Relebactam Drug Asset Due Diligence Report 2026: Clinical, IP, Market, Deals, and Go/No-Go
This Relebactam Drug Asset Due Diligence Report was built with PatSnap Life Sciences MCP workflows. Drug & Asset MCP establishes identity, ownership and stage; Clinical Trials MCP checks design, endpoints and readouts; Company & Deal Intelligence MCP reconstructs transaction precedent. Explore the MCP servers used in this report.
Decision date: 15 July 2026. Currency fields are presented in US$ millions as returned by the deal dataset. This is a screening memorandum, not legal, medical, patent or investment advice.
Phase 3
Highest phase
8
Registered trials
5
Result records
Matched deals
Executive recommendation: GO
Decision memo
Advance diligence: development maturity and available evidence support continued investment, subject to indication-specific safety, IP, and commercial gates.
The central underwriting question is whether Relebactam can convert its Small molecule drug profile and Not disclosed biology into clinically meaningful differentiation while preserving an investable safety, IP and commercial position.
1. Asset identity and development status
| Asset | Relebactam (query alias: relebactam) |
|---|---|
| Modality / target | Small molecule drug; Not disclosed; Not disclosed |
| Highest global status | Phase 3 |
| Originator | Not disclosed |
| Active developers | Not disclosed |
The MCP disease footprint includes no disclosed indication. The highest-phase flag is a useful orientation point, but the licensing case depends on indication-level evidence and rights, not the global label alone.
2. Clinical program: design and endpoint audit
| Registry | Phase | Status | Enrollment | Lead primary endpoint |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| NCT02493764 | Phase 3 | Completed | 537 | Percentage of Participants With All-cause Mortality (ACM) Through Day 28 in the Modified Intention-to-treat (MITT) Population |
| PER-060-12 | Phase 2 | 20 | Not disclosed | |
| NCT04147221 | Phase 1 | Completed | 9 | Imipenem Clearance |
The trial set should be diligenced for randomization, comparator relevance, endpoint hierarchy, analysis population, multiplicity, geographic mix and readout timing. For early-stage studies, safety and dose selection can be as decision-critical as response rate.
Reproduce the asset-to-trial workflow with PatSnap MCP
3. Clinical readouts: what is known
An Open-label Pharmacokinetic Study of Imipenem-Relebactam in Critically Ill Patients With Augmented Renal Clearance
Phase 1; n=9; evaluation: not stated. Reported fields: -; -; Imipenem Clearance(Mean) = 17.31 L/h (Standard Deviation, 5.67)
A Phase III, Randomized, Double-Blind, Active Comparator-Controlled Clinical Trial to Study the Safety, Tolerability, and Efficacy of Imipenem/Cilastatin/Relebactam (MK-7655A) Versus Piperacillin/Tazobactam in Subjects With Hospital-Acquired Bacterial Pneumonia or Ventilator-Associated Bacterial Pneumonia
Phase 3; n=537; evaluation: not stated. Reported fields: Percentage of Participants With All-cause Mortality (ACM) Through Day 28 in the Modified Intention-to-treat (MITT) Population = 15.9 Percentage of participants ; Percentage of Participants With All-cause Mortality (ACM) Through Day 28 in the Modified Intention-to-treat (MITT) Population = 21.3 Percentage of participants ; Percentage of Participants With All-cause Mortality (ACM) Through Day 28 in the Modified Intention-to-treat (MITT) Population: Adjusted difference in ACM = -5.3(95% CI, -11.9 to 1.2), P-Value = <0.001
A Phase II, Randomized, Active Comparator-Controlled Clinical Trial to Study the Safety, Tolerability, and Efficacy of MK-7655 + Imipenem/Cilastatin Versus Imipenem/Cilastatin Alone in Patients With Complicated Intra-Abdominal Infection [cIAI]
Phase 2; n=351; evaluation: not stated. Reported fields: Percentage of Participants With a Favorable Clinical Response at Completion of IV Study Therapy = 95.2 Percentage of participants (95% Confidence Interval, 88.1 - 98.7); Percentage of Participants With a Favorable Clinical Response at Completion of IV Study Therapy = 96.3 Percentage of participants (95% Confidence Interval, 89.6 - 99.2); Percentage of Participants With a Favorable Clinical Response at Completion of IV Study Therapy: Percentage Difference = 1.1(95% CI, -6.2 to 8.6), P-Value = < 0.001; Percentage Difference = 3.7(95% CI, -2.0 to 10.8), P-Value = < 0.001
These fields are structured evidence signals, not a substitute for statistical review. The next diligence pass should reconcile denominators, confidence intervals, follow-up, censoring, dose cohorts and treatment-emergent toxicity against the original abstract, registry and protocol.
4. Market and competitive position
Relebactam addresses its disclosed development indications. Commercial attractiveness rests on addressable biomarker-positive patients, treatment-line placement, duration, administration burden, pricing and displacement of entrenched standards. The modality—Small molecule drug—must demonstrate a benefit large enough to offset class-specific safety and operational costs.
The strongest market-validation signal in this screen is partner behavior: 0 matched transaction record(s) indicate that sophisticated counterparties have assigned strategic value to the asset or its rights. That does not establish net present value; probability of success, remaining R&D spend, royalties, cost sharing and territorial scope still need modeling.
5. Transaction precedent and economics
| Date | Transaction | Phase at deal | Disclosed economics |
|---|---|---|---|
| No matched asset transaction returned. | |||
Headline values are not directly comparable. Diligence should normalize upfront cash, equity, development and sales milestones, tiered royalties, opt-in mechanics, cost sharing, change-of-control clauses and geography.
6. IP and freedom-to-operate screen
No asset-specific patent-application milestone appeared in the returned milestone slice. That absence is not a freedom-to-operate conclusion; a dedicated family, claim, ownership, expiry, and legal-status search remains mandatory before signing.
The claim chart should separately test composition or sequence coverage, formulation and dosing, indication and biomarker claims, combinations, manufacturing know-how, prosecution history, term extensions and third-party blocking rights. Confirm that licensed patents, data and know-how track every granted territory and field.
7. Principal risks and diligence gates
- Therapeutic index across KRAS/BRAF mutation subgroups
- On-target toxicity and adaptive MAPK resistance
- Lack of matched efficacy results in the current MCP result set
Cross-functional diligence should also test CMC comparability, supply chain, pharmacovigilance, regulatory correspondence, data integrity, investigator concentration, partner obligations and change-of-control restrictions.
8. Final go/no-go memorandum
GO
Advance diligence: development maturity and available evidence support continued investment, subject to indication-specific safety, IP, and commercial gates.
Required pre-signing gates: reproduce key efficacy analyses; complete an indication-specific safety review; run a full patent-family and freedom-to-operate search; model risk-adjusted economics by territory; and reconcile all rights, sublicenses and encumbrances.
Build your next drug-asset diligence workflow with PatSnap Life Sciences MCP Servers
Data provenance: PatSnap Drug & Asset MCP, Clinical Trials MCP, and Company & Deal Intelligence MCP; accessed 15 July 2026. Counts and status fields may change as source records update.
