Hospital visits and costs following outpatient treatment of CAP with levofloxacin or moxifloxacin.

BACKGROUND: Hospital admissions (inpatient and emergency room) are a major source of medical costs for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) initially treated in the outpatient setting. Current CAP treatment guidelines do not differentiate between outpatient treatment with levofloxacin and moxifloxacin. OBJECTIVE: Compare health care resource use and medical costs to payers for CAP outpatients initiating treatment with levofloxacin or moxifloxacin. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: CAP episodes were identified in the PharMetrics database between 2Q04 and 2Q07 based on: pneumonia diagnosis, chest X-ray and treatment with levofloxacin or moxifloxacin. Subsequent 30-day risk of pneumonia-related hospital visits and 30-day health care costs to payers for levofloxacin vs. moxifloxacin treatment were estimated after adjusting for pre-treatment demographics, health care resource use and pneumonia-specific risk factors using propensity score and exact factor matching. RESULTS: A total of 15,472 levofloxacin- and 6474 moxifloxacin-initiated CAP patients were identified. Among 6352 matched pairs, levofloxacin treatment was associated with a 35% reduction in the odds of pneumonia-related hospital visits (odds ratio = 0.65, P = 0.004), lower per-patient costs for pneumonia-related hospital visits (102 dollars vs. 210 dollars, P = 0.001), lower pneumonia-related total costs (medical services and prescription drugs, 363 dollars vs. 491 dollars, P < 0.001) and lower total costs (1308 dollars vs. 1446 dollars, P < 0.001) vs. moxifloxacin over the 30-day observation period. LIMITATIONS: Although observational analyses of claims data provide large sample sizes and reflect routine care, they do have several inherent limitations. Since randomization of subjects is not possible, adequate statistical techniques must be used to ensure that patient characteristics are well-balanced between treatment groups. In addition, data may be missing or miscoded. CONCLUSIONS: CAP outpatients initiated with levofloxacin generated substantially lower costs to payers compared to matched patients initiated with moxifloxacin. The cost savings for patients initiated with levofloxacin were largely attributable to reduced rates of pneumonia-related hospitalization or ER visits.

Levofloxacin for the treatment of pneumonia caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae including multidrug-resistant strains: pooled analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the clinical and microbiologic efficacy of levofloxacin for the treatment of subjects with pneumonia caused by multidrug-resistant (MDR) Streptococcus pneumoniae (MDRSP) and non-MDRSP strains. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A pooled analysis was conducted using data from ten clinical studies in pneumonia: five comparative studies and five noncomparative studies conducted from 1992 to 2002. This analysis included data from levofloxacin-treated subjects with S. pneumoniae isolated at study entry. Susceptibility of S. pneumoniae isolated from subjects at study entry was determined against representative agents from five antimicrobial classes: tetracyclines, sulfonamides, second-generation cephalosporins, penicillins, and macrolides. Isolates were classified as MDRSP (based on resistance to two or more antimicrobial classes) or non-MDRSP (intermediate resistance or susceptible to all classes or resistant to 1 antimicrobial class). Clinical and microbiologic efficacy of levofloxacin (i.v., p.o., or i.v./p.o. for 5 to 14 days) in the microbiologically evaluable population was determined at post-therapy; a test for homogeneity of the odds ratio of the difference in clinical success for comparative versus noncomparative studies was performed. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES AND RESULTS: The main outcome measures were clinical success rates and microbiologic eradication rates of 419 microbiologically evaluable levofloxacin-treated subjects with MDRSP or non-MDRSP. Clinical success rates were 96.3% (52/54) and 95.1% (347/365), respectively (difference -1.2; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -6.7, 4.3). Similarly, per pathogen microbiologic eradication rates for MDRSP and non-MDRSP were 96.3% (52/54) and 95.6% (350/366), respectively (difference -0.7; 95% CI: -6.1, 4.8). Study limitations include the use of data from comparative and noncomparative studies. A test for homogeneity of the odds ratios for clinical success in comparative versus noncomparative studies showed no significant difference (p = 0.27). CONCLUSIONS: These data support the use of levofloxacin for patients with community-acquired pneumonia caused by S. pneumoniae, including MDR strains.

A double-blind, randomized comparison of levofloxacin 750 mg once-daily for five days with ciprofloxacin 400/500 mg twice-daily for 10 days for the treatment of complicated urinary tract infections and acute pyelonephritis.

OBJECTIVES: A clinical study was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of levofloxacin 750 mg once daily for 5 days to ciprofloxacin twice daily for 10 days for the treatment of complicated urinary tract infections (cUTI) or acute pyelonephritis (AP). METHODS: A multicenter, double-blind, randomized, noninferiority study enrolled subjects with AP or cUTI. Subjects received either levofloxacin 750 mg intravenously or orally once daily for 5 days or ciprofloxacin 400 mg intravenously and/or ciprofloxacin 500 mg orally twice daily for 10 days and were evaluated at end of therapy, posttherapy, and poststudy for microbiologic eradication and clinical outcome. RESULTS: A total of 1109 subjects were enrolled; 619 with confirmed diagnosis of AP or cUTI and a study entry uropathogen with a colony count 10(5) CFU/mL or greater and were included in the modified intent-to-treat population. Five hundred six subjects met all criteria for inclusion and were included in the microbiologically evaluable population. At end of therapy, eradication rates in the modified intent-to-treat population were 79.8% for levofloxacin and 77.5% for ciprofloxacin-treated subjects (95% CI, -8.8% to 4.1%). In the microbiologically evaluable population, eradication rates were 88.3% for levofloxacin and 86.7% for ciprofloxacin-treated subjects (95% CI, -7.4% to 4.2%). Outcomes were comparable for the 2 treatments at posttherapy and poststudy. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that both drug regimens are safe and effective and that a 5-day course of therapy with levofloxacin, administered at a dose of 750 mg once daily, is noninferior to a 10-day course of therapy with ciprofloxacin for the treatment of AP and cUTI.

A trial of levofloxacin 750 mg once daily for 5 days versus ciprofloxacin 400 mg and/or 500 mg twice daily for 10 days in the treatment of acute pyelonephritis.

OBJECTIVE: A double-blind, noninferiority trial was conducted to establish the safety and efficacy of a once-daily, 5-day course of levofloxacin 750 mg compared to a twice-daily, 10-day course of ciprofloxacin in complicated urinary tract infections (cUTI) and acute pyelonephritis (AP). This report focuses on subjects with AP. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Adult male and female subjects with clinical signs and symptoms of AP and laboratory confirmation of their diagnosis were randomized to receive one dose of levofloxacin 750 mg once daily intravenously (i.v.) or orally and one dose of placebo for 5 days, followed by placebo; or ciprofloxacin 400 mg i.v. and/or 500 mg orally twice daily for 10 days. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary, prospectively defined end point was microbiologic eradication at post-therapy (study days 15-22). Secondary outcomes included clinical response and safety and tolerability. RESULTS: In the modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population (levofloxacin 94, ciprofloxacin 98), 83% of levofloxacin-treated and 79.6% of ciprofloxacin-treated subjects achieved microbiological eradication (difference -3.4, 95% CI -14.4%, 7.6%). In the microbiologically evaluable (ME) population (levofloxacin 80, ciprofloxacin 76), 92.5% of levofloxacin-treated vs. 93.4% of ciprofloxacin-treated subjects (difference -0.9, 95% CI -7.1%, 8.9%) achieved microbiologic eradication. Clinical success was achieved in 86.2% vs. 80.6% (mITT) and in 92.5% vs. 89.5% (ME) of levofloxacin-treated and ciprofloxacin-treated subjects, respectively. Escherichia coli was the most commonly isolated uropathogen. Few (2.1%) of the pathogens were fluoroquinolone-resistant. Adverse events (AEs) were similar to those seen previously with both agents. Potential limitations are that this analysis is based on a subset of subjects from a larger study and, because of different durations of therapy, the results may be biased against levofloxacin. CONCLUSIONS: High-dose, short-course therapy with levofloxacin in subjects with AP is at least as effective as standard 10-day therapy with ciprofloxacin.