Antimicrobial activity of omadacycline in vitro against bacteria isolated from 2014 to 2017 in China, a multi-center study

A Review of Omadacycline for Potential Utility in the Military Health System for the Treatment of Wound Infections

INTRODUCTION

Combat-related wound infections complicate the recovery of wounded military personnel, contributing to overall morbidity and mortality. Wound infections in combat settings present unique challenges because of the size and depth of the wounds, the need to administer emergency care in the field, and the need for subsequent treatment in military facilities. Given the increase in multidrug-resistant pathogens, a novel, broad-spectrum antibiotic is desired across this continuum of care when the standard of care fails. Omadacycline was FDA-approved in 2018 for treatment of adults with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI), as well as community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP). It is a broad-spectrum antibiotic with activity against gram-positive, gram-negative, and atypical bacterial pathogens, including multidrug-resistant species. Omadacycline can overcome commonly reported tetracycline resistance mechanisms, ribosomal protection proteins, and efflux pumps, and is available in once-daily intravenous or oral formulations. In this review, we discuss the potential role of omadacycline, which is included in the Department of Defense Formulary, in the context of combat wound infections.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature review was undertaken for manuscripts published before July 21, 2023. This included a series of publications found via PubMed and a bibliography made publicly available on the Paratek Pharmaceuticals, Inc. website. Publications presenting primary data published in English on omadacycline in relation to ESKAPEE (Enterococcus faecium, Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Acinetobacter baumannii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Escherichia coli, and Enterobacter species) pathogens and Clostridioides difficile, including in vitro, in vivo, and clinical data were included.

RESULTS

Of 260 identified records, 66 were included for evidence review. Omadacycline has in vitro activity against almost all the ESKAPEE pathogens, apart from P. aeruginosa. Importantly, it has activity against the four most prevalent bacterial pathogens that cause wound infections in the military healthcare system: S. aureus, including methicillin-resistant S. aureus, A. baumannii, K. pneumoniae, and E. coli. In vivo studies in rats have shown that omadacycline is rapidly distributed in most tissues, with the highest tissue-to-blood concentration ratios in bone mineral. The clinical efficacy of omadacycline has been assessed in three separate Phase 3 studies in patients with ABSSSI (OASIS-1 and OASIS-2) and with CABP (OPTIC). Overall, omadacycline has an established safety profile in the treatment of both ABSSSI and CABP.

CONCLUSIONS

Omadacycline has broad-spectrum activity, the option to be orally administered and an established safety profile, making it a potentially attractive replacement for moxifloxacin in the military individual first aid kit, especially when accounting for the increasing resistance to fluoroquinolones. Further studies and clinical evaluation are warranted to support broader use of omadacycline to treat combat wound infections in the military healthcare system.

In Vitro Activity of Omadacycline and Comparator Antibiotics against Extended-Spectrum Beta-Lactamase-Producing Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae Urinary Isolates

Limited oral antibiotic options exist for urinary tract infections (UTI) caused by ESBL-producing Enterobacterales. The aim of the study was to evaluate in vitro activity of omadacycline and comparator antibiotics against clinical ESBL-producing and non-ESBL-producing E. coli and K. pneumoniae urinary isolates. 102 isolates each of E. coli and K. pneumoniae were collected from clinical urine specimens in 2019. By design, an equal number of each species were included that tested positive and negative for ESBL production. Omadacycline MICs were determined using gradient test strips and compared to MICs of comparator antibiotics as determined by an automated broth microdilution system. Isolates were considered susceptible to omadacycline if the MIC was ≤4 µg/mL for each species. 54.9% of all ESBL-producing isolates were susceptible to omadacycline, but better susceptibility was observed for ESBL-producing E. coli (74.5%). Omadacycline MICs were 2-4 fold lower for E. coli and K. pneumoniae strains not producing ESBL. The omadacycline MIC 50 and 90 values were 4 and 16 µg/mL, respectively, for all isolates studied. 74.5% of all isolates were considered susceptible to omadacycline. MICs were generally lower for E. coli strains with MIC 50 and 90 values of 4 and 8 µg/mL, respectively (87.3% susceptible), compared with K. pneumoniae. Overall, the most active agents were omadacycline and nitrofurantoin, while other comparator antibiotics were less active. Omadacycline represents a promising oral antibiotic for treating UTI caused by ESBL-producing E. coli, particularly when resistance limits other oral options. Prospective, controlled clinical trials are needed to validate these in vitro results.

Stenotrophomonas maltophilia Infections: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Comparative Efficacy of Available Treatments, with Critical Assessment of Novel Therapeutic Options

Stenotrophomonas maltophilia (SM) represents a challenging pathogen due to its resistance profile. A systematic review of the available evidence was conducted to evaluate the best treatment of SM infections to date, focusing on trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (TMP/SMX), fluoroquinolones (FQs), and tetracycline derivatives (TDs).

