EMROK demonstrates bactericidal activity through dual inhibition of DNA gyrase and topoisomerase IV with DNA gyrase being the primary target. Due to primacy towards DNA gyrase, EMROK causes rapid bactericidal action with minimal propensity for resistance development.
Yes. The unique 4-hydroxy piperidine side chain at C-8 position of the benzoquinolizine core and anionic nature imparts EMROK with an increased activity under acidic conditions which could be clinically beneficial in pus, abscess, wounds and biofilms.
No. EMROK IV and EMROK O doses are not calculated based on body weight. Thus, the dose adjustment is generally not required for underweight or overweight patients.
EMROK has a unique lipophilic tricyclic benzoquinolizine core which provides it with better bacterial cell permeation, enhanced target affinity and ability to overcome efflux pumps in MRSA. Since EMROK is not a substrate of efflux pumps, this helps attain higher intracellular concentrations (unlike ciprofloxacin, norfloxacin) leading to lower potential to select resistance. EMROK has an anionic nature which enables further enhanced bactericidal action against both Gram-positive and Gram-negative pathogens under acidic conditions. Moreover, in non-clinical, clinical studies and post-marketing experience, EMROK has demonstrated a remarkable safety with negligible adverse effects.
Phase III study has been successfully completed across 40 centres in India with a total of 501 adults being recruited with clinically documented ABSSSI. EMROK (800 mg) and EMROK O (1000 mg) were compared with I.V. Linezolid (600 mg) and oral Linezolid (600 mg), respectively.
EMROK immunomodulatory activity was assessed through ex-vivo study by treating human whole blood with lipopolysaccharide (LPS) and also through in vivo studies by injecting LPS to rat and mice. In all of these studies, EMROK showed significant suppression in the levels of pro-inflammatory cytokines like TNF-α, IL-6 and IL-1β. Further in mice, wherein LPS was treated intra-nasally to develop acute lung injury, EMROK showed significant reduction in lung injury which was evident through histopathological observations. The significant reduction in pro-inflammatory cytokine levels by EMROK was depictive of its immunomodulatory effect. However, EMROK should not be used as a treatment for anti-inflammatory effect.
In the Phase III study, the most common adverse event related to EMROK and EMROK O treatment was constipation (3.6%) of mild intensity.
The study was designed for a non-inferiority margin of -15%. However, the clinical cure rates (efficacy end point) observed for EMROK or EMROK O at the test-of-cure were numerically higher compared to linezolid IV and oral, respectively. The treatment difference between EMROK and linezolid in IV group at 95% CI was -4.5 to 10.9% (91.0% versus 87.8%) and in the oral group, the difference was -4.2 to 7.3% (95.2% versus 93.6%). Thus, the actual results demonstrated non-inferiority at > -5%.
A large multi-center, retrospective, post-marketing, real-world, observational study (PIONEER study) was conducted for assessment of safety and efficacy of EMROK and EMROK O in treating various bacterial infections. The data of 1299 patients from 117 hospitals across India was collected. Data of 1229 patients who received treatment for various bacterial infections was collected. EMROK and EMROK O showed very high efficacy and received remarkable safety ratings from the clinicians in this study. Both the agents were successfully used for the treatment of several indications such as ABSSI, pneumonia, COVID19 secondary bacterial pneumonia, BJIs, febrile neutropenia, CR-BSI, septicaemia etc. The clinical success rates were up to 96.8%.
None. In the Pioneer study, out of 1229 patients, none experienced EMROK/EMROK O-linked serious adverse events. Only 9 patients reported adverse events which were mild intensity of nausea, vomiting, constipation.
There is no clinical experience of using EMROK/EMROK O in patients with tendon disorders. Even though EMROK/EMROK O belongs to benzoquinolizine sub-class of fluoroquinolone, owing to certain common moieties in the structure, EMROK/EMROK O may not be preferred in patients with tendon disorders. However, in clinical studies and post marketing real-world observations, EMROK has not been reported to cause tendon disorders even when administered in older patients. Moreover, owing to the previously known class effect of quinolones interaction corticosteroids, EMROK should not be administered in concomitance with steroids. However, in real world use of EMROK, no such clinical incidence of drug-drug interaction has been reported.
Due to feasibility challenges, concentrations of EMROK in human bones were not estimated. However, a surrogate marker, bone penetration study was conducted in rats. The bone penetration of EMROK relative to plasma was 5x. It means that the concentration of EMROK in bones remained above MIC90 for MDR Gram-positive pathogens including MRSA throughout the dosing interval. Moreover, in vitro and in vivo studies have shown the activity of EMROK against Staphylococcus biofilms. This is a crucial and enabling feature in treating bone and joint infections wherein involvement of biofilms is common. In a translational biofilm model study in mice, conducted at University of North Texas, at therapeutic exposures, EMROK killed biofilm embedded S. aureus better than that of rifampicin. Thus excellent bone penetration coupled with activity against biofilms augurs well for EMROK to be a choice of treatment for bone and joint infections