The potential role of nemonoxacin for treatment of common infections

Potential effectiveness of parenteral nemonoxacin in the treatment of Clostridioides difficile infections: in vitro, ex vivo, and mouse studies

Introduction

Antimicrobial therapy plays a crucial role in the management of CDI patients. However, the standard agent for treating CDIs is limited to oral fidaxomicin or vancomycin. For patients made nil by mouth, there is a clinically urgent and essential need to develop an intravenous antibiotic.

Methods

For C. difficile with the lowest MIC of nemonoxacin and vancomycin, the inhibitory effects were tested using the kinetic time-kill assay and ex vivo co-culture model. The effectiveness of nemonoxacin and vancomycin in inhibiting spore germination, the sporicidal activity, and the treatment of mice with CDIs were compared.

Results

For clinical isolates and laboratory strains, lower MICs of nemonoxacin against C. difficile than levofloxacin and ciprofloxacin were observed, even in those harboring point mutations in the quinolone-resistance determining region. Although nemonoxacin failed to suppress spore outgrowth and germination in C. difficile, it exhibited an effective inhibitory effect against C. difficile in the kinetic time-kill assay and the ex vivo co-culture model. Mice receiving intraperitoneal nemonoxacin had less weight loss, higher cecum weight, a longer colon length, and lower expression of the tcdB gene, compared with untreated mice. Notably, there were no significant differences observed in weight loss, cecum weight, colon length, or tcdB gene expression between mice treated with vancomycin and those treated with any dose of nemonoxacin. Similarly, no significant differences were found between mice receiving combination therapy of intraperitoneal nemonoxacin plus oral vancomycin and those treated with intraperitoneal nemonoxacin or oral vancomycin alone.

Discussion

The potential role of nemonoxacin, which can be administered parenterally, for treating CDIs was evidenced through the in vitro, ex vivo, and mouse models.

A multicentre, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-controlled, phase 3 clinical trial assessing the efficacy and safety of intravenous nemonoxacin malate vs. levofloxacin for community-acquired pneumonia in adult patients

BACKGROUND

Nemonoxacin malate is a novel non-fluorinated quinolone for oral and intravenous (IV) administration. This phase 3, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-controlled clinical trial (NCT02205112) evaluated the efficacy and safety of IV nemonoxacin vs. levofloxacin for the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) in adult patients.

METHODS

Eligible patients were randomised to receive 500 mg nemonoxacin or levofloxacin via IV infusion, once daily for 7-14 days. The primary endpoint was the clinical cure rate at the test-of-cure (TOC) visit in the modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population. Secondary efficacy and safety were also compared between nemonoxacin and levofloxacin.

RESULTS

Overall, 525 patients were randomised and treated with nemonoxacin (n = 349) or levofloxacin (n = 176). The clinical cure rate was 91.8% (279/304) for nemonoxacin and 85.7% (138/161) for levofloxacin in the mITT population (P > 0.05). The clinical efficacy of nemonoxacin was non-inferior to levofloxacin for treatment of CAP. Microbiological success rate with nemonoxacin was 88.8% (95/107) and with levofloxacin was 87.8% (43/49) (P > 0.05) at the TOC visit in the bacteriological mITT population. The incidence of drug-related adverse events (AEs) was 37.1% in the nemonoxacin group and 22.2% in the levofloxacin group. These AEs were mostly local reactions at the infusion site, nausea, elevated alanine aminotransferase/aspartate aminotransferase (ALT/AST), and QT interval prolongation. The nemonoxacin-related AEs were mostly mild and resolved after discontinuation of nemonoxacin.

CONCLUSIONS

Nemonoxacin 500 mg IV once daily for 7-14 days is effective and safe and non-inferior to levofloxacin for treating CAP in adult patients.

Antibiotic Strategies for Severe Community-Acquired Pneumonia

Despite advancements in health systems and intensive care unit (ICU) care, along with the introduction of novel antibiotics and microbiologic techniques, mortality rates in severe community-acquired pneumonia (sCAP) patients have not shown significant improvement. Delayed admission to the ICU is a major risk factor for higher mortality. Apart from choosing the appropriate site of care, prompt and appropriate antibiotic therapy significantly affects the prognosis of sCAP. Treatment regimens involving ceftaroline or ceftobiprole are currently considered the best options for managing patients with sCAP. Additionally, several other molecules, such as delafloxacin, lefamulin, and omadacycline, hold promise as therapeutic strategies for sCAP. This review aims to provide a comprehensive summary of the key challenges in managing adults with severe CAP, focusing on essential aspects related to antibiotic treatment and investigating potential strategies to enhance clinical outcomes in sCAP patients.

