Boceprevir: a protease inhibitor for the treatment of hepatitis C.

BACKGROUND: Boceprevir is a protease inhibitor indicated for the treatment of chronic hepatitis C virus (HCV) genotype 1 infection in combination with peginterferon and ribavirin for treatment-naive patients and those who previously failed to improve with interferon and ribavirin treatment. OBJECTIVE: This article provides an overview of the mechanism of action, pharmacologic and pharmacokinetic properties, clinical efficacy, and tolerability of boceprevir. METHODS: Relevant information was identified through a search of PubMed (1990-July 2012), EMBASE (1990-July 2012), International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1970-July 2012), and Google Scholar using the key words boceprevir, SCH 503034, non-structural protein 3 (NS3) serine protease inhibitor, and direct-acting antiviral agent (DAA). Additional information was obtained from the US Food and Drug Administration's Web site, review of the reference lists of identified articles, and posters and abstracts from scientific meetings. RESULTS: Clinical efficacy of boceprevir was assessed in 2 Phase III trials, Serine Protease Inhibitor Therapy-2 (SPRINT-2) for treatment-naive patients and Retreatment with HCV Serine Protease Inhibitor Boceprevir and PegIntron/Rebetol 2 (RESPOND-2) for treatment-experienced patients. In SPRINT-2, patients were randomized to receive peginterferon + ribavirin (PR) or peginterferon + ribavirin + boceprevir (PRB); duration of boceprevir therapy varied from 24, 32, to 44 weeks on the basis of HCV RNA results. The primary endpoint was achievement of sustained virologic response (SVR; lower limit of detection, 9.3 IU/mL). The addition of boceprevir was shown to be superior, with overall SVR rates ranging from 63% to 66% compared with 38% with PR (P < 0.001). Results of SVR in SPRINT-2 were also reorganized to monitor SVRs in black and non-black patients. Treatment-experienced patients were assessed in RESPOND-2; however, null responders were excluded. Patients were again randomized to PR or PRB; duration of boceprevir therapy varied from 32 to 44 weeks on the basis of HCV RNA results. SVR was significantly higher in patients receiving boceprevir (59%-66% vs 21% with PR; P < 0.001). This benefit was seen in both previous nonresponders (SVR, 40%-52% vs 7% with PR), as well as previous relapsers (SVR, 69%-75% vs 29% with PR). Importantly, SVR could be attained with a shortened course of therapy in almost one half of all treated patients in SPRINT-2 (44%) and RESPOND-2 (46%). CONCLUSIONS: Boceprevir was well tolerated in clinical trials and a welcomed addition to our HCV armamentarium.

Renal toxicity of long-term therapy with tenofovir in HIV-infected patients.

Data are sparse on long-term renal toxicity of tenofovir as measured by estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and progression to advanced stages of chronic kidney disease (CKD). The objective of the study is to determine the incidence of renal impairment associated with the use of tenofovir in HIV-infected patients, using abacavir as a control. In a single tertiary care center, all HIV-infected patients with baseline CKD stage 0 or 1 (CKD-1), who were started on either tenofovir or abacavir from 1998 to 2008 and had at least 1 follow-up eGFR measure on therapy, were included in this retrospective analysis. Progression to CKD stages 2 to 5 was compared using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Progression to CKD-2 and CKD-3 occurred more frequently in patients who received tenofovir than those receiving abacavir (CKD-2, 2-year actuarial frequency, 48.8% vs 23.7%; P < .001, log rank; CKD-3, 5.8% vs 0.0%; P = .028). Only 1 patient in the tenofovir group progressed to CKD-4 and none to CKD-5. Treatment with tenofovir was the only independent factor associated with progression to CKD-2 (hazard ratio [HR], 2.12; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.41-3.18; P < .001) and to CKD-3 (HR, 4.91; 95% CI, 1.02-23.7; P = .048). In HIV-infected patients, long-term therapy with tenofovir is associated with mild-to-moderate nephrotoxicity which is significantly higher than in abacavir-treated patients.

Ceftaroline fosamil: a cephalosporin with activity against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus.

BACKGROUND: Ceftaroline is a cephalosporin with expanded gram-positive activity recently approved for clinical uses by the US Food and Drug Administration. OBJECTIVE: This article provides an overview of the in vitro and in vivo activities, mechanism of action, pharmacologic and pharmacokinetic properties, clinical efficacy, and tolerability of ceftaroline. METHODS: Relevant information was identified through a search of PubMed (1990-April 2011), EMBASE (1990-April 2011), International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1970-April 2011), and Google Scholar using the key words ceftaroline, PPI-0903, PPI-0903M, T-91825, and TAK-599. A review of the reference lists of identified articles, a search of the US Food and Drug Administration Web site, and posters and abstracts from scientific meetings yielded additional publications. RESULTS: In vitro, ceftaroline exhibits activity against most aerobic gram-positive isolates, common aerobic gram-negative respiratory pathogens, and some gram-positive anaerobes. The MIC range for most Staphylococcus aureus isolates, including vancomycin-resistant strains was between ≤0.008 and 4 µg/mL. In Phase III studies (CANVAS 1 and CANVAS 2), ceftaroline was found to be noninferior to vancomycin + aztreonam for the treatment of complicated skin and skin-structure infections, with a clinical cure rate of 91.6% among clinically evaluable patients (ceftaroline versus vancomycin + aztreonam: difference, -1.1; 95% CI, -4.2 to 2.0; P = NS). Ceftaroline's efficacy has also been assessed for the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia in 2 Phase III studies (FOCUS 1 and FOCUS 2) and was equivalent to ceftriaxone, with cure rates of 84.3% and 77.7%, respectively, among clinically evaluable patients in the combined analysis (ceftaroline versus ceftriaxone: difference, 6.7; 95% CI, 1.6 to 11.8). The recommended dosage for patients 18 years and older is 600 mg IV every 12 hours. Dosage adjustment is necessary in patients with renal impairment (creatinine clearance ≤50 mL/min). The pharmacokinetic properties of ceftaroline in patients with hepatic impairments are currently unavailable. Ceftaroline appeared to be well tolerated generally. The most frequently (>3%) reported adverse events were nausea, headaches, diarrhea, pruritus, rash, and insomnia; all were usually mild to moderate, self-limiting, and of little clinical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Ceftaroline is a cephalosporin with broad gram-positive activity, including Methicillin-resistant S aureus and vancomycin-resistant S aureus. Its gram-negative activity includes common respiratory pathogens and members of the Enterobacteriaceae. Clinical trials have reported that ceftaroline was noninferior to ceftriaxone, and vancomycin + aztreonam for the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia and complicated skin and skin-structure infections, respectively.

Besifloxacin: a topical fluoroquinolone for the treatment of bacterial conjunctivitis.

BACKGROUND: Besifloxacin is a topical ophthalmic fluoroquinolone that was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in May 2009 for the treatment of bacterial conjunctivitis caused by susceptible bacterial strains. OBJECTIVE: This article provides an overview of the pharmacology, clinical efficacy, and tolerability of ophthalmic besifloxacin when used for the treatment of bacterial conjunctivitis. METHODS: Relevant reports pertaining to the pharmacology, efficacy, and tolerability of besifloxacin were identified through a search of MEDLINE (1985-December 2009) and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1985-December 2009) using the terms besifloxacin, BOL-303224-A, ophthalmic fluoroquinolones, and bacterial conjunctivitis. Additional publications were identified by reviewing the reference lists of identified articles and searching the FDA Web site. RESULTS: Besifloxacin has potent in vitro inhibitory activity against most common ocular bacterial pathogens (MIC90 values generally < or =4 microg/mL), including Staphylococcus aureus, Streptococcus pneumoniae, and Haemophilus influenzae. In an ocular pharmacokinetic study in 64 healthy volunteers, the C(max) in tears (mean [SD], 610 [540] microg/mL) was reached 10 minutes after a single ocular instillation of besifloxacin; concentrations > or =1.6 microg/g of tear were sustained for at least 24 hours; and the elimination t(1/2) was ~3.4 hours. In a study in 24 patients with a clinical diagnosis of bilateral bacterial conjunctivitis, systemic exposure (C(max)) after administration of besifloxacin ophthalmic suspension 3 times daily for 5 days was <0.5 ng/mL. In 2 randomized, double-masked, vehicle-controlled clinical trials, besifloxacin ophthalmic suspension was well tolerated and significantly more efficacious than vehicle in achieving clinical resolution (73.3% vs 43.1%, respectively, in one of the studies [P < 0.001]; 45.2% vs 33.0% in the other [P = 0.008]) and microbial eradication (88.3% vs 60.3% [P < 0.001] and 91.5% vs 59.7% [P < 0.001], respectively). In a randomized, double-masked, parallel-group, noninferiority trial comparing besifloxacin ophthalmic suspension 0.6% with moxifloxacin ophthalmic solution 0.5%, besifloxacin was found to be noninferior to moxifloxacin (predefined cutoff for noninferiority = -15), with no significant differences in rates of clinical resolution (58.3% and 59.4%, respectively; 95% CI, -9.48 to 7.29) or microbial eradication (93.3% and 91.1%; 95% CI, -2.44 to 6.74). Besifloxacin was generally well tolerated in these clinical trials, with the most common (> or =1.5%) ocular adverse events being nonspecific conjunctivitis (2.6%), blurred vision (2.1%), bacterial conjunctivitis (1.8%), and eye pain (1.5%). The recommended dose of besifloxacin is 1 drop in the affected eye(s) 3 times daily (4-12 hours apart) for 7 days. CONCLUSION: Besifloxacin ophthalmic suspension 0.6% appeared to be well tolerated in the populations studied and was efficacious in the treatment of bacterial conjunctivitis caused by susceptible isolates.

Community-acquired pneumonia in the elderly.

BACKGROUND: Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a frequent cause of hospitalization and death among the elderly. OBJECTIVE: This article reviews information on CAP among the elderly, including age-related changes, predisposing risk factors, causes, treatment strategies, and prevention. METHODS: Searches of MEDLINE (January 1990-November 2009), International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (January 1990-November 2009), and Google Scholar were conducted using the terms community-acquired pneumonia, pneumonia, treatment guidelines, and elderly. Additional publications were found by searching the reference lists of the identified articles. Studies that reported diagnostic criteria as well as the treatment outcomes achieved in adult patients with CAP were selected for this review. RESULTS: Three practice guidelines, 5 reviews, and 43 studies on CAP in the elderly were identified in the literature search. Based on those publications, risk factors that predispose the elderly to pneumonia include comorbid conditions, poor functional and nutritional status, consumption of alcohol, and smoking. The clinical presentation of pneumonia in the elderly (>/=65 years of age) may be subtle, lacking the typical acute symptoms (fever, cough, dyspnea, and purulent sputum) observed in younger adults. Pneumonia should be suspected in all elderly patients who have fever, altered mental status, or a sudden decline in functional status, with or without lower respiratory tract symptoms such as cough, purulent sputum, and dyspnea. Treatment of CAP in the elderly should be guided by the latest recommendations of the Infectious Diseases Society of America and the American Thoracic Society (IDSA/ATS), along with consideration of local rates and patterns of antimicrobial resistance, as well as individual patient risk factors for acquiring less common or more resistant pathogens. Recommended empiric antimicrobial regimens generally consist of either a beta-lactam plus a macrolide or a respiratory fluoroquinolone alone. Adherence to the IDSA/ATS guidelines has been found to improve in-hospital mortality (adherence vs nonadherence, 8%; 95% CI, 7%-10% vs 17%; 95% CI, 14%-20%; P< 0.01), length of hospital stay (8 days; interquartile range [IQR], 5-15 vs 10 days; IQR, 6-24 days, respectively; P < 0.01), and time to clinical stability in elderly patients with CAP (percentage of stable patients by day 7, 71%; 95% CI, 68%-74% vs 57%; 95% CI, 53%-61%, respectively; P < 0.01). All elderly patients should be vaccinated against pneumococcal disease and influenza based on recommendations from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Lifestyle modifications and nutritional support are also important elements in the prevention of pneumonia in the elderly. CONCLUSION: Adherence to established guidelines, along with customization of antimicrobial therapy based on local rates and patterns of resistance and patient-specific risk factors, likely will improve the treatment outcome of elderly patients with CAP.

Telavancin: a lipoglycopeptide antimicrobial for the treatment of complicated skin and skin structure infections caused by gram-positive bacteria in adults.

BACKGROUND: Telavancin, a lipoglycopeptide antibiotic, is a semisynthetic derivative of vancomycin. It was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2009 for the treatment of complicated skin and skin structure infections (cSSSIs) caused by gram-positive bacteria, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. OBJECTIVE: This article summarizes the pharmacology, in vitro and in vivo activity, pharmacokinetic properties, and clinical efficacy and tolerability of telavancin. METHODS: Relevant information was identified through a search of MEDLINE (1966-August 2010), Iowa Drug Information Service (1966-August 2010), International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1970-August 2010), and Google Scholar using the terms telavancin, lipoglycopeptide, and TD-6424. Abstracts and posters from scientific meetings, as well as documents submitted by the manufacturer of telavancin to the FDA as part of the approval process, were consulted. In vivo and in vitro experimental and clinical studies and review articles that provided information on the activity, mechanism of action, pharmacologic and pharmacokinetic properties, clinical efficacy, and tolerability of telavancin were reviewed. RESULTS: In vitro, telavancin has potent activity against S aureus, including methicillin-resistant strains; Streptococcus pneumoniae; and vancomycin-susceptible enterococci with MICs generally <1 µg/mL. Telavancin appears to have a dual mechanism of action, inhibiting cell wall formation and disrupting the cell membrane. In Phase III studies (ATLAS 1 and ATLAS 2), telavancin was found to be noninferior to vancomycin, with clinical cure rates of 88.3% and 87.1%, respectively, in clinically evaluable patients in the treatment of cSSSIs (difference, 1.2%; 95% CI, -2.1 to 4.6; P = NS). The effectiveness of telavancin in the treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia was assessed in 2 Phase III studies (ATTAIN 1 and ATTAIN 2). Preliminary findings were that the effectiveness of telavancin was not significantly different from that of vancomycin, with cure rates of 82.7% and 80.9% in the clinically evaluable population, respectively (difference, 1.8%; 95% CI, -4.1 to 7.7; P = NS). The most commonly (>10%) reported adverse events included taste disturbances, nausea, headache, vomiting, foamy urine, constipation, and insomnia. CONCLUSION: In clinical trials, the effectiveness of telavancin was not significantly different from that of vancomycin in the treatment of cSSSIs, and telavancin was generally well tolerated.

Treatment of skin and soft tissue infections in the elderly: A review.

BACKGROUND: Skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) have become the second most common type of infection among persons residing in long-term care facilities. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this article was to review the latest information on SSTIs among the elderly, including age-related changes, challenges, and treatment strategies in the era of emerging bacterial resistance. METHODS: Relevant information was identified through a search of MEDLINE (1970-April 2010), International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1970-April 2010), and Google Scholar using the terms skin and soft tissue infection, skin and skin structure infection, cellulitis, treatment guidelines, and elderly. Additional publications were found by searching the reference lists of the identified articles. Trials published since 1970 were selected for this review if they prospectively evaluated mostly adults (≥18 years of age), included >50 patients, and reported diagnostic criteria as well as clinical outcomes in patients treated for simple or complicated SSTIs. RESULTS: Fifty-eight of 664 identified studies were selected and included in this review. A search of the literature did not identify any prospective clinical trials that were conducted exclusively in the elderly. Information on the treatment of SSTIs in the elderly was based solely on clinical studies that were conducted in adults in general. As recommended by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) 2008 update, SSTIs should be suspected in elderly patients who have skin lesions and present with a decline in functional status, with or without fever. Patients who present with symptoms of systemic toxicity should be hospitalized for further evaluation. Current challenges in the management of SSTIs include the rapid emergence of community-acquired, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (CA-MRSA), the emergence of macrolide-resistant streptococci within the past decade, and the lack of a reliable algorithm to differentiate potentially life-threatening SSTIs that require aggressive interventions and prompt hospitalization from those that can be managed in an outpatient setting. S aureus was the most common cause of SSTIs, being isolated in 42.8% (5015/11,723) of wounds, followed by streptococci. Common SSTIs in the elderly such as shingles, diabetic foot infections, infected pressure ulcers, and scabies, and their treatment were also discussed. Based on reviews of published trials, treatment of simple SSTIs generally consisted of administration of agents with activity against S aureus and Streptococcus species such as a penicillinase-resistant ß-lactam, a first-generation cephalosporin, or clindamycin. Broadening of the antimicrobial spectrum to include gram-negative and anaerobic organisms should be implemented for complicated SSTIs such as diabetic foot infections and infected pressure ulcers. Local rates of MRSA, CA-MRSA, and macrolide-resistant streptococci should be considered when selecting empiric therapy. CONCLUSIONS: A search of the literature did not identify any prospective clinical trials on the treatment of SSTIs in the elderly; therefore, it is recommended to follow treatment based on the current IDSA guidelines. More research and publications are needed to establish proper selection of antimicrobial agents, treatment strategies, and duration of therapy of SSTIs in the elderly population.

Rhodotorula mucilaginosa lymphadenitis in an HIV-infected patient.

We report a case of lymphadenitis due to Rhodotorula mucilaginosa in a man with well-controlled HIV infection. The diagnosis was established microbiologically by positive lymph tissue cultures, and clinically by responses of lymphadenitis to antifungal therapy. The patient was asymptomatic and was treated with itraconazole 200mg orally once daily as an outpatient. Clinical response was evident within three weeks with improvement of lymphadenopathy on serial computed tomography scans. Lymphadenopathy resolved completely after 8 months of itraconazole therapy and had not recurred 9 months after treatment was stopped.

Maraviroc: a CCR5-receptor antagonist for the treatment of HIV-1 infection.

BACKGROUND: The emergence of viral resistance is one of the greatest challenges in the treatment of HIV infection. Maraviroc is the first member of a new class of antiretroviral medications, the CCR5-receptor antagonists. It is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use in combination with other antiretroviral agents in treatment-experienced patients infected with multidrug-resistant, CCR5-tropic HIV-1. OBJECTIVE: This article provides an overview of the pharmacology, efficacy, and tolerability of maraviroc in the treatment of HIV-1 infection. METHODS: Relevant information was identified through a search of MEDLINE (January 2000-May 2008) using the terms maraviroc, UK-427,857, and CCR5-receptor antagonist. Also consulted were abstracts from the International AIDS Society Conference, the Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections, and other relevant scientific meetings. Additional publications were found by searching the reference lists of the identified articles and the FDA Web site. RESULTS: Maraviroc is a selective, reversible, small-molecule CCR5-receptor antagonist. In vitro, it has potent anti-HIV-1 activity, with a mean 90% inhibitory concentration of 2.0 nmol/L. It is widely distributed, with a V(d) of approximately 194 L. Maraviroc is moderately metabolized in the liver (65.3%), primarily via the cytochrome P450 3A4 isozyme. It has an elimination t(1/2) of 15.9 to 22.9 hours. Until more data are available, maraviroc should be avoided in patients with severe hepatic insufficiency; dose adjustment does not appear to be necessary on the basis of age, sex, or renal function. In 2 Phase IIb/III studies, maraviroc 300 mg PO QD or BID was found to be more efficacious than placebo in reducing the viral load at 48 weeks in treatment-experienced, CCR5-tropic HIV-1-infected patients receiving an optimized background regimen (difference vs placebo-QD arm: -0.89 log(10) copies/mL [97.5% CI, -1.17 to -0.62]; BID arm: -1.05 log(10) copies/mL [97.5% CI, -1.33 to -0.78]). The proportion of patients with a viral load < 50 copies/mL was 43.2% in the QD arm and 45.5% in the BID arm, compared with 16.7% in the placebo arm (P < 0.001, both treatment arms vs placebo). In treatment-naive patients infected with CCR5-tropic virus only, maraviroc 300 mg PO BID was not noninferior to oral efavirenz 600 mg QD (difference = -4.2%; lower bound of the 1-sided 97.5% CI, -10.9 [predefined statistical cutoff for noninferiority, -10]). Maraviroc was generally well tolerated in clinical trials. The most frequently reported (> or = 5%) adverse events were upper respiratory tract infection (20.0%), cough (12.7%), pyrexia (12.0%), rash (9.6%), musculoskeletal complaints (8.7%), gastrointestinal and abdominal pain (8.2%), dizziness (8.2%), appetite disorders (7.3%), insomnia (7.0%), herpes infection (6.8%), sinusitis (6.3%), joint complaints (6.1%), bronchitis (5.9%), and constipation (5.4%). The recommended dose of maraviroc differs based on concomitant medications, ranging from 150 to 600 mg BID. CONCLUSION: When used in combination with other antiretroviral agents, maraviroc appears to be a promising agent for treatment-experienced patients infected with multidrug-resistant, CCR5-tropic HIV-1.

Posaconazole: an extended-spectrum triazole antifungal agent.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of invasive fungal infections (IFIs) caused by opportunistic filamentous molds is increasing, along with emerging fungal resistance. Posaconazole, a structural analogue of itraconazole that was approved for marketing in the United States in 2006, appears to be a promising antifungal agent. OBJECTIVE: This article provides an overview of the pharmacology, efficacy, and tolerability of posaconazole when used for the prophylaxis and treatment of various common and rare fungal infections. METHODS: Relevant information was identified through a search of MEDLINE (1966-April 2007), International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1970-April 2007), and abstracts of the Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy using the terms posaconazole and SCH 56592. Additional resources were found by searching the reference lists of the identified articles and the US Food and Drug Administration Web site. RESULTS: Posaconazole is available as an oral suspension. It is highly distributed to various sites, including bone, the central nervous system, and eye tissue. Its Vd is 2447 L when administered in multiple daily doses (up to 800 mg/d) in the presence of a high-fat meal. Because it is excreted mostly as unchanged drug in the feces (77%), posaconazole can be administered to patients with poor renal function without any dose adjustment. Posaconazole has shown in vitro and in vivo activity against a wide variety of fungi, including those that are rare and relatively resistant. Two clinical trials have compared posaconazole with fluconazole or itraconazole for the prophylaxis of IFIs in immunocompromised patients. The first, a randomized, double-blind trial in 600 recipients of hematopoietic stem cell transplants, found that overall rates of IFI did not differ significantly between posaconazole and fluconazole (5% vs 9%, respectively). The other, a randomized, open-label trial in 602 neutropenic patients, reported significantly fewer IFIs in patients receiving posaconazole compared with those receiving fluconazole or itraconazole (>2% vs >8%, respectively; P = 0.001). An additional 2 trials have investigated posaconazole for the treatment of oropharyngeal candidiasis (OPC) in patients with HIV infection. A randomized, controlled, evaluator-blinded study in 350 HIV-infected patients with OPC found similar 14-day clinical success rates with posaconazole and fluconazole (91.7% and 92.5%, respectively; 95% CI, -6.6l to 5.04), whereas an open-label study in 176 HIV-infected patients with a history of refractory OPC reported a 28-day clinical success rate of 75%. Numerous small studies and case reports have described successful posaconazole treatment of zygomycosis, aspergillosis, fusariosis, endemic dimorphic fungal infection, and superficial and subcutaneous fungal infections that were refractory to conventional antifungal agents or in patients who were unable to tolerate these agents. Posaconazole has been well tolerated. The most common complaints have been gastrointestinal in nature, including nausea (7%-8%) and diarrhea (3%-11%), although these have rarely led to permanent discontinuation of therapy. Other common adverse effects have included vomiting (4%-7%), headache (2%-8%), and liver enzyme elevations (2%-3%). CONCLUSIONS: Posaconazole suspension administered at up to 800 mg/d is a reasonable alternative to conventional antifungal agents for the prevention and treatment of IFIs in high-risk populations. It may also be suitable in patients with infections caused by rare or relatively resistant fungi, and those who are unable to tolerate long-term therapy with other antifungal agents.

Tigecycline: a glycylcycline antimicrobial agent.

BACKGROUND: Tigecycline, the first glycylcycline to be approved by the US Food and Drug Administration, is a structural analogue of minocycline that was designed to avoid tetracycline resistance mediated by ribosomal protection and drug efflux. It is indicated for the treatment of complicated skin and skin-structure infections and complicated intra-abdominal infections and is available for intravenous administration only. OBJECTIVE: This article summarizes the in vitro and in vivo activities and pharmacologic and pharmacokinetic properties of tigecycline, and reviews its clinical efficacy and tolerability profile. METHODS: Relevant information was identified through a search of MEDLINE (1966-April 2006), Iowa Drug Information Service (1966-April 2006), and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1970-April 2006) using the terms tigecycline, GAR-936, and glycylcycline. Also consulted were abstracts and posters from meetings of the Infectious Diseases Society of America and the Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy (1999-2006) and documents provided for formulary consideration by the US manufacturer of tigecycline. RESULTS: Like the tetracyclines, tigecycline binds to the 30S subunit of bacterial ribosomes and inhibits protein synthesis by preventing the incorporation of amino acid residues into elongating peptide chains. In vitro, tigecycline exhibits activity against a wide range of clinically significant gram-positive and gram-negative bacteria, including multidrug-resistant strains (eg, oxacillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, vancomycin-resistant enterococci, extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing Enterobacteriaceae), and anaerobes (eg, Bacteroides spp). In pharmacokinetic studies in human adults, tigecycline had a large Vd (7-9 L/kg), was moderately bound to plasma protein (71%-89%), had an elimination t(1/2) of 42.4 hours, and was eliminated primarily by biliary/fecal (59%) and renal (33%) excretion. Dose adjustment did not appear to be necessary based on age, sex, renal function, or mild to moderate hepatic impairment (Child-Pugh class A-B). In patients with severe hepatic impairment (Child-Pugh class C), the maintenance dose should be reduced by 50%. In 4 Phase III clinical trials in patients with complicated skin and skin-structure infections and complicated intra-abdominal infections, tigecycline was reported to be noninferior to its comparators (vancomycin + aztreonam in 2 studies and imipenem/cilastatin in 2 studies), with clinical cure rates among clinically evaluable patients of >80% (P < 0.001 for noninferiority). The most frequently reported (> or =5 %) adverse events with tigecycline were nausea (28.5%), vomiting (19.4%), diarrhea (11.6%), local IV-site reaction (8.2%), infection (6.7%), fever (6.3%), abdominal pain (6.0%), and headache (5.6%). The recommended dosage of tigecycline is 100 mg IV given as a loading dose, followed by 50 mg IV g12h for 5 to 14 days. CONCLUSIONS: In clinical trials, tigecycline was effective for the treatment of complicated skin and skin-structure infections and complicated intra-abdominal infections. With the exception of gastrointestinal adverse events, tigecycline was generally well tolerated. With a broad spectrum of activity that includes multidrug-resistant gram-positive and gram-negative pathogens, tigecycline may be useful in the treatment of conditions caused by these pathogens.

Tinidazole: a nitroimidazole antiprotozoal agent.

BACKGROUND: Tinidazole, a structural analogue of metrondazole, is an antiprotozoal agent that has been widely used in Europe and developing countries for >2 decades with established efficacy and acceptable tolerability. It was recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of trichomoniasis, giardiasis, amebiasis, and amebic liver abscess. OBJECTIVE: This article reviews the pharmacologic and pharmacokinetic properties and clinical usefulness of tinidazole. METHODS: Relevant information was identified through a search of MEDLINE (1966-August 2005), Iowa Drug Information Service (1966-August 2005), and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1970-August 2005) using the terms tinidazole, Fasigyn, and nitroimidazole. RESULTS: In vitro, tinidazole exhibits activity against pathogenic protozoa (eg, Tricbomonas vaginalis, Entamoeba bistolytica, Giardia duodenalis), a wide range of clinically significant anaerobic bacteria (eg, Bacteroides fragilis, Clostridium difficile), and the microaerophilic bacterium Helicobacter pylori. In susceptible protozoal and bacterial cells, tinidazole is reduced to cytotoxic intermediates that covalently bind to DNA, causing irreversible damage. In human adults, tinidazole had a bioavailability of 100% and a V(d) of 50.7 L, was minimally bound to plasma protein (12%), had a plasma elimination t((1/2)) of 12.3 hours, and was eliminated primarily by hepatic metabolism (approximately 63%). Dose adjustment does not appear to be necessary on the basis of race, sex, or renal function. No data were found on the disposition of tinidazole in patients with hepatic insufficiency; therefore, use of tinidazole in patients with severe hepatic impairment (Child-Pugh class C) is not recommended. Clinical cure rates in patients with trichomoniasis, giardiasis, amebiasis, and amebic liver abscess were generally >90%. In comparative trials, tinidazole was as effective as metronidazole in the treatment of trichomoniasis and was significantly more effective than metronidazole in the treatment of giardiasis (P < 0.05) and amebiasis (P < 0.05). The most commonly reported (>1%) adverse effects included bitter taste, nausea, abdominal discomfort, anorexia, vomiting, and fatigue. The recommended dosage of tinidazole is a single dose of 2 g for trichomoniasis and giardiasis, and 2 g/d for 3 to 5 days for amebiasis. CONCLUSIONS: Tinidazole appears to be a promising agent for the treatment of trichomoniasis, giardiasis, amebiasis, and amebic liver abscess. Clinical studies are needed to evaluate the use of tinidazole against anaerobic bacteria and H pylori.

Fatal lactic acidosis associated with coadministration of didanosine and tenofovir disoproxil fumarate.

Lactic acidosis is an uncommon but potentially life-threatening adverse effect of didanosine. When given concomitantly with tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (DF), the area under the concentration-time curve of didanosine is increased by 48-60%. A 63-year-old man with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection tolerated several didanosine-containing antiretroviral regimens. He developed generalized weakness, loss of appetite, weight loss, nausea, and vomiting 1.5 years after tenofovir DF was added to his didanosine-containing regimen. He was diagnosed with lactic acidosis and died after a 13-day hospital stay, when his lactate level increased to 189.7 mg/dl and his arterial blood gas pH value fell to 6.75. Health care providers should maintain a high index of suspicion for lactic acidosis in patients with HIV infection who receive didanosine and tenofovir DF concurrently. For patients receiving antiretroviral regimens containing this drug combination, it would be prudent to monitor lactate levels periodically. This is especially important when patients experience symptoms suggestive of lactic acidosis, such as weakness, abdominal pain, weight loss, nausea and vomiting, and shortness of breath.

Enfuvirtide: a fusion inhibitor for the treatment of HIV infection.

BACKGROUND: Drug resistance continues to be a major challenge in the treatment of HIV-1 infection. Virtually all currently available antiretroviral medications inhibit the viral reverse transcriptase or protease. Enfuvirtide is the first fusion inhibitor approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for use in combination with other antiretroviral agents for the treatment of HIV-1 infection in treatment-experienced patients. OBJECTIVE: This paper describes the pharmacologic properties and clinical usefulness of enfuvirtide. METHODS: Relevant information was identified through searches of MEDLINE (1990 to October 2003), International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1970 to October 2003), and meeting abstracts of major HIV/AIDS conferences (1996-2003) using the search terms enfuvirtide, pentafuside, T-20, DP-178, and fusion inhibitor. RESULTS: In vitro, enfuvirtide exhibits activity against HIV-1 isolates that are resistant to all other classes of anti-retroviral medications. Enfuvirtide blocks the entry of HIV-1 into host cells by interfering with virus-cell fusion, making it unique among licensed antiretroviral medications. In human adults, enfuvirtide has a volume of distribution of 5.48 L, is highly bound to plasma protein (92%), has a plasma elimination half-life of 3.8 hours, and is catabolized by peptidases and proteinases in various tissues. Dose adjustment does not appear necessary on the basis of age, race, or body weight, but may be warranted in women weighing <50 kg. A literature review did not identify any data on the disposition of enfuvirtide in patients with hepatic or renal insufficiency. Clinical trials suggest that enfuvirtide reduces plasma HIV-1 RNA levels in highly treatment-experienced patients taking an optimized antiretroviral regimen. Pivotal trials indicated a mean change in HIV-1 RNA of -1.48 log(10) copies/mL in the enfuvirtide arm at week 48, compared with -0.63 log(10) copy/mL in the control arm ( P<0.001 ). The mean absolute increase on CD4 cell count was 46 cells/mm(3) (91 cells/mm(3)) in the enfuvirtide arm vs 45 cells/mm(3) in the control arm; P<0.001 ). The most commonly reported (>15 cases per 100 patient-years of exposure) adverse events (AEs) in clinical trials included injection-site reactions, diarrhea, nausea, fatigue, insomnia, peripheral neuropathy, headache, vomiting, and fever. The most commonly reported (> or =2%) laboratory abnormalities (grade III or IV) were eosinophilia, anemia, and increases in amylase, lipase, triglycerides, creatine phosphokinase, alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, and gamma-glutamyl transferase. In clinical trials, serious AEs leading to study discontinuation occurred in 12.9% ( 114/885 ) of patients in the enfuvirtide arm, compared with 10.7% ( 12/112 ) in the control arm ( P = NS ). The recommended dosage of enfuvirtide is 90 mg SC BID in adults and 2 mg/kg SC BID in children. Efficacy studies in children are ongoing. CONCLUSION: Although additional studies are needed, enfuvirtide appears to be a promising agent, in combination with other antiretroviral agents, for the treatment of HIV infection in treatment-experienced patients.

Daptomycin: a cyclic lipopeptide antimicrobial agent.

OBJECTIVES: The aims of this article were: to summarize the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy of daptomycin; to explore its safety profile; and to discuss its current and potential roles as an antimicrobial therapy. METHODS: A literature search was conducted using the MEDLINE (1966-August 2004) and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1970-August 2004) databases with the search terms daptomycin, LY146032, and lipopeptide antibiotics. Abstracts of the Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy and documents submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration were also reviewed. RESULTS: Phase III study results suggest no difference in efficacy or tolerability between daptomycin 4 mg/kg IV QD and vancomycin or semisynthetic penicillins for complicated skin and skin-structure infections. Animal studies suggest daptomycin may be useful for the treatment of endocarditis. Daptomycin is not indicated for pneumonia, with poorer outcomes than conventional treatment It is available as an IV medication and exhibits 92% plasma protein binding in vitro. In healthy adult humans, daptomycin has a volume of distribution of 0.1 L/kg and a plasma elimination half-life of approximately 9 hours, and is eliminated primarily by renal excretion (approximately 54%). In patients with reduced renal function, including those receiving hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis, the dose interval should be 48 hours. No dosage adjustment appears to be necessary for mild to moderate hepatic impairment. The use of daptomycin in patients with severe hepatic impairment has not been assessed. The most commonly reported adverse events include constipation, nausea, injection-site reactions, headache, and diarrhea. Patients should also be monitored regularly for skeletal muscle toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Daptomycin may be useful for complicated skin and skin-structure infections and gram-positive pathogens resistant to conventional antimicrobials. However, limited data are currently available for duration of treatment beyond 14 days and at doses >4 mg/kg QD.

A practical guide to the treatment of complicated skin and soft tissue infections.

Complicated skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) remain a common reason for hospitalisation. Optimal management of complicated SSTIs begins with a physical examination, and obtaining the complete social and medical history of the patient. Empirical intravenous antibacterial therapy is guided by expected pathogens, patient factors and diagnostic procedure reports, such as the Gram-stained smear of discharge or exudates. The majority of community-acquired SSTIs are caused by Staphylococcus aureus and beta-haemolytic streptococci. On the basis of recent surveillance data, 80-90% of these pathogens remain susceptible to cefazolin or oxacillin. Consequently, a first generation cephalosporin or an antistaphylococcal penicillin remains the first line empirical therapy for community-acquired skin and soft tissue infections. Vancomycin may be an appropriate alternative when vancomycin-resistant S. aureus is highly suspected on the basis of patient history and co-morbid conditions. With the global emergence and spread of macrolide-resistant S. aureus and beta-haemolytic streptococci, clindamycin rather than a macrolide is the recommended agent for empirical antibacterial therapy of community-acquired SSTIs in penicillin-allergic patients. Nosocomial complicated SSTIs are predominantly caused by S. aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Enterococcus spp., Escherichia coli and other Enterobacteriaceae. Piperacillin/tazobactam with or without vancomycin is the preferred agent for empirical treatment depending on local resistance statistics. The newer fluoroquinolones may have a role in the treatment of complicated SSTIs, especially in penicillin-allergic patients. More clinical studies are needed before a formal recommendation can be made. Many of the newer antimicrobial agents such as the carbapenems, oxazolidinones and streptogramins have been shown to be effective for the treatment of complicated SSTIs. However, because of their proven activity against highly resistant organisms including methicillin-resistant S. aureus and vancomycin-resistant enterococci (oxazolidinones and streptogramins), and Gram-negative bacilli producing extended spectrum beta-lactamases (carbapenems), these antibacterials should be reserved for life-threatening situations and/or when resistant pathogens are suspected. Complicated skin and soft tissue infections are often associated with exudates, ulcerations, fluid collections or abscesses. Adequate debridement of devitalized tissues and drainage of abscesses and fluid collections in addition to systemic antibacterial therapy is an integral part of appropriate management.

Voriconazole.

BACKGROUND: Reports of resistance and intolerance to currently available antifungal agents are increasing. Voriconazole is a broad-spectrum azole antifungal agent structurally derived from fluconazole. It is indicated for the treatment of invasive aspergillosis and serious fungal infections caused by Scedosporium apiospermum and Fusarium species in patients who are unable to tolerate or are refractory to other antifungal therapy. OBJECTIVE: This article reviews the pharmacologic and pharmacokinetic properties and clinical usefulness of voriconazole. METHODS: Relevant information was identified through a search of MEDLINE (1966-December 2002), Iowa Drug Information Service (1966-December 2002), International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1970-December 2002), and meeting abstracts of the Infectious Diseases Society of America (1996-2002) and the Interscience Conference on Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy (1996-2002) using the terms voriconazole and UK-109,495. RESULTS: In head-to-head comparative trials, voriconazole appeared to be as efficacious as amphotericin B for the treatment of invasive aspergillosis and the empiric treatment of fungal infections in patients with febrile neutropenia. In clinical studies, it was as efficacious as fluconazole for the treatment of oropharyngeal and esophageal candidiasis. The results of in vitro susceptibility studies and case reports suggested that voriconazole may be useful against fluconazole- and/or itraconazole-resistant strains of Candida. Although voriconazole may be associated with a lower incidence of serious systemic adverse effects compared with amphotericin B (13.4% vs 24.3% in 1 pivotal clinical study; P = NS), major adverse effects associated with voriconazole include visual abnormalities ( approximately 30%), skin reactions ( approximately 20%), and elevations in hepatic enzymes (< or =20%). Voriconazole is available as oral and intravenous formulations. Pharmacokinetically, it has widespread distribution, including penetration into cerebral tissue. However, as 80% of voriconazole is hepatically eliminated, primarily via the cytochrome P450 (CYP) isozymes CYP2C19, CYP3A4, and CYP2C9, voriconazole has a high potential for drug interactions, and dose reduction is recommended in patients with mild to moderate hepatic dysfunction (Child-Pugh class A or B). Oral voriconazole may be preferred in patients with a creatinine clearance <50 mL/min due to the potential accumulation of the solubilizing excipient in the parenteral formulation of voriconazole. CONCLUSIONS: Voriconazole appears to be a useful alternative to conventional antifungal agents in cases of resistance or intolerance to initial therapy. However, dose adjustment is recommended in patients with hepatic dysfunction, as well as in those receiving medications that may interact with voriconazole via hepatic metabolism.

Clostridium difficile colitis after forced anal-receptive intercourse.

Colitis caused by Clostridium difficile toxin has been reported in homosexual men. We report a case of C. difficile colitis that occurred in an immunocompetent heterosexual man after forced anal-receptive intercourse.

Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate: a nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitor for the treatment of HIV infection.

BACKGROUND: Tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (DF) is the first nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitor approved for use in combination with other antiretroviral agents in the treatment of HIV-1 infection in the United States. Unlike the nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors, which must undergo 3 intracellular phosphorylation steps for activation. nucleotide analogues such as tenofovir require only 2 such steps. This reduction in the phosphorylation requirement has the potential to produce more rapid and complete conversion of the drug to its pharmacologically active metabolite. OBJECTIVE: This article describes the pharmacologic properties and potential clinical usefulness of tenofovir DF. METHODS: Relevant information was identified through searches of MEDLINE (1996-April 2002), Iowa Drug Information Service (1996-April 2002), and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1970-April 2002), as well as from meeting abstracts of major HIV/AIDS conferences (1996-2002), using the search terms tenofovir tenofovir disoproxil fumarate, PMPA, bis(POC)PMPA, GS-4331-05, acyclic nucleoside phosphonate, and nucleotide reverse transcriptase inhibitor. Additional information was obtained from material submitted to the US Food and Drug Administration by the manufacturer of tenofovir DF in support of its New Drug Application. RESULTS: In vitro, tenofovir DF has exhibited anti-HIV activity in various HIV-infected cell lines and has produced a synergistic or additive effect against HIV when combined with other antiretroviral agents. In adult humans, tenofovir has a volume of distribution of 0.813 L/kg, is minimally bound to plasma protein (7.2%), has a plasma elimination half-life of 12.0 to 14.4 hours, and is mainly excreted unchanged in urine (70%-80%). Dose adjustment based on sex or body weight does not appear to be necessary, although dose reduction may be necessary in the elderly; there are currently no data on tenofovir DF in renal or hepatic insufficiency. The results of clinical trials suggest the efficacy of tenofovir DF in reducing plasma levels of HIV-1 RNA when used as an add-on to a stable antiretroviral regimen. The most commonly (>3%) reported adverse events in clinical trials have included nausea, diarrhea, asthenia, headache, vomiting, flatulence, abdominal pain, and anorexia. The most commonly (>2%) reported laboratory abnormalities (grade III or IV) included increases in creatine kinase, triglycerides, amylase, aspartate aminotransferase, and alanine aminotransferase, as well as hyperglycemia and glucosuria. Serious adverse events leading to discontinuation of tenofovir DF were infrequent (5%), occurring with an incidence similar to that with placebo (8%). The recommended dosage of tenofovir DF in adults is 300 mg/d PO; pharmacokinetic and efficacy studies in children are ongoing. CONCLUSION: Although additional studies are needed, tenofovir DF appears to be a promising agent for the treatment of HIV infection.