• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

司帕沙星与头孢克洛治疗社区获得性肺炎患者的随机、双盲、对照、多中心研究

Sparfloxacin versus cefaclor in the treatment of patients with community-acquired pneumonia: a randomized, double-masked, comparative, multicenter study.

作者信息

Donowitz G R, Brandon M L, Salisbury J P, Harman C P, Tipping D M, Urick A E, Talbot G H

机构信息

Division of Infectious Diseases, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, USA.

出版信息

Clin Ther. 1997 Sep-Oct;19(5):936-53. doi: 10.1016/s0149-2918(97)80047-1.

DOI:10.1016/s0149-2918(97)80047-1
PMID:9385482
Abstract

Community-acquired pneumonia remains an important infectious disease problem, with more than 4 million cases occurring in the United States annually. Although Streptococcus pneumoniae remains the most commonly identified organism, a variety of bacterial and nonbacterial pathogens may be involved. Hospitalization is unnecessary in most cases, and oral antibiotic therapy is common. In the majority of cases, the etiology of pneumonia is unknown at the time of presentation, necessitating the use of empiric therapy. Quinolones have not been utilized in this setting in the past because of their inconsistent coverage of S pneumoniae. Sparfloxacin (RP 64206) is a broad-spectrum fluoroquinolone with excellent activity in vitro against the majority of bacteria involved in community-acquired pneumonia, including pneumococcus. We therefore studied the efficacy and safety of sparfloxacin compared with the second-generation cephalosporin cefaclor as empiric therapy for patients with community-acquired pneumonia in a double-masked, double-dummy, multicenter trial. Three hundred thirty patients aged 18 years or older with community-acquired pneumonia suspected of being bacterial in etiology were enrolled at 74 centers in the United States from June 1, 1992, to March 4, 1995. Patients meeting the inclusion criteria were randomized to receive 10 days of either sparfloxacin 400 mg orally once followed by sparfloxacin 200 mg orally daily (n = 168), or cefaclor 500 mg orally every 8 hours (n = 162). There were no significant differences between groups with regard to baseline characteristics. Patients were followed up serially at 4 +/- 1 days, 20 +/- 3 days, and 38 +/- 7 days after the beginning of therapy. Patients were evaluated for clinical response, clinical recurrence of infection, and eradication of baseline pathogens. The primary efficacy variable was the clinical response (cured or improved) in the subgroup of patients meeting the definition of clinically assessable. Responses were also evaluated in the intent-to-treat population. In the intent-to-treat population, 35.7% of patients receiving sparfloxacin were clinically cured, compared with 32.1% of patients receiving cefaclor. Clinical successes (patients clinically cured plus improved) were also comparable (72.6% of patients in the sparfloxacin group and 71.0% of patients in the cefaclor group). Similar clinical success rates were noted using only the clinically assessable population (primary efficacy variable). Forty-four percent of patients receiving sparfloxacin and 39.1% of patients receiving cefaclor were clinically cured. In the sparfloxacin group, 86.6% of patients were clinical successes, compared with 84.4% of patients in the cefaclor group. Microbiologic cures were comparable in both groups. There was no difference in the incidence of recurrence of infection or superinfection. Adverse events thought to be due to study drug occurred equally in both groups (14.3% in the sparfloxacin group vs 14.8% in the cefaclor group). Results show that sparfloxacin is a safe and effective empiric therapy for patients with community-acquired pneumonia and is comparable to cefaclor.

摘要

社区获得性肺炎仍然是一个重要的传染病问题,在美国每年有超过400万例病例。虽然肺炎链球菌仍然是最常鉴定出的病原体,但多种细菌和非细菌性病原体都可能与之相关。大多数情况下无需住院,口服抗生素治疗很常见。在大多数病例中,肺炎的病因在就诊时并不明确,因此需要采用经验性治疗。过去喹诺酮类药物未用于此情况,因为它们对肺炎链球菌的覆盖范围不一致。司帕沙星(RP 64206)是一种广谱氟喹诺酮类药物,在体外对大多数与社区获得性肺炎相关的细菌,包括肺炎球菌,具有出色的活性。因此,我们在一项双盲、双模拟、多中心试验中研究了司帕沙星与第二代头孢菌素头孢克洛作为社区获得性肺炎患者经验性治疗药物的疗效和安全性。1992年6月1日至1995年3月4日期间,在美国74个中心招募了330名年龄在18岁及以上、疑似病因是细菌性的社区获得性肺炎患者。符合纳入标准的患者被随机分为两组,一组接受司帕沙星治疗,口服400 mg,每日1次,随后每日口服200 mg,共10天(n = 168);另一组接受头孢克洛治疗,每8小时口服500 mg(n = 162)。两组患者的基线特征无显著差异。治疗开始后,分别在4±1天、20±3天和38±7天对患者进行连续随访。对患者进行临床反应、感染临床复发情况以及基线病原体清除情况的评估。主要疗效变量是符合临床可评估定义的患者亚组中的临床反应(治愈或改善)。在意向性治疗人群中也对反应进行了评估。在意向性治疗人群中,接受司帕沙星治疗的患者有35.7%临床治愈,接受头孢克洛治疗的患者为32.1%。临床成功(临床治愈加改善的患者)情况也相当(司帕沙星组为72.6%,头孢克洛组为71.0%)。仅使用临床可评估人群(主要疗效变量)时,也观察到了相似的临床成功率。接受司帕沙星治疗的患者有44%临床治愈,接受头孢克洛治疗的患者为39.1%。在司帕沙星组中,86.6%的患者临床成功,头孢克洛组为84.4%。两组的微生物学治愈率相当。感染复发或二重感染的发生率没有差异。认为是由研究药物引起的不良事件在两组中发生率相同(司帕沙星组为14.3%,头孢克洛组为14.8%)。结果表明,司帕沙星是社区获得性肺炎患者安全有效的经验性治疗药物,与头孢克洛相当。

相似文献

1
Sparfloxacin versus cefaclor in the treatment of patients with community-acquired pneumonia: a randomized, double-masked, comparative, multicenter study.司帕沙星与头孢克洛治疗社区获得性肺炎患者的随机、双盲、对照、多中心研究
Clin Ther. 1997 Sep-Oct;19(5):936-53. doi: 10.1016/s0149-2918(97)80047-1.
2
Sparfloxacin versus clarithromycin in the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia.司帕沙星与克拉霉素治疗社区获得性肺炎的对比研究
Clin Ther. 1999 Jan;21(1):103-17. doi: 10.1016/S0149-2918(00)88271-5.
3
Sparfloxacin versus ciprofloxacin for the treatment of community-acquired, complicated skin and skin-structure infections.司帕沙星与环丙沙星治疗社区获得性复杂性皮肤及皮肤结构感染的比较
Clin Ther. 1999 Apr;21(4):675-90. doi: 10.1016/S0149-2918(00)88319-8.
4
Oral empiric treatment of community-acquired pneumonia. A multicenter, double-blind, randomized study comparing sparfloxacin with roxithromycin. The Scandinavian Sparfloxacin Study Group.社区获得性肺炎的口服经验性治疗。一项比较司帕沙星与罗红霉素的多中心、双盲、随机研究。斯堪的纳维亚司帕沙星研究组。
Chest. 1996 Dec;110(6):1499-506. doi: 10.1378/chest.110.6.1499.
5
Safety profile of sparfloxacin, a new fluoroquinolone antibiotic.新型氟喹诺酮类抗生素司帕沙星的安全性概况
Clin Ther. 1999 Jan;21(1):148-59. doi: 10.1016/S0149-2918(00)88275-2.
6
Safety and efficacy of lomefloxacin versus cefaclor in the treatment of acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis.洛美沙星与头孢克洛治疗慢性支气管炎急性加重期的安全性与疗效比较
Am J Med. 1992 Apr 6;92(4A):108S-113S. doi: 10.1016/0002-9343(92)90320-b.
7
Comparison of sparfloxacin and ciprofloxacin in the treatment of community-acquired acute uncomplicated urinary tract infection in women. Sparfloxacin Multicenter Uncomplicated Urinary Tract Infection Study Group.司帕沙星与环丙沙星治疗女性社区获得性急性单纯性尿路感染的比较。司帕沙星多中心单纯性尿路感染研究组。
Clin Ther. 1999 Jun;21(6):966-81. doi: 10.1016/s0149-2918(99)80018-6.
8
Comparative efficacy of sparfloxacin in comparison with amoxycillin plus ofloxacin in the treatment of community-acquired pneumonia. French Study Group.司帕沙星与阿莫西林加氧氟沙星治疗社区获得性肺炎的疗效比较。法国研究小组。
J Antimicrob Chemother. 1996 May;37 Suppl A:83-91. doi: 10.1093/jac/37.suppl_a.83.
9
Comparison of cefdinir and cefaclor in treatment of community-acquired pneumonia.头孢地尼与头孢克洛治疗社区获得性肺炎的比较。
Antimicrob Agents Chemother. 1997 Jul;41(7):1579-83. doi: 10.1128/AAC.41.7.1579.
10
Efficacy and safety of ten day moxifloxacin 400 mg once daily in the treatment of patients with community-acquired pneumonia. Community Acquired Pneumonia Study Group.莫西沙星400毫克每日一次治疗社区获得性肺炎患者10天的疗效和安全性。社区获得性肺炎研究组
Respir Med. 2000 Feb;94(2):97-105. doi: 10.1053/rmed.1999.0710.

引用本文的文献

1
Short-course versus long-course therapy of the same antibiotic for community-acquired pneumonia in adolescent and adult outpatients.青少年及成人门诊社区获得性肺炎患者使用同一种抗生素的短程与长程治疗对比
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 Sep 6;9(9):CD009070. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD009070.pub2.
2
Antibiotics for community-acquired pneumonia in adult outpatients.用于成人门诊社区获得性肺炎的抗生素
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014 Oct 9;2014(10):CD002109. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002109.pub4.
3
Empiric antibiotic coverage of atypical pathogens for community-acquired pneumonia in hospitalized adults.
住院成人社区获得性肺炎非典型病原体的经验性抗生素覆盖。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Sep 12;2012(9):CD004418. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004418.pub4.
4
Effectiveness of beta lactam antibiotics compared with antibiotics active against atypical pathogens in non-severe community acquired pneumonia: meta-analysis.β-内酰胺类抗生素与抗非典型病原体活性抗生素治疗非重症社区获得性肺炎的疗效比较:荟萃分析
BMJ. 2005 Feb 26;330(7489):456. doi: 10.1136/bmj.38334.591586.82. Epub 2005 Jan 31.
5
BTS Guidelines for the Management of Community Acquired Pneumonia in Adults.英国胸科学会成人社区获得性肺炎管理指南
Thorax. 2001 Dec;56 Suppl 4(Suppl 4):IV1-64. doi: 10.1136/thorax.56.suppl_4.iv1.
6
Community-acquired pneumonia in the elderly: a practical guide to treatment.老年人社区获得性肺炎:实用治疗指南
Drugs Aging. 2000 Aug;17(2):93-105. doi: 10.2165/00002512-200017020-00002.
7
The next generation: fluoroquinolones in the management of acute lower respiratory infection in adults.下一代:氟喹诺酮类药物在成人急性下呼吸道感染治疗中的应用
Thorax. 2000 Jan;55(1):83-5. doi: 10.1136/thorax.55.1.83.
8
Potential interactions of the extended-spectrum fluoroquinolones with the CNS.广谱氟喹诺酮类药物与中枢神经系统的潜在相互作用。
Drug Saf. 1999 Aug;21(2):123-35. doi: 10.2165/00002018-199921020-00005.