Efficacy, safety and pharmacokinetics of tedizolid versus linezolid in patients with skin and soft tissue infections in Japan - Results of a randomised, multicentre phase 3 study
- PMID: 29530544
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jiac.2018.01.010
Efficacy, safety and pharmacokinetics of tedizolid versus linezolid in patients with skin and soft tissue infections in Japan - Results of a randomised, multicentre phase 3 study
Abstract
The objective of this open-label, randomised (i.e. 2:1 ratio), Phase 3 study was to compare the efficacy and safety of tedizolid phosphate 200 mg, once-daily treatment with that of linezolid 600 mg, twice-daily treatment for 7-14 days in Japanese adult patients (N = 125) with skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) and/or for 7-21 days for those with SSTI-related bacteraemia, caused by confirmed or highly suspected methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). Primary outcome was clinical cure rate at test-of-cure (TOC, in SSTI: 7-14 days, in bacteraemia: 4-6 weeks after end-of-therapy [EOT]) time point in the microbiologically evaluable MRSA (ME-MRSA) population (N = 39). Secondary endpoints were clinical and microbiological response rates at EOT. Safety parameters were evaluated in the safety analysis population up to follow up. Data analysis was descriptive in nature. Baseline characteristics of patients were similar between treatment groups. At TOC in the ME-MRSA population, clinical cure rate was similar in tedizolid phosphate (92.6%) and linezolid (88.9%) groups. At EOT, clinical cure (tedizolid phosphate: 93.1%, linezolid: 90.0%) and microbiological success (tedizolid phosphate: 93.1%, linezolid: 100.0%) rates were similar in the ME-MRSA population. Both treatments were well tolerated; overall treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) in tedizolid phosphate (79.5%) and linezolid (75.6%) treatment groups were similar. Drug-related TEAEs were numerically lower with tedizolid phosphate versus linezolid (30.1%; 39.0%, respectively), as well as gastrointestinal (21.7%; 26.8%) and myelosuppression-related (2.4%; 22.0%) TEAEs. One death occurred in the linezolid group. Tedizolid phosphate may be an appropriate antibiotic for the treatment of SSTIs in Japanese adult patients. International clinical trial registration number: NCT01967225. Japanese clinical trial registration number: JapicCTI-132308.
Keywords: Gram-positive bacteria; Japanese; Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus; Oxazolidinone; Skin and soft tissue infection; Tedizolid phosphate.
Copyright © 2018 Japanese Society of Chemotherapy and The Japanese Association for Infectious Diseases. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Similar articles
-
Efficacy and Safety of Tedizolid Phosphate versus Linezolid in a Randomized Phase 3 Trial in Patients with Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infection.Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2019 Jun 24;63(7):e02252-18. doi: 10.1128/AAC.02252-18. Print 2019 Jul. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2019. PMID: 30988146 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Tedizolid: a novel oxazolidinone with potent activity against multidrug-resistant gram-positive pathogens.Drugs. 2015 Feb;75(3):253-70. doi: 10.1007/s40265-015-0352-7. Drugs. 2015. PMID: 25673021 Review.
-
Efficacy, safety, tolerability and population pharmacokinetics of tedizolid, a novel antibiotic, in Latino patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections.Braz J Infect Dis. 2016 Mar-Apr;20(2):184-92. doi: 10.1016/j.bjid.2015.12.007. Epub 2016 Feb 7. Braz J Infect Dis. 2016. PMID: 26859064 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Phase 2, randomized, double-blind, dose-ranging study evaluating the safety, tolerability, population pharmacokinetics, and efficacy of oral torezolid phosphate in patients with complicated skin and skin structure infections.Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2011 Feb;55(2):583-92. doi: 10.1128/AAC.00076-10. Epub 2010 Nov 29. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2011. PMID: 21115795 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Tedizolid phosphate for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections.Drugs Today (Barc). 2014 Nov;50(11):729-37. doi: 10.1358/dot.2014.50.11.2233783. Drugs Today (Barc). 2014. PMID: 25525633 Review.
Cited by
-
Efficacy and Safety of Tedizolid Phosphate versus Linezolid in a Randomized Phase 3 Trial in Patients with Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infection.Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2019 Jun 24;63(7):e02252-18. doi: 10.1128/AAC.02252-18. Print 2019 Jul. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2019. PMID: 30988146 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
-
Tedizolid phosphate for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections: an evidence-based review of its place in therapy.Core Evid. 2019 Jul 5;14:31-40. doi: 10.2147/CE.S187499. eCollection 2019. Core Evid. 2019. PMID: 31308835 Free PMC article.
-
New Antibiotics for Staphylococcus aureus Infection: An Update from the World Association of Infectious Diseases and Immunological Disorders (WAidid) and the Italian Society of Anti-Infective Therapy (SITA).Antibiotics (Basel). 2023 Apr 12;12(4):742. doi: 10.3390/antibiotics12040742. Antibiotics (Basel). 2023. PMID: 37107104 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Study on the Efficacy and Safety of Tedizolid in Japanese Patients.Antibiotics (Basel). 2024 Dec 23;13(12):1237. doi: 10.3390/antibiotics13121237. Antibiotics (Basel). 2024. PMID: 39766627 Free PMC article.
-
Tedizolid Versus Linezolid for the Treatment of Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Antibiotics (Basel). 2019 Sep 4;8(3):137. doi: 10.3390/antibiotics8030137. Antibiotics (Basel). 2019. PMID: 31487837 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical