Comparación entre sulopenem y antibióticos estándar para el tratamiento de infecciones urinarias complicadas y no complicadas: una revisión sistemática

Florencia Espinoza Veloso; Camila Oñate Cheuquepán; Miguel Valdebenito Barraza

doi:10.5281/zenodo.19056066

Authors

Florencia Espinoza Veloso Estudiante de Medicina, Universidad de Concepción, Chile Author https://orcid.org/0009-0006-8438-1091
Camila Oñate Cheuquepán Estudiante de Medicina, Universidad de la Frontera, Chile Author https://orcid.org/0009-0002-7482-3547
Miguel Valdebenito Barraza Estudiante de Medicina, Universidad San Sebastián, Chile Author https://orcid.org/0009-0002-6042-3366

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.19056066

Keywords:

Urinary tract infections , Antibacterial agents, Bacterial drug resistance , Systematic review

Abstract

Urinary tract infections (UTIs) are among the most common bacterial diseases, particularly affecting women, with high recurrence rates and a significant healthcare burden. The progressive rise in bacterial resistance to conventional antibiotics has markedly limited available therapeutic options, driving the search for effective alternatives. In this context, sulopenem has emerged as a promising antibiotic against multidrug-resistant microorganisms and has recently been approved for the treatment of uncomplicated UTIs.

This systematic review aimed to synthesize the current evidence on the efficacy and safety of sulopenem, administered orally or intravenously, for the treatment of complicated and uncomplicated UTIs, compared with standard antibiotics. A comprehensive search was conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Web of Science without time restrictions, including randomized clinical trials and in vitro studies reporting at least one predefined outcome: clinical response, microbiological eradication, or adverse events. Study selection and data extraction were performed independently by two blinded reviewers with methodological quality control.

Seven studies were included: two multicenter randomized clinical trials and five in vitro investigations. Sulopenem demonstrated greater efficacy than ciprofloxacin in resistant strains and comparable efficacy to ertapenem in complicated infections. In vitro studies confirmed its strong activity against multidrug-resistant Enterobacterales. Reported adverse events were mild and predominantly gastrointestinal.

In conclusion, sulopenem represents a promising therapeutic alternative for resistant urinary tract infections; however, further multicenter and independent studies are needed to confirm its clinical applicability.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Zhanel GG, Pozdirca M, Golden AR, Adam HJ, Baxter MR, Walkty AJ, et al. Sulopenem: An intravenous and oral penem for the treatment of urinary tract infections due to multidrug-resistant bacteria. Drugs [Internet]. 2022 [citado el 9 de octubre de 2025];82(6):673–692. Disponible en: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40265-022-01688-1

2. Dunne MW, Das AF, Zelasky M, Akinapelli K, Boucher HW, Aronin SI. Efficacy and safety of oral sulopenem etzadroxil/probenecid versus oral ciprofloxacin in the treatment of uncomplicated urinary tract infections (uUTI) in adult women: results from the SURE-1 trial. Open Forum Infect Dis [Internet]. 2020 [citado el 15 de enero de 2025];7(Suppl 1):S844–S845. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofaa515.1898

3. Dunne MW, Aronin SI, Das AF, Zelasky M, Akinapelli K, Boucher HW, et al. Sulopenem for the treatment of complicated urinary tract infection including pyelonephritis: a phase 3 randomized trial. Clin Infect Dis [Internet]. 2022 [citado el 15 de enero de 2025];75(8):1336–1345. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciac738

4. VanScoy BD, Conde H, Vincent CE, Bhavnani SM, Aronin SI, Puttagunta S, et al. Pharmacokinetic–pharmacodynamic evaluation of sulopenem using a five-day hollow-fiber in vitro infection model. Open Forum Infect Dis [Internet]. 2023 [citado el 15 de enero de 2025];10(Suppl 2):ofad500.2186. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofad500.2186

5. Maher JM, Huband MD, Blankers CG, Puttagunta S, Aronin SI, Castanheira M. In vitro activity of sulopenem and comparator agents against Enterobacterales and anaerobic clinical isolates collected during the SENTRY antimicrobial surveillance program. J Antimicrob Chemother [Internet]. 2023 [citado el 15 de enero de 2025];78(6):1406–1414. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkad099

6. Maher JM, Huband MD, Lindley JM, Puttagunta S, Aronin SI, Castanheira M. Characterization of sulopenem antimicrobial activity using in vitro time-kill kinetics, synergy, post-antibiotic effect, and sub-inhibitory MIC effect methods against Escherichia coli and Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates. Microbiol Spectr https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.01832-18

7. Aronin SI, Huband MD, Becker H, Puttagunta S, Castanheira M, Dunne MW. In vitro activity of sulopenem against U.S. Enterobacterales clinical isolates collected during the SENTRY antimicrobial surveillance program in 2023. J Glob Antimicrob Resist [Internet]. 2025 [citado el 15 de enero de 2025];34:164–169. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jgar.2025.06.013

8. Karlowsky JA, Adam HJ, Baxter MR, Denisuik AJ, Lagacé-Wiens PRS, Walkty AJ, et al. In vitro activity of sulopenem, an oral penem, against urinary isolates of Escherichia coli. Antimicrob Agents Chemother [Internet]. 2019 [citado el 15 de enero de 2025];63(1):e01832–18. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1128/AAC.01832-18

9. Puttagunta S, Aronin SI, Huband M, Flamm RK, Dunne MW. Sulopenem activity against Enterobacteriaceae isolates from patients with urinary tract infection or intra-abdominal infection. Open Forum Infect Dis [Internet]. 2018 [citado el 15 de enero de 2025];5(Suppl 1):S417–S417. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofy210.1194

10. Walkty AJ, Karlowsky JA, Baxter MR, Lagacé-Wiens PRS, Adam HJ, Zhanel GG. In vitro activity of sulopenem against 1880 bacterial pathogens isolated from Canadian patients with urinary tract infections (CANWARD, 2014–21). J Antimicrob Chemother [Internet]. 2022 [citado el 15 de enero de 2025];77(12):3414–3420. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1093/jac/dkac333

11. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Chapter 8: Assessing risk of bias in a randomized trial. Cochrane Training [Internet]. 2024 [citado el 9 de octubre de 2025]. Disponible en: https://training.cochrane.org/handbook/current/chapter-08

12. Dunne MW, Aronin SI. Efficacy and safety of intravenous sulopenem followed by oral sulopenem etzadroxil/probenecid versus intravenous ertapenem followed by oral ciprofloxacin or amoxicillin-clavulanate in the treatment of complicated urinary tract infections (cUTI): results from the SURE-2 trial. Open Forum Infect Dis [Internet]. 2020 [citado el 15 de enero de 2025];7(Suppl 1):S636. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1093/ofid/ofaa439.1417

13. Dunne MW, Aronin SI, Das AF, et al. Sulopenem or ciprofloxacin for the treatment of uncomplicated urinary tract infections in women: a phase 3 randomized trial. Clin Infect Dis [Internet]. 2022 [citado el 15 de enero de 2025];75(8):1324–1335. Disponible en: https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciac738