Nonclinical and pharmacokinetic assessments to evaluate the potential of tedizolid and linezolid to affect mitochondrial function

Prolonged treatment with the oxazolidinone linezolid is associated with myelosuppression, lactic acidosis, and neuropathies, toxicities likely caused by impairment of mitochondrial protein synthesis (MPS). To evaluate the potential of the novel oxazolidinone tedizolid to cause similar side effects, nonclinical and pharmacokinetic assessments were conducted. In isolated rat heart mitochondria, tedizolid inhibited MPS more potently than did linezolid (average [± standard error of the mean] 50% inhibitory concentration [IC50] for MPS of 0.31 ± 0.02 μM versus 6.4 ± 1.2 μM). However, a rigorous 9-month rat study comparing placebo and high-dose tedizolid (resulting in steady-state area under the plasma concentration-time curve values about 8-fold greater than those with the standard therapeutic dose in humans) showed no evidence of neuropathy. Additional studies explored why prolonged, high-dose tedizolid did not cause these mitochondriopathic side effects despite potent MPS inhibition by tedizolid. Murine macrophage (J774) cell fractionation studies found no evidence of a stable association of tedizolid with eukaryotic mitochondria. Monte Carlo simulations based on population pharmacokinetic models showed that over the course of a dosing interval using standard therapeutic doses, free plasma concentrations fell below the respective MPS IC50 in 84% of tedizolid-treated patients (for a median duration of 7.94 h) and 38% of linezolid-treated patients (for a median duration of 0 h). Therapeutic doses of tedizolid, but not linezolid, may therefore allow for mitochondrial recovery during antibacterial therapy. The overall results suggest that tedizolid has less potential to cause myelosuppression and neuropathy than that of linezolid during prolonged treatment courses. This, however, remains a hypothesis that must be confirmed in clinical studies

Tedizolid phosphate for the management of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections: safety summary

The novel oxazolidinone tedizolid phosphate is in late-stage clinical development. In an effort to improve efficacy and safety, the adverse event profile and safety aspects of tedizolid phosphate have been evaluated in several preclinical animal models and through ongoing clinical trials. Early dose-ranging studies demonstrated a favorable overall adverse event profile and low thrombocytopenia rates, which have been consistently confirmed in phase 2 and 3 clinical trials. Pharmacokinetic modeling suggests a lower potential for monoamine oxidase interaction, and animal and human subject testing has confirmed these predictions. Studies in special patient populations showed a consistent and predictable pharmacokinetic profile across age groups and comorbid conditions, without evidence of increased incidence of adverse effects over matched controls. The favorable safety profile makes tedizolid phosphate an important new option for the management of serious Gram-positive infections, including those caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus

Cloning, Expression, Purification, and Immunocharacterization of Placental Protein-14

Human placental protein-14 (PP-14), a member of the lipocalin superfamily, shares homology at the level of the primary and secondary structures with bovine $\beta$-lactoglobulin. It is the most prominent endometrial protein synthesized by the glandular cells of endometrium under estrogen priming and progesterone stimulation. The temporal and spatial expression of PP-14 in the female reproductive tract combined with its biological activities ex vivo suggest that this glycoprotein probably plays an essential physiological role in the regulation of fertilization, implantation, and maintenance of pregnancy. We proposed to elucidate the molecular mechanisms involved in the function of this protein. A prerequisite to such investigations on any protein is the availability of sufficient amounts of the same in a homogenous form. Therefore, recombinant DNA technology was employed. The PP-14 cDNA was obtained from the first-trimester endometrial tissue RNA by RT-PCR using unique primers. After confirming the identity of the gene, the protein was expressed in Escherichia coli and purified to homogeneity. The gene was also cloned and expressed in Pichia pastoris to obtain the protein product in a glycosylated form. The recombinant proteins were immunocharacterized using a cross-reactive antibody raised to bovine $\beta$-lactoglobulin. Polyclonal antiserum raised to the E coli expressed PP-14 also bound to the native PP-14 from amniotic fluid suggesting that recombinant PP-14 may be exploited to elucidate functional aspects of the protein

Activity of ceftaroline against extracellular (broth) and intracellular (THP-1 monocytes) forms of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: comparison with vancomycin, linezolid and daptomycin

BACKGROUND: Ceftaroline fosamil is approved for treatment of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). We examined the activity of its active metabolite (ceftaroline) against intracellular forms of S. aureus in comparison with vancomycin, daptomycin and linezolid. METHODS: Two methicillin-susceptible S. aureus (MSSA) and 11 MRSA strains with ceftaroline MICs from 0.125 to 2 mg/L [two strains vancomycin- and one strain linezolid-resistant (EUCAST interpretative criteria); VISA and cfr+] were investigated. The activity was measured in broth and after phagocytosis by THP-1 monocytes in concentration-dependent experiments (24 h of incubation) to determine: (i) relative potencies (EC(50)) and static concentrations (C(s)) (mg/L and × MIC); and (ii) relative activities at human C(max) (E(C)(max)) and maximal relative efficacies (E(max)) (change in log(10) cfu compared with initial inoculum). Ceftaroline stability and cellular accumulation (at 24 h) were measured by mass spectrometry. RESULTS: Ceftaroline showed similar activities in broth and in monocytes compared with vancomycin, daptomycin and linezolid, with no impact of resistance mechanisms to vancomycin or linezolid. For all four antibiotics, intracellular E(C)(max) and E(max) were considerably lower than in broth (∼0.5 log(10) versus 4-5 log(10) cfu decrease), but the EC(50) and C(s) showed comparatively little change (all values between ∼0.3 and ∼6× MIC). The mean cellular to extracellular ceftaroline concentration ratios (20 mg/L; 24 h) were 0.66 ± 0.05 and 0.90 ± 0.36 in uninfected and infected cells, respectively. CONCLUSION: In vitro, ceftaroline controls the growth of intracellular MRSA to an extent similar to that of vancomycin, linezolid and daptomycin for strains with a ceftaroline MIC ≤ 2 mg/L