Division of General Internal Medicine, Geneva University Hospitals and Faculty of Medicine, Geneva, Switzerland2Division of Internal Medicine, Hôpital Riviera-Chablais, Monthey, Switzerland.
Division of Internal Medicine, Hôpital Neuchâtelois-La Chaux-de-Fonds, La Chaux-de-Fonds, Switzerland.
JAMA Intern Med. 2014 Dec;174(12):1894-901. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.4887.
The clinical benefit of adding a macrolide to a β-lactam for empirical treatment of moderately severe community-acquired pneumonia remains controversial.
To test noninferiority of a β-lactam alone compared with a β-lactam and macrolide combination in moderately severe community-acquired pneumonia.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Open-label, multicenter, noninferiority, randomized trial conducted from January 13, 2009, through January 31, 2013, in 580 immunocompetent adult patients hospitalized in 6 acute care hospitals in Switzerland for moderately severe community-acquired pneumonia. Follow-up extended to 90 days. Outcome assessors were masked to treatment allocation.
Patients were treated with a β-lactam and a macrolide (combination arm) or with a β-lactam alone (monotherapy arm). Legionella pneumophila infection was systematically searched and treated by addition of a macrolide to the monotherapy arm.
Proportion of patients not reaching clinical stability (heart rate <100/min, systolic blood pressure >90 mm Hg, temperature <38.0°C, respiratory rate <24/min, and oxygen saturation >90% on room air) at day 7.
After 7 days of treatment, 120 of 291 patients (41.2%) in the monotherapy arm vs 97 of 289 (33.6%) in the combination arm had not reached clinical stability (7.6% difference, P = .07). The upper limit of the 1-sided 90% CI was 13.0%, exceeding the predefined noninferiority boundary of 8%. Patients infected with atypical pathogens (hazard ratio [HR], 0.33; 95% CI, 0.13-0.85) or with Pneumonia Severity Index (PSI) category IV pneumonia (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.59-1.10) were less likely to reach clinical stability with monotherapy, whereas patients not infected with atypical pathogens (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.80-1.22) or with PSI category I to III pneumonia (HR, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.82-1.36) had equivalent outcomes in the 2 arms. There were more 30-day readmissions in the monotherapy arm (7.9% vs 3.1%, P = .01). Mortality, intensive care unit admission, complications, length of stay, and recurrence of pneumonia within 90 days did not differ between the 2 arms.
We did not find noninferiority of β-lactam monotherapy in patients hospitalized for moderately severe community-acquired pneumonia. Patients infected with atypical pathogens or with PSI category IV pneumonia had delayed clinical stability with monotherapy.
clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00818610.
在社区获得性中度肺炎的经验性治疗中,添加大环内酯类药物与β-内酰胺类药物联合治疗的临床获益仍存在争议。
检验中度社区获得性肺炎患者中,β-内酰胺类药物单药治疗与β-内酰胺类药物联合大环内酯类药物治疗相比,非劣效性。
设计、场所和参与者:这是一项 2009 年 1 月 13 日至 2013 年 1 月 31 日在瑞士 6 家急性护理医院进行的开放性标签、多中心、非劣效性、随机试验,共有 580 名免疫功能正常的成年患者因中度社区获得性肺炎住院。随访时间延长至 90 天。结果评估者对治疗分配情况不知情。
患者接受β-内酰胺类药物和大环内酯类药物(联合治疗组)或β-内酰胺类药物单药治疗(单药治疗组)。系统性搜索军团菌肺炎感染,并通过在单药治疗组中添加大环内酯类药物进行治疗。
第 7 天未达到临床稳定的患者比例(心率<100 次/分、收缩压>90mmHg、体温<38.0°C、呼吸频率<24 次/分、氧饱和度在空气下>90%)。
治疗 7 天后,291 名单药治疗组患者中有 120 名(41.2%)与 289 名联合治疗组患者(33.6%)未达到临床稳定(差异为 7.6%,P=0.07)。单侧 90%置信区间的上限为 13.0%,超过了预先设定的 8%非劣效性边界。感染非典型病原体的患者(风险比[HR],0.33;95%置信区间,0.13-0.85)或肺炎严重指数(PSI)分类为 IV 级肺炎的患者(HR,0.81;95%置信区间,0.59-1.10),单药治疗更难以达到临床稳定,而未感染非典型病原体的患者(HR,0.99;95%置信区间,0.80-1.22)或 PSI 分类为 I 至 III 级肺炎的患者(HR,1.06;95%置信区间,0.82-1.36),在这两种治疗方案中,结局相当。单药治疗组 30 天内再入院的患者更多(7.9% vs 3.1%,P=0.01)。两组的死亡率、重症监护病房入院率、并发症、住院时间和 90 天内肺炎复发率无差异。
我们未发现β-内酰胺类药物单药治疗在因中度社区获得性肺炎住院的患者中具有非劣效性。感染非典型病原体或 PSI 分类为 IV 级肺炎的患者单药治疗后临床稳定时间延迟。
clinicaltrials.gov 标识符:NCT00818610。