Food and Drug Administration Public Workshop Summary-Development Considerations of Antifungal Drugs to Address Unmet Medical Need.

Pressing challenges in the treatment of invasive fungal infections (IFIs) include emerging and rare pathogens, resistant/refractory infections, and antifungal armamentarium limited by toxicity, drug-drug interactions, and lack of oral formulations. Development of new antifungal drugs is hampered by the limitations of the available diagnostics, clinical trial endpoints, prolonged trial duration, difficulties in patient recruitment, including subpopulations (eg, pediatrics), and heterogeneity of the IFIs. On 4 August 2020, the US Food and Drug Administration convened a workshop that included IFI experts from academia, industry, and other government agencies to discuss the IFI landscape, unmet need, and potential strategies to facilitate the development of antifungal drugs for treatment and prophylaxis. This article summarizes the key topics presented and discussed during the workshop, such as incentives and research support for drug developers, nonclinical development, clinical trial design challenges, lessons learned from industry, and potential collaborations to facilitate antifungal drug development.

The Value of the Information That Can Be Generated: Optimizing Study Design to Enable the Study of Treatments Addressing an Unmet Need for Rare Pathogens.

In traditional phase 3 trials confirming safety and efficacy of new treatments relative to a comparator, a 1-sided type I error rate of 2.5% is traditionally used and typically leads to minimum sizes of 300-600 subjects per study. However, for rare pathogens, it may be necessary to work with data from as few as 50-100 subjects. For areas with a high unmet need, there is a balance between traditional type I error and power and enabling feasible studies. In such cases, an alternative 1-sided alpha level of 5% or 10% should be considered, and we review herein the implications of such approaches. Resolving this question requires engagement of patients, the medical community, regulatory agencies, and trial sponsors.

Analysis of the Clinical Pipeline of Treatments for Drug-Resistant Bacterial Infections: Despite Progress, More Action Is Needed.

There is an urgent global need for new strategies and drugs to control and treat multidrug-resistant bacterial infections. In 2017, the World Health Organization (WHO) released a list of 12 antibiotic-resistant priority pathogens and began to critically analyze the antibacterial clinical pipeline. This review analyzes "traditional" and "nontraditional" antibacterial agents and modulators in clinical development current on 30 June 2021 with activity against the WHO priority pathogens mycobacteria and Clostridioides difficile. Since 2017, 12 new antibacterial drugs have been approved globally, but only vaborbactam belongs to a new antibacterial class. Also innovative is the cephalosporin derivative cefiderocol, which incorporates an iron-chelating siderophore that facilitates Gram-negative bacteria cell entry. Overall, there were 76 antibacterial agents in clinical development (45 traditional and 31 nontraditional), with 28 in phase 1, 32 in phase 2, 12 in phase 3, and 4 under regulatory evaluation. Forty-one out of 76 (54%) targeted WHO priority pathogens, 16 (21%) were against mycobacteria, 15 (20%) were against C. difficile, and 4 (5%) were nontraditional agents with broad-spectrum effects. Nineteen of the 76 antibacterial agents have new pharmacophores, and 4 of these have new modes of actions not previously exploited by marketed antibacterial drugs. Despite there being 76 antibacterial clinical candidates, this analysis indicated that there were still relatively few clinically differentiated antibacterial agents in late-stage clinical development, especially against critical-priority pathogens. We believe that future antibacterial research and development (R&D) should focus on the development of innovative and clinically differentiated candidates that have clear and feasible progression pathways to the market.

FDA Public Workshop Summary-Coccidioidomycosis (Valley Fever): Considerations for Development of Antifungal Drugs.

Coccidioidomycosis is a fungal disease endemic to the southwestern United States, Mexico, and Central and South America. Prevalence rates are increasing steadily, and new endemic areas of Coccidioides are emerging. Standard treatment is often administered for months to decades, and intolerance to medications and treatment failures are common. No new treatments for coccidioidomycosis have been approved in the United States in nearly 40 years. On 5 August 2020, the US Food and Drug Administration convened experts in coccidioidomycosis from academia, industry, patient groups, and other government agencies to discuss the disease landscape and strategies to facilitate product development for treatment of coccidioidomycosis. This article summarizes the key topics concerning drug development for coccidioidomycosis presented by speakers and panelists during the workshop, such as unmet need, trial designs, endpoints, incentives, research and development support, and collaborations to facilitate antifungal drug development.

