Tedizolid 200mg tablets

Oxazolidinone antibiotics-linezolid and tedizolid-are often used to treat multidrug-resistant infections. They are highly bioavailable and ideal for transition to enteral therapy when appropriate. However, multiple associated adverse effects are potentially treatment-limiting. The objective of this review is to discuss relevant adverse effects of linezolid and tedizolid, including serotonin syndrome, myelosuppression, neuropathies, and lactic acidosis, and their commonality in real-world experience in the last decade. Mitigation strategies, including the role of therapeutic drug monitoring, are also discussed.

Abstract licence: CC BY

ABSTRACT Bone and joint infections (BJIs) are common infections increasingly managed with oral therapy. However, there are limited safe oral options for many Gram-positive pathogens. In animal studies and short-term human use, tedizolid lacks the hematologic and neurologic toxicity of the other available oxazolidinone, linezolid. However, there are limited prospective safety data. We conducted an open-label, non-comparative trial of oral tedizolid for BJI treatment. Primary outcomes were safety and cure rate. Eligible patients had a BJI caused by documented or suspected Gram-positive pathogen, required 4–12 weeks of therapy, and did not have myelosuppression or peripheral/optic neuropathy. Subjects underwent weekly evaluation for cytopenias and neuropathy. We enrolled 44 subjects; five were lost to follow-up. Two subjects did not complete planned treatment because of rash ( n = 1) and urgent surgery ( n = 1). Of 37 patients with evaluable outcomes, 17 (46%) had hardware-associated infection, 13 (35%) had osteomyelitis, 5 (14%) had prosthetic joint infection, and 2 (5%) had other BJIs. Median (mean, range) treatment duration was 12 (10.1, 4–12) weeks. There were no cases of cytopenias or peripheral or optic neuropathy. Treatment cure occurred in 13 (35%); 19 (51%) required antibiotic continuation after 12 weeks of tedizolid related to retained hardware at the BJI site, and failure occurred in four (11%), two unlikely, one possibly, and one probably due to tedizolid. We found that oral tedizolid was well tolerated for prolonged BJI treatment without significant toxicity. Clinical failure rate was similar to that of other published BJI investigations. (This study has been registered at Clinicaltrials.gov under identifier NCT03009045.) IMPORTANCE Bone and joint infections are common infections with limited effective and safe oral options for Gram-positive infections. The largest prospective clinical trial of tedizolid therapy for bone and joint infections enrolled 44 patients and tested each in person weekly with detailed safety monitoring including tests for leukopenia, anemia, thrombocytopenia, peripheral neuropathy, and optic neuropathy for up to 12 weeks. Findings demonstrated tedizolid was generally well tolerated and there were no incident cases of cytopenias or neuropathy. Cure rates were similar to that in other bone and joint infection studies. In summary, oral tedizolid appears to be a well-tolerated oral option for Gram-positive bone and joint infections.

Abstract licence: CC BY

Skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) are associated with significant morbidity and healthcare costs, especially when caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). Vancomycin is a preferred antimicrobial therapy for the management of complicated SSTIs (cSSTIs) caused by MRSA, with linezolid and daptomycin regarded as alternative therapeutic options. Due to the increased rates of antimicrobial resistance in MRSA, several new antibiotics with activity against MRSA have been recently introduced in clinical practice, including ceftobiprole, dalbavancin, and tedizolid. We evaluated the in vitro activities of the aforementioned antibiotics against 124 clinical isolates of MRSA obtained from consecutive patients with SSTIs during the study period (2020–2022). Minimum inhibitory concentrations (MICs) for vancomycin, daptomycin, ceftobiprole, dalbavancin, linezolid and tedizolid were evaluated by the MIC Test Strip using Liofilchem strips. We found that when compared to the in vitro activity of vancomycin (MIC90 = 2 μg/mL), dalbavancin possessed the lowest MIC90 (MIC90 = 0.094 μg/mL), followed by tedizolid (MIC90 = 0.38 μg/mL), linezolid, ceftobiprole, and daptomycin (MIC90 = 1 μg/mL). Dalbavancin demonstrated significantly lower MIC50 and MIC90 values compared to vancomycin (0.064 vs. 1 and 0.094 vs. 2, respectively). Tedizolid exhibited an almost threefold greater level of in vitro activity than linezolid, and also had superior in vitro activity compared to ceftobiprole, daptomycin and vancomycin. Multidrug-resistant (MDR) phenotypes were detected among 71.8% of the isolates. In conclusion, ceftobiprole, dalbavancin and tedizolid exhibited potent activity against MRSA and are promising antimicrobials in the management of SSTIs caused by MRSA.

Abstract licence: CC BY

OBJECTIVES: Mycobacterium abscessus is an emerging infection in people living with lung diseases, including cystic fibrosis (CF) and bronchiectasis, and it has limited treatment options and low cure rates. The off-label use of novel antibiotics developed for other bacterial pathogens offers potential new therapeutic options. We aimed to describe the in vitro activity of imipenem, imipenem-relebactam and tedizolid against comparator antibiotics in M. abscessus isolates from Australian patients with and without CF. METHODS: We performed susceptibility testing for imipenem-relebactam, tedizolid and comparator antibiotics by Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) criteria against 102 clinical M. abscessus isolates, including 46 from people with CF. RESULTS: values of 16 and 32 mg/L, respectively, measured. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows lower MICs for imipenem-relebactam and tedizolid compared to other more commonly used antibiotics and supports their consideration in clinical trials for M. abscessus treatment.

Abstract licence: CC BY

Abstract The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the in vitro activity of tedizolid against several clinically significant species of Nocardia by comparing with that of linezolid. A total of 286 isolates of Nocardia species, including 236 clinical isolates recovered from patients in Japan and 50 strains (43 species) purchased from NITE Biological Resource Center, were studied. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing was performed using the broth microdilution method. For the 286 Nocardia isolates, the minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC) 50 and MIC 90 values of tedizolid were 0.25 and 0.5 μg/ml, and those of linezolid were 2 and 2 μg/ml, respectively. The distribution of the linezolid/tedizolid ratios (MICs of linezolid/MICs of tedizolid) showed that tedizolid had four- to eight-fold higher activity than linezolid in 96.1% (275/286) of Nocardia isolates. Both the tedizolid and linezolid MIC 90 values for Nocardia brasiliensis were two-fold higher than those for the other Nocardia species. Both tedizolid and linezolid had low MIC values, 0.25–1 μg/ml and 0.5–4 μg/ml, respectively, even against nine isolates (five species) that were resistant to trimethoprim/sulfamethoxazole. One Nocardia sputorum isolate showed reduced susceptibility to tedizolid (4 μg/ml). Bioinformatics analysis suggests different resistance mechanisms than the oxazolidinone resistance seen in enterococci and staphylococci.

Abstract licence: CC BY