Comparison of daptomycin and glycopeptide efficacy and safety for the treatment of Gram-positive infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The indications of daptomycin have been extended to off-label indications including prosthesis-related infection, and bone and joint infection (BJI). However, efficacy and safety have not been thoroughly demonstrated compared with the standard of care. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the treatment effect of daptomycin and glycopeptides for complicated infections. MATERIALS AND METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing daptomycin and standard of care for Gram-positive infections, published until 30 June 2021. The primary outcome was defined as all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes were clinical and microbiological success. The main safety outcome was any severe adverse event (SAE) (grade  ≥3). RESULTS: Overall, eight RCTs were included in the meta-analysis, totalling 1095 patients. Six (75%) were in complicated skin and soft-structure infections, one (12.5%) in bacteraemia and one (12.5%) in a BJI setting. Six RCTs used vancomycin as a comparator and two used either vancomycin or teicoplanin. All-cause mortality and clinical cure were not different between groups. The microbiological cure rate was superior in patients who received daptomycin [risk ratio (RR) = 1.17 (95% CI: 1.01-1.35)]. The risk of SAEs [RR = 0.57 (95% CI: 0.36-0.90)] was lower in the daptomycin arm. CONCLUSIONS: While daptomycin is associated with a significantly lower risk of SAEs and a better microbiological eradication, substantial uncertainty remains about the best treatment strategy in the absence of good-quality evidence, especially in bacteraemia and endocarditis where further RCTs should be conducted.

Evaluation of a New 'Mix-In' Style Glycomacropeptide-Based Protein Substitute for Food and Drinks in Patients with Phenylketonuria and Tyrosinemia.

(1) Background: Poor palatability, large volume, and lack of variety of some liquid and powdered protein substitutes (PSs) for patients with phenylketonuria (PKU) and tyrosinemia (TYR) can result in poor adherence. This study aimed to evaluate a new unflavoured, powdered GMP-based PS designed to be mixed into drinks, foods, or with other PSs, in patients with PKU and TYR. (2) Methods: Paediatric and adult community-based patients were recruited from eight metabolic centres and prescribed ≥1 sachet/day (10 g protein equivalent (PE)) of the Mix-In-style PS over 28 days. Adherence, palatability, GI tolerance, and metabolic control were recorded at baseline and follow-up. Patients who completed at least 7 days of intervention were included in the final analysis. (3) Results: Eighteen patients (3-45 years, nine males) with PKU (n = 12) and TYR (n = 6) used the Mix-In-style PS for ≥7 days (mean 26.4 days (SD 4.6), range 11-28 days) alongside their previous PS, with a mean intake of 16.7 g (SD 7.7) PE/day. Adherence was 86% (SD 25), and GI tolerance was stable, with n = 14 experiencing no/no new symptoms and n = 3 showing improved symptoms compared to baseline. Overall palatability was rated satisfactory by 78% of patients, who successfully used the Mix-In-style PS in various foods and drinks, including smoothies, squash, and milk alternatives, as a top-up to meet their protein needs. There was no concern regarding safety/metabolic control during the intervention. (4) Conclusions: The 'Mix-In'-style PS was well adhered to, accepted, and tolerated. Collectively, these data show that providing a flexible, convenient, and novel format of PS can help with adherence and meet patients' protein needs.

Teicoplanin and vancomycin as treatment for glycopeptide-susceptible Enterococcus faecium bacteraemia: a propensity score-adjusted non-inferior comparative study.

OBJECTIVES: Limited evidence is available regarding alternative therapeutic agents to vancomycin in treating glycopeptide-susceptible Enterococcus faecium (GSEF) bacteraemia. This study assessed the effectiveness and safety of teicoplanin compared with vancomycin for treating GSEF bacteraemia. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective, non-inferiority cohort study. Patients aged ≥18 years who developed GSEF bacteraemia and received either teicoplanin or vancomycin were included. The primary effectiveness outcome was the clinical success at the end of treatment, with a generalized linear model using the propensity score for selecting the agent as a covariate. We used an absolute difference of 20% in clinical success as the non-inferiority margin. Using multivariable logistic regression, the primary safety outcome was the incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI). RESULTS: In total, 164 patients (74 and 90 in the teicoplanin and vancomycin groups, respectively) were included. Overall, 64.9% (48/74) and 48.9% (44/90) of patients in the teicoplanin and vancomycin groups, respectively, achieved the primary effectiveness outcome. A generalized linear analysis showed an adjusted effectiveness difference of 9.9% (95% CI, -0.9% to 20.0%; P = 0.07), indicating non-inferiority of teicoplanin versus vancomycin. The incidence of AKI was 8.1% (6/74) and 24.4% (22/90) in the teicoplanin and vancomycin groups, respectively, with an adjusted OR of 0.242 (95% CI, 0.068 to 0.864; P = 0.029), indicating significantly lower AKI risk in the teicoplanin than in the vancomycin group. CONCLUSIONS: Teicoplanin is a safe and useful alternative therapeutic agent for treating GSEF bacteraemia.

Efficacy and safety of novel glycopeptides versus vancomycin for the treatment of gram-positive bacterial infections including methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To compare between current evidence of novel glycopeptides against vancomycin for the treatment of gram-positive bacterial infections. METHODOLOGY: A systematic review and meta-analysis was done. Major databases were searched for eligible randomized control trials that assessed clinical success, microbiological success and safety profile of novel glycopeptides versus vancomycin for infections caused by gram-positive bacteria. RESULTS: This meta-analysis included eleven trials (7289 participants) comparing telavancin, dalbavancin and oritavancin with vancomycin. No differences were detected between novel glycopeptides and vancomycin for the treatment of skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) among modified intent-to-treat patients (OR: 1.04, CI: 0.92-1.17) as well as within the clinically evaluable patients (OR: 1.09, CI: 0.91-1.30). Data analysed from SSTIs, HAP and bacteremia studies on telavancin showed insignificant high clinical response in microbiologically evaluable patients infected with methicillin resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) (OR: 1.57, CI: 0.94-2.62, p: 0.08) and in the eradication of MRSA (OR: 1.39, CI: 0.99-1.96, P:0.06). Dalbavancin was non-inferior to vancomycin for the treatment of osteomyelitis in a phase II trial, while it was superior to vancomycin for the treatment of bacteremia in a phase II trial. Data analysed from all trials showed similar rates of all-cause mortality between compared antibiotics groups (OR: 0.67, CI: 0.11-4.03). Telavancin was significantly related with higher adverse events (OR: 1.24, CI: 1.07-1.44, P: <0.01) while dalbavancin and oritavancin were associated with significant fewer adverse events (OR: 0.73, CI: 0.57-0.94, p: 0.01; OR: 0.72, CI: 0.59-0.89, p: <0.01 respectively). CONCLUSION: Efficacy and safety profiles of both dalbavancin and oritavancin were the same as vancomycin in the treatment of gram-positive bacterial infections in different clinical settings, while telavancin might be an effective alternative to vancomycin in MRSA infections, but caution is required during its clinical use due to the high risk of adverse events, especially nephrotoxicity.

Relation of Copeptin with Diabetic and Renal Function Markers Among Patients with Diabetes Mellitus Progressing Towards Diabetic Nephropathy.

BACKGROUND: Arginine vasopressin (AVP) plays an important role in the pathophysiology of Diabetes Mellitus (DM) and its related complications like diabetic nephropathy. Copeptin is considered as a reliable surrogate biomarker of AVP. If raised levels of copeptin in diabetic patients are detected earlier, prognosis of DM can be improved by timely modulating the treatment strategy. AIMS OF THE STUDY: The study is therefore planned to assess copeptin levels in different groups of DM and in healthy controls to suggest a better and reliable biomarker for progressive stages of DM. METHODS: Subjects were recruited as controls, pre diabetes, DM without nephropathy and diabetic nephropathy. Serum copeptin levels were measured by ELISA. While, Blood Urea Nitrogen (BUN), creatinine, Glycosylated Hemoglobin (HbA1c) and spot urinary albumin creatinine ratio (UACR) were done using spectrophotometry. Statistical analysis was done using ANOVA and Pearson's correlation tests on SPSS. RESULTS: The average copeptin levels were 215.096 pg/mL. Copeptin levels were significantly elevated in subjects with positive family history of DM (p = 0.025), levels were also raised in pre diabetes kpatients (252.85 pg/mL) as compared to other groups. Copeptin levels were also correlated with HbA1c r = 0.171 (p = 0.101), BUN r = 0.244 (p = 0.007), creatinine r = 0.215 (p = 0.018), UACR r = 0.375 (p = <0.001) and GFR r = 0.215 (p = <0.019). CONCLUSION: The significant correlation of copeptin with diabetic and renal biomarkers, along with its positive association with family history of DM support its' role as an early and reliable biomarker of DM and its associated nephropathy.

