Assessment of pharmacokinetics-pharmacodynamics to support omadacycline dosing regimens for the treatment of patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections.

Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) relationships for efficacy were evaluated using data from omadacycline-treated patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) enrolled in two phase 3 studies. Patients received omadacycline 100 mg intravenously (IV) every 12 hours for two doses, followed by 100 mg IV every 24 hours (q24h), with the option to switch to 300 mg oral (PO) q24h after 3 days or 450 mg PO q24h for two doses, followed by 300 mg PO q24h for a total duration of 7-14 days. Clinical response was evaluated at 48-72 hours [early clinical response (ECR)], end of treatment (EOT), and 7-14 days after EOT. Using a population pharmacokinetic (PK) model and PK data from patients with Staphylococcus aureus at baseline, omadacycline free-drug plasma area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) values were determined, and the relationships between free-drug plasma AUC:MIC ratio and dichotomous efficacy endpoints were evaluated. Using these relationships, the population PK model, simulation, and an omadacycline MIC distribution for S. aureus, mean percent probabilities of response were evaluated. Statistically significant PK--PD relationships were identified for ECR (P = 0.016 and 0.013 for optimized two- and three-group free-drug plasma AUC:MIC ratios, respectively). At an MIC value of 0.5 µg/mL, percent probabilities of model-predicted success for ECR based on the univariable PK-PD relationships using continuous and two-group free-drug plasma AUC:MIC ratio variables were 91.9 and 95.6%, respectively, for the IV-to-PO dosing regimen and 89.3 and 88.4%, respectively, for the PO-only dosing regimen. These data support for omadacycline IV-to-PO and PO-only dosing regimens for ABSSSI and an omadacycline susceptibility breakpoint of 0.5 µg/mL for S. aureus.

Omadacycline for Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin-Structure Infections.

BACKGROUND: Acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections are associated with substantial morbidity and health care costs. Omadacycline, an aminomethylcycline antibiotic that can be administered once daily either orally or intravenously, is active against pathogens that commonly cause such infections, including antibiotic-resistant strains. METHODS: In this double-blind trial, we randomly assigned adults with acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections (in a 1:1 ratio) to receive omadacycline (100 mg given intravenously every 12 hours for two doses, then 100 mg given intravenously every 24 hours) or linezolid (600 mg given intravenously every 12 hours). A transition to oral omadacycline (300 mg every 24 hours) or oral linezolid (600 mg every 12 hours) was allowed after 3 days; the total treatment duration was 7 to 14 days. The primary end point was an early clinical response at 48 to 72 hours, defined as survival with a reduction in lesion size of at least 20% without rescue antibacterial therapy. A secondary end point was an investigator-assessed clinical response at the post-treatment evaluation 7 to 14 days after the last dose, with clinical response defined as survival with resolution or improvement in signs or symptoms of infection to the extent that further antibacterial therapy was unnecessary. For both end points, the noninferiority margin was 10 percentage points. RESULTS: In the modified intention-to-treat population, omadacycline (316 patients) was noninferior to linezolid (311 patients) with respect to early clinical response (rate of response, 84.8% and 85.5%, respectively; difference, -0.7 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -6.3 to 4.9). Omadacycline also was noninferior to linezolid with respect to investigator-assessed clinical response at the post-treatment evaluation in the modified intention-to-treat population (rate of response, 86.1% and 83.6%, respectively; difference, 2.5 percentage points; 95% CI, -3.2 to 8.2) and in the clinical per-protocol population (96.3% and 93.5%, respectively; difference, 2.8 percentage points; 95% CI, -1.0 to 6.9). In both groups, the efficacy of the trial drug was similar for methicillin-susceptible and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections. Adverse events were reported in 48.3% of the patients in the omadacycline group and in 45.7% of those in the linezolid group; the most frequent adverse events in both groups were gastrointestinal (in 18.0% and 15.8% of the patients in the respective groups). CONCLUSIONS: Omadacycline was noninferior to linezolid for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections and had a similar safety profile. (Funded by Paratek Pharmaceuticals; OASIS-1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02378480 .).

Omadacycline for Community-Acquired Bacterial Pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: Omadacycline, a new once-daily aminomethylcycline antibiotic agent that can be administered intravenously or orally, reaches high concentrations in pulmonary tissues and is active against common pathogens that cause community-acquired bacterial pneumonia. METHODS: In a double-blind trial, we randomly assigned (in a 1:1 ratio) adults with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (Pneumonia Severity Index risk class II, III, or IV) to receive omadacycline (100 mg intravenously every 12 hours for two doses, then 100 mg intravenously every 24 hours), or moxifloxacin (400 mg intravenously every 24 hours). A transition to oral omadacycline (300 mg every 24 hours) or moxifloxacin (400 mg every 24 hours), respectively, was allowed after 3 days; the total treatment duration was 7 to 14 days. The primary end point was early clinical response, defined as survival with improvement in at least two of four symptoms (cough, sputum production, pleuritic chest pain, and dyspnea) and no worsening of symptoms at 72 to 120 hours, without receipt of rescue antibacterial therapy. A secondary end point was investigator-assessed clinical response at a post-treatment evaluation 5 to 10 days after the last dose, with clinical response defined as resolution or improvement in signs or symptoms to the extent that further antibacterial therapy was unnecessary. A noninferiority margin of 10 percentage points was used. RESULTS: The intention-to-treat population included 386 patients in the omadacycline group and 388 patients in the moxifloxacin group. Omadacycline was noninferior to moxifloxacin for early clinical response (81.1% and 82.7%, respectively; difference, -1.6 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -7.1 to 3.8), and the rates of investigator-assessed clinical response at the post-treatment evaluation were 87.6% and 85.1%, respectively (difference, 2.5 percentage points; 95% CI, -2.4 to 7.4). Adverse events that emerged after treatment initiation were reported in 41.1% of the patients in the omadacycline group and 48.5% of the patients in the moxifloxacin group; the most frequent events were gastrointestinal (10.2% and 18.0%, respectively), and the largest difference was for diarrhea (1.0% and 8.0%). Twelve deaths (8 in the omadacycline group and 4 in the moxifloxacin group) occurred during the trial. CONCLUSIONS: Omadacycline was noninferior to moxifloxacin for the treatment of community-acquired bacterial pneumonia in adults. (Funded by Paratek Pharmaceuticals; OPTIC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02531438 .).

Genome-Wide Analysis of Left Ventricular Image-Derived Phenotypes Identifies Fourteen Loci Associated With Cardiac Morphogenesis and Heart Failure Development.

BACKGROUND: The genetic basis of left ventricular (LV) image-derived phenotypes, which play a vital role in the diagnosis, management, and risk stratification of cardiovascular diseases, is unclear at present. METHODS: The LV parameters were measured from the cardiovascular magnetic resonance studies of the UK Biobank. Genotyping was done using Affymetrix arrays, augmented by imputation. We performed genome-wide association studies of 6 LV traits-LV end-diastolic volume, LV end-systolic volume, LV stroke volume, LV ejection fraction, LV mass, and LV mass to end-diastolic volume ratio. The replication analysis was performed in the MESA study (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis). We identified the candidate genes at genome-wide significant loci based on the evidence from extensive bioinformatic analyses. Polygenic risk scores were constructed from the summary statistics of LV genome-wide association studies to predict the heart failure events. RESULTS: The study comprised 16 923 European UK Biobank participants (mean age 62.5 years; 45.8% men) without prevalent myocardial infarction or heart failure. We discovered 14 genome-wide significant loci (3 loci each for LV end-diastolic volume, LV end-systolic volume, and LV mass to end-diastolic volume ratio; 4 loci for LV ejection fraction, and 1 locus for LV mass) at a stringent P<1×10-8. Three loci were replicated at Bonferroni significance and 7 loci at nominal significance (P<0.05 with concordant direction of effect) in the MESA study (n=4383). Follow-up bioinformatic analyses identified 28 candidate genes that were enriched in the cardiac developmental pathways and regulation of the LV contractile mechanism. Eight genes (TTN, BAG3, GRK5, HSPB7, MTSS1, ALPK3, NMB, and MMP11) supported by at least 2 independent lines of in silico evidence were implicated in the cardiac morphogenesis and heart failure development. The polygenic risk scores of LV phenotypes were predictive of heart failure in a holdout UK Biobank sample of 3106 cases and 224 134 controls (odds ratio 1.41, 95% CI 1.26 - 1.58, for the top quintile versus the bottom quintile of the LV end-systolic volume risk score). CONCLUSIONS: We report 14 genetic loci and indicate several candidate genes that not only enhance our understanding of the genetic architecture of prognostically important LV phenotypes but also shed light on potential novel therapeutic targets for LV remodeling.

