Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39258877›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy2024

Comparative evaluation of early treatment with ceftolozane/tazobactam versus ceftazidime/avibactam for non-COVID-19 patients with pneumonia due to multidrug-resistant Pseudomonas aeruginosa.

Thomas P Lodise, Engels N Obi, Alexandre H Watanabe, Emre Yucel, Jae Min, Brian H Nathanson

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of antimicrobial chemotherapy, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Thomas P LodiseDepartment of Pharmacy Practice, Albany College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, 106 New Scotland Avenue, Albany, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-4730-0655
Engels N ObiMerck & Co., Inc., 2025 E Scott Ave, Rahway, NJ, USA.
Alexandre H WatanabeMerck & Co., Inc., 2025 E Scott Ave, Rahway, NJ, USA.
Emre YucelMerck & Co., Inc., 2025 E Scott Ave, Rahway, NJ, USA.
Jae MinMerck & Co., Inc., 2025 E Scott Ave, Rahway, NJ, USA.
Brian H NathansonOptiStatim LLC, 25 Willow Circle, Longmeadow, MA, USA.

Funding

Merck & Co., Inc.Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCeftolozane/tazobactam and ceftazidime/avibactam are commonly used in patients with MDR-Pseudomonas aeruginosa (PSA) pneumonia (PNA). This study compared outcomes between non-COVID-19 hospitalized patients with MDR-PSA PNA who received ceftolozane/tazobactam or ceftazidime/avibactam.

methodsThe study included non-COVID-19 adult hospitalized patients with MDR-PSA PNA in the PINC AI Healthcare Database (2016-22) who received ceftolozane/tazobactam or ceftazidime/avibactam within 3 days of index culture for ≥2 days. Outcomes were mortality, recurrent MDR-PSA PNA, discharge destination, post-index culture day length of stay (LOS) and costs (in US dollars, USD), and hospital readmission.

resultsThe final sample included 197 patients (117 ceftolozane/tazobactam, 80 ceftazidime/avibactam). No significant differences were observed in mortality and post-index culture LOS and costs between groups. In the multivariable analyses, patients who received ceftolozane/tazobactam versus ceftazidime/avibactam had lower recurrent MDR-PSA PNA (7.9% versus 18.0%, P = 0.03) and 60 day PNA-related readmissions (11.1% versus 28.5%, P = 0.03) and were more likely to be discharged home (25.8% versus 9.8%, P = 0.03). Compared with ceftazidime/avibactam patients, ceftolozane/tazobactam patients had lower adjusted median total antibiotic costs (5052 USD versus 8099 USD, P = 0.003) and lower adjusted median comparator (ceftolozane/tazobactam or ceftazidime/avibactam) antibiotic costs (3938 USD versus 6441 USD, P = 0.005). In the desirability of outcome ranking (DOOR) analysis, a ceftolozane/tazobactam-treated patient was more likely to have a more favourable outcome than a ceftazidime/avibactam-treated patient [DOOR probability: 59.6% (95% CI: 52.5%-66.8%)].

conclusionsEarly treatment with ceftolozane/tazobactam may offer some clinical and cost benefits over ceftazidime/avibactam in patients with MDR-PSA PNA. Further large-scale studies are necessary to comprehensively understand the outcomes associated with these treatments for MDR-PSA PNA.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsAzabicyclo CompoundsCeftazidimeCephalosporinsDrug CombinationsDrug Resistance, Multiple, BacterialPseudomonas aeruginosaPseudomonas InfectionsTazobactamAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedAnti-Bacterial Agentsavibactam, ceftazidime drug combinationAzabicyclo CompoundsCeftazidimeceftolozane, tazobactam drug combinationCephalosporinsDrug CombinationsTazobactam

Identifiers

PMID39258877
PMCPMC11531822

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.