Dalbavancin (Dalvance, AbbVie) fills an unmet medical demand, according to a study from a tertiary care Veterans Affairs medical center.
The study found that dalbavancin was found to be safe, effective, and convenient in treating multiple infection types, according to the study authors.
Lead author Robbie Lee Anne Christian, PharmD, BCIDP, the PGY-2 infectious diseases residency program director and an infectious diseases clinical pharmacy specialist at the VA Northeast Ohio Healthcare System, in Cleveland, told Infectious Disease Special Edition that they found dalbavancin to be an “an excellent option for many patients for the convenience, without seeing spikes in hospitalizations/failure of treatment.”
A Single Infusion
In the study, a retrospective chart review of 220 veterans treated with dalbavancin since 2014, dalbavancin was administered primarily as a single infusion (70%) and mostly to inpatients (89%). Dalbavancin was used to treat skin and soft tissue infections (42%), osteomyelitis (29%), bacteremia (15%), prosthetic joint infections (7.3%), septic arthritis (6.4%), and endocarditis (3.2%). Staphylococcus aureus was the most frequently isolated bacteria (41%), some of it methicillin-resistant S. aureus (27%). However, nearly one-fourth of patients had polymicrobial infections.
Just under 1 in 5 people treated with the drug were readmitted or required an emergency department visit; many of those patients had foot osteomyelitis. However, only four patients reported an adverse reaction. The researchers did not find a link between prior clinical failure and readmission or emergency department visits.
Worth the Cost
Dalbavancin was chosen for patients for three main reasons: psychosocial (32%), patient convenience (29%), and prior clinical failure (20%).
Dr. Christian told IDSE that VA Northeast Ohio is using the drug more frequently and that it may be included in the emergency department’s formulary.
“Dalbavancin is worth the cost,” Dr. Christian told IDSE. “We have another upcoming study looking at the cost compared to the standard of care, and while it’s slightly higher overall, there were some situations where it was actually cheaper.”
Dr. Christian, who presented her research at MAD-ID 2025 (abstract 79 OR), reported no relevant financial disclosures.
