Daptomycin plus fosfomycin versus daptomycin alone for methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus bacteremia and endocarditis: a randomized clinical trial
Author
Pujol, Miquel
Miró, José-María
Shaw, Evelyn
Aguado, Jose-María
San-Juan, Rafael
Puig-Asensio, Mireia
Pigrau, Carles
Calbo Sebastián, Esther
Montejo, Miguel
Rodriguez-Álvarez, Regino
Garcia-Pais, María-Jose
Pintado, Vicente
Escudero-Sánchez, Rosa
Lopez-Contreras, Joaquín
Morata, Laura
Montero, Milagros
Andrés, Marta
Pasquau, Juan
Arenas, María-del-Mar
Padilla, Belén
Murillas, Javier
Jover-Sáenz, Alfredo
López-Cortes, Luis-Eduardo
García-Pardo, Graciano
Gasch, Oriol
Videla, Sebastian
Hereu, Pilar
Tebé, Cristian
Pallarès, Natalia
Sanllorente, Mireia
Domínguez, María-Ángeles
Càmara, Jordi
Ferrer, Anna
Padullés, Ariadna
Cuervo, Guillermo
Carratalà, Jordi
MRSA Bacteremia (BACSARM) Trial Investigators
Publication date
2020ISSN
1058-4838
Abstract
Background: We aimed to determine whether daptomycin plus fosfomycin provides higher treatment success than daptomycin alone for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bacteremia and endocarditis. Methods: A randomized (1:1) phase 3 superiority, open-label, and parallel group clinical trial of adult inpatients with MRSA bacteremia was conducted at 18 Spanish hospitals. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either 10 mg/kg of daptomycin intravenously daily plus 2 g of fosfomycin intravenously every 6 hours, or 10 mg/kg of daptomycin intravenously daily. Primary endpoint was treatment success 6 weeks after the end of therapy. Results: Of 167 patients randomized, 155 completed the trial and were assessed for the primary endpoint. Treatment success at 6 weeks after the end of therapy was achieved in 40 of 74 patients who received daptomycin plus fosfomycin and in 34 of 81 patients who were given daptomycin alone (54.1% vs 42.0%; relative risk, 1.29 [95% confidence interval, .93–1.8]; P = .135). At 6 weeks, daptomycin plus fosfomycin was associated with lower microbiologic failure (0 vs 9 patients; P = .003) and lower complicated bacteremia (16.2% vs 32.1%; P = .022). Adverse events leading to treatment discontinuation occurred in 13 of 74 patients (17.6%) receiving daptomycin plus fosfomycin, and in 4 of 81 patients (4.9%) receiving daptomycin alone (P = .018). Conclusions: Daptomycin plus fosfomycin provided 12% higher rate of treatment success than daptomycin alone, but this difference did not reach statistical significance. This antibiotic combination prevented microbiological failure and complicated bacteremia, but it was more often associated with adverse events.
Document Type
Article
Document version
Published version
Language
English
Subject (CDU)
61 - Medical sciences
Keywords
Endocarditis
Bacterièmia
Daptomicina
Fosfomicina
Estafilococ aureus resistent a la meticil·lina
Endocarditis
Bacteriemia
Daptomicina
Fosfomicina
Estafilococo aureus resistente a la meticilina
Endocarditis
Bacteremia
Daptomycin
Fosfomycin
Methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus
Pages
9
Publisher
Oxford University Press
Collection
72;9
Is part of
Clinical Infectious Diseases
Citation
Pujol, Miquel; Miró, José-María; Shaw, Evelyn [et al.]. Daptomycin plus fosfomycin versus daptomycin alone for methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus bacteremia and endocarditis: a randomized clinical trial. Clinical Infectious Diseases, 2020, 72(9), p. 1517-1525. Disponible en: <https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/72/9/1517/5877897>. Fecha de acceso: 2 jul. 2021. DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciaa1081
This item appears in the following Collection(s)
- Ciències de la Salut [712]
Rights
This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits non-commercial reproduction and distribution of the work, in any medium, provided the original work is not altered or transformed in any way, and that the work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/