Emerging drugs for treating methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus

References

• https://cddep.org/sites/default/files/swa_2015_final.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Diekema DJ, Pfaller MA, Shortridge D, et al. Twenty-year trends in antimicrobial susceptibilities among staphylococcus aureus from the SENTRY antimicrobial surveillance program. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2019 Mar 15;6(Suppl 1):S47–S53. eCollection 2019 Mar. Erratum in: Open Forum Infect Dis. 2019 May 20;6(5):ofz202.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• https://ecdc.europa.eu/sites/portal/files/documents/EARS-Net-report-2017-update-jan-2019.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Sader HS, Mendes RE, Jones RN, et al. Antimicrobial susceptibility patterns of community- and hospital-acquired methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus from United States hospitals: results from the AWARE ceftaroline surveillance program (2012–2014). Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2016;86:76–79.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bassetti M, Righi E, Peghin M, et al. Is first-line antimicrobial therapy still adequate to treat MRSA in the ICU? A report from a highly endemic country. Crit Care. 2016;20:246.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nillius D, von Müller L, Wagenpfeil S, et al. Methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus in Saarland, Germany: the long-term care facility study. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0153030.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC) net- work: HEALTHCARE-ASSOCIATED INFECTIONS; [cited 2019 Jun 05]. Available from: http://ecdc.europa.eu/en/activities/surveillance/HAI/Documents/2008_HAI_%20special_chapter.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Friedman ND, Kaye KS, Stout JE, et al. Health care–associated bloodstream infections in adults: a reason to change the accepted definition of community-acquired infections. Ann Intern Med. 2002;137:791–797.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Packer S, Pichon B, Thompson S, et al. Clonal expansion of community-associated Meticillin-Resistant Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA) in people who inject drugs (PWID): prevalence, risk factors and molecular epidemiology, Bristol, United Kingdom, 2012 to 2017. Euro Surveill. 2019 Mar;24(13). DOI:10.2807/1560-7917.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bassetti M, Nicco E, Mikulska M. Why is community-associated MRSA spreading across the world and how will it change clinical practice? Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2009;34(Suppl 1):S15–9.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Shashindran N, Nagasundaram N, Thappa DM, et al. Can panton valentine leukocidin gene and clindamycin susceptibility serve as predictors of community origin of MRSA from skin and soft tissue infections? J Clin Diagn Res. 2016;10:DC01–4.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruhe JJ, Smith N, Bradsher RW, et al. Community-onset methicillin- resistant staphylococcus aureus skin and soft-tissue infections: impact of antimicrobial therapy on outcome. Clin Infect Dis. 2007;44:777–784.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eagye KJ, Kim A, Laohavaleeson S, et al. Surgical site infections: does inadequate antibiotic therapy affect patient outcomes? Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2009;10:323–331.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klein EY, Jiang W, Mojica N, et al. National costs associated with methicillin-susceptible and methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus hospitalizations in the United States, 2010–2014. Clin Infect Dis. 2019 Jan 1;68(1):22–28.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stewardson AJ, Allignol A, Beyersmann J, et al.; TIMBER Study Group. The health and economic burden of bloodstream infections caused by antimicrobial-susceptible and non-susceptible Enterobacteriaceae and staphylococcus aureus in european hospitals, 2010 and 2011: a multicenter retrospective cohort study. Euro Surveill. 2016 Aug 18; 21(33). Doi:10.2807/1560-7917.ES.2016.21.33.30319.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Diekema DJ, Hsueh PR, Mendes RE, et al. The microbiology of bloodstream infection: 20-year trends from the SENTRY antimicrobial surveillance program. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2019 Apr 22;63. pii: AAC.00355–19. [Epub ahead of print]. DOI:10.1128/AAC.00355-19.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sader HS, Streit JM, Carvalhaes CG, et al. Frequency and antimicrobial susceptibility of bacterial isolates from patients hospitalized with community-acquired skin and skin-structure infection in Europe, Asia and Latin America. J Glob Antimicrob Resist. 2018 Nov;17(17):103–108. [Epub ahead of print].
