Oral Omadacycline vs. Oral Linezolid for the Treatment of ABSSSI

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the safety and efficacy of omadacycline as compared to linezolid in the treatment of adults with acute bacterial skin and skin structure infections.

Official Title
-----------------
A Phase 3 Randomized, Double-Blind, Multi-Center Study to Compare the Safety and Efficacy of Oral Omadacycline to Oral Linezolid for Treating Adult Subjects With Acute Bacterial Skin and Skin Structure Infection (ABSSSI)

Conditions
-----------------
Bacterial Infections, Skin Structures and Soft Tissue Infections

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Drug: Omadacycline
* Drug: Linezolid


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Patients, ages 18 years or older who have signed the informed consent Has a qualifying skin and skin structure infection Female patients must not be pregnant at the time of enrollment Must agree to a reliable method of birth control during the study and for 30 days following the last dose of study drug Exclusion Criteria: Infections where the outcome is strongly influenced by factors other than protocol-defined treatments and procedures, or that require antibacterial treatment for greater than 14 days Evidence of significant immunological disease Severe renal disease or requirement for dialysis Evidence of septic shock Has a history of hypersensitivity or allergic reaction to any tetracycline or to linezolid Has received an investigational drug within the past 30 days Women who are pregnant or nursing

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 18 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
No

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Design Details

Primary Purpose: Treatment
Allocation: Randomized
Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
Masking: Triple


Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Experimental: Omadacycline<br>Omadacycline tablets | Drug: Omadacycline<br>* po tablets<br>|
| Active Comparator: Linezolid<br>Linezolid tablets | Drug: Linezolid<br>* po tablets<br>* Other names: Zyvox;|

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Number of Participants With Early Clinical Response | Early clinical response is defined as clinical success, which is categorized as survival with at least a 20% reduction of acute bacterial skin and skin structure infection (ABSSSI) primary lesion size compared to Screening measurements, without receiving any rescue antibacterial therapy. An indeterminate classification is used for a response that could not be adequately inferred because the participant was not assessed because they withdrew consent, were lost to follow-up, or other specified reason. | Screening; 48 to 72 hours after the first dose of test article | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Number of Participants With the Indicated Investigator Assessment of Clinical Response in the mITT Population at the Post Therapy Evaluation (PTE) Visit | At the PTE Visit the investigator indicated one of the following outcomes relating to the primary infection under study: Clinical Success: participant was alive; infection was sufficiently resolved such that further antibacterial therapy was not needed. Participants may have had some residual changes related to infection requiring ancillary treatment. Clinical Failure was defined as meeting any of the following criteria: infection required additional treatment with alternative antibacterial therapy; participant received antibacterial therapy between the End-of-Treatment (EOT) Visit and the PTE Visit that may have been effective for the infection under study for a different infection from the one under study; unplanned major surgical intervention for the infection under study between the EOT and PTE Visits; participant died before evaluation; other specified reason. Indeterminate The clinical response to test article could not be adequately inferred. | Screening; 7 to 14 days after the last day of therapy | 
| Number of Participants With the Indicated Investigator Assessment of Clinical Response in the Clinically Evaluable-Post Therapy Evaluation (CE-PTE) Population | At the PTE Visit the investigator indicated one of the following outcomes relating to the primary infection under study: Clinical Success: participant was alive; infection was sufficiently resolved such that further antibacterial therapy was not needed. Participants may have had some residual changes related to infection requiring ancillary treatment. Clinical Failure was defined as meeting any of the following criteria: infection required additional treatment with alternative antibacterial therapy; participant received antibacterial therapy between the EOT Visit and the PTE Visit that may have been effective for the infection under study for a different infection from the one under study; unplanned major surgical intervention for the infection under study between the EOT and PTE Visits; participant died before evaluation; other specified reason. | Screening; 7 to 14 days after the last day of therapy |