A phase 3 randomized trial of sulopenem vs. ertapenem in patients with complicated intra-abdominal infections

被引：1
作者：
Dunne, Michael W. [1 ]
Aronin, Steven I. [2 ]
Das, Anita F. [3 ]
Akinapelli, Karthik [4 ]
Breen, Jeanne D.
Zelasky, Michael T. [5 ]
Puttagunta, Sailaja
机构：
[1] Bill & Melinda Gates Med Res Inst, Cambridge, MA USA
[2] Iterum Therapeut, 20 Res Pkwy, Old Saybrook, CT 06475 USA
[3] Das Stat Consulting, Guerneville, CA USA
[4] Takeda, Cambridge, MA USA
[5] Johnson & Johnson, Cambridge, MA USA
来源：
CLINICAL MICROBIOLOGY AND INFECTION | 2025年 / 31卷 / 03期
关键词：
Complicated intra-abdominal infection; Novel antimicrobial agent; Penem; Phase; 3; trial; Sulopenem; Sulopenem etzadroxil/probenecid; PLUS METRONIDAZOLE; DOUBLE-BLIND; EFFICACY; SAFETY;
D O I：
10.1016/j.cmi.2024.10.025
中图分类号：
R51 [传染病];
学科分类号：
100401 ;
摘要：
Objective: To demonstrate the non-inferiority of intravenous (IV) sulopenem to IV ertapenem, each followed by an oral regimen, in adults with complicated intra-abdominal infections (cIAI). Methods: Hospitalized adults with cIAI were randomly assigned to 5 days of IV sulopenem followed by oral sulopenem etzadroxil/probenecid twice daily or 5 days of IV ertapenem followed by oral ciprofloxacin/metronidazole or amoxicillin-clavulanate depending on baseline pathogen susceptibility. The target treatment duration was 7-10 days. The primary (FDA [Food and Drug Administration]-specified) endpoint was clinical response at day 28 (test-of-cure) in the micro-modified intent-to-treat (microMITT) population. Results: A total of 674 patients were randomly assigned. The two treatment arms were well balanced. Escherichia coli (395 patients) and Bacteroides fragilis (111 patients) were the most frequently isolated pathogens. Clinical success rates in the micro-MITT population were 81.9% (204/249) for sulopenemtreated patients and 87.9% (233/265) for ertapenem-treated patients. The lower bound of the CI for the treatment difference of the primary endpoint was below the pre-specified non-inferiority margin of -10.0 (treatment difference -6.0%, 95% CI, [-12.2 to 0.2]). In all other analysis populations, the lower limit of the 95% CI was above -10.0. Treatment-emergent adverse events (all, 26.0% [87/335] vs. 23.4% [78/333]; related, 6.0% [20/335] vs. 5.1% [17/333]) were similar for sulopenem and ertapenem, respectively. Most events were mild to moderate in severity. There were more serious adverse events in the sulopenem arm (7.5% [25/335] vs. 3.6% [12/333]), only two of which were considered possibly drugrelated. Discussion: : Sulopenem IV followed by oral sulopenem etzadroxil/probenecid was not non-inferior to ertapenem followed by oral step-down in treating cIAI in the micro-MITT population. This finding should be interpreted in the context of country regulations, as endpoint timing, primary analysis population and non-inferiority margin may vary regionally. Both IV and oral sulopenem were well-tolerated; the oral formulation allowed patients with resistant pathogens to step-down from IV therapy. Michael W. Dunne, Clin Microbiol Infect 2025;31:396 (c) 2024 European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights are reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.
引用
收藏
页码：396 / 401
页数：6
相关论文
共 7 条
  • [1] Solomkin J.S., Mazuski J.E., Bradley J.S., Rodvold K.A., Goldstein E.J.C., Baron E.J., Et al., Diagnosis and management of complicated intra-abdominal infection in adults and children: guidelines by the surgical infection society and the infectious diseases society of America, Clin Infect Dis, 11, pp. 79-109, (2010)
  • [2] Mazuski J.E., Tessier J.M., May A.K., Sawyer R.G., Nadler E.P., Rosengart M.R., Et al., The Surgical Infection Society revised guidelines on the management of intra-abdominal infection, Surg Infect (Larchmt), 18, pp. 1-76, (2017)
  • [3] Complicated intraabdominal infections
  • [4] developing drugs for treatment, Guidance Ind, (2018)
  • [5] Solomkin J., Hershberger E., Miller B., Popejoy M., Friedland I., Steenbergen, Et al., Ceftolozane/tazobactam plus metronidazole for complicated intra-abdominal infections in an era of multidrug resistance: results from a randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial (ASPECT–cIAI), Clin Infect Dis, 60, pp. 1462-1471, (2015)
  • [6] Mazuski J.E., Gasink L.B., Armstrong J., Broadhurst H., Stone G.G., Rank D., Et al., Efficacy and safety of ceftazidime-avibactam plus metronidazole versus meropenem in the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infection: results from a randomized, controlled, double-blind, phase 3 program, Clin Infect Dis, 62, pp. 1380-1389, (2016)
  • [7] Solomkin J., Evans D., Slepavicius A., Lee P., Marsh A., Tsai L., Et al., Assessing the efficacy and safety of eravacycline vs ertapenem in complicated intra-abdominal infections in the investigating gram-negative infections treated with eravacycline (IGNITE 1) trial: a randomized clinical trial, JAMA Surg, 152, pp. 224-232, (2017)
1