MATERIALS

PubMed/MEDLINE and Embase were searched from inception to 30 November 2022. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included clinical failure, adverse events, and length of stay. A random effects meta-analysis was performed. This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022321893).

RESULTS

Twenty-four studies, all retrospective, were included. A significant difference in terms of overall mortality was observed when comparing as a monotherapy TMP/SMX versus FQs (odds ratio (OR) 1.46, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.15-1.86, I2 = 33%; 11 studies, 2407 patients). The prediction interval (PI) did not touch the no effect line (1.06-1.93), but the results were not robust for the unmeasured confounding (E-value for point estimate of 1.71). When comparing TMP/SMX with TDs, the former showed an association with higher mortality but not significant and with a wide PI (OR 1.95, 95% CI 0.79-4.82, PI 0.01-685.99, I2 = 0%; 3 studies, 346 patients). Monotherapies in general exerted a protective effect against death opposed to the combination regimens but were not significant (OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.41-1.22, PI 0.16-3.08, I2 = 0%; 4 studies, 438 patients).

CONCLUSIONS

Against SM infections, FQs and, possibly, TDs seem to be reasonable alternative choices to TMP/SMX. Data from clinical trials are urgently needed to better inform therapeutic choices in this setting by also taking into account newer agents.

Omadacycline for treatment of acute bacterial infections: a meta-analysis of phase II/III trials

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to assess the clinical efficacy and safety of omadacycline for the treatment of acute bacterial infections.

METHODS

A search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Clinical Trials was conducted up to July 1, 2022. We included only randomized controlled trials (RCTs), in which omadacycline and other antibiotics were evaluated for treating acute bacterial infections in adults. The primary outcomes were clinical response and microbiological response, whereas the secondary outcome was the risk of adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

A total of seven RCTs involving 2841 patients with acute bacterial infection were included. Overall, our study illustrated that the clinical cure ratio of omadacycline was similar to the comparators in the treatment of acute bacterial infections (OR = 1.18, 95%CI = 0.96, 1.46, I² = 29%). Omadacycline had a microbiological eradication rate similar to comparators in the treatment of acute bacterial infections (OR = 1.02, 95%CI = 0.81, 1.29, I² = 42%). No statistical differences were observed between omadacycline and the comparators in terms of infection caused by Staphylococcus aureus (OR = 1.14, 95%CI = 0.80, 1.63, I² = 0%), methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA, OR = 1.28, 95%CI = 0.73, 2.24, I² = 0%), methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA, OR = 1.12, 95%CI = 0.69, 1.81, I² = 0%), and Enterococcus faecalis (OR = 2.47, 95%CI = 0.36, 16.97, I² = 7%). A significant difference was found between omadacycline and the comparators for the risk of any AEs and treatment related AEs. The risk of discontinuation of the study drug due to an AEs was lower for omadacycline than for the comparators.

CONCLUSION

Omadacycline is as good as comparators in terms of efficacy and tolerance in the treatment of acute bacterial infections in adult patients. Thus, omadacycline is an appropriate option for antibiotic therapy in adult patients with acute bacterial infections.

A Comprehensive Overview of the Antibiotics Approved in the Last Two Decades: Retrospects and Prospects

Due to the overuse of antibiotics, bacterial resistance has markedly increased to become a global problem and a major threat to human health. Fortunately, in recent years, various new antibiotics have been developed through both improvements to traditional antibiotics and the discovery of antibiotics with novel mechanisms with the aim of addressing the decrease in the efficacy of traditional antibiotics. This manuscript reviews the antibiotics that have been approved for marketing in the last 20 years with an emphasis on the antibacterial properties, mechanisms, structure-activity relationships (SARs), and clinical safety of these antibiotics. Furthermore, the current deficiencies, opportunities for improvement, and prospects of antibiotics are thoroughly discussed to provide new insights for the design and development of safer and more potent antibiotics.

New advances in management and treatment of multidrug-resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae

INTRODUCTION

The management of multidrug-resistant (MDR) Klebsiella pneumoniae (KP) represents a major challenge in the field of infectious diseases. It is associated with a high rate of nosocomial infections with a mortality rate that reaches approximately 50%, even when using an effective antimicrobial therapy. Therefore, combined actions addressing infection control and antibiotic stewardship are required to delay the emergence of resistance. Since new antimicrobial agents targeting MDR-GNB bacteria have been produced during the last years and are now available for physicians to treat MDR, it is fundamental to choose appropriate antimicrobial therapy for K. pneumoniae infection.

