Multi-year analysis of the global preclinical antibacterial pipeline: trends and gaps.

Antimicrobial resistance (AMR) is a major global health threat estimated to have caused the deaths of 1.27 million people in 2019, which is more than HIV/AIDS and malaria deaths combined. AMR also has significant consequences on the global economy. If not properly addressed, AMR could immensely impact the world's economy, further increasing the poverty burden in low- and middle-income countries. To mitigate the risk of a post-antibiotic society, where the ability to effectively treat common bacterial infections is being severely threatened, it is necessary to establish a continuous supply of new and novel antibacterial medicines. However, there are gaps in the current pipeline that will prove difficult to address, given the time required to develop new agents. To understand the status of upstream antibiotic development and the challenges faced by drug developers in the early development stage, the World Health Organization has regularly assessed the preclinical and clinical antibacterial development pipeline. The review identifies potential new classes of antibiotics or novel mechanisms of action that can better address resistant bacterial strains. This proactive approach is necessary to stay ahead of evolving resistance patterns and to support the availability of effective treatment options. This review examines the trends in preclinical development and attempts to identify gaps and potential opportunities to overcome the numerous hurdles in the early stages of the antibacterial research and development space.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

White Paper: Developing Antimicrobial Drugs for Resistant Pathogens, Narrow-Spectrum Indications, and Unmet Needs.

Despite progress in antimicrobial drug development, a critical need persists for new, feasible pathways to develop antibacterial agents to treat people infected with drug-resistant bacteria. Infections due to resistant gram-negative bacilli continue to cause unacceptable morbidity and mortality rates. Antibacterial agents have been historically studied in noninferiority clinical trials that focus on a single site of infection (eg, complicated urinary tract infections, intra-abdominal infections), yet these designs may not be optimal, and often are not feasible, for study of infections caused by drug-resistant bacteria. Over the past several years, multiple stakeholders have worked to develop consensus regarding paths forward with a goal of facilitating timely conduct of antimicrobial development. Here we advocate for a novel and pragmatic approach and, toward this end, present feasible trial designs for antibacterial agents that could enable conduct of narrow-spectrum, organism-specific clinical trials and ultimately approval of critically needed new antibacterial agents.

Progress in the Fight Against Multidrug-Resistant Bacteria 2005-2016: Modern Noninferiority Trial Designs Enable Antibiotic Development in Advance of Epidemic Bacterial Resistance.

From a public health perspective, new antibacterial agents should be evaluated and approved for use before widespread resistance to existing agents emerges. However, for multidrug-resistant pathogens, demonstration of superior efficacy of a new agent over a current standard-of-care agent is routinely feasible only when epidemic spread of these dangerous organisms has already occurred. One solution to enable proactive drug development is to evaluate new antibiotics with improved in vitro activity against MDR pathogens using recently updated guidelines for active control, noninferiority trials of selected severe infections caused by more susceptible pathogens. Such trials are feasible because they enroll patients with infections due to pathogens with a "usual drug resistance" phenotype that will be responsive to widely registered standard-of-care comparator antibiotics. Such anticipatory drug development has constructively reshaped the antibiotic pipeline and offers the best chance of making safe and efficacious antibiotics available to the public ahead of epidemic resistance.

Efficient Delivery of Investigational Antibacterial Agents via Sustainable Clinical Trial Networks.

The economics of antibiotics can be improved by infectious diseases-specific clinical trial networks. While developers would still need to implement an independent phase 1 program as well as studies focused on highly resistant pathogens, standardized procedures in a network focused on usual drug resistance phenotype isolates would permit sharing of controls and would predictably generate high-quality pivotal data for product registration while creating cost and time savings in the range of 30%-40%. This would reduce economic barriers to antibiotic development and contribute to public health.

Pharmacodynamics for antifungal drug development: an approach for acceleration, risk minimization and demonstration of causality.

The treatment of invasive fungal diseases constitutes a significant unmet medical need. There are relatively few antifungal agents in clinical development and a paucity of novel targets. Morbidity and mortality remain high and clinical outcomes are compromised by submaximal efficacy, emergence of drug resistance and drug-related toxicity. Thus, new antifungal agents are urgently required. A deep understanding of exposure-response relationships underpins the development of safe and effective clinical regimens of any therapeutic agent. Pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) is increasingly recognized as a vital tool in the development of new antimicrobial agents and maximizes the probability that the right dose will be studied the first time. There is currently no information or agreement as to what constitutes an adequate PK/PD package for the development of a new antifungal agent. This review provides a summary of the achievements of antifungal PK/PD for the treatment of invasive candidiasis, invasive aspergillosis and cryptococcal meningoencephalitis, and outlines the necessary components of a PK/PD package for a new antifungal agent. Such information is critical for the accelerated and efficient development of new agents and enables improved clinical outcomes to be secured.

Impact of treatment strategy on outcomes in patients with candidemia and other forms of invasive candidiasis: a patient-level quantitative review of randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: Invasive candidiasis (IC) is an important healthcare-related infection, with increasing incidence and a crude mortality exceeding 50%. Numerous treatment options are available yet comparative studies have not identified optimal therapy. METHODS: We conducted an individual patient-level quantitative review of randomized trials for treatment of IC and to assess the impact of host-, organism-, and treatment-related factors on mortality and clinical cure. Studies were identified by searching computerized databases and queries of experts in the field for randomized trials comparing the effect of ≥2 antifungals for treatment of IC. Univariate and multivariable analyses were performed to determine factors associated with patient outcomes. RESULTS: Data from 1915 patients were obtained from 7 trials. Overall mortality among patients in the entire data set was 31.4%, and the rate of treatment success was 67.4%. Logistic regression analysis for the aggregate data set identified increasing age (odds ratio [OR], 1.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00-1.02; P = .02), the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II score (OR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.08-1.14; P = .0001), use of immunosuppressive therapy (OR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.18-2.44; P = .001), and infection with Candida tropicalis (OR, 1.64; 95% CI, 1.11-2.39; P = .01) as predictors of mortality. Conversely, removal of a central venous catheter (CVC) (OR, 0.50; 95% CI, .35-.72; P = .0001) and treatment with an echinocandin antifungal (OR, 0.65; 95% CI, .45-.94; P = .02) were associated with decreased mortality. Similar findings were observed for the clinical success end point. CONCLUSIONS: Two treatment-related factors were associated with improved survival and greater clinical success: use of an echinocandin and removal of the CVC.

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

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