Perspectives on synthetic pharmacotherapy for the treatment of nosocomial pneumonia

References

• Organization WH. The top 10 causes of death. The 10 leading causes of death in the world, 2000 and 2012. 2014. [cited 2018 Nov 10]. Available from: http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs310/en/
   Google Scholar
• Kollef MH, Shorr A, Tabak YP, et al. Epidemiology and outcomes of health-care-associated pneumonia: results from a large US database of culture-positive pneumonia. Chest. 2005;128(6):3854–3862.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kollef MH, Morrow LE, Niederman MS, et al. Clinical characteristics and treatment patterns among patients with ventilator-associated pneumonia. Chest. 2006;129(5):1210–1218.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rello J, Ollendorf DA, Oster G, et al. Epidemiology and outcomes of ventilator-associated pneumonia in a large US database. Chest. 2002;122(6):2115–2121.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kalil AC, Metersky ML, Klompas M, et al. Management of adults with hospital-acquired and ventilator-associated Pneumonia: 2016 clinical practice guidelines by the infectious diseases society of America and the American thoracic society. Clin Infect Dis. 2016;63(5):e61–e111.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kollef MH, Hamilton CW, Ernst FR. Economic impact of ventilator-associated pneumonia in a large matched cohort. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2012;33(3):250–256.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Niederman MS, Chastre J, Solem CT, et al. Health economic evaluation of patients treated for nosocomial pneumonia caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: secondary analysis of a multicenter randomized clinical trial of vancomycin and linezolid. Clin Ther. 2014;36(9):1233–1243 e1231.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vincent JL, Bassetti M, Francois B, et al. Advances in antibiotic therapy in the critically ill. Crit Care. 2016;20(1):133.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roberts KL, Micek ST, Juang P, et al. Controversies and advances in the management of ventilator associated pneumonia. Expert Rev Respir Med. 2017;11(11):875–884.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rello J, Ulldemolins M, Lisboa T, et al. Determinants of prescription and choice of empirical therapy for hospital-acquired and ventilator-associated pneumonia. Eur Respir J. 2011;37(6):1332–1339.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ferrer M, Difrancesco LF, Liapikou A, et al. Polymicrobial intensive care unit-acquired pneumonia: prevalence, microbiology and outcome. Crit Care. 2015;19:450.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jones RN. Microbial etiologies of hospital-acquired bacterial pneumonia and ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia. Clin Infect Dis. 2010;51(Suppl 1):S81–87.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chung DR, Song JH, Kim SH, et al. High prevalence of multidrug-resistant nonfermenters in hospital-acquired pneumonia in Asia. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2011;184(12):1409–1417.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandiumenge A, Lisboa T, Gomez F, et al. Effect of antibiotic diversity on ventilator-associated pneumonia caused by ESKAPE organisms. Chest. 2011;140(3):643–651.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vincent JL, Rello J, Marshall J, et al. International study of the prevalence and outcomes of infection in intensive care units. Jama. 2009;302(21):2323–2329.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Surveillance of antimicrobial resistance in Europe – Annual report of the European Antimicrobial Resistance Surveillance Network (EARS-Net). Stockholm: ECDC; 2017.
