Suppr超能文献

头孢泊肟酯。对其在抗菌成本控制方案中的应用评估,作为呼吸道感染的降阶梯治疗和简化治疗。

Cefpodoxime proxetil. An appraisal of its use in antibacterial cost-containment programmes, as stepdown and abbreviated therapy in respiratory tract infections.

作者信息

Balfour J A, Benfield P

机构信息

Adis International Limited, Auckland, New Zealand.

出版信息

Pharmacoeconomics. 1996 Aug;10(2):164-78. doi: 10.2165/00019053-199610020-00008.

Abstract

Cefpodoxime proxetil is an orally administered prodrug which is converted in vivo to the third generation cephalosporin cefpodoxime. Cefpodoxime has a similar spectrum of antibacterial activity to the parenteral cephalosporins ceftriaxone and cefotaxime and a long elimination half-life, which allows once- or twice-daily administration. Cefpodoxime proxetil has proven efficacy in the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia and upper respiratory tract, skin and soft tissue and urinary tract infections. It has been evaluated for use in cost-containment programmes, as stepdown (parenteral-to-oral conversion) therapy in the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia and as abbreviated therapy in upper respiratory tract infections. Substituting oral for parenteral therapy can achieve considerable savings (in acquisition, delivery and labour costs). Moreover, oral administration has advantages for the patient in terms of comfort and mobility, avoids the hazards of parenteral delivery and may allow earlier discharge from hospital, or even allow home treatment from the outset in low-risk patients. As hospitalisation is usually the major cost component in treating serious infections, considerable savings can be made in this way. Pharmacy-driven stepdown programmes in 2 US hospitals have achieved cost savings by targeting patients with community-acquired pneumonia for early conversion from intravenous ceftriaxone therapy to oral cefpodoxime proxetil. Costs were compared with those from a control group of patients who continued to receive intravenous ceftriaxone until physicians deemed that oral therapy (with various agents) was appropriate. In one study, duration of parenteral therapy in the cefpodoxime proxetil group was reduced from 6.18 to 3.82 days and duration of hospitalisation was reduced from 10.06 to 6.23 days (p < 0.02), with corresponding hospitalisation cost reductions of $US7300 per patient. However, clinical trial data relating to the efficacy of cefpodoxime proxetil as stepdown therapy in patients initially requiring parenteral antibacterials are lacking. Abbreviated (4-to 7-day) cephalosporin regimens appear to be as effective as traditional 10-day penicillin regimens in the treatment of upper respiratory tract infections. Short regimens may improve patient compliance and tolerability, thereby reducing the costs of adverse effects and treatment failures. Data from preliminary clinical studies suggest that a 5-day course of cefpodoxime proxetil is as effective as an 8-day course of amoxicillin/clavulanic acid in treating either acute otitis media or sinusitis, and as effective as a 10-day course of amoxicillin/ clavulanic acid and more effective than a 10-day course of phenoxymethyl- penicillin in the treatment of pharyngotonsillitis. Cefpodoxime proxetil tended to be better tolerated and was associated with better compliance than penicillin-based regimens. Indeed, a pharmacoeconomic study showed that a 10-day regimen of cefpodoxime proxetil was associated with lower costs for treating adverse effects and treatment failures than a 10-day regimen of amoxicillin/clavulanic acid in the treatment of acute otitis media in children. A 5-day course of cefpodoxime proxetil had a lower cost per patient treated per month free of recurrence than a 10-day course of phenoxymethylpenicillin (non-generic) or amoxicillin/clavulanic acid in the treatment of recurrent pharyngotonsillitis. Thus, evidence to date suggests that cefpodoxime proxetil has potential for use as stepdown therapy in community-acquired pneumonia and in abbreviated therapy courses in upper respiratory tract infections. These preliminary observations require confirmation in well designed studies.

摘要

头孢泊肟酯是一种口服前体药物,在体内可转化为第三代头孢菌素头孢泊肟。头孢泊肟的抗菌活性谱与肠外头孢菌素头孢曲松和头孢噻肟相似,且消除半衰期长,这使得它可以每日给药一次或两次。头孢泊肟酯已被证实对治疗社区获得性肺炎、上呼吸道感染、皮肤及软组织感染和尿路感染有效。它已被评估用于成本控制项目,作为社区获得性肺炎治疗中的降阶梯(从肠外给药转换为口服给药)疗法以及上呼吸道感染的简化疗法。用口服疗法替代肠外疗法可节省大量费用(在采购、配送和劳动力成本方面)。此外,口服给药在舒适度和行动能力方面对患者有优势,可避免肠外给药的风险,还可能使患者更早出院,甚至对于低风险患者可从一开始就允许在家治疗。由于住院通常是治疗严重感染的主要成本组成部分,通过这种方式可节省大量费用。美国两家医院由药房推动的降阶梯项目通过针对社区获得性肺炎患者,使其从静脉注射头孢曲松治疗尽早转换为口服头孢泊肟酯,实现了成本节约。将成本与一个对照组患者的成本进行比较,该对照组患者持续接受静脉注射头孢曲松,直到医生认为口服治疗(使用各种药物)合适。在一项研究中,头孢泊肟酯组的肠外治疗时间从6.18天缩短至3.82天,住院时间从10.06天缩短至6.23天(p < 0.02),每位患者的住院成本相应降低7300美元。然而,缺乏关于头孢泊肟酯作为降阶梯疗法对最初需要肠外抗菌药物治疗的患者疗效的临床试验数据。在治疗上呼吸道感染方面,简化的(4至7天)头孢菌素治疗方案似乎与传统的10天青霉素治疗方案一样有效。短疗程方案可能会提高患者的依从性和耐受性,从而降低不良反应和治疗失败的成本。初步临床研究数据表明,在治疗急性中耳炎或鼻窦炎时,5天疗程的头孢泊肟酯与8天疗程的阿莫西林/克拉维酸一样有效,在治疗咽扁桃体炎时,与10天疗程的阿莫西林/克拉维酸一样有效且比10天疗程的苯氧甲基青霉素更有效。与基于青霉素的治疗方案相比,头孢泊肟酯的耐受性往往更好且依从性更好。实际上,一项药物经济学研究表明,在治疗儿童急性中耳炎时,10天疗程的头孢泊肟酯在治疗不良反应和治疗失败方面的成本低于10天疗程的阿莫西林/克拉维酸。在治疗复发性咽扁桃体炎时,5天疗程的头孢泊肟酯每位患者每月无复发治疗成本低于10天疗程的苯氧甲基青霉素(非仿制药)或阿莫西林/克拉维酸。因此,迄今为止的证据表明,头孢泊肟酯在社区获得性肺炎的降阶梯疗法以及上呼吸道感染的简化治疗疗程中具有应用潜力。这些初步观察结果需要在精心设计的研究中得到证实。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验