Abstract
Bacterial skin infections result in significant morbidity and have contributed to enhanced health-care resource utilization. The problem is heightened by emerging antimicrobial resistance. Multiple novel agents active against resistant pathogens that cause skin infections—including dalbavancin, tedizolid phosphate, oritavancin, and delafloxacin—have been approved over the past 5 years. Common features of these agents include gram-positive activity and favorable safety. Of these agents, delafloxacin is unique in being active against both gram-positive and gram-negative pathogens that cause skin infections, including those resistant to other antimicrobial agents. It is, therefore, an effective option for the treatment of skin infections.
Keywords: skin infections, antimicrobial susceptibility, delafloxacin, surveillance
Bacterial skin and skin structure infections—also referred to as skin and soft tissue infections, skin and skin structure infections (SSSI), and (since 2013) acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSI)— impose a significant clinical and economic burden, estimated on the basis of health-care resource utilization. Rates of visits to health-care facilities in the United States for treatment of ABSSSIs increased significantly between 1997 and 2005, from 32.1 to 48.1 visits per 1000 people in the population, representing an increase of 50% and translating into 14.2 million visits in 2005 [1]. Another study reported significant increases in ABSSSI-related hospital admissions, from 1.6% of all hospital admissions in 2005 to 2.0% in 2011 [2]. The current epidemiology and burden of skin infections is discussed in greater detail by Kaye et al in this supplement [X].
The predominant bacterial species associated with skin infections is Staphylococcus aureus, with other gram-positive (eg, Streptococcus pyogenes, other Beta hemolytic streptococci, and enterococci) as well as gram-negative species (eg, Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Escherichia coli) also implicated as causative organisms [3–5].
Of concern is the emergence of resistance to antimicrobial agents over time, particularly among isolates of S. aureus, which have shown increasing frequencies of resistance to methicillin (methicillin-resistant S. aureus [MRSA]) and other antimicrobial agents globally [5–7]. Moreover, MRSA isolates causing skin infections are often also resistant to macrolides and fluoroquinolones [8, 9]. Increased resistance translates into higher morbidity and costs [10, 11]. An additional concern is the emergence of vancomycin-resistant enterococcus (VRE), which can cause wound infections [12]. These concerns prompted efforts to develop new antimicrobial agents that are effective against resistant pathogens, with multiple agents having been approved in the United States within the past decade and additional agents under development for the treatment of ABSSSI [13, 14]. Agents approved in the last 10 years include telavancin, ceftaroline, dalbavancin, tedizolid phosphate, oritavancin, and delafloxacin.
This review provides clinicians with a comparative overview of the antimicrobial activity of antibiotics approved for the treatment of ABSSSI in adults in the United States and Europe over the past 5 years (dalbavancin, tedizolid phosphate, oritavancin, and delafloxacin). Included are studies evaluating the in vitro activity of these agents against both gram-positive and gram-negative pathogens causing ABSSSIs. The antimicrobial activity of these agents is discussed below, with data on activity against gram-positive and gram-negative pathogens being summarized in Tables 1 and 2, respectively.
Table 1.
Activity of Antimicrobial Agents Approved During the Past 5 Years Against Gram-positive Pathogens Causing Skin and Skin Structure Infections
| % of Isolates Susceptible by the Following Criteria: | MIC (µg/mL) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Organism Group and Antimicrobial Agent (Number of Isolates) | Location (Year[s] of Isolation) | CLSI | EUCAST | 50% | 90% | Range | Author (Year) [Reference] |
| Staphylococcus aureus | |||||||
| Dalbavancin; oxacillin-susceptible (27 052) | Global (2002–2007) | – | – | 0.06 | 0.06 | ≤0.03 to 0.25 | Biedenbach et al (2009) [15] |
| Dalbavancin; oxacillin-resistant (19 721) | Global (2002–2007) | – | – | 0.06 | 0.06 | ≤0.03 to 0.5 | Biedenbach et al (2009) [15] |
| Tedizolid (7813) | United States and Europe (2009–2013) | 99.8 | 99.8 | 0.25 | 0.5 | ≤0.015 to 2 | Bensaci & Sahm (2017) [16] |
| Delafloxacin (1350) | United States and Europe (2014) | – | – | ≤0.004 | 0.25 | ≤0.004 to 4 | Pfaller et al (2017) [17] |
| Delafloxacin (903) | Europe and Surrounding Areas (2014–2016) | – | – | ≤0.004 | 0.25 | ≤0.004 to >2 | Huband et al (2017) [18] |
| Delafloxacin (3163) | United States (2014–2016) | – | – | 0.008 | 0.25 | – | Shortridge et al (2017) [19] |
| Delafloxacin (9355) | United States and Europe (2014–2016) | 88.9 | – | 0.008 | 0.5 | – | Flamm et al (2017) [20] |
| MRSA | |||||||
| Tedizolid (3234) | United States and Europe (2009–2013) | 99.6 | 99.6 | 0.25 | 0.5 | ≤0.015 to 2 | Bensaci & Sahm (2017) [16] |
| Oritavancin (not reported) | United States and Europe (2010–2013) | 98.4 (US)/ 98.9 (EU)a | – | 0.03 (US)/ 0.03 (EU) | 0.06 (US)/ 0.06 (EU) | – | Mendes et al (2015) [21] |
| Delafloxacin (573) | United States and Europe (2014) | – | – | 0.06 | 0.5 | ≤0.004 to 4 | Pfaller et al (2017) [17] |
| Delafloxacin (177) | Europe and Surrounding Areas (2014–2016) | – | – | 0.25 | 1 | ≤0.004 to >2 | Huband et al (2017) [18] |
| Delafloxacin (1437) | United States (2014–2016) | – | – | 0.12 | 0.5 | – | Shortridge et al (2017) [19] |
| Delafloxacin (3563) | United States and Europe (2014–2016) | 74.4 | – | 0.12 | 1 | – | Flamm et al (2017) [20] |
| MSSA | |||||||
| Tedizolid (4579) | United States and Europe (2009–2013) | 99.9 | 99.9 | 0.25 | 0.5 | ≤0.015 to 1 | Bensaci & Sahm (2017) [16] |
| Delafloxacin (777) | United States and Europe (2014) | – | – | ≤0.004 | 0.008 | ≤0.004 to 4 | Pfaller et al (2017) [17] |
| Delafloxacin (1726) | United States (2014–2016) | – | – | 0.008 | 0.25 | – | Shortridge et al (2017) [19] |
| Coagulase-negative Staphylococci | |||||||
| Dalbavancin; oxacillin-susceptible (2836) | Global (2002–2007) | – | – | ≤0.03 | 0.06 | ≤0.03 to 1 | Biedenbach et al (2009) [15] |
| Dalbavancin; oxacillin-resistant (9472) | Global (2002–2007) | – | – | ≤0.03 | 0.12 | ≤0.03 to 2 | Biedenbach et al (2009) [15] |
| Tedizolid (623) | United States and Europe (2009–2013) | – | 99.0 | 0.12 | 0.25 | ≤0.008 to 4 | Bensaci & Sahm (2017) [16] |
| Oritavancin (not reported) | United States and Europe (2010–2013) | – (US)/ – (EU)a | – | 0.015 (US)/ 0.03 (EU) | 0.06 (US)/ 0.06 (EU) | – | Mendes et al (2015) [21] |
| Delafloxacin (165) | Europe and Surrounding Areas (2014–2016) | – | – | 0.15 | 0.5 | ≤0.004 to >2 | Huband et al (2017) [18] |
| Delafloxacin (228) | United States (2014–2016) | – | – | 0.015 | 0.5 | – | Shortridge et al (2017) [19] |
| Delafloxacin (1575) | United States and Europe (2014–2016) | – | – | 0.015 | 0.5 | – | Flamm et al (2017) [20] |
| β-hemolytic streptococci | |||||||
| Tedizolid (70) | United States and Europe (2009–2013) | – | 100.0 | 0.12 | 0.25 | ≤0.008 to 0.25 | Bensaci & Sahm (2017) [16] |
| Dalbavancin (5316) | Global (2002–2007) | – | – | ≤0.03 | ≤0.03 | ≤0.03 to 0.25 | Biedenbach et al (2009) [15] |
| Viridans Group Streptococci | |||||||
| Dalbavancin (2148) | Global (2002–2007) | – | – | ≤0.03 | ≤0.03 | ≤0.03 to 0.12 | Biedenbach et al (2009) [15] |
| Tedizolid (51) | United States and Europe (2009–2013) | – | – | 0.12 | 0.25 | ≤0.015 to 0.25 | Bensaci & Sahm (2017) [16] |
| Delafloxacin (294) | United States and Europe (2014) | – | – | 0.015 | 0.03 | ≤0.004 to 2 | Pfaller et al (2017) [17] |
| Streptococcus pyogenes | |||||||
| Tedizolid (684) | United States and Europe (2009–2013) | 100.0 | 100.0 | 0.12 | 0.25 | ≤0.015 to 0.25 | Bensaci & Sahm (2017) [16] |
| Oritavancin (not reported) | United States and Europe (2010–2013) | 98.6 (US)/98.4 (EU)a | – | 0.03 (US)/ 0.03 (EU) | 0.12 (US)/0.12 (EU) | – | Mendes et al (2015) [21] |
| Delafloxacin (433) | United States and Europe (2014) | – | – | 0.008 | 0.015 | ≤0.004 to 0.03 | Pfaller et al (2017) [17] |
| Delafloxacin (1699) | United States and Europe (2014–2016) | >99.9 | – | 0.015 | 0.03 | – | Flamm et al (2017) [20] |
| Streptococcus agalactiae | |||||||
| Tedizolid (715) | United States and Europe (2009–2013) | 100.0 | 100.0 | 0.25 | 0.25 | ≤0.015 to 0.5 | Bensaci & Sahm (2017) [16] |
| Oritavancin (not reported) | United States and Europe (2010–2013) | 97.9 (US)/98.0 (EU)a | – | 0.03 (US)/ 0.03 (EU) | 0.12 (US)/0.12 (EU) | – | Mendes et al (2015) [21] |
| Delafloxacin (225) | United States and Europe (2014) | – | – | 0.008 | 0.015 | ≤0.004 to 0.5 | Pfaller et al (2017) [17] |
| Delafloxacin (827) | United States and Europe (2014–2016) | 98.7 | – | 0.015 | 0.03 | – | Flamm et al (2017) [20] |
| Streptococcus dysgalactiae | |||||||
| Oritavancin (not reported) | United States and Europe (2010–2013) | 100.0 (US)/98.3 (EU)a | – | 0.06 (US)/ 0.06 (EU) | 0.25 (US)/0.5 (EU) | – | Mendes et al (2015) [21] |
| Delafloxacin (132) | United States and Europe (2014) | – | – | 0.008 | 0.015 | ≤0.004 to 0.03 | Pfaller et al (2017) [17] |
| Enterococcus faecalis | |||||||
| Tedizolid (868) | United States and Europe (2009–2013) | 99.4 | – | 0.25 | 0.5 | ≤0.015 to 1 | Bensaci & Sahm (2017) [16] |
| Oritavancin (not reported) | United States and Europe (2010–2013) | 95.6 (US)/ 99.3 (EU)a | – | 0.015 (US)/ 0.015 (EU) | 0.06 (US)/ 0.06 (EU) | – | Mendes et al (2015) [21] |
| Delafloxacin (450) | United States and Europe (2014) | – | – | 0.06 | 1 | ≤0.004 to 2 | Pfaller et al (2017) [17] |
| Delafloxacin (173) | Europe and Surrounding Areas (2014–2016) | – | – | 0.12 | >4 | 0.015 to >4 | Huband et al (2017) [18] |
| Delafloxacin (235) | United States (2014–2016) | – | – | 0.12 | 1 | – | Shortridge et al (2017) [19] |
| Vancomycin-susceptible Enterococcus faecalis | |||||||
| Tedizolid (829) | United States and Europe (2009–2013) | 99.4 | – | 0.25 | 0.5 | ≤0.015 to 1 | Bensaci & Sahm (2017) [16] |
| Enterococcus faecium | |||||||
| Tedizolid (372) | United States and Europe (2009–2013) | – | – | 0.25 | 0.5 | 0.03 to 4 | Bensaci & Sahm (2017) [16] |
| Delafloxacin (295) | United States and Europe (2014) | – | – | >4 | >4 | 0.008 to >4 | Pfaller et al (2017) [17] |
| Vancomycin-susceptible Enterococcus faecium | |||||||
| Tedizolid (168) | United States and Europe (2009–2013) | – | – | 0.25 | 0.5 | 0.03 to 1 | Bensaci & Sahm (2017) [16] |
| Oritavancin (not reported) | United States and Europe (2010–2013) | – (US)/– (EU)a | – | ≤0.008 (US)/ ≤0.008 (EU) | ≤0.008 (US)/ ≤0.008 (EU) | – | Mendes et al (2015) [21] |
| Vancomycin-resistant Enterococcus faecium | |||||||
| Tedizolid (202) | United States and Europe (2009–2013) | – | – | 0.25 | 0.5 | 0.12 to 4 | Bensaci & Sahm (2017) [16] |
| Oritavancin (not reported) | United States and Europe (2010–2013) | – (US)/– (EU)a | – | 0.06 (US)/ 0.015 (EU) | 0.12 (US)/ 0.06 (EU) | – | Mendes et al (2015) [21] |
Abbreviations: CLSI, Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; EUCAST, European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing; EU, Europe; MRSA, methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus; MIC, minimum inhibitory concentration; MSSA, methicillin-susceptible Staphylococcus aureus.
aThe interpretive criteria used were those approved by the US Food and Drug Administration.
Dalbavancin
Dalbavancin, a second-generation lipoglycopeptide, was approved in the United States and Europe for the treatment of ABSSSIs in adults on the basis of non-inferiority against vancomycin and linezolid [22]. Its activity against gram-positive clinical isolates that cause ABSSSIs has been extensively documented [15, 23–25]. The first study, which evaluated its activity against 81 673 global gram-positive isolates collected between 2002 and 2007, revealed its activity against oxacillin-susceptible and -resistant strains of S. aureus (minimum inhibitory concentration [MIC50/90] 0.06/0.06 mg/L for both) and against coagulase-negative staphylococci (CoNS; MIC50/90 ≤0.03/0.06 mg/L for oxacillin-susceptible CoNS and ≤0.03/0.12 mg/L for oxacillin-resistant CoNS; Table 1) [15]. Both β-hemolytic and viridans group streptococci (VGS) were highly susceptible (MIC50/90 ≤0.03/≤0.03 mg/L; Table 1). A subsequent analysis of dalbavancin’s activity against 1555 isolates, collected in 2011 in the United States, revealed its activity against both methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) and MRSA (MIC50/90 0.06/0.06 mg/L for both) [23]. An evaluation of its activity against 1600 gram-positive isolates, collected in the United States in 2012, documented its stable activity over time since the initial evaluations (MIC50/90, 0.06/0.06 mg/L against MSSA, MRSA, and CoNS; ≤0.03/≤0.03 mg/L against β-hemolytic streptococci; and ≤0.03/0.06 against VGS) [24]. An analysis of dalbavancin’s activity against 8527 gram-positive isolates responsible for SSSIs in the United States and Europe, collected between 2011 and 2013, revealed MIC50/90 values of 0.06/0.06 mg/L against S. aureus isolates and ≤0.03/≤0.03 against VGS and β-hemolytic streptococci isolates from both regions [25].
Tedizolid
Tedizolid, available as the prodrug tedizolid phosphate, is an oxazolidinone approved in the United States and Europe for the treatment of ABSSSI following a demonstration of non-inferiority versus linezolid [26, 27]. An evaluation of its activity against 11 231 gram-positive clinical isolates, collected between 2009 and 2013 in the United States and Europe, revealed it to be highly active against S. aureus (MIC50/90 0.25/0.5 mg/L), regardless of methicillin resistance, as well as against β-hemolytic streptococci, VGS, S. pyogenes (MIC50/90 0.12/0.25 mg/L for all), and Enterococcus faecalis (MIC50/90 0.25/0.5 mg/L; Table 1) [16]. A subsequent analysis of 3929 S. aureus isolates, collected from 12 countries between 2014 and 2016, revealed tedizolid to be 4-fold more active compared with linezolid (MIC90 0.5 mg/L versus 2 mg/L), with tedizolid being equally active against both MSSA and MRSA (MIC90 0.25 mg/L) [28].
Oritavancin
Oritavancin is another lipoglycopeptide available for the treatment of ABSSSI in adults caused by gram-positive pathogens, including MRSA, and was approved based on non-inferiority versus vancomycin [29]. An analysis of activity against 13 262 isolates causing ABSSSIs, collected between 2010 and 2013, demonstrated its activity against S. aureus (MIC50/90 0.03/0.06 mg/L, with 98.8% of all isolates being susceptible) and CoNS (MIC50 0.015 mg/L and 0.03 mg/L in isolates from the United States and Europe, respectively; Table 1) [21]. Isolates of E. faecalis were all susceptible at ≤0.5 mg/L, although vancomycin-resistant isolates were 16-fold less susceptible (MIC50/90 0.25/0.5 mg/L) than vancomycin-susceptible isolates (MIC50/90 0.015/0.03 mg/L; 99.2–99.8% susceptible). Higher MICs (MIC50/90 0.03/0.12 mg/L) were exhibited by Van A–containing strains of Enterococcus faecium, while Van B–containing and vancomycin-susceptible strains showed identical MICs (MIC50/90 0.004/0.008 mg/L). Strong activity was also seen against S. pyogenes (MIC50/90 0.03/0.12 mg/L; 98.4%-98.6% susceptible), while activity was slightly lower against S. dysgalactiae (MIC50/90 0.06/0.25 mg/L; ≥98.3% susceptible).
Delafloxacin
Delafloxacin is a non-zwitterionic (anionic) fluoroquinolone approved for the treatment of ABSSSI based on efficacy versus vancomycin and linezolid [30–32]. Its activity against 6485 clinical isolates, collected in 2014 from the United States and Europe, including the gram-positive pathogens S. aureus (MIC50/90 ≤0.004/0.25 mg/L), Enterococcus faecalis (MIC50/90 0.06/1 mg/L), S. pyogenes (MIC50/90 0.008/0.015 mg/L), Streptococcus agalactiae (MIC50/90 0.008/0.015 mg/L), and S. dysgalactiae (MIC50/90 0.008/0.015 mg/L), has been demonstrated (Table 1) [17]. Delafloxacin’s activity against gram-negative pathogens, including E. coli (MIC50/90 0.03/4 mg/L; against extended-spectrum β-lactamase [ESBL]-positive isolates: MIC50/90 2/>4 mg/L), Klebsiella pneumoniae (MIC50/90 0.06/>4 mg/L; against ESBL-positive isolates: MIC50/90 4/>4 mg/L), Enterobacter spp. (MIC50/90 0.06/1 mg/L), and P. aeruginosa (MIC50/90 0.25/>4 mg/L), was also demonstrated (Table 2). It has shown high activity even against levofloxacin–non-susceptible isolates of S. aureus (both MRSA and MSSA) that cause ABSSSI [33].
Table 2.
Activity of Delafloxacin Against Gram-negative Pathogens Causing Skin and Skin Structure Infections
| % of Isolates Susceptible by the Following Criteria: | MIC (µg/mL) | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Organism Group
Location (Year[s] of Isolation) |
Number of Isolates | CLSI | EUCAST | 50% | 90% | Range | Author (Year) [Reference] |
| Pseudomonas aeruginosa | |||||||
| United States and Europe (2014) | 200 | – | – | 0.25 | >4 | 0.015 to >4 | Pfaller et al (2017) [17] |
| Europe and Surrounding Areas (2014–2016) | 275 | – | – | 0.5 | >4 | 0.03 to >4 | Huband et al (2017) [18] |
| United States (2014–2016) | 224 | – | – | 0.5 | 4 | – | Shortridge et al (2017) [19] |
| United States and Europe (2014–2016) | 2181 | 63.6 | – | 0.5 | >4 | – | Flamm et al (2017) [20] |
| Enterobacteriaceae | |||||||
| United States (2014–2016) | 1325 | – | – | 0.12 | 2 | – | Shortridge et al (2017) [19] |
| United States and Europe (2014–2016) | 12 468 | 66.7 | – | 0.12 | 4 | – | Flamm et al (2017) [20] |
| Enterobacter spp. | |||||||
| United States and Europe (2014) | 384 | – | – | 0.06 | 1 | ≤0.004 to >4 | Pfaller et al (2017) [17] |
| Escherichia coli | |||||||
| United States and Europe (2014) | 500 | – | – | 0.03 | 4 | ≤0.004 to >4 | Pfaller et al (2017) [17] |
| Europe and Surrounding Areas (2014–2016) | 262 | – | – | 0.06 | 4 | 0.015 to >4 | Huband et al (2017) [18] |
| United States and Europe (2014–2016) | 4436 | 64.8 | – | 0.06 | 4 | – | Flamm et al (2017) [20] |
| ESBL-positive Escherichia coli | |||||||
| United States and Europe (2014) | 92 | – | – | 2 | >4 | 0.008 to >4 | Pfaller et al (2017) [17] |
| Klebsiella pneumoniae | |||||||
| United States and Europe (2014) | 389 | – | – | 0.06 | >4 | 0.015 to >4 | Pfaller et al (2017) [17] |
| United States and Europe (2014–2016) | 2417 | 64.8 | – | 0.12 | >4 | – | Flamm et al (2017) [20] |
| ESBL-positive Klebsiella pneumoniae | |||||||
| United States and Europe (2014) | 102 | – | – | 4 | >4 | 0.06 to >4 | Pfaller et al (2017) [17] |
Abbreviations: CLSI, Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute; ESBL, extended-spectrum β-lactamase; EUCAST, European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing; MIC, minimum inhibitory concentration.
