Efficacy and safety of cefepime treatment in Chinese patients with severe bacterial infections: in comparison with ceftazidime treatment.

An open label, randomized comparative study was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of cefepime, in comparison with ceftazidime, in the treatment of adult hospitalized Chinese patients with severe bacterial infections. Forty patients with severe infections including septicemia, urinary tract infection and bacterial pneumonia were randomly assigned to receive treatment with cefepime (2 g intravenously every 12 h) or ceftazidime (2 g intravenously every 8 h). The cefepime group (20 evaluable patients) and ceftazidime group (16 evaluable patients) were comparable with respect to age, sex, underlying diseases and distribution of infection type. In both groups urinary tract infection was the most common type of infection and Escherichia coli was the most common etiologic microorganism. The rates of satisfactory clinical response were similar in the cefepime and ceftazidime groups (95 versus 93.7%; 95% confidence interval: -0.14 - 0.17, P = 0.87). The bacteriological response rates of the cefepime and ceftazidime groups did not differ significantly (88.9 versus 85.7%; 95% confidence interval: -0.30 - 0.36, P = 0.85). Both cefepime and ceftazidime were well tolerated, with similar incidence of side effects. The results of this study suggest that cefepime is as safe and effective as ceftazidime for the treatment of serious infections in adult hospitalized Chinese patients.