Literature DB >> 18572975

Ceftobiprole: a review of a broad-spectrum and anti-MRSA cephalosporin.

George G Zhanel1, Ashley Lam, Frank Schweizer, Kristjan Thomson, Andrew Walkty, Ethan Rubinstein, Alfred S Gin, Daryl J Hoban, Ayman M Noreddin, James A Karlowsky.   

Abstract

Ceftobiprole, an investigational cephalosporin, is currently in phase III clinical development. Ceftobiprole is a broad-spectrum cephalosporin with demonstrated in vitro activity against Gram-positive cocci, including meticillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) and meticillin-resistant S. epidermidis, penicillin-resistant S. pneumoniae, Enterococcus faecalis, Gram-negative bacilli including AmpC-producing Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas aeruginosa, but excluding extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing strains. Like cefotaxime, ceftriaxone, ceftazidime, and cefepime, ceftobiprole demonstrates limited activity against anaerobes such as Bacteroides fragilis and non-fragilis Bacteroides spp. In single-step and serial passage in vitro resistance development studies, ceftobiprole demonstrated a low propensity to select for resistant subpopulations. Ceftobiprole, like cefepime, is a weak inducer and a poor substrate for AmpC beta-lactamases.Ceftobiprole medocaril, the prodrug of ceftobiprole, is converted by plasma esterases to ceftobiprole in <30 minutes. Peak serum concentrations of ceftobiprole observed at the end of a single 30-minute infusion were 35.5 mug/mL for a 500-mg dose and 59.6 mug/mL for a 750-mg dose. The volume of distribution of ceftobiprole is 0.26 L/kg ( approximately 18 L), protein binding is 16%, and its serum half-life is approximately 3.5 hours. Ceftobiprole is renally excreted ( approximately 70% in the active form) and systemic clearance correlates with creatinine clearance, meaning that dosage adjustment is required in patients with renal dysfunction. Ceftobiprole has a modest post-antibiotic effect (PAE) of approximately 0.5 hours for MRSA and a longer PAE of approximately 2 hours for penicillin-resistant pneumococci. Ceftobiprole, when administered intravenously at 500 mg once every 8 hours (2-hour infusion), has a >90% probability of achieving f T(>MIC) (free drug concentration exceeds the minimum inhibitory concentration [MIC]) for 40% and 60%, respectively, of the dosing interval for isolates with ceftobiprole MIC < or =4 and < or =2 mg/L, respectively.Currently, only limited clinical trial data are published for ceftobiprole. In a phase III trial, 784 patients with Gram-positive skin infections were randomized to treatment with either ceftobiprole 500 mg or vancomycin 1 g, each administered twice daily for 7-14 days; 93.3% of patients were clinically cured with ceftobiprole compared with 93.5% receiving vancomycin, and the eradication rate for MRSA infections was 91.8% for ceftobiprole compared with 90% for vancomycin. A phase III, randomized, double-blind, multicenter trial compared ceftobiprole 500 mg every 8 hours with vancomycin 1 g every 12 hours plus ceftazidime 1 g every 8 hours in patients with complicated skin and skin structure infections. Of the 828 patients enrolled, 31% had diabetic foot infections, 30% had abscesses, and 22% had wounds. No difference in clinical cure was reported in the clinically evaluable, intent-to-treat and microbiologically evaluable populations with cure rates of 90.5%, 81.9%, and 90.8%, respectively, in the ceftobiprole-treated patients and 90.2%, 80.8%, and 90.5%, respectively, in the vancomycin plus ceftazidime-treated group. Microbiologic eradication of Gram-positive cocci meticillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) [ceftobiprole 91% vs vancomycin plus ceftazidime 92%] and MRSA (ceftobiprole 87% vs vancomycin plus ceftazidime 80%), as well as Gram-negative bacilli, E. coli (ceftobiprole 89% vs vancomycin plus ceftazidime 92%), and P. aeruginosa (ceftobiprole 87% vs vancomycin plus ceftazidime 100%), was not significantly different between groups. Similar cures rates in the microbiologically evaluable population occurred in both groups for Panton-Valentine leukocidin (PVL)-positive MSSA and PVL-positive MRSA.Currently, ceftobiprole has completed phase III trials for complicated skin and skin structure infections due to MRSA and nosocomial pneumonia due to suspected or proven MRSA; phase III trials are also ongoing in community-acquired pneumonia. Ceftobiprole has so far demonstrated a good safety profile in preliminary studies with similar tolerability to comparators. The broad-spectrum activity of ceftobiprole may allow it to be used as monotherapy in situations where a combination of antibacterials might be required. Further clinical studies are needed to determine the efficacy and safety of ceftobiprole and to define its role in patient care.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18572975     DOI: 10.2165/00128071-200809040-00004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Clin Dermatol        ISSN: 1175-0561            Impact factor:   7.403