In 2 subsequent studies, delafloxacin’s activity was confirmed against clinical isolates, including fluoroquinolone-resistant isolates, responsible for ABSSSI in Europe and the United States between 2014 and 2016 (Tables 1 and 2) [18, 19]. Together, these studies evaluating activity against ABSSSI isolates, collected over a 3-year period from 2 geographic regions, highlight its continued activity over time.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS
Collectively, the reviewed studies highlight the comparative in vitro activity of agents approved over the past 5 years against bacterial pathogens that cause skin infections. An important characteristic of these antibiotics is their broad-spectrum activity against gram-positive pathogens implicated in skin infections, including resistant organisms [34–38]. Moreover, delafloxacin is also active against gram-negative pathogens [17–20]. Notably, delafloxacin has been shown to be significantly more active against S. aureus at a low pH, as compared with moxifloxacin, with this higher activity being attributed to its higher intracellular accumulation at a lower pH, which, in turn, is a function of it being predominantly uncharged at the low pH [39] (see also the review by Tulkens and colleagues in this issue [X]). The broad spectrum of activity of delafloxacin augurs well for addressing an important, unmet need: namely, the emergence of resistance and a consequent reduction in efficacy.
The trend of resistance in S. aureus, particularly MRSA, has been tracked globally by the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program [40]. Over the last 20 years (1997–2016), the rise of MRSA reached its peak 10 years ago and has been decreasing since then in all regions. In addition, the susceptibility of some older agents has increased, and may be associated with the emergence of epidemic clones (eg, USA 300) with fewer resistance determinants. Several of the newer agents discussed in this review have maintained excellent in vitro activity against S. aureus. The trend of increasing susceptibility was not the same for enterococci, with the prevalence of VRE increasing in all regions over the same period [41]. However, newer agents have maintained their excellent in vitro activities against VRE.
The choice of antimicrobial agents for the treatment of skin infections depends largely on the agent’s spectrum of activity, including against resistant pathogens. Delafloxacin, with its activity against both gram-positive (including MRSA) and gram-negative pathogens and its heightened activity in the acidic environments characteristic of skin abscesses, presents an effective therapeutic option for the treatment of skin infections.
Author contributions. Both authors were involved in the drafting, review, and approval of the manuscript for submission.
Acknowledgments. The authors thank Dr Glenn Tillotson of GST Micro LLC for expert feedback and Prasad Kulkarni and Alexandra Rayser of the Health Care Alliance Group, Voorhees, New Jersey, for assistance with the preparation of this manuscript.
Financial support. This work was supported by Melinta Therapeutics, New Haven, Connecticut.
Supplement sponsorship. This supplement is sponsored by Melinta Therapeutics, Inc.
Potential conflicts of interest. Both authors are employees of JMI Laboratories, Inc., which has received contracts to perform research services for Achaogen; Actelion; Allecra Therapeutics; Allergan; Amplyx Pharmaceuticals; AmpliPhi Biosciences; Antabio; American Proficiency Institute; Astellas Pharma; AstraZeneca; Athelas; Basilea Pharmaceutica; Bayer AG; Becton, Dickinson and Co.; Boston Pharmaceuticals; Biomodels; Cardeas Pharma Corp.; CEM-102 Pharma; Cempra; Cidara Therapeutics, Inc.; CorMedix; CSA Biotech; Cutanea Life Sciences, Inc.; Debiopharm Group; Dipexium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Duke; Entasis Therapeutics, Inc.; Fortress Biotech; Fox Chase Chemical Diversity Center, Inc.; Geom Therapeutics, Inc.; GSK; Iterum Pharma; Laboratory Specialists, Inc.; Medpace; Melinta Therapeutics, Inc.; Merck & Co.; Micromyx; MicuRx Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Motif Bio; N8 Medical, Inc.; Nabriva Therapeutics, Inc.; Nexcida Therapeutics, Inc.; NAEJA-RGM; Novartis; Paratek Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Pfizer; Polyphor; Ra Pharma; Rempex; Riptide Bioscience Inc.; Roche; Scynexis; Shionogi; Sinsa Labs Inc.; Skyline Antiinfectives; Sonoran Biosciences; Spero Therapeutics; Symbal Therapeutics; Symbiotica; Synlogic; Synthes Biomaterials; TenNor Therapeutics; Tetraphase; TGV Therapeutics; The Medicines Company; Theravance Biopharma; ThermoFisher Scientific; VenatoRx Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; Wockhardt; Yukon Pharma; Zai Laboratory; and Zavante Therapeutics, Inc. Neither author has participation in speakers’ bureaus or possession of stock options to declare. Both authors have submitted the ICMJE Form for Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest. Conflicts that the editors consider relevant to the content of the manuscript have been disclosed.
References
- 1. Hersh AL, Chambers HF, Maselli JH, Gonzales R. National trends in ambulatory visits and antibiotic prescribing for skin and soft-tissue infections. Arch Intern Med 2008; 168:1585–91. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2. Kaye KS, Patel DA, Stephens JM, Khachatryan A, Patel A, Johnson K. Rising United States hospital admissions for acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections: recent trends and economic impact. PLOS One 2015; 10:e0143276. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3. Summanen PH, Talan DA, Strong C, et al. . Bacteriology of skin and soft-tissue infections: comparison of infections in intravenous drug users and individuals with no history of intravenous drug use. Clin Infect Dis 1995; 20(Suppl 2):S279–82. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4. Moet GJ, Jones RN, Biedenbach DJ, Stilwell MG, Fritsche TR. Contemporary causes of skin and soft tissue infections in North America, Latin America, and Europe: report from the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program (1998–2004). Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2007; 57:7–13. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5. Ray GT, Suaya JA, Baxter R. Incidence, microbiology, and patient characteristics of skin and soft-tissue infections in a U.S. population: a retrospective population-based study. BMC Infect Dis 2013; 13:252. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6. Lee GC, Dallas SD, Wang Y, et al. . Emerging multidrug resistance in community-associated Staphylococcus aureus involved in skin and soft tissue infections and nasal colonization. J Antimicrob Chemother 2017; 72:2461–8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7. Loewen K, Schreiber Y, Kirlew M, Bocking N, Kelly L. Community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infection: Literature review and clinical update. Can Fam Physician 2017; 63:512–20. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8. Baek YS, Jeon J, Ahn JW, Song HJ. Antimicrobial resistance of Staphylococcus aureus isolated from skin infections and its implications in various clinical conditions in Korea. Int J Dermatol 2016; 55:e191–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9. Maina EK, Kiiyukia C, Wamae CN, Waiyaki PG, Kariuki S. Characterization of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus from skin and soft tissue infections in patients in Nairobi, Kenya. Int J Infect Dis 2013; 17:e115–9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10. Pallin DJ, Egan DJ, Pelletier AJ, Espinola JA, Hooper DC, Camargo CA Jr. Increased US emergency department visits for skin and soft tissue infections, and changes in antibiotic choices, during the emergence of community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Ann Emerg Med 2008; 51:291–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11. Suaya JA, Mera RM, Cassidy A, et al. . Incidence and cost of hospitalizations associated with Staphylococcus aureus skin and soft tissue infections in the United States from 2001 through 2009. BMC Infect Dis 2014; 14:296. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12. Rivera AM, Boucher HW. Current concepts in antimicrobial therapy against select gram-positive organisms: methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, penicillin-resistant pneumococci, and vancomycin-resistant enterococci. Mayo Clin Proc 2011; 86:1230–43. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13. Abbas M, Paul M, Huttner A. New and improved? A review of novel antibiotics for Gram-positive bacteria. Clin Microbiol Infect 2017; 23:697–703. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14. Russo A, Concia E, Cristini F, et al. . Current and future trends in antibiotic therapy of acute bacterial skin and skin-structure infections. Clin Microbiol Infect 2016; 22(Suppl 2):S27–36. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15. Biedenbach DJ, Bell JM, Sader HS, Turnidge JD, Jones RN. Activities of dalbavancin against a worldwide collection of 81,673 gram-positive bacterial isolates. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2009; 53:1260–3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16. Bensaci M, Sahm D. Surveillance of tedizolid activity and resistance: in vitro susceptibility of Gram-positive pathogens collected over 5 years from the United States and Europe. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2017; 87:133–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17. Pfaller MA, Sader HS, Rhomberg PR, Flamm RK. In vitro activity of delafloxacin against contemporary bacterial pathogens from the United States and Europe, 2014. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2017; 61:e02609–16. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18. Huband MD, Streit JM, Shortridge D, Flamm RK. In vitro evaluation of delafloxacin activity when tested against contemporary ABSSSI isolates from Europe and surrounding areas (2014–2016): results from the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program [poster # P1351]. In: Program and abstracts of European Congress of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases2017 (Vienna, Austria) 2017. [Google Scholar]
- 19. Shortridge D, Streit JM, Huband MD, Rhomberg PR, Flamm R. In vitro evaluation of delafloxacin activity when tested against contemporary ABSSSI isolates from the United States (2014–2016): results from the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program [poster Sunday 4]. In: Program and abstracts of American Society of Microbiology (ASM)Microbe 2017 (New Orleans, LA) 2017. [Google Scholar]
- 20. Flamm RK, Shortridge D, Huband MD, McCurdy S, Pfaller MA. Activity of delafloxacin when tested against bacterial surveillance isolates collected in the US and Europe during 2014–2016 as part of a global surveillance program [poster #1222]. In: Program and abstracts of ID Week 2017 (San Diego, CA). 2017. [Google Scholar]
- 21. Mendes RE, Farrell DJ, Sader HS, Flamm RK, Jones RN. Activity of oritavancin against Gram-positive clinical isolates responsible for documented skin and soft-tissue infections in European and US hospitals (2010-13). J Antimicrob Chemother 2015; 70:498–504. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22. Boucher HW, Wilcox M, Talbot GH, Puttagunta S, Das AF, Dunne MW. Once-weekly dalbavancin versus daily conventional therapy for skin infection. N Engl J Med 2014; 370:2169–79. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23. Jones RN, Sader HS, Flamm RK. Update of dalbavancin spectrum and potency in the USA: report from the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program (2011). Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2013; 75:304–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24. Jones RN, Flamm RK, Sader HS. Surveillance of dalbavancin potency and spectrum in the United States (2012). Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2013; 76:122–3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25. Mendes RE, Castanheira M, Farrell DJ, Flamm RK, Sader HS, Jones RN. Update on dalbavancin activity tested against Gram-positive clinical isolates responsible for documented skin and skin-structure infections in US and European hospitals (2011-13). J Antimicrob Chemother 2016; 71:276–8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26. Moran GJ, Fang E, Corey GR, Das AF, De Anda C, Prokocimer P. 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; 14:696–705. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27. Prokocimer P, De Anda C, Fang E, Mehra P, Das A. Tedizolid phosphate vs linezolid for treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections: the ESTABLISH-1 randomized trial. JAMA 2013; 309:559–69. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28. Karlowsky JA, Hackel MA, Bouchillon SK, Alder J, Sahm DF. In vitro activities of Tedizolid and comparator antimicrobial agents against clinical isolates of Staphylococcus aureus collected in 12 countries from 2014 to 2016. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 2017; 89:151–7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29. Corey GR, Kabler H, Mehra P, et al. ; SOLO I Investigators Single-dose oritavancin in the treatment of acute bacterial skin infections. N Engl J Med 2014; 370:2180–90. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30. Kingsley J, Mehra P, Lawrence LE, et al. . A randomized, double-blind, Phase 2 study to evaluate subjective and objective outcomes in patients with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections treated with delafloxacin, linezolid or vancomycin. J Antimicrob Chemother 2016; 71:821–9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31. Melinta Therapeutics I. Baxdela (delafloxacin) prescribing information Available at: https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2017/208610s000,208611s000lbl.pdf Accessed 21 October 2017.
- 32. Pullman J, Gardovskis J, Farley B, et al. ; PROCEED Study Group 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; 72:3471–80. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33. McCurdy S, Lawrence L, Quintas M, et al. . In vitro activity of delafloxacin and microbiological response against fluoroquinolone-susceptible and nonsusceptible staphylococcus aureus isolates from two phase 3 studies of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2017; 61:e00772–17. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34. Juul JJ, Mullins CF, Peppard WJ, Huang AM. New developments in the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections: considerations for the effective use of dalbavancin. Ther Clin Risk Manag 2016; 12:225–32. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35. Ferrández O, Urbina O, Grau S. Critical role of tedizolid in the treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections. Drug Des Devel Ther 2017; 11:65–82. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36. Brade KD, Rybak JM, Rybak MJ. Oritavancin: a new lipoglycopeptide antibiotic in the treatment of gram-positive infections. Infect Dis Ther 2016; 5:1–15. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37. Gleghorn K, Grimshaw E, Kelly EK. New antibiotics in the management of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections. Skin Therapy Lett 2015; 20:7–9. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38. Van Bambeke F. Delafloxacin, a non-zwitterionic fluoroquinolone in Phase III of clinical development: evaluation of its pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and clinical efficacy. Future Microbiol 2015; 10:1111–23. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39. Lemaire S, Tulkens PM, Van Bambeke F. Contrasting effects of acidic pH on the extracellular and intracellular activities of the anti-gram-positive fluoroquinolones moxifloxacin and delafloxacin against Staphylococcus aureus. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 2011; 55:649–58. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40. Diekema DJ, Pfaller MA, Shortridge D, Zervos M, Jones RN. Twenty-year trends in antibiotic susceptibility among Staphylococcus aureus from the SENTRY antimicrobial surveillance program [poster Friday-425]. In: Program and abstracts of ASM Microbe 2018 (Atlanta, GA).2018. [Google Scholar]
- 41. Pfaller MA, Mendes RE, Cormican M, Jones RN, Flamm RK. Temporal and geographic variation in antimicrobial susceptibility and resistance patterns of Enterococci: results from the SENTRY Antimicrobial Surveillance Program, 1997–2016 [poster Friday-450]. In: Program and abstracts of ASM Microbe 2018 (Atlanta, GA).2018. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]