Population Pharmacokinetic Analyses for Omadacycline Using Phase 1 and 3 Data.

Omadacycline, a novel aminomethylcycline antibiotic with activity against Gram-positive and -negative organisms, including tetracycline-resistant pathogens, received FDA approval in October 2018 for the treatment of patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) and community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP). A previously developed population pharmacokinetic (PK) model based on phase 1 intravenous and oral PK data was refined using data from infected patients. Data from 10 phase 1 studies used to develop the previous model were pooled with data from three additional phase 1 studies, a phase 1b uncomplicated urinary tract infection study, one phase 3 CABP study, and two phase 3 ABSSSI studies. The final population PK model was a three-compartment model with first-order absorption using transit compartments to account for absorption delay following oral dosing and first-order elimination. Epithelial lining fluid (ELF) concentrations were modeled as a subcompartment of the first peripheral compartment. A food effect on oral bioavailability was included in the model. Sex was the only significant covariate identified, with 15.6% lower clearance for females than males. Goodness-of-fit diagnostics indicated a precise and unbiased fit to the data. The final model, which was robust in its ability to predict plasma and ELF exposures following omadacycline administration, was also able to predict the central tendency and variability in concentration-time profiles using an external phase 3 ABSSSI data set. A population PK model, which described omadacycline PK in healthy subjects and infected patients, was developed and subsequently used to support pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) and PK-PD target attainment assessments.

Investigation of genetically regulated gene expression and response to treatment in rheumatoid arthritis highlights an association between IL18RAP expression and treatment response.

OBJECTIVES: In this study, we sought to investigate whether there was any association between genetically regulated gene expression (as predicted using various reference panels) and anti-tumour necrosis factor (anti-TNF) treatment response (change in erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR)) using 3158 European ancestry patients with rheumatoid arthritis. METHODS: The genetically regulated portion of gene expression was estimated in the full cohort of 3158 subjects (as well as within a subcohort consisting of 1575 UK patients) using the PrediXcan software package with three different reference panels. Estimated expression was tested for association with anti-TNF treatment response. As a replication/validation experiment, we also investigated the correlation between change in ESR with measured gene expression at the Interleukin 18 Receptor Accessory Protein (IL18RAP) gene in whole blood and synovial tissue, using an independent replication data set of patients receiving conventional synthetic disease modifying anti-rheumatic drugs, with directly measured (via RNA sequencing) gene expression. RESULTS: We found that predicted expression of IL18RAP showed a consistent signal of association with treatment response across the reference panels. In our independent replication data set, IL18RAP expression in whole blood showed correlation with the change in ESR between baseline and follow-up (r=-0.35, p=0.0091). Change in ESR was also correlated with the expression of IL18RAP in synovial tissue (r=-0.28, p=0.02). CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that IL18RAP expression is worthy of further investigation as a potential predictor of treatment response in rheumatoid arthritis that is not specific to a particular drug type.

Prediction of treatment response in rheumatoid arthritis patients using genome-wide SNP data.

Although a number of treatments are available for rheumatoid arthritis (RA), each of them shows a significant nonresponse rate in patients. Therefore, predicting a priori the likelihood of treatment response would be of great patient benefit. Here, we conducted a comparison of a variety of statistical methods for predicting three measures of treatment response, between baseline and 3 or 6 months, using genome-wide SNP data from RA patients available from the MAximising Therapeutic Utility in Rheumatoid Arthritis (MATURA) consortium. Two different treatments and 11 different statistical methods were evaluated. We used 10-fold cross validation to assess predictive performance, with nested 10-fold cross validation used to tune the model hyperparameters when required. Overall, we found that SNPs added very little prediction information to that obtained using clinical characteristics only, such as baseline trait value. This observation can be explained by the lack of strong genetic effects and the relatively small sample sizes available; in analysis of simulated and real data, with larger effects and/or larger sample sizes, prediction performance was much improved. Overall, methods that were consistent with the genetic architecture of the trait were able to achieve better predictive ability than methods that were not. For treatment response in RA, methods that assumed a complex underlying genetic architecture achieved slightly better prediction performance than methods that assumed a simplified genetic architecture.

An Integrated Safety Summary of Omadacycline, a Novel Aminomethylcycline Antibiotic.

Omadacycline is a semisynthetic tetracycline antibiotic. Phase III clinical trial results have shown that omadacycline has an acceptable safety profile in the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections and community-acquired bacterial pneumonia. Similar to most tetracyclines, transient nausea and vomiting and low-magnitude increases in liver aminotransferases were the most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events in phase III studies but were not treatment limiting. Package insert warnings and precautions for omadacycline include tooth discoloration; enamel hypoplasia; inhibition of bone growth following use in late pregnancy, infancy, or childhood up to 8 years of age; an imbalance in mortality (2%, compared with 1% in moxifloxacin-treated patients) was observed in the phase III study in patients with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia. Omadacycline has no effect on the QT interval, and its affinity for muscarinic M2 receptors resulted in transient heart rate increases following dosing.

Early Clinical Response in Community-acquired Bacterial Pneumonia: From Clinical Endpoint to Clinical Practice.

BACKGROUND: Early clinical response (ECR) is a new endpoint to determine whether a drug should be approved for community-acquired bacterial pneumonia in the United States. The Omadacycline for Pneumonia Treatment In the Community (OPTIC) phase III study demonstrated noninferiority of omadacycline to moxifloxacin using this endpoint. This study describes the performance of the ECR endpoint and clinical stability relative to a posttreatment evaluation (PTE) of clinical success. METHODS: ECR was defined as symptom improvement 72-120 hours after the first dose of study drug (ECR window), no use of rescue antibiotics, and patient survival. Clinical success at PTE was an investigator assessment of success. Clinical stability was defined based on vital sign stabilization, described in the American Thoracic Society and Infectious Diseases Society of America community-acquired pneumonia treatment guidelines. RESULTS: During the ECR window, ECR was achieved in 81.1% and 82.7% of omadacycline and moxifloxacin patients, respectively. Similar numbers of patients achieved clinical stability in each treatment group (omadacycline 74.6%, moxifloxacin 77.6%). The proportion of patients with improved symptoms who were considered clinically stable increased across the ECR window (69.2-77.6% for omadacycline; 68.0-79.7% for moxifloxacin). There was high concordance (>70%) and high positive predictive value (>90%) of ECR and clinical stability with overall clinical success at PTE. CONCLUSIONS: Omadacycline was noninferior to moxifloxacin, based on a new ECR endpoint. Clinical stability was similarly high when measured in the same time frame as ECR. Both ECR and clinical stability showed high concordance and high positive predictive value with clinical success at PTE. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT02531438.

Omadacycline for Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infections.

BACKGROUND: Within the last decade, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) has emerged as a frequent cause of purulent skin and soft tissue infections. New therapeutic options are being investigated for these infections. METHODS: We report an integrated analysis of 2 randomized, controlled studies involving omadacycline, a novel aminomethylcycline, and linezolid for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI). Omadacycline in Acute Skin and Skin Structure Infections Study 1 (OASIS-1) initiated patients on intravenous omadacycline or linezolid, with the option to transition to an oral formulation after day 3. OASIS-2 was an oral-only study of omadacycline versus linezolid. RESULTS: In total, 691 patients received omadacycline and 689 patients received linezolid. Infection types included wound infection in 46.8% of patients, cellulitis/erysipelas in 30.5%, and major abscess in 22.7%. Pathogens were identified in 73.2% of patients. S. aureus was detected in 74.7% and MRSA in 32.4% of patients in whom a pathogen was identified. Omadacycline was noninferior to linezolid using the Food and Drug Administration primary endpoint of early clinical response (86.2% vs 83.9%; difference 2.3, 95% confidence interval -1.5 to 6.2) and using the European Medicines Agency primary endpoint of investigator-assessed clinical response at the posttreatment evaluation. Clinical responses were similar across different infection types and infections caused by different pathogens. Treatment-emergent adverse events, mostly described as mild or moderate, were reported by 51.1% of patients receiving omadacycline and 41.2% of those receiving linezolid. CONCLUSIONS: Omadacycline was effective and safe in ABSSSI. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT02378480 and NCT02877927.

Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo- and Positive-Controlled Crossover Study of the Effects of Omadacycline on QT/QTc Intervals in Healthy Subjects.

Omadacycline, an aminomethylcycline, is an antibiotic that is approved in the United States for once-daily intravenous (i.v.) and oral use for treatment of adults with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections and community-acquired bacterial pneumonia. In this thorough QT study, the effects of a therapeutic (100 mg i.v.) dose and a supratherapeutic (300 mg i.v.) dose of omadacycline on the electrocardiogram were studied, with placebo and moxifloxacin as negative and positive controls. Omadacycline at these doses had no effect on the QTc interval. The largest mean placebo-corrected change-from-baseline QTcS (ΔQTcS) were 1.7 ms (90% confidence interval [CI], 0.06 to 3.30) and 2.6 ms (90% CI, 0.55 to 4.67), observed at 20 min and 2 h after the start of the infusion of 100 mg and 300 mg, respectively. Assay sensitivity was demonstrated with moxifloxacin, which caused clear prolongation of QTcS, with the largest mean placebo-corrected ΔQTcS of 9.8 ms at 1.5 and 2 h. With a linear exposure-response model, the estimated slope of the concentration-change-from-baseline QTcF (ΔQTcF) relationship was very shallow: 0.0007 ms per ng/ml (90% CI, 0.0000 to 0.0014). The possibility of an effect on placebo-corrected ΔQTcS exceeding 10 ms can be excluded at omadacycline concentrations in plasma of up to ∼8 µg/ml. Omadacycline had no effect on cardiac conduction (PR and QRS intervals) but caused an increase in heart rate of 16.8 beats per min at 35 min after the 100-mg dose and 21.6 beats per min at 50 min after the 300-mg dose.

Pharmacokinetics, Safety, and Clinical Outcomes of Omadacycline in Women with Cystitis: Results from a Phase 1b Study.

Omadacycline, an aminomethylcycline antibiotic, is approved as once-daily intravenous (i.v.) and oral (p.o.) monotherapy for acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections and for community-acquired bacterial pneumonia, and it is under development for treatment of urinary tract infection (UTI). This is a phase 1b, randomized, open-label study of omadacycline in women with cystitis (defined as UTI symptoms and a positive urine leukocyte esterase test). Patients received omadacycline for 5 days (group 1: 200 mg intravenously on day 1, then 300 mg orally every 24 h [q24h]; group 2: 300 mg orally every 12 h [q12h] on day 1, then 300 mg orally q24h; group 3: 450 mg orally q12h on day 1, then 450 mg orally q24h). Blood and urine samples were collected over 5 days. Investigator-assessed clinical response was determined at end of treatment (EOT; day 6) and posttreatment evaluation (PTE; 5 to 9 days after last dosing). A total of 31 women were treated. At steady state (day 5), the range of mean omadacycline urine concentrations over 24 h across the groups was 17.94 to 48.12 µg/ml. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were gastrointestinal (including nausea [60% to 73%] and vomiting [20% to 40%]) and were generally mild and transient. Investigator-determined clinical success was observed in 94% and 84% of patients at EOT and PTE, respectively, with similar results across groups. A favorable microbiological response at PTE was observed in 78% of patients who had a baseline pathogen. Omadacycline is partially excreted in urine and appears to be safe and well tolerated. These preliminary results indicate that omadacycline warrants further evaluation in larger controlled UTI studies.

Safety and Pharmacokinetics of the Aminomethylcycline Antibiotic Omadacycline Administered to Healthy Subjects in Oral Multiple-Dose Regimens.

Omadacycline, a first-in-class aminomethylcycline antibiotic, is related to tetracyclines but is structurally modified to circumvent mechanisms of resistance to tetracyclines. Omadacycline demonstrates potent activity against a broad range of pathogens, including drug-resistant strains, and is in late-stage development for treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections and community-acquired bacterial pneumonia. Previous studies support an intravenous-to-oral transition regimen with 300-mg once-daily oral dosing. This phase 1 study investigated the pharmacokinetics and safety/tolerability of multiple oral omadacycline doses higher than 300 mg. Using a 3-period crossover design, healthy adults were randomized to receive oral omadacycline at 300, 450, and 600 mg in variable sequence (n = 26) or placebo (n = 7) once daily for 5 consecutive days per period. In plasma, omadacycline maximum concentration and total exposure increased with increasing dose but were less than dose proportional. The kinetics of omadacycline plasma accumulation were similar between dose levels; exposure on day 5 was ∼50% higher than that on day 1. Omadacycline plasma concentrations on day 1 of 450-mg dosing were similar to those on day 5 of 300-mg dosing. All doses were generally well tolerated, but the 600-mg dose was associated with more gastrointestinal adverse events.

Pharmacokinetics and Safety of Omadacycline in Subjects with Impaired Renal Function.

Many antibiotics require dose adjustments in patients with renal impairment and/or in those undergoing hemodialysis. Omadacycline, the first aminomethylcycline antibiotic in late-stage clinical development, displays activity against a broad spectrum of bacterial pathogens, including drug-resistant strains. Data from completed phase 3 studies of omadacycline for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) and community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP) showed intravenous (i.v.) to once-daily oral omadacycline to be clinically effective and well tolerated. To determine if the dosing of omadacycline should be adjusted in patients with impaired renal function, a phase 1 study examining the pharmacokinetics (PK) and safety of i.v. omadacycline (100 mg) was conducted in subjects with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) on stable hemodialysis (n = 8) and in matched healthy subjects (n = 8). i.v. administration of omadacycline produced similar plasma concentration-time profiles in subjects with ESRD and healthy subjects. Further, in subjects with ESRD, similar values of the PK parameters were observed when omadacycline was administered i.v. after or before dialysis. The mean area under the concentration-time curve from time zero extrapolated to infinity in plasma was 10.30 µg · h/ml when omadacycline was administered to ESRD subjects after dialysis, 10.20 µg · h/ml when omadacycline was administered to ESRD subjects before dialysis, and 9.76 µg · h/ml when omadacycline was administered to healthy subjects. The mean maximum observed concentration of omadacycline in plasma in ESRD subjects was 1.88 µg/ml when it was administered after dialysis and 2.33 µg/ml when it was administered before dialysis, and in healthy subjects it was 1.92 µg/ml. The 100-mg i.v. dose of omadacycline was generally safe and well tolerated in both ESRD and healthy subjects. This study demonstrates that no dose adjustment is necessary for omadacycline in patients with impaired renal function or on days when patients are receiving hemodialysis.

Comparison of Omadacycline and Tigecycline Pharmacokinetics in the Plasma, Epithelial Lining Fluid, and Alveolar Cells of Healthy Adult Subjects.

The steady-state concentrations of omadacycline and tigecycline in the plasma, epithelial lining fluid (ELF), and alveolar cells (AC) of 58 healthy adult subjects were obtained. Subjects were administered either omadacycline at 100 mg intravenously (i.v.) every 12 h for two doses followed by 100 mg i.v. every 24 h for three doses or tigecycline at an initial dose of 100 mg i.v. followed by 50 mg i.v. every 12 h for six doses. A bronchoscopy and bronchoalveolar lavage were performed once in each subject following the start of the fifth dose of omadacycline at 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 8, 12, or 24 h and after the start of the seventh dose of tigecycline at 2, 4, 6, or 12 h. The value of the area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) from time zero to 24 h postdosing (AUC0-24) (based on mean concentrations) in ELF and the ratio of the ELF to total plasma omadacycline concentration based on AUC0-24 values were 17.23 mg · h/liter and 1.47, respectively. The AUC0-24 value in AC was 302.46 mg · h/liter, and the ratio of the AC to total plasma omadacycline concentration was 25.8. In comparison, the values of the AUC from time zero to 12 h postdosing (AUC0-12) based on the mean concentrations of tigecycline in ELF and AC were 3.16 and 38.50 mg · h/liter, respectively. The ratio of the ELF and AC to total plasma concentrations of tigecycline based on AUC0-12 values were 1.71 and 20.8, respectively. The pharmacokinetic advantages of higher and sustained concentrations of omadacycline compared to those of tigecycline in plasma, ELF, and AC suggest that omadacycline is a promising antibacterial agent for the treatment of lower respiratory tract bacterial infections caused by susceptible pathogens.

Evaluation of the Tolerability of Switching Patients on Chronic Full µ-Opioid Agonist Therapy to Buccal Buprenorphine.

OBJECTIVE: Assess whether patients with chronic pain receiving 80 to 220 mg oral morphine sulfate equivalent of a full Μ: -opioid agonist could be transitioned to buccal buprenorphine at approximately 50% of their full dose without inducing opioid withdrawal or sacrificing analgesic efficacy. METHODS: A randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, active-controlled, two-period crossover study in adult patients receiving around-the-clock full opioid agonist therapy and confirmed to be opioid dependent by naloxone challenge. Study doses were substituted at the time of the regular dose schedule for each patient. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with a maximum Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale score ≥ 13 (moderate withdrawal) or use of rescue medication. RESULTS: 35 subjects on ≥ 80 mg morphine sulfate equivalent per day were evaluable for opioid withdrawal. One patient during buccal buprenorphine treatment and two during 50% full Μ: -opioid agonist treatment experienced opioid withdrawal of at least moderate intensity. The mean maximum Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale scores were similar, and numerically lower on buccal buprenorphine. There were no significant differences in pain ratings between treatments. The most frequent adverse events with buccal buprenorphine were headache (19%), vomiting (13%), nausea, diarrhea, and drug withdrawal syndrome (each 9%), and with full Μ: -opioid agonist were headache (16%), drug withdrawal syndrome (13%), and nausea (6%). CONCLUSIONS: Chronic pain patients treated with around-the-clock full Μ: -opioid agonist therapy can be switched to buccal buprenorphine (a partial Μ: -opioid agonist) at approximately 50% of the full Μ: -opioid agonist dose without an increased risk of opioid withdrawal or loss of pain control.

Graphie: A network-based visual interface for the UK's primary legislation.

Background: legislation.gov.uk is a platform that enables users to explore and navigate the many sections of the UK's legal corpus through its well-designed searching and browsing features. However, there is room for improvement as it lacks the ability to easily move between related sections or Acts and only presents a text-only rendering of provisions. With Graphie, our novel navigational tool (graphie.quantlaw.co.uk), we aim to address this limitation by presenting alternative visualizations of legal documents using both text and graphs. Methods: The building block of Graphie is Sofia, an offline data pipeline designed to support different data visualizations by parsing and modelling data provided by legislation.gov.uk in open access form. Results: Graphie provides a network representation of the hierarchical structure of an Act of Parliament, which is typically organized in a tree-like fashion according to the content and information contained in each sub-branch. Nodes in Graphie represent sections of an Act (or individual provisions), while links embody the hierarchical connections between them. The legal map provided by Graphie is easily navigable by hovering on nodes, which are also color-coded and numbered to provide easily accessible information about the underlying content. The full textual content of each node is also available on a dedicated hyperlinked canvas. Conclusions: While we focus on the Housing Act 2004 for illustrative purposes, our platform is scalable, versatile, and provides users with a unified toolbox to visualize and explore the UK legal corpus in a fast and user-friendly way.

Safety and efficacy of methylnaltrexone in shortening the duration of postoperative ileus following segmental colectomy: results of two randomized, placebo-controlled phase 3 trials.

PURPOSE: Postoperative ileus contributes to surgical morbidity and is associated with prolonged hospitalization and increased health care costs. The efficacy and safety of the peripherally acting µ-opioid receptor antagonist methylnaltrexone in shortening the duration of postoperative ileus following segmental colectomy was evaluated. METHODS: Two identically designed, multicenter, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled studies randomly assigned patients undergoing segmental colectomy (study 1, N = 515; study 2, N = 533) to receive 12 or 24 mg of methylnaltrexone intravenously or placebo every 6 hours starting within 90 minutes of surgery completion, continuing for up to 10 days or up to 24 hours after gastrointestinal recovery. The primary efficacy end point was the time from the end of surgery to the first bowel movement. Safety was evaluated via standard assessments (ie, adverse events and related withdrawals, physical examinations, laboratory tests, vital signs, electrocardiograms) and assessment of surgical complications. RESULTS: The primary and secondary efficacy outcomes (time to discharge eligibility, time to hospital discharge, and clinically meaningful events of nausea and vomiting following segmental colectomy) did not differ significantly between patients treated with either a dose of methylnaltrexone or with placebo. Rates of adverse events and serious adverse events were comparable across all treatment groups in both studies. The most commonly observed adverse events were nausea, pyrexia, and vomiting. CONCLUSIONS: Although the efficacy of methylnaltrexone in reducing the duration of postoperative ileus was not demonstrated in these studies, intravenous methylnaltrexone at doses of 12 mg and 24 mg was safe, in general, and well tolerated in postcolectomy patients. The utility of intravenous methylnaltrexone in treating postoperative ileus remains unproven.

