Acinetobacter spp. are Gram-negative coccobacilli that are distributed widely in the environment. Although Acinetobacter is an opportunistic organism of relatively low virulence, severe infections with these organisms do occur, especially in compromised patients after invasive diagnostic or therapeutic procedures. Acinetobacter spp. can be isolated from virtually all samples of soil and water. However, the skin of patients and staff serves as a reservoir for Acinetobacter spp. in hospitals and is the likely source for most outbreaks of hospital infection. Acinetobacter respiratory tract infection is usually acquired via aspi-ration. Colonisation of the oropharynx with Acinetobacter spp. occurs in only about 7% of healthy people, and in these cases the organism burden is small. Community-acquired pneumonia caused by Acinetobacter is relatively rare. Sporadic cases have been reported from the US, Papua, New Guinea and Australia.

Background: Owing to its ability to form spores and toxins, Bacillus anthracis is considered a bioterror agent. Although current therapeutic strategies can be effective, treatment does not prevent sporulation and toxin production. Objectives: To quantify the combined effect of a protein synthesis inhibitor and a bactericidal agent on B. anthracis toxin production, sporulation and cell growth.Methods: Susceptibility and synergy titrations were conducted on B. anthracis Sterne and 03-0191 strains using linezolid and levofloxacin. The effect of antibiotic exposure on cell viability was evaluated using a continuous medium replacement model. In vitro static models were used to study the effect of linezolid and levofloxacin on sporulation and toxin production. Spores were quantified using the heat shock method. Toxin was quantified via commercial ELISA.Results: Synergy titrations indicated that the combination was synergistic or indifferent; however, in all models antagonism was observed. In the spore model, linezolid resulted in the lowest sporulation rates, while combination therapy resulted in the highest. In the toxin model, linezolid prevented toxin production altogether.Conclusions: This study advances our understanding of the effects of combination therapy on B. anthracis infection. Used alone, linezolid therapy abolishes toxin production and reduces sporulation. These results suggest that studies using a step-wise approach using linezolid initially to stop sporulation and toxin production followed by levofloxacin to rapidly kill vegetative B. anthracis can be recommended.

Necrotizing external otitis in an infant receiving cytostatic therapy for neuroblastema has been described. The disease is characterized by invasion and necrosis of the skin and cartilage of the external ear. P aeruginosa is the usual pathogen isolated in this infection. The disease should be suspected in infants with severe underlying conditions and who have external otitis that does not respond to local therapy. Vigorous antibiotic therapy and possible surgical intervention are indicated.

Background: Bacillus anthracis, the causative agent of anthrax, is a spore forming and toxin producing rod-shaped bacterium that is classified as a category A bioterror agent. This pathogenic microbe can be transmitted to both animals and humans. Clinical presentation depends on the route of entry (direct contact, ingestion, injection or aerosolization) with symptoms ranging from isolated skin infections to more severe manifestations such as cardiac or pulmonary shock, meningitis, and death. To date, anthrax is treatable if antibiotics are administered promptly and continued for 60 days. However, if treatment is delayed or administered improperly, the patient's chances of survival are decreased drastically. In addition, antibiotics are ineffective against the harmful anthrax toxins and spores. Therefore, alternative therapeutics are essential. In this review article, we explore and discuss advances that have been made in anthrax therapy with a primary focus on alternative pre-approved and novel antibiotics as well as anti-toxin therapies.Methods: A literature search was conducted using the University of Manitoba search engine. Using this search engine allowed access to a greater variety of journals/articles that would have otherwise been restricted for general use. In order to be considered for discussion for this review, all articles must have been published later than 2009.Results: The alternative pre-approved antibiotics demonstrated high efficacy against B. anthracis both in vitro and in vivo. In addition, the safety profile and clinical pharmacology of these drugs were already known. Compounds that targeted underexploited bacterial processes (DNA replication, RNA synthesis, and cell division) were also very effective in combatting B. anthracis. In addition, these novel compounds prevented bacterial resistance. Targeting B. anthracis virulence, more specifically the anthrax toxins, increased the length of which treatment could be administered.Conclusions: Several novel and pre-existing antibiotics, as well as toxin inhibitors, have shown increasing promise. A combination treatment that targets both bacterial growth and toxin production would be ideal and probably necessary for effectively combatting this armed bacterium.

Tedizolid phosphate is a novel oxazolidinone prodrug (converted to the active form tedizolid by phosphatases in vivo) that has been developed and recently approved (June 2014) by the United States FDA for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs) caused by susceptible Gram-positive pathogens, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). Tedizolid is an oxazolidinone, but differs from other oxazolidinones by possessing a modified side chain at the C-5 position of the oxazolidinone nucleus which confers activity against certain linezolid-resistant pathogens and has an optimized C- and D-ring system that improves potency through additional binding site interactions. The mechanism of action of tedizolid is similar to other oxazolidinones and occurs through inhibition of bacterial protein synthesis by binding to 23S ribosomal RNA (rRNA) of the 50S subunit of the ribosome. As with other oxazolidinones, the spontaneous frequency of resistance development to tedizolid is low. Tedizolid is four- to eightfold more potent in vivo than linezolid against all species of staphylococci, enterococci, and streptococci, including drug-resistant phenotypes such as MRSA and vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) and linezolid-resistant phenotypes. Importantly, tedizolid demonstrates activity against linezolid-resistant bacterial strains harboring the horizontally transmissible cfr gene, in the absence of certain ribosomal mutations conferring reduced oxazolidinone susceptibility. With its half-life of approximately 12 h, tedizolid is dosed once daily. It demonstrates linear pharmacokinetics, has a high oral bioavailability of approximately 90 %, and is primarily excreted by the liver as an inactive, non-circulating sulphate conjugate. Tedizolid does not require dosage adjustment in patients with any degree of renal dysfunction or hepatic dysfunction. Studies in animals have demonstrated that the pharmacodynamic parameter most closely associated with the efficacy of tedizolid is fAUC(0-24h)/MIC. In non-neutropenic animals, a dose-response enhancement was observed with tedizolid and lower exposures were required compared to neutropenic cohorts. Two Phase III clinical trials have demonstrated non-inferiority of a once-daily tedizolid 200 mg dose for 6-10 days versus twice-daily 600 mg linezolid for the treatment of ABSSSIs. Both trials used the primary endpoint of early clinical response at 48-72 h; however, one trial compared oral formulations while the other initiated therapy with the parenteral formulation and allowed oral sequential therapy following initial clinical response. Throughout its development, tedizolid has demonstrated that it is well tolerated and animal studies have shown a lower propensity for neuropathies with long-term use than its predecessor linezolid. Data from the two completed Phase III clinical trials demonstrated that the studied tedizolid regimen (200 mg once daily for 6 days) had significantly less impact on hematologic parameters as well as significantly less gastrointestinal treatment-emergent adverse effects (TEAEs) than its comparator linezolid. As with linezolid, tedizolid is a weak, reversible MAO inhibitor; however, a murine head twitch model validated to assess serotonergic activity reported no increase in the number of head twitches with tedizolid even at doses that exceeded the C max in humans by up to 25-fold. Tyramine and pseudoephedrine challenge studies in humans have also reported no meaningful MAO-related interactions with tedizolid. With its enhanced in vitro activity against a broad-spectrum of Gram-positive aerobic bacteria, convenient once-daily dosing, a short 6-day course of therapy, availability of both oral and intravenous routes of administration, and an adverse effect profile that appears to be more favorable than linezolid, tedizolid is an attractive agent for use in both the hospital and community settings. Tedizolid is currently undergoing additional Phase III clinical trials for the treatment of hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia (HABP) and ventilated nosocomial pneumonia (VNP).

Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia (SAB) is one of the most common serious bacterial infections and the most frequent invasive infection due to methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA). Treatment is challenging, particularly for MRSA, because of limited treatment options. Telavancin is a bactericidal lipoglycopeptide antibiotic that is active against a range of clinically relevant gram-positive pathogens including MRSA. In experimental animal models of sepsis telavancin was shown to be more effective than vancomycin. In clinically evaluable patients enrolled in a pilot study of uncomplicated SAB, cure rates were 88% for telavancin and 89% for standard therapy. Among patients with infection due to only gram-positive pathogens enrolled in the 2 phase 3 studies of telavancin for treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia, cure rates for those with bacteremic S. aureus pneumonia were 41% (9/22, telavancin) and 40% (10/25, vancomycin) with identical mortality rates. These data support further evaluation of telavancin in larger, prospective studies of SAB.

Background: Hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) is the most common health care-associated infection contributing to death.Studies have indicated that there may be differences in the causative pathogens and outcomes of ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) and non-ventilatorassociated pneumonia (NV-HAP).However, with limited NV-HAP-specific data available, treatment is generally based on data from studies of VAP.The Phase 3 Assessment of Telavancin for Treatment of Hospital-Acquired Pneumonia (ATTAIN) studies were two double-blind randomized controlled trials that demonstrated the non-inferiority of telavancin to vancomycin for treatment of Gram-positive HAP.We conducted a post hoc subgroup analysis of patients enrolled in the ATTAIN studies who had NV-HAP.Methods: Data from the two ATTAIN studies were pooled, and patients with NV-HAP were analyzed.The all-treated (AT) population consisted of all randomized patients who received $1 dose of study medication, and the clinically evaluable (CE) population consisted of AT patients who were protocol-adherent or who died on or after study day 3, where death was attributable to the HAP episode under study.The primary endpoint was clinical response (cure, failure, or indeterminate) at the follow-up/test of cure visit, conducted 7-14 days after the end of therapy.Results: A total of 1,076 patients (71.6% of overall ATTAIN AT population) had NV-HAP (533 and 543 patients in the telavancin and vancomycin treatment groups, respectively).Clinical cure rates in the CE population were similar for patients with NV-HAP treated with telavancin and vancomycin (83.1% [201/242] and 84.1% [233/277], respectively).In patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolated at baseline, cure rates in the CE population were 74.8% (77/103) for telavancin and 79.3% (96/121) for vancomycin.The incidence of adverse events, serious adverse events, and deaths in patients with NV-HAP was similar whether patients received telavancin or vancomycin.Conclusion: This post hoc subgroup analysis of the ATTAIN studies demonstrated similar cure rates for telavancin and vancomycin for treatment of NV-HAP.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention convened panels of anthrax experts to review and update guidelines for anthrax postexposure prophylaxis and treatment. The panels included civilian and military anthrax experts and clinicians with experience treating anthrax patients. Specialties represented included internal medicine, pediatrics, obstetrics, infectious disease, emergency medicine, critical care, pulmonology, hematology, and nephrology. Panelists discussed recent patients with systemic anthrax; reviews of published, unpublished, and proprietary data regarding antimicrobial drugs and anthrax antitoxins; and critical care measures of potential benefit to patients with anthrax. This article updates antimicrobial postexposure prophylaxis and antimicrobial and antitoxin treatment options and describes potentially beneficial critical care measures for persons with anthrax, including clinical procedures for infected nonpregnant adults. Changes from previous guidelines include an expanded discussion of critical care and clinical procedures and additional antimicrobial choices, including preferred antimicrobial drug treatment for possible anthrax meningitis.

Ceftolozane is a novel cephalosporin currently being developed with the β-lactamase inhibitor tazobactam for the treatment of complicated urinary tract infections (cUTIs), complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAIs), and ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (VABP). The chemical structure of ceftolozane is similar to that of ceftazidime, with the exception of a modified side-chain at the 3-position of the cephem nucleus, which confers potent antipseudomonal activity. As a β-lactam, its mechanism of action is the inhibition of penicillin-binding proteins (PBPs). Ceftolozane displays increased activity against Gram-negative bacilli, including those that harbor classical β-lactamases (e.g., TEM-1 and SHV-1), but, similar to other oxyimino-cephalosporins such as ceftazidime and ceftriaxone, it is compromised by extended-spectrum β-lactamases (ESBLs) and carbapenemases. The addition of tazobactam extends the activity of ceftolozane to include most ESBL producers as well as some anaerobic species. Ceftolozane is distinguished from other cephalosporins by its potent activity versus Pseudomonas aeruginosa, including various drug-resistant phenotypes such as carbapenem, piperacillin/tazobactam, and ceftazidime-resistant isolates, as well as those strains that are multidrug-resistant (MDR). Its antipseudomonal activity is attributed to its ability to evade the multitude of resistance mechanisms employed by P. aeruginosa, including efflux pumps, reduced uptake through porins and modification of PBPs. Ceftolozane demonstrates linear pharmacokinetics unaffected by the coadministration of tazobactam; specifically, it follows a two-compartmental model with linear elimination. Following single doses, ranging from 250 to 2,000 mg, over a 1-h intravenous infusion, ceftolozane displays a mean plasma half-life of 2.3 h (range 1.9–2.6 h), a steady-state volume of distribution that ranges from 13.1 to 17.6 L, and a mean clearance of 102.4 mL/min. It demonstrates low plasma protein binding (20 %), is primarily eliminated via urinary excretion (≥92 %), and may require dose adjustments in patients with a creatinine clearance <50 mL/min. Time-kill experiments and animal infection models have demonstrated that the pharmacokinetic–pharmacodynamic index that is best correlated with ceftolozane’s in vivo efficacy is the percentage of time in which free plasma drug concentrations exceed the minimum inhibitory concentration of a given pathogen (%fT >MIC), as expected of β-lactams. Two phase II clinical trials have been conducted to evaluate ceftolozane ± tazobactam in the settings of cUTIs and cIAIs. One trial compared ceftolozane 1,000 mg every 8 h (q8h) versus ceftazidime 1,000 mg q8h in the treatment of cUTI, including pyelonephritis, and demonstrated similar microbiologic and clinical outcomes, as well as a similar incidence of adverse effects after 7–10 days of treatment, respectively. A second trial has been conducted comparing ceftolozane/tazobactam 1,000/500 mg and metronidazole 500 mg q8h versus meropenem 1,000 mg q8h in the treatment of cIAI. A number of phase I and phase II studies have reported ceftolozane to possess a good safety and tolerability profile, one that is consistent with that of other cephalosporins. In conclusion, ceftolozane is a new cephalosporin with activity versus MDR organisms including P. aeruginosa. Tazobactam allows the broadening of the spectrum of ceftolozane versus β-lactamase-producing Gram-negative bacilli including ESBLs. Potential roles for ceftolozane/tazobactam include empiric therapy where infection by a resistant Gram-negative organism (e.g., ESBL) is suspected, or as part of combination therapy (e.g., with metronidazole) where a polymicrobial infection is suspected. In addition, ceftolozane/tazobactam may represent alternative therapy to the third-generation cephalosporins after treatment failure or for documented infections due to Gram-negative bacilli producing ESBLs. Finally, the increased activity of ceftolozane/tazobactam versus P. aeruginosa, including MDR strains, may lead to the treatment of suspected and documented P. aeruginosa infections with this agent. Currently, ceftolozane/tazobactam is being evaluated in three phase III trials for the treatment of cUTI, cIAI, and VABP.

ABSTRACT U.S. Food and Drug Administration draft guidance for future antibiotic clinical trials of bacterial nosocomial pneumonia recommends the use of diagnostic criteria according to American Thoracic Society/Infectious Diseases Society of America (ATS/IDSA) guidelines and the use of a primary endpoint of 28-day all-cause mortality. The effect of applying these guidelines on outcomes of phase III nosocomial pneumonia studies of telavancin was evaluated in a post hoc analysis. ATS/IDSA criteria were applied in a blind fashion to the original all-treated (AT) group. Clinical cure rates at final follow-up were determined in the refined AT and clinically evaluable (CE) groups (ATS/IDSA-AT and ATS/IDSA-CE, respectively). The exploratory endpoint of 28-day survival was evaluated for the ATS/IDSA-AT group. Noninferiority of telavancin versus vancomycin was demonstrated, with similar cure rates in the ATS/IDSA-AT (59% versus 59%) and ATS/IDSA-CE (83% versus 80%) groups. Cure rates favored telavancin in ATS/IDSA-CE patients where Staphylococcus aureus was the sole pathogen (86% versus 75%). Overall, 28-day survival rates were similar in the telavancin (76%) and vancomycin (77%) groups but lower in telavancin-treated patients with preexisting moderate-to-severe renal impairment (creatinine clearance [CL CR ] of <50 ml/min). Telavancin should be administered to patients with moderate-to-severe renal impairment only if treatment benefit outweighs the risk or if no suitable alternatives are available.

Background: Fewer Canadian seniors are vaccinated against pneumococcal disease than receive the influenza vaccine annually. Improved understanding of factors influencing pneumococcal vaccination among older adults is needed to improve vaccine uptake.Methods: A self-administered survey measuring knowledge, attitudes, beliefs and behaviours about pneumococcal vaccination was administered to a cohort of seniors participating in a clinical trial of seasonal influenza vaccines at eight centers across Canada. Eligible participants were ambulatory adults 65 years of age or older, in good health or with stable health conditions, previously given influenza vaccine. The primary outcome was self-reported receipt of pneumococcal vaccination. Multi-variable logistic regression was used to determine factors significantly associated with pneumococcal vaccine receipt.Results: A total of 863 participants completed questionnaires (response rate 92%); 58% indicated they had received the pneumococcal vaccine. Being offered the vaccine by a health care provider had the strongest relationship with vaccine receipt (AOR 23.4 (95% CI 13.4-40.7)). Other variables that remained significantly associated with vaccine receipt in the multivariable model included having heard of the vaccine (AOR 10.1(95% CI 4.7-21.7)), and strongly agreeing that it is important for adults > 65 to be vaccinated against pneumococcus (AOR 3.3 (95% CI 1.2-9.2)). Participants who were < 70 years of age were less likely to be vaccinated.Conclusions: These results indicate healthcare recommendation significantly influenced vaccine uptake in this population of older adults. Measures to encourage healthcare providers to offer the vaccine may help increase coverage.

Eggerthella lenta is an anaerobic, Gram-positive bacillus commonly found in the human digestive tract. Occasionally, it can cause life-threatening infections. Bacteremia due to this organism is always clinically significant and is associated with gastrointestinal diseases and states of immune suppression. The authors report a case involving an elderly man with a newly diagnosed gastrointestinal malignancy who developed bacteremia caused by E lenta, treated successfully using empirical therapy with vancomycin and piperacillin-tazobactam, followed by directed therapy with metronidazole once the identity and antibiotic susceptibility of the organism was established. The present case reinforces the connection between E lenta bacteremia with gastrointestinal malignancy and highlights the importance of searching for a source of bacteremia due to this organism.

Vancomycin is one of the older antibiotics that has been now in clinical use close to 60 years. Earlier on, vancomycin was associated with many side effects including vestibular and renal, most likely due to impurities contained in early vancomycin lots. Over the years, the impurities have been removed and the compound has now far less vestibular adverse effects, but still possesses renal toxicity if administered at higher doses rendering trough serum levels of >15 mcg/mL or if administered for prolonged periods of time. Vancomycin is effective against most Gram-positive cocci and bacilli with the exception of rare organisms as well as enterococci that became vancomycin resistant, mostly Enterococcus faecium. The major use of vancomycin today is for infections caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus epidermidis (MRSE) and amoxicillin-resistant enterococci. In its oral form, vancomycin is used to treat diarrhea caused by Clsotridium difficile. With S. aureus, there are only a handful of vancomycin-resistant strains. Nevertheless, a "vancomycin creep" that is slow upward trending of vancomycin MIC from <1 mcg/mL to higher values has been noted in several parts of the world, but not globally, and strains that have MIC's of 1.5-2 mcg/mL are associated with high therapeutic failure rates. This phenomenon has also been recently recognized in methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA). While vancomycin is relatively a safe agent adverse events include the "red man" syndrome, allergic reactions, and various bone marrow effects as well as nephrotoxicity. Vancomycin has been a very important tool in our therapeutic armamentarium that remained effective for many years, it is likely remain effective as long as resistance to vancomycin remains controlled.