Search

Background Imipenem combined with the β-lactamase inhibitor relebactam has broad antibacterial activity, including against carbapenem-resistant gram-negative pathogens. We evaluated efficacy and safety of imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam in treating hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (HABP/VABP). Methods This was a randomized, controlled, double-blind phase 3 trial. Adults with HABP/VABP were randomized 1:1 to imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam 500 mg/500 mg/250 mg or piperacillin/tazobactam 4 g/500 mg, intravenously every 6 hours for 7–14 days. The primary endpoint was day 28 all-cause mortality in the modified intent-to-treat (MITT) population (patients who received study therapy, excluding those with only gram-positive cocci at baseline). The key secondary endpoint was clinical response 7–14 days after completing therapy in the MITT population. Results Of 537 randomized patients (from 113 hospitals in 27 countries), the MITT population comprised 264 imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam and 267 piperacillin/tazobactam patients; 48.6% had ventilated HABP/VABP, 47.5% APACHE II score ≥15, 24.7% moderate/severe renal impairment, 42.9% were ≥65 years old, and 66.1% were in the intensive care unit. The most common baseline pathogens were Klebsiella pneumoniae (25.6%) and Pseudomonas aeruginosa (18.9%). Imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam was noninferior (P, Imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam was noninferior to piperacillin/tazobactam for treating hospital-acquired and ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (HABP/VABP), with a comparable tolerability profile. Imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam is an efficacious treatment option for nosocomial pneumonia, including HABP/VABP in mechanically ventilated and critically ill, high-risk patients.

Background The β-lactamase inhibitor relebactam can restore imipenem activity against imipenem-nonsusceptible gram-negative pathogens. We evaluated imipenem/relebactam for treating imipenem-nonsusceptible infections. Methods Randomized, controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial. Hospitalized patients with hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated pneumonia, complicated intraabdominal infection, or complicated urinary tract infection caused by imipenem-nonsusceptible (but colistin- and imipenem/relebactam-susceptible) pathogens were randomized 2:1 to 5–21 days imipenem/relebactam or colistin+imipenem. Primary endpoint: favorable overall response (defined by relevant endpoints for each infection type) in the modified microbiologic intent-to-treat (mMITT) population (qualifying baseline pathogen and ≥1 dose study treatment). Secondary endpoints: clinical response, all-cause mortality, and treatment-emergent nephrotoxicity. Safety analyses included patients with ≥1 dose study treatment. Results Thirty-one patients received imipenem/relebactam and 16 colistin+imipenem. Among mITT patients (n = 21 imipenem/relebactam, n = 10 colistin+imipenem), 29% had Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores >15, 23% had creatinine clearance, Imipenem/relebactam (IMI/REL) is a suitable treatment option for serious gram-negative infections, including those caused by carbapenem-nonsusceptible pathogens in high-risk patients. IMI/REL may be preferable to colistin-based therapy, given comparable efficacy but IMI/REL’s significantly lower nephrotoxicity and improved overall tolerability.

Background In phase 3 MODIFY I/II trials, bezlotoxumab significantly reduced recurrence of Clostridioides (Clostridium) difficile infection (rCDI) over 12 weeks. Choice of CDI antibacterial treatment may affect CDI-related outcomes; therefore, this prespecified analysis assessed if the magnitude of bezlotoxumab-induced rCDI reduction was influenced by the antibiotic administered. Methods In MODIFY I/II (NCT01241552/NCT01513239), participants received a single infusion of bezlotoxumab (10 mg/kg) or placebo during anti-CDI treatment. Using pooled data from MODIFY I/II, initial clinical cure (ICC) and rCDI were assessed in metronidazole-, vancomycin-, and fidaxomicin-treated subgroups. Results Of 1554 participants in MODIFY I/II, 753 (48.5%) received metronidazole, 745 (47.9%) vancomycin, and 56 (3.6%) fidaxomicin. Fewer participants receiving metronidazole had a prior CDI episode in the previous 6 months (12.9%) or ≥1 risk factor for rCDI (66.0%) vs participants receiving vancomycin (41.2% and 83.6%, respectively) and fidaxomicin (55.4% and 89.3%, respectively). ICC rates were similar in the bezlotoxumab (metronidazole, 81.0%; vancomycin, 78.5%; fidaxomicin, 86.7%) and placebo groups (metronidazole, 81.3%; vancomycin, 79.6%; fidaxomicin, 76.9%). In placebo-treated participants, the rCDI was lower in the metronidazole subgroup vs the vancomycin and fidaxomicin subgroups (metronidazole, 28.0%; vancomycin, 38.4%; fidaxomicin, 35.0%). When analyzed by subsets based on history of CDI, rCDI rates were similar in the metronidazole and vancomycin groups. rCDI rates were lower in all antibiotic subgroups for bezlotoxumab vs placebo (metronidazole: rate difference [RD], –9.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI], –16.4% to –3.1%; vancomycin: RD, –15.4%; 95% CI, –22.7% to –8.0%; fidaxomicin: RD, –11.9%; 95% CI, –38.1% to 14.3%). Conclusion Bezlotoxumab reduces rCDI vs placebo in participants receiving metronidazole and vancomycin, with a similar effect size in participants receiving fidaxomicin.

Background In the RESTORE-IMI 2 trial, imipenem/cilastatin/relebactam (IMI/REL) was non-inferior to PIP/TAZ for treating hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (HABP/VABP) in the primary endpoint of Day 28 all-cause mortality (D28 ACM) and the key secondary endpoint of clinical response (CR) at early follow-up (EFU; 7-14 d after end of therapy). We performed a multivariate regression analysis to determine independent predictors of treatment outcomes in this trial. Methods Randomized, controlled, double-blind, phase 3, non-inferiority trial comparing IMI/REL 500 mg/250 mg vs PIP/TAZ 4 g/500 mg, every 6 h for 7-14 d, in adult patients (pts) with HABP/VABP. Stepwise-selection logistic regression modeling was used to determine independent predictors of D28 ACM and favorable CR at EFU, in the MITT population (randomized pts with ≥1 dose of study drug, except pts with only gram-positive cocci at baseline). Baseline variables (n=19) were pre-selected as candidates for inclusion (Table 1), based on clinical relevance. Variables were added to the model if significant (p < 0.05) and removed if their significance was reduced (p > 0.1) by addition of other variables. Results Baseline variables that met criteria for significant independent predictors of D28 ACM and CR at EFU in the final selected regression model are in Fig 1 and Fig 2, respectively. As expected, APACHE II score, renal impairment, elderly age, and mechanical ventilation were significant predictors for both outcomes. Bacteremia and P. aeruginosa as a causative pathogen were predictors of unfavorable CR, but not of D28 ACM. Geographic region and the hospital service unit a patient was admitted to were found to be significant predictors, likely explained by their collinearity with other variables. Treatment allocation (IMI/REL vs PIP/TAZ) was not a significant predictor for ACM or CR; this was not unexpected, since the trial showed non-inferiority of the two HABP/VABP therapies. No interactions between the significant predictors and treatment arm were observed. Conclusion This analysis validated known predictors for mortality and clinical outcomes in pts with HABP/VABP and supports the main study results by showing no interactions between predictors and treatment arm. Table 1. Candidate baseline variables pre-selected for inclusion Figure 1. Independent predictors of greater Day 28 all-cause mortality (MITT population; N=531) Figure 2. Independent predictors of favorable clinical response at EFU (MITT population; N=531) Disclosures Robert Tipping, MS, Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Jiejun Du, PhD, Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Maria C. Losada, BA, Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Michelle L. Brown, BS, Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Katherine Young, MS, Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder)Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Joan R. Butterton, MD, Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Amanda Paschke, MD MSCE, Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Luke F. Chen, MBBS MPH MBA FRACP FSHEA FIDSA, Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder)Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder)

Pre-clinical and epidemiology studies suggest that antibodies directed at C. difficile toxins protect against recurrence of C. difficile infection (CDI). Human monoclonal antibodies (MAb) targeting...

BackgroundIn the randomized controlled RESTORE-IMI 1 clinical trial (NCT02452047), imipenem/cilastatin (IMI) with relebactam (IMI/REL) was as effective as colistin plus IMI for the treatment of imipenem-nonsusceptible gram-negative infections. Differences in nephrotoxicity were observed between treatment arms. As there is no standard definition of nephrotoxicity used in clinical trials, we conducted analyses to further understand the renal safety profile of both treatments.MethodsNephrotoxicity was retrospectively evaluated using 2 acute kidney injury assessment criteria (Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes [KDIGO] and Risk, Injury, Failure, Loss, and End-stage Kidney Disease [RIFLE]). Additional outcomes included time to onset of protocol-defined nephrotoxicity and incidence of renal adverse events.ResultsOf 47 participants receiving treatment, 45 had sufficient data to assess nephrotoxicity (IMI/REL, n = 29; colistin plus IMI, n = 16). By KDIGO criteria, no participants in the IMI/REL but 31.3% in the colistin plus IMI group experienced stage 3 acute kidney injury. No IMI/REL-treated participants experienced renal failure by RIFLE criteria, vs 25.0% for colistin plus IMI. Overall, the time to onset of nephrotoxicity varied considerably (2–22 days). Fewer renal adverse events (12.9% vs 37.5%), including discontinuations due to drug-related renal adverse events (0% vs 12.5%), were observed in the IMI/REL group compared with the colistin plus IMI group, respectively.ConclusionsOur analyses confirm the findings of a preplanned end point and provide further evidence that IMI/REL had a more favorable renal safety profile than colistin-based therapy in patients with serious, imipenem-nonsusceptible gram-negative bacterial infections.ClinicalTrials.gov IdentifierNCT02452047.

