Suppr超能文献

舒巴坦钠:一种用于治疗多重耐药菌引起的尿路感染的静脉注射和口服青霉素类药物。

Sulopenem: An Intravenous and Oral Penem for the Treatment of Urinary Tract Infections Due to Multidrug-Resistant Bacteria.

机构信息

Clinical Microbiology, Department of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, Max Rady College of Medicine, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, Health Sciences Centre, University of Manitoba, MS673-820 Sherbrook Street, Winnipeg, Manitoba, MB, R3A 1R9, Canada.

College of Pharmacy, Rady Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB, Canada.

出版信息

Drugs. 2022 Apr;82(5):533-557. doi: 10.1007/s40265-022-01688-1. Epub 2022 Mar 16.

Abstract

Sulopenem (formerly known as CP-70,429, and CP-65,207 when a component of a racemic mixture with its R isomer) is an intravenous and oral penem that possesses in vitro activity against fluoroquinolone-resistant, extended spectrum β-lactamases (ESBL)-producing, multidrug-resistant (MDR) Enterobacterales. Sulopenem is being developed to treat patients with uncomplicated and complicated urinary tract infections (UTIs) as well as intra-abdominal infections. This review will focus mainly on its use in UTIs. The chemical structure of sulopenem shares properties of penicillins, cephalosporins, and carbapenems. Sulopenem is available as an oral prodrug formulation, sulopenem etzadroxil, which is hydrolyzed by intestinal esterases, resulting in active sulopenem. In early studies, the S isomer of CP-65,207, later developed as sulopenem, demonstrated greater absorption, higher drug concentrations in the urine, and increased stability against the renal enzyme dehydropeptidase-1 compared with the R isomer, which set the stage for its further development as a UTI antimicrobial. Sulopenem is active against both Gram-negative and Gram-positive microorganisms. Sulopenem's β-lactam ring alkylates the serine residues of penicillin-binding protein (PBP), which inhibits peptidoglycan cross-linking. Due to its ionization and low molecular weight, sulopenem passes through outer membrane proteins to reach PBPs of Gram-negative bacteria. While sulopenem activity is unaffected by many β-lactamases, resistance arises from alterations in PBPs (e.g., methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus [MRSA]), expression of carbapenemases (e.g., carbapenemase-producing Enterobacterales and in Stenotrophomonas maltophilia), reduction in the expression of outer membrane proteins (e.g., some Klebsiella spp.), and the presence of efflux pumps (e.g., MexAB-OprM in Pseudomonas aeruginosa), or a combination of these mechanisms. In vitro studies have reported that sulopenem demonstrates greater activity than meropenem and ertapenem against Enterococcus faecalis, Listeria monocytogenes, methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA), and Staphylococcus epidermidis, as well as similar activity to carbapenems against Streptococcus agalactiae, Streptococcus pneumoniae, and Streptococcus pyogenes. With some exceptions, sulopenem activity against Gram-negative aerobes was less than ertapenem and meropenem but greater than imipenem. Sulopenem activity against Escherichia coli carrying ESBL, CTX-M, or Amp-C enzymes, or demonstrating MDR phenotypes, as well as against ESBL-producing Klebsiella pneumoniae, was nearly identical to ertapenem and meropenem and greater than imipenem. Sulopenem exhibited identical or slightly greater activity than imipenem against many Gram-positive and Gram-negative anaerobes, including Bacteroides fragilis. The pharmacokinetics of intravenous sulopenem appear similar to carbapenems such as imipenem-cilastatin, meropenem, and doripenem. In healthy subjects, reported volumes of distribution (V) ranged from 15.8 to 27.6 L, total drug clearances (CL) of 18.9-24.9 L/h, protein binding of approximately 10%, and elimination half-lives (t) of 0.88-1.03 h. The estimated renal clearance (CL) of sulopenem is 8.0-10.6 L/h, with 35.5% ± 6.7% of a 1000 mg dose recovered unchanged in the urine. An ester prodrug, sulopenem etzadroxil, has been developed for oral administration. Initial investigations reported a variable oral bioavailability of 20-34% under fasted conditions, however subsequent work showed that bioavailability is significantly improved by administering sulopenem with food to increase its oral absorption or with probenecid to reduce its renal tubular secretion. Food consumption increases the area under the curve (AUC) of oral sulopenem (500 mg twice daily) by 23.6% when administered alone and 62% when administered with 500 mg of probenecid. Like carbapenems, sulopenem demonstrates bactericidal activity that is associated with the percentage of time that free concentrations exceed the MIC (%f T > MIC). In animal models, bacteriostasis was associated with %f T > MICs ranging from 8.6 to 17%, whereas 2-log kill was seen at values ranging from 12 to 28%. No pharmacodynamic targets have been documented for suppression of resistance. Sulopenem concentrations in urine are variable, ranging from 21.8 to 420.0 mg/L (median 84.4 mg/L) in fasted subjects and 28.8 to 609.0 mg/L (median 87.3 mg/L) in those who were fed. Sulopenem has been compared with carbapenems and cephalosporins in guinea pig and murine systemic and lung infection animal models. Studied pathogens included Acinetobacter calcoaceticus, B. fragilis, Citrobacter freundii, Enterobacter cloacae, E. coli, K. pneumoniae, Proteus vulgaris, and Serratia marcescens. These studies reported that overall, sulopenem was non-inferior to carbapenems but appeared to be superior to cephalosporins. A phase III clinical trial (SURE-1) reported that sulopenem was not non-inferior to ciprofloxacin in women infected with fluoroquinolone-susceptible pathogens, due to a higher rate of asymptomatic bacteriuria in sulopenem-treated patients at the test-of-cure visit. However, the researchers reported superiority of sulopenem etzadroxil/probenecid over ciprofloxacin for the treatment of uncomplicated UTIs in women infected with fluoroquinolone/non-susceptible pathogens, and non-inferiority in all patients with a positive urine culture. A phase III clinical trial (SURE-2) compared intravenous sulopenem followed by oral sulopenem etzadroxil/probenecid with ertapenem in the treatment of complicated UTIs. No difference in overall success was noted at the end of therapy. However, intravenous sulopenem followed by oral sulopenem etzadroxil was not non-inferior to ertapenem followed by oral stepdown therapy in overall success at test-of-cure due to a higher rate of asymptomatic bacteriuria in the sulopenem arm. After a meeting with the US FDA, Iterum stated that they are currently evaluating the optimal design for an additional phase III uncomplicated UTI study to be conducted prior to the potential resubmission of the New Drug Application (NDA). It is unclear at this time whether Iterum intends to apply for EMA or Japanese regulatory approval. The safety and tolerability of sulopenem has been reported in various phase I pharmacokinetic studies and phase III clinical trials. Sulopenem (intravenous and oral) appears to be well tolerated in healthy subjects, with and without the coadministration of probenecid, with few serious drug-related treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) reported to date. Reported TEAEs affecting ≥1% of patients were (from most to least common) diarrhea, nausea, headache, vomiting and dizziness. Discontinuation rates were low and were not different than comparator agents. Sulopenem administered orally and/or intravenously represents a potentially well tolerated and effective option for treating uncomplicated and complicated UTIs, especially in patients with documented or highly suspected antimicrobial pathogens to commonly used agents (e.g. fluoroquinolone-resistant E. coli), and in patients with documented microbiological or clinical failure or patients who demonstrate intolerance/adverse effects to first-line agents. This agent will likely be used orally in the outpatient setting, and intravenously followed by oral stepdown in the hospital setting. Sulopenem also allows for oral stepdown therapy in the hospital setting from intravenous non-sulopenem therapy. More clinical data are required to fully assess the clinical efficacy and safety of sulopenem, especially in patients with complicated UTIs caused by resistant pathogens such as ESBL-producing, Amp-C, MDR E. coli. Antimicrobial stewardship programs will need to create guidelines for when this oral and intravenous penem should be used.

摘要

舒巴坦(以前称为 CP-70,429,当与它的 R 异构体混合时为 CP-65,207 的成分)是一种具有体外活性的静脉内和口服青霉烯类药物,可对抗氟喹诺酮耐药、产超广谱β-内酰胺酶(ESBL)、多重耐药(MDR)肠杆菌科。舒巴坦正在开发用于治疗单纯性和复杂性尿路感染(UTIs)以及腹腔内感染的患者。这篇综述将主要关注其在 UTIs 中的应用。舒巴坦的化学结构具有青霉素、头孢菌素和碳青霉烯类药物的特性。舒巴坦可作为口服前体药物制剂舒巴坦埃杂肟,通过肠道酯酶水解,产生活性舒巴坦。在早期研究中,CP-65,207 的 S 异构体,后来开发为舒巴坦,表现出更高的吸收、尿液中更高的药物浓度和对肾酶去氢肽酶-1的稳定性增加,这为其进一步开发为 UTI 抗菌药物奠定了基础。舒巴坦对革兰氏阴性和革兰氏阳性微生物均具有活性。舒巴坦的β-内酰胺环使青霉素结合蛋白(PBP)的丝氨酸残基烷基化,从而抑制肽聚糖交联。由于其电离和低分子量,舒巴坦可穿过外膜蛋白到达革兰氏阴性细菌的 PBP。虽然舒巴坦的活性不受许多β-内酰胺酶的影响,但耐药性是由于 PBPs 的改变(例如耐甲氧西林金黄色葡萄球菌[MRSA])、碳青霉烯酶的表达(例如产碳青霉烯酶的肠杆菌科和嗜麦芽窄食单胞菌)、外膜蛋白表达减少(例如某些克雷伯氏菌属)以及外排泵的存在(例如铜绿假单胞菌中的 MexAB-OprM),或这些机制的组合。体外研究报道,舒巴坦对粪肠球菌、单核细胞李斯特菌、甲氧西林敏感的金黄色葡萄球菌(MSSA)和表皮葡萄球菌的活性大于美罗培南和厄他培南,对肺炎链球菌、肺炎球菌和化脓性链球菌的活性与碳青霉烯类药物相似,除了一些例外,舒巴坦对革兰氏阴性需氧菌的活性低于厄他培南和美罗培南,但大于亚胺培南。舒巴坦对携带 ESBL、CTX-M 或 Amp-C 酶或表现出 MDR 表型的大肠埃希菌以及产 ESBL 的肺炎克雷伯菌的活性与厄他培南和美罗培南相似,大于亚胺培南。舒巴坦对许多革兰氏阳性和革兰氏阴性厌氧菌的活性与亚胺培南相同或略大,包括脆弱拟杆菌。静脉内舒巴坦的药代动力学似乎与碳青霉烯类药物(如亚胺培南-西司他丁、美罗培南和多利培南)相似。在健康受试者中,报道的分布容积(V)范围为 15.8-27.6 L,总药物清除率(CL)为 18.9-24.9 L/h,蛋白结合率约为 10%,消除半衰期(t)为 0.88-1.03 h。估计舒巴坦的肾清除率(CL)为 8.0-10.6 L/h,1000 mg 剂量中有 35.5%±6.7%以原形在尿液中回收。酯前体药物舒巴坦埃杂肟已被开发用于口服给药。初步研究报告,在空腹条件下,口服生物利用度为 20-34%,但随后的研究表明,通过增加食物摄入来增加其口服吸收或通过抑制肾小管分泌来减少其肾排泄,可显著提高舒巴坦的口服生物利用度。与碳青霉烯类药物一样,舒巴坦具有杀菌活性,与游离浓度超过 MIC 的时间百分比(%fT>MIC)有关。在动物模型中,抑菌作用与 %fT>MICs 范围为 8.6-17%有关,而 2-对数杀灭作用则见于 12-28%的范围。尚无抑制耐药性的药效学目标。在空腹受试者中,舒巴坦在尿液中的浓度为 21.8-420.0mg/L(中位数 84.4mg/L),在进食者中为 28.8-609.0mg/L(中位数 87.3mg/L)。舒巴坦已在豚鼠和小鼠全身和肺部感染动物模型中与碳青霉烯类药物和头孢菌素类药物进行了比较。研究的病原体包括鲍曼不动杆菌、脆弱拟杆菌、柠檬酸杆菌弗氏、阴沟肠杆菌、大肠埃希菌、肺炎克雷伯菌、普通变形杆菌和粘质沙雷氏菌。这些研究报告称,总体而言,舒巴坦与碳青霉烯类药物相当,但似乎优于头孢菌素类药物。一项 III 期临床试验(SURE-1)报道,舒巴坦在治疗对氟喹诺酮类敏感病原体感染的女性中,与环丙沙星相比无非劣效性,因为在治疗后访视时,舒巴坦治疗组的无症状菌尿率更高。然而,研究人员报告称,舒巴坦埃杂肟/丙磺舒与环丙沙星相比,在治疗对氟喹诺酮类/非敏感病原体感染的女性单纯性 UTI 中具有优越性,并且在所有阳性尿液培养的患者中具有非劣效性。一项 III 期临床试验(SURE-2)比较了静脉内舒巴坦随后口服舒巴坦埃杂肟/丙磺舒与厄他培南治疗复杂性 UTIs。在治疗结束时,两组的总体成功率无差异。然而,静脉内舒巴坦随后口服舒巴坦埃杂肟/丙磺舒与厄他培南随后口服降阶梯治疗相比,在治疗后访视时因无症状菌尿率较高,舒巴坦组的总体成功率无非劣效性。在美国食品和药物管理局(FDA)会议后,Iterum 表示,他们目前正在评估一项额外的 III 期单纯性 UTI 研究的最佳设计,该研究将在潜在重新提交新药申请(NDA)之前进行。目前尚不清楚 Iterum 是否打算向 EMA 或日本监管机构申请批准。舒巴坦的安全性和耐受性已在各种 I 期药代动力学研究和 III 期临床试验中报告。舒巴坦(静脉内和口服)在健康受试者中具有良好的耐受性,与和不与丙磺舒联合用药时,报告的严重药物相关治疗后不良事件(TEAE)发生率均较低。报告的发生率超过 1%的 TEAEs 为(从最常见到最不常见)腹泻、恶心、头痛、呕吐和头晕。停药率低,与对照药物无差异。口服和/或静脉内给予舒巴坦可能是一种具有良好耐受性和有效性的治疗单纯性和复杂性 UTIs 的选择,尤其是在有记录或高度怀疑对常用药物(如耐氟喹诺酮类大肠埃希菌)具有抗微生物病原体的患者,以及在有记录的微生物学或临床失败或对一线药物不耐受/有不良反应的患者中。该药物将主要在门诊环境下口服使用,在医院环境下静脉内用药后口服降阶梯治疗。舒巴坦也允许在医院环境下从非舒巴坦静脉内治疗转为口服降阶梯治疗。需要更多的临床数据来全面评估舒巴坦的临床疗效和安全性,尤其是在耐碳青霉烯类药物、Amp-C、MDR 大肠埃希菌等耐药病原体引起的复杂性 UTIs 患者中。抗菌药物管理计划将需要制定何时使用这种口服和静脉内青霉素的指南。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验