Dataset Information

Gatifloxacin versus ofloxacin for the treatment of uncomplicated enteric fever in Nepal: an open-label, randomized, controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Fluoroquinolones are the most commonly used group of antimicrobials for the treatment of enteric fever, but no direct comparison between two fluoroquinolones has been performed in a large randomised trial. An open-label randomized trial was conducted to investigate whether gatifloxacin is more effective than ofloxacin in the treatment of uncomplicated enteric fever caused by nalidixic acid-resistant Salmonella enterica serovars Typhi and Paratyphi A.

Methodology and principal findings

Adults and children clinically diagnosed with uncomplicated enteric fever were enrolled in the study to receive gatifloxacin (10 mg/kg/day) in a single dose or ofloxacin (20 mg/kg/day) in two divided doses for 7 days. Patients were followed for six months. The primary outcome was treatment failure in patients infected with nalidixic acid resistant isolates. 627 patients with a median age of 17 (IQR 9-23) years were randomised. Of the 218 patients with culture confirmed enteric fever, 170 patients were infected with nalidixic acid-resistant isolates. In the ofloxacin group, 6 out of 83 patients had treatment failure compared to 5 out of 87 in the gatifloxacin group (hazard ratio [HR] of time to failure 0.81, 95% CI 0.25 to 2.65, p?=?0.73). The median time to fever clearance was 4.70 days (IQR 2.98-5.90) in the ofloxacin group versus 3.31 days (IQR 2.29-4.75) in the gatifloxacin group (HR?=?1.59, 95% CI 1.16 to 2.18, p?=?0.004). The results in all blood culture-confirmed patients and all randomized patients were comparable.

Conclusion

Gatifloxacin was not superior to ofloxacin in preventing failure, but use of gatifloxacin did result in more prompt fever clearance time compared to ofloxacin.

Trial registration

ISRCTN 63006567 (www.controlled-trials.com).

SUBMITTER: Koirala S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3837022 | biostudies-literature | 2013

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Gatifloxacin versus ofloxacin for the treatment of uncomplicated enteric fever in Nepal: an open-label, randomized, controlled trial.

Koirala Samir S Basnyat Buddha B Arjyal Amit A Shilpakar Olita O Shrestha Kabina K Shrestha Rishav R Shrestha Upendra Man UM Agrawal Krishna K Koirala Kanika Deshpande KD Thapa Sudeep Dhoj SD Karkey Abhilasha A Dongol Sabina S Giri Abhishek A Shakya Mila M Pathak Kamal Raj KR Campbell James J Baker Stephen S Farrar Jeremy J Wolbers Marcel M Dolecek Christiane C

PLoS neglected tropical diseases 20131031 10

<h4>Background</h4>Fluoroquinolones are the most commonly used group of antimicrobials for the treatment of enteric fever, but no direct comparison between two fluoroquinolones has been performed in a large randomised trial. An open-label randomized trial was conducted to investigate whether gatifloxacin is more effective than ofloxacin in the treatment of uncomplicated enteric fever caused by nalidixic acid-resistant Salmonella enterica serovars Typhi and Paratyphi A.<h4>Methodology and princip ...[more]

PMID: 24282626

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundBecause treatment with third-generation cephalosporins is associated with slow clinical improvement and high relapse burden for enteric fever, whereas the fluoroquinolone gatifloxacin is associated with rapid fever clearance and low relapse burden, we postulated that gatifloxacin would be superior to the cephalosporin ceftriaxone in treating enteric fever.MethodsWe did an open-label, randomised, controlled, superiority trial at two hospitals in the Kathmandu valley, Nepal. Eligible participants were children (aged 2-13 years) and adult (aged 14-45 years) with criteria for suspected enteric fever (body temperature ≥38·0°C for ≥4 days without a focus of infection). We randomly assigned eligible patients (1:1) without stratification to 7 days of either oral gatifloxacin (10 mg/kg per day) or intravenous ceftriaxone (60 mg/kg up to 2 g per day for patients aged 2-13 years, or 2 g per day for patients aged ≥14 years). The randomisation list was computer-generated using blocks of four and six. The primary outcome was a composite of treatment failure, defined as the occurrence of at least one of the following: fever clearance time of more than 7 days after treatment initiation; the need for rescue treatment on day 8; microbiological failure (ie, blood cultures positive for Salmonella enterica serotype Typhi, or Paratyphi A, B, or C) on day 8; or relapse or disease-related complications within 28 days of treatment initiation. We did the analyses in the modified intention-to-treat population, and subpopulations with either confirmed blood-culture positivity, or blood-culture negativity. The trial was powered to detect an increase of 20% in the risk of failure. This trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01421693, and is now closed.FindingsBetween Sept 18, 2011, and July 14, 2014, we screened 725 patients for eligibility. On July 14, 2014, the trial was stopped early by the data safety and monitoring board because S Typhi strains with high-level resistance to ciprofloxacin and gatifloxacin had emerged. At this point, 239 were in the modified intention-to-treat population (120 assigned to gatifloxacin, 119 to ceftriaxone). 18 (15%) patients who received gatifloxacin had treatment failure, compared with 19 (16%) who received ceftriaxone (hazard ratio [HR] 1·04 [95% CI 0·55-1·98]; p=0·91). In the culture-confirmed population, 16 (26%) of 62 patients who received gatifloxacin failed treatment, compared with four (7%) of 54 who received ceftriaxone (HR 0·24 [95% CI 0·08-0·73]; p=0·01). Treatment failure was associated with the emergence of S Typhi exhibiting resistance against fluoroquinolones, requiring the trial to be stopped. By contrast, in patients with a negative blood culture, only two (3%) of 58 who received gatifloxacin failed treatment versus 15 (23%) of 65 who received ceftriaxone (HR 7·50 [95% CI 1·71-32·80]; p=0·01). A similar number of non-serious adverse events occurred in each treatment group, and no serious events were reported.InterpretationOur results suggest that fluoroquinolones should no longer be used for treatment of enteric fever in Nepal. Additionally, under our study conditions, ceftriaxone was suboptimum in a high proportion of patients with culture-negative enteric fever. Since antimicrobials, specifically fluoroquinolones, are one of the only routinely used control measures for enteric fever, the assessment of novel diagnostics, new treatment options, and use of existing vaccines and development of next-generation vaccines are now a high priority.FundingWellcome Trust and Li Ka Shing Foundation.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To assess the efficacy of gatifloxacin versus cefixime in the treatment of uncomplicated culture positive enteric fever. DESIGN:A randomized, open-label, active control trial with two parallel arms. SETTING:Emergency Room and Outpatient Clinics in Patan Hospital, Lagankhel, Lalitpur, Nepal. PARTICIPANTS:Patients with clinically diagnosed uncomplicated enteric fever meeting the inclusion criteria. INTERVENTIONS:Patients were allocated to receive one of two drugs, Gatifloxacin or Cefixime. The dosages used were Gatifloxacin 10 mg/kg, given once daily for 7 days, or Cefixime 20 mg/kg/day given in two divided doses for 7 days. OUTCOME MEASURES:The primary outcome measure was fever clearance time. The secondary outcome measure was overall treatment failure (acute treatment failure and relapse). RESULTS:Randomization was carried out in 390 patients before enrollment was suspended on the advice of the independent data safety monitoring board due to significant differences in both primary and secondary outcome measures in the two arms and the attainment of a priori defined endpoints. Median (95% confidence interval) fever clearance times were 92 hours (84-114 hours) for gatifloxacin recipients and 138 hours (105-164 hours) for cefixime-treated patients (Hazard Ratio[95%CI] = 2.171 [1.545-3.051], p<0.0001). 19 out of 70 (27%) patients who completed the 7 day trial had acute clinical failure in the cefixime group as compared to 1 out of 88 patients (1%) in gatifloxacin group(Odds Ratio [95%CI] = 0.031 [0.004 - 0.237], p<0.001). Overall treatment failure patients (relapsed patients plus acute treatment failure patients plus death) numbered 29. They were determined to be (95% confidence interval) 37.6 % (27.14%-50.2%) in the cefixime group and 3.5% (2.2%-11.5%) in the gatifloxacin group (HR[95%CI] = 0.084 [0.025-0.280], p<0.0001). There was one death in the cefixime group. CONCLUSIONS:Based on this study, gatifloxacin is a better treatment for uncomplicated enteric fever as compared to cefixime. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN75784880.

