Roberts, Jason A

ABSTRACT Beta‐lactam antibiotics (beta‐lactams) are first‐line treatments for most major infectious syndromes in acutely ill patients, with in vitro activity against common pathogens, demonstrated efficacy in trials, and a perceived low risk of adverse effects. The current dosing approach, informed by population‐level data, tends to be simplistically reduced to a “one size fits all” dosing method which only accounts for body weight (i.e., in pediatrics) and end organ function to estimate drug clearance (e.g., estimated glomerular filtration rate); this approach results in substantial variability in observed serum concentrations in acutely ill patients, which can compromise real‐world effectiveness and safety. Beta‐lactam dose individualization, therefore, defined as a dosing regimen for one patient informed by measured concentrations from that patient, has been recommended in international clinical guidelines. Comprehensive guidance on best practices for beta‐lactam dose individualization is lacking. To address this knowledge gap and develop guidance, a multidisciplinary panel of international experts was assembled from the disciplines of infectious diseases, critical care, pharmacometrics, and laboratory medicine, representing both adults and pediatrics. The panel systematically evaluated the literature, using the GRADE approach where feasible, to address broad thematic questions pertaining to whether beta‐lactam dose individualization should be pursued, for what indications beta‐lactam dose individualization is warranted, and the most critical considerations and best practices for implementation of beta‐lactam individualization. The resultant consensus recommendations will equip healthcare professionals caring for acutely ill patients treated with beta‐lactam therapy with the evidence and tools necessary to guide optimal use of beta‐lactam dose individualization.

Background: Beta-lactam therapeutic drug monitoring (BL TDM; drug level testing) can facilitate improved outcomes in critically ill patients. However, only 10%–20% of hospitals have implemented BL TDM. This study aimed to characterize provider perceptions and key considerations for successfully implementing BL TDM. Methods: This was a sequential mixed-methods study from 2020 to 2021 of diverse stakeholders at 3 academic medical centers with varying degrees of BL TDM implementation (not implemented, partially implemented, and fully implemented). Stakeholders were surveyed, and a proportion of participants completed semistructured interviews. Themes were identified, and findings were contextualized with implementation science frameworks. Results: Most of the 138 survey respondents perceived that BL TDM was relevant to their practice and improved medication effectiveness and safety. Integrated with interview data from 30 individuals, 2 implementation themes were identified: individual internalization and organizational features. Individuals needed to internalize, make sense of, and agree to BL TDM implementation, which was positively influenced by repeated exposure to evidence and expertise. The process of internalization appeared more complex with BL TDM than with other antibiotics (ie, vancomycin). Organizational considerations relevant to BL TDM implementation (eg, infrastructure, personnel) were similar to those identified in other TDM settings. Conclusions: Broad enthusiasm for BL TDM among participants was found. Prior literature suggested that assay availability was the primary barrier to implementation; however, the data revealed many more individual and organizational attributes, which impacted the BL TDM implementation. Internalization should particularly be focused on to improve the adoption of this evidence-based practice.

Abstract Background Beta-lactam therapeutic drug monitoring (BL TDM; drug level testing) can facilitate improved outcomes in critically ill patients. Yet less than 20% of hospitals have implemented BL TDM. The purpose of this study was to characterize provider perceptions and key considerations for successful implementation of BL TDM. Methods This was a sequential mixed methods study from 2020 to 2021 of stakeholders at three academic medical centers with varying degrees of BL TDM implementation - Mayo Clinic (BL TDM not implemented), University of Florida Health Shands (partially implemented), and Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital (fully implemented). Stakeholders completed a survey to characterize their knowledge, perceptions, and experience with BL TDM. A diverse group of 30 respondents were then purposively sampled for semi-structured interviews. Results from the two strands were integrated, themes were identified, and findings were situated within implementation science frameworks. Results Among the 138 survey respondents (22% response rate), the majority were physicians (38%) and pharmacists (33%). 71% practiced in critical care and 21% in infectious diseases. The majority of respondents felt BL TDM was relevant to their practice and improved medication effectiveness and safety (Figure 1). Two implementation themes were identified: individual internalization and organizational features. Individuals needed to internalize, make sense of, and agree to BL TDM implementation which was positively influenced by repeated exposure to evidence and expertise. The process of internalization seemed more complex with BL TDM than with other antibiotics (i.e., vancomycin). Organizational considerations relevant to BL TDM implementation included adequate physical and informational infrastructure, access to trained personnel, supportive governance/leadership, and robust process and workflow development. Conclusion We found broad enthusiasm about the relevance and potential benefits of BL TDM among stakeholders. Prior literature suggested the primary barrier to implementation was assay availability, but we identified many more individual and organizational attributes which impacted the scale and spread of BL TDM. Disclosures Sara Ausman, PharmD, Gilead: Honoraria Christina G. Rivera, PharmD, Gilead: Grant/Research Support|Gilead: Honoraria|Insmed: Honoraria Jason Roberts, BPharm(Hons), PhD, FSHP, FISAC, British Society of Chemotherapy: Grant/Research Support|Cipla: Honoraria|Gilead: Advisor/Consultant|MSD: Advisor/Consultant|MSD: Honoraria|Pfizer: Board Member|Pfizer: Honoraria|Qpex: Grant/Research Support|Sandoz: Board Member|Summit: Advisor/Consultant|Wolters Kluwer: Advisor/Consultant Marc H. Scheetz, PharmD, MSc, Abbvie: Advisor/Consultant|Allecra: Grant/Research Support|Merck: Advisor/Consultant|Nevakar: Advisor/Consultant|Nevakar: Grant/Research Support|Premier Healthcare Solutions: Honoraria|Spero: Advisor/Consultant|SuperTrans Medical: Advisor/Consultant|SuperTrans Medical: Grant/Research Support|Takeda: Advisor/Consultant|Third Pole Therapeutics: Advisor/Consultant.

Drug-resistant Gram-positive bacterial infections are still a substantial burden on the public health system, with two bacteria ( Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pneumoniae ) accounting for over 1.5 million drug-resistant infections in the United States alone in 2017. In 2019, 250,000 deaths were attributed to these pathogens globally. We have developed a preclinical glycopeptide antibiotic, MCC5145, that has excellent potency (MIC 90 ≤ 0.06 μg/ml) against hundreds of isolates of methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) and other Gram-positive bacteria, with a greater than 1000-fold margin over mammalian cell cytotoxicity values. The antibiotic has therapeutic in vivo efficacy when dosed subcutaneously in multiple murine models of established bacterial infections, including thigh infection with MRSA and blood septicemia with S. pneumoniae , as well as when dosed orally in an antibiotic-induced Clostridioides difficile infection model. MCC5145 exhibited reduced nephrotoxicity at microbiologically active doses in mice compared to vancomycin. MCC5145 also showed improved activity against biofilms compared to vancomycin, both in vitro and in vivo, and a low propensity to select for drug resistance. Characterization of drug action using a transposon library bioinformatic platform showed a mechanistic distinction from other glycopeptide antibiotics.