tedizolid-phosphate and Skin-Diseases--Bacterial

We evaluated safety and tolerability of tedizolid phosphate at the 200-mg once-daily dose approved for 6-day treatment of skin and skin-structure infections.. Clinical adverse event (AE) and laboratory data were pooled across completed clinical studies (13 phase 1, two phase 2, and two phase 3), for all participants who received ≥1 dose of tedizolid 200 mg, linezolid 600 mg (phase 3 only), or placebo (phase 1 only).. 1280 participants received tedizolid (phase 1: n = 355; phase 2/3: n = 925). In total, 13% received >6 doses of tedizolid (range: 7-21); in phase 2/3, 94% of participants received ≥5 doses (range: 5-10). Drug-related AEs occurred in 27% of participants (most commonly gastrointestinal reactions in 13% of participants and headache in 4%). Most AEs were mild-moderate in severity; <1% of participants discontinued treatment due to AEs. Tedizolid and linezolid had similar frequency, severity, and types of drug-related AEs. Tolerability in clinically important subpopulations (obese, n = 346; elderly, n = 99; renal impairment, n = 40; hepatic disease/impairment, n = 294) appeared comparable to the overall population.. Tedizolid, given orally or intravenously at 200 mg, has a favorable safety profile. Clinical trial and postmarketing experience with treatment ≥7 days is limited.

Topics: Acute Disease; Administration, Intravenous; Administration, Oral; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Clinical Trials as Topic; Humans; Linezolid; Organophosphates; Oxazoles; Severity of Illness Index; Skin Diseases, Bacterial

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

Tedizolid is indicated for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI). Although tedizolid shares many similar properties with linezolid, another oxazolidinone used to treat ABSSSI, the two antibiotics have several key differences. Areas covered: This review provides a detailed summary of the overall pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy, and safety of tedizolid for the treatment of ABSSSI. Expert opinion: Compared to other antibiotics used for ABSSSI, tedizolid has several advantages. Tedizolid has a long half-life, allowing for once daily dosing. Tedizolid also has broad spectrum of activity against Gram-positive pathogens, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, Coagulase-negative Staphylococci, and Enterococci - including isolates demonstrating resistance to linezolid. It is available in both oral and intravenous formulations, and, has outstanding oral bioavailability, allowing for oral-step down therapy. There is also some evidence that, tedizolid has fewer significant interactions with serotonin reuptake inhibitors or monoamine oxidase inhibitors than linezolid. Finally, thrombocytopenia may occur less often with tedizolid than linezolid. However, these benefits must be weighed against the financial cost of tedizolid and the availability of alternative antibiotic choices.

Topics: Animals; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Biological Availability; Drug Interactions; Half-Life; Humans; Organophosphates; Oxazoles; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Soft Tissue Infections

In 2013 the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued recommendations and guidance on developing drugs for treatment of skin infection using a new definition of acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infection (ABSSSI). The new classification includes cellulitis, erysipelas, major skin abscesses and wound infection with a considerable extension of skin involvement, clearly referring to a severe subset of skin infections. The main goal of the FDA was to better identify specific infections where the advantages of a new antibiotic could be precisely estimated through quantifiable parameters, such as improvement of the lesion size and of systemic signs of infection. Before the spread and diffusion of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) in skin infections, antibiotic therapy was relatively straightforward. Using an empiric approach, a β-lactam was the preferred therapy and cultures from patients were rarely obtained. With the emergence of MRSA in the community setting, initial ABSSSI management has been changed and readdressed. Dalbavancin, oritavancin and tedizolid are new drugs, approved or in development for ABSSSI treatment, that also proved to be efficient against MRSA. Dalbavancin and oritavancin have a long half-life and can be dosed less frequently. This in turn makes it possible to treat patients with ABSSSI in an outpatient setting, avoiding hospitalization or potentially allowing earlier discharge, without compromising efficacy. In conclusion, characteristics of long-acting antibiotics could represent an opportunity for the management of ABSSSI and could profoundly modify the management of these infections by reducing or in some cases eliminating both costs and risks of hospitalization.

Topics: Ambulatory Care; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Drug Resistance, Multiple, Bacterial; Glycopeptides; Humans; Lipoglycopeptides; Organophosphates; Oxazoles; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Staphylococcal Skin Infections; Teicoplanin; United States; United States Food and Drug Administration

Tedizolid phosphate is a novel oxazolidinone prodrug (converted to the active form tedizolid by phosphatases in vivo) that has been developed and recently approved (June 2014) by the United States FDA for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs) caused by susceptible Gram-positive pathogens, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). Tedizolid is an oxazolidinone, but differs from other oxazolidinones by possessing a modified side chain at the C-5 position of the oxazolidinone nucleus which confers activity against certain linezolid-resistant pathogens and has an optimized C- and D-ring system that improves potency through additional binding site interactions. The mechanism of action of tedizolid is similar to other oxazolidinones and occurs through inhibition of bacterial protein synthesis by binding to 23S ribosomal RNA (rRNA) of the 50S subunit of the ribosome. As with other oxazolidinones, the spontaneous frequency of resistance development to tedizolid is low. Tedizolid is four- to eightfold more potent in vivo than linezolid against all species of staphylococci, enterococci, and streptococci, including drug-resistant phenotypes such as MRSA and vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE) and linezolid-resistant phenotypes. Importantly, tedizolid demonstrates activity against linezolid-resistant bacterial strains harboring the horizontally transmissible cfr gene, in the absence of certain ribosomal mutations conferring reduced oxazolidinone susceptibility. With its half-life of approximately 12 h, tedizolid is dosed once daily. It demonstrates linear pharmacokinetics, has a high oral bioavailability of approximately 90 %, and is primarily excreted by the liver as an inactive, non-circulating sulphate conjugate. Tedizolid does not require dosage adjustment in patients with any degree of renal dysfunction or hepatic dysfunction. Studies in animals have demonstrated that the pharmacodynamic parameter most closely associated with the efficacy of tedizolid is fAUC(0-24h)/MIC. In non-neutropenic animals, a dose-response enhancement was observed with tedizolid and lower exposures were required compared to neutropenic cohorts. Two Phase III clinical trials have demonstrated non-inferiority of a once-daily tedizolid 200 mg dose for 6-10 days versus twice-daily 600 mg linezolid for the treatment of ABSSSIs. Both trials used the primary endpoint of early clinical response at 48-72 h; however, one trial compared

Topics: Animals; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Clinical Trials as Topic; Drug Resistance, Multiple, Bacterial; Gram-Positive Bacteria; Gram-Positive Bacterial Infections; Humans; Microbial Sensitivity Tests; Molecular Structure; Organophosphates; Oxazoles; Skin Diseases, Bacterial

Tedizolid phosphate is the second commercially available oxazolidinone antibiotic, although the first one in class that is dosed once daily. It is a prodrug that is rapidly converted to the active compound tedizolid. Tedizolid has activity against a wide range of gram-positive pathogens, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. It is approved to treat acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs). In 2 randomized controlled phase 3 trials, 6 days of tedizolid (200 mg once daily) has been proven to be noninferior to 10 days of linezolid (600 mg twice daily). These 2 ABSSSI studies have positioned tedizolid among the growing armamentarium of newer, novel, anti-gram-positive agents. Tedizolid appears to differ from linezolid in the incidence of gastrointestinal and hematologic side effects and appears to lack drug interactions with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. Conditions other than ABSSSI are currently being evaluated in clinical studies.

Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic; Drug Interactions; Drug Resistance, Bacterial; Gram-Positive Bacterial Infections; Humans; Linezolid; Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus; Organophosphates; Oxazoles; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Staphylococcal Skin Infections

To review the chemistry, pharmacology, microbiology, pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy, tolerability, drug interactions, dosing, and administration of tedizolid phosphate (TDZ).. A search of PubMed using the terms "tedizolid," "torezolid," "TR-701," "TR-700," "DA-7157," and "DA-7218" was performed. The manufacturer's Web site was also reviewed to further identify relevant information.. All English-language articles from 2006 to November 2014 appearing in these searches were reviewed for relevance to this paper. In addition, their bibliographies were reviewed to identify any articles not uncovered in the searches.. TDZ is the second oxazolidinone antibiotic with a spectrum of activity targeted against gram-positive organisms including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus . It is administered via intravenous infusion or orally without regard to food. The primary route of elimination is fecal excretion. Advanced age, hepatic dysfunction, or renal impairment does not alter its disposition. Phase III clinical trials have demonstrated that TDZ 200 mg daily for 6 days is noninferior to linezolid 600 mg twice daily for 10 days in the treatment of adults with skin and soft tissue infections caused or suspected to be caused by gram-positive organisms. TDZ has a side effect profile similar to that of linezolid and a lower potential for drug interactions.. TDZ has been shown to be safe and effective for the treatment of adults with skin and soft tissue infections. Further research is needed to refine its role, particularly for the treatment of patients requiring a longer duration of therapy and in those receiving concomitant serotonergic agents.

Topics: Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Drug Interactions; Gram-Positive Bacteria; Gram-Positive Bacterial Infections; Humans; Organophosphates; Oxazoles; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Soft Tissue Infections

Tedizolid is a newly approved drug of the oxazolidinone class. It has high in vitro activity against Gram-positive bacteria, including multidrug-resistant strains. Peak plasma concentration of tedizolid is obtained within 3 h of oral dosing (PO), with high bioavailability. Tedizolid is mostly metabolized via the liver, and is excreted in feces in the form of a sulfate conjugate. Tedizolid 200 mg taken once daily demonstrated non-inferior efficacy and a good safety profile in patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections. Results of two pivotal Phase III clinical trials showed that 6 days of 200 mg tedizolid PO or sequential intravenous (IV)/PO once-daily treatment was non-inferior to 10 days of 600 mg linezolid PO or sequential IV/PO twice-daily treatment at 48-72 h (primary end point) and at the test-of-cure in patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections. The Phase II and Phase III trials also demonstrated that tedizolid was well tolerated.

Topics: Acute Disease; Animals; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Clinical Trials as Topic; Drug Resistance, Multiple, Bacterial; Humans; Organophosphates; Oxazoles; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Treatment Outcome

Topics: Animals; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Clinical Trials as Topic; Humans; Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus; Organophosphates; Oxazoles; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Staphylococcal Infections; Teicoplanin

Acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) are associated with remarkable morbidity, and often require hospitalization. The cause of most ABSSSI is aerobic Gram-positive cocci, including Staphylococcus aureus, and β-hemolytic streptococci. Tedizolid phosphate is a novel oxazolidinone prodrug whose active moiety is tedizolid. It has shown potent in vitro activity against Gram-positive pathogens, encompassing methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) and strains resistant to vancomycin or linezolid. Animal studies suggested bactericidal activity in vivo. Pharmacokinetic studies demonstrated a good penetration into skin and soft tissues, and suitability for once-daily administration, either orally or intravenously at the same dosage. Pivotal phase III studies showed that tedizolid phosphate at 200 mg once daily for 6 days is noninferior to linezolid 600 mg twice daily for 10 days in ABSSSI patients, whereas gastrointestinal disorders were less frequent with tedizolid phosphate than linezolid. Tedizolid phosphate has been approved by the U.S. FDA, as Sivextro® to treat adult patients with ABSSSI.

Topics: Acute Disease; Animals; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Clinical Trials as Topic; Drug Resistance, Bacterial; Humans; Organophosphates; Oxazoles; Skin Diseases, Bacterial

Tedizolid phosphate (TR-701), a prodrug of tedizolid (TR-700), is a next-generation oxazolidinone that has shown favorable results in the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections in its first Phase III clinical trial. Tedizolid has high bioavailability, penetration, and tissue distribution when administered orally or intravenously. The activity of tedizolid was greater than linezolid against strains of Staphylococcus spp., Streptococcus spp., and Enterococcus spp. in vitro studies, including strains resistant to linezolid and those not susceptible to vancomycin or daptomycin. Its pharmacokinetic characteristics allow for a once-daily administration that leads to a more predictable efficacy and safety profile than those of linezolid. No hematological adverse effects have been reported associated with tedizolid when used at the therapeutic dose of 200 mg in Phase I, II, or III clinical trials of up to 3 weeks of tedizolid administration. Given that the clinical and microbiological efficacy are similar for the 200, 300, and 400 mg doses, the lowest effective dose of 200 mg once daily for 6 days was selected for Phase III studies in acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections, providing a safe dosing regimen with low potential for development of myelosuppression. Unlike linezolid, tedizolid does not inhibit monoamine oxidase in vivo, therefore interactions with adrenergic, dopaminergic, and serotonergic drugs are not to be expected. In conclusion, tedizolid is a novel antibiotic with potent activity against Gram-positive microorganisms responsible for skin and soft tissue infections, including strains resistant to vancomycin, linezolid, and daptomycin, thus answers a growing therapeutic need.

Topics: Acute Disease; Animals; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Biological Availability; Drug Resistance, Bacterial; Gram-Positive Bacteria; Humans; Organophosphates; Oxazoles; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Soft Tissue Infections; Tissue Distribution

Hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia (HABP) and ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (VABP) are associated with high mortality rates. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of tedizolid (administered as tedizolid phosphate) for treatment of gram-positive ventilated HABP/VABP.. In this randomized, noninferiority, double-blind, double-dummy, global phase 3 trial, patients were randomized 1:1 to receive intravenous tedizolid phosphate 200 mg once daily for 7 days or intravenous linezolid 600 mg every 12 hours for 10 days. Treatment was 14 days in patients with concurrent gram-positive bacteremia. The primary efficacy end points were day 28 all-cause mortality (ACM; noninferiority margin, 10%) and investigator-assessed clinical response at test of cure (TOC; noninferiority margin, 12.5%) in the intention-to-treat population.. Overall, 726 patients were randomized (tedizolid, n = 366; linezolid, n = 360). Baseline characteristics, including incidence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (31.3% overall), were well balanced. Tedizolid was noninferior to linezolid for day 28 ACM rate: 28.1% and 26.4%, respectively (difference, -1.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -8.2 to 4.7). Noninferiority of tedizolid was not demonstrated for investigator-assessed clinical cure at TOC (tedizolid, 56.3% vs linezolid, 63.9%; difference, -7.6%; 97.5% CI: -15.7 to 0.5). In post hoc analyses, no single factor accounted for the difference in clinical response between treatment groups. Drug-related adverse events occurred in 8.1% and 11.9% of patients who received tedizolid and linezolid, respectively.. Tedizolid was noninferior to linezolid for day 28 ACM in the treatment of gram-positive ventilated HABP/VABP. Noninferiority of tedizolid for investigator-assessed clinical response at TOC was not demonstrated. Both drugs were well tolerated.. NCT02019420.

Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Double-Blind Method; Hospitals; Humans; Linezolid; Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus; Organophosphates; Oxazoles; Pneumonia, Bacterial; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Ventilators, Mechanical

Tedizolid phosphate is approved for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infection (ABSSSI) caused by Gram-positive bacteria in the United States, Europe, and other countries. In this multicenter, double-blind, phase 3 study, 598 adult ABSSSI patients in China, Taiwan, the Philippines, and the United States were randomized to receive 200 mg of tedizolid, intravenously (i.v.)/orally (p.o.), once daily for 6 days or 600 mg of linezolid, i.v./p.o. twice daily for 10 days. The primary endpoint was early clinical response rate at 48 to 72 h. Secondary endpoints included programmatic and investigator-assessed outcomes at end-of-therapy (EOT) and posttherapy evaluation (PTE) visits. Safety was also evaluated. In the intent-to-treat (ITT) population, 75.3% of tedizolid-treated patients and 79.9% of linezolid-treated patients were early responders (treatment difference, -4.6%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -11.2, 2.2). After exclusion of patients who never received the study drug (tedizolid,

Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Bacteria; Double-Blind Method; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Organophosphates; Oxazoles; Skin; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Young Adult

The objective of this open-label, randomised (i.e. 2:1 ratio), Phase 3 study was to compare the efficacy and safety of tedizolid phosphate 200 mg, once-daily treatment with that of linezolid 600 mg, twice-daily treatment for 7-14 days in Japanese adult patients (N = 125) with skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) and/or for 7-21 days for those with SSTI-related bacteraemia, caused by confirmed or highly suspected methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). Primary outcome was clinical cure rate at test-of-cure (TOC, in SSTI: 7-14 days, in bacteraemia: 4-6 weeks after end-of-therapy [EOT]) time point in the microbiologically evaluable MRSA (ME-MRSA) population (N = 39). Secondary endpoints were clinical and microbiological response rates at EOT. Safety parameters were evaluated in the safety analysis population up to follow up. Data analysis was descriptive in nature. Baseline characteristics of patients were similar between treatment groups. At TOC in the ME-MRSA population, clinical cure rate was similar in tedizolid phosphate (92.6%) and linezolid (88.9%) groups. At EOT, clinical cure (tedizolid phosphate: 93.1%, linezolid: 90.0%) and microbiological success (tedizolid phosphate: 93.1%, linezolid: 100.0%) rates were similar in the ME-MRSA population. Both treatments were well tolerated; overall treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) in tedizolid phosphate (79.5%) and linezolid (75.6%) treatment groups were similar. Drug-related TEAEs were numerically lower with tedizolid phosphate versus linezolid (30.1%; 39.0%, respectively), as well as gastrointestinal (21.7%; 26.8%) and myelosuppression-related (2.4%; 22.0%) TEAEs. One death occurred in the linezolid group. Tedizolid phosphate may be an appropriate antibiotic for the treatment of SSTIs in Japanese adult patients. International clinical trial registration number: NCT01967225. Japanese clinical trial registration number: JapicCTI-132308.