Effect of subcutaneous methylnaltrexone on patient-reported constipation symptoms.

BACKGROUND: Methylnaltrexone, a selective peripheral acting mu-opioid receptor antagonist, alleviates the constipating effects of opioids without affecting centrally mediated analgesia. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of subcutaneous (SC) methylnaltrexone injection on patient-reported constipation symptoms and pain scores. METHODS: A total of 469 subjects on opioids for chronic non-malignant pain with opioid-induced constipation were randomized to methylnaltrexone SC with once daily (QD) or every other day (QOD) dosing or placebo for 4 weeks. Constipation symptoms and pain were assessed using the patient assessment of constipation-symptoms (PAC-SYM) questionnaire and a 11-point scale, respectively, at baseline, Day 14 and Day 28. Change from baseline in PAC-SYM and pain scores were compared between methylnaltrexone and placebo arms at Day 28 using analysis of covariance, with treatment group as factor and baseline score as covariate. RESULTS: A majority of patients were women (60%), average age was 49 years old, and back pain (60%) was the primary pain condition. At Day 28, the methylnaltrexone SC QD group showed a significant improvement over placebo for rectal symptoms (-0.56 vs. -0.30; P < 0.05), stool symptoms (-0.76 vs. -0.43; P < 0.001) and global scores (-0.62 vs. -0.37; P < 0.001). Improvement in stool symptoms (-0.69 vs.-0.43; P < 0.05) and the global scores (-0.52 vs. -0.37; P < 0.05) were significantly greater than placebo in the methylnaltrexone QOD group. Differences in change from baseline in abdominal symptoms and pain scores between the methylnaltrexone SC QD or QOD dosing arms and placebo were not significant. CONCLUSION: The results of our study indicate significant improvement in constipation symptoms with methylnaltrexone QD or QOD dosing compared to placebo without a significant effect on pain scores.

Efficacy of subcutaneous methylnaltrexone in the treatment of opioid-induced constipation: a responder post hoc analysis.

OBJECTIVE: Methylnaltrexone, a selective peripherally acting mu-opioid receptor antagonist, effectively treats opioid-induced constipation (OIC) in patients with advanced illness and shows efficacy in patients with chronic nonmalignant pain. The objective was to identify patients who achieved maximal treatment effect based on response to initial four methylnaltrexone doses. DESIGN: A post hoc analysis of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluating patients with OIC and chronic nonmalignant pain who received 12 mg subcutaneous methylnaltrexone daily for 4 weeks was performed to determine if response to the first four methylnaltrexone doses predicted overall response during the study. Patients receiving ≥8 doses were included. OUTCOME MEASURES: Patients having ≥3 rescue-free bowel movements (RFBMs)/week; change from baseline in RFBMs/week; percentage of doses with RFBMs within 4 hours after dosing. RESULTS: Of 137 patients, 58 patients (42.3%) had RFBMs after ≥2 of four doses. Among those with response to ≥2 of four doses, 81% had ≥3 RFBMs/week vs. 43% for those with response to <2 of four (P < 0.0001). Those with RFBMs after ≥2 of first four doses averaged 4.8 RFBMs/week vs. 2.0 RFBMs/week for those with <2 of four (P < 0.0001). Percentage of subsequent injections resulting in RFBMs within 4 hours was 45.9 ± 27.6 for those with response to ≥2 of four doses vs. 17.1 ± 19.1 for those with response to <2 of four (P < 0.0001). Abdominal pain was the most frequently reported adverse event. CONCLUSION: Early response to ≥2 of first four doses of methylnaltrexone identified patients who demonstrated a particularly robust effect of treatment over the duration of use.