...
首页> 外文期刊>Clinical microbiology and infection: European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases >A multicentre, open-label, randomized comparative study of tigecycline versus ceftriaxone sodium plus metronidazole for the treatment of hospitalized subjects with complicated intra-abdominal infections.
【24h】

A multicentre, open-label, randomized comparative study of tigecycline versus ceftriaxone sodium plus metronidazole for the treatment of hospitalized subjects with complicated intra-abdominal infections.

机译:替加环素与头孢曲松钠加甲硝唑治疗住院患者并发腹腔内感染的多中心,开放标签,随机对照研究。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Tigecycline (TGC) has demonstrated clinical efficacy and safety, in comparison with imipenem/cilastatin in phase 3 clinical trials, for complicated intra-abdominal infection (cIAI). The present study comprised a multicentre, open-label, randomized study of TGC vs. ceftriaxone plus metronidazole (CTX/MET) for the treatment of patients with cIAI. Eligible subjects were randomized (1:1) to receive either an initial dose of TGC (100 mg) followed by 50 mg every 12 h or CTX (2 g once daily) plus MET (1-2 g daily), for 4-14 days. The primary endpoint was the clinical response in the clinically evaluable (CE) population at the test of cure (TOC) assessment. Of 473 randomized subjects, 376 were CE. Among these, clinical cure rates were 70.4% (133/189) with TGC vs. 74.3% (139/187) with CTX/MET (95% CI -13.1 to 5.1; p 0.009 for non-inferiority). Clinical cure rates for subjects with Acute Physiological and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores > or =10 were 56.8% (21/37) with TGC vs. 58.3% (21/36) with CTX/MET. The microbiologic response was similar between the two treatment arms, with microbiological eradication at TOC achieved in 68.1% (94/138) of TGC-treated subjects and 71.5% (98/137) of CTX/MET-treated subjects. (The most frequently reported adverse events (AEs) for both treatment arms were nausea (TGC, 38.6% vs CTX/MET, 27.7%) and vomiting (TGC, 23.3% vs CTX/MET, 17.7%). Overall discontinuation rates as a result of an AE were 8.9% and 4.8% in TGC- and comparator-treated subjects, respectively. The results obtained in the present study demonstrate that TGC monotherapy is non-inferior to a combination regimen of CTX/MET with respect to treating subjects with cIAI.
机译:在3期临床试验中,与亚胺培南/西司他丁相比,替加环素(TGC)已证明对复杂的腹腔内感染(cIAI)具有临床疗效和安全性。本研究包括一项多中心,开放标签,随机对照的TGC与头孢曲松加甲硝唑(CTX / MET)治疗cIAI患者的研究。将符合条件的受试者随机(1:1)接受初始剂量的TGC(100 mg),然后每12小时50 mg或CTX(每天2 g每天一次)加MET(每天1-2 g),持续4-14天。主要终点是在治愈测试(TOC)评估中可临床评估(CE)人群的临床反应。在473名随机受试者中,有376名是CE。其中,TGC的临床治愈率为70.4%(133/189),而CTX / MET的临床治愈率为74.3%(139/187)(95%CI -13.1至5.1;非劣效性为p 0.009)。 TGC的急性生理和慢性健康评估II得分≥10的受试者的临床治愈率为56.8%(21/37),而CTX / MET为58.3%(21/36)。两个治疗组之间的微生物反应相似,在TGC治疗的受试者中68.1%(94/138)和在CTX / MET治疗的受试者中71.5%(98/137)达到了TOC的微生物消除。 (两个治疗组最常报告的不良事件(AE)为恶心(TGC,38.6%,CTX / MET,27.7%)和呕吐(TGC,23.3%,CTX / MET,17.7%)。在经TGC和对照治疗的受试者中,AE的结果分别为8.9%和4.8%。本研究获得的结果表明,相对于CTX / MET的联合治疗方案,TGC单药治疗不逊于CTX / MET联合治疗cIAI。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号