Linezolid tolerability in multidrug-resistant tuberculosis: a retrospective study

Linezolid and tedizolid adverse effects: a review on serotonin syndrome, myelosuppression, neuropathies, and lactic acidosis

Oxazolidinone antibiotics-linezolid and tedizolid-are often used to treat multidrug-resistant infections. They are highly bioavailable and ideal for transition to enteral therapy when appropriate. However, multiple associated adverse effects are potentially treatment-limiting. The objective of this review is to discuss relevant adverse effects of linezolid and tedizolid, including serotonin syndrome, myelosuppression, neuropathies, and lactic acidosis, and their commonality in real-world experience in the last decade. Mitigation strategies, including the role of therapeutic drug monitoring, are also discussed.

Linezolid Pharmacokinetic-Anemia Modeling in Children With Rifampicin-Resistant Tuberculosis

BACKGROUND

Linezolid, a component of rifampicin-resistant/multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (RR/MDR-TB) treatment, is associated with treatment-limiting toxicities, including anemia. Patient-level and linezolid pharmacokinetic risk factors for anemia have not been well described in children treated for RR/MDR-TB.

METHODS

We evaluated the pharmacokinetics of linezolid and longitudinal hemoglobin data to validate an existing population linezolid pharmacokinetic model. We assessed the impact of linezolid pharmacokinetics and the risk of developing anemia in a prospectively enrolled cohort of children. A previously published population pharmacokinetic linezolid model was validated using nonlinear mixed effects modeling. A multivariable ordinal logistic regression model was built to predict the incidence of anemia.

RESULTS

A total of 112 children, median age 7.2 years (interquartile range, 2.2-16.3), were included from South Africa (n = 87) and India (n = 25). Of these, 24 children contributed new linezolid pharmacokinetic data. The population pharmacokinetic model, which informs the currently recommended linezolid dosing in children (10-15 mg/kg), was validated with these additional new data. For every 1 g/dL lower baseline hemoglobin level, the odds of developing grade 3 or 4 anemia increased by 2.64 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.98-3.62). For every 1 mg/L × h higher linezolid area under the concentration-time curve, the odds of developing grade 3 or 4 anemia increased by 1.012 (95% CI, 1.007-1.017).

CONCLUSIONS

Taken together, these data confirm currently recommended linezolid doses for children. The risk of anemia in children should be carefully considered and monitored. Initiating linezolid in children with low baseline hemoglobin increases the probability of experiencing grade 3 or 4 anemia.

Long-Term Intake of Linezolid Elevates Drug Exposure and Reduces Drug Clearance and Elimination in Adults With Drug-Resistant Pulmonary Tuberculosis

PURPOSE

Pharmacokinetic (PK) studies are critical for dose optimization, and there is a paucity of linezolid (LZD) PK data for prolonged use in drug-resistant tuberculosis (DR-TB). Therefore, the authors evaluated the pharmacokinetics of LZD at two-time intervals in DR-TB during long-term use.

METHODS

PK evaluation of LZD was performed at the end of the 8th and 16th weeks of treatment in a randomly selected subset of adult pre-extensively drug-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis patients (n = 18) from a multicentric interventional study (Building Evidence to Advance Treatment of TB/BEAT study; CTRI/2019/01/017310), wherein a daily dose of 600 mg LZD was used for 24 weeks. Plasma LZD levels were measured using a validated high-pressure liquid chromatography (HPLC) method.

RESULTS

The LZD median plasma C max was comparable between the 8th and 16th weeks [18.3 mg/L, interquartile range (IQR: 15.5-20.8 and 18.8 mg/L, IQR: 16.0-22.7, respectively)]. However, the trough concentration increased significantly in the 16th week (3.16 mg/L, IQR: 2.30-4.76), compared with the 8th week (1.98 mg/L, IQR: 0.93-2.75). Furthermore, compared with the 8th week, in the 16th week, there was a significant increase in drug exposure (AUC 0-24 = 184.2 mg*h/L, IQR: 156.4-215.8 versus 233.2 mg*h/L, IQR: 187.9-277.2), which corroborated with a longer elimination half-life (6.94 hours, IQR: 5.55-7.99 versus 8.47 hours, IQR:7.36-11.35) and decreased clearance (2.91 L/h, IQR: 2.45-3.33 versus 2.19 L/h, IQR: 1.49-2.78).

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term daily intake of 600 mg LZD resulted in a significant elevation in trough concentration (>2.0 mg/L) in 83% of the study participants. Furthermore, increased LZD drug exposure may be partly because of decreased clearance and elimination. Overall, the PK data underscore the need for dose adjustment when LZDs are intended for long-term treatment.

Limited sampling strategies for therapeutic drug monitoring of anti-tuberculosis medications: A systematic review of their feasibility and clinical utility

Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is recommended for medications with high inter-individual variability, narrow therapeutic index drugs, possible drug-drug interactions, drug toxicity, and subtherapeutic concentrations, as well as to assess noncompliance. The area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) is a significant pharmacokinetic parameter since it calculates the drug's total systematic exposure in the body. However, multiple blood samples from the patient are required to calculate the area under the curve, which is inconvenient for both the patient and the healthcare professional. To alleviate the issue, the limited sampling strategy (LSS) was devised, in which sampling is minimized while obtaining complete and precise findings to anticipate the area under the curve. One can reduce costs, labor, and discomfort for patients and healthcare workers by applying this limited sampling strategy. This article examines a systematic evaluation of all the limited sampling done in anti-tuberculosis (anti-TB) medications resulting from the literature search of several research papers. This article also briefly describes the two methodologies: Multiple regression analysis (MRA) and the Bayesian approach used to develop a limited sampling strategy model. Anti-TB medications have been found to have considerable inter-individual variability, and isoniazid has a narrow therapeutic index, both of which are criteria for therapeutic drug monitoring. To avoid multi-drug resistance and therapy failure, it is proposed that limited sampling strategy-based therapeutic drug monitoring of anti-TB medications be undertaken to generate an individualized dose regimen, particularly for individuals at high risk of treatment failure or delayed response.

Association Between Increased Linezolid Plasma Concentrations and the Development of Severe Toxicity in Multidrug-Resistant Tuberculosis Treatment

BACKGROUND

Treatment of multidrug-resistant (MDR) tuberculosis with linezolid is characterized by high rates of adverse events. Evidence on therapeutic drug monitoring to predict drug toxicity is scarce. This study aimed to evaluate the association of linezolid trough concentrations with severe toxicity.

METHODS

We retrospectively assessed consecutive patients started on linezolid for MDR tuberculosis between 2011 and 2017. The primary outcome was severe mitochondrial toxicity (SMT) due to linezolid, defined as neurotoxicity or myelotoxicity leading to drug discontinuation. The impact of plasma linezolid trough concentrations >2 mg/L was assessed in multivariate Cox proportional hazards models including time-varying covariates.

RESULTS

SMT occurred in 57 of 146 included patients (39%) at an incidence rate of 0.38 per person-year (95% confidence interval, .30-.49). A maximum linezolid trough concentration >2 mg/L was detected in 52 patients (35.6%), while the mean trough concentration was >2 mg/L in 22 (15%). The adjusted hazard ratio for SMT was 2.35 (95% confidence interval, 1.26-4.38; P = .01) in patients with a mean trough concentration >2 mg/L and 2.63 (1.55-4.47; P < .01) for SMT after the first detection of a trough concentration >2 mg/L. In an exploratory analysis, higher maximum trough concentrations were dose-dependently associated with toxicity, while lowering elevated trough concentrations did not restore baseline risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Linezolid trough concentrations >2 mg/L are strongly associated with the development of severe treatment-emergent toxicity in patients treated for MDR tuberculosis. Pending further prospective evidence, an individual risk-benefit assessment on the continuation of linezolid treatment is warranted in any patient with trough concentrations >2 mg/L.

Expert consensus statement on therapeutic drug monitoring and individualization of linezolid

Linezolid is an oxazolidinone antibacterial drug, and its therapeutic drug monitoring and individualized treatment have been challenged since its approval. With the in-depth clinical research of linezolid, we have changed our attitude toward its therapeutic drug monitoring and our view of individualized treatment. On the basis of summarizing the existing clinical studies, and based on the practical experience of each expert in their respective professional fields, we have formed this expert consensus. Our team of specialists is a multidisciplinary team that includes pharmacotherapists, clinical pharmacology specialists, critical care medicine specialists, respiratory specialists, infectious disease specialists, emergency medicine specialists and more. We are committed to the safe and effective use of linezolid in patients in need, and the promotion of its therapeutic drug monitoring.

Linezolid-Associated Neuropathy in Patients with MDR/XDR Tuberculosis in Shenzhen, China

Objective

Linezolid is one of the key drugs for the treatment of multidrug-resistant/extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR/XDR-TB). We aimed to describe the incorporation of the Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument (MNSI) and serum trough concentration as screening tools for neurotoxicity in the management of MDR/XDR-TB patients receiving a linezolid-based treatment regimen in Shenzhen, China.

Methods

A total of 73 patients on a linezolid-containing anti–MDR/XDR-TB regimen were prospectively enrolled. The MNSI was used for peripheral neuropathy screening. Optic neuropathy was diagnosed by ophthalmologists. Serum trough concentration was recorded and its relationship with neuropathy analyzed.

Results

Of all patients, neuropathy was observed in 40% (29) during anti-TB treatment. Of these, 20 (69%) had peripheral neuritis, seven (24%) optic neuritis, and two (7%) both. Serum trough concentration >2 mg/L was observed in 17 (59%) patients with neuropathy and 13 (30%) patients without neuropathy. There was a significant statistical difference between the two groups (P=0.013). Time to onset of neuropathy from initiation of the linezolid-containing regimen was within 2 months for eight (28%) patients, 2–6 months for 18 (62%) patients, and >6 months for three (10%) patients. Sixteen (55%) patients were adjusted to a lower dose of 300 mg linezolid daily. Four (14%) patients had linezolid permanently removed from their regimen.

Conclusion

Neuropathy is a commonly reported adverse event associated with long-term use of linezolid. MNSI and serum trough–concentration monitoring can be adopted as simple screening tools for early detection of neuropathy to balance linezolid efficacy and tolerability.

Linezolid toxicity in patients with drug-resistant tuberculosis: a prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Linezolid is recommended for treating drug-resistant TB. Adverse events are a concern to prescribers but have not been systematically studied at the standard dose, and the relationship between linezolid exposure and clinical toxicity is not completely elucidated.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted an observational cohort study to describe the incidence and determinants of linezolid toxicity, and to determine a drug exposure threshold for toxicity, among patients with rifampicin-resistant TB in South Africa. Linezolid exposures were estimated from a population pharmacokinetic model. Mixed-effects modelling was used to analyse toxicity outcomes.

RESULTS

One hundred and fifty-one participants, 63% HIV positive, were enrolled and followed for a median of 86 weeks. Linezolid was permanently discontinued for toxicity in 32 (21%) participants. Grade 3 or 4 linezolid-associated adverse events occurred in 21 (14%) participants. Mean haemoglobin concentrations increased with time on treatment (0.03 g/dL per week; 95% CI 0.02-0.03). Linezolid trough concentration, male sex and age (but not HIV positivity) were independently associated with a decrease in haemoglobin >2 g/dL. Trough linezolid concentration of 2.5 mg/L or higher resulted in optimal model performance to describe changing haemoglobin and treatment-emergent anaemia (adjusted OR 2.9; 95% CI 1.3-6.8). SNPs 2706A > G and 3010G > A in mitochondrial DNA were not associated with linezolid toxicity.

CONCLUSIONS

Permanent discontinuation of linezolid was common, but linezolid-containing therapy was associated with average improvement in toxicity measures. HIV co-infection was not independently associated with linezolid toxicity. Linezolid trough concentration of 2.5 mg/L should be evaluated as a target for therapeutic drug monitoring.

Proposed linezolid dosing strategies to minimize adverse events for treatment of extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis

BACKGROUND

We evaluated clinical trial data (Nix-TB, NCT02333799) to provide data-driven dosing recommendations to potentially minimize linezolid toxicity in patients with extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis.

METHODS

Based on 104 participants, a pharmacokinetic model and toxicodynamic models for peripheral neuropathy, hemoglobin, and platelets were developed. Simulations compared safety outcomes for daily linezolid of 1200 and 600 mg, with and without dose adjustments for toxicity. Severe neuropathy was based on symptom scores from the Brief Peripheral Neuropathy Screen. Severe anemia and thrombocytopenia were defined as ≥grade 3 adverse events according to the Division of Microbiology and Infectious Disease Adult Toxicity table.

RESULTS

Predicted individual concentration-time profiles were a major predictor in all three toxicodynamic models. Simulations showed higher percentages of patients with severe neuropathy (median: 19% (90%CI: 17-22%) vs 5% (4-7%)) and severe anemia (15% (12-17%) vs 1% (0-2%)) between 1200 and 600 mg daily linezolid. No differences in severe thrombocytopenia were observed (median: <1% for both daily doses). Generally, neuropathy occurred after 3 to 6 months of treatment and, with protocol-specified management, reversed within 15 months after onset. Simulations indicated that a >10% decrease from pretreatment in hemoglobin level after 4 weeks of treatment would have maximum sensitivity (82%) and specificity (84%) for predicting severe anemia. Reducing dose from 1200 to 600 mg triggered by this marker may prevent 60% (90%CI: 45-72) of severe anemia.

CONCLUSIONS

Simple neuropathy symptom and hemoglobin monitoring may guide linezolid dosing to avoid toxicities, but prospective testing is needed to confirm benefit-to-risk ratio.

Repurposing Immunomodulatory Drugs to Combat Tuberculosis

Tuberculosis (TB) is an infectious disease caused by an obligate intracellular pathogen, Mycobacterium tuberculosis (M.tb) and is responsible for the maximum number of deaths due to a single infectious agent. Current therapy for TB, Directly Observed Treatment Short-course (DOTS) comprises multiple antibiotics administered in combination for 6 months, which eliminates the bacteria and prevents the emergence of drug-resistance in patients if followed as prescribed. However, due to various limitations viz., severe toxicity, low efficacy and long duration; patients struggle to comply with the prescribed therapy, which leads to the development of drug resistance (DR). The emergence of resistance to various front-line anti-TB drugs urgently require the introduction of new TB drugs, to cure DR patients and to shorten the treatment course for both drug-susceptible and resistant populations of bacteria. However, the development of a novel drug regimen involving 2-3 new and effective drugs will require approximately 20-30 years and huge expenditure, as seen during the discovery of bedaquiline and delamanid. These limitations make the field of drug-repurposing indispensable and repurposing of pre-existing drugs licensed for other diseases has tremendous scope in anti-DR-TB therapy. These repurposed drugs target multiple pathways, thus reducing the risk of development of drug resistance. In this review, we have discussed some of the repurposed drugs that have shown very promising results against TB. The list includes sulfonamides, sulfanilamide, sulfadiazine, clofazimine, linezolid, amoxicillin/clavulanic acid, carbapenems, metformin, verapamil, fluoroquinolones, statins and NSAIDs and their mechanism of action with special emphasis on their immunomodulatory effects on the host to attain both host-directed and pathogen-targeted therapy. We have also focused on the studies involving the synergistic effect of these drugs with existing TB drugs in order to translate their potential as adjunct therapies against TB.

