Intra-abdominal infections (IAI) are an important cause of morbidity and are frequently associated with poor prognosis, particularly in high-risk patients. The cornerstones in the management of complicated IAIs are timely effective source control with appropriate antimicrobial therapy. Empiric antimicrobial therapy is important in the management of intra-abdominal infections and must be broad enough to cover all likely organisms because inappropriate initial antimicrobial therapy is associated with poor patient outcomes and the development of bacterial resistance. The overuse of antimicrobials is widely accepted as a major driver of some emerging infections (such as C. difficile), the selection of resistant pathogens in individual patients, and for the continued development of antimicrobial resistance globally. The growing emergence of multi-drug resistant organisms and the limited development of new agents available to counteract them have caused an impending crisis with alarming implications, especially with regards to Gram-negative bacteria. An international task force from 79 different countries has joined this project by sharing a document on the rational use of antimicrobials for patients with IAIs. The project has been termed AGORA (Antimicrobials: A Global Alliance for Optimizing their Rational Use in Intra-Abdominal Infections). The authors hope that AGORA, involving many of the world's leading experts, can actively raise awareness in health workers and can improve prescribing behavior in treating IAIs.

Antimicrobial resistance is a well-recognized global threat; thus, the development of strong infection control policies coupled with antimicrobial stewardship strategies and new therapies is required to reverse this process. In its 2013 report on antimicrobial resistance, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention focused on this problem while presenting estimated annual rates of infections with antimicrobial-resistant organisms and their related mortality rates. Whereas some resistant pathogens were considered less threatening, others such as carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae were associated with higher mortality rates owing to limited treatment options. An overview of the most common antimicrobial-resistant pathogens, focusing on risk factors for acquisition, clinical and economic outcomes, as well as current treatment options. Strategies to optimize antimicrobial therapy with currently available agents, in addition to newly developed antimicrobials are also discussed. The emergence of pathogens with a variety of resistance mechanisms has intensified the challenges associated with infection control and treatment strategies. Therefore, prudent use of currently available antimicrobial agents, as well as implementing measures to limit spread of resistance is paramount. Although several new antimicrobials have been recently approved or are in the pipeline showing promise in the battle against resistance, the appropriate use of these agents is required as the true benefits of these treatments are to be recognized in the clinical care setting.

The aim of this Phase 1, open-label study (NCT01395420) was to measure and compare concentrations of ceftazidime and avibactam in bronchial epithelial lining fluid (ELF) and plasma, following administration of two different dosing regimens in healthy subjects. Healthy volunteers received 2000 mg of ceftazidime + 500 mg of avibactam (n = 22) or 3000 mg of ceftazidime + 1000 mg of avibactam (n = 21), administered intravenously every 8 h for 3 days (total of nine doses). Bronchoscopy with bronchoalveolar lavage was performed once per subject, 2, 4, 6 or 8 h after the last infusion. Pharmacokinetic parameters were estimated from individual plasma concentrations and the composite ELF concentration–time profile. Safety was assessed. Forty-three subjects received treatment (2000 mg of ceftazidime + 500 mg of avibactam, n = 22; 3000 mg of ceftazidime + 1000 mg of avibactam, n = 21). Plasma and ELF concentrations increased dose-proportionally for both drugs, with 1.5- and 2-fold increases in AUC_τ, for respective components. Ceftazidime C_max and AUC_τ in ELF were ∼23%–26% and 31%–32% of plasma exposure. Avibactam C_max and AUC_τ in ELF were ∼28%–35% and 32%–35% of plasma exposure. ELF and plasma elimination were similar for both drugs. No serious adverse events were observed. Both ceftazidime and avibactam penetrated dose-proportionally into ELF, with ELF exposure to both drugs ∼30% of plasma exposure.

This study evaluated the pulmonary disposition of eravacycline in 20 healthy adult volunteers receiving 1.0 mg of eravacycline/kg intravenously every 12 h for a total of seven doses over 4 days. Plasma samples were collected at 0, 1, 2, 4, 6, and 12 h on day 4, with each subject randomized to undergo a single bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) at 2, 4, 6, or 12 h. Drug concentrations in plasma, BAL fluid, and alveolar macrophages (AM) were determined by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry, and the urea correction method was used to calculate epithelial lining fluid (ELF) concentrations. Pharmacokinetic parameters were estimated by noncompartmental methods. Penetration for ELF and AM was calculated by using a ratio of the area under the concentration time curve (AUC _0–12 ) for each respective parameter against free drug AUC ( f AUC _0–12 ) in plasma. The total AUC _0–12 in plasma was 4.56 ± 0.94 μg·h/ml with a mean f AUC _0–12 of 0.77 ± 0.14 μg·h/ml. The eravacycline concentrations in ELF and AM at 2, 4, 6, and 12 h were means ± the standard deviations (μg/ml) of 0.70 ± 0.30, 0.57 ± 0.20, 0.34 ± 0.16, and 0.25 ± 0.13 with a penetration ratio of 6.44 and 8.25 ± 4.55, 5.15 ± 1.25, 1.77 ± 0.64, and 1.42 ± 1.45 with a penetration ratio of 51.63, respectively. The eravacycline concentrations in the ELF and AM achieved greater levels than plasma by 6- and 50-fold, respectively, supporting further study of eravacycline for patients with respiratory infections.

The burden of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is profound and growing. CDI now represents a common cause of health care–associated diarrhea, and is associated with significant morbidity, mortality, and health care costs. CDI disproportionally affects the elderly, possibly explained by the following risk factors: age-related impairment of the immune system, increasing antibiotic utilization, and frequent health care exposure. In the USA, recent epidemiological studies estimate that two out of every three health care–associated CDIs occur in patients 65 years or older. Additionally, the elderly are at higher risk for recurrent CDI. Existing therapeutic options include metronidazole, oral vancomycin, and fidaxomicin. Choice of agent depends on disease severity, history of recurrence, and, increasingly, the drug cost. Bezlotoxumab, a recently approved monoclonal antibody targeting C. difficile toxin B, offers an exciting advancement into immunologic therapies. Similarly, fecal microbiota transplantation is gaining popularity as an effective option mainly for recurrent CDI. The challenge of decreasing CDI burden in the elderly involves adopting preventative strategies, optimizing initial treatment, and decreasing the risk of recurrence. Expanded strategies are certainly needed to improve outcomes in this high-risk population. This review considers available data from prospective and retrospective studies as well as case reports to illustrate the merits and gaps in care related to the management of CDI in the elderly.