Topics: Aged; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Bacteremia; Female; Humans; Japan; Linezolid; Male; Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus; Organophosphates; Oxazoles; Prospective Studies; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Soft Tissue Infections; Treatment Outcome

Acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) are a frequent cause of hospital admissions in the United States. Safe and effective outpatient treatments may lower ABSSSI-associated health care costs by reducing unnecessary hospital admissions. Using data from 2 phase 3 trials (ESTABLISH-1, NCT01170221; ESTABLISH-2, NCT01421511), this post-hoc analysis explored the efficacy and safety of tedizolid in an outpatient setting.. Subgroup analysis was performed on US outpatients (defined as patients who were not in hospital at the time of treatment initiation) with ABSSSI caused by presumed or proven gram-positive pathogens. Patients were randomly assigned to receive tedizolid phosphate 200 mg once daily for 6 days (n = 403) or linezolid 600 mg twice daily for 10 days (n = 410). The primary end point was early clinical response (48-72 hours after the start of treatment). Secondary end points included investigator-assessed clinical response at end of therapy (EOT) and post-therapy evaluation (PTE; 7-14 days after therapy). Additional assessments included the patient-reported level of pain using a visual analog scale (VAS) and the per-pathogen favorable microbiological response rate at the PTE visit. Compliance with treatment and safety outcomes was also recorded.. Early clinical response was similar between treatment groups (tedizolid, 82.4%; linezolid, 79.0%), as was investigator-assessed clinical response at EOT (tedizolid, 87.1%; linezolid, 86.1%) and PTE (tedizolid, 83.1%; linezolid, 83.7%). Mean changes from baseline to days 10 to 13 in VAS scores were identical between treatment groups (tedizolid, -51.9 mm; linezolid, -51.9 mm). Microbiological eradication rates were generally similar in both treatment groups for all key pathogens. Patients in both groups had favorable response at PTE. More tedizolid-treated patients (89.3%) than linezolid-treated patients (77.3%) were compliant with treatment. The most frequently reported drug-related treatment-emergent adverse events were nausea (tedizolid, 10.7%; linezolid, 13.8%), diarrhea (tedizolid, 4.5%; linezolid, 5.9%), and headache (tedizolid, 5.5%; linezolid, 4.4%). Treatment discontinuation rates were low for both treatment groups (tedizolid, 0.7%; linezolid, 1.0%).. Short-course therapy with tedizolid can successfully treat patients with ABSSSI caused by presumed or proven gram-positive pathogens in an outpatient setting.

Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Ambulatory Care; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Female; Humans; Linezolid; Male; Middle Aged; Organophosphates; Oxazoles; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Treatment Outcome; United States; Young Adult

Tedizolid phosphate is approved for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI). In a pooled analysis of 1,333 ABSSSI patients from the ESTABLISH clinical trials, treatment with tedizolid or linezolid demonstrated similar early and posttherapy clinical responses in nonsevere and severe disease, irrespective of the parameters used to measure ABSSSI severity. Shorter 6-day treatment of ABSSSI, including those that were severe, with tedizolid phosphate demonstrated efficacy comparable to that of 10-day treatment with linezolid. (The ESTABLISH studies discussed in this paper have been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under identifiers NCT01170221 and NCT01421511.).

Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Double-Blind Method; Humans; Linezolid; Organophosphates; Oxazoles; Skin; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Staphylococcal Skin Infections; Staphylococcus aureus; Streptococcal Infections; Streptococcus pyogenes; Young Adult

Outcome assessments as clinical trial endpoints should be well-defined, reliable, and reflect meaningful treatment benefits. For acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) trials, recent recommendations suggest a primary endpoint of reduction in skin lesion area. Objectives were: evaluate ABSSSI lesion area measurement reliability, evaluate impact of various lesion area definitions on treatment effect size, and explore relationships between lesion area and pain.. Data from two randomized, double-blinded Phase 3 trials comparing tedizolid to linezolid in ABSSSI and one open-label, non-comparative Phase 2 study of tedizolid in cellulitis/erysipelas and skin abscess were analyzed. Repeated lesion area measurements were prospectively obtained in all studies. In the open-label study, lesion area was measured by two investigators, using four different definitions. Repeated pain assessments using two patient-reported outcome instruments (Visual Analog Scale [VAS] and Faces Rating Scale [FRS]) were elicited in the randomized trials.. At baseline, lesion size did not correlate with pain intensity: r=0.02 for VAS and r<0.01 for FRS pain scores. However, decreasing lesion size and decreasing pain were strongly associated over time, regardless of initial lesion size or pain intensity (r=0.20 for VAS and r=0.21 for FRS scores at Day 10-13). Each lesion area definition demonstrated high inter-observer reliability (intra-class correlation coefficient>0.95).. Decreasing lesion area (indirect clinician-reported measure of benefit) and pain (direct patient-reported measure of benefit) were strongly associated over time, and lesion area measurements were reliable, regardless of their definition. These findings support both measures as outcome assessments in ABSSSI clinical trials.. Clinicaltrials.govNCT01519778, NCT01170221, and NCT01421511.

Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Double-Blind Method; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Organophosphates; Oxazoles; Pain; Reproducibility of Results; Research Design; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Wounds and Injuries; Young Adult

In August 2010, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration issued draft guidelines for developing antibiotics for treating acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI), with the outcome measure of such treatment relying primarily on the cessation of spread or on the decrease in size of skin lesions at 48-72 h after the initiation of such treatment. In 2012, the Foundation for the National Institutes of Health proposed an interim outcome measure defined as a reduction in lesion size by ≥20% at a 48-72 h examination. These recent changes make it necessary to identify reliable methods for measuring the lesions in acute infections of the skin.. In the first study of the Efficacy and Safety of 6-day Oral Tedizolid in Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infections vs. 10-day Oral Linezolid Therapy (ESTABLISH-1), the sizes of ABSSSI lesions were evaluated with the two methodologies of: (1) Digital planimetry (DP) of photographed lesions, and (2) a ruler technique (RT) with measurement of the longest head-to-toe length and greatest perpendicular width of lesions, to compare the respective response rates of lesions to the two antimicrobial regimens in the study.. The RT method and DP showed similar percentages of subjects in which treatment stopped the spread of ABSSSI lesions (93.2% vs. 94.2%, respectively) but showed less agreement for a reduction in lesion size, of ≥20% (87.7% vs. 62.0%, respectively) across all categories of lesions (cellulitis/erysipelas, major cutaneous abscess, and acute wound infection) at 48-72 h after the initiation of treatment.. The results of the ESTABLISH-1 study show that both the RT method and DP are consistent and reliable techniques for measuring the sizes of ABSSSI lesions. Ultimately, changes in lesion size, rather than the absolute value of lesion size, will be used to assess the outcomes of treatment for ABSSSI in clinical research.

Topics: Acetamides; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Erythema; Humans; Image Interpretation, Computer-Assisted; Linezolid; Organophosphates; Oxazoles; Oxazolidinones; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; United States

New antibiotics are needed to treat infections caused by drug-resistant bacteria. Tedizolid is a novel oxazolidinone antibacterial drug designed to provide enhanced activity against Gram-positive pathogens. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of intravenous to oral tedizolid for treatment of patients with acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections.. ESTABLISH-2 was a randomised, double-blind, phase 3, non-inferiority trial done between Sept 28, 2011, and Jan 10, 2013, at 58 centres in nine countries. Patients (aged ≥12 years) with acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections (cellulitis or erysipelas, major cutaneous abscess, or wound infection) that had a minimum lesion area of 75 cm(2) and were suspected or documented to be associated with a Gram-positive pathogen, were randomly assigned (1:1), via an interactive voice-response system with block randomisation, to receive intravenous once-daily tedizolid (200 mg for 6 days) or twice-daily linezolid (600 mg for 10 days), with optional oral step-down. Randomisation was stratified by geographic region and type of acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infection. The primary endpoint was early clinical response (≥20% reduction in lesion area at 48-72 h compared with baseline), with a non-inferiority margin of -10%. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01421511.. 666 patients were randomly assigned to receive tedizolid (n=332) or linezolid (n=334). 283 (85%) patients in the tedizolid group and 276 (83%) in the linezolid group achieved early clinical response (difference 2·6%, 95% CI -3·0 to 8·2), meeting the prespecified non-inferiority margin. Gastrointestinal adverse events were less frequent with tedizolid than linezolid, taking place in 52 (16%) of 331 patients and 67 (20%) of 327 patients in the safety population. Treatment-emergent adverse events leading to discontinuation of study drug were reported by one (<1%) patient in the tedizolid group and four (1%) patients in the linezolid group.. Intravenous to oral once-daily tedizolid 200 mg for 6 days was non-inferior to twice-daily linezolid 600 mg for 10 days for treatment of patients with acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections. Tedizolid could become a useful option for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections in the hospital and outpatient settings.. Cubist Pharmaceuticals.

