Lode Hartmut, File Thomas M, Mandell Lionel, Ball Peter, Pypstra Rienk, Thomas Michael
Department of Chest and Infectious Diseases, Hospital Heckeshorn, Akademisches Lehrkrankenhaus, Free University Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Clin Ther. 2002 Nov;24(11):1915-36. doi: 10.1016/s0149-2918(02)80088-1.
This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of oral gemifloxacin, an enhanced-affinity quinolone, with sequential therapy with IV ceftriaxone followed by oral cefuroxime (with or without a macrolide) in patients hospitalized for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP).
A randomized, open-label, multicenter study comprised adults hospitalized with a clinical and radiologic diagnosis of CAP. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either (1) oral gemifloxacin 320 mg once daily (7-14 days); or (2) IV ceftriaxone 2 g once daily (1-7 days) followed by oral cefuroxime 500 mg twice daily (1-13 days) for a total of < or = 14 days. Patients receiving ceftriaxone/cefuroxime were allowed concomitant macrolide treatment.
A total of 345 patients were randomized, of whom 341 received at least 1 dose of study medication (gemifloxacin, 169/172; ceftriaxone/cefuroxime, 172/173). Clinical success rates in the clinically evaluable (CE) population at follow-up (day 21-28 post-therapy), the primary end point, were 92.2% (107/116) for gemifloxacin and 93.4% (113/121) for ceftriaxone/cefuroxime (treatment difference, -1.15; 95% CI, -7.73 to 5.43). In patients in Fine risk classes IV and V, the clinical success rate was 87.0% (20/23) for gemifloxacin versus 83.3% (20/24) for ceftriaxone/cefuroxime. No difference in clinical response at follow-up was noted based on macrolide use. Bacteriologic success rates at follow-up in the bacteriologically evaluable (BE) population were 90.6% (58/64) for gemifloxacin and 87.3% (55/63) for ceftriaxone/cefuroxime (treatment difference 3.32; 95% CI, -7.57 to 14.21). The clinical success rate in bacteremic patients at follow-up (BE population) was 100.0%. Both treatments were generally well tolerated. The frequency and types of adverse events were similar between the 2 groups. The most common treatment-related adverse events with gemifloxacin were diarrhea, liver-function adverse events, and rash; with ceftriaxone/cefuroxime, they were diarrhea, elevated hepatic-enzyme activity, and moniliasis.
The clinical efficacy and tolerability of oral gemifloxacin 320 mg once daily were similar to those of IV ceftriaxone followed by oral cefuroxime (with or without a macrolide) in the treatment of adult patients hospitalized with moderate to severe CAP. Both treatments were effective in bacteremic patients and those at increased risk of mortality.
本研究旨在比较口服吉米沙星(一种亲和力增强的喹诺酮类药物)与静脉注射头孢曲松随后口服头孢呋辛(加或不加用大环内酯类药物)序贯疗法治疗社区获得性肺炎(CAP)住院患者的疗效和安全性。
一项随机、开放标签、多中心研究,纳入临床和影像学诊断为CAP的住院成人患者。患者按1:1随机分组,分别接受:(1)口服吉米沙星320mg,每日1次(7 - 14天);或(2)静脉注射头孢曲松2g,每日1次(1 - 7天),随后口服头孢呋辛500mg,每日2次(1 - 13天),总共≤14天。接受头孢曲松/头孢呋辛治疗的患者可同时使用大环内酯类药物。
共345例患者随机分组,其中341例接受了至少1剂研究药物治疗(吉米沙星组169/172例;头孢曲松/头孢呋辛组172/173例)。作为主要终点的随访期(治疗后第21 - 28天)临床可评价(CE)人群的临床成功率,吉米沙星组为92.2%(107/116),头孢曲松/头孢呋辛组为93.4%(113/121)(治疗差异为 - 1.15;95%可信区间为 - 7.73至5.43)。在费氏风险分级IV级和V级患者中,吉米沙星组临床成功率为87.0%(20/23),头孢曲松/头孢呋辛组为83.3%(20/24)。根据大环内酯类药物使用情况,随访时临床反应无差异。在细菌学可评价(BE)人群中,随访时吉米沙星组细菌学成功率为90.6%(58/64),头孢曲松/头孢呋辛组为87.3%(55/63)(治疗差异3.32;95%可信区间为 - 7.57至14.21)。随访时菌血症患者(BE人群)的临床成功率为100.0%。两种治疗总体耐受性良好。两组不良事件的频率和类型相似。吉米沙星最常见的治疗相关不良事件为腹泻、肝功能不良事件和皮疹;头孢曲松/头孢呋辛为腹泻、肝酶活性升高和念珠菌病。
每日1次口服320mg吉米沙星在治疗中度至重度CAP住院成年患者中的临床疗效和耐受性与静脉注射头孢曲松随后口服头孢呋辛(加或不加用大环内酯类药物)相似。两种治疗方法对菌血症患者和死亡风险增加的患者均有效。