Plazomicin is a novel aminoglycoside antibiotic that binds to the bacterial 30S ribosomal subunit, thus inhibiting protein synthesis in a concentration‐dependent manner. Plazomicin displays a broad spectrum of activity against aerobic gram‐negative bacteria including extended‐spectrum β‐lactamase–producing Enterobacteriaceae, carbapenem‐resistant Enterobacteriaceae, and organisms with aminoglycoside‐modifying enzymes. In a large phase III clinical trial, plazomicin was shown to be noninferior to meropenem in the treatment of complicated urinary tract infections (cUTIs) with respect to the coprimary efficacy end points of the microbiologically modified intent‐to‐treat composite cure rate at day 5 (plazomicin 88% [168/191 subjects] vs meropenem 91.4% [180/197]) and at the test‐of‐cure visit (plazomicin 81.7% [156/191] vs meropenem 70.1% [138/197]). In a small phase III clinical trial, plazomicin was shown to be effective in the treatment of infections caused by carbapenem‐resistant Enterobacteriaceae. It was associated with a lower all‐cause mortality or significant disease‐related complication rate (23.5% [4/17]) compared with colistin (50% [10/20]). The most common adverse reactions associated with plazomicin are decreased renal function, diarrhea, hypertension, headache, nausea, vomiting, and hypotension. As with other aminoglycosides, plazomicin may cause neuromuscular blockade, ototoxicity, and fetal harm in pregnant women. Due to limited efficacy and safety data, plazomicin is indicated for the treatment of cUTIs in adults with limited or no alternative treatment options, using a dosage regimen of 15 mg/kg intravenously every 24 hours for 4–7 days. Dosage reductions and therapeutic drug monitoring are warranted in patients with moderate or severe renal impairment. Plazomicin is not recommended in patients with severe renal impairment including those receiving renal replacement therapy. With the approval of plazomicin, clinicians now have an additional option for the treatment of adults with cUTIs, particularly those caused by multidrug‐resistant gram‐negative rods.

M/V has a valuable role in the treatment of CRE and should be used judiciously to preserve its use for resistant infections.

No abstract

Doxycycline remains on intermittent shortage. Evidence supports the substitution of minocycline in skin and soft-tissue infections and carefully selected cases of pneumonia. Minocycline may be carefully considered in Lyme disease prophylaxis and Rickettsial disease in the complete absence of doxycycline.

Macrolides are antimicrobial agents that can be used to treat a variety of infections. Allergic reactions to macrolides occur infrequently but can include minor to severe cutaneous reactions as well as systemic life-threatening reactions such as anaphylaxis. Most reports of allergic reactions occurred in patients without prior exposure to a macrolide. Cross-reactivity among macrolides may occur due to the similarities in their chemical structures; however, some published literature indicates that some patients can tolerate a different macrolide. Most published reports detailed an allergic reaction to erythromycin. Desensitization protocols to clarithromycin and azithromycin have been described in the literature. The purpose of this article is to summarize macrolide-associated allergic reactions reported in published literature. An extensive literature search was conducted to identify publications linking macrolides to hypersensitivity reactions.

No abstract

Aminoglycosides are antimicrobial agents that are primarily used for infections caused by Gram-negative pathogens. The purpose of this article is to review the allergic reactions reported in the published literature to aminoglycoside antibiotics. A thorough PubMed search was conducted and excluded non-allergic adverse reactions to aminoglycosides. Allergic reactions to aminoglycosides occur infrequently, but can include cutaneous reactions as well as systemic reactions, including anaphylaxis. Of the evaluated aminoglycosides, gentamicin had the most reported allergic reactions, including the most reports of anaphylaxis, followed by tobramycin, and then amikacin. Most reports of allergic reactions occurred in patients who had a prior exposure to some dosage form of an aminoglycoside. Cross-reactivity among aminoglycosides is common and occurs due to the similarities in their chemical structures. Desensitization protocols to tobramycin have been described in the literature.

The rise in non-AIDS defining cancers (NADCs) is emerging as a leading cause of death for HIV and cancer patients. To address this, current literature and guidelines suggest the continuation of antiretroviral therapy (ART) with oral oncolytic agents to prevent adverse complications associated with HIV disease progression. However, such an approach has the potential for drug–drug interactions and adverse events for patients on such therapy. Further, recommendations on how to adjust these medications, when used concomitantly, are limited. As such, our purpose is to evaluate existing literature through such means as drug databases (e.g. Micromedex, Lexi-Comp, etc.) and package inserts along with PubMed/Medline, Embase, and Google Scholar databases to develop a reference tool for providers to utilize when there is a decision to treat a patient with ART and oral oncolytic agents concurrently. Our findings suggest that there are many drug interactions that should be taken into consideration with dual therapy. Metabolism is a key determinant of dose adjustment, and many oncolytic agents and ART agents must have their dose adjusted as such. Most notably, several tyrosine kinase inhibitors require dose increases when used with non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors (NNRTIs) but must be decreased when used concomitantly with protease inhibitors (PIs) and cobicistat. Further findings suggest that certain agents should not be used together, which include, but are not limited to, such combinations as bosutinib with NNRTIs, cobicistat, or PIs; idelalisib with maraviroc or PIs; neratinib with NNRTIs, cobicistat, or PIs; and venetoclax with NNRTIs. Overall, the most prominent oncolytic drug interactions were discovered when such agents were used concomitantly with PIs, cobicistat-boosted elvitegravir, or NNRTIs. Future studies are necessary to further evaluate the use of these agents together in disease therapy to generate absolute evidence of such findings. However, from the studies evaluated, much evidence exists to suggest that concomitant therapy is not without drug interactions. As such, clinical decisions regarding concomitant therapy should be evaluated in which the risk and benefit of dual therapy are assessed. Dose adjustments must be made accordingly and in consultation with both HIV and oncology clinicians and pharmacists to reduce the risk for adverse outcomes and disease progression for those with cancer and HIV/AIDS.