Antimicrobial Activity of Omadacycline Tested against Clinical Bacterial Isolates from Hospitals in Mainland China, Hong Kong, and Taiwan: Results from the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program (2013 to 2016)

Non-faecium non-faecalis enterococci: a review of clinical manifestations, virulence factors, and antimicrobial resistance

SUMMARYEnterococci are a diverse group of Gram-positive bacteria that are typically found as commensals in humans, animals, and the environment. Occasionally, they may cause clinically relevant diseases such as endocarditis, septicemia, urinary tract infections, and wound infections. The majority of clinical infections in humans are caused by two species: Enterococcus faecium and Enterococcus faecalis. However, there is an increasing number of clinical infections caused by non-faecium non-faecalis (NFF) enterococci. Although NFF enterococcal species are often overlooked, studies have shown that they may harbor antimicrobial resistance (AMR) genes and virulence factors that are found in E. faecium and E. faecalis. In this review, we present an overview of the NFF enterococci with a particular focus on human clinical manifestations, epidemiology, virulence genes, and AMR genes.

Antimicrobial activity of eravacycline and other comparative agents on aerobic and anaerobic bacterial pathogens in Taiwan: A clinical microbiological study

OBJECTIVES

Eravacycline, a new tetracycline derivative, exhibits broad-spectrum antimicrobial susceptibility. This study aimed to comprehensively investigate in vitro activities of eravacycline, tigecycline, and ertapenem against various Gram-positive, Gram-negative, and anaerobic bacteria.

METHODS

Minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) were determined using the broth microdilution method. The following bacterial species were collected: vancomycin-sensitive (VS) Enterococci species, vancomycin-resistant Enterococci species (VRE), Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus anginosus, Bacteroides species, Clostridioides difficile, Clostridium innocuum, Clostridium perfringens, Parabacteroides distasonis, and Stenotrophomonas maltophilia.

RESULTS

We found that eravacycline exhibited superior in vitro activity compared to tigecycline and ertapenem. Notably, it exhibited the lowest MIC90 for several bacterial species, including VS E. faecalis (0.12 µg/mL), VS E. faecium (0.12 µg/mL), and others. Besides, VRE was susceptible to eravacycline (MIC90:0.12 µg/mL) and tigecycline (MIC90:0.12 µg/mL), but was all resistant to ertapenem (MIC90 > 64 µg/mL). S. aureus was also susceptible to eravacycline (MIC90:0.5 µg/mL) as well as tigecycline (MIC90:1.0 µg/mL). Furthermore, S. anginosus showed higher susceptibility to eravacycline (MIC90:2.0 µg/mL) and tigecycline (MIC90:4.0 µg/mL), but lower to ertapenem (MIC90:32.0 µg/mL). Eravacycline and tigecycline also demonstrated good susceptibility to anaerobes, including Bacteroides species (susceptibility rate: 100%), P. distasonis (100%), C. difficile (94.1‒100%), C. innocuum (94.1‒96.1%), and C. perfringens (88.9‒96.3%). For S. maltophilia, both tigecycline and eravacycline showed an MIC90 of 2 µg/mL. A moderate-to-strong correlation (rho = 0.608-0.804, P < 0.001) was noted between the MIC values of eravacycline and tigecycline against various bacterial species.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study highlights the potential of eravacycline as an effective treatment option for multidrug-resistant bacterial infections.

National surveillance of antimicrobial susceptibilities to ceftaroline, dalbavancin, telavancin, tedizolid, eravacycline, omadacycline, and other comparator antibiotics, and genetic characteristics of bacteremic Staphylococcus aureus isolates in adults: Results from the Surveillance of Multicenter Antimicrobial Resistance in Taiwan (SMART) program in 2020

Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) causes invasive infections and is associated with community-acquired infections (CAIs) and hospital-associated infections (HAIs). In 2020, 315 S. aureus isolates, including 145 methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) and 170 MRSA, mainly associated with bacteremia and mostly CAIs, were collected from 16 hospitals in different regions of Taiwan. Minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) were determined using the Sensititre™ complete automated AST system. Staphylococcal cassette chromosome mec (SCCmec) types were analysed using multiplex polymerase chain reaction. The median age of patients infected with MRSA was significantly higher than that of patients infected with MSSA (72.5 years vs. 67.0 years, P=0.027). MIC₅₀/MIC₉₀ values of eravacycline and omadacycline were 0.06/0.12, and 0.25/0.5, respectively. Of the MRSA isolates, 4.1% presented susceptible dose-dependence to ceftaroline, most of which (85.7%) were HAI- and Panton-Valentine leukocidin (PVL)-negative. Among the MRSA isolates, 7.1% were not susceptible to telavancin and tedizolid (mainly type IV, PVL-negative, and CAI), 0.6% were not susceptible to daptomycin (type III, PVL-negative, and HAI), and 1.8% were not susceptible to quinupristin/dalfopristin (three isolates were type III, IV, and V_T, respectively, and all were PVL-negative), but all were susceptible to dalbavancin. In conclusion, patients with bacteremia caused by MRSA were older than those with bacteremia caused by MSSA, SCCmec type IV was more predominant in CAI than in HAI, and MRSA isolates not susceptible to novel anti-MRSA antimicrobials belonged to types II, III, or IV. Further studies that include comprehensive demographics and more detailed descriptions of other antimicrobial-resistant genes are urgently needed.

In-vitro activity of plazomicin, meropenem-vaborbactam, and omadacycline against carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative isolates in Egypt

Anti-microbial resistance is an escalating worldwide threat. Thus, there is an utmost necessity for the introduction of novel anti-microbial agents. This research aimed to evaluate the in-vitro activity of plazomicin, meropenem-vaborbactam, and omadacycline against carbapenem-resistant Gram-negative isolates gathered from one Egyptian University group of Hospitals. 210 intensive care units (ICU) and 113 non-ICU samples were included. Resistance to carbapenems was reported in 37.5% and 21.05% of the isolated Gram-negative ICU and non-ICU organisms respectively (P < 0.001). Via disc diffusion, the sensitivity rates for carbapenem-resistant non-ICU and ICU strains were 68.8% & 64.4% for plazomicin, 68.8% & 48.9% for meropenem-vaborbactam, and 56.25% & 44.5% for omadacycline, respectively. Regarding MIC₅₀/_90, it was 1/16 μg/mL for plazomicin and 4/32 μg/mL for both meropenem-vaborbactam and omadacycline separately. In conclusion, plazomicin displayed potent activity against carbapenem-resistant strains. Moreover, meropenem-vaborbactam and omadacycline demonstrated satisfactory results.

Activity of Omadacycline Alone and in Combination against Carbapenem-Nonsusceptible Acinetobacter baumannii with Varying Minocycline Susceptibility

Tetracycline-based combinations are increasingly used for serious carbapenem-nonsusceptible Acinetobacter baumannii (CNSAb) infections given their potent in vitro activity, synergism with other agents, and acceptable toxicity profile. Omadacycline is a novel aminomethylcycline with activity against minocycline-resistant pathogens, once daily oral dosing, and favorable pharmacokinetic properties. Given these potential advantages, the in vitro potency and antibacterial activity of omadacycline were evaluated alone and in combination against CNSAb with varying minocycline susceptibility. Broth microdilution testing of 41 CNSAb revealed that omadacycline (MIC50/90: 4/8 mg/L) inhibited 68.3% (28/41) of isolates at ≤4 mg/L and its activity was unaffected by minocycline nonsusceptibility (MIC50/90: 4/8 mg/L; 74.2% [23/31] inhibited at ≤4 mg/L). Ten (5 minocycline susceptible and 5 nonsusceptible) of the 41 CNSAb isolates were then evaluated in time-kill analyses against omadacycline and comparator agents alone and in dual- and triple-drug combinations at the free maximum concentration of drug in serum (fCmax). Amikacin, meropenem, and polymyxin B alone were each bactericidal against 4 of 10 (40%) isolates while omadacycline and sulbactam were bactericidal against 0 (0%) and 1 (10%), respectively. In dual-drug combinations with omadacycline, synergy was observed against 80% of isolates with sulbactam followed by 30% with amikacin or polymyxin B and 0% with meropenem or rifampin. The triple-drug combination of omadacycline, sulbactam, and polymyxin B achieved synergy against just one additional strain over the omadacycline-sulbactam dual combination but significantly reduced the time to 99.9% kill by more than 6 h (4.6 ± 2.8 h vs. 11.3 ± 5.9 h, P < 0.01). These results support the continued investigation into tetracycline-based combinations against CNSAb, particularly those including sulbactam, and suggest that omadacycline may have in vitro advantages over existing tetracycline-derivatives. IMPORTANCE Treatment of infections due to Acinetobacter baumannii often involves the use of multiple antibiotics simultaneously as combination therapy, but it is unknown which antibiotics are best used together. Tetracycline agents such as minocycline and tigecycline maintain good activity against A. baumannii and are often used with one or more other agents to achieve better killing of the bacteria. Omadacycline is a new tetracycline that may have a role in the treatment of A. baumannii, but no data are available evaluating its interaction with other commonly used drugs such as polymyxin B and sulbactam. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate the antibacterial activity of omadacycline when combined with one or more other agents against carbapenem-resistant strains of A. baumannii. These findings may then be used to design confirmatory studies that could help decide what drugs work best together and what combination of agents should be used for patients.

