A Randomized Study Evaluating Oral Fusidic Acid (CEM-102) in Combination With Oral Rifampin Compared With Standard-of-Care Antibiotics for Treatment of Prosthetic Joint Infections: A Newly Identified Drug-Drug Interaction.

BACKGROUND: Fusidic acid (FA) has been used for decades for bone infection, including prosthetic joint infection (PJI), often in combination with rifampin (RIF). An FA/RIF pharmacokinetic interaction has not previously been described. METHODS: In a phase 2 open-label randomized study, we evaluated oral FA/RIF vs standard-of-care (SOC) intravenous antibiotics for treatment of hip or knee PJI. Outcome assessment occurred at reimplantation (week 12) for subjects with 2-stage exchange, and after 3 or 6 months of treatment for subjects with hip or knee debride and retain strategies, respectively. RESULTS: Fourteen subjects were randomized 1:1 to FA/RIF or SOC. Pharmacokinetic profiles were obtained for 6 subjects randomized to FA/RIF. FA concentrations were lower than anticipated in all subjects during the first week of therapy, and at weeks 4 and 6, blood levels continued to decline. By week 6, FA exposures were 40%-45% lower than expected. CONCLUSIONS: The sponsor elected to terminate this study due to a clearly illustrated drug-drug interaction between FA and RIF, which lowered FA levels to a degree that could influence subject outcomes. Optimization of FA exposure if used in combination with RIF should be a topic of future research. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT01756924.

Penetration of Ceftaroline into the Epithelial Lining Fluid of Healthy Adult Subjects.

Ceftaroline, the active metabolite of the prodrug ceftaroline fosamil, is a cephalosporin with bactericidal activity against Gram-positive organisms, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). This study aimed to (i) evaluate ceftaroline concentrations in human plasma and epithelial lining fluid (ELF) and (ii) develop a population pharmacokinetic (PK) model for plasma and ELF to be used in PK/pharmacodynamic (PD) target attainment simulations. Ceftaroline concentrations in ELF and plasma at steady state (day 4) were measured in healthy adult subjects for two dosages: 600 mg every 12 h (q12h) and 600 mg every 8 h (q8h). Both were well tolerated with no serious adverse events. The penetration of free ceftaroline into ELF, assuming 20% protein binding in plasma and no protein binding in ELF, was ≈23%. The population PK model utilized a two-compartment model for both ceftaroline fosamil and ceftaroline. Goodness-of-fit criteria revealed the model was consistent with observed data and no systematic bias remained. At 600 mg q12h and a MIC of 1 mg/liter, 98.1% of simulated patients would be expected to achieve a target free drug concentration above the MIC (fT>MIC) in plasma of 42%, and in ELF 81.7% would be expected to achieve a target fT>MIC of 17%; at 600 mg q8h, 100% were predicted to achieve an fT>MIC in plasma of 42% and 94.7% to achieve an fT>MIC of 17% in ELF. The literature and data suggest the 600 mg q12h dose is adequate for MICs of ≤1 mg/liter. There is a need for clinical data in patients with MRSA pneumonia and data to correlate PK/PD relationships in ELF with clinical outcomes.

Telavancin for Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infections, a Post Hoc Analysis of the Phase 3 ATLAS Trials in Light of the 2013 FDA Guidance.

Two phase 3 ATLAS trials demonstrated noninferiority of telavancin compared with vancomycin for complicated skin and skin structure infections. Data from these trials were retrospectively evaluated according to 2013 U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidance on acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections. This post hoc analysis included patients with lesion sizes of ≥75 cm(2) and excluded patients with ulcers or burns (updated all-treated population; n = 1,127). Updated day 3 (early) clinical response was defined as a ≥20% reduction in lesion size from baseline and no rescue antibiotic. Updated test-of-cure (TOC) clinical response was defined as a ≥90% reduction in lesion size, no increase in lesion size since day 3, and no requirement for additional antibiotics or significant surgical procedures. Day 3 (early) clinical responses were achieved in 62.6% and 61.0% of patients receiving telavancin and vancomycin, respectively (difference, 1.7%, with a 95% confidence interval [CI] of -4.0% to 7.4%). Updated TOC visit cure rates were similar for telavancin (68.0%) and vancomycin (63.3%), with a difference of 4.8% (95% CI, -0.7% to 10.3%). Adopting current FDA guidance, this analysis corroborates previous noninferiority findings of the ATLAS trials of telavancin compared with vancomycin.

Improving the reporting of adverse drug reactions in the hospital setting.

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is perceived by the public as having a substantial responsibility to ensure drug safety; however, the FDA has limited resources for active surveillance and relies on voluntary reporting of adverse events and potential adverse drug reactions. Studies have shown that underreporting of adverse events and adverse drug reactions is widespread. Furthermore, a review of several studies demonstrates that most adverse drug reactions are reported by pharmacists and nurses, with physicians reporting the fewest. The hospital setting, with its clearly defined patient population observed around the clock, is an ideal setting in which to identify potential adverse drug reaction signals and to report them to either the drug manufacturer or the FDA. In this article we describe the present system for addressing adverse events, obstacles to reporting them, and the important role any hospital physician could play in reporting adverse events and potential adverse drug reactions.