In vitro susceptibility of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolates from skin and soft tissue infections to vancomycin, daptomycin, linezolid and tedizolid

Múnera, Johanna Marcela Vanegas; Ríos, Ana María Ocampo; Montoya-Urrego, Daniela; Jiménez, J. Natalia

doi:10.1016/j.bjid.2017.03.010

Cited by 14 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Among these enrolled RCTs, all MICs of tedizolid against MRSA were ≤0.5 mg/L, and the MIC 90 of tedizolid was only 0.5 mg/L, which was lower than those of linezolid (2–4 mg/L). The similar excellent in vitro activity of tedizolid has been demonstrated in many previous studies [18,19,20,21]. A pooled analysis [18] of eighteen studies showed that the overall in vitro activity of tedizolid against 10,119 MRSA isolates was estimated to be 0.25 mg/L and 0.5 mg/L for MIC 50 and MIC 90 , respectively, and the pooled MRSA susceptibility of tedizolid was estimated at 99.6% (95% CI = 99.5–99.8%).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

Tedizolid Versus Linezolid for the Treatment of Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Lan

Lin

Chang³

et al. 2019

Antibiotics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This meta-analysis aims to assess the efficacy and safety of tedizolid, compared to linezolid, in the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infection (ABSSSI). PubMed, Web of Science, EBSCO (Elton B. Stephens Co.), Cochrane Library, Ovid Medline and Embase databases were accessed until 18 July 2019. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy of tedizolid with linezolid for adult patients with ABSSSIs were included. The outcomes included the clinical response, microbiological response, and risk of adverse events (AEs). A total of four RCTs involving 2056 adult patients with ABSSSI were enrolled. The early clinical response rate was 79.6% and 80.5% for patients receiving tedizolid and linezolid, respectively. The pooled analysis showed that tedizolid had a non-inferior early clinical response rate to linezolid (odds ratio (OR) = 0.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.77–1.19, I2 = 0%). The early response rate was similar between tedizolid and linezolid among patients with cellulitis/erysipelas (75.1% vs. 77.1%; OR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.64–1.27, I2 = 25%), major cutaneous abscess (85.1% vs. 86.8%; OR = 0.93, 95% CI = 0.42–2.03, I2 = 37%) and wound infection (85.9% vs. 82.6%; OR = 1.29, 95% CI = 0.66–2.51, I2 = 45%). For methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus patients, tedizolid had a favorable microbiological response rate of 95.2% which was comparable to linezolid (94%) (OR = 1.19, 95% CI = 0.49–2.90, I2 = 0%). In addition to the similar risk of treatment-emergent AEs (a serious event, the discontinuation of the study drug due to AEs and mortality between tedizolid and linezolid), tedizolid was associated with a lower risk of nausea, vomiting and abnormal neutrophil count than linezolid. In conclusion, once-daily tedizolid (200 mg for six days) compared to linezolid (600 mg twice-daily for 10 days) was non-inferior in efficacy in the treatment of ABSSSI. Besides, tedizolid was generally as well tolerated as linezolid, and had a lower incidence of gastrointestinal AEs and bone marrow suppression than linezolid.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 85%

Tedizolid Versus Linezolid for the Treatment of Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Lan

Lin

Chang³

et al. 2019

Antibiotics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similarly, tedizolid and linezolid minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) of MRSA isolates from ABSSSIs were 0.125–0.5 mg and 0.25–4 mg/L, respectively 16. In another study involving 150 MRSA isolates, tedizolid MICs were two- to five fold lower than those of linezolid 17. Similar results were observed against enterococci,18 as also testified by another study in which the in vitro activity of tedizolid was higher than that of linezolid against 302 MRSA isolates and 220 vancomycin-resistant enterococci 19…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

<p>Tedizolid phosphate for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections: an evidence-based review of its place in therapy</p>

Bassetti¹,

Castaldo²,

Carnelutti³

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Tedizolid phosphate is an oxazolidinone approved for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections (ABSSSIs) and active against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus . Aims The objective of this article was to review the evidence for the efficacy and safety of tedizolid phosphate for the treatment of ABSSSI. Evidence review Approval of tedizolid phosphate for the treatment of ABSSSI was based on the results of two phase III randomized controlled trials, ESTABLISH-1 (NCT01170221) and ESTABLISH-2 (NCT01421511), comparing 6-day once-daily tedizolid vs 10-day twice-daily linezolid. In ESTABLISH-1, noninferiority was met with early clinical response rates of 79.5% and 79.4% in tedizolid and linezolid groups, respectively (difference 0.1%, 95% CI –6.1% to 6.2%, with a 10% noninferiority margin). In ESTABLISH-2, noninferiority was met with 85% and 83% rates of early clinical response in tedizolid and linezolid groups, respectively (difference 2.6%, 95% CI –3.0% to 8.2%). Pooled data from ESTABLISH-1 and ESTABLISH-2 indicated a lower frequency of thrombocytopenia in tedizolid-treated than in linezolid-treated patients. Conclusion Tedizolid offers the option of an intravenous to oral switch, allows once-daily administration, and presents lower risk of myelotoxicity when a 6-day course is used for the treatment of ABSSSI. Greater economic cost associated with this antibiotic could be offset by its shorter treatment duration and possibility of oral administration in routine clinical practice, although either sponsored or nonsponsored postmarketing observational experience remains essential for ultimately confirming the effectiveness and tolerability of tedizolid outside clinical trials.

show abstract

“…aureus tem emergido na comunidade e aumentando tanto a frequência quanto à gravidade de infecções causadas por esta bactéria(RICHARDSON et al, 2019). De fato, níveis alarmantes de resistência já são detectados em algumas localizações, e alguns isolados de S. aureus possuem resistência para fármacos considerados como de última escolha, como a vancomicina (OLUFUNMISO; TOLULOPE;ROGER, 2017;VANEGAS MUNERA et al, 2017).…”

unclassified

Verificação Da Temperatura De Distribuição De Refeições Quentes Ofertadas Em Uma Instituição De Longa Permanência Para Idosos E a Correlação Com O Crescimento Microbiológico

Souza¹,

Pinto²,

Sobrinho³

et al. 2019

Pesquisa Científica E Tecnológica Em Microbiologia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Todo o conteúdo deste livro está licenciado sob uma Licença de Atribuição Creative Commons. Atribuição 4.0 Internacional (CC BY 4.0).O conteúdo dos artigos e seus dados em sua forma, correção e confiabilidade são de responsabilidade exclusiva dos autores. Permitido o download da obra e o compartilhamento desde que sejam atribuídos créditos aos autores, mas sem a possibilidade de alterá-la de nenhuma forma ou utilizá-la para fins comerciais.

show abstract

In vitro susceptibility of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolates from skin and soft tissue infections to vancomycin, daptomycin, linezolid and tedizolid

Cited by 14 publications

References 43 publications

Tedizolid Versus Linezolid for the Treatment of Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Tedizolid Versus Linezolid for the Treatment of Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

<p>Tedizolid phosphate for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections: an evidence-based review of its place in therapy</p>

Verificação Da Temperatura De Distribuição De Refeições Quentes Ofertadas Em Uma Instituição De Longa Permanência Para Idosos E a Correlação Com O Crescimento Microbiológico

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About