Assessment of pharmacokinetics-pharmacodynamics to support omadacycline dosing regimens for the treatment of patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections.

Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) relationships for efficacy were evaluated using data from omadacycline-treated patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) enrolled in two phase 3 studies. Patients received omadacycline 100 mg intravenously (IV) every 12 hours for two doses, followed by 100 mg IV every 24 hours (q24h), with the option to switch to 300 mg oral (PO) q24h after 3 days or 450 mg PO q24h for two doses, followed by 300 mg PO q24h for a total duration of 7-14 days. Clinical response was evaluated at 48-72 hours [early clinical response (ECR)], end of treatment (EOT), and 7-14 days after EOT. Using a population pharmacokinetic (PK) model and PK data from patients with Staphylococcus aureus at baseline, omadacycline free-drug plasma area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) values were determined, and the relationships between free-drug plasma AUC:MIC ratio and dichotomous efficacy endpoints were evaluated. Using these relationships, the population PK model, simulation, and an omadacycline MIC distribution for S. aureus, mean percent probabilities of response were evaluated. Statistically significant PK--PD relationships were identified for ECR (P = 0.016 and 0.013 for optimized two- and three-group free-drug plasma AUC:MIC ratios, respectively). At an MIC value of 0.5 µg/mL, percent probabilities of model-predicted success for ECR based on the univariable PK-PD relationships using continuous and two-group free-drug plasma AUC:MIC ratio variables were 91.9 and 95.6%, respectively, for the IV-to-PO dosing regimen and 89.3 and 88.4%, respectively, for the PO-only dosing regimen. These data support for omadacycline IV-to-PO and PO-only dosing regimens for ABSSSI and an omadacycline susceptibility breakpoint of 0.5 µg/mL for S. aureus.

[Soft tissue infections]. / Weichgewebeinfektionen.

Acute skin and soft tissue infections are among the most frequent infections in medicine. There is a broad spectrum including simple local infections as well as severe and life-threatening diseases. Along with Staphylococcus aureus, group A Streptococci are mainly responsible for these illnesses. The therapeutic approach ranges from antiseptic local treatments to administering systemic antibiotics or emergency surgery. Treating physicians often face challenges when presented with soft tissue infections due to a great discrepancy between the first impression of the disease compared to a possibly quick progression as well as the wide range of sometimes confusing historic terms and definitions being used in the English and German language, for instance pyoderma, erysipelas or phlegmon. A recently more popular collective term emphasized by clinical trials is "acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections" (ABSSSI).

Cost-Consequence Analysis of Single-Dose Dalbavancin Versus Standard of Care for the Treatment of Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infections in a Multisite Healthcare System.

BACKGROUND: Acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs) are common infectious diseases that cause a significant economic burden on the healthcare system. This study aimed to compare the cost-effectiveness of dalbavancin vs standard of care (SoC) in the treatment of ABSSSI in a community-based healthcare system. METHODS: This was a retrospective study of adult patients with ABSSSI treated with dalbavancin or SoC during a 27-month period. Patients were matched based on age and body mass index. The primary outcome was average net cost of care to the healthcare system per patient, calculated as the difference between reimbursement payments and the total cost to provide care to the patient. The secondary outcome was proportion of cases successfully treated, defined as no ABSSSI-related readmission within 30 days after the initiation of treatment. RESULTS: Of the 418 matched patients, 209 received SoC and 209 received dalbavancin. The average total cost of care per patient was greater with dalbavancin vs SoC ($4770 vs $2709, P < .0001). The average reimbursement per patient was $3084 with dalbavancin vs $2633 SoC (P = .527). The net cost, calculated as revenue minus total cost, was $1685 with dalbavancin vs $75 with SoC (P = .013). The overall treatment success rate was 74% with dalbavancin vs 85% with SoC (P = .004). CONCLUSIONS: Dalbavancin was more costly than SoC for the treatment of ABSSSI, with a higher 30-day readmission rate. Dalbavancin does not offer an economic or efficacy advantage.

Comparative efficacy of delafloxacin for complicated and acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections: results from a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Delafloxacin is a novel fluoroquinolone with broad antibacterial activity against pathogens causing acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI). This network meta-analysis (NMA) was conducted to evaluate the relative efficacy of delafloxacin versus other comparators used for managing patients with ABSSSI. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted to identify randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating adults (≥ 18 years) with ABSSSI, complicated SSSI (cSSSI), complicated skin and soft tissue infections (cSSTI) or severe cellulitis with pathogen of gram-positive, gram-negative, or mixed aetiology. OVID MEDLINE®, Embase, Epub Ahead of Print, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched from inception through 12 April 2019. A feasibility assessment was conducted, followed by an NMA, which was run in a Bayesian framework. The interventions included in the NMA encompassed monotherapy or combination therapies of amoxicillin/clavulanate, ampicillin/sulbactam, ceftaroline, ceftobiprole, dalbavancin, daptomycin, delafloxacin, fusidic acid, iclaprim, linezolid, omadacycline, oxacillin + dicloxacillin, standard therapy, tedizolid, telavancin, tigecycline, vancomycin, vancomycin + aztreonam and vancomycin + linezolid. RESULTS: A feasibility assessment was performed and evidence networks were established for composite clinical response (n = 34 studies), early clinical response (n = 16 studies) and microbiological response (n = 14 studies) in the overall study population, composite clinical response (n = 4 studies) in obese subpopulation and for composite clinical response (n = 18 studies) and microbiological response (n = 14 studies) in patients with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infection. Delafloxacin performed significantly better than fusidic acid, iclaprim, vancomycin, and ceftobiprole for composite clinical response. Delafloxacin was comparable to dalbavancin, daptomycin, fusidic acid, iclaprim, linezolid, omadacycline, tedizolid, vancomycin, vancomycin + aztreonam and vancomycin + linezolid in the analysis of early clinical response, whereas for microbiological response, delafloxacin was comparable to all interventions. In the obese subpopulation, the results favoured delafloxacin in comparison to vancomycin, whilst the results were comparable with other interventions among the MRSA subpopulation. CONCLUSIONS: Delafloxacin is a promising new antibiotic for ABSSSI demonstrating greater improvement (composite clinical response) compared to ceftobiprole, fusidic acid, iclaprim, telavancin and vancomycin and comparable effectiveness versus standard of care for all outcomes considered in the study.

Omadacycline for Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infections.

BACKGROUND: Within the last decade, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) has emerged as a frequent cause of purulent skin and soft tissue infections. New therapeutic options are being investigated for these infections. METHODS: We report an integrated analysis of 2 randomized, controlled studies involving omadacycline, a novel aminomethylcycline, and linezolid for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI). Omadacycline in Acute Skin and Skin Structure Infections Study 1 (OASIS-1) initiated patients on intravenous omadacycline or linezolid, with the option to transition to an oral formulation after day 3. OASIS-2 was an oral-only study of omadacycline versus linezolid. RESULTS: In total, 691 patients received omadacycline and 689 patients received linezolid. Infection types included wound infection in 46.8% of patients, cellulitis/erysipelas in 30.5%, and major abscess in 22.7%. Pathogens were identified in 73.2% of patients. S. aureus was detected in 74.7% and MRSA in 32.4% of patients in whom a pathogen was identified. Omadacycline was noninferior to linezolid using the Food and Drug Administration primary endpoint of early clinical response (86.2% vs 83.9%; difference 2.3, 95% confidence interval -1.5 to 6.2) and using the European Medicines Agency primary endpoint of investigator-assessed clinical response at the posttreatment evaluation. Clinical responses were similar across different infection types and infections caused by different pathogens. Treatment-emergent adverse events, mostly described as mild or moderate, were reported by 51.1% of patients receiving omadacycline and 41.2% of those receiving linezolid. CONCLUSIONS: Omadacycline was effective and safe in ABSSSI. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT02378480 and NCT02877927.

Current Epidemiology, Etiology, and Burden of Acute Skin Infections in the United States.

The US burden of acute skin infections is substantial. While Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus spp. are the most common causes, gram-negative bacteria and mixed infections can occur in some settings. These mixed infections are more likely to result in inappropriate empiric antibiotic therapy. Important challenges remain in diagnosing and treating acute skin infections.

Omadacycline: A Modernized Tetracycline.

When tetracyclines were introduced in the 1940s, these antibiotics offered a broad spectrum of activity against multiple types of pathogens. However, their utility waned after the selection of tetracycline resistance in the pathogens against which they were effective. Omadacycline is a semisynthetic aminomethylcycline antibacterial derived from the tetracycline class of antibiotics that is unaffected by these resistance mechanisms. It has an appropriate spectrum of activity for community-acquired infections, including those caused by many resistant organisms. Omadacycline offers a well-tolerated treatment for acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections and community-acquired bacterial pneumonia. Omadacycline has minimal known drug-drug interactions, and should be administered in a fasting state, avoiding dairy and cation-containing products for at least 4 hours after dosing. It does not require dose adjustments for sex, age, or hepatic or renal impairment, and has a safety profile similar to that of other oral tetracyclines. Because omadacycline can be administered effectively orally, it can help reduce hospitalization costs associated with intravenous antibiotic administration. This special supplement to Clinical Infectious Diseases offers an in-depth examination of omadacycline development, including discussions of pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic trials, spectrum of activity and preclinical data, early clinical trials, phase III clinical trials, and an integrated safety summary.

Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo- and Positive-Controlled Crossover Study of the Effects of Omadacycline on QT/QTc Intervals in Healthy Subjects.

Omadacycline, an aminomethylcycline, is an antibiotic that is approved in the United States for once-daily intravenous (i.v.) and oral use for treatment of adults with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections and community-acquired bacterial pneumonia. In this thorough QT study, the effects of a therapeutic (100 mg i.v.) dose and a supratherapeutic (300 mg i.v.) dose of omadacycline on the electrocardiogram were studied, with placebo and moxifloxacin as negative and positive controls. Omadacycline at these doses had no effect on the QTc interval. The largest mean placebo-corrected change-from-baseline QTcS (ΔQTcS) were 1.7 ms (90% confidence interval [CI], 0.06 to 3.30) and 2.6 ms (90% CI, 0.55 to 4.67), observed at 20 min and 2 h after the start of the infusion of 100 mg and 300 mg, respectively. Assay sensitivity was demonstrated with moxifloxacin, which caused clear prolongation of QTcS, with the largest mean placebo-corrected ΔQTcS of 9.8 ms at 1.5 and 2 h. With a linear exposure-response model, the estimated slope of the concentration-change-from-baseline QTcF (ΔQTcF) relationship was very shallow: 0.0007 ms per ng/ml (90% CI, 0.0000 to 0.0014). The possibility of an effect on placebo-corrected ΔQTcS exceeding 10 ms can be excluded at omadacycline concentrations in plasma of up to ∼8 µg/ml. Omadacycline had no effect on cardiac conduction (PR and QRS intervals) but caused an increase in heart rate of 16.8 beats per min at 35 min after the 100-mg dose and 21.6 beats per min at 50 min after the 300-mg dose.

A Phase 3, Randomized, Double-Blind, Multicenter Study To Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of Intravenous Iclaprim versus Vancomycin for Treatment of Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infections Suspected or Confirmed To Be Due to Gram-Positive Pathogens (REVIVE-2 Study).

Iclaprim is a novel diaminopyrimidine antibiotic that may be an effective and safe treatment for serious skin infections. The safety and effectiveness of iclaprim were assessed in a global phase 3, double-blind, randomized, active-controlled trial. Six hundred thirteen adults with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs) suspected or confirmed to be due to Gram-positive pathogens were randomized to iclaprim (80 mg) or vancomycin (15 mg/kg of body weight), both of which were administered intravenously every 12 h for 5 to 14 days. The primary endpoint was a ≥20% reduction in lesion size compared with that at the baseline at 48 to 72 h after the start of administration of study drug in the intent-to-treat population. Among patients randomized to iclaprim, 78.3% (231 of 295) met this primary endpoint, whereas 76.7% (234 of 305) of those receiving vancomycin met this primary endpoint (difference, 1.58%; 95% confidence interval, -5.10% to 8.26%). This met the prespecified 10% noninferiority margin. Iclaprim was well tolerated, with most adverse events being categorized as mild. In conclusion, iclaprim was noninferior to vancomycin in this phase 3 clinical trial for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections. On the basis of these results, iclaprim may be an efficacious and safe treatment for skin infections suspected or confirmed to be due to Gram-positive pathogens. (This trial has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under identifier NCT02607618.).

Systematic review and network meta-analysis of tedizolid for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections caused by MRSA.

BACKGROUND: Tedizolid, the active moiety of tedizolid phosphate, is approved in the United States, the European Union, Canada and a number of other countries for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) caused by certain susceptible bacteria, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). This network meta-analysis (NMA) evaluates the comparative effectiveness of tedizolid and other antibacterials indicated for the treatment of ABSSSI caused by MRSA. METHODS: Systematic review of 10 databases was undertaken to inform an NMA to estimate the relative effectiveness of tedizolid and established monotherapy comparators (ceftaroline, daptomycin, linezolid, teicoplanin, tigecycline, vancomycin) for treating MRSA-associated ABSSSI. Randomized controlled trials enrolling adults with ABSSSI or complicated skin and skin structure infections caused by suspected/documented MRSA were eligible for inclusion. Networks were developed based on similarity of study design, patient characteristics, outcome measures and available data. Outcomes of interest included clinical response at end of therapy (EOT), post-therapy evaluation (PTE) or test-of-cure assessment and treatment discontinuations resulting from adverse events (AEs). Bayesian NMA was conducted for each outcome using fixed-effects and random effects models. RESULTS: Literature searches identified 3,618 records; 15 trials met the inclusion criteria and were considered suitable for NMA comparison. In fixed-effects models, tedizolid had higher odds of clinical response at EOT (odds ratio [OR], 1.7; credible interval, 1.0, 3.0) and PTE than vancomycin (OR, 1.6; credible interval, 1.1, 2.5). No differences in odds of clinical response at EOT or PTE were observed between tedizolid and other comparators. There was no evidence of a difference among treatments for discontinuation due to AEs. Results from random effects and fixed-effects models were generally consistent. CONCLUSIONS: Tedizolid was superior to vancomycin for clinical response at EOT and PTE. There was no evidence of a difference between tedizolid and other comparators and no evidence of a difference between tedizolid and all comparators when evaluating discontinuation due to AEs. These findings suggest that tedizolid provides an alternative option for the management of serious skin infections caused by suspected or documented MRSA. This study is subject to the limitations inherent in all NMAs, and the results should be interpreted accordingly.

Top 10 Myths Regarding the Diagnosis and Treatment of Cellulitis.

