International journal of antimicrobial agents · 2023
Omadacycline pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics in the hollow fiber model and clinical validation of efficacy to treat pulmonary Mycobacterium abscessus disease.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Singh Sanjay, Wang Jann-Yuan, Heysell Scott K, McShane Pamela J, Wadle Carly, Shankar Prem, Huang Hung-Ling, Pasipanodya Jotam, Boorgula Gunavanthi D, Philley Julie V, Gumbo Tawanda, Srivastava Shashikant
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Guideline-based therapy (GBT) for pulmonary Mycobacterium abscessus (Mab) disease achieves sustained sputum culture conversion (SSCC) rates of 30%; this is reflected by poor efficacy of GBT in the hollow fiber system model of Mab (HFS-Mab), which killed ∼1.22 log10 CFU/mL. This study was performed to determine which clinical dose of omadacycline, a tetracycline antibiotic, should be used in combination therapy to treat pulmonary Mab disease for relapse-free cure.
METHODS: First, omadacycline intrapulmonary concentration-time profiles of seven daily doses were mimicked in the HFS-Mab model and exposures associated with optimal efficacy were identified. Second, 10,000 subject Monte-Carlo simulations were performed to determine whether oral omadacycline 300 mg/day achieved these optimal exposures. Third, a retrospective clinical study on omadacycline vs. primarily tigecycline-based salvage therapy was conducted to assess rates of SSCC and toxicity. Fourth, a single patient was recruited to validate the findings.
RESULTS: Omadacycline efficacy in the HFS-Mab was 2.09 log10 CFU/mL at exposures achieved in >99% of patients on 300 mg/day omadacycline. In the retrospective study of omadacycline 300 mg/day-based combinations vs. comparators, SSCC was achieved in 8/10 vs. 1/9 (P=0.006), symptom improvement in 8/8 vs. 5/9 (P=0.033), toxicity in 0 vs. 9/9 (P<0.001), and therapy discontinuation due to toxicity in 0 vs. 3/9 (P<0.001) cases, respectively. In one prospectively recruited patient, omadacycline 300 mg/day salvage therapy achieved SSCC and symptom-resolution in 3 months.
CONCLUSION: Based on the preclinical and clinical data, omadacycline 300 mg/day in combination regimens could be appropriate for testing in Phase III trials in patients with Mab pulmonary disease.
METHODS: First, omadacycline intrapulmonary concentration-time profiles of seven daily doses were mimicked in the HFS-Mab model and exposures associated with optimal efficacy were identified. Second, 10,000 subject Monte-Carlo simulations were performed to determine whether oral omadacycline 300 mg/day achieved these optimal exposures. Third, a retrospective clinical study on omadacycline vs. primarily tigecycline-based salvage therapy was conducted to assess rates of SSCC and toxicity. Fourth, a single patient was recruited to validate the findings.
RESULTS: Omadacycline efficacy in the HFS-Mab was 2.09 log10 CFU/mL at exposures achieved in >99% of patients on 300 mg/day omadacycline. In the retrospective study of omadacycline 300 mg/day-based combinations vs. comparators, SSCC was achieved in 8/10 vs. 1/9 (P=0.006), symptom improvement in 8/8 vs. 5/9 (P=0.033), toxicity in 0 vs. 9/9 (P<0.001), and therapy discontinuation due to toxicity in 0 vs. 3/9 (P<0.001) cases, respectively. In one prospectively recruited patient, omadacycline 300 mg/day salvage therapy achieved SSCC and symptom-resolution in 3 months.
CONCLUSION: Based on the preclinical and clinical data, omadacycline 300 mg/day in combination regimens could be appropriate for testing in Phase III trials in patients with Mab pulmonary disease.