A practical management of children with antibiotic allergy.

About 10% of the parents reported that their children are allergic to one drug and the betalactam antibiotics are the most frequently suspected. Even if most of the adverse events following antibiotic prescriptions to children are considered allergic, after a full allergy work-up only a few of the suspected reactions are confirmed. For this reason, many children are incorrectly labelled as "allergic" and this represents an important challenge for the choice of the antibiotic therapy in these "labelled" children, who are frequently improperly deprived of narrow-spectrum antibiotics because considered as allergic. When an allergic reaction is suspected a precise diagnosis and a choice of a safe and effective alternative is essential for the future antibiotic option. In the light of this, the main aim of this paper is to try to provide a practical approach to managing the individuals who have reported adverse reactions to antibiotics.

The impact of antibiotic prescription rates on the incidence of MRSA bloodstream infections: A county-level, US-wide analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the association of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) bloodstream infection with socioeconomic factors and antibiotic prescriptions at the county level. METHODS: MRSA bloodstream infection rates were extracted from the Medicare Hospital Compare database. Data on socioeconomic factors and antibiotic prescriptions were obtained from the US Census Bureau and the Medicare Part D database, respectively. RESULTS: In multivariate analysis, antibiotic prescriptions demonstrated a powerful positive association with MRSA bloodstream infection rates [Coefficient (Coeff): 0.432, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.389, 0.474, P < 0.001], which was largely attributable to lincosamides (Coeff: 0.257, 95% CI: 0.177, 0.336, P < 0.001), glycopeptides (Coeff: 0.223, 95% CI: 0.175, 0.272, P < 0.001), and sulfonamides (Coeff: 0.166, 95% CI: 0.082, 0.249, P < 0.001). Sociodemographic factors, such as poverty (Coeff: 0.094, 95% CI: 0.034, 0.155, P=0.002) exerted a secondary positive impact on MRSA bloodstream infection. Conversely, college education (Coeff: -0.037, 95% CI: -0.068, -0.005, P=0.024), a larger median room number per house (Coeff: -0.107, 95% CI: -0.134, -0.081, P < 0.001), and an income above the poverty line (100% < income < 150% of the poverty line) (Coeff: -0.257, 95% CI: -0.314, -0.199, P < 0.001) were negatively associated with MRSA incidence rates. A multivariate model that incorporated socioeconomic data and antibiotic prescription rates predicted 39.1% of the observed variation in MRSA bloodstream infection rates (Pmodel < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: MRSA bloodstream infection rates were strongly associated with county-level antibiotic use and socioeconomic factors. If the causality of these associations is confirmed, antimicrobial stewardship programs that extend outside acute healthcare facilities would likely prove instrumental in arresting the spread of MRSA.

Unusual oral mucosal microbiota after hematopoietic cell transplantation with glycopeptide antibiotics: potential association with pathophysiology of oral mucositis.

Severe oral mucositis occurs frequently in patients receiving hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HCT). Oral mucosal bacteria can be associated with progression of oral mucositis, and systemic infection may occur via ulcerative oral mucositis. However, little information is available regarding the oral microbiota after HCT. Here, PCR-denaturing gradient gel electrophoresis (DGGE) was performed to characterize the oral mucosal microbiota, which can be affected by antibiotics, before and after HCT. Sixty reduced-intensity HCT patients were enrolled. Three patients with the least antibiotic use (quinolone prophylaxis and/or ß-lactam monotherapy group) and three patients with the most antibiotic use (ß-lactam-glycopeptide combination therapy group) were selected. Bacterial DNA samples obtained from the oral mucosa before and after HCT were subjected to PCR-DGGE. The trajectory of oral mucositis was evaluated. The oral mucosal microbiota in the ß-lactam-glycopeptide combination therapy group was different from that in the quinolone prophylaxis and/or ß-lactam monotherapy group, and Staphylococcus spp. and Enterococcus spp. were identified. Lautropia mirabilis was dominant in one patient. Ulcerative oral mucositis was observed only in the ß-lactam-glycopeptide combination therapy group. In conclusion, especially with the use of strong antibiotics, such as glycopeptides, the oral mucosal microbiota differed completely from that under normal conditions and consisted of Staphylococcus spp., Enterococcus spp., and unexpectedly L. mirabilis. The normal oral microbiota consists not only of bacteria, but these unexpected bacteria could be involved in the pathophysiology as well as systemic infection via oral mucositis. Our results can be used as the basis for future studies in larger patient populations.

Is there still a role for vancomycin in skin and soft-tissue infections?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Skin and soft-tissue infections (SSIs) are among the commonest infections encountered in clinical practice. Spread of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus SSIs continues to increase in both health care and community settings and presents a challenge for the best treatment choice. Vancomycin has been the mainstay of SSIs treatment, but recently its use has been questioned because of concerns about its efficacy, tolerability, and unfavorable pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profile. The purpose of this review is to establish the current role for vancomycin in light of the literature published from January 2007 to September 2017 on comparison with both old and new alternatives. RECENT FINDINGS: Meta-analyses show better clinical and microbiological outcomes for drugs approved for the treatment of SSI, including those sustained by methicillin-resistant S. aureus, in the last 10 years than for vancomycin. The newer glycopeptides and linezolid decrease the total treatment costs compared with vancomycin, by reducing the length of stay or avoiding the hospitalization. SUMMARY: Vancomycin is noninferior in efficacy and safety to all comparator drugs, including the newest on the market. However, the SSI treatment evidence base presents several shortcomings limiting the clinical applicability of the results. High-level clinical trials should be performed to obtain results that can be generalized and applied effectively in clinical practice.

Newer glycopeptide antibiotics for treatment of complicated skin and soft tissue infections: systematic review, network meta-analysis and cost analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) carry significant economic burden, as well as morbidity and mortality, especially when caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). Several new MRSA-active antibiotics have been developed, including semisynthetic glycopeptides (telavancin, dalbavancin and oritavancin). Of these, dalbavancin and oritavancin offer extended dosing intervals. METHODS: We performed a systematic review, network meta-analysis and cost analysis to compare the newer glycopeptides to standard care and to each other for the treatment of complicated SSTIs (cSSTI). A search for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted in Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. We also developed a model to evaluate the costs associated with dalbavancin and oritavancin from the third-party payer perspective. RESULTS: Seven RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Network meta-analyses suggested that the clinical response to telavancin, dalbavancin and oritavancin was similar to standard care (odds ratio (OR) 1.09, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90-1.33; OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.52-1.18; and OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.85-1.33, respectively). Head-to-head comparisons showed no difference in clinical response between oritavancin and dalbavancin (OR 1.36; 95% CI 0.85-2.18), oritavancin and telavancin (OR 0.98; 95% CI 0.72-1.31) or dalbavancin and telavancin (OR 0.72; 95% CI 0.45-1.13). Telavancin had a higher incidence of overall adverse events compared to standard care (OR 1.33; 95% CI 1.10-1.61). Compared to telavancin, there were fewer overall adverse events with dalbavancin (OR 0.58; 95% CI 0.45-0.76) and oritavancin (OR 0.71; 95% CI 0.55-0.92). Studies were of high quality overall. Our cost analyses demonstrated that dalbavancin and oritavancin were less costly compared to standard care under baseline assumptions and many scenarios evaluated. The use of dalbavancin could save third-party payers $1442 to $4803 per cSSTI, while the use of oritavancin could save $3571 to $6932 per cSSTI. CONCLUSIONS: Dalbavancin and oritavancin demonstrate efficacy and safety comparable to standard care in well-designed RCTs and result in cost savings when standard care is treatment that covers MRSA.

