Integrated safety summary of FOCUS 1 and FOCUS 2 trials: Phase III randomized, double-blind studies evaluating ceftaroline fosamil for the treatment of patients with community-acquired pneumonia.

OBJECTIVES

Ceftaroline fosamil, the prodrug of the active metabolite ceftaroline, is a broad-spectrum, parenteral cephalosporin approved for treatment of moderate to severe bacterial infections, including community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). This report provides an integrated safety summary of the ceFtarOline Community-acquired pneUmonia trial versuS ceftriaxone (FOCUS) 1 and 2 trials (registration numbers: NCT00621504 and NCT00509106).

METHODS

Patients hospitalized with CAP requiring intravenous therapy and having Pneumonia Outcomes Research Team (PORT) risk class scores of III or IV were randomized (1:1) to receive 600 mg of ceftaroline fosamil administered intravenously every 12 h or 1 g of ceftriaxone administered intravenously every 24 h for 5-7 days. All patients were followed for treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurring from the start of the initial study drug infusion up to the test-of-cure visit; serious adverse events (SAEs) including deaths occurring up to the late follow-up visit or within 30 days after the last dose were additionally recorded. Scheduled laboratory testing was conducted up to the test-of-cure visit; unscheduled testing continued up to the late follow-up visit.

RESULTS

A total of 1228 patients (613 in the ceftaroline fosamil group and 615 in the ceftriaxone group) received any amount of drug and were included in the safety analysis. The incidences of TEAEs (47.0% versus 45.7%), SAEs (11.3% versus 11.7%), discontinuations (4.4% versus 4.1%) and deaths (2.4% versus 2.0%) were similar between the ceftaroline fosamil and the ceftriaxone groups, respectively. Diarrhoea (4.2%), headache (3.4%) and insomnia (3.1%) were the most commonly reported TEAEs in patients treated with ceftaroline fosamil. The distribution of TEAEs based on severity was also similar between groups, and the majority of patients in both treatment groups (∼75%) had either no TEAEs or only mild TEAEs.

CONCLUSIONS

The data from the FOCUS 1 and FOCUS 2 trials presented in this integrated safety summary demonstrate that ceftaroline fosamil is well tolerated, with a tolerability profile similar to ceftriaxone and the cephalosporin class overall, with no unexpected safety concerns being identified.