Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Ceftaroline fosamil versus ceftriaxone for the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia: individual patient data meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Taboada, Maria; Melnick, David; Iaconis, Joseph P; Sun, Fang; Zhong, Nan Shan; File, Thomas M; Llorens, Lily; Friedland, H David; Wilson, David.
  • Taboada M; AstraZeneca Research & Development, Biometrics & Information Sciences, Parklands, Alderley Park, Macclesfield, SK10 4TG, UK maria.taboada@astrazeneca.com.
  • Melnick D; AstraZeneca, 1800 Concord Pike, Wilmington, DE 19803, USA.
  • Iaconis JP; AstraZeneca, 35 Gatehouse Drive, Waltham, MA 02451, USA.
  • Sun F; AstraZeneca China, 1168 Nan Jing Xi Road, Shanghai, 200041, P.R. China.
  • Zhong NS; State Key Laboratory of Respiratory Diseases, 1st Affiliate Hospital of Respiratory Disease, Guangzhou Medical University, 151 Yan Jiang Road, Guangzhou, 501120, P.R. China.
  • File TM; Northeast Ohio Medical University, Rootstown, OH 44272, USA Summa Health System, Akron, OH 44304, USA.
  • Llorens L; Cerexa Inc., 2100 Franklin St, Oakland, CA 94612, USA.
  • Friedland HD; Cerexa Inc., 2100 Franklin St, Oakland, CA 94612, USA.
  • Wilson D; AstraZeneca Research & Development, Biometrics & Information Sciences, Parklands, Alderley Park, Macclesfield, SK10 4TG, UK.
J Antimicrob Chemother ; 71(4): 862-70, 2016 Apr.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26702925
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

We conducted a meta-analysis of clinical trials of adults hospitalized with pneumonia outcomes research team (PORT) risk class 3-4 community-acquired pneumonia (CAP) receiving ceftaroline fosamil versus ceftriaxone.

METHODS:

Three Phase III trials (clinicaltrials.gov registration numbers NCT00621504, NCT00509106 and NCT01371838) including 1916 hospitalized patients with CAP randomized 11 to empirical ceftaroline fosamil (600 mg every 12 h) or ceftriaxone (1-2 g every 24 h) for 5-7 days were included in the meta-analysis. Primary outcome was clinical response at the test-of-cure visit (8-15 days after end of treatment) in the PORT risk class 3-4 modified ITT (MITT) and clinically evaluable (CE) populations. Data were tested for heterogeneity (χ(2) test) and, if not significant, results were pooled and OR and 95% CI constructed. A logistic regression analysis assessed factors impacting cure rate and treatment interactions.

RESULTS:

Clinical cure rates in each trial consistently favoured ceftaroline fosamil versus ceftriaxone, with no evidence of heterogeneity. In the meta-analysis, ceftaroline fosamil was superior to ceftriaxone in the MITT (OR 1.66; 95% CI 1.34, 2.06; P < 0.001) and CE (OR 1.65; 95% CI 1.26, 2.16; P < 0.001) populations. Results were consistent across various patient- and disease-related factors including patients' age and PORT score. Prior antimicrobial use within 96 h of starting study treatment was associated with diminished differences in cure rates between treatments.

CONCLUSIONS:

Ceftaroline fosamil was superior to ceftriaxone for empirical treatment of adults hospitalized with CAP. Receipt of prior antimicrobial therapy appeared to diminish the observed treatment effect.
Asunto(s)

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Ceftriaxona / Cefalosporinas / Infecciones Comunitarias Adquiridas / Neumonía Bacteriana / Antibacterianos Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials / Systematic_reviews Límite: Humans Idioma: En Año: 2016 Tipo del documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Banco de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Ceftriaxona / Cefalosporinas / Infecciones Comunitarias Adquiridas / Neumonía Bacteriana / Antibacterianos Tipo de estudio: Clinical_trials / Systematic_reviews Límite: Humans Idioma: En Año: 2016 Tipo del documento: Article