A Review of Omadacycline for Potential Utility in the Military Health System for the Treatment of Wound Infections
Daniel V Zurawski,Alisa W Serio,Chad Black,Brandon Pybus,Kevin S Akers,Daniel H Deck,Sheila Johnson,Supaksorn Chattagul,Schroeder M Noble,Malik Raynor,Charlotte A Lanteri
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/milmed/usad417
2024-05-18
Abstract:Introduction: Combat-related wound infections complicate the recovery of wounded military personnel, contributing to overall morbidity and mortality. Wound infections in combat settings present unique challenges because of the size and depth of the wounds, the need to administer emergency care in the field, and the need for subsequent treatment in military facilities. Given the increase in multidrug-resistant pathogens, a novel, broad-spectrum antibiotic is desired across this continuum of care when the standard of care fails. Omadacycline was FDA-approved in 2018 for treatment of adults with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI), as well as community-acquired bacterial pneumonia (CABP). It is a broad-spectrum antibiotic with activity against gram-positive, gram-negative, and atypical bacterial pathogens, including multidrug-resistant species. Omadacycline can overcome commonly reported tetracycline resistance mechanisms, ribosomal protection proteins, and efflux pumps, and is available in once-daily intravenous or oral formulations. In this review, we discuss the potential role of omadacycline, which is included in the Department of Defense Formulary, in the context of combat wound infections. Materials and methods: A literature review was undertaken for manuscripts published before July 21, 2023. This included a series of publications found via PubMed and a bibliography made publicly available on the Paratek Pharmaceuticals, Inc. website. Publications presenting primary data published in English on omadacycline in relation to ESKAPEE (Enterococcus faecium, Staphylococcus aureus, Klebsiella pneumoniae, Acinetobacter baumannii, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Escherichia coli, and Enterobacter species) pathogens and Clostridioides difficile, including in vitro, in vivo, and clinical data were included. Results: Of 260 identified records, 66 were included for evidence review. Omadacycline has in vitro activity against almost all the ESKAPEE pathogens, apart from P. aeruginosa. Importantly, it has activity against the four most prevalent bacterial pathogens that cause wound infections in the military healthcare system: S. aureus, including methicillin-resistant S. aureus, A. baumannii, K. pneumoniae, and E. coli. In vivo studies in rats have shown that omadacycline is rapidly distributed in most tissues, with the highest tissue-to-blood concentration ratios in bone mineral. The clinical efficacy of omadacycline has been assessed in three separate Phase 3 studies in patients with ABSSSI (OASIS-1 and OASIS-2) and with CABP (OPTIC). Overall, omadacycline has an established safety profile in the treatment of both ABSSSI and CABP. Conclusions: Omadacycline has broad-spectrum activity, the option to be orally administered and an established safety profile, making it a potentially attractive replacement for moxifloxacin in the military individual first aid kit, especially when accounting for the increasing resistance to fluoroquinolones. Further studies and clinical evaluation are warranted to support broader use of omadacycline to treat combat wound infections in the military healthcare system.