Lefamulin efficacy and safety in a pooled phase 3 clinical trial population with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia and common clinical comorbidities.

BACKGROUND: Lefamulin, a first-in-class pleuromutilin antibiotic approved for intravenous and oral use in adults with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP), was noninferior to moxifloxacin in the Lefamulin Evaluation Against Pneumonia (LEAP) 1 intravenous-to-oral switch study and the LEAP 2 oral-only study. Using pooled LEAP 1/2 data, we examined lefamulin efficacy/safety overall and within subgroups of patients presenting with comorbidities typical in CABP management. METHODS: In LEAP 1, adults with CABP were randomized to receive intravenous lefamulin (150 mg every 12 h) for 5‒7 days or moxifloxacin (400 mg every 24 h) for 7 days, with optional intravenous-to-oral switch if predefined improvement criteria were met. In LEAP 2, adults with CABP were randomized to receive oral lefamulin (600 mg every 12 h) for 5 days or moxifloxacin (400 mg every 24 h) for 7 days. Both studies assessed early clinical response (ECR) at 96 ± 24 h after first study drug dose and investigator assessment of clinical response (IACR) at test-of-cure (5‒10 days after last dose). Pooled analyses of the overall population used a 10% noninferiority margin. RESULTS: Lefamulin (n = 646) was noninferior to moxifloxacin (n = 643) for ECR (89.3% vs 90.5%, respectively; difference - 1.1%; 95% CI - 4.4 to 2.2); IACR success rates at test-of-cure were similarly high (≥ 85.0%). High efficacy with both lefamulin and moxifloxacin was also demonstrated across all well-represented patient subgroups, including those with advanced age, diabetes mellitus, a history of cardiovascular diseases (e.g., hypertension, congestive heart failure, or arrhythmia) or chronic lung diseases (e.g., asthma or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease), elevated liver enzymes, or mild-to-moderate renal dysfunction. No new safety signals were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Lefamulin may provide a valuable intravenous/oral monotherapy alternative to fluoroquinolones or macrolides for empiric treatment of patients with CABP, including cases of patients at risk for poor outcomes due to age or various comorbidities. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov LEAP 1 (NCT02559310; Registration Date: 24/09/2015) and LEAP 2 (NCT02813694; Registration Date: 27/06/2016).

Pharmacokinetics and safety of lefamulin after single intravenous dose administration in subjects with impaired renal function and those requiring hemodialysis.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Lefamulin is a novel IV and oral pleuromutilin recently approved for the treatment of community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP). Given that renal comorbidities are common in patients admitted for CABP, understanding the pharmacokinetics of lefamulin in the face of severe renal impairment, including those requiring hemodialysis, is needed. DESIGN: Open-label, Phase-1 pharmacokinetic study. SETTING: Research Study Center. PATIENTS: Twenty-three matched subjects were included, seven with "Normal" renal function (creatinine clearance >90 ml/min), eight with "Severe" renal impairment (glomerular filtration rate <30 ml/min/1.73 m2 ), and eight subjects requiring hemodialysis. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Subjects were administered a single dose of lefamulin IV 150 mg as a 1-h infusion. Subjects in the hemodialysis group started hemodialysis within 1 h after lefamulin infusion (On dialysis), as well as, on a non-dialysis day (Off dialysis). Plasma, urine, and dialysate fluid were collected for 36 h and analyzed for lefamulin and its major metabolite, BC-8041. Lefamulin was primarily excreted non-renally across groups. Statistical analyses revealed lefamulin and BC-8041 pharmacokinetics were similar between Normal and Severe groups, except for renal clearance, which decreased in Severe subjects (mean 1.3 L/h Normal vs. 0.4 L/h Severe). Likewise, lefamulin pharmacokinetics during on and off dialysis were unchanged, with lefamulin not measurably filtered in dialysate fluid. Two, three, and three subjects reported drug-related treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) in Normal, Severe, and Hemodialysis groups, respectively. All TEAEs were mild, except one (infusion-site reaction) that was classified as moderate. CONCLUSION: No dosage adjustment is required for patients with renal impairment, and lefamulin can be administered without regard to hemodialysis timing.

