The impact of penicillinase on cefamandole treatment and prophylaxis of experimental endocarditis due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.

Beta-lactams active against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) must resist penicillinase hydrolysis and bind penicillin-binding protein 2A (PBP 2A). Cefamandole might share these properties. When tested against 2 isogenic pairs of MRSA that produced or did not produce penicillinase, MICs of cefamandole (8-32 mg/L) were not affected by penicillinase, and cefamandole had a > or =40 times greater PBP 2A affinity than did methicillin. In rats, constant serum levels of 100 mg/L cefamandole successfully treated experimental endocarditis due to penicillinase-negative isolates but failed against penicillinase-producing organisms. This suggested that penicillinase produced in infected vegetations might hydrolyze the drug. Indeed, cefamandole was slowly degraded by penicillinase in vitro. Moreover, its efficacy was restored by combination with sulbactam in vivo. Cefamandole also uniformly prevented MRSA endocarditis in prophylaxis experiments, a setting in which bacteria were not yet clustered in the vegetations. Thus, while cefamandole treatment was limited by penicillinase, the drug was still successful for prophylaxis of experimental MRSA endocarditis.

Cost-effectiveness of low-molecular-weight heparin for secondary prophylaxis of cancer-related venous thromboembolism.

Although extended secondary prophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin was recently shown to be more effective than warfarin for cancer-related venous thromboembolism, its cost-effectiveness compared to traditional prophylaxis with warfarin is uncertain. We built a decision analytic model to evaluate the clinical and economic outcomes of a 6-month course of low-molecular-weight heparin or warfarin therapy in 65-year-old patients with cancer-related venous thromboembolism. We used probability estimates and utilities reported in the literature and published cost data. Using a US societal perspective, we compared strategies based on quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and lifetime costs. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of low-molecular-weight heparin compared with warfarin was 149,865 dollars/QALY. Low-molecular-weight heparin yielded a quality-adjusted life expectancy of 1.097 QALYs at the cost of 15,329 dollars. Overall, 46% (7108 dollars) of the total costs associated with low-molecular-weight heparin were attributable to pharmacy costs. Although the low-molecular-weigh heparin strategy achieved a higher incremental quality-adjusted life expectancy than the warfarin strategy (difference of 0.051 QALYs), this clinical benefit was offset by a substantial cost increment of 7,609 dollars. Cost-effectiveness results were sensitive to variation of the early mortality risks associated with low-molecular-weight heparin and warfarin and the pharmacy costs for low-molecular-weight heparin. Based on the best available evidence, secondary prophylaxis with low-molecular-weight heparin is more effective than warfarin for cancer-related venous thromboembolism. However, because of the substantial pharmacy costs of extended low-molecular-weight heparin prophylaxis in the US, this treatment is relatively expensive compared with warfarin.