Pharmacogenomics of Antibiotics

Although the introduction of antibiotics in medicine has resulted in one of the most successful events and in a major breakthrough to reduce morbidity and mortality caused by infectious disease, response to these agents is not always predictable, leading to differences in their efficacy, and sometimes to the occurrence of adverse effects. Genetic variability, resulting in differences in the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of antibiotics, is often involved in the variable response, of particular importance are polymorphisms in genes encoding for drug metabolizing enzymes and membrane transporters. In addition, variations in the human leukocyte antigen (HLA) class I and class II genes have been associated with different immune mediated reactions induced by antibiotics. In recent years, the importance of pharmacogenetics in the personalization of therapies has been recognized in various clinical fields, although not clearly in the context of antibiotic therapy. In this review, we make an overview of antibiotic pharmacogenomics and of its potential role in optimizing drug therapy and reducing adverse reactions.

Advantages and Challenges of Tailored Regimens for Drug-Resistant Tuberculosis: A StopTB Italia Look into the Future

The emerge of drug-resistant tuberculosis (TB) strain in recent decades is hampering the efforts of the international community to eliminate the disease worldwide. The World Health Organization (WHO) has drafted many strategies to achieve this ambitious goal. In the very beginning, the aim was to standardize inadequate regimens used in many countries and, thereafter, evolved to tackle the social determinants which hinder TB elimination. However, following the path of narrowing the clinical vision to deal with TB, there is an increased need to personalize the treatment considering both patients and pathogen unique characteristics. In our narrative review, we report the advantages and the backwards in developing a method to implement the concept of precision medicine to the treatment of TB. In this dissertation, we highlight the importance to address different aspects of the diseases encompassing the host and pathogen features, as well as the needs to further implement an adequate follow-up based on the available resources. Nevertheless, many things may hamper the vision of precision medicine in TB, such as the complexity and the costs to develop novel compounds and the costs related to global-scale implementation of patient-centered follow-up. To achieve the ambitious goal of TB elimination, a radical change in TB treatment is needed in order to give a more comprehensive approach based both on patients’ peculiarities and driven by drug susceptibility tests and whole-genome sequencing.

Linezolid-Associated Neurologic Adverse Events in Patients with Multidrug-Resistant Tuberculosis, France

Linezolid is one of the most effective drugs for treating multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR TB), but adverse effects remain problematic. We evaluated 57 MDR TB patients who had received >1 dose of linezolid during 2011–2016. Overall, patients received 600 mg/day of linezolid for a median of 13 months. In 33 (58%) patients, neurologic or ophthalmologic signs developed, and 18 (32%) had confirmed peripheral neuropathy, which for 78% was irreversible at 12 months after the end of TB treatment despite linezolid withdrawal. Among the 19 patients who underwent ophthalmologic evaluation, 14 patients had optic neuropathy that fully reversed for 2. A total of 16 (33%) of 49 patients had a linezolid trough concentration >2 mg/L, and among these, 14 (88%) experienced adverse effects. No significant association was found between trough concentration and neurologic toxicity. These findings suggest the need to closely monitor patients for neurologic signs and discuss optimal duration of linezolid treatment.

Pharmacologic management of Mycobacterium ulcerans infection

INTRODUCTION

Pharmacological treatment of Buruli ulcer (Mycobacterium ulcerans infection; BU) is highly effective, as shown in two randomized trials in Africa.

AREAS COVERED

We review BU drug treatment - in vitro, in vivo and clinical trials (PubMed: '(Buruli OR (Mycobacterium AND ulcerans)) AND (treatment OR therapy).' We also highlight the pathogenesis of M. ulcerans infection that is dominated by mycolactone, a secreted exotoxin, that causes skin and soft tissue necrosis, and impaired immune response and tissue repair. Healing is slow, due to the delayed wash-out of mycolactone. An array of repurposed tuberculosis and leprosy drugs appears effective in vitro and in animal models. In clinical trials and observational studies, only rifamycins (notably, rifampicin), macrolides (notably, clarithromycin), aminoglycosides (notably, streptomycin) and fluoroquinolones (notably, moxifloxacin, and ciprofloxacin) have been tested.

EXPERT OPINION

A combination of rifampicin and clarithromycin is highly effective but lesions still take a long time to heal. Novel drugs like telacebec have the potential to reduce treatment duration but this drug may remain unaffordable in low-resourced settings. Research should address ulcer treatment in general; essays to measure mycolactone over time hold promise to use as a readout for studies to compare drug treatment schedules for larger lesions of Buruli ulcer.

Linezolid use for drug-resistant tuberculosis in Georgia: a retrospective cohort study

SETTING: Data on the long-term use of linezolid (LZD) in the treatment of drug-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis (DR-PTB) are limited.OBJECTIVE: To assess safety, tolerability and efficacy of LZD-containing regimens for the treatment of DR-PTB in the country of Georgia.DESIGN: A retrospective study was conducted among DR-PTB patients receiving LZD 600 mg/day as part of newly implemented regimens (bedaquiline or delamanid, repurposed and second-line drugs) from July 2014 to October 2015 in programmatic conditions and following WHO recommendations.RESULTS: One hundred mostly male (82%) patients with a median age of 33 years received LZD. Most patients (77%) had previously been treated for TB; 57% had extensively drug-resistant TB. The median duration of LZD use was 503 days (interquartile range 355-616). LZD-associated adverse events occurred in 12 patients, leading to discontinuation in 4 (2 each due to peripheral neuropathy and cytopenias), and dose reduction to 300 mg/day in 6 cases (4 due to peripheral neuropathy and 2 for cytopenias). Almost all patients (95%) achieved culture conversion and 79% had a successful treatment outcomes.CONCLUSION: Treatment regimens including lengthy LZD use showed fairly good safety and tolerability and were associated with high rates of culture conversion and favorable outcomes.

Linezolid-based Regimens for Multidrug-resistant Tuberculosis (TB): A Systematic Review to Establish or Revise the Current Recommended Dose for TB Treatment

Linezolid has been successfully used for treatment of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB). However, dose- and duration-related toxicity limit its use. Here, our aim was to search relevant pharmacokinetics (PK)/pharmacodynamics (PD) literature to identify the effective PK/PD index and to define the optimal daily dose and dosing frequency of linezolid in MDR-TB regimens. The systematic search resulted in 8 studies that met inclusion criteria. A significant PK variability was observed. Efficacy of linezolid seems to be driven by area under the concentration-time curve (AUC)/minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC). Literature is inconclusive about the preferred administration of a daily dose of 600 mg. To prevent development of drug resistance, an AUC/MIC ratio of 100 in the presence of a companion drug at relevant exposure is required. A daily dose of 600 mg seems appropriate to balance between efficacy and toxicity. Being a drug with a very narrow therapeutic window, linezolid treatment may benefit from a more personalized approach, that is, measuring actual MIC values and therapeutic drug monitoring.

Linezolid pharmacokinetics in MDR-TB: a systematic review, meta-analysis and Monte Carlo simulation

Objectives

The oxazolidinone linezolid is an effective component of drug-resistant TB treatment, but its use is limited by toxicity and the optimum dose is uncertain. Current strategies are not informed by clinical pharmacokinetic (PK)/pharmacodynamic (PD) data; we aimed to address this gap.

Methods

We defined linezolid PK/PD targets for efficacy (fAUC_0–24:MIC >119 mg/L/h) and safety (fC_min <1.38 mg/L). We extracted individual-level linezolid PK data from existing studies on TB patients and performed meta-analysis, producing summary estimates of fAUC_0–24 and fC_min for published doses. Combining these with a published MIC distribution, we performed Monte Carlo simulations of target attainment.

Results

The efficacy target was attained in all simulated individuals at 300 mg q12h and 600 mg q12h, but only 20.7% missed the safety target at 300 mg q12h versus 98.5% at 600 mg q12h. Although suggesting 300 mg q12h should be used preferentially, these data were reliant on a single centre. Efficacy and safety targets were missed by 41.0% and 24.2%, respectively, at 300 mg q24h and by 44.6% and 27.5%, respectively, at 600 mg q24h. However, the confounding effect of between-study heterogeneity on target attainment for q24h regimens was considerable.

Conclusions

Linezolid dosing at 300 mg q12h may retain the efficacy of the 600 mg q12h licensed dosing with improved safety. Data to evaluate commonly used 300 mg q24h and 600 mg q24h doses are limited. Comprehensive, prospectively obtained PK/PD data for linezolid doses in drug-resistant TB treatment are required.

Linezolid interruption in patients with fluoroquinolone-resistant tuberculosis receiving a bedaquiline-based treatment regimen

BACKGROUND

Treatment outcomes of patients with extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis (XDR-TB) are suboptimal and treatment options remain limited. Linezolid is associated with improved outcomes but also substantial toxicity, and details about the relationship between these are lacking from resource-poor HIV-endemic settings.

METHODS

This was a prospective follow-up study of 63 South African XDR-TB patients (58.7% HIV-infected; median CD4 131 cells/μl) between 2014 and 2018. The frequency and severity of linezolid-associated adverse events and the impact on treatment outcomes were compared between linezolid interrupters and non-interrupters.

RESULTS

Twenty-two patients (34.9%) discontinued or underwent dose reduction due to presumed linezolid-associated toxicity. Anaemia (77.3% vs. 7.3%; p< 0.001), peripheral neuropathy (63.6% vs. 14.6%; p= 0.003), and optic neuritis (18.2% vs. 9.8%; p= 0.34) occurred more frequently in linezolid interrupters than in non-interrupters. Anaemia, peripheral neuropathy, and optic neuritis occurred at a median of 5, 18, and 23 weeks, respectively, after treatment initiation. Linezolid interruption was not associated with unfavourable outcomes but was strongly associated with HIV co-infection (adjusted hazard ratio 4.831, 95% confidence interval 1.526-15.297; p= 0.007) and bacterial load (culture days to positivity; adjusted hazard ratio 0.824, 95% confidence interval 0.732- 0.927; p= 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Linezolid-related treatment interruption is common, is strongly associated with HIV co-infection, and system-specific toxicity occurs within predictable time frames. These data inform the clinical management of patients with drug-resistant TB.

Linezolid for drug-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis

BACKGROUND

Linezolid was recently re-classified as a Group A drug by the World Health Organization (WHO) for treatment of multi-drug resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB) and extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis (XDR-TB), suggesting that it should be included in the regimen for all patients unless contraindicated. Linezolid use carries a considerable risk of toxicity, with the optimal dose and duration remaining unclear. Current guidelines are mainly based on evidence from observational non-comparative studies.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of linezolid when used as part of a second-line regimen for treating people with MDR and XDR pulmonary tuberculosis, and to assess the prevalence and severity of adverse events associated with linezolid use in this patient group.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases: the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Specialized Register; CENTRAL; MEDLINE; Embase; and LILACS up to 13 July 2018. We also checked article reference lists and contacted researchers in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies in which some participants received linezolid, and others did not. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of linezolid for MDR and XDR pulmonary tuberculosis to evaluate efficacy outcomes. We added non-randomized cohort studies to evaluate adverse events.Primary outcomes were all-cause and tuberculosis-associated death, treatment failure, and cure. Secondary outcomes were treatment interrupted, treatment completed, and time to sputum culture conversion. We recorded frequency of all and serious adverse events, adverse events leading to drug discontinuation or dose reduction, and adverse events attributed to linezolid, particularly neuropathy, anaemia, and thrombocytopenia.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors (BS and DC) independently assessed the search results for eligibility and extracted data from included studies. All review authors assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool for RCTs and the ROBINS-I tool for non-randomized studies. We contacted study authors for clarification and additional data when necessary.We were unable to perform a meta-analysis as one of the RCTs adopted a study design where participants in the study group received linezolid immediately and participants in the control group received linezolid after two months, and therefore there were no comparable data from this trial. We deemed meta-analysis of non-randomized study data inappropriate.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified three RCTs for inclusion. One of these studies had serious problems with allocation of the study drug and placebo, so we could not analyse data for intervention effect from it. The remaining two RCTs recruited 104 participants. One randomized 65 participants to receive linezolid or not, in addition to a background regimen; the other randomized 39 participants to addition of linezolid to a background regimen immediately, or after a delay of two months. We included 14 non-randomized cohort studies (two prospective, 12 retrospective), with a total of 1678 participants.Settings varied in terms of income and tuberculosis burden. One RCT and 7 out of 14 non-randomized studies commenced recruitment in or after 2009. All RCT participants and 38.7% of non-randomized participants were reported to have XDR-TB.Dosing and duration of linezolid in studies were variable and reported inconsistently. Daily doses ranged from 300 mg to 1200 mg; some studies had planned dose reduction for all participants after a set time, others had incompletely reported dose reductions for some participants, and most did not report numbers of participants receiving each dose. Mean or median duration of linezolid therapy was longer than 90 days in eight of the 14 non-randomized cohorts that reported this information.Duration of participant follow-up varied between RCTs. Only five out of 14 non-randomized studies reported follow-up duration.Both RCTs were at low risk of reporting bias and unclear risk of selection bias. One RCT was at high risk of performance and detection bias, and low risk for attrition bias, for all outcomes. The other RCT was at low risk of detection and attrition bias for the primary outcome, with unclear risk of detection and attrition bias for non-primary outcomes, and unclear risk of performance bias for all outcomes. Overall risk of bias for the non-randomized studies was critical for three studies, and serious for the remaining 11.One RCT reported higher cure (risk ratio (RR) 2.36, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.13 to 4.90, very low-certainty evidence), lower failure (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.70, very low-certainty evidence), and higher sputum culture conversion at 24 months (RR 2.10, 95% CI 1.30 to 3.40, very low-certainty evidence), amongst the linezolid-treated group than controls, with no differences in other primary and secondary outcomes. This study also found more anaemia (17/33 versus 2/32), nausea and vomiting, and neuropathy (14/33 versus 1/32) events amongst linezolid-receiving participants. Linezolid was discontinued early and permanently in two of 33 (6.1%) participants who received it.The other RCT reported higher sputum culture conversion four months after randomization (RR 2.26, 95% CI 1.19 to 4.28), amongst the group who received linezolid immediately compared to the group who had linezolid initiation delayed by two months. Linezolid was discontinued early and permanently in seven of 39 (17.9%) participants who received it.Linezolid discontinuation occurred in 22.6% (141/624; 11 studies), of participants in the non-randomized studies. Total, serious, and linezolid-attributed adverse events could not be summarized quantitatively or comparatively, due to incompleteness of data on duration of follow-up and numbers of participants experiencing events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found some evidence of efficacy of linezolid for drug-resistant pulmonary tuberculosis from RCTs in participants with XDR-TB but adverse events and discontinuation of linezolid were common. Overall, there is a lack of comparative data on efficacy and safety. Serious risk of bias and heterogeneity in conducting and reporting non-randomized studies makes the existing, mostly retrospective, data difficult to interpret. Further prospective cohort studies or RCTs in high tuberculosis burden low-income and lower-middle-income countries would be useful to inform policymakers and clinicians of the efficacy and safety of linezolid as a component of drug-resistant TB treatment regimens.

Enhancement of lung levels of antibiotics by ambroxol and bromhexine

INTRODUCTION

Major unmet needs remain for improved antibiotic treatment in lung infections. While development of new antibiotics is needed to overcome resistance, other approaches to optimize therapy using existing agents are also attractive. Ambroxol induces lung autophagy at human-relevant doses and improves lung levels of several approved antibiotics. Areas covered: This review discusses preclinical and clinical studies of the effects of ambroxol (and its prodrug precursor bromhexine) co-treatment upon levels of antibiotics in lung tissue, sputum, and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid. Expert opinion: Ambroxol co-treatment is associated with significant increases in lung tissue and airway surface fluid levels of a range of antibiotics including beta lactams, glycopeptides, macrolides, nitrofurans, and rifamycins. In most cases, the increased levels are only modest and are insufficient to overcome high-level resistance against that same antibiotic class, and so co-treatment with ambroxol is unlikely to alter clinical outcomes. Additionally, for most antibiotics there is no evidence that outcomes in non-resistant disease are improved by higher drug levels, and there is limited efficacy of co-treatment of antibiotics with ambroxol for most pathogens. The two cases where ambroxol may improve therapy are rifampin-sensitive tuberculosis and non-tuberculous mycobacterial infection, and vancomycin sensitive methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus pneumonia.

Comparison of In Vitro Activity and MIC Distributions between the Novel Oxazolidinone Delpazolid and Linezolid against Multidrug-Resistant and Extensively Drug-Resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis in China

Oxazolidinones are efficacious in treating mycobacterial infections, including tuberculosis (TB) caused by drug-resistant Mycobacterium tuberculosis In this study, we compared the in vitro activities and MIC distributions of delpazolid, a novel oxazolidinone, and linezolid against multidrug-resistant TB (MDR-TB) and extensively drug-resistant TB (XDR-TB) in China. Additionally, genetic mutations in 23S rRNA, rplC, and rplD genes were analyzed to reveal potential mechanisms underlying the observed oxazolidinone resistance. A total of 240 M. tuberculosis isolates were included in this study, including 120 MDR-TB isolates and 120 XDR-TB isolates. Overall, linezolid and delpazolid MIC₉₀ values for M. tuberculosis isolates were 0.25 mg/liter and 0.5 mg/liter, respectively. Based on visual inspection, we tentatively set epidemiological cutoff (ECOFF) values for MIC determinations for linezolid and delpazolid at 1.0 mg/liter and 2.0 mg/liter, respectively. Although no significant difference in resistance rates was observed between linezolid and delpazolid among XDR-TB isolates (P > 0.05), statistical analysis revealed a significantly greater proportion of linezolid-resistant isolates than delpazolid-resistant isolates within the MDR-TB group (P = 0.036). Seven (53.85%) of 13 linezolid-resistant isolates were found to harbor mutations within the three target genes. Additionally, 1 isolate exhibited an amino acid substitution (Arg126His) within the protein encoded by rplD that contributed to high-level resistance to linezolid (MIC of >16 mg/liter), compared to a delpazolid MIC of 0.25. In conclusion, in vitro susceptibility testing revealed that delpazolid antibacterial activity was comparable to that of linezolid. A novel mutation within rplD that endowed M. tuberculosis with linezolid, but not delpazolid, resistance was identified.

Linezolid: a review of its properties, function, and use in critical care

Linezolid can be considered as the first member of the class of oxazolidinone antibiotics. The compound is a synthetic antibiotic that inhibits bacterial protein synthesis through binding to rRNA. It also inhibits the creation of the initiation complex during protein synthesis which can reduce the length of the developed peptide chains, and decrease the rate of reaction of translation elongation. Linezolid has been approved for the treatment of infections caused by vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium, hospital-acquired pneumonia caused by Staphylococcus aureus, complicated skin and skin structure infections (SSSIs), uncomplicated SSSIs caused by methicillin-susceptible S. aureus or Streptococcus pyogenes, and community-acquired pneumonia caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae. Analysis of high-resolution structures of linezolid has demonstrated that it binds a deep cleft of the 50S ribosomal subunit that is surrounded by 23S rRNA nucleotides. Mutation of 23S rRNA was shown to be a linezolid resistance mechanism. Besides, mutations in specific regions of ribosomal proteins uL3 and uL4 are increasingly associated with linezolid resistance. However, these proteins are located further away from the bound drug. The methicillin-resistant S. aureus and vancomycin-resistant enterococci are considered the most common Gram-positive bacteria found in intensive care units (ICUs), and linezolid, as an antimicrobial drug, is commonly utilized to treat infected ICU patients. The drug has favorable in vitro and in vivo activity against the mentioned organisms and is considered as a useful antibiotic to treat infections in the ICU.

Tuberculosis elimination: where are we now?

Tuberculosis (TB) still represents a major public health issue in spite of the significant impact of the efforts made by the World Health Organization (WHO) and partners to improve its control. In 2014 WHO launched a new global strategy (End TB) with a vision of a world free of TB, and a 2035 goal of TB elimination (defined as less than one incident case per million). The aim of this article is to summarise the theoretical bases of the End TB Strategy and to analyse progresses and persistent obstacles on the way to TB elimination.The evolution of the WHO recommended strategies of TB control (Directly Observed Therapy, Short Course (DOTS), Stop TB and End TB) are described and the concept of TB elimination is discussed. Furthermore, the eight core activities recently proposed by WHO as the milestones to achieve TB elimination are discussed in detail. Finally, the recently published experiences of Cyprus and Oman on their way towards TB elimination are described, together with the regional experience of Latin America.New prevention, diagnostic and treatment tools are also necessary to increase the speed of the present TB incidence decline.

Simple strategy to assess linezolid exposure in patients with multi-drug-resistant and extensively-drug-resistant tuberculosis

Linezolid is used increasingly for the treatment of multi-drug-resistant (MDR) and extensively-drug-resistant (XDR) tuberculosis (TB). However, linezolid can cause severe adverse events, such as peripheral and optical neuropathy or thrombocytopenia related to higher drug exposure. This study aimed to develop a population pharmacokinetic model to predict the area under the concentration curve (AUC) for linezolid using a limited number of blood samples. Data from patients with MDR-/XDR-TB who received linezolid and therapeutic drug monitoring as part of their TB treatment were used. Mw\Pharm 3.82 (Mediware, Zuidhorn, The Netherlands) was used to develop a population pharmacokinetic model and limited sampling strategy (LSS) for linezolid. LSS was evaluated over a time span of 6 h. Blood sampling directly before linezolid administration and 2 h after linezolid administration were considered to be the most clinically relevant sampling points. The model and LSS were evaluated by analysing the correlation between AUC_12h,observed and AUC_{12h,estimated}. In addition, LSS was validated with an external group of patients with MDR-/XDR-TB from Sondalo, Italy. Fifty-two pharmacokinetic profiles were used to develop the model. Thirty-three profiles with a 300 mg dosing regimen and 19 profiles with a 600 mg dosing regimen were obtained. Model validation showed prediction bias of 0.1% and r² of 0.99. Evaluation of the most clinically relevant LSS showed prediction bias of 4.8% and r² of 0.97. The root mean square error corresponding to the most relevant LSS was 6.07%. The developed LSS could be used to enable concentration-guided dosing of linezolid.

Long-term outcome and safety of prolonged bedaquiline treatment for multidrug-resistant tuberculosis

Bedaquiline, a recently approved drug for the treatment of multidrug-resistant tuberculosis (MDR-TB), is recommended for a duration of 24 weeks. There are scarce data on patients treated with this drug outside clinical trials.

All MDR-TB patients who started treatment from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2013 and received ≥30 days of bedaquiline were included in a multicentre observational cohort.

Among 45 MDR-TB patients, 53% harboured isolates resistant to both fluoroquinolones and second-line injectables, and 38% harboured isolates resistant to one of these drug classes. Median bedaquiline treatment duration was 361 days and 33 patients (73%) received prolonged (>190 days) bedaquiline treatment. Overall, 36 patients (80%) had favourable outcome, five were lost to follow-up, three died, and one failed and acquired bedaquiline resistance. No cases of recurrence were reported. Severe and serious adverse events were recorded in 60% and 18% of patients, respectively. Values of Fridericia-corrected QT interval (QTcF) >500 ms were recorded in 11% of patients, but neither arrhythmias nor symptomatic cardiac side-effects occurred. Bedaquiline was discontinued in three patients following QTcF prolongation. No significant differences in outcomes or adverse events rates were observed between patients receiving standard and prolonged bedaquiline treatment.

Bedaquiline-containing regimens achieved favourable outcomes in a large proportion of patients. Prolonged bedaquiline treatment was overall well tolerated in this cohort.

Management of multidrug-resistant TB: novel treatments and their expansion to low resource settings

Despite overall progress in global TB control, the rising burden of multidrug-resistant TB (MDR-TB) threatens to undermine efforts to end the worldwide epidemic. Of the 27 countries classified as high burden for MDR-TB, 17 are in ‘low’ or ‘low–middle’ income countries. Shorter, all oral and less toxic multidrug combinations are required to improve treatment outcomes in these settings. Suitability for safe co-administration with HIV drugs is also desirable. A range of strategies and several new drugs (including bedaquiline, delamanid and linezolid) are currently undergoing advanced clinical evaluations to define their roles in achieving these aims. However, several clinical questions and logistical challenges need to be overcome before these new MDR-TB treatments fulfil their potential.

Individualizing management of extensively drug-resistant tuberculosis: diagnostics, treatment, and biomarkers

INTRODUCTION

Success rates for treatment of extensively drug resistant tuberculosis (XDR-TB) are low due to limited treatment options, delayed diagnosis and inadequate health care infrastructure. Areas covered: This review analyses existing programmes of prevention, diagnosis and treatment of XDR-TB. Improved diagnostic procedures and rapid molecular tests help to select appropriate drugs and dosages. Drugs dosages can be further tailored to the specific conditions of the patient based on quantitative susceptibility testing of the M. tuberculosis isolate and use of therapeutic drug monitoring. Pharmacovigilance is important for preserving activity of the novel drugs bedaquiline and delamanid. Furthermore, biomarkers of treatment response must be developed and validated to guide therapeutic decisions. Expert commentary: Given the currently poor treatment outcomes and the association of XDR-TB with HIV in endemic regions, a more patient oriented approach regarding diagnostics, drug selection and tailoring and treatment evaluation will improve treatment outcome. The different areas of expertise should be covered by a multidisciplinary team and may involve the transition of patients from hospitalized to home or community-based treatment.

Linezolid in the treatment of drug-resistant tuberculosis: the challenge of its narrow therapeutic index

INTRODUCTION

Linezolid is an oxazolidinone with potent activity against M tuberculosis, and improves culture conversion and cure rates when added to treatment regimens for drug resistant tuberculosis. However, linezolid has a narrow therapeutic window, and the optimal dosing strategy that minimizes the substantial toxicity associated with linezolid's prolonged use in tuberculosis treatment has not been determined, limiting the potential impact of this anti-mycobacterial agent.

AREAS COVERED

This paper aims to review and summarize the current knowledge on linezolid for the treatment of drug-resistant tuberculosis. The focus is on the pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic determinants of linezolid's efficacy and toxicity in tuberculosis, and how this relates to defining an optimal dose. Mechanisms of linezolid toxicity and resistance, and the potential role of therapeutic drug monitoring are also covered. Expert commentary: Prospective pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic studies are required to define optimal therapeutic targets and to inform improved linezolid dosing strategies for drug-resistant tuberculosis.