头孢洛林与头孢曲松对社区获得性肺炎的亚洲患者的治疗效果对比:一项随机对照的双盲的3期非劣效性及其配对的优效性试验

Ceftaroline fosamil versus ceftriaxone for the treatment of Asian patients with community-acquired pneumonia: A randomised, controlled, double-blind, phase 3, non-inferiority with nested superiority trial
2015-05-12 07:00点击:197次发表评论
作者:Zhong, N.S. , Sun, T., Zhuo, C., D'Souza, G., Lee, S.H., Lan, N.H., Chiang, C.-H., Wilson, D., Sun, F., Iaconis, J., Melnick, D.
机构: 广州医科大学附属第一医院呼吸疾病国家重点实验室
期刊: LANCET INFECT DIS2015年2月2期15卷

Background: Ceftriaxone with or without a macrolide antibiotic is a recommended treatment for patients with community-acquired pneumonia requiring hospital admission and intravenous antibiotic treatment. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of ceftaroline fosamil compared with ceftriaxone in the treatment of Asian patients admitted to hospital with community-acquired pneumonia. Methods: In this international, randomised, controlled, double-blind, phase 3, non-inferiority with nested superiority trial, adult Asian patients with Pneumonia Outcomes Research Team (PORT) risk class III-IV acute community-acquired pneumonia were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intravenous ceftaroline fosamil (600 mg every 12 h) or ceftriaxone (2 g every 24 h) for 5-7 days. Patients were randomly assigned via centralised telephone and web-based system; patients and treating clinicians were masked to treatment allocation. Investigators who did study assessments remained masked to treatment allocation until completion of the study. The primary endpoint was clinical cure at the test-of-cure visit (8-15 days after last dose of study drug) in the clinically evaluable population. Non-inferiority of ceftaroline fosamil was defined as a lower limit of the two-sided 95% CI for the difference in the proportion of patients clinically cured of -10% or higher; if non-inferiority was achieved, superiority was to be concluded if the lower limit of the 95% CI was greater than 0%. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01371838. Findings: Between Dec 13, 2011, and April 26, 2013, 847 patients were enrolled at 64 centres in China, India, South Korea, Taiwan, and Vietnam, of whom 771 were randomly assigned and 764 received study treatment. In the clinically evaluable population (n=498) 217 (84%) of 258 patients in the ceftaroline fosamil group and 178 (74%) of 240 patients in the ceftriaxone group were clinically cured at the test-of-cure visit (difference 9·9%, 95% CI 2·8-17·1). The superiority of ceftaroline fosamil was consistent across all preplanned patient subgroup analyses (split by age 65 years, age 75 years, sex, PORT risk class, and previous antibiotic use) apart from patients younger than 65 years. The frequency of adverse events was similar between treatment groups and the safety results for ceftaroline fosamil were consistent with the cephalosporin class and previous clinical trial data. Interpretation: Ceftaroline fosamil 600 mg given every 12 h was superior to ceftriaxone 2 g given every 24 h for the treatment of Asian patients with PORT III-IV community-acquired pneumonia. These data suggest that ceftaroline fosamil should be regarded as an alternative to ceftriaxone in empirical treatment regimens for this patient population. Funding: AstraZeneca. © 2015 Elsevier Ltd.

 

 

通讯机构: State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Diseases, First Affiliated Hospital, Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, China
学科代码:传染病学   关键词:头孢洛林 头孢曲松 获得性肺炎 ,中国作者重要发表 爱思唯尔医学网, Elseviermed
来源: Scopus
Scopus介绍:Scopus 于2004年11月正式推出,是目前全球规模最大的文摘和引文数据库。Scopus涵盖了由5000多家出版商出版发行的科技、医学和社会科学方面的18,000多种期刊,其中同行评审期刊16,500多种。相对于其他单一的文摘索引数据库而言,Scopus的内容更加全面,学科更加广泛,特别是在获取欧洲及亚太地区的文献方面,用户可检索出更多的文献数量。通过Scopus,用户可以检索到1823年以来的近4000万条摘要和题录信息,以及1996年以来所引用的参考文献。数据每日更新。 马上访问Scopus网站http://www.scopus.com/
顶一下(0
您可能感兴趣的文章
    发表评论网友评论(0)
      发表评论
      登录后方可发表评论,点击此处登录