Advertisement

Fidaxomicin for the treatment of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) in at-risk patients with inflammatory bowel disease, fulminant CDI, renal impairment or hepatic impairment: a retrospective study of routine clinical use (ANEMONE)

  • Maria J. G. T. Vehreschild
  • Surabhi Taori
  • Simon D. Goldenberg
  • Florian Thalhammer
  • Emilio Bouza
  • Joop van Oene
  • Graham Wetherill
  • Areti Georgopali
Original Article

Abstract

Information is limited or lacking on fidaxomicin treatment of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) in patients with inflammatory bowel disease, fulminant or life-threatening CDI, severe renal impairment, moderate-to-severe hepatic impairment and pregnancy. The ANEMONE study investigated fidaxomicin use in a routine clinical setting, focusing on these medical conditions of specific interest (MCSIs). This retrospective, post-authorisation study reviewed hospital records from Austria, Germany, Spain and the UK (June 2012–June 2015), collecting data from hospital admission to 30 days after last fidaxomicin dose. The primary objective was to identify the proportion of fidaxomicin-treated patients with MCSIs. Secondary objectives were to describe 30-day mortality, changes in ECG and laboratory parameters, fidaxomicin exposure and CDI response (resolution of diarrhoea; 30-day recurrence). 45.3% (261/576) of patients had ≥ 1 MCSI. Thirty-day mortality (post-first dose) was 17.0% (98/576) in the total population and slightly higher (24.6–27.6%) in patients with fulminant CDI or severe renal impairment. 29.6% (24/81) deaths of known cause were attributable to CDI. Of changes in laboratory parameters or ECG findings, only a decrease in leucocyte counts appeared associated with fidaxomicin, consistent with a positive treatment response. Diarrhoea resolved in 78.0% (404/518) of treatment episodes; diarrhoea resolution was lowest in patients with fulminant CDI (investigator-defined, 67.5%, 56/88) and severe renal impairment (68.0%, 68/100). Thirty-day recurrence (18.8%, 79/420) was similar across MCSI subgroups. Although almost half of fidaxomicin-treated patients had ≥ 1 MCSI, the majority of patients in all subgroups had positive responses to treatment, and no particular safety concerns were identified.

Keywords

Clostridium difficile Fidaxomicin Inflammatory bowel disease Fulminant CDI Renal impairment Hepatic impairment 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was developed, managed and funded by Astellas Pharma Europe B.V. Site recruitment and data monitoring, management and analysis were outsourced to Quintiles Outcomes (later IQVIA); Christelle da Cruz was the project manager and Elodie Incera was involved in data analysis and interpretation. Medical writing support was provided by Annie Rowe, PhD, and Iona Easthope, DPhil, for Cello Health MedErgy, and funded by Astellas Pharma, Inc.

Author contributions

Study design: MJGTV, SDG, ST, EB, FT, JvO, GW

Conduct and acquisition of data: MJGTV, SDG, ST, EB, FT, JvO, GW

Analysis and interpretation of data: MJGTV, SDG, ST, EB, FT, AG, GW, JvO

Writing of the manuscript: MJGTV, SDG, ST, EB, FT, AG, GW, JvO

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Maria JGT Vehreschild is a consultant to Astellas Pharma, Berlin Chemie, Maat Pharma and MSD/Merck; has served at the speakers’ bureaux of Astellas Pharma, Basilea, Falk Foundation, Gilead Sciences, Merck/MSD, Organobalance and Pfizer; and received research funding from 3M, Astellas Pharma, DaVolterra, Gilead Sciences, Merck/MSD, Morphochem, Organobalance and Seres Therapeutics. Surabhi Taori has received conference attendance sponsorship and speaker fees from Astellas Pharma, Inc. Simon D. Goldenberg has received consultancy fees from Astellas, Pfizer and MSD; speaker fees from Astellas and MSD; and research funding from Astellas. Joop van Oene is a full-time employee of Astellas Pharma Europe B.V. Graham Wetherill is a consultant statistician for Astellas Pharma Europe B.V. Areti Georgopali is a full-time employee of Astellas Pharma, Inc. Florian Thalhammer and Emilio Bouza have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Ethical approval

This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and with the approval of the Independent Ethics Committee/Institutional Review Board of each country and site, where required. This was a retrospective study and all patient data were anonymised; informed consent was therefore not required under country-specific regulations. No direct access to source data by the clinical research organisation or the sponsor was allowed.

Supplementary material

10096_2018_3344_MOESM1_ESM.docx (56 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 56 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Bouza E (2012) Consequences of Clostridium difficile infection: understanding the healthcare burden. Clin Microbiol Infect 18(Suppl 6):5–12CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lessa FC, Gould CV, McDonald LC (2012) Current status of Clostridium difficile infection epidemiology. Clin Infect Dis 55(Suppl 2):S65–S70CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Evans CT, Safdar N (2015) Current trends in the epidemiology and outcomes of Clostridium difficile infection. Clin Infect Dis 60:S66–S71CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Mullane K (2014) Fidaxomicin in Clostridium difficile infection: latest evidence and clinical guidance. Ther Adv Chronic Dis 5:69–84CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Martinez FJ, Leffler DA, Kelly CP (2012) Clostridium difficile outbreaks: prevention and treatment strategies. Risk Manag Healthc Policy 5:55–64CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Finegold SM, Molitoris D, Vaisanen ML et al (2004) In vitro activities of OPT-80 and comparator drugs against intestinal bacteria. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 48:4898–4902CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Credito KL, Appelbaum PC (2004) Activity of OPT-80, a novel macrocycle, compared with those of eight other agents against selected anaerobic species. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 48:4430–4434CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Goldstein EJC, Babakhani F, Citron DM (2012) Antimicrobial activities of fidaxomicin. Clin Infect Dis 55(Suppl 2):S143–S148CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    US Food and Drug Administration (2011) FDA-approved drug products: Dificid. Drugs@FDA. Available: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cder/daf/index.cfm?event=overview.process&applno=201699. Accessed 15 March 2018
  10. 10.
    European Medicines Agency (2011) Assessment report: Dificlir. Available: http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/EPAR_-_Public_assessment_report/human/002087/WC500119707.pdf. Accessed 15 March 2018
  11. 11.
    Cornely OA, Crook DW, Esposito R et al (2012) Fidaxomicin versus vancomycin for infection with Clostridium difficile in Europe, Canada, and the USA: a double-blind, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Infect Dis 12:281–289CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Louie TJ, Miller MA, Mullane K et al (2011) Fidaxomicin versus vancomycin for Clostridium difficile infection. N Engl J Med 364:422–431CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Astellas Pharma Europe BV (2016) Summary of product characteristics: DIFICLIR 200 mg film-coated tablets. Available: http://www.ema.europa.eu/docs/en_GB/document_library/EPAR_-_Product_Information/human/002087/WC500119705.pdf
  14. 14.
    Debast S, Bauer M, Kuijper E (2014) European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases: update of the treatment guidance document for Clostridium difficile infection. Clin Microbiol Infect 20:1–26CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    van der Wilden GM, Chang Y, Cropano C et al (2014) Fulminant Clostridium difficile colitis: prospective development of a risk scoring system. J Trauma Acute Care Surg 76:424–430. Available: http://content.wkhealth.com/linkback/openurl?sid=WKPTLP:landingpage&an=01586154-201402000-00024. Accessed 28 July 2017
  16. 16.
    Surawicz CM, Brandt LJ, Binion DG et al (2013) Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment, and prevention of Clostridium difficile infections. Am J Gastroenterol 108:478–498 Available: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23439232 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mitchell BG, Gardner A (2012) Mortality and Clostridium difficile infection: a review. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control 1:20. Available: https://aricjournal.biomedcentral.com/track/pdf/10.1186/2047-2994-1-20?site=aricjournal.biomedcentral.com. Accessed 1 August 2017
  18. 18.
    Karas JA, Enoch DA, Aliyu SH (2010) A review of mortality due to Clostridium difficile infection. J Inf Secur 61:1–8Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Fehér C, Múñez Rubio E, Merino Amador P et al (2017) The efficacy of fidaxomicin in the treatment of Clostridium difficile infection in a real-world clinical setting: a Spanish multi-centre retrospective cohort. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 36:295–303 Available: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10096-016-2802-x. Accessed 1 August 2017CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Shah DN, Chan FS, Kachru N et al (2016) A multi-center study of fidaxomicin use for Clostridium difficile infection. Springerplus 5:1224. Available: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27536508. Accessed 20 February 2017
  21. 21.
    Nitzan O, Elias M, Chazan B et al (2013) Clostridium difficile and inflammatory bowel disease: role in pathogenesis and implications in treatment. World J Gastroenterol 19:7577–7585CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Spiceland CM, Khanna S, Pardi DS (2018) Outcomes with fidaxomicin therapy in Clostridium difficile infection. J Clin Gastroenterol 52:151–154PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mullane KM, Cornely OA, Crook DW et al (2013) Renal impairment and clinical outcomes of Clostridium difficile infection in two randomized trials. Am J Nephrol 38:1–11CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Eiland EH, Sawyer AJ, Massie NL (2015) Fidaxomicin use and clinical outcomes for Clostridium difficile-associated diarrhea. Infect Dis Clin Pract 23:32–35Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Goldenberg SD, Brown S, Edwards L et al (2016) The impact of the introduction of fidaxomicin on the management of Clostridium difficile infection in seven NHS secondary care hospitals in England: a series of local service evaluations. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 35:251–259CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maria J. G. T. Vehreschild
    • 1
  • Surabhi Taori
    • 2
  • Simon D. Goldenberg
    • 3
  • Florian Thalhammer
    • 4
  • Emilio Bouza
    • 5
    • 6
  • Joop van Oene
    • 7
  • Graham Wetherill
    • 7
  • Areti Georgopali
    • 8
  1. 1.Department I of Internal MedicineUniversity Hospital of Cologne and German Centre for Infection Research, Partner Site Bonn-CologneCologneGermany
  2. 2.King’s College Hospital NHS Foundation TrustLondonUK
  3. 3.King’s College London & Guy’s and St Thomas’ NHS Foundation TrustLondonUK
  4. 4.Department of Infectious Diseases and Tropical Medicine, Division of Internal Medicine IMedical University of ViennaViennaAustria
  5. 5.Clinical Microbiology and Infectious DiseasesHospital Gregorio MarañónMadridSpain
  6. 6.Department of Medicine, Ciber de Enfermedades Respiratorias (CIBERES)Complutense UniversityMadridSpain
  7. 7.Astellas Pharma Europe B.V.LeidenThe Netherlands
  8. 8.Astellas Pharma, Inc.ChertseyUK

Personalised recommendations