Antibiotics needed to treat multidrug-resistant infections in neonates.

Infections remain a leading cause of death in neonates. The sparse antibiotic development pipeline and challenges in conducting neonatal research have resulted in few effective antibiotics being adequately studied to treat multidrug-resistant (MDR) infections in neonates, despite the increasing global mortality burden caused by antimicrobial resistance. Of 40 antibiotics approved for use in adults since 2000, only four have included dosing information for neonates in their labelling. Currently, 43 adult antibiotic clinical trials are recruiting patients, compared with only six trials recruiting neonates. We review the World Health Organization (WHO) priority pathogens list relevant to neonatal sepsis and propose a WHO multiexpert stakeholder meeting to promote the development of a neonatal priority antibiotic development list. The goal is to develop international, interdisciplinary consensus for an accelerated neonatal antibiotic development programme. This programme would enable focused research on identified priority antibiotics for neonates to reduce the excess morbidity and mortality caused by MDR infections in this vulnerable population.

Les infections demeurent l'une des principales causes de décès chez les nouveau-nés. Les rares projets de développement d'antibiotiques et les défis posés par la recherche néonatale ont entraîné une pénurie d'antibiotiques efficaces spécialement étudiés pour traiter les infections multirésistantes (MR) chez les nouveau-nés, en dépit d'une mortalité galopante due à une résistance accrue aux antimicrobiens. Sur 40 antibiotiques autorisés pour les adultes depuis 2000, quatre à peine sont munis d'un étiquetage indiquant la posologie adaptée aux nouveau-nés. Actuellement, 43 essais cliniques portant sur des antibiotiques recrutent des patients du côté des adultes, contre six seulement du côté des nouveau-nés. Dans le présent document, nous passons en revue la liste prioritaire d'agents pathogènes établie par l'Organisation mondiale de la Santé (OMS) pour soigner la septicémie néonatale et proposons de réunir, sous l'égide de l'OMS, des parties prenantes issues de plusieurs domaines d'expertise afin de promouvoir la création d'une liste prioritaire de développement d'antibiotiques destinés aux nouveau-nés. Objectif: parvenir à un consensus international et interdisciplinaire visant à accélérer le programme de mise au point d'antibiotiques à usage néonatal. Ce programme permettrait d'orienter les recherches vers des antibiotiques identifiés comme prioritaires pour les nouveau-nés, en vue de faire baisser les taux de morbidité et de mortalité excessifs qu'engendrent les infections MR au sein de cette population vulnérable.

Las infecciones siguen siendo una de las principales causas de muerte en los recién nacidos. Debido al escaso desarrollo de los antibióticos y a las dificultades para llevar a cabo la investigación neonatal, son pocos los antibióticos eficaces que se estudian de manera adecuada para tratar las infecciones multirresistentes (MR) en los recién nacidos, a pesar de la creciente carga de mortalidad mundial causada por la resistencia a los antimicrobianos. De los 40 antibióticos aprobados para su uso en adultos desde el 2000, solo cuatro han incluido información sobre la dosis para recién nacidos en su etiquetado. En la actualidad, 43 ensayos clínicos con antibióticos para adultos están reclutando pacientes, en comparación con solo seis ensayos que reclutan recién nacidos. Se revisa la lista de patógenos prioritarios de la Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS) relevantes para la sepsis neonatal y se propone una reunión de la OMS con múltiples expertos para promover el desarrollo de una lista de antibióticos prioritarios para los recién nacidos. El objetivo es desarrollar un consenso internacional e interdisciplinario para establecer un programa acelerado de desarrollo de antibióticos neonatales. Este programa permitiría centrar la investigación en los antibióticos prioritarios identificados para los recién nacidos con el fin de reducir el exceso de morbilidad y mortalidad causado por las infecciones MR en esta población vulnerable.

Inclusion of Adolescents in Adult Clinical Trials: Report of the Institute for Advanced Clinical Trials for Children's Pediatric Innovation Research Forum.