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.

Multicenter surveillance of in vitro activities of cefepime-zidebactam, cefepime-enmetazobactam, omadacycline, eravacycline, and comparator antibiotics against Enterobacterales, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and Acinetobacter baumannii complex causing bloodstream infection in Taiwan, 2020

OBJECTIVES

: To determine the in vitro activities of novel and comparator antibiotics against gram-negative bacteria (GNB) in Taiwan.

METHODS

: Isolates of Escherichia coli (n = 335), Klebsiella pneumoniae (n = 316; 144 isolates with hyperviscosity characteristics), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (n = 271), Acinetobacter baumannii complex species (n = 187), and non-typhoidal Salmonella species (n = 226), Shigella species (n = 13) from miscellaneous culture sources were collected in 2020 in Taiwan. The MICs of the isolates to test antibiotics were determined using the broth microdilution method. GeneXpert was used to detect genes encoding carbapenemases among the carbapenem-non-susceptible (NS) Enterobacterales isolates.

RESULTS

: The MIC values of the cefepime-enmetazobactam combination against extended-spectrum β-lactamase-producing E. coli and K. pneumoniae isolates (MIC₉₀ ≤ 0.5 mg/L), bla_KPC-harboring E. coli isolates (0.25 mg/L; n = 2), and 80% of bla_OXA-48-like gene-harboring K. pneumoniae isolates (≤2 mg/L) were low. The MIC ranges of the cefepime-zidebactam against carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales isolates (irrespective of the carbapenemase type [MIC₉₀ ≤ 4 mg/L]) and carbapenem-NS or ceftolozane-tazobactam-NS P. aeruginosa isolates (MIC₉₀ value, 8 mg/L) were significantly lower than those of the cefepime-enmetazobactam.

CONCLUSIONS

: The efficacy of novel antibiotics against important drug-resistant GNB must be monitored and validated during the clinical treatment of patients.

Surveillance of omadacycline activity tested against clinical isolates from the USA: report from the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program, 2019

OBJECTIVES

Omadacycline was tested against 7000 bacterial isolates collected prospectively from medical centres in the USA during 2019.

METHODS

Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed according to Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) guidelines.

RESULTS

Omadacycline was active against: Staphylococcus aureus (MIC_50/90, 0.12/0.25 mg/L; 98.3% susceptible), including methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA); Enterococcus faecalis (MIC_50/90, 0.06/0.25 mg/L; 100.0% susceptible), including vancomycin-resistant enterococci (VRE); Streptococcus pneumoniae (MIC_50/90, 0.06/0.06 mg/L; 99.8% susceptible); viridans group streptococci, including Streptococcus anginosus group (MIC_50/90, 0.03/0.06 mg/L; 100.0% susceptible); β-haemolytic streptococci, including Streptococcus pyogenes (MIC_50/90, 0.06/0.12 mg/L; 99.2% susceptible); Enterobacterales (MIC_50/90, 1/8 mg/L; 86.9% inhibited at ≤4 mg/L), including Escherichia coli (MIC_50/90, 0.5/2 mg/L; 99.6% inhibited at ≤4 mg/L); Enterobacter cloacae (MIC_50/90, 2/4 mg/L; 98.5% susceptible); Klebsiella pneumoniae (MIC_50/90, 1/4 mg/L; 93.2% susceptible); Acinetobacter baumannii (MIC_50/90, 0.5/4 mg/L; 90.8% inhibited at ≤4 mg/L); Haemophilus influenzae (MIC_50/90, 0.5/1 mg/L; 100.0% susceptible); and Moraxella catarrhalis (MIC_50/90, ≤0.12/0.25 mg/L).