BACKGROUND: Cellulitis is commonly treated in the emergency department (ED). Patients who present with cellulitis incur significant health care costs and may be overtreated with antibiotics. The accurate diagnosis and treatment of cellulitis plays an important role in cost-effective, high-quality medical care, as well as appropriate antibiotic utilization. OBJECTIVE: We aim to describe common fallacies regarding cellulitis. We present 10 myths that result in misdiagnosis, overtreatment, or inappropriate empiric management of cellulitis. Clinical presentation, including swelling and redness, is explored in depth, along with incidence of community-acquired methicillin-resistance Staphylococcus aureus, management of tick bites, and effective antibiotic therapy for cellulitis. DISCUSSION: Patients are often treated for cellulitis unnecessarily or inappropriately. Awareness of these myths will help guide providers in clinical decision making in order to effectively tailor treatment for these infections. CONCLUSIONS: Cellulitis is not as simple as it might seem, and is commonly misdiagnosed in the ED. Noninfectious causes of local symptoms, including lymphedema, venous stasis, and deep vein thrombosis need to be considered. Cellulitis should be treated with empiric antimicrobial therapy based on patient risk factors and regional susceptibility patterns. This review will assist providers in managing cellulitis and avoiding treatment errors that lead to high costs, unwanted side effects for patients, and overuse of antibiotics.

Genetic Variation in TLR10, an Inhibitory Toll-Like Receptor, Influences Susceptibility to Complicated Skin and Skin Structure Infections.

BACKGROUND: Toll-like receptors (TLRs) play a central role in the innate immune response to complicated skin and skin structure infections (cSSSIs), with TLR10 being the first family member known to have an inhibitory function. This study assessed the role of TLR10 in recognition of cSSSI-related pathogens and whether genetic variation in TLR10 influences susceptibility to cSSSIs. METHODS: Human peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) preincubated with anti-TLR10 antibody and HEK-293 cells overexpressing TLRs were exposed to cSSSI pathogens, and cytokine secretion was determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. A total of 318 patients with cSSSI and 328 healthy controls were genotyped for 4 nonsynonymous single-nucleotide polymorphisms in TLR10, and functional consequences of the TLR10 SNPs were assessed via in vitro stimulation assays. RESULTS: PBMC stimulation with cSSSI pathogens in the presence of TLR10 neutralizing antibody significantly increased interleukin 6 secretion. Overexpression of TLR10 completely abrogated TLR2-induced interleukin 8 secretion by HEK-293 cells in response to cSSSI pathogens. Three polymorphisms in TLR10, I775L, I369L, and N241H, were associated with reduced susceptibility to cSSSIs. The presence of the TLR10 alleles 775L, 369L, or 241H increased interleukin 6 secretion by PBMCs in response to cSSSI pathogens. CONCLUSIONS: TLR10 is a modulatory receptor of innate immune responses to cSSSI-related pathogens, and genetic variants in TLR10 are associated with protection against cSSSIs.

TLR1, TLR2, and TLR6 gene polymorphisms are associated with increased susceptibility to complicated skin and skin structure infections.

BACKGROUND: Complicated skin and skin structure infections (cSSSIs) are characterized by infections with gram-positive or gram-negative aerobic or anaerobic bacteria, as well as by a polymicrobial etiology. These invading microorganisms are recognized by pattern-recognition receptors (PRRs) of the innate immune system. This study assessed whether genetic variation in genes encoding PRRs influences the susceptibility to cSSSIs. METHODS: A total of 318 patients with cSSSI and 328 healthy controls were genotyped for 9 nonsynonymous single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in PRR genes coding for Toll-like receptors (TLRs) 1, 2, 4, and 6; NOD-like receptor 2; and the signaling adaptor molecule TIRAP. Associations between susceptibility to cSSSIs and a SNP were investigated by means of logistic regression models. In an additional cohort of 74 healthy individuals in whom the same SNPs were genotyped, peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) were obtained and stimulated with Staphylococcus aureus. Interleukin 6 concentrations were determined in supernatants by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay to determine the correlation between genotypes and levels of IL-6 secretion. RESULTS: In the genetic association analysis, polymorphisms in TLR1 (S248N and R80T), TLR2 (P631H), and TLR6 (P249S) were associated with an increased susceptibility to cSSSIs. No association with susceptibility to cSSSIs was observed for polymorphisms TLR2 (R753Q), TLR4 (D299G and T399I), NOD2 (P268S), and TIRAP (S180L). In the functional analysis, individuals bearing the TLR1 248N or 80T allele showed lower IL-6 secretion upon stimulation with S. aureus. CONCLUSIONS: Polymorphisms in TLR1, TLR2, and TLR6 are associated with increased susceptibility to cSSSIs. For TLR1, impaired proinflammatory cytokine production due to the polymorphism is most likely the mechanism mediating this effect.

Dalbavancin for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) in pediatric patients: a case series.

Acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections (ABSSSI) are a significant cause of morbidity in pediatric patients, requiring timely and effective treatment. Dalbavancin, a long-acting lipoglycopeptide antibiotic recently approved for pediatric use, offers advantages such as excellent bactericidal activity against Gram-positive bacteria (including multidrug-resistant pathogens) and high tissue penetration. We present a case series of pediatric patients with ABSSSI treated with dalbavancin. Five cases were described demonstrating the efficacy of dalbavancin in different clinical scenarios. Patients with complex skin conditions, including cellulitis and deep abscesses, benefited from dalbavancin therapy, achieving significant clinical improvement. Notably, dalbavancin facilitated early discharge, improving quality of life and reducing healthcare costs. These cases highlight the potential of dalbavancin as a valuable treatment option for ABSSSI in pediatric patients, particularly in settings where conventional therapies fail to achieve optimal clinical outcomes or prolonged hospitalization is not feasible. Further research is needed to clarify its role and optimize its use in pediatric patients with ABSSSI.

Real-World Use of Dalbavancin for Treatment of Soft Tissue and Bone Infection in Children: Safe, Effective and Hospital-Time Sparing.

Acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) and osteoarticular infections compound the burden of morbidity, mortality and prolonged hospitalizations among gram-positive infections. Dalbavancin, a second-generation, intravenous lipoglycopeptide, due to its prolonged half-life, can be a valuable alternative in their treatment when administered as inpatient treatment at the price of an extended hospital stay. Between October 2019 and September 2023, 31 children and adolescents were treated with dalbavancin because of bone and joint infections (n = 12 patients, 39%), ABSSSI (n = 13 patients, 42%), mainly for the limbs, facial cellulitis or complicated ABSSSI (n = 6 patients, 19%), at five Italian pediatric centers. Microbiological study provided gram-positive bacterial isolate in 16 cases, in 11 cases from a positive blood culture; 9 of them were MRSA. Twenty-five patients were initially treated with a different antibiotic therapy: beta-lactam-based in 18 patients (58%), glycopeptide-based in 15 patients (48%) and daptomycin in 6 (19%). The median time that elapsed between admission and start of dalbavancin was 18 days. A total of 61 doses of dalbavancin were administered to the 31 patients: 16 received a single dose while the remaining 15 patients received between two (n = 9) and nine doses. The frequency of administration was weekly in five cases or fortnightly in nine patients. Median length of stay in hospital was 16 days. Median time to discharge after the first dose of dalbavancin was 1 day. Treatment was very well-tolerated: of the 61 administered doses, only four doses, administered to four patients, were associated with an adverse event: drug extravasation during intravenous administration occurred in two patients, with no sequelae; however, in two patients the first administration was stopped soon after infusion start: in one (ID #11), due to headache and vomiting; in another (ID #12) due to a systemic reaction. In both patients, drug infusion was not repeated. None of the remaining 29 patients reported treatment failure (resistant or recurrent disease) or an adverse effect during a median follow-up time of two months. The use of dalbavancin was safe, feasible and also effective in shortening the hospital stay in children and adolescents.

Clinical efficacy and safety of novel lipoglycopeptides in the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the clinical efficacy and safety of novel lipoglycopeptides in treating acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Turning Research into Practice, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception to 20 May 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the clinical efficacy and safety of lipoglycopeptides with other comparators in treating adult patients with ABSSSIs were included. The primary outcome was clinical response. RESULTS: Eight RCTs (6416 patients; lipoglycopeptides: 3359, comparators: 3057) were enrolled. Clinical response rate was not significantly different between lipoglycopeptides and comparators at early-clinical-evaluation (odds ratio [95% confidence interval]: 1.01 [0.85-1.20], I2 = 34%), end-of-treatment (0.94 [0.80-1.11], I2 = 0%), and test-of-cure (1.05 [0.85-1.30], I2 = 0%). Lipoglycopeptides showed a similar overall microbiological eradication rate (1.12 [0.90-1.38], I2 = 21%) but a borderline higher microbiological eradication rate for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (1.37 [1.00-1.86], I2 = 0%) than the comparators. Lipoglycopeptides were not associated with a higher risk than comparators. CONCLUSIONS: Lipoglycopeptides can achieve similar clinical and microbiological responses to other comparators in treating ABSSSIs. In addition, lipoglycopeptides are as tolerable as their comparators.

Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin-Structure Infections, efficacy of Dalbavancin: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To know the efficacy of different doses of dalbavancin in acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections (ABSSSIs) and versus other antibiotics. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of dalbavancin efficacy for ABSSSIs. We selected 10 clinical trials from MEDLINE and Cochrane databases for qualitative review. Of these, five trials compared one or two doses of dalbavancin versus other antibiotics such as vancomycin or linezolid. RESULTS: Treatment outcomes with other antibiotics were not significantly different versus two doses of dalbavancin (OR 1.13; 95% CI 0.75-1.71; p = 0.55) or single dose dalbavancin (OR 0.98; 95% CI 0.19-5.17; p = 0.98). One dose versus two doses of dalbavancin did not show significant differences in any of the treatment groups. In contrast, the global microbiological assessment results indicated a favorable outcome for two doses of dalbavancin compared to the single dose of dalbavancin (OR 2.96; 95% CI 1.19-7.39; p = 0.02) in both methicillin-resistant and methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus. CONCLUSION: Either single dose or two dose dalbavancin treatment is as clinically effective as other antibiotics such as vancomycin and linezolid for the treatment of ABSSSIs.Abbreviations ABSSI: acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infection; AUC: area under the concentration-time curve; CE: clinical evaluable; CI: confidence interval; EOT: end of treatment; ITT: intention-to-treat; LOS: length of stay; MIC: minimum inhibitory concentration; MIC90: minimum concentration to inhibit growth of 90% of isolates; MR: methicillin resistant; MRSA: methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus; MS: methicillin susceptible; MSSA: methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus; OPAT: Outpatient Parenteral Antimicrobial Therapy; OR: odds ratio; PI: penicillin intermediate; PR: penicillin resistant; PS penicillin susceptible; SIRS: systemic inflammatory response syndrome; SSTI: skin and soft tissue infection; TOC: test of cure; VR: vancomycin resistant; VS: vancomycin susceptible.

Skin infections in Europe: a retrospective study of incidence, patient characteristics and practice patterns.

OBJECTIVE: Acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs) are associated with considerable morbidity and a heavy healthcare burden. The primary objectives of this two-phase study were to determine the incidence of skin infections and ABSSSIs in hospitalized patients (Phase A), and to describe the characteristics and treatment of hospitalized patients with ABSSSIs (Phase B). METHODS: This non-interventional, retrospective study was based on data collected from adult patients hospitalized for skin infections in six European countries (Czech Republic, Greece, Italy, Portugal, Russia and Spain) between January 2014 and June 2016. RESULTS: In Phase A, the total hospital incidence of skin infections and ABSSSIs was 2.4 and 1.8 per 1000 patient-days, respectively. Overall, 73.6% of 50,469 hospitalizations for skin infections were for ABSSSIs. Among the 750 patients with ABSSSIs included in Phase B, Gram-positive bacteria were isolated in 24.9%, most commonly methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus (11.5%). Empirical therapy was administered to 98.1% of patients, most often with a penicillin, with or without a ß-lactamase inhibitor (42.1%). Complete cure was achieved in 46.5% and 34.5% of patients after initial treatment and treatment modification, respectively. Overall, 22.7% of patients had at least one additional ABSSSI-related hospitalization, 47.1% of patients visited the emergency room, 19.3% of patients visited primary care clinics, and 34.8% of patients visited a specialist. CONCLUSION: Treatment of ABSSSIs in Europe is associated with a heavy healthcare burden, highlighting the need for optimized management strategies that may reduce healthcare utilization.

Cost-minimisation analysis of oritavancin for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections from a United Kingdom perspective.

BACKGROUND: Early discharge (ED) from hospital and outpatient parenteral antibiotic therapy (OPAT) are effective approaches for the management of a range of infections, including acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI). Strategies that facilitate ED, thereby reducing complications such as healthcare-acquired infection whilst enhancing patient quality of life, are being increasingly adopted in line with good antimicrobial stewardship practice. This study presents a cost-minimisation analysis for the use of oritavancin at ED versus relevant comparators from a National Health Service (NHS) and personal and social services United Kingdom perspective. METHODS: A cost-minimisation model considering adult patients with ABSSSI with suspected or confirmed methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infection, was developed based on publicly available NHS costs, practice guidelines for ABSSSI and clinical expert's opinion. Cost of treatment and treatment days were compared for oritavancin at ED to dalbavancin, teicoplanin, daptomycin and linezolid. RESULTS: Following the empiric use of either flucloxacillin or vancomycin in the inpatient setting, oritavancin was compared to OPAT with dalbavancin, teicoplanin and daptomycin, and oral linezolid from day 4 of treatment. Oritavancin at ED reduced treatment duration by 0.8 days and led to cost savings of £281 in comparison to dalbavancin. In comparison to teicoplanin, daptomycin and linezolid, oritavancin reduced treatment duration by 5 days, with marginally higher costs (£446, £137, and £1,434, respectively). CONCLUSION: Oritavancin, used to support ED, is associated with lower costs compared with dalbavancin and reduced treatment duration relative to all comparators. Its use would support an ED approach in MRSA ABSSSI management.

Pharmacokinetics, Safety and Pharmacokinetics/Pharmacodynamics Analysis of Omadacycline in Chinese Healthy Subjects.

Objective: Omadacycline is a new type of aminomethylcycline antibiotic, having a broad antibacterial spectrum. But the pharmacokinetic characteristics and safety profile of the Chinese population remain unknown. It is also unclear whether the US-approved treatment regimen is applicable for the Chinese population. Methods: In a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled dose-escalated trial, the pharmacokinetics of omadacycline was evaluated by a non-compartmental and compartmental model. Monte Carlo simulations were performed using the pharmacokinetic data from the Chinese population to evaluate the probability of target attainment (PTA) and the cumulative fraction of response (CFR) of the US FDA-approved dose regimen. Results: The three-compartment model successfully described the rapid distribution and slow elimination of omadacycline after the intravenous infusion (i.v.). The double-peak concentration-time curve of the oral absorption (p.o.) was explained by the two-compartment model with two absorption compartments. The steady-state AUC of 100 mg omadacycline i.v. and 300 mg omadacycline p. o. were 12.1 and 19.4 mg h/L, respectively. Pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics (PK/PD) analysis showed that the omadacycline dosing regimen with a loading dose (200 mg i.v. q24 h, 100 mg i.v. q12 h, 450 mg p. o. q24 h × 2 days or 300 mg p. o. q12 h) and maintenance dose (100 mg i.v. q24 h or 300 mg p. o. q24 h) could cover the main pathogens of the indications acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI) and community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP): Staphylococcus aureus and Streptococcus pneumoniae. Also, omadacycline had showed a good safety profile in the Chinese population. Conclusions: With the evidence provided, omadacycline could be a novel treatment option to Chinese patients with ABSSSI and CABP.