Sulbactam

Acinetobacter baumannii-calcoaceticus complex (ABC) causes severe infections that are difficult to treat due to pre-existing antibiotic resistance. Sulbactam-durlobactam (SUL-DUR) is a targeted β-lactam/β-lactamase inhibitor combination antibiotic designed to treat serious infections caused by Acinetobacter, including multidrug- and carbapenem-resistant strains. In a recent global surveillance study of 5,032 ABC clinical isolates collected from 2016 to 2021, less than 2% of ABC isolates had SUL-DUR MIC values >4 µg/mL. Molecular characterization of these isolates confirmed the primary drivers of resistance are metallo-β-lactamases or penicillin-binding protein 3 (PBP3) mutations, as previously described. In addition, this study shows that certain common PBP3 variants, such as A515V, are insufficient to confer sulbactam resistance and that the efflux of durlobactam by AdeIJK is likely to play a role in a subset of strains.

Durlobactam (DUR; ETX2514) is a novel β-lactamase inhibitor with broad-spectrum activity against Ambler class A, C, and D β-lactamases. Durlobactam restores the in vitro activity of sulbactam (SUL) against members of the Acinetobacter baumannii-A. calcoaceticus complex (ABC). Sulbactam (SUL)-durlobactam (SUL-DUR) is under development for the treatment of ABC infections. Eighty patients with complicated urinary tract infection (cUTI), including acute pyelonephritis (AP), were randomized 2:1 to receive SUL-DUR at 1 g/1 g intravenously (i.v.) or placebo every 6 h (q6h) for 7 days and background therapy with imipenem-cilastatin (IMI) at 500 mg i.v. q6h to evaluate the tolerability of SUL-DUR in hospitalized patients. Patients with bacteremia could receive up to 14 days of therapy. SUL-DUR tolerability and the values of various pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters were determined. Efficacy was recorded at the test-of-cure (TOC) visit. SUL-DUR was well tolerated, with no serious adverse events (AEs) being reported. Headache (5.7%), nausea (3.8%), diarrhea (3.8%), and vascular pain (3.8%) were the most common drug-related AEs with SUL-DUR and were mostly of mild or moderate severity. The PK profile of DUR and SUL in hospitalized patients was consistent with observations in healthy volunteers. Overall success in the microbiological modified intent-to-treat (m-MITT) population was similar between the groups, as would be expected with IMI background therapy in all patients (overall success at the TOC visit, 76.6% [n = 36] with SUL-DUR and 81.0% [n = 17] with placebo). SUL-DUR in combination with IMI was well tolerated in patients with cUTIs. The pharmacokinetics of SUL-DUR observed in hospitalized patients was similar to that observed in healthy volunteers. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under identifier NCT03445195.).

Sulbactam-durlobactam is being developed for the treatment of infections caused by Acinetobacter baumannii, including those caused by multidrug- and carbapenem-resistant isolates. This was a phase 1 study to evaluate the effects of various degrees of renal impairment, including subjects with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) on hemodialysis (HD), on the pharmacokinetics and safety profile of durlobactam (also known as ETX2514) and sulbactam after single intravenous (i.v.) dose administration. For healthy subjects and those with mild or moderate renal impairment (RI), single 1,000-mg doses each of durlobactam and sulbactam via a 3-h i.v. infusion were administered, and for severe renal impairment, 500-mg doses were administered. For subjects with ESRD and HD, 500-mg i.v. doses each of durlobactam and sulbactam were administered post-HD and pre-HD, with a 1-week washout between doses. Among 34 subjects, decreasing renal function increased systemic exposure (peak plasma concentration [Cmax] and area under the concentration-time curve [AUC]) to durlobactam and sulbactam in a generally linear manner. In healthy subjects and in those with mild or moderate renal impairment, the majority of durlobactam and sulbactam was excreted in the urine, while approximately 40% or less was excreted in urine in subjects with severe renal impairment or ESRD. In subjects with ESRD, hemodialysis was effective at removing both durlobactam and sulbactam from plasma. Renal impairment had no effect of the safety/tolerability profile of durlobactam and sulbactam. In summary, RI and ESRD had a predictable effect on the pharmacokinetic (PK) profile of durlobactam and sulbactam with no adverse effects on the safety/tolerability profile. Durlobactam and sulbactam are cleared to a similar extent by renal elimination and are impacted similarly by renal impairment. The results from this study have been used with population PK modeling and nonclinically derived PK/PD (pharmacodynamic) exposure targets to establish dosage recommendations for durlobactam and sulbactam in patients with various degrees of RI. The dosing regimen of durlobactam-sulbactam will require adjustment in patients with severe renal insufficiency and in those with ESRD.

The guideline-based therapy achieves sputum culture conversion rates in 20%-34% of patients with Mycobacterium abscessus (MAB) lung disease (LD). Double-β-lactam combinations have been proposed to improve cure based on time-kill curves. We tested MICs followed by hollow fiber system model of MAB (HFS-MAB) exposure-effect studies with sulbactam-durlobactam administered every 8 h (q8h), q12h, and q24h, to identify target exposures. Next, the sulbactam-durlobactam target exposure plus ceftriaxone was administered in the HFS-MAB inoculated with three different MAB isolates, as was the sulbactam-durlobactam-ceftriaxone combination with epetraborole and omadacycline (SDCEO). γ-slopes (kill-speed) were calculated for all regimens. The minimal sulbactam-durlobactam clinical doses that achieved target exposure were identified using Monte Carlo experiments. Ceftriaxone reduced sulbactam-durlobactam MICs by eight-tube dilutions. In the HFS-MAB, sulbactam-durlobactam microbial kill and antimicrobial resistance were linked to % time concentration persists above MIC (%TMIC), with target exposure of 50%TMIC. Sulbactam-durlobactam killed 3.85 log10 CFU/mL below day 0 burden (B0) with regrowth. Sulbactam-durlobactam plus ceftriaxone killed without regrowth and demonstrated Bliss additivity. The kill slope of bacterial population in >95% of virtual subjects was 2.28 (0.97-4.80) log10 CFU/mL/day for sulbactam-durlobactam-ceftriaxone and 2.91 (1.65-4.93) log10 CFU/mL/day for SDCEO. The optimal sulbactam-durlobactam dose co-administered with ceftriaxone was 2G q8h for creatinine clearance >90 mL/min (or 4G q12h for outpatients), 2G q12h for 60-90 mL/min, 1G q12h for ≥30 to <60 mL/min, and 1G q24h for <30 mL/min. Sulbactam-durlobactam-ceftriaxone achieved the highest microbial kill encountered so far in the HFS-MAB. Sulbactam-durlobactam-ceftriaxone should be tested as the backbone for novel treatment shortening regimens.