Safety and efficacy of omadacycline for treatment of community-acquired bacterial pneumonia and acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections in patients with mild-to-moderate renal impairment |
| |
Authors: | Oliver A. Cornely Thomas M. File Lynne Garrity-Ryan Surya Chitra Robert Noble Paul C. McGovern |
| |
Affiliation: | 1. University of Cologne, Faculty of Medicine, and University Hospital Cologne, Department I of Internal Medicine, Excellence Center for Medical Mycology, Cologne, Germany;2. Cologne Excellence Cluster on Cellular Stress Responses in Aging-Associated Diseases, Cologne, Germany;3. Clinical Trials Centre Cologne (ZKS Köln), Cologne, Germany;4. Infectious Disease Division, Summa Health, 75 Arch St., Suite 506, Akron, OH 44304 USA;5. Paratek Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 1000 First Avenue, Suite 200, King of Prussia, PA, 19406 USA |
| |
Abstract: | BackgroundMany antibiotics require dosage adjustments in patients with renal impairment. In Phase III studies, omadacycline was non-inferior to moxifloxacin and linezolid in adults with community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP) and acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI), respectively. This analysis evaluated efficacy and safety measures from three omadacycline studies by patient renal function.MethodsPatients were stratified as having normal renal function (creatinine clearance >89 mL/min), mild renal impairment (creatinine clearance 60–89 mL/min) or moderate renal impairment (creatinine clearance <60 mL/min); creatine clearance ≤30 mL/min (severe renal impairment) was an exclusion criterion. Efficacy endpoints were clinical success at the early clinical response (ECR) and post-treatment evaluation (PTE) time-points. Safety was evaluated as treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and laboratory measures.ResultsThis subgroup analysis included 773 patients with CABP and 1339 patients with ABSSSI in intent-to-treat (ITT) and modified ITT populations, respectively. Clinical success rates were high at ECR and PTE across the studies (CABP 75–90%; ABSSSI 74–95%), and broadly similar between treatments, irrespective of renal function. Rates of TEAEs in patients with ABSSSI ranged from 33% to 52%, and were similar across renal function groups. In patients with CABP, higher rates were observed in patients with moderate renal impairment (56–61%) compared with patients with normal renal function or mild renal impairment (35–49%). The most common TEAEs were nausea and vomiting.ConclusionsClinical success was similar across renal function groups, indicating no notable difference in the efficacy of omadacycline in patients with mild or moderate renal impairment. Omadacycline and comparators displayed similar safety profiles.ClinicalTrials.gov registryOPTIC (NCT02531438); OASIS-1 (NCT02378480); OASIS-2 (NCT02877927). |
| |
Keywords: | |
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录! |
|