Explore the vast range of titles available.

Oral and intravenous (IV) omadacycline formulations are approved in the United States for treating acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections and community-acquired bacterial pneumonia in adults. Oral omadacycline bioavailability is 34.5%; similar exposures are obtained following 300 mg oral and 100 mg IV doses. Oral administration should be in a fasted state, with dairy products, antacids, or multivitamins avoided for ≥4 hours after dosing. Low protein binding (21%), large volume of distribution (190 L), low systemic clearance (10 L/hour), and long elimination half-life (16–17 hours) support once-daily dosing. Omadacycline is excreted unchanged in feces (81.1%) and urine (14.4%), with low potential for drug–drug interactions. Dose adjustments are unnecessary for age, sex, and renal or hepatic impairment. Pharmacokinetic–pharmacodynamic studies identify fAUC0–24/MIC ratio as the parameter that correlates with in vivo efficacy. Systemic exposure of omadacycline in epithelial lining fluid is greater than/equal to plasma concentrations in healthy adults.

Background. Data suggest that higher doses of vancomycin can increase the risk of nephrotoxicity. No study has been undertaken to determine the pharmacodynamic index (ie, the area under the curve [AUC] or the trough value) that best describes the relationship between vancomycin exposure and onset of nephrotoxicity. Methods. A retrospective study was conducted among patients who received vancomycin for a suspected or proven gram-positive infection during the period from 1 January 2005 through 31 December 2006 at Albany Medical Center Hospital. Patients were included in our study if they (1) were ⩾18 years old, (2) had an absolute neutrophil count of ⩾1000 cells/mm3, (3) received vancomycin for >48 h, (4) had ⩾1 vancomycin trough level collected within 96 h of vancomycin therapy, and (5) had a baseline serum creatinine level of <2.0 mg/dL. Patients were excluded if they (1) had a diagnosis of cystic fibrosis, (2) received intravenous contrast dye within 7 days of starting vancomycin or during therapy, or (3) required vasopressor support during therapy. Demographics, comorbid conditions, and treatment data were collected. The highest observed vancomycin trough value within 96 h of initiation of vancomycin therapy and the estimated vancomycin AUC were analyzed as measures of vancomycin exposure. The vancomycin AUC value from 0 to 24 h at steady state (in units of mg × h/L) for each patient was estimated by use of the maximum a posteriori probability Bayesian procedure in ADAPT II. Nephrotoxicity was defined as an increase in serum creatinine level of 0.5 mg/dL or 50%, whichever was greater, following initiation of vancomycin therapy. Logistic and Cox proportional hazards regression models identified the vancomycin pharmacodynamic index that best describes the relationship between vancomycin exposure and toxicity. Results. During the study period, 166 patients met the inclusion criteria. Both initial vancomycin trough values and 0–24-h at steady state AUC values were associated with nephrotoxicity in the bivariate analyses. However, the vancomycin trough value, modeled as a continuous variable, was the only vancomycin exposure variable associated with nephrotoxicity in the multivariate analyses. Conclusions. The results indicate that a vancomycin exposure-toxicity response relationship exists. The vancomycin trough value is the pharmacodynamic index that best describes this association.

Abstract Background Infections caused by antibiotic-resistant bacteria, including carbapenem-resistant Enterobacteriaceae, have increased in frequency, resulting in significant patient morbidity and mortality. The Infectious Diseases Society of America continues to propose legislative, regulatory, and funding solutions to address this escalating crisis. This report updates the status of development and approval of systemic antibiotics in the United States as of late 2018. Methods We performed a review of the published literature and on-line clinical trials registry at www.clinicaltrials.gov to identify new systemically acting orally and/or intravenously administered antibiotic drug candidates in the development pipeline, as well as agents approved by the US Food and Drug Administration since 2012. Results Since our 2013 pipeline status report, the number of new antibiotics annually approved for marketing in the United States has reversed its previous decline, likely influenced by new financial incentives and increased regulatory flexibility. Although our survey demonstrates progress in development of new antibacterial drugs that target infections caused by resistant bacterial pathogens, the majority of recently approved agents have been modifications of existing chemical classes of antibiotics, rather than new chemical classes. Furthermore, larger pharmaceutical companies continue to abandon the field, and smaller companies face financial difficulties as a consequence. Conclusions Unfortunately, if 20 × ’20 is achieved due to efforts embarked upon in decades past, it could mark the apex of antibiotic drug development for years to come. Without increased regulatory, governmental, industry, and scientific support and collaboration, durable solutions to the clinical, regulatory, and economic problems posed by bacterial multidrug resistance will not be found.

Evidence-based guidelines for managing patients with intra-abdominal infection were prepared by an Expert Panel of the Surgical Infection Society and the Infectious Diseases Society of America. These updated guidelines replace those previously published in 2002 and 2003. The guidelines are intended for treating patients who either have these infections or may be at risk for them. New information, based on publications from the period 2003–2008, is incorporated into this guideline document. The panel has also added recommendations for managing intra-abdominal infection in children, particularly where such management differs from that of adults; for appendicitis in patients of all ages; and for necrotizing enterocolitis in neonates.

A comprehensive review of drug penetration into pulmonary epithelial lining fluid (ELF) was previously published in 2011. Since then, an extensive number of studies comparing plasma and ELF concentrations of antibacterial agents have been published and are summarized in this review. The majority of the studies included in this review determined ELF concentrations of antibacterial agents using bronchoscopy and bronchoalveolar lavage, and this review focuses on intrapulmonary penetration ratios determined with area under the concentration-time curve from healthy human adult studies or pharmacokinetic modeling of various antibacterial agents. If available, pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic parameters determined from preclinical murine infection models that evaluated ELF concentrations are also provided. There are also a limited number of recently published investigations of intrapulmonary penetration in critically ill patients with lower respiratory tract infections, where greater variability in ELF concentrations may exist. The significance of these changes may impact the intrapulmonary penetration in the setting of infection, and further studies relating ELF concentrations to clinical response are needed. Phase I drug development programs now include assessment of initial pharmacodynamic target values for pertinent organisms in animal models, followed by evaluation of antibacterial penetration into the human lung to assist in dosage selection for clinical trials in infected patients. The recent focus has been on β-lactam agents, including those in combination with β-lactamase inhibitors, particularly due to the rise of multidrug-resistant infections. This manifests as a large portion of the review focusing on cephalosporins and carbapenems, with or without β-lactamase inhibitors, in both healthy adult subjects and critically ill patients with lower respiratory tract infections. Further studies are warranted in critically ill patients with lower respiratory tract infections to evaluate the relationship between intrapulmonary penetration and clinical and microbiological outcomes. Our clinical research experience with these studies, along with this literature review, has allowed us to outline key steps in developing and evaluating dosage regimens to treat extracellular bacteria in lower respiratory tract infections.

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) continues to be associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Vancomycin was the \"gold standard\" of treatment for serious MRSA infections; however, the emergence of less-susceptible strains, poor clinical outcomes, and increased nephrotoxicity with high-dose therapy are challenging its current role as first-line therapy. Linezolid is recommended for PO or IV treatment of skin and skin structure infections (SSSIs) and pneumonia caused by MRSA. Daptomycin (IV) should be considered in patients with MRSA bacteremia and right-sided endocarditis as well as in complicated SSSIs, but should not be used to treat MRSA pneumonia. Tigecycline and telavancin are alternative (IV) treatments for SSSIs caused by MRSA; however, safety concerns have limited use of these agents. Ceftaroline is the newest of the approved parenteral agents for SSSIs caused by MRSA. Several investigational agents with activity against drug-resistant gram-positive pathogens are being developed primarily for treatment of MRSA infections, including tedizolid, dalbavancin, and oritavancin.

Antibiotic renal dose adjustments are determined in patients with stable chronic kidney disease and may not translate to patients in late-phase trials and practice. Ceftolozane/tazobactam, ceftazidime/avibactam, and telavancin all carry precautionary statements for reduced clinical response in patients with baseline creatinine clearance of 30–50 mL/min, potentially due to unnecessary dose reduction in the setting of acute kidney injury (AKI). In this review, we discuss the regulatory landscape for antibiotics eliminated by the kidney and highlight the importance of the first 48 hours of therapy. Using a clinical database, we identified AKI on admission in a substantial proportion of patients with pneumonia (27.1%), intraabdominal (19.5%), urinary tract (20.0%), or skin and skin structure infections (9.7%) that resolved by 48 hours in 57.2% of cases. We suggest that deferred renal dose reduction of wide therapeutic index antibiotics could improve outcomes in patients with infectious diseases.

The exposure-response relationship of anti-infective agents at the site of infection is currently being re-examined. Epithelial lining fluid (ELF) has been suggested as the site (compartment) of antimicrobial activity against lung infections caused by extracellular pathogens. There have been an extensive number of studies conducted during the past 20 years to determine drug penetration into ELF and to compare plasma and ELF concentrations of anti-infective agents. The majority of these studies estimated ELF drug concentrations by the method of urea dilution and involved either healthy adult subjects or patients undergoing diagnostic bronchoscopy. Antibacterial agents such as macrolides, ketolides, newer fluoroquinolones and oxazolidinones have ELF to plasma concentration ratios of >1. In comparison, β-lactams, aminoglycosides and glycopeptides have ELF to plasma concentration ratios of ≤1. Potential explanations (e.g. drug transporters, overestimation of the ELF volume, lysis of cells) for why these differences in ELF penetration occur among antibacterial classes need further investigation. The relationship between ELF concentrations and clinical outcomes has been under-studied. In vitro pharmacodynamic models, using simulated ELF and plasma concentrations, have been used to examine the eradication rates of resistant and susceptible pathogens and to explain why selected anti-infective agents (e.g. those with ELF to plasma concentration ratios of >1) are less likely to be associated with clinical treatment failures. Population pharmacokinetic modelling and Monte Carlo simulations have recently been used and permit ELF and plasma concentrations to be evaluated with regard to achievement of target attainment rates. These mathematical modelling techniques have also allowed further examination of drug doses and differences in the time courses of ELF and plasma concentrations as potential explanations for clinical and microbiological effects seen in clinical trials. Further studies are warranted in patients with lower respiratory tract infections to confirm and explore the relationships between ELF concentrations, clinical and microbiological outcomes, and pharmacodynamic parameters.

Omadacycline is a novel aminomethylcycline antibiotic (antibacterial). Omadacycline has had chemical structure modifications at the C9 and C7 positions of the core tetracycline rings that allow stability in the efflux pump and ribosomal protection protein mechanisms of tetracycline resistance. The systemic exposure (i.e., maximum plasma concentrations [ C max ] and area under the plasma concentration–time curve [AUC]) after intravenous (IV) administration were linear and predictable over the dose range of 25 and 600 mg in healthy subjects. The oral bioavailability of omadacycline was 34.5% under fasted conditions (no food intake 6 h before and 4 h after dosing). Both AUC and C max values significantly decreased (41–61%) when a high-fat meal, with and without dairy, were administered 2 h before oral dosing of omadacycline. Similar to other tetracyclines, it is advisable to avoid concurrent administration of divalent- or trivalent cation-containing products (e.g., antacids and iron-containing preparations) for at least 4 h after oral administration of omadacycline. Omadacycline has a large volume of distribution (190 L) and low plasma protein binding (21.3%) that was concentration independent. Systemic exposure of omadacycline in epithelial lining fluid (ELF) and alveolar macrophages was greater than in plasma in healthy adult subjects. Omadacycline is excreted unchanged in the feces (81.1%) and urine (14.4%), and has a low potential for drug–drug interactions since it was not a substrate, inhibitor, or inducer of major cytochrome-metabolizing enzymes or organic anion transporters (OATs). No clinically significant differences in the pharmacokinetics of omadacycline have been observed for age, sex, and renal or hepatic impairment. Pharmacokinetic–pharmacodynamic studies have confirmed that the AUC from time zero to 24 h (AUC 24 )/minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) ratio was the best index for correlating unbound plasma and total-drug ELF concentrations with the efficacy of omadacycline. A population pharmacokinetic model was developed with data from healthy subjects and infected patients and used to establish interpretive criteria for in vitro susceptibility testing and dosing regimens of omadacycline for treating acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections and community-acquired bacterial pneumonia.

Telavancin (TD-6424) was discovered in 2000 and became the first marketed semisynthetic lipoglycopeptide in 2009. This parenteral antibacterial agent has a dual mechanism of action and potent in vitro activity against gram-positive pathogens, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and isolates with reduced vancomycin susceptibility. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analyses support the concentration-dependent activity and once-daily dosing regimen of telavancin. A changing regulatory approval process, manufacturing obstacles, and the termination of a commercialization partnership have challenged the development and marketing of telavancin. The commercial operations for telavancin have been restored, a new manufacturer has been secured, and reliable product supplies are available for clinical use. In addition, telavancin continues to be supported by ongoing clinical research with the recent launch of the Telavancin Observational Use Registry (TOUR; NCT02288234) in the United States and an international phase 3, randomized trial comparing telavancin with standard therapy for the treatment of patients with complicated S. aureus bacteremia, including endocarditis (NCT02208063).