Topics: Acetamides; Administration, Intravenous; Administration, Oral; Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Double-Blind Method; Female; Humans; Linezolid; Male; Middle Aged; Organophosphates; Oxazoles; Oxazolidinones; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult

Acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs), including cellulitis or erysipelas, major cutaneous abscesses, and wound infections, can be life-threatening and may require surgery and hospitalization. Increasingly, ABSSSIs are associated with drug-resistant pathogens, and many antimicrobial agents have adverse effects restricting their use. Tedizolid phosphate is a novel oxazolidinone in development for the treatment of ABSSSIs.. To establish the noninferiority of tedizolid phosphate vs linezolid in treating ABSSSIs and compare the safety of the 2 agents.. The Efficacy and Safety of 6-day Oral Tedizolid in Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infections vs 10-day Oral Linezolid Therapy (ESTABLISH-1) was a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, noninferiority trial that was conducted from August 2010 through September 2011 at 81 study centers in North America, Latin America, and Europe. The intent-to-treat analysis set consisted of data from 667 adults aged 18 years or older with ABSSSIs treated with tedizolid phosphate (n = 332) or linezolid (n = 335).. A 200 mg once daily dose of oral tedizolid phosphate for 6 days or 600 mg of oral linezolid every 12 hours for 10 days.. The primary efficacy outcome was early clinical response at the 48- to 72-hour assessment (no increase in lesion surface area from baseline and oral temperature of ≤37.6°C, confirmed by a second temperature measurement within 24 hours). A 10% noninferiority margin was predefined.. In the intent-to-treat analysis set, the early clinical treatment response rates were 79.5% (95% CI, 74.8% to 83.7%) of 332 patients in the tedizolid phosphate group and 79.4% (95% CI, 74.7% to 83.6%) of 335 patients in the linezolid group (a treatment difference of 0.1% [95% CI, -6.1% to 6.2%]). The sustained clinical treatment response rates at the end of treatment (day 11) were 69.3% (95% CI, 64.0% to 74.2%) in the tedizolid phosphate group and 71.9% (95% CI, 66.8% to 76.7%) in the linezolid group (a treatment difference of -2.6% [95% CI, -9.6% to 4.2%]). Results of investigator-assessed clinical treatment success rates at a posttherapy evaluation visit (1-2 weeks after the end-of-treatment visit) were 85.5% (95% CI, 81.3% to 89.1%) in the tedizolid phosphate group and 86.0% (95% CI, 81.8% to 89.5%) in the linezolid group (a treatment difference of -0.5% [95% CI, -5.8% to 4.9%), and were similar for 178 patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolated from the primary lesion.. Tedizolid phosphate was a statistically noninferior treatment to linezolid in early clinical response at 48 to 72 hours after initiating therapy for an ABSSSI. Tedizolid phosphate may be a reasonable alternative to linezolid for treating ABSSSI.. clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01170221.

Topics: Acute Disease; Administration, Oral; Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Anti-Infective Agents; Double-Blind Method; Female; Humans; Intention to Treat Analysis; Male; Middle Aged; Organophosphates; Oxazoles; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult

Torezolid (TR-700) is the active moiety of the prodrug torezolid phosphate ([TP] TR-701), a second-generation oxazolidinone with 4- to 16-fold greater potency than linezolid against Gram-positive species including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). A double-blind phase 2 study evaluated three levels (200, 300, or 400 mg) of oral, once-daily TP over 5 to 7 days for complicated skin and skin structure infections (cSSSI). Patients 18 to 75 years old with cSSSI caused by suspected or confirmed Gram-positive pathogens were randomized 1:1:1. Of 188 treated patients, 76.6% had abscesses, 17.6% had extensive cellulitis, and 5.9% had wound infections. S. aureus, the most common pathogen, was isolated in 90.3% of patients (139/154) with a baseline pathogen; 80.6% were MRSA. Cure rates in clinically evaluable patients were 98.2% at 200 mg, 94.4% at 300 mg, and 94.4% at 400 mg. Cure rates were consistent across diagnoses, regardless of lesion size or the presence of systemic signs of infection. Clinical cure rates in patients with S. aureus isolated at baseline were 96.6% overall and 96.8% for MRSA. TP was safe and well tolerated at all dose levels. No patients discontinued treatment due to an adverse event. Three-stage hierarchical population pharmacokinetic modeling yielded a geometric mean clearance of 8.28 liters/h (between-patient variability, 32.3%), a volume of the central compartment of 71.4 liters (24.0%), and a volume of the peripheral compartment of 27.9 liters (35.7%). Results of this study show a high degree of efficacy at all three dose levels without significant differences in the safety profile and support the continued evaluation of TP for the treatment of cSSSI in phase 3 trials.

Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Dose-Response Relationship, Drug; Double-Blind Method; Female; Gram-Positive Bacteria; Gram-Positive Bacterial Infections; Humans; Male; Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus; Middle Aged; Organophosphates; Oxazoles; Oxazolidinones; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Soft Tissue Infections; Staphylococcal Skin Infections; Staphylococcus aureus; Treatment Outcome; Young Adult

Nowadays, the incidence of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infection (ABSSSI) is increasing. The increased bioavailability and reduced drug resistance of antibiotics are crucial to obtain a more effective treatment response in these infections. These favorable properties could be achieved by different drug delivery systems such as liposomes. In this study, nanosized, radiolabeled tedizolid phosphate liposomal formulations were prepared and evaluated with their in vitro cellular binding capacity and biocompatible profile for topical treatment of ABSSSI. Liposomes were characterized by evaluation of their visual inspection, particle size (about 190-270 nm), zeta potential value (around 0), and encapsulation efficiency (nearly 10%). The release rate of tedizolid phosphate from liposomes was also studied using dialysis membranes and evaluated kinetically. The stability of formulations was observed at three different temperatures and humidity conditions for 28 days. Afterward, liposomes were labeled with

Topics: Administration, Topical; Animals; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Drug Compounding; Drug Delivery Systems; Drug Liberation; Humans; Liposomes; Organophosphates; Oxazoles; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Technetium

In the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections, pooled data from 2 clinical trials (N = 1333 patients) showed that programmatic and investigator-assessed early treatment success both had a high positive predictive value (94.3%-100.0%) for late clinical cure, including among hospitalized patients. The negative predictive value of programmatic early success was <20%. These exploratory findings require prospective real-world evaluation..  NCT01170221; NCT01421511.

Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic; Humans; Linezolid; Models, Statistical; Organophosphates; Oxazoles; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Retrospective Studies; Sensitivity and Specificity; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome

Topics: Acute Disease; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Glycopeptides; Humans; Lipoglycopeptides; Organophosphates; Oxazoles; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Teicoplanin

The FDA guidance published in 2013 provided requirements for conducting ABSSSI trials. In 2014, dalbavancin, oritavancin, and tedizolid were introduced into the market after phase III noninferiority clinical trials against vancomycin (for the lipoglycopeptides) and linezolid (for tedizolid), demonstrating clinical efficacy for the treatment of ABSSSI. Great interest exists for these agents because of the postulated financial impact. Due to favorable pharmacokinetics which allow for less frequent medication administration and shorter treatment durations, these agents may prove to reduce hospital admissions and length of stay.

Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic; Costs and Cost Analysis; Glycopeptides; Humans; Lipoglycopeptides; Organophosphates; Oxazoles; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Teicoplanin; Treatment Outcome

To evaluate the in vitro antimicrobial activities of tedizolid, linezolid and other comparators against clinically significant Gram-positive cocci isolates from hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP), skin and soft tissue infection (SSTI) and bloodstream infection (BSI), 2140 nonduplicate isolates (23.7 % isolated from HAP, 46.8 % from SSTI and 29.5 % from BSI) were consecutively collected in 26 hospitals in 17 cities across China during 2014. These pathogens included 632 methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, 867 methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcusaureus, 299 coagulase-negative Staphylococcus (CoNS), 104 Enterococcus faecalis, 99 Enterococcusfaecium, 13 Streptococcus pneumoniae, 23 α-haemolytic Streptococcus and 103 β-haemolytic Streptococcus. MICs of routine clinical antibiotics were determined by broth microdilution method according to the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute guidelines 2015. Tedizolid, linezolid, vancomycin, daptomycin, teicoplanin and tigecycline showed high in vitro activity against Gram-positive pathogens (≥98.0 % susceptible), and tedizolid exhibited four- to eight fold greater activity than linezolid against the pathogens tested, with MIC90s of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, α-haemolytic Streptococcus and β-haemolytic Streptococcus (0.25 vs 2 µg ml-1); methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcu saureus, E. faecalis and E. faecium (0.5 vs 2 µg ml-1); methicillin-resistant CoNS and methicillin-sensitive CoNS (0.25 vs 1 µg ml-1); and Streptococcuspneumoniae (0.125 vs 0.5 µg ml-1). Tedizolid MIC90s associated with different infections did not show significant differences, and the drug exhibited excellent activity against surveyed Gram-positive pathogens associated with HAP, SSTI and BSI, including linezolid-nonsusceptible strains. These data suggest that tedizolid could be an alternative to linezolid for the treatment of infections caused by Gram-positive organisms.

Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; China; Cross Infection; Gram-Positive Bacteria; Gram-Positive Bacterial Infections; Hospitals; Humans; Microbial Sensitivity Tests; Organophosphates; Oxazoles; Pneumonia, Bacterial; Sepsis; Skin Diseases, Bacterial; Soft Tissue Infections

Topics: Acetamides; Anti-Bacterial Agents; Female; Humans; Linezolid; Male; Organophosphates; Oxazoles; Oxazolidinones; Skin Diseases, Bacterial

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

Topics: Anti-Infective Agents; Female; Humans; Male; Organophosphates; Oxazoles; Skin Diseases, Bacterial