Antibiotics (Dec 2024)

National Cohort of Compassionate Use of Meropenem–Vaborbactam: No Benefit over Meropenem for <i>Pseudomonas aeruginosa</i>

  • Aurélien Dinh,
  • Alexandre Bleibtreu,
  • Clara Duran,
  • Frédérique Bouchand,
  • Alexie Bosch,
  • Jullien Crozon-Clauzel,
  • Mariam Roncato-Saberan,
  • Morgan Matt,
  • André Boibieux,
  • Annlyse Fanton,
  • Heidi Wille,
  • Elise Fiaux,
  • Benoît Pilmis,
  • Marie Lacoste,
  • Quentin Saint-Genis,
  • Caroline Thumerelle,
  • Patricia Pavese,
  • Fanny Vuotto,
  • Eric Senneville,
  • Anaïs Potron,
  • Stéphane Corvec,
  • David Boutoille,
  • Katy Jeannot,
  • Laurent Dortet,
  • on behalf of the Meropenem-Vaborbactam French Study Group

DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/antibiotics13121152
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 13, no. 12
p. 1152

Abstract

Read online

Background: Meropenem–vaborbactam (MEM-VAB) is a novel carbapenem-beta-lactamase-inhibitor combination that demonstrates activity against carbapenem-resistant (CR) Gram-negative bacteria, and more specifically KPC-producers, since vaborbactam is an effective inhibitor of KPC enzymes in vitro. This study aimed to describe the initial uses and efficacy of MEM-VAB for compassionate treatment during the first 21 months following its early access in France. Method: A national multicenter retrospective study was conducted, including all patients who received at least one dose of MEM-VAB between 20 July 2020, and 5 April 2022. Clinical characteristics and outcomes were collected using a standardized questionnaire. The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of antimicrobials, and complete genome sequencing of bacteria were performed when bacterial isolates were available. Results: Ultimately, 21 patients from 15 French hospitals were included in the study. The main indication for MEM-VAB treatment was respiratory tract infections (n = 9). The targeted bacteria included Pseudomonas aeruginosa (n = 12), Klebsiella pneumoniae (n = 3), Enterobacter spp (n = 3), Citrobacter freundii (n = 1), Escherichia coli (n = 1), and Burkholderia multivorans (n = 1). Overall, no significant advantage of vaborbactam over meropenem alone was observed across all strains of P. aeruginosa in terms of in vitro susceptibility. However, MEM-VAB demonstrated a notable impact, compared to carbapenem alone, on the MIC for the two KPC-3-producing K. pneumoniae and B. multivorans. Conclusions: MEM-VAB seems effective as a salvage treatment in compassionate use, but vaborbactam was shown to lack benefits compared to meropenem in treating P. aeruginosa-related infections. Therefore, it is crucial to compare meropenem to MEM-VAB MICs, particularly for P. aeruginosa, before prescribing MEM-VAB.

Keywords