AREAS COVERED

The PubMed database was searched to review the most significant recent literature on the topic, including data from articles coming from endemic areas and from the current European and American Guidelines.

EXPERT OPINION

We explore the most effective strategies for prevention of MDR-KP spread and the currently available treatment options, focusing on comparing old strategies and new compounds. We reviewed data concerning newly developed drugs that could play an important role in the future; we also propose a treatment algorithm that could be useful for physicians in daily clinical practice.

Re-establishing the utility of tetracycline-class antibiotics for current challenges with antibiotic resistance

The progressive increase in antibiotic resistance in recent decades calls for urgent development of new antibiotics and antibiotic stewardship programs to help select appropriate treatments with the goal of minimising further emergence of resistance and to optimise clinical outcomes. Three new tetracycline-class antibiotics, eravacycline, omadacycline, and tigecycline, have been approved within the past 15 years, and represent a new era in the use of tetracyclines. These drugs overcome the two main mechanisms of acquired tetracycline-class resistance and exhibit a broad spectrum of in vitro activity against gram-positive, gram-negative, anaerobic, and atypical pathogens, including many drug-resistant strains. We provide an overview of the three generations of tetracycline-class drugs, focussing on the efficacy, safety, and clinical utility of these three new third-generation tetracycline-class drugs. We also consider various scenarios of unmet clinical needs where patients might benefit from re-engagement with tetracycline-class antibiotics including outpatient treatment options, patients with known β-lactam antibiotic allergy, reducing the risk of Clostridioides difficile infection, and their potential as monotherapy in polymicrobial infections while minimising the risk of any potential drug-drug interaction. KEY MESSAGESThe long-standing safety profile and broad spectrum of activity of tetracycline-class antibiotics made them a popular choice for treatment of various bacterial infections; unfortunately, antimicrobial resistance has limited the utility of the early-generation tetracycline agents.The latest generation of tetracycline-class antibiotics, including eravacycline, tigecycline, and omadacycline, overcomes the most common acquired tetracycline resistance mechanisms.Based on in vitro characteristics and clinical data, these newer tetracycline agents provide an effective antibiotic option in the treatment of approved indications in patients with unmet clinical needs - including patients with severe penicillin allergy, with renal or hepatic insufficiency, recent Clostridioides difficile infection, or polymicrobial infections, and those at risk of drug-drug interactions.

In vitro antimicrobial activity and resistance mechanisms of the new generation tetracycline agents, eravacycline, omadacycline, and tigecycline against clinical Staphylococcus aureus isolates

In this study, we investigated the in vitro activity and resistance mechanisms of the new generation tetracycline agents, namely eravacycline, omadacycline, and tigecycline, against Staphylococcus aureus isolates. A total of 1,017 non-duplicate S. aureus isolates were collected and subjected to susceptibility testing against eravacycline, omadacycline, and tigecycline using the broth microdilution method. Tetracyclines-resistant (eravacycline/omadacycline/tigecycline-resistant) isolates were selected to elucidate the resistance mechanisms using polymerase chain reaction (PCR), cloning experiment, efflux pump inhibition, and quantitative real-time PCR. The results of the antibacterial susceptibility testing showed that compared with omadacycline, eravacycline and tigecycline had superior antibacterial activity against S. aureus isolates. Among 1,017 S. aureus, 41 tetracyclines-resistant isolates were identified. These resistant isolates possessed at least one tetracycline resistance gene and genetic mutation in the MepRAB efflux pump and 30S ribosome units. A frameshift mutation in mepB was detected in most tetracyclines-resistant strains (except for JP3349) compared with tetracyclines-susceptible (eravacycline/omadacycline/tigecycline-susceptible) strains. This was first shown to decrease susceptibility to omadacycline, but not to eravacycline and tigecycline. After treatment with eravacycline, omadacycline or tigecycline, overexpression of mepA, tet38, tet(K) and tet(L) was detected. Moreover, multi-locus sequence typing showed a major clonal dissemination type, ST5, and its variant ST764 were seen in most tetracyclines-resistant strains. To conclude, eravacycline and tigecycline exhibited better activity against S. aureus including tetracycline-resistant isolates than omadacycline. The resistance to these new generation tetracyclines due to an accumulation of many resistance mechanisms.

Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing for Enterococci

Enterococci are major, recalcitrant nosocomial pathogens with a wide repertoire of intrinsic and acquired resistance determinants and the potential of developing resistance to all clinically available antimicrobials. As such, multidrug-resistant enterococci are considered a serious public health threat. Due to limited treatment options and rapid emergence of resistance to all novel agents, the clinical microbiology laboratory plays a critical role in deploying accurate, reproducible, and feasible antimicrobial susceptibility testing methods to guide appropriate treatment of patients with deep-seated enterococcal infections. In this review, we provide an overview of the advantages and disadvantages of existing manual and automated methods that test susceptibility of Enterococcus faecium and Enterococcus faecalis to β-lactams, aminoglycosides, vancomycin, lipoglycopeptides, oxazolidinones, novel tetracycline-derivatives, and daptomycin. We also identify unique problems and gaps with the performance and clinical utility of antimicrobial susceptibility testing for enterococci, provide recommendations for clinical laboratories to circumvent select problems, and address potential future innovations that can bridge major gaps in susceptibility testing.

Pharmacokinetics, Safety and Pharmacokinetics/Pharmacodynamics Analysis of Omadacycline in Chinese Healthy Subjects

Objective: Omadacycline is a new type of aminomethylcycline antibiotic, having a broad antibacterial spectrum. But the pharmacokinetic characteristics and safety profile of the Chinese population remain unknown. It is also unclear whether the US-approved treatment regimen is applicable for the Chinese population. Methods: In a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled dose-escalated trial, the pharmacokinetics of omadacycline was evaluated by a non-compartmental and compartmental model. Monte Carlo simulations were performed using the pharmacokinetic data from the Chinese population to evaluate the probability of target attainment (PTA) and the cumulative fraction of response (CFR) of the US FDA-approved dose regimen. Results: The three-compartment model successfully described the rapid distribution and slow elimination of omadacycline after the intravenous infusion (i.v.). The double-peak concentration-time curve of the oral absorption (p.o.) was explained by the two-compartment model with two absorption compartments. The steady-state AUC of 100 mg omadacycline i.v. and 300 mg omadacycline p. o. were 12.1 and 19.4 mg h/L, respectively. Pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics (PK/PD) analysis showed that the omadacycline dosing regimen with a loading dose (200 mg i.v. q24 h, 100 mg i.v. q12 h, 450 mg p. o. q24 h × 2 days or 300 mg p. o. q12 h) and maintenance dose (100 mg i.v. q24 h or 300 mg p. o. q24 h) could cover the main pathogens of the indications acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) and community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP): Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pneumoniae. Also, omadacycline had showed a good safety profile in the Chinese population. Conclusions: With the evidence provided, omadacycline could be a novel treatment option to Chinese patients with ABSSSI and CABP.

Evaluation of Neisseria gonorrhoeae Isolates Susceptibility to Tetracycline Antibiotics from 9 Provinces in China Since 2020

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

In-vitro activity of cefiderocol, cefepime/zidebactam, cefepime/enmetazobactam, omadacycline, eravacycline and other comparative agents against carbapenem-nonsusceptible Enterobacterales: results from the Surveillance of Multicenter Antimicrobial Resistance in Taiwan (SMART) in 2017-2020

This study examined the susceptibility of carbapenem-nonsusceptible Enterobacterales (CNSE) to cefiderocol, cefepime/zidebactam, cefepime/enmetazobactam, omadacycline, eravacycline and other comparative agents. Non-duplicate Enterobacterales isolates from 16 Taiwanese hospitals were evaluated. Minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) were determined using the broth microdilution method, and susceptibility results were interpreted based on relevant guidelines. In total, 201 CNSE isolates were investigated, including 26 Escherichia coli isolates and 175 Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates. Carbapenemase genes were detected in 15.4% (n=4) of E. coli isolates and 47.4% (n=83) of K. pneumoniae isolates, with the most common being bla_KPC (79.3%, 69/87), followed by bla_OXA-48-like (13.8%, 12/87). Cefiderocol was the most active agent against CNSE; only 3.8% (n=1) of E. coli isolates and 4.6% (n=8) of K. pneumoniae isolates were not susceptible to cefiderocol. Among the carbapenem-resistant E. coli and K. pneumoniae isolates, 88.5% (n=23) and 93.7% (n=164), respectively, were susceptible to ceftazidime/avibactam. For cefepime/zidebactam, 23 (88.5%) E. coli isolates and 155 (88.6%) K. pneumoniae isolates had MICs ≤2/2 mg/L. For cefepime/enmetazobactam, 22 (84.6%) E. coli isolates and 85 (48.6%) K. pneumoniae isolates had MICs ≤2/8 mg/L. The higher MICs of K. pneumoniae against cefepime/enmetazobactam were due to only one (1.5%) of the 67 bla_KPC-carrying isolates being susceptible. MICs of omadacycline were significantly higher than those of eravacycline and tigecycline. In summary, cefiderocol, ceftazidime/avibactam and cefepime/zidebactam were more effective against carbapenem-nonsusceptible E. coli and K. pneumoniae than other drugs, highlighting their potential as valuable therapeutics.