Avibactam (formerly NXL104, AVE1330A) is a synthetic non-β-lactam, β-lactamase inhibitor that inhibits the activities of Ambler class A and C β-lactamases and some Ambler class D enzymes. This review summarizes the existing data published for ceftazidime-avibactam, including relevant chemistry, mechanisms of action and resistance, microbiology, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and efficacy and safety data from animal and human trials. Although not a β-lactam, the chemical structure of avibactam closely resembles portions of the cephem bicyclic ring system, and avibactam has been shown to bond covalently to β-lactamases. Very little is known about the potential for avibactam to select for resistance. The addition of avibactam greatly (4-1024-fold minimum inhibitory concentration [MIC] reduction) improves the activity of ceftazidime versus most species of Enterobacteriaceae depending on the presence or absence of β-lactamase enzyme(s). Against Pseudomonas aeruginosa, the addition of avibactam also improves the activity of ceftazidime (~fourfold MIC reduction). Limited data suggest that the addition of avibactam does not improve the activity of ceftazidime versus Acinetobacter species or most anaerobic bacteria (exceptions: Bacteroides fragilis, Clostridium perfringens, Prevotella spp. and Porphyromonas spp.). The pharmacokinetics of avibactam follow a two-compartment model and do not appear to be altered by the co-administration of ceftazidime. The maximum plasma drug concentration (C(max)) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) of avibactam increase linearly with doses ranging from 50 mg to 2,000 mg. The mean volume of distribution and half-life of 22 L (~0.3 L/kg) and ~2 hours, respectively, are similar to ceftazidime. Like ceftazidime, avibactam is primarily renally excreted, and clearance correlates with creatinine clearance. Pharmacodynamic data suggest that ceftazidime-avibactam is rapidly bactericidal versus β-lactamase-producing Gram-negative bacilli that are not inhibited by ceftazidime alone.Clinical trials to date have reported that ceftazidime-avibactam is as effective as standard carbapenem therapy in complicated intra-abdominal infection and complicated urinary tract infection, including infection caused by cephalosporin-resistant Gram-negative isolates. The safety and tolerability of ceftazidime-avibactam has been reported in three phase I pharmacokinetic studies and two phase II clinical studies. Ceftazidime-avibactam appears to be well tolerated in healthy subjects and hospitalized patients, with few serious drug-related treatment-emergent adverse events reported to date.In conclusion, avibactam serves to broaden the spectrum of ceftazidime versus ß-lactamase-producing Gram-negative bacilli. The exact roles for ceftazidime-avibactam will be defined by efficacy and safety data from further clinical trials. Potential future roles for ceftazidime-avibactam include the treatment of suspected or documented infections caused by resistant Gram-negative-bacilli producing extended-spect...

Relebactam (formerly known as MK-7655) is a non-β-lactam, bicyclic diazabicyclooctane, β-lactamase inhibitor that is structurally related to avibactam, differing by the addition of a piperidine ring to the 2-position carbonyl group. Vaborbactam (formerly known as RPX7009) is a non-β-lactam, cyclic, boronic acid-based, β-lactamase inhibitor. The structure of vaborbactam is unlike any other currently marketed β-lactamase inhibitor. Both inhibitors display activity against Ambler class A [including extended-spectrum β-lactamases (ESBLs), Klebsiella pneumoniae carbapenemases (KPCs)] and class C β-lactamases (AmpC). Little is known about the potential for relebactam or vaborbactam to select for resistance; however, inactivation of the porin protein OmpK36 in K. pneumoniae has been reported to confer resistance to both imipenem-relebactam and meropenem-vaborbactam. The addition of relebactam significantly improves the activity of imipenem against most species of Enterobacteriaceae [by lowering the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) by 2- to 128-fold] depending on the presence or absence of β-lactamase enzymes. Against Pseudomonas aeruginosa, the addition of relebactam also improves the activity of imipenem (MIC reduced eightfold). Based on the data available, the addition of relebactam does not improve the activity of imipenem against Acinetobacter baumannii, Stenotrophomonas maltophilia and most anaerobes. Similar to imipenem-relebactam, the addition of vaborbactam significantly (2- to > 1024-fold MIC reduction) improves the activity of meropenem against most species of Enterobacteriaceae depending on the presence or absence of β-lactamase enzymes. Limited data suggest that the addition of vaborbactam does not improve the activity of meropenem against A. baumannii, P. aeruginosa, or S. maltophilia. The pharmacokinetics of both relebactam and vaborbactam are described by a two-compartment, linear model and do not appear to be altered by the co-administration of imipenem and meropenem, respectively. Relebactam's approximate volume of distribution (V ) and elimination half-life (t) of ~ 18 L and 1.2-2.1 h, respectively, are similar to imipenem. Likewise, vaborbactam's V and t of ~ 18 L and 1.3-2.0 h, respectively, are comparable to meropenem. Like imipenem and meropenem, relebactam and vaborbactam are both primarily renally excreted, and clearance correlates with creatinine clearance. In vitro and in vivo pharmacodynamic studies have reported bactericidal activity for imipenem-relebactam and meropenem-vaborbactam against various Gram-negative β-lactamase-producing bacilli that are not inhibited by their respective carbapenems alone. These data also suggest that pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic parameters correlating with efficacy include time above the MIC for the carbapenems and overall exposure for their companion β-lactamase inhibitors. Phase II clinical trials to date have reported that imipenem-relebactam is as effective as imipenem alone for treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections and complicated uri...

No abstract

Ceftolozane is a novel cephalosporin currently being developed with the β-lactamase inhibitor tazobactam for the treatment of complicated urinary tract infections (cUTIs), complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAIs), and ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia (VABP). The chemical structure of ceftolozane is similar to that of ceftazidime, with the exception of a modified side-chain at the 3-position of the cephem nucleus, which confers potent antipseudomonal activity. As a β-lactam, its mechanism of action is the inhibition of penicillin-binding proteins (PBPs). Ceftolozane displays increased activity against Gram-negative bacilli, including those that harbor classical β-lactamases (e.g., TEM-1 and SHV-1), but, similar to other oxyimino-cephalosporins such as ceftazidime and ceftriaxone, it is compromised by extended-spectrum β-lactamases (ESBLs) and carbapenemases. The addition of tazobactam extends the activity of ceftolozane to include most ESBL producers as well as some anaerobic species. Ceftolozane is distinguished from other cephalosporins by its potent activity versus Pseudomonas aeruginosa, including various drug-resistant phenotypes such as carbapenem, piperacillin/tazobactam, and ceftazidime-resistant isolates, as well as those strains that are multidrug-resistant (MDR). Its antipseudomonal activity is attributed to its ability to evade the multitude of resistance mechanisms employed by P. aeruginosa, including efflux pumps, reduced uptake through porins and modification of PBPs. Ceftolozane demonstrates linear pharmacokinetics unaffected by the coadministration of tazobactam; specifically, it follows a two-compartmental model with linear elimination. Following single doses, ranging from 250 to 2,000 mg, over a 1-h intravenous infusion, ceftolozane displays a mean plasma half-life of 2.3 h (range 1.9-2.6 h), a steady-state volume of distribution that ranges from 13.1 to 17.6 L, and a mean clearance of 102.4 mL/min. It demonstrates low plasma protein binding (20 %), is primarily eliminated via urinary excretion (≥92 %), and may require dose adjustments in patients with a creatinine clearance <50 mL/min. Time-kill experiments and animal infection models have demonstrated that the pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic index that is best correlated with ceftolozane's in vivo efficacy is the percentage of time in which free plasma drug concentrations exceed the minimum inhibitory concentration of a given pathogen (%fT >MIC), as expected of β-lactams. Two phase II clinical trials have been conducted to evaluate ceftolozane ± tazobactam in the settings of cUTIs and cIAIs. One trial compared ceftolozane 1,000 mg every 8 h (q8h) versus ceftazidime 1,000 mg q8h in the treatment of cUTI, including pyelonephritis, and demonstrated similar microbiologic and clinical outcomes, as well as a similar incidence of adverse effects after 7-10 days of treatment, respectively. A second trial has been conducted comparing ceftolozane/tazobactam 1,000/500 mg and metronidazole 500 mg q8h versus meropenem 1,000 mg q8h in the tre...

No abstract

Eravacycline is an investigational, synthetic fluorocycline antibacterial agent that is structurally similar to tigecycline with two modifications to the D-ring of its tetracycline core: a fluorine atom replaces the dimethylamine moiety at C-7 and a pyrrolidinoacetamido group replaces the 2-tertiary-butyl glycylamido at C-9. Like other tetracyclines, eravacycline inhibits bacterial protein synthesis through binding to the 30S ribosomal subunit. Eravacycline demonstrates broad-spectrum antimicrobial activity against Gram-positive, Gram-negative, and anaerobic bacteria with the exception of Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Eravacycline is two- to fourfold more potent than tigecycline versus Gram-positive cocci and two- to eightfold more potent than tigecycline versus Gram-negative bacilli. Intravenous eravacycline demonstrates linear pharmacokinetics that have been described by a four-compartment model. Oral bioavailability of eravacycline is estimated at 28 % (range 26-32 %) and a single oral dose of 200 mg achieves a maximum plasma concentration (C max) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to infinity (AUC0-∞) of 0.23 ± 0.04 mg/L and 3.34 ± 1.11 mg·h/L, respectively. A population pharmacokinetic study of intravenous (IV) eravacycline demonstrated a mean steady-state volume of distribution (V ss) of 320 L or 4.2 L/kg, a mean terminal elimination half-life (t ½) of 48 h, and a mean total clearance (CL) of 13.5 L/h. In a neutropenic murine thigh infection model, the pharmacodynamic parameter that demonstrated the best correlation with antibacterial response was the ratio of area under the plasma concentration-time curve over 24 h to the minimum inhibitory concentration (AUC0-24h/MIC). Several animal model studies including mouse systemic infection, thigh infection, lung infection, and pyelonephritis models have been published and demonstrated the in vivo efficacy of eravacycline. A phase II clinical trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of eravacycline in the treatment of community-acquired complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI) has been published as well, and phase III clinical trials in cIAI and complicated urinary tract infection (cUTI) have been completed. The eravacycline phase III program, known as IGNITE (Investigating Gram-Negative Infections Treated with Eravacycline), investigated its safety and efficacy in cIAI (IGNITE 1) and cUTI (IGNITE 2). Eravacycline met the primary endpoint in IGNITE 1, while data analysis for IGNITE 2 is currently ongoing. Common adverse events reported in phase I-III studies included gastrointestinal effects such as nausea and vomiting. Eravacycline is a promising intravenous and oral fluorocycline that may offer an alternative treatment option for patients with serious infections, particularly those caused by multidrug-resistant Gram-negative pathogens.

To our knowledge, this is the first published report of a relationship between a pharmacodynamic index and clinical outcome in a febrile neutropenic population. Based on this relationship, dosing with intravenous meropenem 500 mg every 6 hours is predicted to be comparable to the currently recommended 1 g every 8 hours for serious infections. Our model provides further justification for a prospective clinical trial to evaluate a pharmacodynamically targeted meropenem dosing schedule as to its ability to improve clinical outcome in these patients.

Dalbavancin, oritavancin and telavancin are semisynthetic lipoglycopeptides that demonstrate promise for the treatment of patients with infections caused by multi-drug-resistant Gram-positive pathogens. Each of these agents contains a heptapeptide core, common to all glycopeptides, which enables them to inhibit transglycosylation and transpeptidation (cell wall synthesis). Modifications to the heptapeptide core result in different in vitro activities for the three semisynthetic lipoglycopeptides. All three lipoglycopeptides contain lipophilic side chains, which prolong their half-life, help to anchor the agents to the cell membrane and increase their activity against Gram-positive cocci. In addition to inhibiting cell wall synthesis, telavancin and oritavancin are also able to disrupt bacterial membrane integrity and increase membrane permeability; oritavancin also inhibits RNA synthesis. Enterococci exhibiting the VanA phenotype (resistance to both vancomycin and teicoplanin) are resistant to both dalbavancin and telavancin, while oritavancin retains activity. Dalbavancin, oritavancin and telavancin exhibit activity against VanB vancomycin-resistant enterococci. All three lipoglycopeptides demonstrate potent in vitro activity against Staphylococcus aureus and Staphylococcus epidermidis regardless of their susceptibility to meticillin, as well as Streptococcus spp. Both dalbavancin and telavancin are active against vancomycin-intermediate S. aureus (VISA), but display poor activity versus vancomycin-resistant S. aureus (VRSA). Oritavancin is active against both VISA and VRSA. Telavancin displays greater activity against Clostridium spp. than dalbavancin, oritavancin or vancomycin. The half-life of dalbavancin ranges from 147 to 258 hours, which allows for once-weekly dosing, the half-life of oritavancin of 393 hours may allow for one dose per treatment course, while telavancin requires daily administration. Dalbavancin and telavancin exhibit concentration-dependent activity and AUC/MIC (area under the concentration-time curve to minimum inhibitory concentration ratio) is the pharmacodynamic parameter that best describes their activities. Oritavancin's activity is also considered concentration-dependent in vitro, while in vivo its activity has been described by both concentration and time-dependent models; however, AUC/MIC is the pharmacodynamic parameter that best describes its activity. Clinical trials involving patients with complicated skin and skin structure infections (cSSSIs) have demonstrated that all three agents are as efficacious as comparators. The most common adverse effects reported with dalbavancin use included nausea, diarrhoea and constipation, while injection site reactions, fever and diarrhoea were commonly observed with oritavancin therapy. Patients administered telavancin frequently reported nausea, taste disturbance and insomnia. To date, no drug-drug interactions have been identified for dalbavancin, oritavancin or telavancin. All three of these agents are promising alternatives for the trea...