Dosing antibiotics in neonates: review of the pharmacokinetic data.

Antibiotics are often used in neonates despite the absence of relevant dosing information in drug labels. For neonatal dosing, clinicians must extrapolate data from studies for adults and older children, who have strikingly different physiologies. As a result, dosing extrapolation can lead to increased toxicity or efficacy failures in neonates. Driven by these differences and recent legislation mandating the study of drugs in children and neonates, an increasing number of pharmacokinetic studies of antibiotics are being performed in neonates. These studies have led to new dosing recommendations with particular consideration for neonate body size and maturation. Herein, we highlight the available pharmacokinetic data for commonly used systemic antibiotics in neonates.

Empirical antibiotics targeting gram-positive bacteria for the treatment of febrile neutropenic patients with cancer.

BACKGROUND: The pattern of infections among neutropenic patients with cancer has shifted in the last decades to a predominance of gram-positive infections. Some of these gram-positive bacteria are increasingly resistant to beta-lactams and necessitate specific antibiotic treatment. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of empirical anti-gram-positive (antiGP) antibiotic treatment for febrile neutropenic patients with cancer in terms of mortality and treatment failure. To assess the rate of resistance development, further infections and adverse events associated with additional antiGP treatment. SEARCH METHODS: For the review update we searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2017, Issue 2), MEDLINE (May 2012 to 2017), Embase (May 2012 to 2017), LILACS (2012 to 2017), conference proceedings, ClinicalTrials.gov trial registry, and the references of the included studies. We contacted the first authors of all included and potentially relevant trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing one antibiotic regimen versus the same regimen with the addition of an antiGP antibiotic for the treatment of febrile neutropenic patients with cancer. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias, and extracted all data. Risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. A random-effects model was used for all comparisons showing substantial heterogeneity (I2 > 50%). Outcomes were extracted by intention-to-treat and the analysis was patient-based whenever possible. MAIN RESULTS: Fourteen trials and 2782 patients or episodes were included. Empirical antiGP antibiotics were tested at the onset of treatment in 12 studies, and for persistent fever in two studies. The antiGP treatment was a glycopeptide in nine trials. Eight studies were assessed in the overall mortality comparison and no significant difference was seen between the comparator arms, RR of 0.90 (95% CI 0.64 to 1.25; 8 studies, 1242 patients; moderate-quality data). Eleven trials assessed failure, including modifications as failures, while seven assessed overall failure disregarding treatment modifications. Failure with modifications was reduced, RR of 0.72 (95% CI 0.65 to 0.79; 11 studies, 2169 patients; very low-quality data), while overall failure was the same, RR of 1.00 (95% CI 0.79 to 1.27; 7 studies, 943 patients; low-quality data). Sensitivity analysis for allocation concealment and incomplete outcome data did not change the results. Failure among patients with gram-positive infections was reduced with antiGP treatment, RR of 0.56 (95% CI 0.38 to 0.84, 5 studies, 175 patients), although, mortality among these patients was not changed.Data regarding other patient subgroups likely to benefit from antiGP treatment were not available. Glycopeptides did not increase fungal superinfection rates and were associated with a reduction in documented gram-positive superinfections. Resistant colonisation was not documented in the studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Based on very low- or low-quality evidence using the GRADE approach and overall low risk of bias, the current evidence shows that the empirical routine addition of antiGP treatment, namely glycopeptides, does not improve the outcomes of febrile neutropenic patients with cancer.

Use of Oritavancin (Novel New Lipoglycopeptide) in the Treatment of Prosthetic Joint Infections (PJI): A Possible Alternative Novel Approach to a Difficult Problem.

Prosthetic joint infections (PJI) result in significant morbidity, mortality and cost to patients and the health system. Traditional treatment involves a twostaged revision and occasionally a single staged revision along with intravenous antibiotics (IV) and or oral antibiotics for several weeks to months. The use of a single staged revision along with an antibiotic which has a prolonged half life and is bactericidal would be ideal. We present 2 patients who were treated successfully with a single stage revision/antibiotic spacer and a new novel long acting lipoglycopeptide called oritavancin.

Oritavancin: a long-acting antibacterial lipoglycopeptide.

Oritavancin is a new lipoglycopeptide antibacterial agent with an exceptionally long terminal half-life and a rapid bactericidal effect. Multiple mechanisms of action lead to a broad activity against Gram-positive bacteria, such as staphylococci, streptococci and enterococci, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Its long terminal half-life allows for single-dose treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections. Oritavancin was found to be safe and effective in treating acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections in adults and it is currently approved in the USA and in Europe for this indication. Unfortunately, data for other indications are lacking. Here, we review chemistry, microbiology, pharmacology, efficacy and tolerability of oritavancin.

Electrocardiographic Effects of a Supratherapeutic Dose of Oritavancin.

The purpose of this study was to measure oritavancin's electrocardiographic effects at a supratherapeutic dose of 1600 mg given intravenously (IV) over 3 hours. A cohort of 150 healthy volunteers were randomized to receive placebo, oritavancin, or oral moxifloxacin 400 mg in a parallel designed thorough QT study. A supratherapeutic mean maximum oritavancin concentration (Cmax ) of 232 µg/mL was achieved. There was no significant effect on baseline and placebo corrected (dd) QTcF, QRS, or heart rate; ddPR was slightly increased at most time points, with a maximum mean change of 7.7 milliseconds 1 hour after infusion. Linear PK-PD modeling predicted a 3.2-millisecond change in the PR interval for the Cmax (138 µg/mL) observed in pivotal phase 3 studies after 1200 mg of oritavancin. Moxifloxacin produced the expected increase in ddQTcF, validating assay sensitivity. At plasma concentrations above the clinical exposures of oritavancin, no clinically or statistically significant effect on QTcF, QRS, or heart rate was observed. The increase in PR is considered clinically insignificant, given the rapid decline in initial plasma concentration of oritavancin after infusion and the expected lower Cmax in patients. A therapeutic 1200-mg single dose of oritavancin is not anticipated to cause any clinically significant effect on cardiac electrophysiology.

Oritavancin: A Novel Lipoglycopeptide.

OBJECTIVE: To review the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, drug interactions, microbiologic profile, dosage and administration, safety, clinical efficacy, and potential place in therapy for the new lipoglycopetide, oritavancin. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE and PubMed searches of available literature in English were conducted for oritavancin. Principal supplementary sources include the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) package insert, and FDA/European Medicines Agency guidances on acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI). STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Information from all stages of clinical development was evaluated to provide an overview of oritavancin, from in vitro susceptibility, to early human studies, to the latter stages of clinical trials. DATA SYNTHESIS: Oritavancin is a lipoglycopeptide antibiotic that has a mechanism of action and broad-spectrum gram-positive coverage similar to other glycopeptides. Compared with other glycopeptides, oritavancin minimum inhibitory concentrations tend to be lower. Oritavancin also has coverage against glycopeptide-resistant gram-positive organisms. Oritavancin does not require dose adjustment for mild-to-moderate hepatic or renal impairment, and its prolonged half-life of 245 hours allows for a one-time administration in the treatment of ABSSSI. In phase 2 and 3 clinical trials, oritavancin was shown to be well-tolerated in addition to being noninferior to vancomycin for the treatment of ABSSSI. The most common side effects experienced were gastrointestinal in nature. CONCLUSIONS: Oritavancin was approved by FDA for the treatment of ABSSSI in August 2014 and is marketed under the trade name Orbactiv. Its reduced dosing and monitoring requirements and efficacy against resistant gram-positive pathogens provide a unique profile that distinguishes it from current options in the treatment of ABSSSI.

Lipoglycopeptide Antibacterial Agents in Gram-Positive Infections: A Comparative Review.

Oritavancin, telavancin, and dalbavancin are recently marketed lipoglycopeptides that exhibit remarkable differences to conventional molecules. While dalbavancin inhibits the late stages of peptidoglycan synthesis by mainly impairing transglycosylase activity, oritavancin and telavancin anchor in the bacterial membrane by the lipophilic side chain linked to their disaccharidic moiety, disrupting membrane integrity and causing bacteriolysis. Oritavancin keeps activity against vancomycin-resistant enterocococci, being a stronger inhibitor of transpeptidase than of transglycosylase activity. These molecules have potent activity against Gram-positive organisms, most notably staphylococci (including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus and to some extent vancomycin-intermediate S. aureus), streptococci (including multidrug-resistant pneumococci), and Clostridia. All agents are indicated for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections, and telavancin, for hospital-acquired and ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia. While telavancin is administered daily at 10 mg/kg, the remarkably long half-lives of oritavancin and dalbavancin allow for infrequent dosing (single dose of 1200 mg for oritavancin and 1000 mg at day 1 followed by 500 mg at day 8 for dalbavancin), which could be exploited in the future for outpatient therapy. Among possible safety issues evidenced during clinical development were an increased risk of developing osteomyelitis with oritavancin; taste disturbance, nephrotoxicity, and risk of corrected QT interval prolongation (especially in the presence of at-risk co-medications) with telavancin; and elevation of hepatic enzymes with dalbavancin. Interference with coagulation tests has been reported with oritavancin and telavancin. These drugs proved non-inferior to conventional treatments in clinical trials but their advantages may be better evidenced upon future evaluation in more severe infections.

Dalbavancin and Oritavancin: An Innovative Approach to the Treatment of Gram-Positive Infections.

Health care-associated infections, especially those caused by multidrug-resistant gram-positive organisms, such as methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), are a growing public health threat. In 2014, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved two new lipoglycopeptides, oritavancin and dalbavancin, for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections. The rationale for the development of these antimicrobials was partly to aid in the battle against vancomycin resistance in both Staphylococcus and Enterococcus. Considered a subclass of the glycopeptide antibiotics, the new lipoglycopeptides have similar mechanisms of action of binding to the carboxyl terminal d-alanyl-d-alanine residue of the growing peptide chains but differ from their parent glycopeptides by the addition of lipophilic tails. This addition allows for these agents to have prolonged half-lives, giving them unique dosing profiles. In addition, by concentrating at the site of action, they have increased potency against MRSA compared with vancomycin, the current mainstay of therapy. In this review, we focus on comparing and contrasting these two new agents with regard to their pharmacology, mechanisms of action, spectrum of activity, safety profiles, dosage and administration, and drug and laboratory interactions, and we review the clinical trials evaluating their use.

Oritavancin: a review in acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections.

Oritavancin (Orbactiv(®)) is a new generation lipoglycopeptide approved for use in adult patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI). It is administered as a single 1200 mg intravenous infusion over 3 h. In phase 3 trials in adult patients with ABSSSI, oritavancin was noninferior to vancomycin in terms of a composite outcome (cessation of spreading or reduction in the size of the baseline lesion, absence of fever and no rescue antibacterials required; primary endpoint) assessed at an US FDA-recommended early timepoint of 48-72 h after initiation of treatment. Oritavancin was also noninferior to vancomycin in terms of a ≥20 % reduction in the baseline lesion size at the early timepoint and clinical cure rate 7-14 days after the end of treatment. Oritavancin was generally well tolerated in the phase 3 trials, with most treatment-emergent adverse reactions being mild in severity. The most common adverse events occurring in oritavancin recipients were nausea, headache, vomiting, limb and subcutaneous abscesses, and diarrhoea. Oritavancin offers a number of potential advantages, including a convenient single dose treatment that may shorten or eliminate hospital stays, a reduction in healthcare resource utilization and cost, no need for dosage adjustment in patients with mild to moderate hepatic or renal impairment, no need for therapeutic drug monitoring, and elimination of compliance concerns. Therefore, oritavancin is a useful treatment option for adults with ABSSSI.