Acorafloxacin

Topical fluoroquinolones (FQs) are an established treatment for suspected microbial keratitis. An increased FQ resistance in some classes of bacterial pathogens is a concern. Some recently developed FQs have an extended spectrum of activity, making them a suitable alternative for topical ophthalmic use. For example, the new generation FQs, avarofloxacin, delafloxacin, finafloxacin, lascufloxacin, nadifloxacin, levonadifloxacin, nemonoxacin and zabofloxacin have good activity against the common ophthalmic pathogens such asStaphylococcus aureus,Pseudomonas aeruginosa,Streptococcus pneumoniaeand several of theEnterobacteriaceae. However, because there are no published ophthalmic break-point concentrations, the susceptibility of an isolated micro-organism to a topical FQ is extrapolated from systemic break-point data and wild type susceptibility. The purpose of this review is to compare the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the FQs licensed for topical ophthalmic use with the same parameters for new generation FQs. We performed a literature review of the FQs approved for topical treatment and the new generation FQs licensed to treat systemic infections. We then compared the minimum inhibitory concentrations (MIC) of bacterial isolates and the published concentrations that FQs achieved in the cornea and aqueous. We also considered the potential suitability of new generation FQs for topical use based on their medicinal properties. Notably, we found significant variation in the reported corneal and aqueous FQ concentrations so that reliance on the reported mean concentration may not be appropriate, and the first quartile concentration may be more clinically relevant. The provision of the MIC for the microorganism together with the achieved lower (first) quartile concentration of a FQ in the cornea could inform management decisions such as whether to continue with the prescribed antimicrobial, increase the frequency of application, use a combination of antimicrobials or change treatment.

This study compared the clinical efficacy and safety of anti-methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) quinolones for treating acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections (ABSSSIs).

PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for relevant articles from inception to 21 July 2021. RCTs comparing the clinical efficacy and safety of anti-MRSA quinolones with other antibiotics for treating adult patients with ABSSSIs were included.

Six RCTs were included. A total of 1,264 and 1,307 participants received the anti-MRSA quinolone-based study group and the control group. In the study group receiving anti-MRSA quinolone-based treatment, 935, 246, and 83 patients received delafloxacin, levonadifloxacin, and acorafloxacin, respectively. No significant difference was observed in the clinical cure rate at test of cure between the study and control groups (OR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.91-1.29; I² = 0%). In patients with MRSA-associated ABSSSIs, the clinical cure rate (OR, 1.09; 95% CI, 0.71-1.65; I² = 0%) and microbiological response rate (OR, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.48-3.21; I² = 0%) of anti-MRSA quinolones were similar to those of other antibiotics.

The efficacy of anti-MRSA quinolone-based treatment is comparable to that of other anti-MRSA antibiotics for treating ABSSSIs.