Antimicrobial Resistance: Is Health Technology Assessment Part of the Solution or Part of the Problem?

Antimicrobial resistance is a serious challenge to the success and sustainability of our healthcare systems. There has been increasing policy attention given to antimicrobial resistance in the last few years, and increased amounts of funding have been channeled into funding for research and development of antimicrobial agents. Nevertheless, manufacturers doubt whether there will be a market for new antimicrobial technologies sufficient to enable them to recoup their investment. Health technology assessment (HTA) has a critical role in creating confidence that if valuable technologies can be developed they will be reimbursed at a level that captures their true value. We identify 3 deficiencies of current HTA processes for appraising antimicrobial agents: a methods-centric approach rather than problem-centric approach for dealing with new challenges, a lack of tools for thinking about changing patterns of infection, and the absence of an approach to epidemiological risks. We argue that, to play their role more effectively, HTA agencies need to broaden their methodological tool kit, design and communicate their analysis to a wider set of users, and incorporate long-term policy goals, such as containing resistance, as part of their evaluation criteria alongside immediate health gains.

When to change treatment of acute invasive aspergillosis: an expert viewpoint.

Invasive aspergillosis (IA) is an acute infection affecting patients who are immunocompromised, as a result of receiving chemotherapy for malignancy, or immunosuppressant agents for transplantation or autoimmune disease. Whilst criteria exist to define the probability of infection for clinical trials, there is little evidence in the literature or clinical guidelines on when to change antifungal treatment in patients who are receiving prophylaxis or treatment for IA. To try and address this significant gap, an advisory board of experts was convened to develop criteria for the management of IA for use in designing clinical trials, which could also be used in clinical practice. For primary treatment failure, a change in antifungal therapy should be made: (i) when mycological susceptibility testing identifies an organism from a confirmed site of infection, which is resistant to the antifungal given for primary therapy, or a resistance mutation is identified by molecular testing; (ii) at, or after, 8 days of primary antifungal treatment if there is increasing serum galactomannan, or galactomannan positivity in serum, or bronchoalveolar lavage fluid when the antigen was previously undetectable, or there is sudden clinical deterioration, or a new clearly distinct site of infection is detected; and (iii) at, or after, 15 days of primary antifungal treatment if the patient is clinically stable but with ≥2 serum galactomannan measurements persistently elevated compared with baseline or increasing, or if the original lesions on CT or other imaging, show progression by >25% in size in the context of no apparent change in immune status.

Critical analysis of antibacterial agents in clinical development.

The antibacterial agents currently in clinical development are predominantly derivatives of well-established antibiotic classes and were selected to address the class-specific resistance mechanisms and determinants that were known at the time of their discovery. Many of these agents aim to target the antibiotic-resistant priority pathogens listed by the WHO, including Gram-negative bacteria in the critical priority category, such as carbapenem-resistant Acinetobacter, Pseudomonas and Enterobacterales. Although some current compounds in the pipeline have exhibited increased susceptibility rates in surveillance studies that depend on geography, pre-existing cross-resistance both within and across antibacterial classes limits the activity of many of the new agents against the most extensively drug-resistant (XDR) and pan-drug-resistant (PDR) Gram-negative pathogens. In particular, cross-resistance to unrelated classes may occur by co-selection of resistant strains, thus leading to the rapid emergence and subsequent spread of resistance. There is a continued need for innovation and new-class antibacterial agents in order to provide effective therapeutic options against infections specifically caused by XDR and PDR Gram-negative bacteria.

Evaluating for-profit public benefit corporations as an additional structure for antibiotic development and commercialization.

While antibiotics are a key infrastructure underpinning modern medicine, evolution will continue to undermine their effectiveness, requiring continuous investment to sustain antibiotic effectiveness. The antibiotic R&D ecosystem is in peril, moving towards collapse. Key stakeholders have identified pull incentives such as Market Entry Rewards or subscription models as the key long-term solution. If substantial Market Entry Rewards or other pull incentives become possible, there is every reason to expect that for-profit companies will return to the antibiotic field. However, the political and financial will to develop such Market Entry Rewards or other similar incentives may be difficult to muster in the timeframes needed to prevent further diminishment of antibiotic research and development, especially if large drug companies are seen as substantial beneficiaries of these taxpayer-funded pull incentives. Bridging solutions are required from private actors in the interim. This article explores potential solutions led by private actors, including (1) traditional for-profit companies; (2) non-profit enterprises; and (3) public benefit corporations with lower profit expectations, akin to a public utility. All face similar commercial struggles, but nonprofits and public benefit corporations can accept lower profit expectations and might be more politically attractive recipients of pull incentives.