   Google Scholar
• Tong SY, Davis JS, Eichenberger E, et al. Staphylococcus aureus infections: epidemiology, pathophysiology, clinical manifestations, and management. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2015;28(3):603–661.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gould K. Antibiotics: from prehistory to the present day. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2016;71(3):572–575.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cooper MA, Shlaes D. Fix the antibiotics pipeline. Nature. 2011;472(7341):32.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hancock RE. The bacterial outer membrane as a drug barrier. Trends Microbiol. 1997;5(1):37–42.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fischbach MA, Walsh CT. Antibiotics for emerging pathogens. Science. 2009;325(5944):1089–1093.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lewis K. Platforms for antibiotic discovery. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2013;12(5):371–387.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boguski MS, Mandl KD, Sukhatme VP. Drug discovery. Repurposing with a difference. Science. 2009;324(5933):1394–1395.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singh SB, Young K, Miesel L. Screening strategies for discovery of antibacterial natural products. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther. 2011;9(8):589–613.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. Antibacterial agents in clinical development: an analysis of the antibacterial clinical development pipeline, including tuberculosis. Geneva: World Hearth Organization; 2017. Available from: www.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/258965/WHO-EMP-IAU-2017.11-eng.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Burdette SD, Trotman R. Tedizolid: the first once-daily oxazolidinone class antibiotic. Clin Infect Dis. 2015;61(8):1315–1321.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prokocimer P, Bien P, Deanda C, et al. In vitro activity and microbiological efficacy of tedizolid (TR-700) against Gram-positive clinical isolates from a phase 2 study of oral tedizolid phosphate (TR-701) in patients with complicated skin and skin structure infections. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2012;56(9):4608–4613.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sahm DF, Deane J, Bien PA, et al. Results of the surveillance of Tedizolid activity and resistance program: in vitro susceptibility of gram-positive pathogens collected in 2011 and 2012 from the United States and Europe. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2015;81(2):112–118.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schaadt R, Sweeney D, Shinabarger D, et al. In vitro activity of TR-700, the active ingredient of the antibacterial prodrug TR-701, a novel oxazolidinone antibacterial agent. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2009;53(8):3236–3239.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaw KJ, Poppe S, Schaadt R, et al. In vitro activity of TR-700, the antibacterial moiety of the prodrug TR-701, against linezolid-resistant strains. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2008;52(12):4442–4447.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodriguez-Avial I, Culebras E, Betriu C, et al. In vitro activity of tedizolid (TR-700) against linezolid-resistant staphylococci. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2012;67(1):167–169.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute. Development of in vitro susceptibility testing criteria and quality control parameters; approved guideline-4th ed. M23-A3. Wayne, PA: Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; 2016.
   Google Scholar
• The European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing. Breakpoint tables for interpretation of MICs and zone diameters, version 8.1, 2018. [cited 2018 Nov 20]. Available from: http://www.eucast.org/clinical_breakpoints/
   Google Scholar
• Lepak AJ, Marchillo K, Pichereau S, et al. Comparative pharmacodynamics of the new oxazolidinone tedizolid phosphate and linezolid in a neutropenic murine Staphylococcus aureus pneumonia model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2012;56(11):5916–5922.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaku N, Morinaga Y, Takeda K, et al. Antimicrobial and immunomodulatory effects of tedizolid against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in a murine model of hematogenous pulmonary infection. Int J Med Microbiol. 2016;306(6):421–428.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flanagan S, Passarell J, Lu Q, et al. Tedizolid population pharmacokinetics, exposure response, and target attainment. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2014;58(11):6462–6470.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flanagan SD, Bien PA, Munoz KA, et al. Pharmacokinetics of tedizolid following oral administration: single and multiple dose, effect of food, and comparison of two solid forms of the prodrug. Pharmacotherapy. 2014;34(3):240–250.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Housman ST, Pope JS, Russomanno J, et al. Pulmonary disposition of tedizolid following administration of once-daily oral 200-milligram tedizolid phosphate in healthy adult volunteers. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2012;56(5):2627–2634.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Laue H, Valensise T, Seguin A, et al. In vitro bactericidal activity of iclaprim in human plasma. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2009;53(10):4542–4544.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sincak CA, Schmidt JM. Iclaprim, a novel diaminopyrimidine for the treatment of resistant gram-positive infections. Ann Pharmacother. 2009;43(6):1107–1114.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hoover R, Hunt T, Benedict M, et al. Safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetic properties of intravenous delafloxacin after single and multiple doses in healthy volunteers. Clin Ther. 2016;38(1):53–65.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dale GE, Halabi A, Petersen-Sylla M, et al. Pharmacokinetics, tolerability, and safety of murepavadin, a novel antipseudomonal antibiotic, in subjects with mild, moderate, or severe renal function impairment. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2018;62(9).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prokocimer P, De Anda C, Fang E, et al. Tedizolid phosphate vs linezolid for treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections: the ESTABLISH-1 randomized trial. Jama. 2013;309(6):559–569.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moran GJ, Fang E, Corey GR, et al. Tedizolid for 6 days versus linezolid for 10 days for acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections (ESTABLISH-2): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3, non-inferiority trial. Lancet Infect Dis. 2014;14(8):696–705.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xiao XY, Hunt DK, Zhou J, et al. Fluorocyclines. 1. 7-fluoro-9-pyrrolidinoacetamido-6-demethyl-6-deoxytetracycline: a potent, broad spectrum antibacterial agent. J Med Chem. 2012;55(2):597–605.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sutcliffe JA, O’Brien W, Fyfe C, et al. Antibacterial activity of eravacycline (TP-434), a novel fluorocycline, against hospital and community pathogens. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2013;57(11):5548–5558.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Abdallah M, Olafisoye O, Cortes C, et al. Activity of eravacycline against enterobacteriaceae and acinetobacter baumannii, including multidrug-resistant isolates, from New York City. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2015;59(3):1802–1805.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Livermore DM, Mushtaq S, Warner M, et al. In vitro activity of eravacycline against carbapenem-resistant enterobacteriaceae and acinetobacter baumannii. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2016;60(6):3840–3844.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhanel GG, Baxter MR, Adam HJ, et al. In vitro activity of eravacycline against 2213 Gram-negative and 2424 Gram-positive bacterial pathogens isolated in Canadian hospital laboratories: CANWARD surveillance study 2014-2015. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2018;91(1):55–62.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grossman TH, Murphy TM, Slee AM, et al. Eravacycline (TP-434) is efficacious in animal models of infection. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2015;59(5):2567–2571.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Connors KP, Housman ST, Pope JS, et al. Phase I, open-label, safety and pharmacokinetic study to assess bronchopulmonary disposition of intravenous eravacycline in healthy men and women. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2014;58(4):2113–2118.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Solomkin J, Evans D, Slepavicius A, et al. Assessing the efficacy and safety of eravacycline vs ertapenem in complicated intra-abdominal infections in the investigating gram-negative infections treated with eravacycline (IGNITE 1) trial: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA Surg. 2017;152(3):224–232.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Solomkin JS, Ramesh MK, Cesnauskas G, et al. Phase 2, randomized, double-blind study of the efficacy and safety of two dose regimens of eravacycline versus ertapenem for adult community-acquired complicated intra-abdominal infections. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2014;58(4):1847–1854.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• U.S. Food and Drug Administration. XERAVA (eravacycline) Full Prescribing Information. [cited 2018 Nov 24]. Available from: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2018/211109lbl.pdf
   Google Scholar
• EMA. Xerava: product information. European Medicines Agency. Ed. 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Tetraphase Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Tetraphase announces top-line results from IGNITE3 phase 3 clinical trial of eravacycline in complicated urinary tract infections (CUTI). Globe Newswire. [cited 2018 Nov 06]. Available from: https://ir.tphase.com/news-releases/news-release-details/tetraphase-announces-top-line-results-ignite3-phase-3-clinical. Published on February 13, 2018.
   Google Scholar
• Sader HS, Fritsche TR, Jones RN. Potency and bactericidal activity of iclaprim against recent clinical gram-positive isolates. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2009;53(5):2171–2175.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hawser S, Lociuro S, Islam K. Dihydrofolate reductase inhibitors as antibacterial agents. Biochem Pharmacol. 2006;71(7):941–948.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oefner C, Bandera M, Haldimann A, et al. Increased hydrophobic interactions of iclaprim with Staphylococcus aureus dihydrofolate reductase are responsible for the increase in affinity and antibacterial activity. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2009;63(4):687–698.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang DB, File TM Jr., Dryden M, et al. Surveillance of iclaprim activity: in vitro susceptibility of gram-positive pathogens collected from 2012 to 2014 from the United States, Asia Pacific, Latin American and Europe. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2018;90(4):329–334.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Park JH, Craig W, Marchillo K, et al. Identification of the in vivo pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamic driver of iclaprim. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2018;62(4).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lodise TP, Bosso J, Kelly C, et al. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analyses to determine the optimal fixed dosing regimen of iclaprim for treatment of patients with serious infections caused by gram-positive pathogens. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2018;62(2):e01184-17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang DB, File TM Jr., Torres A, et al. A phase II randomized, double-blind, multicenter study to evaluate efficacy and safety of intravenous iclaprim versus vancomycin for the treatment of nosocomial pneumonia suspected or confirmed to be due to gram-positive pathogens. Clin Ther. 2017;39(8):1706–1718.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holland TL, O’Riordan W, McManus A, et al. A phase 3, randomized, double-blind, multicenter study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of intravenous iclaprim versus vancomycin for treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections suspected or confirmed to be due to gram-positive pathogens (REVIVE-2 study). Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2018;62(5)e02580-17.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang DB, O’Riordan W, Overcash JS, et al. A phase 3, randomized, double-blind, multicenter study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of intravenous iclaprim vs vancomycin for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections suspected or confirmed to be due to gram-positive pathogens: REVIVE-1. Clin Infect Dis. 2018;66(8):1222–1229.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shorr AF, Susla GB, Kollef MH. Quinolones for treatment of nosocomial pneumonia: a meta-analysis. Clin Infect Dis. 2005;40(Suppl 2):S115–122.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Remy JM, Tow-Keogh CA, McConnell TS, et al. Activity of delafloxacin against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: resistance selection and characterization. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2012;67(12):2814–2820.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Almer LS, Hoffrage JB, Keller EL, et al. In vitro and bactericidal activities of ABT-492, a novel fluoroquinolone, against Gram-positive and Gram-negative organisms. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2004;48(7):2771–2777.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pfaller MA, Sader HS, Rhomberg PR, et al. In vitro activity of delafloxacin against contemporary bacterial pathogens from the United States and Europe, 2014. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2017;61(4).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thabit AK, Crandon JL, Nicolau DP. Pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic profiling of delafloxacin in a murine lung model against community-acquired respiratory tract pathogens. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2016;48(5):535–541.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dawe RS, Ferguson J, Ibbotson S, et al. Lack of phototoxicity potential with delafloxacin in healthy male and female subjects: comparison to lomefloxacin. Photochem Photobiol Sci. 2018;17(6):773–780.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Riordan W, McManus A, Teras J, et al. A comparison of the efficacy and safety of intravenous followed by oral delafloxacin with vancomycin plus aztreonam for the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections: a phase 3, multinational, double-blind, randomized study. Clin Infect Dis. 2018;67(5):657–666.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pullman J, Gardovskis J, Farley B, et al. Efficacy and safety of delafloxacin compared with vancomycin plus aztreonam for acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections: a Phase 3, double-blind, randomized study. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2017;72(12):3471–3480.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• FDA US, Ed. Baxdela [package insert]. Lincolnshire (IL): Melinta Therapeutics, Inc;2017.
   Google Scholar
• Kang HK, Kim C, Seo CH, et al. The therapeutic applications of antimicrobial peptides (AMPs): a patent review. J Microbiol. 2017;55(1):1–12.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yeaman MR, Yount NY. Mechanisms of antimicrobial peptide action and resistance. Pharmacol Rev. 2003;55(1):27–55.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phoenix DA, Dennison SR, Harris F. Antimicrobial peptides. Weinheim, Germany: Wiley-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Zasloff M. Antimicrobial peptides of multicellular organisms. Nature. 2002;415(6870):389–395.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boto A, Perez de la Lastra JM, Gonzalez CC. The road from host-defense peptides to a new generation of antimicrobial drugs. Molecules. 2018;23(2):e311.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bommarius B, Jenssen H, Elliott M, et al. Cost-effective expression and purification of antimicrobial and host defense peptides in Escherichia coli. Peptides. 2010;31(11):1957–1965.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mishra B, Reiling S, Zarena D, et al. Host defense antimicrobial peptides as antibiotics: design and application strategies. Curr Opin Chem Biol. 2017;38:87–96.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rudilla H, Fuste E, Cajal Y, et al. Synergistic antipseudomonal effects of synthetic peptide AMP38 and carbapenems. Molecules. 2016;21(9):e1223.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Zoysa GH, Cameron AJ, Hegde VV, et al. Antimicrobial peptides with potential for biofilm eradication: synthesis and structure activity relationship studies of battacin peptides. J Med Chem. 2015;58(2):625–639.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de la Fuente-Nunez C, Silva ON, Lu TK, et al. Antimicrobial peptides: role in human disease and potential as immunotherapies. Pharmacol Ther. 2017;178:132–140.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Falagas ME, Michalopoulos A. Polymyxins: old antibiotics are back. Lancet. 2006;367(9511):633–634.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mohamed MF, Abdelkhalek A, Seleem MN. Evaluation of short synthetic antimicrobial peptides for treatment of drug-resistant and intracellular Staphylococcus aureus. Sci Rep. 2016;6:29707.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kollef M, Pittet D, Sanchez Garcia M, et al. A randomized double-blind trial of iseganan in prevention of ventilator-associated pneumonia. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2006;173(1):91–97.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giles FJ, Redman R, Yazji S, et al. Iseganan HCl: a novel antimicrobial agent. Expert Opin Investig Drugs. 2002;11(8):1161–1170.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Srinivas N, Jetter P, Ueberbacher BJ, et al. Peptidomimetic antibiotics target outer-membrane biogenesis in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Science. 2010;327(5968):1010–1013.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Werneburg M, Zerbe K, Juhas M, et al. Inhibition of lipopolysaccharide transport to the outer membrane in Pseudomonas aeruginosa by peptidomimetic antibiotics. Chembiochem. 2012;13(12):1767–1775.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Magill SS, Edwards JR, Fridkin SK. Emerging infections program healthcare-associated I, antimicrobial use prevalence survey T. Survey of health care-associated infections. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(26):2542–2543.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Sader HS, Flamm RK, Dale GE, et al. Murepavadin activity tested against contemporary (2016-17) clinical isolates of XDR Pseudomonas aeruginosa. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2018;73(9):2400–2404.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wach A, Dembowsky K, Dale GE. Pharmacokinetics and safety of intravenous murepavadin infusion in healthy adult subjects administered single and multiple ascending doses. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2018;62(4):e02355-17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin-Loeches I, Dale GE, Torres A. Murepavadin: a new antibiotic class in the pipeline. Expert Rev Anti Infect Ther. 2018;16(4):259–268.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Melchers MJ, Teague J, Warn P, et al. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of murepavadin in neutropenic mouse models. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2019;63(3):e01699-18.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cassini A, Hogberg LD, Plachouras D, et al. Attributable deaths and disability-adjusted life-years caused by infections with antibiotic-resistant bacteria in the EU and the European economic area in 2015: a population-level modelling analysis. Lancet Infect Dis. 2019;19(1):56–66.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Release BLP. [cited 2017 Nov 24]. Available form: http://press.bayer.com/baynews/baynews.nsf/id/Phase-III-study-program-Amikacin-Inhale-addition-standard-intubated-mechanically-ventilated-patients?OpenDocument&sessionID=1512362907
   Google Scholar
• Kollef MH, Ricard JD, Roux D, et al. A randomized trial of the amikacin fosfomycin inhalation system for the adjunctive therapy of gram-negative ventilator-associated pneumonia: IASIS trial. Chest. 2017;151(6):1239–1246.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nicolau DP, Belliveau PP, Nightingale CH, et al. Implementation of a once-daily aminoglycoside program in a large community-teaching hospital. Hosp Pharm. 1995;30(8):674–676, 679–680.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ambrose PG. Antibacterial drug development program successes and failures: a pharmacometric explanation. Curr Opin Pharmacol. 2017;36:1–7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ambrose PG, Bhavnani SM, Ellis-Grosse EJ, et al. Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic considerations in the design of hospital-acquired or ventilator-associated bacterial pneumonia studies: look before you leap! Clin Infect Dis. 2010;51(Suppl 1):S103–110.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Muller M, Dela Pena A, Derendorf H. Issues in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of anti-infective agents: distribution in tissue. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2004;48(5):1441–1453.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pea F, Viale P, Pavan F, et al. Pharmacokinetic considerations for antimicrobial therapy in patients receiving renal replacement therapy. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2007;46(12):997–1038.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kollef MH, Chastre J, Clavel M, et al. A randomized trial of 7-day doripenem versus 10-day imipenem-cilastatin for ventilator-associated pneumonia. Crit Care. 2012;16(6):R218.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Awad SS, Rodriguez AH, Chuang YC, et al. A phase 3 randomized double-blind comparison of ceftobiprole medocaril versus ceftazidime plus linezolid for the treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia. Clin Infect Dis. 2014;59(1):51–61.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freire AT, Melnyk V, Kim MJ, et al. Comparison of tigecycline with imipenem/cilastatin for the treatment of hospital-acquired pneumonia. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2010;68(2):140–151.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rello J. Importance of appropriate initial antibiotic therapy and de-escalation in the treatment of nosocomial pneumonia. Eur Respir Rev. 2007;16(103):33–39.
   Google Scholar
• Kitsios GD, Morowitz MJ, Dickson RP, et al. Dysbiosis in the intensive care unit: microbiome science coming to the bedside. J Crit Care. 2017;38:84–91.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar