tedizolid and Skin-Diseases--Bacterial

Acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) are among the most frequent infectious diseases. Recently, several new antibiotics with activity against MRSA have been approved. Tedizolid, a second-generation oxazolidinone approved for ABSSSI offers theoretical advantages over first-generation oxazolidinones.. A comprehensive online search of Medline, ClinicalTrials.gov, and conference presentations was made, selecting articles between January 2000 and April 2020. In this review, the authors discuss the chemical and microbiological properties of tedizolid, summarize its efficacy, safety, and potential role in the treatment of ABSSSI as well as the potential for future indications.. Tedizolid has proven to be non-inferior compared to linezolid for the treatment of ABSSSI in two registrational phase III clinical trials, being well tolerated. Tedizolid exhibits antibacterial activity against the most important ABSSSI pathogens (including multidrug-resistant strains of MRSA), as well as mycobacteria and Nocardia. It appears to have a safe profile, including decreased myelotoxicity and no significant drug interactions. Preliminary studies with longer duration of therapy seem to confirm these potential benefits. Overall, tedizolid expands the newly acquired armamentarium to treat ABSSSI. The role of tedizolid for other indications is under investigation and has yet to be determined.

Topics: Animals; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Drug Interactions; Humans; Linezolid; Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus; Oxazolidinones; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Staphylococcal Infections; Tetrazoles

Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Enterococcus faecalis; Humans; Microbial Sensitivity Tests; Oxazolidinones; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Streptococcus; Tetrazoles

Tedizolid, the active moiety of tedizolid phosphate, is approved in the United States, the European Union, Canada and a number of other countries for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) caused by certain susceptible bacteria, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). This network meta-analysis (NMA) evaluates the comparative effectiveness of tedizolid and other antibacterials indicated for the treatment of ABSSSI caused by MRSA.. Systematic review of 10 databases was undertaken to inform an NMA to estimate the relative effectiveness of tedizolid and established monotherapy comparators (ceftaroline, daptomycin, linezolid, teicoplanin, tigecycline, vancomycin) for treating MRSA-associated ABSSSI. Randomized controlled trials enrolling adults with ABSSSI or complicated skin and skin structure infections caused by suspected/documented MRSA were eligible for inclusion. Networks were developed based on similarity of study design, patient characteristics, outcome measures and available data. Outcomes of interest included clinical response at end of therapy (EOT), post-therapy evaluation (PTE) or test-of-cure assessment and treatment discontinuations resulting from adverse events (AEs). Bayesian NMA was conducted for each outcome using fixed-effects and random effects models.. Literature searches identified 3,618 records; 15 trials met the inclusion criteria and were considered suitable for NMA comparison. In fixed-effects models, tedizolid had higher odds of clinical response at EOT (odds ratio [OR], 1.7; credible interval, 1.0, 3.0) and PTE than vancomycin (OR, 1.6; credible interval, 1.1, 2.5). No differences in odds of clinical response at EOT or PTE were observed between tedizolid and other comparators. There was no evidence of a difference among treatments for discontinuation due to AEs. Results from random effects and fixed-effects models were generally consistent.. Tedizolid was superior to vancomycin for clinical response at EOT and PTE. There was no evidence of a difference between tedizolid and other comparators and no evidence of a difference between tedizolid and all comparators when evaluating discontinuation due to AEs. These findings suggest that tedizolid provides an alternative option for the management of serious skin infections caused by suspected or documented MRSA. This study is subject to the limitations inherent in all NMAs, and the results should be interpreted accordingly.

Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Bayes Theorem; Ceftaroline; Cephalosporins; Daptomycin; Humans; Linezolid; Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus; Organophosphates; Oxazoles; Oxazolidinones; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Staphylococcal Infections; Tetrazoles; Vancomycin

Vancomycin has been the cornerstone of treatment for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infections. This review describes new MRSA-active antibiotics that have recently been introduced and highlights emerging resistance.. Elevations in the vancomycin minimum inhibitory concentration within the susceptible range are associated with treatment failure and mortality in the treatment of MRSA infections. Ceftaroline and ceftobiprole are anti-MRSA cephalosporins and are noninferior to comparator agents in the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs) and pneumonia. Tedizolid is more potent than linezolid, has improved pharmacokinetics and reduced toxicity and is active against cfr-containing S. aureus. Telavancin now has approval for treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia, and recent phase 2 trial data showed similar cure rates in S. aureus bacteremia. Dalbavancin and oritavancin are administered once weekly and are noninferior to comparators for acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections. Resistance has emerged against many new anti-MRSA antimicrobials including ceftaroline. Combination therapy of β-lactams with vancomycin or daptomycin is increasing.. Several new MRSA-active agents are now approved for use, although much of the data is derived from treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections or pneumonia. Further studies are required for more invasive infections, such as bacteremia and endocarditis.

Topics: Acetamides; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Cephalosporins; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Drug Administration Routes; Drug Therapy, Combination; Glycopeptides; Humans; Linezolid; Lipoglycopeptides; Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus; Microbial Sensitivity Tests; Oxazolidinones; Severity of Illness Index; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Staphylococcal Infections; Tetrazoles; Vancomycin

The results from the phase 3 study that evaluated the efficacy and safety of tedizolid phosphate, an oxazolidinone drug, for the treatment of gram-positive ventilated hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia (vHABP)/ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (VABP) compared with linezolid (VITAL study), have been previously reported. We conducted a subgroup analysis to report the data obtained from Japanese patients enrolled in this study.. Patients aged ≥18 years with vHABP/VABP likely to be caused by gram-positive cocci were randomized 1:1 to tedizolid phosphate 200 mg once daily for 7 days or linezolid 600 mg twice daily for 10 days. In both treatment groups, patients with concurrent gram-positive bacteremia were treated for 14 days. Primary efficacy endpoints were day 28 all-cause mortality (ACM) and investigator-assessed clinical response at test-of-cure (TOC) in the intention-to-treat population. Safety outcomes included assessment of treatment-emergent adverse events.. Fifty-three Japanese patients were randomized at received study drug (tedizolid, n = 28; linezolid, n = 25). Demographics and characteristics were generally similar between treatment groups. Rates of day 28 ACM were 10.7% and 20.0% with tedizolid and linezolid, respectively (difference, 9.3%; 95% CI, -10.1 to 28.7). Rates of investigator-assessed clinical cure at TOC were 78.6% and 72.0% with tedizolid and linezolid, respectively (difference, 6.6%; 95% CI, -16.7 to 29.8). Tedizolid phosphate was generally well tolerated and no new safety concerns were observed in the Japanese subgroup.. The results from this subgroup analysis suggest generally favorable efficacy and safety of tedizolid in adult Japanese patients with vHABP/VABP. (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02019420).

Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Bacteria; Double-Blind Method; Hospitals; Humans; Japan; Linezolid; Organophosphates; Oxazolidinones; Pneumonia, Bacterial; Pneumonia, Ventilator-Associated; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Tetrazoles; Ventilators, Mechanical

Tedizolid phosphate is an oxazolidinone prodrug approved in 2014 for treatment of adults with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs); however, efficacy has not previously been evaluated in children. This study compared the safety and efficacy of tedizolid (administered as tedizolid phosphate) with active antibacterial comparators for the treatment of ABSSSIs in adolescents.. This was a randomized, assessor-blind, global phase 3 study of tedizolid versus active comparators for the treatment of Gram-positive ABSSSIs in adolescents (12 to <18 years of age; NCT02276482). Enrolled participants were stratified by region and randomized 3:1 to receive tedizolid phosphate 200 mg (oral and/or intravenous) once daily for 6 days or active comparator, selected by investigator from an allowed list per local standard of care, for 10 days. The primary endpoint was safety; blinded investigator's assessment of clinical success at the test-of-cure visit (18-25 days after the first dose) was a secondary efficacy endpoint. Statistical comparisons between treatment groups were not performed.. Of the 121 participants enrolled, 120 were treated (tedizolid, n = 91; comparator, n = 29). Treatment-emergent adverse events were balanced between treatment groups (tedizolid, 14.3%; comparator, 10.3%). Overall, 3 participants (3.3%) in the tedizolid group and 1 (3.4%) in the comparator group experienced a single drug-related TEAE. Clinical success rates were high in both treatment groups: 96.7% and 93.1% at the test-of-cure visit for the tedizolid and comparator groups, respectively.. Tedizolid demonstrated safety and efficacy similar to comparators for the treatment of ABSSSIs in adolescents.

Topics: Abscess; Adolescent; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Female; Global Health; Humans; Male; Oxazolidinones; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Soft Tissue Infections; Tetrazoles; Wound Infection

Tedizolid, a novel oxazolidinone with activity against a wide range of Gram-positive pathogens, was evaluated in two noninferiority phase 3 acute bacterial skin and skin structure infection trials. The data from individual trials showed its noninferior efficacy compared to that of linezolid and a favorable tolerability profile. To evaluate potential differences, the pooled data were analyzed. The patients received 200 mg of tedizolid once daily for 6 days or 600 mg of linezolid twice daily for 10 days. Efficacy was evaluated at 48 to 72 h (primary endpoint), on days 11 to 13 (end of therapy [EOT]), and 7 to 14 days after the EOT (posttherapy evaluation). Treatment-emergent adverse events and hematologic and clinical laboratory parameters were collected. The baseline characteristics were comparable between the treatment groups: 852/1,333 (64%) patients were from North America, and the majority of infections were caused by Staphylococcus aureus. Tedizolid was noninferior to linezolid (early clinical responses, 81.6% versus 79.4%, respectively). The early responses remained relatively consistent across various host/disease factors and severity measures. Nausea was the most frequently reported adverse event (tedizolid, 8.2%; linezolid, 12.2%; P=0.02), with onset occurring primarily during the first 6 days. Fewer tedizolid than linezolid patients had platelet counts of <150,000 cells/mm3 at the EOT (tedizolid, 4.9%; linezolid, 10.8%; P=0.0003) and during the postbaseline period through the last day of active drug visit (tedizolid, 6.4%; linezolid, 12.6%; P=0.0016). Efficacy was achieved with a 6-day once-daily course of therapy with the option of an intravenous/oral regimen, and fewer low platelet counts and gastrointestinal side effects were reported with tedizolid than with linezolid, all of which aligns well with antimicrobial stewardship principles. (These studies have been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under registration no. NCT01170221 and NCT01421511.).

Topics: Acetamides; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Double-Blind Method; Female; Humans; Linezolid; Male; Oxazolidinones; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Skin Diseases, Infectious; Staphylococcal Skin Infections; Tetrazoles

Tedizolid phosphate is an oxazolidinone antibacterial agent approved for the treatment of Gram-positive acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs) in patients aged ≥12 years. To support the use of tedizolid phosphate in adolescents with ABSSSIs, a population pharmacokinetic (PK) model, developed using adult and pediatric data, was updated to include PK data from a phase 3 clinical trial (PN012) that evaluated the safety and efficacy of once-daily oral or intravenous 200-mg tedizolid phosphate treatment in adolescents (12 to <18 years) with ABSSSIs, along with emerging data from a phase 1 trial (PN013) in children (2 to <12 years). Updated PK parameter estimates remained similar to those of the previous model. Body weight was a statistically significant covariate on clearance and volume parameters, with no clinically meaningful effects on exposure in adolescents. Tedizolid exposures in adolescents from PN012 were slightly higher with largely overlapped area under the concentration-time curve distribution compared with adults from previous phase 2 and 3 trials. The probability of PK/pharmacodynamic target attainment at the MIC susceptibility breakpoint of 0.5 μg/ml for Staphylococcus and Streptococcus sp. was 100%. As most participants from the PN012 trial were cured, no significant exposure-efficacy relationship was identified. Tedizolid exposures were similar between participants with and without a safety event from PN012; no clear relationship was detected between exposure and safety. Despite lower body weight and higher exposures in adolescents, safety profiles in adolescents were similar those in adults. These results support the 200-mg, once-daily intravenous or oral dose of tedizolid phosphate in adolescents with ABSSSIs.

Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Child; Humans; Oxazolidinones; Probability; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Tetrazoles

Linezolid is used to treat prosthetic joint infection after total hip arthroplasty. Here, we present a case of linezolid-induced severe neutropenia, which improved after switching to tedizolid. Grade 3 neutropenia developed 5 days after linezolid injection (1,200 mg/day) and 33 days after oral administration of the same dose. However, during the 70 days of treatment with tedizolid, grade 3 neutropenia did not occur, and C-reactive protein levels remained in the normal range. No grade ≥ 1 thrombocytopenia or bleeding event occurred during the course of tedizolid treatment. Tedizolid may be an alternative drug for patients who develop linezolid-induced neutropenia.

Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Humans; Linezolid; Microbial Sensitivity Tests; Neutropenia; Organophosphates; Oxazoles; Oxazolidinones; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Tetrazoles

Tedizolid has demonstrated its efficacy and safety in clinical trials; however, data concerning its tolerability in long-term treatments are scarce. The aim of the study was to assess the indications and to describe the long-term safety profile of tedizolid. A multicentric retrospective study of patients who received tedizolid for more than 6 days was conducted. Adverse events (AEs) were identified from patients' medical records and laboratory data. The World Health Organization causality categories were used to discern AEs that were probably associated with tedizolid. Eighty-one patients, treated with tedizolid 200 mg once daily for a median (interquartile range [IQR]) duration of 28 (14 to 59) days, were included; 36 (44.4%) had previously received linezolid. The most common reasons for selecting tedizolid were to avoid linezolid potential toxicities or interactions (53.1%) or due to previous linezolid-related toxicities (27.2%). The most common indications were off-label, including prosthetic joint infections, osteomyelitis, and respiratory infections (77.8%). Overall, 9/81 patients (11.1%) experienced a probably associated AE. Two patients (2.5%) developed gastrointestinal disorders, 1 (1.2%) developed anemia, and 6 developed thrombocytopenia (7.4%) after a median (IQR) duration of treatment of 26.5 (17 to 58.5) days. Four (5%) patients discontinued tedizolid due to AEs. Among 23 patients with chronic renal failure (CRF), the rate of myelotoxicity was 17.4%, and only 8.7% had to stop tedizolid; 20 out of 22 with previous linezolid-associated toxicity had no AE. Long-term tedizolid treatments had good tolerance with rates of gastrointestinal AE and hematological toxicity lower than those reported with linezolid, particularly in patients with CRF and in those with a history of linezolid-associated toxicity.

Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Humans; Organophosphates; Oxazoles; Oxazolidinones; Retrospective Studies; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Tetrazoles

We evaluated the microbiological efficacy of tedizolid compared with that of linezolid against common and emerging pathogens using pooled data from 2 phase 3 trials (NCT01170221 and NCT01421511) in patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections. Patients received tedizolid 200 mg once daily for 6 days (n = 664) or linezolid 600 mg twice daily for 10 days (n = 669). Favorable microbiological outcome in both treatment groups, defined as eradication or presumed eradication at the end of treatment and at the posttherapy evaluation, exceeded 85% for most pathogens, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Favorable microbiological response was observed for staphylococci and streptococci at tedizolid minimal inhibitory concentration values ≤0.5 mg/L and 0.25 mg/L, respectively. The studies demonstrated positive microbiological outcomes against common pathogens with a 6-day, once-daily regimen of tedizolid phosphate in patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections.

Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Child; Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic; Double-Blind Method; Female; Gram-Positive Bacterial Infections; Humans; Linezolid; Male; Middle Aged; Oxazolidinones; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Soft Tissue Infections; Tetrazoles; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult

Tedizolid phosphate, the prodrug of the oxazolidinone tedizolid, has been approved in a number of countries, including the United States, those in the European Union, and Canada, for treatment of patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI). Two phase 3 trials demonstrated the noninferior efficacy of tedizolid (200 mg once daily for 6 days) to linezolid (600 mg twice daily for 10 days) in patients with ABSSSI. Because of the challenges of treating lower-extremity ABSSSI, the efficacy and safety of tedizolid and linezolid for treating lower-extremity versus non-lower-extremity infections were compared.. This was a post hoc analysis of pooled data from patients with lower-extremity infections enrolled in two phase 3 studies, ESTABLISH-1 (NCT01170221) and ESTABLISH-2 (NCT01421511), comparing tedizolid to linezolid in patients with ABSSSI.. Lower-extremity ABSSSI were present in 40.7% of tedizolid-treated and 42.2% of linezolid-treated patients. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) was present in 34.7% of all patients with a baseline causative pathogen. Early clinical responses at 48 to 72 hours and investigator-assessed responses at the post-therapy evaluation were similar between tedizolid and linezolid, regardless of ABSSSI type. With both treatments, the early clinical response was slightly higher in patients with non-lower-extremity infection than in those with lower-extremity ABSSSI (tedizolid, 84.8% versus 77.0%; linezolid, 81.4% versus 76.6%, respectively); however, by the post-therapy evaluation visit, response rates were similar (tedizolid, 87.1% versus 86.3%; linezolid, 86.6% versus 87.2%, respectively). Gastrointestinal adverse events and low platelet counts were observed more frequently with linezolid treatment.. Post-therapy evaluations showed that the clinical response of lower-extremity ABSSSI to tedizolid and linezolid was comparable to that of ABSSSI in other locations. A short 6-day course of once-daily tedizolid was as effective as a 10-day course of twice-daily linezolid in treating patients with lower-extremity ABSSSI.

Topics: Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Female; Humans; Linezolid; Male; Middle Aged; Oxazolidinones; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Tetrazoles; Treatment Outcome

Tedizolid phosphate is a novel antibacterial prodrug that is rapidly and extensively converted to its active moiety, tedizolid. We developed a population pharmacokinetics (PK) model for tedizolid using pooled data from seven densely and sparsely sampled clinical trials evaluating oral and intravenous tedizolid. Model-derived exposure estimates were evaluated for relationships to select efficacy and safety outcomes. A two-compartment model with sigmoidal absorption, absolute bioavailability, and linear elimination described the PK data well. Variability was small (clearance, 31% coefficient of variation; volume, 13.4% coefficient of variation), and absolute bioavailability was high (86%). No clinically significant covariate effects on tedizolid PK were found. Based on phase 3 data evaluating 200-mg once-daily tedizolid for acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI), no relationships were seen between various efficacy outcomes and estimated tedizolid exposure; the estimated exposure range (free-drug area under the concentration-time curve over 24 h at steady state [AUCss(0-24)], 7 to 50 μg · h/ml) in these patients was modest. Safety data modeling, using once-daily doses of up to 400 mg, showed a small increase in the probability of an adverse event with increasing model-estimated tedizolid exposure; no such relationship was observed when specifically evaluating the 200-mg dose. There were no trends in neutrophil or platelet counts with increasing tedizolid exposure. Target attainment simulations for 200-mg tedizolid indicated a 98.31% probability of attaining the target measure (AUC for the free, unbound fraction of a drug [fAUC]/MIC = 3) against a Staphylococcus aureus strain for which the MIC was ≤0.5 μg/ml. These findings support 200-mg tedizolid once daily as the optimum dose for treatment of ABSSSI.

Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Area Under Curve; Biological Availability; Female; Humans; Male; Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus; Microbial Sensitivity Tests; Middle Aged; Neutrophils; Organophosphates; Oxazoles; Oxazolidinones; Platelet Count; Prodrugs; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Staphylococcal Infections; Tetrazoles; Young Adult