The RESTORE-IMI 1 phase 3 trial demonstrated the efficacy and safety of imipenem-cilastatin (IMI) combined with relebactam (REL) for treating imipenem-nonsusceptible infections. The objective of this analysis was to compare the outcomes among patients meeting eligibility requirements based on central laboratory susceptibility versus local laboratory susceptibility. Patients with serious infections caused by imipenem-nonsusceptible, colistin-susceptible, and imipenem-REL-susceptible pathogens were randomized 2:1 to IMI-REL plus placebo or colistin plus IMI for 5 to 21 days. The primary endpoint was a favorable overall response. Key endpoints included the clinical response and all-cause mortality. We compared outcomes between the primary microbiological modified intent-to-treat (mMITT) population, where eligibility was based on central laboratory susceptibility testing, and the supplemental mMITT (SmMITT) population, where eligibility was based on local, site-level testing. The SmMITT (n = 41) and MITT (n = 31) populations had similar baseline characteristics, including sex, age, illness severity, and renal function. In both analysis populations, favorable overall response rates in the IMI-REL treatment group were >70%. Favorable clinical response rates at day 28 were 71.4% for IMI-REL and 40.0% for colistin plus IMI in the mMITT population, whereas they were 75.0% for IMI-REL and 53.8% for colistin plus IMI in the SmMITT population. Day 28 all-cause mortality rates were 9.5% for IMI-REL and 30.0% for colistin plus IMI in the mMITT population, whereas they were 10.7% for IMI-REL and 23.1% for colistin plus IMI in the SmMITT population. The outcomes in the SmMITT population were generally consistent with those in the mMITT population, suggesting that outcomes may be applicable to the real-world use of IMI-REL for treating infections caused by imipenem-nonsusceptible Gram-negative pathogens. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under identifier NCT02452047.).

Background HABP/VABP are serious infections associated with high mortality. Critically ill patients (pts) are at particularly high risk of adverse clinical outcomes. In the RESTORE-IMI 2 trial, IMI/REL was non-inferior to PIP/TAZ in primary and key secondary endpoints. We evaluated outcomes specifically in critically ill pts, according to several definitions, from that trial. Methods Randomized, controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial in adult pts with HABP/VABP. Lower respiratory tract (LRT) specimens were obtained ≤48 hours prior to screening. Pts were randomized 1:1 to IMI/REL 500 mg/250 mg or PIP/TAZ 4 g/500 mg, given IV every 6 h for 7-14 d. The primary endpoint was Day 28 all-cause mortality (ACM) and the key secondary endpoint was clinical response at early follow-up (EFU; 7-14 d after completing therapy) in the modified intent-to-treat (MITT) population (randomized pts with ≥1 dose of study drug, excluding pts with only gram-positive cocci present on baseline Gram stain). This analysis assessed efficacy outcomes specifically in pts in the ICU and in pts with APACHE II score ≥15, both prespecified subgroups. In post-hoc analyses, outcomes were also specifically assessed in the subgroups of pts with moderate/severe renal impairment (creatinine clearance < 60 mL/min) and pts who received vasopressors. Results Of MITT pts (n=531) at baseline, 66.1% (175 IMI/REL, 176 PIP/TAZ) were in the ICU, 47.5% (125 IMI/REL, 127 PIP/TAZ) had APACHE-II score ≥15, and 24.7% (71 IMI/REL, 60 PIP/TAZ) had moderate/severe renal impairment. Further, 20.9% (54 IMI/REL, 57 PIP/TAZ) received vasopressors within 72 h of first dose of study drug and/or during the study. In each subgroup, baseline demographics, clinical characteristics, and causative LRT pathogens (mostly Enterobacterales, P. aeruginosa, and A. calcoaceticus-baumannii complex) were generally comparable between treatment arms. In pts with APACHE-II score ≥15, Day 28 ACM and clinical response rates with IMI/REL were favorable compared to PIP/TAZ (Table). Day 28 ACM was also favorable with IMI/REL in patients receiving vasopressors. Remaining outcomes were similar between treatment arms. Conclusion IMI/REL is an efficacious treatment option for critically ill pts with HABP/VABP. Table. Primary and key secondary efficacy outcomes by subgroup (MITT population) Disclosures Luke F. Chen, MBBS MPH MBA FRACP FSHEA FIDSA, Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder)Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Maria C. Losada, BA, Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Kathryn A. Mahoney, PharmD, Merck (Employee, Shareholder) Jiejun Du, PhD, Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Michelle L. Brown, BS, Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Robert Tipping, MS, Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Katherine Young, MS, Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder)Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) C. Andrew DeRyke, PharmD, Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Joan R. Butterton, MD, Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Amanda Paschke, MD MSCE, Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder)

Background IMI/REL is a combination of IMI and the novel class A and class C β-lactamase inhibitor REL. Here we present per-pathogen outcomes from a recent phase 3 clinical trial (RESTORE-IMI 2), in which IMI/REL was shown to be non-inferior to piperacillin/tazobactam (PIP/TAZ) for empiric therapy of HABP/VABP, in both primary and key secondary endpoints. Methods Randomized, controlled, double-blind, multinational, phase 3, non-inferiority trial in adults with HABP/VABP. Lower respiratory tract specimens were obtained ≤48 hours prior to screening. Participants (pts) were randomized 1:1 to IMI/REL 500 mg/250 mg or PIP/TAZ 4 g/500 mg, given intravenously every 6 h for 7-14 d. Pts also received empiric linezolid until baseline cultures confirmed absence of MRSA. This analysis evaluated outcomes by causative LRT pathogen in modified intent to treat (MITT) pts (randomized pts with ≥1 dose of study drug, excluding pts with only gram-positive cocci present on baseline Gram stain) who had ≥1 baseline LRT pathogen susceptible (according to CLSI criteria) to both study drugs. Outcomes assessed were microbiologic response at end of therapy (EOT), clinical response at early follow-up (EFU; 7-14 d after EOT), and Day 28 all-cause mortality (ACM). Results Of 531 MITT pts, 51.4% (130 IMI/REL, 143 PIP/TAZ) had ≥1 baseline LRT pathogen susceptible to both study drugs. The most common causative pathogens in this analysis population were Klebsiella spp (30.4% of patients), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (22.3%), Escherichia coli (22.0%), and Haemophilus influenzae (9.2%), consistent with other recent trials in HABP/VABP and with surveillance data. Outcomes by pathogen were generally comparable between IMI/REL and PIP/TAZ (Table). In a separate subgroup analysis of the microbiologic MITT population, in pts with ≥1 ESBL-positive LRT pathogen (45 IMI/REL, 35 PIP/TAZ), microbiologic response at EOT was 82.2% (IMI/REL) vs 68.6%% (PIP/TAZ), clinical response at EFU was 64.4% vs 60.0%, and Day 28 ACM was 20.0% and 22.9%, respectively. In the IMI/REL arm, 8 pts had ≥1 confirmed KPC-positive baseline LRT pathogen; KPC status was not assessed in the PIP/TAZ arm. Conclusion IMI/REL is an efficacious treatment option for HABP/VABP, regardless of causative pathogen. Table. Primary and secondary efficacy outcomes in patients who were in the MITT population and had at least 1 baseline LRT pathogen susceptible to both study drugs Disclosures Maria C. Losada, BA, Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Jiejun Du, PhD, Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Michelle L. Brown, BS, Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Katherine Young, MS, Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder)Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Robert Tipping, MS, Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) C. Andrew DeRyke, PharmD, Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Joan R. Butterton, MD, Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Amanda Paschke, MD MSCE, Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder) Luke F. Chen, MBBS MPH MBA FRACP FSHEA FIDSA, Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder)Merck & Co., Inc. (Employee, Shareholder)

Background: The extent to which adult height, a biomarker of the interplay of genetic endowment and early-life experiences, is related to risk of chronic diseases in adulthood is uncertain. Methods: We calculated hazard ratios (HRs) for height, assessed in increments of 6.5 cm, using individual-participant data on 174 374 deaths or major non-fatal vascular outcomes recorded among 1 085 949 people in 121 prospective studies. Results: For people born between 1900 and 1960, mean adult height increased 0.5-1 cm with each successive decade of birth. After adjustment for age, sex, smoking and year of birth, HRs per 6.5 cm greater height were 0.97 (95% confidence interval: 0.96-0.99) for death from any cause, 0.94 (0.93-0.96) for death from vascular causes, 1.04 (1.03-1.06) for death from cancer and 0.92 (0.90-0.94) for death from other causes. Height was negatively associated with death from coronary disease, stroke subtypes, heart failure, stomach and oral cancers, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, mental disorders, liver disease and external causes. In contrast, height was positively associated with death from ruptured aortic aneurysm, pulmonary embolism, melanoma and cancers of the pancreas, endocrine and nervous systems, ovary, breast, prostate, colorectum, blood and lung. HRs per 6.5 cm greater height ranged from 1.26 (1.12-1.42) for risk of melanoma death to 0.84 (0.80-0.89) for risk of death from chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. HRs were not appreciably altered after further adjustment for adiposity, blood pressure, lipids, inflammation biomarkers, diabetes mellitus, alcohol consumption or socio-economic indicators. Conclusion: Adult height has directionally opposing relationships with risk of death from several different major causes of chronic diseases. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the International Epidemiological Association © The Author 2012; all rights reserved.

Context The value of assessing various emerging lipid-related markers for prediction of first cardiovascular events is debated. Objective To determine whether adding information on apolipoprotein B and apolipoprotein A-I, lipoprotein(a), or lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A(2) to total cholesterol and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) improves cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk prediction. Design, Setting, and Participants Individual records were available for 165 544 participants without baseline CVD in 37 prospective cohorts (calendar years of recruitment: 1968-2007) with up to 15 126 incident fatal or nonfatal CVD outcomes (10 132 CHD and 4994 stroke outcomes) during a median follow-up of 10.4 years (interquartile range, 7.6-14 years). Main Outcome Measures Discrimination of CVD outcomes and reclassification of participants across predicted 10-year risk categories of low ( = 20%) risk. Results The addition of information on various lipid-related markers to total cholesterol, HDL-C, and other conventional risk factors yielded improvement in the model's discrimination: C-index change, 0.0006 (95% CI, 0.0002-0.0009) for the combination of apolipoprotein B and A-I; 0.0016 (95% CI, 0.0009-0.0023) for lipoprotein(a); and 0.0018 (95% CI, 0.0010-0.0026) for lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A(2) mass. Net reclassification improvements were less than 1% with the addition of each of these markers to risk scores containing conventional risk factors. We estimated that for 100 000 adults aged 40 years or older, 15 436 would be initially classified at intermediate risk using conventional risk factors alone. Additional testing with a combination of apolipoprotein B and A-I would reclassify 1.1%; lipoprotein(a), 4.1%; and lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A(2) mass, 2.7% of people to a 20% or higher predicted CVD risk category and, therefore, in need of statin treatment under Adult Treatment Panel III guidelines. Conclusion In a study of individuals without known CVD, the addition of information on the combination of apolipoprotein B and A-I, lipoprotein(a), or lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A(2) mass to risk scores containing total cholesterol and HDL-C led to slight improvement in CVD prediction. JAMA. 2012; 307(23):2499-2506 www.jama.com

Background Clinical trials of new antibacterial agents in patients with carbapenem-resistant infections are critical but challenging to conduct. One challenge is identifying the study population by microbiological (micro) criteria; patients need to be identified locally to initiate effective treatment rapidly, but data standardization requires central laboratory confirmation. REL is a novel β-lactamase inhibitor that can restore imipenem activity against many imipenem-NS Gram-negative pathogens. Here we compare a supplemental analysis population based on local microbiology data (SmMITT eligibility) with the primary analysis population (mMITT) from the RESTORE-IMI 1 trial (NCT02452047) of IMI/REL vs. IMI+CST. Methods Randomized, active-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial enrolled adults with hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (HABP/VABP), complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI), or complicated urinary tract infection (cUTI). Patients were mMITT-eligible if pathogens were imipenem-NS (but CST- and IMI/REL-susceptible) based on central laboratory minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC). SmMITT comprised mMITT plus all patients who met inclusion criteria only based on local laboratory MIC. Results The SmMITT population (n = 41 [28 IMI/REL; 13 IMI+CST]) comprised 31 from mMITT plus 10 based on local MIC; 12/41 (29%) had HABP/VABP, 8/41 (20%) cIAI, and 21/41 (51%) cUTI. The majority of differences in central vs. local MIC were 1–2 dilutions; similar numbers of patients were excluded from mMITT due to imipenem susceptibility (n = 5) or IMI/REL-NS (n = 4); 1 patient was CST-NS. Baseline characteristics, including infecting pathogens, were comparable in SmMITT and mMITT (SmMITT: 68% male; 46% ≥65 y; 24% APACHE II score >15; 22% creatinine clearance Conclusion Consistency of results was demonstrated across two analysis populations in a trial of resistant pathogens. This analysis provides results supportive of expected future clinical use of IMI/REL when treatment decisions will be made based on local laboratory results. Disclosures K. Kaye, Merck & Co., Inc.: Consultant and Research Contractor, Research grant. Melinta, Achaogen, Allergan: Consultant, Consulting fee. T. File, Bio Merieux, Curetis, Melinta, Merck, MotifBio, Nabriva, Paratek, Pfizer: Consultant, Consulting fee. H. W. Boucher, Merck & Co., Inc.: Scientific Advisor, Consulting fee. M. Brown, Merck & Co., Inc.: Employee, Salary. A. Aggrey, Merck & Co., Inc.: Employee, Salary. I. Khan, Merck & Co., Inc.: Employee, Salary. H. K. Joeng, Merck & Co., Inc.: Employee, Salary. R. Tipping, Merck & Co., Inc.: Employee, Salary. J. Du, Merck & Co., Inc.: Employee, Salary. K. Young, Merck & Co., Inc.: Employee, Salary and Stock options. J. Butterton, Merck & Co., Inc.: Employee, Salary and Stock. N. A. Kartsonis, Merck & Co., Inc.: Employee, Salary and Stocks. A. Paschke, Merck & Co., Inc.: Employee and Shareholder, Salary.

Background Nephrotoxicity is a common complication of CST-based therapy, limiting its use to treat carbapenem-resistant bacterial infections. REL is a novel β-lactamase inhibitor that restores imipenem activity against many imipenem-NS strains of Gram-negative pathogens. IMI/REL was shown to be as effective but better tolerated than IMI+CST in the phase 3 RESTORE-IMI 1 study (NCT02452047), including a lower incidence of treatment-emergent nephrotoxicity (prespecified secondary endpoint). Here we present additional renal safety data from that trial. Methods Randomized, active-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial in adults with infections caused by ≥1 imipenem-NS (but CST- and IMI/REL-susceptible) pathogen. Treatment (2:1) was IMI/REL or IMI+CST for 5–21 days in complicated intra-abdominal infection and complicated urinary tract infection and 7–21 days in hospital-acquired/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia. For baseline serum creatinine (Cr) 1.2 mg/dL OR decrease in Cr clearance [CrCl] ≥50%; for Cr ≥1.2 mg/dL, nephrotoxicity was defined as an increase in serum Cr ≥1 mg/dL OR decrease from baseline in CrCl ≥20% OR need for renal replacement therapy. KDIGO and RIFLE criteria of acute kidney injury (AKI) were applied to the data; renal-related adverse events (AEs) were analyzed. Results A total of 47 patients were randomized, treated (31 IMI/REL, 16 IMI+CST), and included in this analysis. A significantly smaller percentage of patients in the IMI/REL than the IMI+CST group experienced protocol-defined nephrotoxicity (% difference: −45.9 [95% CI: −69.1, −18.4]; P = 0.002) during study treatment and the 14-day follow-up period (table). These results were confirmed by applying KDIGO and RIFLE criteria, with no patients in the IMI/REL group in stage 3 AKI or failure compared with 31.3% and 25.0%, respectively, in the IMI+CST group. Fewer renal AEs, including discontinuations due to renal events, were observed in the IMI/REL group. Conclusion IMI/REL demonstrates a more favorable renal safety profile compared with CST-based therapy, as demonstrated by a lower incidence of treatment-emergent nephrotoxicity and AKI with IMI/REL across several different analyses. Disclosures M. Brown, Merck & Co., Inc.: Employee, Salary. J. Motsch, Heidelberg University: Research Contractor, Research grant. K. Kaye, Merck & Co., Inc.: Consultant and Research Contractor, Research grant. Melinta, Achaogen, Allergan: Consultant, Consulting fee. T. File, Bio Merieux, Curetis, Melinta, Merck, MotifBio, Nabriva, Paratek, Pfizer: Consultant, Consulting fee. H. W. Boucher, Merck & Co., Inc.: Scientific Advisor, Consulting fee. N. Vendetti, Merck & Co., Inc.: Employee, Salary. A. Aggrey, Merck & Co., Inc.: Employee, Salary. H. K. Joeng, Merck & Co., Inc.: Employee, Salary. R. Tipping, Merck & Co., Inc.: Employee, Salary. J. Du, Merck & Co., Inc.: Employee, Salary. D. D. Depestel, Merck & Co., Inc.: Employee, Salary. J. Butterton, Merck & Co., Inc.: Employee, Salary and Stock. N. A. Kartsonis, Merck & Co., Inc.: Employee, Salary and Stocks. A. Paschke, Merck & Co., Inc.: Employee and Shareholder, Salary.

Background. Actoxumab ((ACT) MK-3415) and bezlotoxumab ((BEZ) MK- 6072) are human monoclonal antibodies against Clostridium difficile toxins A and B, respectively. Methods. Combined data from 2 double-blind, randomized, phase 3 studies in adult patients receiving oral standard of care (SoC) (metronidazole, vancomycin, or fidaxomi- cin) for primary or recurrent Cd ifficile infection (rCDI), including multiple rCDI. In MODIFY I, patients received a single infusion of ACT + BEZ 10 mg/kg each (MK- 3415A), ACT 10 mg/kg alone, BEZ 10 mg/kg alone, or placebo. In MODIFY II, patients received a single infusion of ACT + BEZ, BEZ alone, or placebo. Entry criteria, study visits/ procedures, and efficacy/safety endpoints were the same for both studies. The rCDI (new episode ofdiarrhea andpositive stooltest fortoxigenic Cd ifficile afterclinical cure ofbase- line CDI episode) was the primary endpoint, and global cure (clinical cure of initial epi- sode and no rCDI) was a secondary endpoint; both were evaluated through week 12. Results. A total of 2655 patients (median age 66 years, 57% female) enrolled in 30 countries and 2580 (97%) received the study infusion. Baseline characteristics were ba- lanced across treatment groups. In MODIFY I, the ACT alone group was stopped for ef- ficacy and safety reasons after interim analysis, based on a predefined adaptive plan. In the full analysis set (N = 2327, ACT alone excluded), 53% of patients were ≥65 years of age, 27% had prior CDI, 17% had severe CDI, and 11% were infected with 027 ribotype. The rCDI rates were significantly lower for ACT+BEZ (15.4%) and for BEZ alone (16.5%) versus placebo (26.6%, both 1-sided, P

A new approach that extends the classical Clopper-Pearson procedure is proposed for the estimation of the (1–α)% confidence interval of a proportion with over-dispersion. Over-dispersion occurs when a proportion of interest shows more variation (variance inflation) than predicted by the binomial distribution. There are two steps in the approach. The first step consists of the estimation of the variance inflation factor. In the second step, an extended Clopper-Pearson procedure is applied to calculate the confidence interval after the effective sample size is obtained by adjusting with the estimated variance inflation factor. The performance of the extended Clopper-Pearson procedure is evaluated via a Monte Carlo study under the setup motivated from head lice studies. It is demonstrated that the 95% confidence intervals constructed from the new approach generally have the closest coverage rate to target (95%) when compared with those constructed from competing procedures.

Lovastatin (Mevacor) 20 mg is being considered for nonprescription availability. Because the most severe untoward consequence of therapy with any statin is rhabdomyolysis, the clinical data for lovastatin pertaining to this adverse event were reviewed. Evidence to date, based on almost 2 decades of experience, points to an extremely low risk for myopathy and rhabdomyolysis associated with lovastatin.

BackgroundThere is debate about the value of assessing levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) and other biomarkers of inflammation for the prediction of first cardiovascular events.MethodsWe analyzed data from 52 prospective studies that included 246,669 participants without a history of cardiovascular disease to investigate the value of adding CRP or fibrinogen levels to conventional risk factors for the prediction of cardiovascular risk. We calculated measures of discrimination and reclassification during follow-up and modeled the clinical implications of initiation of statin therapy after the assessment of CRP or fibrinogen.ResultsThe addition of information on high-density lipoprotein cholesterol to a prognostic model for cardiovascular disease that included age, sex, smoking status, blood pressure, history of diabetes, and total cholesterol level increased the C-index, a measure of risk discrimination, by 0.0050. The further addition to this model of information on CRP or fibrinogen increased the C-index by 0.0039 and 0.0027, respectively (P = 20%) (P = 20% and for those with certain other risk factors, such as diabetes, irrespective of their 10-year predicted risk), additional targeted assessment of CRP or fibrinogen levels in the 13,199 remaining participants at intermediate risk could help prevent approximately 30 additional cardiovascular events over the course of 10 years.ConclusionsIn a study of people without known cardiovascular disease, we estimated that under current treatment guidelines, assessment of the CRP or fibrinogen level in people at intermediate risk for a cardiovascular event could help prevent one additional event over a period of 10 years for every 400 to 500 people screened. (Funded by the British Heart Foundation and others.)

Relatively few studies have been conducted linking decreasing intraocular pressure (IOP) to preservation of visual field. This investigation was conducted to determine if this link could be made and to compare the long-term effect of two ocular hypotensive agents on preservation of visual field.In an observer-masked study, 189 patients with primary open-angle glaucoma received either timolol or pilocarpine by random allocation. The dose of antiglaucoma agent was increased from 0.25% to 0.5% twice daily for timolol or from 2% to 4% four times daily for pilocarpine if the initial IOP response was inadequate. After an on-treatment baseline, visual fields were followed every 4 months for 2 years using the Octopus program 32.Compared with timolol, significantly more patients receiving pilocarpine discontinued use because of inadequate IOP control (Por = 0.01). By comparing the mean visual field scores, it can be seen that the pilocarpine group had a significantly worse score at all timepoints from month 4 to month 24. The pilocarpine group also had a greater mean number of test loci with decreased sensitivity of 5 or more decibels (dB) at all timepoints. The mean within-patient regression slope for timolol was 0.01 dB/month and for pilocarpine was -0.06 dB/month (P0.01). The study has shown that over a 2-year period, patients treated with pilocarpine 2% or 4% four times daily experienced a significantly greater visual field deterioration than that seen in patients receiving either 0.25% or 0.5% timolol twice daily.Although these data do not support a link between lowering of IOP and visual field preservation, treatment with timolol was associated with significantly less visual field loss than treatment with pilocarpine.

The Consumer Use Study of OTC Mevacor evaluated the ability of subjects to self-manage high levels of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol by using a multifaceted cholesterol self-management program (the Mevacor Over-the-Counter Self-Management System; MOTC-SMS). This 26-week all-comers multicenter observational study was conducted in naturalistic storefront settings that used the fully functional MOTC-SMS to guide subjects' behavior. Of 3,316 subjects who evaluated the product (evaluators), 1,061 took >or=1 20-mg tablet of Mevacor OTC (users). Eighty-four percent of evaluators made appropriate initial use decisions. Most users demonstrated acceptable ongoing use behavior regarding treatment to goal, compliance/persistence, changes in health status, dietary patterns, and exercise habits. Throughout the study, 23 users (2%) demonstrated behavior that created the potential for suboptimal safety. After 26 weeks, median levels of LDL cholesterol were reduced by 25% among users who fasted. Of the 878 users who completed the study lipid test, 548 (62%) achieved the LDL cholesterol target goal (

Objectives: To determine if NIX (Warner Lambert Healthcare, Morris Plains, NJ) 1% Permethrin Creme Rinse Lice Treatment (1% PLT) without combing will effectively treat ≥95% of patients on day 2 or on day 15; to determine whether combing influences efficacy. Study design: A randomized, observer-blinded study enrolled 95 infested adults and children. All patients were treated with 1% PLT on day 1 and, if still infested, on day 8. One third of households were randomized to the combing group and two thirds to the no-combing group. Efficacy was assessed by: (1) visual inspection on days 1, 2, 8, 9, and 15 and, (2) shampooing/straining on days 2, 9, and 15. The target efficacy was 95%. Results: In the no-combing group, the lice-free rate was 83.1% on day 2 (95% CI, 71.0-91.6), 45.8% on day 8 (before second treatment) (95% CI, 32.7-59.2), 77.6% on day 9 (95% CI, 64.7-87.5), and 78.3% on day 15 (95% CI, 65.8-87.9). Adjunctive combing did not improve efficacy on any day. Conclusions: In this population, 1% PLT was significantly less than 95% effective and suggests resistance to 1% PLT. The failure of nit removal combing by nonprofessional caregivers to improve efficacy demonstrates the unreliability of combing as adjunctive treatment in this setting. (J Pediatr 2002;141:665-70)

Publisher's version (útgefin grein), Aims: There is debate about the optimum algorithm for cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk estimation. We conducted head-to-head comparisons of four algorithms recommended by primary prevention guidelines, before and after 'recalibration', a method that adapts risk algorithms to take account of differences in the risk characteristics of the populations being studied. Methods and results: Using individual-participant data on 360 737 participants without CVD at baseline in 86 prospective studies from 22 countries, we compared the Framingham risk score (FRS), Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation (SCORE), pooled cohort equations (PCE), and Reynolds risk score (RRS). We calculated measures of risk discrimination and calibration, and modelled clinical implications of initiating statin therapy in people judged to be at 'high' 10 year CVD risk. Original risk algorithms were recalibrated using the risk factor profile and CVD incidence of target populations. The four algorithms had similar risk discrimination. Before recalibration, FRS, SCORE, and PCE over-predicted CVD risk on average by 10%, 52%, and 41%, respectively, whereas RRS under-predicted by 10%. Original versions of algorithms classified 29-39% of individuals aged ≥40 years as high risk. By contrast, recalibration reduced this proportion to 22-24% for every algorithm. We estimated that to prevent one CVD event, it would be necessary to initiate statin therapy in 44-51 such individuals using original algorithms, in contrast to 37-39 individuals with recalibrated algorithms. Conclusion: Before recalibration, the clinical performance of four widely used CVD risk algorithms varied substantially. By contrast, simple recalibration nearly equalized their performance and improved modelled targeting of preventive action to clinical need., The work of the co-ordinating centre was funded by the UK Medical Research Council (G0800270), British Heart Foundation (SP/09/ 002), British Heart Foundation Cambridge Cardiovascular Centre of Excellence, UK National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, European Research Council (268834), and European Commission Framework Programme 7 (HEALTH-F2-2012-279233). The Emerging Risk Factor Collaboration’s website https://www.phpc.cam.ac.uk/ceu/erfc/list-of-studies/ has compiled a list provided by investigators of some of the funders of the component studies in this analysis. I.W. was supported by the Medical Research Council Unit Programme MC_UU_12023/21. M.K. is supported by the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research (NWO) Veni grant (Veni, 91616079). J.P. is supported by Erasmus Mundus Western Balkans (ERAWEB), a project funded by the European Commission.