Plasma and Intrapulmonary Concentrations of Tebipenem following Oral Administration of Tebipenem Pivoxil Hydrobromide to Healthy Adult Subjects.

Tebipenem pivoxil hydrobromide (TBP-PI-HBr) is an oral carbapenem prodrug being developed for the treatment of serious bacterial infections. The active moiety, tebipenem, has broad-spectrum activity against common Enterobacterales pathogens, including extended-spectrum-ß-lactamase (ESBL)-producing multidrug-resistant strains. This study evaluated the intrapulmonary pharmacokinetics (PK) and epithelial lining fluid (ELF) and alveolar macrophage (AM) concentrations of tebipenem relative to plasma levels in nonsmoking, healthy adult subjects. Thirty subjects received oral TBP-PI-HBr at 600 mg every 8 h for five doses. Serial blood samples were collected following the last dose. Each subject underwent one standardized bronchoscopy with bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) 1, 2, 4, 6, or 8 h after the fifth dose of TBP-PI-HBr. The tebipenem area under the concentration-time curve for the 8-h dosing interval (AUC0-8) values in plasma, ELF, and AMs were calculated using the mean concentration at each BAL sampling time. Ratios of AUC0-8 values for total ELF and AMs to those for unbound plasma were determined, using a plasma protein binding value of 42%. Mean values ± standard deviations (SD) of tebipenem maximum (Cmax) and minimum (Cmin) total plasma concentrations were 11.37 ± 3.87 mg/L and 0.043 ± 0.039 mg/L, respectively. Peak tebipenem concentrations in plasma, ELF, and AMs occurred at 1 h and then decreased over 8 h. Ratios of tebipenem AUC0-8 values for ELF and AMs to those for unbound plasma were 0.191 and 0.047, respectively. Four (13.3%) subjects experienced adverse events (diarrhea, fatigue, papule, and coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19]); all resolved, and none were severe or serious. Tebipenem is distributed into the lungs of healthy adults, which supports the further evaluation of TBP-PI-HBr for the treatment of lower respiratory tract bacterial infections caused by susceptible pathogens. (This study has been registered at ClinicalTrials.gov under identifier NCT04710407.).

Oral Tebipenem Pivoxil Hydrobromide in Complicated Urinary Tract Infection.

BACKGROUND: There is a need for oral antibiotic agents that are effective against multidrug-resistant gram-negative uropathogens. Tebipenem pivoxil hydrobromide is an orally bioavailable carbapenem with activity against uropathogenic Enterobacterales, including extended-spectrum beta-lactamase-producing and fluoroquinolone-resistant strains. METHODS: In this phase 3, international, double-blind, double-dummy trial, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of orally administered tebipenem pivoxil hydrobromide as compared with intravenous ertapenem in patients with complicated urinary tract infection or acute pyelonephritis. Patients were randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive oral tebipenem pivoxil hydrobromide (at a dose of 600 mg every 8 hours) or intravenous ertapenem (at a dose of 1 g every 24 hours) for 7 to 10 days (or up to 14 days in patients with bacteremia). The primary efficacy end point was overall response (a composite of clinical cure and favorable microbiologic response) at a test-of-cure visit (on day 19, within a ±2-day window) in the microbiologic intention-to-treat population. The noninferiority margin was 12.5%. RESULTS: A total of 1372 hospitalized adult patients were enrolled; 868 patients (63.3%) were included in the microbiologic intention-to-treat population (50.8% of whom had complicated urinary tract infections and 49.2% of whom had pyelonephritis). An overall response was seen in 264 of 449 patients (58.8%) who received tebipenem pivoxil hydrobromide, as compared with 258 of 419 patients (61.6%) who received ertapenem (weighted difference, -3.3 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -9.7 to 3.2). Clinical cure at the test-of-cure visit was observed in 93.1% of the patients in the microbiologic intention-to-treat population who received tebipenem pivoxil hydrobromide and 93.6% of patients who received ertapenem (weighted difference, -0.6 percentage point; 95% CI, -4.0 to 2.8); the majority of patients with microbiologic response failures at the test-of-cure visit were asymptomatic patients with recurrent bacteriuria. Secondary and subgroup analyses were supportive of the primary analysis. Adverse events were observed in 25.7% of patients who received tebipenem pivoxil hydrobromide and in 25.6% of patients who received ertapenem; the most common adverse events were mild diarrhea and headache. CONCLUSIONS: Oral tebipenem pivoxil hydrobromide was noninferior to intravenous ertapenem in the treatment of complicated urinary tract infection and acute pyelonephritis and had a similar safety profile. (Funded by Spero Therapeutics and the Department of Health and Human Services; ADAPT-PO ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03788967.).