Cardeas Pharma Corp.

Latest trials failed to confirm merits of nebulized amikacin for critically ill patients with nosocomial pneumonia. We studied various nebulized and IV antibiotic regimens in a porcine model of severe Pseudomonas aeruginosa pneumonia, resistant to amikacin, fosfomycin, and susceptible to meropenem.

Prospective randomized animal study.

Animal Research, University of Barcelona, Spain.

Thirty female pigs.

The animals were randomized to receive nebulized saline solution (CONTROL); nebulized amikacin every 6 hours; nebulized fosfomycin every 6 hours; IV meropenem alone every 8 hours; nebulized amikacin and fosfomycin every 6 hours; amikacin and fosfomycin every 6 hours, with IV meropenem every 8 hours. Nebulization was performed through a vibrating mesh nebulizer. The primary outcome was lung tissue bacterial concentration. Secondary outcomes were tracheal secretions P. aeruginosa concentration, clinical variables, lung histology, and development of meropenem resistance.

We included five animals into each group. Lung P. aeruginosa burden varied among groups (p < 0.001). In particular, IV meropenem and amikacin and fosfomycin + IV meropenem groups presented lower P. aeruginosa concentrations versus amikacin and fosfomycin, amikacin, CONTROL, and fosfomycin groups (p < 0.05), without significant difference between these two groups undergoing IV meropenem treatment. The sole use of nebulized antibiotics resulted in dense P. aeruginosa accumulation at the edges of the interlobular septa. Amikacin, amikacin and fosfomycin, and amikacin and fosfomycin + IV meropenem effectively reduced P. aeruginosa in tracheal secretions (p < 0.001). Pathognomonic clinical variables of respiratory infection did not differ among groups. Resistance to meropenem increased in IV meropenem group versus amikacin and fosfomycin + meropenem (p = 0.004).

Our findings corroborate that amikacin and fosfomycin alone efficiently reduced P. aeruginosa in tracheal secretions, with negligible effects in pulmonary tissue. Combination of amikacin and fosfomycin with IV meropenem does not increase antipseudomonal pulmonary tissue activity, but it does reduce development of meropenem-resistant P. aeruginosa, in comparison with the sole use of IV meropenem. Our findings imply potential merits for preemptive use of nebulized antibiotics in order to reduce resistance to IV meropenem.

Clinical failures in ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) caused by gram-negative bacteria are common and associated with substantial morbidity, mortality, and resource utilization.

We assessed the safety and efficacy of the amikacin fosfomycin inhalation system (AFIS) for the treatment of gram-negative bacterial VAP in a randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group, phase 2 study between May 2013 and March 2016. We compared standard of care in each arm plus 300 mg amikacin/120 mg fosfomycin or placebo (saline), delivered by aerosol twice daily for 10 days (or to extubation if < 10 days) via the investigational eFlow Inline System (PARI GmbH). The primary efficacy end point was change from baseline in the Clinical Pulmonary Infection Score (CPIS) during the randomized course of AFIS/placebo, using the subset of patients with microbiologically proven baseline infections with gram-negative bacteria.

There were 143 patients randomized: 71 to the AFIS group, and 72 to the placebo group. Comparison of CPIS change from baseline between treatment groups was not different (P = .70). The secondary hierarchical end point of no mortality and clinical cure at day 14 or earlier was also not significant (P = .68) nor was the hierarchical end point of no mortality and ventilator-free days (P = .06). The number of deaths in the AFIS group was 17 (24%) and 12 (17%) in the placebo group (P = .32). The AFIS group had significantly fewer positive tracheal cultures on days 3 and 7 than placebo.

In this trial of adjunctive aerosol therapy compared with standard of care IV antibiotics in patients with gram-negative VAP, the AFIS was ineffective in improving clinical outcomes despite reducing bacterial burden.

ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT01969799; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.

There has been a resurgence of interest in aerosolization of antibiotics for treatment of patients with severe pneumonia caused by multidrug-resistant pathogens. A combination formulation of amikacin-fosfomycin is currently undergoing clinical testing although the exposure-response relationships of these drugs have not been fully characterized. The aim of this study was to describe the individual and combined antibacterial effects of simulated epithelial lining fluid exposures of aerosolized amikacin and fosfomycin against resistant clinical isolates of Pseudomonas aeruginosa (MICs of 16 mg/liter and 64 mg/liter) and Klebsiella pneumoniae (MICs of 2 mg/liter and 64 mg/liter) using a dynamic hollow-fiber infection model over 7 days. Targeted peak concentrations of 300 mg/liter amikacin and/or 1,200 mg/liter fosfomycin as a 12-hourly dosing regimens were used. Quantitative cultures were performed to describe changes in concentrations of the total and resistant bacterial populations. The targeted starting inoculum was 10 8 CFU/ml for both strains. We observed that neither amikacin nor fosfomycin monotherapy was bactericidal against P. aeruginosa while both were associated with rapid amplification of resistant P. aeruginosa strains (about 10 8 to 10 9 CFU/ml within 24 to 48 h). For K. pneumoniae , amikacin but not fosfomycin was bactericidal. When both drugs were combined, a rapid killing was observed for P. aeruginosa and K. pneumoniae (6-log kill within 24 h). Furthermore, the combination of amikacin and fosfomycin effectively suppressed growth of resistant strains of P. aeruginosa and K. pneumoniae . In conclusion, the combination of amikacin and fosfomycin was effective at maximizing bacterial killing and suppressing emergence of resistance against these clinical isolates.