Department of Respiratory Medicine, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, 54 Shogoin-kawaracho, Sakyo, Kyoto, 606-8507, Japan.
Department of Internal Medicine, Ono Municipal Hospital, 323 Naka-cho, Ono, Hyogo, 675-1332, Japan.
BMC Pulm Med. 2020 Jun 5;20(1):160. doi: 10.1186/s12890-020-01198-4.
Ceftriaxone (CTRX) and ampicillin/sulbactam (ABPC/SBT) are recommended by various guidelines as the first-line antibiotics for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). However, which of these antibiotics is more effective for treating non-aspiration CAP remains unclear.
This study was a prospective, single-center, open-label, quasi-randomized controlled trial. Patients with adult CAP without risk for aspiration were allocated to either a CTRX or ABPC/SBT group based on the date of hospital admission. Macrolide was added to patients in each group. The primary outcome was the clinical response in the validated per-protocol (VPP) population at end of treatment (EOT). The secondary outcomes were clinical response during treatment and at end of study (EOS) in the VPP population, and mortality rate at day 30 in the modified intention-to-treat (MITT) population.
Of 696 screened patients, 433 patients were excluded and 263 patients were allocated to receive either of the treatments. Males comprised 54% of patients and mean age and PSI were 62.1 ± 19.8 years and 69.3 ± 30.0, respectively, with 124 patients allocated to the CTRX group and 138 patients allocated to the ABPC/SBT group. The clinical effectiveness rate for the VPP population at EOT was 90% in the CTRX and 96% in the ABPC/SBT group (p = 0.072, 95% confidence interval [CI] of risk difference [RD]: - 12.6-0.8%). No significant difference in effectiveness at day 4 was observed between the CTRX and ABPC/SBT groups (p = 0.079, 95%CI of RD: - 12.1-0.4%), but at day 7, ABPC/SBT was significantly more effective than CTRX in the VPP population (p = 0.047, 95%CI of RD: - 13.3--0.4%). No significant difference in late response at EOS was seen between CTRX and ABPC/SBT groups: cure (89 [86%] and 102 [94%]), relapse (5 [5%] and 1 [1%]) and failure (10 [10%] and 5 [5%]; p = 0.053). Deaths within 30 days in MITT population was higher in CTRX group (4 [3%]) than in ABPC/SBT group (0 [0%]) (p = 0.048, 95%CI of RD: 0.1-6.3%).
No significant difference in effectiveness was found between ABPC/SBT and CTRX at EOT. However, ABPC/SBT might be more effective in the early phase of treatment.
UMIN-CTR, UMIN000037464. Registered 25 July 2019 - Retrospectively registered, https://upload.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000042262.
头孢曲松(CTRX)和氨苄西林/舒巴坦(ABPC/SBT)被各种指南推荐为社区获得性肺炎(CAP)的一线抗生素。然而,对于非吸入性 CAP,哪种抗生素更有效仍不清楚。
这是一项前瞻性、单中心、开放性、准随机对照试验。根据入院日期,将无吸入风险的成人 CAP 患者分配至 CTRX 或 ABPC/SBT 组。每组患者均加用大环内酯类药物。主要结局为治疗结束时(EOT)验证后的符合方案人群(VPP)的临床应答。次要结局为 VPP 人群治疗期间和研究结束时(EOS)的临床应答,以及意向治疗(MITT)人群第 30 天的死亡率。
在筛选的 696 名患者中,433 名被排除,263 名患者被分配接受其中一种治疗。男性占患者的 54%,平均年龄和 PSI 分别为 62.1±19.8 岁和 69.3±30.0,124 名患者分配至 CTRX 组,138 名患者分配至 ABPC/SBT 组。EOT 时 VPP 人群的临床有效率在 CTRX 组为 90%,在 ABPC/SBT 组为 96%(p=0.072,95%置信区间[RD]的风险差为-12.6-0.8%)。第 4 天,CTRX 和 ABPC/SBT 组之间未见有效性的显著差异(p=0.079,95%CI 的 RD:-12.1-0.4%),但第 7 天,ABPC/SBT 在 VPP 人群中的疗效明显优于 CTRX(p=0.047,95%CI 的 RD:-13.3--0.4%)。EOS 时,CTRX 和 ABPC/SBT 组之间未见晚期应答的显著差异:治愈(89 [86%]和 102 [94%])、复发(5 [5%]和 1 [1%])和失败(10 [10%]和 5 [5%];p=0.053)。在 MITT 人群中,30 天内的死亡率在 CTRX 组(4 [3%])高于 ABPC/SBT 组(0 [0%])(p=0.048,95%CI 的 RD:0.1-6.3%)。
EOT 时,ABPC/SBT 和 CTRX 之间未见疗效的显著差异。然而,ABPC/SBT 可能在治疗早期更有效。
UMIN-CTR,UMIN000037464。2019 年 7 月 25 日注册-回顾性注册,https://upload.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000042262.