Project description:Drug resistant typhoid fever is a major clinical problem globally. Many of the first line antibiotics, including the older generation fluoroquinolones, ciprofloxacin and ofloxacin, are failing.We performed a randomised controlled trial to compare the efficacy and safety of gatifloxacin (10 mg/kg/day) versus azithromycin (20 mg/kg/day) as a once daily oral dose for 7 days for the treatment of uncomplicated typhoid fever in children and adults in Vietnam.An open-label multi-centre randomised trial with pre-specified per protocol analysis and intention to treat analysis was conducted. The primary outcome was fever clearance time, the secondary outcome was overall treatment failure (clinical or microbiological failure, development of typhoid fever-related complications, relapse or faecal carriage of S. typhi).We enrolled 358 children and adults with suspected typhoid fever. There was no death in the study. 287 patients had blood culture confirmed typhoid fever, 145 patients received gatifloxacin and 142 patients received azithromycin. The median FCT was 106 hours in both treatment arms (95% Confidence Interval [CI]; 94-118 hours for gatifloxacin versus 88-112 hours for azithromycin), (logrank test p = 0.984, HR [95% CI] = 1.0 [0.80-1.26]). Overall treatment failure occurred in 13/145 (9%) patients in the gatifloxacin group and 13/140 (9.3%) patients in the azithromycin group, (logrank test p = 0.854, HR [95% CI] = 0.93 [0.43-2.0]). 96% (254/263) of the Salmonella enterica serovar Typhi isolates were resistant to nalidixic acid and 58% (153/263) were multidrug resistant.Both antibiotics showed an excellent efficacy and safety profile. Both gatifloxacin and azithromycin can be recommended for the treatment of typhoid fever particularly in regions with high rates of multidrug and nalidixic acid resistance. The cost of a 7-day treatment course of gatifloxacin is approximately one third of the cost of azithromycin in Vietnam.Controlled-Trials.com ISRCTN67946944.

Project description:BackgroundThe zoonotic parasite Plasmodium knowlesi has become the most common cause of human malaria in Malaysia and is present throughout much of southeast Asia. No randomised controlled trials have been done to identify the optimum treatment for this emerging infection. We aimed to compare artesunate-mefloquine with chloroquine to define the optimum treatment for uncomplicated P knowlesi malaria in adults and children.MethodsWe did this open-label, randomised controlled trial at three district hospitals in Sabah, Malaysia. Patients aged 1 year or older with uncomplicated P knowlesi malaria were randomly assigned, via computer-generated block randomisation (block sizes of 20), to receive oral artesunate-mefloquine (target dose 12 mg/kg artesunate and 25 mg/kg mefloquine) or chloroquine (target dose 25 mg/kg). Research nursing staff were aware of group allocation, but allocation was concealed from the microscopists responsible for determination of the primary endpoint, and study participants were not aware of drug allocation. The primary endpoint was parasite clearance at 24 h. Analysis was by modified intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01708876.FindingsBetween Oct 16, 2012, and Dec 13, 2014, we randomly assigned 252 patients to receive either artesunate-mefloquine (n=127) or chloroquine (n=125); 226 (90%) patients comprised the modified intention-to-treat population. 24 h after treatment, we recorded parasite clearance in 97 (84% [95% CI 76-91]) of 115 patients in the artesunate-mefloquine group versus 61 (55% [45-64]) of 111 patients in the chloroquine group (difference in proportion 29% [95% CI 18·0-40·8]; p<0·0001). Parasite clearance was faster in patients given artesunate-mefloquine than in those given chloroquine (18·0 h [range 6·0-48·0] vs 24·0 h [6·0-60·0]; p<0·0001), with faster clearance of ring stages in the artesunate-mefloquine group (mean time to 50% clearance of baseline parasites 8·6 h [95% CI 7·9-9·4] vs 13·8 h [12·1-15·4]; p<0·0001). Risk of anaemia within 28 days was lower in patients in the artesunate-mefloquine group (71 [62%; 95% CI 52·2-70·6]) than in those in the chloroquine group (83 [75%; 65·6-82·5]; p=0·035). Gametocytaemia as detected by PCR for pks25 was present in 44 (86%) of 51 patients in the artesunate-mefloquine group and 41 (84%) of 49 patients in the chloroquine group at baseline, and in three (6%) of 49 patients and two (4%) of 48 patients, respectively, at day 7. Fever clearance was faster in the artesunate-mefloquine group (mean 11·5 h [95% CI 8·3-14·6]) than in the chloroquine group (14·8 h [11·7-17·8]; p=0·034). Bed occupancy was 2426 days per 1000 patients in the artesunate-mefloquine group versus 2828 days per 1000 patients in the chloroquine group (incidence rate ratio 0·858 [95% CI 0·812-0·906]; p<0·0001). One (<1%) patient in the artesunate-mefloquine group had a serious neuropsychiatric event regarded as probably related to study drug.InterpretationArtesunate-mefloquine is highly efficacious for treatment of uncomplicated P knowlesi malaria. The rapid therapeutic response of the drug offers significant advantages compared with chloroquine monotherapy and supports a unified treatment policy for artemisinin-based combination therapy for all Plasmodium species in co-endemic areas.FundingMalaysian Ministry of Health, Australian National Health and Medical Research Council, and Asia Pacific Malaria Elimination Network.

Project description:BackgroundAppendectomy is considered the gold standard treatment for acute appendicitis. Recently the need for surgery has been challenged in both adults and children. In children there is growing clinician, patient and parental interest in non-operative treatment of acute appendicitis with antibiotics as opposed to surgery. To date no multicentre randomised controlled trials that are appropriately powered to determine efficacy of non-operative treatment (antibiotics) for acute appendicitis in children compared with surgery (appendectomy) have been performed.MethodsMulticentre, international, randomised controlled trial with a non-inferiority design. Children (age 5-16 years) with a clinical and/or radiological diagnosis of acute uncomplicated appendicitis will be randomised (1:1 ratio) to receive either laparoscopic appendectomy or treatment with intravenous (minimum 12 hours) followed by oral antibiotics (total course 10 days). Allocation to groups will be stratified by gender, duration of symptoms (> or <48 hours) and centre. Children in both treatment groups will follow a standardised treatment pathway. Primary outcome is treatment failure defined as additional intervention related to appendicitis requiring general anaesthesia within 1 year of randomisation (including recurrent appendicitis) or negative appendectomy. Important secondary outcomes will be reported and a cost-effectiveness analysis will be performed. The primary outcome will be analysed on a non-inferiority basis using a 20% non-inferiority margin. Planned sample size is 978 children.DiscussionThe APPY trial will be the first multicentre randomised trial comparing non-operative treatment with appendectomy for acute uncomplicated appendicitis in children. The results of this trial have the potential to revolutionise the treatment of this common gastrointestinal emergency. The randomised design will limit the effect of bias on outcomes seen in other studies.Trial registration numberclinicaltrials.gov: NCT02687464. Registered on Jan 13th 2016.

Project description:BackgroundArtemisinin combination therapies (ACTs) with broad efficacy are needed where multiple Plasmodium species are transmitted, especially in children, who bear the brunt of infection in endemic areas. In Papua New Guinea (PNG), artemether-lumefantrine is the first-line treatment for uncomplicated malaria, but it has limited efficacy against P. vivax. Artemisinin-naphthoquine should have greater activity in vivax malaria because the elimination of naphthoquine is slower than that of lumefantrine. In this study, the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of these ACTs were assessed in PNG children aged 0.5-5 y.Methods and findingsAn open-label, randomized, parallel-group trial of artemether-lumefantrine (six doses over 3 d) and artemisinin-naphthoquine (three daily doses) was conducted between 28 March 2011 and 22 April 2013. Parasitologic outcomes were assessed without knowledge of treatment allocation. Primary endpoints were the 42-d P. falciparum PCR-corrected adequate clinical and parasitologic response (ACPR) and the P. vivax PCR-uncorrected 42-d ACPR. Non-inferiority and superiority designs were used for falciparum and vivax malaria, respectively. Because the artemisinin-naphthoquine regimen involved three doses rather than the manufacturer-specified single dose, the first 188 children underwent detailed safety monitoring. Of 2,542 febrile children screened, 267 were randomized, and 186 with falciparum and 47 with vivax malaria completed the 42-d follow-up. Both ACTs were safe and well tolerated. P. falciparum ACPRs were 97.8% and 100.0% in artemether-lumefantrine and artemisinin-naphthoquine-treated patients, respectively (difference 2.2% [95% CI -3.0% to 8.4%] versus -5.0% non-inferiority margin, p = 0.24), and P. vivax ACPRs were 30.0% and 100.0%, respectively (difference 70.0% [95% CI 40.9%-87.2%], p<0.001). Limitations included the exclusion of 11% of randomized patients with sub-threshold parasitemias on confirmatory microscopy and direct observation of only morning artemether-lumefantrine dosing.ConclusionsArtemisinin-naphthoquine is non-inferior to artemether-lumefantrine in PNG children with falciparum malaria but has greater efficacy against vivax malaria, findings with implications in similar geo-epidemiologic settings within and beyond Oceania.Trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12610000913077. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.

Dataset Information

Gatifloxacin versus ofloxacin for the treatment of uncomplicated enteric fever in Nepal: an open-label, randomized, controlled trial.

Background

Methodology and principal findings

Conclusion

Trial registration

Publications

Gatifloxacin versus ofloxacin for the treatment of uncomplicated enteric fever in Nepal: an open-label, randomized, controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets