Literature DB >> 22908151

A randomized, evaluator-blind, phase 2 study comparing the safety and efficacy of omadacycline to those of linezolid for treatment of complicated skin and skin structure infections.

Gary J Noel1, Michael P Draper, Howard Hait, S Ken Tanaka, Robert D Arbeit.   

Abstract

A randomized, investigator-blind, multicenter phase 2 trial involving patients with complicated skin and skin structure infections (cSSSI) compared the safety and efficacy of omadacycline, a broad-spectrum agent with activity against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), to those of linezolid (with or without aztreonam). Patients were randomized 1:1 to omadacycline (100 mg intravenously [i.v.] once a day [QD] with an option to transition to 200 mg orally QD) or linezolid (600 mg i.v. twice daily [BID] with an option to transition to 600 mg orally BID) at 11 U.S. sites. Patients suspected or documented to have infections caused by Gram-negative bacteria were given aztreonam (2 g i.v. every 12 h [q12h]) if randomized to linezolid or matching placebo infusions if randomized to omadacycline. Adverse events were reported in 46 (41.4%) omadacycline-treated and 55 (50.9%) linezolid-treated patients. Adverse events related to treatment were assessed by investigators in 24 (21.6%) omadacycline-treated and 33 (30.6%) linezolid-treated patients. The gastrointestinal tract was most commonly involved, with adverse events reported in 21 (18.9%) patients exposed to omadacycline and 20 (18.5%) exposed to linezolid. Rates of successful clinical response in the intent-to-treat (ITT) and clinical evaluable (CE) populations favored omadacycline (ITT, 88.3% versus 75.9%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.9 to 22.9; CE, 98.0% versus 93.2%; 95% CI, -1.7 to 11.3). For microbiologically evaluable (ME) patients with S. aureus infections, the clinical success rates were 97.2% (70/72) in omadacycline-treated and 92.7% (51/55) in linezolid-treated patients. This phase 2 experience supports conclusions that omadacycline is well tolerated in cSSSI patients and that this aminomethylcycline has potential to be an effective treatment for serious skin infections.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22908151      PMCID: PMC3486554          DOI: 10.1128/AAC.00948-12

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother        ISSN: 0066-4804            Impact factor:   5.191


  1 in total

1.  Emergence of community-acquired methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus USA 300 clone as the predominant cause of skin and soft-tissue infections.

Authors:  Mark D King; Bianca J Humphrey; Yun F Wang; Ekaterina V Kourbatova; Susan M Ray; Henry M Blumberg
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2006-03-07       Impact factor: 25.391

  1 in total
  28 in total

1.  Structural characterization of an alternative mode of tigecycline binding to the bacterial ribosome.

Authors:  Andreas Schedlbauer; Tatsuya Kaminishi; Borja Ochoa-Lizarralde; Neha Dhimole; Shu Zhou; Jorge P López-Alonso; Sean R Connell; Paola Fucini
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2015-03-09       Impact factor: 5.191

2.  Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis To Estimate Antibacterial Treatment Effect in Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infection.

Authors:  Jordan E Cates; Fanny S Mitrani-Gold; Gang Li; Linda M Mundy
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2015-05-18       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 3.  Omadacycline.

Authors:  Danial E Baker
Journal:  Hosp Pharm       Date:  2019-01-22

Review 4.  Once-Daily Treatments for Methicillin-Susceptible Staphylococcus aureus Bacteremia: Are They Good Enough?

Authors:  Sylvain A Lother; Natasha Press
Journal:  Curr Infect Dis Rep       Date:  2017-09-23       Impact factor: 3.725

5.  Comparative In Vitro Activity of Omadacycline against Dog and Cat Bite Wound Isolates.

Authors:  Ellie J C Goldstein; Diane M Citron; Kerin L Tyrrell; Eliza Leoncio; C Vreni Merriam
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2018-03-27       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 6.  Tetracycline Antibiotics and Resistance.

Authors:  Trudy H Grossman
Journal:  Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med       Date:  2016-04-01       Impact factor: 6.915

7.  Activities of Omadacycline and Comparator Agents against Staphylococcus aureus Isolates from a Surveillance Program Conducted in North America and Europe.

Authors:  Michael A Pfaller; Paul R Rhomberg; Michael D Huband; Robert K Flamm
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2017-02-23       Impact factor: 5.191

8.  Surveillance of Omadacycline Activity against Clinical Isolates from a Global Collection (North America, Europe, Latin America, Asia-Western Pacific), 2010-2011.

Authors:  Michael A Pfaller; Michael D Huband; Paul R Rhomberg; Robert K Flamm
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2017-04-24       Impact factor: 5.191

9.  In vitro and in vivo antibacterial activities of omadacycline, a novel aminomethylcycline.

Authors:  A B Macone; B K Caruso; R G Leahy; J Donatelli; S Weir; M P Draper; S K Tanaka; S B Levy
Journal:  Antimicrob Agents Chemother       Date:  2013-12-02       Impact factor: 5.191

Review 10.  Omadacycline: A Novel Oral and Intravenous Aminomethylcycline Antibiotic Agent.

Authors:  George G Zhanel; Jenine Esquivel; Sheryl Zelenitsky; Courtney K Lawrence; Heather J Adam; Alyssa Golden; Rachel Hink; Liam Berry; Frank Schweizer; Michael A Zhanel; Denice Bay; Philippe R S Lagacé-Wiens; Andrew J Walkty; Joseph P Lynch; James A Karlowsky
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2020-02       Impact factor: 9.546

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.