7-Year (2015-21) longitudinal surveillance of lefamulin in vitro activity against bacterial pathogens collected worldwide from patients with respiratory tract infections including pneumonia and characterization of resistance mechanisms.

OBJECTIVES: Lefamulin (Xenleta™), a pleuromutilin antibiotic, was approved for the oral and IV treatment of community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP) in adults in 2019/2020. This study evaluated the in vitro activity of lefamulin and comparators against 19 584 unique bacterial isolates collected from patients with community-acquired respiratory tract infections and hospitalized patients with pneumonia within the global SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program during 2015-21. METHODS: Isolates were susceptibility tested by the CLSI broth microdilution method, and resistance mechanisms were investigated in isolates with elevated lefamulin MICs. RESULTS: Lefamulin exhibited potent antibacterial activity against the most common and typical CABP pathogens tested, including Streptococcus pneumoniae [MIC50/90, 0.06/0.25 mg/L; 99.9% susceptible (S)], Staphylococcus aureus (MIC50/90, 0.06/0.12 mg/L; 99.6% S), Haemophilus influenzae (MIC50/90, 0.5/2 mg/L; 99.1% S) and Moraxella catarrhalis (MIC50/90, 0.06/0.12 mg/L; 100.0% S). Potent activity was also observed against the less common pneumonia pathogens: ß-haemolytic (MIC50/90 of 0.03/0.06 mg/L) and viridans group Streptococcus spp. (MIC50/90 of 0.06/0.25 mg/L) and Haemophilus parainfluenzae (MIC50/90 of 1/4 mg/L). Lefamulin's activity was not adversely affected by resistance to macrolides, penicillin, tetracyclines, fluoroquinolones and other resistance phenotypes. Non-susceptibility/resistance to lefamulin was rare and primarily determined by ribosomal protection through vga(A) variants in S. aureus, overexpression of AcrAB-TolC efflux pump in H. influenzae or modifications in L3, L4 and 23SrRNA in Streptococcus spp. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the coverage of the most important CABP pathogens and lacking cross-resistance, lefamulin may represent a valuable empirical treatment option for ambulatory and hospitalized patients with CABP, particularly in settings with high prevalence of resistance.

In Vivo Immune-Modulatory Activity of Lefamulin in an Influenza Virus A (H1N1) Infection Model in Mice.

Lefamulin is a first-in-class systemic pleuromutilin antimicrobial and potent inhibitor of bacterial translation, and the most recent novel antimicrobial approved for the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). It exhibits potent antibacterial activity against the most prevalent bacterial pathogens that cause typical and atypical pneumonia and other infectious diseases. Early studies indicate additional anti-inflammatory activity. In this study, we further investigated the immune-modulatory activity of lefamulin in the influenza A/H1N1 acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) model in BALB/c mice. Comparators included azithromycin, an anti-inflammatory antimicrobial, and the antiviral oseltamivir. Lefamulin significantly decreased the total immune cell infiltration, specifically the neutrophils, inflammatory monocytes, CD4+ and CD8+ T-cells, NK cells, and B-cells into the lung by Day 6 at both doses tested compared to the untreated vehicle control group (placebo), whereas azithromycin and oseltamivir did not significantly affect the total immune cell counts at the tested dosing regimens. Bronchioalveolar lavage fluid concentrations of pro-inflammatory cytokines and chemokines including TNF-α, IL-6, IL-12p70, IL-17A, IFN-γ, and GM-CSF were significantly reduced, and MCP-1 concentrations were lowered (not significantly) by lefamulin at the clinically relevant 'low' dose on Day 3 when the viral load peaked. Similar effects were also observed for oseltamivir and azithromycin. Lefamulin also decreased the viral load (TCID50) by half a log10 by Day 6 and showed positive effects on the gross lung pathology and survival. Oseltamivir and lefamulin were efficacious in the suppression of the development of influenza-induced bronchi-interstitial pneumonia, whereas azithromycin did not show reduced pathology at the tested treatment regimen. The observed anti-inflammatory and immune-modulatory activity of lefamulin at the tested treatment regimens highlights a promising secondary pharmacological property of lefamulin. While these results require confirmation in a clinical trial, they indicate that lefamulin may provide an immune-modulatory activity beyond its proven potent antibacterial activity. This additional activity may benefit CAP patients and potentially prevent acute lung injury (ALI) and ARDS.

Improving Traditional Registrational Trial End Points: Development and Application of a Desirability of Outcome Ranking End Point for Complicated Urinary Tract Infection Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: Traditional end points used in registrational randomized, controlled trials (RCTs) often do not allow for complete interpretation of the full range of potential clinical outcomes. Desirability of outcome ranking (DOOR) is an approach to the design and analysis of clinical trials that incorporates benefits and risks of novel treatment strategies and provides a global assessment of patient experience. METHODS: Through a multidisciplinary committee of experts in infectious diseases, clinical trial design, drug regulation, and patient experience, we developed a DOOR end point for infectious disease syndromes and demonstrated how this could be applied to 3 registrational drug trials (ZEUS, APEKS-cUTI, and DORI-05) for complicated urinary tract infections (cUTIs). ZEUS compared fosfomycin to piperacillin/tazobactam, APEKS-cUTI compared cefiderocol to imipenem, and DORI-05 compared doripenem to levofloxacin. Using DOOR, we estimated the probability of a more desirable outcome with each investigational antibacterial drug. RESULTS: In each RCT, the DOOR distribution was similar and the probability that a patient in the investigational arm would have a more desirable outcome than a patient in the control arm had a 95% confidence interval containing 50%, indicating no significant difference between treatment arms. DOOR facilitated improved understanding of potential trade-offs between clinical efficacy and safety. Partial credit and subgroup analyses also highlight unique attributes of DOOR. CONCLUSIONS: DOOR can effectively be used in registrational cUTI trials. The DOOR end point presented here can be adapted for other infectious disease syndromes and prospectively incorporated into future clinical trials.

Tissue Distribution of [14C]-Lefamulin into the Urogenital Tract in Rats.

Lefamulin, a semisynthetic pleuromutilin antibiotic approved in the United States, Canada, and Europe for intravenous and oral treatment of community-acquired bacterial pneumonia, is highly active in vitro against bacterial pathogens that cause sexually transmitted infections (STIs), including multidrug-resistant strains of Neisseria gonorrhoeae, Chlamydia trachomatis, and Mycoplasma genitalium. This nonclinical study used quantitative whole-body autoradiography (QWBA) and qualitative tape-transfer microautoradiography (MARG) to investigate lefamulin distribution into urogenital tract tissues down to a cellular level in male and female rats. A single intravenous dose (30 mg/kg) of [14C]-lefamulin was administered to 3 male and 3 female Sprague-Dawley rats. At 0.5, 6, and 24 h post dose, rats were euthanized and [14C]-lefamulin distribution was investigated using QWBA and MARG of sagittal planes. [14C]-lefamulin was well distributed throughout the carcasses of male and female rats, with the highest concentrations observed in male bulbourethral gland, urethra, prostate in female clitoral gland, uterus (particularly endometrium), and ovary. In these areas, concentrations were similar to or higher than those observed in the lungs. Concentrations peaked at 0.5 h post dose, remaining detectable in the urogenital tract up to 24 h post dose. [14C]-lefamulin in rats showed rapid, homogeneous distribution into urogenital tissues down to a cellular level, with high tissue:blood ratios in tissues relevant to STI treatment. These results, and the potent in vitro activity of lefamulin against multidrug-resistant bacteria known to cause STIs, will help inform further assessment of lefamulin, including potential clinical evaluation for treatment of STIs.

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.

Antibacterial Activity of Lefamulin against Pathogens Most Commonly Causing Community-Acquired Bacterial Pneumonia: SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program (2015-2016).

Lefamulin, the first semisynthetic pleuromutilin antibacterial for intravenous and oral treatment of community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP), and comparators were evaluated for in vitro activity against a global collection of pathogens commonly causing CABP (n = 8595) from the 2015 and 2016 SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program. Lefamulin was highly active against the pathogens Streptococcus pneumoniae, including multidrug-resistant and extensively drug-resistant strains (MIC50/90 for total and resistant subsets, 0.06/0.12 µg/ml; 100% inhibited at ≤1 µg/ml), Staphylococcus aureus, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA; both MIC50/90, 0.06/0.12 µg/ml; 99.8% and 99.6% inhibited at ≤1 µg/ml, respectively), Haemophilus influenzae (MIC50/90, 0.5/1 µg/ml; 93.8% inhibited at ≤1 µg/ml), and Moraxella catarrhalis (MIC50/90, 0.06/0.12 µg/ml; 100% inhibited at ≤0.25 µg/ml), and its activity was unaffected by resistance to other antibacterial classes.

Low Prevalence of Gram-Positive Isolates Showing Elevated Lefamulin MIC Results during the SENTRY Surveillance Program for 2015-2016 and Characterization of Resistance Mechanisms.

This study investigated the molecular mechanisms possibly associated with non-wild-type MICs for lefamulin among staphylococci and streptococci included in the lefamulin surveillance program from 2015 to 2016. A total of 2,919 Staphylococcus aureus, 276 coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS), 3,923 Streptococcus pneumoniae, 389 ß-hemolytic, and 178 viridans group streptococci isolates were included in the surveillance studies. Eleven (0.3% of all S. aureus) S. aureus isolates with lefamulin MICs above the staphylococcal epidemiological cutoff (ECOFF) value (>0.25 µg/ml) were selected for this study. Eight (72.7%) S. aureus (lefamulin MIC, 0.5 to 4 µg/ml) isolates carried vga(A or E), one isolate (MIC, 32 µg/ml) carried lsa(E), one isolate (MIC, 16 µg/ml) had an alteration in L4, and one strain (MIC, 0.5 µg/ml) did not carry any of the investigated resistance mechanisms. A total of 14 (5.1% of all CoNS) CoNS isolates had lefamulin MICs (0.5 to >32 µg/ml) above the ECOFF. Similar to S. aureus, 8 (57.1%) CoNS (lefamulin MIC, 1 to 8 µg/ml) isolates carried vga(A or B), while 2 isolates (MIC, 4 to 32 µg/ml) carried cfr High genetic diversity was observed among staphylococci, although 3 S. aureus isolates belonged to sequence type 398 (ST398). Among the 3 Streptococcus agalactiae and 3 viridans group streptococci (0.1% of all streptococci surveyed) isolates selected for additional characterization, all but 1 isolate carried lsa(E). This study documents a low occurrence of surveillance isolates exhibiting a non-wild-type MIC for lefamulin, and among these isolates, vga and lsa(E) prevailed in staphylococci and streptococci, respectively.

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.

Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic target attainment analyses to support intravenous and oral lefamulin dose selection for the treatment of patients with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia.

OBJECTIVES: Lefamulin is a semi-synthetic intravenous (iv) and oral pleuromutilin antibiotic active against community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP) pathogens. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) target attainment analyses were carried out to evaluate lefamulin 150 mg iv q12h and 600 mg orally q12h under fed and fasted conditions for the treatment of patients with CABP. METHODS: The analyses undertaken used a population PK model based on Phase 1 PK data, non-clinical PK/PD targets for efficacy and in vitro surveillance data for Streptococcus pneumoniae (SP) and Staphylococcus aureus (SA), and Monte Carlo simulation. Percentage probabilities of PK/PD target attainment by MIC on day 1 were determined using median total-drug epithelial lining fluid (ELF) and free-drug plasma AUC:MIC ratio targets associated with 1 and 2 log10 cfu reductions from baseline. RESULTS: Percentage probabilities of attaining the total-drug ELF AUC:MIC ratio target for a 1 log10 cfu reduction from baseline for SP were ≥99.2% at the MIC90 of 0.12 mg/L and 96.7%, 82.1% and 96.3% for iv and oral dosing regimens under fed and fasted conditions, respectively, at the MIC99 of 0.25 mg/L. Percentage probabilities of attaining the free-drug plasma AUC:MIC target for the same endpoint at the SP MIC99 were 100% for each regimen. For the SA MIC90 of 0.12 mg/L and AUC:MIC ratio targets for the same endpoint, percentage probabilities were 92.7%-100% for iv and oral dosing regimens. CONCLUSIONS: These data provide support for lefamulin 150 mg iv q12h and 600 mg orally q12h for the treatment of patients with CABP and suggest that doses may not need to be taken under fasted conditions.

Oral Lefamulin vs Moxifloxacin for Early Clinical Response Among Adults With Community-Acquired Bacterial Pneumonia: The LEAP 2 Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: New antibacterials are needed to treat community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP) because of growing antibacterial resistance and safety concerns with standard care. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and adverse events of a 5-day oral lefamulin regimen in patients with CABP. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A phase 3, noninferiority randomized clinical trial conducted at 99 sites in 19 countries that included adults aged 18 years or older with a Pneumonia Outcomes Research Team (PORT) risk class of II, III, or IV; radiographically documented pneumonia; acute illness; 3 or more CABP symptoms; and 2 or more vital sign abnormalities. The first patient visit was on August 30, 2016, and patients were followed up for 30 days; the final follow-up visit was on January 2, 2018. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive oral lefamulin (600 mg every 12 hours for 5 days; n = 370) or moxifloxacin (400 mg every 24 hours for 7 days; n = 368). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) primary end point was early clinical response at 96 hours (within a 24-hour window) after the first dose of either study drug in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population (all randomized patients). Responders were defined as alive, showing improvement in 2 or more of the 4 CABP symptoms, having no worsening of any CABP symptoms, and not receiving any nonstudy antibacterial drug for current CABP episode. The European Medicines Agency coprimary end points (FDA secondary end points) were investigator assessment of clinical response at test of cure (5-10 days after last dose) in the modified ITT population and in the clinically evaluable population. The noninferiority margin was 10% for early clinical response and investigator assessment of clinical response. RESULTS: Among 738 randomized patients (mean age, 57.5 years; 351 women [47.6%]; 360 had a PORT risk class of III or IV [48.8%]), 707 (95.8%) completed the trial. Early clinical response rates were 90.8% with lefamulin and 90.8% with moxifloxacin (difference, 0.1% [1-sided 97.5% CI, -4.4% to ∞]). Rates of investigator assessment of clinical response success were 87.5% with lefamulin and 89.1% with moxifloxacin in the modified ITT population (difference, -1.6% [1-sided 97.5% CI, -6.3% to ∞]) and 89.7% and 93.6%, respectively, in the clinically evaluable population (difference, -3.9% [1-sided 97.5% CI, -8.2% to ∞]) at test of cure. The most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse events were gastrointestinal (diarrhea: 45/368 [12.2%] in lefamulin group and 4/368 [1.1%] in moxifloxacin group; nausea: 19/368 [5.2%] in lefamulin group and 7/368 [1.9%] in moxifloxacin group). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with CABP, 5-day oral lefamulin was noninferior to 7-day oral moxifloxacin with respect to early clinical response at 96 hours after first dose. TRIAL REGISTRATIONS: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02813694; European Clinical Trials Identifier: 2015-004782-92.

Vancomycin, metronidazole, or tolevamer for Clostridium difficile infection: results from two multinational, randomized, controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) is a common complication of antibiotic therapy that is treated with antibiotics, contributing to ongoing disruption of the colonic microbiota and CDI recurrence. Two multinational trials were conducted to compare the efficacy of tolevamer, a nonantibiotic, toxin-binding polymer, with vancomycin and metronidazole. METHODS: Patients with CDI were randomly assigned in a 2:1:1 ratio to oral tolevamer 9 g (loading dose) followed by 3 g every 8 hours for 14 days, vancomycin 125 mg every 6 hours for 10 days, or metronidazole 375 mg every 6 hours for 10 days. The primary endpoint was clinical success, defined as resolution of diarrhea and absence of severe abdominal discomfort for more than 2 consecutive days including day 10. RESULTS: In a pooled analysis, 563 patients received tolevamer, 289 received metronidazole, and 266 received vancomycin. Clinical success of tolevamer was inferior to both metronidazole and vancomycin (P < .001), and metronidazole was inferior to vancomycin (P = .02; 44.2% [n = 534], 72.7% [n = 278], and 81.1% [n = 259], respectively). Clinical success in patients with severe CDI who received metronidazole was 66.3% compared with vancomycin, which was 78.5%. (P = .059). A post-hoc multivariate analysis that excluded tolevamer found 3 factors that were strongly associated with clinical success: vancomycin treatment, treatment-naive status, and mild or moderate CDI severity. Adverse events were similar among the treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Tolevamer was inferior to antibiotic treatment of CDI, and metronidazole was inferior to vancomycin. Trial Registration. clinicaltrials.gov NCT00106509 and NCT00196794.

Physiologically-based pharmacokinetic modeling of the drug-drug interaction between ivacaftor and lefamulin in cystic fibrosis patients.

Lefamulin is being evaluated as a treatment for bacterial exacerbations in cystic fibrosis (CF). Ivacaftor is approved for the treatment of patients with CF. Lefamulin is a moderate CYP3A inhibitor and co-administration with ivacaftor may result in a drug-drug interaction (DDI). A CF population was built based on literature using the Simcyp Simulator. A previously developed and validated physiologically-based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model for ivacaftor was used. A PBPK model for lefamulin was developed and verified. Predicted concentrations and pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters for both ivacaftor and lefamulin in healthy subjects and patients with CF were in reasonable agreement with observed data (within 1.4-fold, majority within 1.25-fold). The lefamulin model as a CYP3A4 perpetrator was validated using a different Ki value for oral (p.o.) and intravenous (i.v.) routes. The simulated changes in area under the curve of ivacaftor in patients with CF when co-administered with p.o. and i.v. lefamulin were weak-to-moderate. The predicted change in ivacaftor PK when co-administered with oral lefamulin was less than observed between ivacaftor and fluconazole. These results suggest a low liability for a DDI between lefamulin and ivacaftor in patients with CF.

Safety and Pharmacokinetics Following Oral or Intravenous Lefamulin in Adults With Cystic Fibrosis.

PURPOSE: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections are increasing in prevalence in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) and are associated with worsening lung function and increased mortality. Lefamulin is a pleuromutilin antimicrobial approved to treat community-acquired bacterial pneumonia based on potent in vitro activity and clinical efficacy. This Phase I, open-label, randomized crossover study assessed the safety and pharmacokinetic profile of oral and intravenous (IV) lefamulin in adults with CF. METHODS: The study comprised 2 dosing periods in which adults with CF (N = 13) received a single dose of lefamulin via a 150-mg IV infusion or 600-mg immediate-release orally administered tablet, separated by a 4- to 7-day washout period. Pharmacokinetic and safety parameters were assessed after lefamulin treatment. FINDINGS: Single doses of lefamulin administered via oral tablet or IV infusion resulted in comparable drug exposure, and sputum analysis suggested rapid penetration of lefamulin into the lung. Comparison of the present results with those obtained from prior single-dose studies of healthy volunteers indicate no meaningful difference in the pharmacokinetic properties of lefamulin in patients with CF. Treatment-emergent adverse events were consistent with previous reports, and the majority were mild in severity. IMPLICATIONS: These results show similar lefamulin pharmacokinetic and safety profiles between patients with CF and healthy volunteers receiving the same oral and IV doses, suggesting no need for lefamulin dose adjustment in patients with CF and indicating the potential of lefamulin as therapy for lung infections in patients with CF. CLINICALTRIALS: gov identifier: NCT05225805.

A plain language summary of how lefamulin alone can be used to treat pneumonia caught outside of the hospital due to common bacterial causes, including drug-resistant bacteria.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: Bacterial pneumonia is an infection of the lung caused by bacteria that is potentially deadly, costly, and affects millions of people worldwide every year. Treatment is becoming more challenging-many current treatments no longer work well because some strains of bacteria that cause pneumonia have become resistant to current antibiotics. Many of the antibiotics that do still work have undesirable side effects. Therefore, new antibiotics that work differently are needed to treat bacterial pneumonia. Lefamulin (brand name, Xenleta®) is an antibiotic that was approved to treat bacterial pneumonia caught outside a hospital (also called community-acquired bacterial pneumonia, or CABP) based on results of two clinical studies. In both studies, participants started treatment with lefamulin before the type of bacteria causing the infection was known. Lefamulin was well tolerated and worked well in 5 to 7 days to kill the bacteria causing the infection and to improve symptoms in almost all participants with CABP. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS?: After the studies were completed, the researchers looked back at what kinds of bacteria were identified from the study participants. Lefamulin worked well to kill bacteria and to improve CABP symptoms for most kinds of infecting bacteria, including bacteria resistant to many current antibiotics. WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?: These results suggest that lefamulin, by itself, provides a much-needed treatment option for CABP that covers most of the key bacteria causing this infection.

Pharmacodynamic evaluation of lefamulin in the treatment of gonorrhea using a hollow fiber infection model simulating Neisseria gonorrhoeae infections.

The emergence and spread of antimicrobial resistance in Neisseria gonorrhoeae is seriously threatening the treatment and control of gonorrhea globally. Novel treatment options are essential, coupled with appropriate methods to pharmacodynamically examine the efficacy and resistance emergence of these novel drugs. Herein, we used our dynamic in vitro hollow fiber infection model (HFIM) to evaluate protein-unbound lefamulin, a semisynthetic pleuromutilin, against N. gonorrhoeae. Dose-range and dose-fractionation experiments with N. gonorrhoeae reference strains: WHO F (susceptible to all relevant antimicrobials), WHO X (extensively drug-resistant, including ceftriaxone resistance), and WHO V (high-level azithromycin resistant, and highest gonococcal MIC of lefamulin (2 mg/l) reported), were performed to examine lefamulin gonococcal killing and resistance development during treatment. The dose-range experiments, simulating a single oral dose of lefamulin based on human plasma concentrations, indicated that ≥1.2 g, ≥2.8 g, and ≥9.6 g of lefamulin were required to eradicate WHO F, X, and V, respectively. Dose-fractionation experiments, based on human lefamulin plasma concentrations, showed that WHO X was eradicated with ≥2.8 g per day when administered as q12 h (1.4 g twice a day) and with ≥3.6 g per day when administered as q8 h (1.2 g thrice a day), both for 7 days. However, when simulating the treatment with 5-10 times higher concentrations of free lefamulin in relevant gonorrhea tissues (based on urogenital tissues in a rat model), 600 mg every 12 h for 5 days (approved oral treatment for community-acquired bacterial pneumonia) eradicated all strains, and no lefamulin resistance emerged in the successful treatment arms. In many arms failing single or multiple dose treatments for WHO X, lefamulin-resistant mutants (MIC = 2 mg/l), containing an A132V amino acid substitution in ribosomal protein L3, were selected. Nevertheless, these lefamulin-resistant mutants demonstrated an impaired biofitness. In conclusion, a clinical study is warranted to elucidate the clinical potential of lefamulin as a treatment option for uncomplicated gonorrhea (as well as several other bacterial STIs).

Pooled microbiological findings and efficacy outcomes by pathogen in adults with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia from the Lefamulin Evaluation Against Pneumonia (LEAP) 1 and LEAP 2 phase 3 trials of lefamulin versus moxifloxacin.

OBJECTIVES: Lefamulin, a pleuromutilin antibiotic approved for community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP), was evaluated for microbiological efficacy in a prespecified pooled analysis of LEAP 1 and 2 phase 3 clinical trial data in patients with CABP. METHODS: In LEAP 1, adults (PORT risk class III‒V) received intravenous (IV) lefamulin 150 mg every 12 h (q12h) for 5‒7 days or moxifloxacin 400 mg every 24 h (q24h) for 7 days, with optional IV-to-oral switch. In LEAP 2, adults (PORT II‒IV) received oral lefamulin 600 mg q12h for 5 days or moxifloxacin 400 mg q24h for 7 days. Primary outcomes were early clinical response (ECR) at 96 ± 24 h after treatment start and investigator assessment of clinical response (IACR) 5‒10 days after the last dose. Secondary outcomes included ECR and IACR in patients with a baseline CABP pathogen (detected via culture, urinary antigen testing, serology and/or real-time PCR). RESULTS: Baseline CABP pathogens were detected in 709/1289 patients (55.0%; microbiological intention-to-treat population). The most frequently identified pathogens were Streptococcus pneumoniae (61.9% of patients) and Haemophilus influenzae (29.9%); 25.1% had atypical pathogens and 33.1% had polymicrobial infections. Pathogens were identified most frequently by PCR from sputum, followed by culture from respiratory specimens. In patients with baseline CABP pathogens, ECR rates were 89.3% (lefamulin) and 93.0% (moxifloxacin); IACR success rates were 83.2% and 86.7%, respectively. Results were consistent across CABP pathogens, including drug-resistant isolates and polymicrobial infections. CONCLUSION: Lefamulin is a valuable IV and oral monotherapy option for empirical and directed CABP treatment in adults.

A Multicenter Evaluation of the US Prevalence and Regional Variation in Macrolide-Resistant S. pneumoniae in Ambulatory and Hospitalized Adult Patients in the United States.

Macrolide resistance was found in 39.5% of 3626 nonduplicate Streptococcus pneumoniae isolates from adult ambulatory and inpatient settings at 329 US hospitals (2018-2019). Macrolide resistance was significantly higher for respiratory vs blood isolates and ambulatory vs inpatient settings. Despite geographic variation, S. pneumoniae macrolide resistance was >25% in most regions.

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.