，Nguyen MH ... -  《-》

Antimicrobial Activity of Ceftazidime-Avibactam against Gram-Negative Bacteria Isolated from Patients Hospitalized with Pneumonia in U.S. Medical Centers, 2011 to 2015.

Bacterial isolates were collected from patients hospitalized with pneumonia (PHP), including ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP), from 76 U.S. medical centers in 2011 to 2015. The Gram-negative organisms (n = 11,185, including 1,097 from VAP) were tested for susceptibility to ceftazidime-avibactam and comparators by the broth microdilution method. β-Lactamase-encoding genes were screened using a microarray-based assay on selected isolates. Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Klebsiella spp. were the most common Gram-negative bacteria isolated from PHP and VAP. Ceftazidime-avibactam was very active against P. aeruginosa (n = 3,402; MIC50/MIC90, 2 and 4 μg/ml; 96.6% susceptible), including isolates nonsusceptible to meropenem (86.3% susceptible to ceftazidime-avibactam), piperacillin-tazobactam (85.6% susceptible), or ceftazidime (80.6% susceptible). Ceftazidime-avibactam was also highly active against Enterobacteriaceae (MIC50/MIC90, 0.12 and 0.5 μg/ml; 99.9% susceptible), including carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae (CRE) (n = 189; MIC50/MIC90, 0.5 and 2 μg/ml; 98.0% susceptible) and multidrug-resistant (MDR) (n = 674; MIC50/MIC90, 0.25 and 1 μg/ml; 98.8% susceptible) and extensively drug-resistant (XDR) (n = 156; MIC50/MIC90, 0.5 and 2 μg/ml; 98.1% susceptible) Enterobacteriaceae isolates, as well as Klebsiella species isolates showing an extended-spectrum β-lactamase (ESBL) screening-positive phenotype (n = 433; MIC50/MIC90, 0.25 and 1 μg/ml; 99.5% susceptible). Among Enterobacter spp. (24.8% ceftazidime nonsusceptible), 99.8% of the isolates, including 99.4% of ceftazidime-nonsusceptible isolates, were susceptible to ceftazidime-avibactam. The most common β-lactamases detected among Klebsiella pneumoniae and E. coli isolates were K. pneumoniae carbapenemase (KPC)-like and CTX-M-15, respectively. Only 8 of 6,209 Enterobacteriaceae isolates (0.1%) were ceftazidime-avibactam nonsusceptible, three NDM-1-producing strains with ceftazidime-avibactam MIC values of >32 μg/ml and five isolates with ceftazidime-avibactam MIC values of 16 μg/ml and negative results for all β-lactamases tested. Susceptibility rates among isolates from VAP were generally similar or slightly higher than those from all PHP.

Sader HS ，Castanheira M ，Flamm RK 《-》

Evaluation of the In Vitro Activity of Ceftazidime-Avibactam and Ceftolozane-Tazobactam against Meropenem-Resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa Isolates.

We compared ceftazidime-avibactam, ceftolozane-tazobactam, ceftazidime, cefepime, and piperacillin-tazobactam MICs for 38 meropenem-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa isolates. No isolates harbored carbapenemases; 74% were oprD mutants. Ceftazidime-avibactam and ceftolozane-tazobactam were active against 92% of the isolates, including 80% that were resistant to all three β-lactams. Forty-three percent of ceftazidime-avibactam-susceptible isolates and 6% of ceftolozane-tazobactam-susceptible isolates exhibited MICs at the respective breakpoints. Ceftolozane-tazobactam and ceftazidime-avibactam are therapeutic options for meropenem-resistant P. aeruginosa infections that should be used judiciously to preserve activity.

Buehrle DJ ，Shields RK ，Chen L ，Hao B ，Press EG ，Alkrouk A ，Potoski BA ，Kreiswirth BN ，Clancy CJ ，Nguyen MH ... -  《-》