CONCLUSION

The 2019 in vitro activity of omadacycline against key Gram-positive and Gram-negative pathogens has not changed compared with the prior 3 years of surveillance in the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program. Omadacycline merits further study in serious infections where resistant pathogens may be encountered.

Antimicrobial susceptibility of bacteremic vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium to eravacycline, omadacycline, lipoglycopeptides, and other comparator antibiotics: Results from the 2019-2020 Nationwide Surveillance of Multicenter Antimicrobial Resistance in Taiwan (SMART)

Multicenter surveillance of antimicrobial susceptibility was performed for 235 vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium (VREfm) isolates from 18 Taiwanese hospitals. The minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of eravacycline, omadacycline, lipoglycopeptides, and other comparator antibiotics were determined using the broth microdilution method. Nearly all isolates of VREfm were not susceptible to teicoplanin, dalbavancin, and telavancin, with susceptibility rates of 0.5%, 1.7% and 0.5%, respectively. Tigecycline and eravacycline were active against 93.2% and 89.7% of the VREfm isolates, respectively. Moreover, the susceptibility rates of quinupristin/dalfopristin, tedizolid, and linezolid were 59.1%, 84.2%, and 77.4%, respectively. Additionally, 94% of the VREfm isolates were classified as susceptible to daptomycin, and the MICs of omadacycline required to inhibit VREfm growth by 50% and 90% were 0.12 and 0.5 mg/L, respectively. Susceptibility rates of VREfm isolates to synthetic tetracyclines and daptomycin were slightly lower and to oxazolidinone-class antibiotics were much lower in Taiwan than those in other parts of the world. Continuous monitoring of VREfm resistance to novel antibiotics, including synthetic tetracyclines, oxazolidinone-class antibiotics, and daptomycin, is needed in Taiwan.

Molecular Characterization of Staphylococcus aureus Obtained from Blood Cultures of Paediatric Patients Treated in a Tertiary Care Hospital in Mexico

Purpose

Staphylococcus aureus is one of the main causative agents of hospital-acquired (HA) infections. In Mexico, information about the characteristics of clinical S. aureus isolates is limited. Our aim was to characterize S. aureus strains obtained from blood cultures of paediatric patients treated in a tertiary care hospital.

Materials and Methods

We analysed 249 S. aureus isolates over the period from 2006 to 2019, and their resistance profiles were determined. The isolates were classified into methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) or methicillin-sensitive S. aureus (MSSA). Staphylococcal cassettes chromosome mec (SCCmec) were detected. Virulence genes (cna, clfA, clfB, eta, etb, fnbA, fnbB, hla, pvl, sec, and tsst) were amplified, and their clonal relationships were established by pulsed-field gel electrophoresis (PFGE), multilocus sequence typing (MLST) and clonal complex (CC) typing. We reviewed one hundred medical files to collect clinical information.

Results

Thirty-eight percent of the isolates were MRSA and showed an expanded profile of resistance to other non-beta-lactam antibiotics, while MSSA strains presented a reduced resistance profile. SCCmec-II was the most frequent element (86.3%). Eight virulence factors were detected in MSSA and six in MRSA. The pvl gene was detected in four MRSA-SCCmec-IV isolates (P≤0.0001). MRSA isolates were distributed among 14 clones and were classified into 15 sequence types (ST); the most frequent was ST1011 (17%). The most common CC in MRSA was CC5 (69%, P≤0.0001), and in MSSA, it was CC30 (30%, P≤0.0001). Eighty-seven percent of MRSA isolates were HA-MRSA, and 13% were community-acquired MRSA (CA-MRSA). Of 21 HA-MRSA isolates, 17 had SCCmec-II, while two CA-MRSA isolates had SCCmec-IV. Of MSSA isolates, 77% were derived from HA infections and 23% from CA infections.

Conclusion

MSSA isolates had more virulence factors. MRSA isolates were resistant to more non-beta-lactam antibiotics, and those with SCCmec-IV expressed a greater variety of virulence factors. Most S. aureus isolates belonged to CC5.

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

BACKGROUND

Omadacycline (ZL-2401) is a semi-synthetic derivative of minocycline. It has a broadspectrum activity against Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria, and atypical pathogens. The objective of this study was to evaluate the antibacterial activity of omadacycline against recently collected bacterial isolates from Chinese patients.

RESULTS

Omadacycline showed potent activity against all Gram-positive pathogens: S. aureus MICs were low regardless of susceptibility to methicillin (methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, MRSA: N = 97, MIC_50/90 0.12/0.25 mg/L, 98.5% susceptible; methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus, MSSA: N = 100, MIC_50/90 0.12/0.12 mg/L, 100.0% susceptible). Omadacycline was also very effective against β-haemolytic streptococci (MIC_50/90, 0.06/0.12 mg/L), viridans group streptococci (MIC_50/90,<0.03/0. 06 mg/L), and enterococci (MIC_50/90, 0.03/0.12 mg/L). Against S. pneumoniae, omadacycline was highly active regardless of penicillin-resistance (MIC₉₀ 0.06 mg/L) and despite the fact that less than 10.0% of these strains were susceptible to tetracycline. Omadacycline exhibited good in vitro activity against Enterobacterales isolates (MIC_50/90, 2/8 mg/L), inhibiting 81.7% of the isolates at ≤4 mg/L. M. catarrhalis isolates (MIC_50/90, 0.12/0.25 mg/L) were fully susceptible to omadacycline at ≤0.5 mg/L.

CONCLUSIONS

Omadacycline showed potent in vitro activity against most common bacterial pathogens, and even against highly resistant problem pathogens, such as MRSA, penicillin-R and tetracycline-R S. pneumoniae and enterococci. The susceptibility rate of Chinese isolates was similar to those reported in other countries, but the decreased activity against K. pneumoniae isolates in the present study should be noted.

Omadacycline: A Novel Oral and Intravenous Aminomethylcycline Antibiotic Agent

Omadacycline is a novel aminomethylcycline antibiotic developed as a once-daily, intravenous and oral treatment for acute bacterial skin and skin structure infection (ABSSSI) and community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP). Omadacycline, a derivative of minocycline, has a chemical structure similar to tigecycline with an alkylaminomethyl group replacing the glycylamido group at the C-9 position of the D-ring of the tetracycline core. Similar to other tetracyclines, omadacycline inhibits bacterial protein synthesis by binding to the 30S ribosomal subunit. Omadacycline possesses broad-spectrum antibacterial activity against Gram-positive and Gram-negative aerobic, anaerobic, and atypical bacteria. Omadacycline remains active against bacterial isolates possessing common tetracycline resistance mechanisms such as efflux pumps (e.g., TetK) and ribosomal protection proteins (e.g., TetM) as well as in the presence of resistance mechanisms to other antibiotic classes. The pharmacokinetics of omadacycline are best described by a linear, three-compartment model following a zero-order intravenous infusion or first-order oral administration with transit compartments to account for delayed absorption. Omadacycline has a volume of distribution (V_d) ranging from 190 to 204 L, a terminal elimination half-life (t_½) of 13.5-17.1 h, total clearance (CL_T) of 8.8-10.6 L/h, and protein binding of 21.3% in healthy subjects. Oral bioavailability of omadacycline is estimated to be 34.5%. A single oral dose of 300 mg (bioequivalent to 100 mg IV) of omadacycline administered to fasted subjects achieved a maximum plasma concentration (C_max) of 0.5-0.6 mg/L and an area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to infinity (AUC_0-∞) of 9.6-11.9 mg h/L. The free plasma area under concentration-time curve divided by the minimum inhibitory concentration (i.e., fAUC_24h/MIC), has been established as the pharmacodynamic parameter predictive of omadacycline antibacterial efficacy. Several animal models including neutropenic murine lung infection, thigh infection, and intraperitoneal challenge model have documented the in vivo antibacterial efficacy of omadacycline. A phase II clinical trial on complicated skin and skin structure infection (cSSSI) and three phase III clinical trials on ABSSSI and CABP demonstrated the safety and efficacy of omadacycline. The phase III trials, OASIS-1 (ABSSSI), OASIS-2 (ABSSSI), and OPTIC (CABP), established non-inferiority of omadacycline to linezolid (OASIS-1, OASIS-2) and moxifloxacin (OPTIC), respectively. Omadacycline is currently approved by the FDA for use in treatment of ABSSSI and CABP. Phase II clinical trials involving patients with acute cystitis and acute pyelonephritis are in progress. Mild, transient gastrointestinal events are the predominant adverse effects associated with use of omadacycline. Based on clinical trial data to date, the adverse effect profile of omadacycline is similar to studied comparators, linezolid and moxifloxacin. Unlike tigecycline and eravacycline, omadacycline has an oral formulation that allows for step-down therapy from the intravenous formulation, potentially facilitating earlier hospital discharge, outpatient therapy, and cost savings. Omadacycline has a potential role as part of an antimicrobial stewardship program in the treatment of patients with infections caused by antibiotic-resistant and multidrug-resistant Gram-positive [including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA)] and Gram-negative pathogens.

Therapeutic Options for Infections due to vanB Genotype Vancomycin-Resistant Enterococci

Enterococci are ubiquitous, facultative, anaerobic Gram-positive bacteria that mainly reside, as part of the normal microbiota, in the gastrointestinal tracts of several animal species, including humans. These bacteria have the capability to turn from a normal gut commensal organism to an invasive pathogen in patients debilitated by prolonged hospitalization, concurrent illnesses, and/or exposed to broad-spectrum antibiotics. The majority of vancomycin-resistant enterococcus (VRE) infections are linked to the vanA genotype; however, outbreaks caused by vanB-type VREs have been increasingly reported, representing a new challenge for effective antimicrobial treatment. Teicoplanin, daptomycin, fosfomycin, and linezolid are useful antimicrobials for infections due to vanB enterococci. In addition, new drugs have been developed (e.g., dalbavancin, telavancin, and tedizolid), new molecules will soon be available (e.g., eravacycline, omadacycline, and oritavancin), and new treatment strategies are progressively being used in clinical practice (e.g., combination therapies and bacteriophages). The aim of this article is to discuss the pathogenesis of infections due to enterococci harboring the vanB operon (vanBVRE) and their therapeutic, state-of-the-art, and future treatment options and provide a comprehensive and easy to use review for clinical purposes.

In vitro activity of new tetracycline analogues omadacycline and eravacycline against clinical isolates of Helicobacter pylori collected in China

Omadacycline and eravacycline are newly approved tetracycline analogues with excellent activity against a broad spectrum of Gram-positive and Gram-negative microorganisms; however, no data are available regarding Helicobacter pylori. The susceptibility of 201 clinical isolates of H. pylori collected in China to omadacycline, eravacycline, and the comparator tetracycline was determined by an agar dilution method. They showed greater activity than tetracycline. The MIC_50/90 values of omadacycline, eravacycline, and tetracycline were 0.125/0.25 μg/mL, 0.063/0.125 μg/mL, and 0.25/1 μg/mL, respectively. Omadacycline and eravacycline were potent in vitro against all the isolates tested, including tetracycline-resistant strains, and warrant further investigation as potential antibiotics for H. pylori treatment.

Drugs for Gram-Negative Bugs From 2010-2019: A Decade in Review

A literature review spanning January 1, 2010, to December 31, 2019, was conducted using the PubMed and ISI Web of Science databases to determine the breadth of publication activity in the area of gram-negative bacteria antimicrobial therapy. The number of articles was used as a reflection of scholarly activity. First, PubMed was searched using the following Medical Subject Headings (MeSH): antibacterial agents, Enterobacteriaceae, Acinetobacter, and Pseudomonas. A total of 12 643 articles were identified within PubMed, and 77 862 articles were identified within ISI Web of Science that included these terms. Second, these articles were categorized by antibiotic class to identify relative contributions to the literature by drug category. Third, these studies were used to identify key trends in the treatment of gram-negative bacterial infections from the past decade. This review highlights advances made in the past 10 years in antibacterial pharmacotherapy and some of the challenges that await the next decade of practice.

Population Pharmacokinetic Analyses for Omadacycline Using Phase 1 and 3 Data

Omadacycline, a novel aminomethylcycline antibiotic with activity against Gram-positive and -negative organisms, including tetracycline-resistant pathogens, received FDA approval in October 2018 for the treatment of patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) and community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP). A previously developed population pharmacokinetic (PK) model based on phase 1 intravenous and oral PK data was refined using data from infected patients. Data from 10 phase 1 studies used to develop the previous model were pooled with data from three additional phase 1 studies, a phase 1b uncomplicated urinary tract infection study, one phase 3 CABP study, and two phase 3 ABSSSI studies. The final population PK model was a three-compartment model with first-order absorption using transit compartments to account for absorption delay following oral dosing and first-order elimination. Epithelial lining fluid (ELF) concentrations were modeled as a subcompartment of the first peripheral compartment. A food effect on oral bioavailability was included in the model. Sex was the only significant covariate identified, with 15.6% lower clearance for females than males. Goodness-of-fit diagnostics indicated a precise and unbiased fit to the data. The final model, which was robust in its ability to predict plasma and ELF exposures following omadacycline administration, was also able to predict the central tendency and variability in concentration-time profiles using an external phase 3 ABSSSI data set. A population PK model, which described omadacycline PK in healthy subjects and infected patients, was developed and subsequently used to support pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) and PK-PD target attainment assessments.

In vitro activity of omadacycline against pathogens isolated from Mainland China during 2017-2018

Antibiotic resistance of bacterial pathogens isolated in China is a major concern. Omadacycline is a novel tetracycline derivative that has been approved for use in skin infections and community-acquired pneumonia. This study was conducted to determine the in vitro activity of omadacycline against a large collection of patient isolate medical centers across Mainland China. A total of 1041 recent clinical isolates are obtained from patients hospitalized in 29 provinces and municipalities across China. The in vitro activity of omadacycline and comparator agents was assessed using the microbroth dilution methodology. Omadacycline was active against methicillin-susceptible and -resistant Staphylococcus aureus with MIC₉₀ values of 0.25 and 1 mg/L, respectively. All isolates of Enterococcus faecalis and Enterococcus faecium, including vancomycin-resistant isolates, were inhibited by ≤ 0.25 mg/L of omadacycline. It was active against Streptococcus pneumoniae irrespective of susceptibility to penicillin or macrolides (MIC₉₀ =0.12 mg/L). The minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) distribution of omadacycline was nearly identical against (extended-spectrum beta-lactamases) ESBL-positive, ESBL-negative, and carbapenemase-producing Escherichia coli (MIC₉₀ = 4 mg/L). Omadacycline also showed good activity against Acinetobacter baumannii, inhibiting all isolates at ≤ 8 mg/L. Against Hemophilus influenzae and Moraxella catarrhalis, the MICs of omadacycline were low and not influenced by the presence of β-lactamase. Overall, the activity of omadacycline was very good against isolates commonly associated with skin infections and pneumonia, and the susceptibility of Chinese isolates was similar to that reported for these pathogens from large surveillance studies outside China. This suggests that omadacycline could be an option for treatment of these infections in Chinese patients.

Surveillance of Omadacycline Activity Tested against Clinical Isolates from the United States and Europe: Report from the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program, 2016 to 2018

Omadacycline is a broad-spectrum aminomethylcycline approved in October 2018 by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for treating acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections and community-acquired pneumonia as both an oral and intravenous once-daily formulation. In this report, the activities of omadacycline and comparators were tested against 49,000 nonduplicate bacterial isolates collected prospectively during 2016 to 2018 from medical centers in Europe (24,500 isolates, 40 medical centers [19 countries]) and the United States (24,500 isolates, 33 medical centers [23 states and all 9 U.S. census divisions]). Omadacycline was tested by broth microdilution following the methods in Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute document M07 (Methods for Dilution Antimicrobial Susceptibility Tests for Bacteria That Grow Aerobically; Approved Standard, 11th ed., 2018). Omadacycline (MIC_50/90, 0.12/0.25 mg/liter) inhibited 98.6% of Staphylococcus aureus isolates at ≤0.5 mg/liter, including 96.3% of methicillin-resistant S. aureus isolates and 99.8% of methicillin-susceptible S. aureus isolates. Omadacycline potency was comparable for Streptococcus pneumoniae (MIC_50/90, 0.06/0.12 mg/liter), viridans group streptococci (MIC_50/90, 0.06/0.12 mg/liter), and beta-hemolytic streptococci (MIC_50/90, 0.12/0.25 mg/liter), regardless of species and susceptibility to penicillin, macrolides, or tetracycline. Omadacycline was active against all Enterobacterales tested (MIC_50/90, 1/8 mg/liter; 87.5% of isolates were inhibited at ≤4 mg/liter) except Proteus mirabilis (MIC_50/90, 16/>32 mg/liter) and indole-positive Proteus spp. (MIC_50/90, 8/32 mg/liter) and was most active against Escherichia coli (MIC_50/90, 0.5/2 mg/liter), Klebsiella oxytoca (MIC_50/90, 1/2 mg/liter), and Citrobacter spp. (MIC_50/90, 1/4 mg/liter). Omadacycline inhibited 92.4% of Enterobacter cloacae species complex and 88.5% of Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates at ≤4 mg/liter. Omadacycline was active against Haemophilus influenzae (MIC_50/90, 0.5/1 mg/liter), regardless of β-lactamase status, and against Moraxella catarrhalis (MIC_50/90, ≤0.12/0.25 mg/liter). The potent activity of omadacycline against Gram-positive and -negative bacteria indicates that omadacycline merits further study in serious infections in which multidrug resistance and mixed Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacterial infections may be a concern.

The efficacy and safety of omadacycline in treatment of acute bacterial infection: A systemic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

This study aims to assess the clinical efficacy and safety of omadacycline for the treatment of acute bacterial infections in adult patients through meta-analysis.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Cochrane databases were searched up to May 2019. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated omadacycline and other comparators for treating acute bacterial infections in adult patients were included. The primary outcome was the clinical response rate at the posttreatment evaluation, whereas the secondary outcomes were risk of an adverse event (AE) and mortality.

RESULTS

Four RCTs were included. Overall, omadacycline had a clinical response rate noninferior to comparators in the treatment of acute bacterial infection in the modified intent-to-treat population (odds ratio [OR], 1.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04-1.65; I = 0%) and in the clinically evaluable population (OR, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.11-2.11; I = 0%). Furthermore, no significant differences were found between omadacycline and comparators for the risk of treatment-emergent AEs (OR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.60-2.14; I = 93%), treatment-related AEs (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.46-1.04; I = 56%), serious AEs (OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.64-1.58; I = 0%), and discontinuation of study drug due to an AE (OR, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.47-1.29; I = 0%). However, in the clinical trial, NCT02877927, in which omadacycline was used in only oral form, the reported incidence of nausea and vomiting were 30.2% (111/368) and 16.9% (62/368), respectively. Finally, the mortality rate was similar between omadacycline and comparator in the treatment of acute bacterial infection (OR, 1.32; 95% CI, 0.47-3.67; I = 0%).

CONCLUSION

The clinical efficacy of omadacycline is not inferior to that of comparators in the treatment of acute bacterial infections in adult patients, and this antibiotic is also well tolerated.

Novel Tetracyclines Versus Alternative Antibiotics for Treating Acute Bacterial Infection: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

This meta-analysis assessed the efficacy and safety of novel tetracyclines for treating acute bacterial infections. Data from PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCO, Cochrane databases, Ovid Medline, and Embase databases were accessed until 11 July 2019. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy of novel tetracyclines with that of other antibiotics for treating acute bacterial infections were included. Primary outcomes included the clinical response, microbiological response, and risk of adverse events (AEs). A total of eight RCTs were included, involving 2283 and 2197 patients who received novel tetracyclines and comparators, respectively. Overall, no significant difference was observed in the clinical response rate at test of cure between the experimental and control groups (for modified intent-to-treat [MITT] population, risk ratio [RR]: 1.02, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.99–1.05; for clinically evaluable [CE] population, RR: 1.02, 95% CI: 1.00–1.04; and for microbiological evaluable [ME] population, RR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.99–1.04). No significant difference in the microbiological response at the end of treatment was observed between the experimental and control groups (for ME population, RR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.99–1.03; for microbiological MITT population, RR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.96–1.07). No difference was observed concerning the risk of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), serious adverse events, and discontinuation of treatment due to TEAEs and all-cause mortality between the two groups. In conclusion, clinical efficacy and safety profile for novel tetracyclines in the treatment of acute bacterial infections were found to be similar to those for other available antibiotics.