Explore the vast range of titles available.

In this trial involving patients with atherosclerotic disease who were receiving effective statin therapy, those who were assigned to receive anacetrapib, a CETP inhibitor, had a lower risk of major coronary events than did those in the placebo group.

Linezolid plays a crucial role in the first-line treatment of drug-resistant tuberculosis globally. Its prolonged use can lead to neurological and haematological toxicity, highlighting the need for safer oxazolidinones. Delpazolid, a novel oxazolidinone, might be safer. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of delpazolid and identify an optimal dose. PanACEA-DECODE-01 was a prospective, randomised, open-label, phase 2b, multicentre, dose-finding trial done in five tuberculosis trial sites in Tanzania and South Africa. Adults aged 18–65 years, who weighed 40–90 kg, and had newly diagnosed, smear positive pulmonary tuberculosis were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1:1) through centralised allocation, using a probabilistic minimisation algorithm to receive no delpazolid (D0), delpazolid 400 mg once daily (D400), delpazolid 800 mg once daily (D800), delpazolid 1200 mg once daily (D1200), or delpazolid 800 mg twice daily (D800BD), all administered orally for 16 weeks with follow-up to week 52. All participants received bedaquiline (400 mg orally once daily for the first 14 days, then 200 mg orally thrice weekly), delamanid (100 mg orally twice daily), and moxifloxacin (400 mg orally once daily). Randomisation was stratified based on bacterial load in sputum as measured by GeneXpert cycle threshold (<16 vs ≥16), site, and HIV status. The primary efficacy objective was to establish an exposure–response model with the primary endpoint, measured in the modified intention-to-treat population, of change in mycobacterial load measured by time to positivity using the liquid culture mycobacterial growth indicator tube system. A secondary outcome was the time on treatment to sustained conversion to negative sputum culture in liquid media. The primary safety outcome was the occurrence of oxazolidinone class toxicities defined as peripheral or optical neuropathy, incident leukopenia, anaemia or thrombocytopenia, or adverse events in line with tyramine pressor response, all of grade 2 or higher, possibly, probably or definitely related to delpazolid. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04550832. Between Oct 28, 2021, and Aug 31, 2022, 156 individuals were screened for eligibility, 76 of whom were enrolled and randomly assigned to D0 (n=15), D400 (n=15), D800 (n=15), D1200 (n=16), or D800BD (n=15). 60 (79%) of 76 participants were male and 16 (21%) were female. Population pharmacokinetic–pharmacodynamic modelling suggests maximal microbiological activity at a daily total exposure of delpazolid (area under the concentration curve from 0 h to 24 h [AUC0–24]) of 50 mg/L per h; close to the median exposure observed after a 1200 mg dose. This maximal effect was estimated at a 38% (95% CI 4–83; p=0·025) faster decline in bacterial load compared with no delpazolid. In the secondary time-to-event analysis, there was no significant difference in time to culture conversion between treatment arms or exposure tertile. When all delpazolid-containing groups were combined, the hazard ratio for the time to sustained culture conversion to negative, comparing all delpazolid-containing groups with the group without delpazolid was 1·53 (95% CI 0·84–2·76). Two drug-related serious adverse events (one gastritis and one anaemia) occurred in the D800BD group, with high individual AUC0–24. Apart from the anaemia and one event of brief, moderate neutropenia observed at only one visit in the D800 group not in line with the characteristics of oxazolidinone class toxicity, no oxazolidinone class toxicities occurred. The pharmacokinetic–pharmacodynamic modelling results suggest that delpazolid adds efficacy on top of bedaquiline, delamanid, and moxifloxacin; and that a dose of 1200 mg once daily would result in exposures with maximum efficacy. That dose was shown to be safe, raising hope that linezolid toxicities could be averted in long-term treatment. Delpazolid is a promising drug for future tuberculosis treatment regimens and could be widely usable if safety and efficacy are confirmed in larger trials. LigaChem Biosciences, EDCTP2 programme supported by the EU; German Ministry for Education and Research; German Center for Infection Research; Swiss State Secretariat for Education, Research and Innovation; and Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek.

There are limited therapeutic options for extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis. In this study from South Korea, linezolid was shown to have some activity in treating resistant tuberculosis; however, its use was associated with clinically significant toxicity. Linezolid (Zyvox, Pfizer) was approved in 2000 for drug-resistant, gram-positive bacterial infections. 1 A member of the oxazolidinone antibiotic class, linezolid inhibits protein synthesis by binding the 23S ribosomal RNA (rRNA) portion of the bacterial 50S ribosomal subunit. 2 In adults, linezolid is administered at a dose of 600 mg twice daily, with phase 3 and postmarketing trials showing an acceptable side-effect and adverse-event profile during the FDA-approved 28 days of therapy. 3 Data on longer-term use are limited, but serious neuropathies (e.g., peripheral and optic neuropathies), myelosuppression, and hyperlactatemia have been observed 4 , 5 and are considered to be related to the inhibition . . .

Linezolid is a key component globally in first-line therapy for drug-resistant tuberculosis but has considerable toxicity. New and safer alternative oxazolidinones are needed. Sutezolid is one such promising alternative. We aimed to evaluate preliminary efficacy and safety of sutezolid and to identify an optimal dose. PanACEA-SUDOCU-01 was a prospective, open-label, randomised, phase 2b dose-finding study in four tuberculosis trial sites in Tanzania and South Africa. Adults aged 18–65 years with newly diagnosed, drug-sensitive, smear-positive tuberculosis were enrolled and randomly assigned (1:1:1:1:1) by a probabilistic minimisation algorithm using a web-based interface, stratified by site, sex, and HIV status, to receive no sutezolid (U0), sutezolid 600 mg once daily (U600), sutezolid 1200 mg once daily (U1200), sutezolid 600 mg twice daily (U600BD), or sutezolid 800 mg twice daily (U800BD), all administered orally for 12 weeks followed by standard therapy for 6 months. All participants received oral bedaquiline (400 mg once daily for 14 days followed by 200 mg thrice weekly), oral delamanid (100 mg twice daily), and oral moxifloxacin (400 mg once daily). For the primary endpoint, measured in the modified intention-to-treat population, sputum samples were taken weekly to measure the change in bacterial load measured by time to positivity using the mycobacterial growth indicator tube system. Safety was assessed through weekly electrocardiography, safety blood tests, vision testing, and physical and neurological examinations. Intensive pharmacokinetic measurements were done on day 14 to determine exposure to sutezolid, bedaquiline, delamanid, and moxifloxacin. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03959566). Between May 20, 2021, and Feb 17, 2022, 186 individuals were screened for eligibility, 75 of whom were enrolled and randomly assigned to U0 (n=16), U600 (n=15), U1200 (n=14), U600BD (n=15), or U800BD (n=15). 56 (75%) participants were male and 19 (25%) were female. The final pharmacokinetic–pharmacodynamic model showed a benefit of sutezolid, with an increase in time to positivity slope steepness of 16·7% (95% CI 0·7–35·0) at the maximum concentration typical for the 1200 mg dose, compared with no sutezolid exposure. A maximum effect of sutezolid exposure was not observed within the investigated dose range. Six (8%) participants (one in the U600 group, two in the U600BD group, one in the U800BD group, and two retrospectively identified in the U600 group) had an increase in a QT interval using Fridericia correction greater than 60 ms from baseline. Two (3%) participants in the U600BD group had grade 4 adverse events, one each of neutropenia and hepatotoxicity, but they were not deemed associated with the use of sutezolid by the investigators. No neuropathy was reported. Sutezolid, combined with bedaquiline, delamanid, and moxifloxacin, was shown to be efficacious and added activity to the background drug combination, although we cannot make a final dose recommendation yet. This study provides valuable information for the selection of sutezolid doses for future studies, and described no oxazolidinone class toxicities at the doses used. EDCTP2 programme funded by the EU; German Ministry for Education and Research; German Center for Infection Research; and Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek.

Background. Post hoc analyses of clinical trial data suggested that linezolid may be more effective than vancomycin for treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) nosocomial pneumonia. This study prospectively assessed efficacy and safety of linezolid, compared with a dose-optimized vancomycin regimen, for treatment of MRSA nosocomial pneumonia. Methods. This was a prospective, double-blind, controlled, multicenter trial involving hospitalized adult patients with hospital-acquired or healthcare—associated MRSA pneumonia. Patients were randomized to receive intravenous linezolid (600 mg every 12 hours) or vancomycin (15 mg/kg every 12 hours) for 7-14 days. Vancomycin dose was adjusted on the basis of trough levels. The primary end point was clinical outcome at end of study (EOS) in evaluable per-protocol (PP) patients. Prespecified secondary end points included response in the modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population at end of treatment (EOT) and EOS and microbiologic response in the PP and mITT populations at EOT and EOS. Survival and safety were also evaluated. Results. Of 1184 patients treated, 448 (linezolid, n = 224; vancomycin, n = 224) were included in the mITT and 348 (linezolid, n = 172; vancomycin, n = 176) in the PP population. In the PP population, 95 (57.6%) of 165 linezolid-treated patients and 81 (46.6%) of 174 vancomycin-treated patients achieved clinical success at EOS (95% confidence interval for difference, 0.5%-21.6%; P = .042). All-cause 60-day mortality was similar (linezolid, 15.7%; vancomycin, 17.0%), as was incidence of adverse events. Nephrotoxicity occurred more frequently with vancomycin (18.2%; linezolid, 8.4%). Conclusions. For the treatment of MRSA nosocomial pneumonia, clinical response at EOS in the PP population was significantly higher with linezolid than with vancomycin, although 60-day mortality was similar.

Sutezolid (PNU-100480) is a linezolid analog with superior bactericidal activity against Mycobacterium tuberculosis in the hollow fiber, whole blood and mouse models. Like linezolid, it is unaffected by mutations conferring resistance to standard TB drugs. This study of sutezolid is its first in tuberculosis patients. Sputum smear positive tuberculosis patients were randomly assigned to sutezolid 600 mg BID (N = 25) or 1200 mg QD (N = 25), or standard 4-drug therapy (N = 9) for the first 14 days of treatment. Effects on mycobacterial burden in sputum (early bactericidal activity or EBA) were monitored as colony counts on agar and time to positivity in automated liquid culture. Bactericidal activity was also measured in ex vivo whole blood cultures (whole blood bactericidal activity or WBA) inoculated with M. tuberculosis H37Rv. All patients completed assigned treatments and began subsequent standard TB treatment according to protocol. The 90% confidence intervals (CI) for bactericidal activity in sputum over the 14 day interval excluded zero for all treatments and both monitoring methods, as did those for cumulative WBA. There were no treatment-related serious adverse events, premature discontinuations, or dose reductions due to laboratory abnormalities. There was no effect on the QT interval. Seven sutezolid-treated patients (14%) had transient, asymptomatic ALT elevations to 173±34 U/L on day 14 that subsequently normalized promptly; none met Hy's criteria for serious liver injury. The mycobactericidal activity of sutezolid 600 mg BID or 1200 mg QD was readily detected in sputum and blood. Both schedules were generally safe and well tolerated. Further studies of sutezolid in tuberculosis treatment are warranted. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01225640.

In this trial, anacetrapib, a cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitor, was shown to reduce LDL cholesterol by 40% in patients receiving maximal statin therapy and to increase HDL cholesterol by 138%, as compared with placebo. Elevated low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol and reduced high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol are major risk factors for the development of cardiovascular disease. Lowering LDL cholesterol with 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl-coenzyme A reductase inhibitors (statins) reduces the risk of cardiovascular events in patients with coronary heart disease, as well as in those without coronary heart disease. 1 In many patients, however, a high residual risk of cardiovascular events persists despite aggressive statin therapy to lower LDL cholesterol, especially when other lipid abnormalities, such as low HDL cholesterol, persist after statin therapy. 2 – 4 Accordingly, targeting additional lipid risk factors is an approach that is currently recommended to . . .

Background. Ceftobiprole, the active moiety of ceftobiprole medocaril, is a novel broad-spectrum cephalosporin, with bactericidal activity against a wide range of gram-positive bacteria, including Staphylococcus aureus (including methicillin-resistant strains) and penicillin- and ceftriaxone-resistant pneumococci, and gram-negative bacteria, including Enterobacteriaceae and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Methods. This was a double-blind, randomized, multicenter study of 781 patients with hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP), including 210 with ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP). Treatment was intravenous ceftobiprole 500 mg every 8 hours, or ceftazidime 2 g every 8 hours plus linezolid 600 mg every 12 hours; primary outcome was clinical cure at the test-of-cure visit. Results. Overall cure rates for ceftobiprole vs ceftazidime/linezolid were 49.9% vs 52.8% (intent-to-treat [ITT], 95% confidence interval [CI] for the difference, -10.0 to 4.1) and 69.3% vs 71.3% (clinically evaluable [CE], 95% CI, -10.0 to 6.1). Cure rates in HAP (excluding VAP) patients were 59.6% vs 58.8% (ITT, 95% CI, -7.3 to 8.8), and 77.8% vs 76.2% (CE, 95% CI, -6.9 to 10.0). Cure rates in VAP patients were 23.1% vs 36.8% (ITT, 95% CI, -26.0 to -1.5) and 37.7% vs 55.9% (CE, 95% CI, -36.4 to 0). Microbiological eradication rates in HAP (excluding VAP) patients were, respectively, 62.9% vs 67.5% (microbiologically evaluable [ME], 95% CI, -16.7 to 7.6), and in VAP patients 30.4% vs 50.0% (ME, 95% CI, -38.8 to -0.4). Treatment-related adverse events were comparable for ceftobiprole (24.9%) and ceftazidime/linezolid (25.4%). Conclusions. Ceftobiprole is a safe and effective bactericidal antibiotic for the empiric treatment of HAP (excluding VAP). Further investigations are needed before recommending the use of ceftobiprole in VAP patients. Clinical Trials Registration. NCT00210964, NCT00229008.

