Pharmacokinetics of Intravenous Delafloxacin in Patients With End-Stage Renal Disease.

This was an open-label, parallel-group, crossover study that examined the pharmacokinetics and safety of delafloxacin, an anionic fluoroquinolone, after a single intravenous infusion in subjects with end-stage renal disease (ESRD; creatinine clearance <15 mL/min) undergoing hemodialysis compared with healthy subjects. Subjects received 300 mg delafloxacin containing sulfobutylether-ß-cyclodextrin in 2 periods separated by ≥14-day washouts. Blood and urine samples were collected, and pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated using noncompartmental methods. The mean total exposure (area under the curve) of delafloxacin was about 2.1 and 2.6 higher for subjects with ESRD compared to healthy subjects when dosed 1 hour before or 1 hour after hemodialysis, respectively. Compared to subjects with normal renal function, the maximum exposure to delafloxacin was 13% and 33% higher for ESRD subjects given delafloxacin 1 hour before and 1 hour after hemodialysis, respectively. The mean clearance was 13.7 L/h for healthy subjects and was lower for subjects with ESRD when given before (7.39 L/h) or after (5.69 L/h) hemodialysis. The clearance of delafloxacin in dialysate was 4.74 L/h with about 19.2% of the delafloxacin dose recovered after a 4-hour dialysis session. Delafloxacin was well tolerated in both healthy and ESRD subjects, with diarrhea being the most reported treatment-emergent adverse event.

A randomized phase 2 study comparing two doses of delafloxacin with tigecycline in adults with complicated skin and skin-structure infections.

BACKGROUND: A randomized, double-blind, multicenter trial was done to compare two doses of delafloxacin with tigecycline in patients with various complicated skin and skin-structure infections (wound infections following surgery, trauma, burns, or animal/insect bites, abscesses, and cellulitis). METHODS: Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to receive delafloxacin 300mg intravenous (IV) every 12h, delafloxacin 450mg IV every 12h, or tigecycline 100mg IV×1, followed by 50mg IV every 12h; randomization was stratified by infection type. Duration of therapy was 5-14 days. The primary efficacy analysis, performed on the clinically evaluable (CE) population at the test-of-cure (TOC) visit (14-21 days after the final dose of study drug), compared clinical response rates in the delafloxacin and tigecycline arms. Clinical response rates in the two delafloxacin arms were also compared. RESULTS: Among CE patients, clinical cure rates at TOC visit were similar in the delafloxacin and tigecycline arms (94.3%, 92.5%, and 91.2%, respectively in delafloxacin 300-mg, delafloxacin 450-mg, and tigecycline arms). Overall, the most frequent adverse events were nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea; the 300-mg delafloxacin arm was the best-tolerated regimen. CONCLUSIONS: Delafloxacin was similarly effective as tigecycline for a variety of complicated skin and skin-structure infections and was well tolerated. (Clinicaltrials.gov NCT 0719810).

Association between hemochromatosis (HFE) gene mutation carrier status and the risk of colon cancer.

BACKGROUND: Iron is a pro-oxidant that may promote carcinogenesis. Mutations in the hemochromatosis (HFE) gene are associated with increased total body iron stores in some individuals. We assessed the risk of colon cancer among individuals with and without HFE gene mutations. METHODS: We performed a population-based, case-control study in North Carolina. Case patients with colon cancer and control subjects provided information on multiple environmental exposures, including total iron intake and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) use. They also provided a venous blood sample, from which DNA was extracted, amplified, and subjected to diagnostic restriction enzyme mapping to detect two major HFE gene mutations, C282Y and H63D. Data were analyzed with Fisher's exact test and logistic regression. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Thirteen hundred and eight subjects participated (475 case patients, 833 control subjects). The allele frequencies of the H63D and C282Y mutations were greater among case patients (0.11 and 0.046, respectively) than among control subjects (0.09 and 0.044, respectively; P =.14 and P =.85, respectively). When we controlled for age, race, sex, red meat consumption, NSAID use, and total iron intake, subjects with any HFE gene mutation were more likely to have colon cancer than subjects with no HFE gene mutations (adjusted odds ratio [OR] = 1.40, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.07 to 1.87). The magnitude of the effect was similar for both the H63D (adjusted OR = 1.44, 95% CI = 1.04 to 1.98) and C282Y mutations (adjusted OR = 1.39, 95% CI = 0.88 to 2.19). The risk of colon cancer associated with an HFE gene mutation was similar for those who did and did not have a family history of colon cancer. Among those with HFE mutations, cancer risk increased with increasing age and total iron intake. CONCLUSIONS: HFE gene mutations are associated with an increased risk of colon cancer. Cancer risk is greatest in mutation carriers who are older or consume high quantities of iron.

Quality of colonoscopy reporting: a process of care study.

OBJECTIVE: Several groups have developed guidelines for specific content necessary in endoscopic procedure reports. Little information is available assessing adherence to reporting recommendations, and little is known about common reporting errors. The aim of this study was to assess the quality of colonoscopy reporting and to identify possible areas of improvement. METHODS: Using the 1997 American Society for GI Endoscopy guidelines for endoscopy reporting, we created operational definitions for adherence to each guideline. We then created 31 specific process of care criteria to assess adherence to each of these operational definitions. We subdivided the 31 specific process of care criteria into six domains: demographic information, patient history, sedation procedure, adequacy of preparation/visibility, lesion identification/removal, and procedure interpretation. Reports obtained from 122 separate endoscopy centers were reviewed for adherence to the guidelines. Adequate performance for any criterion was defined as 70% or better compliance. RESULTS: Performance varied widely across the domains. Clinicians demonstrated adequate performance on sedation procedure (75%) and lesion identification/removal (84%). Clinicians scored poorly on demographic data (69%), patient history (57%), procedure quality (40%), and procedure interpretation (58%). CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians' colonoscopy reporting practices are widely variable and often suboptimal. There is an opportunity to improve the quality of care in colonoscopy reporting by improving physicians' adherence to established standards.