Systematic review and network meta-analysis of tedizolid for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections caused by MRSA

Treatment of MRSA Infection: Where are We?

Staphylococcus aureus is a leading cause of septicemia, endocarditis, pneumonia, skin and soft tissue infections, bone and joint infections, and hospital-acquired infections. In particular, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) is associated with high morbidity and mortality, and continues to be a major public health problem. The emergence of multidrug-resistant MRSA strains along with the wide consumption of antibiotics has made anti-MRSA treatment a huge challenge. Novel treatment strategies (e.g., novel antimicrobials and new administrations) against MRSA are urgently needed. In the past decade, pharmaceutical companies have invested more in the research and development (R&D) of new antimicrobials and strategies, spurred by favorable policies. All research articles were collected from authentic online databases, including Google Scholar, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science, by using different combinations of keywords, including 'anti-MRSA', 'antibiotic', 'antimicrobial', 'clinical trial', 'clinical phase', clinical studies', and 'pipeline'. The information extracted from articles was compared to information provided on the drug manufacturer's website and Clinical Trials.gov (https://clinicaltrials.gov/) to confirm the latest development phase of anti-MRSA agents. The present review focuses on the current development status of new anti-MRSA strategies concerning chemistry, pharmacological target(s), indications, route of administration, efficacy and safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics, and aims to discuss the challenges and opportunities in developing drugs for anti-MRSA infections.

Clinical Impact of Staphylococcus aureus Skin and Soft Tissue Infections

The pathogenic bacterium Staphylococcus aureus is the most common pathogen isolated in skin-and-soft-tissue infections (SSTIs) in the United States. Most S. aureus SSTIs are caused by the epidemic clone USA300 in the USA. These infections can be serious; in 2019, SSTIs with S. aureus were associated with an all-cause, age-standardized mortality rate of 0.5 globally. Clinical presentations of S. aureus SSTIs vary from superficial infections with local symptoms to monomicrobial necrotizing fasciitis, which can cause systemic manifestations and may lead to serious complications or death. In order to cause skin infections, S. aureus employs a host of virulence factors including cytolytic proteins, superantigenic factors, cell wall-anchored proteins, and molecules used for immune evasion. The immune response to S. aureus SSTIs involves initial responders such as keratinocytes and neutrophils, which are supported by dendritic cells and T-lymphocytes later during infection. Treatment for S. aureus SSTIs is usually oral therapy, with parenteral therapy reserved for severe presentations; it ranges from cephalosporins and penicillin agents such as oxacillin, which is generally used for methicillin-sensitive S. aureus (MSSA), to vancomycin for methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA). Treatment challenges include adverse effects, risk for Clostridioides difficile infection, and potential for antibiotic resistance.

Ceftaroline Fosamil for the Empiric Treatment of Hospitalized Adults with cSSTI: An Economic Analysis from the Perspective of the Spanish National Health System

Purpose

Complicated skin and soft tissue infections (cSSTI) are associated with high healthcare resource use and costs. The emergency nature of cSSTI hospitalizations requires starting immediate empiric intravenous (IV) antibiotic treatment, making the appropriate choice of initial antibiotic therapy crucial.

Patients and Methods

The use of ceftaroline fosamil (CFT) as an alternative to other IV antibiotic therapies for the empiric treatment of hospitalized adults with cSSTI (vancomycin, linezolid, daptomycin, cloxacillin, tedizolid) was evaluated through cost consequences analysis. The model structure was a decision tree accounting for four different pathways: patients demonstrating early response (ER) either discharged early (with oral antibiotic) or remaining in hospital to continue the initial therapy; non-responders either remaining on the initial IV therapy or switching to a second-line antibiotic. The model perspective was the Spanish National Health System.

Results

CFT resulted in average percentage of patients discharged early (PDE) of 24.6% (CI 19.49–30.2%) with average total cost per patient of €6763 (€6268–€7219). Vancomycin, linezolid, daptomycin and tedizolid resulted in average PDE of 22% (17.34–27.09%), 26.4% (20.5–32.32%), 28.6% (22.08–35.79%) and 26.5% (20.39–33.25%), respectively, for a total cost per patient of €6,619 (€5,902–€6,929), €6,394 (€5,881–€6,904), €6,855 (€5,800–€7,410) and €7,173 (€6,608–€7,763), respectively. Key model drivers were ER and antibiotic treatment duration, with hospital costs accounting for over 83% of the total expenditures.

Conclusion

Given its clinical and safety profile, CFT is an acceptable choice for cSSTI empiric therapy providing comparable ER and costs to other relevant antibiotic options.

WSES/GAIS/WSIS/SIS-E/AAST global clinical pathways for patients with skin and soft tissue infections

Skin and soft-tissue infections (SSTIs) encompass a variety of pathological conditions that involve the skin and underlying subcutaneous tissue, fascia, or muscle, ranging from simple superficial infections to severe necrotizing infections.

Together, the World Society of Emergency Surgery, the Global Alliance for Infections in Surgery, the Surgical Infection Society-Europe, The World Surgical Infection Society, and the American Association for the Surgery of Trauma have jointly completed an international multi-society document to promote global standards of care in SSTIs guiding clinicians by describing reasonable approaches to the management of SSTIs.

An extensive non-systematic review was conducted using the PubMed and MEDLINE databases, limited to the English language. The resulting evidence was shared by an international task force with different clinical backgrounds.

Treatment of Recurrent Severe Cellulitis with a Pill in Pocket Approach

Cellulitis is a common condition that plagues healthcare systems and is associated with significant healthcare costs and resource allocations. With ample antimicrobial therapy this infectious syndrome can be easily treated but recurrence is common. Many conditions predispose patients to be at risk for recurrent cellulitis with chronic lymphoedema being a significant risk factor secondary to pooling of lymphatic fluid and impaired local immune responses. Moreover, patients with chronic lymphoedema can be at risk for acute onset of severe cellulitis requiring urgent medical evaluation and treatment. Consequently, to prevent recurrent cellulitis episodes, the use of long-term oral antibiotics has been advocated, but when recurrences occur despite long-term antibiotic use limited options are available. In this case report, a unique treatment approach for preventing severe cellulitis is discussed with a pill in the pocket approach with the use of oral tedizolid. This has thwarted the need for recurrent hospitalizations and reduced health care costs for this individual patient. Herein this treatment approach is discussed as is the rationale for using tedizolid instead of other antibiotics.

3D-QSAR Studies of 1,2,4-Oxadiazole Derivatives as Sortase A Inhibitors

Sortase A (SrtA) is an enzyme that catalyzes the attachment of proteins to the cell wall of Gram-positive bacterial membrane, preventing the spread of pathogenic bacterial strains. Here, one class of oxadiazole compounds was distinguished as an efficient inhibitor of SrtA via the "S. aureus Sortase A" substrate-based virtual screening. The current study on 3D-QSAR was done by utilizing preparation of the structure in the Schrödinger software suite and an assessment of 120 derivatives with the crystal structure of 1,2,4-oxadiazole which was extracted from the PDB data bank. The docking operation of the best compound in terms of pMIC (pMIC = 2.77) was done to determine the drug likeliness and binding form of 1,2,4-oxadiazole derivatives as antibiotics in the active site. Using the kNN-MFA way, seven models of 3D-QSAR were created and amongst them, and one model was selected as the best. The chosen model based on q 2 (pred_r 2) and R 2 values related to the sixth factor of PLS illustrates better and more acceptable external and internal predictions. Values of crossvalidation (pred_r 2), validation (q 2), and F were observed 0.5479, 0.6319, and 179.0, respectively, for a test group including 24 molecules and the training group including 96 molecules. The external reliability outcomes showed that the acceptable and the selective 3D-QSAR model had a high predictive potential (R 2 = 0.9235) which was confirmed by the Y-randomization test. Besides, the model applicability domain was described successfully to validate the estimation of the model.

Development of Amphiphilic Coumarin Derivatives as Membrane-Active Antimicrobial Agents with Potent In Vivo Efficacy against Gram-Positive Pathogenic Bacteria

Increases in drug-resistant pathogens are becoming a serious detriment to human health. To combat pathogen infections, a new series of amphiphilic coumarin derivatives were designed and synthesized as antimicrobial agents with membrane-targeting action. We herein report a lead compound, 25, that displayed potent antibacterial activity against Gram-positive bacteria, including MRSA. Compound 25 exhibited weak hemolytic activity and low toxicity to mammalian cells and can kill Gram-positive bacteria quickly (within 0.5 h) by directly disrupting the bacterial cell membranes. Additionally, compound 25 demonstrated excellent efficacy in a murine corneal infection caused by Staphylococcus aureus. These results suggest that 25 has great potential to be a potent antimicrobial agent for treating drug-resistant Gram-positive bacterial infections.

Tedizolid (torezolid) for the treatment of complicated skin and skin structure infections

INTRODUCTION

Acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) are among the most frequent infectious diseases. Recently, several new antibiotics with activity against MRSA have been approved. Tedizolid, a second-generation oxazolidinone approved for ABSSSI offers theoretical advantages over first-generation oxazolidinones.

AREAS COVERED

A comprehensive online search of Medline, ClinicalTrials.gov, and conference presentations was made, selecting articles between January 2000 and April 2020. In this review, the authors discuss the chemical and microbiological properties of tedizolid, summarize its efficacy, safety, and potential role in the treatment of ABSSSI as well as the potential for future indications.

EXPERT OPINION

Tedizolid has proven to be non-inferior compared to linezolid for the treatment of ABSSSI in two registrational phase III clinical trials, being well tolerated. Tedizolid exhibits antibacterial activity against the most important ABSSSI pathogens (including multidrug-resistant strains of MRSA), as well as mycobacteria and Nocardia. It appears to have a safe profile, including decreased myelotoxicity and no significant drug interactions. Preliminary studies with longer duration of therapy seem to confirm these potential benefits. Overall, tedizolid expands the newly acquired armamentarium to treat ABSSSI. The role of tedizolid for other indications is under investigation and has yet to be determined.

Tedizolid as Step-Down Therapy following Daptomycin versus Continuation of Daptomycin against Enterococci and Methicillin- and Vancomycin-Resistant Staphylococcus aureus in a Rat Endocarditis Model

Tedizolid (TZD) and daptomycin (DAP) were assessed in a rat endocarditis model against Enterococcus faecalis, Enterococcus faecium (resistant to vancomycin and ampicillin), and Staphylococcus aureus As a monotherapy, TZD for 5 days was not effective in a comparison with no-treatment controls, while DAP for 5 days was significantly effective against these bacteria. Step-down therapy (DAP for 3 days followed by TZD for 2 days) was as effective as DAP for 5 days and was comparable to 3 days of DAP plus ceftriaxone against all bacteria and to 3 days of DAP plus gentamicin against E. faecalis OG1RF.

Considerations and Caveats in Combating ESKAPE Pathogens against Nosocomial Infections

ESKAPE pathogens (Enterococcus faecium, Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Acinetobacter baumannii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Enterobacter species) are among the most common opportunistic pathogens in nosocomial infections. ESKAPE pathogens distinguish themselves from normal ones by developing a high level of antibiotic resistance that involves multiple mechanisms. Contemporary therapeutic strategies which are potential options in combating ESKAPE bacteria need further investigation. Herein, a broad overview of the antimicrobial research on ESKAPE pathogens over the past five years is provided with prospective clinical applications.

[S2k guidelines of the PEG on calculated parenteral initial treatment of bacterial diseases in adults : Focussed summary and supplementary information on antibiotic treatment of critically ill patients]

In January 2018 the recent revision of the S2k guidelines on calculated parenteral initial treatment of bacterial diseases in adults-update 2018 (Editor: Paul Ehrlich Society for Chemotherapy, PEG) was realized. It is a helpful tool for the complex infectious disease setting in an intensive care unit. The present summary of the guidelines focuses on the topics of anti-infective agents, including new substances, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics as well as on microbiology, resistance development and recommendations for calculated drug therapy in septic patients. As in past revisions the recent resistance situation and results of new clinical studies are considered and anti-infective agents are summarized in a table.

The role of tedizolid in skin and soft tissue infections

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Tedizolid is a second-generation oxazolidinone with activity against Gram-positive bacteria, including MRSA isolates resistant to linezolid. Pivotal clinical trials showed that tedizolid at 200 mg once-daily for 6 days is not inferior to linezolid 600 mg twice daily for 10 days in patients with SSTI. The comparison of adverse events is favorable to tedizolid under the circumstances of the clinical trials. This is a review of recent literature on tedizolid, its use in special populations and potential adverse effects.

RECENT FINDINGS

Findings suggest that tedizolid can be used in SSTI in adolescents, those older than 65 years, obese individuals and patients with diabetic foot infections. Forthcoming research to determine the future uses of this drug in other clinical syndromes requires demonstration of tolerance whenever tedizolid is administered for longer than 6 days.We also speculate on missing data and potential future indications of tedizolid in the highly competitive field of the treatment of severe Gram-positive infections other than SSTI.

SUMMARY

Tedizolid is a second-generation oxazolidinone, very convenient for treatment of SSTI, in search for other indications including nosocomial pneumonia and bone and joint infections. VIDEO ABSTRACT.

Is there still a role for vancomycin in skin and soft-tissue infections?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Skin and soft-tissue infections (SSIs) are among the commonest infections encountered in clinical practice. Spread of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus SSIs continues to increase in both health care and community settings and presents a challenge for the best treatment choice. Vancomycin has been the mainstay of SSIs treatment, but recently its use has been questioned because of concerns about its efficacy, tolerability, and unfavorable pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profile. The purpose of this review is to establish the current role for vancomycin in light of the literature published from January 2007 to September 2017 on comparison with both old and new alternatives.

RECENT FINDINGS

Meta-analyses show better clinical and microbiological outcomes for drugs approved for the treatment of SSI, including those sustained by methicillin-resistant S. aureus, in the last 10 years than for vancomycin. The newer glycopeptides and linezolid decrease the total treatment costs compared with vancomycin, by reducing the length of stay or avoiding the hospitalization.

SUMMARY

Vancomycin is noninferior in efficacy and safety to all comparator drugs, including the newest on the market. However, the SSI treatment evidence base presents several shortcomings limiting the clinical applicability of the results. High-level clinical trials should be performed to obtain results that can be generalized and applied effectively in clinical practice.

Tedizolid phosphate for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections: an evidence-based review of its place in therapy

Introduction

Tedizolid phosphate is an oxazolidinone approved for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections (ABSSSIs) and active against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.

Aims

The objective of this article was to review the evidence for the efficacy and safety of tedizolid phosphate for the treatment of ABSSSI.

Evidence review

Approval of tedizolid phosphate for the treatment of ABSSSI was based on the results of two phase III randomized controlled trials, ESTABLISH-1 (NCT01170221) and ESTABLISH-2 (NCT01421511), comparing 6-day once-daily tedizolid vs 10-day twice-daily linezolid. In ESTABLISH-1, noninferiority was met with early clinical response rates of 79.5% and 79.4% in tedizolid and linezolid groups, respectively (difference 0.1%, 95% CI –6.1% to 6.2%, with a 10% noninferiority margin). In ESTABLISH-2, noninferiority was met with 85% and 83% rates of early clinical response in tedizolid and linezolid groups, respectively (difference 2.6%, 95% CI –3.0% to 8.2%). Pooled data from ESTABLISH-1 and ESTABLISH-2 indicated a lower frequency of thrombocytopenia in tedizolid-treated than in linezolid-treated patients.

Conclusion

Tedizolid offers the option of an intravenous to oral switch, allows once-daily administration, and presents lower risk of myelotoxicity when a 6-day course is used for the treatment of ABSSSI. Greater economic cost associated with this antibiotic could be offset by its shorter treatment duration and possibility of oral administration in routine clinical practice, although either sponsored or nonsponsored postmarketing observational experience remains essential for ultimately confirming the effectiveness and tolerability of tedizolid outside clinical trials.

Efficacy of Tedizolid against Enterococci and Staphylococci, Including cfr + Strains, in a Mouse Peritonitis Model

In a mouse peritonitis model, tedizolid was comparable to linezolid and daptomycin against an Enterococcus faecium strain (VAN^r, AMP^r), an Enterococcus faecalis strain, and a methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) strain with and without cfr Against a cfr(B)⁺ E. faecium, tedizolid was inferior in vivo to linezolid and daptomycin, despite an ∼4-fold lower MIC.

Nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopic study of the inclusion complex of (R)-tedizolid with HDAS-β-CD, β-CD, and γ-cyclodextrin in aqueous solution

NMR spectroscopy is used to investigate the host-guest complexation of (R)-tedizolid, such as tedizolid with the hydroxymethyl substituent at the C5 position of the oxazolidinone ring ((R)-TED) or tedizolid with 5-methyl dihydrogen phosphate ((R)-TED-PO₄) with heptakis-(2,3-diacetyl-6-sulfo)-β-cyclodextrin (HDAS-β-CD), β-CD and γ-CD, in particular to obtain information about the mode and strength of the guest complexation into the hydrophobic cavity of the host. The complex stoichiometries of 1:1 (host:guest) and 1:2 were detected in millimolar concentrations for HDAS-β-CD and γ-CD with TED-PO₄ complexes, respectively. In the meantime, the mixed of complexes with stoichiometries of 1:1 and 2:1 were found for β-CD with both TED and TED-PO₄, however the 1:1 complex had a significant advantage.The binding mode was proposed. The estimated binding constants K_a of the complexes of TED or TED-PO₄ with CDs differ significantly in the order HDAS-β-CD<<β-CD<<γ-CD.

What have we learned from network meta-analyses applied to critical care?

It is widely accepted in modern medicine that medical decisions must be supported by scientific evidence. Identifying the best intervention when several options are available constitute a great challenge for every clinician. Traditional meta-analysis (TMA) allows summarizing evidence from studies that compare the same two interventions for one event (head to head studies or direct comparisons). Network meta-analysis (NMA) is a relatively new procedure that allows to compare multiple interventions for one event, even when non-head to head studies have been conducted (indirect evidence). Other advantages of NMA include increasing the accuracy of the results and ranking all the interventions according to their effectiveness. These features are of paramount importance as: 1) they summarize information from events (e.g. diseases or outcomes) that has more than two possible interventions (e.g. treatments or procedures); 2) they strengthen the level of guideline recommendations; and 3) they identify new hypotheses based on indirect comparison. As this is a narrative review, all manuscripts have been selected from PubMed according to our best knowledge with the aim to illustrate different features, options or applications of NMA in critical care. First, we provide a description of the usefulness, interpretation, assumptions and main plots related to NMAs. Second, we analyzed some examples of NMAs related to critical care medicine. Third, we include a pragmatic approach about how results from NMAs can improve the clinical practice as well an R script with a database to conduct an NMAs and reproduce figures and tables that have been shown here. As a conclusion, NMA is an established, robust, objective and reproducible statistic technique that has been applied to several critical care areas. Clinical practice guidelines have started to include NMA evidence to support their recommendations. In future years, it seems highly probable that this technique will increase it applicability in almost all areas of critical care medicine.

Antibiotic therapy for skin and soft tissue infections: a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) in hospital and community settings impose a substantial socio-economic burden. Therapeutic uncertainty due to the availability of a wide range of antibiotics and the need for empirical treatment decisions complicate SSTI clinical management. Completion of numerous pairwise meta-analyses to account for this variability in antibiotics is impractical, and many head-to-head comparisons of potential interest are likely not available. In comparing multiple antibiotics simultaneously, this network meta-analysis aims to identify the antibiotic(s) with the greatest value in the treatment of SSTIs, in terms of patient-important outcomes such as efficacy and safety.

METHODS

We will conduct a systematic review to identify randomized controlled trials of persons with suspected or confirmed SSTI assigned to orally or parenterally administered antibiotic therapy that report results on at least one outcome of interest. We will search MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), along with trial registries. Our primary outcome of interest is clinical success at the test-of-cure visit. Secondary outcomes may include (1) early clinical success (2-3 days after the therapy starts), (2) mortality, (3) adverse events, (4) treatment duration, and (5) length of hospital stay. Independent reviewers will complete screening of titles, abstracts, and full texts, data extraction, risk of bias assessment (using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool), and evaluation of the certainty of evidence (using the GRADE approach) in duplicate. We will complete pairwise and network meta-analyses within the Bayesian framework when possible using a random effects model. We will stratify SSTIs by severity into uncomplicated and complicated SSTIs when possible. Subgroup analyses by age, infection type, comorbidity, and suspected or confirmed methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)-associated infection are planned.

DISCUSSION

This study has several strengths compared to previous reviews: inclusion of a wider range of infection types, antibiotics, and outcomes; a comprehensive search strategy; a priori subgroup analyses; application of GRADE; and improved interpretability of findings through visual presentation of results. We hope our findings will inform future research, health care professionals, and policy makers resulting in improved evidence-based clinical management of SSTIs.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42018085607.

2018 WSES/SIS-E consensus conference: recommendations for the management of skin and soft-tissue infections

Skin and soft-tissue infections (SSTIs) encompass a variety of pathological conditions that involve the skin and underlying subcutaneous tissue, fascia, or muscle, ranging from simple superficial infections to severe necrotizing infections. SSTIs are a frequent clinical problem in surgical departments. In order to clarify key issues in the management of SSTIs, a task force of experts met in Bertinoro, Italy, on June 28, 2018, for a specialist multidisciplinary consensus conference under the auspices of the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES) and the Surgical Infection Society Europe (SIS-E). The multifaceted nature of these infections has led to a collaboration among general and emergency surgeons, intensivists, and infectious disease specialists, who have shared these clinical practice recommendations.