  13 in total

1.  Canadian practice guidelines for surgical intra-abdominal infections.

Authors:  Anthony W Chow; Gerald A Evans; Avery B Nathens; Chad G Ball; Glen Hansen; Godfrey Km Harding; Andrew W Kirkpatrick; Karl Weiss; George G Zhanel
Journal:  Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 2.471

Review 2.  Ceftobiprole medocaril: a review of its use in patients with hospital- or community-acquired pneumonia.

Authors:  Yahiya Y Syed
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 9.546

3.  High Rate of Ceftobiprole Resistance among Clinical Methicillin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Isolates from a Hospital in Central Italy.

Authors:  Gianluca Morroni; Andrea Brenciani; Lucia Brescini; Simona Fioriti; Serena Simoni; Antonella Pocognoli; Marina Mingoia; Eleonora Giovanetti; Francesco Barchiesi; Andrea Giacometti; Oscar Cirioni
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2018-11-26       Impact factor: 5.191

4.  Activities of ceftobiprole and other cephalosporins against extracellular and intracellular (THP-1 macrophages and keratinocytes) forms of methicillin-susceptible and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.

Authors:  Sandrine Lemaire; Youri Glupczynski; Valérie Duval; Bernard Joris; Paul M Tulkens; Françoise Van Bambeke
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2009-03-16       Impact factor: 5.191

5.  A phase 3 randomized double-blind comparison of ceftobiprole medocaril versus ceftazidime plus linezolid for the treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia.

Authors:  Samir S Awad; Alejandro H Rodriguez; Yin-Ching Chuang; Zsuszanna Marjanek; Alex J Pareigis; Gilmar Reis; Thomas W L Scheeren; Alejandro S Sánchez; Xin Zhou; Mikaël Saulay; Marc Engelhardt
Journal:  Clin Infect Dis       Date:  2014-04-09       Impact factor: 9.079

6.  Ceftobiprole Activity against Bacteria from Skin and Skin Structure Infections in the United States from 2016 through 2018.

Authors:  Robert K Flamm; Leonard R Duncan; Kamal A Hamed; Jennifer I Smart; Rodrigo E Mendes; Michael A Pfaller
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2020-05-21       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 7.  New antimicrobial strategies in cystic fibrosis.

Authors:  Mireille van Westreenen; Harm A W M Tiddens
Journal:  Paediatr Drugs       Date:  2010-12-01       Impact factor: 3.022

8.  Ceftobiprole Activity against Gram-Positive and -Negative Pathogens Collected from the United States in 2006 and 2016.

Authors:  Michael A Pfaller; Robert K Flamm; Rodrigo E Mendes; Jennifer M Streit; Jennifer I Smart; Kamal A Hamed; Leonard R Duncan; Helio S Sader
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2018-12-21       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 9.  Cephalosporins: A Focus on Side Chains and β-Lactam Cross-Reactivity.

Authors:  Saira B Chaudhry; Michael P Veve; Jamie L Wagner
Journal:  Pharmacy (Basel)       Date:  2019-07-29

Review 10.  Targeting Antibiotic Resistance.

Authors:  Mathieu F Chellat; Luka Raguž; Rainer Riedl
Journal:  Angew Chem Int Ed Engl       Date:  2016-03-22       Impact factor: 15.336

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.