Mupirocin

VANCOUVER, Canada--( BUSINESS WIRE )--Following its successful fundraising of C$4.91 million (US$3.62), Canadian life sciences company Ondine Biomedical Inc. will continue accelerating commercialisation of its proven nasal photodisinfection technology. This cutting-edge technology replaces topical antibiotics for the prevention of healthcare-associated infections (HAIs) and kills all types of pathogens – bacteria, viruses and fungi – without causing antimicrobial resistance. The company has confirmed that it has more than doubled the number of Steriwave ® deployments in 2023 and is in discussions with more than 75 hospitals in the UK, Mexico, Spain, and Canada. The growing global focus on preventing HAIs post-surgery, coupled with the escalating challenge of antimicrobial resistance, has spurred heightened interest in Ondine’s photodisinfection technology. The deployments are in areas of major surgery, including spinal, orthopedic, and cardiovascular. The antibiotic mupirocin has been used for nasal decolonization for the prevention of HAIs since the 1980s. However, mupirocin has resistance rates of up to 81%, 2 and very poor compliance. 3 Carolyn Cross, CEO of Ondine, commented, "We have put great efforts into improving our commercial activity sales process, which has increased the speed of the average sales cycle from contact to deployment by 50%. We have appointed distributors in the UK, Spain, and Mexico and are gaining real momentum. What is particularly encouraging is that many hospitals are recommending Steriwave to other hospitals. We believe this momentum will continue to increase, and commercial sales will become more significant in 2024.” The five-minute Steriwave nasal decolonization procedure is easy to incorporate into the pre surgery procedures. It is painless and very well received by patients who are often intrigued by the process. There have been no reports of serious side effects as a result of Steriwave usage. Steriwave has been used by more than 150,000 patients, including at Vancouver General Hospital where its use has been associated with a significant reduction in HAIs across major surgeries. 4,5 As well as growing its commercial activities, the company continues to work closely with HCA – the largest hospital group in the United States – to prepare for the Phase 3 trial in circa 14 HCA hospitals as part of its Ondine’s submission to the FDA for approval. The company already has approval for Steriwave in Canada, the UK, the EU, and Mexico. Implementing nasal decolonization prior to major surgery to reduce HAIs is recommended by leading medical bodies, including the World Health Organization, 6 the Society for Healthcare Epidemiology of America (SHEA), 7 and NICE. 8 The nose is the major reservoir of pathogens and the majority of surgical site infections (SSIs) and bloodstream infections have been traced back to bacteria in the patient’s nose. 9 A patient with a surgical site infection (SSI) will, on average, spend 7 to 11 days longer in the hospital, significantly increasing costs and lengthening patients' recovery. 10 While currently focusing on nasal decolonization, Ondine’s patented photodisinfection technology will be developed to prevent and treat a wide variety of topical infections. About Ondine Biomedical Inc. Ondine Biomedical Inc. is a Canadian life science company pioneering the field of photodisinfection therapies. Ondine has a pipeline of investigational products, based on its proprietary photodisinfection platform, in various stages of development. Products beyond nasal photodisinfection include therapies for a variety of medical indications such as chronic sinusitis, ventilator-associated pneumonia, burns, and other indications. 1 Stone PW. Economic burden of healthcare-associated infections: an American perspective. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2009 Oct;9(5):417-22. doi: 10.1586/erp.09.53. PMID: 19817525; PMCID: PMC2827870. 2 Poovelikunnel T, Gethin G, Humphreys H. Mupirocin resistance: clinical implications and potential alternatives for the eradication of MRSA. J Antimicrob Chemother . 2015;70(10):2681-2692. doi:10.1093/jac/dkv169 3 Hansen D, Patzke PI, Werfel U, Benner D, Brauksiepe A, Popp W. Success of MRSA eradication in hospital routine: depends on compliance. Infection. 2007 Jun;35(4):260-4. doi: 10.1007/s15010-007-6273-y. Epub 2007 Jul 23. PMID: 17646910. 4 Bryce E, Wong T, Forrester L, Masri B, Jeske D, Barr K, Errico S, Roscoe D. Nasal photodisinfection and chlorhexidine wipes decrease surgical site infections: a historical control study and propensity analysis. J Hosp Infect. 2014 Oct;88(2):89-95. doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2014.06.017. Epub 2014 Aug 1. Erratum in: J Hosp Infect. 2015 Sep;91(1):93. PMID: 25171975. 5 Moskven E, Banaszek D, Sayre E, Gara A, Bryce E, Wong T, Ailon T, Charest-Morin R, Dea N., Dvorak M, Fisher C, Kwon B, Paquette S, Street J. Effectiveness of prophylactic intranasal photodynamic disinfection therapy and chlorhexidine gluconate body wipes for surgical site infection prophylaxis in adult spine surgery. Can J Surg. 2023 Nov;66(6), E550–E560. https://doi.org/10.1503/cjs.016922 6 World Health Organization. Global Guidelines for the Prevention of Surgical Site Infection. World Health Organization; 2016. Available at: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/9789241550475 . Accessed December 12, 2023. 7 Calderwood MS, Anderson DJ, Bratzler DW, et al. Strategies to prevent surgical site infections in acute-care hospitals: 2022 Update. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2023;44(5):695-720. doi:10.1017/ice.2023.67 8 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE). NICE Surgical Site Infections: Prevention and Treatment. NICE; 2019. Available at: https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/ng125 . Accessed December 12, 2023. 9 von Eiff C, Becker K, Machka K, Stammer H, Peters G. Nasal carriage as a source of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Study Group. N Engl J Med. 2001 Jan 4;344(1):11-6. doi: 10.1056/NEJM200101043440102. PMID: 11136954. 10 Seidelman JL, Mantyh CR, Anderson DJ. Surgical Site Infection Prevention: A Review. JAMA. 2023;329(3):244–252. doi:10.1001/jama.2022.24075

