1399. Clarithromycin–Rifampin-based Treatment for Non-tuberculous Mycobacterial Infections in Immunocompromised Patients Who Require Concomitant CYP-Metabolized Medications. (4th December 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Gonzalez-Bocco, Isabel H; Aleissa, Muneerah M; Cheng, Matthew; Manne-Goehler, Jennifer; Marty, Francisco M
• Is Part Of: Open forum infectious diseases. Volume 8(2021)Supplement 1
• Page Start: S784
• Page End: S784
• Publication Date: 2021-12-04
• Subjects: Communicable diseases -- Periodicals; Medical microbiology -- Periodicals; Infection -- Periodicals; 616.9
• DOI: 10.1093/ofid/ofab466.1591
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2328-8957

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Non-tuberculous mycobacteria (NTM) are causes of pulmonary and extrapulmonary disease that frequently affect immunocompromised hosts (ICH). Current treatment guidelines recommend a macrolide-based, multi-drug regimen that includes rifampin. Rifampin is a potent cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A inducer, which often results in drug-drug interactions in ICH receiving multiple CYP substrates. One way to mitigate rifampin's CYP induction is to utilize clarithromycin, a CYP inhibitor, as the accompanying macrolide. We evaluated the incidence of NTM treatment-related adverse events (AEs) in patients who received a clarithromycin-based regimen compared to patients who received an azithromycin-based regimen. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of NTM infection in 30 immunocompromised adults. All participants had a positive culture for a NTM and had received a rifamycin (rifampin or rifabutin) with a macrolide (azithromycin or clarithromycin) for treatment at Brigham and Women's Hospital between 01/01/2011-10/18/2020 or Dana-Farber Cancer Institute between 06/03/2015-07/01/2020. The primary outcome was the incidence of NTM treatment-related AEs in patients who received a clarithromycin-based regimen compared to those who received an azithromycin-based regimen. Results: There were no significant differences in the reasons for discontinuation of NTM treatment or 90-day mortality between groups. The number of AEs possibly related to NTM treatment were similar in patients who received a clarithromycin-based regimen and those who received an azithromycin-based one (10/13 vs. 14/17; p=0.73). The most common AE was liver function test abnormalities (Table 1). Additionally, the proportion of patients requiring dose adjustments for interacting medications and patients with out-of-range tacrolimus levels were similar between the two groups (23.1% vs. 29.4%; p=0.76 and 8.0% vs. 6.0%; p=1.00, respectively). Table 1: Adverse events Conclusion: A clarithromycin-based regimen for NTM treatment was safe and well tolerated in our patient population. This combination provides a good alternative for patients requiring medications that are CYP substrates, or those who cannot tolerate azithromycin. Disclosures: Matthew Cheng, MD, GEn1E Lifesciences (Advisor or Review Panel member)Kanvas Biosciences (Board Member, Shareholder)nplex biosciences (Advisor or Review Panel member)