Back to Search Start Over

Omadacycline for Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infections.

Authors :
Abrahamian FM
Sakoulas G
Tzanis E
Manley A
Steenbergen J
Das AF
Eckburg PB
McGovern PC
Source :
Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America [Clin Infect Dis] 2019 Aug 01; Vol. 69 (Suppl 1), pp. S23-S32.
Publication Year :
2019

Abstract

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.<br />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.<br />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.<br />Conclusions: Omadacycline was effective and safe in ABSSSI.<br />Clinical Trials Registration: NCT02378480 and NCT02877927.<br /> (© The Author(s) 2019. Published by Oxford University Press for the Infectious Diseases Society of America.)

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
1537-6591
Volume :
69
Issue :
Suppl 1
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
Clinical infectious diseases : an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
31367742
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciz396