Dataset Information

Gatifloxacin versus ceftriaxone for uncomplicated enteric fever in Nepal: an open-label, two-centre, randomised controlled trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Because 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.

Methods

We 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.

Findings

Between 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.

Interpretation

Our 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.

Funding

Wellcome Trust and Li Ka Shing Foundation.

SUBMITTER: Arjyal A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4835582 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

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:BackgroundNutrition education and counselling are considered a cornerstone for the management of type 2 diabetes (T2D). However, there is limited research related to the management of T2D through dietary approach, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries (LMICs) like Nepal. This study assessed the effectiveness of a dietician-led dietary intervention in reducing glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels among people with T2D.MethodsAn open-label, two-armed, hospital-based, randomised controlled trial was conducted at Tribhuvan University Teaching Hospital, Kathmandu, Nepal. Participants were randomly assigned to either dietician-led dietary intervention group (n = 78) or usual care control group (n = 78). People with type 2 diabetes with HbA1c >6.5% and aged 24-64 years were included in the study. The primary outcome was a change in HbA1c level over six months, and secondary outcomes included changes in biochemical and clinical parameters, Problem Areas in Diabetes (PAID) score, diabetic knowledge, dietary adherence, and macronutrient intake level. Data were analysed using an intention-to-treat approach. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04267367.FindingsBetween August 15, 2021 and February 25, 2022, 156 people with type 2 diabetes were recruited for the study, of which 136 participants completed the trial. At six months of follow-up, compared to baseline values, the mean HbA1c (%) level decreased in the intervention group by 0.48 (95% CI: -0.80 to -0.16), while it increased in the control group by 0.22 (95% CI: -0.21 to 0.66). In an adjusted model, the reduction in HbA1c (%) levels for the intervention was 0.61 (95% CI: -1.04 to -0.17; p = 0.006). In addition, fasting blood glucose was decreased by 18.96 mg/dL (95% CI: -36.12 to -1.81; p = 0.031) after the intervention. The intervention resulted in the reduction of BMI, waist and hip circumference, PAID score, dietary adherence, and macronutrient intake in the intervention group compared to the control group.InterpretationThe dietician-led intervention improved glycaemic control, improved macronutrient intake, and clinical outcomes among people with type 2 diabetes. The dietician-led intervention may be considered for diabetes management in LMICs.FundingThe research was funded by the University Grants Commission (UGC), Nepal.

Project description:BackgroundArtemisinin-combination therapy (ACT) is recommended as first-line treatment of falciparum malaria throughout the world, and fixed-dose combinations are preferred by WHO; whether a single gametocytocidal dose of primaquine should be added is unknown. We aimed to compare effectiveness of four fixed-dose ACTs and a loose tablet combination of artesunate and mefloquine, and assess the addition of a single gametocytocidal dose of primaquine.MethodsIn an open-label randomised trial in clinics in Rakhine state, Kachin state, and Shan state in Myanmar (Burma) between Dec 30, 2008, and March 20, 2009, we compared the effectiveness of all four WHO-recommended fixed-dose ACTs (artesunate-mefloquine, artesunate-amodiaquine, dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine, artemether-lumefantrine) and loose artesunate-mefloquine in Burmese adults and children. Eligible patients were those who presented to the clinics with acute uncomplicated Plasmodium falciparum malaria or mixed infection, who were older than 6 months, and who weighed more than 5 kg. Treatments were randomised in equal numbers within blocks of 50 and allocation was in sealed envelopes. All patients were also randomly assigned to receive either a single dose of primaquine 0·75 mg base/kg or not. Patients were followed up for 63 days. Treatment groups were compared by analysis of variance and multiple logistic regression. The primary outcome was the 63 day recrudescence rate. This study is registered with clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT00902811.Findings155 patients received artesunate-amodiaquine, 162 artemether-lumefantrine, 169 artesunate-mefloquine, 161 loose artesunate-mefloquine, and 161 dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine. By day 63 of follow-up, 14 patients (9·4%; 95% CI 5·7-15·3%) on artesunate-amodiaquine had recrudescent P falciparum infections, a rate significantly higher than for artemether-lumefantrine (two patients; 1·4%; 0·3-5·3; p=0·0013), fixed-dose artesunate-mefloquine (0 patients; 0-2·3; p<0·0001), loose artesunate-mefloquine (two patients; 1·3%; 0·3-5·3; p=0·0018), and dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (two patients 1·3%; 0·3-5·2%; p=0·0012). Hazard ratios for re-infection (95% CI) after artesunate-amodiaquine were 3·2 (1·3-8·0) compared with the two artesunate-mefloquine groups (p=0·01), 2·6 (1·0-6-0) compared with artemether-lumefantrine (p=0·04), and 2·3 (0·9-6·0) compared with dihydroartemisinin-piperaquine (p=0·08). Mixed falciparum and vivax infections were common: 129 (16%) had a mixed infection at presentation and 330 (41%) patients had one or more episodes of Plasmodium vivax infection during follow-up. The addition of a single dose of primaquine (0·75 mg/kg) reduced P falciparum gametocyte carriage substantially: rate ratio 11·9 (95% CI 7·4-20·5). All regimens were well tolerated. Adverse events were reported by 599 patients, most commonly vomiting and dizziness. Other side-effects were less common and were not related to a specific treatment.InterpretationArtesunate-amodiaquine should not be used in Myanmar, because the other ACTs are substantially more effective. Artesunate-mefloquine provided the greatest post-treatment suppression of malaria. Adding a single dose of primaquine would substantially reduce transmission potential. Vivax malaria, not recurrent falciparum malaria, is the main complication after treatment of P falciparum infections in this region.FundingMédecins sans Frontières (Holland) and the Wellcome Trust Mahidol University Oxford Tropical Medicine Research Programme.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Glucose management is challenging in patients who require nutritional support in hospital. We aimed to assess whether fully closed-loop insulin delivery would improve glycaemic control compared with conventional subcutaneous insulin therapy in inpatients receiving enteral or parenteral nutrition or both. METHODS:We did a two-centre (UK and Switzerland), open-label, randomised controlled trial in adult inpatients receiving enteral or parenteral nutrition (or both) who required subcutaneous insulin therapy. Patients recruited from non-critical care surgical and medical wards were randomly assigned (1:1) using a computer-generated minimisation schedule (stratified by type of nutritional support [parenteral nutrition on or off] and pre-study total daily insulin dose [<50 or ≥50 units]) to receive fully closed-loop insulin delivery with faster-acting insulin aspart (closed-loop group) or conventional subcutaneous insulin therapy (control group) given in accordance with local clinical practice. Continuous glucose monitoring in the control group was masked to patients, ward staff, and investigators. Patients were followed up for a maximum of 15 days or until hospital discharge. The primary endpoint was the proportion of time that sensor glucose concentration was in target range (5·6-10·0 mmol/L), assessed in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01774565. FINDINGS:Between Feb 8, 2018, and Sept 21, 2018, 90 patients were assessed for eligibility, of whom 43 were enrolled and randomly assigned to the closed-loop group (n=21) or the control group (n=22). The proportion of time that sensor glucose was in the target range was 68·4% [SD 15·5] in the closed-loop group and 36·4% [26·6] in the control group (difference 32·0 percentage points [95% CI 18·5-45·5; p<0·0001]). One serious adverse event occurred in each group (one cardiac arrest in the control group and one episode of acute respiratory failure in the closed-loop group), both of which were unrelated to study interventions. There were no adverse events related to study interventions in either group. No episodes of severe hypoglycaemia or hyperglycaemia with ketonaemia occurred in either study group. INTERPRETATION:Closed-loop insulin delivery is an effective treatment option to improve glycaemic control in patients receiving nutritional support in hospital. FUNDING:Diabetes UK, Swiss National Science Foundation, National Institute for Health Research Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre, Wellcome Trust, and European Foundation for the Study of Diabetes.

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.