Designing development programs for non-traditional antibacterial agents.

In the face of rising rates of antibacterial resistance, many responses are being pursued in parallel, including 'non-traditional' antibacterial agents (agents that are not small-molecule drugs and/or do not act by directly targeting bacterial components necessary for bacterial growth). In this Perspective, we argue that the distinction between traditional and non-traditional agents has only limited relevance for regulatory purposes. Rather, most agents in both categories can and should be developed using standard measures of clinical efficacy demonstrated with non-inferiority or superiority trial designs according to existing regulatory frameworks. There may, however, be products with non-traditional goals focused on population-level benefits that would benefit from extension of current paradigms. Discussion of such potential paradigms should be undertaken by the development community.

The successful uptake and sustainability of rapid infectious disease and antimicrobial resistance point-of-care testing requires a complex 'mix-and-match' implementation package.

The emergence and spread of antimicrobial resistance is one of the major global issues currently threatening the health and wealth of nations, with effective guidelines and intervention strategies urgently required. Such guidelines and interventions should ideally be targeted at individuals, communities, and nations, requiring international coordination for maximum effect. In this respect, the European Joint Programming Initiative on Antimicrobial Resistance Transnational Working Group 'Antimicrobial Resistance - Rapid Diagnostic Tests' (JPIAMR AMR-RDT) is proposing to consider a 'mix-and-match' package for the implementation of point-of-care testing (PoCT), which is described in this publication. The working group was established with the remit of identifying barriers and solutions to the development and implementation of rapid infectious disease PoCT for combatting the global spread of antimicrobial resistance. It constitutes a multi-sectoral collaboration between medical, technological, and industrial opinion leaders involved in in vitro diagnostics development, medical microbiology, and clinical infectious diseases. The mix-and-match implementation package is designed to encourage the implementation of rapid infectious disease and antimicrobial resistance PoCT in transnational medical environments for use in the fight against increasing antimicrobial resistance.

Elaboration of Consensus Clinical Endpoints to Evaluate Antimicrobial Treatment Efficacy in Future Hospital-acquired/Ventilator-associated Bacterial Pneumonia Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in hospital-acquired and ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (HABP and VABP, respectively) are important for the evaluation of new antimicrobials. However, the heterogeneity in endpoints used in RCTs evaluating treatment of HABP/VABP may puzzle clinicians. The aim of this work was to reach a consensus on clinical endpoints to consider in future clinical trials evaluating antimicrobial treatment efficacy for HABP/VABP. METHODS: Twenty-six international experts from intensive care, infectious diseases, and the pharmaceutical industry were polled using the Delphi method. RESULTS: The panel recommended a hierarchical composite endpoint including, by priority order, (1) survival at day 28, (2) mechanical ventilation-free days through day 28, and (3) clinical cure between study days 7 and 10 for VABP; and (1) survival (day 28) and (2) clinical cure (days 7-10) for HABP. Clinical cure was defined as the combination of resolution of signs and symptoms present at enrollment and improvement or lack of progression of radiological signs. More than 70% of the experts agreed to assess survival and mechanical ventilation-free days though day 28, and clinical cure between day 7 and day 10 after treatment initiation. Finally, the hierarchical order of endpoint components was reached after 3 Delphi rounds (72% agreement). CONCLUSIONS: We provide a multinational expert consensus on separate hierarchical composite endpoints for VABP and HABP, and on a definition of clinical cure that could be considered for use in future HABP/VABP clinical trials.

Evidence-Based Study Design for Hospital-Acquired Bacterial Pneumonia and Ventilator-Associated Bacterial Pneumonia.

BACKGROUND: The US Food and Drug Administration solicited evidence-based recommendations to improve guidance for studies of hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia (HABP) and ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (VABP). METHODS: We analyzed 7 HABP/VABP datasets to explore novel noninferiority study endpoints and designs, focusing on alternatives to all-cause mortality (ACM). RESULTS: ACM at day 28 differed for ventilated HABP (27.8%), VABP (18.0%), and nonventilated HABP (14.5%). A "mortality-plus" (ACM+) composite endpoint was constructed by combining ACM with patient-relevant, infection-related adverse events from the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities toxic/septic shock standardized query. The ACM+ rate was 3-10 percentage points above that of ACM across the studies and treatment groups. Predictors of higher ACM/ACM+ rates included older age and elevated acute physiology and chronic health evaluation (APACHE) II score. Only patients in the nonventilated HABP group were able to report pneumonia symptom changes. CONCLUSIONS: If disease groups and patient characteristics in future studies produce an ACM rate so low (<10%-15%) that a fixed noninferiority margin of 10% cannot be justified (requiring an odds ratio analysis), an ACM+ endpoint could lower sample size. Enrichment of studies with patients with a higher severity of illness would increase ACM. Data on symptom resolution in nonventilated HABP support development of a patient-reported outcome instrument.

Analysis of the clinical antibacterial and antituberculosis pipeline.

This analysis of the global clinical antibacterial pipeline was done in support of the Global Action Plan on Antimicrobial Resistance. The study analysed to what extent antibacterial and antimycobacterial drugs for systemic human use as well as oral non-systemic antibacterial drugs for Clostridium difficile infections were active against pathogens included in the WHO priority pathogen list and their innovativeness measured by their absence of cross-resistance (new class, target, mode of action). As of July 1, 2018, 30 new chemical entity (NCE) antibacterial drugs, ten biologics, ten NCEs against Mycobacterium tuberculosis, and four NCEs against C difficile were identified. Of the 30 NCEs, 11 are expected to have some activity against at least one critical priority pathogen expressing carbapenem resistance. The clinical pipeline is dominated by derivatives of established classes and most development candidates display limited innovation. New antibacterial drugs without pre-existing cross-resistance are under-represented and are urgently needed, especially for geographical regions with high resistance rates among Gram-negative bacteria and M tuberculosis.

Developmental roadmap for antimicrobial susceptibility testing systems.

Antimicrobial susceptibility testing (AST) technologies help to accelerate the initiation of targeted antimicrobial therapy for patients with infections and could potentially extend the lifespan of current narrow-spectrum antimicrobials. Although conceptually new and rapid AST technologies have been described, including new phenotyping methods, digital imaging and genomic approaches, there is no single major, or broadly accepted, technological breakthrough that leads the field of rapid AST platform development. This might be owing to several barriers that prevent the timely development and implementation of novel and rapid AST platforms in health-care settings. In this Consensus Statement, we explore such barriers, which include the utility of new methods, the complex process of validating new technology against reference methods beyond the proof-of-concept phase, the legal and regulatory landscapes, costs, the uptake of new tools, reagent stability, optimization of target product profiles, difficulties conducting clinical trials and issues relating to quality and quality control, and present possible solutions.

The Orotomide Olorofim Is Efficacious in an Experimental Model of Central Nervous System Coccidioidomycosis.

Olorofim (formerly F901318) is an advanced analog of the orotomide class that inhibits fungal pyrimidine biosynthesis. We evaluated the in vitro and in vivo activities of olorofim against Coccidioides species. In vitro activity was assessed against 59 clinical Coccidioides isolates. Central nervous system infections were established in mice via intracranial inoculation with Coccidioides immitis arthroconidia. Oral therapy began 48 h postinoculation and consisted of vehicle control, olorofim daily doses of 20 mg/kg (6.67 mg/kg three times daily or 10 mg/kg twice daily) or 40 mg/kg (13.3 mg/kg three times daily or 20 mg/kg twice daily), or fluconazole (25 mg/kg twice daily). Treatment continued for 7 and 14 days in the fungal burden and survival arms, respectively. Fungal burdens were assessed by CFU counts in brains. Olorofim demonstrated potent in vitro activity (MIC range, ≤0.008 to 0.06 µg/ml). Survival was significantly enhanced in mice treated with olorofim. Reductions in brain tissue fungal burdens were also observed on day 9 in the olorofim-treated groups. Improvements in survival and reductions in fungal burdens also occurred with fluconazole. More frequent dosing of olorofim was associated with enhanced survival and greater reductions in fungal burdens. In the group treated with 13.3 mg/kg olorofim three times daily, fungal burdens remained low on day 30 (15 days after treatment was stopped), with undetectable levels in 7 of 10 mice. In contrast, fungal burdens rebounded in all other groups after therapy stopped. Olorofim was highly active in vitro and in vivo against Coccidioides These results demonstrate that olorofim may have a role in the treatment of coccidioidomycosis.