Present guidelines emphasise the importance of low concentrations of LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) in patients with familial hypercholesterolaemia. In most patients with the disease, however, these concentrations are not achieved with present treatments, so additional treatment is therefore warranted. Inhibition of cholesteryl ester transfer protein has been shown to reduce LDL-C concentrations in addition to regular statin treatment in patients with hypercholesterolaemia or at high risk of cardiovascular disease. We aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of anacetrapib, a cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitor, in patients with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia. In this multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study, patients aged 18–80 years with a genotype-confirmed or clinical diagnosis of heterozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia, on optimum lipid-lowering treatment for at least 6 weeks, and with an LDL-C concentration of 2·59 mmol/L or higher without cardiovascular disease or 1·81 mmol/L or higher with cardiovascular disease from 26 lipid clinics across nine countries were eligible. We randomly allocated participants with a computer-generated allocation schedule (2:1; block size of six; no stratification) to oral anacetrapib 100 mg or placebo for 52 weeks, with a 12 week post-treatment follow-up afterwards. We masked patients, care providers, and those assessing outcomes to treatment groups throughout the study. The primary outcome was percentage change from baseline in LDL-C concentration. We did analysis using a constrained longitudinal repeated measures model. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01524289. Between Feb 10, 2012, and Feb 12, 2014, we randomly allocated 204 patients to anacetrapib and 102 to placebo. One patient in the anacetrapib group did not receive the drug. At week 52, anacetrapib reduced mean LDL-C concentration from 3·3 mmol/L (SD 0·8) to 2·1 mmol/L (0·8; percentage change 36·0% [95% CI −39·5 to −32·5] compared with an increase with placebo from 3·4 mmol/L (1·2) to 3·5 mmol/L (1·6; percentage change 3·7% [–1·2 to 8·6], with a difference in percentage change between anacetrapib and placebo of −39·7% (95% CI −45·7 to −33·7; p<0·0001). The number of cardiovascular events was increased in patients given anacetrapib compared with those given placebo (4 [2%] of 203 vs none [0%] of 102; p=0·1544), but the proportion with adverse events leading to discontinuation was similar (12 [6%] of 203 vs five [5%] of 102). In patients with heterozygous familial hypercholesterolaemia, treatment with anacetrapib for 1 year was well tolerated and resulted in substantial reductions in LDL-C concentration. Whether this change leads to a reduction of cardiovascular events will be answered in an outcome study. Merck & Co, Inc

Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) probably has a role in migraine pathophysiology, and antagonism of its receptors might provide treatment without the vasoconstrictor effects of triptans. We aimed to assess the clinical profile of MK-0974 (telcagepant), an orally bioavailable antagonist of CGRP receptor. In a randomised, parallel-treatment, placebo-controlled, double-blind, trial at 81 sites in the Europe and the USA, adults with migraine diagnosed by International Headache Society criteria treated moderate or severe attacks with either oral telcagepant 150 mg or 300 mg, zolmitriptan 5 mg, or placebo. The five co-primary endpoints were pain freedom, pain relief, or absence of photophobia, phonophobia, or nausea at 2 h after treatment. Analysis was by the full analysis set and multiplicity was controlled for with a step-down closed-testing procedure. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00442936. 1380 patients were randomly assigned to receive telcagepant 150 mg (n=333) or 300 mg (354), zolmitriptan (345), or placebo (348). Telcagepant 300 mg was more effective than placebo for pain freedom (95 [27%] of 353 patients vs 33 [10%] of 343 [p<0·0001]), pain relief (194 [55%] of 353 vs 95 [28%] of 343 [p<0·0001]), and absences of phonophobia (204 [58%] of 353 vs 126 [37%] of 342 [p<0·0001]), photophobia (180 [51%] of 353 vs 99 [29%] of 342 [p<0·0001]), and nausea (229 [65%] of 352 vs 189 [55%] of 342 [p=0·0061]). Efficacy of telcagepant 300 mg and zolmitriptan 5 mg were much the same, and both were more effective than telcagepant 150 mg. Adverse events were recorded for 31% taking telcagepant 150 mg, 37% taking telcagepant 300 mg, 51% taking zolmitriptan 5 mg, and 32% taking placebo. Telcagepant 300 mg is effective as an acute treatment for migraine with efficacy comparable to that of zolmitriptan 5 mg, but with fewer associated adverse effects. Merck Research Laboratories.