Nemonoxacin achieved a better symptomatic improvement and a prolonged interval to next exacerbation than moxifloxacin for outpatients with acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease

Nemonoxacin is a novel non-fluorinated quinolone with strong antibacterial efficacy, but data of its effect on acute exacerbations of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (AECOPD) is rare. This study was conducted to compare the efficacy of oral nemonoxacin with moxifloxacin in AECOPD outpatients. In this retrospective observational study, a total of 101 AECOPD outpatients initially treated with nemonoxacin or moxifloxacin from July 2021 to March 2022 were enrolled. We collected COPD assessment test (CAT), Transition Dyspnea Indices (TDI) scores, and exacerbations information during 24 weeks follow-up from the electronic medical records. Kaplan-Meier curve was used to analyze the time to the next moderate/severe exacerbation. Compared to the moxifloxacin group, changes in CAT scores and TDI scores were significantly higher in the nemonoxacin group, and the nemonoxacin group also had a greater probability to reach the minimal clinically important difference of CAT (71.40% vs. 97.80%, p < 0.01) and TDI (40.50% vs. 60.00%, p < 0.05) at week 4. Despite no significant difference in the incidence of exacerbations between two groups, patients treated with nemonoxacin had a significantly prolonged time to next moderate/severe exacerbation than those with moxifloxacin (p < 0.05). Nemonoxacin achieved a better symptomatic improvement and a prolonged interval to next moderate/severe exacerbation for AECOPD outpatients.

Potential role of new-generation antibiotics in acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To summarize the available results of primary analyses from high-quality randomized studies of either recently approved or possible future agents for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI).

RECENT FINDINGS

In the last 2 decades, several novel agents have been approved for the treatment of ABSSSI, that are also active against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). In addition to already available agents, further molecules are in clinical development that could become available for treating ABSSSI in the forthcoming future.

SUMMARY

The current and future availability of several new-generation antibiotics will allow to modulate therapeutic choices not only on efficacy but also on other relevant factors such as the combination of the drug safety profile and the comorbidities of any given patient, the expected adherence to outpatient therapy, and the possibilities of early discharge or avoiding hospitalization by means of oral formulations, early switch from intravenous to oral therapy, or single-dose administration of long-acting intravenous agents. With the advent of new-generation antibiotics, all these factors are becoming increasingly essential for tailoring treatment to individual patients in line with the principles of personalized medicine, and for optimizing the use of healthcare resources.

New antibiotics for the treatment of infections by multidrug-resistant microorganisms

One of the current priorities of the World Health Organization is multidrug-resistant bacteria, because they are a global problem due to their rapid spread and the difficulty of their treatment. In addition, they are associated with high morbidity, mortality and high economic costs. There are multidrug-resistant bacteria, both Gram-positive and Gram-negative, including Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Acinetobacter baumannii resistant to carbapenems, enterobacteria producing carbapenemases, Staphylococcus aureus resistant to methicillin and/or with intermediate sensitivity to vancomycin, and Enterococcus faecium (and less frequently Enterococcus faecalis) resistant to vancomycin. This review will comment on the new antibiotics that have been incorporated into the therapeutic arsenal in recent years, as well as other promising antibiotics that are in their final stages of development.

In vitro Activities of Nemonoxacin and Other Antimicrobial Agents Against Human Mycoplasma and Ureaplasmas Isolates and Their Defined Resistance Mechanisms

Nemonoxacin, a newly developed non-fluorinated quinolone (NFQ), selectively inhibits bacterial DNA topoisomerase activity. However, its activities against Mycoplasmas have rarely been studied to date. Herein, the activities of nemonoxacin were evaluated against clinical isolates of 50 Mycoplasma pneumoniae, 20 Mycoplasma hominis, and 77 Ureaplasma spp., and they were compared to fluoroquinolones, tetracyclines, and macrolides. Nemonoxacin MICs (μg/ml) ranged from 0.03 to 0.25 for M. pneumoniae, 0.25 to 8 for M. hominis, and 0.06 to >16 for Ureaplasma spp., and all of the ranges are similar to those of fluoroquinolones. The activity of nemonoxacin against Mycoplasmas was not affected by resistance to macrolides in the strains tested, but it seems to have the same resistant mechanism as fluoroquinolones. In addition, minimum bactericidal concentrations (MBC) of nemonoxacin to M. pneumoniae were within two dilutions of the MIC values, indicating a bactericidal effect on M. pneumoniae. Nemonoxacin merits further study for treating infections caused by these organisms.

Antibacterials in the pipeline and perspectives for the near future

Antimicrobial resistance is a global threat to the management of infections in our patients. Sound stewardship of antibacterial agents at our disposal must be accompanied by a concerted effort to develop new agents to bolster our armamentarium. This review will cover the latest antibiotics that have come through the pipeline and the role they can play in the management of infections that are increasingly difficult to treat due to resistance mechanisms.

The efficacy and safety of nemonoxacin compared with levofloxacin in the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia: a systemic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Objectives

This meta-analysis aims to assess the clinical efficacy and safety of nemonoxacin in comparison with levofloxacin in treating community-acquired pneumonia (CAP).

Materials and methods

The Pubmed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov., and the Cochrane databases were searched up to September 2018. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating nemonoxacin and levofloxacin in the treatment of CAP were included. The primary outcome was the clinical cure rate, and the secondary outcomes included the microbiologic response rate and the risk of adverse events.