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stacey HJ, Clements CS, Welburn SC, et al. The prevalence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus among diabetic patients: a meta-analysis. Acta Diabetol. 2019 Apr;6(56):907–921. [Epub ahead of print].
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bassetti M, Righi E, Vena A, et al. Risk stratification and treatment of ICU-acquired pneumonia caused by multidrug resistant/extensively drug-resistant/pandrug-resistant bacteria. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2018 Oct;24(5):385–393.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cillóniz C, Dominedò C, Nicolini A, et al. PES Pathogens in severe community-acquired pneumonia. Microorganisms. 2019 Feb 12;7(2). pii:E49. doi: 10.3390/microorganisms7020049.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torres A, Chalmers JD, Dela Cruz CS, et al. Challenges in severe community-acquired pneumonia: a point-of-view review. Intensive Care Med. 2019 Feb;45(2):159–171.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berger A, Oster G, Edelsberg J, et al. Initial treatment failure in patients with complicated skin and skin structure infections. Surg Infect (Larchmt). 2013;14:304–312.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ostermann H, Blasi F, Medina J, et al.; REACH study group. Resource use in patients hospitalized with complicated skin and soft tissue infections in Europe and analysis of vulnerable groups: the REACH study. J Med Econ. 2014;17:719–729.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Kumar A, Ellis P, Arabi Y, et al.; Cooperative Antimicrobial Therapy of Septic Shock Database Research Group. Initiation of inappropriate antimicrobial therapy results in a fivefold reduction of survival in human septic shock. Chest. 2009;136:1237–1248.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vallés J, Rello J, Ochagavía A, et al. Community-acquired bloodstream infection in critically ill adult patients: impact of shock and inappropriate antibiotic therapy on survival. Chest. 2003;123:1615–1624.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Butler-Laporte G, Cheng MP, McDonald EG, et al. Screening swabs surpass traditional risk factors as predictors of MRSA bacteremia. BMC Infect Dis. 2018 Jun 11;18(1):270.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Gunderson CG, Holleck JL, Chang JJ, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus nasal colonization to predict methicillin-resistant S aureus soft tissue infections. Am J Infect Control. 2016;44:1176–1177.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Liu C, Bayer A, Cosgrove SE, et al.; Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clinical practice guidelines by the infectious diseases society of america for the treatment of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections in adults and children. Clin Infect Dis. 2011 Feb 1;52(3):e18–55.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stevens DL, Bisno AL, Chambers HF, et al.; Infectious Diseases Society of America. Practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of skin and soft tissue infections: 2014 update by the infectious diseases society of America. Clin Infect Dis. 2014;59:e10–52. Erratum in: Clin Infect Dis 2015;60:1448.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lodise TP, Rosenkranz SL, Finnemeyer M, et al.; Antibacterial Resistance Leadership Group. The emperor’s new clothes: prospective observational evaluation of the association between initial vancomycin exposure and failure rates among adult hospitalized patients with MRSA bloodstream infections (PROVIDE). Clin Infect Dis. 2019 Jun 3. pii:vciz460. [Epub ahead of print]. DOI:10.1093/cid/ciz460.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ye ZK, Li C, Zhai SD. Guidelines for therapeutic drug monitoring of vancomycin: a systematic review. PLoS One. 2014;9:e99044.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gonzalez-Ruiz A, Seaton RA, Hamed K. Daptomycin: an evidence-based review of its role in the treatment of gram-positive infections. Infect Drug Resist. 2016 Apr 15;9:47–58.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Timbrook TT, Caffrey AR, Luther MK, et al. Association of higher daptomycin dose (7 mg/kg or Greater) with improved survival in patients with methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Pharmacotherapy. 2018 Feb;38(2):189–196. [ Epub 2018 Jan 8].
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Geriak M, Haddad F, Rizvi K, et al. Clinical Data on daptomycin plus ceftaroline versus standard of care monotherapy in the treatment of methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2019 Apr 25;63(5). pii: e02483–18. doi: 10.1128/AAC.02483-18
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torres A, Niederman MS, Chastre J, et al. Summary of the international clinical guidelines for the management of hospital-acquired and ventilator-acquired pneumonia. ERJ Open Res. 2018;4(2). pii: 00028–2018. doi: 10.1183/23120541.00028-2018.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bassetti M, Baguneid M, Bouza E, et al. European perspective and update on the management of complicated skin and soft tissue infections due to methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus after more than 10 years of experience with linezolid. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2014;20(Suppl 4):3–18.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pea F, Viale P, Cojutti P, et al. Therapeutic drug monitoring may improve safety outcomes of long-term treatment with linezolid in adult patients. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2012 Aug;67(8):2034–2042.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pea F, Cojutti PG, Baraldo M. A 10-year experience of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring (TDM) of linezolid in a hospital-wide population of patients receiving conventional dosing: is there enough evidence for suggesting TDM in the majority of patients? Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol. 2017 Oct; 121(4):303–308.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Go AC, Golightly LK, Barber GR, et al. Linezolid interaction with serotonin reuptake inhibitors: report of two cases and incidence assessment. Drug Metabol Drug Interact. 2010;25:41–47.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Smith JR, Barber KE, Hallesy J, et al. Telavancin demonstrates activity against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus isolates with reduced suscept-ibility to vancomycin, daptomycin, and linezolid in broth microdilution MIC and one-compartment pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic models. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2015;59:5529–5534.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pfaller MA, Mendes RE, Sader HS, et al. Telavancin activity against Gram-positive bacteria isolated from respiratory tract specimens of patients with nosocomial pneumonia. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2010;65:2396–2404.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhanel GG, Calic D, Schweizer F, et al. New lipoglycopeptides: a comparative review of dalbavancin, oritavancin and telavancin. Drugs. 2010;70:859–886. Erratum in: Drugs 2011;71:526.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lodise TP Jr, Gotfried M, Barriere S, et al. Telavancin penetration into human epithelial lining fluid determined by population pharmacokinetic modeling and monte carlo simulation. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2008;52:2300–2304.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rubinstein E, Lalani T, Corey GR, et al.; ATTAIN Study Group. Telavancin versus vancomycin for hospital-acquired pneumonia due to gram-positive pathogens. Clin Infect Dis. 2011;52:31–40.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polyzos KA, Mavros MN, Vardakas KZ, et al. Efficacy and safety of telavancin in clinical trials: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2012;7:e41870.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barriere SL. The ATTAIN trials: efficacy and safety of telavancin compared with vancomycin for the treatment of hospital-acquired and ventilator-asso- ciated bacterial pneumonia. Future Microbiol. 2014;9:281–289.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torres A, Rubinstein E, Corey GR, et al. Analysis of phase 3 telavancin nosocomial pneumonia data excluding patients with severe renal impairment and acute renal failure. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2014;69:1119–1126.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Masterton R, Cornaglia G, Courvalin P, et al. The clinical positioning of telavancin in Europe. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2015;45:213–220.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sweeney D, Shinabarger DL, Arhin FF, et al. Comparative in vitro activity of oritavancin and other agents against methicillin-susceptible and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2017 Feb;87(2):121–128.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mendes RE, Sader HS, Castanheira M, et al. Distribution of main Gram-positive pathogens causing bloodstream infections in United States and European hospitals during the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program (2010–2016): concomitant analysis of oritavancin in vitro activity. J Chemother. 2018 Sep;30(5):280–289.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corey GR, Kabler H, Mehra P, et al. Single-dose oritavancin in the treatment of acute bacterial skin infections. N Engl J Med. 2014;370:2180–2190.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corey GR, Good S, Jiang H, et al. Single-dose oritavancin versus 7–10 days of vancomycin in the treatment of Gram-positive acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections: the SOLO II noninferiority study. Clin Infect Dis. 2015;60:254–262.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Corey GR, Arhin FF, Wikler MA, et al.; SOLO I, SOLO II Investigators. Pooled analysis of single-dose oritavancin in the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections caused by gram-positive pathogens, including a large patient subset with methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2016 Nov;48(5):528–534.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Redell M, Moeck G, Lucasti C, et al. A real-world patient registry for oritavancin demonstrates efficacy and safety consistent with the phase 3 SOLO program. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2018 Mar 19;5(6):ofy051.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dunne MW, Puttagunta S, Giordano P, et al. A randomized clinical trial of single-dose versus weekly dalbavancin for treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infection. Clin Infect Dis. 2016;62(5):545–551.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• http://ec.europa.eu/health/documents/community-register/html/h986.htm
   Google Scholar
• Bouza E, Valerio M, Soriano A, et al.; DALBUSE Study Group (Dalbavancina: Estudio de su uso clinico en España). Dalbavancin in the treatment of different gram-positive infections: a real-life experience. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2018;51:571–577.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Li S, Guo Y, Zhao C, et al. In vitro activities of tedizolid compared with other antibiotics against gram-positive pathogens associated with hospital-acquired pneumonia, skin and soft tissue infection and bloodstream infection collected from 26 hospitals in China. J Med Microbiol. 2016;65:1215–1224.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lodise TP, Fang E, Minassian SL, et al. Platelet profile in patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections receiving tedizolid or linezolid: findings from the phase 3 ESTABLISH clinical trials. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2014;58:7198–7204.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shorr AF, Lodise TP, Corey GR, et al. Analysis of the phase 3 ESTABLISH trials of tedizolid versus linezolid in acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2015;59:864–871.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shaw KJ, Barbachyn MR. The oxazolidinones: past, present, and future. Ann NY Acad Sci. 2011;1241:48–70.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flanagan S, Passarell J, Lu Q. Tedizolid population pharmacokinetics, exposure response, and target attainment. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2014;58:6462–6470.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lodise TP, Drusano GL. Use of pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic systems analyses to inform dose selection of tedizolid phosphate. Clin Infect Dis. 2014;58(Suppl 1):S28–S34.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tessier PR, Keel RA, Hagihara M, et al. Comparative in vivo efficacies of epithelial lining fluid exposures of tedizolid, linezolid, and vancomycin for methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in a mouse pneumonia model. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2012;56:2342–2346.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saravolatz LD, Stein GE, Johnson LB. Ceftaroline: a novel cephalosporin with activity against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Clin Infect Dis. 2011;52:1156–1163.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bae IG, Stone GG. Activity of ceftaroline against pathogens associated with community-acquired pneumonia collected as part of the AWARE surveillance program, 2015–2016. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2019 May 30:114843. [Epub ahead of print]. DOI:10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2019.05.015.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walkty A, Adam HJ, Laverdière M, et al.; Canadian Antimicrobial Resistance Alliance (CARA). In vitro activity of ceftobiprole against frequently encountered aerobic and facultative gram-positive and gram-negative bacterial pathogens: results of the CANWARD 2007–2009 study. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2011;69:348–355.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biedenbach DJ, Iaconis JP, Sahm DF. Comparative in vitro activities of ceftaroline and ceftriaxone against bacterial pathogens associated with respiratory tract infections: results from the AWARE surveillance study. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2016;71:3459–3464.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lan SH, Chang SP, Lai CC, et al. Efficacy and safety of ceftaroline for the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia: a systemic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Clin Med. 2019;8(6). pii: E824. DOI:10.3390/jcm8060824.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Canut A, Isla A, Rodríguez-Gascón A. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic analysis to evaluate ceftaroline fosamil dosing regimens for the treatment of community-acquired bacterial pneumonia and complicated skin and skin-structure infections in patients with normal and impaired renal function. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2015;45:399–405.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pani A, Colombo F, Agnelli F, et al. Off-label use of ceftaroline fosamil: a systematic review. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2019 Jul 3. pii: S0924–8579. [Epub ahead of print]. DOI:10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2019.06.025.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson LB, Ramani A, Guervil DJ. Use of ceftaroline fosamil in osteomyelitis: CAPTURE study experience. BMC Infect Dis. 2019 Feb 21;19(1):183.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Veve MP, Stuart M, Davis SL. Comparison of neutropenia associated with ceftaroline or ceftriaxone in patients receiving at least 7 days of therapy for severe infections. Pharmacotherapy. 2019 Aug;39(8):809–815.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cosimi RA, Beik N, Kubiak DW, et al. Ceftaroline for severe methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus infections: a systematic review. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2017;4(2):ofx084.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nichols WW, Newell P, Critchley IA, et al. Avibactam pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic targets. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2018;62(6). pii: e02446–17. DOI:10.1128/AAC.02446-17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riccobene TA, Su SF, Rank D. Single- and multiple-dose study to determine the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of ceftaroline fosamil in combination with avibactam in healthy subjects. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2013;57:1496–1504.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nicholson SC, Welte T, File TM Jr, et al. A randomised, double-blind trial comparing ceftobiprole medocaril with ceftriaxone with or without linezolid for the treatment of patients with community-acquired pneumonia requiring hospitalisation. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2012;39:240–246.
   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;59:51–61.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barberán J. Possible clinical indications of ceftobiprole. Rev Esp Quimioter. 2019 Sep;32(Suppl 3):29–33. Review. PubMed PMID: 31364339.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Soriano A, Morata L. Ceftobripole: experience in staphylococcal bacteremia. Rev Esp Quimioter. 2019;32(Suppl 3):24–28.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tascini C, Attanasio V, Ripa M, et al. Ceftobiprole for the treatment of infective endocarditis: a case series. J Glob Antimicrob Resist. 2019. pii: S2213–7165(19)30186–9. [Epub ahead of print]. DOI:10.1016/j.jgar.2019.07.020.
   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;48:2771–2777.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gunderson SM, Hayes RA, Quinn JP, et al. In vitro pharmacodynamic activities of ABT-492, a novel quinolone, compared to those of levofloxacin against Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae, and Moraxella catarrhalis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2004;48:203–208.
   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. Erratum in: Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2018 Jan 25; 62(2).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldstein EJ, Citron DM, Merriam CV, et al. In vitro activities of ABT-492, a new fluoroquinolone, against 155 aerobic and 171 anaerobic pathogens isolated from antral sinus puClinicalTrials.Gov, IdentifierNCTure specimens from patients with sinusitis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2003;47:3008–3011.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hammerschlag MR, Roblin PM. The in vitro activity of a new fluoro- quinolone, ABT-492, against recent clinical isolates of chlamydia pneumoniae. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2004;54:281–282.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waites KB, Crabb DM, Duffy LB. Comparative in vitro susceptibilities and bactericidal activities of investigational fluoroquinolone ABT- 492 and other antimicrobial agents against human mycoplasmas and ureaplasmas. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2003;47:3973–3975.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google 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;67:2814–2820.
   PubMed 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;48:535–541.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Longcor J, Hopkins S, Wickler M, et al. A phase 2 study of the safety and efficacy of oral delafloxacin (DLX) in community acquired pneumonia (CAP). Presented at ID Week 2012; San Diego, California, USA.
   Google Scholar
• O’Riordan W, Mehra P, Manos P, et al. A randomized phase 2 study comparing two doses of delafloxacin with tigecycline in adults with complicated skin and skin-structure infections. Int J Infect Dis. 2015;30:67–73.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Overcash JS, Bhiwandi P, Garrity-Ryan L, et al. Pharmacokinetics, safety, and clinical outcomes of omadacycline in women with cystitis: results from a phase 1b study. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2019 Apr 25;63(5). pii: e02083-18. doi: 10.1128/AAC.02083-18.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Litwin JS, Benedict MS, Thorn MD, et al. A thorough QT study to evaluate the effects of therapeutic and supratherapeutic doses of delafloxacin on cardiac repolarization. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2015;59:3469–3473.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Rensburg DJ, Perng RP, Mitha IH, et al. Efficacy and safety of nemonoxacin versus levofloxacin for community-acquired pneumonia. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2010;54:4098e106.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Han H, Kim SE, Shin KH, et al. Comparison of pharma- cokinetics between new quinolone antibiotics: the zabofloxacin hydrochlo- ride capsule and the zabofloxacin aspartate tablet. Curr Med Res Opin. 2013;29:1349e55.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rhee CK, Chang JH, Choi EG, et al. Zabofloxacin versus moxifloxacin in patients with COPD exacerbation: a multicenter, double-blind, double-dummy, randomized, controlled, phase III, non- inferiority trial. Int J Chron Obstruct Pulmon Dis. 2015;10:2265e75.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ader HS, Fritsche TR, Jones RN. Potency and bactericidal activity of iclaprim against recent clinical gram-positive isolates. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2009;53:2171–2175.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huang DB, Magnet S, De Angelis S, et al. Surveillance of iclaprim activity: in vitro susceptibility of gram-positive skin infection pathogens collected from 2015 to 2016 from North America and Europe. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2019 Feb;93(2):154–158.
   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 versus 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. 2018b;66:1222–1229.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holland TL, O’Riordan W, McManus A, et al. 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;26(62):e02580–17.
   Google Scholar
• Huang DB, Corey GR, Holland TL, et al. Pooled analysis of the phase 3 REVIVE trials: randomised, double-blind studies to evaluate the safety and efficacy of iclaprim versus vancomycin for treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2018 Aug;52(2):233–240.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pfaller MA, Huband MD, Shortridge D, et al. Surveillance of omadacycline activity tested against clinical isolates from the United States and Europe as part of the 2016 SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2018;62(4).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huband MD, Pfaller MA, Shortridge D, et al. Surveillance of omadacycline activity tested against clinical isolates from the United States and Europe: results from the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Programme, 2017. J Glob Antimicrob Resist. 2019 Feb 27;19:56–63. pii: S2213–7165(19)30057–8.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sun H, Ting L, Machineni S, et al. Randomized, open-label study of the pharmacokinetics and safety of oral and intravenous administration of omadacycline to healthy subjects. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2016;60:7431–7435.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• O’Riordan W, Green S, Overcash JS, et al. Omadacycline for acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections. N Engl J Med. 2019 Feb 7;380(6):528–538.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gotfried MH, Horn K, Garrity-Ryan L, et al. Comparison of omadacycline and tigecycline pharmacokinetics in the plasma, epithelial lining fluid, and alveolar cells of healthy adult subjects. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2017;61(9).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stets R, Popescu M, Gonong JR, et al. Omadacycline for Community-Acquired Bacterial Pneumonia. N Engl J Med. 2019 Feb 7;380(6):517–527.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark RB, Hunt DK, He M, et al. Fluorocyclines. 2. Optimization of the C-9 side-chain for antibacterial activity and oral efficacy. J Med Chem. 2012;55:606–622.
   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;59:1802–1805.
   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.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seifert H, Stefanik D, Sutcliffe JA, et al. In-vitro activity of the novel fluorocycline eravacycline against carbapenem non-susceptible Acinetobacte baumannii. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2018;51:62–64.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Snydman DR, McDermott LA, Jacobus NV, et al. Evaluation of the in vitro activity of eravacycline against a broad spectrum of recent clinical anaerobic isolates. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2018;62.
   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;57:5548–5558.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bassetti M, Righi E. Eravacycline for the treatment of intra-abdominal infections. Expert Opin Investig Drugs. 2014;23:1575–1584.
   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;152:224–232.
   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;58:2113–2118.
   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;59:2567–2571.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Serio AW, Keepers T, Krause KM. Plazomicin is active against metallo-β-lactamase-producing enterobacteriaceae. Open Forum Infect Dis. 2019 Mar 12;6(4):ofz123.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Galani I, Nafplioti K, Adamou P, et al.; Study Collaborators. Nationwide epidemiology of carbapenem resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates from Greek hospitals, with regards to plazomicin and aminoglycoside resistance. BMC Infect Dis. 2019 Feb 15;19(1):167.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Castanheira M, Davis AP, Mendes RE, et al. In vitro activity of plazomicin against gram-negative and gram-positive isolates collected from U.S. hospitals and comparative activities of aminoglycosides against carbapenem-resistant enterobacteriaceae and isolates carrying carbapenemase genes. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2018;62(8).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Walkty A, Karlowsky JA, Baxter MR, et al. In vitro activity of plazomicin against gram-negative and gram-positive bacterial pathogens isolated from patients in Canadian hospitals from 2013 to 2017 as part of the CANWARD surveillance study. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2018 Dec 21;63(1).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thwaites M, Hall D, Stoneburner A, et al. Activity of plazomicin in combination with other antibiotics against multidrug-resistant Enterobacteriaceae. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2018;92(4):338–345.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• García-Salguero C, Rodríguez-Avial I, Picazo JJ, et al. Can plazomicin alone or in combination be a therapeutic option against carbapenem-resistant acinetobacter baumannii? Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2015;59:5959–5966.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• López Díaz MC, Ríos E, Rodríguez-Avial I, et al. In-vitro activity of several antimicrobial agents against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) isolates expressing aminoglycoside-modifying enzymes: potency of plazomicin alone and in combination with other agents. Int J Antimicrob Agents. 2017;50:191–196.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Connolly LE, Riddle V, Cebrik D, et al. A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, phase 2 study of the efficacy and safety of plazomicin compared with levofloxacin in the treatment of complicated urinary tract infection and acute pyelonephritis. Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2018;62(4).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wagenlehner FME, Cloutier DJ, Komirenko AS, et al.; EPIC Study Group. Once-daily plazomicin for complicated urinary tract infections. N Engl J Med. 2019;380:729–740.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKinnell JA, Dwyer JP, Talbot GH, et al.; CARE Study Group. Plazomicin for infections caused by carbapenem-resistant enterobacteriaceae. N Engl J Med. 2019;380:791–793.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Veve MP, Wagner JL. Lefamulin: review of a Promising Novel Pleuromutilin Antibiotic. Pharmacotherapy. 2018;38:935–946.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paukner S, Gelone SP, Arends SJR, et al. Antibacterial activity of lefamulin against pathogens most commonly causing community-acquired bacterial pneumonia: SENTRY antimicrobial surveillance program (2015–2016). Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 2019 Mar 27;63(4). pii: e02161-18. doi: 10.1128/AAC.02161-18.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang L, Wicha WW, Bhavnani SM, et al. Prediction of lefamulin epithelial lining fluid penetration after intravenous and oral administration using phase 1 data and population pharmacokinetics methods. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2019 Apr 1;74(Supplement_3):iii27–iii34.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wicha WW, Strickmann DB, Paukner S. Pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of lefamulin in a neutropenic murine pneumonia model with staphylococcus aureus and streptococcus pneumoniae. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2019 Apr 1;74(Supplement_3):iii11–iii18.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• File TM Jr, Goldberg L, Das A, et al. Efficacy and safety of IV-to-oral lefamulin, a pleuromutilin antibiotic, for treatment of community-acquired bacterial pneumonia: the phase 3 LEAP 1 trial. Clin Infect Dis. 2019 Feb 4.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar