2234. Outcomes by Age and Gender from a Global Phase 3 Study of Delafloxacin (DLX) in Community-Acquired Bacterial Pneumonia (CABP)

Abstract Background Delafloxacin (DLX) is a fluoroquinolone, approved in the United States for treatment of ABSSSI. DLX has no preclinical signals for QT prolongation and has no QT prolongation in a validated challenge study. Risk of QT prolongation is a consideration in antibiotic selection for elderly hospitalized CABP patients. A Phase 3 CABP trial with DLX was analyzed with a focus on age and gender. Methods Data on age and gender were reviewed from a multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial of adults with CABP. Patients were randomized 1:1 to DLX or moxifloxacin (MOX) treatment for 5–10 days. Patients received a minimum of 3 days of IV treatment, then were switched to oral at MD discretion. A key clinical endpoint was the investigator-assessment at Test of Cure (TOC) 5–10 days after the end of treatment. Clinical success was defined as complete or near resolution of signs and symptoms and no further antibiotics needed Results In the overall study, 859 patients were randomized with a mean age of 60 years (55.5% <65, 44.5% ≥65, 21.2% ≥75; range 18–93); 58.7% were male; 25.4% and 1.4% were PORT class IV and V; 28.6% multi-lobar pneumonia. Table shows the comparison of DLX and MOX clinical response at TOC in the Intent to Treat (ITT) population. Overall, DLX was well tolerated, with similar related adverse events (AE) between treatment groups regardless of age (< 65: 16.7% DLX, 13.3% MOX; ≥ 65: 13.4% DLX, 11.7% MOX) or gender (male: 16.0% DLX, 11.1% MOX; female 14.0% DLX, 14.9% MOX). The most common treatment-related AEs for DLX were diarrhea and transaminase elevations which were mild-to-moderate and did not routinely lead to discontinuation. There were no reports of potential QT prolongation on DLX. Conclusion Based on age and gender, DLX had comparable outcomes to MOX in clinical success at TOC. DLX was also well tolerated regardless of age or gender. DLX may offer a promising alternative in the treatment of CABP including elderly patients. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.

Download Full-text

2228. Treatment of Community-Acquired Bacterial Pneumonia (CABP) in Patients with Diabetes: Outcomes from a Global Phase 3 Study of Delafloxacin (DLX)

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofz360.1906 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 6 (Supplement_2) ◽

pp. S761-S761

Author(s):

Igor Kaidashev ◽

Mimi Nitu ◽

Monica Popescu ◽

Laura Lawrence ◽

Megan Quintas ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Clinical Symptoms ◽

Clinical Success ◽

Signs And Symptoms ◽

Patient Characteristics ◽

Qt Prolongation ◽

Phase 3 ◽

Double Blind ◽

Challenge Study ◽

Patients With Diabetes ◽

Intent To Treat

Abstract Background Delafloxacin (DLX) is an IV/oral anionic fluoroquinolone with no QT restrictions. It is approved for the treatment of serious skin infections including those due to MRSA and Gram-negative pathogens. A Phase 3 trial of patients with CABP was recently completed comparing DLX to moxifloxacin (MOX), including patients with diabetes (DM). Methods Multicenter, randomized, double-blind trial of adults with CABP with at least 2 clinical symptoms; physical signs; and radiographic evidence of pneumonia. Patients were randomized 1:1 to DLX or MOX treatment for 5–10 days. Patients received a minimum of 3 days of IV treatment, then were switched to oral at MD discretion. Key endpoints were the Early Clinical Response (ECR) at 96 ±24h and the investigator assessment of response at Test of Cure (TOC) 5–10 days after last dose in the Intent to Treat population. Clinical success was defined as complete or near resolution of signs and symptoms and no further antibiotics needed per investigator assessment. Results 131 DM patients were randomized. Patient characteristics: 59% male; mean age 66 (26% ≥ age 75); 40% PORT class IV/V; 29% multi-lobar pneumonia. Bacterial pathogens were identified in 59% at baseline. Patients received treatment ~8.5 days. DLX was comparable to MOX in patients with DM, with response at ECR 90% DLX vs. 88.5% MOX [1.5 (95% CI -9.6, 13.2)] as well as Clinical Success at TOC 87.1% DLX vs. 86.9% MOX [0.3 (95% CI −11.6, 12.7)]. The overall % of DM patients with at least one treatment-related adverse event (AE) was 18.6% DLX and 11.7% MOX. The most frequent treatment-related adverse events were gastrointestinal in nature including diarrhea seen in 6 DLX and 2 MOX patients.There were 3 DLX and 2 MOX deaths of patients with DM during the study (up to Day 28), unrelated to treatment. There were no cases of C diff in these patients. There were no reports of hypoglycemia on DLX. There was one discontinuation of treatment due to a related AE in each treatment group. Conclusion IV/oral DLX was comparable to IV/oral MOX for treatment of CABP in patients with diabetes. DLX has no preclinical signals for QT prolongation and has no QT prolongation in a validated challenge study. There were no events of hypoglycemia. DLX appears effective and well tolerated in patients with diabetes and CABP. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.

Download Full-text

P148 LACK OF INFLUENCE OF ELDERLY AGE AND GENDER ON THE SAFETY PROFILE OF BUDESONIDE EXTENDED-RELEASE TABLETS FOR ULCERATIVE COLITIS: A POOLED ANALYSIS OF TWO RANDOMIZED, DOUBLE-BLIND, PHASE 3 TRIALS

Gastroenterology ◽

10.1053/j.gastro.2017.11.197 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 154 (1) ◽

pp. S78

Author(s):

Gary R. Lichtenstein ◽

Zeev Heimanson ◽

Brian P. Bosworth

Keyword(s):

Ulcerative Colitis ◽

Safety Profile ◽

Extended Release ◽

Pooled Analysis ◽

Elderly Age ◽

Phase 3 ◽

Double Blind ◽

Age And Gender ◽

And Gender

Download Full-text

2289. Bacterial Causes of Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infections (ABSSSI) in Patients with Intravenous Drug Use (IVDU): Phase 3 REVIVE Studies

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofz360.1967 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 6 (Supplement_2) ◽

pp. S784-S785

Author(s):

David B Huang ◽

Stephanie S Noviello ◽

Barbara Balser ◽

Amy E Scaramucci ◽

Eve Desplats ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Surgical Intervention ◽

Signs And Symptoms ◽

The United States ◽

Lesion Size ◽

Intravenous Drug Use ◽

Wound Edge ◽

Phase 3 ◽

Double Blind ◽

Baseline Characteristics ◽

Post Hoc

Abstract Background Opioid addiction in the United States has reached epidemic proportions threatening public health. This analysis evaluates the baseline characteristics and bacterial causes of ABSSSI in patients who were IVDU from two parallel Phase 3 trials comparing the treatment of iclaprim with vancomycin. Methods A total of 621 patients who were IVDU from two parallel Phase 3, double-blind, randomized (1:1), active-controlled, multinational, multicenter trials (REVIVE-1 and REVIVE-2) were analyzed both separately and pooled. This post-hoc analysis summarizes the baseline bacterial causes of ABSSSI identified among IVDU. Per protocol, ABSSSI (major abscesses, cellulitis, or wound infections) were defined as having either the presence of purulent or seropurulent drainage before or after surgical intervention of the wound or at least 3 of the following signs and symptoms: discharge, erythema (extending at least 2 cm beyond the wound edge in any direction), swelling and/or induration, heat and/or localized warmth, and/or pain and/or tenderness to palpation. IVDU was defined based on subjected-reported medical history. At the baseline visit, ABSSSI were sampled for microbiological culture. Cultures were performed locally, and isolates were submitted to the central microbiology laboratory. Results Among IVDU with ABSSSI, average age was 44 years, 67.6% were male, average lesion size was 322 cm2, 10.8% had abnormal renal function (CrCl ≤ 90 mL/minute), and 3.9% had bacteremia. The bacterial causes of ABSSSI among IVDU are shown in the Table. Conclusion IVDU, a growing population, are vulnerable to ABSSSI. S. aureus, including MRSA, and S. anginosus group were the most commonly identified bacterial causes of ABSSSI in patients who are IVDU. Therefore, antibiotic selection should cover these bacteria among IVDU who present with an ABSSSI. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.

Download Full-text

470. Treatment of Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infections (ABSSSI) in Patients with Significant Drug Abuse: Outcomes from Global Phase 3 Studies of Delafloxacin (DLX)

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofz360.543 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 6 (Supplement_2) ◽

pp. S230-S230 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

J Scott Overcash ◽

William O’Riordan ◽

Megan Quintas ◽

Laura Lawrence ◽

Carol Tseng ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Substance Abuse ◽

Objective Response ◽

The United States ◽

Lesion Size ◽

Fixed Dose ◽

Phase 3 ◽

Double Blind ◽

Intent To Treat ◽

To Receive

Abstract Background Delafloxacin (DLX), an IV/oral anionic fluoroquinolone antibiotic, is approved for the treatment of ABSSSI including those due to MRSA and Gram-negative pathogens including P. aeruginosa. Two global phase 3 ABSSSI trials included patients with substance abuse including IV drugs. Methods Two multicenter, double-blind, double-dummy trials of adults with ABSSSI randomized patients 1:1 to receive either DLX monotherapy or vancomycin 15 mg/kg + aztreonam (VANAZ) for 5–14 days. Study 302 used DLX 300 mg BID IV only; study 303 used DLX 300 mg BID IV for 3 days with a mandatory blinded switch to DLX 450 mg oral BID. Key endpoints were Objective Response at 48–72 hours with ≥20% reduction in lesion size, and Investigator assessment of outcome at Follow-up (FU, Day 14), both in the Intent To Treat population. Results In the 2 studies, 620 patients with substance abuse, excluding alcoholism, including heroin, cocaine and methamphetamine abuse, were randomized in the United States. 71% were male with mean age 44 years. Average erythema area at baseline was ~230 cm2. 16% percent had cellulitis, 30% abscesses, and 53% wound. S. aureus (SA) was the most frequent pathogen. DLX was non-inferior to VANAZ for the Objective Response: 85.9% DLX vs. 84.4% VANAZ [∆2.6 (95% CI −2.9, 8.1)] as well as the assessment of outcome at FU: 82.0% DLX vs. 79.3% VANAZ [∆3.2 95% (CI −3, 9.4)]. Micro success in evaluable patients with SA was seen in 99.1% DLX vs. 100% VANAZ as well as 98.2% DLX vs. 100% VANAZ in patients with MRSA. The overall % of patients with at least one adverse event (AE) was comparable for DLX (49.0%) compared with VANAZ (56.1%). The most frequent treatment-related AEs were gastrointestinal in nature, including nausea seen in 9.7% DLX and 5.8% VANAZ patients, primarily mild to moderate in severity. There were no cases of C.difficile diarrhea. Discontinuations due to treatment-related AEs were lower with DLX (0.3%) compared with VANAZ (2.2%). Conclusion Fixed-dose monotherapyDLX was comparable to VANAZ in treatment of ABSSSI in patients with substance abuse based on the Objective Response as well as investigator-assessed outcome. DLX was also comparable to VANAZ in treating patients with SA and MRSA. DLX appears effective and well tolerated in patients with ABSSSI and significant substance abuse. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.

Download Full-text

A Phase-3 Study to Compare Delafloxacin to Moxifloxacin for the Treatment of Adults with Community-acquired Bacterial Pneumonia (DEFINE-CABP)

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofz514 ◽

2019 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

Juan P Horcajada ◽

Robert A Salata ◽

Rodolfo Álvarez-Sala ◽

Floarea Mimi Nitu ◽

Laura Lawrence ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Clinical Response ◽

Bacterial Pneumonia ◽

Study Drug ◽

The United States ◽

Efficacy And Safety ◽

Success Rates ◽

Phase 3 ◽

Double Blind ◽

Atypical Pathogens ◽

Intent To Treat

Abstract Background The clinical and economic burden of community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP) is significant and is anticipated to increase as the population ages and pathogens become more resistant. Delafloxacin is a fluoroquinolone antibiotic approved in the United States for the treatment of adults with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections. Delafloxacin’s shape and charge profile uniquely impacts its spectrum of activity and side effect profile. This phase 3 study compared the efficacy and safety of delafloxacin to moxifloxacin for the treatment of CABP. Methods A randomized, double-blind, comparator-controlled, multicenter, global Phase 3 study compared the efficacy and safety of delafloxacin 300 mg BID or moxifloxacin 400 mg QD in adults with CABP. The primary endpoint was early clinical response (ECR) defined as improvement at 96 (± 24) hours after first dose of study drug. Clinical response at test of cure (TOC) and microbiologic response were also assessed. Results In the intent-to-treat analysis population (ITT), ECR rates were 88.9% in the delafloxacin group and 89.0% in the moxifloxacin group. Noninferiority of delafloxacin compared with moxifloxacin was demonstrated. At TOC in the ITT population, the success rates were similar between groups. Treatment-emergent adverse events considered at least possibly related to the study drug occurred in 65 subjects (15.2%) in the delafloxacin group and 54 (12.6%) in the moxifloxacin group. Conclusions IV/oral delafloxacin monotherapy is effective and well tolerated in the treatment of adults with CABP, providing coverage for grampositive, gramnegative, and atypical pathogens.

Download Full-text

2841. A Phase 3, Randomized, Double-Blind Study Comparing Tedizolid Phosphate (TZD) and Linezolid (LZD) for Treatment of Ventilated Gram-Positive (G+) Nosocomial Pneumonia

Open Forum Infectious Diseases ◽

10.1093/ofid/ofz359.146 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 6 (Supplement_2) ◽

pp. S67-S67

Author(s):

Richard G Wunderink ◽

Antoine Roquilly ◽

Martin Croce ◽

Daniel Rodriguez Gonzalez ◽

Satoshi Fujimi ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Clinical Response ◽

Clinical Laboratory ◽

Clinical Success ◽

Incidence Rates ◽

Double Blind Study ◽

Phase 3 ◽

Double Blind ◽

Intent To Treat ◽

Hospital Acquired

Abstract Background Hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) and ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) are frequently caused by G+ cocci; TZD has potent in vitro activity against these pathogens, including methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). The VITAL study compared the efficacy and safety of TZD vs. LZD for the treatment of ventilated patients with G+ HAP/VAP. Methods Randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, global, phase 3 study in mechanically ventilated adult patients with presumed G+ HAP/VAP (clinicaltrials.gov NCT02019420). Patients were stratified by region, age, and trauma/nontrauma, then randomized 1:1 to intravenous (IV) TZD 200 mg once daily for 7 days or IV LZD 600 mg every 12 h for 10 d (patients with concurrent G+ bacteremia received 14 d of treatment). The primary efficacy endpoint was day 28 all-cause mortality (ACM) in the intent to treat (ITT) population (all randomized patients; noninferiority [NI] margin, 10%). Secondary endpoints included investigator-assessed clinical response at test of cure (TOC; NI margin, 12.5%). Results In total, 726 patients were randomized (TZD n = 366; LZD n = 360). Baseline characteristics were well balanced between arms. TZD was noninferior to LZD for day 28 ACM in the ITT (table). Noninferiority was not demonstrated for TZD vs. LZD for investigator-assessed clinical success at TOC in the ITT. Stratification factors, analysis population, baseline clinical/laboratory signs of HAP/VAP, G+ only vs. mixed G+/gram-negative (G–) HAP/VAP, adjunctive G– therapy, MRSA vs. methicillin-susceptible S. aureus, and HAP vs. VAP were evaluated, and no single factor accounted for the observed imbalance in clinical response between treatment arms. Greater than 90% of patients experienced treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Anemia, hypokalemia, and diarrhea were the most frequently reported (TEAEs) in both arms. Types and incidence rates of TEAEs overall, and of drug-related TEAEs specifically, were comparable between TZD and LZD. Conclusion TZD was noninferior to LZD for day 28 ACM in the treatment of ventilated G+ HAP/VAP. However, TZD was not noninferior to LZD based on the investigator-assessed clinical response at TOC. Both drugs were similarly well tolerated and TEAEs were well balanced between groups, with no new safety signals identified. Disclosures All Authors: No reported Disclosures.

Download Full-text