Results

Three RCTs were included. Overall, nemonoxacin and levofloxacin had similar clinical cure rates in the treatment of CAP (OR =1.05, 95% CI =0.67–1.64, I²=0%). Nemonoxacin also had a microbiologic response rate similar to levofloxacin (OR =0.89, 95% CI =0.44–1.81, I²=0%). No significant differences were found in treatment-emergent adverse events between the two drugs (OR =1.08, 95% CI =0.81–1.43, I²=0%). In subgroup analysis, the similarities in the clinical cure rate, microbiologic response rate, and risk of adverse events of these two drugs remained unchanged with the dose of nemonoxacin (500 or 750 mg) and individual pathogens.

Conclusion

The clinical and microbiologic efficacy of nemonoxacin is comparable to that of levofloxacin in the treatment of CAP, and this agent is as well tolerated as levofloxacin.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of oral versus intravenous drip infusion of levofloxacin in the treatment of acute lower respiratory tract infection in Chinese elderly patients

Aim

Pharmacoeconomic cost-effectiveness analysis of two different dosage regimens of levofloxacin in the treatment of acute lower respiratory tract infection in elderly patients.

Methods

A total of 108 elderly patients with acute lower respiratory tract infection who visited by our hospital between September 2013 and September 2014 were randomly divided into Group A and Group B, with 54 patients in each group. In Group A, levofloxacin injection was given for continuous intravenous infusion treatment, whereas in Group B, levofloxacin injection and levofloxacin capsule were given as sequential therapy (ST). The period of treatment for both the groups was 10 days, and minimum cost analysis was used to analyze the treatment.

Results

Groups A and B had cure rates of 61.1% and 59.3% (P>0.05), effective rates of 88.9% and 83.3% (P>0.05), bacterial clearance rates of 96.3% and 92.6% (P>0.05), and incidence rates of adverse reactions of 7.4% and 3.7% (P>0.05), respectively. Treatment costs of Groups A and B were 1,588 RMB and 1,150 RMB, respectively, whereas the cost-effectiveness of the two groups was at 17.86 and 13.81, respectively (P<0.05).

Conclusion

Levofloxacin ST had relatively higher cost-effectiveness ratio for the treatment of acute lower respiratory tract infection in elderly patients, especially Chinese.

Antibiotics in the clinical pipeline at the end of 2015

There is growing global recognition that the continued emergence of multidrug-resistant bacteria poses a serious threat to human health. Action plans released by the World Health Organization and governments of the UK and USA in particular recognize that discovering new antibiotics, particularly those with new modes of action, is one essential element required to avert future catastrophic pandemics. This review lists the 30 antibiotics and two β-lactamase/β-lactam combinations first launched since 2000, and analyzes in depth seven new antibiotics and two new β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitor combinations launched since 2013. The development status, mode of action, spectra of activity and genesis (natural product, natural product-derived, synthetic or protein/mammalian peptide) of the 37 compounds and six β-lactamase/β-lactam combinations being evaluated in clinical trials between 2013 and 2015 are discussed. Compounds discontinued from clinical development since 2013 and new antibacterial pharmacophores are also reviewed.

Update on infections caused by Stenotrophomonas maltophilia with particular attention to resistance mechanisms and therapeutic options

Stenotrophomonas maltophilia is a Gram-negative, biofilm-forming bacterium. Although generally regarded as an organism of low virulence, S. maltophilia is an emerging multi-drug resistant opportunistic pathogen in hospital and community settings, especially among immunocompromised hosts. Risk factors associated with S. maltophilia infection include underlying malignancy, cystic fibrosis, corticosteroid or immunosuppressant therapy, the presence of an indwelling central venous catheter and exposure to broad spectrum antibiotics. In this review, we provide a synthesis of information on current global trends in S. maltophilia pathogenicity as well as updated information on the molecular mechanisms contributing to its resistance to an array of antimicrobial agents. The prevalence of S. maltophilia infection in the general population increased from 0.8-1.4% during 1997-2003 to 1.3-1.68% during 2007-2012. The most important molecular mechanisms contributing to its resistance to antibiotics include β-lactamase production, the expression of Qnr genes, and the presence of class 1 integrons and efflux pumps. Trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole (TMP/SMX) is the antimicrobial drug of choice. Although a few studies have reported increased resistance to TMP/SMX, the majority of studies worldwide show that S. maltophilia continues to be highly susceptible. Drugs with historically good susceptibility results include ceftazidime, ticarcillin-clavulanate, and fluoroquinolones; however, a number of studies show an alarming trend in resistance to those agents. Tetracyclines such as tigecycline, minocycline, and doxycycline are also effective agents and consistently display good activity against S. maltophilia in various geographic regions and across different time periods. Combination therapies, novel agents, and aerosolized forms of antimicrobial drugs are currently being tested for their ability to treat infections caused by this multi-drug resistant organism.