MONDAY, May 8, 2023 -- When Ann Alexander underwent chemotherapy to treat breast cancer a decade ago, she was warned about potential hair loss, nausea and vomiting. The 73-year-old wasn’t, however, told about the potential side effects of radiation therapy, namely acute radiation dermatitis. Symptoms can range from mild to severe, and they include itchy skin, swelling, blistering and open sores. “It was painful, and it was scary,” the Bronx, N.Y., resident said. "I did everything I was supposed to do and ended up with really bad burns on my skin. I would have liked a heads up that this could occur.” Now 10 years cancer-free, Alexander routinely counsels other women on what to expect and how to deal with this side effect as a Bronx Oncology Living Daily (BOLD) buddy. Each year, 95% of people undergoing radiation to treat cancer will develop acute radiation dermatitis. Until recently, this condition was poorly understood and there wasn’t much to do to prevent it. This may all change due to the results of two new studies that implicate a common bacterium as the culprit and suggest that a simple antibacterial treatment may be the solution. “I absolutely believe these findings should change practice,” said study author Dr. Beth McLellan , director of supportive oncodermatology at Montefiore Einstein Cancer Center and chief of the division of dermatology at Montefiore Health System and Albert Einstein College of Medicine in the Bronx. Until now, acute radiation dermatitis was believed to be the result of a radiation burn, but when researchers took cultures of bacteria before and after radiation from 76 people being treated for cancer, they started to see things differently. The investigators took samples from inside the nose, skin in the radiated area, and skin on the side of the body not treated with radiation. Before treatment, around 20% of people tested positive for Staphylococcus aureus bacteria (staph) but did not have an active infection. After treatment, 48% of people who developed severe radiation dermatitis tested positive for staph , compared with only 17% of those who developed the mildest form of the condition, the study found. Staph typically lives on the skin and doesn't cause any problems. But radiation may weaken the skin’s structure and allow the bacteria to break through the skin, the study authors explained. Many people tested positive for nasal staph, suggesting that nose bacteria might infect the skin. The second study included 77 patients undergoing radiation. They were told to follow the standard care (normal hygiene and moisturizing treatment such as Aquaphor) or an experimental antibacterial regimen. This treatment involved using the antibacterial body cleanser chlorhexidine and mupirocin, an antibiotic nasal ointment, every day for five days, every other week, throughout their radiation treatment. More than half the people treated with the new antibacterial regimen developed mild-to-moderate symptoms, but no one developed severe symptoms. In contrast, 23% of people who followed the current standard of care developed severe symptoms, the findings showed. “People should know that there are options to prevent radiation dermatitis, including our antibacterial regimen, and they should ask their radiation oncologist if it is an option for them before they start treatment,” said McLellan. Both studies were published online May 4 in JAMA Oncology . “Radiation dermatitis is an expected bystander effect for many undergoing radiotherapy for various cancers, one which can be extremely burdensome, disabling, possibly treatment-interfering, and for which we have no standard of care for prevention or treatment,” said Dr. Adam Friedman . He is chair of dermatology at the George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, in Washington, D.C. People who develop more severe radiation dermatitis tend to have staph in their nasal passages, said Friedman, who has no ties to the new study. “Utilizing a relatively simple decolonization regimen significantly limited the severity of radiation dermatitis in cancer patients, compared to those receiving standard of care for prevention/management,” he said. “More work is needed; however, given the simplicity of this preventive strategy, I will certainly consider it in my supportive oncodermatology clinic at George Washington University,” Friedman added. Sources Ann Alexander, patient advocate, Bronx, N.Y. Beth McLellan, MD, director, supportive oncodermatology, Montefiore Einstein Cancer Center, chief, division of dermatology, Montefiore Health System and Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY Adam Friedman, MD, chair, dermatology, George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, D.C. JAMA Oncology, May 4, 2023, online Posted May 2023