DOCSLIB.ORG

N200327s0160

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
N200327s0160 Clinical Review Sheral S. Patel, M.D. NDA 200327 SD478 S-16 and S-17 Ceftaroline fosamil (Teflaro®) CLINICAL REVIEW Application Type Pediatric Efficacy Supplements Application Number(s) NDA 200327 SD478 S-16 and S-17 Priority or Standard Priority Submit Date 7 December 2015 Received Date 7 December 2015 PDUFA Goal Date 7 June 2016 Division/Office Division of Anti-Infective Products/ OAP/ OND/ CDER Reviewer Name Sheral S. Patel, M.D. Team Leader Hala Shamsuddin, M.D. Review Completion Date 13 May 2016 Established Name Ceftaroline fosamil (Proposed) Trade Name Teflaro® Applicant Cerexa, Inc. (A Subsidiary of Forest Laboratories, LLC.) Formulation(s) Powder for Injection Dosing Regimen 1. Children aged 2 months to < 2 years: 8 mg/kg every 8 hours IV administered over 5 to 60 minutes 2. Children and adolescents aged 2 years to ≤ 18 years: 12 mg/kg (up to a maximum of 400 mg for pediatric patients weighing > 33 kg) q8h by IV infusion administered over 5 to 60 minutes Applicant Proposed For the pediatric population 2 months to < 18 years Indication(s)/Population(s) 1. Acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections 2. Community acquired bacterial pneumonia Recommendation on Approval Regulatory Action Recommended For the pediatric population 2 months to < 18 years Indication(s)/Population(s) 1. Acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (if applicable) 2. Community acquired bacterial pneumonia CDER Clinical Review Template 2015 Edition 1 Reference ID: 3933750 Clinical Review Sheral S. Patel, M.D. NDA 200327 SD478 S-16 and S-17 Ceftaroline fosamil (Teflaro®) Table of Contents Glossary ......................................................................................................................................... 10 1 Executive Summary ............................................................................................................... 12 1.1. Product Introduction ...................................................................................................... 12 1.2. Conclusions on the Substantial Evidence of Effectiveness ............................................ 13 1.3. Benefit-Risk Assessment ................................................................................................ 13 2 Therapeutic Context .............................................................................................................. 18 2.1. Analysis of Condition ...................................................................................................... 18 2.2. Analysis of Current Treatment Options ......................................................................... 19 3 Regulatory Background ......................................................................................................... 20 3.1. U.S. Regulatory Actions and Marketing History ............................................................. 20 3.2. Summary of Presubmission/Submission Regulatory Activity ........................................ 21 3.3. Foreign Regulatory Actions and Marketing History ....................................................... 23 4 Significant Issues from Other Review Disciplines Pertinent to Clinical Conclusions on Efficacy and Safety................................................................................................................. 23 4.1. Office of Scientific Investigations (OSI) .......................................................................... 23 4.2. Product Quality .............................................................................................................. 23 4.3. Clinical Microbiology ...................................................................................................... 24 4.4. Nonclinical Pharmacology/Toxicology ........................................................................... 24 4.5. Clinical Pharmacology .................................................................................................... 25 4.5.1. Mechanism of Action .............................................................................................. 25 4.5.2. Pharmacodynamics ................................................................................................. 25 4.5.3. Pharmacokinetics .................................................................................................... 26 5 Sources of Clinical Data and Review Strategy ....................................................................... 27 5.1. Table of Clinical Studies .................................................................................................. 27 5.2. Review Strategy .............................................................................................................. 35 6 Review of Relevant Individual Trials Used to Support Efficacy ............................................. 35 6.1. Study P903-23: A Multicenter, Randomized, Observer-Blinded, Active-Controlled Study to Evaluate the Safety, Tolerability, Efficacy, and Pharmacokinetics of Ceftaroline CDER Clinical Review Template 2015 Edition 2 Reference ID: 3933750 Clinical Review Sheral S. Patel, M.D. NDA 200327 SD478 S-16 and S-17 Ceftaroline fosamil (Teflaro®) Versus Comparator in Pediatric Subjects With Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infections (D3720C00004) ........................................................................................................ 35 6.1.1. Study Design............................................................................................................ 35 6.1.2. Study Results ........................................................................................................... 40 6.2. Study P903-31: A Multicenter, Randomized, Observer Blinded, Active-Controlled Study Evaluating the Safety, Tolerability, Pharmacokinetics, and Efficacy of Ceftaroline Versus Ceftriaxone in Pediatric Subjects With Community-acquired Bacterial Pneumonia Requiring Hospitalization (DC3720C00007) .............................................................................................. 44 6.2.1. Study Design............................................................................................................ 44 6.2.2. Study Results ........................................................................................................... 49 6.3. Study P903-24: A Multicenter, Randomized, Observer-Blinded, Active-Controlled Study Evaluating the Safety, Tolerability, Pharmacokinetics, and Efficacy of Ceftaroline Versus Ceftriaxone Plus Vancomycin in Pediatric Subjects with Complicated Community-acquired Bacterial Pneumonia ................................................................................................................. 49 6.3.1. Study Design............................................................................................................ 49 6.3.2. Study Results ........................................................................................................... 53 7 Integrated Review of Effectiveness ....................................................................................... 58 7.1. Assessment of Efficacy Across Trials .............................................................................. 58 7.1.1. Primary Endpoints ................................................................................................... 58 7.1.2. Secondary and Other Endpoints ............................................................................. 59 7.1.3. Subpopulations ....................................................................................................... 59 7.1.4. Dose and Dose-Response........................................................................................ 59 7.1.5. Onset, Duration, and Durability of Efficacy Effects ................................................ 59 7.2. Additional Efficacy Considerations ................................................................................. 59 7.3. Integrated Assessment of Effectiveness ........................................................................ 60 8 Review of Safety .................................................................................................................... 63 8.1. Safety Review Approach ................................................................................................ 63 8.2. Review of the Safety Database ...................................................................................... 64 8.2.1. Overall Exposure ..................................................................................................... 64 8.2.2. Baseline demographic and other characteristics ................................................... 66 8.2.3. Adequacy of the safety database: .......................................................................... 71 8.3. Adequacy of Applicant’s Clinical Safety Assessments .................................................... 71 CDER Clinical Review Template 2015 Edition 3 Reference ID: 3933750 Clinical Review Sheral S. Patel, M.D. NDA 200327 SD478 S-16 and S-17 Ceftaroline fosamil (Teflaro®) 8.3.1. Issues Regarding Data Integrity and Submission Quality ....................................... 71 8.3.2. Categorization of Adverse Events ........................................................................... 71 8.3.3. Routine Clinical Tests .............................................................................................. 72 8.3.4. Deaths ....................................................................................................................
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Medical Review(S) Clinical Review
    CENTER FOR DRUG EVALUATION AND RESEARCH APPLICATION NUMBER: 200327 MEDICAL REVIEW(S) CLINICAL REVIEW Application Type NDA Application Number(s) 200327 Priority or Standard Standard Submit Date(s) December 29, 2009 Received Date(s) December 30, 2009 PDUFA Goal Date October 30, 2010 Division / Office Division of Anti-Infective and Ophthalmology Products Office of Antimicrobial Products Reviewer Name(s) Ariel Ramirez Porcalla, MD, MPH Neil Rellosa, MD Review Completion October 29, 2010 Date Established Name Ceftaroline fosamil for injection (Proposed) Trade Name Teflaro Therapeutic Class Cephalosporin; ß-lactams Applicant Cerexa, Inc. Forest Laboratories, Inc. Formulation(s) 400 mg/vial and 600 mg/vial Intravenous Dosing Regimen 600 mg every 12 hours by IV infusion Indication(s) Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infection (ABSSSI); Community-acquired Bacterial Pneumonia (CABP) Intended Population(s) Adults ≥ 18 years of age Template Version: March 6, 2009 Reference ID: 2857265 Clinical Review Ariel Ramirez Porcalla, MD, MPH Neil Rellosa, MD NDA 200327: Teflaro (ceftaroline fosamil) Table of Contents 1 RECOMMENDATIONS/RISK BENEFIT ASSESSMENT ......................................... 9 1.1 Recommendation on Regulatory Action ........................................................... 10 1.2 Risk Benefit Assessment.................................................................................. 10 1.3 Recommendations for Postmarketing Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategies ........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Surgical Decolonization and Prophylaxis
    Surgical Decolonization and Prophylaxis SurgicalSurgical Decolonization Decolonization and Prophylaxis and Prophylaxis DECOLONIZATION DECOLONIZATION Nasal Screening Result Recommended Intervention Nasal Screening Result Recommended Intervention MRSA Negative • No decolonization required MSSAMRSA NegativeNegative • No decolonization required MSSA PositiveNegative • Intranasal mupirocin twice daily x 5 days MSSA Positive • Intranasal mupirocin twice daily x 5 days MRSA Positive • Intranasal mupirocin twice daily x 5 days, MRSA Positive AND• Intranasal mupirocin twice daily x 5 days, •ANDChlorhexidine bathing one day prior to surgery ANTIMICROBIAL• ChlorhexidinePROPHYLAXISbathing one day prior to surgery ANTIMICROBIAL PROPHYLAXIS CLINICAL CONSIDERATIONS • Preoperative dose-timing CLINICAL CONSIDERATIONS • PreoperativeWithin 60 minutesdose-timing of surgical incision WithinExceptions: 60 minutes vancomycin of surgicaland fluoroquinolones incision within 120 minutes of surgical incisionExceptions: vancomycin and fluoroquinolones within 120 minutes of surgical • Weightincision-based dosing • WeightCefazolin-based: 2 gm dosingfor patients <120 kg, and 3 gm for patients ≥120 kg Vancomycin:Cefazolin: 2 gm usefor ABW patients <120 kg, and 3 gm for patients ≥120 kg Gentamicin:Vancomycin: use use ABW ABW unless ABW is >120% of their IBW, in which case use AdjBWGentamicin:(see below use ABW for equation)unless ABW is >120% of their IBW, in which case use • DurationAdjBW of(see prophylaxis below for equation) • DurationA single of dose, prophylaxis
    [Show full text]
  • Use of Ceftaroline Fosamil in Children: Review of Current Knowledge and Its Application
    Infect Dis Ther (2017) 6:57–67 DOI 10.1007/s40121-016-0144-8 REVIEW Use of Ceftaroline Fosamil in Children: Review of Current Knowledge and its Application Juwon Yim . Leah M. Molloy . Jason G. Newland Received: November 10, 2016 / Published online: December 30, 2016 Ó The Author(s) 2016. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com ABSTRACT infections, CABP caused by penicillin- and ceftriaxone-resistant S. pneumoniae and Ceftaroline is a novel cephalosporin recently resistant Gram-positive infections that fail approved in children for treatment of acute first-line antimicrobial agents. However, bacterial skin and soft tissue infections and limited data are available on tolerability in community-acquired bacterial pneumonia neonates and infants younger than 2 months (CABP) caused by methicillin-resistant of age, and on pharmacokinetic characteristics Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus pneumoniae in children with chronic medical conditions and other susceptible bacteria. With a favorable and those with invasive, complicated tolerability profile and efficacy proven in infections. In this review, the microbiological pediatric patients and excellent in vitro profile of ceftaroline, its mechanism of action, activity against resistant Gram-positive and and pharmacokinetic profile will be presented. Gram-negative bacteria, ceftaroline may serve Additionally, clinical evidence for use in as a therapeutic option for polymicrobial pediatric patients and proposed place in therapy is discussed. Enhanced content To view enhanced content for this article go to http://www.medengine.com/Redeem/ 1F47F0601BB3F2DD. Keywords: Antibiotic resistance; Ceftaroline J. Yim (&) fosamil; Children; Methicillin-resistant St. John Hospital and Medical Center, Detroit, MI, Staphylococcus aureus; Streptococcus pneumoniae USA e-mail: [email protected] L.
    [Show full text]
  • Anthem Blue Cross Drug Formulary
    Erythromycin/Sulfisoxazole (generic) INTRODUCTION Penicillins ...................................................................... Anthem Blue Cross uses a formulary Amoxicillin (generic) (preferred list of drugs) to help your doctor Amoxicillin/Clavulanate (generic/Augmentin make prescribing decisions. This list of drugs chew/XR) is updated quarterly, by a committee Ampicillin (generic) consisting of doctors and pharmacists, so that Dicloxacillin (generic) the list includes drugs that are safe and Penicillin (generic) effective in the treatment of diseases. If you Quinolones ..................................................................... have any questions about the accessibility of Ciprofloxacin/XR (generic) your medication, please call the phone number Levofloxacin (Levaquin) listed on the back of your Anthem Blue Cross Sulfonamides ................................................................ member identification card. Erythromycin/Sulfisoxazole (generic) In most cases, if your physician has Sulfamethoxazole/Trimethoprim (generic) determined that it is medically necessary for Sulfisoxazole (generic) you to receive a brand name drug or a drug Tetracyclines .................................................................. that is not on our list, your physician may Doxycycline hyclate (generic) indicate “Dispense as Written” or “Do Not Minocycline (generic) Substitute” on your prescription to ensure Tetracycline (generic) access to the medication through our network ANTIFUNGAL AGENTS (ORAL) _________________ of community
    [Show full text]
  • Cefalexin in the WHO Essential Medicines List for Children Reject
    Reviewer No. 1: checklist for application of: Cefalexin In the WHO Essential Medicines List for Children (1) Have all important studies that you are aware of been included? Yes No 9 (2) Is there adequate evidence of efficacy for the proposed use? Yes 9 No (3) Is there evidence of efficacy in diverse settings and/or populations? Yes 9 No (4) Are there adverse effects of concern? Yes 9 No (5) Are there special requirements or training needed for safe/effective use? Yes No 9 (6) Is this product needed to meet the majority health needs of the population? Yes No 9 (7) Is the proposed dosage form registered by a stringent regulatory authority? Yes 9 No (8) What action do you propose for the Committee to take? Reject the application for inclusion of the following presentations of cefalexin: • Tablets/ capsules 250mg • Oral suspensions 125mg/5ml and 125mg/ml (9) Additional comment, if any. In order to identify any additional literature, the following broad and sensitive search was conducted using the PubMed Clinical Query application: (cephalexin OR cefalexin AND - 1 - pediatr*) AND ((clinical[Title/Abstract] AND trial[Title/Abstract]) OR clinical trials[MeSH Terms] OR clinical trial[Publication Type] OR random*[Title/Abstract] OR random allocation[MeSH Terms] OR therapeutic use[MeSH Subheading]) Only one small additional study was identified, which looked at the provision of prophylactic antibiotics in patients presenting to an urban children's hospital with trauma to the distal fingertip, requiring repair.1 In a prospective randomised control trial, 146 patients were enrolled, of which 69 were randomised to the no-antibiotic group, and 66 were randomised to the antibiotic (cefalexin) group.
    [Show full text]
  • (CUA) and Cefprozil (CZ) in Pharmaceutical Drugs by RP-HPLC
    American Journal of www.biomedgrid.com Biomedical Science & Research ISSN: 2642-1747 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Research Article Copyright@ MA Alfeen New Development Method for Determination of Cefuroxime Axetil (CUA) and Cefprozil (CZ) in Pharmaceutical Drugs by RP-HPLC MA Alfeen1* and Y Yildiz2 1Department of Chemistry, Al-Baath University, Syria 2Science Department, Centenary University, USA *Corresponding author: MA Alfeen, Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Second Science, Al-Baath University, Homs, Syria. To Cite This Article: MA Alfeen.New Development Method for Determination of Cefuroxime Axetil (CUA) and Cefprozil (CZ) in Pharmaceutical Drugs by RP-HPLC. Am J Biomed Sci & Res. 2019 - 4(1). AJBSR.MS.ID.000759. DOI: 10.34297/AJBSR.2019.04.000759 Received: June 29, 2019 | Published: July 17, 2019 Abstract High performance liquid chromatography was one of the most important technologies used in drug control and pharmaceutical quality control. In this study, an analytical method was developed using chromatography method for determination of two Cephalosporin as like: Cefuroxime Axetil (CUA), and Cefprozil (CZ) in pharmaceutical Drug Formulations. Isocratic separation was performed on an Enable C18 column (125mm × 4.6mm i.d, 5.0μm, 10A˚) Using Triethylamine: Methanol: Acetonitrile: Ultra-Pure Water (0.1: 5: 25: 69.9 v/v/v/v %) as a mobile phase at flow rate of 1.5 mL\min. The PDA detection wavelength was set at 262nm. The linearity was observed over a concentration range of (0.01–50μg\mL) for RP-HPLC method (correlation coefficient=0.999). The developed method was validated according to ICH guidelines. The relative standard deviation values for the method precision studies were < 1%, and an accuracy was > 98%.
    [Show full text]
  • Adverse Drug Reactions Sample Chapter
    Sample copyright Pharmaceutical Press www.pharmpress.com 5 Drug-induced skin reactions Anne Lee and John Thomson Introduction Cutaneous drug eruptions are one of the most common types of adverse reaction to drug therapy, with an overall incidence rate of 2–3% in hos- pitalised patients.1–3 Almost any medicine can induce skin reactions, and certain drug classes, such as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), antibiotics and antiepileptics, have drug eruption rates approaching 1–5%.4 Although most drug-related skin eruptions are not serious, some are severe and potentially life-threatening. Serious reac- tions include angio-oedema, erythroderma, Stevens–Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis. Drug eruptions can also occur as part of a spectrum of multiorgan involvement, for example in drug-induced sys- temic lupus erythematosus (see Chapter 11). As with other types of drug reaction, the pathogenesis of these eruptions may be either immunological or non-immunological. Healthcare professionals should carefully evalu- ate all drug-associated rashes. It is important that skin reactions are identified and documented in the patient record so that their recurrence can be avoided. This chapter describes common, serious and distinctive cutaneous reactions (excluding contact dermatitis, which may be due to any external irritant, including drugs and excipients), with guidance on diagnosis and management. A cutaneous drug reaction should be suspected in any patient who develops a rash during a course of drug therapy. The reaction may be due to any medicine the patient is currently taking or has recently been exposed to, including prescribed and over-the-counter medicines, herbal or homoeopathic preparations, vaccines or contrast media.
    [Show full text]
  • Cefixime (Suprax) Division of Disease Control What Do I Need to Know?
    Division of Disease Control What Do I Need To Know? Cefixime (Suprax) About your medicine: Cefixime is used to treat bacterial infections in many different parts of the body. This medicine will not work for colds, flu, or other viral infections. It may be used to other problems as determined by your healthcare provider. These instructions will help you receive the optimum benefits from Cefixime. Before taking this medication: Tell your doctor, nurse or healthcare provider if you… . Have any allergies to medications (especially cephalosporins and penicillin) . Take any other medications . Have medical condition (especially kidney or eye problems) . Are pregnant, breast-feeding or trying to become pregnant . History of convulsions Possible side effects of this medicine: If these symptoms continue or become severe, call your health care provider… . Nausea, vomiting, diarrhea . Gas . Indigestion . Dyspepsia (upset stomach) . Abdominal pain . Muscle cramps, stiffness, spasms . If your symptoms do not improve within a few days, notify your healthcare provider How to take this medicine: . This is the only dose of this medicine you will receive . Take this medication with a full glass (8 ounces) of water, preferably after a meal . DO NOT take with milk or other dairy products, or any products containing magnesium or calcium (such as antacids), iron or aluminum within 2 hours of the time you take this medicine . Drink several additional glasses of water today Warning: Call a healthcare professional immediately if you develop any of the following: . Difficulty breathing . Hives/skin rash Sexual Behavior: Abstain from any type of sexual activity for 7 days after treatment of self and partner For more information, contact the NDDoH STD Program at 701.328.2378 or toll-free 800.472.2180 Page 1 of 1 Last Updated: 4/3/2012 .
    [Show full text]
  • The Antibacterial Activity of Cefpodoxime and the Novel Β
    Session-198 b SATURDAY-279 The Antibacterial Activity of Cefpodoxime and the Novel -lactamase Inhibitor ETX1317 Against Recent Clinical Isolates of b-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae Entasis Therapeutics S. McLeod1, M. Hackel2, R. Badal2, A. Shapiro1, J. Mueller1, R. Tommasi1, and A. Miller1 1-781-810-0120 1Entasis Therapeutics, Waltham, MA and 2IHMA, International Health Management Associates, Schaumburg, IL USA www.entasistx.com Abstract In vitro activity of ETX1317 vs. comparator BLIs Cumulative activity vs. 911 ESBL-enriched Enterobacteriaceae from 2013-2015 Activity vs. 35 sequenced KPC+ and/or MBL+ Enterobacteriaceae MIC (mg/L) Background β-lactamase inhibition (IC50, µM) Strain ID Species encoded bla genes IPM CAZ-AVI CPD-ETX1317 ETX1317 ETX1317 is a novel, diazabicyclooctenone inhibitor of serine β-lactamases that Number (cumulative %) of isolates inhibited at MIC (mg/L) Class A Class C Class D Drug %S* ARC3528*¥ E. cloacae AmpC [∆308-313(SKVALA)] 0.25 32 0.125 4 restores β-lactam activity against multidrug-resistant Enterobacteriaceae. ETX0282, < 0.03 0.06 0.12 0.25 0.5 1 2 4 8 16 32 > 32 ARC4165*¥ C. freundii CMY-2; AmpC [N366Y]; TEM-1; SHV-5 2 32 ≤0.03 4 the oral prodrug of ETX1317, is currently under investigation in combination with BLI CTX-M-15 SHV-5 KPC-2 TEM-1 AmpC* P99 OXA-24/40 OXA-48 0 5 6 14 19 34 20 27 17 18 18 733 3 CPD 10.8 ARC6479* K. oxytoca NDM-1 16 >32 32 32 cefpodoxime proxetil (CPDP), which is hydrolyzed in vivo to release cefpodoxime 0% 0.5% 1% 3% 5% 9% 11% 14% 16% 18% 20% 100% (CPD).
    [Show full text]
  • Antimicrobial Surgical Prophylaxis
    Antimicrobial Surgical Prophylaxis The antimicrobial surgical prophylaxis protocol establishes evidence-based standards for surgical prophylaxis at The Nebraska Medical Center. The protocol was adapted from the recently published consensus guidelines from the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP), Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA), Infectious Disease Society of America (IDSA), and the Surgical Infection Society (SIS) and customized to Nebraska Medicine with the input of the Antimicrobial Stewardship Program in concert with the various surgical groups at the institution. The protocol established here-in will be implemented via standard order sets utilized within One Chart. Routine surgical prophylaxis and current and future surgical order sets are expected to conform to this guidance. Antimicrobial Surgical Prophylaxis Initiation Optimal timing: Within 60 minutes before surgical incision o Exceptions: Fluoroquinolones and vancomycin (within 120 minutes before surgical incision) Successful prophylaxis necessitates that the antimicrobial agent achieve serum and tissue concentrations above the MIC for probable organisms associated with the specific procedure type at the time of incision as well as for the duration of the procedure. Renal Dose Adjustment Guidance The following table can be utilized to determine if adjustments are needed to antimicrobial surgical prophylaxis for both pre-op and post-op dosing. Table 1 Renal Dosage Adjustment Dosing Regimen with Dosing Regimen with CrCl Dosing Regimen with
    [Show full text]
  • In Vitro Susceptibilities of Escherichia Coli and Klebsiella Spp. To
    Jpn. J. Infect. Dis., 60, 227-229, 2007 Short Communication In Vitro Susceptibilities of Escherichia coli and Klebsiella Spp. to Ampicillin-Sulbactam and Amoxicillin-Clavulanic Acid Birgul Kacmaz* and Nedim Sultan1 Department of Central Microbiology and 1Department of Microbiology, Faculty of Medicine, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey (Received January 30, 2007. Accepted April 13, 2007) SUMMARY: Ampicillin-sulbactam (A/S) and amoxicillin-clavulanic acid (AUG) are thought to be equally efficacious clinically against the Enterobacteriaceae family. In this study, the in vitro activities of the A/S and AUG were evaluated and compared against Escherichia coli and Klebsiella spp. Antimicrobial susceptibility tests were performed by standard agar dilution and disc diffusion techniques according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI). During the study period, 973 strains were isolated. Of the 973 bacteria isolated, 823 were E. coli and 150 Klebsiella spp. More organisms were found to be susceptible to AUG than A/S, regardless of the susceptibility testing methodology. The agar dilution results of the isolates that were found to be sensitive or resistant were also compatible with the disc diffusion results. However, some differences were seen in the agar dilution results of some isolates that were found to be intermediately resistant with disc diffusion. In E. coli isolates, 17 of the 76 AUG intermediately resistant isolates (by disc diffusion), and 17 of the 63 A/S intermediately resistant isolates (by disc diffusion) showed different resistant patterns by agar dilution. When the CLSI breakpoint criteria are applied it should be considered that AUG and A/S sensitivity in E. coli and Klebsiella spp.
    [Show full text]
  • Antimicrobial Stewardship Guidance
    Antimicrobial Stewardship Guidance Federal Bureau of Prisons Clinical Practice Guidelines March 2013 Clinical guidelines are made available to the public for informational purposes only. The Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) does not warrant these guidelines for any other purpose, and assumes no responsibility for any injury or damage resulting from the reliance thereof. Proper medical practice necessitates that all cases are evaluated on an individual basis and that treatment decisions are patient-specific. Consult the BOP Clinical Practice Guidelines Web page to determine the date of the most recent update to this document: http://www.bop.gov/news/medresources.jsp Federal Bureau of Prisons Antimicrobial Stewardship Guidance Clinical Practice Guidelines March 2013 Table of Contents 1. Purpose ............................................................................................................................................. 3 2. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................... 3 3. Antimicrobial Stewardship in the BOP............................................................................................ 4 4. General Guidance for Diagnosis and Identifying Infection ............................................................. 5 Diagnosis of Specific Infections ........................................................................................................ 6 Upper Respiratory Infections (not otherwise specified) ..............................................................................
    [Show full text]