A randomised, double-blind trial comparing ceftobiprole medocaril with ceftriaxone with or without linezolid for the treatment of patients with community-acquired pneumonia requiring hospitalisation

被引:123
作者
Nicholson, Susan C. [1 ]
Welte, Tobias [2 ]
File, Thomas M., Jr. [3 ]
Strauss, Richard S. [4 ]
Michiels, Bart [5 ]
Kaul, Pratibha [6 ]
Balis, Dainius [7 ]
Arbit, Deborah [7 ]
Amsler, Karen [7 ]
Noel, Gary J. [7 ,8 ]
机构
[1] Janssen Pharmaceut Sci Affairs LLC, Titusville, NJ USA
[2] Hannover Med Sch, D-3000 Hannover, Germany
[3] Summa Hlth Syst, Akron, OH USA
[4] Centocor Res & Dev, Wayne, PA USA
[5] Janssen Pharmaceut Co Johnson & Johnson, Beerse, Belgium
[6] Syracuse Vet Adm, Syracuse, NY USA
[7] Janssen Pharmaceut Co Johnson & Johnson, Raritan, NJ USA
[8] Weill Cornell Med Coll, New York, NY USA
关键词
Ceftobiprole; Community-acquired pneumonia; Streptococcus pneumoniae; MANAGEMENT; OUTCOMES;
D O I
10.1016/j.ijantimicag.2011.11.005
中图分类号
R51 [传染病];
学科分类号
100401 ;
摘要
Community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) is a serious infection requiring hospitalisation in 20% of cases. The novel cephalosporin ceftobiprole has microbiological activity against the major bacterial pathogens causing CAP, including Streptococcus pneumoniae, Haemophilus influenzae and Klebsiella pneumoniae, as well as against Staphylococcus aureus, including meticillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA). This was a multicentre, double-blind study in which 706 patients with CAP severe enough to require hospitalisation were randomised to ceftobiprole or to an expert-recommended course of ceftriaxone +/- linezolid (comparator group). Clinical and microbiological outcomes were determined 7-14 days after completion of therapy (test-of-cure visit). For the 469 clinically evaluable patients, cure rates were 86.6% vs. 87.4% for ceftobiprole and comparator, respectively [95% confidence interval (CI) of the difference, -6.9% to 5.3%]; in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis of 638 CAP patients, these cure rates were 76.4% vs. 79.3%, respectively (95% CI of the difference, -9.3% to 3.6%). A typical bacterial pathogen was identified in 29% of the ITT population. Microbiological eradication rates in the 144 microbiologically evaluable patients were 88.2% and 90.8% for the respective treatment groups (95% CI of the difference, -12.6% to 7.5%). Both study drugs were well tolerated, with but a minority of patients requiring premature discontinuation due to an adverse event (6% in the ceftobiprole group and 4% in the comparator group). The overall incidence of treatment-related adverse events was higher in the ceftobiprole group, primarily owing to differences in rates of self-limited nausea (7% vs. 2%) and vomiting (5% vs. 2%). In summary, ceftobiprole was non-inferior to the comparator (ceftriaxone +/- linezolid) in all clinical and microbiological analyses conducted, suggesting that ceftobiprole has a potential role in treating hospitalised patients with CAP. [ClinicalTrails.govidentifier: NCT00326287] (C) 2011 Elsevier B.V. and the International Society of Chemotherapy. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:240 / 246
页数:7
相关论文
共 11 条
[1]   Pharmacokinetics-pharmacodynamics of antimicrobial therapy: It's not just for mice anymore [J].
Ambrose, Paul G. ;
Bhavnani, Sujata M. ;
Rubino, Christopher M. ;
Louie, Arnold ;
Gumbo, Tawanda ;
Forrest, Alan ;
Drusano, George L. .
CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES, 2007, 44 (01) :79-86
[2]  
[Anonymous], 1996, BRIT MED J, V313, P1448
[3]   Initial Antibiotic Selection and Patient Outcomes: Observations from the National Pneumonia Project [J].
Bratzler, Dale W. ;
Ma, Allen ;
Nsa, Wato .
CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES, 2008, 47 :S193-S201
[4]  
Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute, 2006, M100S16 CLSI
[5]   Binding of ceftobiprole and comparators to the penicillin-binding proteins of Escherichia coli, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, Staphylococcus aureus, and Streptococcus pneumoniae [J].
Davies, Todd A. ;
Page, Malcolm G. P. ;
Shang, Wenchi ;
Andrew, Ted ;
Kania, Malgosia ;
Bush, Karen .
ANTIMICROBIAL AGENTS AND CHEMOTHERAPY, 2007, 51 (07) :2621-2624
[6]   A prediction rule to identify low-risk patients with community-acquired pneumonia [J].
Fine, MJ ;
Auble, TE ;
Yealy, DM ;
Hanusa, BH ;
Weissfeld, LA ;
Singer, DE ;
Coley, CM ;
Marrie, TJ ;
Kapoor, WN .
NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE, 1997, 336 (04) :243-250
[7]   Ceftriaxone - An update of its use in the management of community-acquired and nosocomial infections [J].
Lamb, HM ;
Ormrod, D ;
Scott, LJ ;
Figgitt, DR .
DRUGS, 2002, 62 (07) :1041-1089
[8]   Infectious Diseases Society of America/American Thoracic Society consensus guidelines on the management of community-acquired pneumonia in adults [J].
Mandell, Lionel A. ;
Wunderink, Richard G. ;
Anzueto, Antonio ;
Bartlett, John G. ;
Campbell, G. Douglas ;
Dean, Nathan C. ;
Dowell, Scott F. ;
File, Thomas M., Jr. ;
Musher, Daniel M. ;
Niederman, Michael S. ;
Torres, Antonio ;
Whitney, Cynthia G. .
CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES, 2007, 44 :S27-S72
[9]   Quality of care, process, and outcomes in elderly patients with pneumonia [J].
Meehan, TP ;
Fine, MJ ;
Krumholz, HM ;
Scinto, JD ;
Galusha, DH ;
Mockalis, JT ;
Weber, GF ;
Petrillo, MK ;
Houck, PM ;
Fine, JM .
JAMA-JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, 1997, 278 (23) :2080-2084
[10]   A randomized, double-blind trial comparing ceftobiprole medocaril with vancomycin plus ceftazidime for the treatment of patients with complicated skin and skin-structure infections [J].
Noel, Gary J. ;
Bush, Karen ;
Bagchi, Partha ;
Ianus, Juliana ;
Strauss, Richard S. .
CLINICAL INFECTIOUS DISEASES, 2008, 46 (05) :647-655