Including adolescents in adult clinical trials can play an important role in making innovative new medicines available to children in a timelier fashion. Stakeholders involved in the processes leading to regulatory approval and labeling of new drugs recognize that challenges exist in involving adolescents and older children in clinical trials before the safety and efficacy of these drugs are established for adults. However, it has been possible to design and execute phase 3 trials that combine adults with adolescents which are medically and scientifically sound and ethically justified. Based on this experience and considerations of the medical and scientific, ethical, and operation-related matters, the 2019 Pediatric Innovation Research Forum advocated for the position that adolescents routinely be considered for enrollment in phase 3 clinical trials. The Forum also concluded that exclusion of adolescents in adult pivotal trials occur only when a thorough evaluation of the target disease and the potential benefit and risks of the study intervention supports a delay in their involvement until after completion of clinical trials in adults.

Advancing Pediatric Antibacterial Drug Development: A Critical Need to Reinvent our Approach.

The Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative convened with several groups in the pediatric antibacterial drug development community with the goal of identifying challenges and recommending ways to improve current practice. Attention to 5 major areas hold the promise of making new antibiotics available for use in children as soon as possible after they are approved for use in adults.

Perceived barriers to pediatrician and family practitioner participation in pediatric clinical trials: Findings from the Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative.

Despite legislation to stimulate pediatric drug development through clinical trials, enrolling children in trials continues to be challenging. Non-investigator (those who have never served as a clinical trial investigator) providers are essential to recruitment of pediatric patients, but little is known regarding the specific barriers that limit pediatric providers from participating in and referring their patients to clinical trials. We conducted an online survey of pediatric providers from a wide variety of practice types across the United States to evaluate their attitudes and awareness of pediatric clinical trials. Using a 4-point Likert scale, providers described their perception of potential barriers to their practice serving as a site for pediatric clinical trials. Of the 136 providers surveyed, 52/136 (38%) had previously referred a pediatric patient to a trial, and only 17/136 (12%) had ever been an investigator for a pediatric trial. Lack of awareness of existing pediatric trials was a major barrier to patient referral by providers, in addition to consideration of trial risks, distance to the site, and time needed to discuss trial participation with parents. Overall, providers perceived greater challenges related to parental concerns and parent or child logistical barriers than study implementation and ethics or regulatory barriers as barriers to their practice serving as a trial site. Providers who had previously been an investigator for a pediatric trial were less likely to be concerned with potential barriers than non-investigators. Understanding the barriers that limit pediatric providers from collaboration or inhibit their participation is key to designing effective interventions to optimize pediatric trial participation.

Facilitators and barriers to the successful implementation of pediatric antibacterial drug trials: Findings from CTTI's survey of investigators.

An urgent need exists to develop new antibacterial drugs for children. We conducted research with investigators of pediatric antibacterial drug trials to identify facilitators and barriers in the conduct of these trials. Seventy-three investigators completed an online survey assessing the importance of 15 facilitators (grouped in 5 topical categories) and the severity of 36 barriers (grouped in 6 topical categories) to implementing pediatric antibacterial drug trials. Analysis focused on the identification of key factors that facilitate the successful implementation of pediatric antibacterial drug trials and the key barriers to implementation. Almost all investigators identified two factors as very important facilitators: having site personnel for enrollment and having adequate funding. Other top factors were related to staffing. Among the barriers, factors related to parent concerns and consent were prominent, particularly obtaining parental consent when there was disagreement between parents, concerns about the number of blood draws, and concerns about the number of invasive procedures. Having overly narrow eligibility criteria was also identified as a major barrier. The survey findings suggest three areas in which to focus efforts to help facilitate ongoing drug development: (1) improving engagement with parents of children who may be eligible to enroll in a pediatric antibacterial drug trial, (2) broadening inclusion criteria to allow more participants to enroll, and (3) ensuring adequate staffing and establishing sustainable financial strategies, such as funding pediatric trial networks. The pediatric antibacterial drug trials enterprise is likely to benefit from focused efforts by all stakeholders to remove barriers and enhance facilitation.

Improving Conduct and Feasibility of Clinical Trials to Evaluate Antibacterial Drugs to Treat Hospital-Acquired Bacterial Pneumonia and Ventilator-Associated Bacterial Pneumonia: Recommendations of the Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative Antibacterial Drug Development Project Team.

BACKGROUND: The etiology of hospital-acquired or ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (HABP/VABP) is often multidrug-resistant infections. The evaluation of new antibacterial drugs for efficacy in this population is important, as many antibacterial drugs have demonstrated limitations when studied in this population. HABP/VABP trials are expensive and challenging to conduct due to protocol complexity and low patient enrollment, among other factors. The Clinical Trials Transformation Initiative (CTTI) seeks to advance antibacterial drug development by streamlining HABP/VABP clinical trials to improve efficiency and feasibility while maintaining ethical rigor, patient safety, information value, and scientific validity. METHODS: In 2013, CTTI engaged a multidisciplinary group of experts to discuss challenges impeding the conduct of HABP/VABP trials. Separate workstreams identified challenges associated with HABP/VABP protocol complexity. The Project Team developed potential solutions to streamline HABP/VABP trials using a Quality by Design approach. RESULTS: CTTI recommendations focus on 4 key areas to improve HABP/VABP trials: informed consent processes/practices, protocol design, choice of an institutional review board (IRB), and trial outcomes. Informed consent processes should include legally authorized representatives. Protocol design decisions should focus on eligibility criteria, prestudy antibacterial therapy considerations, use of new diagnostics, and sample size. CTTI recommends that sponsors use a central IRB and discuss trial endpoints with regulators, including defining a clinical failure and evaluating the impact of concomitant antibacterial drugs. CONCLUSIONS: Streamlining HABP/VABP trials by addressing key protocol elements can improve trial startup and patient recruitment/retention, reduce trial complexity and costs, and ensure patient safety while advancing antibacterial drug development.

Assessment of musculoskeletal toxicity 5 years after therapy with levofloxacin.

BACKGROUND: Safety concerns for fluoroquinolones exist from animal studies demonstrating cartilage injury in weight-bearing joints, dependent on dose and duration of therapy. For children treated with levofloxacin or comparator in randomized, prospective, comparative studies for acute otitis media and community-acquired pneumonia, this 5-year follow-up safety study was designed to assess the presence/absence of cartilage injury. METHODS: Children enrolled in treatment studies were also enrolled in a 1-year follow-up safety study, which; focused on musculoskeletal adverse events (MSAE). Those with persisting MSAEs, protocol-defined musculoskeletal disorders, or of concern to the Data Safety and Monitoring Committee were requested to enroll in four additional years of follow-up, the subject of this report. RESULTS: Of the 2233 subjects participating in the 12-month follow-up study, 124 of 1340 (9%) of the levofloxacin subjects, and 83 of 893 (9%) of the comparator subjects were continued for 5-year posttreatment assessment. From children identified with an MSAE during years 2 through 5 posttreatment, the number that were "possibly related" to drug therapy was equal for both arms: 1 of 1340 for levofloxacin and 1 of 893 for comparator. Of all cases of MSAE assessed by the Data Safety and Monitoring Committee at 5 years' posttreatment, no case was assessed as "likely related" to study drug. CONCLUSIONS: With no clinically detectable difference between levofloxacin- and comparator-treated children in MSAEs presenting between 1 and 5 years in these safety studies, risks of cartilage injury with levofloxacin appear to be uncommon, are clinically undetectable during 5 years, or are reversible.

Children's medicines in Tanzania: a national survey of administration practices and preferences.

OBJECTIVE: The dearth of age-appropriate formulations of many medicines for children poses a major challenge to pediatric therapeutic practice, adherence, and health care delivery worldwide. We provide information on current administration practices of pediatric medicines and describe key stakeholder preferences for new formulation characteristics. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We surveyed children aged 6-12 years, parents/caregivers over age 18 with children under age 12, and healthcare workers in 10 regions of Tanzania to determine current pediatric medicine prescription and administration practices as well as preferences for new formulations. Analyses were stratified by setting, pediatric age group, parent/caregiver education, and healthcare worker cadre. RESULTS: Complete data were available for 206 children, 202 parents/caregivers, and 202 healthcare workers. Swallowing oral solid dosage forms whole or crushing/dissolving them and mixing with water were the two most frequently reported methods of administration. Children frequently reported disliking medication taste, and many had vomited doses. Healthcare workers reported medicine availability most significantly influences prescribing practices. Most parents/caregivers and children prefer sweet-tasting medicine. Parents/caregivers and healthcare workers prefer oral liquid dosage forms for young children, and had similar thresholds for the maximum number of oral solid dosage forms children at different ages can take. CONCLUSIONS: There are many impediments to acceptable and accurate administration of medicines to children. Current practices are associated with poor tolerability and the potential for under- or over-dosing. Children, parents/caregivers, and healthcare workers in Tanzania have clear preferences for tastes and formulations, which should inform the development, manufacturing, and marketing of pediatric medications for resource-limited settings.

A randomized, evaluator-blind, phase 2 study comparing the safety and efficacy of omadacycline to those of linezolid for treatment of complicated skin and skin structure infections.

A randomized, investigator-blind, multicenter phase 2 trial involving patients with complicated skin and skin structure infections (cSSSI) compared the safety and efficacy of omadacycline, a broad-spectrum agent with activity against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), to those of linezolid (with or without aztreonam). Patients were randomized 1:1 to omadacycline (100 mg intravenously [i.v.] once a day [QD] with an option to transition to 200 mg orally QD) or linezolid (600 mg i.v. twice daily [BID] with an option to transition to 600 mg orally BID) at 11 U.S. sites. Patients suspected or documented to have infections caused by Gram-negative bacteria were given aztreonam (2 g i.v. every 12 h [q12h]) if randomized to linezolid or matching placebo infusions if randomized to omadacycline. Adverse events were reported in 46 (41.4%) omadacycline-treated and 55 (50.9%) linezolid-treated patients. Adverse events related to treatment were assessed by investigators in 24 (21.6%) omadacycline-treated and 33 (30.6%) linezolid-treated patients. The gastrointestinal tract was most commonly involved, with adverse events reported in 21 (18.9%) patients exposed to omadacycline and 20 (18.5%) exposed to linezolid. Rates of successful clinical response in the intent-to-treat (ITT) and clinical evaluable (CE) populations favored omadacycline (ITT, 88.3% versus 75.9%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.9 to 22.9; CE, 98.0% versus 93.2%; 95% CI, -1.7 to 11.3). For microbiologically evaluable (ME) patients with S. aureus infections, the clinical success rates were 97.2% (70/72) in omadacycline-treated and 92.7% (51/55) in linezolid-treated patients. This phase 2 experience supports conclusions that omadacycline is well tolerated in cSSSI patients and that this aminomethylcycline has potential to be an effective treatment for serious skin infections.

A randomised, double-blind trial comparing ceftobiprole medocaril with ceftriaxone with or without linezolid for the treatment of patients with community-acquired pneumonia requiring hospitalisation.

Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a serious infection requiring hospitalisation in 20% of cases. The novel cephalosporin ceftobiprole has microbiological activity against the major bacterial pathogens causing CAP, including Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Klebsiella pneumoniae, as well as against Staphylococcus aureus, including meticillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA). This was a multicentre, double-blind study in which 706 patients with CAP severe enough to require hospitalisation were randomised to ceftobiprole or to an expert-recommended course of ceftriaxone ± linezolid (comparator group). Clinical and microbiological outcomes were determined 7-14 days after completion of therapy (test-of-cure visit). For the 469 clinically evaluable patients, cure rates were 86.6% vs. 87.4% for ceftobiprole and comparator, respectively [95% confidence interval (CI) of the difference, -6.9% to 5.3%]; in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis of 638 CAP patients, these cure rates were 76.4% vs. 79.3%, respectively (95% CI of the difference, -9.3% to 3.6%). A typical bacterial pathogen was identified in 29% of the ITT population. Microbiological eradication rates in the 144 microbiologically evaluable patients were 88.2% and 90.8% for the respective treatment groups (95% CI of the difference, -12.6% to 7.5%). Both study drugs were well tolerated, with but a minority of patients requiring premature discontinuation due to an adverse event (6% in the ceftobiprole group and 4% in the comparator group). The overall incidence of treatment-related adverse events was higher in the ceftobiprole group, primarily owing to differences in rates of self-limited nausea (7% vs. 2%) and vomiting (5% vs. 2%). In summary, ceftobiprole was non-inferior to the comparator (ceftriaxone ± linezolid) in all clinical and microbiological analyses conducted, suggesting that ceftobiprole has a potential role in treating hospitalised patients with CAP. [ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00326287].

Pharmacometrics-based dose selection of levofloxacin as a treatment for postexposure inhalational anthrax in children.

Levofloxacin was recently (May 2008) approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration as a treatment for children following inhalational exposure to anthrax. Given that no clinical trials to assess the efficacy of a chosen dose was conducted, the basis for the dose recommendation was based upon pharmacometric analyses. The objective of this paper is to describe the basis of the chosen pediatric dose recommended for the label. Pharmacokinetic (PK) data from 90 pediatric patients receiving 7 mg/kg of body weight levofloxacin and two studies of 47 healthy adults receiving 500 and 750 mg/kg levofloxacin were used for the pharmacometric analyses. Body weight was found to be a significant covariate for levofloxacin clearance and the volume of distribution. Consistently with developmental physiology, clearance also was found to be reduced in pediatric patients under 2 years of age due to immature renal function. Different dosing regimens were simulated to match adult exposure (area under the concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h at steady state, maximum concentration of drug in serum at steady state, and minimum concentration of drug in serum at steady state) following the approved adult dose of 500 mg once a day. The recommended dose of 8 mg/kg twice a day was found to match the exposure of the dose approved for adults in a manner that permitted confidence that this dose in children would achieve efficacy comparable to that of adults.

Pharmacodynamic profiling of ceftobiprole for treatment of complicated skin and skin structure infections.

Ceftobiprole, a broad-spectrum cephalosporin with activity against methicillin (meticillin)-resistant staphylococci, was statistically noninferior to a combination of vancomycin plus ceftazidime in patients with complicated skin and skin structure infections (cSSSI). This analysis used data from this clinical trial to determine the relationship between therapeutic outcome and the percentage of time that the unbound ceftobiprole concentration exceeds the MIC (percent T>MIC). From the trial of ceftobiprole (500 mg every 8 h, 2-h infusion) for cSSSI due to gram-positive and/or gram-negative bacteria, data from 309 patients in the microbiological intent-to-treat analysis set with measured ceftobiprole concentrations and baseline MICs were used to assess the relationship between percent T>MIC and therapeutic outcome. Individual pharmacokinetic (PK) profiles were obtained from a three-compartment population PK model. The relationship between percent T>MIC and a clinical cure was determined. For the clinical trial dosing regimen, individual percent T>MICs were used to calculate fractional target attainment rates (TARs) for >or=30 and >or=50% T>MIC targets at various MICs. There was a statistically significant relationship between achieving a >or=30 or >or=50% T>MIC and a clinical cure (P = 0.003 and P = 0.007, respectively; Pearson's chi(2) test). The fractional TAR was greater than 90% at a MIC of MIC and a clinical cure with ceftobiprole was demonstrated. A ceftobiprole regimen of 500 mg every 8 h as a 2-h infusion has a high probability of achieving a target of >or=30 or >or=50% T>MIC for patients with cSSSI due to gram-positive and gram-negative pathogens.

Identifying exposure targets for treatment of staphylococcal pneumonia with ceftobiprole.

Ceftobiprole is a cephalosporin with potent activity against methicillin (meticillin)-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). In order to treat patients with severe staphylococcal pneumonia, it is important to understand the drug exposure required to mediate the killing of multiple log(10) cells in a preclinical-infection model. We measured drug exposure in terms of the percentage of penetration of the drug into epithelial lining fluid (ELF) and in terms of the time for which the drug concentration was above the MIC (time>MIC) in plasma and ELF. In a murine model of staphylococcal pneumonia, we demonstrated that ceftobiprole penetrated into ELF from the plasma at a median level of nearly 69% (25th to 75th percentile range, 25 to 187%), as indexed to the ratio of values for the area under the concentration-time curve in ELF and plasma. The total-drug times>MIC in ELF that were required to kill 1 log(10) and 2 log(10) CFU/g of lung tissue were 15% and 25% of the dosing interval. We also examined the penetration of ELF by ceftobiprole in volunteers, demonstrating mean and median penetration percentages of 25.5% and 15.3%, respectively (25th to 75th percentile range, 8 to 30%). Attainment rates were calculated for kill targets of 1 log(10) and 2 log(10) CFU/g, taken from the murine model, but using the volunteer ceftobiprole ELF penetration data. The standard dose for ceftobiprole is 0.5 g every 8 h as a 2-h infusion. The attainment rates remained above 90% for 1-log(10) and 2-log(10) CFU/g kill targets at MICs of 1 and 0.5 mg/liter, respectively. Taking the expectation over the distribution of ceftobiprole MICs for 4,958 MRSA isolates showed an overall target attainment of 85.6% for a 1-log(10) CFU/g kill and 79.7% for a 2-log(10) CFU/g kill. It is important to derive exposure targets in preclinical-infection models of the infection site so that these targets can be explored in clinical trials in order to optimize the probability of a good clinical outcome.

Population pharmacokinetic analysis of ceftobiprole for treatment of complicated skin and skin structure infections.

Population pharmacokinetic analysis demonstrated that renal function, as assessed by creatinine clearance (CL(CR)), was the patient characteristic that had a clinically relevant impact on ceftobiprole pharmacodynamics. Dosing adjustments based on CL(CR) for subjects with renal impairment should provide ceftobiprole exposure similar to that in patients with normal renal function.

A randomized comparative study of levofloxacin versus amoxicillin/clavulanate for treatment of infants and young children with recurrent or persistent acute otitis media.

BACKGROUND: The need for alternative antimicrobial therapy for recurrent and persistent acute otitis media (AOM) in children has raised interest in assessing the efficacy and safety of fluoroquinolones for treatment of these infections. METHODS: In an evaluator-blinded, active-comparator, noninferiority, multicenter study, children (6 months to <5 years) were randomized 1:1 to receive levofloxacin (10 mg/kg twice daily) or amoxicillin/clavulanate (14:1; amoxicillin 45 mg/kg twice daily) for 10 days, with evaluations 4-6 days of therapy (visit 2), 2-5 days after completing therapy (visit 3), and 10-17 days after last dose (visit 4). Primary outcome was clinical cure at visit 3 based on resolution of clinical signs and symptoms of AOM. RESULTS: A total of 1650 children were randomized and 1305 were clinically evaluable at visit 3 (630 levofloxacin, 675 comparator). Clinical cure rates were 72.4% (456 of 630) in levofloxacin-treated and 69.9% (472 of 675) in amoxicillin/clavulanate-treated children. Cure rates were also similar for levofloxacin and comparator for each age group (< or =24 months: 68.9% versus 66.2%; >24 months: 76.9% versus 75.1%; respectively). Cure rates at visit 4 were 74.9% and 73.8% in levofloxacin and amoxicillin/clavulanate groups, respectively. The upper limits of the confidence intervals were less than the noninferiority margin of 10% indicating that levofloxacin treatment is noninferior to comparator treatment overall and in both infants (6 months to 2 years) and children 2-5 years. No differences between treatment groups regarding the frequency or type of adverse events were apparent. CONCLUSIONS: Levofloxacin was not inferior to amoxicillin/clavulanate for the treatment of recurrent and/or persistent AOM in infants and children.