Pharmacokinetics and safety of lefamulin after single intravenous dose administration in subjects with impaired-hepatic function.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Lefamulin is a novel pleuromutilin recently approved by the FDA for the treatment of community-acquired bacterial pneumonia. Given that, lefamulin is primarily metabolized by CYP450 Phase-1 reactions, this study evaluated the pharmacokinetics of IV lefamulin in subjects with various degrees of hepatic impairment as compared with matched healthy subjects. DESIGN: Open-label, Phase-1 clinical pharmacokinetic study. SETTING: Research Study Center. PATIENTS: Twenty-seven subjects; comprised of 11 individuals with normal hepatic function and eight each with moderate or severe hepatic impairment were included, as classified by Child-Pugh scores. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Subjects were administered a single dose of IV lefamulin 150 mg over 1 h. Plasma was collected for 48 h and analyzed for lefamulin and its major metabolite, BC-8041, concentrations in addition to assessing lefamulin plasma protein binding. Pharmacokinetics were evaluated by noncompartmental analysis. Pharmacokinetic parameters were compared using least square geometric mean ratios. Lefamulin was well tolerated in all hepatic function groups. Statistical analyses revealed reductions in Cmax and increases in renal clearance for Moderate and Severe groups, as well as, the increased volume of distribution for the Severe group. Lefamulin plasma AUC mean (SD) was similar across groups at 7615 (1554), 8233 (2286), and 8938 (1640) h.ng/mL for Normal, Moderate, and Severe groups, respectively, despite decreased clearance observed primarily during terminal elimination phases. Decreased plasma-protein binding was seen in hepatically-impaired versus normal subjects. CONCLUSION: Lefamulin was generally well tolerated. Differences in lefamulin and BC-8041 pharmacokinetics were small, relative to the overall variability, and any changes appear to be compensated by increases in renal clearance and decreased protein binding.

Use of mucolytics in COPD: A Delphi consensus study.

BACKGROUND: International guidelines recommend mucolytic agents as add-on therapy in selected patients with COPD because they may reduce exacerbations and improve health status. As the evidence varies among mucolytic agents, we used the Delphi method to assess consensus amongst an international panel of COPD experts on mucolytics use in COPD. METHODS: 53 COPD experts from 12 countries were asked to complete an online questionnaire and rate their agreement with 15 statements using a 5-point scale. The mucolytic agents evaluated were carbocysteine, erdosteine and N-acetylcysteine (NAC). Data were collected anonymously and consensus presented using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: The 47 respondents reached consensus on the statements. They agreed that regular treatment with mucolytic agents effectively reduces the frequency of exacerbations, reduces the duration of mild-to-moderate exacerbations, and can increase the time to first exacerbation and symptom-free time in COPD patients. Consensus was consistently highest for erdosteine. The experts agreed that all three mucolytics display antioxidant and anti-inflammatory activity. Erdosteine and NAC were thought to improve the efficacy of some classes of antibacterial drugs. All three mucolytics were considered effective for the short-term treatment of symptoms of acute exacerbations when added to other drugs. The panel agreed that approved doses of mucolytic agents have favorable side-effect profiles and can be recommended for regular use in patients with a bronchitic phenotype. CONCLUSIONS: Consensus findings support the wider use of mucolytic agents as add-on therapy for COPD. However, the differences in pharmacological actions and clinical effectiveness must be considered when deciding which mucolytic to use.

Arctigenin protects mice from thioglycollate-induced acute peritonitis.

Acute peritonitis is an acute inflammatory response of the peritoneal cavity to physical injury and chemical stimulation. Timely resolution of this response is critical to prevent further damage to the body, which can eventually lead to more severe chronic inflammation. Arctigenin (ATG) is the main active ingredient of the Chinese medicine Arctium lappa. In recent years, there have been an increasing number of studies on the anti-inflammatory effect of ATG, but there have been few studies on the effect of ATG on acute inflammation, especially in acute peritonitis, which has not been reported. In this study, a mouse model of experimental acute peritonitis induced by thioglycolate (TG) solution was used to study the protective anti-inflammatory effect of ATG against acute peritonitis and the relevant mechanism. Our results showed that, after 12 hours of TG treatment, ATG significantly reduced inflammatory cell infiltration in mouse tissues and inhibited the secretion and expression of interleukin-6 (IL-6) and tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α) in mice. ATG significantly reduced the percentage of CD11b+ Ly6G+ neutrophils and F4/80+ macrophages in the spleen and peritoneal exudate. In addition, ATG significantly inhibited the expression of the chemokines CCL3 and CCL4 and the adhesion molecule CD62L on the surface of CD11b-positive monocytes. ATG was observed to inhibit the phosphorylation of p65 and p38 in LPS-stimulated RAW264.7 cells. In conclusion, ATG can improve the symptoms of TG-induced acute peritonitis through immune regulation. ATG can reduce the inflammatory response in TG-induced acute peritonitis in mice.

Lefamulin: The First Systemic Pleuromutilin Antibiotic.

OBJECTIVE: To review the pharmacology, microbiology, efficacy, and safety of lefamulin. DATA SOURCES: A literature search was performed using PubMed and Google Scholar (2010 to end-April 2020) with the search terms BC-3781 and lefamulin. Other resources included abstracts presented at recent conferences, prescribing information, and the manufacturer's and Food and Drug Administration websites. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: All relevant English-language articles of studies assessing the efficacy and safety of lefamulin were included. DATA SYNTHESIS: Lefamulin is a pleuromutilin antibiotic with activity against Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus pneumoniae, and atypical bacteria. Lefamulin, given at the dose of 150 mg intravenously or 600 mg orally on an empty stomach every 12 hours for 5 to 7 days, was proven noninferior to moxifloxacin for the treatment of community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP). Common adverse reactions include injection site reactions, hepatic enzyme elevation, gastrointestinal upset, hypokalemia, insomnia, and headache. Lefamulin is associated with QT prolongation, and concomitant use with CYP3A substrates that prolong the QT interval is contraindicated. Lefamulin may cause fetal harm. RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE: Lefamulin is a novel antibiotic with a unique mechanism of action. It represents an alternative option to ß-lactams and macrolides in the treatment of adults with CABP and an alternative option to amoxicillin and doxycycline in the outpatient setting given the rise in resistance to macrolides and safety concerns with fluoroquinolones. Nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea may limit the tolerability of the oral formulation. CONCLUSIONS: Lefamulin is the first systemic pleuromutilin antibiotic that has proven safe and effective for adults with CABP.

An overview of lefamulin for the treatment of community acquired bacterial pneumonia.

INTRODUCTION: Lefamulin is a novel antibiotic that belongs to the pleuromutilin class with excellent activity against all microorganisms, including atypical pathogens, that cause community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). AREAS COVERED: This article reviews the spectrum of activity, the main pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of lefamulin as well as its clinical efficacy and safety in the treatment of CAP in adult patients. EXPERT OPINION: The clinical efficacy of lefamulin in patients with non severe CAP has been demonstrated in 2 randomized clinical trials. Precisely one of the limitations of the phase 3 trials is that the proportion of severe CAP cases is very low. Its particular mechanism of action, affecting ribosomal protein synthesis, provides a low probability of cross-resistance to other commonly used antibiotics in CAP. These findings, together with the antimicrobial activity of lefamulin, its pharmacokinetic parameters and safety profile make it a good alternative for outpatient treatment of CAP. In patients hospitalized with CAP, lefamulin can be used as a potential oral step-down agent after an intravenous regimen with beta-lactams, or as a therapeutic alternative in patients with ß-lactam allergies.

Effect of Erdosteine on COPD Exacerbations in COPD Patients with Moderate Airflow Limitation.

Background: The RESTORE study, a multi-national randomized, placebo-controlled study, showed that erdosteine - a muco-active antioxidant that modulates bacterial adhesiveness - reduced the rate and duration of exacerbations in moderate and severe COPD with a history of exacerbations. How much benefit patients with less severe disease experience when taking this drug remains unclear. Methods: This post hoc analysis of the 254 RESTORE participants with spirometrically-defined moderate COPD (post-bronchodilator forced expiratory volume in 1 second [FEV1] 50‒79% predicted) examined exacerbation rate and duration, time to first exacerbation, and exacerbation-free time. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and comparisons between treatment groups used Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, Mann-Whitney U-tests, or log rank tests. Results: Patients with moderate COPD received erdosteine 300 mg twice daily (n=126) or placebo (n=128) added to usual COPD therapy for 12 months. During this time, there were 53 exacerbations in the erdosteine group and 74 in the placebo group, with 42.1% and 57.8% of patients, respectively, experiencing an exacerbation. There was a 47% reduction in the mean exacerbation rate with erdosteine compared to placebo (0.27 vs 0.51 exacerbations per-patient per-year, respectively, P=0.003), and a 58.3% reduction in the mild exacerbation rate (0.23 vs 0.53 mild exacerbations per-patient per-year, P=0.001). Mean duration of exacerbations was 26% shorter in erdosteine-treated patients (9.1 vs 12.3 days for placebo, P=0.022), with significant reductions in the duration of mild and moderate-to-severe exacerbations. Mean time to first exacerbation was prolonged by 7.7% (182 days for erdosteine vs 169 days for placebo, P<0.001) and the mean exacerbation-free time was increased by 51 days (279 days for erdosteine vs 228 days for placebo; P<0.001). Conclusion: These results indicate that adding erdosteine to usual COPD maintenance therapy reduces the number of mild, and duration of all, exacerbations in patients with moderate COPD and a history of exacerbations.

Therapeutic potential of lefamulin in the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia.

Despite the increasing availability of antibiotics with activity against pathogens that cause community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), CAP remains a major cause of morbidity, hospital admissions and re-admissions, and mortality. Lefamulin is a novel pleuromutilin antibiotic with potent in vitro activity against both typical and atypical CAP pathogens. In this review of the medical literature, we summarize the available information, including mounting clinical evidence, about lefamulin and its potential value in CAP.

Efficacy and safety profile of mucolytic/antioxidant agents in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a comparative analysis across erdosteine, carbocysteine, and N-acetylcysteine.

BACKGROUND: To date there are no head-to-head studies comparing different mucolytic/antioxidant agents. Considering the inconsistent evidence resulting from the pivotal studies on mucolytic/antioxidant agents tested in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), and the recent publication of Reducing Exacerbations and Symptoms by Treatment with ORal Erdosteine in COPD (RESTORE) study, we have performed a meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of erdosteine 600 mg/day, carbocysteine 1500 mg/day, and N-acetylcysteine (NAC) 1200 mg/day in COPD. METHODS: A pairwise and network meta-analyses were performed to assess the efficacy of erdosteine, carbocysteine, and NAC on acute exacerbation of COPD (AECOPD), duration of AECOPD, and hospitalization. The frequency of adverse events (AEs) was also investigated. RESULTS: Data obtained from 2753 COPD patients were extracted from 7 RCTs published between 2004 and 2017. In the pairwise meta-analysis mucolytic/antioxidant agents significantly reduced the risk of AECOPD (RR 0.74 95%CI 0.68-0.80). The network meta-analysis provided the following rank of effectiveness: erdosteine>carbocysteine>NAC. Only erdosteine reduced the risk of experiencing at least one AECOPD (P < 0.01) and the risk of hospitalization due to AECOPD (P < 0.05). Erdosteine and NAC both significantly reduced the duration of AECOPD (P < 0.01). The AEs induced by erdosteine, carbocysteine, and NAC were mild in severity and generally well tolerated. The quality of evidence of this quantitative synthesis is moderate. CONCLUSIONS: The overall efficacy/safety profile of erdosteine is superior to that of both carbocysteine and NAC. Future head-to-head studies performed on the same COPD populations are needed to definitely confirm the results of this meta-analysis. TRIAL REGISTRATION: CRD42016053762 .

Pharmacokinetics and tolerability of lefamulin following intravenous and oral dosing.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the pharmacokinetics (PK) of oral and intravenous (iv) lefamulin after single and multiple doses, and the effect of food on bioavailability. METHODS: Lefamulin PK was examined in four studies. In Study 1, PK was assessed in patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections who received repeated iv lefamulin q12h (150 mg). In Study 2, a four-period crossover study, healthy subjects received a single dose of oral lefamulin [immediate-release (IR) tablet, 1 × 600 mg] in a fasted and fed state, oral lefamulin (capsule, 3 × 200 mg) in a fasted state, and iv lefamulin in a fasted state. In Study 3, a three-period crossover study, healthy males received a single oral lefamulin dose (IR) in the following states: fasted, fasted followed by a high-calorie meal 1 h post-dose, and fed. Study 4 had two parts; in part A, healthy males received a single lefamulin dose (IR) in a fasted and fed state; in part B, subjects received repeated doses of lefamulin (IR, q12h) or placebo. Adverse events (AEs) were recorded in each study. RESULTS: Single and repeated dosing of iv and oral lefamulin resulted in comparable exposure. Intravenous and oral lefamulin (given fasted or with a meal 1 h post-dose) resulted in bioequivalence. Bioequivalence was not established between oral lefamulin in the fed state and iv or oral administration in the fasted state. All AEs were mild or moderate in severity, no serious AEs were reported, and no participant discontinued because of an AE. CONCLUSIONS: The PK of lefamulin supports successful switch from iv to oral therapy; lefamulin was generally well tolerated.

Cardiovascular Disease in Gout and the Protective Effect of Treatments Including Urate-Lowering Therapy.

Cardiovascular disease affects more than 90 million Americans. Recent studies support an increased cardiovascular disease risk in inflammatory conditions, such as gout. Increased serum urate levels, or hyperuricemia, are a precursor to gout. Data from meta-analyses have shown hyperuricemia to be linked to hypertension and coronary heart disease. Similarly, gout has been associated with an increased risk of myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular accidents, and death from cardiovascular disease in randomized clinical trials. Urate-lowering therapy reduces serum urate and may decrease systemic inflammation, generation of oxidative species, and reverses endothelial dysfunction through hyperuricemia-dependent or hyperuricemia-independent pathways. Cardioprotective benefits of allopurinol, a first-line agent for the treatment of gout, have been demonstrated to potentially prevent myocardial infarction, stroke, atrial fibrillation, and other cardiovascular diseases in observational studies in select populations. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have also examined the role of newer urate-lowering therapies, such as febuxostat and lesinurad, and their risk of cardiovascular-specific mortality in comparison to allopurinol. A large post-marketing study of febuxostat vs. allopurinol showed higher all-cause and cardiovascular-specific mortality in the febuxostat group than in the allopurinol group; a major study limitation was that large numbers of patients were lost to follow-up or discontinued treatment. RCTs are required to assess the comparative effectiveness of urate-lowering therapies, validate findings of observational studies, and to determine which subgroup populations of gout are most likely to benefit from appropriate long-term urate-lowering therapy. This review examines the data for increased cardiovascular disease in gout and potential underlying mechanisms (including hyperuricemia, inflammation, endothelial dysfunction, oxidative stress) and the effect of urate-lowering therapy on cardiovascular disease.

Efficacy and Safety of Intravenous-to-oral Lefamulin, a Pleuromutilin Antibiotic, for the Treatment of Community-acquired Bacterial Pneumonia: The Phase III Lefamulin Evaluation Against Pneumonia (LEAP 1) Trial.

BACKGROUND: Lefamulin, a pleuromutilin antibiotic, is active against pathogens commonly causing community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP). The Lefamulin Evaluation Against Pneumonia (LEAP 1) study was a global noninferiority trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lefamulin for the treatment of CABP. METHODS: In this double-blind study, adults with CABP of Pneumonia Outcomes Research Team risk class ≥III were randomized 1:1 to receive lefamulin at 150 mg intravenously (IV) every 12 hours or moxifloxacin at 400 mg IV every 24 hours. After 6 doses, patients could be switched to an oral study drug if prespecified improvement criteria were met. If methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus was suspected, either linezolid or placebo was added to moxifloxacin or lefamulin, respectively. The US Food and Drug Administration primary endpoint was an early clinical response (ECR) 96 ± 24 hours after the first dose of the study drug in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population (noninferiority margin, 12.5%). The European Medicines Agency co-primary endpoints were an investigator assessment of clinical response (IACR) 5-10 days after the last dose of the study drug in the modified ITT (mITT) and clinically evaluable (CE) populations (noninferiority margin, 10%). RESULTS: There were 551 patients randomized (n = 276 lefamulin; n = 275 moxifloxacin). Lefamulin was noninferior to moxifloxacin for ECR (87.3% vs 90.2%, respectively; difference -2.9%, 95% confidence interval [CI] g -8.5 to 2.8) and IACR (mITT, 81.7% vs 84.2%, respectively; difference -2.6%, 95% CI -8.9 to 3.9; CE, 86.9% vs 89.4%, respectively; difference -2.5%, 95% CI -8.4 to 3.4). Rates of study drug discontinuation due to treatment-emergent adverse events were 2.9% for lefamulin and 4.4% for moxifloxacin. CONCLUSIONS: Lefamulin was noninferior to moxifloxacin for the primary efficacy endpoints and was generally safe and well tolerated. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT02559310.

Potential Dangers of Serum Urate-Lowering Therapy.

In observational studies, high serum urate levels are associated with adverse outcomes, including mortality. However, the hypothesis that urate-lowering may improve nongout outcomes has not been confirmed by placebo-controlled clinical trials. On the contrary, 7 recent placebo-controlled trials of urate-lowering drugs with different mechanisms of action (uricosuric: lesinurad; xanthine oxidase inhibition: febuxostat; uricase: pegloticase) have observed higher mortality or trends to higher mortality in gout patients, with the largest decreases in serum urate. Because all urate-lowering mechanisms were implicated, this raises safety concerns about urate-lowering itself. Far from unexpected, the higher mortality associated with more intense urate-lowering is in line with the U-shaped association of urate with mortality in some observational studies. Urate accounts for most of the antioxidant capacity of plasma, and strategies to increase urate are undergoing clinical trials in neurological disease. Post hoc analysis of recent trials should explore whether the magnitude of urate-lowering is associated with adverse outcomes, and safety trials are needed before guidelines recommend lowering serum urate below certain thresholds.

Integrated safety studies of the urate reabsorption inhibitor lesinurad in treatment of gout.

Objective: Lesinurad (LESU) is a selective urate reabsorption inhibitor approved at 200 mg daily for use with a xanthine oxidase inhibitor (XOI) to treat hyperuricaemia in gout patients failing to achieve target serum urate on XOI. The aim of the study was to investigate the long-term safety of LESU + XOI therapy. Methods: Safety data were pooled from three 12-month phase III (core) trials evaluating LESU 200 and 400 mg/day combined with an XOI (LESU200+XOI and LESU400+XOI), and two 12-month extension studies using descriptive statistics. To adjust for treatment duration, treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were expressed as exposure-adjusted incidence rates (patients with events per 100 person-years). Results: In the core studies, exposure-adjusted incidence rates for total and total renal-related TEAEs were comparable for XOI alone and LESU200+XOI but higher with LESU400+XOI. Exposure-adjusted incidence rates for serum creatinine (sCr) elevations ⩾1.5×baseline were 2.9, 7.3 and 18.7, respectively. Resolution (sCr ⩽1.2×baseline) occurred in 75-90% of all events, with 66-75% occurring without any study medication interruption. Major adverse cardiovascular events were 3, 4 and 9 with XOI, LESU200+XOI and LESU400+XOI, respectively. Longer exposure in core+extension studies did not increase rates for any safety signals. Conclusion: At the approved dose of 200 mg once-daily combined with an XOI, LESU did not increase renal, cardiovascular or other adverse events compared with XOI alone, except for sCr elevations. With extended exposure in the core+extension studies, the safety profile was consistent with that observed in the core studies, and no new safety concerns were identified.

Efficacy and Safety of Lesinurad in Patients with Hyperuricemia Associated with Gout: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of lesinurad for the treatment of hyperuricemia in patients with gout. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). PATIENTS OR PARTICIPANTS: Five RCTs, which included 1959 patients, compared the efficacy and safety of lesinurad in patients with hyperuricemia associated with gout. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Relevant studies were identified from PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library databases, and the ClinicalTrials.gov registry. Two reviewers independently assessed the studies. Individual effect sizes were standardized, and a meta-analysis was conducted to calculate the pooled effect size by using a random-effect model. The primary outcomes were the proportion of patients achieving target serum uric acid (sUA) levels by month 6 and the mean sUA levels at month 6 and month 12. Gout-related outcomes were also assessed. The secondary outcome was the number of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Compared with xanthine oxidase inhibitor (XOI) monotherapy, lesinurad 200 mg or 400 mg in combination with allopurinol or febuxostat exhibited a higher proportion of patients achieving target sUA levels of < 6.0 mg/dl or < 5.0 mg/dl, respectively, by month 6. Lesinurad-plus-XOI groups also significantly sustained lower mean sUA levels at month 6 and month 12 compared to XOI alone group. In gout-related outcomes, no significant treatment group differences favored lesinurad. The number of TEAEs was comparable between the lesinurad 200 mg-plus-XOI group and the XOI-monotherapy group. Although lesinurad 400 mg monotherapy demonstrated superior efficacy compared with placebo, significantly more TEAEs occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Although the combination of lesinurad 200 mg and XOI is effective and well tolerated for treating patients with gout who have not achieved an adequate response to XOI monotherapy, clinical gout-related outcomes were not improved. Therefore, additional studies investigating the long-term clinical implication of lesinurad are warranted.

Lefamulin: Review of a Promising Novel Pleuromutilin Antibiotic.

The emergence and spread of antimicrobial resistance have led to a global public health emergency requiring development of new antimicrobial classes. Lefamulin (formally BC-3781) is a novel pleuromutilin antibiotic currently undergoing Food and Drug Administration review for community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP) as intravenous (IV) and oral (PO) formulations. Although pleuromutilin antibiotics were first developed in the 1950s, lefamulin is the first to be used for systemic treatment of bacterial infections in humans. Lefamulin exhibits a unique mechanism of action through inhibition of protein synthesis by binding to the peptidyl transferase center of the 50S bacterial ribosome, thus preventing the binding of transfer RNA for peptide transfer. Lefamulin displays activity against gram-positive and atypical organisms associated with CABP (i.e., Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae, Mycoplasma pneumoniae, Legionella pneumophila, and Chlamydophila pneumoniae), with an expanded gram-positive spectrum including Staphylococcus aureus (i.e., methicillin-resistant, vancomycin-intermediate, and heterogeneous strains) and vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium. Lefamulin was also shown to retain activity against multidrug-resistant Neisseria gonorrhoeae and Mycoplasma genitalium. Lefamulin exhibits time-dependent killing, and the pharmacodynamic target best associated with antibacterial activity is ƒAUC0-24 /MIC (minimum inhibitory concentration [MIC]). Preclinical and phase II trials indicate that lefamulin concentrates in lung tissue are well tolerated at an IV dose of 150 mg twice/day over 1 hour or a PO dose of 600 mg twice/day, and preliminary phase III data suggest similar efficacy when compared with moxifloxacin with or without linezolid in CABP. Documented resistance and cross-resistance with other gram-positive antibacterials remains low. Additional published in vitro, in vivo, and preclinical trial data suggest further exploration of lefamulin in various infectious disease states (e.g., acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections, and sexually transmitted infections). This review discusses the pertinent bacterial spectrum of activity, preclinical and ongoing clinical data, and potential roles in therapy for lefamulin.

Lesinurad: A Novel Agent for Management of Chronic Gout.

OBJECTIVE: To review the pharmacology, efficacy, and safety of lesinurad and determine its role relative to other agents in the management of chronic gout. DATA SOURCES: A PubMed search (1946 to February 2018) using the terms lesinurad and RDEA594 was conducted to identify relevant articles. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: In vitro or in vivo evaluations of lesinurad published in the English language were eligible for inclusion. Phase II and III trials were selected for review of efficacy and safety. DATA SYNTHESIS: Five clinical trials were evaluated. In 4 trials in which lesinurad was used in combination with a xanthine oxidase inhibitor (XOI), a greater percentage of patients receiving lesinurad 200 mg (54.0%-63.0%) compared with placebo (23.3%-46.8%) achieved a serum uric acid (sUA) level of <6 mg/dL at 1 to 6 months. In one trial involving lesinurad used as monotherapy, a sUA level of <6 mg/dL was achieved by a significantly greater percentage of patients receiving lesinurad 400 mg (29.9%) compared with placebo (1.9%) at 6 months. When used as combination therapy, the drug had an acceptable safety profile, with upper-respiratory-tract infection, nasopharyngitis, and hypertension occurring most commonly and transient renal-related events detected less frequently. CONCLUSIONS: Lesinurad has a novel mechanism of action and is safe and effective for the treatment of chronic gout. At this time, lesinurad may be considered as an add-on therapy for patients who have an inadequate response to maximum tolerated doses of a XOI.